The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2009/10/14 - Agenda Packet - Planning Commission THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 6,-ItA PLANNING COMMISSION LAGENDA 7� i taw CUCAAMONGA OCTOBER 14, 2009 - 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Council Chambers 10500'civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California II. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Chairman Fletcher Vice Chairman Munoz Stewart_ Howdyshell _ Wimberly_ 0 I II. ANNOUNCEMENTS IIII. APPROVAL OF MINUTES September 9, 2009 Regular Meeting Minutes IIV. CONSENT CALENDAR The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and non-controversial. They will be acted on by the Commission at one time without discussion. If anyone has concern over any item, it should be removed for discussion. A. VACATION OF STORM DRAIN EASEMENT-A request to vacate a storm drain easement and related purposes, located south of Foothill Boulevard, west of East Avenue -APN: 229-041-10. Related File: DRC2006-00540 IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS The following items are public hearings in which concerned individuals may voice their . opinion of the related project. Please wait to be recognized by the Chairman and • address the Commission by stating your name and address. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Please sign in after speaking. • 1 of 4 " PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA L ' OCTOBER 14, 2009 RANCHO CHCAMONGA B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2008-00632 - PITASSI ARCHITECTS, INC - A proposal to add/replace equipment, construct new buildings, and other associated improvements at an existing chemical manufacturing facility of about 19 acres in the General Industrial (GI) District (Subarea 8), located at 12550 Arrow Route-APN: 0229-031-023. Staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt from CEQA review and qualifies as a Class 1 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 - Existing Facilities and Section 15302 - Replacement or Reconstruction. C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2007-00402 — FRANK AN - Design Review of a proposed retail commercial center consisting of 3 buildings totaling 51,940 square feet on 4.67 acres of land within the Community Commercial District (Subarea 4) of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located along the west side of Etiwanda Avenue north of Foothill Boulevard - APN: 0227-221-08. Related File: Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18535. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. • CONTINUED FROM SEPTEMBER 9, 2009. D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM18535 - FRANK AN - A request to subdivide 4.67 acres of land into 3 parcels for commercial purposes in the Community Commercial District (Subarea 4) within the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located along the west side of Etiwanda Avenue north of Foothill Boulevard-APN: 0227-221-08. Related File: Development Review DRC2007-00402. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. CONTINUED FROM SEPTEMBER 9, 2009. E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2009-00586-CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT - A request to operate a 6,000 square foot fire station on approximately 1.1 acre of the subject site, located on the west side of Hellman Avenue at the intersection of Rancho Street-APN: 1061-621-03. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT\DESIGN REVIEW DRC2009-00720 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT-A request for the development of a single story 6,000 square foot fire station on approximately 1.1 acre of the subject site, • 2 of 4 • PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA OCTOBER 14, 2009 RANCHO CUCA.MONGA located on the west side of Hellman Avenue at the intersection of Rancho Street - APN:1061-621-03. Related File: Conditional Use Permit DRC2009-00586. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration VI. PUBLIC COMMENTS This is the time and place for the general public to address the commission. Items to be discussed here are those that do not already appear on this agenda. VII. COMMISSION BUSINESS/COMMENTS VIII. ADJOURNMENT • The Planning Commission has adopted Administrative Regulations that set an 11:00 p.m. adjournment time. If items go beyond that time, they shall be heard only with the consent of the Commission. I, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on October 8, 2009, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 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. • 3 of 4 • ocep\its Lvov PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA L� OCTOBER 14, 2009 RANCHO CUCAMONGA • INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC 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. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and speak into the microphone. After speaking, please sign in on the clipboard located next to the speaker's podium. It is important to list your name, address and the agenda item letter your comments refer to. Comments are generally limited to 5 minutes per individual. If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under"Public Comments." There is opportunity to speak under this section prior to the end of the • agenda. Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. The deadline for submitting these items is 6:00 p.m. Tuesday, one week prior to the meeting. The Planning Commission Secretary receives all such items. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the Planning Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m.to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of$2,124 for maps and $2,231 for all other decisions of the Commission. (Fees are established and governed by the City Council). Please turn off all cellular phones and pagers while the meeting is in session. Copies of the Planning Commission agendas and minutes can be found at http:llwww.ci.rancho-cucamonga.ca.us • 4 of 4 A • Vicinity Map Planning Commission October 14, 2009 ,) i SPHERE IOF INFLUENCE; I 1 CC W Q yW ..1 W H LSIDE g ti W I a ' WIL`AP N 2 ':I z Annglit IN ; a i V p \ WV A \ -� �fas21A- • zio ��W�- IOW 19TH i VASE LINE (- 4 CHURCH 1 ` p` • ra FOOTHILL 1 IARROW ( „---- 1 I 8TH 0 1z -+ y Q Q m o a C,D > k 3 Q z IQ s =i a _ Wt 4TH B Q * Meeting Location: City Hall • 10500 Civic Center Drive (12 ervA. r1r VAN T H E C I T Y O F R A N C H .O C U C A M O N G A StaffReport • . DATE: October 14, 2009 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer BY: Willie Valbuena, Assistant Engineer SUBJECT: VACATION OF STORM DRAIN EASEMENT, LOCATED SOUTH OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, WEST OF EAST AVENUE (V-215) — A REQUEST TO VACATE A STORM - DRAIN EASEMENT AND RELATED PURPOSES, LOCATED ON THE SOUTH OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, WEST OF EAST AVENUE — APN 229-041-10 RELATED FILE: DRC2006-00540 ANALYSIS: III On June 9, 1999, a storm drain easement was recorded for the future extension of a portion of Master Plan Storm Drain along the south side of Foothill Boulevard. Development review project DRC2006-00540 is proposing to construct 225 multi-family units. The project was conditioned to realign and construct the remaining portion of a Master Plan Storm drain. The proposed storm drain easement has been plan checked and ready for City Engineer's approval and eventually will be recorded. Chapter 4, Article 1, Section 8333 of the Streets and Highways Code allows for an existing easement to be summarily vacated when it has been superseded by relocation and there are no public facilities located within the easement. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make the finding through minute action that the vacation conforms to the General Plan. This finding will be forwarded to the City Council for further processing and final approval. Respectfully submitted, Dan James Senior Civil Engineer DJ:WAV/akt •Attachments: Exhibit A - Vicinity Map Exhibit B - Legal Description for vacation of storm drain easement Exhibit C - Map of Easement to be vacated Item A • j '----- F� MILLER AVE \ / X111 111 /lc 1111n _ ! N.T.S. Laj III I e •, '� a VIA VENETO Z �� AVE Q /III z 41111iELIi in. iwmia� Z tea. CI WS in um 11 G 'lWI --. N . / la- O ; PROJECT SITE ``;'i N W • B VD U FOOTHILL 111111/i ' Z * N J w 1■g a as I � in mm WSW a 3 1 al as witaira_ ono me WS iri z S W N W - < — E r S • Item: Vs 2/5 Title: V/C7N/Ty HAP . EXHIBIT A . . , , A-2 EXHIBIT "A" • Legal Description For Vacation of Storm Drain Easement Being Parcel "2"along with the Right of Entry—Temporary Easement-Drainage Acceptance of that certain Document No, 19990247347, Official Records, dated June 9, 1999 in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California. • See Document No. 19990247347, Official Records dated June 9, 1999 attached hereto and made a part hereof. • Prepared bv: Dan Guerra &Associates 10271-B Trademark Street Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 • PROEEssio h Qtv� E. 0 cue"R Fy 1' °1 ° ()V- C c y D iel E. Guerra Date m R.C.E. 29224 R. .E. 29224 Expires 3-31-2011 sr;, ivil/ rf oc CAL�FO�� • • • EXHIBIT B A-3 Recorded in Official Records, County of _ San Bernardino, Larry Walker-,- Recorder Assessor Parcel No.: Doc No . 199.90247347 izi- °4' -io 3 : 00pm 06/p09/99. • RECORDING REQUESTED.BY First SY12f i I itis 8 M 631 City of Rancho Cucamonga . WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO i 2 s .1 4 5 i / 7 I ! II r6 . FEE . AK I CMS PP CPT aT'LTT ADD Ye PEE MI -?TOR City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 in 22)) I I Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 s 16 (A! ._._._—.__.__—_ —_ NON ST LI SYP CIT-CD TVIS TAX I DA 1 CNNG. I __ __-- EXAM " MAIL TAX STATEMENTS TO - DOCUMENTARY'TRANSFER TAX S ,UO NE COMPUTED ON.FULL VALUE OF PROPERTY CONVEYED Name: - _ OR COMPUTED-ON FULL.VALUE'LESS LIENS AND • Sheet ENCUMERANCEES REMAINING AT TIME.OF SALE, Address:Donald Plyley . ciya 10766'Bonikr.CanyonRoad. UN a' tZM t1D v of 4 Slate;. Alta Loma, CA 91737 _ Signature el Deolarenl cg Agent at lemming lax, Firm Name EASEMENT •. z�, l •. FOR.A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, c, .. • Donald J. Plyley, Marjory. L. Carson and Janice -L. - Funk, as . Tenants.. in Common GRANT(S) to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, a Municipal Corporation, an Easement for storm, drain and related. purposes , in, over and upon that certain real property in the City of . . Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State:of California,.described and shown on the attached • EXHIBITS "A" and "B". • , Dated Signature . , Name Typed or Printed 3-26" ?? % , oit67/1?).1,g4 ,99A. ii t- Y l S- z6- 99 M a4� , � 9 H4-rierU I Cocoon TLi 1 3-a(0- 9-q O , ter, . .-ate r lA n 'n . 9. a . This is to certify that the interest in real properly conveyed by the. C.�4 . within instrument to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, a City jm; p. ?4,53 I incorporated under the laws of the State of California, is hcrchy lD-31-01 ,>E accepted hy.order oithe City Council, and the Grantee consents to the recordation thheerreeof by its duly authorized-officer. I. OF cIA� ; Dated.- /7/ By. ZtOY-le //fl'�!J RCE Scd `. ATrACII COMPLETED NOTARY ACKNOWLEDGEMENT(S) • . aE-EN EXAt.11NEQ A : . --c.,.,_... `.i'= _.,",.r, ri;4.OR AS TO ITS 'EFFECT UPON TITLE. ¢ EXHIBIT C -Year.DOC_*D 1999.247347. ?age:. 1 of 6 A-4 CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT Ne ,g6- . eIll �!Il7l�•�off illJllllf llJ/!!!If!!!!.c—__ f c-l:tcserr.-I r_., Cs i . State of., A �r �, ;ory ` •• ti R .;county. countyofccL,,, 1.>,?-L- ,,car:, v t . •On r_)- )a,..c.-- sLl 19,9 before me, v, � .i ,- Ie�{ ---E —1-o in , orn∎ . P ‘,/ k- 4 5' t DATE NAME-TtITLE OF OFFICER-E.G..'JANE DOE.NOTARY PNBL k• ersonall a eared �Orh-Id '3. PI f K , k �. P Y PP v Ylc; ) o L. eArSo } inn ice I Fun NAME(5"Si F SIGN--cRISI‘ `' \apersonally known. to me - OR 0 proved to me on the basis Of satisfactory evidence kto be the person(s)• whose name(s).*are g subscribed to. the. within instrument and t me ac- knowled ed to that knowledged feLthey executed the same . in. : l`t/txr/their' authorized . capacity(ieth), and: that by rj:i-O r/their § • . signature(s) on the instrument:the!person(s), or the entity, upon . behalf of.which. .th:e person(s) acted executed the, instrument. a S. SHIRLEY. A THORNTON �1 • •'exec ?.• -ornm.►1,1;2060 '' th kN `,g.. y; NOTABVlIQiC cAUFOBeu w th - WITNESS my hand and official seal: 1„ `� i San'Bfrnerdino County. �. My Camm. Lxpeei.July ii,2W1 ti ._ :Cie'-1 le C-1). u �` ...,-fir SIGNATURE OF NOTARY • 1 OPTIONAL c - k Though the.data-.below is.not:required by law, it.may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and•could prevent 'fraudulent reattachment of this form. ' .• - ' \: • .• CAPACITY'CLAIMED BYSIGNER DESCRIPTION.OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT S .,.INDIVIDUAL •1 ❑'1'OORPORATE OFFICER • • • ) .. -ASemeeir . • . 1.. - TITLE(S). . — TITLE OR TYPE.OF DOCUMENT . 1 k0 PAR.TNER(S). . 5 LIMITED. ' . ` ' • 0`GENERAL M'tP, •• . ❑•ATTORNEY-IN-FACT. -- k . 1 . 0-.TR.USTEE(S) NUMBER OF PAGES , r0'GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR 1 . ;aI:OTHER:'*2r1a-n1S' in ' Con'"-Inn --- MM� .. a (, I4 `1 I 1. --- DATE OF DOCUMENT ,'. k-. -.SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: - ;•NAME OF.PERSON(s)OR ENTITY(IES) 1 k . . .- X�kl ----- ` ' -"--' -- --- _ SIGNER(S).OTHER THAN NAMED ABOVE l lrcl • 01993 NATIONAL NOTARY ASSOCIATION•8236 Remmel Ave.,P.O.Sox 7164-Canoga Park CA 91309-7184 scriptien:_ San Sernard_no,CA a � Do cdent-Ye at.Doc_,3 A-5 14734. ?age: 2 .0' c der:. 52025526 b Co,=rent: • • • • EXHIBIT "A " • • • STORM DRAIN EASEMENT DEDICATED TO.THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Being portions of the northwest ''A of Section 9, _Township 1 south,• Range 6 west, San Bernardino base and:meridian in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, as described in Document No: 19970469382, Official Records dated December 22, 1997; described as follows: PARCEL "1" A 25.00 foot wide strip of land, the centerline more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at a point on the westerly line of herein described document, said point bears S 21° 16' 02"W a distance.of 48,56 feet from the northwesterly corner of said document; THENCE N 89'23' 35"E•along a Iine parallel-with (measured at right.angles)'and 95.00 feet .southerly of the centerline of Foothill Boulevard a distance of 91,71.feet to Point "A": The sidelines.of above described Parcel "1"shall be extended•or shortened to,meet at angle points and shall.beein at the westerly line of herein'described document and.shall end at a line. drawn perpendicular fo theterminus,of said.Point"A". • PARCEL"2" • A 48.00 foot wide strip of landi.the centerline more particularly described as follows; • BEGINNING at herein.describe •Point "A";TRENCE.N 89°23'35"Ealong a line parallel with (measured at right angles) and 95.00 feet southerly Of the centerline of Foothill Boulevard a • distance of 1.00 footto a point on a curve concave southwesterly having a radius of 90.00 feet;. • THENCE.easterly,en&southeasterly along said'curve through a central angle of 32° 28' 03"an arclength of 51.;00 feet • • The sidelines of above described Parcel "2"shall be extended or shortened to meet at angle • points.and shall begin on a line drawn perpendicular to the terminus of Parcel"1" and.to end on. a line.drawn perpendicular to the terminus of Parcel "2". See attached Exhibit`B" attached herewith and made a part hereof. Prepared.bv:. Derbish, Guerra& Associates. Qs'�p0 EESS0ptiy� • 8331 Utica.Avenue,.Suite 150 Q0 0. . ��, c Rancho Cucamonga,.California 91730 2 ?i No. 2.9224 _...'. &A . — . --- *::-... ..< . , D iel E. Guerra • 1 t • RCE 29224 ��k ~F�riiI� • Date Expires 3-31-03 • • • • _r_ rion: San S_ernardino,CA Document-vear.DocyD e_7: 42025426 b Com;�e_t: A-6 '47347 Pace: 3 of 6 N.E. CDR. N.W. 1 /4 - CENTERLINE FOOTHILL BLVD. (RT. 66). SEC.9,T1S.., • FOOTHILL BOULEVARD R6W. S.B.B.M. t. P.O.B.--1 _LPAPCEL " 1." r-- S89'23'35"WI Enm co 5 �� 26.9.40' Y _ 1 rt o"GF SS/0-c-- S21' 16'02"W - I - -are "2" L .Rik E. Gc 48.56' 2 - . ;,--5 N r�°y 7 T.P.O.B. / A o Ln a s # .. � `— inc a _.Tq LrVIl, fit. rat � "Q K) ^ Cil — OF COQ G. II . F • M co fj 1n Z .1.4./ 0 R=90.00 p 6v..: N L=32' 03" - •o o L=51 .00' �� T=26..21., . - N89'23'35" E.. - -7 \ - 1071 .37' w i R°a.;;e • Olt-) Co 7 0 50 100 O M SCALE 1"=100' u0. 61 O \ I > N89`23'40"'E 2089.40' V . /� EXHIBIT " B" MAP SHALL ACCOMPANY LEGAL DESCRIPTION .. - • 3cr_ptaon: San 3ernardino,CA Document-Yea_.Docyr A- 7 '47347 Page: 4 of 5 :er: 42025426 b Co.meat: • • • • • Right of Entry—Temporary Easement—Drainage Acceptance • We hereby state that we are the record property owners of the property shown on the attached exhibit legally described as a portion of the Northwest '/, of Section 9, TI S, R6W, SBBM(also.known as San Bernardino County Assessor's Parcel No. 229-041-10), and hereby consent to the installation and maintenance of the improvements denoted on the attached exhibit by R C. Homes, L.L.C. and/or its heirs, agents and assigns, and arree to accept the dtainaee until such time as alternate drainage facilities are constructed to the satisfaction of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 11111 _ U r Donald J. Ply ey • , � --- — Date ari _7_ _- C — _ Marjory L./Carson. . —�? 7 Date Jani e :Funk Date 'Acknowledeed by: City of Rancho Cucamonga . • • Dan Jam Senior Civil Engineer Date • :ript_on: San Bernardino/CA Docunen,--year.Doc:D 747347 Page: 5 of 6 -- . 42025426. b Comment: A_8 • 4 1 ' { I: ,,�. fit_ a P } I ! C�� i /r �ji� (l f I I. I —iit?11 1111 It:. i • c a d- ; ) ' I Juan I ! main)+ t -' pb.n. .iI ` G='—.I... f 1. • 'iiN.1- 11 1 .. ��'{ '. iii ` 11. i'' Ei, It 13 l 0•d" i i. r' i K �'u � [ I I I 71 y.l .. I. Iii Jy Y :11"C Ec2 I, I r r . I ;a 1' Ili ; li l \ �i .a Y9g ••11-01, :4 • < _1 r rJ r hu I 1h c • ��f ,til scr_p-ion. San Bernardino/CA Docunent-year.DOCID 24 v_ > -icr: 42025426 b Comment: A-9 7_.7 Page: 6 of 6 - ' t. STAFF REPORT • 1r PLANNING DEPARTMENT RANCHO CUCAMONGA DATE: October 14, 2009 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: James R. Troyer, AICP, Planning Director BY: Mike Smith, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2008 00632 - PITASSI ARCHITECTS, INC. - A proposal to add/replace equipment, construct new buildings and other associated improvements at an existing chemical manufacturing facility of approximately 19 acres in the General Industrial (GI) District (Subarea 8), located at 12550 Arrow Route - APN: 0229-031-023. Staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt from CEQA review and qualifies as a Class 1 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 - Existing Facilities and Section 15302 - Replacement or Reconstruction. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: • A. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: Site Chemical manufacturing facility— General Industrial (GI) District (Subarea 8) North - Shopping center— Regional Related Commercial (RRC) District, Foothill Boulevard Districts (Subarea 4) South - Steel manufacturing facility — Heavy Industrial (HI) District (Subarea 15) East - Water storage reservoir- General Industrial (GI) District (Subarea 8) West - Vacant—General Industrial (GI) District (Subarea 8) B. General Plan Designations: Site - General Industrial North - General Commercial South - Heavy Industrial East - General Industrial West - General Industrial C. Site Characteristics: The project site is a parcel of approximately 838,000 square feet (19.23 acres) that is approximately 660 feet (east to west) and approximately 1,300 feet (north to south). The site is developed with a chemical facility operated by Air Liquide which has been in operation since 1977 (Exhibit D and E). Improvements on-site include a variety of equipment (compressors, pumps, a 110-foot tall cooling tower, etc.), several small buildings, equipment shelters, and outdoor storage areas (Exhibit J). At the front of the property is a building of about 10,000 square feet and a parking lot. This building is also owned by Air • Liquide; until recently it was a retailer for industrial equipment and supplies but it is now Item B • PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2008-00632— PITASSI ARCHITECTS, INC. October 14, 2009 Page 2 • vacant. The property is bound on the west by a vacant parcel of about 1,252,000 square feet (28.75 acres). That site is proposed to be an operations and maintenance facility for Omnitrans and is currently in review by the City (Development Review DRC2007-00440 and Conditional Use Permit DRC2007-00664) and has been scheduled for review and action by the Planning Commission on October 28, 2009. The project site is bound on the north by the Foothill Marketplace shopping center while to the south, across Arrow Route, is a steel products manufacturing facility. To the east is a reservoir operated by the Metropolitan Water District (MWD). The zoning of the property and the properties to the east and west is General Industrial (GI) District (Subarea 8). The zoning of the properties to the south is Heavy Industrial (HI) District (Subarea 15). The zoning of the properties to the north is Regional Related Commercial (RRC), Foothill Boulevard Districts (Subarea 4). The subject property is generally level with an elevation at the north and south sides of about 1,180 feet and 1,160 feet, respectively. D. Parking Calculations: The parking calculations for the facility are as follows per Section 17.12.040(C)(1)(a), (b), and (d): Type Floor Area Parking Number of of Use (SF) Ratio Spaces Required Total 35,427 • Office/Administration 8,018 1/250 32.1 Warehouse 7,547 1/1000 (up to 20,000 SF) 7.5 Industrial/Manufacturing 18,062 1/500 36.1 Total Parking Required 76 Total Parking Provided 76 ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant proposes to construct two new buildings with a combined floor area of 6,100 square feet, install new equipment (and associated shelters/enclosures), replace the existing 110-foot tall cooling tower with a new 80-foot tall cooling tower, construct new paving, and install new fences/walls (Exhibit L). There are two driveways along Arrow Route, located about 75 feet and 260 feet east of the west property line. The one closest to the west property line serves as the primary access to the manufacturing facility. This driveway will be replaced by a new street cul-de-sac and associated improvements including extensive landscaping at the southwest corner of the site (Exhibit H). The new street, the corresponding intersection with Arrow Route, and other improvements will be constructed with the participation of Omnitrans. The other driveway is used for access to the existing retail building; it will remain and will be upgraded with decorative paving. All of the proposed structures will match, or closely match, the design and general • appearance of the existing structures on-site (Exhibits F and J). Because of the nature of the B-2 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2008-00632— PITASSI ARCHITECTS, INC. October 14, 2009 • Page 3 facility, all structures will be built of pre-fabricated steel. Both new buildings will be approximately 18 feet in height. New walls will be of split-face concrete block construction. In the case of equipment that will not be in a shelter or otherwise enclosed, because of their respective distances from Arrow Route and existing screening from public view by a wall/fence and existing landscaping including trees, visibility of them will be very limited. Although the most obvious change as seen from the street will be the new cooling tower, it will be 30 feet shorter than the tower it replaces. . Aside from the existing retail building, the distance between the nearest structure or equipment installation to Arrow Route is about 300 feet. B. Floor/Area Analysis: Per Chapter III, Section 2.5.3.8 of the General Plan, the maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) in the General Industrial (GI) land use category.is_60.percent. The net site area after the completion of the new cul-de-sac and associated public improvements will be 825,354 square feet (18.95 acres). The overall building coverage proposed will be 35,427 square feet (0.81 acre). Therefore, the FAR for this site will be 4.29 percent (35, 427/825,354 = 4.29 FAR). • C. Description of Operations: Air Liquide specializes in the manufacture of liquid oxygen and similar products that are, for example, used in the medical and manufacturing industries. • There are currently 28 full-time employees. The proposed modifications and improvements are expected to require an additional 24 employees so that there will be a total of 54 employees. The facility is in continuous operation throughout the day, 365 days a year; no changes to the operating hours/days are proposed. Although there is outdoor storage of products and other materials, existing screening along the Arrow Route frontage substantially minimizes visibility into the site. Retail operations, and corresponding customer traffic, is neither present nor proposed. D. Land Use Compatibility: Staff finds that the applicant's proposed improvements and uses of said improvements are consistent with the existing improvements and uses at the facility. They are consistent with the site's Development District and the surrounding Development Districts. Furthermore, the proposed modifications/improvements will not affect neighboring properties. Disturbance to any residents living in the area will be very minimal as the nearest residential district/use is an apartment complex, located approximately 0.40 mile to the east at the northeast corner of Arrow Route and Etiwanda Avenue. E. Grading Review Committee: The project was reviewed by the Grading Review Committee (Miller and Addington) on August 4, 2009. Noting that there will be very limited grading activity, the Committee recommends approval with conditions. These conditions have been incorporated into the Resolution of Approval. F. Design Review Committee: The project was .reviewed by the Design Review Committee • (Munoz, Stewart, and Nicholson) on August 4, 2009. As the proposed improvements consist • B-3 • PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2008-00632—PITASSI ARCHITECTS, INC. October 14, 2009 Page 4 • of new equipment, a new cooling tower that is shorter than the existing tower and a few buildings that will match the existing buildings on the property, all of which will be screened or outside of public view. The Committee recommends approval of the proposal as submitted (Exhibit K). G. Technical Review Committee: The Technical Review Committee reviewed the application and submitted its standard and special conditions of approval. Public improvements along the Arrow Route right-of-way, including curb, gutter, sidewalks, and landscaping are existing. Therefore, the focus of the conditions of approval is the new cul-de-sac and the corresponding intersection with Arrow Route. Both will be constructed per the City's standards. Although the applicant's submittal identifies a traffic signal will be installed at the new intersection, the Engineering Department has indicated that traffic signal will not be a condition of approval and that installing the traffic signal will be at the applicant's option and expense. • During Design Review Committee, the Committee requested clarification regarding the installation of a traffic signal as they considered its absence unusual. They believed that the absence of a traffic signal, when combined with the future traffic generated by the proposed Omnitrans facility, the existing traffic on Arrow Route and traffic exiting from the driveways across the street, could contribute to problems with safe and efficient traffic flow. According to the Engineering Department, a traffic signal will not be conditioned at this time as the • projected volume of traffic at the intersection of Arrow Route and the new cul-de-sac will not warrant it. A traffic study prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff on October 13, 2008, states that the majority of the traffic generated by the Omnitrans facility will .be entering and exiting the site at a new driveway to be constructed about 950 feet west of the centerline of the new cul-de-sac. This new driveway will have a traffic signal. Omnitrans will also construct another driveway (without a traffic signal) about 500 feet west of the centerline of the new cul-de-sac. Both driveways will be used exclusively by Omnitrans and will alleviate the traffic volume at the subject intersection. Although the remaining volume of traffic at the intersection will not be high enough to warrant a traffic signal, the Engineering Department has indicated that the City may pursue the installation of traffic signal at a future date. H. Environmental Assessment The Planning Department staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines. The project qualifies as a Class 1 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) because there is a chemical manufacturing facility on the subject property, the proposed project contemplates the replacement of existing equipment with new equipment, and although the proposed project contemplates the construction of new additions, the floor area of the additions are not in excess of 10,000 square feet (and all public improvements are in place and the site is not environmentally sensitive). The project also qualifies as a Class 1 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15302 (Replacement or Reconstruction) because the proposed • project contemplates the replacement of existing equipment where the new equipment will be B-4 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT . CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2008-00632 - PITASSI ARCHITECTS, INC. October 14, 2009 Page 5 on the same site as the existing structure/equipment and will generally have the same purpose and capacity as the equipment being replaced. There is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. • CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Director adopt the Negative Declaration of environmental impacts and approve Conditional Use Permit DRC2008-00632 through adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval with conditions. Respectfully submitted, ?”1"4") 61/141"j2 . James R. Troyer, AICP • Planning Director Attachments: Exhibit A - Location Map Exhibit B - Aerial Map Exhibit C - Site Utilization Map Exhibit D - Site Plan Exhibit E - Conceptual Grading Plan and Sections Exhibit F - Building Elevations, Floor Plans, and Roof Plans Exhibit G - Site Elevations Exhibit H - Landscape Plan for the Area at the New Intersection Exhibit I - Photos of the Project Site Exhibit J - Photos of the Existing Buildings Exhibit K - Design Review Committee Action Comments Exhibit L - Correspondence from the applicant Resolution of Approval for Conditional Use Permit DRC2008-00632 S B-5 sq -�g nr"4/xr i( N,c4 �. 'I 'L.L>J If 1oxwo1 120 II "Y* w;1 �`. Lr \ p �PWbq�,:� W1N!- if sum I�/ xIGxUNO AVE - I ,{ �_ 4 x MUELLar 1 nigg,On I@E (-1 'r I' 03' _Jr EI6 \t moray aE 2'- ° \ wesuJ N �q jai ai t E X ait_ wtw0E g W }� �� xiq S u -AN(AO iILLx631P f E rI GWtl PL6E 4L \ 4Q[' X C s E SI.0 S 3 -to -1 W� 'F-4"-ss. E E IM I� . !.� ` it L,AmIOP E.`y y�l �L � 0.A1Fd`„,_,,Y 1; S OPg \`A(F-PI "1�L L�.SN_O lOx 9NN ri �tf ovrs �� 1`,s 18+ ", RANCHO- -- /s4unuo n � m J,�r e!� �I� ''L w€°m Inn ua_p Q ..,31,,,_oP numilL II W g CUCAMONGA T^'4oA �L'IL..n •i 9501R All dl I n'(Eln��-�. nnomAt �I i .y WINDROW6 �? �' 1 EfIWANOA X�IA �°"nA = q . Ar'� YG� €1 lit �� L3 FANxowr 'iz H LAIRSRI l3 `� �� 5 F oxh "r+ptioKL Lt.sr^w:< - 1 A� me N 3� r € _ �—r ,1 x ;`°awl 1'I47RBIA sr 6 yL1 3I �_ �– 'Y 3 tJi 2__ t t iE �-lr P wf n - ,s` O i'1 4 �-=N�s�@.�' J& 1 rs'oor k� llji. u¢I '1 �' II i'-�^,I1 p ,� 'nmt[L i F� —7�s ¢Fx 5v S -`' I `A R 1 1r r Win tika5 s� -4.-- uni lo ETIWANDA a�rP IF m--� �� u wflnee I MJ I s- 1 J p e Kdr ` @"a$_ �� Stv" PA ��lE £/ �� f � << �b II — h55EtLS wrt II �@ XT"� ° �� 1� `�° p EFT .11 viA kazi,--37- J �"f 1 I - iffirl z r 1� p` r6 j �1 � °S�°�° 'c'Ta En it_ �I LLAI i dal,tA4- n m eX..aw w Ir II 51� 1 kn'I �, ef,--s 3'4If'A 3 H Fs N O '�+ 33 ,,�,�6 ,t5g All We ` s i ¢R¢ Xr � Ln / I.[[J� a� r,e fi xHA"Ifr r tM4svm P,,,>>» A 4 .Z+oN 3 a s cos _, IIFi ry, U. / zeL�ie it CUCAMONGA 4t R4 ND4JL X€�t eFnf w � �w � �� - 1 tGRAPa4AND PAIII: g1 eVit v� U F e G IPI t�g WIARR SIBN n3 ~m L D a s ewu4xen L= li,�\ rPwlw4ESF �Pos o R g� I// BAS �tn.l g Wnra r 4eLexwnox Px HISTORIC-f O X" I r- k l7,, '-7 MOlinEXtur E. WINE MUSEUMS OKt `( IA m'_ i , P - I �NM>,I RI . n;oL �, , � 41Pw�m _i ,� -i d Awn "bit- 0" MW-�Y+th �jY \‘\,,, �Lx '4P_0. l{ -aQm t y DI-.f 44 5 ( � Rli �' NCI 4XE WEEN6Lw0� IIW' � ' � OUl1 k wm[wu TN 4 I WM �I PIE,/ t (p- VISTA l]U(r ,� �gcEW Y ORI%_ �xe L S1 1�OM0 - ._ Y6'GJi, V A l"NI 4 F"s § Vd':JEV1-max. 1 " J 0 FN CWAI .24; 5 i-c-,D ryi /NtAV� '% r e "'Sa+!^n .:l�X51.. li`d �.. a0.:..al 121II�n �I- x,u ��c." °P s -vo' ox— II Is LrFe pose a r�1 t a I ;am nsslOxE OA� a.vAw� � ;am CHURCH sr �,/ � c � F_5p@s ,i�'�m�� ww cuLrvaxcrmAOx t e V- �., MIU EBOyEfI 21 `' PROJECT SITE - AF t,:ctgrwwn PARK,CB1 VICTORIA GARDENS [ eau d. ,� :PnRI: PARK XON xAXFS / sn,xxcs `\,,,M"sL I CANYON v V.M.C. 6MINLLV45l Y 5 // t1.°n i1 Pd,„..�IS'� 0 VM I� vrnuuus m� :� cxsnmLSr " � x g - r ALPFTM o 6a� EMS PARK '� \; i°vnioxwuEir dt 'w,cloRA G ' t-/ RANCHO I e • /�11 SAN ANTO !D 4YOPXrOmin V MEWCAL saonexewx PL gvgi —� ^/ e • CENTER 4 ,— / $I 8 HISTORIC w /.� �( -_� �J66 FOOTHILL Bl oom F � BII( _ I^—` cnassFx y c Esr vt SEBAEiIM'WAVJ /` r.xmPyyi �1 - ._.. roar iuN n errL�er g > .EPICENTER a "r / g 2 wunu4xvn ICUCAMO ADULT SPORTS / a c2c_, ZS i W 11 COMPLEX _.__ ANIMAL •SHELTER n.is, ARROW ROC Q J ,AOM DB_ � Ix lifi Bi 2 �I I y' 6 • 7,,, i v =O u AVE �I_wxr=R I IERSEYBLlln r Metro/ink Stati ' I I NAPA (: .ii‘- / PARK 3 y SWIM OR I5 XP➢ xt, 6TH S IL I I 11 I sl • JE1I ;I Ii =1 a —JI�I `�I 'a v' II "' I' .3/4" h, A IL sA!!_...hra all_...„, if( al ,I o§,JL.jI E I ._ s xoe M R k. • EXHIBITA 4TH ST W _ Conditional Use Permit DRC2008-00632 • fI' i .r C is Mt l ' r Cr • fr i I S_ 1 3'i' 1 } 7 1454' 4444,# xr : r I F".A S.Sti \ , p'g �p ' I � � ' �..,s- r • fa h.1 ;h 11 f'a �q � I tt{tiT,1,1�,.l, k4; �,/` ,,e,4'. iQ„"y''`''t , _ , :, , M*10,11401g V ti rlt rf Y ur 2, Yla 11 r 1 r r 1 , 1 • �1 I .'1' rti Iii" 9 f,l 1 t.,. , r t •ti,j Y P ,r r anti,' -,r ,Fr -�` r us ,- S�—�{ lej 1,,,Ift krill 1�3Il:[[[o� i' , p[1a"r! r� o 'r5 w .i:,,,i,3aSjv&-,-,---,—i+ ._ M 1 n 1 r`It47 { 1 I ii',an, f at h �� ^ d r r f III J. � rJr I1 n i ftfr,1`"J 1 11 Ij1 3 '<ta°k� it,A 1!/ IH 11 Ll.v�'IV Fr + > f 1 r. �' t k +r� 4 llr F°r ., r r 1 .i f,to ,r .I'll..1rd 21.11._. 1"'�" !gyp • frr$"44ti l'A iS�l , , 11114 y�V,' ':'''1 JI.4,4 ilil'{ I44kLf e4 , Ik d 1 <}ppnnf %E ,y6 S.X. S' r �d+1�{ r�li '}h A 'I logy,p� °tY.{, r l ", i� (kin+ 7tr m,g, t + I , »,ten..f ,,ff i rtW 47,,,i,iitt I . 7 ::;—a., ! ',r l ":or at. r1;t ki",lE/ri44,,.41,+71k.-acs _^—•—•�-.m„+ • ,$,.`.f'y' + eq`�,T' - .T r,,l, r r '...._i•r �,�y4 q.,7 tirt'i ti ig--.d-.�," s �, t.T ;�" "7"�?'w'TaM Lj' ,y s � ''Ur �o""'A*,ti2'�i+" il $� I r . J. tit ,J' . n. t y�a .r •• r *'y -i`.r••7" .. v f �id�a a,., ' r '+4r,7,C 1, x --, r< t ivi°i F " HT.� k^' 1,a-7a` p.h•.7^ ,s 4. , .7„ Jt W ach-,-✓ '`''• r. c tk''S. ri N�F 4 ?T'r/ n *"'�'v Tf' t rt1, 1Fy� �8 r ire'�,''x- }`i `v sit i` ,�-Ff.44 ry xW- n • :ti y° .t t{t _'e ,@ r —ac+� 2p,�t + ' , +b a 4ik a 3 f ai'4':IS J irj.„,+U.;� ;t'r'cr'r.( t' r are 1x +� r Pro e1)LVd rr -ht, .'�", . 1�jg ytt" _ „�(E i`� Tat n ' qr r f+�iv�� ,�! ./ ',Y"ir t Fell,E1 1 r'" }dN q .), 1 'rte PP 1..x i'J' TJly '" - ,.i y 14 r i j �...+6'N 1,�,i,y_, ,,,,arci, n a +.-4 n G J.ri+hsd r j 11 � k r:: r .sk a vi r , i -r, i .k y`., ,>f r 13,,.m� _ 3, ^'ors �, x• d2 ,,b' i, y hli > if Fx 4.1.10.4r 143:77, i w„�. i p{x ��y,+,7 i r1 ..us°°•r Ik. 11^ F '^, ' " i+1^S0 1„aks }a yi . �F Liffi'!c 'itfA pr i,' * .I f r r ^.fir ! F 2141M� 4-',, ..1 m y I F 6 I ftl Imr'++, r j�r 1 `TI C {[I p' , ��}r,„1 d i^L y{ rT r” ° ° ivr m" r F , 1 ai 1114,t1 tas . r i'�§pp;y,-! ry# . ,, p r r't t- i_ '43/4 e Ss r Irt 4 b d 1 n 15 W a ,,ii t q '�,,cf III �1 ��i r ?i S, Ps,, �9TA xl aC' �I 7 ,Ly"o 1' yw' v7 Y 1 ' }m a+ ° -is tr4r�t1,�'mli ^(l� r yyP 5.t r 15sE r ' ! I t � r 1 � rN , -"x' � .. , r sd_.. r + nj 'W 'vo yM" 7 "kn �'�+ ,� 4 p j f f r 1 c x '^111 6 w v r'w ` �, 1aiz d 14,,L.sr4 raIi t ta r +7 a y e r 1 N li rn lti � 1 ti, E hT }} Mq4 -7414-' u4� � 10. w1rrC, 1 ©I Y, Pg , �� -0 qM1, A 1 - • e r r ;t t ,cr'- n�-'v' , 'C Y, S krarTIi 1� r� C4 f,, , � @, w r ,SP„,i �1 r �il n^ } , oti i��R, flM!!iy4 "�,}9 ttl 1 11 riff �Y ��i s rt:'x oL,-,re ^ �+JL -r.t._ .-:rf v� a`n ''t."„!1 1 p Y t k 7.- ,bcl .. ,r Y t "Tr Y r ,- 11` ..0-�+4-- tt-, y�� '‘V.,2. ..!`a 1 '4°-. f,ttopye( .`"tkr.,c 4 ,- 'ti 'T. k' t•„ Ti.4 yr'�`+'' � ” +i'cr �'.q ' x-11.,.1 y _ �Y r, 6 �''M� ?.z`a �'t 1r 1_ + fi L"ir; {rnr'�? ` r.it C17" t -- 'Mr n,yi t, y"n '4 9 P t>n+r,, t N1 .i�Q4'I( C ^+% LtI'�'4f?{yI ry.t � , 4 I `4n4r1 : i }61{� tit '"1!�i pk1 4 t� gt, j ' ci „y,1/44ry4.4.1,'• it a , 4, 1{+'J-. - .try t'p444z t Ai e, ' } j i„, A-„,m4,/, k'�° ,j1 1r f41�, i, x a d1 ' R1 rsa tl 4 ”' „a } kis aj n '`+Y+re qVu WI� +• , i , , r �, r l �' 1. C" d ry' Ia° xak ,'•, m�,411! 4 1k d " q { 1 :. dIv1 ,r 1'V'M+,rI +f,�' # tii ""- ,i 1 i.1,'4,ptr �.arn c 1�.: 1, 9 �, ♦y�'� ��1I xa} (': �+i^!^Ti� «I t4'''F 't lh i4 J 4„s�i , ,11 11,4t s SI' k 1,/, r Id1� yl.' Pr \74) v i4 llr m11 M1' I¢! 4 :=nr• ze�� "emu 447-,,L4....17� .; r�i � Y�I"` i41{P ' s1 qC �l1 �144:u1+ds 'Y°� �IP 1 1 n i T i,4- , 7r e'J• •dd„ . / y� 1 5 s +5�..ta+K'rt'+..r-'� .play bw C a Liar. J1 O1r1 t p' ,+" S '1 ;if u'n hR' ... ..�rta a, a rare ".-'4 ,Y +� V -: Fv �'.. `k� _. 4 3. i 'N .>ef'. `iyJ,y�,a� e -xeia a ..-,q-- yt `ta 7-�W..- '41 t ' �-rW.�q x c-Y nx#}, „ tl!rex.neoili l 1Gecea9e 1 enBE J -�- •U' u ., rr 14 4"�• d.'`Ei{�i 71 r r .,4 :: r - ti ,'1 . r n rl. r h -44 {r -r*J n4.-- l Li Ti t �y r ,+S s Fd y `;..,. -4;,-4-:2-0-,;, Y i� #'•-c..'4 -_ �py�$ �x� �, 'µa rCr «!f a-�'y.gr�vt '•. ir �--" �4 rrar•wrkw T' �` 1,.�.e '-Yi as 1 t . `r, 'I"'°y1^`JS i,i•y a y, • ��✓� r g��?�' ybC .�,� � 1� �,., �r";��' s.,yv "+�.y, v + , _? v y. w '�.r�ct''�� ,. ' atr .dy�,F "K qt-4 1 it N P'�lr"+V�u gis „ S *�vg' tT ,3 inn"15 � 'r3fr yi6dV� eYm ,^ >, rry�8- Y. s n �. �u �.�r� °y Ir+�y� J,�N1t ta�� T� jr �'�j /j��y�y EXHIBITY k eJ ' _ ! nnr,�� d1 ' i4 'i'Si,,'4. '�°Jy yy'vS - 't 4T•. B-7 1 70y AX A 's n • � Z^ m z i y e o . yo b CAO n 5 n -nC _ z.) ____ 7 --\ o I )1.. . , / I �- — n O o o m@ I s A ' __2” g e. 2` e; I - I _ mC : ; - r A - i- • ' 2 0 .. • • I ■ E 1 Z \ Zn (=-1 ink 3 :. in Za :i e // i II k I a� ICI II 1 I ! D t V. iD .F L � T • t? rr U 4 .n DRC20080063 2 J EXHIBIT C B-g • 7 0 >2..) 0 —• , . l I es— O- W I i_______ o ro 2.) 1 = -• y :§ , Crg ET n I___ il P I on : . -i ...: '. : ..Pn '-;t •f r n ro ' ' - _ II ...7..; = I • u ...." I 'I _ __ = a —. . 17' ' ,,,sp" I FI , a) iI i Nail r- 1 : : I If ••■ , iii.1,1 7. u • P 1 ; I- r F, m . " UT a! :: i, Will t i .- 1 , , ! -1 - —44kn/.lin — EEI =r 1 i ;ThVI i= I • :1" _ - --i 2 i s E - , . _ . ; --'• - _. 1 IMO c----1, tie 1 L: .in:_-- ,i = i, wiy._ ill EEO r bE pa - --,:-- 1 • t c - t r-------, I. 1-0 .: •. -) i : p gf i _ : iiii al.12 :10:: ‘: ::1;• 1.7, : ‘!i — — 5L4•"' - : 3 _ . b , - – . i ' ,------ . I A W ti , 42 i: -4 In/We , – ;b i 1 :: : I LH:-----, f ' ■.,;(2 ..:;_._ ,---.7gw-________._________:.2- . - - a I \ II 1 •i• N • %.. — / H ti 0 N -.-- tf > I I 1 / \ / tr – ; , . .... " . .., if > 1 .... , , , lit _-- if -1 s Ei 14 5 i IIIII fr, Lei i e ra IN,..) •• n nRconnn-nnr,12 - _J EXHIBIT D , B-9 • „,_,n,„„„„0,.„,,„ax„,,,,,,,,,...,,,,,,,,,,,, '11 ' ill a yu I, iiI 111 lit i ti! ts1"`14 Pli ! - . 1 1 • kil' 5 .. • 1 k , illopipil a It n." P gm g,bn ligi ;i 9 i li 1 6 O . 1 -4 kt CA g 1.1i ii:1 , 11, . CZtti --- -- _,____—_-,__ ...- , . 1 1 1 1 • h_ .. -- . .. , 1 t. .:::::":c.f.'::::::-.:::?::::(:::-.-<;:.),::11-;1:21:,:;-:(:::- ..:;: : )‘ - 1 k 'tr..: 'Y.", :':::..:-..f';'),....,,..:,-.'/...,..1.; 'Ai-.,..:. \•,.\ lig :. Tit/S::;;; ; Ii'/..: ■•;:;.....:: :': # " ..\ 1 .... . it :-7-: ,11611111. N ' : . .i = 1 i ;4--:-.t ."Ti — 6;1 . '. ;I % \ ' °- - 4'- \ ..; 1 ._ ___. .111 .L,,,,::?,7.' ,':' \,-;A,-„-. rti ''?. :: \ :-" - . . = 10 '7". ..:-.,AP4' :-!_'_2;,'•'I. . ..4 =__ ,, , ,,.:..1, . ...,,L.tEi il, -,.. :: lir 1,\,_,;.: :..1 1\ ::;_ : iii'...:::11114.1t1.„.; 1..L::, --- /'..:I at\I F' I t; .:,- , ?.-..---•.".:.4.2.. li il - - l'H li 11 -- ,_, ‘4:.-ft.!-: T.-„: .le .L.,“....:1::*, _--- ill -' ----,', , • k w 0 , . 1 , ;: iiii ".' 3, ‘..1 :!gii20 _A:1) - , 1 ,:fl ..' -1106;r1.1,1 -..‘1.', -4' • Cc hk. z4 = , .li It , i , lyit;.:-.,1, • ake ik --‘ .1-. :v., '.4r,Ii L,:, , 0 C3 IAA 4 = t 1;`11 FL:11 . /- .. : •••: ;,t1,;i:!,..'' ' ' ' ...;;<'7--;- 1(1-7,:sli ,: Fli__,,,,,.,):111:W .. : 1 i 1__,,-. :1,1 , . . ,, ..4 s). , - ::), li:1 .,) ,,, „. . : ,, ,,,....„ „ tip. „ _ , .r7,3 4,,,,-,f,,,irt:;::::::::-ii.:.).-..,%-.4. _:.2. .., r-4,:-.L.7-,t,l_.: ii ) , :. IC •.C.••1?":' l---n,• 1 i•E;katir fr 1 -----:.J-2. .1 Ta',{ '.c.b c 7'a re - :1 .i ! >,_---' : ..:- .2_21::!,.., . , 47-2----.--r-,,-,5. ,-ET':-.:: . ig/:!41 pth4,..1.1 ; . . 41... 0 - I . i.lci. tli , , 4- I;;::.- t ::.t_. ."1 '....;:n:1 , - i 1 .,' • ' . ,. ..1 ,. . ,o, H. t t:, 4....li a I n .,. __ 41 ( , ,„, , ... : ; 1-1:°Er ,,_'! ..• - . .: , . kik HI:b1-1":: 1 : , . il pri 7; [ ' :. ; _ -tit: i L.-----2', i • 11 i • JrC.) 1,, , ii : .1, ,,, I 4 ,,•:?::,.:i-' -1-1-t--", t ; --\,_ .il ,. .k -,FIJI I). ,: „..-,. 1 ' i .J1:11 .c 0'‘ I' ll ilhP. - '•;;,* 2,-----'52.77;„ ..- ‘,1- „ - !,, i !A .4-_ • : ; k . • t1 1 t ----i-2- '; 1!4‘ ' , ITLIIILI:111:— - ::::--: -----Th'•• •'•I 1 ' 1. • J.k ..4--- • •-- - \ :i-1--'i :1 i . Lap ,1,:: rH.,,,,,- q.: ,..., ,,,,:, I - -E:: '-- .L,: _/ . . ,1 k:.: Xi. ilr.,#. ; • \.I. 'K. A 1. nit, lc c. LI AI! I 1.1-17-:, \ h `14-1 -1;\,, . - , 1 .,', x arc‘1 , -..", 1 it ;5: -:.: -14:: :: 17:—.117: [ ,..: . . . - ,4"; ; .i ; ; 1 kitthattli . !;:: C14): kttOtttkItted .\ i? ( . - 01:1 1I i ..:‘'i.:1- . . ‘‘I. al . .. — ' .. . t, I. .„. . • .. a I •-i— . ‘a._,_ , . ., h g ' ._ .. 1 .§ . 1 .„., .. . . •_ _ __________ - 111. ' Illig 0 EXHIBIT E ZE900-8OOZJaO M i ii • w = 1,, z ;, 414 y 1i < it F s6 • E. I F. Y D 8 I •° 1 1 p I 6 a i ii di i1 l i cup O lt Y $ m fit,_:,__ _...... , �i . J V r ,`E' : tP, y -8 _ ____ ,_ - 3 t 1 - - — _ iE�90 - - CO •_ C q 3 Q ip tO , 9 Ct MI U 3's :. I`' --B 3 bA ;i =_ C 39 W O !3a — C B -- �_ u iil e a Lti —C Ill s - • EXHIBIT F . B-11 • ZE900-9OQZD Q .,71- i ;• • N j :• f� w ! fe M li 12 --5 N 16 / Milk N ie II H_ i I I s 6 I " I li 31 j viii r I a I° did 1 �^ 01 ' z II 77pp ( it _-- 'r . 3l 1 e . ri ASP IN r" fts CIF j = s -"-.. HI 1 . r` re c y b ft O r. U ;I; c b c 0.0 C e = U C '3.33.e s 4 o F I:. is (0 • C c Cr (1) • V i O o - !! w 5 5 i� ; '� bt�l;6 ill a) 3 �U 9F v in = .— O • -- - v a >v Jt y N o V > � L C ---- '----- 2E' - n it n •— EXHIBIT G B-12 • ¢ 311014 , - - -----rt• s lid O 00 - - b - - -3> - • :• .,, li e-- Ei3 II 1I` .e lat.: • '. G '-; t�. e. , 1 ( * 1 ! Ri �/ g II Y, —. ) „ft, k. _ t,H iii,, tr.„1� " .1• i _ : at. a AS :-- a, � ° y 1 w .-:. -• , r;4tsti 'i iiiii ♦ I ft 7 mmmmn f E 00 Vo - ;„I � , , et J ' E U . li 1 - 7-4Prit i / A 3 1 a { I9 n it { 3 'tl 11r4 m 3 3 I F d� S 3 1 &i � s € ' 5i � j •. ;u O:-I j S 0000000 v 11 L q , i 1 i i ii iii {if - 111-: ` I 2 2111Th 1 = � O - z jt rr 5p p E r F g � i I • II . Z 9 T. B E (J EXHIBIT H B-13 I • —11—I ;I � 1 ••• (—/ j ''''../ I [ I ! ) • it % p-i—L, it Y � i 0 I 07 1 I I I � I� El I, .0 1,,„:,, —t ., dee ',„: .___K__ _ _ i. , • K i 0 L Co • Kt 1 Ilk ' \ : I ('a ', Q ' iP - . 1 + it I v \ ° _--_ --T 7-7--r-' A. (1:1:b---- ■.:(1\\., >Li \ SITE PHOTO KEY MAP SITE PHOTOS "Air Liquide %°\ Rancho Cucamonga, CA r PITASSI ARCHITECTS ,INC, • 0939 WAne C kAae.SUim.105 • Aandw Cucangia,�.a 98730 EXHIBITI B-14 N1�„h . 1e 909-980-1 6I.1ar.9049145814• m l p a®,�ilann� m . • 1i Yr1 ;n3�+iF >� he r ,.r kks 59•- IS>V,W.'y�`'25-74,p t 'k 1, ‘..� �2 ;cat .i a 1 . Pr J] , -:-'r 4; f. r �{�5a.�� Fi ' z.-,.::-hi ua!"n i(ni ..,...$,--. ''S2 4q T 3;4 .. y6p .- M' t 1 4 , a`Pk? ! v 1 '. !4 d x-"p'- - Ir tt4t fy'"T"`a v 3a4 I l( .3,s 4141 1 gA",41 s 1"ar finet*Ark7 v .. {w-140.1„, p f1 I.4..), 'fnl 'L e k 13'4 14 i 1 P �"L`. ``" .es n I �Y;,f y 31, a 1; 0, a :k A v ‘ + r 1 a I1,Fy h ca. _ Vi t ,' ,tv1. 1.1,..4.-,'^+V xp. r t„9s 4 7 a 44ry +k it 4�1 nn3 n 4t,'�3 531F1 3 J Y L l 4 !Y.°.,,: 1 i`° :.� 41hr1".4t J17. ddk <ta'l4" 33 vl `F4. 1-f 4f b Ye Fie4 `. o- SYltf '� S r'f•'• ti.-17 ti '"' "vttaf ,kd ehat -3''F 1 roa'°�Fy{ hkS' Y f . .. r la 0. hffr 7i a,i, i,.. xG n r. '§ 4' °{,+t,--P. H 1 . 4■cis 7l t s Tu. Pt 1 g4F rlv• ee. • ...,-1 4.4 ' e x 1 lit,' is 17 r�t gr J .tl nF>< t el x Yrfr+kR1^ 1Ak c l4.r t a;r 1 t t [aid ri s tlsA'4 RRµ y'.t,; �',N Y{2 1 i,t Ya r u#4 a+.l�--mca ,N,:t',LHy', fi lir 1b f 'a !I y N 'V. 31 r i 9 t 1 r! rt, RY t a 4 J 3>I N ,- 1,� is N Mi i::C'',"!x'11 'Y iJ r;'''''.. Air 12� It r Y r.{ x r3 11& �N 3^0.' w 4n v l > t o 1 F T S t ( - 1 n e r )f'.+ y ■ .1 r 1 }1�,�Sr A 1 a ro Ohl F C�p t7 3xdl 713r a I ..f •i • : t -- -weggi9M--tkar 44 6-40:Air4 {,t,tiltotit,itatier,'!;;P:Ow*, ,4:--.5.-fls...s.,;:ft,a....1:#4; ,, -- ..;:-•15,7.4r -,1-:,,,,,,,i`.-.."---wOro.gl't-Ati-4:445.mytkerve;p4A4a,:stk., A 1.--- ,v,,,.4 ::-.-vis,v:mc; -,,,,,, -rsaeT471,1"--:',-4,,,:i• -1,fiagi.tritat-i.rn!,,,,,t1, .00:01404**1:344.*0.4..i.c*.(isitek‘ciek*c:: 14, tr,:14.- .314t.t.,e,:c7c,i,v. .P.,-;4 .--r;ir %IgiV. - '..1 q !.1 41,4 1,0i-itPtftatCYk4A:tgilltkkl'tg4Agtk1r2tV,ha';gefien441;t.sPt-1;iivir,-j*Miali.:!.,11..r>' ;,11431,r) :11/04:4#144K11143,Pialt*ritgek4f011111Ac7.4*4;114521744)%e4:=1.:trt,VAMilila';;:e111:,.I:7*:q;i41.4"'.4 4r:1,%Ldlidt:;', ,a pd ,,...,.s,, , ,,,:af.,:ys• ,r--,--v---,1,1,4-i-,-.'+,:.''','''rrr; 1".r.VI•P1,11•IN 111°,11"..41•14.'1!IC•1.I...II.:?,A mvs.17.,4, ,ini,.4.4.4.1.+VA..2.,„?0,.,rill..,4 .,,,4,f.i- t,-5'..,.c,T. ''''.4k\d/441?ti$Vi•-•' ''''' ,1•••"•••••-•1^1;!'4•4'r-''''ca.I'i■:7,•-•.,.41:44C•II1t5tcW,AtIlikkr,1,,i,,,-.4...;"..,L.:2 A•AZ,.;11.4.4.14f1,0,1.0,k:4.k?-14'.1:'4••.'a-,-,•,:le ei^''''1;nti 4 n-s-,----11■.:1 ■-af:Zi,■4,1..'■,i' ittl.i,airrs-4-4114, Vitlitb s,litt7e1„,,„, V4,:', , 4'N.:42'2.1t...j•nt':i1S5St(3:4'ir% t ____,4161"Tr E a,atg Ptr` ip lig s.45,!..:,,,J. ..?1,-y: .':giti;:likk,,I!, ,`,1c4;c345-V-ilka--44.1:541; C. -4,14;'...*ct`l9:zirti;---tf-i-ifTfitr...:1RH:::"; •.k.::(2:1,[,,,-i',.::'4:-.t s:to .;4 ;;. ;.,...i.k.41-p; twg'-'0-0§NAittiti,-4?-.74 4c14.-1.!-.44.. 1. aire:-.>. .-.., ;...-tc:ii:2,-.7.,, ,,-3.,,K:.,:,,.. . .°!-.;'',)Y.:" '''::".,--,a•24, :::Isrrir -.;r4c-iiTa-.*:VA.11,1,17?,4c1.;-.'.,ofe. S..( .:, zpnc..74;,-4,4-{±40 ''' ,. .,'''1.4--4.4 :•AA:14'244e.4.41 ...1:1'... 41114411,,7t1:;c Ltim' , 1A4.31..., ‘4. \ - ',1).-' -.A:'7.\ '' ' r -IP L'il. i'l I If‘1661:k4 ,.::. : - - .:,---- .1",. ---. ''; ..i . -.ti: ;:j,' .,i'i'lL:g. :" / 14:A "rei,r.t'aiG'Ipig,,Y)>FAStr;im4.11Itike::::-v,:•z ,, . 1 . ' . - . , -. \<7.- : , - c ,,,.' -'!. ., tzfz :L.:' n...,;t1:2:17.-0,,,:;,:-,..4 ,.',.‘ -,.- : [ • , —N. . . . . . ,,‘,.;i,.. 41%-4,,,,:-"iii, Ve,.?1 i---,..itit:tw.,,,i•-E,;,frt .:04-,:fitil.7.L\ ,r.,-; .-. i ; - ,..... .. .-.....*=.5.,P,--f:iitt- -...,--ys,.-... ... ..w.,:, ro:,,-,,,,,Nn. . .,-,4 I -...-..---t-- . ! \ - ,. ,. ,,, , tcA '4,■il ...-\ .!!'„i,, - , 1 ,,:. . _c, i4,4!.-,i.,-, , w.:;!ext,,,,7:!gck„,„t.:.(1.titc-2,..:;.-1:4 ,,,2 ,,,,ccIrcu, ., , - : -c- . ... . ,,,,„,ir, ...!!:itr!%-r-!,:!,,,,,3,,,c,-,,-1:1::!,,,,,c!!„,:r2ci ,„.„14.-at.,fra.4 -iii.)*/tr' ' . ., ' ' '-' I.''' ' .. ''......,' .--,' 1"- '-''''''J -- ifrif.d.1.);"t `ur.lt."'"-i/i. 1.4 r--41/4/7"-Q :14.411;"."--'' ' .'". I.. ..frm'''.:' I . .1 ,.. ......... ' - 1.N..r.:.-,1 t1 1 ±- . .4..•;a11:1::42;.7......I'd.:1410,1",;14C4'fill,Ilfte,=,.5“44.1 te: t,iraq,..„,...,:+4k A.,- - u .. *71..c.,.,14,,.- ,.:.ii .-..-ort.:-..4.----- --1 .-.L ulie• P-—,..tri. r.t.O.,.17,'RI ttrj,.. Afaiti,p;,:;'. -1: :■' i 1 '.54,1,1t,'`'.1,;_rilt.--0. 'fje„,4,20‘. .!•*•"-.. .,..,:..--.— —,A-4-c.,....,,,, -...., -=,."''4-r''-7!!'"r:1"6-.'''HD mPk"'"1-43'• /1 ' r>'S;War t'.1 - I, soy; --,ft■ p--•..„,,d':oil:- i '.4•=7-141-t-4-.4---.,....:-4 ea Ivc.1..i'lr...-tt.'. • h.!,..'.)4J- ,.. ..14,,,,... - $4.V,4,1:,,, f Pt Si,. "C' i,;trl 'IT C.,':. Pt iP1,4,1*,111,t,t,i;',21-lit `f• 'telkirat' ta . - r.att.--yr *WP447* '41.4..4.'"' '' n.5%4974,W,INd 01,',Ini 6/‘840"4e4,0,';..i '11j09"..?5r411", ..- ■ 4;t4egkesq'tC:-..' 'IA 4-4.11r.4%-iw-4 41 RI;,41-1°4.6 4 7 At. -1414,,4-ri Ne...,-",:g,tues. ...s. ' — ti •I•••• '`•110,1 PIA " fi r'11VNr1A,2•1,1I-V1I'Ijillie,i'44-44g 4,64,1/44,141:1`" 1i-.1.h.1,4424 '... 444Wir-'2a-14:.^ii11j13PA.S4Z4p4.•;■.'4 42!'•LACP:•,43144.4.4:411 ;e elk"'41.‘441 r44t...,.:A.A,wf.---- - .1 01 ,h‘i11 ‘'..-1 1.1..c.', d.,,,,.:,1•fri;21•4.`"I Z1414,JIL4711q44,1,ret1.14inal 4-;.-•1'4". .....4,1.`tr1r-' • •• „14,1?,I IS 1,,,,1,..4.1ttailsriii;.!4,C$W.?,14•41W:freVS.1'.:414P414,;211'ff*ItjAP% j1 14k•i:;'.4]t'..r.;;:'.:111:117111.C:Irr17L..41•,4Pr'Fikityl .4M: • . r,,,.1"1:;': i. • -, -,4-49,k■ l*f F‘I''' •,,,gt:Pt..>VC j-t-::" -„'-'tP,41frerqttl,..;L:uci,4alt46,44,aignt l',ii 4417■:',';',, .1.1" ,”:2:44',.,,-**7-`'ilia,'T,07:1^I' 1 lk.., firs:44,p--triFitttoigttsr:i-1,-p A g*,eat-,.-;,:tatP47-71k4kft-Wtt be.-747Serge, ek-V.ttigLi;W".0'-ita., - *,4.1440.7at-.1.5.‘,..,.„ r-Srfa'n'tvi. -;•'0'N'Nel-.. fia16401. 444',#`l;'6V'1,4 alai,1.14,71t ttifflirkiOtr,-,'-;,"*V03:fre.tidnetiit.4.1,,,,t,t4 r Istii. -541,6tt " .11 . % 1 ,11r- 1 41.,: 1 ,`I,4;11,1111'4"iri iil#41141101, '''1'41;41*T-1ft4044-11Wansi4ktiCag CV - . - ' 41 ,,,iiJ',cf! *Mil,', 1th- 1., t .r,r,ii, tir4=4:046.Wri:40401-lif)*Atfcta‘Strti'frOPIIt rgitY*Lnels4;11114/4". • . % s '.."11-t'..-.. .t..‘ .,, litagrikstt e..i.4.c.,--0,0,-..,FAN,..-Pligolite,A,16,s,,PM to, AR mr.i.'4.*14,.t,,,Atik.— ..,,,,,,,,,,,,o_. ,44.,,,,,,;(07.1.3;;;.&.,,:ieri,„(aLaroitiki,,,itsx,„ii.:,..„,:a0A.faiii..,6 in.i.,40.,nitimk e.,14,,,...,-, • . . .,. • ■: . - 4.' ..- .ie . , I 1.- • 'Xt ,, _ - _- - r,t ,. .— :-,-..... -0. __ 4.1r-.-;„4,----' • • 16-3) VIEW WEST AT SITE ENTRY SITE PHOTOS S pil ,(A,Ave.,„.,05 • Randfp,ptc„,......." • MU•en, : I':904,980-1161•In.509-944- Air r Liquide Cucamonga, CA B-1 7 PITASSI ARCH ITECTS ,INC. Rancho Cuca monga,Ca 91730 • r° + ,d' '9�4T '+S'fri �+ !t t�.C r2'rf '�rE P iI w^t 7ur I N t'y z'. •• • � ,g F' '(.{f'�1 4 a ,, iliNg 'i,i `5 `W, ,4r 3' iAA` w'. •A G J .. I)•y/fin t +c1,6,...r �+r n o d e r- '1,. .1 „ • yy`3 lge.- k ,{ F^'Si `1l i T y-ii to T', �,y t k'iYT^`c t� ,v .4 4 i* s+s s.r ,+ a j } i".{NV`fi { f Y J ... iR. fi` A f..'� r u} SAS vs 4A F >.^4 .R '2 rASS, n a al°f4 ti0 .PN 54' s y-' 1 er .- 3 'a r-I„ t f vtr''t' tx .a I f y r I 4• �e1• + t .Pltic a �y x0. s'I «' a� a,, ay v"� ors xr, i1yw = 1 '=fi �,. ". s� ' "j3E�'2;4 it skr g� 4" a`l'e , i f t u74 v r , 3 vFe h< TlmA ab3" 3 r M ; < t� r` AIEF Y3 4i-" + G _ iv" �h ', �FM1 s3` 'A +7�II F 9s fr def U ffi II tit h v1 �h� j+l 9�$ ,� r 1fu a l iY lYN r� ' S t''-a � f t v a - iWZ l 1 i+.8. i Tai" If ,'. • Y ty ,y A S' ? X11 Ei� �Y. S y t� �_ viak t-. rI _ _I 4 ,,}.1t or:, ff4• 1. 'n, s, : rk, G�d1l¢ $'f�a�y 't 'hy xi,�,vP+f 3u 1"kG f� Ixx{t M,,Y ! arr, i mr! f .r ade -r.1£.d r l✓� fy v". u#. h r LmT x 5r fA: «i r ai��A nA .4r v+' £ t i l a'+i # 9f f > p f I x k"k a I . ��r�q�tR 1 a A e 3 r' 3 vn tt- xj"i` r °� r rK '£ x'n v tl� 1 5 G 1 f£ r�i at V9 i f7 1 -. . r u r1 ! h w ., 1 s�1itr ae.i� al ✓+y nl I °' +,Sr et tin-1 P ,y p 1 r n y tl t ti di'�xq Sr i 'W1�lP"s' _ . y0 iAt 14.:141 .r qe r 5s,'. t'. x i 31 f .1—.4,-..77....-,,,-. ....w. tl®1�{q�a '}'�,af5 �3oatY-'M gyjB k:'T11YLL il� ._I 4,4 .} ,i5 t...J t:'fir } x4..,, g nt h1+'.a.. a . _1x1 b E..••. ,>-. rd ,u-"' [ , h i I�'}[ S-: p )fig" ! �¢j +4�i �,- t1 tk. J1,.( ., �.ix' r1�5 Y .4,,�i Y _ 1 a i t fmi d It tr y{�, *-'1"it L i---�t �'' ,Tke .A T� v t,.-n ":"1 l wt 41?2i'.y S r}.e.i0�„„ PA„b 'Ih ,, j�it ,, I h 1 'i A '� HCi�3 �I v„- i r: Ifd 3 +` t jfx { F ,t3 f {'( 1 l'�i krot, L t s#.^1”Y"� f i k q,! v ! Yt' kL i / { �i,I; �$ Y r �3.y^ s i�`9 R fi ui eSy d #jl'p ! f t 'AY �n I , k tl1 Pl'Ir' JTF41 '�;".v' ft�n! i� I ��r4Tt3y "J �'1" �3 iY It ��r;E r 9 i a 4 .0 i 6C tl^ i'M Ar^,'vbk &In1� .+'N' -�.�i,+r! in '..s. J'�: �1-: �� .�. 1:4;1:310 rl) I,"I k� n aY 3kP IS fiaAs 11 f } 1c 191 4 A A a b , 4 " G } ��t ,V-S 4 ". 1 iiJi 9l' IIII'�4$14IjI 1314�ht II i1C r d b� iN44 ,,M.. .t445-kl � dd gp a�T�l . �Y I xrvd x... rif+viwry ah "5 L 9 If° .e$ �. ° r:�., e A- r°. 'IYP i I � ';Ilrr.al a1 it ,.e,7;;u , c 4_., ✓�z.2. as Fut A+ ti .."�+ai �—ate v' rn` i� 7 p, �^ea;;-"`�i Wm �Ya�-`. . `e pp9�.� �Jy + s 1p1 •3al�ai• `^ l�F A"' ".2- tt Y `T !'kx. 1 'L�fA�� k�.11[t� S - Mi �` � Y > T ! 4 f., ,t, r I� may " SnIMn .� 2. Y [ I` 't l { ✓ r e r, i)`�Se .g3"Q.„,,,,,-:;;;;;;Sr, 5 f ` 45 i; ✓ "u-. 'r✓f`'a ..i 1ry..3si` ', `� 4�h • A • e J v. f ' .+ r "T�, A�qr y w i is 4 1L „ / n r � v k 4 t i 7 en ,� }y" j4r d " aee -Y i t*' t r x >.kti }3u' t071, _u. �3. i,y' M .7 k1:d °S .. rPF.,Yom' {S, • L r,ar a r g 4 ):I e x d b >,. �a !fit , 'i " . " A A4y'. � �l c'. sy, c 1 r _ /" .f h ra t s .y I . Ai s£i ....tit i ` r . ^r'+' e +vfx 1 u >r4 a 1 f f M� 3K r V [ry :. r a e 4 .a Tip 1s £.a^ rv+"7. -y-• .0 .. 1 r lSsc ck 1 i, 1ar A r r 114 ., kr + W. fi tt qs pd <e a. kr 'y T I£4 r hw° +F �;� �i i Giu f%' - c rF�,�,aj P Ina x I .. {nr„ i TS e r 4 uP :.:*. x� • e• :F (_� A{u{c Yom, Y`". f l��d .x,a d -. �� ^v`-1✓r Ya e"��ul '� �1Tara�x�� x'4L ' cvy� �'�s,�.-t� bo- F't'� Sr r �3 Y -T.. .y5 wy`t .-' i }6.i , 4 l` .t t r` ~A t t a :.te1c }a� H� ,1 t. "4Vi,.,fi f X I .yf) � 1r,'r f1 . ,.;;; .5 '*di t'^XA,a i - , bN„.t n i P k t:-9. S ✓ t r C,yl4g sry, � e;;Av v'S. r yG'Y�, ,r f i t ar•c,difrr i-°,t41 trreN3;, t `�'T't ' i�)�"-4.„.1 T ,I �K.PJ v..,> i, ttf�t Syr ' i vr_gt i £i i'tin3x ,1.1, 4 iii Vi +4i+ A r. .V,kA,� P A +4 i } 3,, Nn,k 811 &i' 6 k1i ( G4 lkk A }� i i �A. .° . s "'h,,,1,F c,`9 :1e�y likl".1" 1 vv 9Y,1,y`.1,..R9 g ak .Y-4,-.,'"P," ilFt+tl£� ��)^� 3h},'. r !r t i �Hb�y�„�y l yn lx,aS Ei fa , E,,, . ,. v .b` z m1 r*. ,�ly„r' �,a?wvA h`M4eL.xJf#4{ J `' �t�r,�,.^a,,4��kii- .0 d fV'k x t G4- dl i t: 6�Y"*" .1 _ ..it ikW.. ts1 kris.', 'M I''u`ti5 'Y 1 s j! y r f,'.., v Lc.17V.c'Gr."43, ,,y+ ' 1 S.Y.`iwk 1 ]fit Tar � „°JSV. .�i �. . '-�' Mt P f i ._,rlSS �n _...-�?'3�=n3�,aA�ri ,a .c .a�*j �IS:r1 1' �'t' S ,�Ib"+R 4 .t w ' ti,f ,.•,i as-- ` , -aa^^'k .• '�'..a *f '� {r' R. y�? .s t �'v"' 4 �,17-€X4'.' q4. "ie . •ryy'- rf 's� • 4 -... ,�' *�`'t�y by F ' 'fi ,Tito. -'..c "Y Ti 4 r' } r+ ,r' yn-1,-4tl,.u. w, -.b.40- , :40,-*. it x..w n app t,9-},'vx r yor e ¢,i ci1 * .,,,P .,,, 1Ar- !1 � u t ro trf 1 r mA''rf "i P'+f<;- ti "'jt� a 1#n�`tp"'S] 5 ytk..•d44-, "c�¢¢ , nmi41`d:r✓•tq'f I , .?4 !) x i a a A r P > I v r� a r t a'� rM .f4 ' �'f "a'ar �` ..cT'.z . ,.n,_..s,.v; ,, , ..,, , _ ., �'_.1 .. 5 o.w..a t.i...,. ,vr ,.S.r..u1.�.. r�,9 ._«C... a�`.ez:. 3s r,u" t 04 VIEW NORTH IN SITE SITE PHOTOS • R-0) Iliir Liquide Rancho Cucamonga, CA PITASSI ARCHITECTS ,INC . • • Tel W8�341 Ave..,Suile.-58 • Rancb(yQnnrydG91i30 • • Tel.909-980-1341•fa.9]?9a35B1I•wnil.ppYaPJea�'irtHlwrvn B 18 • • • t� " .Z e'.`tv z a i iPA C`,F��J rS ^G1 k Pn5 9. i 1 rl' A Mk a 4 , , 4+4 y t r,k ! 'e 1"•,� .KilI x55 r 9 hl A" l fl SF M + A','4.,(201/4=,",..,..., ' +" A , • < kkr Milt r,1 M ��U�1 .fl'Xx`r,,, �k Ii.F N �r pryI i s r •4�4d< 1 armor r .I` {�N �r iltr,�� I� � 1 " '4N >maa°°'y"«"t ' R fit`f.{q ` >x -'t`t r 4 qr f 4-0. NPl"� f!,k,'l lli'trfU �x 4 i xrtriiP t w 7 �1 c a I~,g4}'•.1=4,1 & , "Pty` up,P$ S.n. 1 1, 'r' !A ,- L� }r t ht ,.St`' 1.4 �r∎313�tatt.i.. ,r! .rte. tre xF tut"^alf. `'r j �F t Azi f. .,A M `+y �'`1�`,!1='' h. j~��i�',, , �,ea,• '34 ,ILO In r a'�.x'�n,,f t7i P t ee '` t `$4,W W# .'.u`r� �i a'51 .. . °'1 tt . h £r a It . , �4"^;" y ,�'..b:. .�'° tk cm,0 1 e -r s i " Irsig 4 „ »F , `fr j� 4 l ' a4 i i. i 3 4 c- , rr `y n P' �' ki,41 fir 4fi'4 ,:] 1' 1 .1 ri'�41}i�a ,:4114W.l'Aiii . h`PS!;: }� f'�r]`� a. Y .irila °4 P ' t!kg.i tM:�.'17d2 !'rril il "lyk r '1' h ,�", 1 itP t'i1, ,,� � Jam' "f �� 1 u t s al:+,f i�1II .*a ,y4J',,btbr r if 11: l.t if Ts}V;I rit$34,ill, 1 �iv„til'ri f xrf45, w q,.;t]+43 P� Ini ` 4;11"",�qtp it}i;..:se ';9 441;2.', 2.'x:41. .�ticat`tkM" Y,,.. d >�, !fitr ,.I{� r ,';"rirIAy P ,ro„I,; 2.,+ Trfr,}u ,.FYuI” SAIL''� '�. ''�Pa+` ta u9"] f �I �,Y, Y*rI rrfi 3., r +�' IPat.M;,± Id1. �r? ° 'f",111!;14;1;714 4til Sjri'e P .ellsge4 i,lg3,,`I t', 4 �,`, id 4 w v � 1t e s, rk 4 P fl �,'(4 0fr }' xa en rl 'IM"� 1 § y'1-,r � � 4�,k:"�F�'�r �,t1':'V�'v a '�� xiaaPr��f�=v4;§'$0111$14i� P f;1.41.41:1350'14-4: I s ICI � ,Cu It1��V,tr��, d,�;�r��+^'�. ,�Y.i�! �'1{ ;;P;a�h��n'k 4A4�a`�� Cit 5jc' x tzt P 1'5 „r"A Fri :t .441 ^�.� L,. r1 �10v t r« �h a i+ t``T ¢ Via+' 0 611.1#'3 k I. `0 r4v,�ter ?+ 4 i '0zr w x 1 t lr ->:f l�. '141p ! ;ib F' �-t,hfy, Iw Tv ea F•n1 'rl j tgliPi 'T�:� �' Y .{ 4 eh I o773r�Ts < Hr,! �� .t ysa• +A..r tr- tc.' y - b ¢- t a y I r d b W c .n a p 1 fry.-� i `t r'1s;* , , *-'; l 'fift4;4 h.3` M''4-'" -'P �i �. i't ti, „%, ,4 ,aYFJ tit v:.; 4i. lax;$l$tl°^N 1 0. '£�,r7.'i'`tr -z 'r, Z ;"IN. l °4:Pro ,y34^t :r�' �,"0. pyi 'Ca 4a t, f.. o r,F RIVli at-gf-»rt,t3-lu I �.. " �.;ci"R Yips i al,? <it .x•.4 m FP'T'n vI �� ' 9' 4ti' b. i4uls^-1;1. .{y. ,2.,,04." }}, I �4't {p-; b vi yf 11 ,i S"n1°'I fi^ i''"4 Sfv' �.1 1 ! -v ur-}�^` 7 + ✓•< Lilk i }31L.Mfity Jla�* 9 o 3{ { 3�} a�er3 6 � � '�j-r Ni T�M1 114 tV {11 L t P ��;t� �rlr I+f�i 1U d i t�1}"yv�(I G+h �{$t �^b rJ�.f•'l��w �l 'u1'4�1 '�R (r� �, Y�c'1 I lr"' I4 yd a 71e I I f,..p.,` {P �ff j ` I4r �P.• {'4N { !3`" a.l�qPp sri"{�fll^, zy`Y' rIN jWk440t.-Ji{x +14:W' �q ,9 iii" lui;,94 f�pp.r, Ver' rP.4JJhili 4 ' �'tlt5 13' Z{}w } X I Ir -4.- 7 I. r ]fl il'I r '�. I/��F $ } >4 4 , 1104, 31'3fp1I v 1 t. c i 9i+� 1 k JpUt ti: r`99', ii, 4-; t os "4 y� ti,; 4 ?4,40, 6 } 'i, i rlrt r ,t �rin ^,- Ya M1^' L n .- �� n I, + Y�jjS.3' o- t 1 xnY. � +% 2.h 4W PA�' 1 �.�}� +. I �m q �t s�J %1" t�I,¢��J�+�,>C. u7�,''7qI G4'F'�i W t'K''1 N¢�t�`�',� >)"`C'�,,T 3 +' :4:41" " 65 d "� A i 9c,91tri-lt rik C. .�3thle a�^ '1)9A. A�y� IL>�t 7 �1" x t 1'T bT• I F gQ j 1£i S,F, .h w . ii 1 f`.i�`':11:4 XI J 3a'Sf,a'^.9mA ,{, �- i trirCf c Y}S"r h 1�Y �1�}}„„ f 'Trak� fi 1YM1kf{ I aR,?!(; .l .."� ice. � �t"y, S bp�'�I�atfn$`�'=y+3'� ��.k5 'tf 4 n;It-Y �,y d 4 $'P'P fi] J Th�.A .tfl I* +;y f "1 I a y.„z ,ICO vA : i' „ ]AR7;J,1 ,.als a 'Ltl,,j iA 'v t",t ° dg''°,",Pi '�,I of �tt',y�r 0� ]19 „. ,,}^' r 1 •w` ,>5",`4'i°S �r"i r �I 7 ,v .t,�,,,t. `ti �C�� '� � I '� �� Y uY .`IIO� �i .� '� 4 �'d� �2N�'k�,A� "-�`V"4 » � '� 'x r�"`,' �r °i^'''� °�i, `r�tf ��: 1�1i1ry J�„�'r;�tst, Y n P n 9 w1' L y r I 5 n I N A � 6 d+ ��t t I,V( r$14a r 1F I u`I i 1�112.(SYt x I��l ytJ{, �p .0, 7 .ns r "R.': 4av .y�oy "�.r� `i M' 7iyl rr�k"!.3�y vl�J'�u fl �i,T,an�F �']]]]'}'��'`k{lx{�k'`ilf��"'',#'�t^r,. 9E'1 ti y5�xr} ,a �qp' l+�'' 4",yy ' ' �' `"�Jfj`��.E at 6'4�j1i� `,n ^"1�"vY:�1 ``i [�W } S,.4 7 i „..4(4�,,,a rj 1, tdl�] - in �, .., h`Q Y 1. .R 4, 11f^ _.l. 1 n• P• .. d] N `�3°' l 4c tp Q• ti. r p31 tl q'�� vt".. --3 ii - Ns Q 'S t °k , F 1 Ci r le.w... •sw,..e tu_ r,!;t G eFS«Stbx"'� `?xt'+, ,°::.'y"+may N i nS :l i ��Ss ... r _rsa, .r_ "'fk« _ ufti.rs. �, 1, .z� �..�4•v'�i. :� 06 VIEW EAST IN SITE SITE PHOTOS • ic •• r Liquide ' Rancho Cucamonga CA PITASSI ARCHITECTS .Irc. bS39 WA1m Uak M...,09-14105 Rnnclu,Cucirmga,C"736 • • ]e 1.9p}9P0.1]RI•fay.9�}94581a•email.rypiaBnONiardv4[fau.n . B-20 • ° 'S. „ a O Fe r .f °.1'4 1 �.: " cia "`• Rt. .+ , "t>114 M A r- w '.' IIr � E . d r. a r M A n"�s � Rs; ' y143,*" y0" '� . y 'It 14°0 ,4 i'fr. r a T e 1 k + $A lr 4 C v u 3 " s $ 5r c , %" i g;?-3,s r f k, Z'tq 0,' W ` R 'A i T3 b a " % q' 4} r r l, a r, G K:r 9 M 7 M n f04 in' +' "3• h: A4 t ' J4211, 3 n R^ t}3 I h J v 1i [ l ` , 3 v rK4404 37 ,. „O. '4 �r] F r �V � Y�V.N i , 3 -`30 . f 3- t,. a oc 0.. L 4 . t'1 ri{ - f a 00004 :1— re 'ti r e. I •F r1�% ! a' t l :; �Pa,,ppprr }#>xu�zly 1 !It %WI I )°1 g�{r $r` p,tr }I�r 1 6g . r I TO aT/,'w Tu' iltt�' $ 2 7 edI.4a„Prtspe,�,,ffA�ti , � vas[! Oac,0 {x k r}yy}{''S5�rqqu}u '�b�ggg 1Pii y Mg 1I at 191 sS � '1 ''�9'i31 tl,.v L cJV rvcr } 'TF'xi•, I� .5x a .' A4tl tr.As•m+'. q as ar'C E�.it S iga f a . asraaa "�/w x.a;ai.u3. .ss iV y O' 4 +1E4 •Pf0at��A t r 'Y f ;. . v.0,1p4404 Ay �9�fr &w a z'a '# t,.A'ry Ji 4:4.44 .,4.- T2t,;e1=0p i='� t A u F?d•Y i,lt.4 .4.i s vi x 'INS.2, l;In °'I i rl iHrn{lO lrym yv�i'1m f[� Dr ti?[f i r'�[ k r � 'py��a 1440. r.+,xS.l' f rk !�z F a+.x a `t4, , -. Y4 at.e11 .h 9 z'ruc:4,4,�,Pt w V ' f, ,+. +�x 1 dal hn1'w r a M s rd a �9�.zr n 4"a w t 1 G ^n rP �009ry `t4r0,0-SG'^ ..m' e a t! ,.re F a .. 1X yJ ""M' v �'5± r/04 3' ,4y�y 6 iiii,T 0,01 r u _h” t r eft r a+r : 41 r r y40.0'yrr d�w'' a rr—.2 a' ""� „u x„ 0 1 'pY 3404 Y "• r i g'.q.uY f a K a r .i^` 10 00 yq,..v kt ,+ r- - �vYt�S , a.ac^ r .11,9t-'---,m t r a sY :,,,;...,. %4`-x ,.0 + t rA r 1`y .'Ta:,-7 a', sa 4,- Tr a�## tifir . "±:,,a4.4. 6 '°'� ta, .+.c.a "", i.F- a ,. rar ak r.. urd*4sw t- fS � M3t �"'T�+ .. y, `�fin!^;�5'"'a.^"`i�AaAd � '.v1�rAt Ip. r ,• i0..r P ir-S +-+! •� 1T 3 w>✓.? ff�.t�. ��' ht Jr" +r .q-,�; •Pt= ,tn.' .714. y.ahiaSti r 7'fffta y a. 4`trif h ri .e J5• 1 t'.', hr1r 0,r "six,,,Th��.r '� '� sari 7It +^mr r C 4A b# % v : " g g' ;asy4^4 k 'uAP i'4ar.M✓:.1. eti.t.:1 rift 11• A,4Af. <, w- rn •II 3 y wt 1 . 4 t fa t MWc r A„: .1P,tia?eA3 • -i�"A" k e 3 i :4 t�'`r�Ftl'16` 0341 ri J ns a s dtv 7 ^ :hy. w's.. j 4"';r u0". "F: "A. r rf�c£la"."4F.,`tf k' V htF°si7f?jam" ) I T .� a 05 r�` '� rn-~1 N I yY# s d4. ^� � t{tr3.'.Yy' "``-v7r� �."' ncf i°ki�v 3 r 5-� [ n J '°� ' f.'� >k.d .x G,. 5�y' � eL ��yx�j. .5 SI' n.a"1'1 4 '1i.1 §�'�4 -r 4 e,.t yr x�ki� [- & J .. i yh 4'. ?' tt l r Yr `" t„r„h, a3c r r d TM ,.6 S{.',tt a 5'i t' r4a t 5 A cr' �,i�',! .�r1a pJ,,,rn+�n r� � Y '�.F' ��' � r5� �_�i✓t� w✓,.�'ix� y �n�'qt J x'7 ,� f l c.,y t41*Y -30 a.y, h ti S.r a 8., i ty t0+'O"�hlw'0f.... 700.2 ,Rf yi5 „ter+ wriiA: &4,..n i"{ - y,7r [.t2.'. I'a u f l .�. ,. � t "'ftii �.' .'J�SiY,fiPi'rr..++f..ly. .�;5` ,-..s.. ..ff�. .: ,.r.s. .-_ �..A ar'v.,:.w 07 VIEW SOUTH IN SITE Y SITE PHOTOS • Air Liquide ' S Rancho Cucamonga, CA PITASSI ARCH ITECTS,INC. g , • 8439 Wive Oak Ave.,Stale.105 • Rancho Cucamonga.Ca 917:10 • B 21 . let YA9911361•fax.90}9145014.email.ppuiaCp4d Ntlmacen • • • L."' 'ai 1 r vm, .y.} .� } . xir 'h `nF' q`.'.` .s' r 8 + ,4 r °' a mom'$'°£.),. • i v '{ > '9i %1"Y -t-r'— .., r �'`"' �lty+ 4a�yt�^ �iti 7� "`gfht 's- tom 1 i-' f _rlyttj#.. f v. V`. • '4' .y .,}'��.�� s i;.gk ) +� 1,g0, ...ls. r&1- I :10.19. 4-1 i t'bY- . 5 ��5.' Y ff '} tai Y+. , R i S' at el-ez i+'}„v w At`Y �"t p.74 I.R"li gAH7�S '�M t trr 1h 1 r g kk f- Y n M 2:1 tl Vat a'r� r ; •i';wif.r&i lot-li ry R" 7 > }tt W.-ft• �r a.xt< �ALVfAh }r '' uc kt� a� r *:. ' x Pad} 7iF k '1Y*U,ry ''�`�,E rs tl tgu''u a� 3 IyT t h ) xt y " 4: �(!P k S q sfi i 1i.„,. $f c 3 1 r�'r nL Y,a 5 a * I 5. an 5 r. yS t, '�-,L�",411`3') tat yr 't j N7,'1 .Y! h is 4tig"'S�^fp ``.,v , '�.Y r9 .n441 i x{ J ''' 5,� Y°.dii�. 3 .t bra ra,t IX �r^ r k t 3 •0 �a,,,l---- -pp r�au'Gdkex c '-'q'� i!"is !t xc 9 m 'dd ar l�a .$;d4 ,{--Y :p f .J•( kcil •yN O w ,ne±4,k 4s'$ lin r r k,rPt�. .x %“1∎ t M r. �.f d a., Y tg 'ya y f�w2- y� . b�va., w�'e � { a` sr.>�ti• l�i'_ t 4 n n F >- ,. ry ika fFr ) ;,.; 'x�`t1 nrcV�i '@-f 5 ''aya-J° '� s m•t- c"'`yi I . k �s�3+.r�VyG a•F '� ^ t t� +u) �.}e aj$r`� s`+i�1`� I "ten � � 1 - 1 7ter' -Ilk-”' i T rz W"1:L.- 1r f4 'mss• Fp 9n L f F;tri �f, r ry • y 1` F %). » } h u{ F'N y'(w r+ r a t t„ li y t > ' I it t I H. pi t i. A\ 4- -� �I^rt' i) ''' 4 it V I dt$ ut r Y i r .. I k?4i >aiA ."k':+`�'�c°r uv ate t r,k. 7 'oA'Ac v 1 t m,� r _ t v> 4. y-'.'a .1.14 � J ;,_,}�.a - f Yt$e ytA�1 i esr 1 t/ 'Yy F 5 . . T- � 22�4x�x. 'F ;'tv P`yt-i`iy(rr�,,,� Ya��. "` aMx'Vt t.� . �n I dL�.' � +r..W` d Y x'tt Y41^3# '17+.li9,i4--� �YSsM:� S 7'"r<r +x x .w l�' IM u r {u $Aaa.3. a� /10I Itti a uY r° ° ( ptr v R ' n i` + to a y �A1 yv }x6 1 .r�1 t t , httl11 ra')5 5rr S <, ] "-i7 ✓ .7101 r4 SP r A`r't.kirt",.k 1 ti, . fy irt'�: ,,ac' t i 6 v u t � r,: A o <-,i ( I r �� 0,� x aNcm FtFi 1 C r@,,N (l` t1, �)I a/srwp r� n+. ae� T A dpi J ! �W it,, ip l li& i` r',S:u .{r. lr..R r > r ]T.2 k e t..MT' ) 9 .�{ �.« a- F• vi .3 fi i• r a :f a r�. k f t ;: P r ty r. . 1` X x-. Aii r9`" S- i e, `tRi.gi 'ftla[t.,---S' aa1.T^ ta--,.e. ,$t ,a4 iAre:#4.25 . e a'�: �`ja,, g a 1 .ttcr.;-4, 112 a 3Ft�F tiASIIrx,"'y..�„z`� A# t aiikta i`Tt'r�LS `e t 'H-" r' `�r�R hn W fii4tal�4a x i3 1 r.-x r-°-- Fc "„'" I V'+e ek----,t �4 -c '"�a tea " 77{{tK "H' h, I A n a.ial£'1'�,�+rY� 3 vu}, si"r tl, &+5�( .�Y�t x { "i1t75�e�t'ec uM i.-, -1 'nrtiv53..,, 7ri. "'qr.,' Aqt -""° v 9,,.,a4 C 'P1 "'�` �t�7 r,F {,li?i r"Y-A '�i "1tw,, e r, Lar 1pp1alar �'��J11 g14 14xr,,,,4 ^.r r S r t..as ..n.. r"', t •r r 15:.^ r ,W it r, u kYll'O�t'hia�U iC + {�"t4{4i .1 4 `az-"' -'.rac' aP ._'ar+ ry'a % fL DIMc.,�f7,r t t o '- '^ u' -• y. .. nom, Fg 'Cg'• " i t -t '^ -r Exrut C 5 n .. r x)' t ,� I, 1 ✓ v x 'Y;F Y1 4Yt! ! l w"� >T Y t 1 s !i4 " a"`t v [ ? (-tf 7y..s- aF E,.. f 2' :t n,a { tk ti 1 'x- x:t 1} t ti c �S'1 ✓`f a r „ -sn *. auri�i•+ f t r f`1s- h.. 4 a t,Pg '. r !i a "' b� pv r ,V;' x a.ix t r .n 1 %9 Mt:jbYR la4''1 'Y } �-� n..fi. 5 4 ab^°ft n r u i Hied ,,w Y�L tt a. ya .[a a here , x 3'I, k t t] a �t I -> t5 I ti 1 p I ti's7f 8 4 LI ^d .w . : ti .y i v� li t - d� .. 7, A,..:5yg>j,a Jt] 1 it N 5441 Lr'rV,. �t J t M .�f t..J Nt a ri.`k, is -% N - r y Y+S GY tsr'30 i. r i Simz $• -e d 1 1 , stir '4 .: �y 1 <.w) KE 47 r['r.ait LS�4 >v `�V'y '' z 1+k4 61 r iz t. .� r - .. 1`) t L S .x.E-4 -c ... y; rz $ Srt k .� >.5v° rr M1 t!L N ry ,h it u- y '� ^ "T .-zu, r L d: ♦ T a E clL-:- t S t.r t 'i;x y t 'Satr Vv a e: it) w.. 3 5 t• ) '4 k 1/2:ALc.9i3'er.c., .3.c',,„ . ,s r ..., ,: ._..n'z4.. '1...'. ..;.n4A* H.... ._ . "-.. ... �w.....,<'�-, > -.T_ ..., a;_.,;.,?x?. ( VIEW NORTH IN SITE SITE PHOTOS p„,, . •ir Liquide Rancho Cucamonga, CA PITASSI ARCH ITECTS ,iUC. • 8Li9Wh'nc)I OA Ave..Suite 105 • Rancho(uurcng;G 91 AU • . te1.90f.9pM1l)61•lu.9p39t45d1,•amill.PViaBPAm.rdittmu.n . B-22 II- I I IIIIIU I f tea.. III .:-.v� �_ _ V V v c___) t • I ° I. o I -_—is r I I 06 �� , II 09 01 A 'Pap ti. � a o � � 1 o� os 021, 03 •7)1 Fi 0 13 -0 08 �� ' 04 07 D r ooa (1 1 1 r 1 i ALaL' i21. ,.., • \ ...r____T ____. ,...._. ___rat -j 11 KEY MAP BUILDING PHOTOS July 21,2009 Sir Liauide �� " PITASSI ARCHITECTS ,NC EXHIBIT J . a,9 Oak ,� . F �Ca9„0 : Norh • *dwssnlMl•Fa059-wa3814• �lgWrplmWwen.,,,,, B-25 r* •- lefir.t : •u..; 1--- '''"Y= --'14 TirSi•qt;- :, ;‘ :1ity ' e:1„.1; IA! . , = "-- e4.34 Als.* .,•:,-f(:it.:f!-'4-!-=: tf47,: i .. t.!.. #74;r1/2 -:-,-.5eibtr -T4: : • .c't ILl'•: . -:' :-..- , • c ^. • . • :.:,„„:,....z.,,,,,,c .:5:tt-a VcPt-A tesr.,.4c..t.Y"..irf,V-a. 11;:. qtr. . . ..„::..7,7"w-:::?;71!...:.:..,•:",3,':!;:::74---411:211,;:t*4e( • Flit s7, - - - --•---: -.7-7:7--: -:-.---::::-.-7i7-A7.--,--:---;4- 4-4-....-..74,77,77:,...i.„....„:,7,7:-..„7„..47.„ . ......_. •-,- 3 ,;:. -77 . . — - ,....-"4t :,-;,...:a., .... ___„,. ,77..7,..a... ---:,-.",”--! i-:•:-...,.-:,..;.:•-•;,-,:,,, -1-11/4.,it 4: ,..-..,.... z!-::::.;-,•;',,,i ;.:,ist?' •-"zritsTRA...-- _ ,•__.s.:ar:Z"Sia--.41"-- ...11'=• ••4$3''''''Th 7.1 ,Va,f;:' le - •--, ''-farn.a:7:r. .'S'' --. .. .are,crvf-",ece.t7-1,HZ:-S704.. ,ti:c=:17 zyr-:,-,i77-7-7"rfm.i.,c-f. „•!‘, irt 7770 - E-44T.0•4: .."-;;,-.7i;tr; tI:7-E7'; fintf,,,,,C.c..as -tawliffs7:1•.- 5-47,:e •••.,,•••;;I:-.. ',F,„,.,r,_:,,,,,...'p,„ ,,,.,`.;,,,,.' ,1;4.: t-7"4"'- `'../12,t,itr4i*Vjgi,,,,:,....'c';-:;ra. r., ,,,,a,°•:,,,,'.'LIN.,lk-,,,,; ay,lia,w4V,,,,i,,,A7:4,-,r-7,-÷,'=,9„-: _'- '-. --- -4,;«,,,,g . inid.,,,,16 7, friatt`.-.ntr, :24,-S,'-a i :,.. -4-1 .' -::. ...::.;:-.0elexci ,,z, -!..-,...c,iii, L _ " - ,...- _.. FIN{Z'A,-' •,.. aln.CIZAtt,-..: raii,„Ftt ."-,-;.'''' W,If ea049:1-: :-"as=•'' 44.1.-f•t.3•::':77::- . .;.; :.:,..••.!..,c7,.: - --;f1L--1130.W4,teiVM*---CS--7 %: 4: p7c:: ;-'13.•:7-iii...;--:•- ,s- ' --` -'-r - -:a -?>7•77‘2, ,' - -...-,-... : ;:,---csii• -'4'7fitcri%- 'nLi:7347'''' a.41'7,7'27,•''',•%,:/- -'''--•:,77',77:::::::I , ;;^-41-t.a0:1•0T .:1-E-i; -cl-lf .SAtczyp ,,,;:::::,:rit•Lka••;EN,, ki,,--!--L-,' .---;o:trpr.,--- .;.;',i.rki„. 1, ....s....Az.,- ,...,,iv..,, R,I1j...,•--.4-tr-77.- ...;Inz1-.7,-; e!mw- ';',•.•:-"•-;-,••:,W at,'1;4.17'; ,,:_f,.....:.? „,.4, 't er, $17,1 517V-1111/Er:Y;.,-;:.Teki§?&•: ;;.+,4P-,,-,?,,t 3. -'--$''.a.,•f-7'7,11frait4•11,4".4in•-74:7-'-•,',,-':.7a-fi 47:rt:Lneue,NJA",7:;■ci-,?;„,9,"; 7 :•:, •••,-,21::,':,•.,,7,7,q.•f,I ---- "..71,•:',-rtit74.4:671 :'A•ta',,c=;].:S 'EX Acat•-•Vt'.-a rt''''' --rermtmr777:L•..41,-": •:144.00,,,4IV&:',:'7.7-...:.:/-7447 -- - ----f•,,,nrrY41•7:::' 0•,•da,74747,"-73:et'... •••.:744 int.:S.7S kn'l- ::''''•'•"?':a7-'-'11 ' tfir7:7-7 :;.-2.--itit:77'4.-'7-:," e•TJ-7 -7 ttitiar;Sqlft tc,i, i, :.;^7:-.7, „ ,,2W,;7.24:74.;■.:7:7-;•4--7---- ,,4,,,,,...goidli.k•aitre..2-••:,..',.•;;Ifr,f7t - ,--7,-"f•r-277.1t.”`2,"7-77;4..,fe's" .-:-.•.%•:‘•;,,,,"4.:•s;ia..4- f- ;-,44,..-ea 41744'7-"%•-:',-7.-it7:7i re-••47.27:7•t•,.7'f.. '''•::-.(4.-'.,:;;42,74c:,ia::::4.:1,egaf`ft: ''' rtr 4-t*-43:crr:,,.:./,.:....frigift • 1'” r<5'i. ..---* .at i:Vriff_t ''.t.'1%.%}7:391$7441.anZ,CI:)..: n -. '- .L'9.'- '-•' .."tXA::.:-C,,■alitai&T,Z 5,•:,t-..:4Z c;ef2Z tt;fj.'7:77:7171:::) 4.6':jtC. .,;.,‘S.WAArtr.e.:125,1i71., -Rg hrzi 4,.:, 1___y('••\,....15`.. ......,:_,,,,-_,,-,,,:ria, :?4,,tirlf.Artait / ,-faij reepe_re.",•,,,-;;:t.."•:•;71.,747-/.. 4, ,:.. atact.7, 75"-n•-••,:i•ie•-;:.7-5 .i7.7.,,c,:ia•., -,-•.•-•,,:r3,2,-?4-47?*ft --,•4:-‘1:4 1Aqiela•tik7V1.7cifSk'S-V7'7ZW7-:1-r-n-• re. "77;g7egtpie;tri :...-7,.„....;,,i,°-■thir,':,r,A, .TP2.1"t•L'',71-a7-,•.-,7 40'.•S%-..0 '•7'4.;':',:'; "6'..:...;.. :A17 “... ' 0.'.Wittr,.:ffgdrA.1..',4?Att.F#7,11‘.450,!,:..fil,'.'C 047234-2:54$-,,,,,.::"':41.,,,:-:,4,1.,1; i";"S 4 'Ir,a'',4:SE1,175.‘i';',144W4Ited..4%,-,174,-,4-,--nr-r,..., -,:erinitl,:„:::, '-''''''..-7-,.,...,,,teiA-7eiV,,;?•:-/t:i4424i7V, ;, ,rtil-t.t;s;z2q,'-' ' 1. i. -al.',:.,: -1-;-::1- "t' „,,i,41-. 71.: gAl47:9,4ANiiitvizig.tY6:-,•0E:4:::,:.:,Z.2.t::=:::: :14 r ,. 10 ,- , ::,:::4314:4 :.0,,,444,w.:::: .4.94.::,4.404:%:1 -1:::±:,:x-',:i.'-`:-frv4.- i...-... „toe.:10-4.-.0.,:itt-:,:sygN.::::t.:,,ytftt.;.,ta,:::{i::e7:-,,,-.:::;::s4-1::=:fr 00: 4,..R ,,,,,,,. :i..44,.t.,„. 4k:, ;:iy:.:roffektstA5liev:}":4:::41;.- -.4;;.,:z.-;-w.:::,: • .s.:,tr.6.:,, .k4,.....,6 ,M= t t 1,...t4,; ”..,;(t7,1 ;14::■.IC2. 1r4ig.-4:P4*.:f.4%.V!. .,;?.. I•6, .1.70 't.' 'Lt,‘ ...e.:‘ 47.1 ;.1"7:4''AitrgRttkairtitS.P;.....r'■173';‘k C. ■ *' .4.4,1.. 'f,,,,,.. Ir.. Tr...4 r,:r.li",it.,..47 e_ t ..41'4n:-.4 7,1,,HaRretiatiaHr_174n-ca-liaitAktiP1179,45P:4;t4:140;' ..4'..14,-75:■,1 ,:VT•L-4V-e: I'S a- t.--.; .r24,7,7strZi;.,:„43 ITC,A1:,-444%.-,.7',.-+ b.,,:fi.rii,:11A";?.Yr.1%4411-7,:q.,PA,. bziN.1?- l'%:-.V;t'irittNI:ibl'aln4V #,Y3',-f'.P...1=44*-^Stt'll-%;'-''L}Fnl'At4 . ,,t5") -'.'"-%.,.„...irtbapt:':,,J-,11.;'teltirf:0'", ,,--i- .--' ,d^,i'V% = 1-natf%45,1^Sttit.7.SPEOla,-'tr. ..,9441',.,F41[; r7:77,:;c::::.; ,,,,3,t;„;,,,y;c:4;r:::::tzazgler,..v,:fr k:,...„4:::,,..:r„,:p.,:yi;F:2:4-::;,-,fre,‘„-‘4.v„.,,,,:s3.:-4,ry,Tia,1/4 ,1::=1,:i.: :4:t: ,..-,L.:,43, - .4,-;101„,./.4,,,:0,A,a,„,..,.:.-s,.- 11;',4,,p,..,:t::: : =, ;.„, :, friV. . . 41 :•i I tci .,, ,--*::z4;if:-.41.-„,,.?,,;_Lz.:_,..,‘-c,:#4.74-,44,. ..v.„--,,,,„5:-_,,a-40,44,14.*:„.5.A:p.ist.,, t. - ..,. ...q., s'-'----...„ ,-;.::-:-€?.-74.v.4..44.Et-_,A,-,.:,-4bititir--, 7:essiLesta...._4:4P..1-sebLi:zi .t.r. ::1 4.,,...:#..4..,..,-„:-..,-,..5::: .:_..._,.,,i,...4,:_tk,,..,..,„41$1,--_-4- ,.1-7.:%.**3,,,,fr:iz,i - -:: ...-------....24 :::..: „ 4 : gOiti:g..,, -;:„-z.,- _ „..,,,,.‘„ „ze.•,:terwiy,:z.c4...rite:•,44%. ,.. ,„.• '' ' •,rni,,•+,:- 41;411- t;2rkr,,tet,JE:„.?:,,,i-gra:ne.:1%4M01%?7;eZ::'2E-24.•ta -f it I .'".' •:"2","--?rtt{4:1:;f41.bat;•• . f..- . . k,--”:4` tr:,"."'%.dr.t”el..:114(t:4--ara-V -LVSIS-.77r4,3:”2:::::=?■;,. ..-214Z' • ,“ ' '' s4!I'VP1*;-t.:•t:- .. -,4t;-:?:--17:?"‘.::■;e1I%::;4?- 4,11'•1414-ea'-' ,,‘C,XS%-siAVU4;7411;,4AP:t>'-,Irt:k3;4::■:44 t-..- •”". _- ,..-...ps.,-rni.,- „,ttz...:-,--_-,;-::::. FLTi;. ,.r,..:chyril?:5::::::,:';&*?:,k >;# ...atti,,..wo.e4,:szacir".41,i7:J>:;.r.fi4X- . ,•',* .71.rilt,-,,,.."-:,-2, YeVakyr4047.-7...4:,:izT.:..; ,,.,, ,,,,A 4itiz.,‘,' % il :;":;zr- ,f:, g.(4,1V4- . it ,0 '.-2z.:1-, - .Ye":7 L'I'•''';`.'''-•--,.:-•---.7,'.•.•.q..r. h ,14tl',Ii I ; ; Zi::1,1t77.2:F4.";11"..,; f,: tc.),-..,.,,,,,,:': ,...;!.'.....-:;- ,.-, ,--,..-,.;--mrri. "41.1%aitl) i.::1'tn.croS;;;:c-94-V0-4".; 't i'.5 r'77t7'-',CS:772.77. ,.,=,.7•,',7,v; 1 ••••c,'•.--v,0 {;:iy,..7,,1%;',,,,..--•"".•-•'..2.:T;;.•,44% - 2 .:7‘,..i..5..;:x.',,;;.:"...1,:$4-4.,..1v ;..,-,f,:1-•;.,': 4W- .,',' ,:4--' „.--r,'.‘2.ggi,..;r I' :-K..:0, „v. ar, ,pgisto Irsitatenataqfkzi.H4::-..;,,i=,-- .?7,- ,,...„„,-,0024:1 ,-::'- •.354,:;,,i,fe::tr,r:tt:;"''.:::,:E7frxi2,frel,4.- ' • ,..1;c " „r., . r„,,-.., 5:•:".:1.t . .:,-;,."f;-::::-4.t-t7::::::::4;44$40.tiit414115-iit.01 --, , •-IN .., '.--.-. -- -• )7:,-;.--"w„-a.,,,„2,,,,,,,A.,2,4.,;:::.4.---,7-y : „, .fr 46„.4.400Ez6-1.,444.1".::■;:v,?: ,7414Tr Akig ig4CfEt.,1.7.7:4rr.,-..;I:t,p7'4,7";:inirrit.C7',34-C”Z4:7:°.",-'14*I. ,-,r1W--4b tni..,;,''.....rer..1:-.14.hr''. I r-;,....._.,i'.C.ti*.'“'Irt.'-'1W2C.C7'3.t.li k.tAn' "\44''''''`'. •""''''''rm"--c''' " • ; ' "'''' .• ----'-'ram, ....---::: “--.^-:'‘.4.;‘,„4.7H-‘,44,"Itaringc-424 5.:241.2114tilit4:ittalitiOSTPC:::1” •.:='q ia:X,r - i-e., 1'9 '-a-4.Sr C.■"-‘?''‘;') -4.5.1.-ta't -; ..., -e.""`e, C.....,..'..1,-:'.1 1.1:....t.'1 , ri-,:,-::.„,„. a t 4 t..r i'-l-...-- - -c.',-A:•71-'u-6"*.1i,.",1r•i1co,0-i•i-,i•:-•,•4....7;1",..t.,,-i--;f-h•:.:;•m•'=‘.3.'.-,n:•--.j-•• 3cgyn•'•f•:••7.4"/.-14:`•1•;-§'&.;2%467•?-:-'::'4}•:-4,•....:-,=,-:t6---;-‘.;• - - ,A:,:ar•'',1 T-it-a. 114-, - r - � �,- � ^.2.'y " 1\A"`l rir^ • f F -3 n a x I r J:. + l{ 4 s W $_ r_ �* � tv C �f xi 1 , • # •s ce r�ez` §1 I #� m La I. N x' n ` r ' r c- & t ,K u?r` 4 '' d° r 4,c.i. s - '4 n `� p ," r 4, - "R"'y' " •F �e T 1 Y.-.. ° �x"[' i' ,._ ry i 'x -xtA E 7+ t *' q yy,..'s.,, ` S ^m 'PA a ks3 cm ^r ^^{-yK"r} j sr ^a -rv. � x # - r ! r z z .n`s ,i , .F � de p S . 1 m f .. 9E' 1t { s� Y1 a : 4,� r x - _ 2 ` .'C _y l !a'-S Y hY i fr•-m4 b t , pE 1 A +' I y a h- '1 , a I .. M1W:mm�•t $L� ` 'Y fi -y C S y •t:u f y ; • r a_ j t!F!iirr,lk w.F n�i j A Rrhr rb..a•„;”`��v"¥,''7rtev,,r'^^teu.`�`se+r-'in r R+ .l 4 q}"H v� . " f o x3At I,i.at -. r p �;t•A,"" .Wit_ a4 41%11'4" K + r l 8• 1 i a ry a".i ...` e .�- ct } s i s Lea .y t'. a-- omt Rsa m . t - C —. — `" i, " Af s yo z ' . T jy " ` 'LC t { 641`.-,,6.; M +W r µ'4(. 3 { , r • rM t A�� 4: " r " k g a' t nyp w '�i . r s. t g %41.14'::: � ^ iw �„G i , �s,}J 7�iN. " S "'vM+v+� s S �L' �,{: n ex x si, ... ---• row .' -'6 ris:y k..t .x - r t T G,",t frnr i � S e U y a--z ,-,,_ 4- a spr Y1 `„ s 44-,:a Ey r i ?FEW 3 5:AA h. . e ; °c'h `,i x Yh q "L.k� ix,. `,1 }r G , r r� { 1 w t .•,i Le... y d4-is :ade 6 - L 1 5 ' t , � al ` . ,{ i . 3a tzi 3 ' NF ,f t '' i,as {:� ^� st5 I� e3 : �J "c-�� 'stw' ti L{ .e r$ } arxv i rt , a :r aer®C + L % 5- ; f m1 r » k `y eit 1 x alieZa.} ' tI_ irr . y •' v4 ;.n x v :' " a `y 4 v 4 M Ek " x a = �rs .-,1- l °j f :°^� - yrF,".6.6;ffi+2 -. +vim +a ` j1 :• aTRfa 4 ; r & is• P a[ �i`'i, i1- "ms."p::"?..,: . 4£ F xl$ F z' , a�' .�h " -' as r y. ;� t J ' G f- r ! �s t .. + 4i d 'yv . "= r Y' s A fir - s F y, { F- Z.4 6" `• ` jiC i r v d* �iNS't f , r ? +tiiv rr} &P$ � _ . i4 3 a I# l Y .Sa f t- "Y x tl r F i� 1 d $ i 4 rd � d {. ,:z a il s P" !1 �� ; r F L f! ce k 11c *n "`y r � t a� d vn rC >" od _J X1 + " �j µ 14 a ^Fa.a�4 Q � x ,k ' r Y° t :,r i E � tm � 1 r�L11 j e a T t g -i R s r 1 "�5 J u -f �E � _ s} . Y" V •i ; rLLfu h4 Y.o- y a`,Jy- tt S ' r t: r � 14,... i r 's gx * qn''cw A r , t J r ! u ,dy 4V.NVy. � 1 ri 1 £ c • ,9 t °• 1' 5i ins fX + :y + ya i r x �e c Pty ' W'4 + }Y rr3. n a. Sr• ay '�s- ¢ ..e '� ?,ry.' "' Vii t .5 7" fr.! CO •r7-2; c* t . . it- VI ..,. -:g.-- • ---:-.',.. -5,-.,")/A-,f,m;.i,J-,-., , :... t 0. It.'"OiXj.1t7‘terk,a-Zttt':- :i- . • •?:''.^CC ',41 :',',..V;;S7trIkr 4. f.at:W4.11,QfrapAI:S, ' i--7 ;1 ;1','i';:?. 4;45. 45Ett774:"..7: VLA ,;..- 4?-tro:4:4,4-74,,f-,ire - „,,,---941 - V .1A,414,:.,-4-1,,.§4.4:,,,ze- - liffaktst,,,,.., ; ,i!L , -..4. --141,wsgt?-44,, 424, -.4 n -71comtp;,_____ __:., ,4tut .... t.--,.,7443oltSif0414_,,Nit3tir ._„....„..4t,t77=z ,,.-c., fr •.•-•.,7"-.7.-m!tr‘:-- 44 • - ,-,-;-.,,at..• - „, ..,..-:-...--,a,;.: i.74'itt,:t s ”' ei _ >•., . ,riCt: " ' ''. I" ."t:... ..:74,-'7-71 ,q1P41,44.4 sit -.77:.;:- 1 '. - IT' 2t4;71?e4'2-ift` 31 ti C ft:;11:-2:-2;" X.44 . ., _ . - -__:,,,,;.:,;,,-_ ,- 4*--t-Fr,"4.1,7.f. .4-1.14N4?-- - - ' .--7,' :- ...,H 4-..;--,:±7,7-137,M1,';‘,.‘ .; .7;#42=',1 -,--;7 77 7 71 :1 :::::::::jr''''...!‘);t1/•;;.;H:4-27 i tcr2c,C?; p..„.z.;?..5„;;;;h421; " , ..::;::::...,-,.••••;'-r:71;7•7:)1,;•,4;1: -•-•;.tiV5:75-,tac _ , --, ,-.... .-,-0,7.-pc.t.,,.,,,,,:-t•-gc; 3.10 - .., ._..,,,., .,_,„„2:.7,,i,-,;- .. ,..,-;,,- .,."-,, ,;-..t-,,,,..:,e7,4,,L47::: :-... 71 kgR:1.1Sgilt. — . '-.;LE,:.']:;;;;:- '''''.77.-;',il'r cli-t'-1'4,4%frile .: i •3Wiz1771Z' gt■-,- ::: '-.:'::' rThr-i,, :•*.*:5.”-',I,:','L: : r. j'- ,.. ,.. si : Zlt; . -......,. .---7 ' iitsi...2...:4rt..;._IA: 1 '''--"Vi't- -.- .. .--'•.--;;4:1;.4.,it:;;1•,,74 ti;MOg -:-',t.4,6ef.', 4, 5,:-, ,4,,c,-: , i-7-. •;-- .,;,,titthiAlti`'.:.•.4t-,2:-.c7Eir. .it: I --:5P fl 1 -f ..,. _:,. „:,,,:.7.:„ ..]:ita-rt,Rtt,- f,- „ mt;..„.,,,,,,,,z :1-,F,-,:..t.....c--;7-:41-2K•,4-1"----.74-.. -:. .,,-,: --1- !:.' -4,44,:,,,,,,;,v,..„,r.-1,15-_,..:,„ agri,g,, ,...Thjgr,c. pa„ _ • -- c... k11-7--,tit.,,144‘,4 ,,,.. 7,.7,-..::',: :: .t".17,:,..,,,if..,;:. :,--,i,'”, 4; - _,iL ,-„,_, •- , •1` -"-- ,, k7-r,t.,t:4- '''•'---t-T: :::,;, g14:::::;:4'744,''•I'tt,,tjc;;,gr"' *.ttZ ;7 • i ;;W ,e4H111%&,TL;;;;: 4n :Pg!lt.??1,;.•Y;;'C-3- •- -747jak.:tt 't it 44 --' ' :&46:;•: '-c,:cek4:11.. ..4.4r.Kit-tvi:4ta,.;:i4y :-:.:?5,7),:fi:::,,;;;;;:.;?2:,,kc,, ,,x3*?.; .-1,1Z-11 wr I'S‘fl :,:-47daitA, ;.:,":...F....i14:1:4:3,-;?klitit.Z.V.AM'ifir44-..;,„c,- .„--1. 1ft. p ? 4, ....LT; 13t1,04.117;fq::, "2"---S;t:4,'' :-. .'''eWJ,=4';-irAig:V;,;k:5a,=I'4t::j;,,,Ap*IirL"f..; •:•:. ;1 ...-;.;:...i.,-"4,70,,tr:,..y.:k.:::,,,,44,-,- ,--tst317,4v:;;;13,7:n-J::';'4.:-.E,Itc?-t",01,,,'?.• i': • !-c.„4„...4:47.--st, .:‘...-yiz-i: t.,,,,..7,.?„,:,. .,..,,, ,ii:/:.:iitt,:::*--FE-7,w t ,pciaty,a,:rd: 4-7 -3;-:--,--ri \''''',cirgc,44.11;1;4:'1:::::5t5:4;,,,4i,.....,c,ke:44.ite:_:,1 .-2.t.,. t..,--j,-32+-4.-74‘ "a- .t.r.-"*.rt-:9,',:,',;;;;:.:,'Lq-:::-:';'“4;•;:t4,47:?ft.r:•ss.itfLifeilkfA.,„: ""C1/41/4,4„4,., cipL-,6;44 tiz •-:,cir-:? , 17;k:-0.?Ntib!ictap-,:-.7:, -,)B.,-,,,-A. ,•,,,,,-- 35. .-.,-.7:;:f.:,•17:;..., ,:'XIIILIE;; ;.-7".Citr-;;;;Mtsf',7 4 ;...:;;k:1;: ; 744,:tr- i.547-L-4:7"..fri. a.raL44.-szttfl , '7,:klt.efi.,,ittari::.--:.-;:i'L.,..".;:5L?;.-2;i2i,,A27%::::,4-.4tvi- L.,...,. -2717:1•1„, e-2r-±1 .„ ,17-4;.`ia,,ir4,W4116, 1,5.a.:-.. 12:- ctsttrype : .14:;.54NTattkees,:likie.:174 ` .„: ...,...„. -,...7.-_,...tans,,, iiy$3,44•kr4,-,.- ,,,•••2;-;:.11...--,, p, ;04,,..• 'im.N.,54..:(tin,341.41t..•.•?..T,‘:-.-• ,:f?!,;?t ar.+ , 't . .' ",2,9 ' 7, . ;! ,e1:4,creitl".;;4f,t?,a4ifai;4:44::. S.4::;ytorileicks.'., tt ,--.7,.., . ;Ii;1.2;7*P:,--;.,...;:ii„s4vARTge,,,,4-,,r, , -,...". .-..T.--g='TargC:Le."(i",„:H-7:::' :r;L;-. e r‘ii;;;;IVI;;S:104:‘,:■■[::".75 ,,,....z.. it, -A, #,-- -.,,r,, FT ,,,, - :04-4_,Hrcr1/4;7, --„,47-.-->„41,4,,..",,,,,,t,- 4 ., ':2.Z..""kir‘ Vit,"tV*-^.7''''''-gli'.'"' ''''). ' .' -• •;?:.:kr-ftrik.ikr4.5 .--7,40ii;•51qt$ 91:1':.14: :4:'1';:4:t-t -ilf,-*415-',,,,Itki. ,,, 4” kori,if.-w;•-. y:-.,ti,,,5'?:iSicAnZ9i-t1/2:4Vti,410.51 dlkif sR •''-'..4 .g.tt,.,-,7‘',4%;"1', It/ :.'' :,..,4.:4.65141941;V-4...a!".”evrt.tte,.',11:!,,t,-,,k; ' • 'toir?',C2`"-Mt. W.A.,,. , '. t 'la N tarke,: t .''ffrrati:tifgillIll.?1:Var`:;;?..""''1;7414Zit'lltfitlar"Dal -..' a i,'',l'NskAni..:!4,..!riA■140:41.'"'11 ,•,44^trtmja.!,-Mq:.k.' '.4 -.l's'. 'TS:attt 'e'tr.'',i1,4„• ,:' •Intk,'"ttiNI:317::+1:44:34.ittel",,,,,t1.1:trWitkraCRI-ELtfa.:,-4.*,n4ci:S.r". ,,. .,74;('''''''' r9,1 ..- _., ,.•••■',-- ezve..4,., .: ..... .„;: ,:st, 4 -r, „4.43sitc.,.4„.4.,.,. „... --e.2.-- -11,,.--.,z -;-.4- ;? _; 4,7y.i.;*,„.';`,C4ir, tia$43.4,413;t7441,g5t74'14a4::%17:1441Crif45,kt:454,* :12-ti;nictakhtg: .6::?‹..::Acirt".-4,Ltat.41,1ttirg$41-K7*.Riagft74=Wt,-..-;;;;;74.4W:11004i441C: ygi."-t413,titiWati;g4W;LAM.Sr*:4;0;;:t,:t14V4Y ;.144':::14.:%; 4Z;;;;t7kt.M :: ;cR;" ?:;*0:it'ftt' :-..51'Atklic..1 ■:;:tti."';;;Inatti;;;:.:-."'"3;S. ‘iit t4 .%tbkit,:;ilik;cX:09MAT,,44.:,,:44:i;fri,t4.-,..;:v_ dc,;< te ,,,at..-.1,m4filt,ji,, ,Acq.M.44.Wif':'::::ii::::ttiths,12•;-71,W:;•kn.--,;€`2‘;;;,..;:i.A.:Ntj.c.f.24•4??.;;;":.,%ti.:(;:,t2a1.44.i.,:mR,a,-.44.,:47..x.• -.7,,,,t . 42_.1422-d.tr`A.b,Jiii4It;"1:111}W,I,k;2;a4fZ176:15:4:::**),Jalitti:e4t"' 44:44t''&:*:-;tx ...P'.,r;:.4.1 '-'-I;'::;',7$•:;;;;;V 3gf citfrp-,,,, .1 ;•-•-"1:,'Ae5,3**4'Vi'et:44:4"-.Itt`?1:3 :1V --t -}“'"r•v:I*CT-F4-'744.44'4NifilIceePt,Vk:S11:-: to,'r,_ ,'''-/,',Alt:::t j -- - 2- -, .,;4 ...■ ''11?"atS1-"";ZaftClatti'Cli:;1,„‘A-lioSiVieltriVa::;IS,"7.1WA3-rkiift'a';;•- ''''47t,:; 1;44.,:kaf,97k41477:14:44.*;1.1,tat.4.3‘.14,efirgt;''...11,4: 4; .i.b.ta4,;7;:kkftlecit'A:7 'itri , ".S.17' 0 I run.;.;;-:j'atit:Telt-:tantr*.a".4.1,'c4,2,' ,1*-5 4, '...±&,•i:4"11Z:St?- cis-t Fif, ;2.-c :1 '' ."::' -, •.-a. , _-*,,,gth.f.\-.--m%T.,:aet,':Al7t 4,(by ". -e..‘-ir . ....,,=-..t- •ii 1-14'..=: 2::.=-ine . : .,, 5147 Qj7,;t-t72,2). 4 i ,, .4'. :.:451. .t;,:b "IgAtTr,iti.t":...II:: •,... :4;:ri1+4,„;111r 4,;TS'CUL,""1%. ' "7"7:ti,c,G5A74i,:". IA wint4:-, tIS.,4s .:;?-1.. m1;0V:tiatt, '`if rac.---intc;.....Pfr.filta:12:17.aiiPk. i', I VirgiM4M'OCgigti .:i. ..gy: I ',irs-nie. .1' -tg-1--z T.-'4".irjH',:.?•f:': 1. oaftftatien -.:4 TEW: i --.' p41.tfilktiA I:I 'a,Nt.c... ,-, - . ,.-,'...g§,vit--. B-2& k— : g•-.., ..-- .ie-:1241.74 .. • i :.:( ,-:--i-a•-• , • -h. ,,_....„ -,1•.11,,,,,,i-a , :-: i . - :::4:,--41fi •,-.7-wy: _,•*;-;:c.,,-.4.- ...,,F•Astic, • • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:20 p.m. Mike Smith August 4, 2009 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2008-00632 - PITASSI ARCHITECTS, INC. - A proposal to add/replace equipment, construct new buildings, and other associated improvements at an existing chemical manufacturing facility of approximately 19 acres in the General Industrial (GI) District, Subarea 8, located at 12550 Arrow Route; APN: 0229-031-023. Staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt from CEQA review and qualifies as a Class 1 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 - Existing Facilities and Section 15302 - Replacement or Reconstruction. • Desiqn Parameters: The project site is a parcel of approximately 838,000 square feet (19.23 acres), which is approximately 660 feet (east to west) by approximately 1,300 feet (north to south). The site is developed with a chemical facility operated by Air Liquide that specializes in the manufacture of liquid oxygen and similar products. Improvements on-site include a variety of equipment (compressors, pumps, a 110-foot tall cooling tower, etc.), several small buildings, equipment shelters, and outdoor storage areas. At the front of the property is a building of approximately 10,000 square feet and a parking lot. This building is owned by • Air Liquide; until recently it was a retailer for industrial equipment and supplies but it is now • vacant. The property is bound on the west by a vacant parcel of approximately 1,252,000 square feet (28.75 acres). That site is proposed to be an operations and maintenance facility for Omnitrans and is currently in review by the City (Development Review DRC2007-00440 and Conditional Use Permit DRC2007-00664). The site is bound on the north by the Foothill Marketplace shopping,center while to the south, across Arrow Route, is a steel products manufacturing facility. To the east is a reservoir operated by the Metropolitan Water District (MWD). The zoning of the property and the properties to the east and west is • General Industrial (GI) District, Subarea 8. The zoning of the properties to the south is Heavy Industrial (HI) District, Subarea 15. The zoning of the properties to the north is Regional Related Commercial (RRC), Foothill Boulevard Districts, Subarea 4. The subject property is generally level with an elevation at the north and south sides of approximately 1,180 feet and 1,160 feet, respectively. The applicant proposes to construct two new buildings with a combined floor area of 6,100 square feet, install new equipment (and associated shelters/enclosures), replace the existing cooling tower with a new 80-foot tall cooling tower, construct new paving, and install new fences/walls. There are two driveways along Arrow Route, located about 75 feet and 260 feet east of the west property line. The one closest to the west property line serves as the primary access to the manufacturing facility. This driveway will be replaced by a new street cul-de-sac and associated improvements including extensive landscaping at the southwest corner of the site. The new street and improvements will be constructed with the participation of Omnitrans per the City's Engineering standards. The other driveway is used for access to the existing retail building; it will remain and will be upgraded with decorative paving. The facility is • required to have 76 parking stalls for the employees and visitors; 76 parking stalls will be provided. The site is currently screened from public view by a wall/fence and existing • landscaping including trees. The landscape coverage will be 12 percent as required in this development district. EXHIBIT K . 638 • DRC COMMENTS • DRC2008-00632 August 4, 2009 Page 2 All of the proposed structures will match, or closely match, the design and general appearance of the existing structures on-site. Due to the nature of the facility, all structures will be built of pre-fabricated steel. Both new buildings will be approximately 18 feet in height. New walls will be of split-face concrete block construction. In the case of equipment that will not be in a shelter or otherwise enclosed, because of their respective distances from Arrow Route and aforementioned landscaping along the street, visibility of such equipment will be very limited. Although the most obvious change as seen from the street will be the new cooling tower as it will be 30 feet shorter than the tower it replaces. Aside from the existing retail building, the closest structure or equipment installation is approximately 300 feet from Arrow Route. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion regarding the project. None Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be approved and forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: The Design Review Committee accepted the application as proposed. Members Present: Pam Stewart, Lou Munoz, Corkran Nicholson • Staff Planner: Mike Smith • • B-39 AIR LIQUIDE—EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT PROJECT • Mr. Troyer, Thanks for providing us time to present Air Liquide's project to replace the existing air separation plant. As agreed at the end of the meeting, the following is offered to summarize the meeting and support further discussion with your staff. Air Liquide has been located at 12550 Arrow Route since 1977 and supplies Tamco gaseous oxygen via pipeline. The site has an existing air separation plant that Air Liquide intends to replace and the following describes the replacement plans; 1) Remove the existing air separation cold box (120 ft. height)and replace with a new air separation cold box (appx. 85 ft. height) 2) Remove two existing compressors (1250 hp &7000 hp)from the existing compressor building and install one dual 8000 hp compressor surrounded with a sound barrier 3) Remove two existing 60,000 liquid oxygen storage vessels (LOX storage) and install one 450,000 gallon liquid nitrogen vessel (LIN storage) 4) Discontinue use of existing 500 hp oxygen compressor located in the existing compressor building and • install a new 1400 hp oxygen compressor with a sound barrier • 5) Remove existing electrical switchgear building/transformers and install new switchgear building/transformers • • 6) SCE will add a new substation (this work will be done by SCE) 7) Remove existing VSA equipment and install a rollup door on the building to accommodate minor vehicle maintenance 8) Modify existing entrance driveway to accommodate a shared driveway and cul-de-sac (proposed by Tamco, Omnitrans and City of Rancho Cucamonga) 9) & 10) This work is not part of the air separation.plant replacement project, however, it is included for information purposes; expand existing cylinder filling area/offices and storage area • Please let us know if additional information or clarification is needed; the following persons are available by cell phone anytime and are available to meet with you at your convenience. Ted Farnham, Air Liquide Project Manager, 832-265-9001 Dave Jones, Air Liquide-Etiwanda Owner Representative, 760-646-3703 Larry Rosson,Air Liquide Assistant Plant Manager, 951-334-5975 Pete Pitassi, Pitassi Architects, 909-980-1361 Respec Ily_submitted, Air Liquide>Etiwanda Owner Representative 909-899-4641 760-646-3703 (cell) • • EXHIBIT L. B-40 February 6, 2009 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Air Liquide MAY 1 9 2009 • 12550 Arrow Route Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 RECEIVED - PLANNING Larry Henderson, Principal Planner, City of Rancho Cucamonga Mike Smith, Project Planner, City of Rancho Cucamonga Sirs, The following comments are offered in response to DCR2008-00632, incompleteness item 3.a. Air Liquide has reviewed the project description information submitted to Mr. Troyer on April 28, 2008 and determined that the information is unchanged. Additionally, the hours of operation will be 24 hours per day, 7 days per week and 365 days per year. We anticipate 24 full time employees and two, twelve-hour work shifts each day. Typically, 6 employees will be present during the first shift and 2 employees during the • second shift. The remaining employees are delivery drivers who will be on site for brief periods throughout the day. Please let us know if additional information or clarification is needed. Dave Jones/s Air Liquide-Rancho Cucamonga Owner Representative 909-899-4642 760-646-3703 cell • B41 March 27, 2009 • Air Liquide CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 12550 Arrow Route Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 MAY 1 9 2009 Moises Eskenazi, Senior Fire Plans Examiner Fire Construction Services RECEIVED - PLANNING NNIN City of Rancho Cucamonga i"Pet"tY� !iV Sir, Air Liquide improvements as proposed in our DRC2008-00632 CUP application will be designed to conform to the 2007 California Fire Code, 2007 California Building Code, Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (RCFPD) Ordinance FD46 and NFPA's National Fire Codes and Standards including recommended practices and guidelines. Although the site drawings submitted with the CUP may not illustrate sufficient detail to meet conformance, future drawings submitted to the City of Rancho Cucamonga for engineering and construction review will reflect conformance to these codes. • Moreover, an Air Liquide Business Plan and Risk Management Plan will be prepared consistent with CALCUPA guidelines and submitted to the San Bernardino County Fire Department for review and approval. Air Liquide's Fire Protection Consultant or designated staff (qualifications acceptable to RCFPD) will submit a Fire Protection Plan (FPP) for the entire facility. The FPP will include a Hazardous Material Inventory and a Hazardous Material Management Plan. The FPP will be submitted to RCFPD and approved before engineering plans are submitted for the facility upgrade. The FPP shall also provide fire department access (Iwo points of access, appropriate turn-arounds and turn radii) and water supply recommendations in compliance with the RCFPD Standards. Please let us know if additional information or clarification is needed. • B-42 Dave Jones/s Air Liquide-Rancho Cucamonga Owner Representative 909-899-4642 • 760-646-3703 cell • • B-43 • • RESOLUTION NO. 09-35 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2008-00632 TO ADD/REPLACE EQUIPMENT, CONSTRUCT NEW BUILDINGS, AND OTHER ASSOCIATED IMPROVEMENTS AT AN EXISTING CHEMICAL MANUFACTURING FACILITY OF APPROXIMATELY 19 ACRES IN THE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL (GI) DISTRICT (SUBAREA 8), LOCATED AT 12550 ARROW ROUTE AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF —APN: 0229-031-023. A. Recitals. 1. Pitassi Architects, Inc., on behalf of Air Liquide, filed an application for the issuance of Conditional Use Permit DRC2008-00632, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditional Use Permit request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 14th day of October 2009, 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 October 14, 2009, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to a parcel of land located at 12550 Arrow Route; APN: 0229-031-023. The parcel has an overall area of approximately 838,000 square feet (19.23 acres); and b. The parcel is approximately 660 feet (east to west) and approximately 1,300 feet (north to south); and c. The site is bound on the north by the Foothill Marketplace shopping center while to the south, across Arrow Route, is a steel products manufacturing facility. To the east is a reservoir operated by the Metropolitan Water District (MWD). The property to the west is vacant; and d. The property is currently developed with a chemical manufacturing facility operated • by Air Liquide that has been in operation since 1977; and • B-44 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-35 DRC2008-00632 — PITASSI ARCHITECTS, INC. • October 14, 2009 • Page 2 IP • • e. The applicant proposes to construct two buildings with a combined floor area of 6,100 square feet, install new equipment(and associated shelters/enclosures), replace the existing 110-foot tall cooling tower with a new 80-foot tall cooling tower, construct new paving, and install new fences/walls; and f. Per Chapter III, Section 2.5.3.8,of the General Plan,the maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) in the General Industrial (GI) land use category is 60 percent. The net site area after the completion of the new cul-de-sac and associated public improvements will be 825,354 square feet (18.95 acres). The overall building coverage proposed will be 35,427 square feet (0.81 acre). Therefore, the FAR for this site will be 4.29 percent; and g. The facility manufactures chemical products such as gaseous and liquefied oxygen for medical and industrial customers. As defined in Development Code Section 17.30.030, "medium" manufacturing uses are permitted in this development district with an approved . Conditional Use Permit; and h. The facility operates 24 hours a day, 365 days a year; and i. The applicant is required to provide 76 parking stalls and has provided 76 parking stalls; and j. The nearest residential district/use is an apartment complex located approximately 0.40 mile to the east at the northeast corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Arrow Route. • 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed development is 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 proposed project includes the construction of two buildings, installation of new equipment (and associated shelters/enclosures), and replacement of the existing cooling tower with a new cooling tower. This is consistent with development in the vicinity and the existing development on the subject property. b. 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. The surrounding properties are zoned industrial and the surrounding uses are industrial-oriented. c. The proposed development complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. The proposed development meets all standards outlined in the Development Code and the design and development standards and policies of the Planning Commission and the City. 4. The Planning Department staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines. The project qualifies as a Class 1 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines • Section 15301 - Existing Facilities because there is a chemical manufacturing facility on the subject property, the proposed project contemplates the, replacement of existing equipment with new equipment, and although the proposed project contemplates the construction of new additions the B-45 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-35 DRC2008-00632 — PITASSI ARCHITECTS, INC. October 14, 2009 • Page 3 floor area of the additions are not in excess of 10,000 square feet(and all public improvements are in-place and the site is not environmentally sensitive). The project also qualifies as a Class 1 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15302-Replacement or Reconstruction because proposed project contemplates the replacement of existing equipment where the new equipment will be on the same site as the existing structure/equipment and will generally have the same purpose and capacity as the equipment being replaced. There is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Planning Department's determination of exemption, and based on its own independent judgment, concurs in the staffs determination of exemption. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Department 1) Approval is for the construction of two buildings with a combined floor area of 6,100 square feet, installation of new equipment ' (and associated shelters/enclosures), replacement of the existing 110-foot tall cooling tower with a new 80-foot tall cooling tower, construction of new paving, and installation of new fences/walls at an • existing chemical manufacturing facility operated by Air Liquide at 12550 Arrow Route —APN: 0229-031-023. 2) Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with any sections of the Development Code, State Fire Marshal's regulations, Uniform Building Code, or any other City Ordinances. 3) The chemical manufacturing facility shall be operated in conformance with the performance standards as defined in the Development Code including, but not limited to, noise levels. If operation of the facility causes adverse effects upon adjacent businesses or operations, the Conditional Use Permit shall be brought before the Planning Director for consideration and possible revocation of the Conditional Use Permit. 4) Any modification or intensification of the existing uses/improvements and/or modification/intensification beyond what is specifically approved by this Conditional Use Permit shall require review and approval by the Planning Director prior to submittal of documents for plan check/occupancy, commencement of such .activity, and/or issuance of a business license. 5) All walls, including retaining walls, exposed to public shall be decorative masonry. Decorative means slump stone, split-face, or stucco. • 6) Any new ground-mounted equipment and utility boxes including transformers, back-flow devices, etc., shall be screened by a minimum B-46 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-35 DRC2008-00632 — PITASSI ARCHITECTS, INC. October 14, 2009 Page 4 • of two rows of shrubs spaced a minimum of 18-inches on center. This equipment shall be painted forest green. 7) Any new Double Detector Checks (DDC) and Fire Department Connections (FDC) shall be placed 5 feet from the right-of-way and shall be screened on three sides behind a 4-foot high wall designed to match the on-site walls. 8) All wrought iron fences and sliding gates shall be painted black or similarly dark color. 9) Incorporate undulating berms along the frontage of the new cul-de-sac within the landscape setback and landscape areas. The highest part of the berms should be at least 3 feet in height. 10) All landscaping shall be installed prior to release for occupancy. Engineering Department 1) Cooperate with adjacent property owner to install a cul-de-sac along the west property line. Cul-de-sac improvements to be in accordance with City "Industrial Local Street" standards. Install public improvements • including but not limited to curb and gutter, asphalt street pavement, drive approaches, any necessary curbside drain outlets, sidewalk, street lights, ADA access ramps, and street trees, per City standards, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. a) Relocate existing western driveway to cul-de-sac, using a drive approach. b) Construct entire width of proposed cul-de-sac, including parkway. c) Provide R26 "No Parking" signs along entire cul-de-sac frontage. d) Provide additional traffic striping and signage, as required. e) Provide 5800 lumen HPSV streetlights along entire cul-de-sac frontage. 2) On Arrow Route, remove drive approach of relocated driveway. Replace with curb and gutter and curvilinear sidewalk to City standards, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. a) Construct a catch basin immediately east of the cul-de-sac. 3) Dedicate right-of-way for: a) The proposed new cul-de-sac. • • b) Lot corner cutoffs behind the proposed ADA access ramps. B-47 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-35 DRC2008-00632 — PITASSI ARCHITECTS, INC. October 14, 2009 • Page 5 4) Off site right-of-way for the west half of the cul-de-sac shall be obtained prior to the issuance of building permits. 5) If the construction of the cul-de-sac, per these Conditions and per the Memorandum of Understanding with Omnitrans executed January 16, 2009, delays the plant expansion, the applicant has the option to pay to the City a contribution in lieu of construction for 1) half the estimated cost for the cul-de-sac, 2) the full cost of the new Arrow Route catch basin, and 3) the full cost of removing the existing drive approach. 6) Metropolitan Water District (MWD) shall approve all plans that impact their easement, including utilities, storm drain, slopes, street trees, and landscaping. A note shall be included on all pertinent plans requiring that John Osornia. of the Metropolitan Water District - Water Systems • Operations Group be notified two working days (Monday through Thursday) prior to starting any work in the vicinity of their easement. Telephone (909) 392-5095. 7) A permit shall be obtained from Metropolitan Water District for any work within their right-of-way, including grading. • 8) Public improvement plans shall be 90 percent complete prior to the issuance of grading permits. Public improvement plans shall be 100 percent complete, signed by the City Engineer, and an improvement agreement and bonds executed by the developer, prior to building permit issuance. Building and Safety Department (Grading) 1) Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with current adopted California Building 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. Two copies will be provided at grading and drainage plan submittal for review. Plans shall implement design recommendations per said report. 3) A geologic report shall be prepared by a qualified Engineer or Engineering Geologist and submitted at the time of application for Grading and Drainage Plan review. 4) The final Grading and Drainage Plan, appropriate certifications and • compaction reports shall be completed, submitted, and approved by the Building and Safety Official prior to the issuance of building permits. • • B-48 • PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-35 DRC2008-00632 — PITASSI ARCHITECTS, INC. October 14, 2009 Page 6 • 5) 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. 6) 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. 7) A drainage study showing a 100-year,AMC 3 design storm event for on- site drainage shall be prepared and submitted to the Building and Safety Official for review and approval for on-site storm water drainage prior to issuance of a grading permit. All reports shall be wet signed and sealed by the Engineer of Record. 8) It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to obtain written permission from the adjacent property owner(s) to construct wall on property line or provide a detail(s)showing the perimeter wall(s)to be constructed offset from the property line. 9) The Grading and Drainage Plan shall Implement City Standards for on- site construction where possible, and provide details for all work not • covered by City Standard Drawings. 10)All slopes shall be a minimum 2-foot offset from the public right-of-way or adjacent private property. 11)Private sewer, water and storm drain improvements will be designed per the, latest adopted California Plumbing Code. 12)The maximum parking stall gradient is 5 percent. Accessibility parking stall grades shall be constructed per the, current adopted California Building Code. • 13)Roof storm water is not permitted to flow over the public parkway and shall be directed to an under parkway culvert per City of Rancho Cucamonga requirements prior to issuance of a grading permit. 14)The final grading and drainage plan shall show existing topography a minimum of 100-feet beyond project boundary. 15)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. 16)The precise grading and drainage plan shall follow the format provided in • the City of Rancho Cucamonga handout"Information for Grading Plans and Permit." B-49 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-35 DRC2008-00632 — PITASSI ARCHITECTS, INC. October 14, 2009 Page 7 17) If underground storm water quality volume based best management practices (BMP's) are proposed, the applicant shall provide a copy of EPA Form 7520-16 (Inventory of Injection Wells) with the Facility ID Number assigned to the Building and Safety Official prior to issuance of the grading permit. 18)Metropolitan Water District (MWD) shall approve all plans that impact their easement and storm drain system, including utilities, storm drain, slopes, and street trees and landscaping prior to issuance of a grading permit. A note shall be included on all pertinent plans requiring Metropolitan Water District Operations Maintenance Branch to be notified two working days prior to starting any work in the vicinity of their easement. 19)A permit shall be obtained from Metropolitan Water District for any work within their right-of-way, including grading prior to issuance of a grading permit. a) The applicant shall obtain written comments from MWD regarding site design restrictions within their easement and provide a copy of said comments to the Building and Safety Official for review. • 20)Prior to removing fences or walls along common lot lines and prior to constructing walls along common lot lines the applicant shall provide a letter from the adjacent property owner(s)allowing work on the adjacent property. • 21)The Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP)prepared by SB&O Inc., dated July 28, 2008, was reviewed and deemed "Substantially Complete." 22) Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Water Quality Management Plan shall be completed and the City of Rancho Cucamonga Memorandum of Storm Water Quality Agreement shall be recorded. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2009. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA • B-50 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-35 DRC2008-00632— PITASSI ARCHITECTS, INC. October 14, 2009 Page 8 • BY: Richard B. Fletcher, Chairman ATTEST: James R. Troyer, AICP, Secretary I, James R. Troyer,AICP, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 14th day of October 2009, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: • • 13-51 • COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT to ' DEPARTMENT . q STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT#: DRC2008-00632 SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICANT: PITASSI ARCHITECTS, INC., (FOR AIR LIQUIDE) LOCATION: 12550 ARROW ROUTE —APN: 0229-031-23 ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 0. General Requirements Completion Date 1. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its _/_/_ agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval,or in the alternative,to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 2. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval No. 09-35, Standard _/_/_ Conditions, 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. 3. The applicant shall be required to pay any applicable Fish and Game fees as shown below. The /_/_ project planner will confirm which fees apply to this project. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary prior to the Planning Commission or Planning Director hearing: a) Notice of Exemption - $50 X • • SC-12-08 1 I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2009 Res & StfRpt\DRC2008-00632 Std.Cond 10-14.doc 8-52 Project No.DRC200B-00632 • Completion Date B. Time Limits 1. Conditional Use Permit, Variance, or Development/Design Review approval shall expire if / /� building permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 5 years from the date ' of approval. No extensions are allowed. C. Site Development 1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include _/_/_ site plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping,sign program,and grading on file in the Planning Department,the conditions contained herein, Development Code . regulations. 2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all Conditions _/_/_ of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction.of the Planning Director. 3. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and /_/_ State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Department to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. • 4. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be _/_/_ submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for _/ /_ consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.)or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. 6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code,all / / • other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 7. 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 owner at least 30 days prior to the removal of any existing walls/ fences along the project's perimeter. D. Landscaping • —/—/— 1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping in _/_/_ the case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. 2. Existing trees required to be preserved in place shall be protected with a construction barrier in _/ /_ accordance with the Municipal Code Section 19.08.110, and so noted on the grading plans. The location of those trees to be preserved in place and new locations for transplanted trees shall be • shown on the detailed landscape plans. The applicant shall follow all of the arborist's recommendations regarding preservation, transplanting, and trimming methods. 2 • I:1 PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2009 Res & StfRpt\DRC2008-00632 Std.Cond 10-14.doc B-53 • Project No. DRC2008-00632 Completion Date • 3. 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. 4. 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. 5. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas,the _/_/_ design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Services Department. 6. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of _/—/- Xeriscape as defined in Chapter 19.16 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. Prior to issuance of Building Permits, the project landscape architect shall certify on he submitted plans that the Xeriscape requirements have been met. E. Signs —/—/— 1. 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. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT, (909)477-2710, —/ / FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: NOTE: ANY REVISIONS MAY VOID THESE REQUIREMENTS AND NECESSITATE ADDITIONAL REVIEW(S) F. General Requirements —/ /— 1. Submit five complete sets of plans including the following: _/_/_ • a. Site/Plot Plan; b. Foundation Plan; c. Floor Plan; d. Ceiling and Roof Framing Plan; e. Electrical Plans(2 sets, detached) including the size of the main switch, number and size of service entrance conductors, panel schedules, and single line diagrams; f. Plumbing and Sewer Plans, including isometrics, underground diagrams,water and waste diagram, sewer or septic system location, fixture units, gas piping, and heating and air • conditioning; and g. Planning Department Project Number (i.e., DRC2008-00632) clearly identified on the outside of all plans. 2. Submit two sets of structural calculations, energy conservation calculations, and a soils report. / /_ Architect's/Engineer's stamp and "wet" signature are required prior to plan check submittal. 3. Contractors must show proof of State and City licenses and Workers'Compensation coverage to / / the City prior to permit issuance. --- 4. Separate permits are required for fencing and/or walls. / / • • 3 I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2009 Res & StfRpt\DRC2008-00632 Std.Cond 10-14.doc B-54 Project No. DRC2008-00632 Completion Date • 5. Business shall not open for operation prior to posting the Certificate of Occupancy issued by the / /_ Building and Safety Department. G. Site Development —/ / • • 1. Plans shall be submitted for plan check and approved prior to construction. All plans shall be _/ /_ marked with the project file number(i.e., DRC2008-00632). The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted California Codes, and all other applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations in effect at the time of permit application. Contact the Building and Safety Department for availability of the Code Adoption Ordinance and applicable handouts. 2. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new commercial or industrial development project or / /_ major addition,the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include but are not limited to: City Beautification Fee, Park Fee, Drainage Fee, Transportation Development Fee,Permit and Plan Check Fees,Construction and Demolition Diversion Program deposit and fees and School Fees. Applicant shall provide a copy of the school fees receipt to the Building and Safety Department prior to permits issuance. 3. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building and Safety Official after tract/parcel map _/ /_ recordation and prior to issuance of building permits. 4. Construction activity shall not occur between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. Monday / / through Saturday, with no construction on Sunday or holidays. 5. Construct trash enclosure(s) per City Standard (available at the Planning Department's public _/_/_ counter). H. New Structures —/—/— 1. Provide compliance with the California Building Code (CBC) for property line clearances / /� considering use, area, and fire-resistiveness. 2. Provide compliance with the California Building Code for required occupancy separations. _/—/— 3. Provide draft stops in attics in line with common walls. / / 4. Exterior walls shall be constructed of the required fire rating in accordance with CBC Table 5-A —/_/_ 5. Openings in exterior walls shall be protected in accordance with CBC Table 5-A. / / 6. Upon tenant improvement plan check submittal, additional requirements may be needed. —/—/_ I. Grading —/—/— 1. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with California Building Code, City Grading / / Standards, and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved grading plan. 2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to / /_ perform such work. 3. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the time of application for grading plan check. 4 • I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2009 Res & StfRpt\DRC2008-00632 Std.Cond 10-14.doc B-55 Project No. DRC2008-00632 Completion Date • 4. The final grading plan, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be completed, _/_/_ submitted, and approved by the Building and Safety Official prior to the issuance of building • permits. 5. A separate grading plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for _/—/- existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The grading plan shall be prepared, stamped, and signed by a California registered Civil Engineer. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT,(909)477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: J. Dedication and Vehicular Access _ 1.1. 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. 2. Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards. / / K. Street Improvements -/ /- 1. 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. • 2. 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 thatreasonable, 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. 3. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: / / • Curb& A.C. Side- Drive Street Street Comm Median Bike Street Name Gutter Pvmt walk Appr. Lights Trees Trail Island Trail Other Arrow Route 'I C 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. • 5 • I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2009 Res & StfRpt\DRC2008-00632 Std.Cond 10-14.doc B-56 Project No. DRC2008-00632 • Completion Date 4. 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 galvanized steel with pull rope or as specified. e. Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all corners of intersections per City / /_ Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain Open to traffic at all times with / / • adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving,which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be _/_/_ installed to City Standards, except for single family residential lots. h. Street names shall be approved by the Planning Director prior to submittal for first plan / /_ • check. 5. 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. • • 6 • I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2009 Res & StfRpt\DRC2008-00632 Std.Cond 10-14.doc 6.57 • Project No.DRC2008-00632 Completion Date 6. 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. • The Engineering Services Department reserves the right to adjust tree species based upon field conditions and other variables. For additional information, contact the Project Engineer. Min. Grow Street Name Botanical Name Common Name Space Spacing Size Qty. PROVIDE SELECT APPROPRIATE TREE FROM THE APPROVED STREET FILL STREET NAME TREE LIST FOR RANCHO CUCAMONGA. LIST EACH STREET AS IN A SEPARATE LINE ITEM WITHIN THIS LEGEND. 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. 4) Street trees are to be planted per public improvement plans only. 7. 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. Public Maintenance Areas 1. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting _/ /_ • Districts shall be filed with the Engineering Services Department prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. M. Utilities —/—/— 1. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. / / 2. 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. N. General Requirements and Approvals —/—/— 1. Permits shall be obtained from the following agencies for work within their / / right of-way: MWD --- • 7 I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2009 Res & StfRpt\DRC2008-00632 Std.Cond 10-14.doc B-58 Project No. DRC2008-00632 Completion Date 2. A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the estimated operating costs for all _/_/_ new streetlights for the first six months of operation, prior to final map approval or prior to building permit issuance if no map is involved. • 3. Prior to the issuance of building permits, a Diversion Deposit and related administrative fees shall / /_ be paid for the Construction and Demolition Diversion Program. The deposit is fully refundable if at least 50% of all wastes generated during construction and demolition are diverted from landfills,and appropriate documentation is provided to the City. Form CD-1 shall be submitted to the Engineering Services Department when the first building permit application is submitted to Building and Safety. Form CD-2 shall be submitted to the Engineering Services Department within 60 days following the completion of the construction and/or demolition project. • APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE SAFETY DEPARTMENT, FIRE PROTECTION PLANNING SERVICES AT, (909) 477-2770, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING • CONDITIONS: • SEE ATTACHED —/—/— • • • • • I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2009 Res & StfRpt\DRC2008-00632 Std.Cond 10-14.doc 6-59 • .•,e° k Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection , District • FIRE Fire Construction Services • STANDARD CONDITIONS May 6, 2009 Air Liquide 12550 Arrow Rte. DRC2008-00632 Air Liquide agrees to make the necessary improvements to the site to comply with the standard conditions listed below as outlined in the attached Air Liquide letter dated March 27, 2009 THE FOLLOWING STANDARD CONDITIONS ALSO APPLY TO THIS PROJECT The RCFPD Procedures & Standards which are referenced in this document can be access on the web at http://www.cisancho-cucamonqa.ca.us/fire/index.htm under the Fire Safety Division & Fire Construction Services section. Search by article; the preceding number of the standard refers to the article. Chose the appropriate article number then • a drop down menu will appear, select the corresponding standard. FSC-1 Public and Private Water Supply 1. Design guidelines for Fire Hydrants: The following provides design guidelines for the spacing and location of fire hydrants: a. The maximum distance between fire hydrants in commercial/industrial projects is 300-feet. No portion of the exterior wall shall be located more than 150-feet • from an approved fire hydrant. For cul-de-sacs, the distance shall not exceed 100-feet. c. If any portion of a facility or building is located more than 150-feet from a public fire hydrant measured on an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, additional private or public fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required fire flow shall be provided. d. Provide one fire hydrant for each 1000 gpm of required fire flow or fraction thereof. FSC-2 Fire Flow 1. The required fire flow for this project is 4000 gallons per minute at a minimum residual pressure of 20-pounds per square inch. This requirement is made in accordance with Fire Code Appendix, as adopted by the Fire District Ordinances. 3. Public fire hydrants located within a 500-foot radius of the proposed project may be • used to provide the required fire flow subject to Fire District review and approval. Private fire hydrants on adjacent property shall not be used to provide required fire flow. B-60 4. Fire protection water plans are required for all projects that must extend the existing • water supply to or onto the site. Building permits will not be issued until public fire protection water plans are approved. 5. On all site plans to be submitted for review, show all fire hydrants located within • 600-feet of the proposed project site. FSC-3 Prerequisite for submittal of Overhead Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems 1. Prior to submitting plans for an overhead automatic fire sprinkler system, the applicant shall submit plans, specifications and calculations for the fire sprinkler system underground supply piping. Approval of the underground supply piping system must be obtained prior to submitting the overhead fire sprinkler system plans. FSC-4 Requirements for Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems Automatic fire sprinklers shall be installed in buildings as required by the2007 California Fire Code and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance FD46 and/or any other applicable standards require an approved automatic fire sprinkler system to be installed. FSC-5 Fire Alarm System & Sprinkler Monitoring 1. The 2007 California Building Code, the RCFPD Fire Alarm Standard, Ordinance FD46 and/or the 2007 California Fire Code require most fire sprinkler systems to be monitoring .by Central Station sprinkler monitoring system. A manual and or automatic fire alarm system fire may also be required based on the use and occupancy of the building. Plan check approval and a building permit are required • prior to the installation of a fire alarm or a sprinkler monitoring system. Plans and specifications shall be submitted to Fire Construction Services in accordance with RCFPD Fire Alarm Standard. FSC-6 Fire District Site Access Fire District access roadways include public roads, streets and highways, as well as private roads, streets drive aisles and/or designated fire lanes. Please reference the RCFPD Fire Department Access Roadways Standard. 1. Location of Access: All portions of the structures 1st story exterior wall shall be located within 150-feet of Fire District vehicle access, measure on an approved route around the exterior of the building. Landscaped areas, unpaved changes in elevation, gates and fences are deemed obstructions. 2. Specifications for private Fire District access roadways per the RCFPD Standards are: a. The minimum unobstructed width is 26-feet. b. The maximum inside turn radius shall be 24-feet. c. The minimum outside turn radius shall be 50-feet. d. The minimum radius for cul-de-sacs is 45-feet. e. The minimum vertical clearance is 14-feet, 6-inches. f. At any private entry median, the minimum width of traffic lanes shall be 20-feet on each side. g. The angle of departure and approach shall not exceed 9-degrees or 20 percent. • h. The maximum grade of the driving surface shall not exceed 12%. i. Support a minimum load of 70,000 pounds gross vehicle weight (GVW). B-61 2 • j. Trees and shrubs planted adjacent to the fire lane shall be kept trimmed to a minimum of 14-feet, 6-inches from the ground up. Vegetation shall not be allowed to obstruct Fire Department apparatus. • 3. Access Doorways: Approved doorways, accessible without the use of a ladder, shall be provided as follows: a. In buildings without high-piled storage, access shall be provided in accordance with the 2001 California Building Code, Fire and/or any other applicable standards. b. In buildings with high-piled storage access doors shall be provided in each 100 lineal feet or major fraction thereof, of the exterior wall that faces the required access roadways: When railways are installed provisions shall be made to maintain Fire District access to all required openings. 4. Access Walkways: Hardscaped access walkways shall be provided from the fire apparatus access road to all required building exterior openings. 5. Commercial/Industrial Gates: Any gate installed across a Fire Department access road shall be in accordance with Fire District Standard. The following design requirements apply: a. Prior to the fabrication and installation of the gates, plans are required to be submitted to Fire Construction Services (FCS) for approval. Upon the completion of the installation and before placing the gates in service, inspection and final acceptance must be requested from FCS. b. Gates must slide open horizontally or swing inward. c. Gates may be motorized or manual. d. When fully open, the minimum clearance dimension of drive access shall be 20 feet. • e. Manual gates must be equipped with a RCFPD lock available at the Fire Safety Office. £ Motorized gates must open at the rate of one-foot per second. g. The motorized gate actuation mechanism must be equipped with a manual override device and a fail-safe or battery backup feature to open the gate or release the locking Mechanism in case of power failure or mechanical malfunction. h. Motorized gates shall be equipped with a Knox override key switch. The switch must be installed outside the gate in a visible and unobstructed location. i. For motorized gates, a traffic loop device must be installed to allow exiting from the complex. j. If traffic pre-emption devices (TPD) are to be installed, the device, location and operation must be approved by the Fire Chief prior to installation. Bi-directional or multiple sensors may be required due to complexity of the various entry configurations. 7.. Fire Lane Identification: Red curbing and/or signage shall identify the fire lanes. A site plan illustrating the proposed delineation that meets the minimum Fire District standards shall be included in the architectural plans submitted to B&S for approval. 8, Approved Fire Department Access: Any approved mitigation measures must be clearly noted on the site plan. A copy of the approved Alternative Method • application, if applicable, must be reproduced on the architectural plans submitted to B&S for plan review. 6. Roof Access: There shall be a means of fire department access from the exterior walls of the buildings on to the roofs of all commercial, industrial and multi-family residential structures with roofs less than 75' above the level of the fire access road. a. This access must be reachable by either fire department ground ladders or by an aerial ladder. B-62 3 b. A minimum of one ladder point with a fixed ladder shall be provided in buildings ' with construction features, or high parapets that inhibit roof access. c. The number of ladder points may be required to be increased, depending on the building size and configuration. • d. Regardless of the parapet height or construction features the approved ladder point shall be identified in accordance to the roof access standard. e. Where the entire roof access is restricted by high parapet walls or other obstructions, a permanently mounted access ladder is required. f. Multiple access ladders may be required for larger buildings. g. Ladder construction must be in accordance with the RCFPD Roof Access Standard Appendix A. h. A site plan showing the locations of the roof ladder shall be submitted during plan check. i. Ladder points shall face a fire access roadway(s). FSC-10 Occupancy and Hazard Control Permits Listed are those Fire Code permits commonly associated with the business operations and/or building construction. Plan check submittal is required with the permit application for approval of the permit; field inspection is required prior to permit issuance. General Use Permit shall be required for any activity or operation not specifically described below, which in the judgment of the Fire Chief is likely to produce conditions that may be hazardous to life or property. • Application of Flammable Finishes • Motor Vehicle Fuel-Dispensing Operation • Battery Systems • Ovens • ■ • Compressed Gases • Cryogenics. • Radioactive Materials • Dust-Producing Processes and Operations • Refrigeration Systems • Repair Garages • Flammable and Combustible Liquids • Hazardous Materials • Tents, Canopies and/or Air Supported Structures • Liquefied Petroleum Gases • Welding and Cutting Operations FSC-11 Hazardous Materials — Submittal to the County of San Bernardino The San Bernardino County Fire Department shall review your Business Emergency/Contingency Plan for compliance with minimum standards. Contact the San Bernardino County Fire, Hazardous Materials Division at (909) 387-4631 for forms and assistance. The County Fire Department is the Cal/EPA Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) for the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 1. If the facility is a NEW business, a Certificate of Occupancy issued by Building & Safety will not be finalized until the San Bernardino County Fire Department reviews your Business Emergency/Contingency Plan. California Government Code, Section • 65850.2 prohibits the City from issuing a final Certificate of Occupancy unless the applicant has met or is meeting specific hazardous materials disclosure requirements. A Risk Management Program (RMP) may also be required if regulation substances are to be used or stored at the new facility. B63 4 • 2. Any business that operates on rented or leased property.which is required to submit • a Plan, is also required to submit a notice to the owner of the property in writing stating that the business is subject to the Business Emergency/Contingency Plan mandates and has complied with the provisions. The tenant must provide a copy of the Plan to the property owner within five (5) working days, if requested by the owner. FSC-12 Hazardous Materials - Submittal to Fire Construction Services Plans shall be submitted and approved prior to construction of buildings and/or the installation of equipment designed to store, use or dispense hazardous materials in accordance with the 2007California Building, Fire, Mechanical, Plumbing, Electrical Codes, RCFPD Ordinances FD46 and other implemented and/or adopted standards. FSC-13 Alternate Method Application Fire Construction Services staff and the Fire Marshal will review all requests for alternate method, when submitted. The request must be submitted on the Fire District "Application for Alternate Method" form along with supporting documents and payment of the $92 review fee. Chronological Summary of RCFPD Standard Conditions PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS — Please complete the following prior to the issuance of any building permits: 1. Private Water Supply (Fire) Systems: The applicant shall submit construction • plans, specifications, flow test data and calculations for the private water main system for review and approval by the Fire District. Plans and installation shall comply with Fire District Standards. Approval of the on-site (private) fire underground and water plans is required prior to any building permit issuance for any structure on the site. Private on-site combination domestic and fire supply system must be designed in accordance with RCFPD Standards. The Building & Safety Division and Fire Construction Services will perform plan checks and inspections. All private on-site fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed and operable prior to delivering any combustible framing materials to the site. Fire construction Services will inspect the installation, witness hydrant flushing and grant a clearance before lumber is dropped. 2. Public Water Supply (Domestic/Fire) Systems: The applicant shall submit a plan showing the locations of all new public fire hydrants for the review and approval by the Fire District and CCWD. On the plan, show all existing fire hydrants within a 600-foot radius of the project. Please reference the RCFPD Water Plan Submittal Procedure Standard. All required public fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed and operable prior to delivering any combustible framing materials to the site. CCWD personnel shall inspect the installation and witness the hydrant flushing. Fire Construction Services shall inspect the site after acceptance of the public water system by CCWD. Fire Construction Services must grant a clearance before lumber is dropped. • 3. Construction Access: The access roads must be paved in accordance with all the requirements of the RCFPD Fire Lane Standard. All temporary utilities over access roads must be installed at least 14' 6" above the finished surface of the road. B-64 5 4. Fire Flow: A current fire flow letter from CCWD must be received. The applicant is • responsible for obtaining the fire flow information from CCWD and submitting the • letter to Fire Construction Services. PRIOR TO THE RELEASE OF TEMPORARY POWER The building construction must be substantially completed in accordance with Fire Construction Services' "Temporary Power Release Checklist and Procedures". PRIOR TO THE RELEASE OF TEMPORARY POWER The building construction must be substantially completed in accordance with Fire Construction Services' "Temporary Power Release Checklist and Procedures". PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY OR FINAL INSPECTION — Please complete the following: 1. Hydrant Markers: All fire hydrants shall have a blue reflective pavement marker indicating the fire hydrant location on the street or driveway in accordance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Standard Plan 134, "Installation of Reflective Hydrant Markers". On private property, the markers shall be installed at the centerline of the fire access road, at each hydrant location. 2. Private Fire Hydrants: For the purpose of final acceptance, a licensed sprinkler contractor, in the presence of Fire Construction Services, shall conduct a test of the most hydraulically remote on-site fire hydrants. The underground fire line contractor, developer and/or owner are responsible for hiring the company to perform the test. A final test report shall be submitted to Fire Construction Services • verifying the fire flow available. The fire flow available must meet or exceed the required fire flow in accordance with the California Fire Code. 3. Fire Sprinkler System: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the fire sprinkler system(s) shall be tested and accepted by Fire Construction Services. 4. Fire Sprinkler Monitoring: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the fire sprinkler monitoring system must be tested and accepted by Fire Construction Services. The fire sprinkler monitoring system shall be installed, tested and operational immediately following the completion of the fire sprinkler system (subject to the release of power). 5. Fire Suppression Systems and/or other special hazard protection systems shall be inspected, tested and accepted by Fire Construction Services before occupancy is granted and/or equipment is placed in service. 6. Fire Alarm System: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the fire alarm system shall be installed, inspected, tested and accepted by Fire Construction Services. 7. Access Control Gates: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, vehicular gates must be inspected, tested and accepted in accordance with RCFPD Standards by Fire Construction Services. 8. Fire Access Roadways: Prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, the fire access roadways must be installed in accordance with the approved plans and acceptable to Fire Construction Services. The CC&R's, the reciprocal agreement and/or other approved documents shall be • recorded and contain an approved fire access roadway map with provisions that prohibit parking, specify the method of enforcement and identifies who is responsible for the required annual inspections and the maintenance of all required fire access roadways. 8-65 6 9. Address: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, industrial buildings shall post the address in accordance to the appropriate RCFPD addressing Standard. 4IP 10. Hazardous Materials: The applicant must obtain inspection and acceptance by Fire Construction Services. 11. Confidential Business Occupancy Information: The applicant shall complete the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District "Confidential Business Occupancy Information" form. This form provides contact information for Fire District use in the event of an emergency at the subject building or property. This form must be presented to the Fire Construction Services Inspector. 12. Mapping Site Plan: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, an 8 '/z" x 11" or 11" x 17" site plan of the site in accordance with RCFPD Standard shall be revised by the applicant to reflect the actual location of all devices and building features as required in the standard. The site plan must be reviewed and accepted by the Fire Inspector. • • • • B-66 7 STAFF REPORT • PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: October 14, 2009 RANCHO TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission CUCAMONGA FROM: James R. Troyer, AICP, Planning Director BY: Adam Collier, Planning Technician SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2007-00402 — FRANK AN - Design Review of a proposed retail commercial center consisting of 3 buildings totaling 51,940 square feet on 4.67 acres of land within the Community Commercial District (Subarea 4) of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located along the west side of Etiwanda Avenue north of Foothill Boulevard - APN: 0227-221-08. Related File: SUBTPM18535. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP , SUBTPM18535 - FRANK AN - A request to subdivide 4.67 acres of land into 3 parcels for commercial purposes in the Community Commercial District (Subarea 4) within the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located along the west side of Etiwanda Avenue north of Foothill Boulevard - APN: 0227-221-08. Related File: Development Review DRC2007-00402. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. • PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Condominium Complex— Medium Residential of the Etiwanda Specific Plan South - Vacant— Community Commercial (CC) District (Subarea 4) of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan East - Planned Commercial Center (vacant) — Community Commercial (CC) District (Subarea 4) of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan West - Commercial Center — Community Commercial (CC) District (Subarea 4) of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan B. General Plan Designations: Project Site - General Commercial North - Medium Residential South - General Commercial East - General Commercial West - General Commercial C. Site Characteristics: The 4.67-acre rectangular shaped parcel has frontage along the west side of Etiwanda Avenue, and is located north of Foothill Boulevard. The parcel is currently vacant with sparse vegetation and annual.grassland. The site slopes from north to south with drainage following the same pattern. The proposed project would not create any conflicts with the existing land uses in the area and is consistent with the General Plan land use • designations for the site. Items C & D • PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2007-00402 & SUBTPM18535 — FRANK AN • October 14, 2009 • Page 2 D. Parking Calculations: Number of Number of Square Parking Spaces Spaces Type of Use Footage Ratio Required, Provided Retail 30,820 5/1000 155 189 • Office 17,120 4/1000 69 69 Restaurant 4,000 10/1000 40 40 . Totals 264 298 ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant is proposing to construct a multi-tenant commercial retail building north of Foothill Boulevard along Etiwanda Avenue. The proposal is to construct a total of 3 multi-tenant retail buildings consisting of a total of 51,940 square feet on a rectangular shaped parcel. Two of the buildings are single-story, with the third and larger building along the north side of the property being a two-story mixed-use office and retail building. The proposal is consistent with the architectural imagery requirements of the • Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan and has a Mediterranean-inspired architecture with low-pitched roofs, stucco walls, fieldstone veneer, and exposed rafter tails. The proposed buildings are consistent with the architecture of surrounding development. Large tower elements and decorative fieldstone veneers break up long facades, along with decorative wood trellises and awnings. A covered colonnade is proposed along the second floor of the mixed-use office and retail building providing shade for tenants and customers. The two single-story buildings have an overall height of 36 feet measured to the top of the tower elements, with the remainder of the buildings measuring 26 feet to the top of the parapets. The two-story mixed-use office and retail building has an overall height of 45 feet measured to the top of the tower elements, with the remainder of the building measuring 35 feet to the top of the parapet. Setbacks from Etiwanda Avenue are required at 35 feet from ultimate curb face which is consistent with the applicant's proposal. A 20-foot buffer was provided along the northern property line to allow landscaping to screen the proposed development from existing residences to the north. The proposed development provides access to the existing International Restaurant Village (DRC2004-01128) along the eastern property line. Two reciprocal access easements will be established with the recordation of the proposed Tentative Parcel Map permitting vehicular access across both properties. A third reciprocal access easement is proposed along the south side of the property to permit access from future development to the south. B. Design Review Committee: The project was reviewed by the Design Review Committee (Munoz, Stewart, and Nicholson) on August 18, 2009. The Committee approved the project • subject to the applicant revising the Site Plan, Grading Plan, and Sections to show the correct parkway design along Etiwanda Avenue per Figure 5-23 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. The • C & D- 2 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2007-00402 & SUBTPM18535 — FRANK AN • October 14, 2009 Page 3 Committee recommended that the item be forwarded to the Planning Commission subject to staff reviewing the revised plan prior to the hearing. . C. Environmental Assessment: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures related to Air Quality, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Hydrology and Water Quality, and Noise, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and'of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. A Mitigation Monitoring Program has also been prepared to ensure implementation of, and compliance with, the mitigation measures for the project. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within . a 660-foot radius of the project site. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Development Review DRC2007-00402 and Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18535 through the adoption of the • attached Resolutions of Approval with conditions. Respectfully submittoter,d Ja s R. Troyer, AICP Planning Director JRT:AC/Is Attachments: Exhibit A - Site Plan Exhibit B - Floor Plans Exhibit C - Elevations Exhibit D - Building Sections and Trash Enclosure Exhibit E - Conceptual Grading Plan Exhibit F - Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18535 Exhibit G - Conceptual Landscape Plan Exhibit H - Design Review Committee Action Comments, dated August 18, 2009 Exhibit I - Initial Study Part I and Part II Exhibit J - Mitigation Monitoring Plan Draft Resolution of Approval for Development Review DRC2007-00402 Draft Resolution of Approval for Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18535 • • C & D- 3 • 8 I s `y ilhI %� @5 8 I� ,1 811 O ®® a 1 V Q IIII ! !11} a :e k s g q - W E.Lam_- 1 3 tl y ,' t 1 c E E : t °' -- a s e a C7 a e E < , a R x R i g Y :- I` I' E 2 off s W Q I\ cal 4 ggv 0 yi ra P a yi 1 ~ rt -I 3Y 11_ ` }yY co y' a %a e- :6" @ 9 1 1 f__I 3 a i 9 Fi. n w g S o tl i s gyp I �I O yC 11 y ' G • T 1 18 I H I II r---11-it 86 a i l " & i m me mvi t,-- g - ,, is CO fi / ¢Lr=SL -•-.)-1-"t---: .! : - - _� _ _ ; _ _ _..��-fir/ e W _ O 3NN3AV VONVMIl3 e , 1-.. x 1 e, t ' _11.11 I I I \ / R v ..ary • I ' I P \ b / 0 In I o co __I p Y 11 I ( I ITI I k_ ' \n J pv; on _ py 8F'M-1 J U �ry- r g I o- ,,!,,,,71 ! . E 1 I Y on- L',,' _ 1 `V }1 5 - w i' 1 1 L a I " a._ -'— • I IO 0 CC QC Q u) - ly a p �' @3 Y I' '— P . ..—_ Z \ I O a : AE ill �� l 1 1 1 9 z-• I 1 , Q jr f01e1ee� z ►� 7 ' ° Q I � IEe III° aili „ I :9. 1 / �� C� } } 1,-,,i---- 31,1---4-L--- x" it Z 4 ■ 1 — 1E I� '14 B II °T q I I \� .-i_ 'I ! i— J3 �� ? --w.�.Jm,. — r� I i' J Dry—e I 1 a IT- o ; _ e' .1 J o a ° x 0 -(5 s ; III Z EXHIBIT Aj C & D- 4 NI 11tii� frli • "13 ; t l ili! t 6 hi l, . 1 §ii; h;„116 $ CD e000000806fl CC .... @1 4.1 fr � _ g—r _ _ r •NI,• I•2 Vii.. la ,> /Alai Z (0 O c I wa a o o c) � 1. O W I, a =,I i IL .r R \ .r F ; 1 ^i'yppp Z I I L . ±},,, i. ;a- ] I B Ia • I II W of o in 1,30.7,1fd ILA cN I LC CO o in r, - 1�,'�' ‘: LD o 0 CO ca T9`; , ,.... 2 � '� 2 Q CO 17 a )) 3 `i 3 R Q ply n d r 6 K .7 I. e g O iu1F a...® O II'. O W 1U 1; 1 P �. I—T W a r. 1 ' 1 dig' 7 I , .....................:.....•1 I ? O U , -g _. \I,i P 10, 5 \\ hs. U N. � W y U nr _ m _ . 0 (0a 4 rn T ' C rY y � EXHIBIT B c & o_. 5 T ,�I„ 1 y 1 S LLI 3S{i w1S w $ IIII� '. ''e ! lflflv 1 Q W 0 m 2 Q. F- 0 U O W U. ti 0 0 0 �� Z BI i I s _I`�I O� '9„ ti. o alp u_ . \ - --..I c 5fl - ---a — c Z I ? ' o D ° Q. 46 o ��,` a w CD S i y J o 03 It S Y � o Q. I A } p " p I = I 9 t , F� �It i ai w w r uq nal 4 MT 42 Q .I W Q e d6;,.... ,......._,...I..,. j1 i,- lIE W -\-�!� / gI ' f Irma ♦ / V l I L . g � � _ I - iT ti ar MIL o 111 iii' o 0 0 V O C Z 1 N U Q9- C) flu . y CC T 1 1- 6 • ;, Hp; g® gSgiAg® 91 i a� s3? ToeoL. 44A 9411 iI11 ;1 Q ± W II iiiii � l I � ¢1¢ . �' I F r„liwi;::. e 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i / I i s II I / —I-J _— Y: , w:::, e 2 Q e (a j 00000000 000000000 O ; Ira f o O '+! \ �L r h «':r , n .ti ° ti CC y,_ ilE.all'ui;; o I� L. I J b.o °num ° ea C IL r (I)to Q O OQ 9 O i.��°— ''d '.. �' W V k'rI��/WS:,—e 1 I . f S] k 111 / � c.11�� Q ° .. � W ri O I� 1 m:14 p J ' Raw 1 (1s ktsp: 9 ''..EN=Ivo, o L:ICI'"'®I 1= III .I 2 :. L. (.) o iini�., IIIi o E a.l .� 9 a ;� .. m CIC ° a 9 o ) IIM_h a iI a l - o� ff ee sr �i��' I'u1b utu7„. em o Is.: ■1 O 14.146_� Ik'i``I �1 °Q O in l �� . °O / ;: 9 mil !h CO • i.py.._ jy: tg+.C_ O .� �� il♦1 O W v1?`CMS:.—M�... /\ 11 I. O LO O dal i eW `\\r I �� io 00 O la �, ej 'rze[I uZ U m \l' a,7 g'e ° I .■ I ° Q /mum \of ,.. �, ii ,I z O n ^1, a wI:41S: J ,c4 Ai _ y la In 1 _. ME a ..III a In Q N. I: I. alit II .. w �, '01 .� z ■. .rte . MO Fo I �I_IN X11 :I :; ° � :: �I z Cr 10100 , 7 (� ti III �� IL 0 0. V ca 14 • H1 Z HI 2 EXHIBIT C z C& D- 7 III : 1iI LL 1 a l 13 a � ° 19 I I I I I : 'I' h E 151 i �yp g, \ 'i M1 m 11111 ; 111111i1i18 1 C0 in m `=:al•�' Z 0000000®000000000 ® i 01 0 00 q 2 to Q jIifl W a Ircc j y� I rI�� W j .; ! 9 a WWII a LLUU U) J �"Ri!nlN� rn 1r it e1 CC 1' O # 9 11 O O O k' a I4g ° W U Fi Ill d w ti Z ` se ca MN ii 1 I .1 O ��, ., a O �f� °O m1 D 1111 a -a o cc 6' Ns m in m M o¢ Q r 1 o n,'I-1 F OW u .1 ti " E # ai ¢ ,� M Q ass m Iiilan(02M T I'�I'9+�rll.l�l WWp O m r ° I'. I{I+linlr�%IP` WIN I.- O 4A j; 11T5ii:Y:� 2 #�ij:':�iJ{i'I!'i1�1 O_ v x . O NI Ira 1 r. a to p oc o0 4 0 B O Q 9 N (0 0 �l 0 i � a S 11.16P2 I 06 26 i 1 Za. 9 k 0 Jjt:.__a / tot i (1 11111rin �'' Z r CE it fl w a � lalh alaua a� o Till 0� a I Ili ° C, ea a @ 0 CC S g i o m� o W fp *F m ° �OZ x ° I ��° ., O Z ■• 1114f VAIN= C " b mg o flan e Q IP�W o oe d�[lyl ra � aw 9� o limn= ° �Ivil.. fow z c o 0 3 ■I m ' , Man N 3p ° ei 4JI0 o�»' 1p !EL v U n' ° a7 dd a ° G. 9 0 � �i '� = C Q °° : I- 8 , ƒ/ • ; I "I Ik _ , ( Q CD . i ) , ;- • | | ._: ° I �. - : J ! 7 \ . / ,; m CC / 7 § w UH i ( \ ° o m § w \ `§ )d ` / \ o w • « ) Ii / , \ 4 \ u ) § % { m R ;11 ) 0 . H \ ) \E �CZ • ' § § ® r}_ / . ,\s - \ ~� \ . \ \| I / / •- , m / 2\ • . Z\ .9 \ , 7 *- EXHIBIT D e & D- , 411. bti ±# iiiiEe 8l ... Q 7 i 8 5e $ Ur , . :1 ih 2 ii I z = NNW ml wll ti A U r O )1pr I� o E • Ill O Ill co cc @ 3 K a. ti as Ay 0 �ei9 U E 't 2 W �.. W h WI ti I-- (..) g§cu iu q ;jr c U '� Lu W �� w16I"`' w k w oc cc H o a M U • w Oof Oil i NI, • SW 44 O a. U j 1 o-.e O O Z a 9 k W W e—;� 1 I - S deg 0/////moo. d J .,-Z . 4 a�I c €� NI I� QP G�! gig p w [LLB -0� J _ IIIII� 61 i O Q =gam, • '' w - cp 1 I Li '' .. N CC �F pq 1111 I V Q9 hi ?fill U � I U �a — n� CC• . i- 10 ? I'///'''1 __ 20P00-[oozonu1 stcnfwd1ens N " .�%S�_9NIL33 N3W I°n 111 Ii C'1 Jt Ie'I Z�HJ6e6e11YAtuungsoH/eu<Il�eweYUt[c I a�II�I sr" ET F� it11p • �; $m } 5 pY iepJSg!g v rtP s lF 0Q i tg E d IL I ii,g; �gWI I- aN ePP?PEEP P PIPi'n i it' pi $tt�liSi a N °f1srr<114 1.. L ., 1 Ililitti _ e @ �- rc { i tt. z 3 •:' t t .t O 1! € l:19slPti 5 • aE▪ _ : {!i! Y h ca !.-tali!i MI e e e e e i e a ! l ill ; r u i - ..a tIii ibi ta3�6 T T7I I I ..a Iii ri CIIB .I P! ii t.0 La of w_i t 1, `.i C 1 , rl 'it 1/ O am \_ 4 � � , 5 °c W , -- _ tlG59c .35�� to OI .�—`.� t r 6 6 H y 1"----' ,u g -M;Td �o vi O : B / —7 I i mT,yrat --in r - _-i - a+ III j 8 Z o 1 Nu W 'I'°T4 / mri 'a {r d „6 fee I --. r p�!� Rini_ Ti s 3 I'IIi ,:M :a Rm- . ,e `i i 4t� — / I / t Gall[l' 1 r a 4—;,---1-,7--_-:• —. fI: W N S i 1 \\y .� �I ! \ t i II iii I o Jr,EL I--I °52112 'n•;, I lyl--il•.•i '( `ot11. "OM J / ,�m:a '.h e q.IT.\ ! 4e !, j i ,,. i .�i. • Q� il-g; \ 14 t 11!�.\ m�4iEl� trio \ ,�1 O. ; P . \;S II' Ili edp C, wA'l vi ,/ V!I . 1: - -t' '�.•.. I _I..11 - .•rf� d�1 ,.•••�;r�vJ ,,., , 1�1 1 1 in Ct '1;1' LL I { rvi. Q. g ZO :II '�I I I l J t `• • �,e'I ...1 <11. t..-11. L.. _" \'1.53 v I I I;I I 4 3g 1 c.a.' — f. times o J n 0°■U � N f f ' Y.x�va7l� �.I I, I . l._} -4 '' fl 11 IJ ay^•.ti a o 11 Pi��_�I�W < ` �11_T � '�>\ r ydh \ itl p A�� Z 'a 6 M ):I 5 Il t I', i l'. can dG V] a '\�,I • 'f ' I to i � -, Ise I I 1. l e �� f 11 7 rt. II ,p 1,48811 g y1 i i *� I r•Fg. ,-, -e 4 4r; Ile E SI ! > �' <e `rQ . F .._• ',LA — @"B '" Il l l r [ i e 0* E''rra 11� 1 pm I! i '. €" -• !1 \* l l If $ ]B � _ P� � I y Pi. , (, I I 5 t. �� C I e ii'I I'.• ��1('• ° �� e 11 ;Ill �1 '$et II 1��cII ko� ��t plp � < �'� < �� < .oe't � r 2 I I�'� t :� i / f 1I• �. t„uI r a �� / l'I . < �r,< • <�I9� v. 141 :. ' Iv I I II 11 i .. d 1.�s//, 1.� II C II ti ii, L !� .$. • r f II f pl9Pl� II Y' cl e r.0� +f 3 �` it yCSe \ ... C I1 T' R e6if 4. TC h .�< ,I 'l .. -... - o J 1 I rh i l gg.5� 4 �� O►� � �,q – a ifs e t I�ii P ,If eg lb o �°I iU 8 `,e� v _ 2' l Pr `}N,W�! I i III �„ [ !e It-- `' �I r - n d j P ! II �I a ghat, r,r —;- R° I�.� - { it f ” y I h b 1' _ /y Imo,1 .-Ji' �� It 1 :: �kndla+ n .. !it tali. I l °'1/14 R a ;.( 1 `. 1 1—1 � 11 I i° l 5 t Il e i YEiaea f p y a•t 7 - , If g iI t " 5 ,1 -� � k.:Sji I ,a_ a if � 9� 17 3� � P i 1 i s-� g•I' 4 m%:} Yi,�, iA9 N�n f.31 + rte' a lily �. " QI lljl }g,�1'�,I '�,,r` Q -'a --.r_—� 5a '2- S 59 gg !#€ J _• 2 1 tnr' w<-ter-.-- I e I r. .I \ 041 pi III! 11 R '- "V-12,T. 1 FtJ-� I I_ l! ,�5Ptr s — t 1 !Ix r W*y'r.J sw f�` 44. F ki a w �_Re` tl ll., .� �, "DO vri., 14z ,�,Imr 2.1 !"� .iw „ 'e N =°` �i / II II ig . '" �� 1.`I_/ r."WJ - !i� �'7 ! P 11 I a 6€ f6C s'e EXHIBIT E "'•.4.3A 1=11 a zo,00-zonaYY/sttetwdlans N 9NIA3A.DSO -9NM33N19N3lAp � fr � n °�' B aeuowsun OPYI �E 1 11E N! a•.!1 . -I I'Nd-ROOM luangslY/suopemqu! t" N • • t •G .x:kkRkkkk n • 1 11 P k25Rkk „ „ kkkkkk 1 1,. 1 I S I 111 i I I I I \1 I i k Ii I 1 .1i E .t ' v1 1 9 O 8p. ID ° 1 k IQ1n1 • . '7 °�° __ T` III eP'' IS E 11 R ° / 3 ' I I g �Ii ..,.,..,.. ..kkk Rk III I .I. Z Ili I i II I III 5 $ s / II ' Hi 11 s II lie € i so 1 . I II 11 !lilt }, , ( Ps 123�'Ig1 /i/ I I/ 1 I ='1g I 116 T 11 9 I 11 i 1,I / 1/J I Va •ill 1 ; .,: 1 01 - I� ; J I I I 1 I`' 1 ; 1111 1I� I ■ Ilia , Ij1 I ! I;^ $I II i1 I2j11 I'1i1 -. 55 I J a I1 SCI 1i; I 1 i1 It III 1 i 11 ill Iii 11111 I e II I II I Al 11 g I , ' I , 11.1 1 1.1 1 1 1 Ili I I 111 '. t.I �I k 1 P . 'SIP l I I1 1 ' I • k j � PIr I ; 1 I 11 3@ I pill I I I I I I I I PI I .. . . _5211 2.k zkkk ....„ .Z _ "z kkekk V & ✓- 12 9NIAZMI SGCCIIi ONItl3'NI'JN3.l J 111 frldel Z0600'LOOZ8N0/SL58lWd180S .� $ •• U.1 h•vtlL o @� Va'¢6ukmnnJ¢4ou¢tl"antl¢GU¢xlJ3 ; 0¢ 11 : @�.. !! SL58i'W'd'1 F: i .°• v ZXd-.fiellq JUwneJratl/eu¢pewalul ba O S i 1 "g a 3 e 11 0 %4 ; E 9 1 gglI . �SSS °o: gr'' �s � ipH1 5 69 S�3 e 3 11v.9 r ^ °°8j ! I. ; a�.: q 3 E= i zP 1 9 @i . . 1 t !$l9 $ 1 1 Ill '''i 0 $=9 $a ¢° 6' @; 9$ 41 I lIQ P1,1$$. I; 1:1D.;Y T--- a 9 f $ 1i1 3111$ § ; 6@ &o r6 1 ;6.1 hill 5l: pg q' e95363P > 3 -; c 1 e d o i Y? " Y3S �& 45 p,5 � rj ti `¢ 1 1� a _- - ��...__. z &S —�L7,7 • 1, p pp `- 5 , gg ,, 3: 1 i =i 111:4 I e 11 p�-21 rt gg!! e�� C =1 rs -0 1 i h i 1 S�1S„§1§ §1§1 1 yyii $ vJ!;i 9 � 4FF$35 3i >9 1p 1.1 .1 i ', li h: III ;il ` 1" Ir.- !I ;i1 @@a1 1 tltl;. " w lii6 1 $,l ii¢ ql ,, p:1 ss da 15911!1114 hg 1 -11 -1 r!@9p. •9F! !!k Ii a'§Y - : !. / \ j a II e • s 1 n I iou m, !•S a $y cep -< - _ y.J _.n �..._5 ._OS'HBC 3 IS000 __1i „�"' —.�. v�2 o w o 1- > W 9 ants �. v flu • �...ollnai f- -. e® f .. Z = r .I i f s _ Intl_ . 9 , 1. 1 \� l .,.,%1 61 a li calo el- I it FSF.1 � ' • I I ': / //\ \ +i C w Q 1 \ j, ail, $ n 'll ¢ v r I\ / \ � 9!1 el zott ,n�j Km'.c o9N:c; IP vv c.—I t J. " II • d„ `..•:. .� v � �� 111 _ m l l �.✓� '4_ -' -__ . _ . � � '" °6 0 CG 213 w - O wba:` Ir IE i� P Z gg I - 1 . a, 3 Cd th 1 1 1 1 I" I It/. .�t ti „ J 'fig d 6 U' 0E 8 1`: ].. ..,-,;,‘„,:•�` it., ., n Ifs E. '2 T Oe o8 1 -.: 5 7 ; vilbI lb [d,l1 e I=`i 5 .• -- � .E $ C3 �€ ^ _ t' ,. m !� l ( 1,., I°ICI-�� I,I.t 11" ° /E��rr; c1;,:;T ' e• a � AR 1 x°-- [c .�LIIpA 1 }:f 1,� I11R:-1--I',v '',S, t ii _ $ `o nr- bl1 �„AI_ ur1i x°11 1I 1111a r ; `o- . '• 17..)” ®ii I - 1 /y eta, RN g °e . 3 1._ '' _rji I n. 1 -,. III 1;, ,o 1 . �; _� c I _' i _O I 11111111 al10111�11dr,; : !g 1! u Y� rir 5,: :Ir•,I _r te �-,7° p r11isuu1Cozr i. » € i 1 co -S: t., i L-7 i �I OW - C IIdI $� '. 1 _ El I d Bi g'I-L. • 0_ ... k i °-fie .e —I I ffi° .7 1 ICI ` „ bit� _ - f 7 EXHIBIT F c & D- 13 II 9a 3 E W1 pal • ih : U S i § L 13(1N3AV VQNVMIl3 n I I . i a t l j i — xlsa®lit xe N -� j 'Ia �..... 1 fir' II P H1 ow'4 m CZ tiww N ai1�101 , } tt W Ji'ni ttYYii iii 9 IL ci •1 x¢11 �, i�`1� 1 III •' 1F;A: n. n'. ,,.w , !'.. win tei 7►C to yF a (. rah i _, b tt ° 0. i. , , . 01 , , , fialk, 0 q �• Ø !I ! ! OI4 --- - !I ' i_ Ey I1E& go, b° i g % �I �,Y 3'1 1 1 lI i I ` Cjam. .�.a ►• g 111 ' . ,. m i ai a. • 4 ! `w - a i J T �- H ro e 1. 1---, %1 1 _ . I 5 ww —� 8 it w< a I EXHIBIT G - a a;, m L. 9 ? oN n 1 ' 1 !VIII li a- -1 • 3■ I n I I1I a� a � ,` , Z U Si 1 ! : E1 I 1 I I .e I w ' 1 1i N = . a 3 15111111it1111 ea I 1 ij [ PW tEt c 1� • e e 4 F w ' i w ! ; d rib i l l d z o w "= C 1? 1I ix cl- � i ! 1 ! !; liI ! ! 1 < a < !- f „ !1111, BB Z X36 0 s 1 a 1 1 aH � i1 ]; i, ]1 ` 1 111! ti .� II'' o I 6 3 3 : < .� m v- g = o i ,i ; l t E N o, 1 Q O $ .a� Z s o 1 ga JF 1f !t ! !4 !? JI ]} Cr— ° cW ira W O 24 t erne^ I O 9 +9 m 2 e g= Ln.`. 0 n W 5 2sxs 01 c. Ix 11,E A. 0 E 3 ~ g s - . i 9 .L 1 ;Ariz. o E .i -t..' 0 i Z Y rit ry 8 $ i i o ,- 6 F 0 W� n s Ww3 a• f :kip- A C & D- 15 m < r= a ^DLLs • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • • 8:00 p.m. Adam Collier August 18, 2009 • ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2007-00402 '- FRANK AN - Design Review of a proposed retail commercial center consisting of 3 buildings totaling 51,940 square feet on 4.67 acres of land within the Community Commercial District (Subarea 4) of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located along the east west side of Etiwanda Avenue north of Foothill Boulevard - APN: 0227-221-08. Related File: SUBTPM18535. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM18535 - FRANK AN - A request to subdivide 4.67 acres of land into 3 parcels for commercial purposes in the Community Commercial District (Subarea 4) within the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located along the cast west side of Etiwanda Avenue north of Foothill Boulevard - APN: 0227-221-08. Related File: Development Review DRC2007-00402. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Design Parameters: The applicant is proposing to construct a multi-tenant commercial retail building north of Foothill Boulevard along Etiwanda Avenue. The proposal is to construct a total of three multi- tenant retail buildings consisting of a total of 51,940 square feet on a rectangular-shaped parcel. Two of the buildings are single-story, with the third and larger building along the north side of the property being a two-story mixed-use office and retail building. The proposal is consistent with the architectural imagery requirements of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan and has a Mediterranean-inspired architecture with low pitched roofs, stucco walls, fieldstone veneer, and exposed rafter tails. The proposed buildings are consistent with the architecture of the • surrounding development. The large tower elements and decorative fieldstone veneers break up long facades, along with decorative wood trellises and awnings. A covered colonnade is proposed along the second floor of the mixed-use office and retail building providing shade for tenants and customers. The two single-story buildings have an overall height of 36 feet measured to the top of the tower . elements, with the remainder of the buildings measuring 26 feet to the top of the parapets. The two-story mixed-use office and retail building has an overall height of 45 feet measured to the top of the tower elements, with the remainder of the building measuring 35 feet to the top of the parapet. Setbacks from Etiwanda Avenue are required at 35 feet from ultimate curb face which is consistent with the applicant's proposal. A 20-foot buffer was provided along the northern property line to allow landscaping to screen the proposed development from the existing residences to the north. The development is proposing access to the existing International Restaurant Village (DRC2004-01128) along the eastern property line. Two reciprocal access easements will be established with the recordation of the proposed Tentative Parcel Map permitting vehicular access across both properties. A third reciprocal access easement is proposed along the south side of the property to permit access from future development to the south. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Major Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: 1. Recommend that the applicant provide a meandering sidewalk along Etiwanda Avenue consistent with the adjacent development. Revise the Conceptual Grading Plan and Sections C-C and D-D • consistent with this recommendation. EXHIBIT H C & D- 16 • • DRC AGENDA DRC2007-00402 — FRANK AN • August 18, 2009 Page 2 Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. All trash enclosures should be centered in the landscape islands to allow for vine plantings or landscape screening. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. All groundmounted equipment and utility boxes including transformers, fire department connections, back-flow devices, etc. shall be surrounded by a minimum of two rows of shrubs spaced at a minimum of 18 inches on-center. This equipment shall be painted forest green. 2. Decorative paving shall be provided at the Etiwanda Avenue access point to the site. 3. Provide durable street furniture in the outdoor seating areas such as tables, chairs, and waste receptacles. 4. A Uniform Sign Program shall be submitted following Planning Commission action for review and approval prior to plan check submittal. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be approved, subject to the revisions above • which can be verified by staff, and forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and action. • Design Review Committee Action: The Design Review Committee approved the project and forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and action subject to the following revisions: 1. The 5-foot sidewalk should be located in a sidewalk easement at the back of the right-of-way (except along turn pockets where it may be curb adjacent) and should not be meandering per consistency with the surrounding development. The Site Plan, Parcel Map, Grading Plan, and Sections must be revised to incorporate this revision. • 2. Sixty feet north of the southern property boundary, the 10-foot southbound turn lane should . transition from 42 feet to 47 feet. The Site Plan, Parcel Map, Grading Plan, and Sections must be revised to incorporate this revision. The Design Review Committee requested that staff verify that the requested revisions have been incorporated prior to the Planning Commission hearing. Members Present: Stewart, Munoz, Nicholson Staff Planner: Adam Collier • C & D- 17 ENVIRONMENTAL r §x: a", INFORMATION FORM WitTera (Part I - Initial Study) City of Rancho Cucamonga (Please type or print clearly using ink. Use the tab key to move from one line to the next line.) Planning Division (909)477-2750 he purpose of this form is to inform -.the City,.;of the .basic components of :the Iroposed project,so that the Cibi;may review the project pursuant to..City Policies;:. )cdmances, and Guidelines, the California Environmental .Quality;Act, and the'City's tules and`Procedures to :Implement CEQA It is important that the information eguested in this application be provided infull I :ENERAL INFORMATION: INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE PROCESSED. Please note that it is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that the application is complete at the time of submittal; City staff will not be available to perform work required to provide missing information. Application Number for the project to which this form pertains: DRC 2007-00402 Project Title: International Restaurant Village Phase 2 411fre&Address of project owner(s): Frank An & Caroline Lee 1159 S. Ardmore Ave. Los Angeles, CA 90006 213-453-1131 Name&Address of developer or project sponsor. Frank An 1159 S.Ardmore Ave. Los Angeles, CA 90006 213-453-1131 Contact Person&Address: Frank An 1159 S. Ardmore Ave. Los Angeles, CA 90006 213-453-1131 Name&Address of person preparing this form (if different from above): Same as above • Telephone Number: 213-453-1131 EXHIBIT - I Page 1 of 9 & D- 18 Created on 5/22/2002 2 4:09 [ ROJECT INFORMATION & DESCRIPTION: • • Information indicated by an asterisk(')is not required of non-construction CUP's unless otherwise requested by staff '1) Provide a full scale(8-1/2 x 11) copy of the USGS Quadrant Sheet(s)which includes the project site, and indicate the site boundaries. 2) Provide a set of color photographs that show representative views into the site from the north, south, east and west; views into and from the site from the primary access points that serve the site;and representative views of significant features from the site. Include a map showing location of each photograph. • 3) Project Location (describe): North of Foothill Blvd &west of Etiwanda 4) Assessors Parcel Numbers (attach additional sheet if necessary): 0227-221-08 '5) Gross Site Area (ac/sq. ft.): 4.67 • '6) Net Site Area (total site size minus area of public streets&proposed dedications): 4.04 • 7) Describe any proposed general plan amendment or zone change which would affect the project site (attach additional sheet if necessary): None 8) Include a description of all permits which will be necessary from the City of Rancho Cucamonga and other governmental agencies in order to fully implement the project: Grading and Building Permit • 9) Describe the physical setting of the site as it exists before the project including information on topography, soil stability, plants and animals, mature trees, trails and roads, drainage courses, and scenic aspects. Describe any existing structures on site(including age and condition)and the use of the structures. Attach photographs of significant features described. In addition, cite all sources of information(i.e., geological and/or hydrologic studies, biotic and archeological surveys, traffic studies): Hydrology study and traffic study information will be provided to engineering, if it needs. Drainage generally flows to southwest and southeast as shown on plans. • EnvironmentallnfoForm Page 2 of 9C & D- 19 Created on 5/22/2002 4 4:09 • • _• • • 10) Describe the known cultural and/or historical aspects of the site. Cite all sources of information(books, published reports and oral history): It has not historical and cultural value. • 11) Describe any noise sources and their levels that now affect the site(aircraft, roadway noise, etc.) and how they will affect proposed uses: Normal traffic noise generated from Foothill blvd that will not adversely affect the proposed project. • 12) Describe the proposed project in detail. This should provide an adequate description of the site in terms of ultimate use that will result from the proposed project. Indicate if there are proposed phases for development, the extent of development to occur with each phase, and the anticipated completion of each increment. Attach additional sheet(s) if necessary: Proposed mix of retail and office use for the general community with an approximate square footage of P-7600, Q-37560, R-8060 • • • EnvironmentalInfoForm Page 3 of 10 Created on 5/22/2002 2-F 4:09 C & D- 20 • . • • 13) Describe the surrounding properties, including information on plants and animals and any cultural, historical, or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land use (residential, commercial, etc.), intensity of land use(one-family, apartment houses, shops, department stores, etc.) and scale of development(height, frontage, setback, rear yard, etc.): East- Etiwanda Ave. West- Retail center, Sacred Heart Church, Starbucks, then 15 freeway overpass North- Existing multi family South- Foothill Blvd, Existing gas station, Vacant old home, and Vacant land. 14) Will the proposed project change the pattern, scale or character of the surrounding general area of the project? None • • 15) Indicate the type of short-term and long-term noise to be generated, including source and amount. How will these noise levels affect adjacent properties and on-site uses. What methods of soundproofing are proposed? Short term construction noise. Proposed project operations will complay with applicable city noise standards for commercial development. *16) Indicate proposed removals and/or replacements of mature or scenic trees: • None • 17) Indicate any bodies of water(including domestic water supplies)into which the site drains: None • EnvironmentallnfoForm Page 4 of 10_ & D- 21 Created on 5/22/2002 1c 4:09 • .8) Indicate expected amount of water usage. (See Attachment A for usage estimates). For further clarification, please contact the Cucamonga County Water District at 987-2591. a. Residential(gal/day) Peak use (gal/Day) b. Commercial/Ind. (gal/day/ac) 2,500.00 Peak use(gal/min/ac) 5,000.00 19) Indicate proposed method of sewage disposal. ❑ Septic Tank ® Sewer. If septic tanks are proposed, attach percolation tests. If discharge to a sanitary sewage system is proposed indicate expected daily sewage generation: (See Attachment A for usage estimates). For further clarification, please contact the Cucamonga County Water District at 987-2591. a. Residential(gal/day) , b. Commercial/Industrial(gal/day/ac) 2.500.00 RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS: 20) Number of residential units: . Detached(indicate range of parcel sizes, minimum lot size and maximum lot size: N/A • Attached(indicate whether units are rental or for sale units): • • 21) Anticipated range of sale prices and/or rents: . Sale Price(s) $ to $ Rent(per month) $ to $ 22) Specify number of bedrooms by unit type: N/A 23) Indicate anticipated household size by unit type: N/A • . • • EnvironmentallnfoForm Page 5 of 10 C & D- 22 Created on 5/22/2002 lc 4:09 . 24) Indicate the expected number of school children who will be residing within the project: Contact the appropriate School Districts as shown in Attachment B: a. Elementary: 0 • b. Junior High: 0 c. Senior High 0 COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL PROJECTS • 25) Describe type of use(s) and major function(s)of commercial, industrial or institutional uses: Retail sales and Office • • 26) Total floor area of commercial, industrial, or institutional uses by type: Retail use of 35530 sq ft and 17690 sq ft office. 27) Indicate hours of operation: To be determined • • 28) Number of employees: Total: TO )7 p t erp1i/f rrf • Maximum Shift: 'Q !9f' c f'te x/14,ft F( g Time of Maximum Shift: 7u £.2-e C1 C net t'l�/ 29) Provide breakdown of anticipated job classifications, including wage and salary ranges, as well as an indication of the rate of hire for each classification (attach additional sheet if necessary): To be determined • 30) Estimation of the number of workers to be hired that currently reside in the / City: _ 70 be GIPfNIivotA '31) For commercial and industrial uses only, indicate the source, type and amount of air pollution emissions.' (Data should be verified through the South Coast Air Quality Management District, at(818) 572-6283): Nothing anticipated beyond that planned for in the zoning regulations. Proposed project will complay with • applicable air quality standards, during and after construction. EnvironmentatInfoForm[2] Page 6 of 9C & D- 23 Created on 5/22/20021 4:09 • ALL PROJECTS •) Have the water, sewer, fire, and flood control agencies serving the project been contacted to determine their ability to provide adequate service to the proposed project? If so, please indicate their response. All agencies contacted have indicated their ability to provide adequate service to the project site. • • 33) In the known history of this property, has there been any use, storage, or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic materials? Examples of hazardous and/or toxic materials include, but are not limited to PCB's;radioactive substances; pesticides and herbicides;fuels, oils, solvents, and other flammable liquids and gases. Also note underground storage of any of the above. Please list the materials and describe their use, storage, and/or discharge on the property, as well as the dates of use, if known. None known 0) Will the proposed project involve the temporary or long-term use, storage or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic materials, including but not limited to those examples listed above? If yes, provide an inventory of all such materials to be used and proposed method of disposal. The location of such uses, along with the storage and shipment areas; shall be shown and labeled on the application plans. No I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for • adequate evaluation of this project to the best of my ability, that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct tot he best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaluation can be made by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Date: 5/21/07 • • Signature: / 11,t,--",t • Title: tic 17611 • • EnvironmentallnfoForm[2] Page 7 of 9 C & D- 24 Created on 5/22/2002 Q4-4:09 rr - City of Rancho Cucamonga 4fr ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM Elegvs ""ill''` INITIAL STUDY PART II thews , BACKGROUND . 1. Project File: Development Review DRC2007-00402 2. Related Files: Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18535 3. Description of Project: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2007-00402 — FRANK AN - Design Review of a proposed retail commercial center consisting of 3 buildings totaling 51,940 square feet on 4.67 acres of land within the Community Commercial District (Subarea 4) of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located along the west side of Etiwanda Avenue north of Foothill Boulevard - APN:• 0227-221-08. Related File: SUBTPM18535. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM18535 — FRANK AN - A request to subdivide 4.67 acres of land into 3 parcels for commercial purposes in the Community Commercial District (Subarea 4) within the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located along the west side of Etiwanda Avenue north of Foothill Boulevard -APN: 0227-221-08. Related File: Development Review DRC2007-00402. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative • Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. • 4. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Giant Star Properties Inc. Frank An . 1159 S. Ardmore Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90006 5. General Plan Designation: General Commercial 6. Zoning: Community Commercial (CC) Subarea 4 of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan 7. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The project site is located on the west side of Etiwanda Avenue north of Foothill Boulevard in the Community Commercial District of Subarea 4 of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan. Surrounding the project to the north is a condominium complex in the Medium Residential District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, to the south is an existing mini-mart and vacant parcels in the Community Commercial District of Subarea 4 of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, to the west is an existing commercial center in the Community Commercial District of Subarea 4 of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, and to the east is a vacant parcel in the Community Commercial District of Subarea 4 of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan. 8. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 - . C & D- 25 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2007-00402 AND SUBTPM18535 — FRANK AN Page 2 9. Contact Person and Phone Number: • Adam Collier(909)477-2750 10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (SARWQCB), Santa Ana Region Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) GLOSSARY—The following abbreviations are used in this report: CVWD—Cucamonga Valley Water District EIR— Environmental Impact Report FEIR —Final Environmental Impact Report NPDES— National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NOx— Nitrogen Oxides ROG — Reactive Organic Gases • PM10— Fine Particulate Matter • RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board SCAQMD— South Coast Air Quality Management District SWPPP—Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan URBEMIS7G— Urban Emissions Model 7G ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," or"Less Than-Significant-Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. • (x) Aesthetics (x) Agricultural Resources • (x) Air Quality ( ) Biological Resources (x) Cultural Resources (x) Geology & Soils ( ) Hazards &Waste Materials (x) Hydrology &Water Quality ( ) Land Use & Planning ( ) Mineral Resources (x) Noise ( ) Population & Housing ( ) Public Services ( ) Recreation ( ) Transportation/Traffic ( ) Utilities & Service Systems ( ) Mandatory Findings of Significance 'DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: (V) I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by, or agreed to, by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. Prepared By: r_�✓ Date: c7/3/0 9 Reviewed B/� Li_t ea., !' Date: 1/5/O • Rev. 3/13/07 C & D- 26 . Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2007-00402 AND SUBTPM18535 — FRANK AN Page 3 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: apta rear wh nan Significant Mitigation Significant No I mpact Incorporated Impact Impact EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial affect a scenic vista? ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State Scenic Highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or ( ) ( ) ( ) (1) quality of the site and its surroundings? • d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Comments: a) Less-Than-Significant Impact: The project site fronts along Etiwanda Avenue, a secondary arterial. The proposed design, using a variety of trees and shrubs to enhance the landscaping along Etiwanda Avenue, will be consistent with the applicable street master plan, subject to the review of the Design Review Committee (DRC). Additionally, there are no significant vistas within or adjacent to the project site. The site is not within a • view corridor according to General Plan Exhibit III-15. For these reasons, less-than-significant impact is anticipated for the project. b) No Impact: The project site contains no scenic resources and no historic buildings within a State Scenic Highway. There are no State Scenic Highways within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. c) . No Impact: The 4.67 acre site, located along the west side of Etiwanda Avenue, north of Foothill Boulevard, is surrounded by a condominium complex to the north, a commercial center to the west, and vacant land to the south and east. Design review is required prior to approval. City standards require the developer to underground existing and new utility lines and facilities to minimize unsightly appearance of overhead utility lines and utility enclosures in accordance with Planning Commission Resolution No. 87-96, unless exempted by said Resolution. Therefore, the project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. No impact is anticipated. d) Less-Than-Significant Impact: The project would increase the number of street lights and security lighting used in the immediate vicinity. The design and placement of light fixtures will be shown on the site plans which require review for consistency with City standards that requires shielding, diffusing, or indirect lighting to avoid glare. Lighting will be selected and located to confine the area of illumination to within the project site. The impact is not considered significant. • • Rev. 3/13/07 C & D- 27 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2007-00402 AND SUBTPM18535 — FRANK AN Page 4 Less Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With an Significant orpor,on Significant Impact Incorporated Impact Impap 2. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or ( ) ( ) (V) ( ) Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment, ( ) ( ) ( ) (7) • which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? Comments: a) Less-Than-Significant Impact: The site is not designated as Prime Farmlands, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. The 4.67-acre site, is located along the west side of Etiwanda Avenue and north of Foothill Boulevard, and is surrounded by a condominium complex to the north, a commercial center to the west, and vacant land to the south and east. There are approximately 1,300 acres of Prime Farmlands, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance within the City of Rancho Cucamonga, of which about one-third is either developed or committed to development according to • General Plan Table IV-2. The major concentrations of designated farmlands are located in the southern and eastern portions of our City that is characterized by existing and planned development. Further, two-thirds of the designated farmlands parcels are small, 'ranging from 3 acres to 30 acres, and their economic viability is doubtful; therefore, they are not intended to be retained as farmland in the General Plan Land Use Plan. The General Plan FEIR identified the conversion of farmlands to urban uses as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was. ultimately adopted by the City Council. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan for which the FEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. b) No Impact: There is no agriculturally zoned land within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. • There are no Williamson Act contracts within the City. c) No Impact: The project would not involve other changes in the existing environment. The site is currently vacant and is surrounded by a condominium complex to the north, a commercial center to the west, and vacant land to the south and east. Therefore, the project would not convert any farmland to non-agricultural use and no adverse impacts are anticipated. • 3. AIR QUALITY. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute ( ) (✓) ( ) ( ) substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? • Rev. 3/13/07 C & D- 28 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2007-00402 AND SUBTPM18535 — FRANK AN Page 5 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially w,m Than SlI,,ipsanl corporate Significant Impact Incorporated Impact Impact c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable Federal or State ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant ( ) (✓) ( ) ( ) concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) number of people? Comments: a) No Impact: As noted in the General Plan FEIR (Section 5.6), continued development will contribute to the pollutant levels in the Rancho Cucamonga area, which already exceed Federal and State standards. The General Plan FEIR identified the citywide increase in emissions as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. -The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan for which the FEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. Development of the proposed project would not conflict with the South Coast Air Quality Management Plan with the approval of the project. Therefore no impact is • anticipated. b) Less-Than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated: The project site and proposed construction was evaluated using the Urban Emission Model 2007 version 9.2.4 (URBEMIS 2007). The URBEMIS 2007 model is used to estimate emissions generated by proposed land use development projects. The evaluated criteria pollutants include: Reactive Organic Gases (ROG), Nitrous Oxides (Nor), Carbon Monoxide (CO), Fine Particulate Matter (PM10 and PM25), and Carbon Dioxide (CO2). Two of these, ROG and Nox, are ozone precursors. There are two types of emissions estimated by the model, one is for during construction phases and other is for the daily operation of the proposed and speculative uses (office, warehousing, and manufacturing). Construction Emissions (Short-Term Impacts) Construction-site grading and building emissions are considered short-term, temporary emissions and are estimated in Table 1. During construction, on-site stationary sources (generated by on-site construction activities and equipment), mobile sources (generated by heavy-duty construction vehicles and construction worker vehicles) and on-site energy use would generate emissions. These emissions have the potential to obstruct implementation of the Air Quality Management Plan. In addition, fugitive dust would also be generated during grading and construction activities. • • Rev. 3/13/07 • C & D- 29 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2007-00402 AND SUBTPM18535 - FRANK AN Page 6 Less Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With an Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • Table 1 Project Construction Emissions Source Pollutant Emissions, Ibs/da CO ROG NO, SO2 PM10 I PM2.5 CO2 Project Construction Mass Grading .07 .02 .13 .00 .12 .03 11.86 Fine Grading .14 .03 .25 .00 .25 .06 23.72 I Trenching .12 .03 .22 .00 .01 .01 9.99 Paving .12 .03 .17 .00 .01 .01 16.10 Building 1.29 .32 1.47 .00 .11 .10 182.05 Coating .00 .55 .00 .00 .00 .00 .44 SCAQMD Thresholds 550 75 100 150 150 55 No Significant Emissions? No No No No No No _ Threshold • CO= Carbon Monoxide PM10= Coarse Particulate Matter ROG = Reactive Organic Gases PM2.5= Fire Particulate Matter • NO,= Nitrogen Oxide SO2= Sulfur Dioxide SO2= Sulfur Dioxide SCAQMD= South Coast Air Quality Management District As shown in Table 1, construction emissions would not exceed South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) thresholds. However, emissions from construction still • need to be mitigated. While most of the dust would settle on or near the project site, • smaller particles would remain in the atmosphere, increasing particle levels within the surrounding area. Fugitive dust and equipment emissions are required to be assessed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) on a project-specific basis. Therefore dust control measure would be implemented during the construction phases as required by SCAQMD Rules 403-Fugitive Dust. For this reason, contractors would be required to comply with air quality rules and regulations to minimize impacts to air quality. The following mitigation measures shall be implemented to reduce short-term-emissions: • 1) All construction equipment shall be maintained in good operating condition so as to reduce operational emissions. Contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained as per manufacturers' specifications. Maintenance records shall be available at the construction site for City verification. 2) Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, the developer shall submit construction plans to City denoting the proposed schedule and projected equipment use. Construction contractors shall provide evidence that low-emission mobile construction equipment will be utilized, or that their use was investigated and found to be infeasible for the project. Contractors shall also conform to any construction measures imposed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) as well as City Planning Staff. 3) All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1113. Paints and coatings shall be applied either by hand or • high-volume, low-pressure spray. • Rev. 3/13/07 C & D- 30 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2007-00402 AND SUBTPM18535 — FRANK AN Page 7 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Patenbelly with Than Significant Mitigation Si mficant No Impact Incorporated mpact Impact 4) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. 5) All construction equipment shall comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403. Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions: • Reestablish ground cover on the construction site through seeding and watering. • Pave or apply gravel to any on-site haul roads. • Phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large areas to erosion over extended periods of time. • Schedule activities to minimize the amounts of exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. • Dispose of surplus excavated material in accordance with local ordinances and use sound engineering practices. • Sweep streets according to a schedule established by the City if silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling. Timing may vary depending upon time of year of construction. • • Suspend grading operations during high winds (i.e., wind speeds exceeding 25 mph) in accordance with Rule 403 requirements. • Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils haul trucks or cover payloads using tarps or other suitable means. • Wash truck tires leaving the site to reduce the amount of particulate matter transferred to paved streets according to SCAQMD Rule 403. • Limit traffic speeds on all unpaved road surfaces to 15 miles per hour or less to reduce fugitive dust. The Applicant shall post signs on the Project site limiting traffic speeds on unpaved road surfaces to a maximum of 15 miles per hour. 6) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and Regional Water Quality Control Board [RWQCB]) daily to reduce PM" emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. 7) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM" emissions. 8) The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel powered equipment where feasible. 9) The construction contractor shall ensure that construction-grading plans • include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. Rev. 3/13/07 C & D- 31 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2007-00402 AND SUBTPM18535 — FRANK AN Page 8 Lass Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than Significant corporate Significant pa Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Operational Emissions (Long-Term) Long term operational emissions would be generated by both stationary and mobile sources resulting from day-to-day operation activities after occupancy. Operational emissions of the project are compared to the SCAQMD thresholds of significance. The . analysis of daily operational emissions has been prepared using the URBEMIS2007 • model. The predicted emissions are based on development of a 51,940 square foot commercial center on a 4.67-acre site. The operational mobile source emissions were evaluated using the URBEMIS 2007 model, shown in Table 2. Table 2 • Project Operational Emissions Source Pollutant Emissions, tons/year CO ROG NOx SO2 j PM,o PM2.5 CO2 • Project Land Uses Strip Mall 33.82 2.73 4.14 .04 .34 .04 3,636.15 SCAQMD Thresholds 550 75 100 150 150 55 No Significant Emissions? No No No No I No No Threshold - CO =Carbon Monoxide MID=Coarse Particulate Matter ROG = Reactive Organic Gases PM2.5= Fire Particulate Matter NO = Nitrogen Oxide SO2 = Sulfur Dioxide • SO2= Sulfur Dioxide SCAQMD = South Coast Air Quality Management District As indicated in Table 2, operational emissions of the proposed project would not exceed SCAQMD thresholds. However, emissions from the operations still need to be mitigated. The following mitigation measures shall be implemented to reduce long-term emissions: 10) All industrial and commercial facilities shall post signs requiring that trucks shall not be left idling for prolonged periods (i.e., in excess of 10 minutes). 11) Warehouse managers/building operators shall be required to post both bus and Metrolink schedules in conspicuous areas. 12) Warehouse managers/building operators shall be required to configure their operating schedules around the Metrolink schedule to the extent reasonably feasible. 13) Warehouse managers/building operators shall be required to incorporate high-efficiency/low-polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water heaters in the building. 14) Warehouse managers/building operators shall be required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. •c) No impact: According to Tables 1 and 2, listed under b), the proposed project, individually, would not exceed'any SCAQMD thresholds for criteria pollutants. As noted in the General Plan FEIR (Section 5.6) continued development would contribute to the pollutant levels in the Rancho Cucamonga area, which already exceed Federal and State • standards. The General Plan FEIR identified the citywide increase in emissions as a significant and adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was Rev. 3/13/07 C & D- 32 • initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2007-00402 AND SUBTPM18535 — FRANK AN Page 9 • • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With M1an Sint Mitigation Significant No impact Impact Incorporated Impact Impact ultimately adopted by the City Council. The project proposed is consistent with the General Plan for which the FEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. Although the proposed project individually would not exceed any SCAQMD thresholds for criteria pollutants, the proposed project would likely cause emissions of Greenhouse Gases (GHG) and would contribute to a cumulative global impact. GHGs are released into the atmosphere by natural resources as well as human activities and are believed to cause global climate change, commonly referred to as "global warming." The principal GHGs are carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, ozone, and water vapor. The State of California passed Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32), the "Global Warming Solution Act" on August 31, 2006. The Governor's Office of Planning and Research is in the process of developing CEQA significance thresholds for GHG emissions; therefore, thresholds have yet to be established. AB 32 requires all regions in California to reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by year 2020. Table 3 illustrates GHG emissions for the project using the URBEMIS2007 model. Table 3 Project GHG Emissions Emission Source Emissions (tons per year) • CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Vehicles 550 .039 .059 570 Electricity Production 250 .0028 .0015 250 Natural Gas Combustion 350 .0067 .0064 350 Total Annual Emissions 1,200 .049 .067 • 1,200 CO2=Carbon Dioxide CO2e=Carbon Dioxide Equivalent CH4 = Methane N20= Nitrous Oxide • SCAQMD = South Coast Air Quality Management District As previously mentioned, currently there are no adopted thresholds of GHG emissions significance. In the absence of any definitive thresholds of significance, the GHG emphasis on a project-specific level is to incorporate any available energy conservation. Using alternative fuels and operating from electric line power instead of on-site portable . generation is strongly encouraged to minimize global cumulative GHG impacts during construction. d) Less-Than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated: Sensitive receptors are defined as 'populations that are more susceptible to the effects of pollution than the population at large. The SCAQMD identifies the following as sensitive receptors: long- term health care facilities, rehabilitation centers, convalescent centers, retirement homes, residences, schools, playgrounds, child care centers, and athletic facilities. According to the SCAQMD, projects have the potential to create significant impacts if they are located within 1/4 mile of sensitive receptors and would emit toxic air contaminants identified in SCAQMD Rule 1401. The project site is located within 1/4 mile of the nearest sensitive receptors, which are multi-family residences to the north of the project site. • Potential impacts to air quality are consistent with the Public Health and Safety Super- Element within the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. Emissions may be generated during construction and day to day operation (both stationary and mobile sources). Rev. 3/13/07 C & D- 33 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2007-00402 AND SUBTPM18535 — FRANK AN Page 10 Loss Then • • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Therefore the mitigation measures as listed under b), would reduce the impacts to less- than-significant levels. e) No Impact: Typically, the uses proposed do not create objectionable odors. No adverse impacts are anticipated. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on riparian habitat ( ) ( ) ( )' (• ) or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? • c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) protected wetlands as defined by. Section 404 of the • Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery • sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) Conservation Plan, Natural Community conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan? Comments: a) No Impact: According to the General Plan Exhibit IV-3, and Section 5.3 of the General Plan FEIR, the project site is not within an area of sensitive biological resources; therefore, development will not adversely affect rare or endangered species of plants or animals because of the fact that the project is surrounded by urbanized land uses and is -consistent with the General Plan Land Use Plan. The site has previously been disturbed during construction of surrounding development as well as annual discing for weed abatement. No impact is anticipated. b) No Impact: The project site is located in an urban area with no natural communities. No • riparian habitat exists on site, meaning the project will not have any impacts. Therefore, the project would not have a substantial adverse effect on riparian habitat or other Rev. 3/13/07 • C & D- 34 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2007-00402 AND SUBTPM18535 — FRANK AN Page 11 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • • sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. c) No Impact: No wetland habitat is present on site. As a result, project implementation would have no impact on these resources. d) No Impact: The project site is located in an urbanized area and has previously been disturbed during construction of surrounding developments as well as annual discing for weed abatement. The majority of surrounding parcels have been or are being developed. The project would not interfere substantially with the movement of any resident or• migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife • corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. No adverse impacts are anticipated. e) No Impact: The project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. There are no existing trees on-site which could be classified as a Heritage Tree by the City of Rancho Cucamonga Tree Preservation Ordinance; therefore, no impact is anticipated. f) No Impact: The project site is not located within a conservation area according to the General Plan, Open Space and Conservation Plan, Exhibit IV-4. No conflicts with habitat • conservation plans will occur. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the ( ) . (✓) ( ) ( ) significance of an archeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? • c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological ( ) (✓) ( ) ( ) resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) outside of formal cemeteries? Comments: • a) No Impact: The project site has not been identified as a "Historic Resource" per the standards of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 2.24 (Historic Preservation). Therefore, the project would not cause any substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource and no impact is anticipated. b) Less-Than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated: There are no known archaeological sites or resources recorded on the project site; however, the Rancho Cucamonga area is known to have been inhabited by Native Americans according to the General Plan FEIR (Section 5.11). Construction activity, particularly • grading, soil excavation and compaction, could adversely affect or eliminate existing and potential archaeological resources. The following mitigation measures shall be implemented: Rev. 3/13/07 C & D- 35 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2007-00402 AND SUBTPM18535 — FRANK AN Page 12 Less Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially wm Than pp g significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 1) If any prehistoric archaeological resources are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. With the assistance of the archaeologist, the City of Rancho Cucamonga will: • Enact interim measures to protect undesignated sites from demolition or significant modification without an opportunity for the City to establish its archaeological value. • Consider establishing provisions to require incorporation of archaeological sites within new developments, using their special qualities as a theme or focal point. • Pursue educating the public about the archaeological heritage of the area. • Propose mitigation measures and recommend conditions of approval to eliminate adverse project effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric resources, following appropriate CEQA guidelines. • Prepare a technical resources management report, documenting the inventory, evaluation, and proposed mitigation of resources within the project area. Submit one copy of the completed report with original illustrations, to the San Bernardino County Archaeological Information • Center for permanent archiving. c) Less-Than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated: The General Plan FEIR (Section 5.11) indicates that the Rancho Cucamonga area is on an alluvial fan. According to the San Bernardino County database, no paleontological sites or resources have been recorded within the City of Rancho Cucamonga or the sphere-of-influence, including the project site; however, the area has a high sensitivity rating for paleontological resources. The older alluvium, which would have been deposited during the wetter climate that prevailed 10,000-100,000 years ago during the Late Pleistocene epoch of the Quaternary period, when the last"Ice Age" and the appearance of modern man occurred, may contain • significant vertebrate fossils. The project site is underlain by Quaternary alluvium per General Plan Exhibit V-2; therefore, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 2) If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal fossils) are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified paleontologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. The paleontologist shall submit a report of findings that will also provide specific recommendations regarding further mitigation measures (i.e., paleontological monitoring) that may be appropriate. Where mitigation monitoring is appropriate, the program must include, but not be limited to, the following measures: • Assign a paleontological monitor, trained and equipped to allow the rapid removal of fossils with minimal construction delay, to the site full-time during the interval of earth-disturbing activities. • • Should fossils be found within an area being cleared or graded, divert earth-disturbing activities elsewhere until the monitor has completed Rev. 3/13/07 C & D- 36 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2007-00402 AND SUBTPM18535 — FRANK AN Page 13 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially- With han Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact salvage. If construction personnel make the discovery, the grading contractor should immediately divert construction and notify the monitor of the find. • Prepare, identify, and curate all recovered fossils for documentation in the summary report and transfer to an appropriate depository (i.e., San Bernardino County Museum). • Submit summary report to City of Rancho Cucamonga. Transfer collected specimens with a copy of the report to San Bernardino County Museum. • d) No Impact: The proposed project is in an area that has already been disturbed by development. The project site has already been disrupted by construction of surrounding developments and annual disking for weed abatement. No known religious or sacred sites exist within the project area. No evidence is in place to suggest the project site has been used for human burials. The California Health and Safety Code (Section 7050.5) states that if human remains are discovered on-site, no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. As adherence to State regulations is required for all development, no mitigation is required in the unlikely event human remains are discovered on-site. No adverse impacts are anticipated. • 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning. Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to- Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) Hi) Seismic-related ground failure, including ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) liquefaction? iv) Landslides? ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ( ) (✓) ( ) ( ) c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating • substantial risks to life or property? • • Rev. 3/13/07 • C & D- 37 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2007-00402 AND SUBTPM18535 — FRANK AN Page 14 Less Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Significant an • Si Impact Mitigation Significant Im Impact Impact Inporpwata0 Impact Impact e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? Comments: a) Less-Than-Significant: No known faults pass through the site and it is not in an Earthquake Fault Zone, nor is it in the Rancho Cucamonga City Special Study Zone along the Red Hill Fault, according to the General Plan Exhibit V-1, and Section 5.1 of the General Plan FEIR. The Red Hill Fault, passes within 2.5 miles north of the site, and the Cucamonga Fault Zone lies approximately 4 miles north. These faults are both capable of producing MV, 6.0-7.0 earthquakes. Also, the San Jacinto fault, capable of producing up to Mw 7.5 earthquakes is 15 miles northeasterly of the site and the San Andreas, capable of up to Mw 8.2 earthquakes, is 20 miles northeasterly of the site. Each of these faults can produce strong ground shaking. Adhering to the Uniform Building Code will ensure that geologic impacts are less than significant. b) Less-Than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated: The proposed project will require the excavation, stockpiling, and/or movement of on-site soils. The Rancho Cucamonga area is subject to strong Santa Ana wind conditions during September to April, which generates blowing sand and dust; and creates erosion problems. Construction activities may temporarily exacerbate the impacts of windblown sand, resulting in temporary • problems of dust control; however, development of this project under the General Plan would help to reduce windblown sand impacts in the area as pavement, roads, buildings, and landscaping are established. Therefore, the following fugitive dust mitigation measures shall be implemented to reduce impacts to less-than-significant levels: 1) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) daily to reduce PM1g emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. 2) Frontage public•streets shall be swept according to a schedule established by the City to reduce PM10 emissions associated with vehicle tracking of soil off-site. Timing may vary depending upon time of year of construction. 3) Grading operations shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed 25 mph to • minimize PM10 emissions from the site during such episodes. 4) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM10 emissions. c) No Impact: The General Plan FEIR (Section 5.1) indicates that subsidence is generally associated with large decreases or withdrawals of water from the aquifer. The project would not withdraw water from the existing aquifer. The site is not within a geotechnical hazardous area or other unstable geologic unit or soil type according to General Plan FEIR Figure 5.1-2. Soil types onsite consist of Tujunga Loamy Sand Soil (30 to 50 percent slopes) association according to General Plan FEIR Exhibit 5.1-3. These soils typically • have a very low level of runoff and the hazard for erosion is light unless exposed to wind. No adverse impacts are anticipated. Rev. 3/13/07 C & D- 38 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2007-00402 AND SUBTPM18535 — FRANK AN Page 15 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Nth nan Significant Mitiparen Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact d) No Impact: The majority of Rancho Cucamonga, including the project site, is located on alluvial soil deposits. These types of soils are not considered to be expansive. Soil types on-site consist of Tujunga Loamy Sand Soil association according to General Plan Exhibit V-3 and General Plan FEIR Exhibit 5,1-3. These soils typically have a very low level of runoff and the hazard for erosion is light unless exposed to wind. No adverse impacts are anticipated. • e) No Impact: The project will connect to, and be served by, the existing local sewer system for wastewater disposal. No septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal is proposed. 7. HAZARDS AND WASTE MATERIALS. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) • acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 1/4 mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, ( ) ' ( ) ( ) (✓) would the project result in a safety hazard for people • residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an ( ) ( ) ( ) (1) adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of ( ) ( ) ( ) . (✓) loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Comments: • a) No Impact: The project will not involve the transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. The City participates in a countywide interagency coalition that is considered a full service Hazardous Materials Division that is more comprehensive that any other in the state. The City is in the process of developing an Emergency Operations Plan to meet Rev. 3/13/07 C & D- 39 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2007-00402 AND SUBTPM18535 — FRANK AN Page 16 Less Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than pp g Significant MNporae Significant Imp• act Incorporated Impact Impact State and Federal requirements. The City has approved a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan which has received State and Federal approvals. Compliance with Federal, State, and local regulations concerning the storage and handling of hazardous materials and/or waste will reduce the potential for significant impacts to a level less-than-significant. No adverse impacts are expected. b) No Impact: During construction, hazardous or toxic materials transported or stored on- site may include items such as oils, paints, and fuels. All materials required during construction will be kept in compliance with State and local regulations. With the implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs) and compliance with all applicable regulations, any potential impacts from the use of hazardous materials would be considered less-than-significant. c) No Impact: Although there are no schools within a 1/2 mile of the project site, the proposed project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous materials or • acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste. d) No Impact: The proposed project is not listed as a hazardous waste or substance materials site. Recent site inspection did not reveal the presence of discarded drums or illegal dumping of hazardous materials. No impact is anticipated. e) No Impact: The site is not located within an airport land use plan and (is/is not) within • 2 miles of a public airport. The project site is located approximately 5 miles northerly of the Ontario Airport and is offset north of the flight path. No impact is anticipated. f) No Impact: The nearest private airstrip, Cable Airport, is located approximately 2 1/2 miles to the west of the City's westerly limits. No impact is anticipated. g) No Impact: The City's Multi-Hazard Disaster Plan, which is updated every two years, includes policies and procedures to be administered by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District in the event of a disaster. Because the project includes at least two points of public street access and is required to comply with all applicable City codes, including local fire ordinances, no adverse impacts are anticipated. h) No Impact: Rancho Cucamonga faces the greatest ongoing threat from a wind-driven fire in the Urban Wildland Interface area found in the northern part of the City according to the Fire District Strategic Plan 2000-2005; however, the proposed project site is not located within a high fire hazard area according to General Plan Exhibit V-7. 8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge ( ) (7) ( ) ( ) requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere ( ) ( ) ( ) (7) substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the • production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? Rev. 3/13/07 C & D- 40 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2007-00402 AND SUBTPM18535 — FRANK AN Page 17 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially calm an Sipnt Mitigation Significant No Impact Impact Incorporated Impact Impact c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the ( ) ( ) ( ) (7) site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on-or off-site? • e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ( ) (7) ( ) ( ) g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) • that would impede or redirect flood flows? Expose people or structures to a significant risk of ( ) ( ) ( ) (7) • loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ( ) ( ) ( ) (7) Comments: a) Less-Than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated: Water and sewer service is provided by the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD). The project is designed to connect to the existing water and sewer systems. The State of California is authorized to administer various aspects of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit under Section 402 of the Clean Water Act. The General Construction Permit treats any construction activity over 1 acre as an industrial activity, requiring a permit under the State's General NPDES permit. The State Water Resource Control Board (SWRCB) through the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), Santa Ana Region, administers these permits. Construction activities covered under the State's General Construction permit include removal of vegetation, grading, excavating, or any other activity for new development or significant redevelopment. Prior to commencement of construction of a project, a discharger must submit a Notice of Intent (NOI) to obtain coverage under the General Permit. The General permit requires all dischargers to comply with the following during construction activities, including site clearance and grading: • Develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that • would specify Best Management Practices (BMPs) that would prevent construction pollutants from contacting storm water and with the intent of keeping all products of erosion from moving off-site into receiving waters. Rev. 3/13/07 C & D- 41 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2007-00402 AND SUBTPM18535 — FRANK AN Page 18 Less Than • Signifcant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than PP 9 Significant Incorporated SiImpct Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • • Eliminate or reduce non-storm water discharges to storm sewer systems and other waters of the nation. • Perform inspections of all BMPs. Waste discharges include discharges of storm water and construction project discharges. A construction project for new development or significant redevelopment requires an NPDES permit. Construction project proponents are required to prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). To comply with the NPDES, the project construction contractor will be required to prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) during construction activities and a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for post-construction operational management of storm water runoff. The applicant has submitted a WQMP, prepared by Michael P. St. Jacques of Madison-FCS, Inc. on June 19, 2008 that identifies Best Management Practices (BMPs) to minimize the amount of pollutants, such as eroded soils, entering the drainage system after construction. Runoff from driveways, roads and other impermeable surfaces must be controlled through an on-site drainage system. BMPs include both structural and non-structural control methods. Structural controls used to manage storm water pollutant levels include detention basins, oil/grit separators, and porous pavement. Non-structural controls focus- on controlling pollutants at the source, generally through implementing erosion and sediment control plans, and various Business Plans that must be developed • by any businesses that store and use hazardous materials. Practices, such as periodic parking lot sweeping can substantially reduce the amount of pollutants entering the storm drain system. The following mitigation measures would be required to control additional storm water effluent: Construction Activities: 1) Prior to issuance of grading permits, the permit applicant shall submit to Building Official for approval, Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) specifically identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that shall be used on-site to reduce pollutants during construction activities entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 2) An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, included in grading plan, and implemented for the proposed project that identifies specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion from the time ground disturbing activities are initiated through completion of grading. This Erosion Control Plan shall include the following measures at a minimum: a) Specify the timing of grading and construction to minimize soil exposure to rainy periods experienced in southern California, and b) An inspection and maintenance program shall be included to ensure that any erosion which does occur either on-site or off-site as a result of this project will be corrected through a remediation or restoration program within a specified time frame. 3) Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit to the City Engineer for approval of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), • including a project description and identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on-site to reduce pollutants into the storm drain system to the maximum extent practicable. Rev. 3/13/07 C & D- 42 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2007-00402 AND SUBTPM18535 — FRANK AN Page 19 • Lass Then Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Signf an wti niic Significant Incorporated Significant pa Impact Incorporetetl Imoed Impact 4) Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit to the City Engineer for approval of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), including a project description and identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on-site to reduce pollutants into the storm drain system to the maximum extent practicable. • 5) During construction, temporary berms such as sandbags or gravel dikes must be used to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site when there is rainfall or other runoff. 6) During construction, to remove pollutants, street cleaning will be performed prior to storm events and after the use of water trucks to control dust in order to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site. Post- Construction Operational: 7) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality Management Plan prepared by Michael P. St. Jacques of Madison-FCS, Inc. on June 19, 2008, to reduce pollutants after construction entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. • • 8) Landscaping plans shall include provisions for controlling and minimizing the use of fertilizers/pesticides/herbicides. Landscaped areas shall be monitored and maintained for at least two years to ensure adequate coverage and stable growth. Plans for these areas, including monitoring provisions for a minimum of two years, shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. b) No Impact: According to CVWD, 43 percent of the City's water is currently provided from ground water in the Cucamonga and Chino Basins. CVWD has adopted a master plan that estimates demand needs until the year 2030. The proposed project will not deplete ground water supplies, nor will it interfere with recharge because it is not within an area designated as a recharge basin or spreading ground according to General Plan Exhibit IV-2. The development of the site will require the grading of the site and excavation; however, would not affect the existing aquifer, estimated to be about 288 to 470 feet below the ground surface. As noted in the General Plan FEIR (Section 5.9), continued development citywide will increase water needs and is a significant impact; however, CVWD has plans to meet this increased need through the construction of future water facilities. c) No Impact: The project will cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and amount of surface water runoff because of the amount of new building and hardscape proposed on a site; however, the project will not alter the course of any stream or river. All runoff will be conveyed to the existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to handle the flows. The project design includes landscaping of all non-hardscape areas to prevent erosion. A grading and drainage plan must be approved by the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. Therefore, the project will not result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site. The impact is not • considered significant. Rev. 3/13/07 C & D- 43 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2007-00402 AND SUBTPM18535 — FRANK AN Page 20 Less Than • Significant Lass Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially wm Than Significant Incorporated Significant pa Impact Inwmoratetl Impact Impact d) No Impact: The project will cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and amount of surface water runoff because of the amount of new building and hardscape proposed on a site; however, the project will not alter the course of any stream or river. All runoff will be conveyed to the existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to handle the flows. A grading and drainage plan must be approved by the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. Therefore, • increase in runoff from the site will not result in flooding on- or off-site. No impacts are anticipated. e) No Impact: The project will cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and amount of surface water runoff because of the amount of new building and hardscape proposed on a site; however, all runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to handle the flows. The project will not result in substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. A grading and drainage plan must be approved by the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. Therefore, increase in runoff from the site will not result in flooding on- or off-site. No impacts are anticipated. f) Less-Than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated: Grading activities associated with the construction period could result in a temporary increase in the amount of suspended solids in surface flows during a concurrent storm event, thus resulting in surface water quality impacts. The site is for new development or significant redevelopment; therefore, • is required to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) to minimize water pollution. The mitigation measures listed under a) shall be implemented to reduce any potential impacts to less-than-significant levels. g) No Impact: No housing units are proposed with this project. No adverse impacts are expected. h) No Impact: The project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area according to General Plan Exhibit V-5. No adverse impacts are expected. i) No Impact:' The Rancho Cucamonga area is flood protected by an extensive storm drain system designed to convey a 100-year storm event. The system is substantially improved and provides an integrated approach for regional and local drainage flows. This existing system includes several debris dams and levees north of the City, spreading grounds, concrete-lined channels, and underground storm drains as shown in General Plan Exhibit V-6. The project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area according to General Plan Exhibit V-5. No adverse impacts are expected. j) No Impact: There are no oceans, lakes or reservoirs near the project site; therefore, impacts from seiche and tsunami are not anticipated. The Rancho Cucamonga area sits at the base of the steep eastern San Gabriel Mountains whose deep canyons were cut by mountain streams. Numerous man-made controls have been constructed to reduce the mudflow impacts to the level of non-significance within the City. This existing system includes several debris dams and levees north of the City, and spreading grounds both within and north of the City. • Rev. 3/13/07 • C & D- 44 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2007-00402 AND SUBTPM18535 — FRANK AN Page 21 • Less Than Sipnrficant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: , Potentially With than Significant l corporiate Significant Imp Impact Impact Incorporated Imped Impact 9. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project • a) Physically divide an established community? ( ) ( ) ( ) (/) b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, a general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan ( ) ( ) ( ) (/) or natural community conservation plan? Comments: a) No Impact: The 4.67-acre site, located along the west side of Etiwanda Avenue and north of Foothill Boulevard, is surrounded by a condominium complex to the north; a commercial center to the west; and vacant land to the south and east. This project would not physically divide an established community because it would be of similar design and size to the surrounding commercial development to the south and west. In addition, the project, using new construction materials and techniques, would enhance the area and become part of a larger community. No adverse impacts are anticipated. • b) No Impact: The project site land use designation is General Commercial. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and does not interfere with any policies for environmental protection. As such, no impacts are anticipated. c) No Impact: The project site is not located within any habitat conservation or natural community plan area. According to the General Plan Exhibit IV-3, and Section 5.3 of the General Plan FEIR, the project site is not within an area of sensitive biological,resources; • therefore, development will not adversely affect rare or endangered species of plants or animals because of the fact that the project is surrounded by urbanized land uses and is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Plan. 10. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Comments: a) No Impact: The site is not designated as a State Aggregate Resources Area according to the City General Plan, Figure IV-1 and Table IV-1; therefore, there is no impact. b) No Impact: The site is not designated by the General Plan, Figure IV-1 and Table IV-1, • as a valuable mineral resource recovery site; therefore, there is no impact. Rev. 3/13/07 C & D- 45 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2007-00402 AND SUBTPM18535 — FRANK AN Page 22 Less Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Ponificant With Than PP g Significant Mitigation Significant pa Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 11. NOISE. .Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ( ) ( ) ( ) (/) ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ( ) (✓) ( ) ( ) ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) • would the project expose people residing or working in • the project area to excessive noise levels? Comments: a) No Impact: The project site is within an area of noise levels exceeding City standards according to General Plan Exhibit V-13 at build-out. However, as this is a commercial • • center built with wood-frame construction similar to surrounding buildings in the immediate vicinity, the proposed activity will be commercial in nature, similar to surrounding uses in the immediate vicinity. As such, no impacts are anticipated. b) No Impact: The uses associated with this type of project normally do not induce ground borne vibrations. As such, no impacts are anticipated. • c) No Impact: The primary source of ambient noise levels in Rancho Cucamonga is traffic. The proposed activities will not significantly increase traffic; hence, are not anticipated to increase the ambient noise levels within the vicinity of the project. d) Less-Than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated: The General Plan FEIR (Section 5.7) indicates that during a construction phase, on-site stationary sources, heavy- duty construction vehicles, and construction equipment, will generate noise exceeding City standards. The following measures are provided to mitigate the short-term noise impacts: . 1) Construction or grading shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. • 2) Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120-D, as measured at the property line. Rev. 3/13/07 C & D- 46 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2007-00402 AND SUBTPM18535 — FRANK AN Page 23 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With hen Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • Developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly noise level monitoring as specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120. Monitoring at other times may be required by the Building Official. Said consultant shall report their findings to the Building Official within 24 hours; however, if noise levels exceed the above standards, then the consultant shall immediately notify the Building Official. If noise levels exceed the above standards, then construction activities shall be reduced in intensity to a level of compliance with above noise standards or halted. 3) Haul truck deliveries shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. Additionally, if heavy trucks used for hauling would exceed 100 daily trips (counting both to and from the construction site), then the developer shall prepare a noise mitigation plan denoting any construction traffic haul routes. To the extent feasible, the plan shall denote haul routes that do not pass sensitive land uses or residential dwellings. e) No Impact: The site is not located within an airport land use plan and is not within 2 miles of a public airport. The site is located approximately 6 miles northerly of the Ontario Airport and is offset north east of the flight path. No impact is anticipated. • f) No Impact: The nearest private airstrip, Cable Airport, is located approximately 2 1/2 miles to the west of the City's westerly limits. No impact is anticipated. • 12. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) • the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Comments: a) No Impact: The project is located in a predominantly developed area and will not induce • population growth. Construction activities at the site will be short-term and will not attract new employees to the area. Once constructed, the proposed project will have a limited number of employees; hence will not create a demand for additional housing as a majority of the employees will likely be hired from within the City or surrounding communities. No impacts are anticipated. b) No Impact: The project site contains no existing housing units. No adverse impact expected. • c) No Impact: The project site is vacant land. No impacts are anticipated. Rev. 3/13/07 C & D- 47 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2007-00402 AND SUBTPM18535 — FRANK AN Page 24 Less Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially wati Than pp 9 Significant Incorporated Significant Impact Incotpwale0 Impact Impact 13. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order • to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) b) Police protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) c) Schools? ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) d) Parks? ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) e) Other public facilities? ( ) ( ) ( ) (/) Comments: a) No Impact: The site, located along the west side of Etiwanda Avenue, north of Foothill Boulevard, would be served by a fire station located approximately 2 1/2 miles from the project site. The project will not require the construction of any new facilities or alteration of any existing facilities or cause a decline in the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new facilities. Standard conditions of approval from the • Uniform Building and Fire Codes will be placed on the project so no impacts to fire • services will occur. No impacts are anticipated. b) No Impact: Additional police protection is not required as the addition of the project will not change the pattern of uses within the surrounding area and will not have a substantial increase in property to be patrolled as the project site.is within an area that is regularly patrolled. c) No Impact: The site is in a developed area currently served by the Etiwanda School District and the Chaffey Joint Union High School District. The project will be required to pay school fees as prescribed by State law prior to the issuance of building permits. No impacts are anticipated. d) No Impact: The site is in a developed area, currently served by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The nearest park, Victoria Arbors, is located 2 miles from the project site. The project will not require the construction of any new facilities or alteration • of any existing facilities or cause a decline in the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new facilities. A standard condition of approyal will require the developer to pay park development fees. No impacts are anticipated. e) No Impact: The proposed project will utilize existing public facilities. The site is in a developed area, currently served by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The project will not require the construction of any new facilities or alteration of any existing facilities or cause • a decline in the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new facilities. Cumulative development within Rancho Cucamonga will increase demand for library ' services. According to the General Plan FEIR (Section 5.9.9), the projected increase in • library space under the General Plan will not meet the projected demand. The General Plan FEIR identified the cumulative impact on library services as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately Rev. 3/13/07 C & D- 48 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2007-00402 AND SUBTPM18535 — FRANK AN Page 25 • Less Than Significant Len Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially wan Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • adopted by the City Council. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan for • which the EIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. Since the adoption of the General Plan, the City built a new library within the Victoria Gardens regional shopping center of approximately 22,000 square feet, which is in excess of the projected need of 15,500 square feet at build-out of the City. 14. RECREATION. Would the project a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or ( ) • ( ) ( ) (✓) require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Comments: a) & b) No Impact: The site is in a developed area, currently served by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The nearest park, Victoria Arbors, is located 2 miles from the • project site. This project is not proposing any new housing or large employment generator that would cause an increase in the use of parks or other recreational facilities. A standard condition of approval will require the developer to pay park development fees. No impacts are anticipated. • 15. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of ( ) ( ) ( ) (/) service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or • highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including ( ) ( ) ( ) • (.7) either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) • f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) • g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs ( ) ( ) ( ) (7) supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus • turnouts, bicycle racks)? Rev. 3/13/07 C & D- 49 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2007-00402 AND SUBTPM18535 — FRANK AN Page 26 Less Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than Significant corporate Significant Impact Incorporated Impact TOaLt Comments: • a) No Impact: Implementation of the proposed project will generate 2,916.1 vehicle trips daily. The proposed project includes the development of a 51,940 square foot retail development consisting of 4,000 square feet of restaurant uses and 47,940 square feet of retail uses. The Rancho Cucamonga Traffic Model estimates that the development will generate 234.2 trips daily. As noted in the General Plan FEIR (Section 5.5), continued development will contribute to the traffic load in the Rancho Cucamonga area. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan for which the FEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. The project is in an area that is mostly developed with street improvements existing or included in project design. The project will not create a substantial increase in the number of vehicle trips, traffic volume or congestion at intersections. The project site will be required to provide street improvements (curb, gutter and sidewalk) along the street frontage of the site per City roadway standards.' In addition, the City has established a Transportation Development fee that must be paid by the applicant prior to issuance of building permits. Fees are used to fund roadway improvements necessary to support adequate traffic circulation. No impacts are anticipated. b) No Impact: The Rancho Cucamonga Traffic Model estimates that the project will generate 234.2 two-way peak hour trips daily. In November 2004, San Bernardino County voters passed the Measure I extension which requires local jurisdictions to impose • appropriate fees on development for their fair share toward regional transportation improvement projects. On May 18, 2005, the City of Rancho Cucamonga adopted a Comprehensive Transportation Fee Schedule updating these development impact fees. As a result, the San Bernardino County Congestion Management Agency waived the Congestion Management Plan (CMP) Traffic Impact Analysis reporting requirement. This project will be required, as a condition of approval, to pay the adopted transportation • development fee prior to issuance of building permit. The project is in an area that is mostly developed with all street improvements existing. The project will not negatively impact the level of service standards on adjacent arterials. The project will be required to provide street improvements (curb, gutter and sidewalk) along the street frontage of the site. No impacts are anticipated. c) No Impact: Located approximately 6 miles northerly of the Ontario Airport, the site is offset north of the flight path and will not change air traffic patterns. No impacts are anticipated. . d) No Impact: The project is in an area that is mostly developed. The project will be required to provide street improvements (curb, gutter and sidewalk) along the street frontage of the site. The project design does not include any sharp curves or dangerous intersections or farming uses. The project will, therefore, not create a substantial increase in hazards because of a design feature. No impacts are anticipated. e) No Impact: The project will be designed to provide access for all emergency vehicles and will therefore not create an inadequate emergency access. No impacts are anticipated. f) No Impact: The project design has adequate parking in compliance with standards of the • Rancho Cucamonga Development Code and will therefore not create an inadequate parking capacity. No impacts are anticipated. Rev. 3/13/07 C & D- 50 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2007-00402 AND SUBTPM18535 — FRANK AN Page 27 . Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With hen Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact g) No Impact: The project design includes, or the project will be conditioned to provide, features supporting transportation and vehicle trip reduction (e.g., bus bays, bicycle racks, carpool parking, etc.). 16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the ( ) ( ) ( ) (7) applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or ( ) ( ) ( ) (7) wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm ( ) ( ) ( ) (7) water drainage facilities or expansion of existing . facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects.? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) • provider, which serves or may serve the project, that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted ( ) ( ) ( ) (7) capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with Federal, State, and local statutes and ( ) ( ) ( ) (7) • regulations related to solid waste? Comments: a) No Impact: The proposed project is served by the Cucamonga Valley Water District sewer system, which has waste treated by the Inland Empire Utilities Agency at the RP-4 treatment plant located within Rancho Cucamonga. The project is required to meet the requirements of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board regarding wastewater. No impacts are anticipated. b) No Impact: The proposed project is served by the Cucamonga Valley Water District sewer system, which has waste treated by the Inland Empire Utilities Agency at the RP-4 treatment plant located within Rancho Cucamonga and RP-1 located within City of Ontario, neither of which are at capacity. The project is required to meet the requirements of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board regarding wastewater. No impacts are anticipated. c) No Impact: All runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been • designed to handle the flows. A grading and drainage plan must be approved by the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. The impact is not considered significant. Rev. 3/13/07 C & D- 51 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2007-00402 AND SUBTPM18535 — FRANK AN Page 28 • Less Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially wnh Than • pp 9 Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact d) No Impact: The project is served by the Cucamonga Valley Water District water system. There is currently a sufficient water supply available to the City of Rancho Cucamonga to serve this project. No impacts are anticipated. • e) No Impact: The proposed project is served by the Cucamonga Valley Water District sewer system, which has waste treated by the Inland Empire Utilities Agency at the RP-4 treatment plant located within Rancho Cucamonga and RP-1 located within City of• Ontario, neither of which are at capacity. No impacts are anticipated. f) No Impact: Solid waste disposal will be provided by the current City contracted hauler • who disposes the refuse at a permitted landfill with sufficient capacity to handle the City's solid waste disposal needs. • g) No Impact: This project complies with Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations regarding solid waste. The City of Rancho Cucamonga continues to implement waste • reduction procedures consistent with AB 939. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated. 17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) quality of the environment, substantially reduce the • habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or • wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) . limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively • considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects that will ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Comments: a) No Impact: The site is not located in an area of sensitive biological resources as identified on the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Exhibit IV-3. Additionally, the area surrounding the site is developed. Based on previous development and street improvements, it is unlikely that any endangered or rare species would inhabit the site. b) No Impact: If the proposed project were approved, then the applicant would be required to develop the site in accordance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. The • 2001 General Plan was adopted along with the certification of a Program FEIR, Findings of Fact, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations for significant adverse environmental effects of build-out in the City and Sphere-of-Influence. The City made Rev. 3/13/07 C & D- 52 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2O07-00402 AND SUBTPM18535 — FRANK AN Page 29 • findings that adoption of the General Plan would result in significant adverse effects to aggregate resources, prime farmland, air quality, the acoustical environment, library services, and aesthetics and visual resources. Mitigation measures were adopted for each of these resources; however, they would not reduce impacts to less than significant levels. As such, the City adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations balancing the benefits of development under the General Plan Update against the significant unavoidable adverse impacts (CEQA Guidelines Section 15092 and 15096(h)). These benefits include less overall traffic volumes by developing mixed-use projects that will be pedestrian friendly and conservation of valuable natural open space. With these findings and the Statement of Overriding Considerations, no further discussion or evaluation of cumulative impacts is required. c) No Impact: Development of the site under the proposed land use change would not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. The Initial Study identifies construction-related emissions of criteria pollutants as having a potentially significant impact. Proposed mitigation measures would further reduce emission levels. Additionally, impacts resulting from air quality would be short-term and would cease once construction activities were completed. The Initial Study identified potentially significant impacts associated with the exposure of people to increased noise levels. Mitigation measures contained in this Initial Study will ensure impacts are at less-than-significant levels. EARLIER ANALYSES Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one • or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration per Section 15063(c)(3)(D). The effects identified above for this project were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in the following earlier document(s) pursuant to applicable legal standards, and such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. The following earlier analyses were utilized in completing this Initial Study and are available for review in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Division offices, 10500 Civic Center Drive (check all that apply): (T) General Plan FEIR (SCH#2000061027, Certified October 17, 2001) (T) Master Environmental Assessment for the 1989 General Plan Update (SCH #88020115, certified January 4, 1989) (T) Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan ER (SCH #87021615, certified September 16, 1987) (T) Etiwanda Specific Plan EIR (SCH #82061801, certified July 6, 1983) • • • Rev. 3/13/07 C & D- 53 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2007-00402 AND SUBTPM18535 – FRANK AN Page 30 APPLICANT CERTIFICATION • I certify that I am the applicant for the project described in this Initial Study. I acknowledge that I have read this Initial Study and the proposed mitigation measures. Further, I have revised the project plans or proposals and/or hereby agree to the proposed mitigation measures to avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant environmental effects would occur. Applicant's Signature: • � � C! Date: 9— C 9 Print Name and Title: Fta�}G /'"F`i • • • • • Rev. 3/13/07 C & D- 54 • City of Rancho Cucamonga ' MITIGATION MONITORING . fm<�r144,1 PROGRAM Project File NO.: Development Review DRC2007-00402 and Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18535 This Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP)has been prepared for use in implementing the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the above-listed project. This program has been prepared in compliance with State law to ensure that adopted mitigation measures are implemented (Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code). ' Program Components - This MMP contains the following elements: 1. Conditions of approval that act as impact mitigation measures are recorded with the action and the procedure necessary to ensure compliance.The mitigation measure conditions of approval are contained in the adopted Resolution of Approval for the project. 2. A procedure of compliance and verification has been outlined for each action necessary. This procedure designates who will take action, what action will be taken and when, and to whom and when compliance will be reported. • 3. The MMP has been designed to provide focused, yet flexible guidelines. As monitoring progresses, changes to compliance procedures may be necessary based upon recommendations by those responsible for the program. Program Management - The MMP will be in place through all phases of the project. The project planner, assigned by the Planning Director, shall coordinate enforcement of the MMP. The project planner oversees the MMP and reviews the Reporting Forms to ensure they are filled out correctly and proper action is taken on each mitigation. Each City department shall ensure compliance of the conditions (mitigation) that relate to that department. Procedures - The following steps will be followed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 1. A fee covering all costs and expenses, including any consultants' fees, incurred by the City in performing monitoring or reporting programs shall be charged to the applicant. 2. A MMP Reporting Form will be prepared for each potentially significant impact and its' corresponding mitigation measure identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Checklist, attached hereto. This procedure designates who will take action, what action will be taken and when, and to whom and when compliance will be reported. All monitoring and reporting documentation will be kept in the project file with the department having the original authority for processing the • project. Reports will be available from the City upon request at the following address: City of Rancho Cucamonga - Lead Agency Planning Department 10500 Civic Center Drive • Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 o . EXHIBIT J C & D- 55 Mitigation Monitoring Program • DRC2008-00802 AND SUBTPM18535 Page 2 • 3. Appropriate specialists will be retained if technical expertise beyond the City staff's is needed,as determined by the project planner or responsible City department,to monitor specific mitigation activities and provide appropriate written approvals to the project planner. 4. The project planner or responsible City department will approve, by signature and date, the completion of each action item that was identified on the MMP Reporting Form. After each measure is verified for compliance, no further action is required for the specific phase of development. • 5. All MMP Reporting Forms for an impact issue requiring no further monitoring will be signed off as completed by the project planner or responsible City department at the bottom of the MMP Reporting Form. 6. Unanticipated circumstances may arise requiring the refinement or addition of mitigation measures. The project planner is responsible for approving any such refinements or additions. An MMP Reporting Form will be completed by the project planner or responsible City department • and a copy provided to the appropriate design, construction, or operational personnel. 7. The project planner or responsible City department has the authority to stop the work of construction contractors if compliance with any aspects of the MMP is not occurring after written notification has been issued. The project planner or responsible City department also has the authority to hold certificates of occupancies if compliance with a mitigation measure attached hereto is not occurring. The project planner or responsible City department has the authority to • hold issuance of a business license until all mitigation measures are implemented. 8. Any conditions (mitigation) that require monitoring after project completion shall be the responsibility of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department. The Department shall require the applicant to post any necessary funds (or other forms of guarantee) with the City. These funds shall be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measure for the required period of time. 9. In those instances requiring long-term project monitoring, the applicant shall provide the City with a plan for monitoring the mitigation activities at the project site and reporting the monitoring results to the City. Said plan shall identify the reporter as an individual qualified to know whether the particular mitigation measure has been implemented. The monitoring/reporting plan shall conform to the City's MMP and shall be approved by the Community Development Director or Planning Director prior to the issuance of building permits. • • C & D- 56 :TPA N H L t : v U tt m o a v v y Z N N N N N El R IS c a � a'Aad CC 0 CI C CI) a v { i Q .. s `O _ r,§u'' ,- '• • > a* 0 0 a= g >;. . a H 3 PM co LL Q co co -.J 4 o o a7 co to Q ,;,; c a a. - a a C O O ,.�. O O O O O Z r: cul V tea?' d a_3i m a_a)i m •O. V C L > > > > > G a R at p a a a d m Q 0 1•- > 6T( !r Q n F- r,,z' a '.,,, co rn a s,- Y a) • U y,4 c W oac ea 2u_ jkj U 0 0 m 0 O _ 0 rn s `/ JD L .,ul Z cn y in U. CO c o ,.. ? 0 x. 0 m a 'D r, C N co a) D a) C co ' C �, D N 0 - C = 0 C .O 0 -O s a1 a O ttl O O - o ,_ 0 'O N G 0 , 1 °o)o ` 0 o U 0 o '5 J 3 0 '_ ca 0 X -0 0 O N ° a) o o c C3 al Z o � a � Ems ° Eoo_= = a) � i > >, h' � o U "R�1,?$ .000 'a) C . O LO rOQ = OCC -0 o U ~Q N m a E o N a � � ° .� o ° m t 0 o E p cUro 'omc omns a) . � 0 62y 0 3 0 R xc 'd ° mcco cp, o . 0CCO0 od 'm E >, ° o a -0 0 co n I- O Q E E -E -o , ` � co ? E �° -c ° U E0E oc E T T Yr o O C o 0 o C - U O C O C O u) O c C a1 co R 0 to N xi .;• .„ C to o co - 0 ca y y c O O Q 'o 0. o ai .0 .., c U dyy3 co o — >, no a 0 '0 'O2 C o0 p o o q WO N a O N �.iv4� O O N '� L O0V .U°. 2 N 0 00 (I) aC d d '- C Q > 0 L Z (t w . 0- ° 0 E T - N `a ° 0 o 0 It y L Ls,i.`2!,_'J a ° 0_7a U E O 0 ° ° ON N "O h o O a CL d O N. 9 - C 0 a N C 0 C O o a3 to 0 Q 5 O) NQ C^- a) � R ova y CO n.0 ° � ° ° N c o) a Ep �d. c Z a as ,., cacmE' m _ _ "° 000 2m - i — � -° p d T a) Cy) ;, o 0Uo ° '° c �a NL ° a° E � m mU � ° .N � Umo LL *- o d ,Z� mN o 0) m o ac) o ° m o) It ro E y -" Eo c 0 C V N mE 'yP:g'r 2 � g Em .n is oC EEEO10eo) C mE `ao • c cVo a co a— .',-4 O co UN-) .a E — O O d a) O W W al C d aO ? o U o N a _ a „a ° 0c5 ,-- Esc- ' o > c 5 :° '5 o c a) C C C o ct a) o S D. = 5E Q,�` ¢ oa) 0 ay > a -oo aa)) a00.c0E � d < ads < cc ¢-¢ c Lb C & D- 57 0 0 L O a a = E S o o c c c 0 • -4 v v cn Z N N N N s <t V .. 7 7 V N 0 "O C • ' 0 0 0 (0 . • a) a7 o C O O 'O o O U it = 5 > a a s a Q a Q a < • C C 0 C C al al re ca CC �.. 0 a a s a a C O C C C 0 O r. `o `o o `o `o '� '� o 0 0 0 . 3 E E ' m E o 3 m o) om- C)a a a C ( C o C 0 C o C o C - _ o N 0 a) 0 a) J CO J 0 J 0 J O J O J O I- > CC I CC CC CC D U D U D 0 D 0 0 0 D o C T C c C CO 0 7 0 • C Cr n u• i U U U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N rn -0 `o C C C O O w 0 p p p p 0 0 0 p 0 0 ix a 07 CO CO w CO CO CO 07 00 CO CO 0 a) Q c 'O -o U p •L co - a) 10 O f: N N Q1 "O T C - C N = 0 = r 0 o .- 0 L c .� . v1 -0 J L .0 .E ..- 3 ° > 0 J cn - _ ro 0 N N o C N N N 1] a ro T 'O co O O O U a ro N N U O D O 'V T.. ° N � y ro C L C N O o -J0 o t - O ro O 0 V) N o W J . t E ° = `o E mJ a> o `0 3 ° mn °) a • co o)0J ppa' y a0 rom E ° oro E o) 0 oa) o -0 a 0 00 E O L O L t6 .0 c0 a N, N E L - N 0I 0 o ° -c 0 ca (n Q al 0 O U ' « .O N..W 0 0 0 C 0) C O C 41 C _O J c O` 3 T-0 O a) 0 C a N a) 0 0 U ` o 'C Cl) 0 j ul (` Q O O L L al> C N O ro o J r C > y 0 O oco CC as oo) o ra E °i 02 cz02co) � EE L � • - _ a0 or, a_0 3 a-a)imaa) N c c C 2, a) 'O YO ro O Ln 0 0 o 0)m p J N y 0 -0 O Q > m ro C x E -O O O) c - N J .- >. C E Q m C y C a) a) O.C a) c J m m0 ca a is a ro0 p o 3 m o ° u°) = ai -o CO 0 o. C E N a 5 mupi c n � w m roUg Z -0 "C `a j to '0 O- O U ° 0 0 D a o-O) c'ri E N N O y O _ a N >. m C3 � � o m `o) o c '5 > = m as ,- 0 c X 0 E 0 i a• = ° aa)i L y a Lo -0 aci > j U or- T 0) ca 5 Q y N 0 > -p O C C "' -p a C y 0)p U co CZ O a L N a a C 0 X '6 ° a) O) o T c0 ca O A 'N6 cc E N O U a oU U O. U ` ° N ro N ro .0 07 rn y a) ro N a) o O C _ O ro Y J ° .� - 2 E L E m 3 s c � N as o) o -° a) a) ro0 aV0) E ` Dad CEa) ^ o0 C' 00. J n 'Ft' > 0 C • C m 0 N -0 y a 0 '0 O a s J 0 cop .ro ,-. .L] r 0 ), Q 0) E > a) o O 0 0 J N cn C a) o Y p. O C N `cos in a-O < G ro N JO N E G .X .- ca O N :.. E a) O > al - r a 0 U 0) GEC N C = ro a) a) -E a) ca ca C as N CC L a 0_ `5 cn o - O aC cn C I- o° u) 3 ccn 2 L 0 o h � IL- L. E w o o d O. a) - F. ` U 5E . . . . . H. colSm C & D- 58 ' . . • 0 „EaLag.4 a , c ra O '13 a 4; 0 E 0 c O 0 -..,. 0 0 . • .. C C 03 0 <1- CO -.... C') Co Z <I- <I- 0J mr CV • «IP a Ts Nit: 13 C .. co ...... de t -0-31 atz- . U., - c t 2 kgrA i:s tal • pip 0 0 ._ ..a _i- t zr, 0 0 pi M > < < 0 0 0 0 td-,-. 0 0 0 0 0 En 0 si a = a a = C a kec 0 0 0 m C co co -, ID O --- 0 -...= -5 t) "5 5 -a '5 "5 Pa as o 0 a o.) 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 rii .c ,, a) ._ o ._ o ._ o ._ o '5 o .5 a) E '5 s'ife t 8 g > > > a, a, > a, a, a, a) a, :'.: '1= > 0 0 tt CC CC CC CC CC Cr nE...../. L70 10 >. ksil C 0 'at C CO ow a , . ..,. . c cr gomt.?: It 0 • DC) 0 0 i* co a u_ c...) o a a a a 6 Eli at waiw.1 co WA_ 0 .t I Etli 3 36 rot. tir CC 00 tz° 12.* - V4r_z41 o 36 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cc waom CO CO CO m a. POP 'DEC C "iiii -,- u) a a) c a) -c, as 0 0) F2 0 -0 r . . c , CD C 0 al -C 0 Ca) -0 ' fl a .2 .10 C .0 C 0,1;-$ a) ;,,...h.", as .- .- ai 0 o .0.1:2) E., . , 1-0 = .... CV 0 2 8 0 c4) o _ a) Ta - 2 .7) - = ct' To ca ca 78 -6 a) f1 6 7-.) 7.5 7,3 0 E Q9 a) 715 ro Z in- 7.- 0 ,... ..c p co a) a) c _ c a c cn a) co .- n 3 4 o 0 -6 0 0 c .C.3 0 7 ..._. 6 a a o 8 a CD CO G 0 ,_ -C co 5 3 co 0 I CI CV .0 T.- 0000a5c 0 0 73 (7) ° = 1,1 0 , 0 .... , -0 03 ,-.. - 0 2 E , , c,, o , o 0 c o -->".. 8 § os . -0 - to 0 > 8 -cr) 0 a) • 0 c ta c Its -c (9 2 cd 1:,' ra >"'71: 0 a) -c r- CI 75 m • - " :— ..- 0 m laT> = otri c ts CCS 0 .0 0 _c .N ° — c 0 373 Th- a 2 0 V) 0 CD cli to c co at " o..5 - 0- ° Kg4: To di ° CO o = So a) ....=. co as a . - 0 '5 o , - o :.= can) c E 0 o 0- rp 0 _ C15 ..c 0 7 0 0 a) 'Es ..6 5 _ a t) o m .- p a) - - rza o) 0 o 1`. a) a) 0 c. .f. -0 _C Ca o . 0)2 ra- E :..=, , o .- cr, as ... o) . a i- x 6 .c c E RP 7, o 8- o 2 n a - - - _c D E 2 -0 _,.E. a) a) ._ o)-al a- u) .5 -6 (2 --e, To - 0 LI c z .6 %-a- f a 0 ..),,_ n- 'a _ 0 a...,4- ...... o) •-• cr (2..) ..) '5 , - CCI c 0 CO 7 -G 7 la '5 -S. la _c .- -- i ci —-o > 0 • tr. o 0 .._. 0 ,... ._ c r t n a c a 0 '8 ....... o -. - n ,.,, 0 ---- 0 0 c u, .0 4" 15- z - a 8 vi ca -g 000. E 8 Y2 -° 0 _c --. Li2 ta ci) „, ....a) ..„ ,. ca m, ma) 8 .0 0 In c tc.?, 0- a a - ,.- ° 5 E nu) mu' 0 .c a) 0 a) - c 6 Es 0 0 :_E c0 .— 0 CU) 0' cn 0 5 0) c .- • 0) 0 ,,,;1.4 in o 3 0) 0 a) a) 21)-5 • cti .- -0 ea 0- 0 = 11 .0 a) C u) D o c c - ° -g (k) c -0 2 C m 0 = 8 47-- 2 a Tel cz _ C0) 0 al 8 ch .qc,m o o .0 a) „9- :a, cts a - c a . .-0 .i 30 -0 •0 0 (a - 0 as .- .c co 0 :5 To. --a-> _. _ u") E = 0 — 73 " C " E 2 cs-0- E "E ° E •g s E .E .a- rig..1 z .c, 4 Li E _ CD 0) rl- TO 0 0 ..r.— a) = o)'5 as - g o ° • 5 . 5 = ,_ o c.) n .- . _c - 73 - = co u) o_ en o o c .2- - 2 - 7) g 0 Scs _c 6 ° 0 = CD C a) 2 " '5 ° ° " ior4 " 0 0) c c o c .- _ c - • 0 -. .c.ij '0:c4, °- " 0- 0 0 C D Cd a_c 11.. 0 > 0 in cn = = = = 2 2 -0 5 -0 e_ -, -o 0 0 -0 .... CIL° ° 0 FcT5'; >CE ea co > TEI E .° 0 - a) g fa ° 2 ct -0 •c_c -0w -cc "a) a c 0 0 ..c ,u2 c -c 2 .c gi. c p , -:.-- a,- ma' . 0 •E c i v, 0 0 c 1 7; c -5 0 2 .5 <a 2 .5 "O .5 -.tr.- ,..° 2 .5 -, ,-., as o - 5 _6 7, 0 0 Icr) 0 C 0-= vs 0- C ca 0- 0 cV or c0 = c4 cr — V-5.e. 0 iti t--- CI.9 0 -C 5. 2 P c 0 2 - o a) a> .,. c -6 2 5 C.) ir o 92 I-- ca 1- o o Z.( 92 92 8 2 .-E C & D- 59 0 0 O m • E •n c RO C V ,:s. .71- • cn Z c) co a') o) M a N R c a a) . 0 . 0 m > 0 `o —° v ca o 0 2 > a 0 0 0 0 0 'C -C t r 'C 'C 0 • 0 0 0 0 0 a a a a a a C E 2 d 2 2 2 0 o • `0 0 0 0 0 o as tn C V a) o o a) 031 a) d N > 0) > aa)) 0) F > CC CC CC CC CC CC • • O) > Co C CO O () • o i1 0 • O nL. U 0 0 0 0 m 0) O E a `O N r C C 0-• 22 m m m m N ❑i ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ W 2 a a a a d a 'o C CO 0 3 m 0) 'o U O < €-0 U L .>. C ca N o . a1 C 0 Oj m • 0) 0 .- O L C O J C U C L.. c o n co � LU1 0- m et 0 E o'c W a ° o c 'c m�o m 0 o m al - o)� E c CO E a J U °-o U E m c'E o a o) E o 0 0 m L a) JO o 0) 0 C - 0) a 0 N = rO 0 'O O E -o ° cn o 0c` 'o � o ._ _ a) Ca oro dmu, n , — c E a) 3 m m N m m 'a E m c .ob mN E m m ro . J O 0 C)' .. -p O p)o L O ro 0 C tP a= L y E . C W a) U 'C ay ' a m > .' a) E o.m ° to 0 .3 c m o) d U ..>� G "t� N CO 0 0) c a c a) 3 a 0) o . L _ C N • o : U y a m ro m CO Em c j . c aF m m° o � E Cu m c9 N C_ C) E o O C o _ O 0 L C C o CD ° 0) 0) E .E a.E a co o o Cu0 m ° oar y � ° 00 ao � _ u, _ o o f c ` matt EEO fn O 0 O) L L. ° o o ) O > E O O J O a) Y h _o 92 0 0 L C T m ro O E -- c. 0 C T O m y w 0 �O C CO o) 0 O L ) m m ro 21 .- O a.- E a) m _ O ro .0 m - C m L ` ro > N O 4— 0 0 Z C m = J h co C C C o O` '•.° U m a) 0 O ° ° p2 CT m ° ' U N o m o <a . J O O a'C O U L ' ° p C N o m U-c ... o 0 E c co a i co 3 0 E 0) a m 0 o Oct J Cu m ro m N U m 0 to Ti p J .F > > a a) co o m a1 m Q E a ° .� 0 o m o aa) .m E o c ° °)'E E o) 0 ° 2 .0 h- ` E aL J 0 m 0 20 o a ° m E fi a) . m,. ° `7o.o0 o � ` roEa > a ` Emm � EE r ° E a`0 0s� .a p a J .aLL @ 0 0 _o . mm? o O a1 0 '0 l m p p � 0 V a 0 C p p 0� L. ` o c 1.= j cy ' ct' Opa)d wv3ro USa 0. co CL0a) am a -Oamo < Ca = oI) 0 _ ro y > c 0 m a a m 2 E -- ayamtO- -oo E C & D- 60 1 W.,•ri co • :‘,V; • 0 , c i• -: o Lo ri co Z. • o o .s., U,- co o 1111 nt"t• CO Z xt 'I CO CO 0 4 CI3 44,4 Z.- -ctu 'E 0 .r... IA F 0 . rfp,tc4 > 0 at ••-• cp Ca CI fbil EIP C 41- o 0 .- .. 'V ra '',744pg ID 0 • nil- -• I-- 0 0 . -C It!: "ff,4 0 0 o 8 a a a -St a 92 2 8 2 g:: c I a a a to o . .2 p 2 o '- -6 73 "6 0-6 14:0.4 = . '1 0 t t t Ca 0 ‘i sy,_2 o) ,_ = 0) ,_ m o) ,_ .EE a.) o o a) p -,-,-) c -,,a,• _ '5 '5 o 0 -P-76. ,- = S c c. c ,c c E 3- > 0 a) > a) 0) cp a•• r 0 0 = 0 = 0 P > CC cc C c c p:a a 0 Do 0 0 Do . Ig..i • a, ., i C • O 0 4-÷Wa CO • "E or o 0 2 a.- 0 0 Ea 0 0 kn: ,J.1 0 a a a in Oa co co .c 071 71 15- WY' CC O 0 frit*t . n.2 nr*Fr ta te, 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 cc 2 0- co a- a. K', co co co co -0 .c a) -0 0 ai a) r •-• o o ra 0 0 >-, .,....... '- "0 CD no 0= .- to -o c o CE 2 0 c 0 o - c .c -E. 94 a) c 0 - 0 ca CC C0 F-- as - > u) 4-) Es- o -c 0 ;wad -c co c 0 2 0 a) o_ >-• 'Eh ro a= c..) 2 "7 • a) .5 > -'5 = - '- 0 a.) • Li) CO al 0 r "5 -s no a' -0- "O. 0 0 2 0 P . -5 a) -5 5 Ts 0 V u) c c i 0 0 a 0 '- c cp c .- a ,1)4: 6 2 b. fo o a) a) E o) co a) > ›,.E. o icss ii) • oa) > C P ° 13 "" -0 -' 02 a) 0 "M co - c:7) E .c 0 0 c 0 •-i;at,'. < ° '6 0 0 IS to 2 o -° c •=_Qp :5 :5 ''' ro oo c o) >. 0 cO it...4 co u) u.;- al col a) > = I:."ra a) c En ° ° ot w . a a ,rki c o ...3, o_ -o 0- 2 > 2 - gaLio -cE8 ° a 0 ° o ktvi 0 "a" - o c 'E ° le tom E 22j il-- >.'• -0 03 nx,‘';. .0 -0 7) a) a) 0) a) a), as o E 0 ca ° 0 .E E _ .- a4 c? 0...>2.-2 .._c a.= ra • co o E V. a.) • 0) a To a'tz--- - -c-) i'"1. -0 .E. .0 -0 = . CD > — >.18 •;.-..- -C -C c 175 E a) co Fife a) „ a) a) c <0 E -o tic ca . ..,._ -c " L_ -5 a) 2 >—F) t.• co =2.:m > 0) 43 a) > CD ' 0 " 0 ra .- --, -C •- ca0 f3a Ei " " notyl -0 0 0, — _c CL a o 0 4,1%,-, ..,a) ot 2- To --. -c ° o rn 0- - II t 0 .- -a") _c -c 's• E .9. -0 a ....., 5L- co -0 Ecco >, 0o , 2 16 ,,t,4,fl MI 0_ .0 - V 0 rzu CO -0 0 --- > d 0 Oca C rag :&_ -0Ca0 trC.";1 0 ct a- 0 >.' >, = cO .c ..0 0 .- -5 Z To _C 0 TD 0 't c 1._ 5 , 2 . o 0 E o L. a) ‘(.7) 1:: ta - 0 cri co LI al >., c 0 ,,,,a, -c, > .c a 0 , a to oi U) C -= 7., —,,, — > ,a2 a) -, C CO° P ..4. •- no . aWni: - D xt a) P 0 to E CI9 ._1(14) a.E s 0 0 0 ,.. , __- a> fo' ;tr. a - -0 >-...E. c co i- a) re,r.;, a) c -c, _ a) o2 > >, 0 i■ CD Id " C .0 r 2 c :4— a) C C H I. w..p4; n a) CD w = L c t i 03 C In CD Loca7) = 45 ra Ti to' 0 . vrg a - ca .E. 5 7,-, = ,--L- 1/41.-.g. ,,9) ,- 77) -sQ .5 E o cv ...0 to _o a tact a E r _ cog0 0i- O) c ccia) Fs; - - ..g..-.. cc 0 a o ..., z, •6 1.7). _ E to 00 .- <7, -o00 .0 a _9 , ara ...„ 7, >,. ._ ,„3 (02) To _o , - E0 at cs) ow 0000 .- - 0 - 0 - . k;,... .co) a - o ._ 0 co o -o L- 0 en _ CD CD • 5 C Fp 7z -C— "-- co CI> c5./ ,_a; (7., a- 2>‘ _ 0 40 5 5 Inc 0-'2 E E n --ra.i i m E 2----"c C. = 'GT) '5 -E ,.,,c1) .2 a; cn c coo mane- 4 oo - oco - -00 - c - -0 - Eocno co < a) t -o (f) o To :_-_ co co 0_ -o co C.) an 0 o 2 .. i.: Lf,) E a) 0 -‘7, o p W. TaL zo E € ..c- > 0 r • i o ro o Cll -0 00 ci t > =' ■.- 0 E - --- a 0 -c ,--5 - • • • O,E - n C U. n D "6 "6 0 0 0 C as p ge03a. C & D- 61 '6 WI in R oU � . • CO a a a Z -,1- III r N al co r > 0 C .',' D 'O a5 1 la Ow y-., n '- = Z e ?t 0 0 0 0 n > a a a a N N co N C C C C rF tC (E A 0 L a a a o. ,� o o «. o `o o `o w o m a) a) i= > y Q Q Q Ol o C V o a) `- : co f= ❑ ❑ ❑ 45 • O d � U U U U m w co 2u. co m m Si cu ,t w C C gt O 0 9 r4 m 2 I do 0 0 0 0 CC w c0 m co co 3 -a' o f ` C O C 'O o> CPo ` O t 0 Ja) E -� U N O E. C O U C O C C C _o U _ U L 1 ' ;.V O . € s N 'O O T N O _. E N-. a'-O fa 'o N X > V f ` -am . -. 'O O J 0 O C p L 3 0C a O f C� U aN o � ` oEN N � ` o Oa � mm ` P °� ma � a nN4 n ? E Na t argil o mm o > - to .5. 0c -65 ,2 E ` co •c - o E rat m ad D .`= o ocO N a_ 5 C O D > ° > E E N 'w r a ad N d fA 0 0 a) 5 m C .V N x 0 as V a E om a p p O a 05 NO ° c oE_ I p J , p L. Y > U O o E a)o f .4 in c U N 0 0_gfr-kg o N E n a E m m L .E m a` a m _ E 5 C o J E 2 2 ° 2 m o c a « EE . r ' 0CNio o ` c5` etixti_ - _ Ei 0p2 Nac occ f6 : E Co �m E0E m O F m al E ` 5 c o c Ea -EEY mJ am To' (0 No E =S Em c C) c o E o0 . o .` ? D C � O 0 0 a y o - a E c E ° 2 � FO: T oc C C °- O o 5 n a ° a W d . N - 12 0 0o f c.= a) N a) C as p u) d 0 E ` d -0 N E C C J N O a) O i H a 2o x ° -LE- 20 '2E - 8 = 0 =' 05279 .0 = t e c , .1, 0 > cor -O U E79 .0 = = a E ` � d N A e ' C O C N 'O O O O d O N .a) .- C. 9 O '5 J ' C 0 -o 0 0) a _c a) Ol 3- O m a) C 0 a c C ) . -0 75�Ca3 - tnE 0 N N C 7 N O a) C . U N Y ea 0 C O _ •O apt E ? JOJ CC0 C � UO � a N O O O faC N O C L 1Na E 5 LO N co 4 'O N 2020 = E :,-, U I P; N m U N f . c N O O aC C y P p - m c o >,n) E ° 0 o .J W to O o ...g--_,,,..' � E S W � y N N C k- O N O C 9 O. O o 0 0 0 N To OC a) c a) O O 'O L c , L 0 L V O ,p J J a) in J 2 O ` m :m_' d L N > .a L O -c Q -c aN fa F- E p) t6. ¢ C - 0 3 NCom L a Na N 4:'F C & D- 62 • a ` ; as L c 'a/411 as m a '',9 c E R• O 7 V 7 V fA Z N N N 'w V N TO + .6 C i;Y ' a) m m • O � . 'O :.= 0 m >a a 0 a co w co to m m m m w o 0 o a aa•.' o O `o `o `o `o r} '_ E t _ > f5g3„; C V) > > > > O F > m m m m U U Pr fT a is C O yy •O a) Via?•'Y CO • 3 O d U 0 5LL m U m U m j m +' 42` " 9 .r U I O 0) 7_1m al N w_ i..4-0 , 4 c c s� 0 0 aM in ¢ ° m m m co S m -°co c .vooc o `omoomorn cLom 8c2 >m .,.r� a) ui y h .O N a) -0 • o X 0 c 0 o 3 a C . .co o) c is C , O 4= 0) 07 a) CO N a >= a) > a) a) a 0) p _ c +a wE ou.) a`a)) >,a0 O1 EL r31 0a) mr 0 +1; ? m m 50 - E 788ui ° E .5 '03 -co = `o oo _ —.JQow m3a E-Sm -0 acLLa) m 2 amo > " c EOCWQa) Y > 0aa.. _, oc (/p ao o "o c 2 0 L o 0 o c 2 g E n m O m o as a) m " z k 'fi 0 c ayo0 s) Ts Oa) oaz_ = acmesEY'o 'Ea) a p • p p C E co m � 42Ln r -o � mo c)) E ppzz° ° Y E o o `a 0 C p as yo 0 ? '° E ogpof acidm c °)Jo Now _, m .oc E .-- aa> m � � eV � O . o ? _ a" E a c ..... a> a O a) a> O d N y C .p YO a) y a> > .- _ ] t`-a.y+'' c co c W O N a) a) O _ O W _ - m rect. co O p out t a> a> y 0 > L C 'O a) m E L O c a a. O To- (Fa ) L _o Z• a 0 ' -00 .E ' C E e 'C `m .°c' 0- a , o j o@ o > Q) i ca co & L• =1 007,50 ro > ai d t Cr) y E O "? @ > m o a m CO `. y��yjS-'' ° i, CD L -) 0 (0 V a) .p 0 o O p `p "o a) c E 0 E 6-., E 0 3 E > al r di am cs) CU rn N .O o .@C ,- U' u) o .....0 ol Es 01 7 3 O- C R > ' (C O 'Z ° CC :w <S O O 3 N • 2 c = o a m ma c„ CO CO owcU � c � c a c ° mom o C Ci 0 3 342 42 � a. (� LO. aa)°' o`o -0002o p N m � a) •-.= en t--- ``� o � tn = _ ma _ > m m m m .c � . m m E c yes a) o)m_ ` -pm m , v o a c o D)C C .p N C U 0 o N 0 N E .- O O C c a c g --- 'd...'q.l ` C C a c O - > L '5 O - J C ° N O = a) c O c > a> O L .O N O a) ° O= O S:O,, O o O m 2 U .) m a 1- 2 —, a) a 0 92 .o a) --CE E a d w 0 0 0 m o l2 m U Z4 U L .E c Pavia C & D- 63 • S a _�[�A .- 0 3f c 0 • O O r .. w v U N c c O m 0 O as C o = m - N Z V V 1d m co • D C 0 0 0 ¢..°. mao° ) O 0- w R .4 Q (7 U Y a D -0 ` 8p@k .c .0 .c 3 C Y 0 ID el - ".g. L a o J. O> N 0 , N O am [aat; 3 cc cc 5 > 0 ._ Cu m a to co r C D 0 HI ✓ 0 d m o 5 > Q C m•• 1 E. c a o al c a d a C C '.� 0 0 =R ':. E i To m 2 o)_2 : $ a E = c y • cw p), a " Y .co 033 m Q U m c 0 ;- c co p a) '21! Q m U m i c Cr ); O • IF); co O 2 U U ` * E CD 4 ,i c 07 GN' p O O• a •C%$ > 0 2 ,Q O S C U O m o om .- 01' r U o a of cc m aOW o o U m ° c 0 m E ., - ° o ° c) .o '- c 0 a n y ro , co rp� a` FL- Co. . U >, ° Emo � acn mc co mo amUOw a y ro ro a ° y T al c0i C3 -OOEcmm � s' ;' > °' a°'i -% 3 °1 °- °'^' OC - 0 3 c° E atpr � O 0O m To ..c ° oU 2 ° ° m0 xa m )1 m Too -o,c a� -6 u) cm E X y = m • 0 ~ O 0 0L = so d el -ip cooico -oc c_°- DCOro c w ° ELC.0 oo -0 pp..,,r� o > ? ro ° `O .2.- m > N > ro a1 O - w T y F" 0 A of N. 0 m y5a-20 .cca2 ma a? c 0 a c Ei:?Y m 0 C C 0 0 ° o) o c6 y c E cc (D ro T a d 2 ° 2 yrp... O a) 0 -O - E O N C -0 7 'O O o - -0 C O y o o ro A 4 c m ' c v O O ro 'O N O N C 0 ro C ro O C 1. ° .c ' T', i O O c yc 0'-o 4m � Nro � o - •_ ° " ro `" =•- Em �' 0I' }0oDy' °' va) O 0 - O ° . m -° '- 0 O N o, -0 a1 ` co 0 0 -0 0:0tY� d o` N D D rn W ) 12 0 p L .0 o .c "_ > �- U ° d o .0 0 N¢ o N N 0 0 aa)i Q nom;! 8 O 0 N ° N C a a r to ° >.'ai 0 C '- C ro Ca > O " > 0 0 C 0 -° co 0 'far >. m :S .ro D . O pl O C ' LEC „ > ° O0 o -C mORa "O ° roa Y• Md` � Oc = a0 5 '5 O O N .O d ' -a ': of-- « O Y a] m O p r ra ° 5 co W :d E m m U • C c L O 0 ` 'NO a N w - co co "NO` "O 'NO` 'tn 'NO` p °' 3 E U C a1 L F Cy o c w a u U s E ro c o Cn o- 2 ro (Li m ro C co cis mo a> ` al .? U FffO U at - 5 .o m Ol 0 0 a '°- C 0 a) 0 _ 0 a p] -O .a-1 -O ` c0 C C ro -- c.— r o.01'. ' d U ma_ jr.. p' om aa) a) '5 o a> ry ro ° oc 0 mp ) is 5c °a a' o ° a0ci >. p,010 . w O0 U 2 £ U in Cn m c U a a, a m in •c y S .c .E c .0 ca a o -2 m Y ' U a U m a a • C & D- 64 • RESOLUTION NO. 09-36 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2007-00402, LOCATED ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF ETIWANDA AVENUE, NORTH OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD IN THE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT OF SUBAREA 4 OF THE FOOTHILL BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF -APN: 0227-221-08. A. Recitals. 1. Frank An filed an application for the approval of Development Review DRC2007-00402, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Review request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 14th day of October 2009, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. • NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved 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 October 14, 2009, including written and oral staff reports and public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to the property located along the west side of Etiwanda Avenue north of Foothill Boulevard,with a street frontage of 369 feet and lot depth of 540 feet and is presently vacant; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is a condominium complex, the properties to the south consist of a mini-mart and vacant land; the property to the east is approved for a commercial center, and the property to the west is an existing commercial center; and c. The applicant has concurrently applied for Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18535 to subdivide the subject property into three separate parcels for commercial purposes; and d. The use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and • e. The design and exterior materials of the proposed building will be consistent with the surrounding area and the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan. C & D- 65 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-36 DRC2007-00402 — FRANK AN October 14, 2009 • Page 2 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and b. The proposed use is in accord with the objectives of the Development Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and c. The proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code; 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. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, 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 and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: • a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA")and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that,with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds: (i)that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. c. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, • Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings C & D- 66 • PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-36 DRC2007-00402 — FRANK AN • October 14, 2009 Page 3 upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the Planning Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Department 1) This approval is for the development of a 51,940 square foot retail-office center including the site plan, exterior building design, and conceptual landscaping. Plans submitted for plan check shall conform to the plans approved by the Planning Commission approval on October 14, 2009. 2) No exterior changes to the design of the project, including exterior materials, shall be permitted without prior City review and approval. 3) All applicable conditions of approval for Tentative Parcel Map • SUBTPM18535 shall apply. 4) Final project approval shall be subject to approval of the associated Tentative Parcel Map 18535. • 5) A Uniform Sign Program (USP) shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review and final approval by the Design Review Committee prior to building plan check submittal. 6) All ground mounted equipment and utility boxes including transformers, fire department connections, back-flow devices, etc., shall be surrounded by a minimum of two rows of shrubs spaced at a minimum of 18 inches on-center. This equipment shall be painted forest green. 7) Decorative paving shall be provided at the Etiwanda Avenue driveway entrance to the site. 8) Provide durable street furniture in the outdoor seating areas such as tables, chairs, and waste receptacles subject to review and approval by the Planning Director. • 9) Retaining walls within public view shall be decorative (i.e., block with ledgestone veneer, etc.). • • • C & D- 67 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-36 DRC2007-00402 — FRANK AN October 14, 2009 • Page 4 • • Engineering Department 1) Etiwanda Avenue to be improved in accordance with City "Secondary Arterial" standards including dual southbound left turn lanes (10 feet and 10 feet), 2 southbound thru lanes (11 feet and 11 feet), 1 bike lane (4 feet) and 1 southbound bus bay/right turn lane (12 feet). Widen west half of Etiwanda Avenue from 32 feet at north project boundary to 47 feet at south project boundary a) Provide cobble curb and gutter, sidewalk, drive approach, street trees and street lights, as required, per Figure 5-23 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. b) Provide a 10-foot southbound right turn lane for driveway that extends, at 42 feet from centerline, to 60 feet north of the south property line then transitions to 47 feet for the intersection right turn lane. c) Provide traffic striping and signage, including R26 signs, as required. 2) Provide reciprocal access easements in favor of the commercial • property to the west and to the south. a) Make a good faith effort to establish reciprocating vehicular , access with commercial property along the westerly boundary of this project. 3) Pavement reconstruction and overlays on Etiwanda Avenue will be determined during plan check. 4) Construct appropriate off-site street improvements from transition to existing. , 5) An in-lieu fee as contribution to the future undergrounding of the existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical, except for the 66 KV electrical)on the opposite side of Etiwanda Avenue shall be paid to the City prior to map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever comes first. The fee shall be one-half the City adopted unit amount times the length of the project frontage on Etiwanda Avenue: 6) The developer shall execute a fine extension agreement for electrical service and shall construct electrical distribution facilities in accordance with such agreement and Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility requirements and dedicate such facilities to the Rancho Cucamonga • Municipal Utility. The Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility shall be the electrical service provider for all project related development C & D- 68 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-36 DRC2007-00402 — FRANK AN • October 14, 2009 Page 5 7) Prior to the issuance of building permits, a Diversion Deposit and related administrative fees shall be paid for the Construction and Demolition Diversion Program. The deposit is fully refundable if at least 50 percent of all wastes generated during construction and demolition are diverted from landfills, and appropriate documentation is provided to the City. Form CD-1 shall be submitted to the Engineering Department when the first building permit application is submitted to the Building and Safety Department. Form CD-2 shall be submitted to • the Engineering Department within 60 days following the completion of the construction and/or demolition project. 8) Final Parcel Map 18535 shall be reviewed, approved and recorded, prior to issuance of building permits. 9) Revise the City Drawing No. 1863-D to add private storm drain • connection. • Grading 1) The applicant shall provide a copy of EPA Form 7520-16 (Inventory of Injection Wells) with the Facility ID Number assigned to the Building • and Safety Official prior to issuance of the grading permit. 2) Prior to removing fences or walls along common lot lines and prior to constructing walls along common lot lines the applicant shall provide a letter from the adjacent property owner(s) allowing work on the adjacent property. ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION Air Quality 1) All construction equipment shall be maintained in good operating condition so as to reduce operational emissions. The contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained as per manufacturers'specifications. Maintenance records shall be available at the construction site for City verification. 2) Prior to the issuance of any grading permits,the developer shall submit Construction Plans to the City denoting the proposed schedule and projected equipment use. Construction contractors shall provide evidence that low-emission mobile construction equipment will be utilized,or that their use was investigated and found to be infeasible for the project. Contractors shall also conform to any construction measures imposed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District • (SCAQMD) as well as City Planning staff. C & D- 69 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-36 DRC2007-00402 — FRANK AN October 14, 2009 • Page 6 3) All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1113. Paints and coatings shall be applied • either by hand or high-volume, low-pressure spray. 4) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. 5) All construction equipment shall comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403. Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions: a) Reestablish ground cover on the construction site through seeding and watering. b) Pave or apply gravel to any on-site haul roads. c) Phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large areas to erosion over extended periods of time. d) Schedule activities to minimize the amounts of exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. e) Dispose of surplus excavated material in accordance with local • ordinances and use sound engineering practices. f) Sweep streets according to a schedule established by the City if silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occur as a result of hauling. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. g) Suspend grading operations during high winds(i.e.,wind speeds exceeding 25 mph) in accordance with Rule 403 requirements. h) Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils haul trucks or cover payloads using tarps or other suitable means. 10) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and Regional Water Quality Control Board [RWQCB]) daily to reduce PM10 emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. 11) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM10 emissions. 12) The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel-powered equipment where feasible. • C & D- 70 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-36 DRC2007-00402 — FRANK AN • October 14, 2009 Page 7 13) The construction contractor shall ensure that the Construction Grading Plans include a statement that work crews will shut-off equipment when hot in use. 14) All industrial and commercial facilities shall post signs requiring that trucks shall not be left idling for prolonged periods (i.e., in excess of 10 minutes). • 15) Warehouse managers/building operators shall be required to post both bus and Metrolink schedules in conspicuous areas. 16) Warehouse managers/building operators shall be required to configure their operating schedules around the Metrolink schedule to the extent reasonably feasible. 17) Warehouse managers/building operators shall be required to incorporate high-efficiency/low-polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water heaters in the building. • 18) Warehouse managers/building operators shall be required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. • Cultural Resources 1) If any prehistoric archaeological resources are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. With the assistance of the archaeologist, the City of Rancho Cucamonga will: a) Enact interim measures to protect undesignated sites from demolition or significant modification without an opportunity for the City to establish its archaeological value. • b) Consider establishing provisions to require incorporation of archaeological sites within new developments, using their special qualities as a theme or focal point. c) Pursue educating the public about the archaeological heritage of the area. d) Propose mitigation measures and recommend conditions of approval to eliminate adverse project effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric resources,following appropriate CEQA guidelines. • e) Prepare a technical resources management report,documenting the inventory, evaluation, and proposed mitigation of resources C & D- 71 • • PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-36 DRC2007-00402 — FRANK AN • October 14, 2009 • Page 8 within the project area. Submit one copy of the completed report, • with original illustrations, to the San Bernardino County Archaeological Information Center for permanent archiving. 2) If any paleontological resources (i.e., plant or animal fossils) are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified paleontologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. The paleontologist shall submit a report of findings that will also provide specific recommendations regarding further mitigation measures (i.e., paleontological monitoring) that may be appropriate. Where mitigation monitoring is appropriate, the program must include, but not be limited to, the following measures: a) Assign a paleontological monitor, trained and equipped to allow the rapid removal of fossils with minimal construction delay,to the site full-time during the interval of earth-disturbing activities. b) Should fossils be found within an area being cleared or graded, divert earth-disturbing activities elsewhere until the monitor has completed salvage. If construction personnel make the discovery, the grading contractor should immediately divert • construction and notify the monitor,of the find. c) Prepare, identify, and curate all recovered fossils for documentation in the summary report and transfer to an appropriate depository(i.e., San Bernardino County Museum). d) Submit summary report to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Transfer collected specimens with a copy to the report to San Bernardino County Museum. Geology and,Soils 1) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB)daily to reduce PM10 emissions, • in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 or re-planted with drought resistant landscaping as soon as possible. 2) Frontage public streets shall be swept according to a schedule established by the City to reduce PM•0 emissions associated with vehicle tracking of soil off-site. Timing may vary depending upon time of year of construction. 3) Grading operations shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed 25 mph to minimize PM10 emissions from the site during such episodes. • C & D- 72 • • PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-36 • DRC2007-00402 — FRANK AN • October 14, 2009 Page 9 • 4) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PKo emissions. • Hydrology and Water Quality 1) Prior to issuance of grading permits, the permit applicant shall submit . to Building Official for approval, Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) specifically identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that shall be used on-site to reduce pollutants during construction activities entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 2) An Erosion Control Plan shall be ,prepared, included in the Grading Plan, and implemented for the proposed project that identifies specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion from the time ground disturbing activities are initiated through completion of grading. This Erosion Control Plan shall include the following measures at a minimum: a) Specify the timing of grading and construction to minimize soil exposure to rainy periods experienced in Southern California, and b) An inspection and maintenance program shall be • included to ensure that any erosion which does occur either on-site or off-site as a result of this project will be corrected through a remediation or restoration program within a specified time frame. 3) Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit to the City Engineer for approval of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), including a project description and identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on-site to reduce pollutants into the storm drain system to the maximum extent practicable. 4) During construction, temporary berms such as sandbags or gravel dikes must be used to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site when there is rainfall or other runoff. 5) During construction, to remove pollutants, street cleaning will be performed prior to storm events and after the use of water trucks to control dust in order to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site. 6) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality Management Plan prepared by Michael P. St. Jacques of Madison-FCS, Inc., on June 19, 2008, to reduce pollutants after construction entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent • practical. C & D- 73 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-36 DRC2007-00402— FRANK AN October 14, 2009 • Page 10 • 7) Landscaping Plans shall include provisions for controlling and minimizing the use of fertilizers/pesticides/herbicides. Landscaped areas shall be monitored and maintained for at least two years to ensure adequate coverage and stable growth. Plans for these areas, including monitoring provisions for a minimum of two years, shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. • 8) Prior to issuance of grading or paving permits, applicant shall obtain a Notice of Intent (NOI) to comply with obtaining coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Storm Water Permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Evidence that this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Dischargers Identification Number)shall be submitted to the City Building Official for coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit. Noise 1) Construction or grading shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. • 2) Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120-D, as measured at the property line. Developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly noise level monitoring as specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120. Monitoring at other times may be required by the Building Official. Said consultant shall report their findings to the Building Official within 24 hours; however, if noise levels exceed the above standards, then the consultant shall immediately notify the Building Official. If noise levels exceed the above standards, then construction activities shall be reduced in intensity to a level of compliance with above noise standards or halted. 3) Haul truck deliveries shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. Additionally, if heavy trucks used for hauling would exceed 100 daily trips(counting both to and from the construction site), then the developer shall prepare a Noise Mitigation Plan denoting any construction traffic haul routes. To the extent feasible, the plan shall denote haul routes that do not pass sensitive land uses or residential dwellings. • C & D- 74 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-36 DRC2007-00402 — FRANK AN • October 14, 2009 Page 11 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. . APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2009. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Richard B. Fletcher, Chairman ATTEST: James R. Troyer, AICP, Secretary I, James R. Troyer,AICP, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 14th day of October 2009, by the following vote-to-wit: • AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: • C & D- 75 • iiilsym COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT pit �' DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT#: DRC2007-00402 SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICANT: FRANK AN LOCATION: ETIWANDA AVENUE NORTH OF FOOTHILL BLVD — APN: 0227-221-08 ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2750, FOR • COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: • 0. General Requirements Completion Date 1. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its _/ /_ agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval,or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 2. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval No. 09-36, Standard _/ / Conditions, 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. 3. The applicant shall be required to pay any applicable Fish and Game fees as shown below. The _/_/_ project planner will confirm which fees apply to this project. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary prior to • the Planning Commission or Planning Director hearing: a) Mitigated Negative Declaration-$2,043.00 -SEE SUBTPM18535 CONDITIONS-ONLY ONE FEE TAKING IS REQUIRED. B. Time Limits 1. Development Review approval shall expire if building permits are not issued or approved use has / /_ not commenced within 5 years from the date of approval. No extensions are allowed. SC-12-08 1 I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2009 Res 8 StfRpt\DRC2007-00402StdCondlO-14.doc C & D- 76 Project No. DRC2007-00402 Completion Date , C. Site Development . iii1. 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, Development Code regulations, and the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan. 2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon,all Conditions •• / /_ of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. 3. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and /_/_ State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Department to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. 4. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be /_/_ submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for / /_ consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.)or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision,or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. • 6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code,all _/_/_ other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 7. A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram,shall be reviewed and approved _/_/_ by the Planning Director and Police Department (477-2800) prior to the issuance of building • permits. Such plan shall indicate style, illumination, location,height, and method of shielding so as not to adversely affect adjacent properties. 8. Trash receptacle(s)are required and shall meet City standards. The final design, locations,and /_/_ the number of trash receptacles shall be subject to Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 9. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall be / /_ located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. • 10. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, _/_/_ including proper illumination. 11. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property _/_/_ owner, homeowners'association,or other means acceptable to the City. Proof of this landscape maintenance shall be submitted for Planning Director and City Engineer review and approved prior to the issuance of building permits. D. Building Design 1. 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 I:\PLANNING\Adam\DRC's\D RC2007-00402\D RC2007-00402StdCond l 0-14.doc . 2 C & D- 77 Project No.DRC2007-00402 • Completion Date painted consistent with the color scheme of the building. Details shall be included in building plans. • 2. For commercial and industrial projects, paint roll-up doors and service doors to match main / / building colors. E. Parking and Vehicular Access (indicate details on building plans) 1. All parking spaces shall be 9 feet wide by 18 feet long. When a side of any parking space abuts _/_/ a building, wall, support column, or other obstruction, the space shall be a minimum of 11 feet wide. 2. All parking lot landscape islands shall have a minimum outside dimension of 6 feet and shall _/_/_ contain a 12-inch walk adjacent to the parking stall (including curb). , 3. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances, . / /_ and exits shall be striped per City standards. 4. Plans for any security gates shall be submitted for the Planning Director, City Engineer, and / /_ Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. For residential development, private gated entrances shall provide adequate turn- around space in front of the gate and a separate visitor lane with call box to avoid cars stacking into the public right-of-way. ' F. Trip Reduction 1. Bicycle storage spaces shall be provided in all commercial, office, industrial, and multifamily / /_ residential projects of more than 10 units. Minimum spaces equal to five percent of the required automobile parking spaces or three bicycle storage spaces,whichever is greater. After the first • 50 bicycle storage spaces are provided,additional storage spaces required are 2.5 percent of the required automobile parking spaces. Warehouse distribution uses shall provide bicycle storage • spaces at a rate of 2.5 percent of the required automobile parking spaces with a minimum of a 3-bike rack. In no case shall the total number of bicycle parking spaces required exceed 100. Where this results in a fraction of 0.5 or greater, the number shall be rounded off to the higher whole number. 2. Carpool and vanpool designated off-street parking close to the building shall be provided for / /_ commercial, office, and industrial facilities at the rate of 10 percent of the total parking area. If covered, the vertical clearance shall be no less than 9 feet. 3. Category 5 telephone cable or fiber optic cable.shall be provided for office buildings and other / /_ non-residential development. G. Landscaping ' • 1: "" A minimum of 20% of trees planted within industrial projects, and a minimum of 30% within /_/_ commercial and office projects, shall be specimen size trees -24-inch box or larger. 2. Within parking lots, trees shall be planted at a rate of one 15-gallon tree for every three parking / /_ stalls. 3. Trees shall be planted in areas of public view adjacent to and along structures at a rate of one /_/_ tree per 30 linear feet of building. 4. All private slopes of 5 feet or more in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than 2:1 /_/_ slope,shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion • control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. I:\PLANNING\Adam\DRC's\D RC2007-00402\D RC2007-00402Std Cond 10-14.doc 3 C & D- 78 • Project No.DRC2007-00402 Completion Date 5. All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater _/_/_ slope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as • 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. 6. The final design of the perimeter parkways,walls,landscaping,and sidewalks shall be included in /_/_ ' the required landscape plans and shall be subject to Planning Director review and approval and coordinated for consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which may be required by the Engineering Department. 7. 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. 8. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the _/_/_ design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Department. 9. 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. 10. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of _/_/_ Xeriscape as defined in Chapter 19.16 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. Prior to issuance of Building Permits, the project landscape architect shall certify on he submitted plans that the Xeriscape requirements have been met. H. Environmental • 1. Mitigation measures are required for the project. The applicant is responsible for the cost of _/_/_ implementing said measures, including monitoring and reporting. Applicant shall be required to post cash, letter of credit,or other forms of guarantee acceptable to the Planning Director in the amount of$557 prior to the issuance of building permits,guaranteeing satisfactory performance and completion of all mitigation measures. These funds may be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measures. Failure to complete all actions required by the approved environmental documents shall be considered grounds for forfeit. • 2. In those instances requiring long term monitoring(i.e.)beyond final certificate of occupancy),the / /_ applicant shall provide a written monitoring and reporting program to the Planning Director prior to issuance of building permits. Said program shall identify the reporter as an individual qualified to know whether the particular mitigation measure has been implemented. - APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT, (909)477-2710, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: NOTE: ANY REVISIONS MAY VOID THESE REQUIREMENTS AND NECESSITATE ADDITIONAL REVIEW(S) I. General Requirements 1. Submit five complete sets of plans including the following: / /_ a. Site/Plot Plan; b. Foundation Plan; • c. Floor Plan; I:\PLANNING Wd am\D RC's\D RC2007-00402\D RC2007-00402StdCond 10-14.doc 4 • C & D- 79 • Project No.DRC2007-00402 Completion Date d. Ceiling and Roof Framing Plan; • e. Electrical Plans (2 sets, detached) including the size of the main switch, number and size of service entrance conductors, panel schedules, and single line diagrams; • f. Plumbing and Sewer Plans, including isometrics,underground diagrams,water and waste diagram, sewer or septic system location, fixture units, gas piping, and heating and air conditioning; and • g. Planning Department Project Number (DRC2007-00402 & SUBTPM18535) clearly identified on the outside of all plans. 2. Submit two sets of structural calculations, energy conservation calculations, and a soils report. / /_ Architect's/Engineer's stamp and "wet"signature are required prior to plan check submittal. 3. Contractors must show proof of State and City licenses and Workers'Compensation coverage to / /_ the City prior to permit issuance. 4. Separate permits are required for fencing and/or walls. _/_/_ 5. Business shall not open for operation prior to posting the Certificate of Occupancy issued by the /_/_ Building and Safety Department. J. Site Development 1. Plans shall be submitted for plan check and approved prior to construction. All plans shall be / /_ marked with the project file number (i.e., DRC2007-00402 & SUBTPM18535). The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted California Codes,and all other applicable codes,ordinances, and regulations in effect at the time of permit application. Contact the Building and Safety Department for availability of the Code Adoption Ordinance and applicable handouts. • 2. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new commercial or industrial development project or /_/_ major addition,the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include but are not limited to: City Beautification Fee, Park Fee, Drainage Fee, Transportation Development Fee, Permit and Plan Check Fees,Construction and Demolition Diversion Program • deposit and fees and School Fees. Applicant shall provide a copy of the school fees receipt to • the Building and Safety Department prior to permits issuance. 3. The Building and Safety Official shall provide the street address after tract/parcel map _/_/_ recordation and prior to issuance of building permits. . 4. Construction activity shall not occur between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. Monday /_/_ through Saturday, with no construction on Sunday or holidays. 5. Construct trash enclosure(s) per City Standard (available at the Planning Department's public _/ /_ counter). • K. New Structures • , 1. Provide compliance with the California Building Code (CBC) for property line clearances / /_ considering use, area, and fire-resistiveness. . 2. Provide compliance with the California Building Code for required occupancy separations. _/_1_ 3. Provide draft stops in attic areas. _/_/_ 4. Exterior walls shall be constructed of the required fire rating in accordance with CBC Table 5-A /_/_ • 5. Openings in exterior walls shall be protected in accordance with CBC Table 5-A. _/_/_ 6. Upon tenant improvement plan check submittal, additional requirements may be needed. _/_/_ • I:\PLANNING\Adam\DRC's\D RC2007-00402\D RC2007-00402 Std Cond 10-14.doc 5 C & D- 80 • Project No.DRC2007-00402 Completion Date L. Grading • 1. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with California Building Code,City Grading / / • Standards, and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved grading plan. 2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to _/_/ perform such work. 3. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the _/_/ time of application for grading plan check. 4. The final grading plan, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be completed, _/_/ submitted, and approved by the Building and Safety Official prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. A separate grading plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for / / existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The grading plan shall be prepared, stamped, and signed by a California registered Civil Engineer. 6. 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. 7. If a Rough Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit are submitted to the Building and Safety Official for /_/_ review,that plan shall be a separate plan/permit from Precise Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit. 8. A drainage study showing a 100-year, AMC 3 design storm event for'on-site drainage shall be _/ /_ prepared and submitted to the Building and Safety Official for review and approval for on-site storm water drainage prior to issuance of a grading permit. All reports shall be wet signed and • sealed by the Engineer of Record. 9. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off-site drainage easements _/_/ prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 10. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off-site drainage acceptance / /_ letter(s)from adjacent downstream property owner(s) or discharge flows in a natural condition (concentrated flows are not accepted)&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 permit. 11. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to obtain written permission from the adjacent _/ / property owner(s)to construct wall on property line or provide a detail(s)showing the perimeter wall(s)to be constructed offset from the property line. 12. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall Implement City Standards for on-site construction where /_/_ possible, and provide details for all work not covered by City Standard Drawings. • 13. All slopes shall be a minimum 2-foot offset from the public right of way or adjacent private /_/_ property. 14. Private sewer, water and storm drain improvements will be designed per the, latest adopted _/_/_ California Plumbing Code. 15. The maximum parking stall gradient is 5%.Accessibility parking stall grades shall be constructed /_/_ per the, current adopted California Building Code. 16. Roof storm water is not permitted to flow over the public parkway and shall be directed to an _/ /_• under parkway culvert per City of Rancho Cucamonga requirements prior to issuance of a grading permit. I:\PLANNING\Adam\DRC's\D RC2007-00402\DRC2007-00402StdCond 10-14.doc 6 C & D- 81 • Project No. DRC2007-00402 Completion Date 17. The final grading and drainage plan shall show existing topography a minimum of 100-feet / /_ beyond project boundary. • 18. 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. 19. The precise grading and drainage plan shall follow the format provided in the City of Rancho / /_ Cucamonga handout"Information for Grading Plans and Permit". APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: M. Dedication and Vehicular Access 1. Dedication shall be made of the following rights-of-way on the perimeter streets(measured from _/_/_ street centerline): 50 total feet on Etiwanda Avenue / / 2. Reciprocal access easements shall be provided ensuring access to all parcels by CC&Rs or by _/_/_ deeds and shall be recorded concurrently with the map or prior to the issuance of building permits, where no map is involved. 3. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quit-claimed or delineated on the / /_ final map. 4. Easements for public sidewalks placed outside the public right-of-way shall be dedicated to the _/_/_ City. • 5. Additional street right-of-way shall be dedicated along right turn lanes,to provide a minimum of 7 / /_ feet measured from the face of curbs. N. Street Improvements 1. Pursuant to City Council Resolution No.88-557,no person shall make connections from a source _/_/_ of energy,fuel or power to any building service equipment 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 or unit, the development may have energy connections made to a percentage of those buildings, or units proportionate to the completion of improvements as required by conditions of approval of development. In no case shall more than 95 percent of the buildings or units be connected to energy prior to completion and acceptance of all improvements required by these conditions of approval of development. 2. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: / /_ Curb& A.C. Side- Drive Street Street Comm Median Bike Street Name Gutter Pvmt walk Appr. Lights Trees Trail Island Trail Other Etiwanda Avenue (e) J J J J J Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. (c) If so marked, sidewalk shall be curvilinear per Standard 114. (d) If so marked, an in-lieu of construction fee shall be provided for this item. • (e) cobble curb and clutter . I:\PLANNING\Ad am\DRC's\D RC2007-00402\D RC2007-00402StdCond 10-14.doc 7 C & D- 82 Project No. DRC2007-00402 Completion Date 3. Improvement Plans and Construction: a. Street improvement plans, including street trees,street lights,and intersection safety lights I / • on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be . posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements,prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a / /_ • construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in addition to any other permits required. c. Pavement striping, marking,traffic signing, street name signing,traffic signal conduit,and /_/_ interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction _/_/_ project along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals and interconnect wiring. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR, or any other locations approved by the City Engineer • Notes: 1) Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No.5 along streets,a maximum of 200 feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer. 2) Conduit shall be 3-inch galvanized steel with pull rope or as specified. e. Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all corners of intersections per City _/_/_ Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with /_/_• adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving,which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be /_/_ installed to City Standards, except for single family residential lots. • h. Street names shall be approved by the Planning Director prior to submittal for first plan / /_ check. 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. • • • • I:\PLANNING\Ad am\DRC's\D RC2007-00402\D RC2007-00402StdCond 10-14.doc 8 C & D- 83 Project No. DRC2007-00402 Completion Date • 5. 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. The City Engineer reserves the right to adjust tree species based upon field conditions and other variables. For additional information, contact the Project Engineer. Min. Grow Street Name Botanical Name Common Name Space Spacing Size Qty. Etiwanda Avenue Eucalyptus Silver Dollar Gum 5' 30'o.c. 15 Gal polyanthemas 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 Department. 4) Street trees are to be planted per public improvement plans only. 6. 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. 0. Public Maintenance Areas • 1. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting / /_ Districts shall be filed with the City Engineer prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. P. Drainage and Flood Control 1. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the / /_ property from adjacent areas. Q. Utilities 1. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewage system, water, gas, electric power, telephone, and cable TV(all underground)in accordance with Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 2. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. _/_/_ 3. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga 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. 4. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. / /_ • Approval of the final parcel map will be subject to any requirements that may be received from them. I:\PLANNING\Adam\DRC's\DRC2007-00402\D RC2007-00402StdCond 1 0-14.doc 9 C & D- 84 • Project No.DRC2007-00402 Completion Date R. General Requirements and Approvals 1. A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City,covering the estimated operating costs for all / /_• new streetlights for the first six months of operation,prior to final map approval or prior to building permit issuance if no map is involved. 2. Prior to the issuance of building permits, a Diversion Deposit and related administrative fees shall / /_ be paid for the Construction and Demolition Diversion Program. The deposit is fully refundable if at least 50% of all wastes generated during construction and demolition are diverted from landfills,and appropriate documentation is provided to the City. Form CD-1 shall be submitted to the Engineering Department when the first building permit application is submitted to Building and Safety. Form CD-2 shall be submitted to the Engineering Department within 60 days following the completion of the construction and/or demolition project. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2800, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: S. Security Lighting 1. All parking, common, and storage areas shall have minimum maintained 1-foot candle power. / /_ These areas should be lighted from sunset to sunrise and on photo sensored cell. 2. All buildings shall have minimal security lighting to eliminate dark areas around the buildings,with _/_/_ direct lighting to be provided by all entryways. Lighting shall be consistent around the entire development. • 3. Lighting in exterior areas shall be in vandal-resistant fixtures. / /_ T. Security Hardware • • 1. All roof openings giving access to the building shall be secured with either iron bars,metal gates, _/_/_ or alarmed. U. Windows 1. Security glazing is recommended on storefront windows to resist window smashes and impede /_/_ entry to burglars. V. Alarm Systems 1. Install a burglar alarm system and a panic alarm if needed. Instructing management and / /_ employees on the operation of the alarm system will reduce the amount of false alarms and in turn save dollars and lives. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE SAFETY DEPARTMENT, FIRE PROTECTION PLANNING SERVICES AT, (909) 477-2770, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: SEE ATTACHED • • I:\PLAN N I N G\Adam\DRC's\DRC2007-00402\D RC2007-00402StdCond 10-14.doc 10 C & D- 85 • Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District yc Fire Construction Services • j FIRE • STANDARD CONDITIONS September 11, 2008 International Restaurants Phase II 8036 Etiwanda • PM18535 DRC2007-00402 • THE FOLLOWING STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLY TO THIS PROJECT The RCFPD Procedures & Standards which are referenced in this document can be access on the web at http://www.ci.rancho-cucamonqa.ca.us/fire/index.htm under the Fire Safety Division & Fire Construction Services section. Search by article; the preceding number of the standard refers to the article. Chose the appropriate article number then a drop down menu will appear, select the corresponding standard. FSC-1 Public and Private Water Supply 1. Design guidelines for Fire Hydrants: The following provides design guidelines for the spacing and location of fire hydrants: a. The maximum distance between fire hydrants in commercial/industrial projects is 300-feet. No portion of the exterior wall shall be located more than 150-feet from an approved fire hydrant. For cul-de- sacs, the distance shall not exceed 100-feet. b. The preferred locations for fire hydrants are: 1. At the entrance(s) to a commercial, industrial or residential project from the public roadways. 2. At intersections. 3. On the right side of the street, whenever practical and possible. 4. As required by the Fire Safety Division to meet operational needs of the Fire District. 5. A minimum of forty-feet (40') from any building. c. If any portion of a facility or building is located more than 150-feet from a public fire hydrant measured on an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, additional private or public fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required fire flow shall be provided. d. Provide one fire hydrant for each 1000 gpm of required fire flow or fraction thereof. FSC-2 Fire Flow I. The required minimum fire flow for this project, when automatic fire sprinklers are installed is 2,625gallons per minute at a minimum residual pressure of 20-pounds per square inch. This flow reflects a 50-percent reduction for the installation of an approved automatic fire sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13 with central station monitoring. This requirement is made in accordance with the California Fire Code • Appendix, as adopted by the Fire District Ordinances. 3. Public fire hydrants located within a 500-foot radius of the proposed project may be used to provide the required fire flow subject to Fire District review and approval. Private fire hydrants on adjacent property • shall not be used to provide required fire flow. Fire protection water plans are required for all projects that must extend the existing water supply to or onto the site. Building permits will not be issued until fire protection water plans are approved. 5. On all site plans to be submitted for review, show all fire hydrants located within 600-feet of the proposed project site. C & D- 86 • FSC-3 Prerequisite for submittal of Overhead Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems 1. Prior to submitting plans for an overhead automatic fire sprinkler system, the applicant shall submit plans, specifications and calculations for the fire sprinkler system underground supply piping. Approval of the underground supply piping system must be obtained prior to submitting the overhead fire sprinkler system• plans. FSC-4 Requirements for Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems Automatic fire sprinklers shall be installed in buildings as required by the2007 California Fire Code and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance FD46 and/or any other applicable standards require an approved automatic fire sprinkler system to be installed. FSC-5 Fire Alarm System & Sprinkler Monitoring 1. The 2007 California Building Code, the RCFPD Fire Alarm Standard, Ordinance FD46 and/or the 2007 California Fire Code require most fire sprinkler systems to be monitoring by Central Station sprinkler monitoring system. A manual and or automatic fire alarm system fire may also be required based on the use and occupancy of the building. Plan check approval and a building permit are required prior to the installation of a fire alarm or a sprinkler monitoring system. Plans and specifications shall be submitted to Fire Construction Services in accordance with RCFPD Fire Alarm Standard. FSC-6 Fire District Site Access Fire District access roadways include public roads, streets and highways, as well as private roads, streets drive aisles and/or designated fire lanes. Please reference the RCFPD Fire Department Access Roadways Standard. 1. Location of Access: All portions of the structures 151 story exterior wall shall be located within 150-feet of •Fire District vehicle access, measure on an approved route around the exterior of the building. Landscaped areas, unpaved changes in elevation, gates and fences are deemed obstructions. 2. Specifications for private Fire District access roadways per the RCFPD Standards are: a. The minimum unobstructed width is 26-feet.. b. The maximum inside turn radius shall be 24-feet. c. The minimum outside turn radius shall be 50-feet. d. The minimum radius for cul-de-sacs is 45-feet. e. The minimum vertical clearance is 14-feet, 6-inches. f At any private entry median, the minimum width of traffic lanes shall be 20-feet on each side. g. The angle of departure and approach shall not exceed 9-degrees or 20 percent. h. The maximum grade of the driving surface shall not exceed 12%. 1. Support a minimum load of 80,000 pounds gross vehicle weight (GVW). j. Trees and shrubs planted adjacent to the fire lane shall be kept trimmed to a minimum of 14-feet, 6- inches from the ground up. Vegetation shall not be allowed to obstruct Fire Department apparatus. 3. Access Doorways: Approved doorways, accessible without the use of a ladder, shall be provided as follows: a. In buildings without high-piled storage, access shall be provided in accordance with the 2001 California Building Code, Fire and/or any other applicable standards. b. In buildings with high-piled storage access doors shall be provided in each 100 lineal feet or major fraction thereof, of the exterior wall that faces the required access roadways. When railways are installed provisions shall be made to maintain Fire District access to all required openings. 4. Access Walkways: Hardscaped access walkways shall be provided from the fire apparatus access road to all required building exterior openings. 5. Commercial/Industrial Gates: Any gate installed across a Fire Department access road shall be in• accordance with Fire District Standard. The following design requirements apply: a. Prior to the fabrication and installation of the gates, plans are required to be submitted to Fire Construction Services (FCS) for approval. Upon the completion of the installation and before placing the gates in service, inspection and final ac%e%tace87 ust be requested from FCS. 2 b. Gates must slide open horizontally or swing inward. c. Gates may be motorized or manual. d. When fully open, the minimum clearance dimension of drive access shall be 20 feet. • e. Manual gates must be equipped with a RCFPD lock available at the Fire Safety Office for $20.00. f. Motorized gates must open at the rate of one-foot per second. g. The motorized gate actuation mechanism must be equipped with a manual override device and a fail- safe or battery backup feature to open the gate or release the locking Mechanism in case of power failure or mechanical malfunction. h. Motorized gates shall be equipped with a Knox override key switch. The switch must be installed outside the gate in a visible and unobstructed location. i. For motorized gates, a traffic loop device must be installed to allow exiting from the complex. j. If traffic pre-emption devices (TPD) are to be installed, the device, location and operation must be approved by the Fire Chief prior to installation. Bi-directional or multiple sensors may be required due to complexity of the various entry configurations. 7. Fire Lane Identification: , Red curbing and/or signage shall identify the fire lanes. A site plan illustrating the proposed delineation that meets the minimum Fire District standards shall be included in the architectural plans submitted to B&S for approval. 8. Approved Fire Department Access: Any approved mitigation measures must be clearly noted on the site plan. A copy of the approved Alternative Method application, if applicable, must be reproduced on the architectural plans submitted to B&S for plan review. 6. Roof Access: There shall be a means of fire department access from the exterior walls of the buildings on to the roofs of all commercial, industrial and multi-family residential structures with roofs less than 75' above the level of the fire access road. a. This access must be reachable by either fire department ground ladders or by an aerial ladder. b. A minimum of one ladder point with a fixed ladder shall be provided in buildings with construction features, or high parapets that inhibit roof access. c. The number of ladder points may be required to be increased, depending on the building size and • configuration. d. Regardless of the parapet height or construction features the approved ladder point shall be identified in accordance to the roof access standard. e. Where the entire roof access is restricted by high parapet walls or other obstructions, a permanently mounted access ladder is required. f Multiple access ladders may be required for larger buildings. g. Ladder construction must be in accordance with the RCFPD Roof Access Standard Appendix A. h. A site plan showing the locations of the roof ladder shall be submitted during plan check. i. Ladder points shall face a fire access roadway(s). FSC-10 Occupancy and Hazard Control Permits Listed are those Fire Code permits commonly associated with the business operations and/or building construction. Plan check submittal is required with the permit application for approval of the permit; field inspection is required prior to permit issuance. General Use Permit shall be required for any activity or operation not specifically described below, which in the judgment of the Fire Chief is likely to produce conditions that may be hazardous to life or property. • Candles and open flames in public assemblies • Compressed Gases Public Assembly • Dry Cleaning Plants Refrigeration Systems • Explosive or Blasting Agents Repair Garages • Tents, Canopies and/or Air Supported Structures LPG or Gas Fuel Vehicles in Assembly Buildings 11C-12 Hazardous Materials - Submittal to Fire Construction Services Plans shall be submitted and approved prior to construction of buildings and/or the installation of equipment designed to store, use or dispense hazardous materials in accordance with the 2007 California Building, Fire, C D- 88 • Mechanical, Plumbing, Electrical Codes, RCFPD Ordinances FD46and other implemented and/or adopted standards. FSC-13 Alternate Method Application Fire Construction Services staff and the Fire Marshal will review all requests for alternate method, when• submitted. The request must be submitted on the Fire District "Application for Alternate Method" form along with supporting documents and payment of the $92 review fee. FCS-14 Map Recordation 1. RECIPROCAL AGREEMENTS for Fire Department Emergency Access and Water Supply are required on this project. The project appears to be located on a property that is being subdivided. The reciprocal agreement is required to be recorded between property owners and the Fire District. The recorded agreement shall include a copy of the site plan. The Fire Construction Services shall approve the agreement, prior to recordation. The agreement shall be recorded with the County of San Bernardino, Recorders Office. Reciprocal access agreement — Please provide a permanent access agreement between the owners granting irrevocable and a non-exclusive easement, favoring the Fire District to gain access to the subject property. The agreement shall include a statement that no obstruction, gate, fence, building or other structure shall be placed within the dedicated access, without Fire Department approval. The agreement shall have provisions for emergency situations and the assessing of cost recovery to the property by the fire District. Reciprocal water covenant — Please provide a permanent maintenance and service covenant between the owners granting an irrevocable and non-exclusive easement, favoring the Fire District for the purpose of accessing and maintaining the private water mains, valves and fire hydrants (fire protection systems facilities in general). The covenant shall have provisions for emergency situations and the assessing of cost recovery to the property by the fire District. FCS-15 Annexation of the parcel map: Annexation of the parcel map into the Community Facilities District #85-1 or#88-1 is required prior to the issuance of grading or building permits. Chronological Summary of RCFPD Standard Conditions PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS — Please complete the following prior to the issuance of any building permits: 1. Private Water Supply (Fire) Systems: The applicant shall submit construction plans, specifications, flow test data and calculations for the private water main system for review and approval by the Fire District. Plans and installation shall comply with Fire District Standards. Approval of the on-site (private) fire underground and water plans is required prior to any building permit issuance for any structure on the site. Private on-site combination domestic and fire supply system must be designed in accordance with RCFPD Standards. The Building & Safety Division and Fire Construction Services will perform plan checks and inspections. All private on-site fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed and operable prior to delivering any combustible framing materials to the site. Fire construction Services will inspect the installation, witness hydrant flushing and grant a clearance before lumber is dropped. 2. Public Water Supply (Domestic/Fire) Systems: The applicant shall submit a plan showing the locations of all new public fire hydrants for the review and approval by the Fire District and CCWD. On the plan, show all existing fire hydrants within a 600-foot radius of the project. Please reference the RCFPD Water • Plan Submittal Procedure Standard. All required public fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed and operable prior to delivering any combustible framing materials to the site. CCWD personnel shall inspect the installation and witness the hydrant C D- 89 flushing. Fire Construction Services shall inspect the site after acceptance of the public water system by CCWD. Fire Construction Services must grant a clearance before lumber is dropped. 3. Construction Access: The access roads must be paved in accordance with all the requirements of the • RCFPD Fire Lane Standard. All temporary utilities over access roads must be installed at least 14' 6" above the finished surface of the road. 4. Fire Flow: A current fire flow letter from CCWD must be received. The applicant is responsible for obtaining the fire flow information from CCWD and submitting the letter to Fire Construction Services. 5. Easements and Reciprocal Agreements: All easements and agreements must be recorded with the County of San Bernardino. PRIOR TO THE RELEASE OF TEMPORARY POWER The building construction must be substantially completed in accordance with Fire Construction Services' "Temporary Power Release Checklist and Procedures". • PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY OR FINAL INSPECTION — Please complete the following: 1. Hydrant Markers: All fire hydrants shall have a blue reflective pavement marker indicating the fire , hydrant location on the street or driveway in accordance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Standard Plan 134, "Installation of Reflective Hydrant Markers". On private property, the markers shall be installed at the centerline of the fire access road, at each hydrant location. 2. Private Fire Hydrants: For the purpose of final acceptance, a licensed sprinkler contractor, in the presence of Fire Construction Services, shall conduct a test of the most hydraulically remote on-site fire hydrants. The underground fire line contractor, developer and/or owner are responsible for hiring the company to perform the test. A final test report shall be submitted to Fire Construction Services verifying the fire flow available. The fire flow available must meet or exceed the required fire flow in accordance with the California Fire Code. Fire Sprinkler System: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the fire sprinkler system(s) shall be tested and accepted by Fire Construction Services. 4. Fire Sprinkler Monitoring: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the fire sprinkler monitoring system must be tested and accepted by Fire Construction Services. The fire sprinkler monitoring system shall be installed, tested and operational immediately following the completion of the fire sprinkler system (subject to the release of power). 5. Fire Suppression Systems and/or other special hazard protection systems shall be inspected, tested and accepted by Fire Construction Services before occupancy is granted and/or equipment is placed in service. . 6. Fire Alarm System: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the fire alarm system shall be installed, inspected, tested and accepted by Fire Construction Services. 7. Access Control Gates: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, vehicular gates must be inspected, tested and accepted in accordance with RCFPD Standards by Fire Construction Services. 8. Fire Access Roadways: Prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, the fire access roadways must be installed in accordance with the approved plans and acceptable to Fire Construction Services. The CC&R's, the reciprocal agreement and/or other approved documents shall be recorded and contain an approved fire access roadway map with provisions that prohibit parking, specify the method of enforcement and identifies who is responsible for the required annual inspections and the maintenance of all required fire access roadways. 9. Address: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, commercial/industrial and multi-family buildings shall post the address in accordance to the appropriate RCFPD addressing Standard. 10. Hazardous Materials: The applicant must obtain inspection and acceptance by Fire Construction Services. 0. Confidential Business Occupancy Information: The applicant shall complete the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District "Confidential Business Occupancy Information" form. This form provides contact information for Fire District use in the event of an emergency at the subject building or property. This form must be presented to the Fire Construction Services Inspector. C}& D- 90 • 12. Mapping Site Plan: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, a 8 ''/z' x 11" or 11" x 17" site plan • of the site in accordance with RCFPD Standard shall be revised by the applicant to reflect the actual location of all devices and building features as required in the standard. The site plan must be reviewed and accepted by the Fire Inspector. • • • • C & D- 91 6 • • RESOLUTION NO. 09-37 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM18535, LOCATED ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF ETIWANDA AVENUE, NORTH OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD IN THE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT OF SUBAREA 4 OF THE FOOTHILL BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 0227-221-08. A. Recitals. 1. Frank An filed an application for the approval of Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18535, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Review request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 14th day of October 2009, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. • NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved 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 October 14, 2009, including written and oral staff reports and public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to the property located along the west side of Etiwanda Avenue north of Foothill Boulevard, with a street frontage of 369 feet and lot depth of 540 feet and is presently vacant; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is a condominium complex, the properties to the south consist of a mini-mart and vacant land; the property to the east is approved. for a commercial center, and the property to the west is an existing commercial center; and c. The applicant has concurrently applied for Development Review DRC2007-00402 to construct a proposed retail commercial center consisting of 3 buildings totaling 51,940 square feet; and d. The use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and • e. The design and exterior materials of the proposed building will be consistent with the surrounding area and the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan. C & D- 92 • PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-37 DRC2007-00402 — FRANK AN -October 14, 2009 • Page 2 • 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and b. The proposed use is in accord with the objectives of the Development Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and c. The proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code; 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. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, 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 and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this,reference, based upon the •findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA")and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds: (i)that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. c. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, • Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings C & D- 93 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-37 DRC2007-00402 — FRANK AN • October 14, 2009 Page 3 upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the Planning Director of the City of • Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Department • 1) This approval is to subdivide 4.67 acres of land into 3 parcels for commercial purposes. Plans submitted for plan check shall conform to the plans approved by the Planning Commission approval on October 14, 2009. 2) All applicable conditions of approval for DRC2007-00402 shall apply. 3) Adequate provision shall be made and continue in perpetuity to assure that access and maintenance between all parcels established under • Parcel Map SUBTPM18535 and DRC2007-00402 will be provided. Engineering Department 1) " Etiwanda Avenue to be improved in accordance with City "Secondary Arterial" standards including dual southbound left turn lanes (10 feet and 10 feet), 2 southbound thru lanes (11 feet and 11 feet), 1 bike lane (4 feet)and 1 southbound bus bay/right turn lane (12 feet). Widen west half of Etiwanda Avenue from 32 feet at north project boundary to 47 feet at south project boundary. a) Provide cobble curb and gutter, sidewalk, drive approach, street trees and street lights, as required, per Figure 5-23 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. b) Provide a 10-foot southbound right turn lane for driveway that extends, at 42 feet from centerline, to 60 feet north of the south property line then transitions to 47 feet for the intersection right turn lane. • c) Provide traffic striping and signage, including R26 signs, as required. 2) Provide reciprocal access easements in favor of the commercial property to the west and to the south. • C & D- 94 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-37 DRC2007-00402— FRANK AN October 14, 2009 • Page 4 • a) Make a good faith effort to establish reciprocating vehicular access with commercial property along the westerly boundary of this project. 3) Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check on Etiwanda Avenue. 4) Construct appropriate off-site street improvements from transition to existing. 5) An in-lieu fee as contribution to the future undergrounding of the existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical, except for the 66 KV electrical)on the opposite side of Etiwanda Avenue shall be paid to the City prior to map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever comes first. The fee shall be one-half the City adopted unit amount times the length of the project frontage on Etiwanda Avenue. 6) The developer shall execute a line extension agreement for electrical service and shall construct electrical distribution facilities in accordance with such agreement and Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility • requirements and dedicate such facilities to the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility. The Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility shall be the electrical service provider for all project related development 7) Final Parcel Map 18535 shall be reviewed, approved and recorded, prior to issuance of building permits. • 8) Revise the City Drawing No. 1863-D to add private storm drain connection. Grading 1) The applicant shall provide a copy of EPA Form 7520-16 (Inventory of Injection Wells) with the Facility ID Number assigned to the Building and Safety Official prior to issuance of the grading permit. 2) Prior to removing fences or walls along common lot lines and prior to constructing walls along common lot lines the applicant shall provide a letter from the adjacent property owner(s) allowing work on the adjacent property. • • • • C & D- 95 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-37 DRC2007-00402 — FRANK AN • October 14, 2009 Page 5 ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION Air Quality 1) All construction equipment shall be maintained in good operating condition so as to reduce operational emissions. The contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained as per manufacturers'specifications. Maintenance records shall be available at the construction site for City verification. 2) Prior to the issuance of any gradingipermits,the developer shall submit Construction Plans to the City denoting the proposed schedule and projected equipment use. Construction contractors shall provide evidence that low-emission mobile construction equipment will be utilized, or that their use was investigated and found to be infeasible for the project. Contractors shall also conform to any construction measures imposed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) as well as City Planning staff. 3) All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1113. Paints and coatings shall be applied • either by hand or high-volume, low-pressure spray. 4) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. 5) All construction equipment shall comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403. Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions: a) Reestablish ground cover on the construction site through seeding and watering. b) Pave or apply gravel to any on-site haul roads. ' c) Phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large areas to erosion over extended periods of time. d) Schedule activities to minimize the amounts of exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. e) Dispose of surplus excavated material in accordance with local ordinances and use sound engineering practices. f) Sweep streets according to a schedule established by the City if silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occur as a result of hauling. Timing may vary depending upon the time of • year of construction. C & D- 96 • • PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-37 DRC2007-00402 — FRANK AN October 14; 2009 • Page 6 g) Suspend grading operations during high winds(i.e.,wind speeds exceeding 25 mph) in accordance with Rule 403 requirements. h) Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils haul trucks or cover payloads using tarps or other suitable means. 3) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and Regional Water Quality Control Board [RWQCB]) daily to reduce PM10 emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. 4) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM10 emissions. 5) The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel-powered equipment where feasible. 6) The construction contractor shall ensure that Construction Grading • Plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. • 7) All industrial and commercial facilities shall post signs requiring that trucks shall not be left idling for prolonged periods (i.e., in excess of 10 minutes). 8) Warehouse managers/building operators shall be required to post both bus and Metrolink schedules in conspicuous areas. 9) Warehouse managers/building operators shall be required to configure their operating schedules around the Metrolink schedule to the extent reasonably feasible. 10) Warehouse managers/building operators shall be required to incorporate high-efficiency/low-polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water heaters in the building. 11) Warehouse managers/building operators shall be required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. Cultural Resources 1) If any prehistoric archaeological resources are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. With the assistance of the archaeologist, • the City of Rancho Cucamonga will: C & D- 97 • PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-37 DRC2007-00402 — FRANK AN • October 14, 2009 Page 7 a) Enact interim measures to protect undesignated sites from demolition or significant modification without an opportunity for • the City to establish its archaeological value. b) Consider establishing provisions to require incorporation of archaeological sites within new developments, using their special qualities as a theme or focal point. c) Pursue educating the public about the archaeological heritage of the area. d) Propose mitigation measures and recommend conditions of approval to eliminate adverse project effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric resources,following appropriate CEQA guidelines. e) Prepare a technical resources management report, documenting the inventory, evaluation, and proposed mitigation of resources within the project area. Submit one copy of the completed report, with original illustrations, to the San Bernardino County Archaeological Information Center for permanent archiving. • 2) If any paleontological resources (i.e., plant or animal fossils) are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified paleontologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. The paleontologist shall submit a report of findings that will also provide specific recommendations regarding further mitigation measures (i.e., paleontological monitoring) that may be appropriate. Where mitigation monitoring is appropriate, the program must include, but not be limited to, the following measures: a) Assign a paleontological monitor, trained and equipped to allow the rapid removal of fossils with minimal construction delay,to the site full-time during the interval of earth-disturbing activities. b) Should fossils be found within an area being cleared or graded, divert earth-disturbing activities elsewhere until the monitor has completed salvage. If construction personnel make the discovery, the grading contractor should immediately divert construction and notify the monitor of the find. c) Prepare, identify, and curate all recovered fossils for documentation in the summary report and transfer to an appropriate depository(i.e., San Bernardino County Museum). . C & D- 98 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-37 DRC2007-00402 — FRANK AN October 14, 2009 • • Page 8 d) Submit summary report to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Transfer collected specimens with a copy to the report to San Bernardino County Museum. Geology and Soils 1) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB)daily to reduce PM10 emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 or re-planted with drought resistant landscaping as soon as possible. 2) Frontage public streets shall be swept according to a schedule established by the City to reduce PM10 emissions associated with vehicle tracking of soil off-site. Timing may vary depending upon time of year of construction. 3) Grading operations shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed 25 mph to minimize PM10 emissions from the site during such episodes. 4) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for • 96 hours or more to reduce PM-10 emissions. Hydrology and Water Quality 1) Prior to issuance of grading permits, the permit applicant shall submit to the Building Official for approval, Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) specifically identifying Best Management Practices • (BMPs) that shall be used on-site to reduce pollutants during construction activities entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 2) An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, included in the Grading Plan, and implemented for the proposed project that identifies specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion from the time ground disturbing activities are initiated through completion of grading. This Erosion Control Plan shall include the following measures at a minimum: a) Specify the timing of grading and construction to minimize soil exposure to rainy periods experienced in Southern California, and b) An inspection and maintenance program shall be included to ensure that any erosion which does occur either on-site or off-site as a result of this project will be corrected through a remediation or restoration program within a specified time frame. 3) Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit to the • • City Engineer for approval of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), including a project description and identifying Best C & D- 99 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-37 • DRC2007-00402— FRANK AN . October 14, 2009 Page 9 Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on-site to reduce pollutants into the storm drain system to the maximum extent • practicable. • 4) During construction, temporary berms such as sandbags or gravel dikes must be used to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site when there is rainfall or other runoff. 5) During construction, to remove pollutants, street cleaning will be performed prior to storm events and after the use of water trucks to • control dust in order to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site. 6) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality Management Plan prepared by Michael P. St. Jacques of Madison-FCS, Inc., on June 19, 2008, to reduce pollutants after • construction entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 7) Landscaping Plans shall include provisidns for controlling and minimizing the use of fertilizers/pesticides/herbicides. Landscaped • areas shall be monitored and maintained for at least two years to ensure adequate coverage and stable growth. Plans for these areas, including monitoring provisions for a minimum of two years, shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. 8) Prior to issuance of grading or paving permits, applicant shall obtain a Notice of Intent (NOI) to comply with obtaining coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Storm Water Permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Evidence that this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Discharger's Identification Number)shall be submitted to the City Building Official for coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit. Noise 1) Construction or .grading shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. 2) Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120-D, as measured at the property line. Developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly • noise level monitoring as specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120. Monitoring at other times may be required by the Building Official. Said consultant shall report their findings to the C & D- 100 • • PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-37 DRC2007-00402 — FRANK AN • October 14, 2009 • Page 10 Building Official within 24 hours; however, if noise levels exceed the above standards, then the consultant shall immediately notify the Building Official. If noise levels exceed the above standards, then construction activities shall be reduced in intensity to a level of compliance with above noise standards or halted. 3) Haul truck deliveries shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. Additionally, if heavy trucks used for hauling would exceed 100 daily trips(counting both to and from the construction site), then the developer shall prepare a Noise Mitigation Plan denoting any construction traffic haul routes. To the extent feasible, the plan shall denote haul routes that do not pass sensitive land uses or residential dwellings. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2009. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA • BY: Richard B. Fletcher, Chairman ATTEST: James R. Troyer, AICP, Secretary I, James R. Troyer, AICP, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 14th day of October 2009, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: • C & D- 101 k Atts 444 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SS�� . DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT #: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM18535 . SUBJECT: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP APPLICANT: FRANK AN LOCATION: ETIWANDA AVENUE NORTH OF FOOTHILL BLVD —APN: 0227-221-08 ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING. DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: • 0. General Requirements Completion Date 1. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its / /_ agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval,or in the alternative,to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court .costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may,at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 2. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval No. 09-37 Standard _/_/_ Conditions, 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. 3. The applicant shall be required to pay any applicable Fish and Game fees as shown below. The /_/_ project planner will confirm which fees apply to this project. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary prior to the Planning Commission or Planning Director hearing: a) Mitigated Negative Declaration - $ 2,043.00 B. Time Limits 1. This tentative tract map shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, unless a / /_ complete final map is filed with the City Engineer within 3 years from the date of the approval. • 1 I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2009 Res & StfRpt\SUBTPM18535StdCondl0-14.doc C & D- 102 • Project No. SUBTPM18535 Completion Date . C. Site Development 1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include / / site plans, architectural elevations,exterior materials and colors,landscaping,sign program,and grading on file in the Planning Department,the conditions contained herein, Development Code regulations, and the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan. 2. 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. 3. 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. 4. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code,all / /_ other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. • 5. 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 City Engineer review and approved prior to the issuance of building permits. 6. The developer shall submit a construction access plan and schedule for the development of all / /_ lots for Planning Director and City Engineer 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. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2740, FOR • COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: D. Dedication and Vehicular Access 1. Dedication shall be made of the following rights-of-way on the perimeter streets(measured from / /_ street centerline): 50 total feet on Etiwanda Avenue _/_/_ 2. Reciprocal access easements shall be provided ensuring access to all parcels by CC&Rs or by / /_ deeds and shall be recorded concurrently with the map or prior to the issuance of building permits, where no map is involved. 3. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be provided and shall be delineated or /_/_ - noted on the final map. • 4. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quit-claimed or delineated on the /_/_ final map. 5. Easements for public sidewalks placed outside the public right-of-way shall be dedicated to the / /_ City. 6. Additional street right-of-way shall be dedicated along right turn lanes,to provide a minimum of 7 /_/_ feet measured from the face of curbs. • 2 C & D- 103 Project No. SUBTPM18535 • Completion Date E. Street Improvements • 1. Pursuant to City Council Resolution No.88-557,no person shall make connections from a source / 1 of energy,fuel or power to any building service equipment 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 or unit, the development may have energy connections made to a percentage of those buildings, or units proportionate to the completion of improvements as required by conditions of approval of development. In no case shall more than 95 percent of the buildings or units be connected to energy prior to,completion and acceptance of all improvements required by these conditions of approval of development. 2. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including,but not limited to: / /_ Curb& AC. Side- Drive Street Street Comm Median Bike Street Name Gutter Pvmt walk Appr. Lights Trees Trail Island Trail Other Etiwanda Avenue (e) J J J J J Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. (c) If so marked, sidewalk shall be curvilinear per Standard 114. (d) If so marked, an in-lieu of construction fee shall be provided for this item. (e) cobble curb and gutter 3. Improvement Plans and Construction: a. Street improvement plans, including street trees,street lights,and intersection safety lights _/_/_ on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil • Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements,prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits,whichever occurs first. ' b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a / /_ construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in addition to any other permits required. c. Pavement striping, marking,traffic signing,street name signing,traffic signal conduit,and / /_ interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction _/_/_ project along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals and interconnect wiring. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR, or any other locations approved by the City Engineer Notes: 1) Pull boxes shall be No.6 at intersections and No.5 along streets,a maximum of 200 feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer. 2) Conduit shall be 3-inch galvanized steel with pull rope or as specified. e. Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all corners of intersections per City / /_ Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. • f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with _/ /_ adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash • deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving,which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 3 C & D- 104 Project No. SUBTPM18535 Completion Date 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 Director prior to submittal for first plan _/_/_• check. 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. 5. 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. The City Engineer reserves the right to adjust tree species based upon field conditions and other variables. For additional information, contact the Project Engineer. Grow Street Name Botanical Name Common Name Space Spacing Size Qty. Etiwanda Avenue Eucalyptus Silver Dollar Gum 5' 30'o.c. 15 Gal polyanthemas• 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.Department. 4) Street trees are to be planted per public improvement plans only. • 6. 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: • F. Public Maintenance Areas 1. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting / /_ Districts shall be filed with the City Engineer prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. • • 4 C & D- 105 Project No. SUBTPM18535 Completion Date G. Drainage and Flood Control • • 1. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the —/—/- property from adjacent areas. H. Improvement Completion . 1. If the required public improvements are not completed prior to approval of the final parcel map, —/—/ an improvement security accompanied by an agreement executed by the Developer and the City will be required: All public improvements. - I. Utilities 1. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system,water, gas, _/_/- electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 2. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. / / 3. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the ! / Cucamonga 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. • 4. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. / / Approval of the final parcel map will be subject to any requirements that may be received from them. J. General Requirements and Approvals 1. A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City,covering the estimated operating costs for all / /_ new streetlights for the first six months of operation,prior to final map approval or prior to building permit issuance if no map is involved. 2. Prior to the issuance of building permits,a Diversion Deposit and related administrative fees shall / /_ be paid for the Construction and Demolition Diversion Program. The'deposit is fully refundable if at least 50% of all wastes generated during construction and demolition are diverted from landfills, and appropriate documentation is provided to the City. Form CD-1 shall be submitted to the Engineering Department when the first building permit application is submitted to Building and Safety. Form CD-2 shall be submitted to the Engineering Department within 60 days following the completion of the construction and/or demolition project. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE SAFETY DEPARTMENT, FIRE PROTECTION PLANNING SERVICES AT, (909) 477-2770, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: SEE ATTACHED • 5 C & D- 106 • • 0-CO IAI Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District etw 4.91 1 Fire Construction Services FME • STANDARD CONDITIONS September 11, 2008 International Restaurants Phase II 8036 Etiwanda PM18535 DRC2007-00402 THE FOLLOWING STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLY TO THIS PROJECT The RCFPD Procedures & Standards which are referenced in this document can be access on the web at http://www.ci.rancho-cucamonga.ca.us/fire/index.htm under the Fire Safety Division & Fire Construction Services section. Search by article; the preceding number of the standard refers to the article. Chose the appropriate article number then a drop down menu will appear, select the corresponding standard. FSC-1 Public and Private Water Supply 1. Design guidelines for Fire Hydrants: The following provides design guidelines for the spacing and location of fire hydrants: • a. The maximum distance between fire hydrants in commercial/industrial projects is 300-feet. No portion of the exterior wall shall be located more than 150-feet from an approved fire hydrant. For cul-de- sacs, the distance shall not exceed 100-feet. b. The preferred locations for fire hydrants are: 1. At the entrance(s) to a commercial, industrial or residential project from the public roadways. 2. At intersections. 3. On the right side of the street, whenever practical and possible. 4. As required by the Fire Safety Division to meet operational needs of the Fire District. 5. A minimum of forty-feet (40')from any building. c. If any portion of a facility or building is located more than 150-feet from a public fire hydrant measured on an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, additional private or public fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required fire flow shall be provided. d. Provide one fire hydrant for each 1000 gpm of required fire flow or fraction thereof. FSC-2 Fire Flow • 1. The required minimum fire flow for this project, when automatic fire sprinklers are installed is 2,625gallons per minute at a minimum residual pressure of 20-pounds per square inch. This flow reflects a 50-percent reduction for the installation of an approved automatic fire sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13 with central station monitoring. This requirement is made in accordance with the California Fire Code Appendix, as adopted by the Fire District Ordinances. 3. Public fire hydrants located within a 500-foot radius of the proposed project may be used to provide the required fire flow subject to Fire District review and approval. Private fire hydrants on adjacent property • shall not be used to provide required fire flow. Fire protection water plans are required for all projects that must extend the existing water supply to or onto the site. Building permits will not be issued until fire protection water plans are approved. 5. On all site plans to be submitted for review, show all fire hydrants located within 600-feet of the proposed _ project site. C & D- 107 FSC-3 Prerequisite for submittal of Overhead Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems 1. Prior to submitting plans for an overhead automatic fire sprinkler system, the applicant shall submit plans, specifications and calculations for the fire sprinkler system underground supply piping. Approval of the underground supply piping system must be obtained prior to submitting the overhead fire sprinkler system • plans. FSC-4 Requirements for Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems Automatic fire sprinklers shall be installed in buildings as required by the2007 California Fire Code and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance FD46 and/or any other applicable standards require an approved automatic fire sprinkler system to be installed. FSC-5 Fire Alarm System & Sprinkler Monitoring 1. The 2007 California Building Code, the RCFPD Fire Alarm Standard, Ordinance FD46 and/or the 2007 California Fire Code require most fire sprinkler systems to be monitoring by Central Station sprinkler monitoring system. A manual and or automatic fire alarm system fire may also be required based on the use and occupancy of the building. Plan check approval and a building permit are required prior to the installation of a fire alarm or a sprinkler monitoring system. Plans and specifications shall be submitted to Fire Construction Services in accordance with RCFPD Fire Alarm Standard. FSC-6 Fire District Site Access Fire District access roadways include public roads, streets and highways, as well as private roads, streets drive aisles and/or designated fire lanes. Please reference the RCFPD Fire Department Access Roadways Standard. 1. Location of Access: All portions of the structures 1 s` story exterior wall shall be located within 150-feet of Fire District vehicle access, measure on an approved route around the exterior of the building. • Landscaped areas, unpaved changes in elevation, gates and fences are deemed obstructions. 2. Specifications for private Fire District access roadways per the RCFPD Standards are: a. The minimum unobstructed width is 26-feet. b. The maximum inside turn radius shall be 24-feet. c. The minimum outside turn radius shall be 50-feet. d. The minimum radius for cul-de-sacs is 45-feet. e. The minimum vertical clearance is 14-feet, 6-inches. f. At any private entry median, the minimum width of traffic lanes shall be 20-feet on each side. g. The angle of departure and approach shall not exceed 9-degrees or 20 percent. h. The maximum grade of the driving surface shall not exceed 12%. i. Support a minimum load of 80,000 pounds gross vehicle weight (GVW). j. Trees and shrubs planted adjacent to the fire lane shall be kept trimmed to a minimum of 14-feet, 6- inches from the ground up. Vegetation shall not be allowed to obstruct Fire Department apparatus. 3. Access Doorways: Approved doorways, accessible without the use of a ladder, shall be provided as follows: a. In buildings without high-piled storage, access shall be provided in accordance with the 2001 California Building Code, Fire and/or any other applicable standards. b. In buildings with high-piled storage access doors shall be provided in each 100 lineal feet or major fraction thereof, of the exterior wall that faces the required access roadways. When railways are installed provisions shall be made to maintain Fire District access to all required openings. 4. Access Walkways: Hardscaped access walkways shall be provided from the fire apparatus access road to all required building exterior openings. 5. Commercial/Industrial Gates: Any gate installed across a Fire Department access road shall be in • accordance with Fire District Standard. The following design requirements apply: a. Prior to the fabrication and installation of the gates, plans are required to be submitted to Fire Construction Services (FCS) for approval. Upon the completion of the installation and before placing the gates in service, inspection and final acceptance must be requested from FCS. D- 108 b. Gates must slide open horizontally or swing inward. c. Gates may be motorized or manual. d. When fully open, the minimum clearance dimension of drive access shall be 20 feet. • e. Manual gates must be equipped with a RCFPD lock available at the Fire Safety Office for $20.00. f. Motorized gates must open at the rate of one-foot per second. g. The motorized gate actuation mechanism must be equipped with a manual override device and a fail- safe or battery backup feature to open the gate or release the locking Mechanism in case of power failure or mechanical malfunction. h. Motorized gates shall be equipped with a Knox override key switch. The switch must be installed outside the gate in a visible and unobstructed location. i. For motorized gates, a traffic loop device must be installed to allow exiting from the complex. j. If traffic pre-emption devices (TPD) are to be installed, the device, location and operation must be approved by the Fire Chief prior to installation. Bi-directional or multiple sensors may be required due to complexity of the various entry configurations. 7. Fire Lane Identification: Red curbing and/or signage shall identify the fire lanes. A site plan illustrating the proposed delineation that meets the minimum Fire District standards shall be included in the architectural plans submitted to B&S for approval. 8. Approved Fire Department Access: Any approved mitigation measures must be clearly noted on the site plan. A copy of the approved Alternative Method application, if applicable, must be reproduced on the architectural plans submitted to B&S for plan review. 6. Roof Access: There shall be a means of fire department access from the exterior walls of the buildings on to the roofs of all commercial, industrial and multi-family residential structures with roofs less than 75' above the level of the fire access road. a. This access must be reachable by either fire department ground ladders or by an aerial ladder. b. A minimum of one ladder point with a fixed ladder shall be provided in buildings with construction features, or high parapets that inhibit roof access. c. The number of ladder points may be required to be increased, depending on the building size and • configuration. d. Regardless of the parapet height or construction features the approved ladder point shall be identified in accordance to the roof access standard. e. Where the entire roof access is restricted by high parapet walls or other obstructions, a permanently mounted access ladder is required. f. Multiple access ladders may be required for larger buildings. g. Ladder construction must be in accordance with the RCFPD Roof Access Standard Appendix A. h. A site plan showing the locations of the roof ladder shall be submitted during plan check. i. Ladder points shall face a fire access roadway(s). FSC-10 Occupancy and Hazard Control Permits Listed are those Fire Code permits commonly associated with the business operations and/or building construction. Plan check submittal is required with the permit application for approval of the permit; field inspection is required prior to permit issuance. General Use Permit shall be required for any activity or operation not specifically described below, which in the judgment of the Fire Chief is likely to produce conditions that may be hazardous to life or property. • Candles and open flames in public assemblies • Compressed Gases Public Assembly • Dry Cleaning Plants Refrigeration Systems • Explosive or Blasting Agents Repair Garages • Tents, Canopies and/or Air Supported Structures LPG or Gas Fuel Vehicles in Assembly Buildings OC-12 Hazardous Materials - Submittal to Fire Construction Services Plans shall be submitted and approved prior to construction of buildings and/or the installation of equipment designed to store, use or dispense hazardous materials in accordance with the 2007 California Building, Fire, C & D- 109 3 Mechanical, Plumbing, Electrical Codes, RCFPD Ordinances FD46and other implemented and/or adopted standards. FSC-13 Alternate Method Application Fire Construction Services staff and the Fire Marshal will review all requests for alternate method, when • submitted. The request must be submitted on the Fire District "Application for Alternate Method" form along with supporting documents and payment of the $92 review fee. FCS-14 Map Recordation 1. RECIPROCAL AGREEMENTS for Fire Department Emergency Access and Water Supply are required on this project. The project appears to be located on a property that is being subdivided. The reciprocal agreement is required to be recorded between property owners and the Fire District. The recorded agreement shall include a copy of the site plan. The Fire Construction Services shall approve the agreement, prior to recordation. The agreement shall be recorded with the County of San Bernardino, Recorders Office. Reciprocal access agreement — Please provide a permanent access agreement between the owners granting irrevocable and a non-exclusive easement, favoring the Fire District to gain access to the subject property. The agreement shall include a statement that no obstruction, gate, fence, building or other structure shall be placed within the dedicated access, without Fire Department approval. The agreement shall have provisions for emergency situations and the assessing of cost recovery to the property by the fire District. Reciprocal water covenant — Please provide a permanent maintenance and service covenant between the owners granting an irrevocable and non-exclusive easement, favoring the Fire District for the purpose of accessing and maintaining the private water mains, valves and fire hydrants (fire protection systems facilities in general). The covenant shall have provisions for emergency situations and the assessing of • cost recovery to the property by the fire District. FCS-15 Annexation of the parcel map: Annexation of the parcel map into the Community Facilities District #85-1 or#88-1 is required prior to the issuance of grading or building permits. Chronological Summary of RCFPD Standard Conditions PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS — Please complete the following prior to the issuance of any building permits: 1. Private Water Supply (Fire) Systems: The applicant shall submit construction plans, specifications, flow test data and calculations for the private water main system for review and approval by the Fire District. Plans and installation shall comply with Fire District Standards. Approval of the on-site (private) fire underground and water plans is required prior to any building permit issuance for any structure on the site. Private on-site combination domestic and fire supply system must be designed in accordance with RCFPD Standards. The Building & Safety Division and Fire Construction Services will perform plan checks and inspections. All private on-site fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed and operable prior to delivering any combustible framing materials to the site. Fire construction Services will inspect the installation, witness hydrant flushing and grant a clearance before lumber is dropped. 2. Public Water Supply (Domestic/Fire) Systems: The applicant shall submit a plan showing the locations of all new public fire hydrants for the review and approval by the Fire District and CCWD. On the plan, show all existing fire hydrants within a 600-foot radius of the project. Please reference the RCFPD Water • Plan Submittal Procedure Standard. All required public fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed and operable prior to delivering any combustible framing materials to the site. CCWD personnel shall inspect the installation and witness the hydrant D- 110 flushing. Fire Construction Services shall inspect the site after acceptance of the public water system by CCWD. Fire Construction Services must grant a clearance before lumber is dropped. 3. Construction Access: The access roads must be paved.in accordance with all the requirements of the • RCFPD Fire Lane Standard. All temporary utilities over access roads must be installed at least 14' 6" above the finished surface of the road. 4. Fire Flow: A current fire flow letter from CCWD must be received. The applicant is responsible for obtaining the fire flow information from CCWD and submitting the letter to Fire Construction Services. 5. Easements and Reciprocal Agreements: All easements and agreements must be recorded with the County of San Bernardino. PRIOR TO THE RELEASE OF TEMPORARY POWER The building construction must be substantially completed in accordance with Fire Construction Services' "Temporary Power Release Checklist and Procedures". PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY OR FINAL INSPECTION — Please complete the following: 1. Hydrant Markers: All fire hydrants shall have a blue reflective pavement marker indicating the fire hydrant location on the street or driveway in accordance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Standard Plan 134, "Installation of Reflective Hydrant Markers". On private property, the markers shall be installed at the centerline of the fire access road, at each hydrant location. 2. Private Fire Hydrants: For the purpose of final acceptance, a licensed sprinkler contractor, in the presence of Fire Construction Services, shall conduct a test of the most hydraulically remote on-site fire hydrants. The underground fire line contractor, developer and/or owner are responsible for hiring the company to perform the test. A final test report shall be submitted to Fire Construction Services verifying the fire flow available. The fire flow available must meet or exceed the required fire flow in accordance with the California Fire Code. Fire Sprinkler System: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the fire sprinkler system(s) shall be tested and accepted by Fire Construction Services. 4. Fire Sprinkler Monitoring: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the fire sprinkler monitoring system must be tested and accepted by Fire Construction Services. The fire sprinkler monitoring system shall be installed, tested and operational immediately following the completion of the fire sprinkler system (subject to the release of power). 5. Fire Suppression Systems and/or other special hazard protection systems shall be inspected, tested and accepted by Fire Construction Services before occupancy is granted and/or equipment is placed in service. 6. Fire Alarm System: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the fire alarm system shall be installed, inspected, tested and accepted by Fire Construction Services. 7. Access Control Gates: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, vehicular gates must be inspected, tested and accepted in accordance with RCFPD Standards by Fire Construction Services. 8. Fire Access Roadways: Prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, the fire access roadways must be installed in accordance with the approved plans and acceptable to Fire Construction Services. The CC&R's, the reciprocal agreement and/or other approved documents.shall be recorded and contain an approved fire access roadway map with provisions that prohibit parking, specify the method of enforcement and identifies who is responsible for the required annual inspections and the maintenance of all required fire access roadways. 9. Address: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, commercial/industrial and multi-family buildings shall post the address in accordance to the appropriate RCFPD addressing Standard. 10. Hazardous Materials: The applicant must obtain inspection and acceptance by Fire Construction Services. Confidential Business Occupancy Information: The applicant shall complete the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District "Confidential Business Occupancy Information" form. This form provides contact information for Fire District use in the event of an emergency at the subject building or property. This form must be presented to the Fire Construction Services Inspector. C & D- 111 5 12. Mapping Site Plan: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, a 8 %' x 11" or 11" x 17" site plan of the site in accordance with RCFPD Standard shall be revised by the applicant to reflect the actual location of all devices and building features as required in the standard. The site plan must be reviewed and accepted by the Fire Inspector. • • • • • • • • • Co& D- 112 . :, PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-36 DRC2007-00402 — FRANK AN October 14, 2009 Page 4 10) Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permit, the applicant shall establish to the satisfaction of the Planning Director that applicant has sufficient clear title to the subject property to complete construction of the project and to operate the project. Engineering Department 1) Etiwanda Avenue to be improved in accordance with City "Secondary Arterial" standards including dual southbound left turn lanes (10 feet and 10 feet), 2 southbound thru lanes (11 feet and 11 feet), 1 bike lane (4 feet) and 1 southbound bus bay/right turn lane (12 feet). Widen west half of Etiwanda Avenue from 32 feet at north project boundary to 47 feet at south project boundary a) Provide cobble curb and gutter, sidewalk, drive approach, street trees and street lights, as required, per Figure 5-23 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. b) Provide a 10-foot southbound right turn lane for driveway that extends, at 42 feet from centerline, to 60 feet north of the south property line then transitions to 47 feet for the intersection right turn lane. c) Provide traffic striping and signage, including R26 signs, as required. 2) Provide reciprocal access easements in favor of the commercial property to the west and to the south. a) Make a good faith effort to establish reciprocating vehicular access with commercial property along the westerly boundary of this project. 3) Pavement reconstruction and overlays on Etiwanda Avenue will be determined during plan check. 4) Construct appropriate off-site street improvements from transition to existing. 5) An in-lieu fee as contribution to the future undergrounding of the existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical, except for the 66 KV electrical) on the opposite side of Etiwanda Avenue shall be paid to the City prior to map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever comes first. The fee shall be one-half the City adopted unit amount times the length of the project frontage on C & D Page 67 . PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-36 DRC2007-00402 — FRANK AN • October 14, 2009 Page 5 6) The developer shall execute a line extension agrcoment for electrical 7) Prior to the issuance of building permits, a Diversion Deposit and related administrative fees shall be paid for the Construction and Demolition Diversion Program. The deposit is fully refundable if at least 50 percent of all wastes generated during construction and demolition are diverted from landfills, and appropriate documentation is provided to the City. Form CD-1 shall be submitted to the Engineering Department when the first building permit application is submitted to the Building and Safety Department. Form CD-2 shall be submitted to the Engineering Department within 60 days following the completion of the construction and/or demolition project. 8) Final Parcel Map 18535 shall be reviewed, approved and recorded, • prior to issuance of building permits. 9) Revise the City Drawing No. 1863-D to add private storm drain connection. Grading 1) The applicant shall provide a copy of EPA Form 7520-16 (Inventory of Injection Wells) with the Facility ID Number assigned to the Building and Safety Official prior to issuance of the grading permit. 2) Prior to removing fences or walls along common lot lines and prior to constructing walls along common lot lines the applicant shall provide a letter from the adjacent property owner(s) allowing work on the adjacent property. ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION Air Quality 1) All construction equipment shall be maintained in good operating condition so as to reduce operational emissions. The contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained as per manufacturers'specifications. Maintenance records shall be available at the construction site for City verification. 2) Prior to the issuance of any grading permits,the developer shall submit C & D Page 68 A . °St 7Priv /t36^ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-37 .DRC2007 oe402 — FRANK AN October 14, 2009 Page 3 d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the Planning Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Department 1) This approval is to subdivide 4.67 acres of land into 3 parcels for commercial purposes. Plans submitted for plan check shall conform to the plans approved by the Planning Commission approval on October 14, 2009. 2) All applicable conditions of approval for DRC2007-00402 shall apply. 3) Adequate provision shall be made and continue in perpetuity to assure . that access and maintenance between all parcels established under Parcel Map SUBTPM18535 and DRC2007-00402 will be provided. 4) Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permit, the applicant shall establish to the satisfaction of the Planning Director that applicant has sufficient clear title to the subject property to complete construction of the project and to operate the project. Engineering Department 1) Etiwanda Avenue to be improved in accordance with City "Secondary Arterial" standards including dual southbound left turn lanes (10 feet and 10 feet), 2 southbound thru lanes (11 feet and 11 feet), 1 bike lane (4 feet) and 1 southbound bus bay/right turn lane (12 feet). Widen west half of Etiwanda Avenue from 32 feet at north project boundary to 47 feet at south project boundary. a) Provide cobble curb and gutter, sidewalk, drive approach, street trees and street lights, as required, per Figure 5-23 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. b) Provide a 10-foot southbound right turn lane for driveway that extends, at 42 feet from centerline, to 60 feet north of the south • property line then transitions to 47 feet for the intersection right turn lane. C & D Page s9i/ { 5�9Qi fin J&535 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-37 .-D.14624343-7-1:19482-- FRANK AN October 14, 2009 Page 4 c) Provide traffic striping and signage, including R26 signs, as required. 2) Provide reciprocal access easements in favor of the commercial property to the west and to the south. a) Make a good faith effort to establish reciprocating vehicular • access with commercial property along the westerly boundary of this project. 3) Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check on Etiwanda Avenue. 4) Construct appropriate off-site street improvements from transition to existing. 5) An in-lieu fee as contribution to the future undergrounding of the existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical, except for the 66 KV electrical)on the opposite side of Etiwanda Avenue shall be paid to the City prior to map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever comes first. The fee shall be one-half the City adopted unit amount times the length of the project frontage on Etiwanda Avenue. 7) Final Parcel Map 18535 shall be reviewed, approved and recorded, prior to issuance of building permits. 8) Revise the City Drawing No. 1863-D to add private storm drain connection. Grading 1) The applicant shall provide a copy of EPA Form 7520-16 (Inventory of Injection Wells) with the Facility ID Number assigned to the Building and Safety Official prior to issuance of the grading permit. 2) Prior to removing fences or walls along common lot lines and prior to constructing walls along common lot lines the applicant shall provide a letter from the adjacent property owner(s) allowing work on the C & D Page 95 • STAFF REPORT PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: October 14, 2009 RANCHO CUCAMONGA TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: James R. Troyer, AICP, Planning Director BY: Larry Henderson, AICP, Principal Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2009-00586 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT - •A request to operate a 6,000 square foot fire station on approximately 1.1 acre of the subject site, located on the west side of Hellman Avenue at the intersection of Rancho Street - APN: 1061-621-03. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Related File: Development Review DRC2009-00720. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT\DESIGN REVIEW DRC2009-00720 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT-A request for the development of a single-story, 6,000 square foot fire station on approximately 1.1 acre of the subject site, located on the west side of Hellman Avenue at the intersection of Rancho Street - APN: 1061-621-03. Related File: Conditional Use Permit DRC2009-00586. ' Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Related File: Conditional Use Permit DRC2009-00586. • •PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: The Fire Station 177 project consists of an approximately 6,000-square foot fire station on approximately 1.1 acre, fronting Hellman Avenue within an existing flood control basin. The 1.1-acre project site is part of a previously abandoned 7-acre flood control basin. The 7-acre flood control basin was recently filled with approximately 116,000 cubic yards of soil by the San Bernardino County Flood Control District to bring the flood control basin to a developable grade. The 6,000-square foot fire station would include an apparatus area (consisting of two vehicle bays, a turn-out locker room, a decontamination room, hose storage, as well as an additional area for general storage), an administration area (consisting of a reception/lobby area, office space, a public restroom, a training room, break room with restroom, and storage), and a living area (consisting of a day room, a kitchen, a dining area, dorm rooms, restroom/showering facilities, an exercise room, laundry facilities, and storage). The station design includes drive-through capability for emergency apparatus, with driveways on Rancho Street, i.e., Rancho Street would be extended along the southern boundary of the project site for site access purposes. Additionally, the fire station would be equipped with an above-ground storage tank for fuel and an emergency generator. Staff parking would be provided on the western portion of the site, behind the station. Parking spaces for the public would be provided on the southwest portion of the site. A. Project Density: FAR .125 • B. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Single-Family Residential and Very Low Residential (0-2 Dwelling Units Per Acre) South - Single-Family Residential and Very Low Residential (0-2 Dwelling Units Per Acre) . East - Single-Family Residential and Very Low Residential (0-2 Dwelling Units Per Acre) West - Vacant and Flood Control C. General Plan Designations: • Project SiteFlood Control Utility Corridor North - Very Low Residential South - Very Low Residential East - Very Low Residential • West - Very Low Residential Items E & F PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2009-00586 AND DRC2009-00720 - RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT • October 14, 2009 Page 2 D. Site Characteristics: The 1.1-acre project site is part of a previously abandoned 7-acre flood control basin. The 7-acre flood control basin was recently filled with approximately 116,000 cubic yards of soil by the San Bernardino County Flood Control District to bring the flood control basin to a developable grade. E. Parking Calculations: Number of Number of Square Parking Spaces Spaces Type of Use Footage Ratio Required Provided Fire Station 6,000 1/600 NA 2 enclosed apparatus 2 visitor 8 staff ANALYSIS: A. General: The architectural style is Contemporary using a residential scale, Ranch design, blended visually into the residential neighborhood. Architectural features include a single-story with an attached garage with roll up doors and glazing to provide visual interest and to provide natural lighting to the apparatus work spaces. Neighborhood residential style materials include concrete tile roof, stacked stone accents, and stucco exterior walls. • Under the Conditional Use Permit, station alarm noise, involving the temporary or periodic noise increases during operation of the fire station, which could result in the exposure of persons to noise levels in excess of standards, was a concern. Mitigation measures and/or conditions of approval have been included with the project to minimize these possible impacts such as: • Station alarms will only be sounded internally • Fire personnel will carry pagers or Handi-Talkie's alerting them of an impending call • Decorative block walls on the rear and side perimeters are required to further attenuate noise from the site, particularly the back up generator and the above-ground fuel pump • Sirens will only be used when the engineer has safety situations and to warn approaching vehicles (Fire District Policy 8-020 "Code Three Driving Policy" Section III. C.2 - Siren(s) shall be used as reasonably necessary for public and emergency responding apparatus safety (CA Vehicle Code Section 21055) B. Design Review Committee: On August 18, 2009, the Design Review Committee unanimously recommended approval of the site plans and architectural design elements. C. Grading and Technical Committees: Reviewed and recommended approval on August 18, 2009. D. Neighborhood Meeting: A neighborhood meeting was held on April 2, 2009, with positive comments on the design features of the plans. See the attached copy of the sign in sheets and summary of • comments. E & F - 2 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2009-00586 AND DRC2009-00720 - RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT October 14, 2009 Page 3 E. Environmental Assessment: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures related to cultural resources, geology/soils, hazards/waste materials, hydrology/water quality, noise, and transportation/traffic, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. A Mitigation Monitoring Program has also been prepared to ensure implementation of, and compliance with, the mitigation measures for the project. FACTS FOR FINDING: a. The proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. b. The proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. c. The proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin • newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts and approval of DRC2009-00586 and DRC2009-00720 with conditions as indicated in the attached Resolutions. Respectfully submitted, ,I� Jam R. Troyer, AICP Planning Director JRT:LH/ge Attachments: Exhibit A - Site Location Map Exhibit B - Grading Plan Exhibit C - Site Plan Exhibit D - Architectural Elevations Exhibit E - Floor Plan Exhibit F - Landscape Plan Exhibit G - Neighborhood Meeting sign in sheets and summary of comments Exhibit H - Initial Study I and II Exhibit I - Appendicies and Special Studies (Distributed Under Separate Cover) Draft Resolution of Approval for Conditional Use Permit DRC2009-00586 • Draft Resolution of Approval for Development Review DRC2009-00720 E & F - 3 • Øava •-s o'-}-- � 1.ASTIP ai.. I 1� olue V HILLSIDE RO• II LL/ w Z Q / / W 2 w RANCHO STREET F w w - / C L11 • CO / IOau• _ • : HERITAGE PARK f 1 . I I 1 1 100 0 100200300400 Feet m•— Ci-1-$) * SITE LOCATION MAP • EXHIBIT A • E & F - 4 Z 'y.,.:;tvia:t.-.: _l i g :ii 0 t.", i! INN 01p li ''' le CD 7;.-.....;,..:. _ ,_.... . II±Clf $t.• 1 .• Z 111 Oh 1' gt IN > . , _L___,,. ., .1 ::, IT' . , - „ „•. : , -, 't -._,. _ . . .0 , rin--ir \ Th-i ,, ,, .,} ., , Li A! .I ," ? I 'Art: ; 1 . . ; : 1 ;El 1 •A 1.__C., ..' .;.1.),79 .rif, i_ _ I 7' 1, 1 FT*, P 1 ; ; ik ; ;-:;:;y; ) ,. , w,, , \_ L___I 1 , g / ; N‘, \ L__.--1..... ;,:joi \ 4 L.) __,,, _ c..; ; :-.-in :: -222:22:E212: ::;s.,,:,L,,,,.. ,:;,,i2,,•=2„:-7-,F2;- ,,, ,2-:* [.; -.2,A ...,,,‘.! 2 ,2 22,-±t_L-J -=;, 2--------- \ , L.,: , mc72,,2222.i 2 222---; /' „se -- '2,- 2 2Th, -=-27-- :2. 2 2„„.222,a \ 2212Nrinki-.42,.c.,-,-• 2 _1 2„,,: ii-,;2.2-„2/ 7-.J. 2_ ;,=, --, - 2 '=---- ‘v/I , ,,'• srialmi'L 2, T , ----=-:'---'=-- i_c=,-*,,,rfika- • • ___i --- ,--_-_i-- 7---N a il:=5:10 ,,, ,1 r ! n• .ji'''21: //,'.::,:::.'.20■rr I. ir , 1 \i ,. %, \ i: i i i / i I iil c1f-it r• ,,4:/./://,-,--:: :' .11:" . -IiiL .i. ii.: / / .: / ri i ' ' i7---,,,..,:[,. .'.- pril - : I , : i .g i . I / 7 / 7 la 7 1 ,•/... ., L11 5- 1E 'I 1,0t7 ' --71 I ,• ! r I 1°1 ' ' 1 I / 7 I 1 H -- , ,. . . „.. :, .„ . ' - : • • q; -Oil"ji_q!ii Anil ir: " .: / / ; ,/ ii ,. // „: / ./ 111 -.., 4 ' ' 14' 11,- • I ,t i : f ,/ t 1 :1 : i i i / / 11 1 1 ' j . ' ' : i I 1 i i ' : )1 1 i ;Ill ,L) h 1 , rii,,,„,, :,.. :77- /L. , .1 - I I 1 ; ; ; , ii ; ; I ... ; , 11 I J‘-..7 0 ' ca212-,1•L, ' L___II: i.??.7, Hi;.11..,b ,:/: /- / ; : ., / : : : -: ; : 1 122 21 - • , , ) ,L2k.2.fr\-42,G7,-„,: i.2:22 ,y. il :, 2 2 f ,2 / 2 / : 1 21 7, , 221 ,11:„22]„22:2,22,-222,:,/22:: :, T.. ,2 4 El p . / : / ; , ; ,, ) , / ) ). , ii k, ){ i 1 - I i I 1 i 7 : ; i ; : 1 :. r I 11 17, 1 ct:, = -;774.' ,:,:( ,,: !, / i " r ' ' i ' 1 • ' ! 0 ' I ' ' ' ' - : I ( 0 -.L.7--: CD - -- -TM i ; : / i 2 i ;1112 ,:i 22, = - =--7-2,Lui H-222,/,-°„ r ,2 ig i : :-.--,- ; / i ; i ; i ; : 2 iii 1 i 1 ' s-tri ' t,' 1 I ! ; I ' 2' : i ' . 2' :' LIE i/i2R*T2-';'' c:- ;22::::1:./2:;•222',,:-tra i I., 1127 ,-2\Vic 4 ...."72 !al■) ; ; l• ; / ; . ; l • ii ri i -- 0 - ...,..-;H:•:,.,,c) ; ‘,. '1/4... ' '.?: c• ;:r[..,,,,Yillit, ii 1 " ./ • / I . ; ( i i !..t ; ; d II (![ ...... Ili'. :,u : a ,..-2.,. .,-.. ,: # ..r. i / „,H ., : ! 1 i /II Ed1:, ri c 1:' '''2 ' ithi : i /11,--/ : , II: ' .t1 i2P11 V / I II zi: /\/7;10.ic-::: ?--_::-.. .,: • 1? / ,I / / i :. : i I I II . ± 11:6i1 I 'c',r1'2:;:.•-:. '---7 : P.:e<" • / i IN •' i.111 :/. 1) •: ?Illi '...:,--:...-±- ,,;. i../....:.,. ti .t-4;;;.T.:.:75,.:.}1,1c. thr-..;t:,;. IT.!..,::',, :..,:-:7!',,••:::::: ::::;::::::';::•217;,:-.-7t7-----,,,,,, -----;.-: [II ;,:!: , ct 1 jil fr, '::::r .:-. :#-'7,7‘1 .- 1::r rj°;;;;;;;.:;.:/ 7.,!.--/;«0;;;`'',E, — I's-—— '4, A ,E7).2:-;-.1 '.-:-, '-<:,;:.,;:::::::,,,,,.-.:,:c„:::::-._.-pQ-:'4”444., ; 1 !: N ';1='LIO' k::::1: :C,:..:l: i 1 ii ( 91,1\ (-HIL::::,° H . ' I.1 ' i 11 \ , ?: re Att,,,, ,,,,,,, ... , - , : , .,, : ,), 1 ,, • • , ,,,,,, : „7.--::. ,cliN,A,\YRSIK.:.*-- .-(,••;'..---i:-, - %•NC-„,•••:•-_,);,:: *• ?., ' :• '•z- 'V:- y=tsi;s"4'- A-H,>*:•, ,--, )),ca5,„:4 ,, „), , ,.,: (51:t:: '... -r,. ..,' .,?; ____-_-:- '':,:i' x;-4::; • ,, , ‘t, m'l '.,..\., ''... A‘.. ' '' / -';N:-;;:-..:'',.. kl.::,/ ,.., ',"' k "*.k.,..,.."‘: ,..---- :i--.)::,Z)::::::::: .•,-,„g7/2.y.„-=. /,---, ;_\L / / , • ) ,,S' N- •,:.:t.. .::,-,. / /• c . -- ::::-!.,. ....%,., ,,,ks.:::::,,,,A,- /..----,.--< , ' ‘, ,,,, ' K.',..- EXHIBIT B .,. , }I ' ' [ & F 5 - . • Z 0 MB Q ors J m, , W Es 3f1N3AV NVW113H Cl) alive BITIMdi/ --- ,AMILIIIIMMIIIIIIHIENI `III■■■■■■ ■ail o II i� cod E 1 Mir i -- ;1■1fhV . j w - 1 Ili O= 410 il; Sill LI = N .°::11■■I° I CC :�■m■ o �®I■■■ :i■ - ■Ali u 6' III ■MI k % - ��'�■■■l; � F ■■I■ g i1 . - -- a,•i ■■I� z i__. 4, o 1■■■1-: ,s $ � I I I IF Z ‘-- -- , . O • - V U O 2 V Z EXHIBIT C E & F - 6 � , ,= h �/'� ,, A 0 3rems'' 9� VJ a� ,:c me m jUtil'E fsl1I o i IA L iy 24 S 0 t LLJ 1 efI J ua W i !i g it i 1 i L pif osh f 611 k; @g N f 11E Illirtigi a l N i- 1 iHil 1, Jr ■ r z p l Oil y ® T Z cW IlNMI IC iL F , 4" O lin ii I F 1211 E w ■1m J . ' u A a w fi r a ; . P w w a o 4-.A,f: y W • C . a B R„s b r shy. C a®eor z .., O -S •mBl 5q �ly 2 N ;.Mn, , 1. V .—y - �1 tit 6i V4 �,. YY 1 hi re cr %^ IL•tf iJ' .., . . il�'YI.! 0 V 1 n3 LLA E n 0 _ I t z ..� Iw,,A,. W ill _J a !Q w z! Z I Z Y.— Z O- O r e a, O i wSgF w i v e wln y .. W ci CC ZO cn EXHIBIT D ° E & FF • Z MN • el.1■, ,__I t7.'til • • =U -o 1 ct LE 0 0 _J U_ • •– .s• .. - u-,c•• • ... n .2, co..- r 2, Ie ., DI r 1.10 • '1 1EC -I : • - . .i! T' 1: - 1 I :Inn DO ILA' ' • : — 1 amon 1: NM ,i z - h8 r :9. w -\ ' , IT ammo / 10 , I I, III.= Inman ,r t I/ ..1 n , I_ SO !4 -, is Ta MNIMI • .i :IL 910:r K `L--- ---2 --- _4- ,-,:.v•Lc_l . E G . , : .-- . i .1111111111 -\ *Mal ■ , - Ai I -I --4 r . ' _ _ . ,. 71111 i 1 • ----11- 1 —\ 1 I I I 1 1 • / ; n ag g rum. 11 I ; • ! 1 ' ; IP( , Id I Iv. c., , ( i -', VI EN 14 In i i 1 ___, - ' 2 ...c4.; Hi= 7 '31 : r iy, 1 . i 1. . k8 :t ,,. . 2 ilk 1 : 1 : .. .. (—a 9 my la . is! 46 i II - I , !;. - L-1 18 It 18 ! . .i Id i .. - IN \ Jilly . _ _ __ CC t--- 0 2: - d 0 z • z 5 — 0 . _ C7^ I- . CO I- Of E _ ..e....1c cr. CI:C 0 • CD . , a U 0 J 0 0 • Z < ' W EXHIBIT E . E & F - 8 • . , z a C J • a w o 0- V No • o U`^ Q VJ 0 • _ i1 = � r co o ° ° a a ° . 9 B k 4 3I I Y io°" A 3 2 J d d A J b 2 x ] e l� 3f1N3Atl NVWll3H mo> � y 1 ;Y -4ttts '!\\\ c■a\tilt �-' i i i l ! } t 1 1 I i iiHL - 4 • WHIN 3 S ! v.b NW! �' °e° 4Q��-�y(Y�.1J"� N 0 8 5 Ii, ry� ,�@@m �s! fib � �1 i�: �`4��\�pp O s o Off° o ■i °z : ._. 4H!�ES396 thy a �. p�: r..4 \0_.. w A rc 01 Fit. U 2 ll lb, 0 Ilk z €� { o-o cp n t r F y F liacl° ^ Iro mi eZ 11 �tnt►aet �' 1 \a ° l' i 0 © �` � _ — _ TOODDt \ O z co�ano ��g 1 . _LL cc i _— x twv : ` `1 �oa,Ws'h i n r ' Q a ii spC<�,,, I I t z o of 1 F t 1µ.a+fi24 (� uru / • w YEYL ' 3 d �y_a AA vz A.a ��1�p��j� r.�... V cc w as a1°a"i0nera'albo." f� v Zan "L`,.J" V afw � 0�� Z am ¢ Q K EXHIBIT F E & F — 9 • Northwest Fire Station Neighborhood Meeting Sign-In Sheet April 2, 2009 Name Address E-mail D A n�:Pi H V\ q O 1 kAA r r.UJt t ±eG wv (' S On‘pc LC-rte- eve- . D � C I L.A (f (9( uAC;o J�)`9Q)0 ( �( C r) . -cqJ PK , l`iCnc P_.✓S.vo 1G(1,jc�(c. Lc 4�- A2/$ zrki csi l- e////2tear / -.12.;$2 °'/c./teridea.- nn \'1'n r4-f c?`/2 i iti x7r"'G.o -- 3 7./7A,72, 2.. fry -,6,72•;+:63,77-34• cr,Xa_he.--e-e. /L'L e.rl( @L(&O .?-14A-C-#10 41h,60 ior,k69-2nunSuc e !-1'eX 0✓1rte.c I.vr4Yi (r'7�� .� ywn � IGCt% `�I-2(51 nle X1 Iv n l ( �>'Yt,`t.or�:c 1 _ SM 1 --C/1/1 LLYI n ) ' 7 7 k«L s. S F `7 / 1 3 —I o t4ain cs'N/i LLA44-3 hlol/n4i AI/A Sl//1/Errol 7677 Pe(1Lec -CI- AL.�/11n/an `f 117 • `1 C�e!'i� Vhslc�v' c 9y`7 /�/'ew , t/6 2 L 9173 / 11�Im.<1f rLdJ tic) Cana • • EXHIBIT G E & F - 10 Northwest Fire Station Neighborhood Meeting Sign-In'Sheet April 2, 2009 Name Address E-mail 7 67/./�<<�-- 9 77.7 ///i>/0&i \-ac �,_ )'i2,c.�� 2LA . y ZO 71/I Di) .�_'JH • - -7;22 /7:/./ Keti �bou n>> G; 0q/ 4 itioLso C'P2oi DousEAsc COO 4-1t1 [ ue yr) 5i-4-R-he-H70 aol ,C tfe( nacrn c.)'4f/(ocG?..7Ic°l her) (-1 /10/6/a anon.(ClatIc/CtJlcccste'TJ <, I iu,6-e 5-9 e — yD.&6 dI/ /(5;(4. t(s7 b72lUc'rtek,/h(.C✓1v! • • E & F - 11 • Neighborhood Meeting • April 2, 2009 • Start Time: 6:04 p.m. End Time: 7:00 p.m. Introduction by Chief Peter Bryan . Foam vs. gel products • . 7-acre site 1.1 acre - Rancho Street • . Draft site plan Hellman elevation design — north, south, and east • Architect, Rubio Medina, explained the different types of elevation shapes, colors, windows, and roofs. 4 Conceptual Elevations (North and South) Water cautions Actual project vs. code requirement • C. Lot Coverage C. Height . Setback from curb face • Chief Peter Bryan discussed the following: . Site timeline C. Pre-design to end . Project update web page . Dedicated phone line . Break into a site design/station design quest Station Design Questions were brought up regarding sidewalks Question was asked regarding the fire station being one or two stories. Questions were asked on the following: Will there be turf? Will there be a gym? Will there be granite counter tops? Will there be built-in bbq's? Will there be a policy on lights and sirens in the evening hours? Will the streets be completely repaved if torn up from the moving of dirt? • The meeting ended at 7:00 p.m. • E & F - 12 • NORTH WEST FIRE STATION QUESTION/COMMENT CARD Question/Comment: 4 -7Ze.„.., t, (-11--cc f,2'6( j,1fke hz24, 773 /v.) 11 ;(.0. (4.:•-k 0 i • / ticrtik (771.4; A /it Co el fri_--c;Asc vrf-7. tic.L -77,c )1] 0 E,ity it (717 r I 11- (A, ,) -x ; Je; ri4 k ,w L OPTIONAL: Name: A-Ler 14 (0 /ler, Phone: (--(re/ 7V 1/4 e-mail: [1(1,,, / ro NORTH WEST FIRE STATION QUESTION/COMMENT CARD Question/Comment: (t11) 9 1 tOW 4 14 0 I 66 4- 111^11A ( it€2_ 127)k' Oh' 51-e/ pi,--le/tts?hy WAL-i-lerbre kiefr &tat (Ap 4-but_ Lai 15 ; redire,Pt OPTIONAL: Name: f est/j L SX • Phone: qM. 9115- 9/59 e-mail: 3/4'-kAt--/-(14-0 Ito!, (Mn E & F - 13 NORTH WEST FIRE STATION • QUESTION/COMMENT CARD Question/Comment: Sp a el iS aAla 1 14- l lad / ) P lid . ire- I-n s r-- i n-&t 1eir ?- +Le AU/0 .c 'GO-_ . j2 will fL°dbet tR r',%gh x.. fi itt -6r _, rt °-tltt v-t5 .4'74 4. fee , U CA (5 G'/ -e. (44-094 At, DC•C'4 r l� - OPTIONAL: Name: r'b� p0/ (?!SS C LA 0is& Aj0kt Ca'nnc>, / a,E'& Prte-j: ENVIRONMENTAL % ? INFORMATION FORM • (Part I - Initial Study) City of Rancho Cucamonga (Please type or print clearly using ink. Use the tab key to move from one line to the next line.) Planning Division (909)477-2750 The purpose of this form is to inform the,City of the basic components;of the proposed projectso that the City may review the project pursuant to City Policies, Ordinancesjand '' Gwdelines, the' California Environmental Quality, Act, and the City 4s9 Rules and Procedures to Implement CEQA It is important that the information requested in this, application be provided in full ,' GENERAL INFORMATION: INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE PROCESSED. Please note that it is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that the application is complete at the time of submittal; City staff will not be available to perform work required to provide missing information. Application Number for the project to which this form pertains: DRC2009-00586 Project Title: Fire Station 177 • Name &Address of project owner(s): Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Name &Address of developer or project sponsor: Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Contact Person &Address: Peter Bryan, Fire Chief Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Name &Address of person preparing this form (if different from above): LSA Associates, Inc. 1500 Iowa Avenue, Suite 200 Riverside, California 92507 • Telephone Number 951-781-9310 EXHIBITH tntal Info Form.doc Page 1 of 9 Created on 8/17/2009 4:33:00 PM E & F - 15 • PROJECT INFORMATION & DESCRIPTION: Information indicated by an asterisk()is not required of non-construction CUP's unless otherwise requested by staff. • *1) Provide a full scale(8-1/2 x 11) copy of the USGS Quadrant Sheet(s) which includes the project site, and indicate the site boundaries. 2) Provide a set of color photographs that show representative views into the site from the north, south, east and west; views into and from the site from the primary access points that serve the site;and representative views of significant features from the site. Include a map showing location of each photograph. 3) Project Location(describe): The project site is approximately 1.1 acres fronting Heilman Avenue within a previously abandoned seven-acre flood control basin. 4) Assessor's Parcel Numbers(attach additional sheet if necessary): 1061-621-03 *5) Gross Site Area (ac/sq. ft.): 1.1 acres • *6) Net Site Area (total site size minus area of public streets&proposed dedications): ' 1.1 acres • 7) Describe any proposed general plan amendment or zone change which would affect the project site (attach additional sheet if necessary): Not applicable as the proposed project does not propose a general plan amendment or zone change. 8) Include a description of all permits which will be necessary from the City of Rancho Cucamonga and other governmental agencies in order to fully implement the project: City of Rancho Cucamonga: Conditional Use Permit, Development Review, Grading and Building Permits, Septic System Permit; Cucamonga Valley Water District: Water Connection Permit; Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board: Septic System Permit; SCAQMD: Permit to Operate/Construct. 9) Describe the physical setting of the site as it exists before the project including information on topography, soil stability, plants and animals, mature trees, trails and roads, drainage courses, and scenic aspects. Describe any existing structures on site (including age and condition)and the use of the structures. Attach photographs of significant features described. In addition, cite all sources of information (i.e., geological and/or hydrologic studies, biotic and archeological surveys, traffic studies): Please refer to the Environmental Checklist Form Initial Study Part II (Background - Description of Project) • • DRC2009-00586 Part I Environmental Info Form.doc Page 2 of 9 Created on 8/17/2009 4:33:00 PM E & F - 16 10) Describe the known cultural and/or historical aspects of the site. Cite all sources of information (books,published reports and oral history): Please refer to Initial Study Checklist Part II (Checklist Questions 5a through 5d - Cultural Resources). • • 11) Describe any noise sources and their levels that now affect the site (aircraft, roadway noise, etc.)and how they will affect proposed uses: The project site is currently a previously abandoned flood control basin in an urbanized area. As identified in Title 17 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code, no operation or activity may cause the ambient base levels to exceed the identified noise standards. Existing noise sources would not affect the proposed uses. 12) Describe the proposed project in detail. This should provide an adequate description of the site in terms of ultimate use that will result from the proposed project. Indicate if there are proposed phases for development, the extent of development to occur with each phase, and the anticipated completion of each increment. Attach additional sheet(s) if necessary: The proposed project is the construction and operation of a 6,000 square foot fire station which would include an apparatus room (consisting of vehicle bays, a turn-out locker room, a decontamination room, hose storage, as well as additional area for general storage), an administration area (consisting of a reception/lobby area, office space, a public restroom, a training room, ambulance private entry, breakroom . • with restroom, and storage), and a living area (consisting of a day room, a kitchen, a dining area, dorm rooms, restrooms/showering facilities, an exercise room, laundry facilities, and storage). Additionally, the fire station would be equipped with an aboveground storage tank for fuel and an emergency generator. DRC2009-00586 Part I Environmental Info Form.doc Page 3 of 9 Created on 8/17/2009 4:33:00 PM E & F - 17 13) Describe the surrounding properties, including information on plants and animals and any cultural, historical, or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land use(residential, commercial, etc.), intensity of land use(one-family, apartment houses, shops, department stores, etc.)and scale of development(height, frontage, setback, rear yard, etc.): Please refer to the Environmental Checklist Form Initial Study Part II (Project Background). • 14) Will the proposed project change the pattern, scale or character of the surrounding general area of the project? Please refer to Initial Study Checklist Part II (Checklist Questions 1 a through 1 d -Aesthetics). • 15) Indicate the type of short-term and long-term noise to be generated, including source and amount. How will these • noise levels affect adjacent properties and on-site uses. What methods of soundproofing are proposed? Please refer to Initial Study Checklist Part II (Checklist Questions 11 a through 11f- Noise). *16) Indicate proposed removals and/or replacements of mature or scenic trees: The nearest trees to the project site are located along the western side of the basin and consist of two eucalyptus trees and ten sucker trees. Since these trees are not within the project site boundaries, the proposed project does not propose the removal and/or replacement of mature or scenic trees. 17) Indicate any bodies of water(including domestic water supplies)into which the site drains: The propsoed project would drain into the City's drainage system, therefore the project does not drain directly into any bodies of water such as lakes, reservoirs, or the ocean. • DRC2009-00586 Part I Environmental Info Fonn.doc Page 4 of 9 Created on 8/17/2009 4:33:00 PM E & F - 18 18) Indicate expected amount of water usage. (See Attachment A for usage estimates). For further clarification, please contact the Cucamonga County Water District at 987-2591. • a. Residential(gal/day) Peak use(gal/Day) b. Commercial/Ind. (gal/day/ac) 600 qallons/day Peak use (gal/min/ac) 1,200 qallons/dav 19) Indicate proposed method of sewage disposal. ❑ Septic Tank 0 Sewer. If septic tanks are proposed, attach percolation tests. If discharge to a sanitary sewage system is proposed indicate expected daily sewage generation: (See Attachment A for usage estimates). For further clarification,please contact the Cucamonga County Water District at 987-2591. a. Residential(gal/day) b. Commercial/Industrial(gal/day/ac) 270.00 RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS: 20) Number of residential units: Detached(indicate range of parcel sizes, minimum lot size and maximum lot size: • Attached(indicate whether units are rental or for sale units): • 21) Anticipated range of sale prices and/or rents: Sale Price(s) $ to $ Rent(per month) $ to $ 22) Specify number of bedrooms by unit type: 23) Indicate anticipated household size by unit type: • DRC2009-00586 Part I Environmental Info Form.doc Page 5 of 9 Created on 8/17/2009 4:33:00 PM E & F - 19 24) Indicate the expected number of school children who will be residing within the project: Contact the appropriate School Districts as shown in Attachment B: a. Elementary: 0 • b. Junior High: 0 c. Senior High 0 •COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL PROJECTS 25) Describe type of use(s)and major function(s)of commercial, industrial or institutional uses: The proposed project is the construction and operation of a fire station. The major function of a fire station is to provide fire protection services to the surrounding area through the response to calls from the community. 26) Total floor area of commercial, industrial, or institutional uses by type: 6,000 square feet (fire station) 27) Indicate hours of operation: Year round -24 hours a day. • 28) Number of employees: Total: 9 • Maximum Shift: 3 firefighters Time of Maximum Shift: 24h 29) Provide breakdown of anticipated job classifications, including wage and salary ranges, as well as an indication of the rate of hire for each classification(attach additional sheet if necessary): Captain -$6,707 - $8,152/month; Engineer- $5,717 - $6,949/month; Firefighter- $4,996 - $6,073/month 30) Estimation of the number of workers to be hired that currently reside in the City: 0 *31) For commercial and industrial uses only, indicate the source, type and amount of air pollution emissions. (Data should be verified through the South Coast Air Quality Management District, at(818) 572-6283): • DRC2009-00586 Part I Environmental Info Form.doc Page 6 of 9 Created on 8/17/2009 4:33:00 PM E & F - 20 ALL PROJECTS • 32) Have the water, sewer, fire, and flood control agencies serving the project been contacted to determine their ability to provide adequate service to the proposed project? If so,please indicate their response. Water-The water agency has determined that adequate water supply exists to serve the project. Sewer- If the project extends the sewer connection to the existing sanitary sewer system, service ability from agency will be required. Fire-the project will provide adequate fire service to the surrounding area. Flood Control - the project is within a previously abandoned flood control basin which will be filled and brought up to a developable grade. Service ability from agency not required. 33) In the known history of this property, has there been any use, storage, or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic materials? Examples of hazardous and/or toxic materials include, but are not limited to PCB's;radioactive substances; pesticides and herbicides;fuels, oils, solvents, and other flammable liquids and gases. Also note underground storage of any of the above, Please list the materials and describe their use, storage, and/or discharge on the property, as well as the dates of use, if known. • Please refer to Initial Study Checklist Part II (Checklist Questions 7a through 7h - Hazards and Waste Materials). • • 34) Will the proposed project involve the temporary or long-term use, storage or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic materials, including but not limited to those examples listed above? If yes,provide an inventory of all such materials to be used and proposed method of disposal. The location of such uses, along with the storage and shipment areas, shall . be shown and labeled on the application plans. Please refer to Initial Study Checklist Part II (Checklist Questions 7a through 7h - Hazards and Waste Materials). I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for adequate evaluation of this project to the best of my ability,that the facts,statements,and information presented are true and correct tot he best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaluation can be made by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. . Date: Signature: Title: Peter Byran, Fire Chief • DRC2009-00586 Part I Environmental Info Form.doc Page 7 of 9 Created on 8/17/2009 4:33:00 PM E & F - 21 ATTACHMENT A Water Usage • Average use per day Residential Single Family 600 gal/day Apt/Condo 400 gal/day Commercial/Industrial General and Regional Commercial 3,000 gal/day/ac Neighborhood Commercial 1,500 gal/day/ac General Industrial 2,500 gal/day/ac Industrial Park 3,000 gal/day/ac • Peak Usage For all uses Average use x 2.0 Sewer Flows • Residential Single Family 270 gal/day Apt/Condos 200 gal/day • Commercial/Industrial General Commercial 2,000 gal/day/ac • Neighborhood Commercial 1,000 gal/day/ac General Industrial 1,500 gal/day/ac Heavy Industrial 3,000 gal/day/ac Source: Cucamonga County Water District Master Plan, 6/00 • • • • • DRC2009-00586 Part I Environmental Info Form.doc Page 8 of 9 Created on 8/17/2009 4:33:00 PM E & F - 22 ATTACHMENT B •ontact the school district for your area for amount and payment of school fees: Elementary School Districts Alta Loma 9350 Base Line Road, Suite F Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909) 987-0766 Central 10601 Church Street, Suite 112 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909) 989-8541 Cucamonga 8776 Archibald Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909) 987-8942 Etiwanda 5959 East Avenue P.O. Box 248 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 • (909)899-2451 • High School Chaffey High School 211 West 5th Street Ontario, CA 91762 (909) 988-8511 • • • DRC2009-00586 Part I Environmental Info Form.doc Page 9 of 9 Created on 8/17/2009 4:33:00 PM E & F - 23 +WP—T 7�, A.�C� . Vhf( � ccJr l��"�'W . I .ate 3"1 i '�". irr� �I� ),ti9∎9 i l l •i -�- I � � -�i�s�,f - C �1u�--.. ( , ,�� 1 ( 1d.�/ l7 +n 1�y :k-:. Pr —nh---� t y/i j. `41q iFK`1\ >i �� 8}�. - L1 t�\w I ,_ I �, - 4 %/,trtr i lli`^Laoo � " U8\ .-1� " il.`-^ u l) -i-,i✓— JIB\c 'Jr C r:9-: 9r -� VS:-'1Sa ,� �,j j{ ,1 1, 1_ w � � �,, t , ;�J ti C .— � ' ,1 �: , ' +( 1 /I �.�(P ) N t 1: Tai T J, � _ � ( _ ladzx ' t 90 ( l 9 i Jt I i LL••' ��'. 1 -;:i IIt., iI 'S In t1,(,F( rg �c�s v),.),:":..: I 1 , x 14, A vI II( j,A xAV j---.1.,-4-=:,-\J ' 'c L 7 11k-ti 1 I -,L/ '').6'.;-' ,1?= ' ;... 1 1 \ ,\-d ,i- ,I SFf. 8; .• ,,i, • .4...t,„, 4 - F =t-r'. t Lr , jr i7, ,�� — '�c1-�_ 1 'a_lam; t '4.1 y,— ^'-- - , `J ��..4 /j ]c 1 I ' • I . ao rte-9— ` � ,. 1_.� � f. Q va ,i .0 ao _ : ) a Ilia , Project Location,, �z �a �y HILLSIDEROAO :q s , Y ,EN t -' ccy z �'...z _ I Regional Location �� yI� �Q v �!i; Y ' Los engelea County II Son Bernardino County a - . 14.-I IQ I £_ ~-x I Project Area -- — W f , IIME il e - y - Z 2 'pas) Rimvde Cor j --; liin ar'r 8 MIN oran County '-- I5 © n __ • rt D D D Pacific .'-- • Ocean - MILES _ �� ,�>. --- L S A FIGURE 1 4 , o 1,000 2,000 Fire Station 177 ■ Noise Impact Analysis III FEET SOURCE:USGS 7.5'Quad:Cucamonga Peak(1988),Mt.Baldy(1988),CA;Thomas Bros.,2006 Regional and Project Location I:\RNF0701\ReporuWOise\reg Ioc.mxd(04118107) E & F - 24 S INITIAL STUDY FIRE STATION 177 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA • Prepared for: Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Prepared by: LSA Associates, Inc. 1500 Iowa Avenue, Suite 200 Riverside, California 92507 • (951) 781-9310 LSA Project No. RNF0701 LSA • July 2009 E & F - 25 • �. City of Rancho Cucamonga taw ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM INITIAL STUDY PART II as tam BACKGROUND 1. Project File: DRC2009-00586 AND DRC2009-00720 2. Related Files: Not applicable 3. Description of Project: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2009-00586 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT - A REQUEST TO OPERATE A 6,000 SQUARE FOOT FIRE STATION ON APPROXIMATELY 1.1 ACRE OF THE SUBJECT SITE, LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF HELLMAN AVENUE AT THE INTERSECTION OF RANCHO STREET; APN: 1061-621-03. STAFF HAS PREPARED A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS FOR CONSIDERATION. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT\DESIGN REVIEW • DRC2009-00720 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT- A REQUEST FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A STORY 6,000 SQUARE FOOT FIRE STATION ON APPROXIMATELY 1.1 ACRES OF THE SUBJECT SITE, LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF HELLMAN AVENUE AT THE INTERSECTION OF RANCHO STREET: APN:1061-621-03. RELATED FILE: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2009-00586. STAFF HAS PREPARED A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS FOR CONSIDERATION 4. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 5. General Plan Designation: Flood Control/Utility Corridor 6. Zoning: Flood Control/Utility Corridor and Very Low Residential • E & F - 26 Initial Study for DRC2009-00586 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 2 • Figure 1: Regional and Project Location • • E & F - 27 Initial Study for DRC2009-00586 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 3 • Figure 2: Conceptual Site Plan • • • E & F - 28 • Initial Study for DRC2009-00586 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 4 • • • 7. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Existing residential uses are located to the north (between the proposed site and Hillside Road, as well as farther north of Hillside Road) and to the east (across Hellman Avenue). Adjacent to the project site to the west is an unlined flood control channel with residential neighborhoods beyond. Land uses to the south include the other portion of the existing flood control basin and residential uses, including a newly developing cul-de-sac (loamosa Court) adjacent to the project's southern boundary. Two houses are currently completed on loamosa Court, one adjacent to the project's southern boundary and the other across loamosa Court, on the south side of the street. 8. Lead Agency Name and Address: Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 9. Contact Person and Phone Number: Chief Peter Bryan (909)477=2770 10. Other agencies whose approval is required: • Conditional Use Permit from the City of Rancho Cucamonga. • Development Review by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. • Grading and Building Permits from the City of Rancho Cucamonga. • Water connection permits from Cucamonga Valley Water District. • • Approvals related to connection to sewer system or installation of a septic system from the City of Rancho Cucamonga and from the Santa Ana Region of the State Water Resources Control Board. • Permit to operate or a permit to construct from the South Coast Air Quality Management District. GLOSSARY— The following abbreviations are used in this report: Ac-ft/yr Acre-foot per year • AQMP Air Quality Management Plan AST Above-ground storage tank Basin South Coast Air Basin BMP Best Management Practice BTEX Benzene, toluene, ethybenzene, xlyenes CASQA California Stormwater Quality Association CBC California Building Code CDFG California Department of Fish and Game • CNDDB California Natural Diversity Data Base CO Carbon Monoxide CRHR California Register of Historical Resources CVWD Cucamonga Valley Water District dBA A-weighted decibels. DTSC Department of Toxic Substance Control • EIR Environmental Impact Report EPA Environmental Protection Agency FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency E & F - '29 • • Initial Study for DRC2009-00586 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 5 • FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map FMMP Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program HaC Hanford coarse sandy loam, 2-9 percent slopes • HMBP Hazardous Materials Business Plan HMI Hazardous Materials Inventory Lmax Maximum Noise Level LOS Level of Service LST Localized Significant Thresholds MTBE methyl tertiary butyl ether NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NRHP National Register of Historic Places NO2 Nitrogen Dioxide • NOx Nitrogen Oxides • NRCS Natural Resource Conservation Service 03 Ozone PLLD Pressure Line Leak Detector PM2.5 Particulate Matter with a Diameter of 2.5 Microns or Less PM,O Particulate Matter with a Diameter of 10 Microns or Less ROC Reactive Organic Compounds ROG Reactive Organic Gases RRP Release Response Plan RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board SARWQCBSanta Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board • SBCFCD San Bernardino County Flood Control District SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District SERP Spill and Emergency Response Plan sf Square feet SLF Sacred Lands File SOx Oxides of Sulfur SR-210 State Route 210 SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan TvC Tujunga Gravelly Loamy Sand, 0-9 percent UBC Uniform Building Code UPC Uniform Plumbing Code USDA United States Department of Agriculture VMT Vehicle miles traveled VOC Volatile Organic Compounds WQMP Water Quality Management Plan • • E & F - 30 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 6 • ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," or "Less-Than-Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. (V) Aesthetics ( ) Agricultural Resources (✓) Air Quality (✓) Biological Resources (V) Cultural Resources (V ) Geology & Soils (✓) Hazards & Waste Materials (V) Hydrology & Water Quality (V) Land Use & Planning ✓ ( ( ) Mineral Resources (V) Noise (V) Population & Housing (V) Public Services (V) Recreation (V)Transportation/Traffic (V) Utilities & Service Systems (✓) Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: (✓) I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by, or agreed to, by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. • • Prepared By: LSA Associates, Inc. Date: 7/15/09 / Reviewed By: Larry Henderson Date: /5%09 • • • E & F - 31 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 7 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially WO Than PP 9 Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact -Incorporated Impact Impact EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial effect on a scenic vista? ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) • not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State Scenic Highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) which would adversely affect daytime or nighttime views in the area? Comments: a—b) The proposed project is located approximately 1.25 mile north of SR-210. Based on the Caltrans California Scenic Highway Program list, a portion of SR-210 is considered to be an eligible state scenic highway; however, this portion is in Los Angeles and consists of • the segment of the freeway between Interstate 5 near the Tunnel Station and State Route 134.1 Roadways in the vicinity of the project site are not identified as scenic highway corridors as delineated in the City's General Plan.2 The project site is in an urbanized area characterized by existing residential development to the north, south, east, and west. Views afforded from the project site consist of existing single-family residential uses to the north, east, south, and west. These views are punctuated with accompanying ornamental landscape features. Beyond these residential uses, the San Gabriel Mountains can be seen. The City of Rancho Cucamonga's General Plan recognizes the San Gabriel Mountains as the City's most prominent feature providing a significant scenic backdrop for the community. Adjacent to the proposed project's southern boundary is a newly developing cul-de-sac (loamosa Court). Two houses are currently completed on loamosa Court, one adjacent to the projects southern boundary, and the other across loamosa Court, on the south side of the street. T he proposed fire station is anticipated to be located along the northeast portion of the basin, with frontage occurring on Hellman Avenue. The proposed fire station would be located in a developed neighborhood, and views of the San Gabriel Mountains are already partially obstructed in the area because of residential development, including a two-story residence adjacent to the project boundary on the north. As the height and design of the fire station would be in line and compatible with existing development in the area and because the proposed project would be designed in compliance with City Development Standards, impacts associated with scenic vistas are considered less-than-significant and no mitigation would be required. • Caltrans California Scenic Highway Program, http://www.dot.ca.qov/hq/LandArch/scenic/cahisys4.htm, website accessed July 13, 2009. 2 Exhibit 111-15 Community Design Features, City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan, November 2001. E & F - 32 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 8 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: POt8np811r With Than Significant litigation Significant No Impact Incoryaated Impact Impact c) The proposed project site was previously a flood control basin and is currently characterized by disturbed vegetation. However, under a separate environmental • review, the flood control basin would be filled to a developable grade. For people living and working in close proximity to the project site, their view of the project site would change from one of an existing flood control basin to one of a fire station with associated infrastructure and landscaping as a result of the construction of the proposed project. During construction, there would be several temporary visual impacts, such as exposed earth and job site equipment. However, these visual impacts are temporary and would not have a significant impact on surrounding uses. Once constructed, the proposed project would not damage the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings because it would provide landscaping and would be designed to complement the character of the existing nearby residences. Additionally, as part of the • design review process, on-site design and lighting are required to meet City standards. City standards require new projects to underground existing and new utility lines and facilities to minimize unsightly appearance of overhead utility lines and utility enclosures in accordance with Planning Commission Resolution No. 87-96. Because the proposed project would be required to adhere to City design standards and the design review process, impacts associated with this issue would be less-than-significant and no mitigation would be required. d) The proposed project site is located in a developed area, with existing light sources from • street lighting and outdoor lighting from nearby residences. Development of the proposed project would necessitate the installation of outdoor lighting necessary for the maintenance of public safety and security. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has established standards for the design, placement, and operation of outdoor lighting in Title 17 (Development Code) of the Municipal Code. These standards identify the preferred lighting source and dictate shielding requirements. Because these standards are imposed on all outdoor lighting sources and because such standards must be adhered to in order to obtain project approval, these requirements are not considered mitigation. Compliance with the site lighting standards contained in the City's Development Code would reduce light impacts on neighboring properties to a less-than-significant level. Materials used in the construction of the proposed fire station would not produce substantial nighttime glare. Because all lighting installed for the proposed project would comply with development code standards, impacts associated with light or glare are less-than-significant and no mitigation is required. • E & F - 33 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 9 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than PP g. Significant ith Than Sig• Impact Impact • 2. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or ( ) ( ) ( ) (V ) Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes _in the existing environment, ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? Comments: a) Important farmland maps are compiled by the California Department of Conservation, Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP), pursuant to the provisions of Section 65570 of the California Government Code. These maps utilize data from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resource Conservation • Service (NRCS) soil survey, and current land use information using eight mapping categories and represent an inventory of agricultural resources within San Bernardino County. The maps depict currently urbanized lands and a qualitative sequence of agricultural designations. Maps and statistics are produced biannually using a process that integrates aerial photo interpretation, field mapping, a computerized mapping system, and public review. Mapping of County farmland categories is conducted every two years. The proposed project site is identified by the Department of Conservation as Urban and Built-Up land. Adoption of the proposed project would not convert lands designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance by the State • FMMP to non-agricultural use. According to the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan (2001), the project site is designated as "Flood Control/Utility Corridor." The areas surrounding the project site on the north, south, east, and west are designated as "Very Low Residential" by the City's General Plan. Furthermore, there are approximately 1,305 acres of Prime Farmlands, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance within the City of Rancho Cucamonga.' The major concentrations of designated farmlands are located in the southern and eastern portions of the City that are characterized by existing and planned development and are not within the vicinity of the project. Since the project site is not designated as Prime Farmlands, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance, no impacts associated with this issue would result from project implementation and no mitigation would be required. • Agricultural Resources Pg. 5.1-8, Soils and Geology, General Plan Update Administrative Draft Environmental Impact Report, City of Rancho Cucamonga, July 2001. E & F - 34 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 10 • Len Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than Significant Incorporated Significant No Impact Incorporated Impaq Impact b) Williamson Act' contracts restrict land development of contract lands. The contracts typically limit land use in contract lands to agriculture, recreation, and open space, unless otherwise stated in the contract. The property is not in the most recent Williamson Act Conservation Contract database.2 As the project is not covered by a Williamson Act contract, the implementation of the proposed project would not result in any impacts to existing zoning for agricultural use or to Williamson Act land. No mitigation measures are required. c) The project consists of the construction of a fire station within an already developed neighborhood. The City's General Plan designates the project site as "Flood Control/Utility Corridor" and surrounding land uses as "Very Low Residential." Because surrounding land is currently utilized for residential uses, the implementation of the proposed project would not result in the development of non-agricultural uses within the surrounding vicinity of the project site. Because surrounding land is already developed with urban uses, impacts associated with the conversion of adjacent agricultural land to urban uses would not occur and no mitigation is required. • • • The Williamson Act is a procedure authorized under State law to preserve agricultural lands as well as open - • space. Property owners entering into a Williamson Act contract receive a reduction in property taxes in return for agreeing to protect the land's open space or agricultural values. 2 Williamson Act Conservation Contract Database, San Bernardino County, February 2007. E & F - 35 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 11 • • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 3. AIR QUALITY. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the .( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute ( ) ( ) (V) ( ) substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of ( ) ' ( ) (✓) ( ) any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable Federal or State ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial ( ) ( )'`• (✓) ( ) number of people? • Comments: a) The project is located within the South Coast Air Basin (Basin) and is within the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The Basin • •is bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the west and the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto Mountains to the north and east. It includes all of Orange County, the non-Antelope Valley portions of Los Angeles County, and the non-desert portions of Riverside and San Bernardino Counties. The Basin is currently classified as being in non-attainment for three criteria pollutants: ozone (03), particulate matter (PM10 and • PM2.5), and carbon monoxide (CO) (Los Angeles County only). The Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) for the Basin establishes a program of rules and regulations directed at the attainment of State and Federal air quality standards. The current Regional Air Quality Plan is the 2007 AQMP adopted by the SCAQMD on June 1, 2007. The 2007 AQMP employs the most up-to-date science and analytical tools and incorporates a comprehensive strategy aimed at controlling pollution from all sources, including stationary sources, on-road and off-road mobile sources and area sources. The 2007 AQMP also updates the attainment demonstration for the standards for ozone and PM10, and proposes attainment demonstration with a more focused control of sulfur oxides, directly-emitted PM2,5, nitrogen oxides, and volatile organic compounds by 2015. Conformance with the AQMP is established by determining that a • development project complies with local land use plans and through compliance with air quality rules and regulations. The 2007 AQMP was prepared to accommodate growth, to reduce the high levels of • pollutants within the areas under the jurisdiction of SCAQMD, and to re-establish clean air to the region. Projects that are considered to be consistent with the AQMP would not interfere with attainment, because this growth is included in the projections used to formulate the AQMP. Therefore, projects, uses, and activities that are consistent with E & F - 36 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 12 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Nth Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact . Incorporated Impact Impact the applicable assumptions used in the development of the AQMP would not jeopardize attainment of the air quality levels identified in the AQMP. Generally, if a project is planned in a way that results in the minimization of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) both within the project and the community in which it is located, and consequently the minimization of air pollutant emissions, that aspect of the project is consistent with the • AQMP. The proposed project site is located in an urbanized area of the City along Hellman Avenue and is proposed to accommodate the growth projection in the project vicinity. The proposed fire station facility itself is not a growth inducing project. Therefore, the emissions associated with the proposed project are expected to be within the amounts already accounted for in the 2007 AQMP. In this respect, the proposed project is consistent with, and would conform to the current AQMP and impacts are considered to be less-than-significant. b) Any project in the Basin with daily emissions that exceed any of the following thresholds should be considered as having an individually and cumulatively significant air quality impact: • 55 lbs. per day of ROC (reactive organic compounds) (75 lbs./day during construction). • • 55 lbs. per day of NOx (oxides of nitrogen) (100 lbs./day during construction). • 550 lbs. per day of CO (carbon monoxide) (550 lbs./day during construction). • 150 lbs. per day of PM1O (150 lbs./day during construction). • 150 lbs. per day of SOx (oxides of sulfur) (150 lbs./day during construction). • Construction Emissions: Air quality impacts would occur during construction of the proposed project from soil disturbance and equipment exhaust. Major sources of emissions during site preparation and grading phases include: (1) exhaust emissions from construction vehicles; (2) equipment and fugitive dust generated by construction vehicles and equipment traveling over exposed surfaces; and (3) soil disturbances from grading and backfilling. Exhaust emissions during grading and construction activities envisioned on-site would Vary as construction activity levels change. As illustrated in Table A, the total peak daily construction emissions for the project would not exceed SCAQMD thresholds. • Table A: Peak Site Preparation Day Construction Emissions (lbs./day) Number and Equipment Type* Hours or Miles per Day CO ROG NOx SOx PM-lo 2 Rubber Tired Dozers 8 hours 27 6.1 55 0.0 2.4 2 Tractor/Loader/Backhoes 8 hours 6.6 2.1 13 0.0 1.0 1 Mechanic Truck 10 miles 0.11 0.007 0.024 1E-04 0.001 1 Fuel Truck 10 miles 0.11 0.007 0.024 1E-04 0.001 1 Foreman Truck 10 miles 0.11 0.007 0.024 1E-04 0.001 • 1 Water Truck 20 miles 0.30 0.023 0.055 4E-04 0.003 25 Haul Trucks 40 miles each 17 2.3 30 0.03 1.19 E & F - 37 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 13 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than PP 9 Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Table A: Peak Site Preparation Day Construction Emissions (lbs./day) Number and Equipment Type* Hours or Miles per Day ' CO ROG NOx 50x PMtg 40 Workers commuting 25 miles each 6.4 0.28 0.81 0.007 0.06 Subtotal Exhaust Emissions 58 11 99 0.0 4.6 Total Fugitive Dust with Control Measures — — — — 136 Total Emissions (with Control Measures) 58 11 99 0.0 141 SCAQMD Threshold 550 75 100 150 150 • Significant? No No No No No Emission factors provided by SCAQMD, CEQA Handbook Update,March 2005,and EMFAC2007. Source:LSA Associates, Inc., March 2008. • As estimated in the air quality analysis conducted for the project and summarized in Table A, during the peak construction day, total emissions for the project site would not exceed SCAQMD thresholds. These emission numbers are based on a probable set of equipment utilized on peak days during the construction phase of the project. Fugitive dust emissions are generally associated with land clearing, exposure, vehicle and equipment travel on unpaved roads; and cut and fill operations. Dust generated • daily during construction would vary substantially, depending on the level of activity, the specific operations, and weather conditions. Nearby sensitive receptors and on-site workers may be exposed to blowing dust, depending upon prevailing wind conditions. Previously referenced Table A indicates that fugitive dust emissions (PMto) would not exceed any of the SCAQMD daily emission thresholds with implementation of standard policies for the control of fugitive dust emissions. The SCAQMD has established standard policies for the control of fugitive dust emissions. Rule 402 requires implementation of dust suppression techniques to prevent fugitive dust from creating a nuisance off-site, while Rule 403 requires that fugitive dust is controlled with the best available control measures so that the presence of such dust does not remain visible in the atmosphere beyond the property line of the emission source. Because these rules are standards imposed on all fugitive dust-generating activities and because they must be complied with, they are not considered mitigation. Specific measures the construction contractor may utilize to implement Rules 402 and 403 include, but are not be limited to: • Application of non-toxic chemical soil stabilizers to all inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive for ten days or more); • Watering of active sites at least twice daily (locations where grading is to occur to be thoroughly watered prior to earth disturbance activities); and • Revegetation of disturbed areas as quickly as possible; and • Limiting speed on unpaved roads to 15 mph or less; and • • The suspension of earth-disturbing activities when wind speeds (instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 mph; and • • E & F - 38 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 14 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially ft Than Significant Mitigat ion Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • The installation of wheel washers where vehicles exit unpaved roads onto paved roads, or washing trucks and any equipment leaving the site each trip; and • The covering of vehicles hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose material or maintaining at least two feet of vertical space between the top of the load and the top of the trailer. • Adherence to standard SCAQMD rules and regulations would result in fugitive dust emissions.of approximately 141 pounds per day (as illustrated in Table A), which is below the SCAQMD daily threshold of 150 pounds per day. Architectural coatings contain VOCs that are similar to ROC and are part of the 03 precursors. At this stage of project planning, no detailed architectural coatings • information is available. Compliance with the SCAQMD Rule 1113 on the use of architectural coatings would be considered sufficient to reduce the amount of VOCs. An • estimate was made using the project description of an approximately 6,000-square foot building. Applying the SCAQMD CEQA factor of 2.0 square feet of area to coat for every square foot of non-residential floor space, there is an approximately 12,000-square foot area to cover with architectural coatings. Using the SCAQMD CEQA VOC emission factor for architectural coatings of 250 g/I translates to 11.6 lbs. VOC per • 1,000 square feet of coating, a total project emission of 139 lbs. of VOC would result. Assuming a one-week period of coating application, the result is 28 lbs. of VOC emitted per day from the application of architectural coatings. These emissions would occur after grading activities, near the end of the construction phase. Therefore, this VOC emission is the principal air emission and is below the SCAQMD threshold. As illustrated above, emissions associated with construction activities would not exceed the daily thresholds for the criteria pollutants of NOx, ROC, CO, 50x, and PM13. Therefore, impacts associated with construction emissions are less-than-significant. Operational Emissions: Long-term air pollutant emissions associated with the proposed project result from vehicular emissions and stationary emissions created through the .consumption of fossil fuels. Vehicular emissions are based upon anticipated project-related traffic. The proposed project is estimated to generate 18 vehicular trips per day. Stationary sources would include the emergency generator; however, the emissions from the emergency generator that would be located at the fire station would be negligible because such generators typically only run for approximately half an hour once a week. As illustrated in Table B, operational air pollutant emissions resulting from the occupation of the proposed project are below SCAQMD levels of significance and no further mitigation is required. Table B: Project Operational Emissions Pollutants (lbs./day) Source ROG NOx CO 50x Mho PM2.s Mobile and Stationary Sources 0.38 0.35 3.9 0.00 0.31 0.06 SCAQMD Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55 E & F - 39 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 15 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Table B: Project Operational Emissions Pollutants (Ibs./day) Source • ROG NOx CO SOx PM1a PM2.e Exceeds SCAQMD Threshold? No No No No No No Source: LSA Associates, Inc.,March 2008. As discussed above, emissions from construction and operational activities are below SCAQMD thresholds of significance. Compliance with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403 would further reduce construction emissions. Therefore, impacts associated with air quality standards are less-than-significant and no mitigation is required. c) Localized air quality effects would occur when emissions from vehicular traffic increase in local areas as a result of the proposed project. The primary mobile source pollutant of local concern is CO, which is a direct function of vehicle idling time and, thus, traffic flow conditions. CO transport is extremely limited; it disperses rapidly with distance from the source under normal meteorological conditions. However, under certain extreme meteorological conditions, CO concentrations proximate to a congested roadway or intersection may reach unhealthful levels affecting local sensitive receptors (residents, • school children, the elderly, hospital patients, etc.). Typically, high CO concentrations are associated with roadways or intersections operating at unacceptable levels of service or with extremely high traffic volumes. In areas with high ambient background CO concentration, modeling is recommended to determine a project's effect on local CO levels. At the Upland Monitoring Station, the background concentrations are 3.6 ppm for the one-hour period and 2.7 ppm for the eight-hour period.' These background CO concentrations are low enough that substantial vehicular trips would have to be added to intersections that have high turn volumes during peak hours to make a noticeable difference. Because the proposed project would result in 18 or fewer daily trips, the proposed project would not have a significant impact on local air quality for CO, and no mitigation measures is required. Given the broad scope of global climate change, the challenge under CEQA is for a Lead Agency to scale the issue down to the level of a CEQA document for a specific project in a way that is meaningful to the decision-making process. However, global warming and greenhouse gases (GHGs) are an emerging environmental concern being raised on statewide, national, and international levels. Among the prominent GHGs contributing to the greenhouse effect are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), ozone (03), water vapor, nitrous oxide (N20), and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). Regional, • State, and Federal agencies are developing strategies to control pollutant emissions that contribute to global warming. Although regulatory agencies at the regional level are in the process of developing thresholds and methodologies to assess global warming and • greenhouse gases on a site-specific level (e.g., AB 32, SB 97, and SB 375), neither Air Quality Analysis for Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177, LSA Associates, Inc., March 2008. E & F - 40 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 16 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact CEQA nor the CEQA Guidelines currently mentions or provides any methodology for • analysis of greenhouse gases, nor do they provide any significance thresholds. Human-caused emissions of GHGs in excess of natural ambient concentrations are responsible for enhancing the greenhouse effect. GHGs are global pollutants, unlike criteria air pollutants and toxic air contaminants, which are pollutants of regional and local concern, respectively. Emissions of GHGs are associated with the • industrial/manufacturing, utility, transportation, residential, commercial, and agricultural sectors. To account for the fact that different GHGs have different polluting impacts, a standard measurement known as the "carbon dioxide equivalent" was established to quantify the effects from these different emissions. Carbon dioxide equivalent is a measurement used to account for the fact that different GHGs have different potential to retain infrared radiation in the atmosphere and contribute to the greenhouse effect. This potential, known as the global warming potential of a GHG, is also dependent on the lifetime, or persistence, of the gas molecule in the atmosphere. For example, methane is a much more potent GHG than CO2. Expressing GHG emissions in carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e) takes the contribution of all GHG emissions to the greenhouse effect and converts them to a single unit equivalent to the effect that would occur if only CO2 were being emitted. • • The increased concentration of GHGs in the atmosphere has been linked to global warming, which can lead to changes in climate. Some of the potential resulting effects in California of global warming may include loss in Sierra snow pack and threats to water supplies, sea level rise, more extreme heat days per year, more high ozone days, more large forest fires, and more drought years. Globally, climate change has the potential to impact numerous environmental resources through potential, though uncertain, impacts related to future air temperatures and precipitation patterns. The projected effects of global warming on weather and climate are likely to vary regionally, but are expected to include the following direct effects: • Higher maximum temperatures and more hot days over nearly all land areas; and • Higher minimum temperatures, fewer cold days and frost days over nearly all land areas; and • Reduced diurnal temperature range over most land areas; and • Increase of heat index over land areas; and • More intense precipitation events. In addition to these direct effects, there are many secondary effects that are projected to result from global warming, including global rise in sea level, impacts to agriculture, changes in disease vectors, and changes in habitat and biodiversity. While the possible outcomes and the feedback mechanisms involved are not fully understood, and much • research remains to be done, the potential for substantial environmental, social, and economic consequences over the long term may be great. E & F - 41 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga • Fire Station 177 Page 17 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact To date, no quantitative GHG emission thresholds or similar criteria have been established to evaluate the cumulative impact of a single project on global climate. In the absence of quantitative greenhouse gas emissions thresholds, consistency with adopted programs and policies is used by many jurisdictions to evaluate the significance of cumulative impacts. The California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) recently published a White Paper (January 2008) that explored several options for setting numeric, non-zero thresholds. The White Paper acknowledges medium to high uncertainty as to each potential numeric threshold "due to the uncertainty associated with the effectiveness of AB 32 implementation overall, the new character of GHG reduction strategies on a project basis, the immaturity of GHG reduction technologies or infrastructure (such as widespread biodiesel availability), and the uncertainty of GHG reduction effectiveness of certain technologies (such as scientific debate concerning the relative lifecycle GHG emissions of certain biofuels, for example)." When applied to residential examples, the thresholds discussed would range from approximately 50 single-family dwelling units to 2,600 residential units as screening thresholds; commercial thresholds would rely on square footage. Application of those thresholds, however, may first require enactment of a specific Climate Action Plan in a General Plan or other large-scale policy document. Based on the above, none of the potential numeric thresholds would be appropriate for application to this project. Thus, • for the purposes of analyzing this project, and consistent with one of the CAPCOA's identified approaches to climate change analysis, the potential climate change impacts • will be analyzed without setting a specific threshold. As previously stated, there is no guidance from the State of California and the CEQA Guidelines on thresholds for assessing the impact of greenhouse gas emissions. The following considerations were developed for the proposed project from a review of recent publications and actions from CARB that address how the state plans to achieve the goals of reducing greenhouse gases. These considerations include: (1) The potential conflicts with the 44 early action strategies identified by the ARB; and (2) The relative size of the project in comparison to the statewide estimated greenhouse reduction goal of 173 million metric tons of CO2e by 2020 and in comparison to the size of major facilities that are required to report greenhouse gas emissions (25,000 metric tons of CO2e per year); and (3) Conflict with the State goal of reducing GHG emissions in California to 1990 levels by 2020 as set forth by the timetable established in AB 32, California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. • These considerations will be used to evaluate whether the project emissions could conflict with the State goals for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. (1) Potential conflicts with the 44 early action strategies identified by the ARB. II/ The project does not pose any apparent conflict with the most recent list of the ARB early action strategies. The ARB focus in identifying the 44 early action items was to recommend measures that ARB staff's evaluation concluded were "expected to yield • E & F - 42 Initial Study for • City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 18 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Po1Bnt1a'y With Than pp g Significant Incorporated Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact significant GHG emission reductions, are likely to be cost-effective and technologically feasible." Accordingly, the 44 early action items focus on industrial production processes, agriculture, and transportation sectors and do not apply directly to the proposed project. Therefore, no significant impacts associated with this project would • occur. (2) The relative size of the project in comparison to the statewide estimated greenhouse reduction goal of 173 million metric tons of CO2e by 2020 and in comparison to the size of major facilities that are required to report greenhouse gas emissions (25,000 metric tons of CO2e per year). Just as construction activities would result in the emission of criteria pollutants, greenhouse gases, primarily 002, with small contributions of N2O, would be emitted from equipment exhaust, construction related vehicular activity and construction worker automobile trips. Similar to emission levels of criteria pollutants, CO2 emission levels for construction activities would vary depending on the number and type of equipment, duration of use, operation schedules, and the number of construction workers. In addition to construction, operation of the proposed project would result in emissions of the greenhouse gases, primarily 002, which would be formed as a primary product of combustion of gasoline and diesel fuel in commute trips and emergency response as • well as energy use associated with heating and cooling the building. Area and mobile emissions of CO2 that would result from operations of the proposed project were quantified using URBEMIS 2007. The operation of the fire station would result in the generation of 74 metric tons of CO2e per year or approximately 0.000042 percent of the total State greenhouse gas reduction goal. Given the relatively low amount of CO2e generated by the proposed project and since climate change is a global issue, it is unlikely that the proposed project would generate enough GHG emissions to influence global climate change on its own. Therefore, impacts associated with this issue would be less-than-significant. (3) Conflict with the State goal of reducing GHG emissions in California to 1990 levels by 2020 as set forth by the timetable established in AB 32, California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. • • As previously stated, the proposed project does not pose any apparent conflict with the most recent list of the CARB early action strategies. These 44 early action items are "expected to yield significant GHG emission reductions, are likely to be cost-effective and technologically feasible," and would be consistent with the State goal of reducing GHG emissions in California. Since the proposed project does not conflict with these 44 early action strategies, the project is consistent with the strategies to reduce California's emissions to the levels proposed in Executive Order S-3-05. In addition, the development of the proposed project would result in a reduction of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) through the siting of fire protection services closer to urban development within the northern portion of the City. This would be consistent with Senate Bill 375 (SB 375), which requires planning agencies to develop strategies for meeting GHG emission • targets as a part of regional transportation plans and provides regulatory incentives for development projects near existing transit facilities. Based on the project's consistency • E & F - 43 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 19 • Less Than Significant Less • Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than PP g Significant eagan Significant No Impact incorporated Impact Impact with these measures contained in Executive Order S-3-05, the project has a less-than-significant impact associated with this issue. d) Sensitive receptors are defined as populations that are more susceptible to the effects of • pollution than the population at large. The SCAQMD identifies the following as sensitive receptors: long-term healthcare facilities, rehabilitation centers, convalescent centers, retirement homes, residences, schools, playgrounds, childcare centers, and athletic facilities. The project site is in an area that is currently developed with residential and other sensitive uses. A Localized Significance Threshold (LST) analysis was conducted for the construction and operational phase of the project. The closest existing residential area is to the north, adjacent to the site at a distance of less than 50 feet from the closest construction area. - Using the SCAQMD's Localized Significant Thresholds (LST) methodology, Tablet identifies the construction-related emissions of NOR, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 compared with the LSTs at distances of 25 meters. As indicated in Table C, emissions rates for the proposed construction activities are below the localized significance thresholds for CO, NOR, PM10, and PM2.5 for all sensitive receptors. Therefore, the proposed construction activities would not cause any short-term, localized, significant air quality impacts for • nearby sensitive receptors and no mitigation is required. Table C: Summary of Construction Emissions Localized Significance Emissions Rates (lbs/day) Construction Phase CO NOR PMtg PM2.5 Site Preparation 58 99 9.3 6.7 Grading 30 72 7.1 4.6 Building 22 45 3.9 3.6 Architectural Coating and Paving 16 34 2.6 2.4 Localized Significance Threshold 1,748 438 16 8 Exceed Significance? No No No No Source:L5A Associates,Inc., March 2008. The operational localized emissions analysis was performed based on SCAQMD Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology(June 2003). Based on data contained in Table D, emissions rates for NOR, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 would not exceed localized significance thresholds. Therefore, no significant impacts associated with operational LSTs would occur with implementation of the proposed project and no mitigation is required. Table D: Summary of Operational Emissions Localized Significance Emissions Rates (Ibs/day) • Operational Phase CO NOx PMtp PM2.5 Project Operational Emissions 3.9 0.35 0.31 0.06 Localized Significance Threshold 1,748 438 4 2 E & F - 44 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 20 • Less Then Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Imoad Incorporated Impact Impact Table D: Summary of Operational Emissions Localized Significance Emissions Rates (lbs/day) Operational Phase CO NOX PMtg PM2.5 Exceed Significance? No No No No Source: LSA Associates,Inc.,March 2008. e) During construction, the various diesel-powered vehicles and equipment in use on the . site would create odors. Additionally, the application of architectural coatings and installation of asphalt may generate odors. These odors are temporary and not likely to be noticed beyond the project boundaries. SCAQMD standards regarding the application of architectural coatings (Rule 1113) and the installation of asphalt surfaces are sufficient to reduce temporary odors to a less-than-significant level and no mitigation is required. On-site fueling from the aboveground storage tank would occur sporadically and would occur over short periods of time. These odors are not likely to be noticed beyond the project boundaries. Compliance with SCAQMD standards regarding the application of architectural coatings and the installation of asphalt surfaces are sufficient to reduce temporary odor impacts to a less—than-significant level. Long-term objectionable odors are not expected to be generated by the proposed • project. Outdoor activities conducted at the proposed project would include typical odor generating activities, such as cooking and the use of gas barbecue grills, neither of which would generate substantial objectionable odors. Solid waste generated by the proposed on-site uses would be collected by a contracted waste hauler, ensuring that any odors resulting from on-site uses would be adequately managed. Additionally, waste receptacles and garbage areas would be designed and constructed per applicable standards and would be situated away from the existing residential uses. For these reasons, impacts from objectionable odors generated by the project are considered less-than-significant. • • • • E & F - 45 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 21 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than PP g Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact incorporated Impact Impact 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the'project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or. regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on riparian habitat ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish • and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? • d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) Conservation Plan, Natural. Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State Habitat Conservation Plan? Comments: a) As identified in the City's General Plan,' the project site is not within an area of sensitive biological resources. In addition, no federally-listed, state-listed, proposed endangered„ threatened, or sensitive plant or animal species were observed on site during the field survey conducted for the proposed project.2 Designated, final, remanded (10/24/2000) critical habitat for the federally-listed coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) is located approximately 600 feet north of the proposed project site. Although the proposed project site does not lie within any designated critical habitat, 3 the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) has identified two occurrences that have been reported approximately 5 miles east of the project site. The first reported occurrence was between the mouth of • I Exhibit IV-3 Sensitive Biological Resources,City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan,November 2001. 2 Fire Station 177 Biological Resources Constraints Report, LSA Associates, Inc.,March 27,2007. 3 Results of a Focused California Gnatcatcher Survey for the Fire Station 177 Project Site, LSA Associates, Inc., July 13,2007. E & F - 46 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 22 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially wnn Than Significant Incorporated SlImpacnt No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact east Etiwanda Canyon and Dan Canyon Wash, 3 miles north of Etiwanda Avenue. The second reported occurrence is south of Base Line Road, 0.75 mile west of Etiwanda Avenue, between Fontana and Rancho Cucamonga. A focused presence/absence survey for the coastal California gnatcatcher was conducted for the flood control basin which includes the project site due to the presence of Riverside an upland sage scrub. Based on the focused California Gnatcatcher survey completed for the proposed project, no California gnatcatchers were observed during the six site visits conducted on a weekly basis during the breeding season.' Because no gnatcatchers were observed and because the proposed project is not within the critical habitat of the coastal California gnatcatcher, impacts associated to this issue are less-than-significant and no mitigation is required. b) The project site was previously utilized as a flood control basin and is not within an area of sensitive biological resources.2 Vegetation on site includes annual bur-sage (Ambrosia acanthicarpa), California sagebrush (Artemisia californica), California aster (Corethrogyne filaginifolia), telegraph weed (Heterotheca grandiflora), scalebroom (Lepidospartum squamatum), shortpod mustard (Hirschfeldie incana), London rocket (Sisymbrium irio), broom (Cytisus sp.), redstem stork's bill (Erodium cicutarium), cheeseweed (Malva parviflora), and California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum). No • riparian habitat is present on the project site. Additionally, the proposed project site is disturbed due to past uses associated with flood control maintenance. As such, impacts associated with riparian habitat and sensitive communities are less-than-significant and no mitigation is required. c) The project site was previously utilized as a flood control basin and does not contain or affect federally protected wetlands. Therefore, no impact associated with this issue would occur and no mitigation is required. d) The project site was previously utilized as a flood control basin and the area around the project site is developed with residential uses. The installation of roadways and other infrastructure features has further isolated the project site from natural areas. Because • of the existing condition of the site and adjacent property, the project site is not used as a wildlife migration/movement corridor or a wildlife nursery site. Therefore, impacts associated with this issue are less-than-significant and no mitigation is required. e) The City of Rancho Cucamonga.has an adopted Tree Ordinance3 to protect heritage trees including eucalyptus, palm, oak, sycamore, and pine to preserve scenic beauty, prevent soil erosion, provide shade and wind 'protection, and screen air pollution. No trees are currently located within the project site. The nearest trees to the project site are located along the western side of the basin and consist of two eucalyptus trees and ten sucker trees. Since these trees are not within the project site boundaries, it is I Results of a Focused California Gnatcatcher Survey for the Fire Station 177 Project Site, LSA Associates, Inc., • July,13,2007. 2 Exhibit 1V-3 Sensitive Biological Resources,City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan,November 2001. 3 Tree Removal Permit (Ordinance No. 276), httn://www.ci.rancho-cucamonrza.ca.us/pdf fonns/rreeRernAnn.ndf , City of Rancho Cucamonga,website accessed July 13,2009. E & F - 47 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga • Fire Station 177 Page 23 • • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than PP g Significant Mitigation Significant No Impel Incorporated Impact Impact anticipated that no trees would be removed. Additionally, any tree removal required for implementation of the proposed project would be done in compliance with tree removal permit requirements from the City including replacement planting. The proposed project does not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. Therefore, impacts are less-than-significant and no mitigation is required. f) As identified in the City's General Plan, the project site is not located within a • conservation area.' Because the project site is not identified or located within a conservation area, the proposed project would not conflict with the provision of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan or other approved local, regional, or State Habitat Conservation Plan. Therefore, no impacts associated with this issue would result from project implementation and no mitigation is required. • • • • I Exhibit/V-4 Open Space and Conservation Plan,City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan,November 2001. E & F - 48 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 24 • Less Than Significant Less • Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) . significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the ( ) (✓) ( ) ( ) significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological ( ) (V) ( ) ( ) resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) outside of formal cemeteries? Comments: a) Through a visual survey of the property, it was determined that the project site does not contain any existing structures. Based on the cultural resources report prepared for the Demens Basin Reclamation Project,' which included a National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) assessment and California Register of Historical Resources • (CRHR) assessment, no historical resources were identified on the project site. In addition, the City's General Plan does not identify any historic resources within the project site.2 Because development of the project site would not result in any adverse changes to a historical resource, no impacts to a historical resource would result from project implementation and no mitigation is required. • b) Although the Rancho Cucamonga area is known to have been inhabited by Native Americans, there are no known archaeological sites or resources recorded on the project site.3 Furthermore, the Native American Heritage Commission was able to perform a records search of its Sacred Lands File (SLF) for the project site: The SLF did not indicate the presence of Native American cultural resources in the immediate project area." The proposed project site was formerly used as a detention basin by the San Bernardino County Flood Control District (SBCFCD) and is approximately 25 to 45 feet below surrounding grade. Any archaeological resources that may have existed at the proposed project site would have been greatly modified or destroyed by the soil excavation activities associated with preparation and operation of the detention basin. The possibility of unearthing archaeological resources at the project site is very low because of the disturbed nature of the site and surrounding areas. Although the project site is not anticipated to yield archaeological resources, the potential for unknown buried resources exists. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-01 would ensure that impacts associated with archaeological resources are less—than-significant. t Appendix D Cultural Resources Report of the Demens Flood Control Basin Debris Relocation Initial Study, San Bernardino County Department of Public Works,March 18,2008. • 2 Exhibit 111-15 Major Community Design Features. City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan,November 2001. 3 Appendix D Cultural Resources Report of the Demens Flood Control Basin Debris Relocation Initial Study, San Bernardino County Department of Public Works,March 18,2008. Demens Flood Control Basin Debris Relocation Initial Study, San Bernardino County Department of Public Works, March 18,2008. E & F - 49 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 25 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact , CUL-01 In the event an archaeological or paleontological resource is uncovered during the course of project-related grading or construction, ground-disturbing activities in the vicinity of the find shall cease until the nature and extent of the find can be evaluated by a qualified archaeologist or paleontologist (as determined by the City). Any such resource uncovered during the course of project-related grading or construction shall be recorded and/or removed per applicable City and/or State regulations. c) No paleontological resources have been recorded within the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the sphere of influence, including the project site.1 The past construction, operation, and maintenance of the site for flood control uses has significantly reduced the potential for any such on-site resource. Had any significant paleontological resources existed on the site, they would have been discovered during past usage of the site; therefore, the potential for impacts to paleontological resources is low. Although the project site is not anticipated to yield paleontological resources, the potential for unknown buried resources exists. Implementation of previously identified Mitigation Measure CUL-01 would ensure that impacts associated with paleontological resources are less-than-significant. • d) The proposed project is in an area that has been previously disturbed by soil excavation activities associated with the construction, operation, and maintenance of the detention basin. No known religious or sacred sites exist within the project area. No evidence is in place to suggest the project site has been used for human burials. The California Health and Safety Code (Section 7050.5) states that if human remains are discovered on site, no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. As adherence to State regulations is required for all development, no impacts related to this issue are anticipated to occur with implementation of this project and no mitigation is required. • • 5./1 Cultural Resources, Draft Environmental Impact Report, Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update, Michael Brandman Associates,June 2001. E & F - 50 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 26 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially ignifi alnt Wth Than pp g Significant corpafioe Significant pa Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. H) Strong seismic ground shaking? ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) Hi) Seismic-related ground failure, including ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) liquefaction? iv) Landslides? ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, ( ) (7) ( ) ( ) • or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table ( ) (7) ( ) ( ) • • 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use ( ) (✓) O ( ) of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the. disposal of wastewater? Comments: a) i) The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (Act) mitigates fault rupture hazards by prohibiting the location of structures for human occupancy across the trace of an active fault. The Act requires the State Geologist to delineate "Earthquake Fault Zones" along faults that are "sufficiently active" and "well defined." The boundary of an "Earthquake Fault Zone" is generally 500 feet from major active faults and from 200 to 300 feet from well defined minor faults. The mapping of active faults has • been completed by the State Geologist. These maps are distributed to all affected cities, counties, and State agencies for their use in developing planning policies and controlling renovation or new construction. According to the 2005 California Geologic Survey, the project site is not within the boundaries of an Alquist-Priolo • Fault Zone. No fault rupture impact would result from the development of this project and no mitigation is required. E & F - 51 • • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga • Fire Station 177 Page 27 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than PP 9 Significant Incorporated Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • ii) According to the 2005 California Geologic Survey, there are no known seismic faults within the project site. However, the project site is located in the seismically active southern California region, and the City of Rancho Cucamonga planning area lies in a region where numerous faults are capable of generating moderate to large earthquakes. The nearest fault is the Cucamonga Fault Zone, which is approximately 0.7 mile north of the project site. Other faults within the area include the Red Hill Fault (approximately 1.9 miles southeast of project site), the San Jacinto Fault (approximately 9 miles north of the project site), and the San Andreas Fault (approximately 12 miles northeast of the project site). Both the Cucamonga Fault Zone and Red Hill Fault are capable of producing M„, 6.0-7.0 earthquakes while the San Jacinto Fault and San Andreas Fault are capable of producing up to My,7.5 and 8.2 . earthquakes, respectively. While no active faults are located within the limits of the project site, development of the proposed project within a seismically active region may increase the potential for property loss, injury, or death resulting from ground • shaking. The City of Rancho Cucamonga maintains construction standards based on the California Building Code—California Code of Regulations, Title 24 (CBC). These established engineering standards are appropriate for the seismic zone in which development may occur. Adherence to these•standards and requirements set forth in the CBC and by the City would reduce impacts related to this issue to a • less-than-significant level. iii) Liquefaction is a phenomenon that occurs when strong earthquake shaking causes soils to collapse from a sudden loss of cohesion and undergo a transformation from a solid state to a liquefied state. This happens in areas where the soils are saturated with groundwater. Loose soils with particle size in the medium sand to silt range are particularly susceptible to liquefaction when subjected to seismic ground shaking. Affected soils lose all strength during liquefaction and failure of building foundations can occur. Liquefaction typically occurs in areas where groundwater is present within 50 feet of the surface. As identified in the preliminary geotechnical investigation, groundwater was not encountered within a depth of 50 feet below the • ground surface on the project.' The preliminary geotechnical investigation states that groundwater in the project area is anticipated to occur approximately 250 feet below the ground surface and liquefaction is not considered to represent a potential impact associated with development of the project site. As the project is not located within an area susceptible to liquefaction and is not in a special hazard zone, impacts associated with liquefaction are less-than-significant and no mitigation is required. iv) The City prohibits structures in areas where there are slopes with greater than 30 percent of steepness, and that a study is required for areas where there are slopes with 10-30 percent of steepness.2 As indicated in the City's General Plan, the project site is located in an area of less than 10 percent slope.' Additionally, the project site is surrounded by urban development and is not susceptible to seismically induced landslides and rock falls due to the lack of hills or geographic features on or adjacent • 1 Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for Proposed Fire Station#177, RGS Engineering Geology, May 4,2007. 2 Table 5.1-2 Suitability of Development in Seismic/Geologic Hazard Areas, Draft Environmental Impact Report, Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update,Michael Brandman Associates,June 2001. 3 Exhibit V-4 Slopes of Rancho Cucamonga. City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan, November 2001. E & F - 52 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 28 • • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potantiatly With Then Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact to the site. Because the project site is not identified in an area susceptible to landslides, impacts related to these issues are considered to be less-than-significant and no mitigation measures are required. b) The proposed project would require the excavation, stockpiling, and movement of on-site soils. Currently, construction projects resulting in the disturbance of 1.0 acre or more are required to obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit issued by the respective Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The. project's construction contractor would be required to prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that addresses erosion and discharge impacts and identifies Best Management Practices (BMPs) associated with the proposed on-site grading. As part of the SWPPP, an Erosion Control Plan would be prepared and implemented prior to the commencement of on-site grading activities. The plan is required to identify specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion during the entire grading and construction period. The erosion control plan would, at a minimum, include the following measures: (a) specifications related to the timing of grading and construction to minimize soil exposure to prolonged periods of rain and (b) implementation of an inspection and maintenance program to ensure that any erosion that may occur would • be remedied within a specified time frame. Adherence during construction to provisions of the NPDES permit and in the SWPPP would ensure that potential impacts related to this issue are reduced to a less-than-significant level. c) There are three types of ground failure that could occur within the City of Rancho Cucamonga and Sphere of Influence: liquefaction, differential compaction, and subsidence. As discussed in Response 6a (Hi) above, the proposed project site is not located in an area of the City subject to liquefaction. Differential compaction is the compression in sediments, such as sand or limestone as the weight of structures or features on the soil causes reduction in pore space and forcing out of water. The placement of structures in areas prone to differential compaction may result on cracks in the walls, foundation, and floor of the structures and may compromise the structural soundness and integrity. However, as indicated in the Stockpile Evaluation, the soil that would be placed as fill within the project site is considered non-expansive and suitable for use as structural fill.' Recommendations in the Stockpile Evaluation include the compaction of fill to a minimum 90 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM 1557 test method. Adherence to Mitigation Measure GEO-01 would reduce impacts associated with this issue to a less-than-significant level. Subsidence is the sudden sinking or gradual downward settling of the earth's surface with little or no horizontal motion and is caused by a variety of activities, which include (but are not limited to) withdrawal of groundwater, pumping of oil and gas from underground, the collapse of underground mines, liquefaction, and hydro-compaction. The project does not include the on-site removal of groundwater and no documented subsidence has occurred on site. Minor ground subsidence is expected to occur in the • Stockpile Evaluation for Demens Basin No.! North End of Amethyst Street, Just South of Almond Street, Rancho Cucamonga, California, RGS Engineering Geology,August l I,2008. E & F - 53 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga • Fire Station 177 Page 29 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentiany With Than PP g Significant Maranon Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact soils below the zone of removal due to settlement and machinery working during the • grading phase. However, the actual amount of subsidence is expected to be variable and would be dependent on the type of machinery uses, repetitions of use, and dynamic effect, all of which are difficult to precisely assess. The development of the proposed project would require adherence to the siting, design, and construction standards identified by the City, or in the Uniform Building Code (UBC), and/or applicable geotechnical investigations. Adherence to these standards, as well as Mitigation Measure GEO-01 identified below, would reduce soil stability impacts to a less-than-significant level. GEO-01 A site-specific geotechnical and soils investigation shall be • submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits for the proposed fire station. The investigation shall be prepared by qualified (licensed) engineering geologists and soils engineers and shall address the existing geotechnical/soils condition of the site, suitability of imported soil, development limitations, the limits of soil compaction, and recommendations for the design and construction of structures and facilities. The • geotechnical/soils investigation shall include (but not be limited to) analysis of the following issues: ground shaking, slope stability, subsidence, expansive soils, and erosion. The design and construction of all structures and facilities within the project limits shall be in accordance with the regulations and recommendations identified in the Uniform Building Code, by the. City of Rancho Cucamonga, and/or in a site-specific geotechnical/soils investigation that would be prepared for the proposed project. d) Expansive soils generally have a significant amount of clay particles, which can give up water (shrink) or take on water (swell). The change in volume exerts stress on buildings and other loads placed on these soils. The extent of shrink/swell is influenced by the amount and kind of clay in the soil. The occurrence of these soils is often associated with geologic units having marginal stability. On-site soils consist of Hanford coarse sandy loam, 2-9 percent slopes (HaC) and Tujunga Gravelly Loamy Sand, 0-9 percent (TvC). The Tujunga Gravelly loamy sand covers the majority of the projected site. According to Soil Survey of San Bernardino County, Southwestern Part,' both of these soil types have a low shrink-swell potential. The development of the proposed project would require adherence to the siting, design, and construction standards identified by the City, or in the UBC, and/or applicable geotechnical investigations. Adherence to these standards, as well as previously identified Mitigation Measure GEO-01 would reduce expansive soil impacts to a less-than-significant level. e) The proposed project may include the installation of a septic system to provide wastewater disposal services for the station. To support the use of a septic system, • soils on site must be conducive to subsurface soil treatment and disposal. Prospective t Soil Survey of San Bernardino County, Southwestern Part, California. United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service,January 1980. E & F - 54 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 30 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than pp g Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact soils should be relatively permeable and remain unsaturated to several feet below system depth. Septic tank absorption fields distribute effluent from a septic tank into natural soil. Soil properties that affect absorption must be considered when determining suitability of soils for a septic tank system. Such properties include soil permeability, depth to water table, and susceptibility to flooding. The Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (SARWQCB) controls the installation of private sewage disposal systems in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The installation of a septic system on the project site would be required to adhere to standards and requirements set forth by the SARWQCB, the San Bernardino County Environmental Health Department, and the City of Rancho Cucamonga. In the event that the proposed project decides to go forward with the installation of a septic system instead of connection to the existing sanitary sewer system, implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-02 would reduce impacts • associated with a septic system to a less-than-significant level. f the proposed project decides to go with a connection to the existing sanitary sewer system, Mitigation Measure GEO-02 will not be required. GEO-02 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project proponent shall submit to and receive from the City, an approved design and construction plan for the on-site septic system and appropriate • percolation tests for the on-site septic system. This plan shall provide evidence that the design and construction of the on-site septic system adheres to standards and requirements detailed in the Uniform Plumbing Code (UPC), the San Bernardino County Environmental Health Standards; Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board Permit(s); and/or other design requirements established by the City. • • • E & F - 55 • • • • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 31 • • Less Than Significant Lass Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than PP g Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 7. HAZARDS AND WASTE MATERIALS. Would the project: ( ) () (✓) ( ) a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the ( ) (✓) ( ) ( ) environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of • hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within Ya mile of an existing or proposed school? • d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) hazardous • materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, • would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? • e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, ( ) ( ) (V) ( ) where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an ( ) ( ) (V) ( ) adopted emergency response plan or emergency • evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of ( ) ( ) (✓ ) ( loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Comments: a) The proposed project envisions the construction and operation of a fire station facility, including an aboveground storage tank (AST) for fuel and an emergency generator. Operation of the proposed project would include the storage, dispensing, and use of hazardous materials including, diesel fuel and petroleum products, lubricants, and other automotive fluids. Exposure to hazardous materials during the construction and operation of the proposed on-site uses would result from (1) the improper handling or use of hazardous substances; (2) transportation accidents; or (3) an unforeseen event • (e.g., fire, flood, or earthquake). The severity of any such exposure is dependent upon the type, amount, and characteristic of the hazardous material involved; the timing, location, and nature of the event; and the sensitivity of the individual or environment affected. E & F - 56 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 32 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Nth Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact The transport, storage, and handling of hazardous materials are governed by existing local, State, and Federal regulations, including applicable sections of the California Code of Regulations. The transport and delivery of fuel to ASTs is regulated by the Federal Department of Transportation. Although potentially hazardous materials such as lubricants, solvents, and cleaning products may be used during the course of daily activities at the fire station and would be present on-site, such materials would be present in small quantities. In addition, hazardous wastes produced on site are subject to requirements associated with accumulation time limits, proper storage locations and containers, and proper labeling. For removal of hazardous waste from the site, hazardous waste generators are required to use a certified hazardous waste transportation company, which must ship hazardous waste to a permitted facility for treatment, storage, recycling, or disposal. As with any fire station operation, any on-site activity involving hazardous substances must adhere to applicable local, State, and Federal safety standards, ordinances, or regulations. Compliance with applicable regulations would ensure impacts associated with the use, transport, and storage of hazardous materials would be less-than-significant. No mitigation is required. • b) Potentially hazardous materials such as lubricants, solvents, fuels, and cleaning products may be used during the course of daily activities; therefore, the potential for an accidental release of hazardous materials into the environment is present at the • proposed project site. Because of the amount of potentially hazardous materials such as lubricants, solvents, and cleaning products that would be present at the project site, any hazardous material spill associated with these products is likely to be small and easily contained. However, the proposed project includes the addition of an AST with a capacity of 1,000 gallons for diesel fuel. The fuel in the AST represents a larger quantity of hazardous material in comparison to quantities of such materials found in the surrounding area. In the event of an accident, the on-site presence of an AST could release hazardous materials such as diesel fuel into the environment. Potential fire or explosion impacts could also result secondarily from ignition of spillage, overfilling, leaking or rupture of an AST system's dispenser, piping, and tanks or from a vehicular accident, which could increase the potential for soil and groundwater contamination through a release of diesel fuel. However, internal fire extinguishers would be included in each fuel dispenser. In addition, the proposed AST system would meet currently required fire and safety standards including the use of double-walled fiberglass material for the ASTs and associated piping and industry monitoring • equipment. Furthermore, the diesel storage and delivery system would incorporate leak detection and automatic shutoff equipment. Safety requirements would ensure potential impacts to groundwater or near-surface soils from leaks and spills are unlikely. As previously indicated, the ASTs would be constructed of rupture-resistant fiberglass and would be double-walled for secondary containment. In addition, it is anticipated that the fire station's fueling systems would be equipped with the following safety features: • A Pressure Line Leak Detector (PLLD) would be installed within the fuel system at • the required three gallons per hour sensitivity setting as required by Federal or California code for double-walled piping. Additionally, the use of visual and audible alarms would prevent AST overfill. E & F - 57 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga • Fire Station 177 Page 33 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation 51 cant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • Positive shut down (if either the primary or secondary containment tank walls are compromised, a sensor would shut off the entire product delivery system). • Emergency manual and automatic shut-off systems with audible alarms. • Poppeted breakaway devices on fuel hoses that stop the flow of fuel at both ends of the fuel hose in the event of an accidental drive off. • Phase II vapor recovery system for the fueling nozzles. Mitigation Measures HAZ-01 through HAZ-03 in coordination with State and Federal transportation safety standards would govern the handling of hazardous materials during fire station operations. These standards include procedures to contain, report, and remediate any accidental spill or release of hazardous materials. The handling of hazardous materials in accordance with all mitigation measures and applicable local, State, and Federal standards, ordinances, and regulations would reduce the impacts associated with environmental and health hazards related to an accidental release of hazardous materials to a less-than-significant level. HAZ-01 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project proponent shall • submit detailed plans that comply with the most current AST engineering standards as well as all local, State, and Federal regulations to the City for review and approval. Implementation of these requirements includes (but may not be limited to) the following components: • Installation of the AST by a qualified licensed contractor. • Secondary containment for all AST tanks. • Double-wall vent and vapor lines with crash protection post for vent risers. • Overfill prevention equipment. • A Pressure Line Leak Detector (PLLD) to be installed within . the fuel system and the use of visual and audible alarms would prevent UST overfill. • Positive shut down if either the primary or secondary containment tank walls are compromised; a sensor would shut off the entire product delivery system. • Emergency shut-off systems. • Phase II vapor recovery system for the fueling nozzles. • Testing and monitoring including manual inspection of the • AST system. HAZ-02 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall prepare and submit a project-specific Hazardous Materials Business Plan (HMBP) to the City for approval. The HMBP shall include, but shall E & F - 58 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 34 • Less Than Significant Less entially With cant Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Pot Potemcant Mthen Than No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact not be limited to the aboveground storage tank, related hazardous materials, hazardous wastes, and spillage. The HMBP shall include a Hazardous Materials Inventory (HMI) of hazardous materials stored or handled at the facility as well as Release Response Plan (RRP) for hazardous material emergencies. A copy of the HMBP shall be maintained and be made available for review at the proposed project site. HAZ-03 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project proponent shall prepare and submit a Spill and Emergency Response Plan (SERP) to the City for approval. The SERP shall consider fire response, absorbents for surface leaks, methods, and schedule for removal of • fuel from leaking primary containers, and reporting of a release to the underlying soils or drainage channels. A copy of the SERP shall be maintained and be made available for review at the proposed project site. • c) The nearest schools to the project site are Alta Loma Junior High, which is located approximately one mile south of the proposed project site and Floyd M. Stork • Elementary School, located approximately one mile west of the proposed project site. As the proposed project would not result in hazardous emissions and is not located within one fourth mile of any schools, no impacts associated with this issue are anticipated to occur and no mitigation is required. d) The Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC) does not identify the proposed project site on its Hazardous Waste and Substance Site (Cortese) List.' Based on a visual survey of the project site, no obvious indicators of The presence of hazardous materials and/or substances (e.g., drums, stained soil) were identified. Because the project site is not identified as being on a hazardous materials site, no impacts associated with this issue are anticipated to occur and no mitigation is required. e) The nearest public airport to the project site is the Ontario International Airport located approximately 6.5 miles south of the project site. The site is not located within the airport land use plan for this airport or any other airports and is not within 2 miles of a public airport. Thus, a less-than-significant impact associated with aircraft safety would result from project implementation and no mitigation is required. f) The nearest private airstrip to the project site is Cable Airport, located approximately 5.5 miles southwest of the project site. The development of the project site would not result in a safety hazard caused by a private airport. Therefore, no impacts associated with private aircraft safety would occur and no mitigation would be required. g) The proposed project is the construction of a new fire station. The fire station would be designed, constructed, and maintained to comply with applicable, local, regional, State, • • and/or Federal requirements related to emergency access and evacuation plans. The I Department of Toxic Substances Control,EnviroStor Dat abase, httn:!/www_envirostovdtsc.ca.eov/public!,website accessed July 13,2009. E & F - 59 • • • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga • Fire Station 177 Page 35 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact fire station building would be designed to accommodate all emergency equipment required for use at the fire station. When completed, the proposed project would provide improved emergency response to structures nearby. Construction activities, which may temporarily restrict vehicular traffic, would be required to implement adequate and appropriate measures to facilitate the passage of persons and vehicles through/around any required road closures. The City's Multi-Hazard Disaster Plan, which is updated every two years, includes policies and procedures to be administered by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District in the event of a disaster. Additionally, the • project includes at least two points of public street access and is required to comply with all applicable City codes, including local fire ordinances. Adherence to applicable requirements would reduce potential impacts related to emergency response to a less-than-significant level and no mitigation is required. h) The City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan identifies and categorizes structural and wildland fire threat based upon probability of occurrence and consequence if a fire occurs. The parameters for probability include topography, structures, density of structures, fire protection systems, roofing materials, fire history, fuel type, and arrangement. As identified by the City's General Plan, the project site would be in an • area of high probability and low consequence. Therefore, as the consequences of a potential wildland fire are low in the project area and the project proposes a fire station that would be strategically placed to assist in the prevention of urban/wildland fires, less-than-significant impacts resulting from wildland fires would result from project implementation and no mitigation is required. • • • I Exhibit V-7 Fire Risk Assessment. City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan,November 2001. E & F - 60 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 36 LB55 Than • Significant Less • Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • 8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: O (7) O ( ) a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere ( ) ( ) (7) ( ) substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on site or off site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) • site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on site or off site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ( ) (✓) O O g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures ( ) ( ) (7) ( ) that would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Expose people or structures to inundation by seiche, ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) tsunami, or mudflow? • Comments: a) Water and sewer service is provided by the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD). Project is designed to connect to existing water and sewer systems. • The State of California is authorized to administer various aspects of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit under Section 402 of the Clean Water Act. The General Construction Permit treats any construction E & F - 61 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 37 • Less Tfian Significant Less • Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than pp 9 Significant t Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact activity over 1 acre as an industrial activity, requiring a permit under the State's General NPDES permit. The State Water Resource Control Board (SWRCB) through the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), Santa Ana Region, administers these permits. Construction activities covered under the State's General Construction permit include removal of vegetation, grading, excavating, or any other activity for new development or significant redevelopment. Prior to commencement of construction of a project, a discharger must submit a Notice of Intent (NOI) to obtain coverage under the General Permit. The General permit requires all dischargers to comply with the following during construction activities, including site clearance and grading: • Develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that would specify Best Management Practices (BMPs) that would prevent construction pollutants from contacting storm water and with the intent of keeping all products of erosion from moving off-site into receiving waters. • Eliminate or reduce non-storm water discharges to storm sewer systems and other waters of the nation. • • Perform inspections of all BMPs. Waste discharges include discharges of storm water and construction project discharges. A construction project for new development or significant redevelopment requires an NPDES permit. Construction project proponents are • required to prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). To comply with the NPDES, the project's construction contractor will be required to prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) during construction activities, and a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for post-construction operational management of storm water runoff. The applicant has submitted a WQMP, prepared by Dan Guerra & Associates dated August 3, 2009, that identifies Best Management Practices (BMPs) to minimize the amount of pollutants, such as eroded soils, entering the drainage system after construction. Runoff from driveways, roads and other impermeable surfaces must be controlled through an on-site drainage system. BMPs include both structural and non-structural control methods. Structural controls used to manage storm water pollutant levels include detention basins, oil/grit separators, and porous pavement. Non-structural controls focus on controlling pollutants at the source, generally through implementing erosion and sediment control plans, and various business plans that must be developed by any businesses that store and use hazardous materials. Practices, such as periodic parking lot sweeping can substantially reduce the amount of pollutants entering the storm drain system. The following mitigation measures would be required to control additional storm water effluent: • Construction Activities: 1. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the permit applicant shall submit to Building. Official for approval, Storm Water Pollution Prevention E & F - 62 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 38 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with •Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Plan (SWPPP) specifically identifying Best Management Practices • (BMPs) that shall be used on-site to reduce pollutants during construction activities entering the storm drain system to the • maximum extent practical. 2. An erosion control plan shall be prepared, included in grading plan, and implemented for the • proposed project that identifies specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion from the time ground disturbing activities are initiated through completion of grading. This erosion control plan shall include the following measures at a minimum: a) Specify the timing of grading and construction to minimize soil exposure to rainy periods experienced in southern California, and b) An inspection and maintenance program shall be included to ensure that any erosion which does occur either on-site or off-site as a result of this project will be corrected through a remediation or restoration program within a specified time frame. 3. During construction, temporary berms such as sandbags or gravel dikes must be used to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site when there is rainfall or other runoff. • 4. During construction, to remove pollutants, street cleaning will be performed prior to storm events and after the use of water trucks to control dust in order to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site. • Post- Construction Operational: 5. The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality Management Plan prepared by Dan Guerra & Associates dated • August 3, 2009 to reduce pollutants after construction entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 6. Landscaping plans shall include provisions for controlling and minimizing the use of fertilizers/pesticides/herbicides. Landscaped areas shall be monitored and maintained for at least two years to ensure adequate coverage and stable growth. Plans for these areas, including monitoring provisions for a minimum of two years, shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. b) Water to the project site would be provided by Cucamonga Valley Water District • (CVWD). The CVWD's water source comes from a blend of local groundwater sources (Cucamonga and Chino groundwater basins) surface water (local canyons and tunnels along the San Bernardino Mountains), and imported water (State Water Project). On E & F - 63 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 39 •• Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than PP 9 Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact average the CVWD receives 48 percent of its water from groundwater supplies, 16 percent from surface water supplies, and the remaining 36 percent from imported water supplies.' The project site is underlain by the Cucamonga sub-basin of the Upper Santa Ana Valley groundwater basin, which encompasses approximately 9,530 acres. The installation of impermeable surfaces associated with the proposed project would incrementally reduce the amount of land available for groundwater recharge; however, when compared with the groundwater basin's total recharge area of 9,530 acres, the loss of permeable area on the approximately 1.1-acre project site is insignificant. In addition, the proposed project would not install wells on the project site that would result in the depletion of groundwater supplies. For these reasons,. the conversion of the project site from a flood control basin to a developed site would not • result in significant impacts associated with groundwater recharge or supplies. As such, impacts associated with groundwater supplies and groundwater recharges are • considered to be less-than-significant and no mitigation is required. c—e) The project would cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and amount of surface water runoff within the immediate vicinity of the station due to the amount of new building and hardscape proposed on site. However, the project would . not alter the course of any stream or river. Approvals of drainage • features/improvements are made through the plan check process. As part of this process, all project-related drainage features would be required to meet the City's Public Works Department standards. The installation of project-related storm drain systems would occur within an existing urbanized area and the on-site storm drain system would be designed, installed, and maintained per Public Works Department standards. Therefore, all runoff would be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to handle the flows. Because the project would be required to design and install drainage systems according to standards and provisions set forth by the City, impacts related to this issue are anticipated to be less-than-significant and no mitigation is required. f) Grading activities associated with the construction period could result in a temporary increase in the amount of suspended solids in surface flows during a concurrent storm event, thus resulting in surface water quality impacts. The site is for new development or significant redevelopment; therefore, is required to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) to minimize water pollution. The following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 1) Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit to the City Building Official for approval of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), including a project description and identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on-site to reduce pollutants into the storm drain system to the maximum extent • practicable. The WQMP shall identify the structural and non-structural measures consistent with the Guidelines for New Development and • • Cucamonga Valley Water District website,http: 'www.ecwdwater.convindex.aspx?page=138,site accessed July 13,2009. E & F - 64 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 40 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than pP 9 Significant Mitigora Significant Na Impact Incorporated d Impact Impact Redevelopment adopted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in June 2004. 2) Prior to issuance of grading or paving permits, applicant shall obtain a Notice of Intent (NOI) to comply with obtaining coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Storm Water Permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Evidence that this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Discharger's Identification Number) shall be submitted to the City Building Official for coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit. g—h) The majority of the annual rainfall in the region occurs in the winter. Flooding in the City would typically result from intense. storms resulting in rapid runoff. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) identify areas subject to flooding during the 100-year storm' and 500-year storm event. Based on these FIRM maps3 and the City's General Plan,4 the project site is located within a 100-year flood hazard area and is designated as Zone A. Although the project • site is currently identified as being located within a 100-year flood hazard area, the basin in which the project site is located would be reclaimed by the San Bernardino County Flood Control District. Once reclaimed, the basin and therefore the project site's final elevation would be out of the 100-year floodplain. This higher final elevation would reduce the potential for on-site flood hazards by raising the project above and out of the 100-year floodplain. Additionally, development within flood hazard zones is required to comply with provisions of Chapter 19.12 (Floodplain Management Regulations) of the City's Municipal Code; thus, impacts associated with the 100-year flood hazard area are considered less-than-significant and no mitigation is required. i) The Rancho Cucamonga area is flood-protected by an extensive storm drain system designed to convey a 100-year storm event. The system is substantially improved and provides an integrated approach for regional and local drainage flows. This existing system includes several debris dams and levees north of the City, spreading grounds, concrete-lined channels, and underground storm drains.5 Additionally, the project site is not located within an area that would be subject to flooding in the event of dam or a levee failure.6 As such, no impacts associated with flood hazards attributed to dams or levees would occur and no mitigation is required. 2 The term"100-year"is a measure of the size of the flood,not how often it occurs.The"100-year flood"is a flooding event that has a one percent chance of occurring in any given year. 3 Federal Emergency Management Agency[FEMAj Flood Insurance Rate Map 06071 C7890 F dated March 18, 1996. ° Exhibit V-5 Flood Hazards,City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan,November 2001. 5 Exhibit V-6 "Existing Storm Drainage Facilities, City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan,November 2001. • 6 Hazard Overlays, San Bernardino County Land Use Plan, httpliwww.eo.san- bern ardino.ca.us!landuseservices!General%20PIan%20Undate/Mappin,!2-Hazard%200verlays%20Maps/FH2Oa ndf, • website accessed July 13,2009. E & F - 65 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga • Fire Station 177 Page 41 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact j) There are no oceans, lakes, or reservoirs near the project site; therefore, impacts from • seiches and tsunamis are not anticipated. The Rancho Cucamonga area sits at the base of the steep eastern San Gabriel Mountains whose deep canyons were cut by mountain streams. Numerous controls have been constructed to reduce the mudflow impacts to the level of non-significance within the City. This existing system includes several debris dams and levees north of the City and spreading grounds both within and north of the City. With the City's extensive man-made controls to reduce mudflow impacts, impacts associated with this issue are considered less—than-significant. • • • • • • • E & F - 66 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 42 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially U9 Than pp g Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • 9. ' LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or ( ) ( ) (V) ( ) regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, a general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan ( ) ( ) (7) ( ) or natural community conservation plan? • Comments: a) The physical division of an established community typically refers to the construction of a physical feature (such as an interstate highway or railroad tracks) or removal of a means of access (such as a local road or bridge) that would impair mobility within an existing • • community or between a community and outlying areas. For instance, the construction of an interstate highway through an existing community may constrain travel from one • side of the community to another; similarly, such construction may impair travel to areas outside of the community. The project site is designated "Flood Control/Utility Corridor" while the surrounding area is designated "Very Low Density Residential" by the City's General Plan.' The project vicinity is characterized by residential development to the north, south, west, and east. Residential uses are located to the north between the proposed site and Hillside Road, as well as farther north of Hillside Road. Adjacent to the project site to the west is a flood control channel. Residential neighborhoods are present to the west (beyond the flood control channel) and to east (across Hellman Avenue). Land uses to the south are residential, including a newly developing cul-de-sac (loamosa Court) adjacent to the project's southern boundary. Two houses are currently completed on loamosa Court, one adjacent to the project's southern boundary and the other across loamosa Court, on the south side of the street. Residential uses are also present farther to the south. Implementation of the proposed project would result in the development of a fire station facility on a site that is currently utilized as a flood control basin. The proposed project would not physically divide, disrupt, or interfere with the mobility of an established community. In addition, the proposed project would result in the development of a public facility with amenities that would allow the project to blend in with the surrounding community through the use of architectural features and landscaping. Therefore, impacts associated with this issue are considered to be less-than-significant and no mitigation is required. b) The flood control basin in which the project site is located is zoned and designated by • the City of Rancho Cucamonga's Development Code and General Plan as "Very Low Residential" (fewer than two dwelling units per acre) and "Flood Control/Utility Corridor." I Exhibit 111-1 Land Use Plan, City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update,November 2001. E & F - 67 • • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga • Fire Station 177 Page 43 Less Than Significant Less P°'Bnpa With Than and Supporting Information Sources: Significant Mitigation Impact Incorporated Imp act Impact According to Section 17.08.030 (Use Regulations for Residential Districts) of the Development Code, fire stations are allowed with a Conditional Use Permit in a Very Low Residential Zone. Therefore, the proposed fire station project requires a Conditional Use Permit for approval. With approval of a Conditional Use Permit for the proposed project, impacts are considered less-than-significant and no mitigation is required. c) Based on the information contained in the General Plan, the project site is not located within a habitat conservation or natural community plan area or within an area of sensitive biological resources.' Therefore, the development of the proposed project would not conflict with any Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community Conservation Plan and would result in a less-than-significant impact. No mitigation is required. • • Exhibit IV-3 "Sensitive Biological Resources,"City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan,November 2001. E & F - 68 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 44 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Ten Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 10. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? Comments: a—b) As indicated in the City's General Plan,' the project site is not designated as a State Aggregate Resources Area. The proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State. In addition, the proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. As such, no impact related to this issue is anticipated to occur with the implementation of the proposed project and no mitigation is required. • 11. NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in ( ) (✓) ( ) ( ) excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ( ) ( ) (✓) O groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise ( ) (7) ( ) () levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ( ) (✓) ( ) ( ) ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, ( ) ( ) (7) .( ) where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) would the project expose people residing or working in • • the project area to excessive noise levels? • • t Exhibit IV-1 "Regionally Significant Aggregate Resources."City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan,November 2001. E & F - 69 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga • Fire Station 177 Page 45 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than PP 9 Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Comments: a) Potential noise impacts from the proposed project have been analyzed in a noise study conducted for the proposed project.' Sensitive receptors within the project vicinity that may be affected by increased noise levels associated with the proposed project include single-family residences within the vicinity of the project site. Residential uses are located to the north between the proposed site and Hillside Road, as well as farther north of Hillside Road. Adjacent to the project site to the west is a flood control channel. Residential neighborhoods are present to the west (beyond the flood control channel) and to east (across Hellman Avenue). Land uses to the south are residential, including a newly developing cul-de-sac (loamosa Court) adjacent to the project's southern boundary. Two houses are currently completed on loamosa Court, one adjacent to the project's southern boundary, and one across loamosa Court, on the south side of the street. Residential uses are also present farther to the south. These sensitive land uses may be potentially affected by noise generated during construction and operation of the proposed project. Noise standards are identified in Title 17 (Development Code) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code and have been provided in Table E. No operation • or activity may cause the ambient base noise jevels to exceed these standards except identified exemptions, which include emergency equipment, vehicles and devices and temporary construction, maintenance, or demolition activities between the hours of 6:30 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. (except on Sundays and national holidays). Table E: Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Residential Noise Standards Exterior Noise (dBA) Interior Noise (dBA) Maximum-Allowabl'e.Noise 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. 55 dBA 40 dBA 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. 60 dBA . 45 dBA Impulse or Simple Tone.Notse . ..,r. 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. 50 dBA 35 dBA 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. 55 dBA 40 dBA Source: Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code,Title 17, Development Code, Chapter 17.08,Residential District,Section 17.008.080, Performance Standards,Table 17.08.080. Short-term noise increases from the proposed project would be generated during grading and construction activities. These activities would be short-term and would be subject to the construction activity restrictions in the City Code. As identified in Response 11.d, below, construction noise would result in noise levels exceeding the maximum noise level allowed at the closest residences. However, with adherence to Mitigation Measures NOISE-05 through NOISE-09, impacts associated with construction noise would be less-than-significant. • I Noise Impact Analysis, Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177, City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, LSA Associates, Inc. March 2008. E & F - 70 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 46 • Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Issues and Su pp ortin g Information Sources: Sl t Mitigation Significant No Impact Moor-mated Impact Impact In addition, operational noise impacts would occur from station operation, including generator, fire engine, alarm, and siren noise. As indicated in Response 11.c, below, noise generated from these operational uses would result in noise levels exceeding the • maximum noise levels allowed at the closest residences. However, with adherence to Mitigation Measures NOISE-01 through NOISE-04, impacts associated with operational noise would be less-than-significant. b) Vibration refers to groundborne noise and perceptible motion. Groundborne vibration is a concern inside buildings and is rarely perceived as a problem outdoors, where the motion may be discernable but without.the effects associated with the shaking of a building. Building damage from ground vibration is not a factor for normal transportation • sources, with the occasional exception of blasting and pile driving during construction. Typical sources of groundborne vibration are construction activities (e.g., blasting, pile driving, and operating heavy-duty earthmoving equipment), steel-wheeled trains, and occasional traffic on rough roads. Problems with groundborne vibration and noise from these sources are usually localized to areas within approximately 100 feet from the vibration source, although there are examples of groundborne vibration causing interference out to distances greater than 200 feet. When roadways are smooth, vibration from traffic (even heavy trucks) is rarely perceptible. Streets surrounding the • project site are paved, smooth, and unlikely to cause significant groundborne vibration. In addition, the rubber tires and suspension systems of on-road vehicles would make it unusual for on-road vehicles to cause groundborne noise or vibration problems. No such vehicular vibration impacts would occur, resulting in a less-than-significant impact. Groundborne vibration from construction activity would be low to moderate. If heavy construction activities such as pile driving occur at the construction boundary, these activities would be potentially significant and result in community annoyance; however, it is anticipated that no pile driving activities or blasting activities would be required to develop the project site. Because blasting and pile driving activities would not occur during the construction phase, no significant groundborne vibration impacts would occur, rendering vibration impacts to a less-than-significant level. No mitigation is required. c) The proposed project would result in operational noise impacts associated with traffic noise, station alarms, generator noise, parking lot activity noise, fire truck engine noise, and siren noise. Noise generated from the operation of the proposed project would have the potential to increase the ambient noise level in the project vicinity. However, much of the noise associated with the operation of a fire station is short in nature and sporadic, including fire truck engine, alarm, and siren noise. Traffic Noise Levels. Table F provides the existing roadway noise conditions with and without the proposed project. The proposed project is not expected to generate more than 18 daily trips. Future traffic volumes were obtained by applying a 3 percent annual growth rate to existing Hellman Avenue and Hillside Road traffic volumes. These noise levels represent the worst-case scenario, which assumes that no shielding is provided • between the traffic and the location where the noise contours are drawn. E & F - 71 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga • Fire Station 177 Page 47 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than PP g Significant Mitigation Significant No • Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Table F: Existing Condition Traffic Noise Levels Ldn (dBA) 50 feet from Centerline of Outermost Increase in Noise Lane Levels With Project Roadway Segment Without Project With Project (dBA) Hellman Avenue between Wilson Street and Hillside 50.6 50.7 0.1 Road Hillside Road between Beryl 55.7 55.7 0.0 Street and Hellman Avenue Hillside Road between Hellman Avenue and Amethyst 54.9 54.9 • 0.0 Avenue Source:LSA Associates,Inc., March 2008. As identified in Table F, under existing baseline with project conditions, traffic noise levels in the project vicinity would remain similar to those under existing baseline without project conditions. The project-related traffic nbise level increase would range from 0.0 to 0.1 dBA. These noise level increases are much smaller than 3.0 dBA. 'As previously • stated, changes in noise level of 3 dBA or less are not perceptible to the human ear in an outdoor environment. Therefore, since existing and future noise levels would not be significantly increased, impacts associated with this issue are considered to be less-than-significant and no mitigation is required. Table G provides the future year without project noise levels and future year plus project condition noise levels on roads adjacent to the project site. Table G: Future Year Traffic Noise Levels Ldn (dBA) 50 feet from Centerline.of Outermost Increase in Noise Lane Levels With Project Roadway Segment Without Project With Project (dBA) Hellman Avenue between Wilson Street and Hillside 53.2 53.5 0.1 Road Hillside Road between Beryl 58.2 58.3 0.1 Street and Hellman Avenue Hillside Road between Hellman Avenue and Amethyst 57.4 57.5 0.1 Avenue Source:LSA Associates, Inc.,March 2008. Future traffic noise levels along Hellman Avenue and Hillside Road in the project vicinity • would remain at moderate levels. The data in Table G indicate that there would be at most, a 0.1 dBA change in the traffic noise levels associated with implementation of the project. As stated previously, changes in noise level of 3 dBA or less are not perceptible to the human ear in an outdoor environment; therefore, the proposed project would not E & F - 72 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 48 • • Less Than • Significant Less Potentially With Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Significant ate Significant Impact Incorporated im aact Impa G result in a significant traffic noise impact associated with exceeding existing noise standards and no mitigation is required. On-Site Traffic Noise. The proposed fire station would have a day room (kitchen, training, dining, lounge area, etc.) and dorm rooms that would potentially be exposed to traffic noise from Hellman Avenue. Because there is no final decision on the exact location of the fire station on the project site, as a worst-case impact analysis scenario, it is assumed that the fire station would be located along Hellman Avenue and adjacent to the existing residences to the north. Based on this assumption, the proposed fire station building would be approximately 120 feet from the centerline of Hellman Avenue and • living quarters within the station would be exposed a traffic noise of 50 dBA Ldn. Typical construction standards (for walls, doors, and windows) for southern California buildings would provide more than 20 dBA in exterior-to-interior noise reduction with windows closed and 12 dBA or more with windows open (national average is 25 dBA with windows closed and 15 dBA with windows open). With windows closed, interior noise levels in the living area would be 30 dBA Ldn or lower; thus, no building facade upgrades would be required. With windows open, the interior noise in the living area would also be below the 45 dBA Ldn standard (i.e., 50 dBA — 12 dBA = 38 dBA). Therefore, impacts associated with on-site traffic noise are considered less-than-significant and no mitigation measures are required. • Station Alarm Noise. Temporary or periodic noise increases during operation of the fire station would include station alarm noise, which could result in the exposure of persons to noise levels in excess of standards. Operational noise impacts associated with the operation of the alarm would be significant and could affect noise-sensitive receptors (such as residences) adjacent to the fire station. The proposed fire station would be expected to have two to three emergency calls per day. Station alarms would be sounded internally and fire personnel would carry pagers or, if they are outside, a Handi-Talkie to alert them of an impending call. The use of station alarms could generate noise levels reaching 90 dBA Lmax at a distance of 50 feet. Assuming the worst-case scenario for the fire station location on the project site, the closest distance to the residences to the north or south would be less than 50 feet. The alarm is used inside the fire station building and when projected out to the nearest residences to the north and south, the noise would be attenuated by a minimum of 12 dBA. In addition, the 6- foot-high concrete block wall proposed around the perimeter of the project site would reduce the alarm noise by another 5 dBA. The alarm noise would be reduced to 73 dBA Lmax at the nearest residences to the north and south. This range of exterior noise levels is higher than the City's maximum allowable nighttime noise standard of 50 dBA for residential uses (see Section 17.08.080, Performance Standards, of the City's Development Code) and is a significant impact, requiring mitigation. Inside these nearest residences, with windows and doors closed, the alarm noise would be reduced to 49 dBA Lmax or lower, which is higher than the City's standard of 40 dBA. Implementation of Mitigation Measures NOISE-01 and NOISE-02 would reduce impacts associated with station alarm noise to a less-than-significant level. • • E & F - 73 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 49 • Less Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than PP 9 Significant Incorporated Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact NOISE-01 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project building contractor shall provide to the City Planning Department and receive approval of site plans, which include a 6-foot-high concrete block wall along the project's north, west, and south boundaries. The 6-foot-high concrete block wall shall meet all requirements as determined by the City's Planning Department. NOISE-02 Prior to building occupancy, the project applicant shall install . internal and external warning lights instead of audible station alarms. They shall be placed in appropriate places (as agreed upon by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department) as well as inside the fire station. Generator Noise. Emergency generators would be used during testing periods for approximately half an hour once a week and during crises, such as power outages. As part of the project design, emergency generators would be placed in enclosures to decrease noise impacts. For the proposed project, the generators would be located at the northwest corner of the project site, enclosed by a 6-foot-high concrete block wall, which has been incorporated as Mitigation Measure NOISE-03. Noise levels associated with generators on site could reach 80 dBA Lmax at a distance of 50 feet. Because of the height of these generators, the 6-foot-high concrete block enclosure would reduce the generator noise by a minimum of 10 dBA. The generator would be approximately 50 feet from the residences to the north and receive no additional noise reduction when compared with the source noise level measured at 50 feet. Thus, exterior noise associated with the generator would be reduced to 70 dBA Lmax at the nearest residences to the north without the perimeter wall. Inside these nearest residences, with windows and doors closed, the generator noise would be reduced to 46 dBA Lmax or lower without the perimeter wall. However, as part of the project, a 6-foot-high concrete block perimeter wall would be constructed on the project's north, west, and south boundaries. This perimeter wall would provide a minimum of 5 dBA noise reduction for residences to the north. With the perimeter wall, the exterior noise associated with the generator would be reduced to 65 dBA Lmax at the nearest residences to the north. Interior noise levels would be reduced to 41 dBA Lmax at the nearest residences to the north. The noise associated with the generator would exceed the maximum allowable nighttime exterior and interior noise standards and daytime exterior standards for residential uses. However, as previously stated, the emergency generators would only be used half an hour once a week (for testing periods) and during emergency situations. It is anticipated that the testing periods for the generators would only occur during the daytime and would therefore not impact nighttime noise levels except in emergency conditions that warrant the use of the generators. To ensure that the generators are tested only during the daytime, Mitigation Measure NOISE-04 has been identified. With adherence to • Mitigation Measure NOISE-04, nighttime exterior and interior noise levels would not be exceeded. Despite limiting generator testing to the daytime, generator associated noise would still result in the exceedance of daytime exterior noise levels by 5 dBA. However, E & F - 74 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 50 • Less Than SigNficant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact the City's Development Code Performance Standards state that any mechanical device, apparatus, or equipment used, related to, or connected with emergency machinery, vehicles, work, or warning alarms or bells is exempt from the provisions of Section 17.08.080 of the Development Code Performance Standards. Based on these reasons, impacts associated with this issue are considered to be less-than-significant with adherence to Mitigation Measures NOISE-03 and NOISE-04 and applicable City regulations. NOISE-03 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall provide to the City Planning Department and receive approval of site plans which include an enclosure surrounding the generator which meets City planning requirements and attenuates sounds levels by 6 dBA. NOISE-04 Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits, the project applicant shall provide evidence to the City Planning Department that routine generator testing shall only occur between the hours of 7 a.m. and 10 p.m. Parking Lot Activity Noise. The proposed fire station would have a parking lot for station • staff on the west side of the site as well as a public parking lot on the south side, with driveways on the Hellman Avenue and Rancho Street. Noise generating events at the parking lot would be intermittent in nature, and usually of a very shod duration, lasting a few seconds. The combination of the intermittent activities, even over the course of a day, does not add up to a significant amount of time. Based on the preliminary site plan, the shortest distance from the existing residences to the nearest driveway/parking area is approximately 35 feet. Existing residences would also be separated by a 6-foot-high concrete block wall. This concrete block wall would provide a minimum of 5 dBA noise reduction for residences to the north. Passenger vehicle movement noise in the parking lots for the proposed fire station would result in a maximum noise level of 75 dBA Lmax at 50 feet. Based on the above discussion, with the 5 dBA noise reduction provided by the 6-foot-high concrete block wall, vehicle movement noise would be reduced to below 73 dBA Lmax at the nearest residences to the north or south. This range of maximum noise levels is comparable to maximum (Lmax) noise generated by vehicular traffic on Hellman Avenue. Therefore, no significant noise impacts from on-site parking lot activity are expected. Fire Truck Engine and Siren Noise. The proposed project would implement a "quiet station" design, eliminating outside speakers, horns, and bells. Alarms would be sounded internally, and fire personnel would carry pagers or, if they are outside, a Handi-Talkie.1 Flashing lights or buzzers, rather than sirens, would be used when appropriate. Sirens would be necessary to protect the public; however, those operating the fire response vehicles would use the warning sirens only when considered crucial. For example, if there were not a significant amount of traffic on Hellman Avenue, the fire • response equipment would pull out and leave the site, and not turn on the sirens unless necessary to alert the public. The proposed project would include an apparatus room, An HT(short for"Handi-Talkie")is a handheld low-powered ham radio. E & F - 75 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 51 • Less Than Significant Less • Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially witn Than PP g significant Mitigation significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact which would house firefighting vehicles and supporting maintenance spaces. The maintenance spaces would include maintenance and storage for vehicles and equipment (e.g., fire extinguishers, self-contained breathing apparatus, protective clothing, hoses, and firefighting agents). Sound-absorbing technologies, such as acoustic tiles, would be included in its design, thereby reducing somewhat the diesel engine start-up noises. Noise levels associated with sirens and diesel engines could generate noise levels reaching 110 dBA Lmax at a distance of 50 feet. When projected out to residences adjacent to the project site, noise levels from fire truck operations would exceed the City's allowable maximum noise level standards. However, noise associated with sirens and fire trucks would be short in nature and sporadic generally lasting a few minutes. In addition, the City's Development Code Performance Standards state that any mechanical device, apparatus, or equipment used, related to, or connected with emergency machinery, vehicles, work, or warning alarms or bells is exempt from the provisions of Section 17.08.080 of the Development Code Performance Standards. Although noise associated with sirens and fire truck engines are exempt from City standards, the proposed project would implement a "quiet station" design which would utilize sirens, speakers, horns, or bells only during crucial and necessary settings as • previously discussed and identified in Mitigation Measure NOISE-02. Therefore, impacts associated with fire truck engine and siren noise are less-than-significant. Project implementation would result in the generation of noise levels that would potentially exceed City noise standards for the nearest residences. However, the implementation of Mitigation Measures NOISE-01 through NOISE-04 would reduce all noise impacts with the exception of siren noise to a less-than-significant level. Siren • noise is exempt from the provisions of Section 17.08.080 of the Development Code Performance Standards. As such, all impacts associated with this issue are considered to be less-than-significant. d) Short-term noise impacts generated from grading activities and construction equipment as well as noise generated from workers' vehicles would contribute to a temporary increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project site. Construction Traffic. Construction crew commutes and the transport of construction equipment and materials to the project site would incrementally increase noise levels on access roads leading to the site. There would be a relatively high single-event noise exposure potential, at a maximum of 87 dBA Lmax at 50 feet from passing project construction vehicles. A noise level increase of 3 dBA is barely perceptible to most • people, and as construction traffic noise associated with the project would result in a less than 1.0 dBA increase, short-term construction-related impacts associated with worker commute and construction equipment transport to the project site would result in a less-than-significant impact on noise-sensitive receptors along the access routes. • Construction Equipment. Noise levels from grading and other construction activities for the proposed project may range up to 91 dBA Lmax at the closest residential uses to the north or south of the project site for very limited times when construction occurs at the E & F - 76 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 52 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentialy with Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • boundary of the project site. Table H lists typical construction equipment noise levels recommended for noise impact assessments, based on a distance of 50 feet between the equipment and a noise receptor (e.g., residences). Typical noise levels range up to . 91 dBA Lmax at 50 feet during the noisiest construction phases. The site preparation phase tends to generate the highest noise levels because the noisiest construction equipment is earthmoving equipment. Earthmoving equipment includes excavating machinery such as bulldozers, backhoes, front-end loaders, excavators, scrapers, and graders. Typical operating cycles for these types of construction equipment may involve one or two minutes of full-power operation followed by three to four minutes at lower- power settings. Table H: Typical Maximum Construction Equipment Noise Levels (Lmax) Range of Maximum Suggested Maximum Sound Levels Sound Levels for Maximum . • Measured (dBA at 50 Analysis (dBA at 50 Sound Level at Type of Equipment feet) • feet) 100 feet (dBA) Pile drivers, 12,000 to 18,000 ft- 81-96 93 87 lb/blow . Rock drills 83-99 96 90 • Jack hammers 75-85 82 76 Pneumatic tools 78-88 85 79 . •Pumps 74-84 80 74 Bulldozers 77-90 85 79 Scrapers 83-91 87 81 Haul trucks 83-94 88 82 Cranes 79-86 82 76 Portable generators 71-87 80 74 Rollers 75-82 80 74 Tractors 77-82 80 74 Front-end loaders 77-90 86 . 80 Hydraulic backhoe 81-90 86 80 Hydraulic excavators 81-90 86 80 Graders 79-89 86 80 Air compressors 76-89 86 80 Trucks 81-87 86 80 Source: Noise Control for Buildings and Manufacturing Plants,Bolt.Beranek&Newman 1987. Construction of the proposed project is expected to require the use of excavators, bulldozers, and water and pickup trucks. Noise typically associated with the use of construction equipment is estimated between 77 and 91 dBA Lax at a distance of 50 feet • from the construction effort for the grading phase. As illustrated in Table H, the maximum noise level generated by each scraper on-site is 87 dBA Lmax at 50 feet from the scraper. • Each bulldozer would generate 85 dBA Lmax at 50 feet. The maximum noise level E & F - 77 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga • Fire Station 177 Page 53 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than pp 9 Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact generated by water and pickup trucks is approximately 86 dBA Lmax at 50 feet from these vehicles. Each doubling of the sound sources with equal strength increases the noise level by 3 dBA. Assuming that each piece of construction equipment operates as an individual . noise source, the worst-case composite noise level during this phase of construction would be 91 dBA Lmax at a distance of 50 feet from an active construction area. As these noise sources are point sources, the noise decreases at a rate of 6 dB per doubling of distance. The nearest residences are located to the north and south of the project site along Hellman Avenue. These residences are less than 50 feet from the project boundary and may be subjected to short-term noise reaching 91 dBA Lmax intermittently generated by construction activities on site, based on the suggested maximum noise levels in Table H. Construction-related noise impacts of the proposed project would exceed the noise standards established by the City for residential uses, requiring mitigation measures. To minimize the impact of the construction noise on residences adjacent to the project area, compliance with the City's Noise Control Ordinance and Mitigation Measures NOISE-05 through NOISE-09 are required to reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level. NOISE-05 During all site excavation and grading on the project site, the project • contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers consistent with manufacturers' standards. NOISE-06 The project contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive receptors nearest the project site. NOISE-07 The construction contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that would create the greatest distance between construction- related noise sources and the nearest noise-sensitive receptors during all project construction. NOISE-08 During all project site construction, the construction contractor shall adhere to the City's standards, which includes limiting construction activities to the hours of 6:30 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. No construction activities shall occur outside of these hours'or on Sundays and national holidays. NOISE-09 Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120-D, as measured at the property line. Developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly noise level monitoring as specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120. Monitoring.at other times may be required by the Building Official. Said consultant shall report his or her findings to . the Building Official within 24 hours; however, if noise levels exceed • the above standards, then the consultant shall immediately notify the Building Official. If noise levels exceed the .above standards, then construction activities shall be reduced in intensity to a level of compliance with above noise standards or halted. E & F - 78 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 54 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentany wth Than Significant rption Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact With implementation of Mitigation Measures NOISE-05 through NOISE-09, potential short-term noise impacts resulting from the construction of the proposed project would be reduced to a less-than-significant level. e) The proposed project site is located approximately 6.5 miles north of Ontario International Airport. The project site is not located within the airport land use plan for the Ontario International Airport and is not within 2 miles of any public airport. Therefore, the proposed project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels associated with airport land uses. A less-than- significant impact would occur and no mitigation is required. f) The project site is located approximately 5.5 miles northeast of Cable Airport, the nearest private airstrip. Due to the distance of the nearest private airstrip, the development of the project would not result in the exposure of persons working or residing in the area to excessive noise levels from a private airstrip. Therefore, a less-than-significant impact associated with this issue would occur and no mitigation is required. 12. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: • a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Comments: a) The proposed project consists of the construction of a fire station. The construction of the fire station would not provide for residential opportunities to the existing population. Construction activities at the project site would be short-term and would not attract new employees to the area. As the proposed project is a fire station, it would have a limited number of employees and would not create a significant demand for additional housing. While the proposed project would provide additional public services, it would provide public services to a developed area that is already receiving services from the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. It would not extend the area of service coverage but would result in shorter travel times to emergency calls for the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. As the project does not include the development of large employee- generating uses or residential units, nor does it extend the area of service coverage for fire protection services, development of the project would not induce substantial • population growth in the area. As such, impacts are considered less-than-significant and no mitigation is required. E & F - 79 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 55 • Less Than -Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Patentauy With Than Significant rption Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact b) The project site was formerly used as a detention basin by the San Bernardino County Flood Control District (SBCFCD) and it is currently vacant. As there are no existing housing units on-site, there would be no displacement of existing housing. Therefore, no impacts associated with this issue would result from project implementation and no mitigation is required. c) Since there are no existing housing units on the project site, no people would be displaced and require the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. No impact associated with this issue would occur. 13. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in • substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or • • other performance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (') b) Police protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) c) Schools? O O O (✓) d) Parks? O O O (✓) e) Other public facilities? ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) Comments: a) The proposed project would be designed and constructed per applicable fire prevention/protection standards, including the determination of the water supply to meet fire flow requirements. Since the proposed project is the construction of a new fire station, impacts associated with the construction and operations of the new fire station are analyzed in this Initial Study. Therefore, no impacts associated with this issue are anticipated to occur with the construction and operation of the proposed project and no mitigation is required. b) Additional police protection is not required as the addition of the project would not change the pattern of uses within the surrounding area. The proposed project does not include the construction or operation of any structure that would generate a response need from law enforcement providers. As the project site would be within an area that is regularly patrolled, there would not.be a substantial increase in property to be patrolled. • The proposed project would not require the construction of new facilities to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives. Therefore, no impacts associated with police services would result from project implementation and no mitigation is required. E & F - 80 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 56 • Less Than Significant Less Potentially was Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact ,Incorporated Impact Impact c) The project site is located in a developed area currently served by the Alta Loma School District.' The project site is within the attendance boundary for Stork Elementary School and Alta Loma Junior High School. However, since the proposed project is a fire station, no children would reside at the proposed project, which would result in no demands for school services. Since the project would not generate a demand for additional school services and because the proposed project does not include a residential component, it would not cause an increase in population for the area. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impacts on existing school capacity and student ratios and no mitigation is required. d) Park facilities in the vicinity of the project site include Heritage Community Park, located approximately 0.2 mile west of the project site. Amenities at this facility includes picnic tables, barbecue areas, basketball courts, three softball/baseball fields, two soccer fields, an equestrian facility, and associated infrastructure. The proposed project would not generate a demand for park use, as it is not a residential development. Employees for the fire station are already living within the area, so there would be no population increase associated with the proposed project. Because the proposed project would not result in an increased usage of area parks or the need to construct new park facilities, no impacts associated with this issue are anticipated to occur and no mitigation is required. • e) The site is in a developed area, currently served by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The project would not require the construction of any new facilities or alteration of any existing facilities or cause a decline in the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new facilities. Therefore, no impacts associated with this issue would result from project implementation and no mitigation is required. 14. RECREATION. Would the project: a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b). Include recreational facilities or require the ( ) ( ) ( ) (• ) construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Comments: • a—b) Park facilities in the vicinity of the project site include Heritage Community Park, located approximately 0.2 mile west of the project site. Amenities at this facility includes picnic tables, barbecue areas, basketball courts, three softball/baseball fields, two soccer fields, an equestrian facility, and associated infrastructure. Since the proposed project is a fire station, the proposed project would not generate a demand for park use, as it is not • a residential development. In a similar manner, the construction of the proposed project I Alta Loma School District Boundary Map, Alta Lorna School District website, 1m)://www.alsd.1:12.ca.uslaboutialsdboundarymap.pdf,website accessed July 13,2009. E & F - 81 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 57 • s man Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with man PP ortin g Les , Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • would not require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities in the area as the proposed project would provide a public service and not result in additional demand on recreational facilities. Therefore, no impacts associated with this issue would occur with development of the proposed project and no mitigation is required. 15. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: a) " Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in ( ) ( ) (✓ ) O relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in • either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or• congestion at intersections)? • b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) • • either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature ( ) (V) ( ) ( ) (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? • e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? Comments: a) Roads in the vicinity of the project are primarily utilized by residents traveling to and from home. The City's General Plan Draft EIR identifies roads within the City that are operating at a deficient level of service (LOS). None of the intersections within the project vicinity is identified as operating at a deficient LOS.' With an anticipated three firefighters working per shift, vehicle trips generated by firefighters and administrative staff commuting to and from work would not constitute a significant increase in vehicle trips. Trips generated by fire protection vehicles would vary depending on the number of emergency calls .received. While the actual number of emergency vehicle trips would vary depending on calls received, the proposed fire station is expected to receive an average of two emergency calls per day. Additional non-emergency trips of fire station vehicles are estimated at approximately two round trips per day. Therefore, the number • I 5.5 Traffic and Circulation, City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Draft Environmental Impact Report, Michael Brandman Associates,June 2001. E & F - 82 • • • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 58 • • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially t" Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact of vehicle trips generated by the proposed project would be 18 total trips' and would not constitute a substantial increase in traffic volumes on streets in close proximity. As such, impacts associated with increased traffic are considered to be less-than-significant and no mitigation is required. b) Fire stations do not typically generate a significant amount of traffic. The number of vehicle trips generated by the project would be nominal, since the trips would be limited to approximately 18 trips per day for emergency calls, non-emergency purposes, and employee vehicles. The project's impact on the existing levels of service for the designated roadways would be negligible and would not result in the reduction in LOS on nearby intersections. Therefore, impacts associated with a reduction in LOS are considered less-than-significant and no mitigation is required. c) The proposed project site is located approximately 5.5 miles northeast of Cable Airport and approximately 6.5 miles north of Ontario International Airport. The proposed project is not located within the land use plan for either airport and would not result in a change in air traffic patterns. Thus, no impact to air traffic would result from the implementation of the project.. • d) The proposed project is located on the west side of Hellman Avenue south of • Hillside Road, with the ingress and egress for emergency vehicles onto Hellman Avenue and Rancho Street. The northwestern portion of the City is an equestrian community. Heritage Park, which is located approximately 0.2 mile west of the proposed project site, is heavily utilized by equestrians. Equestrian amenities in the park include an equestrian facility, two arenas, equestrian trail access, and equestrian picnic areas. With equestrian activities in the area centered at Heritage Park, there are equestrian trails throughout the project vicinity which are utilized by those equestrians, including those traveling to and from the park. Hillside Avenue to the north and Wilson Avenue to the south are designated as Community Trails in Exhibit III-13 in the City's General Plan. Community Trails are intended for equestrian and pedestrian users in this portion of the City. In addition to these designated Community Trails, there are other trails in the immediate vicinity of the project site, that are utilized by equestrians, including a trail along the drainage that is adjacent to the west, and a trail adjacent to the southern boundary of the site that continues east of Hellman Avenue. The operation of the fire station would result in the exposure of horses associated with equestrian uses to noise and lights from emergency sirens. Emergency vehicles would not always utilize their sirens when leaving the site because the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District tries to avoid utilizing the sirens in residential neighborhoods. However, in cases when there is heavy traffic on Hellman Avenue or the siren is otherwise necessary to alert drivers, pedestrians, etc., and for safety, the sirens would be used. • I Based on two round trips (or four trips) per day for emergency calls, two round trips (or four trips) per day for non-emergency purposes,and approximately ten trips per day for employee vehicles. E & F - 83 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga • Fire Station 177 Page 59 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than PP 9 Significant Mirgarate Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact There is existing noise occurring in the area from roadway traffic. Horses in the area are already functioning in an urban environment. They are exposed to traffic noise, including people honking their car horns, and are already exposed to occasional police, fire, or ambulance sirens. While every attempt on the part of the fire truck engineer would be made to minimize the use of sirens, it would be necessary in some cases to utilize them. The proposed fire station would conduct a daily siren test. The exposure of equestrians to noise and lights associated with the sirens would occur when three conditions are happening at the same time: an equestrian is present on the trail, an emergency vehicle is leaving the station en route to an emergency call, and conditions on Hellman Avenue require the need for sirens. Given the need for three separate events to occur at once to create an impact, and with an expected average of two to three calls per day for the station, the chances for a conflict to occur are low. Nonetheless, the potential for conflicts between equestrians in the area and the proposed operation of the fire station is a significant impact. Considering that the proposed fire station is located at a distance of approximately 0.2 mile from the equestrian activities and Heritage Park, and the potential for occurrence of conflicts is low due to the need for several events to occur simultaneously, the implementation of mitigation measures TRAN-01 through TRAN-03 would reduce potential impacts to a less-than-significant level. • TRAN-01 Prior to the commencement of operations at the proposed fire station, the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District shall install and maintain signs on the trails in the project area to alert riders of the potential for the departure of a fire engine from the station. The sign shall include text explaining that emergency vehicles would be departing the site, with possible sirens and lights. Signs shall be posted along each trail in the area between Hillside Avenue to the north, Wilson Avenue to the south, Beryl Avenue to the west and Hellman Avenue to the east, and along the trail east of Hellman Avenue that is a continuation of the trail adjacent to the southern project boundary and should be visible to riders within 250 feet of the station boundary or at a' distance that results in a more effective advanced warning. TRAN-02 Prior to the commencement of operations at the proposed fire station, the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District shall offer ' sensitivity training sessions to train horses to become accustomed to fire engine sirens. The Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District shall, at a minimum, provide two training sessions prior to the commencement of operations at the proposed fire station. After commencement of operations at the fire station, the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District shall offer additional sensitivity training at least once a year, every year. • TRAN-03 The Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District shall post notice of daily siren tests, including siren test times and duration, at the entrance to each equestrian trail in the area between Hillside Avenue to the north, Wilson Avenue to the south, Beryl Avenue to the west E & F - 84 • • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 60 • Less Than • • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact and Hellman Avenue to the east, and along the trail. east of Hellman Avenue that is a continuation of the trail adjacent to the southern project boundary. In the event that the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District is unable to conduct the daily siren test at the posted time, the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District shall conduct the test at an off-site location. e) Construction of the proposed project may require the temporary'lane closures/detour of adjacent roadways. If necessary, a traffic control plan conforming to standard City standards would be approved to facilitate traffic flows and eliminate potential safety hazards associated with potential lane closures/detours. Access to adjacent uses would be maintained throughout the construction of the proposed project. Adherence to applicable guidelines delineated by the traffic control plan would reduce potential impacts related to this issue to a less-than-significant level.• f) The Rancho Cucamonga Development Code does not specifically have fire station parking requirements. Since the proposed project is similar to a public utility use, the parking requirements for public utility uses have been utilized for analysis purposes, as indicated in the following excerpt from the Rancho Cucamonga Development Code: 6. Public Utility and Like Uses. Public utility facilities including, but not limited to, • electric, gas, water, telephone and telegraph facilities not having business offices on the premises: one space for every two employees in the largest shift plus one space for each vehicle used in connection with the use. A minimum of two spaces shall be provided for each such use regardless of building space or number of employees.' Utilizing the identified parking standard and assuming three firefighters per shift with two fire vehicles (excluding the fire truck), five parking spaces would be required. The project would provide nine parking spaces for employee parking, four parking spaces for public parking, as well an area for fire emergency vehicles. The project design has adequate parking in compliance with standards of the Rancho Cucamonga Development Code. Therefore, the project would not create an inadequate parking capacity. No impacts are anticipated and no mitigation is required. g) The project design includes, or the project would be conditioned to provide, features supporting transportation and vehicle trip reduction (e.g., bus bays, bicycle racks, or carpool parking). Since the proposed project would be required to adhere to applicable City standards that support and/or facilitate alternative means of transportation, adherence to City alternative transportation requirements would ensure no impact • related to this issue would result from development of the proposed project. No mitigation is required. • • I Subsection 6. Public Utility and Like Uses, Section 17,12,040 Parking Requirements, Chapter 17.12 Parking Regulations, City of Rancho Cucamonga Development Code,June 2007. E & F - 85 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 61 • Less Than Significant Less • Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than PP 9 'Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: ( ) ( ) (✓ ) ( ) a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) stormwater drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) • provider, which serves or may serve the project, that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with Federal, State, and local statutes and ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) regulations related to solid waste? Comments: a) The proposed project would either utilize a septic system for wastewater treatment or connect to the existing sanitary sewer system. The project is required to meet the standards of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board regarding septic systems and any connections to the existing sanitary sewer system. Because the project would comply with the waste discharge prohibitions and water quality objectives established by the RWQCB, impacts related to this issue would be reduced to a. • less-than-significant level and no mitigation is required. b) The proposed project's wastewater treatment would be provided either via an on-site septic system or through a connection to the existing sanitary sewer system. The septic system and the connection to the existing sanitary sewer system would be sized to accommodate flows from the proposed station. All proposed septic systems and connections to an existing sanitary sewer system would be subject to review and approval by the County of San Bernardino Environmental Health Department and the • Regional Water Quality Control Board. The proposed project would result in wastewater • E & F - 86 • • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 62 • • Less Than Significant Less . Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact generation of approximately 270 gallons per day.' In addition, the proposed project is required to meet the standards established by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board regarding wastewater and septic systems. Therefore, impacts associated With this issue would be less-than-significant and no mitigation is required. c) The proposed project would result in an increase in the amount of runoff coming from the project site due to an increase in impervious surfaces. A grading and drainage plan must be approved by the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits to ensure that post-development flows would not create nuisance flows at the project site. .The installation of project-related storm drain systems would occur within an existing urbanized area and the on-site storm drainage system would be designed, installed, and maintained per City standards. Compliance with City requirements, including the preparation of a grading and drainage plan would ensure impacts associated with stormwater drainage facilities remain less-than-significant. d) The project is within the service area of the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD).2 The CVWD has approximately 47,000 water connections and serves a population of approximately 170,000 people within a 47-square mile area. Water for the CVWD is obtained from three water sources: local groundwater, local surface water, and imported • water. On average the CVWD receives 48 percent of its water from groundwater supplies (Cucamonga and Chino groundwater basins), 16 percent from surface water supplies (local canyons and tunnels along the San Bernardino Mountains), and the remaining 36 percent from imported water supplies (State Water Project).3 Information obtained from the City indicates that the proposed fire station is anticipated to use an average of 600 gallons of water per day, with a peak use of 1,200 gallons per day.4 Based on water supply and demand forecasts contained within the CVWD's 2005 Urban Water Management Plan, the future water supply availability is adequate to serve future populations over the next 25 years.5 These supply and demand forecasts are incorporated in Table H. • Table H: CVWD Water Supply and Demand Projections (2005-2030) Water Supply Average Annual Water Demand Surplus/Shortage Year (acre-feet per year') (acre-feet per year) (acre-feet per year) 2005 59,227 55,856 Surplus: 3,371 2010 84,470 65,400 Surplus: 19,070 • 2015 96,780 72,500 Surplus: 24,280 • ' Personal correspondence with Pamela Pane, Management Analyst II, City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, May 8, 2007. 2 Cucamonga Valley Water District Boundary Map, Cucamonga Valley Water District, http://www.cvwdwater.com/index.asox?page=239,site accessed July 13, 2009. 3 Cucamonga Valley Water District website, http://www.ccwdwater.com/index.asox?page=138 , site accessed • July 13, 2009. a Personal correspondence with Pamela Pane, Management Analyst II, City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, May 8, 2007. 5 Cucamonga Valley Water District 2005 Urban Water Management Plan, Cucamonga Valley Water District, htt.://www.sca..ca..ovlrc./.df/uwm./SanBernardino/Cucamon.aValle WD2005UWMP.•df, December 2005. E & F - 87 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 63 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than PP 9 Significant rplion Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Table H: CVWD Water Supply and Demand Projections (2005-2030) Water Supply Average Annual Water Demand Surplus/Shortage Year (acre-feet per year') (acre-feet per year) (acre-feet per year) 2020 103,750 79,500 Surplus: 24,250 • 2025 106,130 86,000 Surplus: 20,130 2030 106,130 86,000 Surplus: 2.0,130 ' An acre-foot is the amount of water necessary to cover one acre of,surface area to a depth of one foot and is approximately 326,000 gallons of water. Source:Cucamonga Valley Water District 2005 Urban Water Management Plan,2005. As indicated in Table H, current and future water supplies of the CVWD would be able to supply the water demanded by the proposed uses. In addition, compliance with the • water service requirements and standards of CVWD and applicable regulations of the City is required to obtain water service. Therefore, impacts associated with this issue are anticipated to be less-than-significant and no mitigation is required. • e) • The proposed project may receive services from a wastewater provider in the event that the proposed project would not include an on-site septic system to provide wastewater treatment. If the proposed project does not include an on-site septic system, the • proposed project is anticipated to be served by the CVWD sewer system, which has waste treated by the Inland Empire Utilities Agency (IEUA) at the RP-4 treatment plant located within Rancho Cucamonga. It is anticipated that the proposed project would result in wastewater generation of approximately 270 gallons per day. Since the wastewater treatment center has sufficient capacity to provide adequate service to the project and because the project is required to comply with the regulations of the Santa Ana RWQCB regarding wastewater, wastewater treatment impacts are less-than-significant. No mitigation is required. f) Solid waste disposal would be provided by the current City contracted hauler who disposes the refuse at a permitted landfill (Mid-Valley Landfill in Rialto). Based on a solid waste generation of 5 pounds per day per 1,000 square feet for public/quasi public uses, the proposed project is anticipated to generate approximately 30 `pounds of waste per day and approximately 10,950 pounds (5.4 tons) of waste per year. The Mid-Valley Landfill has a daily permitted throughput of 7,500 tons per day. The estimated closure date for the Mid-Valley Landfill is in 2033. Development of the proposed project would not significantly impact current operations or the expected lifetime of the landfill. On-site uses would be required to comply with the City and State waste reduction and recycling standards. As such, impacts are considered less-than-significant. g) The proposed project would be required to comply with applicable elements of AB 1327, Chapter 18 (California Solid Waste Reuse and Recycling Access Act of 1991) and other local, state and federal solid waste disposal standards. Because the proposed project is required to adhere to these regulations, no impacts related to this issue are anticipated to occur with implementation of the proposed project and no mitigation measures are • • required. City of Ranch Cucamonga General Plan Update Draft E/R,page 5.9-19. 2 5 pounds per day/1,000 square feet for public uses x 6,000 square feet=30 lbs/day of waste; 30 lbs/day x 365 days/year= • 10,950 Ibs/yr; 10,950 lbs/yr x 1 ton/2000 lbs=5.4 tons/yr. E & F - 88 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 64 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the ( ) ( ) (✓ ) ( ) quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, • • threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number dr restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or • prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually ( ) (7) ( ) ( ) limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) c) Does the project have environmental effects that will ( ) (✓) ( ) ( ) • cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Comments: a) No endangered or threatened species were identified as occurring on the project site. Because of the absence of any sensitive or special status species, the development of the proposed project would not cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels. Because of the nature of surrounding uses, which includes extensive residential development, the development of the proposed on-site uses would not restrict the movement/distribution of a rare or endangered species. No significant cultural, historical, or paleontological resources have been identified within the project limits. Adherence to standard City and State measures related to the discovery, recovery, and/or recordation of cultural resources and/or human remains during construction activities would ensure no significant impact to cultural resources would result from implementation of the proposed project. • b) Pollutant emissions levels are below SCAQMD thresholds; therefore, no cumulatively considerable air quality impacts would occur with project implementation. Other impacts related to geology and soils, noise, and transportation are reduced to a less-than- significant level through the implementation of mitigation measures and the adherence to established City-mandated construction standards. There are no other development projects that, in combination with the proposed project, would create a significant environmental impact associated with aesthetics, air quality, agricultural resources, • biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology, land use and planning, mineral resources, noise, population and • housing, public services, recreation, transportation, and utilities and service systems. Therefore, impacts associated with these issues are less-than-significant. E & F - 89 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 Page 65 • Lass Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than PP g Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact c) . The Initial Study determined that the project would have no impact, less-than-significant impact, or less-than-significant with mitigation incorporated for all sixteen topic areas. As impacts associated with the proposed project would be mitigated to a less-than-significant level, the proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect on human beings. EARLIER ANALYSES Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration per Section 15063(c)(3)(D). The effects identified above for this project were within the scope of, and adequately analyzed in, the following earlier document(s) pursuant to applicable legal standards, and such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. The following earlier analyses were utilized in completing this Initial Study and are available for review in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Department offices, 10500 Civic Center Drive (check all that apply): (T) General Plan FEIR (SCH#2000061027, Certified October 17, 2001) • (T) 2001 General Plan City of Rancho Cucamonga (adopted November,17, 2001) (T) Demens Flood Control Basin Debris Relocation Initial Study, San Bernardino County Department of Public Works. (adopted March 18, 2008) • APPLICANT CERTIFICATION I certify that I am the applicant for the project described in this Initial Study. I acknowledge that I have read this Initial Study and the proposed mitigation measures. Further, I have revised the project plans or proposals and/or hereby agree to the proposed mitigation measures to avoid the 'effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant environmental effects would occur. Applicant's Signature: / SR' Date: 7121101:1 n, Print Name and Title: Peter M. Bryan, Fire Chief, Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District • • E & F - 90 • EXHIBIT APPENDICIES AND SPECIAL STUDIES • (DISTRIBUTED UNDER SEPARATE COVER) E & F - 91 ti! City of Rancho Cucamonga MITIGATION MONITORING i't i �6 PROGRAM Project File No.: DRC2009-00586 AND DRC2009-00720 This Mitigation Monitoring Program(MMP)has been prepared for use in implementing the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the above-listed project. This program . has been prepared in compliance with State law to ensure that adopted mitigation measures are implemented (Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code). Program Components - This MMP contains the following elements: 1. Conditions of approval that act as impact mitigation measures are recorded with the action and the procedure necessary to ensure compliance.The mitigation measure conditions of approval are contained in the adopted Resolution of Approval for the project. 2. A procedure of compliance and verification has been.outlined for each action necessary. This procedure designates who will take action, what action will be taken and when, and to whom and when compliance will be reported. . • 3. The MMP has been designed to provide focused, yet flexible guidelines. As monitoring progresses, changes to compliance procedures may be necessary based upon recommendations by those responsible for the program. Program Management - The MMP will be in place through all phases of the project. The project planner, assigned by the Planning Director, shall coordinate enforcement of the MMP.The project planner oversees the MMP and reviews the Reporting Forms to ensure they are filled out correctly and proper action is taken on each mitigation. Each City department shall ensure compliance of the conditions (mitigation) that relate to that department. Procedures - The following steps will be followed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. , 1. A fee covering all costs and expenses, including any consultants' fees, incurred by the City in performing monitoring or reporting programs shall be charged to the applicant. 2. A MMP Reporting Form will be prepared for each potentially significant impact and its corresponding mitigation measure identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Checklist, attached hereto. This procedure designates who will take action,what action will be taken and when, and to whom and when compliance will be reported. All monitoring and reporting documentation will be kept in the project file with the department having the original authority for processing the . project. Reports will be available from the City upon request at the following address: City of Rancho Cucamonga - Lead Agency Planning Department • 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 E & F - 92 • Mitigation Monitoring Program • DRC2009-00586 AND DRC2009-00720 THE FIRE STATION 177 PROJECT Page 2 • • 3. Appropriate specialists will be retained if technical expertise beyond the City staffs is needed, as determined by the project planner or responsible City department, to monitor specific mitigation activities and provide appropriate written approvals to the project planner. 4. The project planner or responsible City department will approve, by signature and date, the completion of each action item that was identified on the MMP Reporting Form. After each measure is verified for compliance, no further action is required for the specific phase of development. 5. All MMP Reporting Forms for an impact issue requiring no further monitoring will be signed off • as completed by the project planner or responsible City department at the bottom of the MMP Reporting Form. 6. Unanticipated circumstances may arise requiring the refinement or addition of mitigation measures. The project planner is responsible for approving any such refinements or additions. An MMP Reporting Form will be completed by the project planner or responsible City department and a copy provided to the appropriate design, construction, or operational personnel. 7. The project planner or responsible City department has the authority to stop the work of construction contractors if compliance with any aspects of the MMP is not occurring after written notification has been issued. The project planner or responsible City department also has the authority to hold certificates of occupancies if compliance with a mitigation measure attached • hereto is not occurring. The project planner or responsible City department has the authority to hold issuance of a business license until all mitigation measures are implemented. 8. Any conditions (mitigation) that require monitoring after project completion shall be the responsibility of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department. The Department shall require the applicant to post any necessary funds (or other forms of guarantee) with the City. These funds shall be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measure for the required period of time. 9. In those instances requiring long-term project monitoring, the applicant shall provide the City with a plan for monitoring the mitigation activities at the project site and reporting the monitoring results to the City. Said plan shall identify the reporter as an individual qualified to know whether the particular mitigation measure has been implemented. The monitoring/reporting plan shall conform to the City's MMP and shall be approved by the Community Development Director or Planning Director prior to the issuance of building permits. • E & F - 93 t CD t, �� ns_. i il cNs,,,,"4..' ilt7' gi,„...,.''' IT,.,g(s 0 CO Eo 'i t..,, ,; l'ai „C O U 3 y -f wiS ;. .d. fA 2 t:. a m!'"' *a* 1;,...: fj O ' I x' L m dui � a a ? Pe d a xe LL a c i . '�A,� a' lx .. d va 9€ ,Fy r g ` v. 0..rot,C > O £" iw J' o4m_Q 0 O "= U' I :a U c O U A i Y ` O c rw 9z , • a ; Y e' f— R ti a le ."-: : J c d skfi�" ` 'FS c H ca om W £3 t 0 g cv o E rn 2 Z . a .. w _ a E u 'as 1.3 ,y� o i Co0) >, �, s , '),, J c o - Y`,' -. j ot.M O o m a 4 ` m '%.'` in inj N w C s 'r! t7 F� .14 t. Tj kav � z C O .a ' - ti Si"- - O 0 "--71 ' . m ry o yN . Vy aa, 2 } -o 0.° eb s ' ! a''r U O ?as > ml Z •O Q N ` N o rO ` �' :', z s rn£ 0 ?ocmo H _ =7. O me w a H in o c o a n ' a 2 m & *3r d cw a co O J A kW an c dd' . V.- ��' t � o S' - `� ' r c tec o0 * . , - c o y _ a, ,• O ; e a to o C N w O -o a N .. ` c o .o >, ` V — ax �� 1 e. 4 w cps c a N O v ; 5w k A M c ' c o g a e g 11 m ' % 5 co G m w o u ` a a, v CD c at m a o� cit 3 p � d y d 9 m O aQ w4 Bav o y L o r a a 0) We. a Of a •?- d y a 0 w ca • 7 LL c �. re a�w f Yd u0 E. a c •c 5ISI Oep i j ?ti 5' l c o v o c � � w ° d — d ++ rye' O It k — O N c y Q C 0 a 0 Cl)N m I key -3 ' 1 &: '3 q c 'o a .c E m 2 3 m "ii o, .. a, Od m C'!4 a, to c :34 _I 0 . = as c c w •O i+ O. ww@: o IFS; o L.' Oyv0� O "7 ca w C >. a, c O n L. C 2E 'C z 1 k z a< Z mh Z &US 0 0. s n a c o m E & F - 94 .i . CCh• ;i N N �i 3. ki i: rtYer n.,, e y,r t C N C 0 W a E. p O o .> 0 CC o . ;�..� N $1/44,. m m s 4'}`d 0 0 m CO NS '+: N N O)'� _ 'O N N V - 0 0) (0 'O 0 0 0 N 0 0 CO C if;9 t y. y 3 1] y C O O C L L C N f0 n C C , -c -c n N C N -2 co N r3 N 5 � CO E X o c H 0 ° °m o T O = o 3 vi E a E C E r � m a E L O N fa = To o v 5 � > 0 m -°0 N E . C O n d N N `�.•,i @ O a y O) N N CO N N O .N. C .L.. L- 0 en 0 o .0 0 C o I. C L Ev = 0 c ' o f (o c a > noL a0N E y 5; : � mo0).. NOm '� � oa ` .Emo � o � yc ` u, `O a .c o 4,0.,,yy''. U 10 v' Y .L.. _O 0 x in O 'E a(0 C 0 - o c o c ea U N ",pry •C d N � '5 N O C C . o O . U N d ._ a)CD YC009 C UC0oo ° SE0 = t 0o4_ S . d ,tr 5-o m wv U d (p v c m yw N o m . A d Q O C C (0 „L„ iC O co L o C 0_ Y > .O L co c ' L c 'O U r0 o 't d ' .. 45 .E m m � 0 r c a `o o 0 aH C O a o .'i} of W L 0 L E .D 0 cO Y (/i co c L' C U N V U E .o 0_ U C 2 E C fi ..' O H N Ri c - C d ' d 1" L O N C E C 0- V E Y O) r'�1<. U L N C cp� j C O Y O/.L.. 0 0= a s_. C .2 0 = O l9 -O y 0 0 0 O >> N Jf". : w _, ' O C1 C E E U ' N 3 L O co a N N c c >. C Q. > > V i- ..,, ww = o % foaaE2 (00 =9 '0) 3a� � Eo !? � '�°n c.) o� v, EC _ C U N W e , (wt N L O N d U y C my L d = O U N rn L E ca.-0 O O O C L' ! O - 47 w O N > w N T.O_. L U O N .0. .L+ O c t 0 O o C c 0, 0 --g L O 4�-_. (0 C '0 > 7 O •Q @ N H w U 0 O O O T N Y 0 D r 0 0 r! 1!:I1IEu41 :! oihfl:00 01U1II1flL Y �`7 Q•2 N a N sops40mVaaooaEco of ° mo9y0. Odm0Yva01EcEr ($ (W7 L 2L�. Lc' (co ma' .E_ o o o,E 'co ca 0 c I_ U 'w2) O Di) o ° 0 waminaa E & F - 95 , � • Y0 S ' N Ot _;t yp)v{ p.4e '" -tip CU a_ ri., O ' :. 3 "•a; s > a O_ O M le AA. m t 0 . ' y ID RR .c ammm aa) N a � mN a c a x.�' ui 15 -0 'o E c u co o > = C a0i aa)) w I Ecctiaa L � m ° cNOi,:Lr a7 W W 0 N N y' a1 a C C 12 4 , N .3 J N O CL CD * O)d N C w r0 g')., a) � g - ° C e. : c H � � o .� "- D m E = 2 co -5 a) v 0 c . CC •Ear E E '.� a � t� > cE @ — ym � 0. E0 y m i 45 _ ° m E — o O m E ° > .- a c d .Eid CD ai N 5 All a) E c 2 0 a ° a) a) ° E {❑6 trol 0 a m o > c N a dCm co N U O ° N 3 C C C N y N >. > 01 N _ y �o � oo Q E ma) CCi _ � 3 wmC N a f.fk L ° NU N O a) c c ° ° N c 3 y o o f• Y3'(' ,b2 NEm mcu - .@ a�ci 8 o c � E 3 � 1 'Ea) k O C d a) r ° O O > N C J C —co N a E N O 3 O U> — ° > HI as• - O ° L N G O ,3 O O L N c N N ft C a ° .., as 5 0 9 3 0 a 10 a3NCC ' ° m c � �H o „ E To = 2 a NC ° o H9 1flUui ! ' • • • • • • E & F - 96 Is N N O 0 U U N N C C co co EL a O 0 Gam' a) CC M o_ o • m m O O m m G) 0 >. a) '0 aj N O C 5 G) G) 9 `p as O O m C U vi N . 0 0 N 9 d a 19 _ N « C G) C 'p a y co G) a) O ' - O > a N to U p '0_.- a9 t/1 E G) 0-to U L Y N 0° ¢ y G) d U C 9 G) y a G) O C C 0 0 N '0 0_... L_. N �6 0 C v) p d YO G7 > w co G) l0 O1' N .O C �? G7 �. mamma pm � 'BE cEo . co5E0 O N 0 C N j G7 V1 � E @c o3 = Ea) ac 'v) acwaLE *5mn 0 ° Ec0 ® w � mg c2 oCc ccd 'Q: ym " Nymco—0 _ mc_ a cac — yc � � Gi 7 co c cc) c N O N O N 3 - co V = G) - - @ - O co .a) G7 C G) y a CO ..,,CD N N m m a) L 0 L coo E co p N G7 N a G) 0 0 U N G) to p y' , y E a G) L C E ▪ G) To 2 n N - O F O G) $ 0 O W 'C O O Cl.) O a0 L co G) L ^ 0Df G) f0 0 ON N - Ti) a (G CV (p O _ •n, o cot . .E CO NSY co N N y t E � Lww E O j a {0 j > O N CO a (a L Cu a a " U~ 4-' 0 O a RI Q v - 0- 0 ,-9 -p ,2 - y 0 > Q a 0) >O no > C c .- 0cvd= l tN. 00 0OpcE • a G7 L j C I N Q O E GD E O'L G) a Sm= SELF CL -- o Saw com 2 � UaN E & F - 97 • • .• .,1 .,,, , "4? .�"4,'ke N N N N N ftisia L Me iii+ ' gr;f .. rta ,n, a a a a a Picr1 U U U 3 3 — �., Cl) c c c c 1 , a a a a a 0 0 `0 0 0 ` • 3 3 3 3 3 a) a> a) a) a) *Win] Y v'• 0 • ,s : t , W 0 r � � I ) ti,• m m m m m f)4 4 , • Jr,4',+ m m m m m 0 CC0a) .000a 0 a) o) ora) ja) E .c0 a) u 0 mc � a ,.fie; O a> O U L ((pp. a) o c .c C a ° a al U O c 0 ; a _0 .. 3y N a E C O> U 0 N o o a) .E 7 C — °O — `0) N aa) o N > `o a) m a 7 C>U ' c O) 0 C O 0)) 0 0 o).- j Q) 00 0 L 0 3 0 y a 0 5 O c C ?Q . U E ' omo ( m coma a- , a.- ova Eo - °aE � E a) 0 c m a) c a _o a> E E c y E a o o `m 3 0 ° 0 _ E o n W C �_ y y a c 0 U (a a) - O l0 U a to L N N > y O c a O c c i�yl: _ O _ L V°> To o)._ y O O c 0) a7 O 0 a)) �`�•;-'+ c -6 a y O 0 x a7 a) O1 y (n a) V ° L N O = o E c U a) CO a) ° x � ° a> yaa° o ° "- Ea3wd n� � ooE 12- a ° c co E o c E E `° ° m v E °io ° mcomo 0E �coa 'Eoc°) y � ° o,_ oHgy EYU ° E u ° ... ' ocX °- 0000 ° Eoa) 0o cEc aE00 000 ° X O a 0 a) 0 ._ O E o 0 c a) 000 E U y ° O N E 401?r▪ " c0ao5ob- cca'as i ° � o � c2c uo � E 0YE °t =` - .. o CC '��` y V L a) O (a : « 'E O E o .E 0 o E -0 N O N 9 0. a) W % LO., '@ N - (0 >,— C y ° n-- h a) O a) ` O E (a 0 a a) c 71-, 0 o c a) m O 0 0 `y O @.QJ ca to a1 O c a) `L o o g > 8c O y _ "'10 y VrU - c 'L.' ° y oy N . 0 a) .L'• a1j UEyE ° 0CA N E CD T0 0 oc E Ud C IT) a`> `0 a°) a > N O 0 a0 N ° = � flu 0): g 0 a) co 00 • IC o o o a 7 y m o d t f6 c y o aci a�oi o '� ° m ° N L D N y CI a F- c�. a� ymvc � ca'nmF m ° � uo 'N = a mo ° aac °)+ ai � p N � crn E °o ° -oy c. a ° - vm �. c )na -0 Em `O ° @ > aoc � c) ai ° CO) °c) - a) 0 000m ° � � f0 ° Ur > ° a) a) O � Q o oa i-_-.) .5 E o � o o � c "; o °V • y c o mt o d m ° ° `mm E g>i:, T N Oa.co fa , 0 -Oj., U 0 p y E'(0 Q C N U 3 2 co . !� = N co _ .0 n N N YE:l S n as d n N i c a 0 -0 0)2 O YE E & F - 98 r § Jr..; 5f,, k xTPT1 • N N N k, "TYAY K r k 0 0 0 �' ' CD O CO ■' i 1'3 §v ,1. E E E ct' vt o 0 0 3.. 3 3 3 S n ii- m a) a) 0 a) et CL 2 S/ iti.. A..1 Ft fl 45 • ■ O 0 0 t 6 m m m rx X; '!: !. r, i� owr% 0 0 - ;O O CO O 15- CI f O N a) CD 'Z' C C L .� >'c N w) N (� . R A *¢'u L ` �' a1 .N c 4? as U a @ N al al N U a) ➢ k iogt C N O C O «_ o , co C7 m C , ;O N O N ° j a) 2i co E O O m y %a rnO rn • �� E C ca aoaC7 a) (aLr (3 •• t>' C N N N (0 O al O12 L U m > 0 `60 0 -co O` "° L N O N' n c” Ca = >N 2 a ° > C " mf 0 -00 n N C y y 0 al W 0 p 1i !JIi: 2 ° 'S aa) '▪ 0 0 co 0 ° UI1HU gmEC 10_a almmEyE 2 O V c CO ... O F m R.la' N, N N O - C C a 0 al al a7 a o .°. Z > al ,, w N > _ 'Tr,!, v c .EvcaEm cn � a� L°. a2 a> ool> aW ° r ° fa C_ U '�0 01 L O O N EEL al O C Z a) W@ �.: o f O o cow` ul .E ° U c o N N C N m0 O U t•c k a_ n y E 0 7 0 > O a u ' .N. C c O C y 0 > CO E ..0 - thgt' -' ` 0, c :oaa) a ^ ° k000 OE,C .o ) op °UEoo `OEo 0. C 7 v. 10 cu 'V al co ' ° a O v a c d O -5 c c k" &5 O r? r., 0 a 'O[j. o+ z co m n al . o m °�— C hot •moo S o � acimo ° aw ° ° aciaaxi � 0ao a` ocWON o o4`m ova co c` ° -° 2 c o ° mE a> E U d o c m me S .° mac w. w A•.. .tcal o ' E O O j 0 o c O C ° j p ` a) ° Q N 0 O al w 2 2 _4 n;.E . `l Q 2 N ° y E 3 ' O U O a7 •° E w a) co 22 ° -c70 O C ._ N ,i.'OP N ale; al VIP ctEym .5 > E Taal m mat do Ta= yod aci 'So � o c o o 20S..0aci � E2n 2asal02 ° E � 3mU 2m30UCC o — mU � Z � Z j E & F - 99 • N M N CO V V a • • • O 0 0 0 a a a a a N CO 0 0 C C C C co N co co E a . a C C C O O O O O O O U U U • CAS CAS CA1- a) a) G) a) C N C „ C V) .a) .a) .0 a) O o O o O O m ce • m CC 0 o O o O c.) O • T W 45 m 0 m O • 0 0 0 O O m m O a a 0 0 0 0 a a a a a a a N >`• ci O L N U .N 9 0 0 to a) 0).0 L 0 � = a) — >.L_ = N ' Q) N N ` C -C p a) o .c a) L Cu .0 C V O d Cu Co a7 co � L. N O ' 0a) 00 '50imC �� cE3C ERNE caa3 a)C oocp- N °' pcp N am3. m5 3 G.0 c' a O E O` C V ea 0 0 N N -0 N Cr n. a) p f9 L a) C L E O L a7 N a (a co N U d O L N a r O L V Cu C N C C U a ) _ U j - o .0 a C ' a) C 'O L N O O C t y a U Cr co V 9 a) CO CA a) a O O a a ay N C m L �p O w a) U a) C@ O a — a d L O ` CO y O) O O a) a) a) C O V ovo co E N as cm a)A a y > 0 = F = ' a ', ° c a 2ti E � � 0 m@ � � m V ) m5apmo) ai cdeco o � �m > oEpCHO aa) 0> fE o E 0• C C C U C 03 C N U C C co p � C C N O 5 U C j — 1 C ° o xo poc a) Ca) 2° c 0> o. CO a ) a a; o- 0N o La) a aE O' N CL U E = E W U aco N Co a O ..U C 'O — N a) p v d — > > L a) L 0. C C0 0 5 r r C -do) c m a E O C if= E O AL O y O j O y Y O a N a C O ._ CO O � E a 2 o m aY o g p E d o Y c a) m V o .- o c5 E d c a) o >, c) a C a co > a u C 1O Cl O L p . ] a E h C U Ti.L O . 2 ' - 0 O N O a) as T _ d ` m co C d o am as 5 a s 0 a . a o a C 2 H C )d a r , ,ii:y A F- 0 ac m4 � � ' ,OJ 04 oq ° U ° m y � q �dq� C oo c) Eywm . 9L c - � Ea-) O WOCV WV - ' a LUC v W W y g 'L OE W8 3 aEL wUC j y "0 N c o t- o o y to a rd 2c m N CO c a c 'N 0 m y ' m ' o � A a y a 2 p .o o o o a O m ° o O Q o �O o O aco � Z O o n L ao Lv Z O o c o ..c. O= c Z a 0 E o Z a o Z a0 o f Z o o a Zoo) co -a E & F - 100 _ - r' it Ix 5 • 4 w°, • x z 1,. e• 20"222 1 r. .2i w,,,. . ... 1 a u af 0 . ' 4t Q U w ' . , � � fi , r ! c "i >, 2a • . 1 ; -, V U O { tit',' 0 0 Cu Ti .(y' e�".�F"3 dr ..'' pb Sx A t , • 4 ■ 4 M patH k r • L'-+ IN ' o U 0 w" � W § ' a; 3 4441: N : 4 : 0 0 ' '��` k`'i.0 m r • N �� C -0 C m C 0 N N > :_ > N O r / - 3- _ . m m _ . oaU ° . . . EaOE � m � m = mo> �e m .c d E > .- J as t ?la = C O 2 0 O C N O O O O L C - o N L f o d Imo a > .o ac o � O o E U m . r k . O t o f N c c o o)tq xli E °' m m °z " , u .N t9 0 a d 0 C °y c .- C N J u) L d '> C •�Y. 'F I a O . 0 0 J a.- U a i& pa oHEo `"° m rn0oc opLo, °°- , 0cE r` , '. w ca 0mEo020) O0 � ' O- o .t. S.a a O • O c C y N U (t) p C y N N C 'U w 3 I J o = E '0 o y 0 m 0) a 0) o 4 'ter o "N p t`U{.•moSoyc u � p2 � JS U . mom C7 ., S k''�p, -.•)C - C') C O � v 6L 2Omy C .LO.. U O O y C=•i, ) �,4 cLersy'. m CI -c 3 0 0 =12 °U N 0 0 C G --= 0 L TL C rV x` '�i I � Z C 0 O P Z '' Cx ¢ • N. J t T .L. 1- O > U N O V) S • �' N Ox, i.d O1 1044 W TO-2 (6 - '00` N W -0 c o C 0 J -c L f0 5 (O C (0 b �,'Y t'1741 0'.aw co C L J L 0 y 3 u G) 0 y L in:-0 03 -o 2 '0 S:O 0 {i"f.1R N p`t C) aCr D O g � " 0 K d N -9-' O 0 O N C N et ' C 7 r iZ (34.7 ° 01/46 Z w t0O U a a t h o ip T o < dO « — w 0. Z 0:!: Z a' Z E & F - 101 SO); My rte: ` ; RL C) c`') th.. - . aw dr- ' zi d U 0 U 0 , ir N C CC c @ a a a 45 4O 0 4 t a) 5 > > :; 0 a i ) Gr • O - In tai[ A .. NZ 0 0 0 ti a a a ht _ _ _ A4A. @ E L. Q En 2 -2 o @ N .c —O @ i y 0 ° C C @ C C L O O C a) C c C C _ @ C C U L y C 0 C O L. .0 -C O -C 0 p � � cmw � @ @ � EEoa) m2 c � 'O my at = ....0c o aa)) > > 0)4- c � ucel ma) y acih > aci _c > 2S1E. 0 mmN � OO � y � o oho > > m4 �` � rn om ;' � ogm >. .; c a0 > m@ � oO o .NOmo � a - aQQO � @d ° ao OA 0 UC a) o a C200tov c > - - o -• ° ao NN C a) � t o @C ° `) ac) EC ° U � o `� a`�) uN) u o .a 0 ,a) � U �` a�i � c' 010am @caa)) = m � 82 @ >'•a mEoca C L @ r C 0- C L 3 E L C N = S o C .0 y a C 'c c) 0 . C — o@ o c CO m C O ° E r - C u o E u _ c o O w C o hi) o a ° c E '0 10Em22 .2LO, � -omE oC Da _ a E a) )n _ oEyE@ o (ca C O O C C ° C C 0 O) 2°2 (0 O 0) 3 aa @ C @ @ - ° @ ,ry c @ t 3 0 0 0 0 0 E 0 0 O c L C c U 'O 0 C a) - c O 7 n N a) — C 0 O) aj w C c a) E C @ O C Q C 0 « ° 0 n o = C O o U h g E � y � c c .Nc o o � ° @� @ Ew C E � o E E y C.) 4- -'m @ CD ° � U o' o 1.,taa 8c- -E c o = 50200 -0 = 730 -.S o m w e o f ° E@ '> C �p c o m ,_ > > a) 0 o C L a) nd 0 — @ C C c 0 0 - 0 j 0 0 2 ° 0 t o t @ c Q > O L O C 2 ft, LC @ L C C X"" C C > a7 C 0 '.- .0 CD L 0 U a ° C o ct C '0 c > @ C C C O@ '-'-.0•. N 0 CO u:. 0 m L > Q .-r0 .0 ..;-- N O y U) O E .E E L C c - Q E@ y@ = v ° 2 y `0xtma¢isa) mm ° E E ` ° 2E0EOco oCu _ 00 - 003 -co -w,a' c m • `o 0 @ .ca C CN ow 0 @ c 0 @a a) C ate w = i) ^ A � � 'ON- aNCaai mr - ocL@.. dc N � EEla5 m ~ - E .` › c - 0 - c airn co O c Y 0 C m= o L a'-' N O c L L CO E i ' r) .c N ` _ @ O C Y .N Er §p} a 0 @ U C E C a 0 r p Q C > y _ _ of la I-Q a 0 a) ) C - y a) 0 0 C L.. co .c C 4 aC.. E C@ O O o 0 ° 2 V C C c 3 a) n7 C U � U =tt, 0 O` @ C L O L a) C > > 0 -O h@ C O "' C L .. @@ L y `) O' C C l0 @ > H O h ri«t nCL `-- L W3 °).o L.. QQ N 'c93 HL. a 0Nu) NNoT HOET) CL -c .`. b ° 5 no �.:. E & F - 102 a x a `8 co co O -. I Y'. O .5 O 9 c m 0 c ,$t Sri! co c 8 o o S,. .4 8 ° e2N ap a a o o d • 333O U CC O O O ? y C 04 .c L .c O a O .,. 1f� t o 9 > .' mrfio t �1ti•IM .- N CO K LO CO N- ...MM.en i wwrt� y�`` N ai; N j , MP m a3� , N e a a, -. cc w�x o p Ci t a E s `w 2 0 0 to ki es e e `sc 03 ym0 a m Of ACP& fIFF.�C Q m U ^° c O G r d n; c tau 0 0 m; > c 2 ,..R b' 0 C U Io 3 W. -6 O o a a C, W r so o Pr � S 5 0 2 c n /El 3 a r 0 0 �z ' ¢ m a0 W a d c '' � rte. rn• (7) a) d d. is v tz„ a O 1. 0 y 0 .clE•� - M3 y C C 0 ' -U).' o N N ' i^ au) C o ar o y c leg C a - D ` m - - o y Y % o in E c c c U t • N 9 N O C. U a. lL kw Z,[ t a E ' w :o $ U d ° 0mau z cap z '44. oac.0a E & F - 103 • t yi,,, .,t l : City of Rancho Cucamonga .,:je MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION The following Mitigated Negative Declaration is being circulated for public review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act Section 21091 and 21092 of the Public Resources Code. Project File No.: DRC2009-00586 AND DRC2009-00720 Public Review Period Closes: October 14, 2009 Project Name: Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, Fire Station 177 Project Applicant: Mike Bell, Fire Chief Project Location (also see attached map): Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, Fire Station 177, located on the west side of Hellman'Avenue at the intersection of Rancho Street- APN: 1061-621-03. • Project Description: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2009-00586 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT - A REQUEST TO OPERATE A 6,000 SQUARE FOOT FIRE STATION ON APPROXIMATELY 1.1 ACRE OF THE SUBJECT SITE. STAFF HAS PREPARED A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS FOR CONSIDERATION. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT\DESIGN REVIEW DRC2009-00720 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT- A REQUEST FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A STORY 6,000 SQUARE FOOT FIRE STATION ON APPROXIMATELY 1.1 ACRES OF THE SUBJECT SITE, LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF HELLMAN AVENUE AT THE INTERSECTION OF RANCHO STREET - APN:1061-621-03. RELATED FILE: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2009-00586. STAFF HAS PREPARED A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS FOR CONSIDERATION FINDING This is to advise that the City of Rancho Cucamonga,acting as the lead agency,has conducted an Initial Study to determine if the project may have a significant effect on the environment and is proposing this Mitigated Negative Declaration based upon the following finding: The Initial Study identified potentially significant effects but: (1) Revisions in the project plans or proposals made or agreed to by the applicant before this proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration was released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur, and • (2) There is no substantial evidence before the agency that the project, as revised, may have a - significant effect on the environment. E & F - 104 • MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION • DRC2009-00586 AND DRC2009-00720 Page 2 If adopted,the Mitigated Negative Declaration means that an Environmental Impact Report will not be required. The factual and analytical basis for this finding is included in the attached Initial Study. The project file and all related documents are available for review at the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department at 10500 Civic Center Drive (909) 477-2750 or Fax (909)477-2847. NOTICE The public is invited to comment on the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration during the review period. • October 14, 2009 Date of Determination Adopted By • • • E & F - 10 5 • • RESOLUTION NO. 09-38 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2009-00586, LOCATED IN THE VERY LOW RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (0-2 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), LOCATED AT THE WEST SIDE OF HELLMAN AVENUE AT RANCHO STREET;AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF—APN: 1061-621-03. A. Recitals. 1. Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District filed an application for the issuance of Conditional Use Permit DRC2009-00586, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditional Use Permit request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 14th day of October 2009, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved 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 October 14, 2009, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to the property located on the west side of Hellman Avenue at the intersection of Rancho Street, with a street frontage of 145 feet and lot depth of 372 feet and which is presently vacant; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is Single-Family Residential and zoned Very Low Residential(0-2 dwelling units per acre); to the south is vacant and Single-Family Residential and zoned Very Low Residential (0-2 dwelling units per acre); to the east is Single-Family Residential and zoned Very Low Residential (0-2 dwelling units per acre); and to the west is Vacant and zoned Flood Control; 3. . Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above,this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. b. The proposed use,together with the conditions applicable thereto,will not be detrimental to •the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. c. The proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. E & F - 106 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-38 DRC2009-00586 - RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT October 14, 2009 Page 2 • 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, 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 and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds: (i)that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA;and (ii)that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. c. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring • Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program, and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the Planning Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Department 1) No external public address system shall be allowed. Personnel shall be equipped with personal paging and communication devises. Engineering Department 1) Process a Lot Line Adjustment, prior to issuance of building permits. 2) Install curb and gutter, asphalt pavement, sidewalk, access ramps, street lights • and street trees on Hellman Avenue for entire length of the parcel frontage prior to the lot line adjustment. • E & F - 107 • PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-38 DRC2009-00586 - RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT October 14, 2009 "'Page 3 a) Widen the west side of Hellman Avenue by 9 feet. b) Protect the existing R26 "No Parking" signs, or replace as required. c) Revise the traffic signing and striping as required. d) The street trees south of Street"A" can be deferred until development. e) Because of the utility installation and City capital improvement project of Hellman Avenue, limit of street reconstruction will be determined during plan check. • 3) Construct Street"A"full width. a) Rights-of-way shall be dedicated prior to the issuance of building permits. b) The high point for the new cul-de-sac shall create a water barrier to • Q100 flows in Hellman Avenue. c) The parkway on the south side shall be graded at 2 percent toward the street. Street trees can be deferred until development of the adjacent property. • 4) An in-lieu fee as contribution to the future under grounding of the existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical, except for the 66 kV electrical)on the opposite side of Hellman Avenue shall be paid to the City prior to the issuance of building permits. The fee shall be one-half the City adopted unit amount times the length of the project frontage. Grading and Drainage 1) Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the current adopted California Building 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. 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. 2) A geologic report shall be prepared by a qualified Engineer or Engineering Geologist and submitted at the time of application for Grading and Drainage Plan review. 3) The final Grading and Drainage Plan, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be completed, submitted, and approved by the Building and Safety Official 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 u E & F - 108 • PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-38 • DRC2009-00586 - RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT October 14, 2009 Page 4 • Grading and Drainage Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and wet signed by a California licensed Civil Engineer. 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. 6) If a Rough Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit are submitted to the Building and Safety Official for review,that plan shall be a separate plan/permit from Precise • Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit. 7) A drainage study showing a 100-year, AMC 3 design storm event for on-site drainage shall be prepared and submitted to the Building and Safety Official for review and approval for on-site storm water drainage prior to issuance of a grading permit. All reports shall be wet signed and sealed by the Engineer of Record. 8) It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off-site • drainage easements prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 9) It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off-site drainage acceptance letter(s) from adjacent downstream property owner(s) dr 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 permit. 10) It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to obtain written permission from the adjacent property owner(s) to construct wall on property line or provide a • detail(s) showing the perimeter wall(s) to be constructed off-set from the property line. 11) The Grading and Drainage Plan shall implement City standards for on-site construction where possible and provide details for all work not covered by City Standard Drawings. 12) All slopes shall be a minimum 2-foot off-set from the public right-of-way or adjacent private property. 13) Private sewer, water and storm drain improvements will be designed per the latest adopted California Plumbing Code. 14) The maximum parking stall gradient is 5 percent. Accessibility parking stall grades shall be constructed per the current adopted California Building Code. 15) Roof storm water is not permitted to flow over the public parkway and shall be directed to an under parkway culvert per City of Rancho Cucamonga requirements prior to issuance of a grading permit. • 16) The final grading and drainage plan shall show existing topography a minimum of 100 feet beyond project boundary. E & F - 109 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-38 DRC2009-00586 - RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT October 14, 2009 "rage 5 17) 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. 18) The precise grading and drainage plan shall follow the format provided in the City of Rancho Cucamonga handout"Information for Grading Plans and Permit." 19) If underground injection wells are proposed as a WQMP BMP device, the applicant shall provide a copy of EPA Form 7520-16 (Inventory of Injection Wells) with the Facility ID Number assigned to the Building and Safety Official prior to issuance of the grading permit. 20) An HCOC exists for the downstream receiving water. The downstream receiving water (Mill Creek; Prado Area) is experiencing significant degradation of its banks. The project must implement a volume-based treatment control BMP (retention/detention facility)on each lot. The Storm Water Quality Management Plan and the grading plan must contain an appropriate volume based BMP prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 21) Prior to removing fences or walls along common lot lines and prior to constructing walls along common lot lines the applicant shall provide a letter • from the adjacent property owner(s) allowing work on the adjacent property. 22) The applicant shall use volume based water treatment systems meeting the requirements of the State Water Construction Permit and as presented in the draft Water Quality Management Plan dated July 1, 2009. 23) 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. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN 1) A Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) was submitted with this Grading Committee submittal package to the Building and Safety Official for review. The WQMP will need to be completed prior to issuance of a grading permit. 2) A WDID number must be provided prior to final approval of the WQMP and issuance of the grading permit. 3) The Water Quality Management Plan prepared by Dan Guerra & Associates dated August 3, 2009 (revised) has been reviewed and deemed "Substantially Complete"dated August 18,2009.The following corrections are required prior to the final approval of the WQMP: • • E & F - 110 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-38 DRC2009-00586 - RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT October 14, 2009 Page 6 • Page Section Item Cover The engineer of record must wet sign and seal the document A-8 1.2 Please include the "DRC" number in this section when it is available. Documentation was provided showing that the WDID number has been applied for. A-9 1.3 A reference is made that the City of Rancho Cucamonga's "Memorandum of Agreement of Storm Water Quality Management Plan" is not required. Upon discussing this issue with the Engineering — Environmental Division, the Engineering Department will require this document to be completed and recorded. A-13 3.1.1 This section refers to BMP's such as "generous pervious facilities",which are not shown on the conceptual grading and drainage plan, or the WQMP BMP exhibit.Please show these items on both the conceptual grading and drainage plan and a separate BMP exhibit attached to the WQMP document. A-13 3.1.1 This section refers to BMP's such as "Grass drainage swales have been utilized",which are not shown on the conceptual grading and drainage plan, or the WQMP BMP exhibit. Please show these items on both the conceptual grading and drainage plan and a separate BMP exhibit attached to the WQMP document. A-15 3.1.1 This section refers to BMP's such as "A hydrodynamic separator", which are not shown on the conceptual grading and drainage plan, or the WQMP BMP exhibit. Please show these items on both the conceptual grading and drainage plan and a separate BMP exhibit attached to the WQMP document. A-16 3.1.2 This section has a check box marked"YES"and refers to BMP's such as"First flush captured in street catch basins and discharged to adjacent vegetated • swales or gravel shoulder",which are not shown on the conceptual grading and drainage plan, or the WQMP BMP exhibit. Please show these items on both the conceptual grading and drainage plan and a separate BMP exhibit attached to the WQMP document. A-16 3.1.2 The last box on the page reads "Descirbe actions taken or justification / alternative". Please describe the discharging of the catch basins to a • vegetative swale or the gravel shoulder. A-17 3.1.2 A detention basin is described on the conceptual grading and drainage plan. However, the WQMP document does not list/describe a detention basin as a BMP. Please clarify these referenced documents. A-26 3.4.1 Please complete this section including the calculations for the flow-based design criteria. A-26 3.4.2 Please complete this section including the calculations for the volume-based design criteria. 5 Section 5 is missing. Please complete. 6 Section 6 is missing. Please complete. 6 Please use the City of Rancho Cucamonga "Memorandum of Storm Water Quality Management Plan Agreement".A copy may be obtained at the Building and Safety front counter. A-32 Exhibit A for the legal description is missing. A-32 Exhibit B for the map/illustration is missing Please provide a WQMP BMP exhibit within the document. Please provide the educational materials within the document. • • E & F - 111 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-38 DRC2009-00586 - RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT October 14, 2009 •Page 7 • Building and Safety Department COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL STANDARD CONDITIONS NOTE: ANY REVISIONS MAY VOID THESE REQUIREMENTS AND NECESSITATE ADDITIONAL REVIEW (S). A) General Requirements: 1) Submit five complete sets of plans including the following: a) Site/Plot Plan; b) Foundation Plan; c) Floor Plan; d) Ceiling and Roof Framing Plan; e) Electrical Plans (2 sets, detached)including the size of main switch, number and size of service entrance conductors, panel schedules, , and single line diagrams; • f) Plumbing and Sewer Plans, including isometrics, underground • diagrams,water and waste diagram,sewer or septic system location, fixture units, gas piping, and heating and air conditioning; and g) Planning Department Project Number (DRC2009-00586) clearly identified on the outside of all plans. 2) Submit two sets of structural calculations, energy conservation calculations, and a soils report. Architect's/Engineer's stamp and "wet" signature are required prior to plan check submittal. 3) Contractors must show proof of State and City licenses and Workers' Compensation coverage to the City prior to permit issuance. 4) Separate permits are required for fencing and/or walls. 5) Business shall not open for operation prior to posting the Certificate of • Occupancy issued by the Building and Safety Division. B) Site Development: 1) Plans shall be submitted for plan check and approved prior to construction. All plans shall be marked with the project file number(DRC2009-00586). The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted California Codes, and • all other applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations in effect at the time of permit application. Contact the Building and Safety Department for availability of the Code Adoption Ordinance and applicable handouts. E & F = 112 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-38 DRC2009-00586 - RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT October 14, 2009 Page 8 • 2) Prior to issuance of building permits for a new commercial or industrial development project or major addition, the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but are not limited to: City Beautification Fee, Park Fee, Drainage Fee, Transportation Development Fee, Permit and Plan Check Fees, and School Fees. Applicant shall provide a copy of the school fees receipt to the Building and Safety Department prior to permit issuance. 3) The Building and Safety Official shall provide the street addresses after tract/parcel map recordation and prior to issuance of building permits. 4) Construction activity shall not occur between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. Monday through Saturday, with no construction on Sunday or holidays. 5) Construct trash enclosure(s) per City Standard (available at the Planning Division's public counter). C) New Structures: 1) Provide compliance with the California Building Code (CBC)for property line clearances considering use, area, and fire-resistive construction. 2) The construction materials must comply with the requirements of the 2007 • CBC Chapter 7A. 3) Provide compliance with the California Building Code for required occupancy separations. 4) Provide draft stops in attic areas. 5) Exterior walls shall be constructed of the required fire rating in accordance with CBC. 6) Openings in exterior walls shall be protected in accordance with CBC. • 7) Upon tenant improvement plan check submittal, additional requirements may be needed. Environmental Mitigation CUL-01 In the event an archaeological or paleontological resource is uncovered during the course of project-related grading or construction,ground-disturbing activities in the vicinity of the find shall cease until the nature and extent of the find can be evaluated by a qualified archaeologist or paleontologist(as determined by the City).Any such resource uncovered during the course of project-related grading or construction shall be recorded and/or removed per applicable City and/or State regulations. GEO-01 A site-specific geotechnical and soils investigation shall be submitted to the • City for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits for the proposed fire station. The investigation shall be prepared by qualified (licensed) engineering geologists and soils engineers and shall address the existing geotechnical/soils condition of the site, suitability of imported soil, development limitations, the limits of E & F - 113 • PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-38 DRC2009-00586 - RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT October.14, 2009 •Page 9 soil compaction, and recommendations for the design and construction of structures and facilities. The geotechnical/soils investigation shall include (but not be limited to) analysis of the following issues: ground shaking, slope stability, subsidence, expansive soils, and erosion. The design and construction of all structures and facilities within the project limits shall be in accordance with the regulations and • recommendations identified in the Uniform Building Code, by the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and/or in a site-specific geotechnical/soils investigation that would be • prepared for the proposed project. GEO-02 Prior to the issuance of building permits,the project proponent shall submit to and receive from the City, an approved design and construction plan for the on-site septic system and appropriate percolation tests for the on-site septic system. This plan shall provide evidence that the design and construction of the on-site septic system adheres to standards and requirements detailed in the Uniform Plumbing Code (UPC),the San Bernardino County Environmental Health Standards; Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board Permit(s); and/or other design requirements established by the City. HAZ-01 Prior to the issuance of building permits,the project proponent shall submit detailed plans that comply with the most current AST engineering standards as well as ' all local, State, and Federal regulations to the City for review and approval. Implementation of these requirements includes (but may not be limited to) the • following components: • • Installation of the AST by a qualified licensed contractor. • • Secondary containment for all AST tanks. • Double-wall vent and vapor lines with crash protection post for vent risers. • Overfill prevention equipment. • A Pressure Line Leak Detector(PLLD)to be installed within the fuel system and the use of visual and audible alarms would prevent UST overfill. • Positive shut down if either the primary or secondary containment tank walls are compromised; a sensor would shut off the entire product delivery system. • Emergency shut-off systems. • Phase II vapor recovery system for the fueling nozzles. • Testing and monitoring including manual inspection of the AST system, HAZ-02 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall prepare and submit a project-specific Hazardous Materials Business Plan (HMBP) to the City for approval. The HMBP shall include, but shall not be limited to, the above-ground storage tank, related hazardous materials, hazardous wastes, and spillage. The HMBP shall include a Hazardous Materials Inventory (HMI) of hazardous materials stored or handled at the facility as well as Release Response Plan (RRP) for hazardous material emergencies. A copy of the HMBP shall be maintained and be • made available for review at the proposed project site. HAZ-03 Prior to the issuance of building permits,the project proponent shall prepare and submit a Spill and Emergency Response Plan(SERP)to the City for approval.The SERP shall consider fire response, absorbents for surface leaks, methods, and E & F - 114 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-38 DRC2009-00586 - RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT October 14, 2009 Page 10 • schedule for removal of fuel from leaking primary containers, and reporting of a release to the underlying soils or drainage channels. A copy of the SERP shall be maintained and be made available for review at the proposed project site. NOISE-01 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project building contractor shall provide to the City Planning Department and receive approval of site plans, which include a 6-foot-high concrete block wall along the project's north, west, and south boundaries. The 6-foot-high concrete block wall shall meet all requirements as determined by the City's Planning Department. NOISE-02 Prior to building occupancy, the project applicant shall install internal and external warning lights instead of audible station alarms. They shall be placed in appropriate places (as agreed upon by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department) as well as inside the fire station. NOISE-03 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall provide to the City Planning Department and receive approval of site plans, which include an enclosure surrounding the generator which meets City planning requirements and attenuates sounds levels by 6 dBA. NOISE-04 Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits, the project applicant shall provide evidence to the City Planning Department that routine generator testing shall only occur between the hours of 7 a.m. and 10 p.m. • • NOISE-05 During all site excavation and grading on the project site, the project • contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or.mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers consistent with manufacturers' standards. NOISE-06 The project contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive receptors nearest the project site. NOISE-07 The construction contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that would create the greatest distance between construction-related noise sources and the nearest noise-sensitive receptors during all project construction. NOISE-08 During all project site construction,the construction contractor shall adhere to the City's standards, which includes limiting construction activities to the hours of 6:30 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. No construction activities shall occur outside of these hours or on Sundays and national holidays. NOISE-09 Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120-D, as measured at the property lihe. Developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly noise level monitoring as specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120. Monitoring at other times may be required by the Building Official. Said consultant shall report his or her findings to the Building Official within 24 hours; however, if noise levels exceed the above standards, then the consultant shall immediately notify the Building Official. If noise levels exceed • the above standards,then construction activities shall be reduced in intensity to a level of compliance with above noise standards or halted. E & F - 115 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-38 DRC2009-00586 - RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT October 14, 2009 Page 11 TRAN-01 Prior to the commencement of operations at the proposed fire station, the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District shall install and maintain signs on the trails in the project area to alert riders of the potential for the departure of a fire engine from the station. The sign shall include text explaining that emergency vehicles would be departing the site,with possible sirens and lights. Signs shall be posted along each trail in the area between Hillside Avenue to the north, Wilson Avenue to the south, Beryl Avenue to the west and Heilman Avenue to the east, and along the trail east of Hellman Avenue that is a continuation of the trail adjacent to the southern project boundary and should be visible to riders within 250 feet of the station boundary or at a distance that results in a more effective advanced warning. TRAN-02 Prior to the commencement of operations at the proposed fire station, the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District shall offer sensitivity training sessions to train horses to become accustomed to fire engine sirens. The Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District shall, at a minimum, provide two training sessions prior to the commencement of operations at the proposed fire station. After commencement of operations at the fire station, the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District shall offer additional sensitivity training at least once a year, every year. TRAN-03 The Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District shall post notice of daily siren tests, including siren test times and duration,at the entrance to each equestrian trail inthe area between Hillside Avenue to the north, Wilson Avenue to the south, Beryl Avenue to the west and Hellman Avenue to the east, and along the trail east of Hellman Avenue that • is a continuation of the trail adjacent to the southern project boundary. In the event that the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District is unable to conduct the daily siren test at the posted time, the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District shall conduct the test at an off-site location. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2009. • PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Richard B. Fletcher, Chairman ATTEST: James R. Troyer, AICP, Secretary I, James R. Troyer, AICP, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 14th day of October 2009, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: • NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: E & F - 116 •%,tr. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT to DEPART MENT teivois STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT #: DRC2009-00586 SUBJECT: HELLMAN AVENUE FIRE STATION 177 APPLICANT: RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT LOCATION: WEST SIDE OF HELLMAN AVENUE AT RANCHO STREET- APN: 1061-621-03 ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: • .. General Requirements Completion Date 1. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval No. 09-38, Standard _/_/_ Conditions, 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. 2. The applicant shall be required to pay any applicable Fish and Game fees as shown below. The _/_/_ project planner will confirm which fees apply to this project. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary prior to the Planning Commission or Planning Director hearing: a) Mitigated Negative Declaration - $ 2,043.00 X B. Time Limits 1. Conditional Use Permit, Variance, or Development/Design Review approval shall expire if / /_ building permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 5 years from the date of approval. No extensions are allowed. C. Site Development 1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include / /_ site plans,architectural elevations,exterior materials and colors,landscaping,sign program,and grading on file in the Planning Department, the conditions contained herein, and the Development Code regulations. • SC-12-08 1 I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2009 Res & StfRpt\DRC2009-00586StdCond 10-14.doc E & F - 117 • Project No. DRC2009-00586 Completion Date • 2. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and _/_/_ State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Department to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. 3. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be _/ /_ submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 4. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for _/ /_ consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.) or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. 5. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code,all /_/_ other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 6. A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram,shall be reviewed and approved _/_/_ by the Planning Director and Police Department (477-2800) prior to the issuance of building permits. Such plan shall indicate style, illumination, location, height,and method of shielding so • as not to adversely affect adjacent properties. 7. 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. 8. 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. • 9. 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 owner at least 30 days prior to the removal of any existing walls/ fences along the project's perimeter. 10. 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. • 11. Return walls and corner side walls shall be decorative masonry. —/-/ D. Building Design 1. For all residential development,provide conduit from each unit/lot and a pull box to connect to the _/_/_ street. Provide interior structured wiring for each house/building with minimum Category 5 copper wire, Radio Grade 6 coaxial cable, and a central distribution panel, prior to release of occupancy (fiber-to-the building, FTTB). Plans shall be submitted for Planning Director and • Building Official review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. • • • 2 I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2009 Res & StfRpt\DRC2009-00586StdCond 10-14.doc E & F - 118 Project No. DRC2009-00586 Completion Date Parking and Vehicular Access (indicate details on building plans) ai1. All parking spaces shall be 9 feet wide by 18 feet long. When a side of any parking space abuts _/_/_ a building, wall, support column, or other obstruction, the space shall be a minimum of 11 feet wide. 2. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances, / /_ and exits shall be striped per City standards. F. Trip Reduction 1. Category 5 telephone cable or fiber optic cable shall be provided for office buildings and other /_/_ non-residential development. • G. Landscaping 1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping in _/_/_ the case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. 2. Within parking lots, trees shall be planted at a rate of one 15-gallon tree for every three parking _/_/_ stalls. 3. Trees shall be planted in areas of public view adjacent to and along structures at a rate of one _/_/_ tree per 30 linear feet of building. 4. Special landscape features such as mounding,alluvial rock,specimen size trees,and intensified _/_/_ • landscaping, is required along Hellman Avenue. . 5. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of _/_/_ Xeriscape as defined in Chapter 19.16 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. Prior to issuance of Building Permits,the project landscape architect shall certify on he submitted plans that the Xeriscape requirements have been met. • APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT, (909)477-2710, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: NOTE: ANY REVISIONS MAY VOID THESE REQUIREMENTS AND NECESSITATE ADDITIONAL REVIEW(S) STANDARD CONDITIONS ARE NOTED IN THE RESOLUTION. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT,(909)477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: H. Dedication and Vehicular Access 1. 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. 2. Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards. __/_ • 3 I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2009 Res & StfRpt\DRC2009-00586StdCond 10-14.doc E & F - 119 Project No.DRC2009-00586 Completion Date 3. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quit-claimed or delineated on the _/_/_ final map. • I. Street Improvements 1. 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. 2. 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. 3. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: Curb& A.C. Side- Drive Street Street Comm Median Bike Street Name Gutter Pvmt walk Appr. Lights Trees Trail Island Trail Other Hellman Avenue X X X X X (e) Rancho Street X X X X X X Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement • reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. (c) If so marked, sidewalk shall be curvilinear per Standard 114. (d) If so marked, an in-lieu of construction fee shall be provided for this item. (e) Access ramps. 4. 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 • 4 I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2009 Res & StfRpt\DRC2009-00586StdCond 10-14.doc E & F - 120 Project No.DRC2009-00586 Completion Date 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 galvanized steel with pull rope or as specified. e. Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all corners of intersections per City _/_/_ Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with _/_/_ adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving,which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be _/_/_ installed to City Standards, except for single family residential lots. h. Street names shall be approved by the Planning Director prior to submittal for first plan _/_/_ check. 5. 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. 6. 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. • The Engineering Services Department reserves the right to adjust tree species based upon field conditions and other variables. For additional information, contact the Project Engineer. Min. Grow Street Name Botanical Name Common Name Space Spacing Size Qty. Hellman Avenue Geijera parviflora Australian Willow 5' 20' O.C. 15 Gal Rancho Street Cinnamomum Camphor Tree 8' 30' O.C. 15 Gal Camphora Note: The project is within the high fire hazard area. Spacing subject to City Fire Protection District Review. 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. 4) Street trees are to be planted per public improvement plans only.. 7. 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. • • 5 I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2009 Res & StfRpt\DRC2009-00586StdCond 10-14.doc E & F - 121 • Project No. DRC2009-00586 Completion'Date • J. Drainage and Flood Control 1. The project(or portions thereof) is located within a Flood Hazard Zone;therefore,flood protection /_/_ • measures shall be provided as certified by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer. 2. It shall be the developer's responsibility to have the current FIRM Zone G designation /_/_ removed from the project area. The developer shall provide drainage and/or flood protection facilities sufficient to obtain a Zone "X"designation. The developer's engineer shall prepare all necessary reports, plans, and hydrologic/hydraulic calculations. A Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) shall be obtained from FEMA prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. A Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) shall be issued by FEMA prior to occupancy or improvement acceptance, whichever occurs first. 3. A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final map _/ /_ approval or the issuance of buildirg permits,whichever occurs first. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer. 4. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the / /_ property from adjacent areas. 5. A permit from the San Bernardino County Flood Control District is required for work within its _/_/_ right-of-way. 6. 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. 7. Public storm drain easements shall be graded to convey overflows in the event of a blockage in a / /_ sump catch basin on the public street, and provisions made to pass through walls. K: Utilities • 1. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. / /_ 2. 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. L. General Requirements and Approvals 1. Permits shall be obtained from the following agencies for work within their right of-way: /_/_ San Bernardino County Flood Control District. 2. A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City,covering the estimated operating costs for all _/_/_ new streetlights for the first six months of operation,prior to final map approval or prior to building permit issuance if no map is involved. • 6 I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2009 Res & StfRpt\DRC2009-00586StdCond 10-14.doc • E & F - 122 • Project No. DRC2009-0D586 Completion Date 3. Prior to the issuance of building permits,a Diversion Deposit and related administrative fees shall _/_/_ • be paid for the Construction and Demolition Diversion Program. The deposit is fully refundable if at least 50% of all wastes generated during construction and demolition are diverted from landfills, and appropriate documentation is provided to the City. Form CD-1 shall be submitted to the Engineering Services Department when the first building permit application is submitted to Building and Safety. Form CD-2 shall be submitted to the Engineering Services Department within 60 days following the completion of the construction and/or demolition project. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE SAFETY DEPARTMENT, FIRE PROTECTION PLANNING SERVICES AT, (909) 477-2770, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: SEE ATTACHED • • 7 I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2009 Res & StfRpt\DRC2009-00586StdCond 10-14.doc E & F - 123 ` MO� Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection • @A � `� '( \:-r .J District ,FIRE. ..,, Fire Construction Services STANDARD CONDITIONS August 6, 2009 RCFPD Fire Station Hellman Ave. at Rancho Dr. DRC2009-00586 The site is located in the city's designated VHFHSZ. The development of the site must be in accordance with the RCFPD Standard 47-1 and all the reference documents adopted by RCFPD Ordinance FD46. The landscape design must observe the planting densities, irrigation, spacing, clearance, and species regulations. The exterior materials of the station must meet the ignition resistance and non-combustible requirements of the 2007 CBC Chapter 7A. Exterior above ,ground tanks and generator shall be protected from exposure. THE FOLLOWING STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLY TO THIS PROJECT • The RCFPD Procedures & Standards which are referenced in this document can be access on the web at http://www.ci.rancho-cucamonqa.ca.us/fire/index.htm under the Fire Safety Division & Fire Construction Services section. Search by article; the preceding number of the standard refers to the article. Chose the appropriate article number then a drop down menu will appear, select the corresponding standard. FSC-1 Public and Private Water Supply 1. Design guidelines for Fire Hydrants: The following provides design guidelines for the spacing and location of fire hydrants: a. The maximum distance between fire hydrants in commercial/industrial projects is 300-feet. No portion of the exterior wall shall be located more than 150-feet from an approved fire hydrant. For cul-de-sacs, the distance shall not exceed 100-feet. b. The preferred locations for fire hydrants are: 1. At the entrance(s) to a commercial, industrial or residential project from the public roadways. 2. At intersections. 3. On the right side of the street, whenever practical and possible. • 4. As required by the Fire Safety Division to meet operational needs of the Fire District. 5. A minimum of forty-feet (40') from any building. E & F - 124 • c. If any portion of a facility or building is located more than 150-feet from a public fire hydrant • measured on an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, additional • private or public fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required fire flow shall be provided. d. Provide one fire hydrant for each 1000 gpm of required fire flow or fraction thereof. FSC-2 Fire Flow 1. The required minimum fire flow for this project, when automatic fire sprinklers are installed is • 1500 gallons per minute at a minimum residual pressure of 20-pounds per square inch. This flow reflects a 50-percent reduction for the installation of an approved automatic fire sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13 with central station monitoring. This requirement is made in accordance with the California Fire Code Appendix, as adopted by the Fire District Ordinances. 3. Public fire hydrants located within a 500-foot radius of the proposed project may be used to provide the required fire flow subject to Fire District review and approval. Private fire hydrants on adjacent property shall not be used to provide required fire flow. 4. Fire protection water plans are required for all projects that must extend the existing water supply to or onto the site. Building permits will not be issued until fire protection water plans are approved. 5. On all site plans to be submitted for review, show all fire hydrants located within 600-feet of the proposed project site. FSC-3 Prerequisite for submittal of Overhead Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems • 1. Prior to submitting plans for an overhead automatic fire sprinkler system, the applicant shall submit plans, specifications and calculations for the fire sprinkler system underground supply piping. Approval of the underground supply piping system must be obtained prior to submitting the overhead fire sprinkler system plans. FSC-4 Requirements for Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems • Automatic fire sprinklers shall be installed in buildings as required by the2007 California Fire Code and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance FD46 and/or any other applicable standards require an approved automatic fire sprinkler system to be installed. FSC-5 Fire Alarm System & Sprinkler Monitoring 1. The 2007 California Building Code, the RCFPD Fire Alarm Standard, Ordinance FD46 and/or the 2007 California Fire Code require most fire sprinkler systems to be monitoring by Central Station sprinkler monitoring system. A manual and or automatic fire alarm system fire may also be required based on the use and occupancy of the building. Plan check approval and a building permit are required prior to the installation of a fire alarm or a sprinkler monitoring system. Plans and specifications shall be submitted to Fire Construction Services in accordance with RCFPD Fire Alarm Standard. • • 2 E & F - 125 FSC-6 Fire District Site Access • Fire District access roadways include public roads, streets and highways, as well as private roads, streets drive aisles and/or designated fire lanes. Please reference the RCFPD Fire Department Access Roadways Standard. 1. Location of Access: All portions of the structures 1st story exterior wall shall be located within 150-feet of Fire District vehicle access, measure on an approved route around the exterior of the building. Landscaped areas, unpaved changes in elevation, gates and fences are deemed obstructions. 2. Specifications for private Fire District access roadways per the RCFPD Standards are: a. The minimum unobstructed width is 26-feet. b. The maximum inside turn radius shall be 24-feet. • c. The minimum outside turn radius shall be 50-feet. d. The minimum radius for cul-de-sacs is 45-feet. e. The minimum vertical clearance is 14-feet, 6-inches. • f. At any private entry median, the minimum width of traffic lanes shall be 20-feet on each side. • • g. The angle of departure and approach shall not exceed 9-degrees or 20 percent. h. The maximum grade of the driving surface shall not exceed 12%. i. Support a minimum load of 70,000 pounds gross vehicle weight (GVW). j. Trees and shrubs planted adjacent to the fire lane shall be kept trimmed to a minimum of 14-feet, 6-inches from the ground up. Vegetation shall not be allowed to obstruct Fire Department apparatus. 3. Access Doorways: Approved doorways, accessible without the use of a ladder, shall be provided as follows: a. In buildings without high-piled storage, access shall be provided in accordance with the 2001 California Building Code, Fire and/or any other applicable standards. b. In buildings with high-piled storage access doors shall be provided in each 100 lineal feet or major fraction thereof, of the exterior wall that faces the required access roadways. When railways are installed provisions shall be made to maintain Fire District access to all required openings. 4. Access Walkways: Hardscaped access walkways shall be provided from the fire apparatus access road to all required building exterior openings. • 5. Commercial/Industrial Gates: Any gate installed across a Fire Department access road shall be in accordance with Fire District Standard. The following design requirements apply: 3 E & F - 126 a. Prior to the fabrication and installation of the gates, plans are required to be submitted to Fire Construction Services (FCS) for approval. Upon the completion of the installation and • before placing the gates in service, inspection and final acceptance must be requested from FCS. b. Gates must slide open horizontally or swing inward. c. Gates may be motorized or manual. . d. When fully open, the minimum clearance dimension of drive access shall be 20 feet. e. Manual gates must be equipped with a RCFPD lock. The lock must be purchased at the Fire Administration Office. • f. .Motorized gates must open at the rate of one-foot per second. g. The motorized gate actuation mechanism must be equipped with a manual override device and a fail-safe or battery backup feature to open the gate or release the locking Mechanism in case of power failure or mechanical malfunction. h. Motorized gates shall be equipped with a Knox override key switch. The switch must be installed outside the gate in a visible and unobstructed location. i. For motorized gates, a traffic loop device must be installed to allow exiting from the complex. j. If traffic pre-emption devices (TPD) are to be installed, the device, location and operation • must be approved by the Fire Chief prior to installation. Bi-directional or multiple sensors may be required due to complexity of the various entry configurations. 7. Fire Lane Identification: Red curbing and/or signage shall identify the fire lanes. A site plan illustrating the proposed delineation that meets the minimum Fire District standards shall be included in the architectural plans submitted to B&S for approval. 8. Approved Fire Department Access: Approved FD access must be clearly noted on the site plan. 9. Roof Access: There shall be a means of fire department access from the exterior walls of the buildings on to the roofs of all commercial, industrial and multi-family residential structures with roofs less than 75' above the level of the fire access road. a. This access must be reachable by either fire department ground ladders or by an aerial ladder. - b. A minimum of one ladder point with a fixed ladder shall be provided in buildings with construction features, or high parapets that inhibit roof access. c. The number of ladder points may be required to be increased, depending on the building size and configuration. d. Regardless of the parapet height or construction features the approved ladder point shall • be identified in accordance to the roof access standard. 4 E & F - 127 • • e. Where the entire roof access is restricted by high parapet walls or other obstructions, a • permanently mounted access ladder is required. f. Multiple access ladders may be required for larger buildings. g. Ladder construction must be in accordance with the RCFPD Roof Access Standard Appendix A. h. A site plan showing the locations of the roof ladder shall be submitted during plan check. • i. Ladder points shall face a fire access roadway(s). • FSC-10 Occupancy and Hazard Control Permits Listed are those Fire Code permits commonly associated with the business operations and/or building construction. Plan check submittal is required with the permit application for approval of the permit; field inspection is required prior to permit issuance. General Use Permit shall be required for any activity or operation not specifically described below, which in the judgment of the Fire Chief is likely to produce conditions that may be hazardous to life or property. • • Compressed Gases • Public Assembly • Repair Garages • • Tents, Canopies and/or Air Supported Structures FSC-12 Hazardous Materials - Submittal to Fire Construction Services Plans shall be submitted and approved prior to construction of buildings and/or the installation.of equipment designed to store, use or dispense hazardous materials in accordance with the 2007 California Building, Fire, Mechanical, Plumbing, Electrical Codes, RCFPD Ordinances FD46and other implemented and/or adopted standards. • Chronological Summary of RCFPD Standard Conditions • PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS — Please complete the following prior to the issuance of any building permits: 1. Private Water Supply (Fire) Systems: The applicant shall submit construction plans, specifications, flow test data and calculations for the private water main system for review and approval by the Fire District. Plans and installation shall comply with Fire District Standards. Approval of the on-site (private) fire underground and water plans is required prior to any building permit issuance for any structure on the site. Private on-site combination domestic and fire supply system must be designed in accordance with RCFPD Standards. The Building & Safety Division and Fire Construction Services will perform plan checks and inspections. • 5 • E & F - 128 All private on-site fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed and operable prior to delivering any combustible framing materials to the site. Fire construction Services will inspect the • installation, witness hydrant flushing and grant a clearance before lumber is dropped. 2. Public Water Supply (Domestic/Fire) Systems: The applicant shall submit a plan showing the locations of all new public fire hydrants for the review and approval by the Fire District and CCWD. On the plan, show all existing fire hydrants within a 600-foot radius of the project. Please reference the RCFPD Water Plan Submittal Procedure Standard. • All required public fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed and operable prior to delivering any combustible framing materials to the site. CCWD personnel shall inspect the installation and witness the hydrant flushing. Fire Construction Services shall inspect the site after acceptance of the public water system by CCWD. Fire Construction Services must grant a clearance before lumber is dropped. 3. Construction Access: The access roads must be paved in accordance with all the requirements of the RCFPD Fire Lane Standard. All temporary utilities over access roads must be installed at least 14' 6" above the finished surface of the road. 4. Fire Flow: A current fire flow letter from CCWD must be received. The applicant is responsible for obtaining the fire flow information from CCWD and submitting the letter to Fire Construction• Services. • PRIOR TO THE RELEASE OF TEMPORARY POWER The building construction must be substantially completed in accordance with Fire Construction Services' "Temporary Power Release Checklist and Procedures". • PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY OR FINAL INSPECTION— Please complete the following: 1. Hydrant Markers: All fire hydrants shall have a blue reflective pavement marker indicating the fire hydrant location on the street or driveway in accordance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Standard Plan 134, "Installation of Reflective Hydrant Markers". On private property, the markers shall be installed at the centerline of the fire access road, at each hydrant location. • 2. Private Fire Hydrants: For the purpose of final acceptance, a licensed sprinkler contractor, in the presence of Fire Construction Services, shall conduct a test of the most hydraulically remote on-site fire hydrants. The underground fire line contractor, developer and/or owner are responsible for hiring the company to perform the test. A final test report shall be submitted to Fire Construction Services verifying the fire flow available. The fire flow available must meet or exceed the required fire flow in accordance with the California Fire Code. 3. Fire Sprinkler System: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the fire sprinkler system(s) shall be tested and accepted by Fire Construction Services. 4. Fire Sprinkler Monitoring: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the fire sprinkler monitoring system must be tested and accepted by Fire Construction Services. The fire sprinkler monitoring system shall be installed, tested and operational immediately following the completion of the fire sprinkler system (subject to the release of power). • 6 E & F - 129 5. Fire Suppression Systems and/or other special hazard protection systems shall be inspected, • , tested and accepted by Fire Construction Services before occupancy is granted and/or equipment is placed in service. 6. Access Control Gates: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, vehicular gates must be inspected, tested and accepted in accordance with RCFPD Standards by Fire Construction Services. 7. Fire Access Roadways: Prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, the fire access roadways must be installed in accordance with the approved plans and acceptable to Fire Construction Services. The CC&R's, the reciprocal agreement and/or other approved documents shall be recorded and contain an approved fire access roadway map with provisions that prohibit parking, specify the method of enforcement and identifies who is responsible for the required annual inspections and the maintenance of all required fire access roadways. 8. Address: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, commercial/industrial buildings shall post the address in accordance to the appropriate RCFPD addressing Standard. 9. Hazardous Materials: The applicant must obtain inspection and acceptance by Fire Construction Services. 10. Confidential Business Occupancy Information: The applicant shall complete the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District "Confidential Business Occupancy Information" form. This form provides contact information for Fire District use in the event of an emergency at the • subject building or property. This form must be presented to the Fire Construction Services Inspector. • 11. Mapping Site Plan: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, a 8 Yz" x 11" or 11" x 17" site plan of the site in accordance with RCFPD Standard shall be revised by the applicant to reflect the actual location of all devices and building features as required in the standard. The site plan must be reviewed and accepted by the Fire Inspector. • • 7 • E & F - 130 • • RESOLUTION NO. 09-39 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00720, LOCATED IN THE VERY LOW RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT(0-2 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF HELLMAN AVENUE AT THE INTERSECTION OF RANCHO STREET; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF— APN: 1061-621-03. A. Recitals. 1. Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District filed an application for the approval of Development Review DRC2009-00720, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Review request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 14th day of October, 2009, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. • B. Resolution. • NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved 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 October 14, 2009, including written and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to the property located on the west side of Hellman Avenue at the intersection of Rancho Street, with a street frontage of 145 feet and lot depth of 372 feet and which is presently vacant; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is Single-Family Residential and zoned Very Low Residential (0-2 dwelling units per acre); to the south is vacant and Single-Family Residential and zoned Very Low Residential (0-2 dwelling units per acre); to the east is Single-Family Residential and zoned Very Low Residential (0-2 dwelling units per acre); and to the west is Vacant and zoned Flood Control; 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing, and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and • b. The proposed use is in accord with the objectives of the Development Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and • E & F - 131 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-39 DRC2009-00720— RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT October 14, 2009 Page 2 • d. The proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. • 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration,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 and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA")and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it,finds: (i)that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that • the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. • c. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the Planning Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Department 1) All applicable conditions for Conditional Use Permit DRC2009-00586 • shall apply. E & F - 132 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-39 DRC2009-00720 — RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT October 14, 2009 • • Page 3 Engineering Department 1) All applicable conditions for Conditional Use Permit DRC2009-00586 shall apply. Environmental Mitigation 1) All applicable conditions for Conditional Use Permit DRC2009-00586 shall apply. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2009. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Richard B. Fletcher, Chairman • ATTEST: James R. Troyer, AICP, Secretary I,James R.Troyer,AICP, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 14th day of October 2009, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: • • E & F - 133 L '; COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT #: DRC2009-00720 SUBJECT: HELLMAN AVENUE FIRE STATION 177 APPLICANT: RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT LOCATION: WEST SIDE OF HELLMAN AVENUE AT RANCHO STREET-APN: 1061-621-03 • ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: • • General Requirements Completion Date 1. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval No. 09-39, Standard _/ / Conditions, 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. 2. The applicant shall be required to pay any applicable Fish and Game fees as shown below. The /_/ project planner will confirm which fees apply to this project. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary prior to the Planning Commission or Planning Director hearing: a) Mitigated Negative Declaration - $ 2,043.00 X B. Time Limits • 1. Conditional Use Permit, Variance, or Development/Design Review approval shall expire if • / /_ building permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 5 years from the date of approval. No extensions are allowed. C. Site Development 1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include _/_/ site plans, architectural elevations,exterior materials and colors, landscaping,sign program,and grading on file in the Planning Department, the conditions contained herein, and the Development Code regulations. • SC-12-08 1 I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2009 Res & Stf Rot\DRC2009-00720StdCond 10-14.doc E & F - 134 Project No. DRC2009-00586 Completion Date 2. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and _/_/_ State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be • submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Department to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. 3. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be _/_/_ submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 4. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for _/_/_ consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.) or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision,or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. 5. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code,all _/ /_ other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the • time of building permit issuance. 6. A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram,shall be reviewed and approved /_/_ by the Planning Director and Police Department (477-2800) prior to the issuance of building permits. Such plan shall indicate style, illumination, location, height,and method of shielding so as not to adversely affect adjacent properties. 7. 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. 8. 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. 9. 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 owner at least 30 days prior to the removal of any existing walls/ fences along the project's perimeter. 10. 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. 11. Return walls and corner side walls shall be decorative masonry. _/_/_ D. Building Design 1. For all residential development, provide conduit from each unit/lot and a pull box to connect to the / /_ street. Provide interior structured wiring for each house/building with minimum Category 5 copper wire, Radio Grade 6 coaxial cable, and a central distribution panel, prior to release of occupancy (fiber-to-the building, FTTB). Plans shall be submitted for Planning Director and Building Official review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. • 2 I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2009 Res & Stf Apt\DRC2009-0072OStdCond 10-14.doc E & F - 135 Project No. DRC2009-00586 Completion Date • Parking and Vehicular Access (indicate details on building plans) 1. All parking spaces shall be 9 feet wide by 18 feet long. When a side of any parking space abuts _/_/_ a building, wall, support column, or other obstruction, the space shall be a minimum of 11 feet wide. 2. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles,entrances, _/_/_ and exits shall be striped per City standards. F. Trip Reduction 1. Category 5 telephone cable or fiber optic cable shall be provided for office buildings and other _/ /_ non-residential development. G. Landscaping 1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping in _/_/_ the case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. 2. Within parking lots, trees shall be planted at a rate of one 15-gallon tree for every three parking _/_/_ stalls. 3. Trees shall be planted in areas of public view adjacent to and along structures at a rate of one _/_/_ tree per 30 linear feet of building. 4. Special landscape features such as mounding,alluvial rock,specimen size trees,and intensified _/_/_ • landscaping, is required along Hellman Avenue. 5. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of _/_/_ Xeriscape as defined in Chapter 19.16 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. Prior to . issuance of Building Permits,the project landscape architect shall certify on he submitted plans that the Xeriscape requirements have been met. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT, (909)477-2710, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: NOTE: ANY REVISIONS MAY VOID THESE REQUIREMENTS AND NECESSITATE ADDITIONAL REVIEW(S) STANDARD CONDITIONS ARE NOTED IN THE RESOLUTION. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT,(909)477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: H. Dedication and Vehicular Access 1. 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. 2. Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards. _/_/_ • 3 I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2009 Res & StfRpt\DRC2009-00720StdCond 10-14.doc . E & F - 136 Project No. DRC2009-00586 Completion Date 3. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quit-claimed or delineated on the _/_/_ final map. • I. Street Improvements 1. 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. 2. 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. 3. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: / / Curb& A.C. Side- Drive Street Street Comm Median Bike Street Name Gutter Pvmt walk Appr. Lights Trees Trail Island Trail Other Hellman Avenue X X X X X (e) Rancho Street X X X X X X Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement • reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. (c) If so marked, sidewalk shall be curvilinear per Standard 114. (d) If so marked, an in-lieu of construction fee shall be provided for this item. (e) Access ramps. 4. 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 • 4 l:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2009 Res & StfRpt\DRC2009-00720StdCond 10-14.doc E & F - 137 Project No.DRC2009-00586 Completion Date 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 galvanized steel with pull rope or as specified. e. Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all corners of intersections per City _/_J_ Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with l /_ 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 Director prior to submittal for first plan _/_/_ check. 5. 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. 6. 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. • The Engineering Services Department reserves the right to adjust tree species based upon field conditions and other variables. For additional information, contact the Project Engineer. • Min. Grow Street Name Botanical Name Common Name Space Spacing Size OW. Hellman Avenue Geijera parviflora Australian Willow 5' 20' O.C. 15 Gal Rancho Street Cinnamomum Camphor Tree 8' 30' O.C. 15 Gal Camphora Note: The project is within the high fire hazard area. Spacing subject to City Fire Protection District Review. 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. 4) Street trees are to be planted per public improvement plans only. 7. 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. • 5 I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2009 Res & StfRpt\DRC2009-00720StdCond 10-14.doc E & F - 138 Project No. DRC2009-00586 • Completion Date J. Drainage and Flood Control 1. The project(or portions thereof) is located within a Flood Hazard Zone;therefore,flood protection _/_/_• measures shall be provided as certified by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer. 2. It shall be the developer's responsibility to have the current FIRM Zone A designation _/_/_ removed from the project area. The developer shall provide drainage and/or flood protection facilities sufficient to obtain a Zone "X"designation. The developer's engineer shall prepare all necessary reports, plans, and hydrologic/hydraulic calculations. A Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) shall be obtained from FEMA prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. A Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) shall be issued by FEMA prior to occupancy or improvement acceptance, whichever occurs first. 3. 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. 4. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the _/_/_ property from adjacent areas. 5. A permit from the San Bernardino County Flood Control District is required for work within its / /_ right-of-way. 6. 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. 7. Public storm drain easements shall be graded to convey overflows in the event of a blockage in a / /_ sump catch basin on the public street, and provisions made to pass through walls. K. Utilities • 1. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. / /_ 2. 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. L. General Requirements and Approvals 1. Permits shall be obtained from the following agencies for work within their right of-way: /_/_ San Bernardino County Flood Control District. 2. A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the estimated operating costs for all _/_/_ new streetlights for the first six months of operation, prior to final map approval or prior to building permit issuance if no map is involved. • 6 I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2009 Res & Sit Rpt\DRC2009-00720StdCond 10-14.doc E & F - 139 Project No. DRC2009-00586 Completion Date 3. Prior to the issuance of building permits, a Diversion Deposit and related administrative fees shall _/_/_ • be paid for the Construction and Demolition Diversion Program. The deposit is fully refundable if at least 50% of all wastes generated during construction and demolition are diverted from landfills,and appropriate documentation is provided to the City. Form CD-1 shall be submitted to the Engineering Services Department when the first building permit application is submitted to Building and Safety. Form CD-2 shall be submitted to the Engineering Services Department within 60 days following the completion of the construction and/or demolition project. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE SAFETY. DEPARTMENT, FIRE PROTECTION PLANNING SERVICES AT, (909) 477-2770, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING • CONDITIONS: SEE ATTACHED • • • • • • 7 I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2009 Res & StfRpt\DRC2009-00720StdCond 10-14.doc E & F - 140 • Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection , e9. District ➢6°E. Fire Construction Services STANDARD CONDITIONS August 6, 2009 RCFPD Fire Station Hellman Ave. at Rancho Dr. DRC2009-00586 • The site is located in the city's designated VHFHSZ. The development of the site must be in accordance with the RCFPD Standard 47-1 and all the reference documents adopted by RCFPD Ordinance FD46. The landscape design must observe the planting densities, irrigation, spacing, clearance, and species regulations. The exterior materials of the station must meet the ignition resistance and non-combustible requirements of the 2007 CBC Chapter 7A. Exterior above ground tanks and generator shall be protected from exposure. THE FOLLOWING STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLY TO THIS PROJECT • The RCFPD Procedures & Standards which are referenced in this document can be access on the web at http://www.ci.rancho-cucamonqa.ca.us/fire/index.htm under the Fire Safety Division & Fire Construction Services section. Search by article; the preceding number of the standard refers to the article. Chose the appropriate article number then a drop down menu will appear, select the corresponding standard. FSC-1 Public and Private Water Supply 1. Design guidelines for Fire Hydrants: The following provides design guidelines for the spacing and location of fire hydrants: a. The maximum distance between fire hydrants in commercial/industrial projects is 300-feet. No portion of the exterior wall shall be located more than 150-feet from an approved fire hydrant. For cul-de-sacs, the distance shall not exceed 100-feet. b. The preferred locations for fire hydrants are: 1. At the entrance(s) to a commercial, industrial or residential project from the public roadways. 2. At intersections. 3. On the right side of the street, whenever practical and possible. • • 4. As required by the Fire Safety Division to meet operational needs of the Fire District. 5. A minimum of forty-feet (40') from any building. • E & F - 141 • • c. If any portion of a facility or building is located more than 150-feet from a public fire hydrant measured on an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, additional private or public fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required fire flow shall be • provided. d. Provide one fire hydrant for each 1000 gpm of required fire flow or fraction thereof. FSC-2 Fire Flow 1. The required minimum fire flow for this project, when automatic fire sprinklers are installed is 1500 gallons per minute at a minimum residual pressure of 20-pounds per square inch. This flow reflects a 50-percent reduction for the installation of an approved automatic fire sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13 with central station monitoring. This requirement is made in accordance with the California Fire Code Appendix, as adopted by the Fire District Ordinances. 3. Public fire hydrants located within a 500-foot radius of the proposed project may be used to provide the required fire flow subject to Fire District review and approval. Private fire hydrants on adjacent property shall not be used to provide required fire flow. 4. Fire protection water plans are required for all projects that must extend the existing water supply to or onto the site. Building permits will not be issued until fire protection water plans are approved. 5. On all site plans to be submitted for review, show all fire hydrants located within 600-feet of the proposed project site. FSC-3 Prerequisite for submittal of Overhead Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems • • 1. Prior to submitting plans for an overhead automatic fire sprinkler system, the applicant shall submit plans, specifications and calculations for the fire sprinkler system underground supply piping. Approval of the underground supply piping system must be obtained prior to submitting the overhead fire sprinkler system plans. FSC-4 Requirements for Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems Automatic fire sprinklers shall be installed in buildings as required by the2007 California Fire Code and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance FD46 and/or any other applicable standards require an approved automatic fire sprinkler system to be installed. • FSC-5 Fire Alarm System & Sprinkler Monitoring 1. The 2007 California Building Code, the RCFPD Fire Alarm Standard, Ordinance FD46 and/or the 2007 California Fire Code require most fire sprinkler systems to be monitoring by Central Station sprinkler monitoring system. A manual and or automatic fire alarm system fire may also be required based on the use and occupancy of the building. Plan check approval and a building permit are required prior to the installation of a fire alarm or a sprinkler monitoring system, Plans and specifications shall be submitted to Fire Construction Services in accordance with RCFPD Fire Alarm Standard. • • 2 E & F - 142 FSC-6 Fire District Site Access • Fire District access roadways include public roads, streets and highways, as well as private roads, streets drive aisles and/or designated fire lanes. Please reference the RCFPD Fire Department Access Roadways Standard. ' 1. Location of Access: All portions of the structures 1st story exterior wall shall be located within 150-feet of Fire District vehicle access, measure on an approved route around the exterior of the building. Landscaped areas, unpaved changes in elevation, gates and fences are deemed obstructions. 2. Specifications for private Fire District access roadways per the RCFPD Standards are: a. The minimum unobstructed width is 26-feet. b. The maximum inside turn radius shall be 24-feet. c. The minimum outside turn radius shall be 50-feet. d. The minimum radius for cul-de-sacs is 45-feet. e. The minimum vertical clearance is 14-feet, 6-inches. f. At any private entry median, the minimum width of traffic lanes shall be 20-feet on each side. • g. The angle of departure and approach shall not exceed 9-degrees or 20 percent. h. The maximum grade of the driving surface shall not exceed 12%. i. Support a minimum load of 70,000 pounds gross vehicle weight (GVW). j. Trees and shrubs planted adjacent to the fire lane shall be kept trimmed to a minimum of 14-feet, 6-inches from the ground up. Vegetation shall not be allowed to obstruct Fire Department apparatus. 3. Access Doorways: Approved doorways, accessible without the use of a ladder, shall be provided as follows: a. In buildings without high-piled storage, access shall be provided in accordance with the 2001 California Building Code, Fire and/or any other applicable standards. b. In buildings with high-piled storage access doors shall be provided in each 100 lineal feet or major fraction thereof, of the exterior wall that faces the required access roadways. • When railways are installed provisions shall be made to maintain Fire District access to all required openings. 4. Access Walkways: Hardscaped access walkways shall be provided from the fire apparatus access road to all required building exterior openings. • 5. Commercial/Industrial Gates: Any gate installed across a Fire Department access road shall be in accordance with Fire District Standard. The following design requirements apply: 3 E & F - 143 • • a. Prior to the fabrication and installation of the gates, plans are required to be submitted to Fire Construction Services (FCS) for approval. Upon the completion of the installation and • before placing the gates in service, inspection and final acceptance must be requested from FCS. b. Gates must slide open horizontally or swing inward. c. Gates may be motorized or manual. d. When fully open, the minimum clearance dimension of drive access shall be 20 feet. e. Manual gates must be equipped with a RCFPD lock. The lock must be purchased at the Fire Administration Office. f. .Motorized gates must open at the rate of one-foot per second. g. The motorized gate actuation mechanism must be equipped with a manual override device and a fail-safe or battery backup feature to open the gate or release the locking Mechanism in case of power failure or mechanical malfunction. h. Motorized gates shall be equipped with a Knox override key switch. The switch must be installed outside the gate in a visible and unobstructed location. i. For motorized gates, a traffic loop device must be installed to allow exiting from the complex. j. If traffic pre-emption devices (TPD) are to be installed, the device, location and operation • must be approved by the Fire Chief prior to installation. Bi-directional or multiple sensors may be required due to complexity of the various entry configurations. 7. Fire Lane Identification: Red curbing and/or signage shall identify the fire lanes. A site plan illustrating the proposed delineation that meets the minimum Fire District standards shall be included in the architectural plans submitted to B&S for approval. 8. Approved Fire Department Access: Approved FD access must be clearly noted on the site plan. 9. Roof Access: There shall be a means of fire department access from the exterior walls of the buildings on to the roofs of all commercial, industrial and multi-family residential structures with roofs less than 75' above the level of the fire access road. a. This access must be reachable by either fire department ground ladders or by an aerial ladder. • b. A minimum of one ladder point with a fixed ladder shall be provided in buildings with construction features, or high parapets that inhibit roof access. c. The number of ladder points may be required to be increased, depending on the building size and configuration. • d. Regardless of the parapet height or construction features the approved ladder point shall • be identified in accordance to the roof access standard. 4 E & - 1 4 4 e. Where the entire roof access is restricted by high parapet walls or other obstructions, a • permanently mounted access ladder is required. f. Multiple access ladders may be required for larger buildings. • g. Ladder construction must be in accordance with the RCFPD Roof Access Standard Appendix A. h. A site plan showing the locations of the roof ladder shall be submitted during plan check. i. Ladder points shall face a fire access roadway(s). FSC-10 Occupancy and Hazard Control Permits Listed are those Fire Code permits commonly associated with the business operations and/or building construction. Plan check submittal is required with the permit application for approval of the permit; field inspection is required prior to permit issuance. General Use Permit shall be required for any activity or operation not specifically described below, which in the judgment of the Fire Chief is likely to produce conditions that may be hazardous to life or property. • Compressed Gases • Public Assembly • Repair Garages • • Tents, Canopies and/or Air Supported Structures • FSC-12 Hazardous Materials - Submittal to Fire Construction Services Plans shall be submitted and approved prior to construction of buildings and/or the installation.of equipment designed to store, use or dispense hazardous materials in accordance with the 2007 California Building, Fire, Mechanical, Plumbing, Electrical Codes, RCFPD Ordinances FD46and other implemented and/or adopted standards. Chronological Summary of RCFPD Standard Conditions PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS — Please complete the following prior to the issuance of any building permits: 1. Private Water Supply (Fire) Systems: The applicant shall submit construction plans, specifications, flow test data and calculations for the private water main system for review and approval by the Fire District. Plans and installation shall comply with Fire District Standards. Approval of the on-site (private) fire underground and water plans is required prior to any building permit issuance for any structure on the site. Private on-site combination domestic and fire supply system must be designed in accordance with RCFPD Standards. The Building & Safety Division and Fire Construction Services will perform plan checks and inspections. • • 5 E & F - 145 All private on-site fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed and operable prior to delivering any combustible framing materials to the site. Fire construction Services will inspect the • installation, witness hydrant flushing and grant a clearance before lumber is dropped. 2. Public Water Supply (Domestic/Fire) Systems: The applicant shall submit a plan showing the locations of all new public fire hydrants for the review and approval by the Fire District and CCWD. On the plan, show all existing fire hydrants within a 600-foot radius of the project. Please reference the RCFPD Water Plan Submittal Procedure Standard. All required public fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed and operable prior to delivering any combustible framing materials to the site. CCWD personnel shall inspect the installation and witness the hydrant flushing. Fire Construction Services shall inspect the site after acceptance of the public water system by CCWD. Fire Construction Services must grant a clearance before lumber is dropped. • 3. Construction Access: The access roads must be paved in accordance with all the requirements of the RCFPD Fire Lane Standard. All temporary utilities over access roads must be installed at least 14' 6" above the finished surface of the road. 4. Fire Flow: A current fire flow letter from CCWD must be received. The applicant is responsible for obtaining the fire flow information from CCWD and submitting the letter to Fire Construction Services. PRIOR TO THE RELEASE OF TEMPORARY POWER The building construction must be substantially completed in accordance with Fire Construction Services' 'Temporary Power Release Checklist and Procedures". • PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY OR FINAL INSPECTION — Please complete the following: 1. Hydrant Markers: All fire hydrants shall have a blue reflective pavement marker indicating the fire hydrant location on the street or driveway in accordance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Standard Plan 134, "Installation of Reflective Hydrant Markers". On private property, the markers shall be installed at the centerline of the fire access road, at each hydrant location. • 2. Private Fire Hydrants: For the purpose of final acceptance, a licensed sprinkler contractor, in the presence of Fire Construction Services, shall conduct a test of the most hydraulically remote on-site fire hydrants. The underground fire line contractor, developer and/or owner are responsible for hiring the company to perform the test. A final test report shall be submitted to Fire Construction Services verifying the fire flow available. The fire flow available must meet or exceed the required fire flow in accordance with the California Fire Code. 3. Fire Sprinkler System: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the fire sprinkler system(s) shall be tested and accepted by Fire Construction Services. 4. Fire Sprinkler Monitoring: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the fire sprinkler monitoring system must be tested and accepted by Fire Construction Services. The fire sprinkler monitoring system shall be installed, tested and operational immediately following the completion of the fire sprinkler system (subject to the release of power). • 6 E & F - 146 • 5. Fire Suppression Systems and/or other special hazard protection systems shall be inspected, • tested and accepted by Fire Construction Services before occupancy is granted and/or equipment is placed in service. 6. Access Control Gates: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, vehicular gates must be inspected, tested and accepted in accordance with RCFPD Standards by Fire Construction Services. 7. Fire Access Roadways: Prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, the fire access roadways must be installed in accordance with the approved plans and acceptable to Fire Construction Services. The CC&R's, the reciprocal agreement and/or other approved documents shall be recorded and contain an approved fire access roadway map with provisions that prohibit parking, specify the method of enforcement and identifies who is responsible for the required annual inspections and the maintenance of all required fire access roadways. S. Address: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, commercial/industrial buildings shall post the address in accordance to the appropriate RCFPD addressing Standard. 9. Hazardous Materials: The applicant must obtain inspection and acceptance by Fire Construction Services. 10. Confidential Business Occupancy Information: The applicant shall complete the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District "Confidential Business Occupancy Information" form. This form provides contact information for Fire District use in the event of an emergency at the • subject building or property. This form must be presented to the Fire Construction Services Inspector. 11. Mapping Site Plan: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, a 8 Yz" x 11" or 11" x 17" site plan of the site in accordance with RCFPD Standard shall be revised by the applicant to reflect the actual location of all devices and building features as required in the standard. The site plan must be reviewed and accepted by the Fire Inspector. • • • • 7 E & F - 147 ?e 00/Z C-ery .5.1037-7/n J&-T3& PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-37 _DRe2e437-ee4132-- FRANK AN October 14, 2009 Page 4 c) Provide traffic striping and signage, including R26 signs, as required. 2) Provide reciprocal access easements in favor of the commercial property to the west and to the south. a) Make a good faith effort to establish reciprocating vehicular .access with commercial property along the westerly boundary of this project. 3) Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check on Etiwanda Avenue. 4) Construct appropriate off-site street improvements from transition to existing. 5) An in-lieu fee as contribution to the future undergrounding of the existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical, except for the 66 KV electrical)on the opposite side of Etiwanda Avenue shall be paid to the City prior to map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever comes first. The fee shall be one-half the City adopted unit amount times the length of the project frontage on Etiwanda Avenue. 7) Final Parcel Map 18535 shall be reviewed, approved and recorded, prior to issuance of building permits. 8) Revise the City Drawing No. 1863-D to add private storm drain connection. Grading 1) The applicant shall provide a copy of EPA Form 7520-16 (Inventory of Injection Wells) with the Facility ID Number assigned to the Building and Safety Official prior to issuance of the grading permit. 2) Prior to removing fences or walls along common lot lines and prior to constructing walls along common lot lines the applicant shall provide a letter from the adjacent property owner(s) allowing work on the C & DPage95 ?eco#4 c2e,'c • PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-36 DRC2007-00402 — FRANK AN October 14, 2009 Page 5 6) 7) Prior to the issuance of building permits, a Diversion Deposit and related administrative fees shall be paid for the Construction and Demolition Diversion Program. The deposit is fully refundable if at least 50 percent of all wastes generated during construction and demolition are diverted from landfills, and appropriate documentation is provided to the City. Form CD-1 shall be submitted to the Engineering Department when the first building permit application is submitted to the Building and Safety Department. Form CD-2 shall be submitted to the Engineering Department within 60 days following the completion of the construction and/or demolition project. 8) Final Parcel Map 18535 shall be reviewed, approved and recorded, prior to issuance of building permits. 9) Revise the City Drawing No. 1863-D to add private storm drain connection. Grading 1) The applicant shall provide a copy of EPA Form 7520-16 (Inventory of Injection Wells) with the Facility ID Number assigned to the Building and Safety Official prior to issuance of the grading permit. 2) Prior to removing fences or walls along common lot lines and prior to constructing walls along common lot lines the applicant shall provide a letter from the adjacent property owner(s) allowing work on the adjacent property. ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION . Air Quality 1) All construction equipment shall be maintained in good operating condition so as to reduce operational emissions. The contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained as per manufacturers'specifications. Maintenance records shall be available at the construction site for City verification. 2) Prior to the issuance of any grading permits,the developer shall submit C & D Page 68 rttr l HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION DRC2009-00679 - CINDY HAMPTON A request to designate the George E. Frost House as a Designated Local Landmark located at 7082 East Avenue-APN: 227-092-03. Related File: Mills Act Agreement DRC2009-00695. MILLS ACT APPLICATION DRC2009-00695' -CINDY HAMPTON A request to implement the use of the Mills Act to reduce property tax for the George E. Frost House, currently applying for Historic Landmark Status, located at 7082 East Avenue-APN: 227-092-03., Related file: Landmark Designation DRC2009-00679.; "c,^F 0 - On East Avenue,just above the Pacific Electric Trail 1/2 acre site—zoned Low Residential Craftsman style home Built 1918 v CE s✓% JCWAC� Sn , III1 1 i:II� , � .; „ i 1 x411 . \ �� „ _ l pklAUVl -L'Y .HJ 1114�1L . I "''�A History...ry... Early 1880's: George Frost came to Etiwanda from Canada to work for the Chaffey brothers. His son George E. Frost (aka Geo) was just a small child when they arrived. 1887: George purchased land at the SW corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Victoria Avenue and built a small general store called "The Frost Brothers General Store." George Frost was the organizer of 3 fruit-growers associations. 1914: Geo purchased the property on East Avenue and-the' PE railway and built the grove house on the site in 1918.-Geo was a citrus farmer/clerk with the citrus association, the'al-ea constable, and also a member of the Etiwanda Service Club. I 1941: Geo lived in the grove house until his death. Grove j houses were once very common in the Etiwanda area because of the fruit packing industry but haverbecome ' increasingly rare as new development has occurred. „6 =_� - 6 X ;J Per, _- --_ may Before- 2004 fl before Hamptons purchased the property d"-;- a9 ■ ��♦ _� R'a'cs r I ` b 2 1..":::' f After- 2009 r� 1 f , n1 I i1D �t : � - L.��`----'�'' ,n. 1,. •:-: ..__ . 1/ ' pL` ca �• work in progress... ialrAiffct ._ , . .� g , )4.„..._,, r w. ^ rs- , .;; . , >' ,� ,s a," ' i 71447-4",4",m i , Writ]` •—e---- v .'...- �� 4 `�a r� 'S�� a Irr s 3 in I.77IS � \ 5� i1 w1 ' :�, l 3 `'' Facts for Finding 1 Lire Fact/s: The property is an example of life in early Etiwanda. Most residents here were associated with growing citrus and/or vineyards and lived nearby their work. This is a grove house that was surrounded by orchards and vineyards. The property, being adjacent to the Pacific Electric Trail, made it convenient for the owners to live and work in the same area as part of the fruit industry. Facts: The dwelling was built in 1918, which makes it-91, years old. r- Fact/s: Geo E. Frost was the son of George Frost who was prominent in the Etiwanda community. Geo was a citrus farmer/clerk with the citrus association, the area constable, and also was a member of the Etiwanda Service Club- ilk ' RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Historic Preservation Commission recommend approval of Landmark Designation DRC2009- , 00679 and Mills Act Agreement DRC2009 00695 to be forwarded to the City Council fors final action. 6-ti 4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-36 DRC2007-00402 — FRANK AN October 14, 2009 Page 4 10) Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permit, the applicant shall establish to the satisfaction of the Planning Director that applicant has sufficient clear title to the subject property to complete construction of the project and to operate the project. • Engineering Department 1) Etiwanda Avenue to be improved in accordance with City "Secondary Arterial" standards including dual southbound left turn lanes (10 feet and 10 feet), 2 southbound thru lanes (11 feet and 11 feet), 1 bike lane (4 feet) and 1 southbound bus bay/right turn lane (12 feet). Widen west half of Etiwanda Avenue from 32 feet at north project boundary to 47 feet at south project boundary a) Provide cobble curb and gutter, sidewalk, drive approach, street trees and street lights, as required, per Figure 5-23 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. b) Provide a 10-foot southbound right turn lane for driveway that extends, at 42 feet from centerline, to 60 feet north of the south • • property line then transitions to 47 feet for the intersection right turn lane. c) Provide traffic striping and signage, including R26 signs, as required. 2) Provide reciprocal access easements in favor of the commercial property to the west and to the south. a) Make a good faith effort to establish reciprocating vehicular access with commercial property along the westerly boundary of this project. 3) Pavement reconstruction and overlays on Etiwanda Avenue will be determined during plan check. 4) Construct appropriate off-site street improvements from transition to existing. 5) An in-lieu fee as contribution to the future undergrounding of the existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical, except for the 66 KV electrical) on the opposite side of Etiwanda Avenue shall be paid to the City prior to map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever comes first. The fee shall be one-half the City adopted unit amount times the length of the project frontage on • C & D Page 67 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-36 DRC2007-00402 — FRANK AN October 14, 2009 Page 5 • 6) __ : __. _ '_ • _: : .. 7) Prior to the issuance of building permits, a Diversion Deposit and related administrative fees shall be paid for the Construction and Demolition Diversion Program. The deposit is fully refundable if at least 50 percent of all wastes generated during construction and demolition are diverted from landfills, and appropriate documentation is provided to the City. Form CD-1 shall be submitted to the Engineering Department when the first building permit application is submitted to the Building and Safety Department. Form CD-2 shall be submitted to the Engineering Department within 60 days following the completion of the construction and/or demolition project. 8) Final Parcel Map 18535 shall be reviewed, approved and recorded, prior to issuance of building permits. 9) Revise the City Drawing No. 1863-D to add private storm drain connection. Grading 1) The applicant shall provide a copy of EPA Form 7520-16 (Inventory of Injection Wells) with the Facility ID Number assigned to the Building and Safety Official prior to issuance of the grading permit. 2) Prior to removing fences or walls along common lot lines and prior to constructing walls along common lot lines the applicant shall provide a ' letter from the adjacent property owner(s) allowing work on the adjacent property. ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION Air Quality 1) All construction equipment shall be maintained in good operating condition so as to reduce operational emissions. The contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained as per manufacturers'specifications. Maintenance records shall be available at the construction site for City verification. 2) Prior to the issuance of any grading permits,the developer shall submit C & D Page 68 suers'"72 /6%-36 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-37 CRC2007 06402 — FRANK AN October 14, 2009 Page 3 d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the Planning Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Department 1) This approval is to subdivide 4.67 acres of land into 3 parcels for commercial purposes. Plans submitted for plan check shall conform to the plans approved by the Planning Commission approval on October 14, 2009. 2) All applicable conditions of approval for DRC2007-00402 shall apply. 3) Adequate provision shall be made and continue in perpetuity to assure that access and maintenance between all parcels established under Parcel Map SUBTPM18535 and DRC2007-00402 will be provided. 4) Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permit, the applicant shall establish to the satisfaction of the Planning Director that applicant has sufficient clear title to the subject property to complete construction of the project and to operate the project. Engineering Department 1) Etiwanda Avenue to be improved in accordance with City "Secondary Arterial" standards including dual southbound left turn lanes (10 feet and 10 feet), 2 southbound thru lanes (11 feet and 11 feet), 1 bike lane (4 feet) and 1 southbound bus bay/right turn lane (12 feet). Widen west half of Etiwanda Avenue from 32 feet at north project boundary to 47 feet at south project boundary. a) Provide cobble curb and gutter, sidewalk, drive approach, street trees and street lights, as required, per Figure 5-23 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. b) Provide'a 10-foot southbound right turn lane for driveway that extends, at 42 feet from centerline, to 60 feet north of the south property line then transitions to 47 feet for the intersection right turn lane. C & D Page S N .514 eirri /8535 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 09-37 .-DRG2.99.7—B84e2-- FRANK AN October 14, 2009 Page 4 c) Provide traffic striping and signage, including R26 signs, as required. 2) Provide reciprocal access easements in favor of the commercial property to the west and to the south. a) Make a good faith effort to establish reciprocating vehicular access with commercial property along the westerly boundary of this project. 3) Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check on Etiwanda Avenue. 4) Construct appropriate off-site street improvements from transition to existing. 5) An in-lieu fee as contribution to the future undergrounding of the existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical, except for the 66 KV electrical) on the opposite side of Etiwanda Avenue shall be paid to the City prior to map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever comes first. The fee shall be one-half the City adopted unit amount times the length of the project frontage on Etiwanda Avenue. 7) Final Parcel Map 18535 shall be reviewed, approved and recorded, prior to issuance of building permits. 8) Revise the City Drawing No. 1863-D to add private storm drain connection. Grading 1) The applicant shall provide a copy of EPA Form 7520-16 (Inventory of Injection Wells) with the Facility ID Number assigned to the Building and Safety Official prior to issuance of the grading permit. 2) Prior to removing fences or walls along common lot lines and prior to • constructing walls along common lot lines the applicant shall provide a letter from the adjacent property owner(s) allowing work on the C & D Page 95 • Law Offices of Bryan Mashian APC • October 14, 2009 Mr. James R. Troyer, AICP Planning Director The City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91729 Re: DRC 2007-00402; alleged illegal subdivision Dear Mr. Troyer: I am writing this letter is in opposition to the application of Mr. Frank An, as I had an accident and am not able to attend tonight's meeting in person. I am asking at least for a continuance of this hearing so that I may recover and attend the hearing in person. Mr. An's most recent proposed site plan incorporates an area as part of his proposed project which he legally does not have the right to use or build on. As you are aware, under a recorded document called "Area A Agreement" (copy is attached as part of the attached correspondence), we have the exclusive and perpetual right to use and build on the "Area A." This area in contention is known as "Area A,"which I have approximately marked on Exhibit A. The plan submitted by Mr. An shows "Area A" as part of his project, which is absolutely wrong and not possible. Mr. An does not have the right to include this property (i.e., Area A) as part of his proposed project. We have not given Mr. An any permission to use Area A. Mr. An knew about the Area A Agreement when he bought his property and was aware that we have the exclusive right to use and build on it. Mr. An had previously submitted plans which showed Area A not as part of his project area because at that time he was respecting the Area A Agreement. Mr. An is now trying to blatantly violate, disregard and destroy our rights under the Area A Agreement by submitting a plan that includes Area A, to which he has no right. When we bought our property at the corner and also became the grantee under the Area A Agreement, we paid a price based on our ability to build on and/or use this Area A, which is for our exclusive use in perpetuity. Telephone 310.207.1464 Email Bryan @Mashianlaw.com Fox 310.207.1466 11726 San Vicente Blvd. Suite #290 Los Angeles, California 90049 STEM C q— . This issue has some history, which I will not reiterate, but will provide the following previous correspondence regarding this very matter, consisting of the following: I. Letter dated October 18, 2007 by Mr. James Troyer on behalf of City of Rancho Cucamonga to Mr. Frank An, advising him that the creation of Area A was an illegal subdivision and that a lot lime adjustment is needed to clarify the status of Area A; 2. My letter dated December 3, 2007 to Mr. James Troyer, stating various reasons the creation of Area A was not an illegal subdivision, the due process needed for determining whether in fact the subdivision map act has been violated, and the consequences on the pending application even if such a finding were made; 3. My letter dated February 28, 2008 to Mr. Jim Markman, the City attorney for the City of Rancho Cucamonga wherein the decisions that were reached in meeting had on February 13, 2008 are confirmed. In the past, as confirmed in my meeting with Mr. Markman at the meeting with him on February 13, 2008, the issuance of development permits for both affected properties was to be conditioned on complying with the Subdivision Map Act. This proposed use by Mr. An, however, is completely disregarding the very existence of the Area A agreement and our rights under this Agreement. The City cannot unilaterally decide whether the Area A Agreement is valid or not, and that we have no longer the right to use the Area A, and Mr. An does. We have not been provided with a written notification of the city attorney's change in position, or the rationale for such change. Further, this is a legal issue between two private parties that are neighbors, and which needs to be resolved through the judicial and court system, and not through the planning process. The question of who is entitled to use Area A, whether or not its creation violates the Subdivision Map Act, and the other legal issues which are involved must be resolved after the parties have been given notice and opportunity to be heard before a court with the appropriate jurisdiction. With all due respect, I don't believe that the city's Planning Commission has the jurisdiction to take away a property owner's rights, such as our right to use Ares A. Also, I would like to bring to your attention that the following approval required the developer to respect a similar easement, and did not allow for it to be developed on the easement--no determination of a violation of map act: "ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18212 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - A request to subdivide 6 acres of land into two lots. Lot one is 4.79 acres of land for 67 residential condominium units in the proposed Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), and lot 2 is 1.21 acres of land to remain as an existing commercial parking lot and a vacant portion of land to remain as an existing commercial parking lot and vacant portion of landin the Village commercial District, located at the northwest corner of Base Line Road and San Carmela Court - APN: 1089- 581-01. Related files: General Plan Amendment DRC2006-00224, Victoria Community CrP Plan Amendment DRC2006-00447, Development Review DRC2006-00730, and Tree • Removal Permit DRC2007-00081. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration." I believe that similarly situated project must be treated the same. Therefore, we respectfully request a continuance of this hearing and/or have Mr. An revise his plan to exclude Area A. Very truly yours, LAW OFFICES OF BRYAN MASHIAN, a professional corporation By I - Bryan Mashian BM\fy Mayor DuniAW.n J. KURTH, M.D. Mayer Pro Tnrr DIANE WILLIAMS Caunribunubni Rix Gurntaner. I.. DISNNIS NIR:l IAI I. bSAM SINGNol.o City Arch rr L . THE Cm OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA JACK Levi,AICP RANCHO CUCAMONGA October 18, 2007 • Frank An 1159 S. Ardmore Avenue Los Angeles, California 90006 . SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2007- 00402 - DEFICIENT ZONING APPLICATION VIA ILLEGAL DIVISION OF LAND, • LOCATED AT FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AT ETIWANDA AVENUE — APN: 0227-221-08; 14, 26, AND 27. Dear Mr. An: As you have been in receipt of the letter of September 17, 2007 regarding the AREA A AGREEMENT' and the City of Rancho Cucamonga's determination that the location known as 'Area A' involved in your zoning application constitutes an illegal division of land, the City would like to clarify the status of your zoning application subsequent to your meeting with Planning Division staff. • If you and the other property owner do not seek a lot line adjustment, then the location known in the above-referenced document as 'Area A' remains as part of your property and can be integrated into your project development proposal. You may re-submit drawings and development documents and continue processing your project. • If you should have any questions, please feel free to contact me or Vance Pomeroy at (909) 477-2750, Monday through Thursday from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. • - Sincerely, 14,ert-i Ja s R. Troyer, AICP • Planning Director JRT:VP/Is c: Dan James, Sr. Civil Engineer Trang Huynh, Building Official • ct� 10500 Civic Center Or. • RU. Box 807• Rancho Cucamonga.CA 91729.0807•'reI 909-477.2700• Fax 90'I-477-28.19•www,ci.rancho.cocamnnla.ca.u> Law Offices of Bryan Mashian APC December 3, 2007 Mr. James R. Troyer, AICP Planning Director The City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91729 Re: DRC 2007-00436; alleged illegal subdivision Dear Mr. Troyer: This letter is in response to your letter dated September 17, 2007, addressed to Mrs. Vicki Barbieri, as the project architect for the above-referenced project. Your letter, a copy of which is attached for your ease of reference, has been forwarded to this office for response. First, the applicant disagrees with your conclusion that the Area A agreement amounts to an illegal subdivision of land in violation of the Subdivision Map Act. Your letter merely states a conclusion, and does not provide the legal basis for such a conclusion. As you have determined from reviewing the Area A Agreement, this • agreement provides for a perpetual easement appurtenant of the subject area. For us to be able to more substantively respond to your conclusion, we respectfully request that you (or the city attorney) provide us with the specific code section or the operative portion of the Subdivision Map Act which the city contends has been violated. . Second, without conceding that the Area A Agreement violates the Subdivision Map Act, Government Code Section 66499.34, which is cited in your letter, does not warrant the action which the City has taken, i.e., withholding permits. Specifically, Government Code Section 66499.34 provides as follows" "No local agency shall issue any permit or grant any approval necessary to develop any real property which has been divided, or which has resulted from a division, in violation of the provisions of this division or of the provisions of local ordinances enacted pursuant to this division if it finds that development of such real property is contrary to the public health or the public safety. As you can see from the highlighted portion, the proposed use and development of the Area A is for providing vehicular and pedestrian ingress and egress into the project. The proposed use of providing access is not contrary to the public hearth or safety, but further promotes public health and safety by providing additional and alternative points of Telephone 310.207.1464 Email Bryan @Mashianlow.com Fax 310.207.1466 11726 San Vicente Blvd. Suite#290 Los Angeles, California 90049 G �� access. This area is being minimally improved, i.e., only being paved. No buildings are currently proposed to be Iodated in Area A. Third, as you know, Subdivision Map Act Section 66499.35(a) provides that "Any person owning real property or a vendee of that person pursuant to a contract of sale of the real property may request, and a local agency shall determine, whether the real property complies with the provisions of this division and of local ordinances enacted pursuant to this division." Subdivision Map Act Section 66499.35(b) further provides: "If a local agency determines that the real property does not comply with the provisions of this division or of local ordinances enacted pursuant to this division, it shall issue a conditional certificate of compliance. A local agency may, as a condition to granting a conditional certificate of compliance, impose any conditions that would have been applicable to the division of the property at the time the applicant acquired his or her interest therein, and that had been established at that time by this division or local ordinance enacted pursuant to this division . . ." This Section further provides: - "Compliance with these conditions shall not be required until the time that a permit or other grant of approval for development of the property is issued by the local agency." As you can see, the specific mandate of the Subdivision Map Act is that correction of any alleged non-compliance is not until the time that "a permit or other grant of approval for development of the property is issued by the City. The time of enforcement of the correction of an alleged non-compliance is not at time of application for a permit. Therefore, the application for the development of this project must be taken by the city, with the condition that the alleged violation of the Subdivision Map Act be corrected prior to the permit for the development being issued. Fourth, on an equitable basis, we believe that the City's refusal to process an application is unnecessarily harsh, given the overall circumstances. The applicant bought the property and acquired the benefits of the Area A Agreement without having any knowledge that such an agreement may later be held to violate the Subdivision Map Act. Furthermore, the curing of this alleged violation is not completely within the control of the applicant. Rather, the correction remedy the city has requested, i.e., a lot line • adjustment with the neighboring property, is not an action solely with the applicant's control but is dependent on the cooperation of the owner of the area affected by the Area A Agreement. To suspend the processing of the applicant's project application would in essence put this project at the mercy of the neighboring property owner. In sum, the applicant has not been provided with the specific basis of the alleged violation. The alleged violation does not create any detriment to public health and safety, � t but in fact promotes the public health and safety by providing additional access. The timing of the attempted enforcement by the City is itself in violation of the specific provisions of the Subdivision Map Act, and should be postponed until the time of issuance of the permit. And, the remedy is inequitably harsh. Therefore, we respectfully request the City to immediately correct its prior demand in a manner consistent with the Subdivision Map Act, i.e., postpone the enforcement of the alleged violation until the time of issuance of the permit, and not at the time of accepting the application. Please call me if you have any question. Very truly yours, LAW OFFICES OF BRYAN MASHIAN, a professional orporation By B Mashian BM\fy Cc: Chuck Buquet Vicki Barbieri • Gtr Mayor DONALD J. KURTH,M.D. Mayor ProTem DIANE.WILLIAMS Councilmemben RE%GLMERREZ r1 I.. DENNIS MICHAEL t V SAM SPAGNOLO City Manager Lit,. THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA JACK LAM,AICP RANC HO CUCAMONGA September 17, 2007 • Vicki Leonor Barbieri Certified Mail Number 7004 1350 8211 1520 - -210-8: Central Avenue, Snite-200 - Glendale, California 91203 SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND COI iDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2007-00402 AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW • DRC2007-00436 - DEFICIENT ZONING APPLICATION VIA ILLEGAL DIVISION OF LAND, LOCATED AT FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AT ETIWANDA AVENUE_ - APN: 0227-221-08, 14, 26, AND 27. Dear Applicants: Based on substantial review of the information included in your application, especially focused on the description of land included in your requested entitlement(s), including the document called "THE AREA A AGREEMENT," the City of Rancho Cucamonga has determined that the location known as 'Area A' involved in the two above-referenced zoning applications constitutes an illegal division of land in violation of the Subdivision Map Act (Government Code Section 66410 et seq.). The result of this determination is that the City of Rancho Cucamonga does not recognize 'Area A' or any action related to it. • Pursuant to Government Code Section 66499.34, the City will withhold permits for entitlements and improvements to the property until the matter is resolved and the City may also begin the process to file a Notice of Violation against the northerly of the two properties in question (See Government Code Section 66499.36). To remedy the issue, a Lot Line Adjustment must be approved and recorded. As an additional consequence, the two above-referenced zoning applications are fundamentally deficient because of the subdivision violation to warrant the suspension of review of the application for completeness until this matter is fully resolved. If you should have any questions, please feel free to contact me or Vance Pomeroy at (909) 477-2750, Monday through Thursday from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. el K ki mes R. Troyer, AICP Planning Director JRT:VP/ds c: Dan James, Sr. Civil Engineer Trang Huynh, Building Official 10500 Civic Cancer Dr.•P.O. Box 807•Rancho Cucamonga,CA 91729-0807•Td 909-477-2700•Fax 909-477-2849• www.ci.rancho.cucamonga.ca.us • • , ■r>!;:.0 *m ryv-t 7r, Recorded in Official Records, County of . rtDING REQUESTED BY: San Bernardino, Larry Walker, Recorder Doc No . 20000079217 I((J_ When Recorded Mail Document 3 : 00pm 03/08/00 1425SW.„ ervices, FoothillcBlvd. , Ste 20G First flhI U Il litre B 11601 • Upland, CA 91786 Attn: Grace Yang / 2l 7r 4r Sr— sn7ner e e ri NEE An CMS PX CPT CPT CPT ADC NM PER PR PCDR �r�p _ 11 �l 60 _ Escrow No. /1 �SV r -� 51i 5 6Q� Title Order No. U� -- NON ST lR SPY CRtC TRANS TRY DA MG EXAM ?eV-) - V-f— 08, ic4 THE "AREA A” AGREEMENT Page 1 of 3 This ageement("Agreement") is made and entered into as of the 3rd day of Jan. _ 2000 (the "Effective Date"), by and between Overland Investment, LLC. (Grantor") and Stephen K. Lam/Carrie LiriCheng Cheng Lin/Carol Lin/Jung Fang Hung/Lin Su Chiu Hung/Hou Min Chen/The I lsiao Family Trust ("Grantee"). RECITALS A. Grantor owns certain real property legally described in Exhibit"A" attached hereto ("Grantor's Property"). B. Grantee owns certain real property located adjacent to Grantor's Property and legally described in Exhibit"B" attached hereto ("Grantee's Property"). C. Grantee currently has the right to improve a portion of Grantor's Property with certain building, parking and landscaping improvements and uses same in connection with its operation of Grantee's Property. That portion of Grantor's Property so improved and used by Grantee is legally described in Exhibit"C" attached hereto and is hereinafter referred to as "Area A". D. Grantor and Grantee desire to formally document the rights of Grantee in "Area A" as hereinafter set . forth. AGREEMENT • Therefore, for valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereby agree as follows: I. Grant of"Area A": Grantor does hereby grant and convey to Grantee and its successors and assignees, a perpetual right in, to, and over "Area A" for the construction, installation, operation, maintenance, repair, reconfiguration and replacement of all improvements including, without limitation, driveways, parking areas, parking lot lighting, landscaping, irrigation and utilities servicing "Area A". Such perpetual right shall be appurtenant to and for the sole benefit of Grantee's Property and each and every portion thereof. 2:Maintenance and Repair: The owner(s) of the Grantee's Property shall, at its/their sole cost and expense, operate, repair, replace and maintain in good condition from time to time the improvements • located on"Area A" and used by the owner(s) and/or occupants of Grantee's Property. 3. Construction or Reconstruction of improvements: All improvements hereafter installed by the owner(s) of the Grantee's Property within the"Area A" shall be constructed in a good and workmanlike manner. Grantee and subsequent owners of Grandee's Property • Description: San Bernardino,CA Document-Year.DocID 2000.79217 Page: 1 of 21 Order 6156394 Comment: • • Page 2 of 3 shall have the right to build, modify, alter reconfigure, demolish and/or replace all improvements from time to time located on"Area A". 4. Indemnity: Grantee and its successors in interest as owner of all or any portion of the Grantee's Property shall indemnify and hold Grantor and its successors harmless. (except for the loss or damage resulting from the tuitions acts of the indemnitee) from and against any damages, liability, actions, claims and expenses in connection with the loss of life:, personal injury and/or damage to property arising from or out of Grantee's exercise of the rights associated with the grant of the:rights in and to"Area A" provided for herein or resulting from a material breach of Grantee's obligations hereunder. 5.Exclusivity of"Area A": The owners and occupants of such portion of Grantor's Property, as may hereafter be developed and operated for commercial retail purposes, • shall not have the right, in common with the owners and occupants of Grantee's Property, to use "Arta A". 6. Not a public Dedication:Nothing contained in this Agreement shall be deemed to be a gift or dedication of all or any portion of "Area A" to the general public or for any public purposes whatsoever, it being the intention that this Ageement and the rights in and to "Area A" herein contained be strictly limited for the purposes herein expressed for the sole benefit of Grantee and its heirs, successors, assigns, licensees, guests, invites, contractors, subcontractors, employees, agents and tenants. 7. Successors; This Agreement shall run with the land, with respect to the benefits and burdens created herein, and affecting all parcels of land described herein, and shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the successors and assigns of the respective parties; provided, however, that if any party sells any portion of all of its interest in and to its parcel, said transferring party shall be automatically freed and released from and after the date of such sale of all liabilities respecting the performance of any agreements or obligations on the part of such party contained in this instrument thereafter to be performed with respect to the interest: so sold, it being intended hereby that the agreements on the part of each party shall be binding on such party only during its ownership, but that the selling party shall remain liable for any obligations incurred prior to the date of such sale. 8 Termination and Amendment: This Agreement may he amended or terminated by the recordation of a written amendment or agreement of termination recorded in the Office of the County Recorder, San Bernardino County, California, executed by the current owners of"Area A" and Grantee's Property. 9. Attorneys' Fee: In the event of any controversy,claim, or dispute between the parties arising out of or relating to this Agreement or the breach thereof,the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the other party reasonable expenses, attorney's fees and costs. 10. Counterparts: 'this Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, all of which shall be deemed an original and which taken together shall constitute one and the same Description: San Bernardino,CA Document-Year.DocID 2000.79217 Page: 2 of 21 • Order: 6156394 Comment: ��(� • • Page 3 of 3 instrument. 11. If Grantees or its heirs, successors, assigns decide to grant the"Area A"back to Grantor and or its heirs,successors, assigns, Grantor and or its heirs, successors, assigns must,within thirty (30)days after receiving the written notice thereof, refund unconditionally the amount of Fifty Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Eight ($58,728.00)Dollars plus interest based on a eight (8%) percent annual interest rate starting from the Effective Date hereof. Grantee and or its heirs, successors, assigns shall,in its written notice to Grantor and or its heirs, successors, assigns, specify the escrow or title company with whom it has deposited its Grant Deed of"Area A"to Grantor and or its heirs, successors, assigns and Grantor and or its heirs, successors, assigns shall, within the time set forth above, deposit the sum of Fifty Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Eight($58,728.00)Dollars into such escrow and Grantor and or its heirs,successors, assigns shall execute all documents required by such escrow or title company as are necessary for close of escrow. 12. Further Assurances: Each party hereto agrees to execute any additional documents which may be reasonably required by the other to carry out the purposes of this Agreement. In Witness Whereof, this Perpetual"Area A" Agreement has been executed as of the day and year first above written. Overland Investment,LLC, a California lim ed liabili company 1 By: Cam_'/2.- �^^ L2it/✓_ al, Fred E.Liao, Managing Member Andrew Hsu,Managing ber • Stephen K. Lam Carrie Lin Cheng Cheng Lin Carol Lin Jung Pang Hung Lin Su Chits Hung • The Hsiao Family Trust Hou Min Chcn • Description: San Bernardino,CA Document-Year.DocID 2000.79217 Page: 3 of 21 Order 6156394 Comment: I I • • Page 3 of 3 instrument. 11. If Grantees or its heirs, successors, assigns decide to grant the"Area A"back to Grantor and or its heirs,successors, assigns, Grantor and or its heirs, successors, assigns must,within thirty (30) days after receiving the written notice thereof, refund unconditionally the amount of Fifty Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Eight($58,728.00)Dollars plus interest based on a e igM (8%)percent annual interest rate starting from the Effective Date hereof. Grantee and or its heirs, successors,assigns shall, in its written notice to Grantor and or its heirs, successors, assigns, specify the escrow or title company with whom it has deposited its Grant Deed of"Arta A"to Grantor and or its heirs, successors, assigns and Grantor and or its heirs, successors, assigns shall, within the time set forth above, deposit the sum of Fifty Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Eight($58,728.00)Dollars into such escrow and Grantor and or its heirs, successors, assigns shall execute all documents required by such escrow or title company as are necessary for close of escrow. 12. Further Assurances: Each party hereto agrees to execute any additional documents which may be reasonably required by the other to carry out the purposes of this Agreement. In Witness Whereof,this Perpetual"Area A"Agreement has been executed as of the day and year first above written. Overland Investment,LLC, a California limited liability company By: .. By: Fred E. Liao, Managing Member Andrew Hsu, Managing Member Stephen K. Lam Carrie Lin • Cheng Cheng Lin Carol Lin Jung Fang Hung Lin Su Chiu Hung (( i c `IAA) (Am( rbe,r - & tie& ae (Ate_ /ivr), The Hsiao Family Trust Hou Min Chen a " Description: San Bernardino,CA Document-Year.Doc!D 2000.79217 Page: 9 of 21 Order: 6156394 Comment: n • JAN-I1-200C TUE 02:06 P>n 9. 003/003 • • Page 3 of 3 insttume nt. 11.If Grantees or its heirs, successors,assigns decide to grant the"Ares A"back to Grantor and or its heira,successors, assigns,Grantor and or its heirs, successors,assigns must,within thirty (30)days after receiving the written notice thereof,refund unconditionally the amount of Fifty Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Eight(558,728.00)Dollars plus interest based on a eight (8%)percent annual interest rate starting from the Effective Date hereof. Grantee and or its heirs, successors,assigns shall,in its written notice to Grantor and or its heirs,successors, assigns, specify the escrow or title company with whom it has deposited its Grant Deed of"Area A"to Grantor and or its hairs, successors, assigns and Grantor and or its heirs, successors, assigns shall, . within the time set forth above, deposit the sum of Fifty Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Eight(358,728.00)Dollars into such escrow and Grantor and or its heirs,successors,assigns shell execute all documents required by such escrow or title company as are necessary for close of escrow. 12,Further Assurances:Eanh party hereto agrees to execute any additional documents which may be reasonably required by the other to carry out the purposes of this Agreement. In Witness Whereof,this Perpetual"Area A"Agreement has been executed as of the day and year first above written. Overland Investment,LLC, a California limited liability company By. By Fred E. Liao,Managing Member Andrew Hsu,Managing Member • • Stephen K.Lam Carrie Lin Ching ChenngLiLin Carol Lin l grf eng ip�� . LuX_.,J N5„40 Lin Su Chiu Hung k Gt tom, Argo, 7n 1io:An.rcn.iit• a/ The Hsiao Family Trust Clvn'le le 19744 Hou Min Chen Luke Hsiao, Trustee of ir4wE:E Luke Hsiao , M.D. , Employee' s Money Purchase Pension Plan • • Description: San Bernardino,CA Document-Year.DocID 2000.79217 Page: 8 of 21 Order: 6156394 Comment: • Page 3 of 3 instrument. 11. If Grantees or its heirs, ittwessors,assigns decide to grant the"Area A"back to Grantor dad or he heirs, successors, usigas,Grantor end or its hears, successors, assigns must,within thirty. (30)days after receiving the written notice thereof;refund unconditionally the amount of Fifty Sight Thousand Seven Htmdred Twenty Eight($58,728.00)Dollars plus hermit based on a eight (8%)percent stmual interest rate starting from the Effective Due hereof. Gnmee and or ha heirs, successors,assigns shall,in its written notice to Grantor and or Its heirs, successors,assigns, specify the escrow or title company with whom it has deposited its Grant Deed of"Area A"to Grantor and or its heirs,successors, assigns and Grantor and or its heirs,successors, assigns shall, within the time set forth show,deposit the sum of Fifty Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Eight($58,728.00)Dollars into such escrow and Grantor and or its heirs,successors,assigns shall execute all documents tegtdred by such escrow or title company as are asceasaty for close of escrow. 12.Further Assurances:Each party hereto agrees to execute any additional documanu which may be reasonably required by the other to carry out the purposes of this Agreement. In Witness Whereof, this Perpetual"Area A"Agreement has been executed as of the day and.year first above written. Overland Investment,LLC,a California limited liability company . . By: By. Fred Rialto,Managing Member Andrew Hsu,Managing Member Stephen K.Lam Carrie Lin J1� l., I rrf •�`"'_ K • c Chang Chang Lin "Carol Lim ANA Shih—Juen Carol tin Lin Su Chiu Hung The Horan Family Trust • Rau 14.11-Chen Taiwan City of Tnlpol .) Amsrican lnsti lute In ) a' TAkein, Ta12C!. • On 1 `_ ,IAN-'Wa-. .,., 1:' .re qp, ll,:+ nr'.Ir_airn.^d, paraona11r Ap::,-zr•v.:, bin C3tet19.gng_andLin, Shih-Juen Carol---- " / end ackaorl,ed,;,d that w+/-rat; C_i7 ,m: :,b IL. ) William Y. Wood Special Notary 1P1,96-8) cppointeu, ar,Q My commission eipires:leoreary 22, 2001 Description: San Bemardino,CA Document-Year.Doc1D 2000.79217 Page: 6 of 21 Order: 6156394 Comment: Crt-- T • • Page 3of3 instrument, 11. If Grantees or its heirs, successors,assigns decide to grant the"Area A"back to Grantor and or its heirs, successors,assigns, Grantor and or its heirs, successors, assigns must,within thirty (30)days after receiving the written notice thereof;refund unconditionally the amount of Fifty Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Eight(558,728.00)Dollars plus interest based on a eight (8%)percent animal interest rate starting d'om the Effective Date hereof. Grantee and or its heirs, successors,assigns shall,in its written notice to Grantor and or its heirs, successors, assigns, specify the escrow or title company with whom it has deposited its Grant Deed of"Area A"to Grantor and or its heirs, successors, assigns and Grantor and or its heirs,successors, assigns shell, within the time set forth above, deposit the suns of Fifty Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Eight(S58,728.00)Dollars into such escrow and Grantor and or its heirs, successors, assigns shall execute all documents required by such escrow or title company as are necessary for close of escrow. 12. Further Assurances:Each party hereto agrees to execute any additional documents which may be reasonably required by the other to carry out the.purposes of this Agreement. M Witness Whereof,this Perpetual"Area A"Agreement has been executed as of the day and year first above written. • Overland Investment,ILO,a California lir ' d habiis. company ■ By: i .c ` `� • . 4.. Fred E. Liao,Managing Member Andrew Hsu,Managing 7.t bar Stephen K. Lam Carrie Lin �� Chong Cheng Lin Carol Lin • Jung Pang; Lung Lin Su Chiu Hung The Hsiao Family Trust Hou Mtn•Chen • • Description: San Bernardino,CA Document-Year.DocID 2000.79217 Page: 5 of 21 Order 6156394 Comment: I • _ Received: 1 /11 /U0 4:30PM; MID AMERICAN; Page 4 JAN-M-2000 TUE 02'•19 PM - P. 004/004 Page 3 of 3 • instrument. 11.If Grantees or its heirs, successors, assigns decide to grant the"Area A"back to Grantor Ind ar its heirs,successors,assigns, Grantor and or its heirs, successors,assigns must,within thirty (30) days after receiving the written notice thereof,reflmd uncondltionslly the amount of Fifty Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Eight(558,728.00)Dollars plus interest based on a tight (8%)percent annual interest rate starting from the Effective Date hereof. Grantee and or its heirs, successors,assigns shall,in its written notice to Grantor and or its heirs, successors, assigns, specify the escrow or title company with whom it has deposited its Grant Deed of"Area A'to Grantor and or its heirs, successors, assigns and Grantor and or its heirs, successors, assigns shall, within the time set forth above, deposit the sum of Fifty Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Eight(558,728.00)Dollars into such escrow and Grantor and or its heirs, successors, assigns shall execute all documents required by such escrow or title company as are necessary for close of escrow. 12.Further Assurances:Each party hereto agrees to execute any additional documents which may be reasonably required by the other to carry out the purposes of this Agreement. In Witness Whereof this Perpetual"Area A"Agreement has been executed as of the day and year first above written. • Overland Investmeet,LLC, a California limited liability company By. By: Fr •, ,:• ,._„g Member Andrew Hsu,Managing Member tap .C. • am -- Came Lin Cheng Cheng Lin Carol Lin Jung Fang Hung Lin Su Chiu Hung The Hsiao Family Trust Hou Min Chan • NOTHRVEY ARYY PUBLIC State of Texas �.:. Comm.E, .12.18-2002 b 0- v • Description: San Bernardino,CA Document-Year.Dod D 2000.79217 Page: 4 of 21 Order: 6156394 Comment: • • Page 3 of 3 instrument. II. If Grantees or its heirs, successors, assigns decide to grant the"Area A" back to Grantor and or its heirs, successors, assigns, Grantor and or its heirs, successors, assigns must, within thirty (30) days after receiving the written notice thereof, refund unconditionally the amount of Fifty Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Eight($58,728.00)Dollars plus interest based on a eight (8%) percent annual interest rate starting from the Effective Date hereof Grantee and or its heirs, successors, assigns shall, in its written notice to Grantor and or its heirs, successors, assigns, specify the escrow or title company with whom it has deposited its Grant Deed of"Area A"to Grantor and or its heirs, successors, assigns and Grantor and or its heirs, successors, assigns shall, within the time set forth above, deposit the sum of Fifty Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Eight($58,728.00) Dollars into such escrow and Grantor and or its heirs, successors, assigns shall execute all documents required by such escrow or title company as are necessary for close of escrow. 12. Further Assurances: Each party hereto agrees to execute any additional documents which may be reasonably required by the other to carry out the purposes of this Agreement. In Witness Whereof,this Perpetual"Area A" Agreement has been executed as of the day and year first above written. Overland Investment, LLC,a California limited liability company By: By: — Fred E. Liao, Managing Member Andrew Hsu, Managing Member Stephen K. Lam Carrie Lin / Chcng Cheng Lin 3r eu �/C�q Yj arol Lin �H '^� Fi7cT� — , euni',(Pr' C' ci/, N F4 ` L 'an- Hung Lin Su Chiu Hung / a,Q A s aAOna-y 'ti FT" 4 u arh The I'Isiao Family Trust Hou Min Chen • Description: San Bernardino,CA Document-Year DocID 2000.79217 Page: 7 of 21 Order: 6156394 Comment: • • • EXHIBIT "A" • LEGAL DESCRIPTION: THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 1 SOUTH, RANGE 6 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO; STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT A POINT AT THE SOUTH EAST CORNER OF LOT 9, IN BLOCK"X" OF THE ETIWANDA COLONY LANDS, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. AS PER PLAT RECORDED IN BOOK 2 OF MAPS, PAGE 24; THENCE NORTH 89° 07 ' 00" WEST 550 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 0° 47 ' 00" WEST 369.5 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89° 07 ' 00" EAST 550 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0° 47 '00" EAST 369.5 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING EXCEPT THEREFROM ANY PORTION IN STREETS OR HIGHWAY. SAID PROPERTY IS ALSO SHOWN ON MAP OF TOWN OF ETIWANDA, RECORDED IN BOOK 8 OF MAPS, PAGE 13, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY. • • Description: San Bernardino,CA Document-Year.DocID 2000.79217 Page: 10 of 21 Order:: 6156394 Comment: • n;093-B Ent- IBIT "B" LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL NO. 1: • THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 1 SOUTH, RANGE 6 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY 01' SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER, OF SAID SECTION 5; THENCE NORTH 0 DEG. 47' EAST, 164 FEET ALONG THE CENTER LINE OF ETIWANDA AVENUE; THENCE NORTH 89 DEC. 07' WEST, 177 .78 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 0 DEG, 47' WEST, 165. 70 FEET TO THE CENTER LINE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEC. 40' EAST, 177. 78 FEET ALONG THE CENTER LINE OF• FOOTHILL BOULEVARD TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL NO. 2 : THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 1 SOUTH, RANGE 6 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS : • BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF' SAID SECTION 5; THENCE NORTH 89 DEC. 40' WEST, 177 . 78 FEET ALONG THE CENTER LINE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 0 DEG. 47' EAST, 165.70 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS PARCEL NO. 1 IN A DEED TO AMY CUNNINGHAM MILLER, RECORDED JULY 11, 1936, IN BOOK 1147, PAGE 414 , OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE NORTH 89 -DEG. 07' WEST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE, 50 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 0 DEG. . . 47' WEST TO A POINT IN THE CENTER LINE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEC. 40 EAST, 50 FEET ALONG THE CENTER LINE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL NO. 3 :. THAT PORTION OF SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 1 SOUTH, RANGE 6 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS : • Description: San Bernardino,CA Document-Year.DocID 2000.79217 Page: 11 of 21 Order: 6156394 Comment • 275093-B BEGINNING AT A POINT 369-1/2 FEET SOUTH AND 40 FEET EAST OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 9, BLOCK "X" , ETIWANDA COLONY LANDS, AS PER PLAT RECORDED IN BOOK 2 OF MAPS, PAGE 24, RECORDS OF SAID COx:NTY; THENCE WEST ON A LINE PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 9, 227. 78 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 62 FEET; THENCE EAST 227.78 FEET; THENCE NORTH 62 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, IN THE TOWN OF ETIWANDA, AS PER PLAT RECORDED IN BOOK 8 OF MAPS, PAGE 13, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY. EXCEPTING THEREFROM ANY PORTION OF THE PROPERTY HEREIN DESCRIBED LYING WITHIN FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, ADJOINING ON THE SOUTH AND ETIWANDA AVENUE ADJOINING ON THE EAST. • • • • Description: San Bernardino,CA Document-Year.DocID 2000.79217 Page: 12 of 21 Order 6156394 Comment: 1) l cP9'07 Oa'G!/ •95� ,-- s.C.aZ/2 .Cof9, 1 /2 A .2-2 4 4, .-- a ,l Grantor's Property GO <. M rn g y� %'� 'r/ r. J 2 ' Carex,&Qr�& Dd 9 4c. - .v.19'o7iv`w I • ._W227 /,vsfs . e'.3-i�o, a4'. i�7a ' l- o •o 0 l 1 `..__\_ ko Area "A^ '` - ti f i,cZ7BI & Grantee' s Property io % `� \• • t > r'.1 @ { o b p .� o HBO . 1 .L.iW/. .7: -- , — --\ tea, . --- 7 r�or�i‘‘ �oacEaaizo " r 55..e a �' I f— • CC a'ra/re 70 A(-,(41/4) ___ -- c% arlfig 7P/ 7 .41,:912.10 _ . ,/sew 'or L/,v - - ---- E.s rc.,ve - • . E'Xyldlr B „ l ClA# Description: San Bernardino,CA Document-Year.Doc/D 2000.79217 Page: 13 of 21 Order. 6156394 Comment: G-I-- • • EXHIBIT"C" LEGAL DESCRIPTION: AN PERPETUAL EASEMENT OVER AND ABOVE THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PARCEL: THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 1 SOUTH, RANGE 6 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; COMMENCING AT A POINT AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 9, IN BLOCK"X" OF THE ETIWANDA COLONY LANDS, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA; AS PER PLAT RECORDED IN BOOK 2 OF MAPS, PAGE 24; THENCE SOUTH 0° 47 ' 00" WEST 300 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 89° 07 ' 00" WEST 187.78 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 0° 47 ' 00" WEST 69.5 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89° 07 ' 00" EAST 187.78 FEET; THENCE NORTH O° 47'.00" EAST 69.5 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING • SAID PROPERTY 1S ALSO SHOWN ON MAP OF TOWN OF ETIWANDA, RECORDED IN BOOK 8 OF MAPS, PAGE 13, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY • • ----- 77-7-- Description: San Bernardino,CA Document-Year.Doc!D 2000.79217 Page: 14 of 21 Order: 6156394 Comment: • MLaw Offices of Bryan Mashian APc February 28, 2008 Jim Markman, Esq. City attorney The City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91729 Property: 12842, 12854 and 12892 Foothill Boulevard, Rancho • Cucamonga; APNs: 0227-221-14, 26 & 27 , Easement: Recorded March 8,2000, Inst. No. 2000-0079217 Dear Mr. Markman: I wanted to thank you, Mr. Troyer and Kevin Ennis, Esq. for meeting with me and Messrs. Chuck and Charlie Buquet on February 13, 2008. Pursuant to our discussions, owners of the above-referenced properties will be permitted to submit by providing their own letter of authorization and to secure approval of applications for entitlements, understanding that issuance of the building permit for a • development that includes the area of the easement referenced above will be conditioned on complying with the Subdivision Map Act by a lot line adjustment or as otherwise permitted by law. Kindly sign the enclosed copy of this letter in the space below to confirm your agreement to the foregoing and sending it to me. Please call me if you have any questions. Very truly yours, LAW OFFIC OF BRYAN MASHIAN, a professiona et soration / By i . Bryan Mashian Jim Markman, Esq., City Attorney Date: , 2008 Telephone 310.207.1464 Email Bryan @Mashionlow.com Fax 310.207.1466 11726 Son Vicente Blvd. Suite#290 Los Angeles, California 90049 BM\fy Cc: Mr. James R. Troyer, Planning Director Kevin Ennis, Esq. Mr. Chuck Buquet Mr. Charlie Buquet Mrs. Vicki Barbieri • • n �� Mayor DONALD J. KURTH, M.D. Mayor Pro Tern L. DENNIS MICHAEL Councilmembers REX GUTIERREZ • SAM SPAGNOLO DIANE WILLIAMS City Manager SIL;(1->: THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA JACK LAM, AICP RANCHO • CUCAMONGA October 1, 2009 Susan Nakamura 21865 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4178 SUBJECT: RESPONSE LETTER TO SCAQMD REGARDING THE DRAFT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR DRC2007-00402 AND SUBTPM18535 Dear Mrs. Nakamura: • Thank you for reviewing the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration for DRC2007-00402 and SUBTPM18535. We appreciate your effort in reviewing this project for conformance with SCAQMD's air quality policies. 'In your letter dated September 29, 2009, South Coast Air Quality Management District(SCAQMD)requests the following information: "SCAQMD staff requests that when calculating the regional air quality impacts of the project,the lead agency also evaluates the localized air quality impacts to ensure that nearby sensitive receptors or workers are not adversely affected by the construction or operational activities that would occur in close proximity to the project. On Page 4 of the initial study, the lead agency has identified sensitive receptors located north (multi- family residences) and workers (commercial) west and south of the project site. In the event that the lead agency's localized air quality analysis requested above demonstrates that any criteria pollutant exceeds any localized significance threshold, the SCAQMD staff recommends that the lead agency consider mitigation measures, if feasible." (See attachment for original letter.) • • In response to this request, staff has worked with the project applicant's consultant to clarify the tables provided in the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration to identify the Localized Significance Thresholds. The proposed project is on a 4.67 acre site located within 25 meters of sensitive receptors to the north,south,and west of the project site. The proposed project is located within Sensitive Receptor Area (SRA) Number 4— Central San Bernardino Valley. The Localized Significance Thresholds for sensitive receptors within 25-meters based on the Central San Bernardino Valley SRA are as follows: • Construction Thresholds Operational Thresholds • NO, 270 • NO, 270 CO 1720 CO 1720 PM10 14 PM10 4 PM2s 8 PM2s 2 Staff has revised Table 1 — Project Construction Emissions and Table 2— Project Operational Emissions to include the Localized Significance Thresholds. Table 2—Project Operational Emissions has been changed to calculate emissions from tons/year to lbs/day. See below for the revised Tables incorporating the clarifications (changes are identified in italics): 10$00 Civic Cancer Dr. • P.O. Box 807 • Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729-0807•Tel 909-477-2700 • Fax 909-477-2849•www.ciryofrc.us • RESPONSE LETTER . DRC2007-00402 & SUBTPM18535 - SCAQMD September 30, 2009 Page 2 Table 1 Project Construction Emissions Source Pollutant Emissions, lbs/day CO ROG NO. SO2 PM15 PM2.5 CO2 Project Construction Mass Grading .07 .02 .13 .00 .12 .03 11.86 Fine Grading .14 .03 .25 .00 .25 .06 23.72 Trenching .12 .03 .22 .00 .01 .01 9.99 Paving .12 .03 .17 .00 .01 • .01 16.10 Building 1 .29 .32 1 .47 .00 .11 .10 182.05 Coating .00 .55 .00 .00 .00 .00 .44 SCAQMD Thresholds 550 75 100 150 150 55 No Exceeds Thresholds No No No No No No Threshold Localized Significance 1720 N/A 270 N/A 14 8 No • Thresholds Threshold Exceeds Thresholds No N/A No N/A No No CO=Carbon Monoxide PM10=Coarse Particulate Matter ROG=Reactive Organic Gases PM2.5= Fire Particulate Matter NO.= Nitrogen Oxide SO2=Sulfur Dioxide SO2=Sulfur Dioxide SCAQMD= South Coast Air Quality Management District Table 2 Project Operational Emissions . Source Pollutant Emissions, lbs/day CO ROG NO,, SO2 PM10 PM2.5 CO2 Project Land Uses Strip Mall 180.93 15.01 21.73 .21 1.87 .22 19,998.82 SCAQMD Thresholds 550 75 100 150 150 55 No Significant Emissions? No No No No No No Threshold Localized Significance 1720 N/A 270 N/A 4 2 No Thresholds Exceeds Thresholds No N/A No N/A No No Threshold CO=Carbon Monoxide PM10=Coarse Particulate Matter • ROG= Reactive Organic Gases PM2.5= Fire Particulate Matter NO.= Nitrogen Oxide SO2=Sulfur Dioxide , SO2= Sulfur Dioxide SCAQMD= South Coast Air Quality Management District As shown in the revised tables, none of the criteria pollutants exceed any localized significance threshold (LST) in the Central San Bernardino Valley SRA; therefore, the revised analysis does not create any new avoidable significant effects or require additional mitigation than currently included in the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration for DRC2007-00402 and SUBTPM18535. Because the information requested is a minor clarification of data previously included in the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration,and does not create ` any new avoidable significant effects or require additional mitigation, staff has determined that it is unnecessary to incorporate the revised tables in the Final Mitigated Negative Declaration prior to Planning Commission consideration. The Planning Department staff will be sure to include this information in applicable initial studies in the future. /�_ l// RESPONSE LETTER DRC2007-00402 AND SUBTPM18535—SCAQMD October 1, 2009 Page 2 Commission consideration. The Planning Department staff will be sure to include this information in applicable initial studies in the future. Should you have any further questions or comments, or if we can be of further assistance, please feel free to contact the project planner,Adam Collier, at(909)477-2750, Monday through Thursday from 7 a.m.to 6 p.m. Sincerely, Larry Henderson, AICP Principal Planner LH:AC/ge Attachment • • South Coast Air Quality Management District 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar. CA 91.765-4178 AQM i' (909) 396-2000 www.aqmd.gov E-MAILED: SEPTEMBER 29. 2009 September 29, 2009 Mr. Adam Collier, Planner Planning Division City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (Draft MND) for the Proposed DRC2007- 00402 and SUBTPMIS535 The South Coast Air Quality Management District(SCAQMD)appreciates the opportunity to comment on the above-mentioned document. The following comments are meant as guidance for the Lead Agency and should be incorporated into the Final Mitigated Negative Declaration. Please provide the AQMD with written responses to all comments contained herein prior to the adoption of the Final MND. The SCAQMD staff would be happy to work with the Lead Agency to address these issues and any other questions that may arise. Please contact Gordon Mize, Air Quality Specialist —CEQA Section, at (909)396-3302, if you have any questions regarding these comments. Sincerely, Susan Nakamura Planning Manager Planning,Rule Development& Area Sources Attachment SN:EE:GM SBC090917-03 Control Number Mr. Adam Collier 1 September 29. 2009 Planner Localized Significance Thresholds • SCAQMD staff requests that when calculating the project's regional air quality impacts the lead agency also evaluates the localized air quality impacts to ensure that nearby any sensitive receptors or workers are not adversely affected by the construction or operational activities that would occur in close proximity to the project. On page 4 of the initial study, the lead agency has identified sensitive receptors located north (multi-family residences) and workers (commercial)west and south of the project site. The SCAQMD's guidance for performing a localized air quality analysis can be found at the following web address: http://www.agmd.aov/cega/handbook/LST/LST.html. In the event that the lead agency's localized air quality analysis requested above demonstrates that any criteria pollutant exceeds any localized significance threshold, the SCAQMD staff recommends that the lead agency consider the mitigation measures found at the following website, if feasible. These mitigation measures can be found at http://www.agmd.gov/cega/handbook/mitigation/MM intro.html . �-J � cJM Ccr2c EXHIBIT I APPENDICIES AND SPECIAL STUDIES (DISTRIBUTED UNDER SEPARATE COVER) • I t cfe.04767 E-1-1 F LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JULY 9009 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 177 APPENDIX A • DEMENS FLOOD CONTROL BASIN DEBRIS RELOCATION INITIAL STUDY • .I R1\RNF'0701\Initial Study\07_09 Initial Study\Appendicc Slipsheets.doc • San Bernardino County MM end IId[ STP hoi��::I °m`%;ii, MITIGATED • NEGATIVE DECLARATION Project Description Vicinity Map APNs: 1061-621-03, 1061-411-11, 0174-011-20 A, Demens -;, 11-ii i , . Hllside 1,": APPLICANT: San Bernardino County Basin 1 l„si> Basin Department of Public Works - t_- if r_i° ` PROPOSAL: Relocate approximately 96,000 cubic • m_;i •, .,,' we 11 tr i, r l� yards(cy)of stockpiled flood debris soil ` �° _ <,,= '• u I : 1, a,- from Demens Basin 1 and approximately Y J11� °�, 20,000 cy of stockpiled flood debris soil it , !l lr e from Hillside Basin(both located in the a„e,„t f T I i '— u .nn .;i( ,. k, foothills of the San Bernardino c .,K, s II I _1-Hr [r—- Xr _f Mountains, adjacent to the northern ll / i jl� J I i'r }i j r R, ' , i boundary of the City of Rancho ,.;-!III., (r+_i , ; _I w,= _- .-t- r . Cucamonga), to Demens Basin 2, within IL!%L ” i jll'�. I I ,, I'I ' ' ,r , (- the City oRancho Cucamonga.The l' Basin 2 t- �, '�, ..va^= t"Ca sego=• project will fill Demens Basin 2, an 1 h j i J } `, ! Q , c �J inactive water storage basin, to . j��'_j L __JL a.m�'� 1, li ' .j i7 °ail t l elevations suitable for buildable property. r[ I` > ,JI I� i (II _J3`- - A portion of property is proposed to be '.`iJ 'I I it { J if , .: `t, j ff t nr IIfr,,1, ,ff-. ,l I ` tit sold to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, 1.' i , 'jj 1I L.I l; Il J ifH'lllu IL .- rf' Il I i', which proposes to build a fire station. 1 1L1 II II �j � Il 7 f-•rJ t , 1_ "II . The remainder will be surplused for "I"fit i : ,� .iI 1l J I Fill development. Any development of the P Stu, a .rid r ,�,__°e.— ,�ti" • property, including the proposed fire L_ ,�-- : lii L ': I!I' station, will undergo a separate environmental process, and is not covered in this document. COMMUNITY: City of Rancho Cucamonga/Supervisorial District 2 LOCATION: Hellman Avenue at Hillside Drive • LATITUDE/LONGITUDE: 34.153509°, -117.604303° - March 18, 2008 (Effective Date of Approval/Adoption) Plans and specifications for the referenced project are available for public inspection at the Land Use Services Department, 385 North Arrowhead Avenue, San Bernardino, CA 92415-0182. Pursuant to provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and the San Bernardino County Environmental Review Guidelines, it has been determined the above referenced project will not have a significant effect upon the environment after the implementation of mitigation measures listed in the. Initial Study. An Environmental Impact Report will not be required. Reasons to support this finding are included in the written Initial Study prepared under the supervision of the San Bernardino County Land Use Services Department. / %I ,2-,0 ', 2-7 J 20,Naresh Prrarma, P.E., Chief Date of Dete ination Environmental Management Division Department of Public Works, Environmental Mgmt. Div. 825 East Third Street, San Bernardino, CA 92415-0835 Attachments: Initial Study I• cc: Advance Planning Division Meg Dec.doc Rev.I/94 IAP SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM ( This form and the descriptive information in the application package constitute the contents of Initial Study • pursuant to County Guidelines under Ordinance 3040 and Section 15063 of the State CEQA Guidelines. PROJECT LABEL: Amethyst Avenue and Beryl Street,in the City of Rancho Cucamonga; and Hillside Basin APN: 1061-411-11; 1061-511-10, 12, & 15; located east of Demens Basin 1. 1061-501-02; 1061-621-03 USGS QUAD: Cucamonga Peak Quadrangle, APPLICANT: San Bernardino County Flood California,7.5-Minute Series(Topographic) Control District T,R,SECTION: Township 1 North,Range 7 West, PROPOSAL: Reclaim Demens Basin 1 by Section 22, San Bernardino Baseline and Meridian. relocating 96,000 cubic yards(cy)of stockpiled material to Demens Basin 2. The THOMAS BROS: Page 572, grid H2, material will fill a 4-acre portion of the 5-acre San Bernardino&Riverside Counties 2005 edition Demens Basin 2. Approximately 20,000 cy of material will also be transported from Hillside PLANNING AREA: City of Rancho Cucamonga Basin to Demens Basin.2 to ensure fill of the full 4 acres. The 1-acre westerly portion of LAND USE DISTRICT: City of Rancho Demens Basin 2 will remain for flood control Cucamonga—Flood ControUUtility Corridor purposes. COMMUNITY: Rancho Cucamonga, California • LOCATION: Demens Basins 1 and 2 located • north and south of Hillside Road between • PROJECT CONTACT INFORMATION: Lead agency name and address: San Bernardino County Flood Control District 825 E. Third Street San Bernardino, CA 92415-0835 • Contact person and phone number: Julie Gilbert, Senior Associate Planner, County of San Bernardino Department of Public Works, (909) 387-8115 Project sponsor's name and address: San Bernardino County Flood Control District 825 E. Third Street San Bernardino, CA 92415-0835 BACKGROUND In the early 19SOs, the United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) constructed Demens Creek Channel to bring flood relief to the northwestern area of Rancho Cucamonga. This project was part of the channelization and dam project for Deer Creek. The federal project also included the construction of Demens Basin 1, located north of Hillside Road and west of Amethyst Avenue, and Demens Basin 2, located south of Hillside Road on the west 1 Demens Flood Control Basin Debris Relocation Initial Study • January 22,2008 Page 3 SUMMARY OF PROPOSED SITE ACTIVITIES • The San Bernardino County Flood Control District (District) is proposing to reclaim the stockpile area availability of Demens Basin 1 by removing excess debris stockpiled at the site from past storm events. The project includes exporting the reclaimed material to Demens Basin 2 where it will be placed within the basin beginning at the eastern edge and filling approximately three-fourths of the length of the basin (approximately 4 acres) in accordance with the District's fill plan. The basin's remaining capacity would be reduced from the existing estimate of 149,500 cy to 63,450 cy. As determined by the District, reducing the capacity of Demens Basin 2 would not affect the basin's ability to continue to provide conservation of localized flows, and detention for any overflow that might result from Demens Basin I. The material will be placed within Demens Basin 2 in accordance with a District-prepared fill plan, and compacted in accordance with Uniform Building Code (UBC) and City of Rancho Cucamonga standards, to achieve the grade and compaction requirements necessary for a buildable, four-acre piece of property. The four- acre site will be subsequently disposed of by the District at a future date. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has identified this site to potentially construct a fire station, which will be the subject of a separate, independent environmental review. (This environmental document does not analyze the potential impacts of the fire station or any other potential use for the property). Potential future development that may occur on the property would be required to comply with City of Rancho Cucamonga requirements and subsequently comply with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for any action considered a project as defined in Chapter 2.5, Section 21065 of the 2007 CEQA Statutes. It is estimated that approximately 96,000 cy are stockpiled at Demens Basin 1. Based on compaction and screening requirements to provide a useable area at Demens Basin 2, an additional 20,000 cy of material may be required and could be transported to the site from the District's Hillside Basin located approximately two miles east of Demens Basin 2. Therefore, this Initial Study evaluates the relocation of a maximum of 1 I6,000 cy from • Demens Basin I and Hillside Basin to Demens Basin 2, and the compaction of this material at Demens Basin 2 to allow the District to allow the four-acre area to be considered as future surplus property. Prior to transportation, materials at Demens Basin 1 and Hillside Basin would be manually screened to remove wood, vegetation debris, and boulders/rocks greater than six inches in diameter. A front end loader would deposit material at the top of the screen (Grizzly), then screened material would be placed in trucks for transport to Demens Basin. It is estimated that the use of this type of equipment will process approximately 4,800 cy per day. At the aforementioned rate it will take approximately 21 working days to process 100,000 cy. It is anticipated that the screening and trucking operation will occur simultaneously. Proposed earthwork activities would occur over a four- to five-week period. Exportation of material from Demens Basin 1 includes trucks traveling south along Amethyst Avenue, then west along Hillside Road, and then south along Hellman Avenue for a total one-way travel distance of 0.6 miles. If additional material is needed, it would be brought to the site from Hillside Basin located approximately two miles east of the site.Trucks traveling from Hillside Basin would travel south along Haven Avenue and then west along Hillside Road to the project site for approximately two miles. Sensitive receptors including single-family residential occur along both proposed travel routes. Equipment required for on-site grading and compaction would include: a loader, two water trucks, a dozer, grader,and a rubber tire dozer. i• 3 Demens Flood Control Basin Debris Relocation Initial Study January 22,2008 Page 2 side of Hellman Avenue in Rancho Cucamonga, California (see Figure 1 Regional Map and Figure 2 Vicinity ( Map). Demens Basin 1 was designed for collection of debris in the event of a flood, and Demens Basin 2 was • constructed for water conservation of localized flows, and any overflow that might result from Demens Basin 1. Ownership and operation of the facilities were subsequently turned over to the San Bernardino County Flood Control District(District). Historically, Demons Basin 2 has received minimal flows and is dry most of the year. The water sources for Demens Basin 2 are an underground pipe that is connected to Demens Basin 1, as well as street runoff and nuisance flows. The pipe outlets under Hillside Avenue into a natural drainage channel that is conveyed over a concrete spillway at the northwestern corner of the basin, and water ponds in a low spot located on the western portion of the basin. If excess water exists, the water continues down a drainage ditch that dead ends. Should flows reach the top of the bank, they would enter a concrete swale located at the top of the bank, which outlets back onto surface streets. Sediment and debris is periodically stockpiled adjacent to and outside of Demens Basin 1. Generally, the District offers the material to local contractors to utilize as fill for construction projects.This practice assists the District in reducing the amount of stockpiled materials at the site. During the past several storm seasons, especially after the 2003/2004 storm events, Demens Basin I received an unusually excessive amount of debris. To date, the local market has not been able to absorb all of the debris from this basin. A total of approximately 96,000 cy of material remains stockpiled at the Demens Basin 1 site. ENVIRONMENTAL/EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS Demens Basin I is located in the City of Rancho Cucamonga and spans across four parcels totaling approximately 53.13 acres that are owned and maintained by the District.The site is designated as Flood Control/Utility Corridor • by the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Land Use Map and is located on the west side of Amethyst Avenue between Gooseneck Drive to the north and Sherwood Drive to the south. Surrounding land uses include Demens Creek Channel to the north and west, vacant land to the east, and single-family residential to the south. Demens Basin 2, located 0.6 miles southwest of Demens Basin 1, is also located within the planning limits of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and is designated as Flood Control/Utility Corridor by the City's General Plan Land Use Map. The approximate 5-acre basin is situated on a 7.18-acre site located on the west side of Hellman Avenue between Hillside Road to the north and Ioamosa Court to the south. Surrounding land uses include single- family residential to the north and west, Hellman Avenue and single-family residential to the east, and an approximate 25-foot flood control easement and single-family residential (currently under construction) to the south. Demens Basin 2 has historically received little to no flows. Therefore the District has determined that the basin is no longer needed for flood control or water storage. The Demens Basin 2 site supports approximately one-acre of Riversidean upland sage scrub which occurs along the north, south and west side slopes of the basin (Focused California Gnatcatcher Survey, LSA Associates, Inc. July 13, 2007). The remainder of the site consists of non-native grassland and areas with only ruderal vegetation. Dominant species within the Riversidean upland sage scrub include California sagebrush, California buckwheat, and shortpod mustard. The basin also occurs within an area designated as critical habitat for the California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica). The basin is relatively shallow with side slopes averaging approximately 12 feet wide. Results of the Focused California Gnatcatcher survey performed at the site are provided in Section IV of this Initial Study. • Omens Flood Control Basin Debris Relocation Initial Study January 22,2008 Page 4 •`; ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact"as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture Resources ❑ Air Quality ❑ Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Geology/Soils ❑ Hazards&Hazardous Materials ❑ Hydrology/Water Quality ❑ Land Use/Planning ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Noise ❑ Population/Housing ❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation ❑ Transportation/Traffic ❑ Utilities/Service Systems ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation, the following finding is made: ❑ The proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. El Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project • proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. The proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ❑ The proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required,but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ❑ Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project,nothing further is required. C'9% 1 el 9,(i, a. ig:u.„4---)I �- Gilbert, Senior Associate Planner date C.• n , of San Bernardino Flood Control District p Naresh P.Varma,P.E., Chief Dq{e / San Bernardino County Department of Public Works l• Environmental Management Division 4 Demens Flood Control Basin Debris Relocation Initial Study January 22,2008 Page 5 f Potentially Less than Less than No • Significant Significant Significant impact Impact with Mitigation I. AESTHETICS—Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? • ❑ ❑ ® ❑ b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings,and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? ❑ ❑ ❑ d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? ❑ ❑ ❑ SUBSTANTIATION (check if project is located within the viewshed of any Scenic Route listed in the General Plan): a) There will be a temporary visual impact for single-family residences located south of Demens Basin 1 and 2,and for single-family residences located west and south of Hillside Basin during relocation of debris from earthmoving and equipment activity. Earthmoving activities will be short-term and will not alter any existing scenic resources in the area. Residents south of Demens Basin 1 currently have a view of the stockpile that hinder views of the San Gabriel Mountains. Upon completion, views in the area would not be degraded, but would improve allowing an uninterrupted view of the San Gabriel Mountains to the north. Therefore, less than significant impacts to aesthetics are anticipated. b) According to the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan, no scenic highways exist within the City limits. The existing basins are surrounded by single-family residential development, vacant land and local connector streets including portions of Amethyst Avenue, Hillside Road, Haven Avenue and Hellman Avenue. A total of two eucalyptus trees and approximately 10 eucalyptus sucker trees occur along the top of the western side slope of Demens Basin 2. Since the project involves filling in the eastern portion of the basin, no trees would be impacted. The existing stockpiles at Demens Basin 1, and material at Hillside Basin are devoid of vegetation and trees. Therefore no existing trees,rock outcroppings or historic buildings would be impacted by the proposed project. • c) Both Demens Basin 1 and 2, and the Hillside Basin are located adjacent to existing single-family homes, vacant land, and public roadways. Relocation of debris from Demens Basin I and Hillside Basin to Demens Basin 2 would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the sites and surrounding areas.Upon completion, visual quality of the area would not be degraded, but would improve by removal of the above-ground stockpile. Therefore, no impacts to aesthetics are anticipated. d) Construction activities will be limited to daylight hours and would not create additional light or glaze. There would be no permanent lighting associated with the project. No adverse impacts to the day or nighttime views in the area would result. No significant adverse impacts to aesthetics are identified or anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. i • 5 • Demens Flood Control Basin Debris Relocation Initial Study January 22,2008 Page 6 • Potentially Less than Less than No Significant Significant Impact Impact with Mitigation LI.AGRICULTURE RESOURCES—In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model(1997)prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance(Farmland),as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency,to non-agricultural use? C] C] S b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use,or a Williamson Act contract? S S S c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? Li S SUBSTANTIATION (check_if project is located in the Important Farmlands Overlay): • a) Neither Demens Basin 1, Demens Basin 2 or Hillside Basin are designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance. There are approximately 1,300 acres of Prime Farmlands, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance within the City of Rancho Cucamonga, of which about one-third is either developed or committed to development according.to General Plan Table IV-2. The major concentrations of designated farmlands are located in the southern and eastern portions of the City that is characterized by existing and planned development. The site is within the northwestern section of the City and was not known to be used for agricultural purposes. b-c) According to the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Land Use Map, Demens Basin I, Demens Basin 2, and Hillside Basin are designated Flood ControVUtility Corridor.The area surrounding all three basins is designed Very Low Residential (less than two dwelling units per acre).There are no agriculturally zoned lands within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Additionally, there are no Williamson Act contracts within the City. No impacts to Williamson Act contracts or conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use would result: No impacts to agricultural resources are identified or anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. f� 6 Demens Flood Control Basin Debris Relocation Initial Study January 22,2008 Page 7 • Potentially Less than Less than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Mitigation III.AIR QUALITY—Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable ❑ ❑ ❑ air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard(including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? ❑ ❑ ❑ d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? ❑ ❑ ❑ e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? ❑ ❑ ❑ SUBSTANTIATION : • The project site is located in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB). The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) has jurisdiction over air quality issues and regulations within the SCAB. To assist local agencies to determine if a project's emissions could pose a significant threat to air quality, the SCAQMD has published its CEQA Air Quality Handbook (CEQA Handbook). The air and dust emissions from the implementation of the project would be temporary, occurring during the excavation, hauling, and grading activities. These were measured based on the SCAQMD standards and evaluated against the most recent thresholds applicable. The detailed summary of the model results is attached as Appendix A. a) The proposed project is the removal of a total of approximately 116,000 cy of material (approximately 96,000 CY from Demens Basin 1 and approximately 20,000 cy from Hillside Basin) and relocating the material to Demens Basin 2 thereby increasing stockpile capacity of Demens Basin 1 and Hillside Basin. Demens Basin 2 was determined by the District to have excess storage capacity and can therefore accept the additional material. The proposed project will not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the SCAQMD Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) or any other applicable air quality plans. Earthmoving activities are short-term and are not anticipated to be significant. Upon completion of earthmoving activities, no permanent emissions would result. The project would not conflict with South Coast Air Quality Management Plan. Therefore, no impact is anticipated. b-c) Relocation of material from Demens Basin 1 and Hillside Basin, located approximately 0.6 miles and 2 miles (one- way), respectively to Demens Basin 2, would require earthmoving, excavation, and other activities such as grading and material screening. The removal of material will not overlap. Once material removal is completed from Demens Basin I work will begin at Hillside Basin if needed. The material at Demens Basin 2 will be compacted by the District to allow the four-acre area to be considered as future surplus property. • 7 Demens Flood Control.Basin Debris Relocation Initial Study January 22,2008 Page 8 • The project's proposed earthwork activities were screened for emission generation using SCAQMD "Air Quality Handbook" guidelines, Emission Factors for On-Road Heavy-Heavy Duty Diesel Trucks (EMFAC 2007) and SCAQMD Off-Road Mobile Source Emissions Factors(2007). These tables are used to generate emissions estimates for development projects.The criteria pollutants screened for included: reactive organic gases(ROG), nitrous oxides (NO,), carbon monoxide(CO), and particulates(PMia and PM,s) and greenhouse gases (GHG)(CO2).Two of these, ROG and NO„ are ozone precursors. Construction Emissions Construction earthwork emissions are considered short-term, temporary emissions and are estimated in Tables 1, 2 and 3.The following construction parameters were assumed: Demens Basin 1 • The removal of approximately 96,000 cy of stockpiled material to Demens Basin 2 • Approximately 1.2 mile haul distance(roundtrip) • 2 Loaders operating 8 hours per day • 48 street legal haul trucks(10 cy per load)operating per hour Hillside Basin • • The removal of up to 20,000 cy of material to Demens Basin 2 • • Approximately 4 mile haul distance(roundtrip) • 2 Loaders operating 8 hours per day • 24 street legal haul trucks(10 cy per load)operating per hour Demens Basin 2 • Earthwork and compaction of material • 2 Loaders operating 8 hours per day • 2 miscellaneous construction equipment operating 8 hours per day Table 1 Construction Emissions Demens Basin 1 to Demens Basin 2 (Poundsper Day) Source ROG NO, CO PMto PM23 CO2 Loaders' 2.7 22.4 9.0 1.6 1.5 1737.6 Haul Trucks2 2.4 27.2 8.8 1.1 1.0 -- Totals abs/day) 5.1 49.6 17.8 2.7 2.5 1737.6 SCAQMD Threshold 75 100 550 150 55 Significant No No No No No N/A SCAQMD Off-Road Mobile Source Emissions Factors(2007) 2 Emission Factors for On-Road Heavy-Heavy Duty Diesel Trucks(Ernfac 2007) —No emission factors *No established thresholds • 8 Demers Flood Control Basin Debris Relocation Initial Study January 22,2008 Page 9 • Table 2 Construction Emissions Hillside Basin to Demens Basin 2 (Pounds per Day) Source ROG NO, CO PMto PM s CO2 Loaders' 2.7 22.4 9.0 1.6 1.5 1737.6 Haul Trucks 2.7 38.4 11.5 1.9 1.5 --- Totals fibs/day) 5.4 60.8 20.5 3.5 3.0 1737.6 SCAQMD Threshold 75 100 550 150 55 . * Significant No No , No No No N/A SCAQMD Off-Road Mobile Source Emissions Factors(2007) '-Emission Factors for On-Road Heavy Heavy Duty Diesel Trucks(Emfac 2007) -No emission factors `No established thresholds Table 3 Construction Emissions Demens Basin 2 Earthwork (Pounds per Day) Source ROG NO, . CO PMts PM13 CO2 2-Loaders' 2.7 22.4 9.0 1.6 1.5 1737.6 _ Misc.Equipment` 3.2 28.8 10.1 1.3 1.2 2259.2 Totals (lbs/day) 5.9 51.2 19.1 2.9 2.7 3996.8 SCAQMD Threshold 75 100 550 150 55 * Significant No No No No No N/A • Emission Factors for On-Road Heavy Heavy Duty Diesel Trucks(Emfac 2007) •No established thresholds Compliance with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403 Although the proposed project does not exceed SCAQMD thresholds for construction emissions, the District is required to comply with all applicable SCAQMD rules and regulations as the South Coast Air Basin is in non- attainment status for ozone and suspended particulates (PMta).The project shall comply with,Rules 402 nuisance, and 403 fugitive dust, which require the implementation of Best Available Control Measures (BACM) for each fugitive dust source; and the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), which identifies Best Available Control Technologies (BACT) for area sources and point sources, respectively. This would include, but not be limited to the following BACMs and BACTs: 1. The project proponent shall ensure that any portion of the site to be graded shall be pre-watered prior to the onset of grading activities. (a) The project proponent shall ensure that watering of the site or other soil stabilization method shall be employed on an on-going basis after the initiation of any grading activity on the site. Portions of the site that are actively being graded shall be watered regularly to ensure that a crust is formed on the ground surface, and shall be watered at the end of each workday. (b) The project proponent shall ensure that all disturbed areas are treated to prevent erosion. i • 9 Demens Flood Control Basin Debris Relocation Initial Study January 22,2008 Page 10 • (c) The project proponent shall ensure that all grading activities are suspended during first and second stage ozone episodes or when winds exceed 25 miles per hour. Exhaust emissions from construction vehicles and equipment and fugitive dust generated by equipment traveling over exposed surfaces, would increase NOx and PM10 levels in the area. Although the proposed project does not exceed SCAQMD thresholds during construction, the District will be required to implement the following conditions as required by SCAQMD: 2. To reduce emissions, all equipment used in earthwork must be tuned and maintained to the manufacturer's specification to maximize efficient burning of vehicle fuel. 3. The project proponent shall ensure that construction personnel are informed of ride sharing and transit opportunities. 4. The operator shall maintain and effectively utilize and schedule on-site equipment in order to minimize exhaust emissions from truck idling. 5. The operator shall comply with all existing and future CARE and SCAQMD regulations related to diesel- fueled trucks, which may include among others: (1)meeting more stringent emission standards; (2) retrofitting existing engines with particulate traps; (3) use of low sulfur fuel; and (4) use of alternative fuels or equipment. 'Compliance with the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006(AB 32) • In September 2006 Governor Swarzenegger signed Assembly Bill 32, which was created to address the Global Warming situation in California. The Act requires that the Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions in California be reduced to the levels of 1990 by 2020. This is part of a larger plan in which California hopes to reduce its emissions by 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. This will be accomplished through a statewide cap on GHG emissions by 2012, which will be regulated by California Air Resources Board (CARB). With the act in place, CARB is in charge of setting specific standards for different sources of emissions, as well as implementing these standards and monitoring whether they are being met. This includes distributing cost and funding appropriately, ensuring that GHG levels don't increase in specific communities, protecting entities that have already accomplished GHG emission goals, and opening up communication with other states and countries about these goals. The California Air Resources Board is responsible for developing regulations and market mechanisms to achieve these goals. At the end of June 2007, CARB released their"Recommendations for Designing a Greenhouse Gas Cap-and-Trade System for California." At this time the cap and trade system would be aimed at industrial and other"point of emission" sources. No regulations have been passed yet to implement the cap and trade program. At some later time the transportation sector may be included as well as the commercial and residential sectors. Because no criteria pollutants are exceeded, and because greenhouse gases are relative to criteria pollutants in quantity, the project is consistent with conformance with the Act(AB32). Operational Emissions The proposed project is the relocation of approximately 116,000 cy of fill material to restore the debris stockpile capacity at the existing Demens Basin I and Hillside Basin.The project will fill a portion of the existing Demens Basin 2 that is no longer used for flood control or water storage purposes. The fill material will be compacted so • that a useable piece of surplus property will be the end product. No operational emissions are anticipated beyond the current, routine maintenance activities (material removal)at Demens Basin 1 and Hillside Basin. 10 • Demens Flood Control Basin Debris Relocation Initial Study January 22,2008 Page 11 • As air quality legislation changes and guidance from the Legislature is passed, the County will be required to comply. Maintenance of the Basins does not include the development of any land uses.Therefore, the short-term air quality impacts associated with the removal of material from Demens Basin 1 and Hillside Basin to Demens Basin 2 to mitigate seasonal flooding is anticipated to be less than significant. d-e) The project sites are located adjacent to residential land uses. The project is necessary to improve the flood control facilities and increase the capacity for collection of stormwater from the surrounding area. Implementation of the proposed project requires earthwork and the use of trucks for transport of material and the use of heavy equipment for spreading and compaction of materials. During the project duration, trucks and construction vehicles would use the surrounding access roads. The air quality analysis conducted concludes that the project would be below the air emission thresholds established by the SCAQMD (see Appendix A). With the mitigation measures implemented, there would be no impact on the sensitive receptors (e.g. nearby residential development) resulting from substantial pollutant concentrations or objectionable odors. Therefore, less than significant impacts to air quality from implementing the maintenance project are anticipated. Potentially Less than Less than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Mitigation IV.BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES— Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat • modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans,policies,or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game • or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ • b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified.in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption,or other means? ❑ ❑ ❑ d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors,or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? ❑ ❑ ❑ e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? ❑ ❑ ❑ t) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional,or state habitat conservation plan? ❑ ❑ ❑ c • 11 ' Demens Flood Control Basin Debris Relocation Initial Study January 22,2008 Page 12 • SUBSTANTIATION (check if project is located in the Biological Resources Overlay or contains habitat for any species listed in the California Natural Diversity Database_ X ): a-c) Demens Basin 2 site supports approximately one acre of Riversidean upland sage scrub which occurs along the north, south and west side slopes of the basin (Focused California Gnatcatcher Survey, LSA Associates, Inc. July 13, 2007, see Appendix B). The remainder of the site consists of non-native grassland and areas with only ruderal vegetation. Dominant species within the Riversidean upland sage scrub include California sagebrush, California buckwheat, and shortpod mustard. The basin also occurs within an area designated as critical habitat for the California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica); a Focused California Gnatcatcher Survey was performed at the site by LSA Associates, Inc. during May and June of 2007. The surveyy was conducted in accordance with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Coastal California Gnatcatcher Presence/Absence Survey Protocol. The survey consisted of six site visits on a weekly basis during the breeding season. The Riversidean upland sage scrub portion of the site was surveyed at a rate of about one acre per hour. Based on the results of the survey, it was determined that the California gnatcatcher does not occur at the site and is not likely to be found at the site in the future. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impacts to the California gnatcatcher. No other species of concern were identified during surveys. The District is proposing the removal of debris currently stockpiled at the site of Demens Basin 1, and relocating the debris to Demens Basin 2 where it will be placed within the basin beginning along the eastern edge and filling to approximately three-fourths the length of the basin in accordance with a City-approved, District-prepared fill plan. Should additional material be required, approximately 20,000 cy is available for fill at the Hillside Basin. The new eastern side slope created as a result of debris placement will be graded to 3:1 slopes and will be vegetated with native species found within the project area. The west and remaining northern and southern slopes will not be graded as part of the project. After the relocation of debris, the District will continue to operate and • maintain the basins for flood control purposes. Demens Basin I, Demens Basin 2 and Hillside Basin are not listed as federally protected wetlands, and the basins do not support riparian habitat. Therefore the project would have no impact on any riparian habitats or federally protected wetlands(see Appendix C). d) The basins and surrounding areas occur within an urbanized area that includes other flood control facilities, residential housing tracts, streets, curb and gutter, and lighting to support such uses. Although Demens Basin 2 occurs within an area designated as critical habitat for the California gnatcatcher, a focused survey for the species performed during May/June 2007, determined that no gnatcatchers currently use or are expected to utilize the site in the future. The basins, other flood control facilities, and most of the surrounding residential neighborhoods were constructed in the early 1980s and as such the area has been in its present state for approximately 25 years. The site is considered biologically isolated and would not support use as a migration corridor. e) The City of Rancho Cucamonga has an adopted Tree Ordinance to protect "heritage" trees including eucalyptus, palm, oak, sycamore, pine, and others to preserve scenic beauty, prevent soil erosion, provide shade, wind protection, screening and counteract air pollution. Removal of stockpiles from the Demens Basin I site or from Hillside Basin would not affect protected heritage trees. At Demens Basin 2, there are two eucalyptus trees and approximately ten sucker trees located along the western side slopes of the basin. Since filling activities would occur only in the eastern three-fourths of Demens Basin 2, existing trees located along the western side slopes would not be affected. Therefore, no impacts to local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, including the City of Rancho Cucamonga Tree Ordinance would result. f) The project site is not located within a conservation area according to the General Plan Exhibit IV-4, Open Space and Consgrvation Plan. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, (• or state habitat conservation plan. 12 • • Demens Flood Control Basin Debris Relocation Initial Study January 22,2008 Page 13 • Potentially Less than Less than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Mitigation V. CULTURAL RESOURCES— Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? ❑ 0 0 • b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §1 5064.5? S ® 0 LI c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? ❑ ❑ 0 d) Disturb any human remains,including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? ❑ ® 5 SUBSTANTIATION (check if the project is located in the Cultural or Paleontologic _ Resources overlays or cite results of cultural resource review): a-c) The project area was surveyed for historical and archeological resources by a qualified team of specialists. The cultural resources report prepared for this project (Appendix D) determined that no the project will have no adverse effect on cultural resources due to the fact that no significant (previously identified sites) or potentially significant cultural resource sites (those identified during the field survey), are known to exist within the area o potential effect. The project sites and surrounding area are not located within a cultural or paleontologic resource area of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and no cultural resources are known to occur within the project area. • Project-related debris relocation, filling and grading do not have the potential to uncover significant buried archaeological or paleontologic resources. The District's flood control basins are frequently excavated to remove silt and sands deposits. The likelihood of unearthing cultural resources or unique geologic features during regular maintenance would be considered remote. However, project-related earthwork may include excavation and re- compaction of the basin floor at Demens Basin 2. Therefore in order to ensure impacts to potential cultural resource are reduced to a less than significant level,the following mitigation measure shall be implemented. CR-1: Should significant subsurface prehistoric or historic archaeological resources appear to be encountered during construction and/or earthmoving activities, the evaluation of any such resources should proceed in accordance with the criteria outlined in Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (1966, as amended), in accordance with CEQA guidelines (1970, as amended), and in accordance with the County of San Bernardino General Plan. Specifically, all work must be halted in the immediate vicinity of the cultural resource found until a qualified archaeologist can assess the significance of the resource. d) The project sites have been disturbed and are frequently excavated to remove silt and sands deposits. The likelihood of finding human remains is remote. However, because an additional 10 feet of excavation may occur at Demens Basin 2 in order to achieve proper compaction, and to ensure impacts to potential buried remains are reduced to a less than significant level the following mitigation measure shall be implemented: s • 13 Demens Flood Control Basin Debris Relocation Initial Study January 22,2008 Page 14 • CR-2: California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 dictates that if any human remains are unearthed during construction, no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to CEQA regulations and Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. Potentially Less than Less than No 0 Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Mitigation VI.GEOLOGY AND SOILS—Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury,or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ❑ ❑ ❑ El ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? ❑ ❑ ❑ ig iv) Landslides? ❑ ❑ ❑ El b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ❑ ❑ ❑ El • c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on or off site landslide,lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? ❑ ❑ ❑ Ei d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 181-B of the Uniform Building Code(1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? ❑ ❑ U El e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? ❑ ❑ ❑ El SUBSTANTIATION (check if project is located in the Geologic Hazards Overlay District): a) The District is proposing the reclamation of Demens Basin 1 to remove excess debris stockpiled at the site from past storm events and thereby increase the basin's capacity. The project includes exporting the reclaimed material to Demens Basin 2, an existing 5-acre basin that the District has determined to have excess capacity. Material will be placed in Demens Basin 2 beginning at the eastern edge and filling approximately three-fourths of the length of the basin (approximately 4 acres) in accordance with the District's fill plan. An evaluation of the project's potential to result in the exposure of people or the environment to geological hazards is discussed herein. Appendix C (the Jurisdictional Assessment)contains a general grading plan for Demens Basin 2. i) The project sites are not located within the boundaries of a California Earthquake Fault Zone for fault- rupture hazard as defined by the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act nor are any faults known to traverse through or trend toward the project sites. The closest fault within the vicinity of the general project area is the Cucamonga Fault located approximately 1 mile to the north. The Cucamonga Fault is a 14 Demens Flood Control Basin Debris Relocation Initial Study January 22,2008 Page 15 ( reverse thrust fault and has a total length of approximately 17 miles with a slip rate of approximately inch per year. The fault displays a maximum moment magnitude of 7.0 with a recurrence interval of 650 years. Ground rupture usually occurs along pre-existing surface faults traces. As previously discussed, no active faults are known to traverse, or trend toward the project vicinity. Therefore, the potential for ground rupture during seismic event is considered low. ii) The primary geologic hazard that exists within the project vicinity is that of ground shaking.The strength of earthquake-induced ground shaking is commonly measured as maximum or peak ground acceleration. Considering the location of the project sites relative to the Cucamonga Fault zone, the sites could experience strong ground shaking. Since the project does not include the construction of permanent structures for human occupancy, no significant impacts from an earthquake event are expected to occur. A geotechnical engineer will be consulted during the design and construction phases of this project to ensure proper compaction during the filling. Subsequent sale of the property created at Demens Basin 2 and any future development at the site determined to be a project as defined by CEQA, would be required to undergo separate CEQA review, and would be subject to City requirements and Uniform Building Code (UBC) regulations to ensure potential impacts from an earthquake event are reduced to the extent possible. iii) Soil liquefaction is the loss of soil strength due to increased pore water pressures caused by a significant ground shaking (seismic) event. Liquefaction typically consists of the re-arrangement of soil particles into a denser condition resulting in localized areas of settlement, sand boils, and flow failures. Areas underlain by loose to medium dense cohesionless oils, where groundwater is within 30 to 40 feet of the surface, are particularly susceptible when subject to ground accelerations such as those due to earthquake motion. The alluvial sediment, which underlies the project vicinity, is not considered to be susceptible to liquefaction hazard due to its dense conditions, gravelly nature, and lack of groundwater or saturation. Therefore th potential for liquefaction hazard, ground rupture, and earthquake-induced settlement to impact the project sites is considered low. iv) The project sites are relatively flat and underlain by alluvial fan sediment that is not susceptible to landslide failure due to the strength characteristics of the sediment. No landslides or slope instability has been documented in the vicinity of the sites. The potential for landslides is considered low. b) The topography will be altered at Demens Basins I and 2 and to a lesser extent at Hillside Basin. Grading will be done in accordance with a,District-prepared grading plan and will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. During the course of the project, dust will be generated due to the operation of machinery on-site and potentially as a result of high winds. Additionally, erosion of soils could occur due to a storm event. The State of California is authorized to administer various aspects of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). Construction activities covered under the State's General Construction permit include removal of vegetation, grading, excavation, or any other activity that causes the disturbance of one acre or more. The General Construction permit requires developments of one acre or more to reduce or eliminate non-storm water discharges into storm water systems, and to develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan(SWPPP).The Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), Santa Ana Region has issued an area-wide NPDES Storm Water Permit for the County of San Bernardino, the San Bernardino County Flood Control District, and the incorporated cities of San Bernardino County within the Santa Ana Region. The construction contractor would be required to implement mitigation measures for the project to comply with the area-wide permit requirements. The SWPPP includes Best Management Practices (BMPs)to prevent the project from polluting surface waters. This is a standard condition of approval applicable to this project. BMP's would include, but would not be limited to water application at the site during screening, street sweeping of adjacent roads during material transportation, and the ceasing of activities in the event of high winds. Potential impacts are considered less than significant. • 15 Demens Flood Control Basin Debris Relocation Initial Study January 22,2008 Page 16 • c) The District is proposing the removal of debris currently stockpiled at the site of Demens Basin 1, and relocating the debris to Demens Basin 2 where it will be placed within the basin beginning along the eastern edge and filling to approximately three-fourths the length of the basin in accordance with a City-approved, District prepared fill plan. Should additional material be required, approximately 20,000 cy is available for fill fromthe Hillside Basin. The alluvial sediment, which underlies the project sites is not considered to be susceptible to liquefaction hazard due to its dense conditions, gravelly nature, and lack of groundwater or saturation. Therefore the potential for liquefaction hazard, ground rupture, and earthquake-induced settlement to impact the project sites is considered low. The project sites are relatively flat and underlain by alluvial fan sediment that is not susceptible to landslide failure due to the strength characteristics of the sediment.Fill and compaction of materials within Demens Basin 2 would be in accordance with a District-prepared fill plan, and reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. Therefore no unstable soil conditions would be created as a result of the proposed project. No significant impacts are anticipated. d) Soils at the project sites are considered to be very low to low expansion potential. No impacts from expansive soils are anticipated. e) The proposed project includes the removal of stockpiled debris at Demens Basin 1 and relocation, filling and compaction of the materials at Demens Basin 2 located 0.6 miles southwest of Demens Basin 1, with additional material, if required to come from the Hillside Basin located approximately two miles northeast of the Demens Basin 2.The proposed project does not require infrastructure for sewage disposal or septic tanks.No impacts would result. Potentially Less than Less than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Mitigation • VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS— Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport,use, or disposal of hazardous materials? ❑ ❑ Z ❑ b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving . _ _ .the release of hazardous materials into the environment? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,substances,or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? ❑ ❑ ❑ IZ d) Be located on a site, which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? ❑ ❑ ❑ El e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? ❑ ❑ ❑ El j• 16 Demens Flood Control Basin Debris Relocation Initial Study January 22,2008 Page 17 . f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? ❑ ❑ ❑ IX 1 g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? ❑ ❑ ❑ h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? ❑ ❑ ❑ SUBSTANTIATION: (check if project is located in the Fire Hazards Overlay— X ) a) The project involves earthwork including relocation of debris from Demens Basin 1 and possibly the Hillside Basin, and fill and compaction of the materials at Demens Basin 2.Heavy equipment used for earthwork would be fueled by a mobile fuel truck and would not store any significant amounts of fuel on-site during construction. The equipment and storage areas would be fenced to prevent trespassing. The proposed earthwork and continued operation and maintenance of the basins would comply with the safety standards established by the State and District. Project- related impacts to the public or the environment through routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials would be less than significant. b) The proposed relocation of debris would require the transportation, filing and compaction of soils which would not result in the creation of any potential health hazards. Proposed earthwork and continued operation of the flood control facilities would not expose people to any potential health hazards. c) The nearest school within the project vicinity is located approximately one-mile southwest of Hillside Road. Th proposed project would not handle, or emit hazardous materials, substances or wastes. No impact from hazardous wastes is expected on local schools. d) The project sites are not listed under the hazardous materials sites database of San Bernardino County. There is no history of contamination from hazardous substances at the project sites. Therefore, the project would not take place on a site(s)that is known to contain hazardous materials. e-t) The project sites are not located within an airport land use plan, is not within two miles of a public airport, and is not in the vicinity of a public airstrip. No conflicts with current basin operations and aircraft overflights are known to exist. Once the proposed earthwork is complete, the basins will continue with existing operations. The project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area. No impacts from aircraft operations would result. g) The City of Rancho Cucamonga Multi-Hazard Disaster Plan, which is updated every two years, includes policies and procedures to be administered by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District in the event of a disaster. Proposed earthwork would be short-term and would not interfere with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan.Notification of any modifications to traffic patterns or detours due to construction traffic will be forwarded to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District. On-going operations of the basins would not involve any activities, which could result in a significant impact to emergency response or evacuation plans.The four-acre surplus property created as a result of the project may be subsequently disposed of by the District at a future date. Potential future development that may occur on the property would be required to comply with City of Rancho Cucamonga requirements and subsequently comply with CEQA for any action considered a project as defined in Chapter 2.5, Section 21065 of the 2007 CEQA Statutes and Guidelines handbook. • 17 Demens Flood Control Basin Debris Relocation Initial Study January 22,2008 Page 18 h) According to the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Exhibit V-7, Demens Basin 1 and the Hillside Basin are located within the High Probability/High Consequence fife hazard area, and Demens Basin 2 is located with the High Probability/Low Consequence fire hazard area. According to the Fire District Strategic Plan, Rancho Cucamonga faces the greatest on-going threat from a wind-driven fire in the Urban Wildland Interface area found in the northern part of the City. The project sites do not contain dense grasses or trees, and are maintained by weed abatement activities annually. The proposed relocation of stockpiled materials would require material screening,loading and transporting from Demens Basin land, if needed,the Hillside Basin,and filing and compaction of soils at Demens Basin 2.Proposed earthwork and continued operation of the flood control facilities would not pose a significant threat to people or property because no inhabited structures are located on the site and visitors are limited to personnel performing routine maintenance and inspections. Routine weed removal will continue and will serve as a fire prevention measure. • No significant adverse impacts from hazards or handling of hazardous materials to the public or sensitive uses would result from implementation of the proposed project.Therefore, no mitigation measures are required. Potentially Less than Less than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Mitigation VIII.HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY—Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially • with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level, which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? ❑ . ❑ ❑ c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site? ❑ ❑ ❑ d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a • manner which would result in flooding on-or off-site? ❑ ❑ ❑ e) Create or contribute runoff water, which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑ ❑ ❑ g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? ❑ ❑ ❑ • 18 • Demens Flood Control Basin Debris Relocation Initial Study January 22,2008 Page 19 ■ h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? S 5 i). Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or darn? [ S j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? S El SUBSTANTIATION: According to City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Exhibit V-5, both basins occur within the 100-year floodplain.The watershed tributary to the basins is located on the south slope of the San Gabriel Mountain north of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and is composed of Demens Canyon, Thorpe Canyon,Angalls Canyon and an unnamed canyon to the west. The total watershed area is approximately 2.2 square miles. The area is described as a steep mountainous foothill area with slopes greater than 900 feet per mile. Prior to the construction of Demens Basin 1,the canyon watersheds historically produced flood flows of considerable magnitude creating flooding downstream and causing damage and loss to property. The United States Army Corps of Engineers constructed Demens Creek Channel to bring flood relief to the area served by the Beryl Avenue Storm Drain. Demens Basin 2 was engineered as a flood control and water conservation basin. A 66-inch diameter conduit placed at Demens Basin 1 was designed to outlet conservation waters to Demens Basin 2. The capacity of the conduit is approximately 166 cfs to Demens Basin 2. • a) The proposed project includes the manual screening of debris currently stockpiled at the site of Demens Basin and relocation of the screened materials to Demens Basin 2 where they will be placed within the basin beginnin at the eastern edge and filling approximately three-fourths of the length of the basin (approximately 4 acres) in accordance with the District's fill plan. An additional 20,000 cy of material, if needed, is available and would be taken from the Hillside Basin located approximately two miles northeast of Demens Basin 2. The new eastern side slope created as a result of debris placed within Demens Basin 2 with be graded to 3:1 and vegetated. The west and remaining northern slope will not be graded as part of the project. The proposed debris relocation and associated earthwork would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. Existing BMPs in place at the basins would continue to be implemented during the course of the proposed earthwork.Demens Basins 1 and 2, and the Hillside Basin are owned by the District, which conducts regular maintenance and reinforcement of embankments as necessary. b) Demens Basin 1 is an intermediate stormwater collection facility that facilitates the groundwater recharge to the underlying aquifer from percolation of stormwater collected in the basin. Removal of debris would not disrupt this activity.During relocation of debris and proposed earthwork at Demens Basin 2, water will be used for dust control. The water supply will be from off-site resources delivered via water trucks. Proposed earthwork is not anticipated to intercept local groundwater supplies or alter groundwater flows. Demens Basin 2 was engineered as a flood control and water recharge basin.A 66-inch diameter conduit placed at Demens Basin I was designed to outlet conservation waters to Demens Basin 2. According to the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Exhibit fV-2, Demens Basins 1 and 2, and the Hillside Basin are not functional as recharge basins or as spreading grounds, due to a lack of water reaching the basins, and do not occur within an area used for groundwater recharge. Filling in approximately 4 acres of the eastern portion of Demens Basin 2 would not deplete groundwater supplies, nor would it interfere with recharge. Groundwater basins within Rancho Cucamonga are replenished by natural precipitation, and through a number of spreading grounds and percolation sites, the nearest one (the Alta Loma Basin) located approximately one-mile southeast of Demens Basins 1 and 2.• ( No impact on groundwater supplies is expected. 19 • Demens Flood Control Basin Debris Relocation Initial Study January 22,2008 Page 20 • c-d) The proposed removal of debris stockpiled adjacent to Demens Basin 1 would increase the capacity of the basin to its original design capacity. Relocation of the debris from Demens Basin 1 and placement within the 4-acre eastern portion of Demens Basin 2 would reduce the net capacity of the basin from 149,500 cy to 63,450 cy. Since the construction of Demens Basin 2 in the early 1980s, the District has determined from past storm events and existing capacities of neighboring storm water facilities,that only a portion of Demens Basin 2 is necessary for flood control purposes.Based on current conditions, it was demonstrated by the District that the existing capacity of Demens Basin 2 could be reduced from its current capacity of 149,500 cy to its proposed capacity of 63,450 cy without jeopardizing human life or the environment. The proposed relocation of debris from Demens Basin 1, and if necessary Hillside.Basin, to Demens Basin 2 would not alter or result in alteration of the course of a stream or river resulting in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off- site.No change in the existing drainage pattern of the sites or area would result. e-f) Relocation of debris from Demens Basin 1, and if necessary Hillside Basin, to Demens Basin 2 would not result in creating or contributing towards an increase in runoff water because the facilities were designed to manage localized storm flows. The basins will continue to operate as intermediate facilities that are part of the regional infrastructure. The basins would continue to collect only stormwater and would not result in contaminating or degrading the quality of water. g-j) The proposed project would not place housing or any habitable structures on any of the basin sites.The project would not expose people or structures to significant risk of loss,injury or death from flooding.Due to the seasonal collection of water within the basins, the occurrence of a seiche or mudflow is remote. The basins are mostly dry as the stormwater evaporates or percolates into the ground. Since the overall function of the basins would not change, and • since the District has determined that the capacity of Demens Basin 2 could be reduced, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding. No significant adverse impacts on hydrology and water quality are identified or anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required. Potentially Less than Less than No • Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Mitigation _ IX.LAND USE AND PLANNING—Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? ❑ ❑ ❑ El b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan,policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project(including,but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? ❑ ❑ ❑ El Demens Flood Control Basin Debris Relocation Initial Study January 22,2008 Page 21 \, SUBSTANTIATION: • a-b) Demens Basin 1 is an existing detention basin located north of Hillside Road on the west side of Amethyst Avenue. Demens Basin 2 is located south of Hillside Road on the west side of Hellman Avenue approximately 0.6 miles southwest of Demens Basin 1; and Hillside Basin is located on the west side of Haven Avenue approximately 0.5 miles north of Hillside Road. The basins occur within the City of Rancho Cucamonga and are designated as Flood Control/Utility Corridor on the City's General Plan Land Use Map. The District currently maintains the basins for retention of stormwater from the surrounding areas. Relocation of debris from Demens Basin 1 to Demens Basin 2 and filling in a portion of Demens Basin 2 would not alter the land use or result in a land use conflict. An additional 20,000 cy of material,if needed, is available and would be taken from the Hillside Basin located approximately two miles northeast of Demens Basin 2. The project does not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy,or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over project area. No significant land use impacts have been identified. b) According to the City of Rancho.Cucamonga General Plan Exhibit IV-4, Open Space and Conservation Plan, the project site is not located within a conservation area. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local,regional,or state habitat conservation plan. No significant adverse impacts are identified or anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. Potentially Less than Less than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Mitigation X. MINERAL RESOURCES—Would the project: • a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? f ❑ ❑ N b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? ❑ ❑ SUBSTANTIATION (check_if project is located within the Mineral Resource Zone Overlay): a-b) According to the city General Plan, Figure IV-1 and Table IV-1, the basins are not designated as a State Aggregate Resources Area and are not designated as a valuable mineral resource recovery site; therefore, no impacts would result. No impacts to mineral resources are anticipated. Potentially Less than Less than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Mitigation M. NOISE—Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? ❑ 0 LI N (� • 21 Demens Flood Control Basin Debris Relocation Initial Study January 22,2008 Page 22 • b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbome vibration or groundbome noise levels? ❑ ❑ ❑ c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? ❑ ❑ ❑ d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or,where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport,would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? ❑ ❑ ❑ f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? ❑ ❑ ❑ SUBSTANTIATION (check if the project is located in the Noise Hazard Overlay District or is subject to severe noise levels according to the General Plan Noise Element J: a-d) General maintenance of the basins including the removal of debris on an annual basis or after a significant storm event, and inspections that occur on a monthly basis, involves the use of heavy equipment and vehicles traveling to • the site.The proposed project involves the removal of debris from Demens Basin I to Demens Basin 2.The basins are separated by a distance of 0.6 miles with the travel route occurring south along Amethyst Avenue, then west on Hillside Road, and then south on Hellman Street to Demens Basin 2. An additional 20,000 cy of material, if needed, is available and would be taken from the Hillside Basin located approximately two miles northeast of Demens _ Basin 2. Noise generated as a result of debris removal would require similar heavy-duty equipment used during maintenance. The proposed project including manual screening, transportation, and fill/grading activities would be conducted in one phase over a period of approximately six weeks. The basins and proposed travel routes occur within residential areas. Due to the short-term nature of the project, significant long-term impacts to the ambient noise level of the surrounding area would not result. Operation of heavy equipment and screening activities will generate noise levels above existing conditions. Standard measures contained in the City of Rancho Cucamonga Development Code including activity restrictions, the use of mufflers, and reduced idle time, will be followed by the District to ensure construction noise will be at less than significant levels.The impact is considered less than significant. e-f) The basins are located in the northern portion of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and are not within the vicinity of an airport land use plan or a private airstrip. The basins are located approximately six miles north of the Ontario International Airport and are offset north of the flight path.The project would not expose people working on-site to excessive noise levels.There would be no impact. There would be no significant adverse impacts from noise with implementation of the mitigation measure. • 22 Demens Flood Control Basin Debris Relocation Initial Study January 22,2008 Page 23 ( Potentially Less than Less than No • Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Mitigation XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING—Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses)or indirectly (for example,through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? ❑ 0 0 b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? 0 0 ❑ El c) Displace substantial numbers of people;necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? 0 0 El El SUBSTANTIATION: a-c) Proposed earthwork activities would be short-term and would not provide long-term employment that would require people to move to the area. The project would not directly or indirectly induce population growth in the area or displace existing houses or structures.The project would have no impacts on the population and housing in the area. No significant adverse impacts to population and housing are identified from implementation of the project. Potentially Less than Less than No • Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Mitigation XIH. PUBLIC SERVICES— - a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new of physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance • objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? ❑ 0 L Police protection? 0 0 0 Schools? El 0 0 Parks? 0 El 0 El Other public facilities? 0 0 L ^) • 23 Demens Flood Control Basin Debris Relocation Initial Study January 22,2008 Page 24 • SUBSTANTIATION: a) Demens Basins 1 and 2, and the Hillside Basin are owned by the District, which conducts regular maintenance and reinforcement of embankments as necessary. Upon completion of proposed earthwork activities, routine maintenance and inspection of the basins will resume. Fire, police, school, parks and recreation, or other public services would not be required nor impacted from the project.No impact to public services would result. The project will have no significant adverse impacts to public services. Potentially Less than Less than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Mitigation XIV. RECREATION— a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? ❑ ❑ ❑ Potentially Lcss than Less than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Mitigation b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the • construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? ❑ ❑ ❑ SUBSTANTIATION: a-b) The proposed project would not result in impacts to any recreational activities within the area.The sites are currently fenced to restrict access into the basin. The project would have no impact on recreational facilities in the vicinity of the project site. There would be no significant adverse impacts to the recreational facilities and no mitigation measures are required. Potentially Less than Less than No ' Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Mitigation XV.TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC— Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads,or congestion at intersections)? ' ❑ ❑ ® ❑ b) Exceed,either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? ❑ ❑ ❑ i• 2q • Demens Flood Control Basin Debris Relocation Initial Study January 22,2008 Page 25 c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase • in traffic levels or a change in location,that results in substantial safety risks? ❑ ❑ ❑ d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections)or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? O ❑ ❑ e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ ❑ f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ ❑ ❑ g) Conflict with adopted policies,plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation(e.g.,bus turnouts,bicycle racks)? ❑ ❑ ❑ SUBSTANTIATIONi a) The proposed project includes the manual screening of debris currently stockpiled at the site of Demens Basin I, and relocation of the screened materials to Demens Basin 2 where they will be placed within the basin beginning at the eastern edge and filling approximately three-fourths of the length of the basin (approximately 4 acres) in accordance with the District's fill plan. An additional 20,000 cy of material, if needed, is available and would be taken from the Hillside Basin located approximately two miles northeast of Demens Basin 2. Proposed earthwork activities would occur over a six-week period. Exportation of material from Demens Basin I includes trucks traveling south along Amethyst Avenue, then west along Hillside Road, and then south alon Hellman Avenue for a total one-way travel distance of 0.6 miles. If additional material is needed it would b brought to the site from Hillside Basin located approximately two miles east of the site. Trucks traveling from Hillside Basin would travel south along Haven Avenue and then west along Hillside Road to the project site for approximately two miles. No changes or alterations to existing transportation systems will result from the project. The proposed reclamation of Demens Basin I and filllgrading activities proposed at Demens Basin 2, will not impact existing transportation systems(see Figure 3). . b) Proposed screening, transportation and fill/grading activities will require mobilization of heavy-duty construction equipment prior-to construction and upon completion of the project. Additional-travel to the site will be in the form of construction crew-members, soil export trucks and periodic site inspectors.These trips are estimated to be approximately 30 per day and will not significantly impact the surrounding roadways. Due to the short-term nature of the project and low-volume of construction traffic, substantial amounts of additional traffic will not occur during the project.Therefore, there would be no impact on the level of service standards. c) The project would not impact air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial risks. d) The project would not require road improvements including modifications in design. Project-related traffic and safety regulations will be in accordance with practices and methods outlined within the City of Rancho Cucamonga Development Code. No impacts are anticipated. e) The basins are surrounded by vacant and residential development. There would be temporary increase in traffic from the areas along the proposed transportation route(s). Proposed activities would not block or result in inadequate emergency access.No impacts are anticipated. 25 Demens Flood Control Basin Debris Relocation Initial Study January 22,2008 Page 26 • 0 Construction crew-parking and equipment staging areas will be contained within the basin areas. No additional demand for parking or impacts to existing parking facilities will occur during the project. No impacts to parking are anticipated. g) The proposed project includes the manual screening of debris currently stockpiled at the site of Demens Basin I, and relocation of the screened materials to Demens Basin 2 where they will be placed within the basin beginning at the eastern edge and filling approximately three-fourths of the length of the basin (approximately 4 acres) in accordance with the District's fill plan. An additional 20,000 cy of material, if needed, is available and would be taken from the Hillside Basin located approximately two miles northeast of Demens Basin 2. There would be no impacts to the adopted policies,plans or programs supporting alternative transportation as a result of the project. No significant adverse impacts are identified to the traffic/transportation systems. Potentially Less than Less than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Mitigation XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS— Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? ❑ ❑ ❑ El Potentially Less than Less than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Mitigation • b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? ❑ ❑ ❑ El c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ .._d) .Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from - - - - - - existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? ❑ ❑ ❑ El e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider,which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? ❑ ❑ ❑ El f) Be served by a landfill(s)with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? ❑ ❑ ❑ El g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? ❑ ❑ ❑ El i40 26 • Demens Flood Control Basin Debris Relocation Initial Study January 22,2008 Page 27 SUBSTANTIATION: • a-b) Upon project completion, Demens Basin's capacity would be reduced from the existing estimate of 149,500 cy to 63,450 cy. As determined by the District, reducing the capacity of Demens Basin 2 would not affect the basin's ability to continue to provide conservation of localized flows, and detention for any overflow that might result from Demens Basin 1. There would be no impacts to wastewater treatment facilities or wastewater treatment requirements of the Regional Water Quality Board as a result of the project. c) The proposed project involves the removal of debris stockpiled at Demens Basin 1, and if necessary from Hillside Basin, to Demens Basin 2 where the material will be used to fill in the eastern portion of the existing basin, reducing the size of the basin from 149,500 cy to 63,450 cy. As determined by the District, reducing the capacity of Demens Basin 2 would not affect the basin's ability to provide conservation of localized flows, and detention for any overflow that might result from Demens Basin 1. The proposed project would not result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities. No impacts to these facilities are anticipated. d-g) The proposed earthwork activities would not require any utility service or construction of new facilities. Project- related water requirements would be short-term to provide dust control during relocation of debris, and compaction/grading activities.The project would not result in the need for wastewater treatment or waste disposal in landfills. No impacts to utilities would result. No significant adverse impacts are identified or anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. Potentially Less than Less than No • Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Mitigation XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE— a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop- below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? ❑ ® ❑ ❑ b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited,but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects,and the effects of probable future projects)? ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause Substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? ❑ ❑ ❑ • 27 Demens Flood Control Basin Debris Relocation Initial Study January 22,2008 Page 28 • SUBSTANTIATION: a) The basins and surrounding areas occur within an urbanized area including other flood control facilities, residential housing tracts, streets, curb and gutter, and lighting to support such uses. Although Demens Basin 2 occurs within an area designated as critical habitat for the California gnatcatcher, a focused survey for the species performed during May/June 2007, determined that no gnatcatchers currently use or are expected to utilize the site in the future. The basins, other flood control facilities, and most of the surrounding residential neighborhoods were constructed in the early 1980s and as such the area has been in its present state for approximately 25 years. The site is considered biologically isolated. The project sites and surrounding area are not located within a cultural or paleontologic resource area of concern as designated by the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and no cultural resources are known to occur within the project area. Project-related debris relocation, filling and grading do not have the potential to uncover significant buried archaeological or paleontologic resources. The project sites are frequently excavated to remove silt and sands deposits.The likelihood of unearthing cultural resources or unique geologic features is considered remote. However, it is likely that earthwork may include excavation and re-compaction of the basin floor at Demens Basin 2. //DISCUSS CULTURAL RESOURCES//Implementation of mitigation measures contained in Section V of this Initial Study would reduce potential impacts to less than significant. b) Impacts associated with the proposed project would not be considered adverse or unfavorable. Although the project would not exceed thresholds for criteria air pollutants, all applicable SCAQMD rules and regulations would be implemented during proposed earthwork as the South Coast Air Basin is in non-attainment status for ozone and suspended particulates (PM10). The project would be required to comply with Rules 402 nuisance, and 403 fugitive dust, which require the implementation of Best Available Control Measures (BACM) for each • fugitive dust source, and the Air Quality Management Plan, which identifies Best Available Control Technologies (BACT) for area sources and point sources, respectively. No significant cumulative adverse impacts are expected with implementation of the proposed project, as the District generally performs maintenance at flood control facilities, and the proposed project is necessary to facilitate the original intent of the basin, and would subsequently create surplus property at another basin that was determined to have excess capacity. No impact is anticipated. c) The project will not cause adverse effects on humans either directly or indirectly. Potential flood hazards will be reduced with the reclamation of Demens Basin. XVIII. MITIGATION MEASURES The mitigation measures that would be followed during and after construction are listed below: CR-1: Should significant subsurface prehistoric or historic archaeological resources appear to be encountered during construction and/or earthmoving activities, the evaluation of any such resources should proceed in accordance with the criteria outlined in Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (1966, as amended), in accordance with CEQA guidelines (1970, as amended),and in accordance with the County of San Bernardino General Plan. Specifically,all work must be halted in the immediate vicinity of the cultural resource found until a qualified archaeologist can assess the significance of the resource. CR-2: California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 dictates that if any human remains are unearthed during construction, no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to CEQA regulations and Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. • 28 • Appendix A Air Quality Model Results • • Earthwork Emissions Demens Basin #1 -96,000 CY • 2 Loaders Operating CO NO, PMr, ROG PM1s CO2 Emission per hour 0.56 1.40 0.10 0.17 96%of PM,o 108.6 Loaders x2 x2 x2 x2 x2 x2 Sub Total 1.12 2.8 .20 .34 96%of PM,o 217.2 Flours of Operation x8 x8 x8 x8 x8 x8 Total 9.0 _ 22.4 1.6 2.7 (96%of PM to) 1.5 1737.6 On-Road Heavy Heavy Duty Diesel Trucks: 1.2 Miles Round Trip Exhaust CO NO, ROG PM10 PM255 PMro PM2.5 Emission per mile .0145 0.0472 0.0037 .0023 .0020 .0022 .0020 Total Miles x1.2 x1.2 x1.2 x1.2 x1.2 x1.2 x1.2 Sub Total .022 .071 .006 .003 .002 .003 .003 Trips per hour x48 x48 x48 x48 x48 x48 x48 . Sub Total 1.1 3.4 .30 .14 .10 .14 .10 Hours per day x8 x8 x8 xS x8 x8 x8 Total 8.8 27.2 2.4 1.1 .80 1.12 .80 Demens Basin #1 Emissions Total • CO NO, ROG PMro PM23 CO2 2-Loaders 9.0 22.4 2.7 1.6 1.5 1737.6 Truck Trips 8.8 27.2 2.4 1.1 1.0 --- Total 17.8 49.6 5.1 2.7 2.5 1737.6 SCAQMD Threshold 550 100 75 150 55 --- No emission factors * No established thresholds ( • 1 • Hillside Basin-20,000CY 2 Loaders Operating CO NO, PM,. ROG PM2s CO2 Emission per hour 0.56 1.40 0.10 0.17 96%of PM/0 108.6 Loaders x2 x2 x2 x2 x2 x2 Sub Total 1.12 2.8 .20 .34 96%of PM1a 217.2 Hours of Operation x8 x8 x8 x8 x8 x8 Total 9.0 22.4 1.6 2.7 (96%of MID)1.5 1737.6 On-Road Heavy Heavy Duty Diesel Trucks: 4 Miles Round Trip Exhaust CO NO, ROG PMro PM2,s PMts PM2,s Emission per mile .0145 .0472 .0037 .0023 .0020 .0022 .0020 Total miles x4 x4 x4 x4 x4 x4 x4 Sub Total .06 .20 .014 .01 .008 .009 .008 Total Trips Per Day x24 x24 x24 x24 x24 x24 x24 Sub Total 1.4 4.8 .34 .24 1.9 .22 .22 Hours per day x8 x8 x8 x8 x8 x8 x8 Total 11.5 _ 38.4 2.7 1.9 1.5 1.76 1.76 Hillside Basin Emissions Total • CO NO, ROG PM10 PM2.s CO2 2-Loaders 9.0 22.4 2.7 1.6 1.5 1737.6 Truck Trips 11.5 38.4 2.7 1.9 1.5 --- Total 20.5 60.8 5.1 2.7 2.5 1737.6 SCAQMD Threshold 550 100 75 150 55 * --- No emission factors * No established thresholds Demens Basin #2-Earthwork and Compaction of Material • 2 Loaders Operating CO NO, PM10 ROG PM CO2 Emission per hour 0.56 1.40 0.10 0.17 96%of PKo 108.6 Loaders x2 x2 x2 x2 x2 x2 Sub Total 1.12 2.8 .20 '.34 96%of PKo 217.2 Hours of Operation x8 x8 x8 x8 x8 x8 Total 9.0 22.4 1.6 2.7 (96%of PM19) 1.5 1737.6 Other Construction Equipment CO NO ROG P■ 1O PM2.5 CO2 Emission per hour 0.63 1.8 0.2 .08 96%of PMio 141.2 Misc. Equipment x2 x2 x2 x2 x2 x2 Sub Total 1.3 3.6 0.4 0.16 96% ofPMio 282.4 Hours per day x8 x8 x8 x8 x8 x8 Total 10.1 28.8 3.2 1.3 (96%of PM1D) 1.2 2259.2 Demens Basin #2 Emissions Total CO NO, ROG PM,o PM23 CO2 • 2-Loaders 9.0 22.4 2.7 1.6 1.5 1737.6 Misc. Equipment 10.1 28.8 3.2 1.3 1.2 2259.2 Total 19.1 51.2 5.9 2.9 2.7 3996.8 SCAQMD Threshold 550 100 75 150 55 * * No established thresholds • ( • S Appendix B Focused Survey Results for California Gnatcatcher S • L J/� A I LSA ASSOCIATES,INC. DIREELET FORT COLLINS )DINT RICHMOND 1300 IOWA AV RNVO.IYITt3D0 931.78E9310 TEL CARLSRAD IRVINE OCRLIN RIVERSIDE,CALIFORNIA 923 tl7 951.711.4277 PAX COLA PALM SPRINGS SAN LUIS OBISPO • • July 13, 2007 Ms. Sandra Marquez Dr.John Gustafson U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Habitat Conservation Planning Branch Carlsbad Field Office California Department of Fish and Game • 6010 Hidden Valley Road 1416 Ninth Street Carlsbad, California 92009 Sacramento,California 95814 Subject: Results of a Focused California Gnatcatcher Survey for the Fire Station 177 Project Site in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County (LSA Project Number RNF0701) Dear Ms.Marquez and Dr.Gustafson: This letter provides the results of a focused presence/absence survey for California gnatcatcher(Polioptila califomica californica) by LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA) on the above-referenced approximately 4-acre project site in the City of Rancho Cucamonga,San Bernardino County.The project site is located on the west side of Hellman Avenue and south of Hillside Road,within the southwest 14 of projected Section 22, ' Township I North,Range 7 West as shown on the Cucamonga Peak, California 7.5-minute series U.S. • Geological Survey(USGS)topographic map(see attached Figure I).The project is the construction of a fire station. The project site is a portion of a flood control basin.It is bordered by residences to the east,north, and south,and by the remainder of the flood control basin,a flood control channel,and residences to the west (see attached Figure 2).The site supports about 1 acre of Riversidean upland sage scrub.The remainder of the site consists of non-native grassland and areas with only ruderal vegetation.Dominant species within the Riversidean upland sage scrub include California sagebrush (Artemisia californica), California buckwheat(Erioganum fasciculatuni),and shortpod mustard(Hirschjeldia incana).Dominant species in the non-native grassland include redstem stork's bill(Erodium cicutari«nl),longbeak stork's bill(Erodium botrys),golden aster(Heterotheca sessiliflora),and deerweed(Lotus scoparius).The remainder of the site is mostly barren,with sparsely scattered redstem stork's bill,longbeak stork's bill,shortpod mustard,and pointed cryptantha(Cryptmuha tnuricata). METHODS The California gnatcatcher survey was conducted by LSA Senior Biologists Stan Spencer and Eric Krieg. under LSA Federal 10(a)(l)(A) Permit TE-777965 and under a Letter of Agreement (LOA) from the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG; May 12, 2003, to March 31, 2007) in lieu of a Memorandum of Understanding between LSA and the CDFG.The survey was conducted in accordance with Coastal California Gnatcatcher (Polioptila califomica califomica) Presence/Absence Survey Protocol(U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service,Revised July 28,1997).The survey consisted of six site visits on a weekly basis per the survey protocol for the breeding season.The Riversidean upland sage scrub portion 7713/2007(14N2NF070I11Aio1Gna11atehenGnanalcher repon.doe) • PLANNING I ENV'RO •MENTAL I DESIGN 1.34 ASSOCI'ATUS, INC. • of the site was surveyed at a rate of about 1 acre per hour.Taped vocalizations were used periodically during the first survey.Table A provides the survey personnel;dates and weather conditions for each site visit. • Table A-Survey Personnel,Dates,and Weather Conditions Time(24-hour) Cloud Cover(%) Wind(mph) Temperature('F) Personnel Date Start/Finish Start/Finish Start/Finish Start/Finish Stan 5/21/07 0852/1112 100/100 1-3/1-3 58/62 • Spencer Stan 5/29/07 0836/0944 100/100 < 11<1 62/65 Spencer , Erik Krieg 6/6/07 0800/900 80/80 1-3/1-3 cool/cool Stan 6/13/07 0828/0930 0/0 1-3/1-3 78/84 Spencer Stan 6f20/07 0715/0810 0/0 < 1/< 1 76/82 Spencer Stan 6/27/07 0919/1009 0/0 < 1/<1 81/85 Spencer RESULTS • The California gnatcatcher was not observed during the focused survey. A list of bird species observed during the focused survey is attached. • Please contact me if you require any additional information. Sincerely, - LSA ASSO IA1} NC.' Stanley C)/Spencer, Ph.D. Senior Biologist Attachments: Figure 1:Project Location Figure 2:Land Cover List of Bird Species Observed cc: Chief Peter Bryan, Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Pamela Pane,Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Richard Erickson,LSA Associates,Inc. Kelly Czechowski, LSA Associates,Inc. • 7/13/21H 17(R:\RN1l01\BinlGnai©ichedGnmamher_repoadoe) 7 . ( BIRD SPECIES OBSERVED • Scientific Name Common Name Odontophoridae New World Quail Callipepla californica California quail Charadriidae Plovers and Lapwings Charadrius vocifenis Killdeer Columbidae Pigeons and Doves Columba livia• Rock pigeon • Zenaida m acroura Mourning dove Trochilidae Hummingbirds Calypte anna Anna's hummingbird Tyrannidae Tyrant Flycatchers • Sayornis saya Say's phoebe Corvidae Crows and Ravens Aplelocoma californica Western scrub-jay Acgitholidac Bushtits • Psaltripana minimus Bushtit Troglodytidae Wrens • Thryommnes bewickii Bewick's wren Troglodytes aedon • House wren Cmberizidne •-- - - Emberizines Pipilo maculatus Spotted towhee Pipilo crissalis California towhee Fringillidne Finches Carpodacus mexicanas House finch Carduelis psalrria Lesser goldfinch •Non-native species. • ( ) 71 17Q 007(2:\RNF0701\Bio\GnatcatchenBisdSpmrsObsevcd.doc) • •' Appendix C Results of Jurisdictional Assessment for Demens Basin • 1 M a ��, u,vyh w Y.t . �+M1 � 1 •,1 • `iu'I LICE ir:inllln,111 �;>!ci:n ENVntONt.IEN'I'ALSERVICPS • PLANNING • NAIURALRESOURCESMANAGENIENr July 21,2007 Ms.Julie Gilbert, Planner III Environmental Management Division San.Bernardino County Department of Public Works 825 E.Third Street,Room 201 San.Bernardino, CA 92415 Subject:. Results of a Jurisdictional Assessment for theDemens Basin,proposed location for Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station No. 177,City of Rancho Cucamonga,San Bernardino County,California. Dear Ms.Gilbert: Michael Brandman Associates(MBA)has completed a jurisdictional assessment for the secondary Demens Basin(Project Site or Site) in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County, California. MBA conducted the jurisdictional assessment to determine if the Site contains features under the jurisdiction of the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)pursuant to section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the Regional Water Quality Control Board(RWQCB)pursuant to section 401 of the Clean • Water Act and State Water Code,or the California Department of Fish and Game(CDFG)under section 1602 of Fish and Game Code. Project Location The Project Site(Site) is located in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County,California (Exhibit 1). It is west of Hellman Avenue,south of Hillside Road,north of Wilson Avenue,and east of Beryl Street(Exhibit 2). The Site is located in the northeast quadrant of an unsectioned land grant boundary located in the southwest quadrant of Range 7 west,Township 1 north on the Cucamonga Peak 7.5-minute U.S. Geological Survey(USGS)topographic quadrangle (Exhibit 3). Section 22 is ._ immediately east of the Project Site and section 15 is north of the Project Site. The Site is located south of the main Demens Debris Basin and east of the Demens Channel. Environmental Setting • Topographically, the Site is situated on an alluvial fan on the southern front of the San Gabriel Mountains,east of Demens Channel. It slopes slightly to the southwest with an elevation of approximately 1,860 feet above mean sea level. Most of the alluvial fan areas have been developed and the basin is surrounded by residential development to the west,north,and east; with one residence and an undeveloped parcel occuring to the south. Bakersfield Fresno Irvine Palm Springs Saa:unenn> San Bernardino Sari Raman San ra Cruz 1,61.334.2355 55049741310 714308.410n 760.322.8847 916.38311944 900,884.2255 925.830?733 ,831.^_6_2.173I 1 I www.hrnndmnn.com mbaialbrandman.com • • Ms.Julie Gilbert August 21,2007 Page 2 The entire Site is mapped as Tujunga gravelly loamy sand series(Natural Resources Conservation Service). This series is a somewhat excessively drained soil that occurs on alluvial fans and consists of alluvium derived from granite. The soils in this series do not meet hydric criteria. Regulatory Framework USACE Section 404 Regulations The discharge of dredged or fill material (temporarily or permanently) into areas delineated as"waters of the United States,"including wetlands, typically requires authorization from the USACE,pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act(CWA). USACE regulated activities involve a discharge of dredged or fill material including,but not limited to,grading,placing of rip-rap for erosion control,pouring concrete,laying sod,and stockpiling excavated material. Activities that generally do not involve a regulated discharge(if performed specifically in a manner to avoid discharges)include driving pilings, drainage channel maintenance, temporary mining and farm/forest roads,and excavating without stockpiling, Waters of the United States,as defined in the Code of Federal Regulations(CFR)328.3 include all waters or tributaries to waters such as lakes,rivers, intermittent and perennial streams,mudflats,sandflats, natural ponds,wetlands,wet meadows,and other aquatic habitats. Frequently, a water of the United States(with at least intermittently flowing water or tidal influences)is demarcated by the Ordinary High Water Mark(OHWM),defined in CFR 328.3(e)as the line on the shore established by the fluctuations of • water and indicated by physical characteristics such as a clear,natural line impressed on the bank shelving,changes in the character of soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation,the presence of litter and debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding areas. Typically,in this area, the OHWM is indicated by the presence of an incised streambed with defined bank shelving. According to the Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands(1987), three criteria must be satisfied to classify an area as a jurisdictional wetland. These are: 1)A predominance of plant life that is adapted to life in wet conditions(hydrophytic vegetation); 2) Soils that saturate, flood,or pond long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part(hydric soils); and 3) Permanent or periodic inundation or soils saturation,at least seasonally(wetland hydrology). As a result of the 2001 Solid Waste Agency of North Cook County(SWANCC)case;a - wetland must show connectivity to a stream course in order for such a feature to be considered jurisdictional. Section 401 of the Federal Clean Water Act Section 401 of the federal CWA requires that"any applicant for a Federal permit for activities that involve a discharge to waters of the State,shall provide the Federal permitting agency a certification from the State in which the discharge is proposed that states that the discharge will comply with the applicable provisions under the federal Clean Water Act." Therefore,before the USACE will issue a Section 404 permit,applicants must apply for and receive a Section 401 water quality certification from the Regional Water Quality Control Board(RWQCB). {• • Ms.Julie Gilbert • ( August 21,2007 Page 3 Porter Cologne Act The RWQCB regulates actions that would involve"discharging waste,or proposing to discharge waste, within any region that could affect the Water of the state"(Water Code 13260(a)),pursuant to provisions of the State Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act. "Waters of the State"are defined as"any surface water or groundwater,including saline waters,within the boundaries of the state'(Water Code 13050(e)). RWQCB Regulated Activities Under Section 401 of the CWA, the RWQCB regulates all activities that are regulated by the USACE. Additionally,under the Porter Cologne Act, the RWQCB regulates all activities,including dredging, filling,or discharge of materials into waters of the state that are not regulated by the USACE due to a lack of connectivity with a navigable water body and/or lack of an OHWM. CDFG Section 1602 Regulations The California Fish and Game Code mandates that"it is unlawful for any person to substantially dived or obstruct the natural flow or substantially change the bed,channel,or bank of any river,stream,or lake designated by the department,or use any material from the streambeds, without first notifying the department of such activity." CDFG jurisdiction includes ephemeral, intermittent and perennial watercourses(including dry washes) characterized by: 1. The presence of hydrophytic vegetation; 2. The location of definable bed and banks;and 3. The presence of existing fish or wildlife resources. • Furthermore,CDFG jurisdiction is often extended to habitats adjacent to watercourses,such as oak woodlands in canyon bottoms or willow woodlands that function as part of the riparian system and alluvial fans. Historic court cases have further extended CDFG jurisdiction to include watercourses that • seemingly disappear,but re-emerge elsewhere. Under the CDFG definition,a watercourse need not exhibit evidence of an OHWM to be claimed as jurisdiction. However, CDFG does not regulate isolated wetlands; that is, those that are not associated with a river,stream, or lake. CDFG regulated activities involve diversions, obstruction, or changes to the n atural flow or bed,channel,. - -or bank of any river,stream,or lake that supports fish or wildlife resources. Methodology • Jurisdictional Assessment Methodology Prior to the field visit,an aerial photograph of the Site was procured and compared with the USGS topographic quadrangle map to identify drainage features as indicated from topographic changes or visible drainage patterns. The United States Department of Agriculture Soil Survey Map for the area was reviewed to identify the soil series that occur on-the Site. A field assessment was conducted by MBA biologist Linda Archer on July 2,2007. The survey was conducted on foot and each potential drainage feature identified during the initial literature review was evaluated to determine state or federal jurisdiction. All drainage features were inspected to record existing conditions. Width measurements were taken from bank to bank at the ordinary high water mark • • • Ms. Julie Gilbert August 21,2007 Page 4 (OHWM). Drainage features were inspected upstream until the OHWM was no longer distinguishable. Areas where the OHWM was obscured for shod distances were regarded as potentially jurisdictional if the O1-IWM became clearly visible further upstream. Information regarding drainage characteristics such as an observable channel bed and bank, changes in soils or vegetation were recorded in a field notebook and transferred to standardized datasheets for clarity and consistency. Results The main Demens Debris Basin occurs north of the Site,north of Hillside Road. It captures flows from streams coming from canyons to the north including Demens Canyon,Thorpe Canyon,and Angalls, Canyon. Demens Channel, a concrete facility,extends southwest from Demens Basin. A secondary earthen channel extends south from Demens Basin and continues west of the Project Site ultimately ' terminating at a berm approximately 453 feet southwest of the Project Site. An apparent water control structure or intake tower occurs at the southern terminus of this channel(See Photo it 3). No other outlet was evident for this channel. The OHWM of the channel is approximately 3.5 feet wide within the toe-to-toe(which is 9 feet wide), and the bank to bank average is 60 feet. Much of the channel bottom is unvegetated with ruderal vegetation occurring in the bed of the channel south of the Project Site. The sides of the channel at the northern end are vegetated with Riverside sage scrub (RSS)dominated by California sagebrush (Artemisia californica),buckwheat(Eriogonum fasciculatum),mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), and non-native grasses. The banks along the southern end of the channel also include scalebroom and chamise(Adenostoma fasciculation). • The Project Site(secondary basin)occurs adjacent to this un-named earthen channel. Flows from the channel enter the basin. The floor of the basin consists of ruderal vegetation including mustard,tocalote (Centaurea melitensis),filaree (Erodium sp.),ragweed (Ambrosia acanthicarpa),pigweed (Antaranthus albus), and sparse scalebroom (Lepidospartum sguamatum),California sunflower(Helianthus tumults), and horseweed(Conyza sp.)._The far eastern end of the basin as well as the eastern side slope was dominated by deerweed (Lotus scoparius),tanveed'(Deinandra fasciculata),and telegraph weed (Heterotheca grandiflora). The northern and southern side slopes were comprised of Riversidean alluvial fan sage scrub(RAFSS)habitat dominated by buckwheat, California sagebrush, and scalebroom. Conclusions - - - The un-named channel located west of the basin contained an OHWM and a clearly defined bed and bank. As the channel has no connectivity to a waters of the U.S. and has no nexus to interstate commerce, the feature is not under the jurisdiction of the USACE. The USACE has final decision on jurisdictional status. As the feature does support ephemeral flows and the banks support RSS and RAFSS habitat this channel would be under the jurisdiction of the CDFG and the RWQCB. The Project Site(i.e.—the basin),is not within the streambed and therefore would not be under the jurisdiction of the CDFG pursuant to section 1602 of Fish and Game Code. Impacts resulting from a project as defined by CEQA to the habitat supported by the basin side slopes would have to be analyzed under CEQA. 1• Ms. Julie Gilbert • ( August 21,2007 Page 5 Filling of the basin would require notification to the RWQCB and potentially a Waste Discharge Report if it is determined that impacts would result to beneficial uses. I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this assessment and that the facts,statements,and information presented herein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Please feel to call me at 909.884.2255 if you have any questions concerning the information provided in this report. We look forward to continuing to assist you with work on this and other sites. Sincerely, 5Z AcApt Linda Archer Regulatory Section Manager Michael Brandman Associates 621 E. Carnegie Drive,Suite 100 San Bernardino,CA 92408 Attachments: Exhibits 1 -4 Site Photos • LMA:nvw H:\CIknf0052100520027\Focused Plant survq.doc • • • • • • FLORAL COMPENDIUM Asteracene Sunflower Family Artemisia californica California sagebrush Ericameria pinifolia pinebush Gnaphalium californicum California everlasting Lepidospartum squamatum scale-broom Boraginaceae Borage Family Cryptantha sp. Popcorn flower Brassicaceae Mustard Family tHirschfeldia incana short-podded mustard Chenopodiaceae Goosefoot Family 'Salsola tragus Russian thistle Cucurbitaceae Gourd Family Marah macrocarpus wild cucumber Fabacene Legume Family Lotus scoparius deerweed Geraniaceae Geranium Family `Erodium cicutarium red-stemmed filaree Hydrophyllaceae Waterleaf Family Eriodictyon crassifolium thick-leaved yerba santa • Lamiaceae Mint Family Salvia apiana white sage Salvia columbariae chia Salvia mellifera black sage . Onagracene - • Evening Primrose Family Camissonia bistorta California sun cup Polygonncene Buckwheat Family Eriogonum fasciculatum California buckwheat Rhamnnceae - - .- - - Buckthorn Family Ceanothus crassifolius hoary leaf ceanothus Rhamnus crocea spiny redberry Rosaceae Rose Family Adenostoma fasciculatum chamise Cercocarpus betuloides birch-leaf mountain-mahogany Scrophularlaceae Figwort Family • Penstemon spectabilis -- royal penstemon • Liliaceae Lily Family Calochortus plummerne Plummer's mariposa lily Dichelostemma capitatum blue dicks Yucca whipplei Our Lord's candle Poaceae Grass Family •Bromus diandrus ripgut grass "Bromus madritensis ssp.mbens foxtail chess (• • Appendix D Cultural Resources Report • • • A National Register of Historic Places and California Register of Historical Resources Survey, Determination of Eligibility Statement, and • Determination of Effect for the Proposed Demens Basin Stockpile Reclamation Project Prepared by: Roger G. Hatheway Principal Investigator, Cultural Resources Specialist County of San Bernardino Department of Public Works January 15, 2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. General Introduction/Executive Summary 1 11. Qualifications 2 IlI. Proposed Undertaking 3 IV. Project Location and Determination of APE 4 V. Methodologies and Scope-of-Work 4 VI. Previous Findings: Historical Resources Record Search 6 Table I:Known Archaeological resources in Vicinity of APE 7 VII. NM-IC Consultation 7 VIII. Environmental Background: Existing Site Conditions 8 IX. Historical Development and Use of Project Site 8 X. Ethnographic and Historical Background 9 XI. Relevant Federal,State,and Local Guidelines 13 • XII. Survey Findings and Statement of Eligibility 16 XIII. Determination of Effect 16 XIV. Recommendations 16 XV. References --- - 16 APPENDIX A:Historical Resources-Record Search(October 30,-2007) 21 APPENDIX B: Figures- •_-_• 24 APPENDIX C: Photographs of Project Areas:Demens Basin I and Demens Basin 2 29 APPENDIX D:NAHC Consultation Request Sc Response 32 APPENDIX E: Qualifications • - • • --- 36 1. Introduction/Executive Summary During the period of time extending from October 20, 2007 to January 14, 2008 the following Cultural Resource Management (CRM) Report entitled,A National Register of Historic Places and California Register of Historical Resources Survey, Determination of Eligibility Statement, and Determination of Effect for the Proposed Demens Basin • Stockpile Reclamation Project was prepared by the Department of Public Works (DPW). A Historical Resources Record Search was completed on October 30, 2007, by the San Bernardino County Archaeological Information Center(A1C). Field surveys were completed in December of 2007, and the final report was prepared in mid-January of 2008. The final report was ultimately prepared to determine, in accordance with both federal and state guidelines, the potential for impacts to cultural resources within a defined Study/Survey Area and/or Area of Potential Effect (APE) for the proposed project. I • 1 This report was prepared with the understanding that it would be submitted to and reviewed by United States Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) staff. It was, therefore, prepared in accordance with standard federal and state guidelines, and in accordance with • San Bernardino County Archaeological Information Center(AIC) guidelines. A Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) Sacred Lands File (SLF) consultation was implemented with negative findings. Tribal entities were not contacted as the findings of the NAHC consultation were negative, and the project is within an area already massively disturbed by flood control related activities. Future contact with any Tribal entity may, of course, be initiated at the discretion of the ACOE. No prehistoric and/or historic cultural resources were identified during the field survey of the APE of the proposed Demens Basin Stockpile Reclamation Project. In addition,no previously identified National Register eligible resources are within the proposed APE. The cultural resources survey for the proposed Demens Basin Stockpile Reclamation Project did, therefore, result in negative findings. It is here determined that implementation of the proposed Demens Basin Stockpile Reclamation Project shall have NO ADVERSE EFFECT on cultural resources due to the fact that no significant (previously identified sites) or potentially significant cultural resource sites (those identified during the field survey), are known to exist within the APE. Concurrence is here requested regarding this finding. NO SITE-SPECIFIC MITIGATION RECOMMENDATIONS are here made with regards to architectural, historical, or archaeological resources as implementation of the Demens Basin Stockpile Reclamation Project shall have NO ADVERSE EFFECT on • cultural resources. A monitor shall not be required during construction and/or • cartlmnoving activities as the APE has been massively altered by flood control improvements and/or the stockpiling of debris. However, should-significant subsurface prehistoric or historic archaeological resources appear to be encountered during construction and/or earthtnoving activities, the evaluation of any such resources should proceed in accordance with the criteria outlined in Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (1966, as amended), in accordance with CEQA guidelines.(1970, as amended), and in accordance with the . County of San Bernardino General Plan. Specifically, all work must be halted in the immediate vicinity of the cultural resource found until a qualified archaeologist can assess the significance of the resource. Finally, if human remains are encountered within the project APE , then the San Bernardino County Coroner's Office MUST be contacted in accordance with state law within 24 hours of the find, and all work should be halted until a clearance is given by that office and any other involved agencies. 11. Qualifications The preparation of this report was designed to maximize the level of information gathered, and utilized cultural resource specialists throughout the course of the project. Roger Hatheway, County of San Bernardino, DPW, served as the project Principal Investigator and as the Principal Investigator for History and Architecture. John Romani, Compass Rose Archaeological, Inc., served as the Principal Investigator for Archaeology. Mr. Hatheway and Mr. Romani each have over thirty years of qualifying experience as • Principal Investigators. III. Proposed Undertaking The proposed Demens Basin Stockpile Reclamation Project is described in a draft initial • study as prepared by County of San Bernardino, DPW, Environmental Management Division staff which reads: The San Bernardino County Flood Control District(District) is proposing to reclaim the stockpile area availability of Demens Basin 1 by removing excess debris stockpiled at the site from past storm events.The project includes exporting the reclaimed material to Demens Basin 2 where it will be placed within the basin beginning at the eastern edge and filling approximately three-fourths of the length of the basin(approximately 4 acres) in accordance with the District's fill plan.The basin's remaining capacity would be reduced from the existing estimate of 149,500 cy to 63,450 cy. As determined by the District,reducing the capacity of Demens Basin 2 would not affect the basin's ability to continue to provide conservation of localized flows,and detention for any overflow that might result from Demens Basin I. The material will be placed within Demens Basin 2 in accordance with a District- prepared fill plan,and compacted in accordance with Uniform Building Code(UBC)and City of Rancho Cucamonga standards, to achieve the grade and compaction requirements necessary for a buildable, four-acre piece of property. The four-acre site will be subsequently disposed of by the District at a future date. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has identified this site to potentially construct a fire station, which will be the subject of a separate,independent environmental review. (This environmental document does not analyze the potential impacts of the fire station or any other potential use for the property). Potential future development that may occur on the property would be required to comply with City of Rancho Cucamonga requirements and subsequently comply with California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA) for any action considered a project as defined in Chapter 2.5,Section 21065 of the 2007 CEQA Statutes, It is estimated that approximately 96,000 cy are stockpiled at Demens Basin I. Based on • compaction and screening requirements to provide a useable area at Demens Basin 2, an additional 20,000 cy of material may be required and could be transported to the site from the District's Hillside Basin located approximately two miles east of Demens Basin 2. Therefore, this Initial Study evaluates the relocation of a maximum of 116,000 cy from Demens Basin 1 and Hillside Basin to Demens Basin 2,and the compaction of this material at Demens Basin 2 to allow the District to allow the four-acre area to be considered as future surplus property. Prior to transportation, materials at Demens Basin 1 and Hillside Basin would be manually screened to remove wood,vegetation debris,and boulders/rocks greater than six inches in diameter.A front end loader would deposit material at the top of the screen (Grizzly),then screened material would be placed in trucks for transport to Demens Basin. ft is estimated that the use of this type of equipment will process approximately 4,800 cy per day.At the aforementioned rate it will take approximately 21 working days • to process 100,000 cy. It is anticipated that the screening and trucking operation will occur simultaneously. Proposed earthwork activities would occur over a four- to five-week period. Exportation of material from Demens Basin I includes trucks traveling south along Amethyst Avenue, then west along Hillside Road,and then south along Hellman Avenue for a total one-way travel distance of 0.6 miles. If additional material is needed, it would be brought to the site from Hillside Basin located approximately two miles east of the site.Trucks traveling from Hillside Basin would travel south along Haven Avenue and then west along Hillside Road to the project site for approximately two miles. Sensitive receptors including single-family residential occur along both proposed travel routes. Equipment required for on-site grading and compaction would include: a loader, two water trucks,a • dozer,grader,and a rubber tire dozer. 3 • IV. Project Location and Determination of APE • The location of the Demens Basin Stockpile Reclamation Project is described in a draft initial study as prepared by County of San Bernardino, DPW, Environmental Management Division staff which reads: APN: 1061-411-11; 1061-511-10, 12,& 15; 1061-501-02; 1061-621-03 APPLICANT: San Bernardino County Flood Control District PROPOSAL: Reclaim Demens Basin 1 by relocating 96,000 cubic yards(cy)of stockpiled material to Demens Basin 2.The material will fill a 4-acre portion of the 5- acre Demens Basin 2. Approximately 20,000 cy of material will also be transported from Hillside Basin to Demens Basin 2 to ensure fill of the full 4 acres. The I-acre westerly portion of Demens Basin 2 will remain for flood control purposes. COMMUNITY: Rancho Cucamonga LOCATION: Demens Basins 1 and 2 located north and south of I-Iillside Road between Amethyst Avenue and Beryl Street, in the City of Rancho Cucamonga; and Hillside Basin located east of Demens Basin I. USGS QUAD: Cucamonga Peak Quadrangle,California,7.5-Minute Series(Topographic) T, R,SECTION:Township 1 North, Range 7 \Vest, Section 22, San Bernardino Baseline and Meridian. THOMAS BROS: Page 572,grid H2, San Bernardino&Riverside Counties 2005 edition • PLANNING AREA: City of Rancho Cucamonga LAND USE DISTRICT:City of Rancho Cucamonga—Flood Control/Utility Corridor The Area of Potential Effect (APE) and Survey/Study Area of the Demens Basin Stockpile Reclamation Project is here defined as consisting of approximately 60 acres of land (the majority containing stockpiled debris) located in Section 22, Township 1 North, Range 7 West, Section 22, as depicted on the Cucamonga Peak USGS Quadrangle map (See Appendix B: Figure 4). Note: For additional information regarding the project locations and APE please refer to Appendix B. Figure 1: Regional Location Map Figure 2: Site Location Map Figure 3: Proposed Haul Route Figure 4: USGS Project Location Map, Survey/Study Area, and APE V. Methodologies and Scope-of-Work A determination was made by DPW staff to prepare cultural resource environmental documentation for the proposed Demens Basin Stockpile Reclamation Project for submittal to the United States Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE). In accordance with • appropriate federal, state, and local guidelines this included: I 4 1.) Determine Area of Potential Effect (APE) for proposed project. 2.)Receive and review Historical Resources Record Search, as prepared by County of • San Bernardino Archaeological Information Center(AIC) staff, for the previously defined APE. 3.) Conduct field survey and archival research as necessary to complete National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) assessment, California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) assessment, and Determination of Effect(DOE) documentation for the defined APE. 4.) Conduct Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) consultation for the defined APE. 5.) Prepare Cultural Resource Management(CRM) report for the defined APE in accordance with appropriate federal, state, and local guidelines for submittal to the ACOE. Field Survey A field survey was conducted in December of 2007. The Study/Survey Areas and APE for each project were photographed for inclusion in the final report (See Appendix C: Photographs). Rogcr G. Hatheway served as the project Principal Investigator for History and Architecture. He also conducted the field survey under the direction of.John Romani, • Compass Rose Archaeological, Inc, Principal Investigator for Archaeology. Ground . visibility was excellent (80-100%). The Demens Basin I survey area consisted of massively disturbed soils comprised of stockpiled debris (small to large rock cobbles). The Demens Basin 2 survey area also consisted of massively disturbed soils (excavated debris basin). Archival Research Background archival investigations were conducted that minimally included consultation of the following sources of information: 1 986 Survey of Surveys: A Summary of California's Historical and Architectural Resource Surveys. 1988 Five Views: An Ethnic Sites Survey for California. California Historical Landmarks. California Points of Historical Interest. 2007 Determinations of Eligibility--Records entered into the OHP • computer file—received quarterly. 2007 Directory of Historic Properties—Records entered into the OHP computer file of historic resources- received quarterly. Additional sources of historical information consulted include: -San Bernardino County Archives -San Bernardino County Archaeological Information Center(AIC) -Property Information Management System (PIMS)Files -Feldheym Library, California Room, City of San Bernardino -Smiley Library, Redlands ( • 5 • Note: Please refer to the References section of this report for additional information regarding sources consulted. ,• Report Preparation All opinions expressed herein are based on experience with similar studies, and on information gathered as part of the specific proposed investigation. The opinions expressed are based on visual observations made at the project site, on data gathered as part of the survey, historical and archival research process, and on information provided by DPW staff team members. If additional information is made available at a later date, and/or the proposed project is changed in any manner whatsoever, the County of San Bernardino DPW reserves the right to modify any and all opinions expressed. VI. Records Search: Previous Findings of Significance A Historical Resources Record Search was prepared by Robin Laska on October 30, 2007, at the Archaeological Information Center(AIC), San Bernardino County Museum, Redlands, California. • The results of the records search included the following: HISTORICAL RESOURCES RECORD SEARCH: Demons Basin,RFA 091-971402-4B In response to your request for information dated 17 October 2007,a records search has been conducted for the above project on USGS Cucamonga Pcak 7.5'quad. Historical Resources: Prehistoric Archaeological Resources: I prehistoric archaeological sites 0 pending prehistoric archaeological sites 0 prehistoric districts • • 0 prehistoric isolates Historic Archaeological Resources(sites older than 50 years of age): 1 historic archaeological sites 0 pending historic archaeological sites . 6 historic structures . • .. .. - • 0 historic districts 0 historic isolates 5+ possible historic structure/archaeological site locations determined from historic maps(maps checked):Thompson, 1917/20, 1929; Beasley, 1892; Blackburn, 1932;AAA-various;Hall, 1888; Lippencott, 1898;USGS Cucamonga, 1894; US Army Cucamonga, 1940/I;Subdivision of Rancho. , - Cucamonga, 1871. Cultural Landscapes: 0 cultural Landscapes Ethnic Resources: • 0 ethnic resources Heritage Properties(designated by State and Federal commissions): 0 National Register Listed Properties I National Register Eligible Properties 0 California Historic Landmarks 0 California Points of Historic Interest PREVIOUS HISTORICAL RESOURCE INVESTIGATIONS: Historical resource reports for the project area include: 17 Area-specific survey reports 5 General area overviews In addition to the Center's historical resources files,the following publications,manuscripts or correspondence also were consulted: • 1986 " Survey of Surveys: A Summary of California's Historical and Architectural Resource Surveys. 6 1988 Five Views:An Ethnic Sites Survey for California. California Historical Landmarks. California Points of Historical Interest. 2007 Determinations of Eligibility—Records entered into the OHP ( • computer file—received quarterly. 2007 Directory of Historic Properties--Records entered into the OHP computer file of historic resources-received quarterly. SENSITIVITY OF PROJECT AREA FOR HISTORICAL RESOURCES: Based upon the above information,available historical records and maps,and comparisons with similar environmental localities,the sensitivity assessment for this project area is: Prehistoric Archaeological Resources High Historic Archaeological Resources High Historic Resources High Cultural Landscapes Unknown Ethnic Resources Unknown Comments:Potential for all types of resources based on sites found in the APE& sites/structures/flumes/roads shown on historic maps.APE is within the boundaries of the historic Rancho Cucamonga. RECOMMENDATIONS: In order to minimally comply with CEQA,NEPA and/or Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act,a field survey should be conducted by a qualified professional for historical resources within portions of the project area not previously surveyed for such resources. The AIC historical resources files (site records) contain the following information: Table 1 Known Archaeological Resources in Vicinity of APE Site Primary Initial Recorder and Year First Age/Period Site Description Number Number . Recorded • • CA-SBR- 7694H Historic Boulder Powerlines 1593 Pre-Historic Campsite Summary: Historical Resources Record Search CA-SBR-7694H consists of the Boulder Powerlines, a National Register eligible resource. These powerlines are located to the north of the northern boundary of the Demens Basin 1 APE. CA-SBR-1593 consists of a prehistoric campsite. First recorded in 1935, it was re-recorded in 1976 and is noted as having been "almost completely destroyed" by construction of ranch buildings and an orchard. This site is located to the northwest of the northern boundary of the Demens Basin 1 APE. Both of the previously identified cultural resources are outside of the defined APE and Survey/Study Area of the Demens Basin Stockpile Reclamation Project. VII. NAHC Consultation A Native American Heritage Commission(NAHC) Sacred Lands File (SLF) consultation was implemented with negative findings. Tribal entities were not contacted as the findings of the NAHC consultation were negative, and the project is within an area already massively disturbed by flood control related activities. In effect, there are no undisturbed soils visible within Demens Basin 1 and/or Demens Basin 2. Future contact with any Tribal entity may, of course, be initiated at the discretion of the ACOE. Note: For additional information regarding the NAHC consultation please refer to • ( I Appendix D. 7 VIII. Environmental Background: Existing Site Conditions • The Environmental Background and Existing Site Conditions of the Deniers Basin Stockpile Reclamation Project are described in a draft initial study as prepared by County of San Bernardino, DPW, Environmental Management Division staff which reads: • Demens Basin I is located in the City of Rancho Cucamonga and spans across four parcels totaling approximately 53.13 acres that are owned and maintained by the District. The site is designated as Flood ControVUtility Corridor by the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Land Use Map and is located on the west side of Amethyst Avenue between Gooseneck Drive to the north and Sherwood Drive to the south. Surrounding land uses include Demens Creek Channel to the north and west,vacant land to the east,and single-family residential to the south. • Demens Basin 2, located 0.6 miles southwest of Demens Basin I,is also located within the planning limits of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and is designated as Flood Control/Utility Corridor by the City's General Plan Land Use Map.The approximate 5- acre basin is situated on a 7.18-acre site located on the west side of Hellman Avenue between Hillside Road to the north and Ioamosa Court to the south. Surrounding land uses include single-family residential to the north and west,Hellman Avenue and single- family residential to the east, and an approximate 25-foot flood control easement and single-family residential (currently under construction) to the south. Demens Basin 2 has historically received little to no flows. Therefore the District has determined that the basin is no longer needed for flood control or water storage. The Demens Basin 2 site supports approximately one-acre of Riversidean upland sage scrub which occurs along the north,south and west side slopes of the basin(Focused California Cuatcatcher Survey,, LSA Associates,Inc.July 13, 2007). The remainder of the site consists of non-native grassland and areas with only ruderal vegetation.Dominant • species within the Riversidean upland sage scrub include California sagebrush,California buckwheat,and shortpod mustard.The basin also occurs within an area designated as critical habitat for the California gnatcatcher(Polioptila californica califbrnica).The . basin is relatively shallow with side slopes averaging approximately 12 feet wide. IX. Historical Development and Use of Project Site The Historical Development and Use of the Project Site is described in a draft initial study as prepared by County of San Bernardino, DPW, Environmental Management Division staff which reads: • In the early 1980s, the United Slates Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) constructed Demens Creek Channel to bring flood relief to the northwestern area of Rancho Cucamonga. This project was part of the channelization and dam project for Deer Creek. The federal project also included the construction of Demens Basin 1, located north of Hillside Road and west of Amethyst Avenue, and Demens Basin 2, located south of Hillside Road on the west si de o f H ellman Avenue in Rancho Cucamonga, California (Sec Figure 1 Regional Map and Figure 2 Vicinity Map). Demens Basin 1 was designed for collection of debris in the event of a flood, and Demens Basin 2 was constructed for water conservation of localized flows, and any overflow that might result from Demens Basin I. Ownership and operation of the facilities were subsequently turned over to the San Bernardino County Flood Control District(District). Historically, Demens Basin 2 has received minimal flows and is dry most of the year. The water sources for Demens Basin 2 are an underground pipe that is connected to Demens B asin 1, a s well a s street runoff and nuisance flows. The p ipe outlets under • Hillside Avenue into a natural drainage channel that is conveyed over a concrete spillway • at the northwestern comer of the b asin,and waterponds in a l ow s pot located on t he ( western portion of the basin. If excess water exists, the water continues down a drainage 8 ditch that dead ends. Should flows reach the top of the bank, they would enter a concrete swale located at the top of the bank,which outlets back onto surface streets. r Sediment and debris is periodically stockpiled adjacent to and outside of Demens Basin • 1. Generally, the District offers the material to local contractors to utilize as fill for construction projects. This practice assists the District in reducing the amount of stockpiled materials at the site.During the past several storm seasons, especially after the • 2003/2004 storm events, Demers Basin I received an unusually excessive amount of debris. To date, the local market has not been able to absorb all of the debris from this basin. A total of approximately 96,000 cy of material remains stockpiled at the Demens Basin 1 site. X. Ethnographic and Historical Background Prehistory It is generally believed that human occupation of southern California began at least 10,000 years before present (BP). The archaeological record indicates that between approximately 10,000 and 6,000 years BP, a predominantly hunting economy existed, characterized by archaeological sites containing numerous projectile points and butchered large animal bones. Animals that were hunted probably consisted mostly of large species still alive today. Bones of extinct species have been found,but cannot definitely be associated with human artifacts. Although small animal bones and plant grinding tools are rarely found within archaeological sites of this period, small game and vegetal foods were probably exploited on a limited basis. A lack of deep cultural deposits from this period suggests that groups included only small numbers of individuals who did not often stay in one place for extended periods (Wallace 1978). Around 6,000 years BP, there was a shift in focus from hunting towards a greater reliance • on vegetal resources. Archaeological evidence of this trend consists of a much greater number of milling tools (e.g., metates and manos) for processing seeds and other vegetable matter. This period, which extended until around 3,000 years BP, is sometimes referred to as the"Millingstohe Horizon' (Wallace 1978). Projectile points are found in archaeological sites from this period, but they are far fewer in number than from sites dating to before 6,000 years BP. An increase in the size of groups and the stahility of settlements is indicated by deep, extensive middens at some sites from this period (Wallace 1978). In sites dating to after about 3,000 years BP, archaeological evidence indicates that reliance on both plant gathering and hunting continued as in the previous period, with more specialized adaptation to particular environments. Mortars and pestles were added to metates and manos for grinding seeds and other vegetable material. Chipped-stone tools became more refined and specialized, and bone tools were more common. During this period, new peoples from the Great Basin began entering southern California. These immigrants, who spoke a language of the Uto-Aztecan linguistic stock, seem to have displaced or absorbed the earlier population of Hokan-speaking peoples. The exact time of their entry into the region is not known; however, they were present in southern California during the final phase of prehistory. During this period, known as the "Late Horizon,"population densities were higher than before and settlement became concentrated in villages and communities along the coast and interior valleys (Erlandson 1994). Regional subcultures also started to develop, each with its own geographical territory and language or dialect (Kroeber 1925; Moratto 1984). These were most likely • 1 1 9 • the basis for the groups encountered by the first Europeans during the eighteenth century (Wallace 1978). Despite the regional differences, many material culture traits were • shared among groups, indicating a great deal of interaction(Erlandson 1994). The introduction of the bow and arrow into the region sometime around 1,500 to 1,000 years BP is indicated by the presence of small projectile points (Moratto 1984). • Ethnohistory The project area is in the eastern part of the territory occupied by the Gabrielino (Tongva) Native American group prior to the arrival of Euro-Americans. Gabrielino settlement and subsistence systems may extend back in time to the beginning of the Late Prehistoric Period(about A.D. 750). The Gabrielino lived in villages of up to 150 people and were located near permanent water sources and a variety of food resources. The village was the center of a territory from which resources were gathered. Work parties left the village for short periods of time to hunt, fish, and gather plant foods (Bean and Smith 1978; Earle and O'Neil 1994). While away from the village, they established seasonal residential bases, temporary camps, and resource processing locations (Mason and Peterson 1994). Archaeologically, such locations are indicated by manos and metates for seed processing, bedrock mortars for acorn processing, and lithic scatters indicating manufacturing or maintenance of stone tools (usually made of chert) used in hunting or butchering. Overnight stays in field camps are indicated by fire-affected rock used in hearths. The Gabrielino were semi-sedentary hunters and gatherers. Acorns gathered from oak groves in canyons, drainages, and foothills were one of the most important food resources for inland groups. Acorns were ground with a mortar and pestle. Seeds from sage and grasses, goosefoot, and California buckwheat were collected and ground with manos and • metates. Protein was supplied by hunting deer, rabbits, and other animals using a bow and arrow, as well as various traps and snares. Coastal dwellers collected shellfish and engaged in fishing. Dried shellfish and fish were probably exchanged for inland products such as acorns. - Exploration to Early American Period Spanish missionaries began their exploration of Alta California (the area north of Baja California) and establishment of missions in 1769, starting in San Diego and ending with the missions in San Rafael and Sonoma, established in 1823 (Castillo 1978). The purpose of the missions was to convert and control the Native American population. Mission San Gabriel Archangel was founded in 1771 east of what is now Los Angeles in Gabrielino territory. An asistencia or outpost of the San Gabriel Mission, known as the San Bernardino Rancho Asistencia, was founded in 1819 near the boundaries of Gabrielino, Cahuilla, and Serrano territories near present-day Redlands. • After Mexico became independent from Spain in the early 1830s, the Mexican • government closed the missions. Former mission lands were granted to soldiers and other Mexican citizens for use as cattle ranches. The Rancho Cucamonga area was surrounded by large rancho grants during the Mexican period of the 1840s. This included the El Muscupiabe Rancho of Miguel Blanco (Michael White) and Henry Hancock, the Bandini and Rubidoux Ranchos, the Chino Rancho, and the Cucamonga Rancho. The nearest permanent settlement during this early period was Agua Mansa. This • Hispanic settlement of traders from New Mexico was located on the banks of the Santa Ana River a short distance downstream from its confluence with Lytle Creek. The I0 riverside location proved to be ill-chosen when the town was wiped out during the disastrous flood of 1862 (Clark 1978/1979; Ahlborn 1982). The American period began when the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo was signed between • Mexico and the United States in 1848. As a result of the treaty,Alta California became part of the United States. California became a state in 1850. In 1851 a large group of Mormons arrived to establish a colony in the San Bernardino Valley after a difficult journey from Salt Lake City. One group, under the leadership of Captain Andrew Lytle, camped near the mouth of Canon de los Negros and renamed it Lytle Creek. The Mormons purchased San Bernardino Rancho from the Lugos; however, the United States government did not recognize their claim to the lands west of Lytle Creek, so they settled at what is now San Bernardino. By 1853 they had cleared a new road between San Bernardino and Cucamonga. This road later became a segment of Foothill Boulevard (Stoebe and Bemis 1976). Greater than normal precipitation, along with melting of an unusually deep snow pack accumulated during the winter of 1861-1862, resulted in the flood of January 1862, the largest flooding episode recorded in southern California history. In addition to the destruction of Agua Mansa, extensive damage was done to San Bernardino by the Santa Ana River and Lytle Creek (Clark 1978/1979; Ahlborn 1982; Hayden et al. 1997). In the long run, however, the disaster did not slow settlement of the area and, throughout the 1860s and 1870s, families continued to establish small farms west of Lytle Creek, growing mostly grapes and fruit trees (Stoebe and Bemis 1976). In 1874 the area west of Lytle Creek was the subject of a survey by John Goldsworthy, the U.S. Deputy Surveyor. Goldsworthy left a record of the area that included soil • conditions, native vegetation, and land use. The region encompassing the Lytle Creek alluvial plain consisted of north-south trending bands of fertile soil interspersed with bands of rocky, gravelly ground. Natural vegetation, consisting of moderately dense • coastal sage scnib, grew on the soil-covered areas, while vegetation was distinctly less- dense in the thin, rocky soil in between. The farming that existed at the time of the Goldsworthy survey took advantage of the fertile areas. The Goldsworthy survey also indicated that several irrigation ditches, or zmrjas, had been dug to divert water from Lytle Creek to the farms in the area (Hayden et al. 1997). History of Ranch Cucamonga The following is taken from City of Rancho Cucamonga website located at: • http://www.cityofrc.us/adventure/history.htm The Native American cultures of southern California had stabilized some three thousand years ago, thriving until almost eliminated by European invasion.Over twenty linguistic families with close to one hundred thirty-five different languages characterized this culture. By about 1200 A.D. the Kucamongan Native Americans established a village- like clustering around the land mass we know as Red Hill.The Kucarnongan people were part of the Gabrielino culture, and anthropologists believe that,at their peak, the Gabrielinos existed as one of the largest concentrations of indigenous peoples on the North American continent. Eager to expand its empire,Spain set out to explore North America in the eighteenth century. In 1769,Captain Gaspar de Portola led a group of soldiers and Franciscan • 1 monks,supervised by Father 7unipera Serra, to Baja California in a colonization effort. 11 The Mission System established by Serra supported a loosely-constructed social system of ranchos, primarily cattle producing,ordered by a feudal and kinship way of life. The nineteenth century brought with it profound change and expansion. By 1833, the • amount of control held by Spain diminished and as Mexico won its independence from the Crown, all land in southern and Baja California was opened up for granting from the new governor of Mexico.A dedicated soldier,smuggler and politician,Tubercio Tapia was granted 13,000 acres of land around the area called Cucamonga by governor Juan Bautista Alvarado on March 3, 1839.Using Indian labor,Tapia constructed a well- fortified adobe home on Red Hill and raised great herds of cattle.Unlike many who had gone before him,Tapia began a successful winery,portions of which stand today known to us as the Thomas Winery. American forces invaded California in 1846, annexed it in 1848,and made it a state in 1850.Unlike the northern portion of our state during that era,southern California,and specifically Los Angeles,was described as a "random collection of adobes rimmed by sandy wastes, wild mustard,and willow trees." This mid-nineteenth-century mixture of cultures and lives is well represented in the estate developed by Alabama-born John Rains and his wife Maria Merced Williams de Rains. Dona Merced was the great-granddaughter of Francisco Lugo and granddaughter of Antonio Lugo,and daughter of Isaac Williams of the famous Rancho Santa Ana del Chino. The Rains purchased the Rancho de Cucamonga from Tapia's daughter and her husband Leon Victor Prudhomme in 1858.Before his murder in 1862,Rains greatly expanded the vineyards Tapia had planted and imported brick masons from Ohio,via Los Angeles, to construct the family home, now listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The Rancho period came to a close and changing land ownership and debates over water rights determined the American settlement of this region. When combined with transpdrtation, the availability of water shaped the nature of development. The wagon - trail over Cajon Pass to the Mission San Gabriel in 1826, the Butterfield Stagecoach line • in 1858, the Union Pacific Railroad in 1887,and the Pacific Electric Railway Line in 1913 all brought supplies men, women,hopes and dreams to this area while men like George Day captured the water as it emerged on its path from the San Bernardino Mountains above us. Cucamonga's history stretches back further than most of the other regional communities. President Abraham Lincoln signed into existence a post office located at the base of Red Hill in 1864 the first in the western portion of San Bernardino County.After John Rains' death and Dona Merced's departure,the Rancho went into foreclosure, and in 1870 it was sold to Isaias Hellman and other San Francisco businessmen who later formed the • Cucamonga Company. In 1887, both water and access were provided to the Cucamonga colony,as irrigation tunnels were dug into Cucamonga canyon and the Santa Fe Railroad extended through the area.Although early settlers planted and cultivated citrus,olive, peach,and other crops, vineyards and wine making characterized the Cucamonga community. Alta Loma was carved from the original Rancho de Cucamonga. The banker, Hellman, formed the Cucamonga Homestead Association,but could not get water to the subdivision, and the town's development was curtailed until Adolph Petsch and four other investors opened up the Hermosa tract in 1881 just outside of the Rancho lands. Spurred on by the competition,Hellman established the Iowa tract in 1882 and brought needed water to the tract via Cucamonga Canyon.Dug by Chinese laborers,some of these water ways are still in use.The two colonies combined to form loamosa in 1887 and when in 1913 the Pacific Electric Railway came through,supported by Captain Peter Demens, a Russian nobleman, and other citrus growers looking to improve crop transportation, the town became Alta Loma. The City's eastern community of Etiwanda has the distinction of being the first town planned by George and William Chaffey who purchased the land in 1881 from Joseph 12 • Garcia,a retired Portuguese sea captain.The innovations in city planning,subdividing, promotion,beautification, and most significantly irrigation for which the Chaffeys would become famous, were first tested in the Etiwanda colony.George Chaffey,an • ' experienced engineer,created a mutual water company and pipe system of irrigation that became the standard for water system management in southern California.Not set on just bringing water to the and chaparral,Chaffey also harnessed hydro-electric power and on December 4, 1882, the first electric light glowed from Etiwanda;and four months earlier the first long distance call in southern California was completed between San Bernardino and Etiwanda. By 1913,the community boasted of paved streets,rock curbs, and streetlights quite a list of accomplishments for a small town. Men and women from many cultures have shaped Rancho Cucamonga's history.Many Mexican families labored in the vineyards and groves,often living in small,quickly constructed camps, located away from the other centers of settlement.Later, they created a thriving community of their own,known as North Town, in which a dance ball,theater, markets, restaurants,and a church, Our Lady of Mt.Carmel,was founded and bound them together. Much of the heritage and built environment of North Town exists today. Likewise,Italian immigrants like the Nosenzos,Guideras,DiCarlos, and Campanellas established a community out along Foothill Boulevard in southern Etiwanda, consisting of homes, wineries of all sizes, and Sacred Heart church. Note: The mention above of Russian nobleman and orange grower Captain Peter Demens, namesake of Demens Basin 1 and 2. XI. Guidelines for Assessment (Federal, State, and Local) The following federal and state guidelines have been utilized during preparation of this report. Federal: The National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) • This is the Nation's official list of cultural resources worthy of preservation. Authorized tinder the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, the National Register is part of a national program to coordinate and support public and private efforts to identify, evaluate, and protect the country's historic and archeological resources. Properties listed in the National Register include districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that are significant in American history, architecture; archeology, engineering, and culture. The National Register is administered by the National Park Service, which is part of the U.S. Department of the Interior. Currently there are more than 70,000 listings that make up the National Register, including all historic areas in the National Park System, over 2,300 National Historic Landmarks, and properties nominated because they are significant to the nation, a state or a community. Properties are nominated to the National Register by the State Historic Preservation Officer(SHPO) of the state in which the property is located, by the Federal Preservation Officer(FPO) for properties under Federal ownership or control, or by the Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO), if the property is on tribal lands. Any individual or group may prepare a National Register nomination. Thorough documentation of the physical appearance and historic significance of the property is required. Completed nominations are submitted to Office of Historic Preservation (OHP). In California, after an application has been reviewed by staff, it is submitted to • the State Historical Resources Commission (Commission) to determine whether or not properties meet the criteria for evaluation and to make a recommendation to the SHPO to • ( approve or disapprove the designation. Nominations recommended by the Commission 13 • and approved by the SHPO are forwarded to the Keeper of the National Register at the National Park Service in Washington D.C. • During the time the proposed nomination is reviewed by the SHPO,property owners and local officials are notified of the intent to nominate. Local officials and property owners are given an opportunity to comment on the nomination and owners of private property are given an opportunity to object to the nomination. The SHPO may forward the nomination to the National Park Service only for a determination of eligibility. Without formally listing the property in the National Register, the National Park Service then determines the property eligible for listing. If the review board and the SHPO agree on the eligibility of the property(and the owner has not objected to the nomination), then the nomination is forwarded to the National Park Service to be considered for listing. Application of National Register Guidelines The findings and conclusions of this report are based upon the following general guidelines. In particular, the assessment of National Register eligibility is based primarily on federal guidelines contained in 36 CFR 60.4. Specifically: The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archaeology, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association, and: (a)that are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or, (b)that are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past;or, • (c) that embody distinctive characteristics of a type,period,or method of construction or, (d)that have yielded or may be likely to yield,information important in prehistory or history. Proper consideration of the above noted criterion provides sufficient information for the application of survey results to almost any cultural resource environmental document related to Section 106 compliance. National Register District Authorization and Definitions Authorization and Expansion of the National Register The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, 80 Stat. 915, 16 U.S.C. 470 et seq., as amended, authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to expand and maintain a National Register of districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects significant in American • history, architecture, archeology, engineering and culture. The regulations herein set forth the procedural requirements for listing properties on the National Register. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, provides that Federal agencies are required to identify cultural resources within a project's potential environmental impact area. Section 106(4) provides for the continuing Federal responsibility to preserve historic, cultural and natural aspects of the environment. The Act states that "it is the continuing responsibility of the Federal Government to use all practical means, consistent lip with other essential consideration of national policy, to improve and coordinate Federal 14 plans, functions,programs, and resources to the end that the Nation may preserve important historic, cultural, and natural aspects of our national heritage."The law • ( requires Federal agencies to consider the impact of their proposed activities upon the • environment, including historic and cultural resources. The basis of all cultural resource management plans and programs is the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 which established procedures that Federal agencies must follow if a project under their jurisdiction has the potential to affect significant properties. These procedures are set forth in Section 106, and the significant properties are those which are eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places. Among the many facets of this legislation was the expanding of the National Register to include properties of regional, state or local significance as well as those of national significance as established by the Historic Sites Act of 1935. State: California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) Archaeological and historical resources are protected on private land by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA: Statute as amended January 1, 2001 —Legislation: 1992-2001 —Guidelines as amended February 1, 2001). All archaeological and historical resources are evaluated in accordance with California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) guidelines. California Register: Criteria for Listing The California Register of Historical Resources (California Register)—is a state version of the National Register of Historic Places program. The California Register of Historical Resources program was enacted in 1992, and became official January I, 1998. Potential historic resources are evaluated for inclusion in the California Register using the • same four criteria as the National Register, though the California Register criteria are numbered (1-4) rather than lettered (a-d). These are: An historical resource must be significant at the local, state or national level tinder one or more of the following four items: 1. It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the United States; 2. It is associated with the lives of persons important to local,California or national history; 3. It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type,period,region or method of construction, or represents the work of a master or possesses high artistic values; 4. It has yielded or has the potential to yield information important to the prehistory or history of the local area,California or the nation. All resources nominated for listing must have integrity, which is the authenticity of a historical resource's physical identity evidenced by the survival of characteristics that existed during the resource's period of significance. Resources, therefore, must retain enough of their historic character or appearance to be recognizable as historical resources and to convey the reasons for their significance. Integrity is evaluated with regard to the retention of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association. It 15 must also be judged with reference to the particular criteria under which a resource is proposed for nomination. • XII. Survey Findings and Statement of Eligibility No prehistoric and/or historic cultural resources were identified during the field survey of the APE of the proposed Demens Basin Stockpile Reclamation Project. In addition, no previously identified National Register eligible resources are within the proposed APE. The cultural resources survey for the proposed Demens Basin Stockpile Reclamation Project did, therefore,result in negative findings. XIII. Determination of Effect No significant (previously identified sites) or potentially significant cultural resource sites (those identified during the field survey), are known to exist within the APE of the proposed Demens Basin Stockpile Reclamation Project. It is here determined, therefore, that implementation of the proposed Demens Basin Stockpile Reclamation Project shall have NO ADVERSE EFFECT on cultural resources, and concurrence is here requested regarding this finding. XIV. Recommendations NO SITE-SPECIFIC MITIGATION RECOMMENDATIONS are here made with regards to architectural,historical, or archaeological resources as implementation of the Demens Basin Stockpile Reclamation Project shall have NO ADVERSE EFFECT on cultural resources. • A monitor shall not be required during construction and/or eartlunoving activities as the APE has been massively altered by flood control improvements and/or the stockpiling of debris. However, should significant subsurface prehistoric or historic archaeological resources appear to be encountered during construction and/or earthmoving activities, the evaluation of any such resources should proceed in accordance with the criteria outlined in Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (1966, as amended), in accordance with CEQA guidelines (1970, as amended), and in accordance with the County of San Bernardino General Plan. Specifically, all work must be halted in the immediate vicinity of the cultural resource found until a qualified archaeologist can assess the significance of the resource. Finally, if human remains are encountered within the project APE , then the San Bernardino County Coroner's Office MUST be contacted in accordance with state law within 24 hours of the find, and all work should be halted until a clearance is given by that office and any other involved agencies. XV. References Books and Reports Ahlbom, William O. 1982 Santa Ana River Basin Flood Hazard. Quarterly of the San Bernardino 1110 County Museum Association 29(2). 16 • Bean, Lowell J. and Charles R. Smith 1978 Gabrielino. In Handbook of North American Indians, Voiwne 8, • California, edited by R.F. Heizer, pp. 538-549. Smithsonian Institution, Washington. Beattie, George W., and H. P. Beattie 1939 Heritage of the Valley. Biobooks, Oakland. Brown, J. B., and J. Boyd 1922 History of San Bernardino and Riverside Counties. Western Historical Association, Lewis Publishing Co., Chicago. Cadwell, Ernest 1955a Historical Dates. In History of Fontana. Edited by Ernest Cadwell. San Bernardino County Historical Society and the Fontana Chamber of Commerce, Fontana, California. Pp. 37-38. California Department of Parks and Recreation 1998a California Register of Historical Resources: The Listing Process. California Department of Parks and Recreation, Office of Historic Preservation, California Register Program, Sacramento. 1998b California Register of Historical Resources: Questions and Answers. California Department of Parks and Recreation, Office of Historic Preservation, California Register Program, Sacramento. • Castillo, Edward 1978 The Impact of Euro-American Exploration and Settlement. In Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 8, edited by Robert F. Heizer, pp. 99- r27. Smithsonian Institution, Washington. Clark, Anthony 0. 1978 Quaternary Evolution of the San Bernardino Valley. Quarterly of the San Bernardino County dlirseuit Association 26(2 & 3), Winter/Spring. Donaldson, Milford Wayne 1991 Historic Resources Reconnaissance Survey San Bernardino, as prepared for the City of San Bernardino, Department of Planning and Building Services. Earle, David D. and Stephen O'Neil 1994 Newport Coast Archaeological Project: An Ethnohistoric Analysis of Population, Settlement, and Social Organization in Coastal Orange County, at the end of the Late Prehistoric Period. Prepared for Coastal Community Builders, Newport Beach. The Keith Companies Archaeology Division, Costa Mesa. ( . 17 Erlandson, Jon M. 1994 Early Hunter-Gatherers of the California Coast. Plenum Press, New • York. Hayden, William, Benjamin Vargas, David D. Earle, Paul E. Langenwalter III, and Michael E. Macko 1997 Historical, Archaeological, and Paleontological Assessment of the Mid- Valley Sanitary Landfill Expansion, San Bernardino County, California. Macko, Inc., Santa Ana Heights, California. Kroeber, W. A. 1925 Handbook of American Indians of California. Washington: Bureau of - American Ethnology Bulletin 78. Mason, Roger D. and Mark L. Peterson 1994 Newport Coast Archaeological Project: Newport Coast Settlement Systems, Analysis and Discussion. Prepared for Coastal Community Builders, Newport Beach. The Keith Companies Archaeology Division, Costa Mesa. Moratto, Michael J. 1984 California Archaeology. Academic Press, Inc., New York. Robinson, John W. 1989 The San Bernardinos.Big Santa Anita Historical Society, Arcadia. • Robinson, John W. 1983 The San Gabriels 11. Big Santa Anita Historical Society, Arcadia. Robinson, John and Bruce D. Risher 1990 San Bernardino County Museum Association Quarterly(Winter 1990) "San Bernardino National Forest: A Century of Federal Stewardship" - San Bernardino County Assessor's Office 2007 Property Information Management System (PIMS) Reports Wallace, William 1978 Post Pleistocene Archaeology, 9000 to 2000 B.C. In Handbook of North American Lrdians, Volume 8, California, edited by Robert F. Heizer, pp. 26-36. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. Guidelines, Laws, and Bulletins Federal Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and National Park Service 1988 Identification of Historic Properties: a Decision making Guide for Managers. ACHP, Washington, DC. i• 18 Luce, W. Ray and Marcella Sherfy 1996 Guidelines for Evaluating and Nominating Properties that Have Achieved Significance Within the Past Fifty Years, National Park Service, Washington D.C. • National Park Service Archeology and Historic Preservation; Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines. 48 FR 44716-42, 1983. National Park Service Section 110 Guidelines: Guidelines for Federal Agency Responsibilities Under Section 110 of the National Historic Preservation Act. 53 FR 4727-46, 1988. National Register Bulletin #15: "How To Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation," 1991. National Register Bulletin #36: "Guidelines for Evaluating and Registering Archeological Properties" 2000. National Register Bulletin #38: "Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Traditional Cultural Properties," 1990, revised 1991. National Register Bulletin #39: "Researching a Historic Property," 1991. The Secretary of the Interior's Standards The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties 1995 Technical Preservation Services for Historic Buildings. General Outline • and Smnnnaty Statement. National Park Service. Revised March 6, 1999 The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties 1995 Standards for Rehabilitation. Technical Preservation Services for Historic Buildings. National Park Service. State . California Environmental Quality Act (provisions regarding historical resources) • Public Resources Code 21083.2; 21084(e); 21084.1; California Code of Regulations (title 14) CEQA Guidelines 15064.5; 15126.4; 15325; 15331 California Office of Historic Preservation. Technical Assistance Series #1, California Environmental Quality Act and Historical Resources: Questions and Answers. Sacramento, California California Office of Historic Preservation. Technical Assistance Series #4, California Register of Historical Resources Qd✓1 for Local Govereunents. Sacramento, California California Office of Historic Preservation. Technical Assistance Series #6, California Register and National Register:A Comparison. Sacramento, California California Office of Historic Preservation. Technical Assistance Series#10, ( • 19 • California State Law and Historic Preservation: Statutes, Regulations and Administrative Policies Regarding Historic Preservation and Protection of Cultural and Historical • Resources. May 23, 2001 California Register of Historical Resources Public Resources Code 5020.1(a); 5020.4(a)(8); 5024.1; 5024.6(b)(m); 5028; 5029; 5079.20(a); 21084.1; Executive Order W-26-92 Landmark Listings American Association for State and Local History 1989 National Register of Historic Places, 1966-1988. Nashville, TN. California Office of Historic Preservation 1986 Survey of Surveys: A Summary of California's Historical and Architectural Resource Surveys. 1988 Five Views: An Ethnic Sites Survey for California. 1997 California Historical Landmarks. 1992 California Points of Historical Interest. 2005 Listing of National Register Properties--Records entered into the OHP computer file--received quarterly. 2005 Inventory of Historic Structures--Records entered into the OHP computer file of historic resources-received quarterly. San Bernardino County Museum 1980 Historical Landmarks of San Bernardino County. Quarterly of the San Bernardino County Museum Association 28(1-2). • Maps 7.5 Minute Series, Cucamonga Peak CA, USGS Quadrangle Map, 1996. Museums/Libraries/Archives Feldheym Library, City of San Bernardino San Bernardino County Archives San Bernardino County Museum, Redlands, California Private Library and Collection/Roger G. Hatheway _ Smiley Library, Redlands, California Public Records San Bernardino County Assessor's Office Information 2007 Property Information Management System (PIMS) Reports APN/Address/Ownership Use Codes/Land Characteristics/ Building Characteristics Building Record (Historic) Assessors Map and Parcel Book Respondents -Robin Laska, San Bernardino County Archaeological Information Center -Julie Gilbert, EMD, Department of Public Works Websites/Internet • http://www.citvofrc.us/adventure/history.htm 20 APPENDIX A AIC Historical Resources Record Search October 30, 2007 • 21 30 October 2007 Roger Hatheway San Bernardino County Public Works - • 825 E. Third St San Bernardino,CA 92415-0835 HISTORICAL RESOURCES RECORD SEARCH: Demens Basin, RFA 091-971402-43 In response to your request for information dated 17 October 2007,a records search has been conducted for the above project on USGS Cucamonga Peak 7.5'quad. Historical Resources: Prehistoric Archaeological Resources: 1 prehistoric archaeological sites O pending prehistoric archaeological sites 0 prehistoric districts O prehistoric isolates Historic Archaeological Resources(sites older than 50 years of age): 1 historic archaeological sites • 0 pending historic archaeological sites 6 historic structures 0 historic districts 0 historic isolates 5+ possible historic structure/archaeological site locations determined from historic maps (maps checked): Thompson, 1917/20, 1929; Beasley, 1892; Blackburn, 1932; AAA-various; Hall, 1888;Lippencott, 1898; USGS Cucamonga, 1894; US Army Cucamonga, 1940/1; Subdivision of Rancho Cucamonga, 1871. Cultural Landscapes: O cultural Landscapes • Ethnic Resources: 0 ethnic resources Heritage Properties (designated by State and Federal commissions): O National Register Listed Properties 1 National Register Eligible Properties 0 California Historic Landmarks O California Points of Historic Interest • PREVIOUS HISTORICAL RESOURCE INVESTIGATIONS: Historical resource reports for the project area include: 17 Area-specific survey reports 5 General area overviews In addition to the Center's historical resources files,the following publications, manuscripts or correspondence also were consulted: 1986 Survey of Surveys: A Summary of California's Historical and Architectural Resource Surveys. 1988 Five Views: An Ethnic Sites Survey for California. California Historical Landmarks. California Paints of Historical Interest. 2007 Determinations of Eligibility--Records entered into the OHP computer file--received quarterly. 2007 Directory of Historic Properties--Records entered into the OHP computer file of historic resources-received quarterly. • • 97 SENSITIVITY OF PROJECT AREA FOR HISTORICAL RESOURCES; • Based upon the above information, available historical records and maps,and comparisons with similar environmental localities,the sensitivity assessment for this project area is: Prehistoric Archaeological Resources High Historic Archaeological Resources High Historic Resources High Cultural Landscapes Unknown Ethnic Resources Unknown Comments:Potential for all types of resources based on sites found in the APE d sites/structures/flumes/roads shown on historic maps. APE is within the boundaries of the historic Rancho Cucamonga. RECOMMENDATIONS: • In order to minimally comply with CEQA, NEPA and/or Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act,a field survey should be•conducted by a qualified professional for historical resources within portions of the project area not previously surveyed for such resources. A CEQA Initial Study of"MAYBE"for potential adverse environmental impact to historical resources • is warranted unless it can be documented by o qualified professional that NO resources older than 45 years in age exist an the property. Implementation of the above recommendation(s)will ensure that existing historical resources will be inventoried and evaluated,and that appropriate mitigation measures will be recommended to avoid adverse impacts. If appropriate mitigation measures are not proposed for significant historical resources within the • project area, then subsequent destruction of these resources may violated the California Environmental Quality Act, Nation Environmental Policy Act, National Historic Preservation Act, California codes or various local government ordinances. If prehistoric or historic artifacts over 50 years in age area encountered during land modification, than activities in the immediate area of the finds should be halted and an on-site inspection should be performed immediately by a qualified archaeologist. This professional will be able to assess the find, determine its significance,and make recommendations for appropriate mitigation measures within the guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act and/or the Federal National Environmental Policy Act. .. If human remains are encountered on the property, then the San Bernardino County Coroner's Office MUST be contacted within 24 hours of the find,and all work should be halted until a clearance is given by that office and any other involved agencies. Contact the County Coroner at 175 South Lena Road,San Bernardino, CA 92415-0037 or(909) 387-2543,or(760) 955-8535 in Victorville,or (760) 365-1668 in Yucca Valley or (760) 326-4825 in Needles. The County of San Bernardino requests that historical resource data and artifacts collected within this project area be permanently curated at a repository within the County.. Per a State Historical Resources Commission motion dated 7 Feb 1992,the repository selected should consider 36 CFR 79, Curation of Federally-owned and Administered Archaeological Collection: Final Rule,as published Federal Register, 12 Sept 1990,or a later amended for, for archival collection standards. If you have any further questions, please,contact me at (909)307-2669 x 255,Monday through Friday between 8 AM and 4 PM. Robin E. Lasko I• Assistant Center Coordinator • 23 • APPENDIX B FIGURES Figure 1: Regional Location Map Figure 2: Site Location Map Figure 3: Proposed Haul Route Figure 4: USCS Project Location Map • 94 ( . • FIGURE 1 — REGIONAL LOCATION MAP r ill • JP" CD Lenca91er - ndcmmo ` a _r.' Pamdala . Cc •, '..L,..,i, ... +,.. 1:'. Apple Valley o V+dmtle ,i to Acton 'f1;1 1 `a 4 .._..-...Tikespesa� e :._ - _ '' �,[e soars qo ___ - suBear City ��._"� . w Project Late 3uroank Auuecna .. Location nn9 K 13a Glandele .Pesaoena Gleneere Rancho ._. w • s�,1iey CucSmonga Fontana R Bemerdino O2 CuvinO I + nine Ilnrmrne N11ls Pomona .Colton 4, °— +We9l OOldl+p OWOmnyton .. _ rann . BJ,Los Angeles. 1COwna Watwt "Chino I "- ReL3nde Yuceipn 01 o'Ixl i Ocil L� .F'cero HIl Mini L in RNnr0ldo C ss Desert + +. M1ILCr 1 - (. ", 3Prl, ame OOWney�1.; 1 t 40 _. 40 Elio 60 0eaumOnitt narcJnO U. Compton_Norxalk. Brea Yolb9LiMa Valley �y) 79 , � M1 i n T Lakewood Ananelm O ante Ger.s= - i. + i :m 5>n Jn�mo I i t drov'S Orange "� Penis Lang Beach �"Grova—?-k,c ;TIC_ nr aw Hemet -- °"a -,..C� -4't % Santa Ana:=‘,, -c.d can City 'cxsmr' r Huhn hart ' + as S3a '� V Bassi 93 tI.Si∎cn r Elsmom b� Lake Forest' t d wwvnm t ,il . S. 4 Newer ,,- l�]� rt �L.. x 4 f o�u Beath T°�Vela N g cl Yi Munvm ® x {f-il `v=S.jx �'V^ Vd'' g9anJ aO Temea,a O y . 0 Daue Point Lnp r no Y Y? . I ,u, S%f .fiz. `= �a + # $ E W San .144 i "%§+ `kd ,i:mf}n Clem nie Fanaront � ' ; l" th w �97SAT+90 e Map tlala 0'20W NAVtEO T +_':�I r r ,.,sf aa'i .,a.t ^X,rr , I. ) • 25 ..-. 0 FIGURE 2 -.SITE LOCATION MAP , Demens Basin 1 I Stockpile Material Location maii55' - :I I - 4, 5i D: ',IS.*. - N.P..mura SI ■ .2, - ...- 1,4t..aliodo II , d -,- /1 1 P.: I r I dr 1 haled,Earn.Pt/:d.. :1, , . I,d4•••■1 a.idnpa r _ddAdorn carpi RI , --- dr-ddarn ‘. 1 -i i- 'd 5 1- CordniM r-t. d 7 i''.3 -r ; . ..e• ; 3L _. ' " • .irl ' d eThald.rjoy St . c..- . _.Ny-4-.11:1:dr' 5 2 t. III ,,z. _ ,.. i C:natii Sd • 'sr.? — 'I. --• Cei t. • i- .. if nd •-• .. ; •I. hr,MX-. thltida Rd . 1.1r.s.in 111:1 r - 2; a , s •... , Hfri-Zabi - !--ISLIe Ro I`I ' 3.-755 rdl :9 f. f q -H - :3-4-.,E.y...:,g, ..: ,..,c;s„„„„„iiv. — . . . _ _ ;-; Demens Basin 2 L' ,..,. t71:7 . - ' .1 Fill Location . . v ... 'I 9 .: L' 1 .. i -et 74 _ .. : ; " U ! ; , 4: • du it—' • r r Mill, Ord rad•r - — 1 ' "1 . _ . ,,,it._ ?Id ID, mranalui ,. I 5:51W,it 04.141r,31 a-- rd Morriiie C.] :- id. giF I a- Sarl.tradr St-t - 0 • 1 r.d.sikr,..1;.S. 2i d: 1 • t. 1 i' 14:' 1 , . R ' ' 2 . 7-- )1 .;-11;, ne:. ri.,,,„,.si---4----I---- E I3.3nran a ' ve ). , . ' T ; . . ni T L ' 1 / I . . P L'''''''''"4"'' €: .9 2 L.'""it'l 3/4°' . - 3 I I fit Er."'51 Fr' ' .. _ C 1 - II .." Pi ,b. 5, : . r5.100VGoogle-5,:n13Y;data 31;217 NAVridlYs-t r:p5111:01 I.Pc'1 - - • 26 FIGURE 3 — PROPOSED HAUL ROUTE • I.f �� d` t^ t„,,,,., p?i{4'+�kii" M : �.. C 4h'i,'4'#if� t 7 r 4' N''-..„1-"'"'".yam- vv,,e.. " r ,3-cr'g { 4?,�5,t .bt�o. I I + 'f' s � rr _ n: 1''a s `-, ,z Ta`.. . !AIL_y a tip ` -,,,...'4.4,;•:-4 - .wive s •t _ > K p 's-7. ,# Ll iv'+� V'• * '4) 1� rL a SRi 1- i f� Vitt. jjjj11� 11 h 'G I i Ly',,,,p 6 Lf,(:�•o z tr, • '`.ti ln�li,' -,„ a(.n !L: ' 41/11/31 ^rstAI '.ili,-R_EE,�Tei -' -'e r '1 j� � , 1°;1 n ��JE�3V 1 t r a E r r <-t ;-} 1++R ra_{{.h . SJ •t ,r ��y1�� t- 61 rrtr ��.(n, .; .E y LA 1 Ar, n- 54 � lr,�• t{-s' 1' M �4rptr' ,t 1 .. y1(e7�4�,7' p.�. 'n N 3- :, t:-. +.'IFW Y 1 / Al', �:rl�- 1 r]?:zg� • tue r� x 54`^ 4 �"?-4 ` i*- FYI j9 d S-AsiiV lI- 24- t :ur "ty` �'!, ' .*_ UI! p1sn +` _IS' 1 B J�Il gc ` k r; awl •a It.: ��73t.C ; ' J :2,1 f -HiE irla, s ( c F .. r .,` ,, -� i i '7a �[n•' + x4y; , irk 9s1� 4 LL'''--. 1 hl! '1 ri> v ..,-., a ...... �.F' 1.;. ,par li x2 rt (4999ggg . -1;" • a ....irxr.. a ,, ^)I J• ��, tA� E 599 .j` m �,�'• gala 1 1�+^ kY to i aye Z _tea f{° q G tC ! . ' ..i''''.1,11,-.),, t vN� z$ 1 �' aACa i a n:n t k�'4 °i ,ilea i gT..- '-- e U H , s, S a r�� 14 nn ti °itn .�. is lq t.-.t� t_.. I. r li. �o yv ,ti.) .+ s _, ,. o � 1t, Jn ..o.:l 5 51 1 wz, re.F 1 1 `.-'" E" l'7-0 6o Y 1 � ��, � + Ig J:[x '..I 4* �t�o i�, t � o .J141 "0 L�! �y+,�p}p t�yy(�}},may_. Sy Sy l# t e �1— r .J.ate..._ , a.�. 3 LTs".3z t.' a 5.:2' _'., r + • 77 FIGURE 4 •' USGS PROJECT LOCATION MAP, PROJECT APE, and SURVEY AREAS Demens Basin 1: Larger Outlined Acreage Demens Basin 2: Smaller Outlined Acreage Cucamonga Peak Quadrangle,California,7.5-Minute Series Township 1 North,Range 7 West,Section 22,SBBM Scale= 100% 1:24 000 t ! �It11 v r U{ I l � A V1% . ' iJ 'i y� l ". ` � r /1 /1-4 'fi 1 %f + r 1 0 _It a �'.'2�: t e ' 1 I "i )� - L — , J. , I _. ._ II BM ii• i - 1753-;± I II / III'. �i T i � _ - -.Ip i— / 1 , ri l a( -. I)u! l 1I :al:.I ikaw fro. _ _ . ' 4,111.:1 ;:':=t! ms, �}-� 1 L I l �1MI .v ;x { µ 1$ � lr,[✓ 7 Fbw C'' ra �l J d �,,. 7,1414 J ♦ `' TT u ? n` 'tP •— . >4-4%,I w.. J • 1 i d(CT ,I st5"' 4 ih i 2' isty. `S bc )/IJ, ,I JlC , I LCh F I i ,� 1 ) al U s`kl ivi =33{ '�^IIvI{" {�` ,` %'F k .: I)54 „ i~ I� . I ____ MIL I. 0- (• • 28 APPENDIX C Photographs of Project Areas Demens Basin 1 and Demens Basin 2 • • 29 ' Yer J u `rn't',�`arr`5h"rT ST1$r"i '. Sir— , C^"� a ttey;tt .6.ra g a ;:E �a r �#`*'�'. 1 7 i i,�;.;.:734.7.,41, 4;p7- • n >S rz -.7 afar A .Is 9),,t ft b J. , �. ra ` 3 , T-' a i 1.Y c , ie -,G�:i'�n-+...�$L:.. -5 .r•,"-att.-. '�J " ' t tj 4'yi�'" .L J'ut'`'C-edK'•gf t ...nit '..F, +a� ""��..9s'o-yir 4µ +' 5`t .ng15fiS�J ;' .� e n i, .r. n t C .,7 . ,� c-s J ham.- filly t ai } t ' ;t fi r $ - koE .;*--4•,-,„",J. F t. aw w k'y'1.-8� 'nv SS,r F lk to 3 -"�' `.S e., -'�'• ,a J ... s ,w•• �, 5 4. y TyuRi...Wrr `,IV.4 5,Vi.4 J-t^.. ,...,-_-... .t..$ x y a tii., r �« ? ' „• iy,t t' 'StP*. PHOTOGRAPH #1: Demens Basin I and 2 Reclamation Project Area APE VIEW OF:Northern Half of Northam Portion of Demons Basin Stockpile VIEW DIRECTION:Looking Northeasterly PHOTO L„OC.ATION:Taken From Amethyst Street rsaua, i "� PHOTO '�?. T I rd; iff+s j•-tL't. `Y"ry t�` i + FIL ui',, .9 y ".Q aSP1 t� x a LJ- a�n t' d'r a � d n w ,0 hrtdl�;�'JT . Y%,..0.$ ` . Y' u' r,�"AA n,iiY.' a 1,1 ,3 r "tq- h..i. -4 t 1. i ,{lh r ��+ s 4 1� ry �' ',rU�t 4 477/ 7. 'nil `S`5 t il r, ., i 4 "NS.,P, h. wi f ^ 4t�* rs �Y� .: '�Yi i „-,J`pp-_yy,{�Y t z f y,, iAL3j1',,�,,J??j�k'S , ... i ,1,, R,F,,...,,. q. `r 5 7 � �I sx�7rtt$ ” .a•sC. -trrvai .S ..-„.0„, '`U`i„.4. -. — %L11, 7,1},.1 �it+7i . }•-{ iqS.Yt � f ' i4 �� ex yG kC >V.AA cte , i„an3 r,nY , *=t Sz � GGG"""”` '. +w m 1L r',ttY4F•L1F r 1 �G' a� r , ,-yWN'"-- Y -,-,,r4„-,14, r�.�y. ^''t.`t Y r r {_'" or xf r'4- St �-L 5' 1`- t T. r *V;te,.a^- m ` ,■ e a tr a -+.f'41.E ...e%. 'L..e" ]a'YSKv YK .151 JY 'u !'>V dil. ,4ti 4r ? # > rdw 6 � A sr ry a . 1 9t Y J+,��._ 4"a fir.- a"= �.. ° i'tAir� .IV* . rt% '° •r Z?'R'- .s ^tiis•� PHOTOGRAPH #2: Demens Basin 1 and 2 Reclamation Project Area APE VIEW OF:Southern Half of Northam Portion of Demens Basin 1 Stockpile • —1 VIEW DIRECTION:Looking Southeasterly PHOTO LOCATION:Taken From Amethyst Street 30 • .. � , -A.:. rk : � aca. , c, .. - m d My � .. ; * ' ;' Rt a t '' 71.1 r kv= a ».mo- 't µ t - '' ,4 ."^ t ^ : .— f F I Z--0.- � .. Yo ) .y.p oY).+ ), ,..s �; � t RR s . t+ .✓-E"�� 7 w ,yr • { :+tom-"'-a'ite;7"f{✓ :-.5tr3� fx` , 't11- 4 "+„ `{,yt,�S� ,03 r , ,,, °..ay T f .1.:1 y�y- d a4 / .ra;,,i tt .n.! ju 7 r { i wJ. _ . - ♦ 3 ,4 r-'' La`¢. ti3 � tip 4 �+ blwr�tc W yyi. lE.,.- .• .4l7-r-a97C''.t ..f C; "'Y'd'i't r,N�,it4K"'f '-s l'it ; rgrq-�-'wt's.rd �.r-.�4.7".(4. - e' 'X' tc Ty- +rsrt t2• L.-,-•/ Cl' F s-' :e t:L' /s€;a•d�'•i .''.`.°I'_aC�•y`f i r_: PHOTOGRAPH #3: Demens Basin 1 and 2 Reclamation Project Area APE VIEW OF:Southern Portion of Demens.Basin Stockpile VIEW DIRECTION:Looking Southwesterly PHOTO LOCATION:Taken From Amethyst Street 4.• �~ r "y'.rar` fief }�H,�— iY £F f t -11W42i. 4i£JI4'r 14-:;.:�( L iit 'S7/ ' ' if t - . .i.fi w".Yt�`'C2s',.,Y .(t V1�1 ry+t - +�, rr(r 'h y -� Jf" rs, .. ". 'a '' c+",y' ,.1/2'- J t �y G r , 7/ c;. ',a"'," ,` .>C ,fit,„,' .. .t` ..; �� i :tf w.; ens s "Tfr4''r s '�+ •c1't ++&Rt A 5,44 ..lka Ty Y r ':i *WSW*,c 0 ,.a Y '. R I, afl is'i,�4 t"a 4 t r 16t V t--:.c,r > �r ,e ,.tx P'" m .�w'1¢ t�F tt8 �t x4. '°�� . ac 4.,4 • i It;' r r:- of „,Y.° ° '- r'K-tt r-mti`r r... c ""` k Y ; 'x''+44-...--.°:.. .J.,;‘0.4. P v .tea �a S.. z. ,'t d :.off 'ti fi i, ewe n� . ky;' "iv. i x i '+r®cs tm4si may^':. -3"4-00,. -" ...3-" x+ ' Y.,hr,-714s'i'"5 4Q.*::a4g ,;?.-,' = ,RNt� �aC. Yti„, f:4t osl `L ".;.4' �r v�1{{(vr� `d . 1'.- -, � 7- +f 4_.._t -41-",44_1,Y1,+'y,:�, ``,frurh' i+rfi4� s, y LC %A('"M #N i n x'('C' ?MU^Y Yv (,} i� r'M^ kff' q r 1. 'Y . : +mto 4efe s' F w. it'sp�f.,��v`r7L.,' 1t'i" '' '3' iff4Atr x e t '!#S•,e artge-. D xSsae�i- ,tAg a i�F- 41.a:'''.-a' x ''w"""`r' .w"s^'w`l .,-, f� f-5... t, vk v�tSZ ,.. ,7 jL `mkt 23 1, �•e" . k 'Y lti f- J"�°Y;tr•If '.' ''yyi-- 4'y",.1(#'.,-,',y`"°r 3'fi(ek.:' ,a'.I FT'" a tirJ p,� .�) r.+yy +`."�"7� nr hmyaxt"t"c r +r rxaxq; +-i's'`"" .'„+�k+,�,Y R•' .e'i^'1i47 . ,{)+ r3't+. e,., PHOTOGRAPH #4 Demens Basin 1 and 2 Reclamation Project Area APE VIEW OF:Overall View of Demons Basin 2 Area to Be Filled VIEW DIRECTION:Looking Northwesterly PHOTO LOCATION:Taken From Hellman Avenue 31 • APPENDIX D NAHC Consultation Request and Response Letter Sent January 14, 2008 Native American Heritage Commission Attn: Dave Singleton Reply Received January 14, 2008 • • 32 DEMENS BASIN NAHC RECORD SEARCH REQUEST • DATE: January 14, 2008 TO: Native American Heritage Commission Dave Singleton 915 Capitol Mall, Room 364 Sacramento, CA 95814 TEL: 916-653-4082 FAX: 916-657-5390 EMAIL: nahc tt pacbell.net FROM: Roger Hatheway, Cultural Specialist, County of San Bernardino,DPW 825 East Third Street San Bernardino, CA 92415-0835 rhatheway@dpw.sbcounty.gov RE: RECORD SEARCH.REQUEST FOR COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO DEMENS BASIN STOCKPILE RECLAMATION PROJECT Dear Mr. Singleton: ,Introduction The County of San Bernardino, Department of Public Works (DPW), is here requesting a record search of the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) Sacred Lands File.The preparation of a cultural resource compliance report for the Demens Basin Stockpile Reclamation Project is required to ensure that no significant cultural resources are damaged as part of a County of San Bernardino flood control project that is subject to approvals by the United States • Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE). The project shall further be conducted in general accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Section 106, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and in accordance with County of San Bernardino General Plan procedures and guidelines. Project: Denier's Basin Stodpile Reclamation Project County: San Bernardino County USGS Quadrangle Map: Cucamonga Peak Quadrangle,California,7.5-Minute Series(Topographic) Township 1 North, Range 7 West, Section 22, San Bernardino Baseline and Meridian. Agency County of San Bernardino Department of Public Works Contact Person Roger G. Hatheway County of San Bernardino, Department of Public Works Principal Investigator, Cultural Resources Specialist Street Address: • %—\ County of San Bernardino 33 Department of Public Works 825 East Third Street • San Bernardino, CA 92415-0835 Attn: Roger Hatheway,Freeway Study Team Phone: Cell: 909-289-2072 County Office: 909-387-8052 Fax: Send to 760-242-9128 Email: RHatheway @dpw.sbcounty.gov Project Description The San Bernardino County Flood Control District(District}is proposing to reclaim the stockpile area availability of Demens Basin 1 by removing excess debris stockpiled at the site from past storm events.The project includes exporting the reclaimed material to Demens Basin 2 where it will be placed within the basin beginning at the eastern edge and filling approximately three- fourths of the length of the basin(approximately 4 acres)in accordance with the District's fill plan. I would greatly appreciate your reply at the earliest possible date. Sincerely and With Great Thanks, Roger G. Hatheway County of San Bernardino, Department of Public Works Principal Investigator • Cultural Resources Specialist CELL: 909-289-2072 FAX: 760-242-9128 • EMAIL: rhathewav(21!dpw.sbcounty.gov • • 34 i •• • NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION M5 eAMTOL MALL ROOM 354 '.' !4 SACRAMENTO,G 53114 - K ^T 1Mal San FQtain efeaas Web e t.-..., 55$51:,ta_Ad+cowra.Enr January 14,2008 Roger G.Hathaway Principal Investigator County of San Bernardino,DPW 525 East Third Street San Bernardino,CA 92415-0835 Fax ft 760-242-9128 Number of pages:2 • Re,Proposed DEMENS BASIN STOCKPILE RECLAMATION PROJECT.San Bernardino County. Dear Mr.Hatheway: • The Native American Heritage Commission was able to perform a record search of Its Sacred Lands File(SLF)for the affected project area- The SLF failed to Indicate the presence of Native American cultural resources In the Immediate project area. The absence of specific site information In the Sacred Lands Eta does not guarantee the absence of cultural resources In any 'are.of potential effect(APE).' Early consultation with Native American tubes in your area is the best way to avoid unanticipated discoveries once a project Is underway. Enclosed are the nearest tribes that may have knowledge of cultural resources In the project area.A List of Native Amencan contacts are attached to assist you. The Commission makes no recommendation of a single indNidual or group • over another. It Is advisable to contact the person fisted if they cannot supply you with specific information about the impact on cultural resources,they may be able to refer you to another tribe or person knowledgeable of the cultural resources Si or near the affected project area(APE). Lack of surface evidence of archeological resources does not preclude the existence of archeological resources. Lead agencies should consider avoidance,as defined In Section 15370 cif the California Environmental Quality Act(CEOA)when significant cultural resources could be affected by a project. Also Public Resources Code Section 5027.98 and Health&Safety Code Section 7050.5 provide for provisions for accidentally discovered archeological resources during construction and mandate the processes to be followed in the event of an accidental discovery of any human remains in a project location other then a'dedicated cemetery. Discussion of these should be Included in your environmental documents,as appropriate. If you have any questions about this response to your request,Please dd not hesitate to contact me at(915)853-6251. cerely, 'eve Si • Program Analyst Attachment Native • edam Contact List • NAHHC RESPONSE LETTER: JANUARY 14, 2008 • 35 • APPENDIX E Principal Investigator Qualifications Roger G. Hatheway Department of Public Works (History and Architecture) John Romani Compass Rose Archaeological, Inc. • • 36 • • ROGER G. HATHEWAY • CULTURAL RESOURCE SPECIALIST HISTORICAL—ARCHITECTURAL—ARCHAEOLOGICAL Department of Public Works County of San Bernardino 825 E. Third Street San Bernardino, CA 92415-0835 PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR CEQA: HISTORY/ARCHITECTURE/ARCHAEOLOGY • EDUCATION Departmental MA, History UCLA, 1978 BA, History Brown University, 1975 Magna Cum Laude, Clarkson A. Collins University Prize SUMMARY QUALIFICATIONS Mr. Hatheway has served as a Principal Investigator for the County of San Bernardino, Department of Public Works since 1997. As the owner of Hatheway&Associates, his • architectural/historical experience covers the entire United States from southern California to Washington D.C. Large to small-scale projects have been completed under both NEPA and CEQA guidelines. Clients include federal and military agencies, the state of California,various counties and cities throughout southern California, and a host of private developers. Entire cities, or substantial portions thereof,have been surveyed by Hatheway&Associates. Research projects have also been completed nationwide, including the Library of Congress, and various other government repositories of information. Mr. Hatheway is recognized by the State of California, Office of Historic Preservation, as qualified to conduct architectural/historical surveys. EMPLOYMENT CHRONOLOGY Select Firms/Agencies (Out of a Total of 350+Clients) 1-Iatheway&Associates(1979-Present): NEPA/CEQA/Section 106/4(0 Community Redevelopment Agency, City of Los Angeles(1980-1983):NEPA/CEQA City of Los Angeles, Engineering Department (1980-1983):NEPA/CEQA Greenwood and Associates (1980-1988): NEPA/CEQA/Section 106 Chambers Consultants and Planners (1980-1981): NEPA/CEQA/Section 106 Houston Transit Consultants (1981-1983): NEPA/CEQA/Section 106/4(0 Scientific Resource Surveys (1983-1986): NEPA/CEQA/Scction 106/4(0 Hatheway&McKenna (1986-1989):NEPA/CEQA TetraTech(2001-2004)NEPA/CEQA The Keith Companies (2002-2004): NEPA/CEQA County of San Bernardino (1997-Present): NEPA/CEQA/Section 106/4(0 • 37 • PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS/ASSOCIATIONS Mr. Hatheway is a past member of many historical societies and professional groups. His policy • is, in fact, to join every local historical society depending, in part, on the duration and size of each project as a means of obtaining pertinent(project related)historical research. He is currently a • board member and Past-President of the Rim of the World Historical Society. He is also a member of the: Library of Congress,Phillips Lee Phillips Society Society for Commercial Archaeology National Trust for Historic Preservation Archaeological Conservancy Archaeological Institute of America PUBLICATIONS/PRESENTATIONS Mr. Hatheway has"published" or completed over 600 reports and documents during the period extending from 1979 to the present. A number of professional papers (35+)have also been published or presented. Most recent professional presentation: "The Late Prehistory of Route 66 in the California Mojave Desert"2001 Millennium Conference, May 9, 10, 11 & 12,Barstow, CA. Conference sponsored by the BLM. EMPLOYMENT HISTORY County of San Bernardino (1997-Present) Initially served as the Principal Investigator for History and Architecture on the 1-15 Freeway Widening Between Victornille and Barstow. I was also a member of the archaeological field survey team that included Principal Investigator for Archaeology,John Romani. Mr. I-Iatheway • has conducted over 50 projects as a Principal Investigator on behalf of the Department of Public Works utilizing both CEQA and NEPA guidelines. Hatheway & Associates (1979-Present) I have worked as a consultant to many Cultural Resource Management and/or archaeological consulting fins over the past 304 years.In my capacity as Principal Investigator for History and Architecture, I have conducted in-depth historical research using all forms of historic maps, public records,photographs, and the written record. I have identified literally hundreds of potential historic archaeological sites as part of my historical research, and have joined with many survey crews over time in.the evaluation of and on-the-ground location of these sites. Field survey experience includes the recognition, identification, evaluation of and mapping of virtually every major type of building, object, feature, linear feature, site,historic archaeological site, and the identification and mapping of many inland prehistoric archaeological sites. Community Redevelopment Agency(1980-1983) Principal Investigator and sole CRM consultant to the Community Redevelopment Agency, City of Los Angeles. Completed architectural/historical surveys of over 20 Redevelopment Areas (including all of Downtown Los Angeles). City of Los Angeles, Engineering Department(1980-1983) Principal Investigator and sole CRM consultant to the Engineering Department, City of Los Angeles. Directed architectural/historical surveys of over 15 Los Angeles neighborhoods. Trained numerous volunteers, and worked directly with City of Los Angeles staff. Greenwood and Associates (1980-1988) 4111 A survey of Edwards Air Force Base in 1980. This involved historical research, an aerial survey, and the subsequent location of a percentage of the sites identified on the ground. In this manner I 38 personally identified 130+previously unknown historic archaeological sites under the direction of Greenwood and Associates Principal Investigators for archaeology. Sites included homesteads, historic trails,roadways,an historic townsite,an abandoned railway alignment, and many military • associated activity areas. A second large-scale survey was conducted for Greenwood and Associates at China Lake Naval Weapons Center. Again,historical research led to the identification of and evaluation of dozens of previously unknown historic sites, Many of these sites were subsequently field reviewed and mapped under the direction of the base archaeologist. Chambers Consultants and Planners(1980-1981) As Principal Investigator for history and architecture I worked on several projects for Chambers Consultants and Planners during the early 1980s,including a survey of the entire San Clemente Island Naval Air Station facility. This involved historical research, an aerial survey, and the subsequent location of a percentage of the sites thereby identified on the ground.I personally identified 20+previously unknown historic archaeological sites under the direction of Chambers • Principal Investigators for archaeology. In addition, I relocated and remapped 10+coastal archaeological sites that had been "lost"due to original surveyor mapping errors. Houston Transit Consultants (1981-1983) Surveys conducted in Houston,Texas were conducted under the authority of the Texas State Historical Commission, and under the direction of Urban Mass Transit Association officials. Approximately 200 miles of transportation corridor were surveyed in accordance with all appropriate Section 106/4(f) guidelines. I served as the Principal Investigator for this project, and directed all cultural resource related studies(field and archival)including history, architecture, and archaeology. Scientific Resource Surveys(1983-1986) I worked as Principal Investigator for history and architecture for SRS for 3+years. In this capacity, I also wrote numerous proposals for various archaeological surveys. Typically, • however, 1 would conduct in-depth historical research and provide all pertinent data to field survey crews, I frequently joined SRS crews during field surveys, including several transportation related projects conducted in both Orange and Riverside counties. Hatheway & McKenna (1986-1989) Jeanette McKenna and Ijoined into partnership in 1986. She and I served as Co-Principal Investigators on a considerable number of projects in Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino,and Los Angeles counties. Although my major tasks were related to history and architecture, I frequently - joined our survey crews as they conducted both large and small-scale projects-while surveying for both prehistoric and historic archaeological sites. TetraTech (2001-2004) Served as the Principal Investigator for History and Architecture on various projects in the Inland Empire and on Edwards Air Force Base. The Keith Companies (2002-2004) Served as the Principal Investigator for History and Architecture on IVG Packing I-louse Phase II Investigation report including Mitigation Alternatives, etc. Completed additional small surveys/evaluations in Inland Empire area. SIGNIFICANT ACCOMPLISHMENTS and CIVIC INVOLVEMENT TEACHING EXPERIENCE Mr. Hatheway taught a class entitled "Practical Approaches to Historic Preservation" from 1983 to 1993 at U.C.L.A. The fully accredited class introduced both undergraduate and • ( graduate students from throughout southern California to the research skills necessary to 39 complete both California State architectural inventory forms, and National Register applications. • WEEKLY NEWSPAPER COLUMN From 1993 to 2003 Mr. Hatheway wrote a weekly column focusing on history for the Mountain News and the Crestline Courier News, both San Bernardino Mountain newspapers, with a . combined circulation of over 11,000 subscribers. MAC MEMBER Mr. Hatheway served as a Municipal Advisory Council member for the Crest Forest Area from 1995 until 2004. As a council member, Mr. Hatheway served in an advisory capacity on planning, environmental and quality of life issues for the greater Crestline area as an appointee of two consecutive County Supervisors. PROFESSIONAL REFERENCES Available upon request • • • • • 40 Compass Rose Archaeological, Inc. John F. Romani (RPA) • ( Principal Investigator, Archaeology SUMMARY OF QUALIFICATIONS Mr. Romani has over 35 years of professional experience in cultural resource management and is certified by the Register of Professional Archaeologists (RPA). His experience includes directing and serving as Principal Investigator on archaeological surveys and excavations, preparing Section 106 (NEPA/NHPA) compliance documents, and CEQA compliance documents. He has special skills in zooarchaeology, artifact analyses, site mapping, field logistics, archaeoastronomy and historic preservation law. Mr. Romani is very familiar with the National Historic Preservation Act (1966, as amended), and more specifically, the Advisory Council Guidelines (36 CFR 800) which implement the Section 106 process. Mr.Romani has,through the course of his career,maintained an excellent rapport with the Native American community in California. He has served as a Staff Director at the Northridge Archaeological Research Center(California State University,Northridge- 1971 - 1980), and as a District Archaeologist/Heritage Coordinator and Principal Investigator for Caltrans District 07 (1980 - 1989). Since leaving Caltrans, Mr. Romani has served as a Principal Investigator and Project Manager for numerous cultural resource firms, as well as county agencies. He has produced numerous reports and publications over the course of his career. Currently, Mr. Romani is the Principal Investigator for Compass Rose Archaeological,Inc. SELECTED PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE County of San Bernardino-Phase I Survey. Mr. Romani served as the Principal Investigator and Section 106 Coordinator for the widening of Interstate 15 from Victorville to Barstow from 1997 to 1999. The lead agency was the Federal Highway Administration(Fl-IWA).Mr.Romani prepared the Archaeological Survey Report (ASR) and Finding of Effects (FOE) document. The project was completed for the San Bernardino Department of Transportation and Flood Control in conjunction • with Caltrans and FHWA. In addition to the Phase I archaeological survey, Mr. Romani prepared visual, geotechnical and other environmental sections for the preparation of an Initial Study/Environmental Assessment(IS/EA)document. County of San Bernardino on-going Archaeological Service Contract. Mr. Romani is currently under contract with the County of San Bernardino to provide archaeological services (Phase I surveys and Phase II excavations), as Principal Investigator, for county transportation projects, which includes the archaeological Phase I evaluation of Route 66 bridges. Private Clients - Extended Phase I and Data Recovery Excavations. As Principal Investigator, Mr. Romani supervised a I imited sampling program at CA-SBA-1, Rincon Point, Santa Barbara County. The project was undertaken in compliance with the County of Santa Barbara's requirements for site capping and preservation. He also conducted a data recovery program within locations proposed for the construction of caissons along the southeastern portion of CA-SBA-1. The data recovery was undertaken in compliance with the county's requirements for the c onstruction of a single-family residence. Private Contractor for Housing and Urban Development (HUD) - Phase I Surveys. Mr. Romani has served as the Principal Investigator for a number of Phase I archaeological surveys and preparer of 106 compliance documents for Housing and Urban Development(HUD)undertakings. Private Contractor for the Foothill Transportation Corridor - Phase II Excavations. Mr. Romani, in the capacity of Project Director, supervised the Phase II Section 106 evaluations of prehistoric sites CA-ORA-22, -907, -921/1127, -997, and -1144. He was also responsible for report preparation and Section 106 compliance documentation for the Foothill Transportation Corridor. • 4I • Various Agencies - Monitoring. Mr. Romani, as Principal Investigator, has supervised the archaeological monitoring and has conducted either tests or data recovery programs for the • installation of a n umber of utility lines. These projects have included the Serra Road waterline project in Malibu; 24 kilometers of GTE conduit from Trancas Canyon Road to Point Mugu; the de- watering project adjacent to Los Encinos Historical Monument for the Los Angeles City Department of Public Works; the Sumac Ridge waterline project for the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works; data recovery for the installation of a waterline at CA-LAN-1415 for the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works; data recovery along a proposed waterline at CA-VEN-339 on Santa Rosa Road for the Camrosa Water Department, Ventura; monitored improvements on Pacific Coast Highway;Los Angeles County, which also included a data recovery program at CA-LAN-690. Private Contractor for Caltrans- Phase I Surveys and Section 106 Coordination. Mr. Romani, under the employment of Greenwood and Associates, has served as the Project Director supervising cultural resource surveys and Section 106 coordination for the following Caltrans highway projects: Route.74 W idening Project,Riverside County,C altraris District 0 8; the extension o f R oute 1 26, Ventura County, Caltrans District 07; the Route 101/Cuesta Grade Improvement Project, San Luis Obispo County, Caltrans District 05; the Route 91 EIS, Riverside County; the Route 18 Realignment Project, San Bernardino County; the Eastern Transportation Corridor, the Foothill Transportation Cooridor and the Lewis Road/101 Freeway Interchange,which included the preparation of an Archaeological Report (ASR) and an Historic Property Survey Report (HPSR). On the aforementioned projects, Mr. Romani supervised all fieldwork and Section 106 coordination and prepared all technical report documentation, and supervised all Section 106 historical architectural efforts. Private Contractor for the Eastern Transportation Corridor - Extended Phase I and Phase H Excavations. Mr. Romani acted as Project Director for the Extended Phase I test programs at six prehistoric sites and Phase II excavations at two prehistoric sites (CA-ORA-478 and -1241). In addition t o preparing the technical documents,h e served a s the Section 106 Coordinator fort he • Eastern Transportation Corridor project. Private Contractor for Various Agencies - Phase I Surveys. Mr. Romani has been a Principal Investigator or Project Manager for various Phase I cultural resource surveys. Some examples include the cultural resource investigation for the California State Prison in Blythe, Riverside County; the survey of the lower Santa Paula drainage in Ventura County for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; a survey in Boron, Kern/San Bernardino counties for Southern California Edison; a survey for the proposed EOS Payload Facility, Vandenberg Air Force Base, Santa Barbara County; and s urveys a t the L os A ngeles Air Route Traffic Control C enter (ARTCC) i n Palmdale for the Federal Aviation Administration(FAA). Private Clients - Phase H and HI Excavations. Mr. Romani has been the Project Director for Phase II investigations in various southern California counties, such as CA-SBA-42 (Limited Data Recovery and site capping) in Santa Barbara County, six prehistoric sites in Hemet, Riverside County; at CA-VEN-1074 in Cuyama Valley, Ventura County for Caltrans District 07; at CA-SLO-. 347 and CA-SLO-1792, Los Osos, San Luis Obispo County; and a data recovery excavation during the Historic Park Stabilization Program at the Albinger Historical Museum, Ventura, for the Ventura Department of Parks and Recreation. Serving as Principal Investigator, he has supervised excavations at CA-LAN-I 14 and -453 in Point Dume, Los Angeles County; at CA-LAN-2049 and - 2143 in Malibu, the Historic Town of Guasti and at CA-SBR-6249 in San Bernardino County; and the prehistoric/historic site of CA-LAN-1872-H in Redondo Beach, Los Angeles County prepared for Southern California Edison. Private Contractor for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - Historic Properties Management Plan (HPMP). Mr. Romani served a s one of the principal preparer oft he Hansen Darn Flood 411 Control Basin Historic Properties Management Plan under the employment of Greenwood and 47 Associates. This project involved outlining the purpose o f the document, the relationship o f the HPMP to the Hansen Dam Master Plan, and summary of all pertinent legislation and compliance procedures. It further presented a comprehensive compilation of background information on • previous research, ethnography and ethnohistory, existing site data, inventory, and NRHP status of known or potentially eligible historic properties. Research issues and problem domains were developed for future studies, and past and present land uses were presented in relation to project impacts on eligible or potentially eligible historic properties, and an evaluation of the HDMP alternatives in regard to the historic properties within the FIDMD APE. Lastly,it prioritized the steps necessary for achieving a responsive Historic Properties Management Plan. Caltrans - District 07 Archaeologist/Heritage Coordinator. Mr. Romani served as the Caltrans District 07 Archaeologist/Heritage Coordinator (Ventura, Los Angeles, and Orange counties) from 1980 through 1989. As the Caltrans District Archaeologist and Associate Cultural Resources Manager, he directed numerous archaeological surveys for both large and small scale transportation projects, and served as Principal Investigator on numerous Extended Phase I and Phase II excavations. National Park Service, Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area. Mr.Romani is serving as a Field Director and Project Manager for a large NPS project in Solstice Canyon,Malibu. As part of his tasks, he served as the Field Director and Project Manager for Phase H and Phase III excavations on three sites in Solstice Canyon in 2002 and 2003. H is Company, Compass Rose Archaeological, Inc. is currently under a five year contract with the NPS for the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area. PROJECT TYPES COMPLETED Cultural Resource Management Plans, archival research, Phase I, II and III investigations for large and s mall transportation projects involving Section 106 and CEQA compliance for Caltrans and FHWA documents. Section 106 cultural resource compliance documents for FAA, FAU, NPS and • NASA. CEQA cultural resource documentation for numerous private contractors, involving Phase I, Phase II, and Phase III investigations. The preparation of environmental documents, including, Initial Study/Environmental Assessment (IS/EA), Negative Declarations (ND) and Environmental Impact Reports (EIR), and Environmental Impact Statements.(EIS) and Findings of No Significant Impacts (FONSI) for CEQA and NEPA (NI-IPA/Section 106) compliance. Mr. Romani has published numerous papers,and presented papers at professional meetings(SCA, SWA,and SAA). EDUCATION M.A. Anthropology, Califomia State University,Northridge, 1981 B.A. Anthropology, California State University,Northridge, 1974 Deans List: 1972 - 1974 PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS/AFFILIATIONS Register of Professional Archeologists(ROPA). Society for California Archaeology(SCA). CONTINUING EDUCATION National Park Service,Introduction to Historic Preservation(1983). Caltrans,(NEPA)Generalist Environmental Planning(1983). Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (1989). COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT Public Education,arranged a museum display in Conejo Valley. Presented Public Awareness Programs Regarding Archaeology to various societies, schools (ranging from elementary to college level),and engineering firms. • 43 LEA ASSOCIATES. INC. JULY 2009 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 177 • • APPENDIX B AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS • I• R:\RNi0701\Initial Study\07_09 Initial Study\Appendice Slipsheets.doc • AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 177 Submitted to: Rancho Cucamonga—Fire Protection District 10500 Civic Center Drive • Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 • Prepared by: LSA Associates, Inc. 20 Executive Park, Suite 200 Irvine, California 92614-4731 (949) 553-0666 LSA Project No.RNF0701 LSA March 2008 • TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION - • 2 LOCATION 2 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS 2 SETTING 5 METHODOLOGY RELATED TO AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT 5 EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 5 REGULATORY SETTINGS 14 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE -16 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION 19 CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS 19 LONG-TERM REGIONAL AIR QUALITY IMPACTS 21 LONG-TERM MICROSCALE(CO HOT SPOT) ANALYSIS 22 AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY 23 CUMULATIVE IMPACT 23 STANDARD CONDITIONS 23 ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDED MEASURES 24 REFERENCES 25 • APPENDICES A: CONSTRUCTION WORKSHEETS B: SUPPORT DATA FOR LST ANALYSIS C: URBEMIS2007 MODEL RUN PRINTOUTS • • R:ULNF0701\Air Quality\Air Quality-March 2008.doc • • FIGURES AND TABLES FIGURES Figure 1: Project Location Map - 3 Figure 2: Conceptual Site Plan 4 TABLES Table A: Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS) 6 Table B: Health Effects Summary of Some of the Common Pollutants Found in Air 8 Table C: Attainment Status of Criteria Pollutants in the South Coast Air Basin 10 Table D: Ambient Air Quality at the Upland Air Monitoring Station 13 Table E: Peak Site Preparation Day Construction Emissions (lbs/day) 20 Table F: Summary of Construction Emissions Localized Significance 21 Table G: Operational Emissions 21 . Table H: Summary of Operation Emissions, Localized Significance 22 • • • R:ULVF0701\Air Quality\Air Quality-March 2008.doc ii LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS MARCH 2001 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 177 • • INTRODUCTION This air quality impact analysis has been prepared to evaluate potential air quality impacts and mitigation measures associated with the proposed Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177 project located in the City of Rancho Cucamonga (City), California. The air quality study provides a discussion of the proposed project, the physical setting of the project area, and the regulatory framework for air quality. The analysis provides data on existing air quality, evaluates potential air quality impacts associated with the proposed project, and identifies mitigation measures recommended for potentially significant impacts. The evaluation was prepared in conformance with appropriate standards,utilizing procedures and methodologies in the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) CEQA [California Environmental Quality Act]Air Quality Handbook(SCAQMD, April 1993). • C. • R:UWFO701\Air Quality Air Quality-March 2008.doc LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS MARCH 2008 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 177 • PROJECT DESCRIPTION LOCATION The proposed project site is located in the City of Rancho Cucamonga within the southwestern portion of San Bernardino County, California. The City of Rancho Cucamonga is located north of the City of Ontario, east of the City of Upland, and west of the City of Fontana.The proposed project site is located on approximately 3.98 acres(APN 1061-621-03) on the west side of Hellman Avenue, south of Hillside Road. Figure 1 depicts the regional and project location. The proposed project site is located approximately 1.25 miles north of SR-210. PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS The Fire Station 177 project(proposed project) consists of the construction of an approximately 6,000-square foot fire station on approximately 1.1 acres fronting Hellman Avenue within an existing flood control basin. The 1.1-acre project site is part of a previously abandoned seven-acre flood control basin, with basin depths ranging from 25 to 45 feet. The seven-acre flood control basin would • be filled with approximately 116,000 cubic yards of soil by the San Bernardino County Flood Control District to bring the flood control basin to a developable grade. The import of 116,000 cubic yards of soil is analyzed by a separate environmental document prepared by the San Bernardino County Flood Control District and is considered to be part of existing baseline conditions for this project. The conceptual site plan is shown in Figure 2. The 6,000-square foot fire station would include an apparatus area (consisting of vehicle bays, a turn- out locker room, a decontamination room, hose storage, as well as additional area for general storage), an administration area (consisting of a reception/lobby area, office space, a public restroom, a training room, ambulance private entry, break room with restroom, and storage), and a living area (consisting of a day room, a kitchen, a dining area, dorm rooms, restroom/showering facilities, an exercise room, laundry facilities, and storage). As illustrated in Figure 2, the station design would include drive-through capability for emergency apparatus, with driveways on Rancho Street. Rancho Street would be extended along the southern boundary of the project site. Additionally, the fire station would be equipped with an aboveground storage tank for fuel and an emergency generator. Staff parking would be provided on the western portion of the site,behind the station. Parking spaces for the public would be provided on the southern portion of the site. The proposed fire station is expected to receive and respond to approximately 720 calls annually,with an additional 200 annual calls for mutual aid from outside the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. This equals an average of approximately 2.5 calls per day. With the proposed fire station expecting two to three emergency calls per day and approximately two additional non-emergency trips with the engine leaving the station, total engine trips leaving the station would be approximately four to five trips per day. It was anticipated that up to ten two-way(in and out) trips are estimated per clay for fire station employees • traveling to and from work based on an average of two trips per employee. • • R 18NF0701\Air Quality\Air Quality-March 2008.doc 2 x'69£,' t ii '..-tJ- C .al-+c 'C A11. ' 'Ji /�:1f( 7" ll ik ' \\\fl?. tt i-\ �� 4-- 71 9 �\ / It' , 'io 1� \ M –( -t i iv� -'c /.v �� y x —y ;%t r, � X11,' � �(�` `r+ I` �f s6 1�'� ( �U�r��J r\;i"� ,1LL_ �a L„.� 1 ____.a'1r �"'. _'.'J/ r _"Y. h, 1 _ir t`r ' 2000”\� `o -tit– , .1/ \J �� ,)170 t tt. Ad I 1 Y Ott 'Y S�.r:�j\� �r 1 1 j��' „, - � 1 J T J J�^�,,- 0r ' „i t' � '`l�/%// l ..1 t f e._._.'y \ (."�1V �� „_� ,� I_: 1.70\ . 1e .�s. I!' ��...� r ri „zb! \ 'h xf is i \t,-fir,-1=-•c::::- a.., l : ` \r` \'� itl L`..'-'° %..._ 7 \�n T. � �(. /f!, n: : n -"': '. 1 � \•� L.f 7' . n1I, J ■2 /�` �I Il rin l. Or ��-. - V fl‘ J,"^ �'�r V� � p il�l� V ' ,1t / irr � ' ` ire l:7'I `, • (2.27 ` `a /10�� ` \�• \r J �' ds � 'v-, ' J\,v p. r _ 1 Ji fJiVl.-�`j altl,l`I ` l ,, .Nwr£. Ny L - ':,,j It\� , ' -- _J'4l Jl---'W f; �yi J \` \indir �,,1 .,l .4o,' t - n `.. 'T Z rl'' is . - . �� I _ �� ll('L��; . , ®�� y' 2. y i f --W M if, ProjectLocationme� ,�� y i JA f. 1 W 1 . - 1 .. m ! 11 , 1 _ t _, HILLSIDEROAD�' .� "v ' is I • t / ¢_ '� he r. h t i� .�16� ^y�q Se' Regional Location `-� *mum O nicistaril al ' Lo A S I Co unty San Ber rd' County • 21..-->(;..... el :t, H6. ••1 :d •J Project Area r` `'�4� :¢j . , ZI �` ��I. • Owe,- - isiatammeial IIII LI WI' rs. II L _n-_ : 'i tea`-. X57!r* X215 fi0 >t ._.�:� sapp �Is9 I Ita R nldYodnry a ..X11_ i7loonrcoonL& iI zls- - W, � _ -;"85.712141. Pacific --- ' fM1 • Y^ �� Ocean � ,: MILES _ n�� L S A FIGURE 1 I 1111P o 1,000 2,000 Fire Station 177 Air Qualify Analysis MI= ■IMIINIM FEET SOURCE:USGS 7.5'Quad:Cucamonga Peak(1988),Mt.Baldy(1988),CA;Thomas Bros.,2006 Regional and Project Location I:UWF070IVieports\Aitueg loc.mxd(04/18/07) W a W W py C c 0. CC v ] N o 9 0 ry , 0 as a 3f1N3Atl NVW113H a �__ . tt. Is is I ,§ i as - ; k ,. 'I : 1 1 1 1 _ L • I , i 1 1 o 1 ... .n. •5 LL 1 . _y_. , I 1 • I 1 1 . i R 11 / ./ H 1 n A iem••r / I o s g . H Ta \ It/ I 8 0 § d9 3 1itt , / N O `e, g tai n 8 N © JF LL a It 8 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS MARCH 2008 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION I7 • SETTING METHODOLOGY RELATED TO AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Evaluation of air quality impacts associated with a proposed mixed-use development typically includes the following: • Determine the short-term construction air quality impacts • Determine the long-term air quality impacts, including vehicular traffic, on-site and off-site air quality-sensitive uses • Determine mitigation measures required to reduce short-term and long-term, on-site air quality impacts from all sources EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The project site is located within the City of Rancho Cucamonga, which is part of the South Coast Air • Basin (Basin) and is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The air quality assessment for the proposed project includes estimating emissions associated with both short-term construction and long-term operation of the proposed project. A number of air quality modeling tools are available to assess air quality impacts of projects. Moreover, certain air districts, such as the SCAQMD, have created guidelines and requirements for air quality analyses. The SCAQMD's current guidelines, included in its CEQA Air Quality Handbook (April 1993), were adhered to in the assessment of air quality impacts for the proposed project. Regional Air Quality Both the State of California and the federal government have established health-based ambient air quality standards(AAQS). As shown in Table A, these pollutants include ozone(03), carbon monoxide(CO), nitrogen dioxide(NO2), sulfur dioxide(SO2),particulate matter with a diameter of 10 microns or less(PM10), and lead. In July 1997, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) adopted new standards for eight-hour ozone and for fine particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter(PM2.5). In addition, the State has set standards for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, vinyl chloride, and visibility reducing particles. These standards are designed to protect the health and welfare of the populace with a reasonable margin of safety. In addition to setting out primary and secondary AAQS, the State of California has established a set of episode criteria for 03, CO,NO2, SO2, and PM10. These criteria refer to episode levels representing periods of short-term exposure to air pollutants that actually threaten public health. Health effects are progressively more severe as pollutant levels increase from Stage One to Stage Three. Table B lists • the primary health effects and sources of common air pollutants. Because the concentration standards were set at a level that protects public health with an adequate margin of safety(EPA), R:\RNF0701 Wir Quality\Air Quality-March 2008.doc 5 • LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS MARCH 2001 RANCHO CUCAMONGA EIRE STATION 177 ( • Table A: Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS) Averaging California Standards' Federal Standards? Pollutant Time Concentrations Method' Primar)'''s I Secondary'" I Method' I-flour 0.09 ppm(180 pg/m') - Ultmviolet Same as . Ozone(03) Photometry Primary Standard Ultraviolet Photometry 8-Hour 0.07 ppm(137 pg/m')• 0.075 ppm(147 pg/m') Respirable 24-Hour .50 pg/m' ISO pg/m' Inertial Particulate . Gravimetric or Beta Same as Separation and Matter Annual Attenuation' Primary Standard Gravimetric (PMt4) Arithmetic 20 pg/m' - Analysis Mean Fine 24-flour No Separate State Standard 35 pg/m' menial Particulate Same as Separation and Matter Annual s Attenuation'Gravimetric or Beta Primary Standard Gravimetric Arithmetic 12 pg/m 15 pg/m I Analysis (P S) Mean 8-Hour 9.0 ppm(10 mg/m) 9 ppm(10 mg/nt') Carbon Nond ispersive Nondispersive Monoxide 1-Hour 20 ppm(23 mg/nt') Infrared 35 ppm(40 mg(m3) None Infrared (CO) Photometry Photometry 8-Hour (NUIR) (NDIR) (Lake Tahoe) 6 ppm(7 mg/m') - Annual Nitrogen Arithmetic 0.030 ppm(56 pg/m') 0.053 ppm(100 pg/m') Gas Phase Same an Gas Phase Dioxide Mean CM1emilummescence Primary Standard Chemiluminescence • (NO2) 1-Hour 0.18 ppm(338 pg1m') - 30-day 1.5 pg/m' - - High-Volume Lead(Pb)' avenge Atomic Absorption Sampler and Calendar 15 Same as Atomic Absorption Quarter p�m r Primary Standard Annual Arithmetic - 0.030 ppm(80 pg/nt') - Mean Sulfur I Ultraviolet g/ Spectrophotometry Dioxide 24-Hour 0.04 ppm(105 um) 0.14 ppm(365 gem) - (Pararosaniline (SO,) Fluorescence Method) 3-Hour - - 0.5 ppm(1300 pg/m') 1-11our 0.25 ppm(655 pg/m') - - Extinction coefficient of 023 per kilometer- Visibilit)' visibility of 10 miles or more(0.07-30 miles or . Reducing B-Hour more for Lake Tahoe)due to panicles when• relative humidity is less than 70 percent.Method: No Particles Beta Attenuation and Transmittance through • Filter Tape. Federal Sulfates 24-11our 25 pg/m' Ion Chromatography Ilydrogen 1-(lour 0.03 ppm(42 pg/m') Ultraviolet Standards ' Sulfide Fluorescence Vinyl s 24-Hour 0.01 ppm(26 pg/m') Gas Chromatography Chloride Source:ARB(November 2008). • R:QLNF0701[Air Quality\Air Quality-March 2008.doc 6 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS MARCH 2006 RANCHO CUCAMONCA FIRE STATION '77 Footnotes: I California standards for ozone;carbon monoxide(except Lake Tahoe);sulfur dioxide(I and 24 hour);nitrogen dioxide;suspended particulate matter,PMI0;and visibility reducing particles are values that are not to be exceeded.All others are not to be equaled or exceeded. California ambient air quality standards are listed in the Table of Standards in Section 70200 of Title 17 of the California Code of Regulations. 2 National standards(other than ozone,particulate matter,and those based on annual averages or annual arithmetic mean)are not to be exceeded more than once a year.The ozone standard is attained when the fourth-highest 8-hour concentration in a year,averaged over 3 years,is equal to or less than the standard.For PMI0,the 24 hour standard is attained when the expected number of days per calendar year with a 24-hour average concentration above 150 pg/m3 is equal to or less than 1.For PM2.5,the 24-hour standard is attained when 98 percent of the daily concentrations, averaged over 3 years,are equal to or less than the standard. Contact U.S. EPA for further clarification and current federal policies. 3 Concentration expressed first in units in which it was promulgated. Equivalent units given in parentheses are based upon a reference temperature of 25°C and a reference pressure of 760 torr.Most measurements of air quality are to be corrected to a reference temperature of 25.0 and a reference pressure of 760 torr;ppm in this table refers to ppm by volume,or micromoles of pollutant per mole of gas. Any equivalent procedure that can be shown to the satisfaction of the ARB to give equivalent results at or near the level of the air quality standard may be used. 5 National Primary Standards:The levels of air quality necessary,with an adequate margin of safety to protect the public health. 6 National Secondary Standards:The levels of air quality necessary to protect the public welfare from any known or anticipated adverse effects of a pollutant. r Reference method as described by the EPA. An"equivalent method"of measurement may be used but must have a • "consistent relationship to the reference method"and must be approved by the EPA. s The ARB has identified lead and vinyl chloride as`toxic air contaminants' with no threshold level of exposure for adverse health effects determined.These actions allow for the implementation of control measures at levels below the ambient concentrations specified for these pollutants. (. R:\RNF0701 Wir Quality\Air Quality-March 2008.doc 7 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS MARCH 20011 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 177 • Table B: Health Effects Summary of Some of the Common Pollutants Found in Air Pollutant Health Effects Examples of Sources Particulate Matter • Increased respiratory disease • Cars and trucks, especially diesels (PM10: less than or • Lung damage • Fireplaces, wood stoves equal to 10 microns) • Premature death • Windblown dust from roadways, agriculture, and construction • Ozone(03) Breathing difficulties • Formed by chemical reactions of • Lung damage air pollutants in the presence of sunlight; common sources are motor vehicles, industries, and consumer products Carbon Monoxide • Chest pain in heart patients • Any source that bums fuel such (CO) • Headaches, nausea as cars, trucks, construction and farming equipment, and • Reduced mental alertness residential heaters and stoves • Death at very high levels • Lung damage •Nitro en Dioxide See carbon monoxide sources (NO2) Toxic Air • Cancer • Cars and trucks, especially diesels Contaminants • Chronic eye, lung, or • Industrial sources such as chrome skin irritation platers • Neurological and reproductive • Neighborhood businesses such as disorders dry cleaners and service stations • Building materials and products Source: ARB 2005. • • R:\RNF070I'Air Quality\Air Quality-March 2008.doc 8 LEA ASSOCIATES. INC. AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS MARCH 940E RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 177 • these health effects will not occur unless the standards are exceeded by a large margin or for a prolonged period of time. State AAQS are more stringent than federal AAQS. Among the pollutants, ozone(03) and particulate matter(PM2.5 and PM10) are considered regional pollutants, while the others have more localized effects. . • The California Clean Air Act(CCAA) provides the SCAQMD with the authority to manage transportation activities at indirect sources. Indirect sources of pollution are generated when minor sources collectively emit a substantial amount of pollution. Examples of this are the motor vehicles at an intersection, a mall,.and on highways. The SCAQMD also regulates stationary sources of pollution throughout its jurisdictional area. Direct emissions from motor vehicles are regulated by the California Air Resources Board(ARB). Climate/Meteorology. Air quality in the planning area is not only affected by various emission sources (mobile, industry, etc.)but also by atmospheric conditions like wind speed, wind direction, temperature, and rainfall. The combination of topography, low mixing height, abundant sunshine, and emissions from the second largest urban area in the United States gives the Basin the worst air pollution problem in the nation. Climate in the Basin is determined by its terrain and geographical location. The Basin is a coastal plain with connecting broad valleys and low hills. The Pacific Ocean forms the southwestern border, • and high mountains surround the rest of the Basin. The Basin lies in the semi-permanent high- pressure zone of the eastern Pacific; the resulting climate is mild and tempered by cool ocean breezes. This climatological pattern is rarely interrupted. However, periods of extremely hot weather, winter storms and Santa Ana wind-conditions do occur. The annual average temperature varies little throughout the Basin, ranging from the low to middle 60s, measured in degrees Fahrenheit. With a more pronounced oceanic influence,coastal areas show less variability in annual minimum and maximum temperatures than inland areas.The climatological station closest to the site is the Claremont Pomona College Station.' The monthly average maximum ' temperature recorded at this station from July 1948 to December 1980 ranged from 63.0°F in January to 89.8°F in July, with an annual average maximum of 75.5'F. The monthly average minimum temperature recorded at this station ranged from 40.0'F in January to 59.2°F in August, with an annual average minimum of 49.1'F. January is typically the coldest month, and August is typically the warmest month in this area of the Basin. Most rainfall in the Basin occurs between November and April. Summer rainfall is minimal and is generally limited to scattered thundershowers in coastal regions and slightly heavier showers in the eastern portion of the Basin and along the coastal side of the mountains. The Claremont Pomona College climatological station monitored precipitation from July 1948 to December 1980. Average monthly rainfall during that period varied from 3.97 inches in January to 0.41 inch or less between May and October, with an annual total of 16.53 inches. Patterns in monthly and yearly rainfall totals are unpredictable due to fluctuations in the weather. • Western Regional Climate Center, www.wrcc.dri.edu. R:\RNF0701\Air Quality\Air Quality-March 2008.doc 9 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS MARCH 2011 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 177 The Basin experiences a persistent temperature inversion (increasing temperature with increasing altitude)as a result of the Pacific high. This inversion limits the vertical dispersion of air contaminants, holding them relatively near the ground. As the sun warms the ground and the lower air layer, the temperature of the lower air layer approaches the temperature of the base of the inversion (upper) layer until the inversion layer finally breaks, allowing vertical mixing with the lower layer. This phenomenon is observed in mid-afternoon to late afternoon on hot summer days,when the smog appears to clear up suddenly. Winter inversions frequently break by mid-morning. Winds in the Basin are predominantly with relatively low velocities. Wind speeds in the Basin average approximately 4 miles per hour(mph). Summer wind speeds average slightly higher than winter wind speeds. Low average wind speeds, together with a persistent temperature inversion, limit the vertical dispersion of air pollutants throughout the Basin. Strong, dry,north, or northeasterly winds,known as Santa Ana winds, occur during the fall and winter months,dispersing air contaminants.The Santa Ana conditions tend to last for several days at a time. The combination of stagnant wind conditions and low inversions produces the greatest pollutant concentrations. On days of no inversion or high wind speeds, ambient air pollutant concentrations are the lowest. During periods of low inversions and low wind speeds, air pollutants generated in urbanized areas are transported predominantly onshore into Riverside and San Bernardino Counties. In the winter, the greatest pollution problems are carbon monoxide and oxides of nitrogen, because of extremely low inversions and air stagnation during the night and early morning hours. In the summer,the longer daylight hours and the brighter sunshine combine to cause a reaction between • hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen to form photochemical smog. • Air Pollution Constituents and Attainment Status.The following describes the six criteria air pollutants and their attainment status in the Basin based on ARB's Area Designations (Activities and Maps) (http://www.arb.ca.gov/desig/desig.htm). ARB provided the EPA with California's reconunendations for eight-hour ozone area designations on July 15, 2003. The recommendations and supporting data were an update to a report submitted to the EPA in July 2000. On December 3, 2003, the EPA published its proposed designations. The EPA's proposal differs from the State's recommendations primarily on the appropriate boundaries for several nonattainment areas. ARB responded to the EPA's proposal on February 4, 2004.The EPA finalized the eight-hour ozone designations in April 2004. The EPA issued the final PM2.5 implementation rule in fall 2004 and issued the final designations on December 14, 2004. Table C summarizes the attainment status in the Basin for the major criteria pollutants. Table C: Attainment Status of Criteria Pollutants in the South Coast Air Basin Pollutant State Federal I-Hour 03 Nonattainment Revoked June 2005 8-Hour 03 Not Established Severe 17 Nonattainment • R:\RNF0701\Air Quality\Air Quality-March 2008.doc 10 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS MARCH 2001 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 177 • PM10 Nonattainment Serious Nonattainment P1\42.3 Nonattainment Nonattainment CO Attainment Attainment/Maintenance NO2 Attainment Attainment/Maintenance SO2 Attainment Attainment Lead Attainment Attainment • All others Attainment/Unclassified Attainment/Unclassified Source:ARB(www.arb.ca.gov/desig/desig.htm)and EPA(www.epa.gov/air/data/monvals.html)2008 CO=carbon monoxide NO2=nitrogen dioxide • 03=ozone(smog) - Ozone. 03 (smog) is formed by photochemical reactions between NOx and reactive organic gases (ROG) rather than being directly emitted. 03 is a pungent,colorless gas typical of Southern California smog. Elevated 03 concentrations result in reduced lung function,particularly during vigorous physical activity. This health problem is particularly acute in sensitive receptors such as the sick, the • elderly, and young children. 03 levels peak during summer and early fall. The entire Basin is designated a nonattainment area for the State one-hour 03 standard. The EPA has designated the Basin as Severe-I 7 nonattaimhett for the eight-hour 03 standard,meaning that by 2021 the Basin must be in attainment. Carbon Monoxide. CO is formed by the incomplete combustion of fossil fuels,almost entirely from automobiles. It is a colorless, odorless gas that can cause dizziness, fatigue, and impairments to central nervous system functions. The entire Basin is designated a serious nonattainment area for federal CO standards. However,based on data monitored in the entire Basin,no CO violations have been recorded in the past three years for the federal CO standards. It is anticipated that the Basin will be reclassified to CO attainment status in the coming years. Only the Los Angeles County portion of the SCAQMD district has been designated by the ARB to be a nonattainment/transitional area for State CO standards. Nitrogen Oxides.NO2, a reddish brown gas, and nitric oxide (NO), a colorless, odorless gas, are formed from fuel combustion under high temperature or pressure. These compounds are referred to as nitrogen oxides, or NOx. NOx is a primary component of the photochemical smog reaction. It also contributes to other pollution problems, including a high concentration of fine particulate matter, poor visibility, and acid deposition (i.e., acid rain). NO2 decreases lung function and may reduce resistance to infection. The entire Basin has not exceeded both federal and State standards for NO2 in the past five years with published monitoring data. It is designated a maintenance area under federal standards and an attainment area under State standards. R:\RNF0701\Air Quality\Air Quality-March 2008.doc I I • LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS MARCH 2005 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION I77 I • Sulfur Dioxide. SO2 is a colorless, irritating gas formed primarily from incomplete combustion of fuels containing sulfur. Industrial facilities also contribute to gaseous SO2 levels. SO2 irritates the respiratory tract, can injure lung tissue when combined with fine particulate matter, and reduces visibility and the level of sunlight. The entire Basin is in attainment with both federal and State SO2 standards. • Lead. Lead is found in old paints and coatings, plumbing, and a variety of other materials. Once in the bloodstream, lead can cause damage to the brain, nervous system, and other body systems. Children are highly susceptible to the effects of lead. The entire Basin is in attainment for federal and State lead standards. Particulate Matter. Particulate matter is the term used for a mixture of solid particles and liquid droplets found in the air. Coarse particles, PM10, derive from a variety of sources, including windblown dust and grinding operations. Fuel combustion and resultant exhaust from power plants and diesel buses and trucks are primarily responsible for fine particle, PM2.5, levels. Fine particles can also be formed in the atmosphere through chemical reactions. PM10 can accumulate in the respiratory system and aggravate health problems such as asthma. The EPA's scientific review concluded that PM2.5, which penetrates deeply into the lungs, is more likely than PM lo to contribute to the health effects listed in a number of recently published community epidemiological studies at concentrations that extend well below those allowed by current PM10 standards. These health effects include • premature death and increased hospital admissions and emergency room visits (primarily the elderly and individuals with cardiopulmonary disease); increased respiratory symptoms and disease (children and individuals with cardiopulmonary disease such as asthma); decreased lung functions (particularly in children and individuals with asthma); and alterations in lung tissue and structure and in respiratory tract defense mechanisms. The entire Basin is a nonattainment area for federal and State PM10 and PM2.5 standards. • Local Air Quality The SCAQMD,together with the ARB, maintains ambient air quality monitoring stations in the Basin. The air quality monitoring station closest to the site is the Upland station, and its air quality trends are representative of the ambient air quality in the project area. Since the Upland Station does not monitor PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations, the data from the Ontario Station was used for this analysis. Also,because the Upland Station does not monitor SO2 concentrations, the data from the Fontana Station was used for this analysis. The pollutants shown in Table D are CO, 03,PM10, PM2.5, NO2, and SO2.' The ambient air quality data in Table D show that NO2, SO2, and CO levels are below relevant State and federal standards. The federal one-hour 03 standard was exceeded from 3 to 15 times per year and the State standard was exceeded between 29 and 48 times per year in the past three years. The federal eight-hour 03 standard was exceeded between 12 and 34 times per year in the past three years. The Air quality data, 2003-2005; EPA and ARB Web sites. • R:\RNF0701\Air Quality\Air Quality-March 2008.doc 12 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS MARCH 2005 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 171 . O. Table D: Ambient Air Quality at the Upland Air Monitoring Station . Pollutant Standard I 2007 I 2006 I 2005 Carbon Monoxide(CO) Maximum I-hr concentration(ppm) 2.4 2.7 2.5 Number of days exceeded: State:>20 ppm 0 0 0 Federal:>35 ppm 0 0 0 Maximum 8-hr concentration(ppm) 1.65 1.90 1.85 Number of days exceeded: State:?9.0 ppm 0 0 0 Federal:a 9 ppm 0 . 0 0 Ozone(03) Maximum 1-hr concentration(ppm) 0.145 0.166 0.149 Number of days exceeded: State:>0.09 ppm 32 52 34 Maximum 8-hr concentration(ppm) 0.115 0.131 0.121 State:>0.07 ppm 46 64 46 Federal:>0.075 ppm 35 50 30 Coarse Particulates(PM10) I Maximum 24-hr concentration(pg/m3) 276 142 108 Number of days exceeded: State:>50µg/m3 33 29 27 Federal:> 150µg/m 2 0 0 Annual arithmetic average concentration(µg/m3) 58.2 51.1 48.4 Exceeded for the year: State:>20µg/m3 Y Y Y Fine Particulates(PM2.5)I Maximum 24-hr concentration(pg/m3) 77.5 52.6 96.8 Federal:>35µg/m3 NA NA NA Annual arithmetic average concentration(pg/m') 18.9 175 18.8 Exceeded for the year: State:> 12 pg/m3 Y Y V • Federal: > 15 pg/In3 Y V Y Nitrogen Dioxide'(NO,) - . .Maximum 1-hr concentration(ppm).. . . . 0.095 0.100 0.102 Number of days exceeded: State:>0.18 ppm 0 0 0 Annual arithmetic average concentration(ppm) 0.027 0.031 0.031 Exceeded for the year: State:>0.030 ppm N Y Y Federal:>0.053 ppm N N N Sulfur Dioxide(S02)1 Maximum I-hr concentration(ppm) 0.010 0.009 0.009 State:>0.25 ppm 0 0 0 Maximum 3-hr concentration(ppm) 0.007 0.005 0.006 Federal:>0.5 ppm 0 0 0 Maximum 24-hr concentration(ppm) 0.004 0.003 0.004 Number of days exceeded: State:>0.04 ppm 0 0 0 Federal:>0.14 ppm 0 0 0 Annual'arithmetic average concentration(ppm) 0.002 0.002 0.002 Exceeded for the year: Federal:>0.030ppm N N N Sources: EPA and ARt3,2008. ppm=parts per million µg/m3=microgram of pollutant per cubic meter of air ID=insufficient data Y=Yes N=No . NA=Data not available • • • l Data taken from Fontana-Arrow Highway station. R:\RNF0701\Air Quality\Air Quality-March 2008.doc 13 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS MARCH 2001 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 177 • State 24-hour PM10 standard was exceeded from 17 to 19 days in each of the past three years but did not exceed the federal 24-hour standard. The federal 24-hour PM2,5 standard was exceeded up to three days a year for the past three years. Both State and federal annual average PM2.5 standards have been exceeded every year for the past three years. REGULATORY SETTINGS Federal Regulations/Standards Pursuant to the federal Clean Air Act (CAA) of 1970, the EPA established national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for six major pollutants,termed"criteria"pollutants. Criteria pollutants are defined as those pollutants for which the federal and State governments have established AAQS, or criteria, for outdoor concentrations in order to protect public health. Data collected at permanent monitoring stations are used by the EPA to classify regions as • "attainment"or"nonattainment,"depending on whether the regions met the requirements stated in the primary NAAQS. Nonattainment areas have additional restrictions as required by the EPA. The EPA has designated the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) responsible for ensuring the Basin's compliance with the CAA. The EPA established new national air quality standards for ground-level 03 and PM2.3 matter in 1997. • On May 14, 1999, the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued a decision ruling that the CAA, as applied in setting the new public health standards for 03 and particulate matter, was unconstitutional as an improper delegation of legislative authority to the EPA. On February 27, 2001, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the way the government sets air quality standards under the CAA. The court unanimously rejected industry arguments that the EPA must consider financial cost as well as health benefits in writing standards. The justices also rejected arguments that the EPA took lawmaking power from Congress when it set tougher standards for 03 and particulate matter in 1997. Nevertheless,the court threw out the EPA's policy for implementing new 03 rules, saying that the agency ignored a section of the law that restricts its authority to enforce such rules. In April 2003,the EPA was cleared by the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to implement the eight-hour ground-level 03 standard.The EPA issued the proposed rule implementing the eight-hour 03 standard in April 2003. The EPA completed final eight-hour nonattainment status on April 15,2004. The EPA revoked the one-hour 03 standard on June 15,2005. The EPA issued the final PM2.5 implementation rule in fall 2004.The EPA issued final designations on December 14, 2004. Due to a lack of evidence linking health problems to long-term exposure to coarse particle pollution,the agency revoked the annual PM10 standard on December 17, 2006. State Regulations/Standards The State of California began to set California ambient air quality standards (CAAQS) in 1969 under • the mandate of the Mulford-Carrell Act. The CAAQS are generally more stringent than the NAAQS. In addition to the six criteria pollutants covered by the NAAQS, there are CAAQS for sulfates, R:UtNF0701 Wir Quality\Air Quality-March 2008.doc 14 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS MARCH 200E RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 1 71 hydrogen sulfide,vinyl chloride, and visibility reducing particles. These standards are also listed in Table A. Originally,there were no attainment deadlines for CAAQS. However, the CCAA of 1988 provided a time frame and a planning structure to promote their attainment. The CCAA required nonattainment areas in the State to prepare attainment plans and proposed to classify each such area on the basis of the submitted plan, as follows: moderate, if CAAQS attainment could not occur before December 31, 1994; serious, if CAAQS attainment could not occur before December 31, 1997; and severe, if CAAQS attainment could not be conclusively demonstrated at all. The attainment plans are required to achieve a minimum 5 percent annual reduction in the emissions of nonattainment pollutants unless all feasible measures have been implemented. The State has currently classified the Basin as a nonattainment area for three criteria pollutants; 03, PM10, and PM2.s. Regional Air Quality Planning Framework The 1976 Lewis Air Quality Management Act established the SCAQMD and other air districts throughout the State. The federal CAA Amendments of 1977 required that each state adopt an implementation plan outlining pollution control measures to attain the federal standards in nonattainment areas of the state. • The ARB coordinates and oversees both State and federal air pollution control programs in California. It oversees activities of local air quality management agencies and is responsible for incorporating air quality management plans for local air basins into a State Implementation Plan (SIP) for EPA approval. The ARB maintains air quality monitoring stations throughout the State in conjunction with local air districts. Data collected at these stations are used by the ARB to classify air basins as attainment or nonattainment with respect to each pollutant and to monitor progress in attaining air quality standards.The ARB has divided the State into 15 air basins. Significant authority for air quality control within them has been given to local air districts that regulate stationary source emissions and develop local nonattainment plans. Regional Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) The SCAQMD and the SCAG are responsible for formulating and implementing the AQMP for the Basin. Every three years the SCAQMD prepares a new AQMP, updating the previous plan and having a 20-year horizon. The SCAQMD adopted the 2003 AQMP in August 2003 and forwarded it • to ARB for review and approval. The ARB approved a modified version of the 2003 AQMP and forwarded it to the EPA in October 2003 for review and approval. The 2003 AQMP updates the attainment demonstration for the federal standards for 03 and PM10; replaces the 1997 attainment demonstration for the federal CO standard and provides a basis for a maintenance plan for CO for the future; and updates the maintenance plan for the federal NO2 standard that the Basin has met since 1992. • The 2003 AQMP proposes policies and measures to achieve federal and State standards for healthful air quality in the Basin and those portions of the Salton Sea Air Basin (formerly named the Southeast R:\RNF0701\Air Quality\Air Quality-March 2008.doc 15 LEA ASSOCIATES. INC. AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS MARCH 500E RANCHO CUCAMONGA EIRE STATION '77 Desert Air Basin)that are under District jurisdiction(namely, Coachella Valley).This revision to the AQMP also addresses several State and federal planning requirements and incorporates significant • new scientific data, primarily in the form of updated emissions inventories, ambient measurements, new meteorological episodes, and new air quality modeling tools. This AQMP is consistent with and builds upon the approaches taken in the 1997 AQMP and the 1999 Amendments to the ozone SIP for • the South Coast Air Basin for the attainment of the federal ozone air quality standard. However,this revision points to the urgent need for additional emission reductions (beyond those incorporated in • the 1997/1999 Plan)to offset increased emission estimates from mobile sources and meet all federal criteria pollutant standards within the time frames allowed under the federal Clean Air Act. The SCAQMD has developed the 2007 AQMP, which it describes as a regional and multiagency effort(i.e.,the SCAQMD Governing Board,ARB, SCAG, and EPA). State and federal planning requirements will include developing control strategies, attainment demonstration,reasonable further progress, and maintenance plans. The 2007 AQMP also incorporates significant new scientific data, primarily in the fonn of updated emission inventories, ambient measurements, new meteorological episodes, and new air quality modeling tools. Localized Significance Threshold (LST) SCAQMD has developed localized significance threshold (LST)methodology that can be used to determine whether or not a project may generate significant adverse localized air quality impacts. • LSTs represent the maximum emissions from a project that will not cause or contribute to an exceedance of the most stringent applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard and are developed based on the ambient concentrations of that pollutant for each source receptor area. SCAQMD's current guidelines,Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology(June 2003), were adhered to in the assessment of air quality impacts for the proposed project. The LST mass rate look-up tables are used to determine whether the daily emissions for the proposed construction and operational activities could result in significant localized air quality impacts. The - • -- -• -emissions of concern from construction activities are NOx and CO combustion emissions from - construction equipment and fugitive PM10 and PM2,5 dust from construction site preparation activities. The primary emissions from operational activities include but are not limited to NOx and CO combustion emissions from stationary sources and/or on-site mobile equipment. Off-site mobile emissions from the project are not included in the emissions compared to the LSTs. THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE A project would nonnally be considered to have a significant effect on air quality if it would violate any AAQS, contribute substantially to an existing air quality violation, expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutants concentrations, or conflict with adopted environmental plans and goals of the community in which it is located. In addition to the federal and State AAQS, there are daily and quarterly emissions thresholds for construction and operation of a proposed project in the Basin. The Basin is administered by the SCAQMD, and guidelines and emissions thresholds established by the SCAQMD in its CEQA Air • Quality Handbook(SCAQMD, April 1993) are used in this analysis. It should be noted that the R:\RNF0701\Air Qualit}1Air Quality-March 2008.doc 16 • LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS MARCH 200E RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 177 • emission thresholds were established based on the attainment status of the air basin in regard to air quality standards for specific criteria pollutants. Because the concentration standards were set at a level that protects public health with an adequate margin of safety(EPA), these emission thresholds are regarded as conservative and would overstate an individual project's contribution to health risks. Thresholds for Construction Emissions The following CEQA significance thresholds for construction emissions have been established for the Basin: • 75 pounds per day of reactive organic compounds (ROC) • 100 pounds per day of NOx • 550 pounds per day of CO • 150 pounds per day of PMIo • 150 pounds per day of sulfur oxides(SOx) Projects in the Basin with construction-related emissions that exceed any of the emission thresholds should be considered to be significant under CEQA. • Thresholds for Operational Emissions The daily operational emissions significance thresholds for the Basin are as follows. Emission Thresholds for Pollutants with Regional Effects.Projects with operations-related emissions that exceed any of the emission thresholds listed below are considered significant under CEQA. • 55 pounds per day of ROC • 55 pounds per day of NOx • • 550 pounds per day of CO • 150 pounds per day of PMIo • 55 pounds per day of PM2.5 • 150 pounds per day of SOx Local Microscale Concentration Standards.The significance of localized project impacts under CEQA depends on whether ambient CO levels in the vicinity of the project are above or below State and federal CO standards. If ambient levels are below the standards, a project is considered to have a significant impact if project emissions result in an exceedance of one or more of these standards. If • ambient levels already exceed a State or federal standard, project emissions are considered significant if they increase one-hour CO concentrations by 1.0 part per million (ppm) or more or eight-hour CO R:\RNF0701\Air Quality\Air Quality-March 2008.doc 17 LEA ASSOCIATES. INC. AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS MARCH 2001 RANCHO CUCAMONCA FIRE STATION 177 • concentrations by 0.45 ppm or more. The following are applicable local emission concentration standards for CO: • California State one-hour CO standard of 20.0 ppm • California State eight-hour CO standard of 9.0 ppm Localized Significance Thresholds.For this project, the appropriate Source Receptor Area (SRA) for the LST is the Northwest San Bernardino Valley area(Area 32), according to the SRA/City Table on the SCAQMD LST Web site.' The project site is approximately 4 acres, thus the 5-acre thresholds were used. The closest existing residential area is to the north adjacent to the site at a distance of less than 50 ft from the closest construction area. Per the LST Methodology,the LST values for 25 meters(m) were used even though the houses are closer. The following thresholds apply for this project: Construction thresholds at 25 m for a 5-acre site: • 438 pounds per day of NOx • 1,748 pounds per day of CO • • 16 pounds per day of PM1p • • 8 pounds per day of PM2.5 Operational thresholds at 25 in for a 5-acre site: • • 438 pounds per day of NOx • • 1,748 pounds per day of CO • 4 pounds per day of PMfo • 2 pounds per day of PM>.5 • • • www.aqmd.goviceqa/handboolc/LST/LST.html. R:\RNF0701 Wir Qualily\Air Qualify-March 2008.doc 18 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS MARCH 9001 RANCHO CUCAMONCA FIRE STATION 177 • IMPACTS AND MITIGATION Air pollutant emissions associated with the project would occur over the short term from construction activities, such as fugitive dust from site preparation and grading and emissions from equipment exhaust. There would be long-term regional emissions associated with project-related vehicular trips. Long-term local CO emissions at intersections in the project vicinity would not be significantly affected by project-related traffic. Long-term stationary source emissions due to on-site energy consumption would add to the project-related stationary source emissions. CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS Air quality impacts would occur during construction of the proposed project from soil disturbance and equipment exhaust. Major sources of emissions during site preparation and grading phases include: (1) exhaust emissions from construction vehicles; (2) equipment and fugitive dust generated by construction vehicles and equipment.traveling over exposed surfaces; and (3) soil disturbances from grading and backfilling. • While the site preparation, grading, and construction phases involve heavy-duty diesel-powered equipment and all activities generate large amounts of fugitive dust, the site preparation phase typically generates greater overall emissions due to the larger equipment needed for the earth-moving. During the site preparation phase, it is anticipated that on a peak day a mix of dozers, tractors/loaders/backhoes,haul trucks and various support equipment could all be used. Table E shows that construction equipment/vehicle emissions during site preparation period would not exceed any of the SCAQMD established daily emissions thresholds. Therefore, short-term constructions impacts to air quality would be less than significant. 5.1.2 Fugitive Dust Fugitive dust emissions are generally associated with land clearing, exposure, and cut and fill operations. Dust generated daily during construction would vary substantially, depending on the level of activity, the specific operations, and weather conditions. Nearby sensitive receptors and on-site workers may be exposed to blowing dust, depending upon prevailing wind conditions. Fugitive dust would also be generated as construction equipment or trucks travel on unpaved roads on the construction site. I. R:\RNF0701 Wir QualilyWir Quality-March 2008.doc 19 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS MARCH 2001 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 177 / • • • Table E: Peak Site Preparation Day Construction Emissions (lbs/day) Hours or Number and Equipment Type' Miles per Day CO ROG NOx 50x PMI0 2 Rubber Tired Dozers 8 hours 27 6.1 55 0.0 2.4 2 Tractor/LoaderBackhoes 8 hours 6.6 2.1 13 0.0 1.0 1 Mechanic Truck 10 miles 0.11 0.007 0.024 1E-04 0.001 1 Fuel Truck 10 miles 0.11 0.007 0.024 1E-04 0.001 1 Foreman Truck . 10 miles 0.11 0.007 0.024 1E-04 0.001 • 1 Water Truck 20 miles 0.30 0.023 0.055 4E-04 0.003 25 Haul Trucks 40 miles each 17 2.3 30 0.03 1.19 40 Workers commuting 25 miles each 6.4 .0.28 0.81 0.007 0.06 Subtotal Exhaust Emissions 58 11 99 0.0 4.6 • Total Fugitive Dust with Control Measures -- -- -- 136 Total Emissions (with Control Measures) 58 11 99 0.0 141 SCAQMD Threshold 550 75 100 150 150 Significant? No No No No No Source: LSA Associates,Inc.,February 2007. Architectural Coatings Architectural coatings contain VOCs that are similar to ROC and are part of the 03 precursors. At this • stage of project planning, no detailed architectural coatings information is available. Compliance with the SCAQMD Rule 1113 on the use of architectural coatings should be considered sufficient. An estimate was made using the project description of an approximately 6,000 sf building. Applying the SCAQMD CEQA factor of 2.0 sf of area to coat for every square foot of non-residential floor space, there is an approximate 12,000 sf area to cover with architectural coatings. Using the SCAQMD CEQA VOC emission factor for architectural coatings of 250 g/I translates to 11.6 lbs VOC per 1,000 square feet of coating, a total project emission of 139 lbs of VOC would result. Assuming a one-week period of coating application, the result is 28 lbs of VOC emitted per day from the application of architectural coatings. These emissions would occur after grading activities, near the end of the construction phase. Therefore, this VOC emission is the principal air emission and is below the SCAQMD threshold.Therefore, short-term impacts to air quality from architectural coating application will be less than significant. Construction Localized Significance The following analysis was performed per SCAQMD Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology(June 2003). The project site is surrounded by residential and vacant land uses. There are existing residences located to the north, south, and east of the project site. The closest existing residential area is to the north adjacent to the site at a distance of less than 50 ft from the closest construction area. Per the LST Methodology, the LST values for 25 m were used even though the house is closer. Emission factors provided by SCAQMD, CEQA Handbook Update, March 2005, and • EMFAC2007. R:\RNF0701\Air Quality\Air Quality-March 2008.doc 20 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS MARCH 2001 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 177 • Table F shows the construction-related peak day emissions,using the above analysis for the Site Preparation phase and the SCAQMD 5-acre example calculation for the other phases, modified with known project-specific information, particularly the importation of 85,700 cubic yards of soil (see Appendix A for details).This table shows that the calculated emissions rates for the proposed construction activities are below the localized significance thresholds for CO,NOx,PM10, and PM2.5 for all sensitive receptors. Therefore, the proposed construction activities would not cause any short- term, localized, significant air quality impacts. • Table F: Summary of Construction Emissions Localized Significance Emissions Rates(lbs/day) Construction Phase CO NOx PMtp PM2.5 Site Preparation 58 99 9.3 6.7 Grading 30 72 7.1 4.6 Building 22 45 3.9 3.6 Architectural Coating and Paving 16 34 2.6 2.4 Localized Significance Threshold 1,748 438 16 8 Exceed Significance? No , No No I No Source:LSA Associates, Inc.,February 2007. • LONG-TERM REGIONAL AIR QUALITY IMPACTS Long-term air emission impacts are those associated with stationary sources and mobile sources related to any change associated with the proposed project. Based on the assumption that the proposed fire station would generate 18 or fewer daily trips, and using the ARB model URBEMIS 2007, emissions associated with project-related vehicular trips were calculated and are included in Table G. It should be noted that Table G lists the higher emissions for each criteria pollutant during summer or winter. As shown,the project's emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD daily emissions thresholds in the year analyzed. Therefore, the proposed project's impact is less than significant, and no mitigation measures are required. The URBEMIS 2007 model run is included in Appendix C. Table G: Operational Emissions Pollutants (lbs/day) Source ROG I NOx CO I SOx PM10 PM2.5 2007 Project Mobile and Stationary Sources 0.38 0.35 3.9 0.0 0.31 0.06 SCAQMD Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55 Exceeds SCAQMD Threshold? No No No No No No Source:LSA Associates, Inc.,March 2008. • R:\RNF0701\Air Quality\Air Quality-March 2008.doc 21 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS MARCH 200E RANCHO CUCAMONCA FIRE STATION 177 • Operational Localized Significance The following analysis was performed per SCAQMD Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology(June 2003). The project site is surrounded by residential and vacant land uses. There are existing residences located to the north, south, and east of the project site. The closest existing residential area is to the north, adjacent to the site at a distance of less than 50 ft from the project area. Per the LST Methodology, the LST values for 25 m were used even though the house is closer. These sensitive uses would be potentially affected by the proposed project during operation of the firehouse. Table H shows the total operational daily emissions for both the on-site and off-site sources for the proposed operational activities. This was done because the URBEMIS 2007 model doesn't differentiate between on-site and off-site mobile sources and the total project emissions are so small. Table H: Summary of Operation Emissions, Localized Significance Emission Rates(lbs/day) CO I NOx PM10 PM25 Total Project 3.9 0.35 0.31 0.06 Localized Significance Threshold 1,748 438 4 2 Exceed Significance? No No No No Source: LSA Associates,Inc.,March 2008. Table H shows that all operational emissions rates are below the LST thresholds at 25 m. Therefore, • the proposed operational activity will not cause any long-term localized significant air quality impacts. LONG-TERM MICROSCALE (CO HOT SPOT) ANALYSIS Vehicular trips associated with the proposed project would contribute to the congestion at intersections and along roadway segments in the project vicinity. Localized air quality effects would occur when emissions from vehicular traffic increase in local areas as a result of the proposed project. The primary mobile source pollutant of local concern is CO, which is a direct function of vehicle idling time and,thus,traffic flow conditions. CO transport is extremely limited; it disperses rapidly with distance from the source under normal meteorological conditions. However,under certain extreme meteorological conditions, CO concentrations proximate to a congested roadway or intersection may reach unhealthful levels affecting local sensitive receptors (residents, school children, the elderly, hospital patients, etc.). Typically, high CO concentrations are associated with roadways or intersections operating at unacceptable levels of service or with extremely high traffic volumes. In areas with high ambient background CO concentration, modeling is recommended to determine a project's effect on local CO levels. Per EPA guidelines, the highest of the second-highest CO concentrations measured within the past three years were used as the background levels. At the Upland Monitoring Station,the background concentrations are 3.6 ppm for the one-hour period and 2.7 ppm for the eight-hour period. These background CO concentrations arc low enough that substantial vehicular trips would have to be added • to intersections that have high turn volumes during peak hours to make a noticeable difference. R:V2NF0701\Air Quality\Air Quality-March 2008.doc 22 • LEA ASSOCIATES. INC. AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS MARCH 1001 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION Ill • Because the proposed project would result in 18 or fewer daily trips, the proposed project would not have a significant impact on local air quality for CO, and no mitigation measures would be required. AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY The proposed project is consistent with the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan, which is consistent with the SCAG Regional Comprehensive Plan Guidelines and the SCAQMD AQMP. In addition,the proposed project will not exceed the SCAQMD's long-term growth projections and emissions thresholds. Therefore, implementation of the project will not conflict with the AQMP, and no significant impacts will result. CUMULATIVE IMPACT Construction of the project would contribute cumulatively to the local and regional air pollutants, together with other projects under construction. The project would not result in any significant operational air quality impacts. Thus, it is not anticipated that these additional emissions would result in significant cumulative air quality impacts. • STANDARD CONDITIONS Construction Impacts The project is required to comply with regional rules that assist in reducing short-term air pollutant emissions. SCAQMD Rule 403 requires that fugitive dust be controlled with best available control measures so that the presence of such dust does not remain visible in the atmosphere beyond the property line of the emission source. In addition, SCAQMD Rule 402 requires implementation of dust suppression techniques to prevent fugitive dust from creating a nuisance off site. Applicable dust suppression techniques from Rule 403 are summarized below. Implementation of these dust . suppression techniques can reduce the fugitive dust generation (and thus the PM10 component). Compliance with these rules would reduce impacts on nearby sensitive receptors. The following are the applicable Rule 403 Measures: • Apply nontoxic chemical soil stabilizers according to manufacturers' specifications to all inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive for 10 days or more). • Water active sites at least twice daily. (Locations where grading is to occur will be thoroughly watered prior to earthmoving). • All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or should maintain at least 2 ft of freeboard in accordance with the requirements of California Vehicle Code(CVC) section 23114 (freeboard means vertical space between the top of the load and top of the trailer). • Pave construction access roads at least 100 ft onto the site from the main road. • Traffic speeds on all unpaved roads shall be reduced to 15 mph or less. R:\RNF0701\Air Quality\Air Quality-March 2008.doc 23 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS MARCH 2001 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 177 I • The project is required to comply with the SCAQMD Rule 1113 on the use of architectural coatings. Emissions associated with architectural coatings would be reduced by complying with these rules and regulations, which include using pre-coated/natural colored building materials,using water-based or low-VOC coating, and using coating transfer or spray equipment with high transfer efficiency. For example, a high-volume, low-pressure(HVLP) spray method is a coating application system operated at air pressure between 0.1 and 10 psig gauge, with 65 percent transfer efficiency. Manual applications such as paintbrush, hand roller, trowel, spatula, dauber,rag, or sponge have 100 percent transfer efficiency. ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDED MEASURES A. Additional dust suppression measures in the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook are included as part of the project's mitigation. • Revegetate disturbed areas as quickly as possible. • All excavating and grading operations shall be suspended when wind speeds(as instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 mph. • All streets shall be swept once per day if visible soil materials are carried to adjacent streets (recommend water sweepers with reclaimed water). • Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto paved roads, or wash trucks and any equipment leaving the site each trip. • • All on-site roads shall be paved as soon as feasible, watered periodically, or chemically stabilized. • The area disturbed by clearing, grading, earthmoving, or excavation operations shall be • minimized at all times. B. The Construction Contractor shall select the construction equipment used on site based on low emission factors and high energy efficiency. The Construction Contractor shall ensure that construction grading plans include a statement that all construction equipment will be tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications. C. The Construction Contractor shall utilize electric or diesel powered equipment in lieu of gasoline powered engines where feasible. • D. The Construction Contractor shall ensure that construction grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. During smog season (May through October), the overall length of the construction period will be extended, thereby decreasing the size of the area prepared each day,to minimize vehicles and equipment operating at the same time. E. •The Construction Contractor shall time the construction activities so as to not interfere with peak-hour traffic and minimize obstruction of through traffic lanes adjacent to the site; if necessary, a flagperson shall be retained to maintain safety adjacent to existing roadways. 1 F. The Construction Contractor shall support and encourage ridesharing and transit incentives for • the construction crew. R:U2NF070I Wir Quality\. Quality March 2006.doc 24 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS MARCH 2001 RANCHO CUCAMONCA FIRE STATION 177 REFERENCES California Air Resources Board web site: http://www.arb.ca.gov. Caltrans. Air Quality Technical Analysis Notes. 1988. Caltrans. Transportation Project-Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol. 1997. South Coast Air Quality Management District. Air Quality Management Plan. 2003. South Coast Air Quality Management District. CEQA Air Quality Handbook. 1993. South Coast Air Quality Management District.Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology, June 2003. South Coast Air Quality Management District. Final Methodology to Calculate Particulate Matter (PM) 2.5 and PM 2.5 Significance Thresholds,October 2006. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Air Quality Data. Western Regional Climate Center Web Site: http://www.wrcc.dri.edu. • • I. R:\RNF0701\Air Quality\Air Quality-March 2008.doc 25 • LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS MARCH ROOS RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION Ilr • APPENDIX A • CONSTRUCTION WORKSHEETS • • i• • R:\RNF0701\Air QualitykAir Quality-March 2008.doc LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSTRUCTION EXHAUST WORKSHEET • #of Hours SCAQMD OffRoad EF Emission Rates(lbs/day) Grading units per day Diesel Emission Factors(lbs/hour) CO ROC NOx SOx PMio Rubber Tired Dozer 2 8 1.695 0.379 3.414 0.002 0.147 27 6.1 55 0.0 2.4 LoaderBackhoe 2 8 0.414 0.131 0.830 0.001 0.064 6.6 2.1 13 0.0 1.0 #of Miles EMFAC2007:2007 Factors Speed units per day Emission Factors(gms/mi) (mph) Mechanic Truck 1 10 5.013 0.305 1.073 0.006 0.046 25 0.11 0.01 0.024 0 0.001 Fuel Truck 1 10 5.013 0.305 1.073 0.006 0.046 25 0.11 0.01 0.024 0 0.001 Foreman Truck 1 10 5.013 0.305 1.073 0.006 0.046 25 0.11 0.01 0.024 0 0.001 Water Truck 1 20 6.88 0.528 1.239 0.009 0.065 15 0.30 0.023 0.055 0 0.003 Haul Trucks 25 40 7.831 1.05 13.56 0.015 0.541 30 17 2.3 30 0.03 1.19 Gasoline Emission Factors(gms/mi) Worker Commute 40 25 2.914 0.126 0.367 0.003 0.028 50 6.4 0.28 0.81 0.01 0.06 Total Grading 58 11 99 0 4.6 #of Flours SCAQMD OffRoad EF Emission Rates.(lbs/day) Construction units per day Diesel Emission Factors(lbs/hour) CO ROC NOx SOx PMio Cranes 1 8 0.637 0.188 1.695 0.001 0.075 5.1 1.5 14 0.0 0.60 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8 0.414 0.131 0.830 0.001 0.064 3.3 1.0 6.6 0.0 0.51 Other Material Handling Equipme 1 8 0.630 0.204 1.836 0.002 0.082 5.0 1.6 15 0.0 0.66 #of Miles EMFAC2007: 2007 Factors Speed units per day Emission Factors (gms/mi) (mph) Mechanic Truck 1 10 5.013 0.305 1.073 0.006 0.046 25 0.11 0.01 0.024 0 0.001 Fuel Truck 1 10 5.013 0.305 1.073 0.006 0.046 25 0.11 0.01 0.024 0 0.001 Foreman Truck 1 10 5.013 0.305 1.073 0.006 0.046 25 0.11 0.01 0.024 0 0.001 Water Truck 1 40 6.88 0.528 1.239 0.009 0.065 15 0.61 0.0470.109 0 0.006 Delivery Trucks 5 40 4.48 0.249 1.033 0.006 0.042 30 2.0 0.11 0.46 0.003 0.02 Gasoline Emission Factors(gms/mi) Worker Commute 40 25 2.914 0.126 0.367 0.003 0.028 50 6.4 0.28 0.81 0.01 0.06 Total Construction 23 4.6 36 0.0 1.9 SCAQMD Threshold 550 75 100 150 150 From SCAQMD web site: http://www.agmd.gov/cega/handbook/offroad/ofTroad.html, downloaded 12/14/2006 • Printed:4/2/2007; 11:41 AM P:\RNF0701\Fire Sta.Construction Emissions-Rev.xis LSA Associates,Ina Fugitive Dust Emission Worksheet • 1 Emission Unmitigated Mitigated Emission Source Emission Rate Mitigation Emission Rate factor units Emission Parameters lb/da ( y) Reduction (lb/day)0.5 Wind Erosion/Excavatioti 0.80 lb/day/acre 1.2 acres I.0 50.0%.0% 0.5 Excavation/scraper/doze? 2.9 lb/hour 2 No.of Equip. 8 hours/day 46 50.0% 23 Dumping/scraper' 5.38E-04 lb/day/ton of 40,000 lb handled/Load dirt handled 200 Loads/day 2.2 50.0% 1.1 Hauling/scraper(unpaved)" 8.3 lb/day/mile 10 miles/day Truck(unpaved)" 8.3 lb/day/mile 15 miles/day 83 50.0% 42 Vehicle travel(paved)5 0.78 lb/day/mile 20 miles/day 125 50.0% Y 8 16 50.0% g SCAQMD CEQA Handbook Data-Appendix 9 Total 272 136 #1-Wind Erosion of Storage Piles-Table A9-9-E E_(1.7 x[G/I.5]x[365-H1/235"[1/15])x.1(lbs/day/acre) G=Silt content(percent) 15 (Table A9-9-E-1:Blended ore and dirt) H=No.Days with>0.01"precip/year 34 (Table A9-9-E-2:Average=percent of time wind>12mph 100 (Worst case) be day for SCAB) 1=TSP Fraction 0.5 (SCAQMD CEQA factor) 1 #2-Dirt Pushing or Bulldozing-Table A9-9-F E=([0.45 x({[G]'5}/{[H]m}]x 2.2046) (lbs/hr) G=Silt content(percent) 15 (Table A9-9-F-1:Blended ore and dirt) H=Moisture content(percent) 8.5 (Table A9-9-F-2: 1/2 wa y between"dry"(2)and"moist"(I5)) 411 #3-Dirt piling or Material Handling-Table A9-9-G 1E_[0.00112 x({[G/5113)/{[H/2]''4})](115s/day/lb of din handled) IG=Mean wind speed(mph) 6 (From local meleorlogical data) H=Moisture content(percent) 4 (Table A9-9-G-I: "dry"(2),"moist"(IS),EPA reeom.4) #4-Travel on Unpaved Roads-Table A9-9-D • E=2.1 x[G/12]x[H/30]x ([J/3]°'') x {[l/4]05) x ([365-K)/365) (lb/day/mile) G=Silt loading(percent) 24 (Table A9-9-D-1:Coal Mine Haul Road(freshly scraped)) H=Mean vehicle speed(mph) IS (Table A9-9-D-2:Recommended maxi mum) I=Mean number er of wheels g (Mix of 4,6 and 18 wheeled trucks) 1=Mean vehicle weight(tons) 15 K=No.Days with>0.01"precip/year 34 (Table A9-9-D-4:Average day for SCAB) #5-Travel on Paved Roads-Table A9-9-C E=0.77 x ((G x)°') (lbs/day/mile) G=Silt loading(oz'yd-') 2.95 (Table A9-9-C-I:Industrial Sites(in operation)) • #6-Building Wrecking-Table A9-9-H E=0.00042 x(N x 0 x P)/Q (lbs/day) • N=Width of building(feet) 50 0=Length of building(feet) 50 P=Height of building(feet) 30 Q=No.Days req'd to demolish a buildin 5 From Mark's Std Hnbk for Engineers: cu yds/truck lb/load lb/cu ft for soil(dry,loose) 76 15 30,780 cu ft for soil(dry,packed) 95 15 38,475 u ft for soil(moist,loose) 78 15 31,590 /cu fl for soil(moist,packe 96 15 38.880 Printed:3/16/2007; 11:46 AM P'\RNF070I\Fire Sta.Construction Emissions.xls Summary of Five Acre Site Example Results By Phase and Equipment i Grading • Vehicle Description No.of P Hours ours Trips Length CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.0 9.67 24.30 1.00 0.91 Graders 2 8.0 9.07 25.97 1.36 1.24 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.0 10.18 20.59 4.74 2.46 Haul Trucks 7 0.1 0.04 0.05 0.001 0.00 Water Trucks 3 6.4 1.00 1.31 0.02 0.02 Total Onsite Emissions 30.0 72.2 7.1 4.6 Localized Significance Threshold* 1,748 438 16 8 Exceed Significance? NO NO NO NO • Building of 164,000 Square Foot Structure Vehicle Description No.of p Vehicle Hours Trips Length CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 Cranes 1 7.0 2.58 8.10 0.41 0.38 Forklifts 3 8.0 6.43 12.19 1.30 1.19 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.0 8.90 18.02 1.81 1.66 Generator Sets 1 8.0 2.70 5.59 0.41 0.38 Electric Welders 1 8.0 N/A N/A N/A Haul Trucks 3 0.1 0.02 0.02 0.0004 0.00 Water Trucks 3 6.4 1.00 1.31 0.02 0.02 Total Onsite Emissions 21.6 45.2 3.9 3.6 Localized Significance Threshold* 1,748 438 16 8 Exceed Significance? NO NO NO NO Architectural Coating and Asphalt Paving of Parking Lot Vehicle Description No.of P Hours Trips Length M th CO NOx P10 PM2.5 Pavers 1 8.0 3.59 7.15 0.54 0.49 • Rollers I 8.0 2.97 6.19 0.47 0.43 Paving Equipment 2 6.0 • 5.03 11.53 0.83 0.76 Cement and Mortar Mixers 2 6.0 0.47 0.82 0.06 0.06 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.0 3.39 6.86 0.69 0.63 Haul Trucks 9 0.1 0.05 0.06 0.0011 0.00 Water Trucks 3 6.4 1.00 1.31 0.02 0.02 Total Onsite Emissions 16.5 33.9 . 2.6 2.4 Localized Significance Threshold* 1,748 438 16 8 Exceed Significance? NO NO NO NO . Thresholds for the Northwest San Bernardino Valley area(Area 32)Source Receptor Area(SRA)at 25 meters. • • B-I LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS MARCH 2001 RANCHO CUCAMONCA FIRE STATION 177 • APPENDIX B SUPPORT DATA FOR LST ANALYSIS • • • • RARNF0701 W it Quality\Air Quality-March 2008.doc 0 an -17 c., • a, 7•"""' 7 ct _,_ V ..... „..r L., . = 0 0 CA .. _ ....:-._, . 0 . , . . - . 0 , 0 7 10 • CY a. 1,' '1.. .7:1 ,...o — co 0 cr.. 7... en T77. •,47 ...... "" ..= r-1 co pc el. r, = 00 :....... ---.0 .., ,—, 0 0 ..-• • C74 ;•-• ,—, 7, ...*"• CC1 ... [—• M .5.-... b.1:• 7 . .—. el 01.7 ...-...... 7— 77.7 L) . ..,...3 — — .7, at .... .— ... -. 11 = o 'r. .:: v. ,...■ x .... t-- c•-) cc) :...., . .6 6 6 6 - 6 U 0 ..o en (-I 4,-) ---, ..... 7_.' .—• k •O... .... 0 st7 CO ,-;-:-.o os o ? c---: ao c - .: = ... —. .......: ,_, 00 ...- ..., .-. 4.7 ? --- -A.o :- - •tt = ... -.:.. ce o r, ..e. U 7..., ..--. CO '17 ,.., C..7 ea a.. i.... .0 t--- _ _ a. r- ..,:r 17 ,- ,.., elV) 0 .0 (-4 :.,-. — r•1 7'0 0.7 ••0?- 7 C... E),sa U _o cl n -_, ._. .7 71 --. -•-. '▪ ,..--. --• L- •- ....- c., :L. et .• .. i C t S C? > ..... ca .477 o E ri 44 la ...) '1- ....-.... = a. GIJ C3.1 7 '•-• C.7 E on c., ..... = -5 ,,,i, .- L. .4 4.• E E .--. rz ad _el 6., 0 - ✓ 0 7 ..-. .... 7 0 0 CA E ...w .-. .- o. ea a) vi .- ,-, 4 L) "...: ---■-•") =.■ a, ca ,s -ir▪ r•-) -- a, ... 6 re cu ei 13 cc,1 •= cL) El 0,0 N L. - ....4 . _.: ..tr Cs. ›: E ::o • H.... -= ..- .... u 7: a■ 2 7o.'. 0 ....„ ......-GI 0 =. ;-■ ' , :... e T... c... = • ..... a) .... .,_ a.) C..." ,n el ■...] v., v, u a...: al tn 7'. a, ..._ 7., = _ ‘g ? .... .- = = .... c... = :- . ..' = Q ..., --. -0 -0 ...-. •,-• ..... ...., 7.: ... -•- -,-, ..... .- ,..., 0 O ...... an > Pt > .- :- .... = ,--. ‘... 0 Cr 7 1.- ■.-▪ 7 a, - = = a) 0 a.) 41 . C...5 4 04 0 i--, ,U LI.1 = CD E- '..7. >• ... .... •1', ;LI 'P... Na :r... O • > o O >, o U N co C O tj 0 y an •C N W O ° • 0 ° •b .0 U C R o x a U X w • [ X fV O c a II p a, U C a R U O O . F O O - E W °• C T � 3 00 V b 03., 0 V 4-1 M N 'V y Q 0 N 7 y v� C4 :13 6 N O N OD U CC 00 II. n. C ^ R a x E a D U 3 '0 11 474 O. ae n E .. hi - - LI t � 0 1- .,e 0 °� v v O c ' a W F E x z d 11.1 — .D N r 'O y E X c E 1. r .. > x p v E .- d O t ,ue w R > '� U fY I .74 R O G 0 '1. sa; t.. p. 7 0 b v, a. ?fir r? _ ° ` ' ..... c 0 3 ° V x C y i E 4.... 0 c. Q � � e ° w t•-•1 co 000 U y o II. U • ca y O F O O O ... U an p 3. i4 .O s W w X O a Z ug E o = v o E. a W a o O t„...i r . C z h H . W h X C' II• -U 3 _G. .a L. y C >, '' E e II .. y c `o C.) x A = c ti al > L r ti y .0 C0 C .O h - p E E a O `o Ln 7 c o Z r c o f - m _ L' Y � -X y co y y •1 R 0 O G- y y p et y co y 0 N y N u W 'CO b.0 u E Oo y w c O 0. q C .b v `' v o e o L F R 2 a•R a O . •- R 7,1° 2 d C C 'a' . ii. a x -•.= > 0 3 Z ° E • Y. .. H 4, E E 00 y i d v °ao ea O U R 'O R L A C L p i, 7 7 . v L 7 O R V x ! t:3" Cr O G y O ^ • • • • - E $ 2 c L a O or O W o m , Ai- 2 o T o T - N'O ty O N N _ .. L - N 0 L O O O O ° . ".D C / = en°.. a • 0 • ps u u u y _ 9' c o ! E c i 2° w G on 2 O0 v _ w 9 n ._ ` y ,c Fs v 3 0 9,4 a E.5 o 2 E " m 'a L_ - h G e p _ H 9 > m .^ .E0,' O 9 F ¢ u ilk 0 = V T _ CO V 'J O M NI l7 -J. N rv�j O -E _ 9 O = 6 Y G v ri rp u c _ .m E 2 U E T % =o V O E d< ^ Fit T Q T u p Iy ¢? .2 x 3 E E P. s v - N¢ ., G _ - _ II ry 173 rd t l N _ - -A o x Y b _ - O 9,.. .d ° c. c ' - `o ° m ° Cr n v T j o c e 0 a - u u. _ 9 _ < Q G E{ a. K C 2 9 u c 6 • 4 F- O .AO o 00 °- O v° v 0 3 °a c `" µ, E .0 °- 9 c ° _ A o u E 00 h n UD o - ... c U JD fn Z _ o _ °- a E c E °, w 2 vl `o n o h E p o v o y o ti Vl % PO N O+ Q) C 2 G 6 6Th ` v n E. p u ` e O n .0 C 0 - 0 cr 0 . U 9 E _. r, - m _ e E 0 U v o = - -9 ry o ° v _ _ m ¢ 0 C o o '^ c -0 _ - o m ' s E o ` U c - E = - y __ .� _ _ ... 9 o t- °e c -o E c T Q Y Y < C 9 C N T Y P 9 E m O O i ? U < O 9 n a e V O 9 ry O E ° ° U m y u 9 - < �_ ry v _ - v c ea L _ ate+ ° F G u 9 T < E N " E O T . r, q o E c o -2 L V E o w e $ _ U - - _ m n • '0-' y ° i G a v: v o o a 0 d, o °' F o " `..'c- m _ `_`o 2 m < _ 9 ¢ w 0 < v: F '�' ° 2 L ri .. d a m P E a. u c E c<_ c c a E E i i L 9` 1.- a n y °CLI v .° u E 0 9 'c" N A v „ w n „ < y 2 ti N w _ u v c m o - o c .a x o 'o o 1n Cr U < > H i..Q j 2 Q __ < Q > > j E F, . ,±,- _ m > x_3_:, __ ;-. v, o v, m z L < 2 2 V v c Co 2 ._ .- Y _ _ a _ • ID. .0 0 0 LL. L T s '7 N_ C ^ L h 00 h Q _ `.0 0 0 0 0 r ^ O t Z _ erj L Z 0 0 0 0 O L ' o _H co U v 7 C!) u C V L r` - _ I � c000 cvho °v,° rnQ 0 P •, _ "' <r = -' t— .' � x � -- u, 00 � — L -- coot z � o u v J al • 5' %' DO 00 -1' 00 _� n 6. c., r p{.,..." z O w i O O O O i .n .- O O 0 O L. Z. O ji i y y F h h tS kJ y C c u 6. > G _ Cn p d O «. O Z Z F .J J s or o ' � D en v N C F — -o - E- • - F' •' a .c u y o 2 cC N C 7 O ti v = •7 = Y u C u C L ;� 4: K O U' a L O C" O ts.. 6) _v 0 Q) 0 O) tC t0 W u. U 6.J V '.-6, E-- r,_; 7.1-1 U W U u. F C' tit U x U - C:. • • ca -o o • \ o / . j so c o 0 C it s9 ) \ 0022 \ / } ; \ ) }§ § 2 j /; & i \ \ { , C Et II \ aft -. / A / \ ( 0§ ® © ( }_ § ® i S ° 21 n Co \ \ f \ \ \ } \ o \ . \ x \ \ . ° } \ ) } \ 247 ; 7@ / ! 0 0 § f @@2 \ o -- - _ . . - > we , w ; . . ; : : ; \ * ` » ` \ \ } \ \ \ / \ \ \ ( \ 20401-> E -- : § _ \ \ 2 k --5 - - o _j : ` ) - / ) - : / } § )_ ! $ 73 L2 1 V• c) _ ; $ 1 » : � / / _ - - : - , , � u. _ : ! - , • ! ci v = f : ; zaO < C J 33U. 2 z f2 / \ g a ± « ; 2 : f»zs5 C • • 0 W CJ) C C_ .x w P. O N p a N .S in- Cl L 01 ON Vl c c : oo ,4 E v, o 00 IDA Cl. a000 � o ,� _" oa • L( p„ o 0 0 0 o G _ . U` C m onP. r. M o C U % "' Cu) S c L 7 V 6D a", Q U 0 0 0 0 0 '� U p �7 v� -', - v -t C _ o x � � oc OZ a oo r-: C oc - - en o _ o 0 o c o o c L = U O L ¢ L V h L d O C U ¢ M a< W V =' d _ • � >. 1.. O+ ^ Ol Oi mt :I-,'' C7. ^ NN h � v r� vov N � l'!.. T r, fi 1... 0 0 0 0 0 C �A w O O C O V V 6! 0 L O O H N h :7 C C R • :, w 0. O V L 3 w. 0 O o `n L a) a 0 .0 .0 F u r vD In O • N w.. a) e. 0 . :� >"5 z 61 L 0 d Y _� C m 0.1 �c o _ b cu ...7 O 0 O F- e umi • a Q -L- __ =A = o pct, v'' .- OD c o = Q .L °' chi C ) C t o o o 73 co? - 0.w s. U w � E , U xn UH U 3 0 , \ . ) ) ) ` T CD s , ® 6666 . ` 2 ® _ = 2 ® ; = 2 f \ \ , ` ° ~ \ ` ` ° ` ` \ \ \ 5 ) ) 8 • \ 3i2 « \ R « ) \ 72% G § 7 /00 0 _ : • ` : ` }6.E o \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ V . . . o @ - ` _» : : ; 5 E \® § / ® { ( S \® / ! j 8 /: \ E _ t 5 `4) >"\ : 11 ! } ) j i { - ` � \ / \ > \ \ » — = « -3 f « Z - \ \ ! ) : t ( } ) . _ _ i - _ .9 E § \ ) � \ : ) C _ - C 2 : }} { 2 • .4 ; \ - - _ 7 § ] » { : / : : 2 _ � ` 8 ` _ - > 000 \ • \\ ) \\ \ ) { \ ) \� 7 / \ \ \ / ) \ } \ \ \ \ \ \ - � _ ; _ ». : ee . ; > = e � oc7 ; zS. « » z= � � = Tel • • LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS MARCH 1001 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 077 • APPENDIX C • URBEMIS2007 MODEL PRINTOUTS • • • R:\RNF0701\Air Quality\Air Quality-March 2008.doc Page: 1 02/13/2007 11:14 AM URBEMIS 2002 For Windows 8.7.0 • File Name: H:\Ronalde\Files\Projects\URBEMIS Runs\RNF0701 - Fire Station.urb Project Name: Station 177, Hellman Avenue site Project Location: South Coast Air Basin (Los Angeles area) On-Road Motor Vehicle Emissions Based on EMFAC2002 version 2.2 SUMMARY REPORT (Pounds/Day - Summer) AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 TOTALS (lbs/day,unmitigated) 0.11 0.00 0.72 0.00 0.00 OPERATIONAL (VEHICLE) EMISSION ESTIMATES ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 TOTALS (lbs/day,unmitigated) 0.21 0.18 1.85 0.00 0.17 SUM OF AREA AND OPERATIONAL EMISSION ESTIMATES ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 TOTALS (lbs/day,unmitigated) 0.32 0.18 2.57 0.00 0.17 • r • • Page: 2 02/13/2007 11:14 AM • • URBEMIS 2002 For Windows 8.7.0 File Name: H:\RonaldB\Files\Projects\URBEMIS Runs\RNF0701 - Fire Station.urb Project Name: Station 177, Hellman Avenue site Project Location: South Coast Air Basin (Los Angeles area) On-Road Motor Vehicle Emissions Based on EMFAC2002 version 2.2 SUMMARY REPORT (Pounds/Day - Winter) AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 TOTALS (lbs/day,unmitigated) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 . 0.00 OPERATIONAL (VEHICLE) EMISSION ESTIMATES ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 TOTALS (lbs/day,unmitigated) 0.15 0.26 1.80 0.00 0.17 SUM OF AREA AND OPERATIONAL EMISSION ESTIMATES ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 TOTALS (lbs/day,unmitigated) 0.15 0.26 1.80 0.00 0.17 • Page: 3 02/13/2007 11:14 AM URBEMIS 2002 For Windows 8.7.0 • File Name: H:\RonaldB\Files\Projects\URBEMIS Runs\RNF0701 - Fire Station.urb Project Name: Station 177, Hellman Avenue site Project Location: South Coast Air Basin (Los Angeles area) On-Road Motor Vehicle Emissions Based on EMFAC2002 version 2.2 DETAIL REPORT (Pounds/Day - Winter) AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES (Winter Pounds per Day, Unmitigated) Source ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Natural Gas 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 Hearth 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Landscaping - No winter emissions Consumer Prdcts 0.00 - - - - Architectural Coatings 0.00 - - - - TOTALS(lbs/day,unmitigated) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 • • Page: 4 02/13/2007 11:14 AM . UNMITIGATED OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Fire Station 0.15 0.26 1.80 0.00 0.17 TOTAL EMISSIONS (lbs/day) 0.15 0.26 1.80 0.00 0.17 Does not include correction for passby trips. Does not include double counting adjustment for internal trips. OPERATIONAL (Vehicle) EMISSION ESTIMATES Analysis Year: 2007 Temperature (F) : 50 Season: Winter EMFAC Version: EMFAC2002 (9/2002) Summary of Land Uses: No. Total Unit Type Acreage Trip Rate Units Trips Fire Station 4 .00 trips/1000 sq. ft. 5.00 20.00 Sum of Total Trips 20.00 Total Vehicle Miles Traveled 111.92 • Vehicle Assumptions: ' feet Mix: hicle Type Percent Type Non-Catalyst Catalyst Diesel Light Auto 55.20 1.80 97.80 0.40 Light Truck < 3,750 lbs 15.10 3.30 94.00 2.70 Light Truck 3,751- 5,750 16.10 1.90 96.90 1 .20 Med Truck 5, 751- 8,500 7.10 1.40 95.80 2.80 Lite-Heavy 8,501-10,000 1 .10 0.00 81.80 18.20 Lite-Heavy 10,001-14,000 0.40 0.00 50.00 50.00 Med-Heavy 14,001-33,000 1.00 0.00 20.00 80.00 Heavy-Heavy 33,001-60,000 0.90 0.00 11.10 88.90 Line Haul > 60,000 lbs 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 Urban Bus 0.10 0.00 0.00 100.00 Motorcycle 1.70 82.40 17.60 0.00 School Bus 0.10 0.00 0.00 100.00 Motor Home 1.20 8.30 83.30 8.40 Travel Conditions Residential Commercial Home- Home- Home- Work Shop Other Commute Non-Work Customer Urban Trip Length (miles) 11.5 4.9 6.0 10.3 5.5 5.5 Rural Trip Length (miles) 11.5 4 .9 6.0 10.3 5.5 5.5- Trip Speeds (mph) 35.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 . % of Trips - Residential 20.0 37.0 43.0 % of Trips - Commercial (by land use) Fire Station 2.0 1.0 97.0 4110 Page: 5 02/13/2007 11:14 AM anges made to the default values for Land Use Trip Percentages • Changes made to the default values for Area The landscape year changed from 2005 to 2007. The nonresidential Arch. Coatings ROG emission factor changed from 0.0185 to 0.011. Changes made to the default values for Operations The operational emission year changed from 2005 to 2007. • • Page: 6 02/13/2007 11:14 AM • URBEMIS 2002 For Windows 8.7.0 File Name: H:\RonaldB\Files\Projects\URBEMIS Runs\RNF0701 - Fire Station.urb Project Name: Station 177, Hellman Avenue site Project Location: South Coast Air Basin (Los Angeles area) On-Road Motor Vehicle Emissions'Based on EMFAC2002 version 2.2 DETAIL REPORT (Pounds/Day - Summer) AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES (Summer Pounds per Day, Unmitigated) Source ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Natural Gas 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 Hearth - No summer emissions Landscaping 0.11 0.00 0.72 0.00 0.00 Consumer Prdcts 0.00 - - - - Architectural Coatings 0.00 - - - - TOTALS(lbs/day,unmitigated) 0.11 0.00 0.72 0.00 0.00 • • • • • 4110 • Page: 7 02/13/2007 11:14 AM 1 . UNMITIGATED OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 Fire Station 0.21. 0.18 1.85 0.00 0.17 TOTAL EMISSIONS (lbs/day) 0.21 0.18 1.85 0.00 0.17 Does not include correction for passby trips. Does not include double counting adjustment for internal trips. OPERATIONAL (Vehicle) EMISSION ESTIMATES Analysis Year: 2007 Temperature (F) : 90 Season: Summer EMFAC Version: EMFAC2002 (9/2002) Summary of Land Uses: - No. Total Unit Type Acreage Trip Rate Units Trips Fire Station 4.00 trips/1000 sq. ft. 5•.00 20.00 Sum of Total Trips 20.00 Total Vehicle Miles Traveled 111.92 • Vehicle Assumptions: Fleet Mix: • ,hicle Type Percent Type Non-Catalyst Catalyst Diesel Light Auto 55.20 1.80 97.80 ' 0.40 Light Truck < 3,750 lbs 15.10 3.30 94.00 2.70 Light Truck 3, 751- 5,750 16.10 1.90 96. 90 1.20 • Med Truck 5, 751- 8,500 7 .10 1 .40 95.80 • 2.80 Lite-Heavy 8,501-10,000 1.10 0.00 81.80 18.20 Lite-Heavy 10,001-14,000 0.40 0.00 50.00 50.00 Med-Heavy 14,001-33,000 1.00 0.00 20.00 80.00 Heavy-Heavy 33, 001-60,000 0.90 0.00 11.10 88.90 Line Haul > 60,000 lbs 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 Urban Bus 0.10 0.00 0.00 100.00 Motorcycle 1.70 82 .40 17.60 0.00 School Bus 0.10 0.00 0.00 100.00 • Motor Home 1.20 8.30 83.30 • 8.40 Travel Conditions Residential Commercial Home- Home- Home- work Shop Other Commute Non-work Customer Urban Trip Length (miles) 11.5 4.9 6.0 10.3 5.5 5.5 Rural Trip Length (miles) 11.5 4.9 6.0 10.3 5.5 5.5 Trip Speeds (mph) 35.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 % of Trips - Residential 20.0 37.0 43.0 % of Trips - Commercial (by land use) Fire Station 2.0 1.0 97.0 III Page: 8 02/13/2007 11:14 AM •anges made to the default values for Land Use Trip Percentages Changes made to the default values for Area The landscape year changed from 2005 to 2007. The nonresidential Arch. Coatings ROG emission factor changed from 0.0185 to 0.011. Changes made to the default values for Operations The operational emission year changed from 2005 to 2007. • I• LEA ASSOCIATES. INC. JULY 2009 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION Ill • APPENDIX C BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES CONSTRAINTS REPORT • • R:\RNF0701\Initial Study 07_09 Initial Study\Appendice Slipshcea.doc O L J"/� LSA ASSOCIATES INC. BERKELEY FORT COLLINS POINT RICHMOND ISOO IOWA AVENUE,SUITE 200 951.]81.93111 TEL CARLSBAD IRVINE ROCKLIN RIVERSIDE,CALIFORNIA 92507 951.781./277 FAX COLMA PALM SPRINGS SAN LUIS OBISPO \ • March 27, 2007 Chief Peter Bryan Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Subject: Fire Station 177 Biological Resources Constraints Report (LSA Project No. RNF0701) Dear Chief Bryan: This letter report discusses the biological resources on the proposed Fire Station 177 project in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Specifically, the proposed project site is located on 3.98 acres (APN 1061-621-03) on the west side of Hellman Avenue, south of Hillside Road and 1.25 miles north of State Route 210. This letter report includes the description of the proposed project, survey methods, and description of the biological resources present on the project site. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: • The Fire Station 177 project (proposed project) consists of the construction of an approximately 5,000-square foot fire station on a one-acre portion of the,four-acre project site. The balance of the project site would be landscaped. The project site was previously utilized as a flood control basin, with depths ranging from 25 to 45 feet. METHODS LSA conducted a literature review and records search to identify sensitive biological resources that could potentially occur on or near the project site vicinity. Database records reviewed included the 2007 California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) administered by the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and the 2007 California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California. On February 21, 2007, LSA Assistant Wildlife Biologist Lisa Wadley conducted a reconnaissance- level biological survey on the proposed project site. The purpose of the survey was to identify vegetation communities and determine the habitat suitability for sensitive species on the proposed project site. For purposes of this report, the term "sensitive species" refers to federal and state listed as threatened or endangered or rare species, or those of local, regional, or State concern. ! • 3/27/2007(R:\RNFO7OI\Bio\Bio assessment.Ba') PLANNING I ENVIRONMENTAL I DESIGN • LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. • SITE CONDITIONS Presently, the site is an overflow catch basin with coastal sage components present along the slopes. Vegetation on-site includes annual bur-sage (Ambrosia acanthicarpa), California sagebrush (Artemisia califonzica), California aster (Corethrogyne filaginifolia), telegraph weed (Heterotheca grandiflora), scalebroom (Lepidospartum squamatum), shortpod mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), London rocket (Sisymbrium Trio), broom (Cytisus sp.), redstem stork's bill (Erodium cicutarium), cheeseweed (Malva parviflora), and California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum). Wildlife observed or detected on site included: red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), killdeer (Charadrius vociferus), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), greater roadrunner (Geococcyx californianus), Anna's hummingbird (Cal)pte aorta), Say's phoebe (Sayornis saya), blue-gray gnatcatcher (Polioptila caerulea), white-crowned sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys), desert cottontail (Sylvilagus audubonii), and California ground squirrel (Spennophilus beecheyi). SENSITIVE SPECIES IMPACTS Plants No federally-listed, state-listed, proposed endangered, threatened, or sensitive plant species were observed on-site during the field survey. • Wildlife • No federally-listed, state-listed, proposed endangered, threatened or sensitive animal species were observed on-site during the field survey. The proposed project site does not lie within any designated critical habitat. However, designated, final, remanded (10/24/2000) critical habitat for the federally listed coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) is located approximately 600 feet north of the proposed project site. Coastal California Gnatcatcher The federally threatened coastal California gnatcatcher(CAGN) has a moderate potential of occurring within and/or adjacent to the proposed project site. Typically the CAGN occurs in or near sage scrub habitat. The majority of plant species found in sage scrub habitatare low-growing, drought-deciduous shrubs and sub-shrubs. Generally, most sage scrub habitats are dominated by one or more of the following: California sagebrush, California buckwheat, California encelia (Encelia californica), brittlebush (Encelia farinosa), white sage (So/via apiana), purple sage (Salvia leucophylla), and black sage (Salvia mellifera). Often the sage scrub occurs in a patchy, or mosaic, distribution pattern throughout the range of the CAGN. CAGN also uses chaparral, grassland, and riparian habitats; these areas are used for foraging and dispersal. The CAGN is nonmigratory and defends breeding territories ranging in size from 2 to 4 acres and has • a reported home range of between 13-39 acres in size. The breeding season for the CAGN extends from late February through July, with the peak of nest initiations (startups)occurring from mid-March t• through mid-May. Dispersal of juveniles generally requires a corridor of native vegetation providing 3/27/2007(R\RNF0701\i3io\13io assessment.doc) 2 ISA ASSOCIATES. INC. • certain foraging and shelter requisites to link larger patches of appropriate sage scrub vegetation. Juvenile CAGN are capable of dispersing long distances (up to 14 miles) across fragmented and highly disturbed sage scrub habitat, like those found along highway and utility corridors or remnant mosaics of habitat adjacent to developed lands, generally the species disperses short distances through contiguous undisturbed habitat (Federal Register NoticeNolume 68, No. 79 Thursday April 24, 2003). The proposed project site has a moderate potential to provide approximately Vi acre of nesting and foraging habitat for the CAGN. In addition, adjacent to the project site is approximately 4 acres of suitable nesting and foraging sage scrub habitat for the CAGN. In the CDFG CNDDB, two occurrences have been reported ±5-miles east of the project site. The first reported occurrence is between the mouth of east Etiwanda Canyon and Dan Canyon wash, 3 miles north of Etiwanda Avenue (CNDBB 1994).The second reported occurrence is `south of Base Line Road, 0.75 mile west of Etiwanda Avenue, between Fontana and Rancho Cucamonga' (CNDBB, 1998). IMPACTS TO WILDLIFE MOVEMENT Habitat fragmentation results from removal of habitat, which disrupts linkages between various habitats. This lessens the value of remaining habitat pieces by potentially reducing the movement of animals across the fragmented habitat. However, the project site lies within a residential area of • Rancho Cucamonga. Wildlife movement is limited to the spillway/drainage that lies adjacent to the west boundary of the project site. Wildlife movement during filling in of basin should not impede wildlife movement after construction is completed. The area just west of the site will not be affected by the proposed project. Therefore, wildlife can continue to use the spillway/drainage to cross through the area to and from the foothills. OTHER CONSTRUCTION-RELATED IMPACTS Other construction-related impacts include fuel and oil spills from refueling construction equipment and leaking vehicles. These impacts can lower the value of habitat for wildlife and plants; however, most activities are expected to occur in the existing disturbed portions of the parcel. Wildlife in the vicinity of construction would be subjected to construction noise; however, the proposed project is adjacent to an existing roadway and residential area. Impacts are not expected to be significantly greater than the existing condition. CONCLUSIONS No federally-listed, state-listed, proposed endangered, threatened, or sensitive plant or animal species were observed during the field survey. The proposed project site does not lie within any designated critical habitat. ( I • 3/27/2007(R:\RNF070I Wmn\Bio assessmenl.dor) 3 I.SA ASSOCIATES. INC. The federally threatened CAGN has a moderate potential of occurring within and/or adjacent to the proposed project site. Coastal sage scrub provides habitat for nesting CAGN. There is approximately ' acre of suitable nesting and foraging habitat on-site and additionally approximately 4 acres adjacent to the west and southwest of the project site that could support nesting or foraging gnatcatchers. A focused presence/absence survey for the CAGN would be needed to determine conclusively if any CAGN are utilizing the project site. If you have any questions about this letter report or if we can be of further assistance, please call me at (951) 781-9310 or e-mail me at Lisa.Wadley @Isa-assoc.com. Sincerely, LSA ASSOCIATES,INC. Lisa Wadley Assi stant t Wildlife Biologist • • • • • . 3/272 007(R:\RNF0701\Bio\Bio assessmenudocl 4 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC, JULY 2009 RANCHO CUCAMONGA TIRE STATION 177 • APPENDIX D FOCUSED CALIFORNIA GNATCATHCER SURVEY • • • R.\RNF070I\Initial Study\07_09 Initial Study\Appendicc Slipsheelsdoc w L J"/� LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. BERKELEY FORT COLLINS POINT RICHMOND A 8500 IOWA-AVENUE.SUITE 200 991.781.9310 TEL CARLSBAD IRVINE ROCKLIN RIVERSIDE.CALIFORNIA 92507 951.781.4277 FAX COLMA PALM SPRINGS SAN LUIS OBISPO `I • July 13, 2007 Ms. Sandra Marquez Dr. John Gustafson U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Habitat Conservation Planning Branch Carlsbad Field Office California Department of Fish and Game 6010 Hidden Valley Road 1416 Ninth Street Carlsbad, California 92009 Sacramento, California 95814 - Subject: Results of a Focused California Gnatcatcher Survey for the Fire Station 177 Project Site in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County (LSA Project Number RNF0701) Dear Ms. Marquez and Dr. Gustafson: This letter provides the results of a focused presence/absence survey for California gnatcatcher(Polioptila californica californica) by LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA) on the above-referenced approximately 4-acre project site in the City of Rancho Cucamonga,San Bernardino County. The project site is located on the west side of Hellman Avenue and south of Hillside Road,within the southwest 1/4 of projected Section 22, Township 1 North, Range 7 West as shown on the Cucamonga Peak, California 7.5-minute series U.S. • Geological Survey(USGS)topographic map(see attached Figure 1). The project is the construction of a fire station. The project site is a portion of a flood control basin. It is bordered by residences to the east, north, and south,and by the remainder of the flood control basin,a flood control channel,and residences to the west (see attached Figure 2).The site supports about 1 acre of Riversidean upland sage scrub.The remainder of the site consists of non-native grassland and areas with only ruderal vegetation.Dominant species within the Riversidean upland sage scrub include California sagebrush (Artemisia californica), California buckwheat(Eriogonuin fasciculaturn),and shortpod mustard(Hirschfeldia incana).Dominant species in the non-native grassland include redstem stork's bill(Erodimn cicutarium),longbeak stork's bill(Erodium • botrys),golden aster(Heterotheca sessiliflora),and deerweed(Lotus scoparius),The remainder of the site is mostly barren,with sparsely scattered redstem stork's bill, longbeak stork's bill, shortpod mustard,and pointed cryptantha (Cryptantha muricata). • METHODS The California gnatcatcher survey was conducted by LSA Senior Biologists Stan Spencer and Eric Krieg under LSA Federal 10(a)(1)(A) Permit 1E-777965 and under a Letter of Agreement (LOA) from the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG; May 12, 2003, to March 31, 2007) in lieu of a Memorandum of Understanding between LSA and the CDFG. The survey was conducted in accordance with Coastal California Gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica califomica) Presence/Absence Survey Protocol(U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service,Revised July 28, 1997).The survey consisted of six site visits on • a weekly basis per the survey protocol for the breeding season. The Riversidean upland sage scrub portion 7/13/2007(R:\RNF0701\Bio\GBatcatcher\Gnalcatcher_repon.doc) • PLANNING I EN\"RO^'MENTAL I OLSIGN • LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. • of the site was surveyed at a rate of about 1 acre per hour. Taped vocalizations were used periodically during the first survey.Table A provides the survey personnel,dates and weather conditions for each site visit. Table A—Survey Personnel,Dates, and Weather Conditions Time (24-hour) Cloud Cover(%) Wind (mph) Temperature CF) Personnel Date Start/Finish Start/Finish Start/Finish Start/Finish Stan 5/21/07 0852/1112 100/100 1-3/1-3 58/62 Spencer . Stan 5/29/07 0836/0944 100/100 < 11.< 1 62/65 Spencer • Erik Krieg 6/6/07 0800/900 80/80 1-3/1-3 cool/cool Stan 6/13/07 0828/0930 0/0 1-3/1-3 78/84 Spencer • Stan 6/20/07 0715/0810 0/0 < 1/< 1 76/82 Spencer Stan 6/27/07 0919/1009 0/0 < 1/< 1 81/85 Spencer • RESULTS The California gnatcatcher was not observed during the focused survey. A list of bird species observed • . during the focused survey is attached. Please contact me if you require any additional information. • Sincerely, • LSA ASSO IATES NC. 7; Stanley C/Spencer, Ph.D. • Senior Biologist Attachments: Figure I: Project Location Figure 2: Land Cover List of Bird Species Observed cc: Chief Peter Bryan, Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Pamela Pane, Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District • Richard Erickson, LSA Associates, Inc. { Kelly Czechowski, LSA Associates, Inc. • 7/13/2007(R:\RNFD70I\Bio\Gnatca tcher\Gnalcatcher_repon.doc) •2 • • kr. /`, +Sr ,t ,a f trjfnr \wi .2r t e" \~ I] ' l 1\xt//�,4it1 -1 "' a t r \,;r rtat� • r� -ti _19e.°"�« ,k;. ),,' v v7r7'\ . 4,----...... ;'0 ,,7 , tr/ lrl�t,1"x :Pt v� (.y�`f.•1 r v ;''`0, ',r� �r- - + \7C/rr �A .' 4,: !. . I tt��IS e• {t l ILu� +. Y� f - 17f w`rl i em 1 ',1•1::.4,(•±•,..:.:: kl,. . yam• r9- • . i i v ,. )� � .1)L s .f� if .s,.' V.1 r. r 1 i 1I � r ��1 % !�T'`..�t .., l Y�( ?�"<\�1 '•`• r 9,-;---kit;4^J,J( r-yX ../.-•:‘,4 `- Z 1fi, ri l .,s 55) 7f i-- :�!'p l Y-- J • IIY� �a� / ,I �u--,:-\,,,.._„‘ '02. 1 -`.f'�/),w.._/;a 1 \Jet\ Ioi r• e/ "m" 1 Jr,'' i[ •Y 900§. }\\ 1r 4 7,1i \ i'�- ,. J'? ,.J _ �7P�•h��`,c,, ' ' '�. .�, 7J 4 . 1- [ \ trei: .- ul� 1111 p:jL { C'W's". ''�+ '1.:--.' \-.ri BLS' { 1/4 J {'}7 P"7 n M1 `^\ } YP !'S ,''11 a 5\�d l,.tx, .,pi, . Wit / , , J • c Uf 1} 1 J Y � �3' Nr: riM1 , r�`_trl ''../".. ^fit ,n� �` t�4if�}t.'/ (J !t} C.r IK �`"j In �:iv '..i V `�ra' e•`>rv� `'-''' .l1' P , Js I z !r C. 14 /n t a.,,,-. ) \W. L. �zsr r Nn '4- msa ' `� sr�? // "' i/�j�}ell ir177 �,U,-,) % t (-i� 1 s ': ;• r�: r• y 1N i� ?Y✓�1 A?} PhT1\� �1 \ r 1\ ml\ f [� � .` � 11,14 r ' v�Y{1}j .log I itc re, ♦ snc, /J"ii",. .1 s I v r v r I )�� y l" s s�(� e• h,..+_"�s' v-� s•*+ f / . 't 8 '�J r-•' J '" a %}-.i ` N,7 )�/ , 1 �1?li +` t+' d i ? "nr �,S3C.(vial i r �t's' �� wr a r. xe gy 0t `V_�� •r-kii '"'"'s.-f. "vrFPti- 5, t o.,• ,Tr tf .mss„ a lao f 1 ..:51. :4 t `d Im �r ,{r y,• �W }1_ai""..=+� W •rxr "" ,rte I-la,�;,� Vi �F' `I7 'fiis -•t` - '! ° � C -. 8 r• bW - Oki'': C t r 1r_. 1. i z hi ' .s .�w-,e tea. (. jt - rn t a is Li)�,y�.F W tpy�t` Q Waler''i"/"��'' S ? -CO . i�t.,+��.,,,,,, ,r�°}`f t F� < �i s° & i -w.x eet r Pt W fah' 1�"iti+ >- .-e '_ Project Location.012=0:).-1 r c,..t?ri raszi 3`c" - =1 rant r _i r 5-t �c 1 s5F W. qx rfi` 7.r i 1 C® ��:tY'* ..-e0 'pf - �� Re y .S TN g Q x3, J f 'p3' ah- r+ r ralk,Wei upa .1$ '" µIa'\' .,reg'- HILLSIDE ROAD 7 - may.'^'+.., Fk /III ' 'r• >yb V'-,�r %.s '� f ., 7i7.4: W l ti -a • e�� `' vi ,3�� .rt" .s�� /� _ �7s1Y■� s;i _. . -+ Regional Location `~ -` -� 3 . I IN ,, g q; m r Q . era \l 8 Y 5 Bernardino Counry [I a� �� i t r7 f�xQr r �'� �. �1 /H _T"� W xif°' 'v.cr #_fxnpl .; 21 IProjec[Area : - I19 Q U #r.,.t,I rte - , f e d -\ ,� 1 rr`. rW ✓3r k `n'l '9'4%44)11 -:o L __ 11, 4 2 k'`$�i...4:,,..y,r , red m. i '2-• t 10 J..=oR 10 _ ' ska4-Q ' y3 s){I l'w s� O�k, .. A , 9os n G i it; c. f '. 5p .7.ar�� ''� � I �. vY.0 �/ �t7., '+{!�' ,! I.u¢A' "r'4"n' -v 3 - 87 91 �t • W 1 tta qtr)x A+ii k 4t yam N rst .c- I i-� \.t 91 Ni-H-1 ` '`'Iae 2 h roc nahn k`&�I{�{ * n - n t • t jg�nianppp].,,,.,.,.., _4 1 o a8 a ,�,e L. h�,�i»„ 1 f -r s,-r i r Ocean. , 73 _ - _ - ®pt .. • Mites L S A FIGURE 1 S Fire Station 177 • j i 0 1,000 2,000. California Gnatcatcher Survey i FEET SOURCE:USGS 73'Quad:Cucamonga Peak(1988),Mt.Bald),(1988),CA;Thomas Bros.,2006 Regional and Project Location I:\RNF0701\Reports\CAGMmg_Ioc.mxd(07/11/07) ats & �p n•--1.-,Li- 9-�e ua� •el q • _ .�- ll rtc, r "°#:."�Y+ P.`T'^ i {Wirt' "f I .'l'/ ,- TF ", w 6lett - m w C yy�. r, i y,'° y-."s.� ,may t R • � - P r I m,4t { p.= .�10 -a° ,r �+iw 'fie h 11 $ Y,, N-�t4 \' ` `' S i *L lw.- �+ s i, . it "' i '4�r- ,,,,,,,_ ISd;t +11 ygi r5 n� f �. tic>` .HILLS/DEit .r- ROAD-}n i`vt"®�„ Z'.•.r-w 3' � -...,ttat)1I s Y K!yY' i.: k"3- Yc:uJ:an Y3 � � L f a. y t E �fµ` 1 c, 4 PI^t -� y� A atc F 3+r(+�" 1 °e s tt ftl -��. +t r -r 1 , S;#;--7 i V ,r i t < t r A am i. ®�- tt1 Fx '.fa3 Y tiZ e.. r,rr ; t 9:> < < r .-, 1 � fif F S ` „7� 'I�:� � IA., Rrn R I 7 _ > . y - 9G 1 ' ;;C=4‘.-Ii-pi 4 1 J74 -.7' X 3i 7 i -.7- L y • d�t �{.R 1�� .._ �'f fU t r f a Y a �"ti I.I. y tt y .�'� ( Y 4' 1 K b) 11-7.11. 1 1 v-, r?, ,Y _./9rm r a SSA '*I iO I r t ¢�> } : t tti 'R"./\ 1 ¢ u.� .-m--7.:' — q', .,,H-p..:.<7.77%:""'""---.E ,� n ''SI� t ;a lI. }> -.Fier+^ 45- '&1 ,,t V s .ks ' 7-1 j: T. Ls 4` �+3 SI P i crez + < E 4:::**et`\\ t‘7.-.71,77,'..7, 7\\:,:-3 4. I .-rit Tr$ 3-.Ap E.5$ - '� T y�,1 �ryet-' l u l 1 d 4 tl tai I � x a s � s �t � �. � f� i " RANCHO STREEr� '�. if : lli • n p i ' 4` yha:r r $ .. �t:,.44 r 4t „g , u ( ;rt..- I +. per'3 �.Y.e- s1 i.cfJT42t ,-,/> ¢ • r £a , ,e 1 a!f + f t` t 1 �+ .4 � �� / N' , g, , . .., Y t uY k Y.7.5.:. IQgFI` y - l ¢ 6'� S 1L*} '!„1:7-',.';',...;, 11 1� .':. 1: 1 Y r,r ce._.e' C Y;:4,°:. l`Ya`h a )! u l -T .�A. l i • Al r� +i' t b i �g`(n?°,1-; It1„�.Rt.- !�I- `MAP W "&y.im.u' c:12.- A a .,9{' 1a Y p N^... '% Fg • itl ... 1 \ ie xte t .t,� )7 • 7`as,Y f e f 1'A. ' wtl S- a ' �{TL..IY-t" `� gS -A_MOSP Az_. .- -''-sl sT"r.,. ..4."4-°+ -if,: ' `?- S T u v tl Y`T B...^ 1 ' t W k ,.- sd"Fe rU. - -1 -2 ::Z-1.-7; e fr r,s, 3 'trig, 1r %-+ - el 1 } Jl r- r�/ .,prF -:'2 yc c+. r ,,,w .1.':' e wt 1e� = r ' s r% t*r art t -., at\Fyy7r 6',�'�} -f-+-_ure•" .r a..� "'s,"-I 1 Mere' ! s` ►u t +-s vn �. s" a`g's`:.,a2' zt*t �°��W, � .a <4 - - . .. t' \ ti, Tt K �°r't'� � 9:<-4 e .J-i` .-.L 4 .Nt rin, :lg. yt-. ` TT Sy'j 1. .. �� t .-1. l ( Ne .er-P.lk 'Au.-, t 'r ",rz'Yl;y � , .- I.xT e e 3„L4�d`r�+ .[ Ik a :' xc r xs"r,�3 x.'J r i ;. R.W`ism' s ,��,..a -!!!!) ,'` # �`s - rs 7- - r3 r-. a eet '`� r °ti' s L '�•; �t fEn sue... 1 aiJJt { # va x -, :•sue L S A FIGURE 2 Ir PROJECT BOUNDARY VEGETATIOWL4ND USE N I J NON-NATIVE GRASSLAND 100 200 ❑ RIVF.k$IDEAN UPLAND SAGE..i'WE Fire Station 177 [Si RUD ERAL California Cnatcatcher Suraey FEET SOURCE AirYimwUSA,2006 Land Cover I:\RNF0701\Reports\CGAN land_cover msd(07/I I/07) • BIRD SPECIES OBSERVED • Scientific Name Common Name Odontophoridae New World Quail Callipepla californica California quail Charadriidae Plovers and Lapwings • Charadrius vociferus Killdeer Columbidae _ Pigeons and Doves Columba Livia* Rock pigeon -Zenaida macroura Mourning dove Trochilidae Hummingbirds Calypte anna Anna's hummingbird Tyrannidae Tyrant Flycatchers Sayernis saya Say's phoebe • Corvidac Crows and Ravens Aphelocoma californica Western scrub-jay • Aegithalidae Bushtits Psaltriparus minimus Bushtit Troglodytidae Wrens Thryomanes bewickii Bewick's wren • Troglodytes aedon _ . .. _ . . _ - ---- -- - . - - House wren Emberizidae Emberizines Pipilo maculatus Spotted towhee Pipilo crissalis California towhee Fringillidae Finches Carpodacus mexicanus House finch Carduelis psaltria Lesser goldfinch *Non-native species. • 7/13/2007(R:VWF0701■13io\Gnatcatcher\BirdSpeciesObseved.doc) • LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JULY 2055 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 177 • APPENDIX E PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION • • • • R:\RNF0701\Initial SIudy00709 Initial Study\Appendice Slipsheets.doc • RGS Engineering 8800 Onyx Avenue,Suite D • Rancho Cucamonga,California 91730 (909) 945-2405 17 Geology ewwrgsgeiaLieucrs.com (909) 945-2407 Pay May 4, 2007 • Mr. Dan Guerra • Dan Guerra &Associates 10271 Trademark Street, Suite B Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 • SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Proposed Fire Station#177 5 Acres, West Side of. Hellman Avenue_,•South of Hillside Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California Project No. 1376-01 Mr. Guerra: In accordance with your authorization, we have completed a Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation of the subject property. The purpose of our investigation was to.evaluate the existing subsurface soil and geologic conditions of the site relative to the proposed development and provide geotechnical recommendations for site design and construction. • Our geotechnical findings, conclusions, and recommendations are presented herein. Should you have any questions, or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Sincerely, RGS Engineering Geology c�a 0° scy '(<n az pG 4� 1O C E5 / CERT IFIED r -I 4 Tf OF A�TQC{� • * t EXPIRES G3-3/.09 q_ Chris •phe tall, CEG 1 : �:T 0- Craig Schroeder, RCE 33` Ens nee?• Geologist FOF cA,4FDe` Project Engineer • Distribution: (4) Addressee (hardcopy) (1) Addressee (electronic copy/CD) • Geologic Evaluation • Fault/Seisntic Studies ® ,Evevtronrnental Assessments • Percolation Testing Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Dan Guerra&Associates • Proposed Fire Station#177,Hellman Avenue Project No. 1376-01 Rancho Cucamonga, California May 4,2007 INTRODUCTION Accompanying Maps, Illustrations, and Appendices Figure 1 - Site Location Map Figure 2 - Geotechnical Map APPENDIX A - References APPENDIX B - Exploratory Boring Logs APPENDIX C - Laboratory Test Results APPENDIX D - Standard Earthwork and Grading Specifications APPENDIX E — Probabilistic Seismic Charts Scope of Services In accordance with your authorization, we have conducted a preliminary geotechnical investigation for the subject development. The scope of work performed as part of this study included the following: • • Review related geologic and soils information available in our files • Drill, log, and collect soil samples from four (4) exploratory borings advanced to a maximum depth of 50 feet below the existing ground surface • Laboratory testing of representative samples to determine pertinent soil engineering parameters including but not limited to in-place moisture and density, optimum moisture content, consolidation potential, direct shear analysis, grain size distribution, and a corrosion suite analysis • Engineering analysis and determination of pertinent design parameters including allowable safe bearing capacity, settlement potential, faulting, seismic design parameters, shrinkage values, and subsidence • Preparation of a report presenting our findings, conclusions, and geotechnical recommendations for site grading and foundation design Site Conditions and Location The sub-rectangular site (5 acres) is located along the west side of Hellman Avenue approximately 380 feet south of Hillside Road in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County, California. The geographical relationship of the site and surrounding vicinity are shown on our Site Location Map, Figure 1. .• RGS Engineering Geology Page 2 Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Dan Guerra&Associates Proposed Fire Station#177,Helhnon Avenue Project No. 1376-01 • Rancho Cucamonga, California May 4, 2007 The property currently exists as open and vacant, and is being utilized as a flood control basin fed by a flood channel inlet at the northwest corner of the basin. Topographically,the site is located on relatively flat terrain which slopes gently towards the south on the order of four to five percent across the site. Total relief of the site is approximately 25 feet from the bottom of the basin up to street grade. Drainage at the site is directed to the west and then south along the flood channel. At the time of our investigation vegetation on site was 'limited to sparse growth of annual weeds and grasses. Proposed Development For the purpose of our study, we were provided with a topographic site plan which was used as a base for our Geotechnical Map, Figure 2. We understand that the property is proposed for development of a fire station with associated driveway, parking, and landscape improvements. To achieve design grade, the existing flood control basin will be filled with import soil. Although grading plans have not been developed at this stage of planning, maximum depth of fill will likely be on the order of 25 feet. The source of borrow material has not been identified. Following the required earthwork, site buildings will likely be supported on continuous • spread footings with concrete slab on grade foundation systems. Concrete pavement or asphaltic concrete is likely proposed for the driveway and parking lot areas. On-site sewage disposal is proposed for the development utilizing the septic tank and seepage pit method. The feasibility of on-site sewage disposal is being investigated by RGS and will be reported under separate cover. SITE INVESTIGATION Subsurface Investigation To evaluate the subsurface soil conditions at the site a total of four (4) exploratory soil borings were advanced using a truck mounted drill rig equipped an eight inch diameter hollow stem auger. The borings were extended to a maximum depth of 50 feet below the existing ground surface. The approximate locations of the exploratory borings are shown on our Geotechnical Map, Figure 2. General descriptions of the earth materials encountered in our exploratory borings are provided below. Detailed descriptions in the form of exploratory boring logs are provided in Appendix B of this report. • • RGS Engineering Geology Page 3 Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Dan Guerra&Associates Proposed Fire Station#177,Hellman Avenue Project No. 1376-01 •, • Rancho Cucamonga, California May 4, 2007 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Earth Materials In general, the site is underlain by alluvial fan deposits consisting of braided sand and gravel with cobble and boulder sized rocks locally. These sediments emanate from the mountain canyons to the north. • Sediments encountered in our boreholes can be described chiefly as well graded sand (Unified Soil Classification —SW). The upper 15 feet is typically yellowish brown (Munsell soil color notation 10YR 5/4), contains fine to coarse grained sand, few gravels, and is well graded, dry to damp and dense to very dense. Gravelly sand (GW)was noted at depth. The gravelly sand is dark yellowish brown to dark grayish Brown (10 YR 4/4 to 4/2), coarse grained, non-cohesive, friable, very dense and yields cobble and boulder sized rocks. Difficult drilling was encountered through this earth unit. Groundwater Occurrence • Groundwater was not encountered within our exploratory borings to a depth of 50 feet below the ground surface. Additionally, no signs of past groundwater or seepage, such as soil mottling, or staining were noted within the lithologic unit encountered. A regional groundwater study of the area (Carson and Matti, 1985) suggests that groundwater occurs at a depth of approximately 250 feet in the site area. This depth to groundwater is extrapolated from well data south of the site. In general, groundwater in the site area is anticipated to occur on the order of 250 feet below the ground surface and is not considered to represent a potential impact to the site development or construction activities. Excavation Characteristics Our borings were advanced to a maximum depth of 50 feet below the ground surface with some difficulty due to cobble and boulder sized rocks. In general, we expect that the on- site earth materials can be excavated with conventional heavy-duty grading equipment in proper working condition. Heavy ripping with large scale grading equipment should be anticipated to loosen the material and expedite loading. Handling of oversized material, including boulder sized rocks, should be anticipated. • RGS Engineering Geology Page 4 • Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Dan Guerra&Associates Proposed Fire Station#177,Hellman Avenue Project No. 1376-01 • � Rancho Cucamonga, California May 4,2007 FAULTING AND SEISMICITY Faulting The site is not located within a California Earthquake Fault Zone for fault rupture hazard, nor are any faults known to traverse through or toward the subject site. The closest type "A"fault is the Cucamonga Fault located approximately 1.5 kilometers to the north. The nearest type B fault is the San Jose Fault located approximately 9.1 kilometers to the west. The Cucamonga Fault is a reverse thrust fault dipping approximately 45 degrees to the north. The fault has a total length of approximately 28 kilometers with a slip rate of 5 mm/yr (, Blake, 1998, CDMG, 1996). The fault displays a maximum moment magnitude of 7 with a recurrence interval of 650 years. The following list includes other regional faults within 50 kilometers of the project site: SUMMARY OF FAULT PARAMETERS • APPROX. SOURCE MAX. SLIP FAULT ABBREVIATED DISTANCE TYPE MAG. RATE TYPE FAULT NAME (km) (A,B,C) (Mw) (mm/yr) (SS,DS,BT) CUCAMONGA 1.5 7.0 5.00 DS SAN JOSE 9.1 6.5 0.50 DS SIERRA MADRE (Central) 10.7 7.0 3.00 DS SAN JACINTO-SAN BERNARDINO 13.4 6.7 12.00 SS SAN ANDREAS - Southern 18.2 7.4 24.00 SS SAN ANDREAS - 1857 Rupture 18.7 7.8 34.00 SS CHINO-CENTRAL AVE. (Elsinore) 18.7- 1.00 DS CLEGHORN 21.7 6.5 3.00 SS CLAMSHELL-SAWPIT 24.2 6.5 0.50 DS ELSINORE-WHITTIER 31.9 6.8 2.50 SS ELSINORE-GLEN IVY 33.5 6.8 5.00 SS NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (West) 34.3 7.0 1.00 DS RAYMOND 36.9 6.5 0.50 D5 SAN JACINTO-SAN JACINTO VALLEY 37.0 6.9 12.00 SS VERDUGO 45.4 6.7 0.50 DS (Blake, 1998) • Seismicity The primary geologic hazard that exists at the site is that of ground shaking. The strength of earthquake-induced ground shaking is commonly measured as maximum or peak ground acceleration. Acceleration is defined as the time rate of change of velocity of a referenced point during an earthquake, commonly expressed in percentage of gravity (g). ' Its value at a particular site is a function of many factors, including, but not limited to, • ) RGS Engineering Geology . - Page 5 Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Dan Guerra&Associates • Proposed Fire Station#I77,Hellman Avenue Project No. 1376-01 Rancho Cucamonga, California May 4,2007 earthquake magnitude, distance to causative earthquake, various seismic-source parameters, site location relative to direction of energy propagation, and geologic conditions at the site. Considering the location of the site relative to the Cucamonga Fault zone, the site is likely to experience strong ground shaking during the design life of the proposed development. Based on a state wide probabilistic seismic hazard assessment (Petersen et. al., 1996) there is a 10 percent chance in 50 years that the site will experience peak horizontal ground accelerations on the order of 60 to 70 percent of gravity or 0.60g to 0.70g. These values are consistent with the California Geological Survey Ground Motion Page (http://www.consrv.ca.gov/cqs/rqhm/pshamap/pshamap.asp) which yields 0.695g for alluvial conditions. The seismic exposure of the site is a function of the design life of the proposed facility, the acceptable level of seismic risk, and the expected ground motions from local and regional earthquakes. Through the western United States and California, seismic exposure is typically defined as the ground acceleration associated with a statistical return period of 475 years, which is referred to as the "Design Basis Earthquake." The 475 year return period represents a 10 percent chance or probability of exceedance considering a 50 year • exposure period. This parameter is typically used for design of"regular" projects, such as residential or commercial development. However, for this project, which is associated with a fire station facility, categorized as an essential service building, the upper-bound earthquake ground motion, which is based on a 949 year statistical return period, or 10 percent probability of exceedance in a 100 year exposure period, should be considered for design. Our probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA) was performed using the computer program FRISKSP (Blake, 1995). The attenuation relationship of Boore, et al (1997), Horizontal-NEHRP D (250) was selected for use in our analysis. Boore et al (1997) has developed equations for the attenuation of horizontal ground acceleration from a selected North American earthquake strong motion data set. Their equations utilize the shortest distance in kilometers from the site to the vertical projection of the earthquake fault rupture on the ground surface. Their attenuation relation considers the average shear wave velocity of the earth materials in the upper 30 meters, using site classifications recommended by the National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program (NEHRP), which correspond to the classifications and soil profile type used in the current California Building Code (2001). Considering the unconsolidated alluvial fan deposits underlying the site in the upper 30 meters, the site is considered to fall within soil profile type 'D' with an average shear wave velocity equal to 250 m/sec. Our PSHA indicates a design basis earthquake ground motion (10% probability of exceedance in a 50 year period) of 0.88g associated with a return period of 475 years. More importantly for this project, our analysis indicates upper bound earthquake ground RGS Engineering Geology Page 6 • Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Dan Guerra&Associates Proposed Fire Station#177,Hellman Avenue Project No. 1376-01 • Rancho Cucamonga, California May 4,2007 motion (10% probability of exceedance in a 100 year period) of 1.04g associated with a statistical return period of 949 years. Our evaluation considered the analysis of all contributing major active faults within a 100 km radius, as noted in Appendix E. SECONDARY SEISMIC HAZARDS Liquefaction Soil liquefaction is the loss of soil strength due to increased pore water pressures caused by a significant ground shaking (seismic) event. Liquefaction typically consists of the re- arrangement of the soil particles into a denser condition resulting, in this case, in localized areas of settlement, sand boils, and flow failures. Areas underlain by loose to medium dense cohesionless soils, where groundwater is within 30 to 40 feet of the surface, are particularly susceptible when subject to ground accelerations such as those due to earthquake motion. The.liquefaction potential is generally considered greatest in saturated loose, poorly graded fine sands with a mean grain size (D50) in the range of 0.075 to 0.2mm. The alluvial fan sediment, which underlies the entire site of this study, is not considered to be susceptible to liquefaction hazard due its dense condition, gravelly nature, and lack of groundwater or saturation. • In summary, it is our opinion considering the location of the site, depth to groundwater,.and the underlying soil profile that the potential for liquefaction hazard to impact the proposed development is low. Ground Rupture Ground rupture usually occurs along pre-existing surface fault traces. As previously discussed, no active faults are known to traverse, or trend toward the site. Therefore, the potential for ground rupture during a seismic event is considered low. Earthquake Induced Settlement Considering the dense and coarse grained nature of the underlying earth material, the potential for seismically induced soil settlement is considered low. Rock Fall Hazard There is no large rock outcrops located along hillsides on, or adjacent to the site, that could become dislodged during a seismic event and impact the proposed development. • RGS Engineering Geology - - Page 7 Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Dan Guerra&Associates • Proposed Fire Station#177,Hellman Avenue Project No. 1376-01 Rancho Cucamonga, California May 4,2007 Considering the absence of large rock outcrops on or near the property, the potential for seismically induced rockfall hazard to impact the proposed development is considered very low to nil. Landslides The property is relatively flat and underlain by alluvial fan sediment that is not susceptible to landslide failure due to the low relief of the site and the strength characteristics of the sediment. No landslides or slope instability has been documented in the vicinity of the subject site to our knowledge. Considering the geologic condition of the site, and the lack of identified landslide failure in the area, the potential for landslide failure to impact the propose development is considered low. CONCLUSIONS Development of the property is considered feasible from a geotechnical standpoint provided the specific conclusions and recommendations of this report are considered and adhered to during future site planning, design, and construction. • > The property is underlain by alluvial fan sediment consisting mainly of well graded sand (SW) and gravelly sand (GW)that is damp to moist, dense to very dense, with cobble and boulder sized rocks. ➢ Groundwater was not encountered within our exploratory borings to a depth of 50 feet below the ground surface and is not anticipated to adversely impact the site development or construction activities. > No active faults are known to traverse through or toward the site. Known active fault zones or seismic sources in the area include the Cucamonga and the San Jose faults located approximately 1.5 and 9.1 kilometers to the north, and southwest, respectively. ➢ The site is located within an area of potentially high seismicity and may experience ground motions on the order of 0.60g to 1.04g during a large-scale earthquake along a nearby fault. . ➢ The potential for secondary seismic hazards including liquefaction, ground rupture, and earthquake-induced settlement, rockfall and landslides are considered low. • RGS Engineering Geology -- -- Page 8 • Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Dan Guerra&Associates Proposed Fire Station#177,Hellman Avenue Project No. 1376-01 . • ( \, Rancho Cucamonga, California May 4,2007 RECOMMENDATIONS General Recommendations for site development and grading are provided in the following sections of this report based on our limited field exploration and our assumptions regarding proposed development. Please understand that these recommendations are subject to • review and change based on final project plans and actual field conditions observed during rough grading. Site Preparation Prior to site grading and earthwork, the site should be cleared of existing vegetation and any miscellaneous debris. Holes and trenches resulting from the removal of trees, brush, buried obstructions or other undesirable materials, should be backfilled with properly compacted fill soil and approved by the project geotechnical consultant. The cleared and stripped materials should not be incorporated into fills, but should be removed from the site and disposed of properly. Site Earthwork and Grading • In general, we anticipate that site earthwork will consist of placing material within the basin to achieve grade. The sediment along the bottom of the basin in considered to be over- consolidated by the load of the material removed to create the basin. Accordingly, deep removal of this material is not considered necessary. However, the upper three feet of the sediment long the bottom of the basin has been impacted by bioturbation and other activities at the site. Therefore, we recommend removal and re-compaction to at least a depth of three feet along the bottom of the basin prior to placement of fill. The native soil along the bottom of the basin should also yield an in-place density of at least 85 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by the ASTM D 1557 test method. The bottom of all over excavations should be observed, inspected, and approved by the project geotechnical consultant to assure that competent material is exposed prior to the placement of fill. These recommendations are subject to review of the project grading and foundation plans. Additional over excavation may be required depending on the proposed earthwork and soil conditions encountered. • Fill Placement • RGS Engineering Geology Page 9 Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Dan Guerra&Associates • Proposed Fire Station#177,Hellman Avenue Project No. 1376-01 Rancho Cucamonga, California May 4,2007 Structural fill placed to achieve design grade should be brought to near optimum moisture content, thoroughly mixed to achieve homogeneous conditions, and placed in six to eight-inch lifts. Fill material should be compacted to a minimum 90% of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 1557 test method. The on-site soil is suitable to be used as structural fill provided it is free of large rocks (greater than 10 inches in diameter) and other deleterious material. If used, it should be properly moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content, mixed to homogeneous conditions, and placed in six to eight inch loose lifts. Fill material should be compacted to a minimum 90% of the maximum dry density as determined by the ASTM D 1557 test method. Import soil to be used as fill material should be granular in nature and free of large rock (greater than six inches). The borrow source should be evaluated by the geotechnical consultant proper to use as structural fill. Evaluation of the borrow source may require additional subsurface excavation and laboratory testing. Benching to a minimum four feet vertical should be maintained into the embankment sides as the fill is placed to assure that all unsuitable earth material along the side slopes is • removed and replaced with compacted fill. • Fill-to-Native Transition . A fill to native transition will be created along the northern, southern, and eastern margins of the property following grading. If possible, building footings should not extend cross the fill-to-native transition line. Foundation elements of the buildings should be supported entirely by compacted fill material approved by the geotechnical consultant. In the event that structural elements extend across the fill-to-native transition, the native portion of the building area, extending at least five feet beyond the foundation lines, should be over excavation and re-compacted to mitigate the adverse effects of differential settlement. The depth of the over excavation and re-compaction should be 'A the depth of fill within the building area. This condition should be further evaluated when grading plans are available. Slope Construction Development of the site as proposed will likely include a west facing fill slope along the western property boundary. We anticipate that fill slopes constructed at a 2:1 (horizontal:vertical)slope ratio to a maximum height of approximately 30 feet will be surficially and grossly stable if constructed in accordance with the recommendations presented in this report, including Appendix D. • The importance of proper fill compaction to the face of slope cannot be overemphasized. In RGS Engineering Geology- Page 10 • Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Dan Guerra&Associates Proposed Fire Station#177,Hellman Avenue Project No. 1376-01 • Rancho Cucamonga, California May 4,2007 order to achieve proper compaction to the slope face, one or more of the four following methods should be employed by the contractor following implementation of typical slope construction guidelines; 1) track walk the slopes at grade; 2) grid roll the slopes; 3) use a combination of sheep foot roller and track walking; and/or 4) overfill the slope at least 3 feet laterally and cut back or trim to grade. Care should be taken to avoid spillage of loose materials down the face of any slope during grading. Loose fill on the face of the slope will require complete removal prior to compaction, shaping and track walking. Proper seeding and planting of the slopes should follow as soon as practical to inhibit erosion and deterioration of the slope surfaces. Proper moisture control will enhance the long-term stability of the finish slope surface. No over-the-slope drainage should be allowed in an uncontrolled manner. Foundation System Design All foundation elements should be placed on dense and compacted fill approved by the project geotechnical consultant. An allowable safe soil bearing capacity of 1500 psf can be considered for continuous spread footings on approved fill with a minimum width of • 12-inches and a minimum depth of 12-inches below the lowest adjacent grade. The allowable safe bearing capacity can be increased by 10 percent for each additional foot of depth to a maximum of 2000 psf. Continuous spread footings and isolated square footings should be designed by the project structural engineer based on the soil parameters given and the anticipated loads. Minimum steel reinforcement within the footings should consist of No. 5 bars placed at the top and bottom Within continuous footings. A friction coefficient of 0.35 can be considered for concrete poured neatly against compacted soil. These values are for dead plus live loads and may be increased by 1/3 for combinations of short term vertical and horizontal forces such as wind or seismic forces. Total differential settlements under static loads of footings, supported on properly compacted fill and sized for the allowable bearing capacity, are expected to be tolerable and not exceed 'A inch in a 40 feet span. These settlements should occur primarily during construction. Concrete slabs-on-grade should have a minimum thickness of 4 inches nominal for lightly loaded floors and be supported on compacted and approved fill. A polyethylene vapor barrier should be installed beneath floors to receive a moisture sensitive floor covering. The vapor barrier should be a minimum 6 mil thick and should be placed within a sand layer to protect it from punctures during construction. !r-m, • RGS Engineering Geology - Page 11 Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Dan Guerra&Associates • '• Proposed Fire Station#177,Hellman Avenue Project No. 1376-01 Rancho Cucamonga, California May 4,2007 Steel reinforcement within the slabs-on-grade should consist of No. 3 bars placed at 24 inches on center at center height of the slab or approved equivalent. These recommendations are subject to review of final grading and foundation plans and should be evaluated by the project structural engineer and architect. Foundation recommendations may change on the physical properties of the import material. Expansive Soil Conditions Based on our laboratory classification and visual field inspection, the on-site soil expected to be used for support of the proposed foundation system is considered to be very low to low in expansion potential. Import soil used as fill material should exhibit similar physical properties with a very low to low expansion index. No special recommendations for foundation design are anticipated from a soil expansion standpoint at this time. Seismic Design Parameters Structural design for the proposed buildings should conform to the provisions of the California Building Code which has adopted the seismic design parameters of the 1997 Uniform Building Code. For design purposes, the following seismic parameters can be considered: • SITE COORDINATES: SITE LATITUDE: 34 . 1536 SITE LONGITUDE: 117 . 6039 UBC SEISMIC ZONE: 0.4 UBC SOIL PROFILE TYPE: SD NEAREST TYPE A FAULT: NAME: CUCAMONGA DISTANCE: 1.5 km NEAREST TYPE B FAULT: NAME: SAN JOSE DISTANCE: 9.1 km SELECTED UBC SEISMIC COEFFICIENTS: Na: 1.5 Nv: 2.0 Ca: 0.66 Cv: 1.28 Ts: 0.776 To: 0.155 1• RGS Engineering Geology - Page 12 • • Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Dan Guerra&Associates Proposed Fire Station#177,Hellman Avenue Project No. 1376-01 • Rancho Cucamonga, California May 4,2007 Retaining Wall / Lateral Earth Pressures The following lateral earth pressures can be considered for design purposes. Values are given for level and sloping backfill with a unit weight of 125 pcf and free drainage conditions. Should variation in the backfill conditions or slope inclination occur, these values should be re-evaluated. Following soil parameters should be used for lateral design and retaining wall design and may be increased by 1/3 for wind and seismic loads. The bottom of all retaining wall • footings, near a slope, should be at least seven feet horizontally from any slope face, however, local code may require H/3 or 0.5(H/3). coefficient of friction .35 unit weight of soil 125 pcf active equivalent fluid pressure (level)--- 40pcf active equivalent fluid pressure (3:1) 45 pcf active equivalent fluid pressure (2:1) 55 pcf at rest equivalent fluid pressure 65 pcf (all building walls and walls restrained from movement at the top) • passive equivalent fluid pressure(level)--- 375 pcf to max. of 3000 passive equivalent fluid pressure(3:1)--- 275 pcf to max. of 3000 passive equivalent fluid pressure(2:1)--- 150 pcf to max. of 3000 allowable bearing pressure 1500 psf minimum footing depth 12 inches The allowable bearing pressure may be increased 150 psf for each additional foot of depth to a maximum of 2000 psf. All retaining structures should be properly drained to relieve potential hydrostatic pressure. As a minimum, a back-drain consisting of a 3 inch diameter perforated pipe enveloped in 3 cubic feet of gravel per lineal foot, wrapped in filter fabric (Mirafi 140 or equivalent) should be provided. A drainage blanket, 6-mil visqueen vapor barrier, or other approved waterproofing should be provided along the wall in moisture sensitive areas. Retaining Wall Backfill Care should be exercised when placing retaining wall backfill so as not to compromise the integrity of the retaining wall with excessive live loads. Retaining wall backfill should be brought to near optimum moisture content, thoroughly mixed to achieve homogeneous conditions, and placed in 6 to 8-inch lifts. Backfill material should be compacted to a • minimum 90% of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 1557 test method. RGS Engineering Geology - --- Page 13 Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Dan Guerra&Associates • Proposed Fire Station#I77,Hellman Avenue Project No. 1376-01 Rancho Cucamonga, California May 4, 2007 Utility Trench Backfill Utility trench backfill should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density determined in laboratory testing by the ASTM D 1557 test method. It is our opinion that utility trench backfill consisting of on-site or approved sandy soils can best be placed by mechanical compaction to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density. All trench excavations should be conducted in accordance with Cal-OSHA standards as a minimum. Tentative Pavement Section Concrete or asphaltic concrete pavement can tentatively be designed as follows based on the granular soil conditions encountered. Additional soil samples should be collected and tested near the completion of rough grading to determine the final structural pavement design. The final design could vary greatly in the event that import soil characteristics are not consistent with native soil. Asphaltic Concrete (AC) • Auto Driveways and Parking 0.25' AC over 0.50' CAB Fire Truck Drive and Parking 0.50' AC over 0.83' CAB Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) • Auto Driveways and Parking 0.50' PCC over 0.33' CAB Fire Truck Drive and Parking 0.50' PCC over 0.50' CAB ---Surface Drainage-- - - Surface drainage should be directed away from foundations of buildings or appurtenant structures. All drainage should be directed toward streets or approved permanent drainage devices. Where landscaping and planters are proposed adjacent to foundations, subsurface drains should be provided to prevent standing water or saturation of foundations by landscape irrigation water. Grading and Foundation Plan Review The project geotechnical consultant should review the grading and foundation plans, when available, to assure that our recommendations are consistent with the proposed earthwork and foundation design. Additional field work and laboratory testing may be required at that • time. RGS Engineering Geology - Page 14 • Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Dan Guerra&Associates Proposed Fire Station#177,Hellman Avenue Project No. 1376-01 • } Rancho Cucamonga, California May 4,2007 Construction Monitoring and Testing Observation and testing under the direction of a qualified geotechnical consultant is essential to verify compliance with our recommendations and to confirm that the geotechnical conditions found are consistent with our investigation. At a minimum, construction monitoring should be provided during the following stages of site development: • Clearing and grubbing • Removal and recompaction of unsuitable material • Placement and compaction of fill material • • Excavation of footing elements • When any unusual conditions are encountered A final report summarizing the earthwork operation and compaction test results, if warranted, should be submitted upon completion of grading. CLOSURE • Our investigation was performed using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable geotechnical engineers and geologists practicing in this and other localities. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the conclusions and professional advice included in this report. The samples taken and used for testing, and the observations made are believed to be representative of the entire project; however, soil and geologic conditions can vary significantly between test locations. As in most projects, conditions revealed during construction may be at variance with preliminary findings. If this occurs, the changed conditions must be evaluated by the project geotechnical engineer and/or geologist and designs adjusted as required or alternate designs recommended. This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or his representatives, to ensure the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the architect and engineer for the project and incorporated into the plans, and the necessary steps taken to see that the contractor and subcontractors carry out such recommendations in the field. This firm does not practice or consult in the field of safety engineering. The findings of this report are valid as of the present date. However, changes in the conditions of a property can occur with the passage of time, whether they are due to natural 1 processes or the works of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in • RGS Engineering Geology Page 4S Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Dan Guerra&Associates Proposed Fire Station#177,Hellman Avenue Project No. 1376-01 •, Rancho Cucamonga, California May 4,2007 applicable or appropriate standards may occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside our control. Therefore, this report is subject to review and revision as changed conditions are identified. • RGS Engineering Geology- - -- - - Page 16 X/1.: 1; C. ly,tt;,V .:CriePrt 9t t7 . tt . trA-----4,1,,N -,,,,.,,-,, ,-.444. ___,- , . , , !..4'....-,}'!.art, ■,:li;...‘,:,".:#,7,; ",,,I*g,t',;:-.;';.:::',::';;;.',%::'"W '''14'...L"....'?''44rAll'"e"e.2-1tU ". rgri'ii,r- "__---.44k- iic:40..afitt.,_i43,irifiti-Z..s,pa_kiria."Cl4lic4rtSR-:ictif..--1C-ti i)? ciiShj 4 sal, q i -...e;*s,4e.„ c.t.i.,:,-.„ 1g-,,-/-. - i•il.„: cc -; .1 -:r-r•---, _ i Ni030:, , `.. 1W KO,C,‘,3 --;„_,,--=1- -- --.= '•-HC:----X\ '411 ' re,..t.. .: 4 )7-:,-,'‘‘ ‘.\"Y.T...-,/ e,:: 4,751:\‘'-','• •;--- trzl.t„,,,.+,,,, , iii-- . .-----/-(--;i 4- es, ,,-, _ , ,..., „...,,.. ,.: , , f / $:-" ,"_ 0•,,%7 LCer-/ 13- ..-L..,_-__.„ . ' 4 \../' % 4-1: 171.- - e :t.C' —I--I- 1 ,,_ -, r 1/4,\_,—it, `It:-.'^ . .fc,\ •- __) . !. 1, i . ..,.• -,--../ -_ ,,: i ( 'W-41A4V er . Wa4,-" "1 3c,001, 1 ■1,-c. k,C-1 / . - ../■-\:))144-- .:<;27c:- . :C•• .- ' L, . . __ A "4E% :ilirg,a, rri/jy, \ . V kk -4 J 'a. '' 11-fr,S.. Ilrj..c: IIII J‘na.-r.l. Sk-•I:c \ii., Q • -.1 -r-J-ISIf ?:5":4 itte:03.., ,. ‘ak,.,,,Th it'ang r•F, w\ isk,' , r i 1,,,,k? o'a.I. 4 Va . \ .-,-1/1, ',1 ' in .,,, e , - ;1-- -, 4.n\tif• -?°4, ::•‘--".tr_Cn.- 'r, 4.•-, ,_,,,,,,..-1 p1:1-%--rf.2.k,,,,..."17N...._,--... .„,-;)1,(,) w• t,---• s, '. '1Y-,,v 4. _,,,,c .4: ti,z,t),37 (41_, 4 Np, i vet , ,...... r_z,.., ...,,.., .!,...±4i,9..cf., 1,4 ary cc S¼, 7.P, re, . ..-- .94 ' if f r;tti-, ,46:1-\,",”2.7--÷,in7 A ,k) •::: ,. -.4 :',..0-13sAitz—hy. NIi.4.- ,. 4 0.Inn^ 34 c s'\ 41/4.*,<:' ' .r2- 1 • C- . x ii\ it -c tr. im4,_ \; .:(c - - , • , i ,,,, •,...,,, %,. -v,.. & :. t _s'^-' - .ps: -.,, -.,, .-,. . ,v . ... \ , _ ,,,;,,,.:-11\ v 1 it i )) : a, .--\ , \''tet a,..t ''', ',2_'' at' - - .4771,9- ; I e-..,z.:. !-ti.i.s\, . ii.v. -..(1....,-....k A Ec., 5ii,--(1.: 4 is rt12.4.-vt.::„.t:1,....„. T.,:ti.1.-„.. -3 , .._,_41-6 ,10 ,-/....k. !:&_I, dri ‘- -...x, k, ., ..,,,,-- ,,_, sst„.... --;.1: :,-,,•:,,,aig:211k4trpl,lyinvF,„\-.....,..r vit•,,t-‘:. 0-„-.t.-.-(: ee9::r•:4.'p 1,:r,-:ey,--,;.,.n.:s,,,-1/2I,':a...,,„,•,_,,,',,•,-r —:_'1..!.,:"'''-.a.7..7...•a?.,.,7.Lir t,'-1-;,;',t7,,wii1;-,.„.o-!c,'=...0.4i,t-.i-1-t L"Z"i.-,. J E,-7,-,,,H-.r-,.'......4d.....a.,p-- .A,e,.t,:sy.i:a.i;%,oA,4-..„:,r.rky;4.1.1,-R,zl1.;3it t.,'..4t..1,•1,3,1..,;.4:1-..0.„i7.i. .-—-g-se 1 ia 1Tx 0r"o,,v'../.. ,‘\T.z6/0„r,•zS L b 7:•*,4a Le C. ;__1-IC-._—.•.,.-_•6--p,,,,1-,-_,,,i t— m-m,a1Illi 7",s l)-.,1,i,;,,'g,-":,.Ie.,r:-.r,2.\t1v-,.tE V,.5:*,,"i:,f,1,t.,d.4)...1-.---a.-4 2.;Jz•i.;A:;:ukV:.>,4);k4-1.r;4.,z/.,7X2?a4-.:5'r-4::?.1 C•-,3-:•,•‘.;-r -:,4•:. ,1.:4,.c.-aP-.e:: .t.,,i.;.4 ‘ k-....•,N!.-.t,°-h..•-' m .i e v. ‘c k:;',,,E,Vgnpin: ' , CIS: 1142.1.iid..„--y-1 k . n i...-. -,-.. : .---,,, . i,. • .__-i--- -.4•,----.2.----4..‘ ;.-,.. • 17 ''c'.- •-r tt,-•-:,'t - '-'-; LA A'''' ”tud-zaWl; __L\I -, ■”' 4t'-'id.--11'0A0 4-7-7 .....-.:11.r.- ..,.. p-e:...tiy-.77,c,0-...n..1/2.1prir --,..:.t.,n-,: 024pAriss 0 -,-;...1.fli ___, .,-- , , , -:<,• •1 !pc-- N --,. .1, ..mu I lank•ii'": ' //'' -"<4,-,24•40.0,: _hi -.4.41, 4. f..._:-.-- Jr 111 1.es, -,:.-0. .2p..ihi *oil_ ; ,•: ini.,.. _- 7 '5.1 •. . am; .ii'Llirii =7-. I. Wi' i • - • 2.-.2",-.9 -..---. -..=..,,,ars ------/ E.:,gi. 1' .:, ...,,. ,,j-i•4 \ • I ' - it;• i. ri'ii 1 wn_SoN i u - BM ty;=_ •I V ' ''..2.. .;=1n`;'--iih'I. 7ft.r..0 Ill' 4xf:. „.‘ ''.---: I ,--4 4. '74 clissel..--/I/\ A , ----.. • .z : 14alti.,c,r It ;i i mr. ' t7;'` 11 " 7-7''217-7/‘r It -i7r, •1-,-. .1 7";71 -e.14-1,72.-•-:-4 '4.:::: ''...,%1 A, -.: / _.. .",__Ut`.1 • ‘.,71A. itizi 1 ‘9 P i fr -____________ I 4k71..int„.. .`.4.4.0 'C' 'Cir '-i -'4"i. r. :Ke '''3c •• .../ " i.ea-AThL-.2-P.:,, . ''.-S‘'..46! -.2, I -------:—__ .... .. --,, lt4,- ;' .4,#.-arcrijseJJJ la" -. i:7.7zer.74.. P':,-- w-17- • -r0i-4L073z 2s4,-,• 'i'',. "'0A-, a:t; 1. =..r .,:ti a..ir....-.,:,-1.4,...v r r 6.-d-..?..es*C-., Ist ' ,r4f dr .7-,.. tz 42- .7.'f.:-704.■,\%:: -_,i_i. . ••• :11: J.J.,°:?;•;;;"7, :7;.21.„. . ,rit', .?":"-.... ',`... .4 '6"A.,.cia....."'";'", .7 r" ' -..,, Qitm ,- ,,WA ' sT- A, 1" t ..:"-] irla'r 'aur I .1;c4;XIZZAtt:t„' ,....,45A „4 ?....wet4:7:1 :-1''41.7: ,L I MI il"0 k 2:4 AEI'ji,:a.31 !:Arri.4-.3 . H ...•„:5-7.->....s:n ..----•7:: It-....tr-..- „,„......: 9. .....—,„: ; 4,/,,.4,,,s t , .., , L ,, : ,-. „.,. }•• Ail ,.4 4'2:4:Wawa I ..,L ,...,ea:ritX.,±1,7=:.K2l-Ell -- ...".€Xia ---- ::`. jC;ratalla'"''''41 I n I'''' -II .MNIM-0.,fx. . ..!-..fix,`"-, .aa,s.in'Ix...r•' ....xilIt'A Y 1.1* 'V'l Lith.........., xxl.,;17 — -I ';:k'':•'!LS''V':''!V1P',i:':'S'::l•• 1: , 41•74 41* :re 1•.; - .rta__:_• , .p4Y04,41t"4-i .41 ::.7.4: " 5'':lai,-, :: , .. c'''''''14^-;,..„,.•,"'''. '"'I 7 t•InV...44`15::',4• i'mc•nt' 7'1;4‘.,--L'iterfSir4Y,. &• Vt. mi. t ' n Tett 4,1ilk . . ift--14'altar 4:-.LiTt 71 i ,4i..., I,4.-lig.11 ii."I'.. 0. !, ,citri, -fg; qt,Th,%40:44 rtg ; ..,:jK Sc.3P7i or 4..,g,...■'-- ...iiM":" _ __.• Irk& 4. 4,?4 tc,. re 1, i kS A L'1” ,,, ''' '' *;MIMI-, la ira-;....."44^1"` "Idl 5:-..,%"5i3i2,X. ?",r,VA-74,,LiZ ?,',.4't S,Priaili:Thflr--. ".'1,e'' • $0.5 P.E.ii,..,:._., ' . k1/2re Y!.'" dr Ijt4VtiCip I:' :'.,;.1;<-'1? Iris ,,,oR-.J.r,iii.:, "tett/.p.---. ,, - ,, -,-.77`,'-‘,5 gm .6 :..11 .-,:. — 12 Ali,,I .1 i ic " w.i. R .-. ,,F, ,, , Nr .....—..:,,,es. -...<. "-, -. ...,-;,-, t.--- , ,,, -zsgye.:1.10-, ,-- ffigi , :-.. - ,- ,-;;;__ -„, --- Tet.„ o, zir.,,Ei____trie rhil-H, 3 IS i rA-L---/ - - • \ '71=5) • ',;.. cer.. 72.,i41. Ja",e^ct44 ---..a."'s'•... - ,,;,..:„,Tri .4), t, ,,,,1 ,:. fl!!1S td„ , v< .,..„ . , , ,1 , _.2.,.2..1-(6, ,..-7,---, , .. .. ,s,Asulf'. `§L,i, p. !.i.?.: '..:; . -,.._ -4 .0 - — P. - ----..-. ,,,.,, n .t.;-. , it . . 1 11 „ 7510 VS I - _ _NI ., .— :"-----15 ,117 •I. I:..1.-'..:'' !tr . 1 5.--- g 51.1.0 i i * ; 1 . - . . aitt,W Niardi . ;. .------ — itLii \ 2 -„--- / DOIrM;71,,,&tE9S7TISH4 1;117N57-1. ' Itit:.,!!75;1:1'; 1"7■7.74/1.1.7?:..:----:':.;4:0-ka-:1.7:7 j-aire.,61,71r1:2;1.;;;Tlicri;r14.54 [' .:7.11-1-. 11 7 . 01_, „ii- ,..,„....lv .. - , ,..; , 7.:,: _z! i...H06 . .... Ti- . ,.f.I. -.Pe.;01-1,9:7'1)id\ U ... , ,&.;__7_,....3ract,41,;.„T. z' ..o,,,,...a...,u, w-..._.`• cairEV, i 0; d Ai , -1--r!' r.n..017,rti...---ri-n- -7-:-.4]..ni .1 I 7g.d..-zt , Lide ., i1.-...:,i 7:1, .,A\ 4-- • r -CL:tgi ''' 4:::::•:a.--111 _ anS, i i,.... rdaiorifst _,.•.7 ift. .2, ocay...; ,',3747-4„ me ° ,y - .-"t "..,T. 3, , ,s-• !JP' i i-i i A p;‘,.-1-7-itiLi" cm'ke-411.A.... .iji.-.3 Itju I.4 tllikar Oil lin '7'' '-it.'`. ` S:A 1-457...24,L 7, &-t‘-:*,adirpi..tr.,-4-tri raAjtalwinhn-,,, Itil Z.: 1pitt 1-tanxIAL y ...i,-- x I 1_ I I VLL. 13°E \ ‘1`i ' 1°114'TPA ...... -....--or eil Ott*ii „..... .-- Name: CUCAMONGA PEAK Location: 034.1535555° N 117.6050644°W Date: 2/28/2007 Caption: Figure 1 . . . _ „ _ Scale: 1 inch equals 2000 feet Site Location Map Project#1376-01 Copyright(C)2002,Maptech,Inc V1. Il ` ti�/ ;�� / � i r ll \ J� ,1 / / r/!/% - -,111 111. \I !I; ; i I I,,1,1.i 1!lirllIl ' "r )1 . 1 I I �- I!I 11 1( '''�'imJ � , ` �I . , ' 0 ill, .I I '1/ I / / m \ \I' I / NI oI I .. .. \ I 1�I1 I� ,III( II f i 1 r / I 1 X 111 )I I, 1 ' // / / O I I I 1j1111Ii �I�ii1i 1 ', CI\\ I' VIII I'/I! I I, j 1 ,l1, 1 I I,,_ �� ' I11'l/Ills;lli III-//Il ill 1 I �1 • IIII� I.}II - N 1 I � Il I Lill(II — 1111 -iI 1 it OI I II I VIII U I I' V I I I / 1. \ 1i �I 11 � I•�I Z r I 1 1 11i `$. ci1, III nl , til / /7-11-11:---------- / i 11 1 1,11 , m Hill:l l.i: il " 1;,,1' I f / : / illl' Iliiil + � 1 ` on 1 I+ � 11 i u 1 1�_ III it fll til ll I t .1 , ` I 11' X1111 � . / 1 I 1I 11 It , 1 I , {/� ( II' 1 II11i. ��l I1I IIfl �l llle1f/ ' I i 111' 1 /1j r/ iIlilir;/ / 1l1 1 r r I :m 1 ' 11.11!1' 1, 1 II :1 r r �' i Lip;t 11111111.11�'1i 1111J�1 : / !1 \\ 1 • r1 \,` \ °c/ 1111 ( / 1'• —'r— � �-- `--/////j�lj/�I �li,1l��)� / /// I I l igl','i\:4 71j 9•.1 - ,I 1 I � I I 1 ,i1�, W / ",� / '—` 1 1I :1'11 1 I 'I I a `o .. )y 1/ ,/ 711!( ro \`N , ✓/ / i 1 .10 2 9 TA \.\<Ht.\ \----.. -'-..-.\.. 71 ri jilt.\ktf..1.,-----., -----..\ __//11/ / : ," 1 ,41\ .3 a ,. • APPENDIX A REFERENCES • • RGS Engineering Geology REFERENCES • Blake, T.F., 1998, UBCSEIS, A Computer Program for the Estimation of Uniform Building Code Coefficients Using 3-D Fault Sources, Window 95 Version, January, 1998. California Division of Mines and Geology, 1997, Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California, CDMG Special Publication 117. California Division of Mines and Geology, 2000, "Digital Images of Official Maps of Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones of California", Southern Region, DMG CD 2000-003. California Division of Mines and Geology, 2007, "Seismic Hazards Zonation Program,": website posting current maps and reports for quadrangles being evaluated for liquefaction potential: http://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/shzp/index.htm. California Building Code, 2001, California Building Standards Commission and International Conference of Building Officials. Carson, Scott E. And Matti, Jonathan C., 1985, Contour Map Showing Minimum Depth to Groundwater, Upper Santa Ana River Valley, California, 1973-1979, U.S. Geological Survey, Map MF-1802. Hart, E.W., 1997, "Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California", California Division of Mines • and Geology Special Publication 42. International Conference of Building Officials, 1998a, "Maps of Known Active Fault Near- Source Zones in California and Adjacent Portions of Nevada", Prepared by the California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and geology, Second Printing, February, 1998. Morton, Douglas M. and Matti, Jonathan C., 1970-1989, Geologic Map of the Cucamonga Peak 7.5 Minute Quadrangle, San Bernardino County, California, USGS Open-File Report 01-311. Petersen et al, 1996, "Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment for the State of California", CDMG Open File Report 96-08. • RGS Engineering Geology •' APPENDIX B EXPLORATORY BORING LOGS • • RCS Engineering Geology EXPLORATORY BORING LOG Date:02-16-2007 Drill Method: HAS 8" Logged By: C.Krall Location: See Plan Drive Weight: 140 Lbs Drop:30 Inches Elevation: 1835 Feet Hole Diameter: 8 Inches Depth Blows Soil Dry Moisture Graphic USCS Lithologic Description (ft) per Sample Density Content Log Foot (pc° (%) • Boring B-1 n Alluvial Fan(00 SW SAND:Brown(10 YR 4/3),medium coarse grained with some fines, dry to damp,moderate density • 20 Ring III 92.4 l 5 10 6< 1' Increasing gravel slightly lighter in color,brown(10 YR 5/3), Practical refusal at 13',density increased,well graded 15 16 12 Inc _. Ao Recovcry Less dense. (iR; GRAVELLY SAND: Dark yellowish brown.(10 YR 4/4),moisture increased,moist,denser. SPT Proj No. 1376-01 RGS Engineering Geology Figure No. EXPLORATORY BORING LOG Date:02-16-2007 Drill Method: HSA 8" Logged By: C.Krall Location: See Plan Drive Weight: 140 Lbs Drop 30 Inches Elevation: 1835 Feet Hole Diameter: 8 Inches 0 Depth Blows Soil Dry Moisture Graphic USCS Litho logic Description (ft) per Sample Density Content Log Foot ( cl) (%) Boring B-1('con't) 30 Alluvial Fan (Qaf1 GW GRAVELLY SAND(con't):Light brownish gray,(10 YR 6/2), medium to coarse grained,moist,dense,well graded,minor cobbles. 40 SW SAND:Pale brown(10 YR 6/3),fine to coarse grained,dense,friable, non-cohesive,damp to moist. • 45 'Iota'Depth 50 Feet No Groundwater Moderately difficult drilling due to cobbles and boulders. 55 • 60 Proj No. 1376-01 RGS Engineering Geology Figure No. EXPLORATORY BORING LOG Date:02-16-2007 Drill Method: HSA 8" Logged By: C.Krall Location: See Plan Drive Weight: 140 Lbs Drop: 30 Inches Elevation: 1858 Feet Hole Diameter: 8 Inches Depth Blows Soil Dry Moisture Graphic USCS Lithologic Description (ft) per Sample Density Content Log fl �':°� Boring B-2 Foot (pe 0 Alluvial Fan (OR SW SAND:Dark yellowish brown(10 YR 3/4),medium to coarse grained With some fines,moist,low density. 5 16 Ring 104.2 2.6 20 GRAVELLY SAND W/COBBLES: 108.9 1.9 GW Dark grayish brown,(10 YR 4/2),increasing fines and gravels,dense, 1> 91 Ring minor boulders. for 11" t(1 Proj No. 1376-01 RGS Engineering Geology Figure No. EXPLORATORY BORING LOG Date:02-16-2007 Drill Method: NSA 8" Logged By: C.Krall location: See Plan Drive Weight 140 Lbs Drop 30 Inches Elevation: 1858 Feet Hole Diameter: 8 Inches Depth Blows Soil thy Moisture Graphic USCS Lithologic Description (ft) per Sample Density Content Log Foot (pcO (%) Boring B-2(con't) GR%%1.1 LY SAND(con't):Dark grayish brown,(10 YR 4'2).fine to GW coarse grained,dense,minor boulders,moist. SW SAND:Pale brown(10 YR 6/3),fine to coarse grained,dense,friable, non-cohesive,damp to moist. an • Total Depth 50 Feet No Groundwater Difficult drilling due to rock. S Proj No. 1376-01 RGS Engineering Geology Figure No. EXPLORATORY BORING LOG Date:02-16-2007 Drill Method: HSA 8" Logged By: C.Krall Location: See Plan Drive Weight: 140 Lhs Drop: 30 Inches Elevation: 1825 Feet Hole Diameter: 8 Inches Depth Blows Soil Dry Moisture Graphic USCS Lithologic Description • (ft) per Sample Density Content Log Foot (pcf) (%) Boring B-3 0 Alluvial Fan I0(2 SW/SP : wish bn( ,mm coarse grained dampSAND,some Y ellofines,moderately row10 YR well grade5/4) d,ediu dense.to Hulk Color change to yellowish brown(10 YR 5/4 5 58 Ring 114.5 I y Hit impenetrable sediment(Practical Refusal) Ito Total Depth 10 Feet No Groundwater Backfilled ;u ?0 111! Proj No. 1376-01 RGS Engineering Geology Figure No. EXPLORATORY BORING LOG Date:02-16-2007 Drill Method: HSA 8" Logged By: C.Krall Location: See Plan Drive Weight: 140 Lbs Drop: 30 Inches Elevation: 1820 Feet Hole Diameter: 8 Inches Depth Blows Soil Dry Moisture Graphic USCS Lithologic Description (ft) per Sample Density Content Log Foot (pet) (%) Boring B-4 Alluvial Fan(Of) SW SILTY SAND:Yellowish brown(10 YR 5/8),fine to medium grained, poorly graded,moist,dense. Dark yellowish brown(10 YR 3/6),increasing clay content. 5 85 Ring 122 6 7.6 Bulk Dark yellowish brown(10YR 14),less cohesive than previously, • 56 Ring 128.5 8.7 gravel present. • a :r;• . 1s jU Ring .s:t SILTY SAND:Dark yellowish brown(10 YR 4/4),damp to moist,well graded,increased gravel content,dense to very dense. SPT 75 R:n' 121.' 13.4 Moist,very dense. Total Depth 27 Feet No Groundwater ,i Backfilled Proj No. 1376-01 RGS Engineering Geology Figure No. APPENDIX C LABORATORY TEST RESULTS • i• RGS Engineering Geology Leighton Consulting, Inc. • A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY March 21, 2007 RGS Engineering Geology 8800 Onyx Ave., Suite D Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Attention: Mr. Chris Kral.l Subject: Report/Laboratory Testing Results Project Name: Dan Guerra(Fire Station) Project No.: 1376-01 LCl No.: 601765001 Dear Mr. Krall: Enclosed please find laboratory testing results for the soil samples from the above referenced project. The requested tests were conducted in essential accordance with the standard test methods listed below. • • TYPE OF TEST TEST METHOD Density of Soil in Place by the Drive- ASTM D 2937 Cylinder Method Laboratory Determination of Water ASTM D 2216 (Moisture) Content of Soil and Rock by Mass Particle-Size Analysis of Soils ASTM D 422 Laboratory Compaction Characteristics ASTM D 1557 of Soil Using Modified Effort Direct Shear Test of Soils Under ASTM D 3080 Consolidated Drained Conditions One-Dimensional Consolidation AS'L'ivl D 2435 Properties of Soils Corrosion Suite DOT CA Tests 417(Part II), 422, 532/643 Test results arc presented in the c-mailed pdfs and attached Data Sheets. ASTM: ASTM International, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Section 4 Construction, Volume 04.08 Soil and Rock (1), 2006. DOT CA: State of California Department of Transportation, Standard Test Methods, Volumes 2 & 3, • Testing and Control Procedures, 1990. 17781 Cowan•Irvine, CA 92614-6009 949.253.9836•Fax 949.250.1114 a www.leightonconsulting.com Project Name: Dan Guerra (Fire Station) March 21, 2007/Page 2 of 2 Project No.: 1376-01 •' Thank you for selecting Leighton Consulting, Inc. to provide laboratory testing services to RGS Engineering Geology. Please feel free to contact us if you should have any questions concerning these results. Very holy yours, LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC. Laboratory Testing Services get� , ".°'r 545. �`1 Ed Shandi Soils Laboratory Supervisor Enclosures • Leighton zG%' s. _z- .x "' -t'n'� ::s'L;..re..'' s- x^u:..+ t A s�P e y. ...;.r u ar.� .- .�. ...:ic._ .<, _... .�, -. ....J w,. _mom_..r..�.�,�..�k 4n_.,_.. s ... _e:3txrt"�i�> .,-i2s.. ,....S��a;�: . .• • N t2 . o © La . al . ,. ( ,, • :,:: t rn o R. • i 4C I'S 5• ee o ro z 1 to 0 in R a, t... Li: • 1 ....... co ili ,_, = 0 P. (.0 , ko c r.,. La • 1 co rn (.7 CO, 1 EV E -• cO ci E >:.. • z z ro co z -Y t 13 1 "E 17 .2-C a,a. a. .) I- .:• .• . . .. n . • ., 0 • . (" r, • 1 • • 14.. en 0 C.' ?... 0 fr- a 17)1 z < LAJ DZI • a - a 0 co ..-; o E o c, LN Ln ,-, •cl- •LC ..9 sc) 85-8 IP_ 0 Ln 0 Ln . 0 0 .,_, CO o cu R --4 0 a ..--j r A 0 nl Lri M 0 NI rn a ...+ ra co U.1 al o L.) a .1-1 CL E b — M v) m. . . c . all ra n 1 "<a-- o in• - Z a in 0 I-I .• • C r oi cn c c a, 0 cn re, C-. •—• 0 ....., .- .- .._. ,-.... .--.. P 'El, A...a ,;-, a) .-.. 0 a 0 . C -0 4.-., ■-• ..0 a u 0 i 0 0) tc, .. c 0 E in 5 . 44S 3 , --I . IY -5 a, 0 =„ ..• c rtt a, ra u .,., + a on E 6 &•-') g 6; L. 0 >. v) R- !t= L' r • 6 co "a „ U Z1 tzr, U a 0 •-..... co a) c2 0 1' •tr— E c- E 7= u 5 li 0 0 a.) tv If al 0 t" {71) 0 10 o ra o rA•,:-.,,ts,, _ . t . • ® PARTICLE-SIZE ANALYSIS of SOILS Leighton ASTM D 422 • Project Name: Dan Guerra (Fire Station) Tested By: GB/SF Date: 02/26/07 Project No.: 1376-01 Checked By: JHW Date: 03/09/07 Exploration No.: B-3 Depth (feet): 0-5 Sample No.: Bulk Soil Identification:Dark Yellowish Brown Silty Sand with Gravel (SMl4 Calculation of Dry Weights Whole Sample Sample Passing Whole Sample Sample J14 Moisture Contents passing#9 Container No.: SP-02 HA Wt. of Air-Dry Soil + Cont.(g) 0.00 0.00 Wt.Air-Dried Soil + Cont.(g) 4189.30 867.10 Wt. of Dry Soil + Cont. (g) 0.00 0.00 Wt. of Container (g) 739.20 246.70 Wt. of Container No. (g) 1.00 1.00 Dry Wt. of Soil (g) 3450.10 620.40 Moisture Content(%) 0.00 0.00 Container No. HA Passing #4 Material After Wet Sieve Wt. of Dry Soil + Container(g) 760.50 Wt. of Container (g) 246.70 Dry Wt. of Soil Retained on # 200 Sieve (g) 513.80 U. S. Sieve Size Cumulative Weight of Dry Soil Retained (g) Percent Passing p p • Whole Sample Sam le Passing #4 (0/0) (mm.) 6" 152.400 3" 75.000 0.00 1 100.0 11/2 37.500 93.10 1 97.3 3/4" • 19.000 - 212.10 93.9 3/8" 9.500 448.60 87.0 #4 4.750 720.40 79.1 #8 2.360 - 86.80 • 68.0 #16 1.180 191.60 54.7 . #30 0.600 293.90 41.6 #50 0.300 389.30 29.5 #100 0.150 466.20 19.7 #200 0.075 513.80 13.6 PAN GRAVEL: 21 Wo SAND: 65 % FINES: 14 % GROUP SYMBOL (SM)g Cu = D60/D10 = • Cc=(D30)2/(D60*D10) = Remarks: ( ? • E3 CO I . I . • . , . 0 6 E ■ 1 . . • ...c>- . • , ' • Z i I • . 1 1 i 1 , Tu- . : . z ! to I I • i---- ___.__- __._ (53 I L -__I i I .• I i ...._ u., Lthi ,__+___, , __-- Ili E . -0 Z 0 i 1 co (7'. ci •• VI W g I I i o I . z aci = i i . • . . I , • l n ..4 . ,q r8 ri I I I i in 2 { : n 1 I i . -••--• , 1 . I. I i __ _ 0 .. i i i i = 1 >- "/ . , 8 ... / ; I N " 0 -Y tt _ 0 ro" { ! • a 6 E 9 L7 E r. w c I 03 0 E o z •••• 1 , ..._. lo tu g.• ,,, 3 . N .. te.) 14.= 0-1 coujc‘ a - ---H I i ______ 0 c 0 Z tn ■ :—.—... 'ZI •-■ CU ;:i 0 , —w : i , 0 .2 a - a a, 'a 132 0 i I . • ceP , • ei o tr, t•D co ■ : . a 12;) * < < . (x) , o Sc c4 ' ' - . o I 8 I _ i r . • ij -: I IA 1 I . Ui I I UNI - {■.-.----- . N Z 11 0 rsi a : F F H N 8 ; +- ---I- --- . . . 1-- cr 1 ,,- - iii D 0 4* i ...I CO --1 --[ ; I e'S FU X C • i c it . I- ' , , o o le V) z 00 . o ._ • I : 0 ro ,ct ri -. z 1 U) ! ■ II E2 1 . ,.._ : : I . 0 't it > i F . ro 4 : ____ - 1 - i- ---4. . = cz) i . . : _ „ ‘.0 0 8 a ____E; ___ ___4 _4_ 4_1 _ ___,_____ ,____ c N ro rn 4 .1 i - . i I I _.__—________H._-.-_,...____ a 1.'1 03 Vi • --- ----H—-- L--- ---- ! r i •- m . a 0 6 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 a 00 E •• -J o 0 N. co in v. co 0 cv ,_ o 1H013M AEI 1:13N1g IN331:13c1 -I--. -4--1 .F3-2 V 110(1) Q) _ I . 0- 0- as PARTICLE-SIZE ANALYSIS of SOILS Leighton ASPM D 422 • Project Name: Dan Guerra (Fire Station) . Tested By: GB/SF Date: 02/24/07 - Project No.: 1376-01 Checked By: 31-IW Date: 03/09/07 Exploration No.: Depth (feet): 5-10 Sample No.: Bulk Soil Identification:Dark Yellowish Brown Silty Sand (SM) Calculation of Dry Weights Whole Sample Sample Passing Whole Sample Sample #4 Moisture Contents passing#4 Container No.: CP-15 ZK Wt. of Air-Dry Soil + Cont.(g) 0.00 0.00 Wt. Air-Dried Soil + Cont.(g) 2029.50 774.70 Wt. of Dry Soil + Cont. (g) 0.00 0.00 Wt. of Container (g) 223.50 249.90 Wt. of Container No. (g) 1.00 1.00 Dry Wt. of Soil (g) 1806.00 524.80 Moisture Content(%) 0.00 0.00 Container No. ZK Passing #4 Material After Wet Sieve Wt. of Dry Soil + Container(g) 585.40 Wt. of Container (g) 249.90 • Dry Wt. of Soil Retained on # 200 Sieve (g) 335.50 U. S. Sieve Size Cumulative Weight of Dry Soil Retained (9) Percent Passing Whole Sample Sample Passing #4 (%) -_.. ..--ea..-_. rte.(mm.) 6" 152.400 3" 75.000 1 11/2 37.500 . 0.00 100.0 3/4" 19.000 33.40 98.2 3/8" 9.500 103.00 I 94.3 #4 4.750 215.00 88.1 #8 2.360 54.10 79.0 #16 1.180 121.80 67.7 #30 0.600 181.70 57.6 #50 0.300 235.60 48.5 #100 0.150 291.20 39.2 #200 0.075 335.50 31.8 PAN GRAVEL: 12 SAND: 56 FINES: 32 GROUP SYMBOL (SM) Cu = DSO/DID = . Cc= (D30)2/(D60*D10) = • Remarks: F. .... • ( ': 1... ; ro E i 0 • a .:°' o I 1 1 . 1 1 i--- , i---- 1 i 1 i 1 .Y —, L _ I • i i 3I MI in • t [__ co — ,, 0 ro , O. c; se . , . O a cu 1 r I . I • I) N • E r C fl 4 II; : ' 6 17) I : tn 2 -. 1 i I Da ID .0 Ifl . ._ T.) 0 ri . ' ...Y to .- nz I , nt 4% ______, col 11 71 ^ co Lni ; „c! .4.7: 0 - 3 '-: 0 I 1 IH - _ang 5!: I i i it I)..i 9 a9 0 1 z En 2 410 0 Z I P 1 . 6 0 in C.) I .• : • w a • , 0 11 o D 0 ! .. °. r 2 * L vi —0 . W UJ 03 - i N Z ' , 1 I-1 0 r4 a . IA t., N i . 0 I . i 1-- 1.! . u ,-- I • , LLI 0 43 ; • CO 0 ...E (..) 1'4 2 I— - , 03 0 r ce 1.- ..,t cc vi --- I • Li o m 1 '- .6., Z 3 VI E: 0• . 2 I I 1 I 22 Iii i • a - . -4 o ;I- I i I > ' : . ,I : . c k.o 0 < ci •"' C N. ' ■ 1 I 0 U i , •- — 0, ..-■ -C - ' 1 .• ---4— --4,— --: a 0) .— 6 : . • o ,, a ai Cll D 1 , , ' --/ o o 0 o o o o o o 0 o o cr, oo t-- a to v CO° IN 1- ■-- ro • z z A 1H013M AS 2:13Nli.I.N3OHad 4-. -I-. V , t.) u I) 0 ,it .,!:".:9 •:: S..iiViii .itr,t. ( . I I a. a. • ® MODIFIED PROCTOR COMPACTION TEST go Leighton ASTM D 1557 . • Project Name: Dan Guerra (Are Station) Tested By : RDS Date: 02/27/07 Project No.: 1376-01 Input By : JHW • Date: 03/09/07 Boring No.: B-3 Depth (ft.) 0-5 Sample No. : Bulk Soil Identification: Dark Yellowish Brown Silty Sand with Gravel (SM)g Preparation X Moist Scalp Fraction (%) Rammer Weight(lb.) = 10.0 Method: Dry - #3/4 Height of Drop(in.) = 18.0 Compaction X Mechanical Ram #3/8 13.0 Method Manual Ram #4 Mold Volume(fta) 0.03321 . TEST NO. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Wt. Compacted Soil + Mold (g) 3863.0 3969.0 3966.0 Weight of Mold (q) 1786.0 1786.0 1786.0 Net Weight of Soil (9) 2077.0 2183.0 2180.0 • Wet Weight of Soil + Cont. (g) 476.80 454.30 501.90 Dry Weight of Soil + Cont. (g) 454.70 424.80 460.30 Weight of Container (g) 54.30 54.20 54.00 Moisture Content (%) 5.52 7.96 10.24 . Wet Density (pcf) 137.9 144.9 144.7 Dry Density (pcf) 130.7 134.2 131.3 • Maximum Dry Density (pcf) • 134.0 . Optimum Moisture Content(%) 8.0 1 Corrected Dry Density (pcf) . 137.5. . Corrected Moisture Content(%) :7.0•` • ❑ Procedure A 140.0 I I I I Soil Passing No.4(4.75 mm) Sieve SP.GR.=2.85 - Mold : 4 in.(101.6 mm) diameter _SP.GR.=230 Layers: 5 (Five) ■,O: SP.GR..2.75 Blows per layer: 25 (twenty-five) May be used if+#4 is 20%or less -� - ® Procedure B 135.0 l Passing 3/8 in.(9.5 mm) Sieve --- - _-.- Mold : 4 in.(101.6 mm) diameter Layers: 5 (Five) u Blows per layer: 25 (twenty-five) °'Use if+#4 is>20%and+3/8 in.is I i 20%or less - c 130.0 -Procedure C __ _ , I _ __ Soil Passing 3/4 in.(19.0 mm) Sieve - 1 Mold: 6 in.(152.4 mm) diameter , Layers: 5 (Five) __ , I _ , i Blows per layer: 56 (fifty-six) _ Use if+3/B in.is >20%and+3/4 In 125.0 Is<30% l Particle-Size Distribution: - I . 21:65:14 1 - , GR:SA:F1 • Atterber Limits: 120.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 , , - Moisture Content(%) MX 8.3,Balk @0.5 • ® MODIFIED PROCTOR COMPACTION TEST 4 Leighton ASTM D 1557 `i • Project Name: Dan Guerra (Fire Station) Tested By : RDS Date: 02/25/07 Project No.: 1376-01 Input By : JHW Date: 03/09/07 Boring No.: B-4 Depth (ft.) 5-10 . Sample No. : Bulk • Soil Identification: Dark Yellowish Brown Silty Sand (SM) Preparation X Moist Scalp Fraction (%) Rammer Weight(lb.) = 10.0 Method: Dry #3/4 Height of Drop(in.) = 18.0 Compaction X Mechanical Ram #3/8 Method . Manual Ram #4 11.9 Mold Volume(ft3) 0.03321 TEST NO. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Wt. Compacted Soil + Mold (q) 3792.0 3940.0 3960.0 3874.0 Weight of Mold (g) 1786.0 1786.0 1786.0 1786.0 Net Weight of Soil (g) 2006.0 2154.0 2174.0 2088.0 Wet Weight of Soil + Cont. (q) 552.30 473.70 451.80 429.50 Dry Weight of Soil + Cont. (g) 531.50 444.50 415.20 388.00 Weight of Container (g) 54.70 54.20 54.00 54.70 Moisture Content (%) 4.36 7.48 10.13 12.45 Wet Density (pcf) 133.2 143.0 144.3 138.6 Dry Density (pcf) 127.6 133.0 131.0 123.3 • Maximum Dry Density (pcf) 133.0 Optimum Moisture Content(%) 8.0 • Corrected Dry Density(pcf) 136.5. Corrected Moisture Content(%) 7.0': :. • ---- - -T®' Procedure A 140.0 I i I Soil Passing No.4(4.75 mm) Sieve GR.=2.65 Mold : 4 in.(101.6 mm) diameter ---I M" SP.GR.=270 _ __ Layers: 5 (Five) I , Ili SP.GR.=2.75 1 Blows per layer: 25 (twenty-Flue) i May be used if+#4 is 20%or less , ❑ Procedure B 135.0 - - _.._._.. \\CkH So il Passing 3/B in.(9.5 mm) Sieve Mold: 4 in.(101.6 mm) diameter I Layers: 5 (Five) v J Blows per layer: 25 (twenty-five) I _ i Use if+#4 is >20%and+3/B In.is I I 20%or less c 130.0 m ProcedureC I i I Soil Passing 3/4 in.(19.0 mm) Sieve -- - Mold : 6 in.(152.4 mm) diameter - I Layers: 5 (Five) __ -I.-__._� Blows per layer: 56 (fifty-six) -� I I Use if+3/8 in.is>20%and+V= in. 125.0 I I I I I N<30% I I Particle-Size Distribution: I 1 I I 12:56:32-1 (R:SA:rt 1 Attterbery Limits: 120.0 . • , i ‘1 LL,YLYl 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 Moisture Content(%) MX 54.Bulk @ SID DIRECT SHEAR TEST 4# Leighton Consolidated Drained-ASTM D 3080 • Project Name: Pan Guerra (Fire Station). Tested By: a Date: 02/26/07 Project No.: 1376-01 Checked By: JHW Date: 03/09/07 Boring No.: B=4 Sample Type: 90% Remold Sample No.: Bulk Depth (ft.): 5510 Soil Identification: Dark Yellowish Brown Silty Sand (SM) Sample Diameter(in): 2.415 2.415 2.415 Sample Thidmess(in.): 1.000 1.000 1.000 Weight of Sample+ ring(gm): 200.90 200.89 200.72 Weight of Ring(gm): 45.33 45.32 45.15 Before shearing • Weight of Wet Sample+Cont.(gm): 251.67 251.67 251.67 Weight of Dry Sample+Cont.(gm): 235.89 235.89 235.89 Weight of Container(gm): 38.62 38.62 38.62 Vertical Rdg.(in): Initial 0.0000 0.2968 0.2673 Vertical Rdg.(in): Final 0.0001 0.2512 0.2681 After Sneering Weight of Wet Sample+Cont.(gm): 196.00 198.73 197.68 Weight of Dry Sample+Cont.(gm): 175.30 178.68 178.50 Weight of Container(gm): 38.57 39.08 38.35 Specific Gravity(Assumed): • 2.70 2.70 2.70 Water Density(pcf): 62.43 62.43 62.43 • • (• DS 8-9,Bulk 510 1.50 s 1.00 N N N - . I co-2 0.50 • 0.00 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 Horizontal Deformation (in.) 1.50 • • I 100 ___-.__,.__.-___.__.___-__.___ d f!7 N •0.50 _ I 0.00 . . . . . . . . 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 Normal Stress(ksf) Boring No. B-4 Normal Stress (kip/ft2) 0.500 1.000 2.000 Sample No. Bulk Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft2) a 0.415 S 0.739 A 1.399 Depth (ft) . 5-10 Shear Stress @ End of Test(ksf) 0 0.393 00.720 L 1.399 Sample Type: Deformation Rate (in./min.) 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 90% Remold Initial Sample Height(in.) 1.000 1.000 1.000 Diameter(in.) 2.415 2.415 2.415 Soil Identification: Initial Moisture Content(%) 8.00 8.00 8.00 Dark Yellowish Brown Silty Dry Density(pd) 119.8 119.8 119.8 Sand (SM) Saturation (%) 53.1 53.1 53.1 Soil Height Before Shearing (in.) 1.0001 0.9956 0.9992 Final Moisture Content(%) 15.1 14.4 13.7 Project No.: 1376-01 40 Leighton DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Dan Guerra (Fire Station) (' Consolidated Drained-ASTM D 3080 • 02-07 • 05 64,Bulk(0)5-10 TESTS for SULFATE CONTENT • Leighton CHLORIDE CONTENT and pH of SOILS • Project Name: Dan Guerra (Fire Station) Tested By : V3 Date: 03/02/07 Project No. : 1376-01 Data Input By: 3HW Date: 03/09/07 Boring No. B-4 Sample No. Bulk Sample Depth ft 5-10 Soil Identification: Dark Yellowish Brown (SM) Wet Weight of Soil + Container(g) 214.43 Dry Weight of Soil + Container (g) 201.57 Weight of Container(q) 40.11 Moisture Content (%) 7.96 Weight of Soaked Soil (g) 100.67 SULFATE CONTENT, DOT California Test 417, Part II Beaker No. 2 • Crucible No. 18 Furnace Temperature (°C) 830 Time In/Time Out 7:30/ 8:15 Duration of Combustion (min) 45 Wt. of Crucible + Residue(g) 19.7336 Wt. of Crucible (g) __ 19.7319 Wt. of Residue (g). (A) 0.0017 PPM of Sulfate (A) x 41150 69.95 PPM of Sulfate, Dry Weight Basis 76 CHLORIDE CONTENT, DOT California Test 422 ml of Chloride Soln. For Titration (B) 30 ml of AgNO3 Soln. Used in Titration(C) 0.6 PPM of Chloride(C -0.2) * 100 * 30/ B 40 PPM of Chloride, Dry Wt. Basis 43 pH TEST, DOT California Test 532/643 pH Value 7.04 • Temperature °C 19.1 . SOIL �� 4 �Ri�h�DD �x��3 DOT ,� � • / / �� Project Name: Dan Guerra (Fire Station) Tested By : V] Date: 03/05/07 Project No. : 1376`01 Data Input By: JHW Date: 03/09/07 Boring No.: B-4 Depth (ft.) : 5-10 Sample No. : Bulk Soil Identification: Park Yellowish Brown (SM) Water Resistance Resi$ance 5oi| Moisture Content(0/0) /MCi) 7.96 Specimen Moisture Added (m|) Reading Resistivity Wet Soil+ Z1�� 3 No. Content (Wa) (ohm) (ohm-cm) (MC) Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) 201.57 1 0 7.96 2000 1349I Wt. of Container (g) 40.11 2 i 100 1627 1200 8095 Container No. 3 200 2157 1350 9107 Initial Soil Wt. (g) (Wt) 1300.00 4 Box Constant 6.746 5 MC=(((1+Mci/1U0)x(YVa/Wt+1))'1)x100 Min. Resistivity Moisture Content Sulfate Content Chloride Content Soil pH (ohm-cm) (0/0) (ppm) (ppm) pH Temp.(°C) DOT CA Test 531/6*3 DOT CA Test 417 Part II DOT cx Test^22 DOT CA Test 532/643 7900 18.0 76 43 7.04 19.1 �� 14000 � / ' �� --- | 13000 • . 12000 �c �� | / 11000 | i . — �—_'--� � � . . ------� i l»»«» } / ------- | co w [� ---_— --- \ ..------f---------I ---~s-- . ~~ 0000 5 — � . mn *000 — 1_—�___ --------_-- , — —_ _ r000 ! ! . ' � , . 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25o Moisture Content (%) • • . a- ONE-DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION c Leighton PROPERTIES of SOILS 0 ; (ASTM D 2435) Project Name: Dan Guerra (Fire Station) Tested By: FT,GB Date: 03/05/07 Project No.: 1376-01 Checked By: LF Date: 03/16/07 Boring No.: 13-3 . Depth (ft.): 5.0 Sample No.: N/A Sample Type: Drive Soil Identification: Brown well-graded sand with silt and gravel (SW-SM)g/ dry, loose, partly disturbed 0.570 Sample Diameter(in.) 2.416 I I Sample Thickness(in.) 1.000 Wt.of Sample+ Ring(g) 177.88 0.550 1 • Weight of Ring(g) 44.83 1 Inundate with ' Height after consol. (in.) 0.9187 Tap water Before Test i 0.530 7 Wt.Wet Sample+Cont.(g) 417.58 Wt.of Dry Sample+Cont. (g) 410.43 0.510 Weight of Container(g) 38.52 o Initial Moisture Content(%) 1.9 i I Initial Dry Density(pcf) 108.5 CI 0.490 - 11 • . NI Initial Saturation(0/0) 9 75 5 i ,Initial Vertical Reading(in.) 0.3638' > 1 After Test Wt.of Wet Sample+Cont. (g) 230.84 !i 11 Wt.of Dry Sample+Cont. (g) 212.78 a4.50-- • Weight of Container(g) 39.15 Final Moisture Content(°/0) 14.02 I I Final Dry Density(pcf) 116.5 0.430- I 1 , i Final Saturation(0/0) __ 85 I Final Vertical Reading (in.) 0.2804 - . I 0.410 I i , . i I , - ! Specific Gravity(assumed) . 2.70 OW 1.00 10.00 100.00 Water Density(pd) 62.43 Pressure, p (ksf) • Pressure Final Apparent Load Deformation Void airrected . No Time Readings (p) Reading Thickness compliance %of Sample Ratio Deriprina- (ksf) (in.) (in.) (%) Thickness tion(0/0) Date Time Elapsed Square Root Dial Rdgs. Time(min) of Time (In.) 0.10 0.3631 1 0.9993 0.00 0.07 0.553 0.07 0.25 0.3607 0.9969 0.06 0.31 0.550 0.25 0.50 0.3573 0.9935 0.08 0.65 0.545 0.57 1.00 0.3499 0.9861 0.11 1.39 0.534 1.28 2.00 0.3429 0.9791 0.18 2.09 0.524 1.91 2.00 0.3210 0.9572 0.18 4.28 0.490 4.10 . 4.00 0,3064 0.9426 0.29 5.74 0.469 5.45 8.00 0.2881 0.9243 0.47 7.58 0.444 7.11 16.00 0.2676 0.9038 0.73 9.62 0.416 8.89 4.00 0.2716 0.9078 0.44 9.22 0.417 8.78 1.00 0.2766 0.9128 0.28 8.72 0.423 8.44 I 0.25 0.2804 0.9166 0.21 8.34 0.428 8.13 • • I I I I I No Time Readings 0.3520 1.0380 • 0.3500- __..-.__..._ I 09380 010.3480 0.6380 -- ......._-__ Ce 0.3460 -- --'-- 0.7300 p c 0.34E0- - 0.6380 o_ __-.._._-. 0.5380 0.3420.--__. .._._..- 0 0 0 0.3400 • 0.3360 0.3380 • 0.3380 0.1 to 0.0 10.0 . Log of Time(min.) Square Root of Time(min."`) 0.00 0 , 1,00 Inundate with I Tap water , 2.00 3.00 ' i I ll II 0 4.00 I ; ; I , I I • 2 5.00. I I 6.00 • , ai 7.00 - i 1 i 1 11 lil 8.00 , I 9.00 l 1 II I 10.00 , 1 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 Pressure, p (kst) Boring Sample Depth Moisture Dry Density(pcf) Void Ratio Degree of No. No. (ft.) Content(%) Saturation(%) Initial Final Initial Final Initial Final Initial Fnal B-3 N/A 5 1.9 14.0 108.5 116.5 0.554 0.428 9 85 Soil Identification: Brown well-graded sand with silt and gravel (SW-SM)g/ dry, loose, partly disturbed Project No.: 1376-01 "i?® ONE-DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION `''i'.3.; Leighton PROPERTIES of SOILS Dan Guerra (Fire Station)'t;'k `,. (ASTM D 2435) • '"J 03-07 ( Ast- ONE-DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION 4# Leighton PROPERTIES of SOILS 0 - (ASTM D 2435) Project Name: Dan Guerra (Fre Station) Tested By: FT,GB Date: 03/05/07 Project No.: 1376-01 Checked By: LF Date: 03/16/07 Boring No.: B-4 Depth(ft.): 15.0 Sample No.: N/A Sample Type: Drive Soil Identification: Strong brown sandy lean clay s(CL) 0.470 Sample Diameter(in.) 2.416 I l . Sample Thickness(in.) 1.000 1 I Wt.of Sample+ Ring(g) 199.36 0A60 Weight of Ring(g) 43.15 ' Height after consol. (in.) 0.9739. Inundate with Before Test 0450 Tap water Wt.Wet Sample+Cont. (g) 338.82 I I Wt.of Dry Sample+Cont. (g) 305.05 1 . : Weight of Container(g) 38.40 0 ,_ .440 : Initial Moisture Content(%) 12.7 Initial Dry Density(pcf) 115.2 1Z :0 Initial Saturation(WO 74 5 I i ! ..,0.430 - Initial Vertical Reading On.) 0.3191 --- r After Test i Wt.of Wet Sample+Cont. (g) 241.75 0420 Wt. of Dry Sample+Cont. (g) 219.60 • Weight of Container(g) 38.83 \ Final Moisture Content(%oo) 16.10 . , I I i Final Dry Density (pcf) 117.4 0410 i- I Final Saturation(°/a) 100 Final Vertical Reading (in.) 0.2918 0400 Specific Gravity(assumed) 2.70 0.10 too 10.00 100.00 Water Density(pd) 62.43 Pressure, p (ksf) Pressure Final Apparent Load Deformation Void. Carrected No Time Readings (p) Reading Thickness Compliance %of Sample Ratio Defame- (csf) (in.) Om) (%) Thickness tion(Wo) Date Time Elapsed Square Root Dial Rd9S. Time(min), of Time (in.) __......_. 0.10 0.3188 0.9997 0.00 0.03 0.463 0.03 I 0.25 • 0.3169 0.9978 0.04 0.22 0.460 0.18 I 0.50 0.3145 0.9954 0.07 0.46 0.457 0.39 I LOU 0.3111 0.9920 0.11 0.80 0.453 0.69 2.00 0.3067 0.9876 0.15 1.24 0.447 1.09 2.00 0.3063 _ 0.9872 0.15 1.29 0.446 1.14 4.00 0.3003 0.9812 0.27 1.88 0.439 1.61 8.00 0.2911 0.9720 0.40 2.80 0.428 2.40 _ . • 16.00 0.2770 0.9579 0.57 4.21 0.410 3.64 4.00 0.2816 0.9625 0.35 3.76 0.413 3.41 1.00 0.2868 0.9677 0.22 3.23 0.419 3.01 0.25 0.2918 _ 0.9727 0.12 2.74 0.425 2.62 • fe No Time Readings r- , 0.3520 . 1.4140 1111 ____ ._ j 0.9380 ,-, F c1.34so • • . , 0.8380 --- ....•-- to a ...... -. , - 0.7380 0 g 0.3440 - • 0.6380 t7a 0 0.3420 -._...- -- 1._ 1 0.5330 I 0.3400 , - 0.4380 I . 0.3380 ' • 0.2380 0.1 1.0 0.0 10.0 Log of Time(min.) Square Root of Time(min.112) 0.00 1 . 1 1 i 1 I 1 Inundate with 1 Tap water 1.00 "ir" ---- _...... . 1 __...._ .._ ‘eg 1 I C 0 •- 2.00 71131 . I • E • to. • cu 2.50 0 . . . .1 ______ 1 . . 1 1 3.00 . . _ I 1 1 1 1 1 3,50 - .__. _ - ; 1- --- . ... . . 1 • 4.00 . I 1 1 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 • Pressure, p (ksf) Moisture Degree of Boring Sample Depth Dry Density(pcf) Vold Ratio Content(%) Saturation(%) No. No. (ft.) Initial Final Initial 1 Final Initial Final Initial 1 Final B-4 N/A 15 12.7 16.1 115.21 117.4 0.463 0.425 74 1 100 Soil Identification: Strong brown sandy lean day s(CL) Project No.: 1376-01 ,,,,•±74i.;4..0- ONE-DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION ;::, Lein hton PROPERTIES of SOILS Dan Guerra (Fire Station) (ASTM D 2435) 03-07 • • • APPENDIX D STANDARD EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS S RGS Engineering Geology • • STANDARD GRADING AND EARTHWORK SPECIFICATIONS These specifications present standard recommendations for grading and earthwork. No deviation from these specifications should be permitted unless specifically superseded in the geotechnical report of the project or by wri communication signed by the Geotechnical Consultant. Evaluations performed by the Geotechnical Consultant during the course of grading may result in subsequent recommendations which could supersede these specifications or the recommendations of the geotechnical report. 1.0 GENERAL 1.1 The Geotechnical Consultant is the Owner's or Developer's representative on the project. For the purpose of these specifications, observations by the Geotechnical Consultant include observations by the Soils Engineer, Geotechnical Engineer, Engineering Geologist,and others employed by and responsible to the Geotechnical Consultant. 1.2 All clearing,site preparation,or earthwork performed on the project shall be conducted and directed by the Contractor under • the allowance or supervision of the Geotechnical Consultant. 1.3 The Contractor should be responsible for the safety of the project and satisfactory completion of all grading. During grading, the Contractor shall remain accessible. 1.4 Prior to the commencement of grading, the Geotechnical Consultant shall be employed for the purpose of providing field, laboratory,and office services for conformance with the recommendations of the geotechnical report and these specifications. It will be necessary that the Geotechnical Consultant provide adequate testing and observations so that he may provide an opinion as to determine that the work was accomplished as specified. It shall be the responsibility of the Contractor to assist the Geotechnical Consultant and keep him apprized of work schedules and changes so that he may schedule his personnel accordingly. 1.5 It shall be the sole responsibility of the Contractor to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the work in accordance with applicable grading codes, agency ordinances,these specifications,and the approved grading plans. If,in the opinion of the Geotechnical Consultant, unsatisfactory conditions, such as questionable soil, poor moisture condition, inadequate compaction,adverse weather,etc.,are resulting in a quality of work less than required in these specifications,the Geotechnical Consultant will be empowered to reject the work and recommend that construction be stopped until the conditions are rectified. 1.6 It is the Contractor's responsibility to provide safe access to the Geotechnical Consultant for testing and/or gra observation purposes. This may require the excavation of test pits and/or the relocation of grading equipment. 1.7 A final report shall be issued by the Geotechnical Consultant attesting to the Contractor's conformance with these specifications. • • 2.0 SITE PREPARATION 2.1 All vegetation and deleterious material shall be disposed of off-site. This removal shall be observed by the Geotechnical Consultant and concluded prior to fill placement. 2.2 Soil, alluvium, or bedrock materials determined by the Geotechnical Consultant as being unsuitable for placement in compacted fills shall be removed from the site or used in open areas as determined by the Geotechnical Consultant. Any material incorporated as a part of a compacted fill must be approved by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to fill placement. 2.3 After the ground surface to receive fill has been cleared,it shall be scarified,and/or bladed by the Contractor until it is uniform and free from ruts, hollows, hummocks,or other uneven features which may prevent uniform compaction. The scarified ground surface shall then be brought to optimum moisture,mixed as required,and compacted as specified. If the scarified zone is greater than twelve inches in depth,the excess shall be removed and placed in lifts not to exceed six inches or less. Prior to placing fill,the ground surface to receive fill shall be observed,tested,and approved by the Geotechnical Consultant. 2.4 Any underground structures or cavities such as cesspools,cisterns,mining shafts,tunnels,septic tanks,wells,pipe lines,or others are to be removed or treated in a manner prescribed by the Geotechnical Consultant. 2.5 In cut-fill transition lots and where cut lots are partially in soil,colluvium or unweathered bedrock materials,in order to provide uniform bearing conditions,the bedrock portion of the lot extending a minimum of 5 feet outside of building lines shall be over excavated a minimum of 3 feet and replaced with compacted fill. Greater over excavation could be required as determined --,, Geotechnical Consultant. Typical details are attached. • • .• 3.0 COMPACTED FILLS 3.1 Material to be placed as fill shall be free of organic matter and other deleterious substances,and shall be approved by the Geotechnical Consultant. Soils of poor gradation,expansion,or strength characteristics shall be placed in areas designated by Geotechnical Consultant or shall be mixed with other soils to serve as satisfactory fill material, as directed by the Geotechnical Consultant. 3.2 Rock fragments less than six inches in diameter may be utilized in the fill, provided: They are not placed or nested in concentrated pockets. • • There is a sufficient amount of approved soil to surround the rocks. The distribution of rocks is supervised by the Geotechnical Consultant. • 3.3 Rocks greater than twelve inches in diameter shall be taken off-site,or placed in accordance with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Consultant in areas designated as suitable for rock disposal. (A typical detail for Rock Disposal is attached.) 3.4 Material that is spongy, subject to decay,or otherwise considered unsuitable shall not be used in the compacted fill. 3.5 Representative samples of materials to be utilized as compacted fill shall be analyzed by the laboratory of the Geotechnical Consultant to determine their physical properties. If any material other than that previously tested is encountered during grading,the appropriate analysis of this material shall be conducted by the Geotechnical Consultant before being approved as fill material. 3.6 Material used in the compacting process shall be evenly spread, watered, processed, and compacted in thin lifts not to exceed six inches in thickness to obtain a uniformly dense layer. The fill shall be placed and compacted on a horizontal plane,unless otherwise approved by the Geotechnical Consultant. 3.7 If the moisture content or relative compaction varies from that required by the Geotechnical Consultant,the Contractor shall rework the fill until it is approved by the Geotechnical Consultant. • 3.8 Each layer shall be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum density in compliance with the testing method specified by the controlling governmental agency or ASTM 1557-70,whichever applies. If compaction to a lesser percentage is authorized by the controlling governmental agency because of a specific land use or expansive soil condition,the area to receive fill compacted to less than 90 percent shall either be delineated on the grading • plan and/or appropriate reference made to the area in the geotechnical report. 3.9 All fills shall be keyed and benched through all topsoil, colluvium, alluvium, or creep material, into sound bedrock or firm material where the slope receiving fill exceeds a ratio of five horizontal to one vertical or in accordance with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Consultant. 3.10 The key for side hill fills shall be a minimum width of 15 feet within bedrock or firm materials,unless otherwise specified in the geotechnical report. (See detail attached.) 3.11 Sub-drainage devices shall be constructed in compliance with the ordinances of the controlling governmental agency,or with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Consultant. (Typical Canyon Sub-drain details are attached.) 3.12 The contractor will be required to obtain a minimum relative compaction of at least 90 percent out to the finish slope face of fill slopes, buttresses, and stabilization fills. This may be achieved by either over building the slope and cutting back to the compacted core,or by direct compaction of the slope face with suitable equipment,or by any other procedure which produces the required compaction approved by the Geotechnical Consultant. 3.13 All fill slopes should be planted or protected from erosion by other methods specified in the Geotechnical report. 3.14 Fill-over-cut slopes shall be properly keyed through topsoil,colluvium or creep material into rock or firm materials,and the transition shall be stripped of all soil prior to placing fill. (See attached detail.) 4.0 CUT SLOPES 4.1 The Geotechnical Consultant shall inspect all cut slopes at vertical intervals exceeding five feet. • 4.2 If any conditions not anticipated in the geotechnical report such as perched water,seepage,lenticular or confined strata of a potentially adverse nature, unfavorably inclined bedding,joints or fault planes encountered during grading,these conditions shall be analyzed by the Geotechnical Consultant,and recommendations shall be made to mitigate these problems. (Typical details for stabilization of a portion of a cut slope are attached.) 4.3 Cut slopes that face in the same direction as the prevailing drainage shall be protected from slope wash by a non-erodible interceptor swale placed at the top of the slope. 4.4 Unless otherwise specified in the geotechnical report,no cut slopes shall be excavated higher or steeper than that allows the ordinances of controlling governmental agencies. 4.5 Drainage terraces shall be constructed in compliance with the ordinances of controlling governmental agencies,or with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Consultant. 5.0 TRENCH BACKFILLS 5.1 Trench excavation shall be inspected prior to structure placement for competent bottom. 5.2 Trench excavations for utility pipes shall be backfilled under the supervision of the Geotechnical Consultant. 5.3 After the utility pipe has been laid, the space under and around the pipe shall be backfilled with clean sand or approved granular soil to a depth of at least one foot over the top of the pipe. The sand backfill shall be uniformly jetted into place before the controlled backfill is placed over the sand. 5.4 The on-site materials,or other soils approved by the Geotechnical Consultant, shall be watered and mixed,as necessary, prior to placement in lifts over the sand backfill. 5.5 The controlled backfill shall be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum laboratory density, as determined by the ASTM D1557-70 or the controlling governmental agency. 5.6 Field density tests and inspection of the backfill procedures shall be made by the Geotechnical Consultant during backfilling to see that proper moisture content and uniform compaction is being maintained. The contractor shall provide test holes and exploratory pits as required by the Geotechnical Consultant to enable sampling and testing. 6.0 GRADING CONTROL • 6.1 Inspection of the fill placement shall be provided by the Geotechnical Consultant during the progress of grading. 6.2 In general,density tests should be made at intervals not exceeding two feet of fill height or every 500 cubic yards of fill pla These criteria will vary depending on soil conditions and the size of the job. In any event, an adequate number of i density tests shall be made to verify that the required compaction is being achieved. 6.3 Density tests should also be made on the native surface material to receive fill,as required by the Geotechnical Consultant. 6.4 All clean-out, processed ground to received fill, key excavations,sub-drains, and rock disposals should be inspected and approved by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placing any till. It shall be the Contractor's responsibility to notify the Geotechnical Consultant when such areas will be ready for inspection. 7.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS 7.1 Erosion control measures,when necessary, shall be provided by the Contractor during grading and prior to the completion and construction of permanent drainage controls. 7.2 Upon completion of grading and termination of inspections by the Geotechnical Consultant, no further filling or excavating, including that necessary for footings foundations,large tree wells,retaining walls,or other features shall be performed without the approval of the Geotechnical Consultant. 7.3 Care shall be taken by the Contractor during final grading to preserve any berms,drainage terraces, interceptor swales,or other devices of permanent nature on or adjacent to the property. i • .+ APPENDIX E PROBABILISTIC SEISMIC CHARTS • i• RGS Engineering Geology • PROBABILITY OF EXCEEDANCE BOORE ET AL(1997) NEHRP D (250)1 • • 25 yrs 50 yrs 100 - 75 yrs 100 yrs 90 80 o 70 la 60 _ • ca 0 50 _ 0 40 = . c - -0 30 a) _ o 20 w 10 _ Vikuitem. 0 -0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1 .00 1 .25 1 .50 Acceleration (q) • • z - O O - _ H - LU '-' N . �T� O - r 1 N -M-I O _ ITlQ - oa U � _ C v) N - ° a)) • F — 0 H O Q LU pit _ O H W W N LO Pi. — O O — O - - O O O O O W O r- ,• (saA) poped wrgeH • PROBABILITY OF EXCEEDANCE BOORE ET AL(1997) NEHRP D (250)1 • 25 yrs 50 yrs • • 75 yrs 100 yrs 15.0 T = 12.5 co 0 L 2 10.0 a) • - U - cu a) 7.5 ' a) - U _ W 5.0 LII IIII IIII IIII 1 IIII IIII 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1 .00 Acceleration (q) _. • LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JULY 2009 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION I]) • APPENDIX F STOCKPILE EVALUATION • • • R:\RNF0701\Initial Study\07 09 Initial Study'AppendicC Slipshcets.doc • ((''+� C�lv Engineering 8800 Onyx Avenue, Suite D • Rancho Cucamonga,California 91730 (909) 945-2405 • LVf 1J Geology wwwrgsgeosciences.com (909) 945-2407 Fin August 11, 2008 James McKenzie y _-, •�- , San Bernardino Flood Control Operations 825 E. Third Street, Room 108 San Bernardino, California 92408 SUBJECT: STOCKPILE EVALUATION • . Demens Basin No. 1, North End of Amethyst Street, Just South of Almond Street, Rancho Cucamonga, California Project No. 1376-03 Mr. McKenzie: In accordance with your authorization, we have completed our evaluation of the subject stockpile earth material. We understand this stockpiled earth material is proposed for use as structural fill to support the proposed Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station No. 177 located along the west side of Hellman Avenue just south of Hillside Avenue. The purpose of our investigation was to determine the physical characteristics of the earth • material, determine its suitability to be used as structural fill, and provide recommendations for fill placement. Our findings, conclusions, and recommendations related to�the stockpiled material and its use as structural fill are presented herein. Should you,,�. t estions, or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contacet acgc ^t ( om SRiGcS eEygel ° nearing Geoto { y < ` �_ i\` Xoc:?5:11,1,117.--,., //5 RTIFIEv I i I / / * cG UE"li:G ii I/ # CIyisto her Kr 1 6, ExPiRsisrEiii31-cy/c,./it Craig Schro°:€ ,- 33529 Pnncip En sneering Geol hipt,, — � / Project Engineer tT Gt.\cy/ _. � • Distribution: (4) Addressee (hardcopy) (1) Addressee (electronic) • Geologic Evaluation O P'aztbt/Seismic Studies 0 Environmental Assessments 0 Perco1atiun. Testing Stockpile Evaluation San Bernardino County Flood Control Operations Demers Basin No. I Project No. 1376-03 Rancho Cucamonga, California August 11,2008 • INTRODUCTION Accompanying Maps, Illustrations, and Appendices Figure 1 - Site Location Map Figure 2 - Trench Location Plan Figure 3 - Oversize Rock Placement APPENDIX A - References APPENDIX B - Exploratory Trench Logs APPENDIX C - Laboratory Test Results Scope of Services In accordance with your authorization, we have conducted a stockpile evaluation for the subject earth material. The scope of work performed as part of this study included the following: • Review related geologic and soils information available in our files. • Excavate, log, and soil sample eight exploratory trenches to evaluate the material • within the stockpiles. • Laboratory testing of representative samples to determine pertinent physical and chemical parameters including particle size, organic content, and corrosion potential. • Analysis of laboratory test results and field data. • Preparation of this report presenting our findings, conclusions, and recommendations for using stockpile material as structural fill. Site Conditions and Location The subject stockpiles, which have been labeled Stockpile No. 1 and Stockpile No. 2 for the purpose of this report (Figure 1 and Figure 2), are located at the north end of Amethyst Street near Almond Street in Rancho Cucamonga, California. The geographical relationship of each stockpile and surrounding vicinity are shown on our Site Location Map, Figure 1. It is our understanding that the stockpiled material has been removed from the Demens Flood Control Basin located just southwest of the stockpile locations. The stockpiles are composed of earth material that has accumulated within the flood control basin • RGS Engineering Geology Page 2 Stockpile Evaluation San Bernardino County Flood Control Operations • Demens Basin No. I Project No. 7376-03 Rancho Cucamonga, California August II, 2008 during periods of heavy or prolonged rainfall and subsequent erosion. As the material accumulated it was periodically removed by heavy duty earth moving equipment and stockpiled. The stockpiles range in height from approximately 5 to 20 feet high with minor native vegetation growing along the margins. The boundaries or limits of the stockpiles are well defined. SITE INVESTIGATION Literature Review As part of our investigation we reviewed several available geologic reports, maps, and other data relating to the local geology and earth materials. Documents from published, and non-published sources available in our files, as well as geologic maps from the California Geologic Survey and United States Geologic Survey, were obtained. A complete list of the documents, maps, and reports considered during the course of our investigation is provided in Appendix A of this report. Subsurface Investigation To evaluate the subsurface earth material conditions within the stockpiles a total of eight • (8) exploratory trenches were excavated on June 26, 2008 using a New Holland LB75-B rubber tired backhoe equipped with a 24" bucket. The trenches were extended to a maximum depth of 16 feet below the existing ground surface with moderate difficulty. The approximate locations of the exploratory trenches are shown on our Trench Location Plan, Figure 2. General descriptions of the earth materials encountered in our exploratory trenches are provided below. Detailed descriptions in the form of exploratory trench logs are provided in Appendix B of this report. Excavation Characteristics On-site earth materials were excavated with moderate difficulty, utilizing a rubber tired backhoe equipped with a 24" bucket. For the most part we expect that the on-site earth materials can be readily excavated with conventional heavy-duty grading equipment in proper working condition. The on-site earth material is generally non-cohesive and susceptible to caving. Care should be exercised for all excavations below a depth of 5 feet. Laboratory Testing Program Representative bulk soil samples were taken to the laboratory for testing. The testing program consisted of particle-size analyses, organic content, and corrosion suite consisting of sulfate content, chloride content, pH value, and electrical resistivity. R GS Engineering Geology Page 3 Stockpile Evaluation San Bernardino County Flood Control Operations Demens Basin No. I Project No. 1376-03 • ( Rancho Cucamonga, California August 11, 2008 Laboratory testing was conducted in accordance with applicable ASTM standard test methods and specifications. The results of our laboratory tests are included in Appendix C, Laboratory Test Results. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Stockpiled Earth Materials Our field exploration and laboratory test results indicate that the stockpiles generally consist of silty sand with gravel (Unified Soil classification — SC/SM) that is very dark gray (Munsell soil color notation — (5Y-3/1) to dark brown (10YR-3/3). The earth material is generally described as fine to coarse grained, moist, loose, well graded, and non-cohesive. Limited quantities of oversized rock (greater than 10 inches in size) and organic material were noted locally. Laboratory testing indicates that the stockpiled material generally consists of 7 to 42 percent gravel, with an average of 24 percent gravel; 46 to 59 percent sand with an average of 52 percent sand; and 12 to 34 percent fines with an average of 24 percent fines. The organic content of the stockpiled material tested ranges from 3.5 to 8.2 percent limited to the layers identified in our exploratory trenches. Stockpile No. 1: Within stockpile No. 1 (trenches T-1 through T-4) cobbles to 10 inches • in size were noted within T-1 to a depth of 8 feet. Gravel with a maximum dimension of approximately 3 inches was noted to 10 or 20 percent by volume at a depth of 8 to 15 feet within trench T-2. Minor organics were noted based on color and odor within T-4 from 13 to 15 feet. Stockpile No. 2: Stockpile No. 2 displayed similar conditions with significant cobble to 12 inches in size noted within T-5 at 12 feet. A few oversize rocks measuring approximately 24 inches in size were noted in T-6 and the layer of cobble at a depth of 12 feet continued. Organics were again noted in T-7 below a depth of 10 feet based on color (5Y-3/1) and odor. Cobbles to 20 or 30 percent by volume were also noted below 13 feet. Oversized rock (approximately 24 inches in size) continued within T-8 and debris consisting ,of wood (4"x6"), steel pipe (likely a vehicle exhaust pipe) and telephone pole were noted at a depth of 6 feet. Suitability for Use as Structural Fill Based on our field exploration, visual classification, and laboratory testing, the stockpiled earth material generally consists of silty sand and gravel that is considered non-expansive and suitable for use as structural fill. ( ) RGS Engineering Geology Page 4 • Stockpile Evaluation San Bernardino County Flood Control Operations Demens Basin No. 1 Project No. 1376-03 • Rancho Cucamonga, California August 11,2008 Oversized material, including rock greater than 10 inches in size will require special handling and placement within deep fills. As an alternative the oversized material can be crushed or removed from the site and otherwise disposed. Similarly, deleterious materials such as construction debris and trash must be removed prior to use as fill. Only minor amounts of debris were noted through our investigation. We anticipate that this material can be adequately removed through hand picking or screening during earthwork operations. Organic material is limited to localized areas containing less than 8 percent by weight. This material can be mixed with non-organic material during the earthwork operation to reduce the organic content to less than 3 percent prior to use as structural fill. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Conclusions • Stockpiled earth materials generally consist of silty sand and gravel with limited oversize rock, organic material, and debris that will require special handling. • • Use of the stockpiled material is considered feasible provided the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of this report are considered and implemented during site earthwork. •- Stockpiled materials.are expected to be readily excavated utilizing conventional heavy duty grading equipment in proper working condition. • Recommendations Fill Placement: Fill soils should be placed in 6 to 8-inch lifts, brought to near optimum moisture content and compacted to a minimum 90% of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 1557 test method. Rocks greater than 10 inches in size should not be placed within 10 feet of the proposed finished grade or slope face. Rocks greater than 6 inches in size should not be placed within 5 feet of finished grade. Rocks greater than 10 inches in size can be placed within deep fills provided they are properly windrowed or spread within the fill as shown on Figure 3, Rock Disposal Detail. As an alternative, over sized material can be crushed to an appropriate dimension and used as fill or removed from the project site altogether. RGS Engineering Geology Page 5 Stockpile Evaluation San Bernardino County Flood Control Operations Demens Basin No. 1 Project No. 1376-03 Rancho Cucamonga, California August 11,2008 • Where organic material is encountered, it should be mixed with clean earth material to reduce the organic content to less than 3 percent. This is likely to be accomplished through the conventional methods of loading earth moving equipment and placement of material as fill. In the event that significant areas of high content (greater than 8 percent) organic material are encountered, special handling to include mixing may be required. Trash and debris, including wood branches, posts, metal, etc., should be removed prior to placement and compaction as fill. Based on the limited quantities of debris encountered, we expect that this material can be removed by hand picking. In the event that additional areas of debris are encountered, screening of the material to remove debris may prove more effective. Trash and debris should be removed from the site and properly disposed. Construction Monitoring: Observation and testing, under the direction of a qualified geotechnical/soils engineer and/or engineering geologist during grading, is essential to verify compliance with our recommendations and to confirm that the geotechnical conditions encountered are consistent with the findings of this investigation. At a minimum, observation and testing should be provided at the following stages of construction: • Excavation and placement of stockpiled material as fill. • Whenever and unusual conditions are exposed • CLOSURE Our investigation was performed using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable Geotechnical Engineers and Geologists practicing in this or similar localities. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made _ as to the conclusions and professional advice included in this report. The samples taken and used for testing and the observations made are believed representative of the entire project; however, soil and geologic conditions can vary significantly between exploratory locations. As in most projects, conditions revealed by excavation may be at variance with preliminary findings. If this occurs, the changed conditions must be evaluated by the Project Geotechnical Engineer and Geologist and designs adjusted as required or alternate designs recommended. This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or his representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the architect and engineer for the project and incorporated into the plans, and the necessary steps are taken to see that the contractor and subcontractors carry out such recommendations in the field ( ) • RGS Engineering Geology Page 6 . - . . . • • . • • • ROCK DISPOSAL DETAIL R. G S Engineering G eology • . FINISH GRADE ' FILL------- _ _ SLOPE FACE - ------- --------- - . - r ---- -------- -i----------- 715, MIN_ -4' MIN. - _..4_ - z- 1- ..22.- .-_-__Lc.„-- -—-—OVERSIZE.-— — WINDROW! — — — . _ • • - - - -•-densified by• , • ' • _GRANULAR SOIL' To i 1 vods, eo . 6 f lood ing ye, . . . . . • . PROFILE ALONG WINDROW . • ____ _____ .. -- - •••••• .- • • • - . - • -.• . - ,\ of , ..' •`A" A\'7 • • • • APPENDIX A References • • RGS Engineering Geology REFERENCES • Bortugno and Spittler 1986, geological map of the San Bernardino Quadrangle, 1:250,000 scale; No. 3A. Carson, S.C. and Matti J.C., 1985. Minimum depth to ground water, Upper Santa Ana river Valley. Department of the Interior U.S.G.S., Miscellaneous field studies map. Morton, D.M., and Matti, J.C., 2001, Geologic Map of the Cucamonga 7.5' Quadrangle, San Bernardino County, California, United States Geological Survey, Open File Report 01-311. RGS Engineering Geology, 2007a, Environmental Site Assessment Report (Phase I), Proposed Fire Station #177 (Hellman Avenue), Rancho Cucamonga, California, Project No. 1376-02, May 3, 2007. RGS Engineering Geology, 2007b, Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Fire Station #177, 5 Acres, West Side of Hellman Avenue, South of Hillside Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California, Project No. 1376-01, May 4, 2007. RGS Engineering Geology, 2007c, Sewage Disposal Investigation, Proposed Fire Station #177, 5 Acres, West Side of Hellman.Avenue, South of Hillside Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California, Project No. 1376-01a, May 8, 2007. • ( ) • RGS Engineering Geology • APPENDIX B Exploratory Trench Logs • • RGS Engineering Geology EXPL-ORA TORY TRENCH LOG PROJECT NAME Demens Basin ELEVATION N/A TRENCH NO. T-1 1376-03 PROJECT No. EQUIPMENT NH LB 75.B w/24"Bucket SO GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION I C s ',,,4 = LOGGED BY Christopher Krall DATE 06-26-08 H u - E SAMPLED BY Christopher Krall ', a F y l C-)O rte- a y, 'U' , L) Sw STOCKPILED FILL GRAVELLY SAND:Brown,(10 YR 4/3)medium to coarse with trace of fines,moist,loose,cobbles to 10"size. SC/SM SILTY SAND:Very dark gray(5 YR 3/1),fine to medium grained, u _ moist,loose,minor organics,faint odor. HI Hulk — 1; I5 Total Depth 15 Feet _410 No oversize rock.No Groundwater Trench Backfilled GRAPHIC LOG Trend: Scale: 1"= 5' *TEST SYMBOLS B- BULK SAMPLE R- RING SAMPLE SC- SANDCONE MD-MAXIMUM DENSITY GS- GRAIN SIZE SE- SAND EQUIVALENT NG-NUCLEAR GAUGE • (90)-RELATIVE COMPACTION Engineering R G S Geology III EXPLORATORY TRENCH LOG PROJECT NAME Demens Basin ELEVATION N/A TRENCH NO. T-2 • PROJECT No. 1376-03 EQUIPMENT NH LB 75.B w/24"Bucket GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION ._ z = LOGGED BY Christopher Kroll DATE 06-26-08 — <-- — — — _ -_-_ .: z 2 :.,- '--- 7--. _.a --7 ./: , SAMPLED BY Christopher Kral! .:.-- --, _ _ — :7: :r; — 74 — ::: -ti :" < :--■ Y -' '-` ,. --J 7,77 :/; S V. STOCKPILED FILL — GRAVELLY SAND:Dark brown,(10 YR 3/3)fine to coarse _ — _ grained,moist,loose,well graded,non-cohesive,gravel to 3"size, — _ minor organics 5'–6',oversize rock present,estimated at 10% by volume,10"–18"size. _ 5 5 _ — _ 0 — 10 GRAVELLY SAND:_ Brown,(10 YR 4/3)fine to coarse grained, _ moist,loose,well graded,gravel to 20%by volume. _ _ — I s 15 _ Total Depth 15 Feet III _ Moderate Excavation.No Groundwater _ _Trench Backfilled GRAPHIC LOG Trend: Scale: 1"= 5' 1 *TEST SYMBOLS B- BULK SAMPLE R- RING SAMPLE SC- SANDCONE MD-MAXIMUM DENSITY GS - GRAIN SIZE SE- SAND EQUIVALENT . NG-NUCLEAR GAUGE (90)-RELATIVE COMPACTION ■ddigillibilb.._ R G S Engineering Geology 0 EXPLORATORY TRENCH LOG PROJECT NAME Demens Basin ELEVATION N/A TRENCH NO. T-3 PROJECT No. 1376-03 EQUIPMENT NH LB 75.B w/24"Bucket • GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION _ z < — ~ LOGGED BY Christopher Krail DATE 06-26-08 =f _ c' f - Z. s -=.' — - SAMPLED BY Christopher Krall STOCKPILED FILL GRAVELLY SAND:Dark brown,(10 YR 3/3)fine to coarse grained,moist,loose,well graded,non-cohesive,gravel to 3"size, SC S\1 minor organics 5'-6',oversize rock present,estimated at 10% s Bulk by volume,10"-18"size.No organics. - 10 — — 10 So oversize rock or organic material. 1 IS 5 __ _ Total Depth 15 Feet _ _ Moderate Excavation.No Groundwater Trench Backfilled GRAPHIC LOG Trend: Scale: 1"= 5' • *TEST SYMBOLS ' B- BULK SAMPLE R- RING SAMPLE SC- SANDCONE MD-MAXIMUM DENSITY GS- GRAIN SIZE SE- SAND EQUIVALENT NG-NUCLEAR GAUGE (90)-RELATIVE COMPACTION ./111Mill R G S Engineering J Geology III • EXPL ORA TOR Y TRENCH LOG PROJECT NAME Demens Basin ELEVATION N/A TRENCH NO. T-4 • PROJECT No. 1376-03 EQUIPMENT NH LB 75.B w/24"Bucket GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION -1 N LOGGED BY Christopher Krall DATE 06-26-08 _ _ J; o = _ z " SAMPLED BY Christopher KraII S Q r _,-.. ___ C .- U s STOCKPILED FILL GRAVELLY SAND:Dark brown,(10 YR 3/3)fine to coarse grained,moist,loose,well graded,non-cohesive,gravel to 3"size, minor organics 5'–6',oversize rock present,estimated at 10% S by volume, 10"– 18"size.No organics. One oversize rock(30"). SILTY SAND w/Gravel:Brown,(10 YR 4/3)fine to coarse grained,moist,loose,well graded,gravel to 5%by volume. 1 1 1) — _ 10 Minor organics 13'–15'. 15 15 1111 _ Total Depth 15 Feet Moderate Excavation.No Groundwater Trench Back filled GRAPHIC LOG Trend: Scale: 1"=5' I *TEST SYMBOLS• B- BULK SAMPLE R- RING SAMPLE SC- SANDCONE MD-MAXIMUM DENSITY GS- GRAIN SIZE SE- SAND EQUIVALENT NG-NUCLEAR GAUGE (90)-RELATIVE COMPACTION ■ MMki R G S G ne • EXPLORA TORY TRENCH LOG PROJECT NAME Demens Basin ELEVATION N/A TRENCH NO. T-5 PROJECT No. 1376-03 EQUIPMENT NH LB 75.B w/24"Bucket a GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION K. < :� x LOGGED BY Christopher Kral! DATE 06-26-08 r-o , z SAMPLED BY Christopher Krall - 1 Z v N r. --. U U STOCKPILED FILL SP/SM GRAVELLY SAND:Brown,(10 YR 4/4)fine to coarse grained,moist,loose,minor cobbles. Trace of organics 8'—10'. S Bulk 5 10 _, _ In Significant cobble to 12"size at 12 feet. 15 _ 1> Total Depth 16 Feet AO Moderate Excavation.No Groundwater Trench Backfilled GRAPHIC LOG Trend: Scale: 1"=5' *TEST SYMBOLS B- BULK SAMPLE R- RING SAMPLE SC- SANDCONE MD-MAXIMUM DENSITY GS - GRAIN SIZE SE- SAND EQUIVALENT NG-NUCLEAR GAUGE (90)-RELATIVE COMPACTION Iflaall R G S Engineering G eology S EXPL ORA TORY TRENCH LOG PROJECT NAME Demens Basin ELEVATION N/A TRENCH NO. T-6 1376-03 • PROJECT No. EQUIPMENT NH LB 75.B w/24"Bucket GEOTECI-INICAL DESCRIPTION z .- = LOGGED BY Christopher Krall DATE 06-26-08 J] - l Z z f SAMPLED BY Christopher Krall a N J .. o a H n q �, L STOCKPILED FILL SW GRAVELLY SAND:Brown,(10 YR 4/4)fine to coarse • grained,moist,loose,minor cobbles. Trace of organics 8'—10'. 5 SM GRAVELLY SAND w/minor organics:Very dark gray,(5 YR 3/1) Bulk fine to coarse grained,moist,loose,faint odor,3 oversize rocks to 24"size. 10 _ to Layer of cobble to 10"size at 12 feet. Steel plate excavated at 14 feet. • _ — — Total Depth 15 Feet Moderate Excavation.No Groundwater Trench Backfilled GRAPHIC I.O( Trend: Scale: 1"=5' I *TEST SYMBOLS B- BULK SAMPLE R- RING SAMPLE SC- SANDCONE MD-MAXIMUM DENSITY GS- GRAIN SIZE SE- SAND EQUIVALENT NG-NUCLEAR GAUGE (90)-RELATIVE COMPACTION ■Millinglikib■ R G S Engineering G eology • EXPLORATORY TRENCH LOG PROJECT NAME Demens Basin ELEVATION N/A TRENCH NO. T-7 PROJECT No. 1376-03 EQUIPMENT NH LB 75.B w/24"Bucket III GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION -) z -.: !■ 7 _ -.. ;-. ,_;; LOGGED BY Christopher Kroll DATE 06-26-08 ,_. - iii -.D K -.- "..] SAMPLED BY Christopher Kroll H - 73' E E-, a.. ...-- '--•.- ,=.• ',- ,--. ■ STOCKPILED FILL S\■• _ — _ SILTY SAND w/Gravel:Dark yellow brown,(10 YR 3/4)fine to — _ medium grained,moist,loose,non-cohesive. • ----, ^ _ SM GRAVELLY SAND:Brown(10 YR 4/3)fine to coarse grained, moist,loose,non-cohesive,minor cobble. * _ — Minor organics below at 10 feet. 10 Soil is discolored(5Y 3/1)with faint odor-non visible vegetation. Cobbles to 20%-30%by volume below 13 feet. — Small Bulk — 15 15 Total Depth 15 Feet _ _410 Moderate Excavation.No Groundwater Trench Backfilled GRAPHIC LOG Trend: Scale: 1"= 5' I *TEST SYMBOLS B - BULK SAMPLE R- RING SAMPLE SC- SANDCONE MD-MAXIMUM DENSITY GS- GRAIN SIZE SE- SAND EQUIVALENT NG-NUCLEAR GAUGE (90)-RELATIVE COMPACTION - 1Millkibb■ R G 0 Engineering 3 Geology 4111/ EXPL ORA TORY TRENCH LOG PROJECT NAME Demens Basin ELEVATION N/A TRENCH NO. T-$ 1376-03 PROJECT No. EQUIPMENT NH LB 75.B w/24"Bucket • GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION _ z _< ` "- LOGGED BY Christopher KraIl DATE 06-26-08 � < L . , z ' -~ SAMPLED BY Christopher Krall w z Q O p v: ,4 Q E-- V q °' 2 U U SW STOCKPILED FILL GRAVELLY SAND:Brown,(10 YR 4/3)fine to coarse grained, — moist,loose,well graded,minor cobble,non-cohesive.4 oversized rock to 24" Debris noted at 6 ft wood(4"x 6"_and steel pipes and telephone pole(tail pipes). 10 — Ifl ID — Total Depth 15 Feet Moderate Excavation.No Groundwater Trench Backfilled GRAPHIC LOG Trend: Scale: l"=5' • *TEST SYMBOLS B- BULK SAMPLE R- RING SAMPLE SC- SANDCONE MD-MAXIMUM DENSITY GS- GRAIN SIZE SE- SAND EQUIVALENT . NG-NUCLEAR GAUGE (90)-RELATIVE COMPACTION R G s Engineering • • APPENDIX C Laboratory Test Results • • RGS Engineering Geology' '•il-. y' • .. Leighton Consulting, Inc. A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY July 14, 2008 RGS Engineering Geology 8800 Onyx Ave., Suite D Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Attention: Mr. Chris Kral! Subject: Report/Laboratory Testing Results Project Name: Demens Stockpiles Project No.: 1376-03 LC'I No.: 602283001 Dear Mr. KralL . Enclosed please find laboratory testing results for the soil samples received 06/30/08 from the above referenced project. The requested tests were conducted in essential accordance with the standard test methods listed below. TYPE OF TEST TEST METHOD • Particle-Size Analysis of Soils AS'IM D 422 Moisture, Ash. and Organic Mailer of ASTM D 2974 Peat and Other Organic Soils Corrosion Suite DOT CA Test 532/643 • Test results are presented in the e-mailed pdfs and attached data sheets. ASTM: ASTM International, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Section 4: Construction, Volume 04.08: Soil and Rock (I), 2006. DOT CA: State of California Department of Transportation, Standard Test Methods, Volumes 2 and 3, Testing and Control Procedures_ 1990. Thank you for selecting Leighton Consulting, Inc. to provide laboratory testing services to RGS Engineering Geology. Please feel free to contact us if you should have any questions concerning these results. Very truly yours, LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC. Laboratory Testin(g� Services • Edward Shandi Soils Laboratory Manager II • Enclosures 17781 Cowan a Irvine, CA 92614-6009 949.253.9836 v Fax 949.250.1114 a www.leightonconsulting.com a PARTICLE-SIZE ANALYSIS of SOILS Leighton ASTM D 422 • Project Name: Demens Stockpiles Tested By: S. Fetter Date: 07/01/08 Project No.: 1376-03 Checked By: J. Ward Date: 07/07/08 Exploration No.: T-1 Depth (feet): 10-13 Sample No.: Bulk Soil Identification:Olive gray silty, clayey sand with gravel (SC-SM)q Calculation of Dry Weights Whole Sample Sample Passing Whole Sample Sample #a Moisture Contents passing#4 Container No.: SP04 ZK Wt. of Air-Dry Soil + Cont.(g) 0.00 0.00 Wt. Air-Dried Soil + Cont.(g) 5472.30 762.90 Wt. of Dry Soil + Cont. (g) 0.00 0.00 Wt. of Container (g) 796.80 249.50 Wt. of Container No. (g) 1.00 1.00 Dry Wt. of Soil (g) 4675.50 513.40 Moisture Content (%) 0.00 0.00 Container No. ZK Passing #4 Material After Wet Sieve Wt. of Dry Soil + Container (g) 555.80 Wt. of Container (9) 249.50 Dry Wt. of Soil Retained on # 200 Sieve (g) 306.30 U. S. Sieve Size Cumulative Weight of Dry Soil Retained (g) Percent Passing • (mm.) Whole Sample Sample Passing #4 (%) 6" 152.400 3" 75.000 0.00 100.0 1 1/2 37.500 425.10 90.9 3/4" 19.000 563.20 88.0 3/8" 9.500 774.90 83.4 #4 4.750 977.10 79.1 #8 2.360 29.30 74.6 #16 1.180 61.70 69.6 #30 0.600 101.70 63.4 #50 0.300 147.20 56.4 #100 0.150 . 216.50 45.7 #200 0.075 300.50 32.8 PAN GRAVEL: 21 SAND: 46 FINES: 33 . GROUP GROUP SYMBOL (SC-SM)g Cu = D60/D10 = Cc = (D30)?/(D60*D10) = Remarks: • • X/ • O � O -, • a 5 I Y > _ _ I " —Fw1-- - - ---- - -- - - _ Cl, I___. _'__---...� __ a.. ____.__._._. O LZZ 0 -- 1 - _-__- —_._ ._--i O O .. - a _... ............. ....- -.....-....... -..-i.-.. ..-....... E F a) M co 5 I a N o -.- ,— 1 - - _ .I C _--` a) N N -- 1 1.— -. _- __ o > u -._._ ----- _-__-- _ ------- --- _.___. --f' -- o ' I- - Cr, 0 oo .-I w o 1 E '"� p c z 1 .. IL § W Q a). _0 w .H y C m ° _ _. 0 �C LL -I 1- _ t ` • w ' a - cd - ----- --- -- - ---- -- n • n - w o _.. . __ _ . ._� . .. _ - C O U)) W N r C u _.----_ _ I _—.. �— Q o . ... -.. . __ _....- .. _ .. __. a ---- '-- '... ........... ... .. -....._- o o °z ,n _ i H i w z u) u I LA I j _. .--_ _...... __. .-.... .._ _... -._. w m - 1 W N Z �d �" ® N o j-- I I- cr v __ - .. -_ __-_�- _...__ ..'....... ......... W J m -- --- I - — ----- U f --- - -- _r____ 0 h~- H F- Z I a G z i w - - ! J O v I 1> w n • lA W 0 N .� - M— — o a o � iI O o z _ 1 1 i n y.I- -- - — j — - ; -- .. -c U) - - r---______�- __.! 0 0) • ° E J 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o m m r to u) K co N 06 O 1HSI3M AS i13N1d 1N3�N3d ( Z Z j' t • ILi L d a7 'Ws^a 0 O ` i . k31' 0- n. PARTICLE-SIZE ANALYSIS of SOILS Leighton ASTM D 422 •' - Project Name: Demens Stockpiles Tested By: S. Felter Date: 07/01/08 Project No.: 1376-03 Checked By: 3. Ward Date: 07/07/08 Exploration No.: TT=3 Depth (feet): 4-7 Sample No.: Bulk Soil Identification:Olive brown silty, clayey sand with gravel (SC-SM)q Calculation of Dry Weights Whole Sample sample Passing Whole Sample Sample #a Moisture Contents passing#a Container No.: SPO1 SP Wt. of Air-Dry Soil + Cont.(g) 0.00 0.00 Wt. Air-Dried Soil + Cont.(g) 5448.70 793.50 Wt. of Dry Soil + Cont. (g) 0.00 • 0.00 Wt. of Container (g) 741.60 220.60 Wt. of Container No. (g) 1.00 1.00 Dry Wt. of Soil • (g) 4707.10 I 572.90 Moisture Content(%) 0.00 0.00 Container No. SP Passing #4 Material After Wet Sieve Wt. of Dry Soil + Container (g) 598.30 Wt. of Container (g) 220.60 Dry Wt. of Soil Retained on # 200 Sieve (g) 377.70 U. S. Sieve Size Cumulative Weight of Dry Soil Retained (g) Percent Passing • Whole Sample (mm.) Sample Passing #4 (%) 6" 152.400 3" 75.000 ' 0.00 100.0 1 1/2 37.500 136.20 97.1 3/4" 19.000 381.80 91.9 3/8" 9.500 696.20 85.2 #4 4.750 . -. 989.20 79.0 #8 2.360 48.90 72.3 #16 1.180 97.00 65.6 #30 0.600 153.40 57.8 #50 0.300 213.50 49.6 #100 0.150 293.90 38.5 #200 0.075 373.30 27.5 PAN GRAVEL: 21 SAND: 51 FINES: 28 • GROUP SYMBOL (SC-SM)g Cu = D60/D10 = Cc = (D30)2/(D60*D10) = Remarks: XI ( 'CS D 1..Ill n -1 o O • >- Z u . 1 '-2 u . CA I I r• CU Z > I V) fo —c . • e _ U • , tr) Lthi .1 , 0 CO .. 02 Z _ Z 0 0 -0 L.I-2 Lc c; .. c ci z CU ry9 = a) >La a1- ao 00 E N rn • cm cr) u •• _ drl IA = In V) --i- 1 C . - -- 2 0 0 - a) N - 0 .> * f o , O 0 o - I J E rni C.! . FL, ,I-1 E ^ E o .....5! . . •-• It • . •• 10 0 ll.. • 0.1 •• It •••-• --, u .. ce .] , N tr) u., . co c 0./ . 0 4_ cci 0 - Z 4-1 D 4t _ . 111 co CC 1111 . . ILI P L) 0 •-• rn CC Z Ln 4* -I < o . a ' - . ' .,... LIJ .t F_. ,-, S Ifl * Vi 7 i 141 z * IV op - . — — . I■1 a r•LI (11 > . g Lul _ tr) s VI M - C C) C th te .-1 laC < LD 0 o z L •••■• 1-1 < w re) i---- 0 ri -C H . rn - 0 Vi • 0 a; 0 2 n . , , , , , . i 0 o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 E -- --I o co oo r--. uo la •rt r) CN ..- .- r1:1 (2 _ z z I I .LHOI3M AEI el3NIA IN33213d Cli j ' c•17 • El. CL • e PARTICLE-SIZE ANALYSIS of SOILS Leighton ASTM D 422 • Project Name: Demens Stockpiles Tested By: S. Felter Date: 07/01/08 Project No.: 1376-03 Checked By: 3. Ward Date: 07/07/08 Exploration No.: TT=5 Depth (feet): 3-6 Sample No.: Bulk Soil Identification: Dark brown poorly-oraded sand with silt and gravel (SP-SM)a Calculation of Dry Weights I Whole Sample Sample Passing Whole Sample Sample #q Moisture Contents passing#4 Container No.: SPO2 HA Wt. of Air-Dry Soil + Cont.(g) 0.00 814.30 Wt. Air-Dried Soil + Cont.(g) 18215.30 814.30 Wt. of Dry Soil + Cont. (g) 0.00 780.00 Wt. of Container (g) 738.80 246.40 Wt. of Container No. (g) 1.00 246.40 Dry Wt. of Soil (g) 17476.50 533.59 Moisture Content (%) 0.00 6.43 Container No. HA Passing #4 Material After Wet Sieve Wt. of Dry Soil + Container (g) 667.60 Wt. of Container (g) 246.40 Dry Wt. of Soil Retained on # 200 Sieve (g) 421.20 U. S. Sieve Size I Cumulative Weight of Dry Soil Retained (9) Percent Passing • (mm.) Whole Sample Sample Passing #4 (%) 6" 152.400 0.00 100.0 3" 75.000 1355.50 92.2 1 1/2 1 37.500 2955.50 • 83.1 3/4" 19.000 4464.00 1 74.5 3/8" 9.500 6237.70 • 64.3 #4 4.750 - - - - 7405.90 57.6 #8 2.360 55.50 51.6 #16 1.180 110.90 45.6 #30 0.600 178.40 38.3 _ #50 0.300 252.10 30.4 #100 0.150 - I 341.50 20.7 #200 0.075 1 418.70 12.4 PAN GRAVEL: 42 SAND: 46 FINES: 12 . GROUP GROUP SYMBOL: (SP-SM)g Cu = D60/D10 = 103.33 Cc = (D30)2/(D60*D10) = 0.23 Remarks: 23 ( . g i 0 V) 5 , 1 0 ,• Yu > 12 r 5 v u I c i ra I 1 Z •••71 ______ -- - . - ! v-, 46- E . . eL fr, ., --E - I t 5 0 0 c •-3 DI tr) CO Z cc 1 6 ro o I • •• v) i . r i • 1- I 1 ! Z 03 0 t7) O. LI >5.5 co I I 1 0. 1- 5- N i 1 ____-■ r% .c.?:, 7 'I - Ul til 5- •• I I 0 I 1 , 0 tes . i I • cr 0 , C CV 0 •• it 0 ■ 1 S N 1 s Cr la ,,, -•8 _ 6 rITI I Z uj 4* .---- C VI Ir. 03 I I I D 0 _ I z Le, i in' LOI ELI rial E --r- i --"--- I I E •• -Li; _ ___•- E o - rcl ...... O z I 1 4 I ...... z ---- u .. cu IF- 1-1 on . • LU c Z s ce it 0 CU .2 la- < D < Z • Q.) .i. , • z u) rO 0 Z to I : : 9 • •-• z 1:11 v) • a-• cc -, - i , - .- UJ o 4-* O. CI r a H * 0 , J tli 5 (..) 111 CI In 0 ui I- . . u j I 4t < < , i i 1 . I t •- 1 0 al EC . 1 ---1 z . o NZ • 0 rn • . : 6 z . • I I . ga" 0 rs1 _J . 2 •sr m r-1 LU I > Lu = a V- _ I i l • et g 0 rn MI (.9 tu , 1 I IT_ M 0 w - : cn N u 1.4 wr - ' I 1 SI Ce it • 1 l ' l••• far- o Ce In er u ir• e . a . 1 1 : 4: 1 _1 I O. z b _ 0 CUI ____ 0____ 0 in ul = z s a a 6 9 i r ul 0 0 0 1 [ri U I 1 I 1 1 In rn C 0 lil i CI) ' C cc 1 E `re 0 LU 5 CU el ...a 0 I i I • • 0 J 0 I -1-------....•......- 0 a) 0 r0 a.) • • • , , • , • 6 E -• -J o 0 o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a co 0 0 0) DO N CO Lit) -1" ol N ( ) .I.H013M rk9 inNIA IN301:13d ,_ 0_ 07 e PARTICLE-SIZE ANALYSIS of SOILS Leighton ASTM D 422 • Project Name: Demens Stockpiles Tested By:• S. Fetter Date: 07/01/08 Project No.: 1376-03 Checked By: J. Ward Date: 07/07/08 Exploration No.: TT=6 Depth (feet): 6-10 Sample No.: Bulk Soil Identification:Olive gray silty sand with gravel (SM)q Calculation of Dry Weights Whole Sample Sample Passing Whole Sample Sample #a Moisture Contents passing#4 Container No.: M10 YK Wt. of Air-Dry Soil + Cont.(g) 0.00 0.00 Wt. Air-Dried Soil + Cont.(g) 3675.20 784.60 Wt. of Dry Soil + Cont. (g) 0.00 0.00 Wt. of Container (g) 233.10 252.30 Wt. of Container No. (g) 1.00 1.00 Dry Wt. of Soil (g) 3442.10 532.30 Moisture Content (%) 0.00 0.00 Container No. YK Passing #4 Material After Wet Sieve Wt. of Dry Soil + Container(g) 678.90 Wt. of Container (g) 252.30 Dry Wt. of Soil Retained on # 200 Sieve (g) 426.60 U. S. Sieve Size Cumulative Weight of Dry Soil Retained (g) Percent Passing • Whole Sample Sample Passing #4 (%) (mm.) 6" 152.400 3" 75.000 0.00 100.0 11/2 37.500 145.30 95.8 3/4" 19.000 365.40 89.4 3/8" 9.500 I 664.10 I 80.7 #4 4.750 . I . ---910.50 . 73.5 #8 2.360 43.40 67.5 #16 1.180 95.30 60.3 #30 0.600 165.90 50.6 #50 0.300 248.70 39.2 #100 0.150 348.00 25.4 #200 0.075 420.90 15.4 PAN GRAVEL: 27 SAND: 58 % FINES: 15 Wo • GROUP SYMBOL (SM)g Cu = D60/D10 = Cc = (D30)?/(D60*D10) = Remarks: - - . . D ( , r o 5 o 0 : 0 >- 5 . --. cr . ._ .1 z z —ce ail - in u) CO ....-, V) UJ X 71 u: se . 6 -• 12 . >- O z ru • t . H E r- 'CA ro 5 "cs WV) c - ro va co — In — - Vi ro . N. a _— o - co N St r- 0 O 0 a - • E 1-1 I ‘DI OE LU 0 • E Lu 6 •• ro •-• or• - (re UJ CT) C a) I■1 '''s u_ C CU ra DK > P in 0 cn k..7 ....1 a O - „., - cc Z 0 * - cc CO - -H - . 0 Cl- V) 2 .4 - 0 . DO 0 1 r Z U) * U) - • u..! . NZ 11-1 0 rsi . . a 0 , L) I I- et ,c- - . • Lil n ca 1 _1 co .. 1 U I1 fr I1 L - — o I z I w 0 1 0 Ce V) etn Bo - _ vi I a 0 z 2 . .0 Lo _1 o ;4-• . s . UJ Lu n I 0 > > ' • I .10-...) iv) - (5 LU 0 i''') r • • I • • la rr) CC La CC ri 0.4 •)( I a I Q) ' l0 E o r-.• -I-. 0 a . I , 1 cu rn in 4 I CD - 1 F 0 •• el . F . I r r r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a) Q) ., o o E -: 0 _J o a) co r- co Ln •cr ca ca ,-- - Z Z IHOIBM A9 el3NIA.1.1),113e13d ( ) U U 4,s- • • .... 0- 0- asios PARTICLE-SIZE ANALYSIS of SOILS Leighton ASTM D 422 • Project Name: Demens Stockpiles Tested By: . V.Juliano Date: 07/02/08 Project No.: 1376-03 Checked By: J. Ward Date: 07/07/08 Exploration No.: T-7 Depth (feet): 13.0 Sample No.: Small Bulk Soil Identification:Very dark olive silty sand (SM) Calculation of Dry Weights Whole Sample Sample Passing Whole Sample Sample #a Moisture Contents passing #4 Container No.: 989 K-3A Wt. of Air-Dry Soil + Cont.(g) 0.00 0.00 Wt. Air-Dried Soil + Cont.(g) 636.20 376.00 Wt. of Dry Soil + Cont. (g) 0.00 0.00 . Wt. of Container (g) _ 109.80 75.59 Wt. of Container No. (g) 1.00 1.00 Dry Wt. of Soil (g) 526.40 300.41 Moisture Content (%) 0.00 0.00 Container No. K-3A Passing #4 Material After Wet Sieve Wt. of Dry Soil + Container (g) 266.44 Wt. of Container (g) 75.59 Dry Wt. of Soil Retained on # 200 Sieve (g) 190.85 U. S. Sieve Size I Cumulative Weight of Dry Soil Retained (g) Percent Passing • (mm.) Whole Sample I Sample Passing #4 (%) 6" 152.400 3" 75.000 I I 1 1/2 37.500 3/4" 19.000 0.00 100.0 3/8" 9.500 19.12 96.4 #4 4.750 . ._. 38.94 92.6 #8 2.360 I 22.43 85.7 #16 1.180 49.89 77.2 #30 0.600 82.05 67.3 #50 0.300 119.43 55.8 #100 0.150 159.67 43.4 #200 0.075 190.71 33.8 PAN GRAVEL: 7 °to SAND: 59 °lo FINES: 34 Wo (• GROUP SYMBOL SM Cu = D60/D10 = Cc = (D30)2/(D60*D10) = Remarks: _ . ... . ..._. D 70 O 3 I o O i O 1 - - 0 w — i--_ E 21 Lei ur) z o ° U p I I ! o o • r z v _ � a� n a >- c CL E F- 0 ei '^ o, in I o o I I _ I - MI 1% • __ I N I O t yk __. ._____ -__.__ -__1._ - ._._.._- ___L._.. .. _.. O > I - I ci w o - E IrI OI a o z _ ___ _ - ____ _ E •• r, o N Z -- .. C a - M w O co o � u w v a a . Q w ■o ..._._ . __ _ _ -. w 0 VI U' LLI Z 0 C ---i —i . a a — - - -- --- - --__- .—��----- _ _--- °o D O � 1 o w z a - r • Vi w m — NZ w 0 N A o — — - 1 I . It v - W 0 p L I J m - — w I—C4 It — 1 I g ce tri a ego o a Li 0 m z a 0 z a _ I Y J O < O J w m ■ '.. j O � ' I I -F to M ....__._...- L.._._- C O c al 1 Q .. - � N N .4-+ ---- ____I__ - - ---- o � _ _ - - 0 _ D m O N •Q� O O O O co O O O O O O O O J O IT N r co N V 17 N Z Z 1HOI3M A8 2f3NIA 1N302f3d it'f,: _ • a) v k'aL' 0 0 P- L d d ■ TESTS for SULFATE CONTENT '--r Leighton CHLORIDE CONTENT and pH of SOILS • Project Name: Demens Stockpiles Tested By : V. Juliano Date: 07/01/08 Project No. : 1376-03 Data Input By: J. Ward Date: 07/07/08 Boring No. T-1 T-5 Sample No. Bulk Bulk Sample Depth (ft) 10-13 3-6 Soil Identification: (SC-SM)g (SP-SM)g Wet Weight of Soil + Container (g) 202.48 180.60 Dry Weight of Soil + Container (g) 184.95 173.58 Weight of Container (g) 60.53 65.20 Moisture Content (%) 14.09 6.48 Weight of Soaked Soil (g) I 100.80 100.70 SULFATE CONTENT, DOT California Test 417, Part II Beaker No. I 10 21 I I Crucible No. 27 26 • Furnace Temperature (°C) 740 740 Time In / Time Out I 7:20 / 8:05 7:20 / 8:05 Duration of Combustion (min) 45 45 Wt. of Crucible + Residue (g) 17.6381 18.8744 Wt. of Crucible (g) 17.6362 18.8734 I Wt. of Residue (g) (A) 0.0019 0.0010 PPM of Sulfate (A) x 41150 78:19 41.15 PPM of Sulfate, Dry Weight Basis 91 44 CHLORIDE CONTENT, DOT California Test 422 ml of Chloride Soln. For Titration (B) I 30 3 ml of AgNO3 Soln. Used in Titration (C) 0.5 0.6 PPM of Chloride (C -0.2) * 100 * 30/ B I 30 400 PPM of Chloride, Dry Wt. Basis I 35 428 pH TEST, DOT California Test 532/643 pH Value 6.88 I 6.63 IIITemperature °C 23.7 I 23.6 • O 4t# SOIL RESISTIVITY TEST Leighton DOT CA TEST 532 / 643 ( Project Name: Demens Stockpiles Tested By : V. Juliano Date: 07/02/08 • Project No. : 1376-03 Data Input By: J. Ward Date: 07/07/08 Boring No.: T-1 Depth (ft.) : 10-13 Sample No. : Bulk Soil Identification: (SC-SM)g Water Adjusted Resistance Soil Moisture Content(%) (MCi) 1 14.09 Specimen Added (ml) Moisture Reading Resistivity( ) 9 ty Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) 202.48 No. (Wa) C(MtCe)t( ohm) (ohm-cm) Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) 184.95 1 100 22.87 1100 7421 Wt. of Container (g) 60.53 2 _ 200 31.64 810 5464 Container No. • 3 300 40.42 880 5936 Initial Soil Wt. (g) (Wt) 1300.00 4 Box Constant 6.746 5 MC =(((1+Mci/100)x(Wa/Wt+1))-1)x100 Min. Resistivity Moisture Content Sulfate Content Chloride Content Soil pH (ohm-cm) (%) (ppm) (ppm) pH Temp.(°c) . DOT CA Test 532/643 DOT CA Test 417 Part II DOT CA Test 422 DOT CA Test 532/643 5400 33.2 I 91 35 1 6.88 23.7 • 8000 - 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 I I 750 1 0 1 I .. ._ .. _U 7000: . E a 1 I I 1 > 6500 I 1 I I in d 1 I I ( . re 6000 - 0 5500 I I I I I 1 i i I I I l t 5000 I 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0 • ( ) Moisture Content (%) ® 4, SOIL RESISTIVITY TEST Leighton DOT CA TEST 532 / 643 • •Project Name: Demens Stockpiles Tested By : V. Juliano Date: 07/02/08 Project No. : 1376-03 Data Input By: J. Ward Date: 07/07/08 Boring No.: 1-5 Depth (ft.) : 3-6 Sample No. : Bulk Soil Identification: (SP-SM)g Adjusted o Water Resistance Soil Moisture Content (%) (MCi) 6.48 Specimen Added ml Moisture Reading Resistivi ty Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) 180.60 (Wa) (MC) (ohm) (ohm-cm) Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) 173.58 1 100 14.67 1100 7421 Wt. of Container (g) • 65.20 2 200 22.86 860 5802 Container No. 3 300 31.05 890 6004 Initial Soil Wt. (g) (Wt) 1300.00 4 Box Constant 6.746 5 MC =(((1+Mci/100)x(Wa/Wt+1))-1)x100 Min. Resistivity Moisture Content Sulfate Content Chloride Content Soil pH (ohm-cm) (%) (ppm) (ppm) pH Temp.(°C) DOT CA Test 532/643 DOT CA Test 417 DOT CA Test 422 DOT CA Test Part II 532/643 III5725 24.8 44 428 1 6.63 23.6 8000 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 7500 - I I I I I I I E .U 7000 - I - - E _ I I I . o 1 I I I «. 6500 - , - I I I- - - - - . > 1 y N f D. I I � re 6000 _ �_ _ • o I c 5500 - 1 I I i 1 I I I 5000 , I I I • 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 ( Moisture Content (%) • ® MOISTURE, ORGANIC MATTER and 40 Leighton ASH CONTENT of SOILS ASTM D 2974(Test Methods A&C) ( Project Name: Demens Stockpiles Tested By: V. Juliano Date: 07/02/08 Project No. : 1376-03 Input By: J. Ward Date: 07/07/08 Client: RGS Boring No. T-1 T-7 Sample No. Bulk Small Bulk • Depth (ft) 10-13 13.0 Olive gray silty, Soil Description clayey sand Very dark olive ■ with gravel (SC silty sand (SM) SM)g Wt. of Moist Soil + Container (gm) 455.30 757.00 Wt. of Dried Soil + Container (gm) 411.15 636.20 Wt.Crucible Container (gm)" 75.54 30982,,,,:., • Furnace Temperature ( °C) 440.00 440.00 Time In / Time Out 7:40/ 11:40 7:40/ 11:40 • Duration of Combustion (hr) 4.00 4.00 • Wt. of Dried Soil + Crucible (gm) 103.81 98.55 Wt. of Ash + Crucible(gm) 101.48 93.62 Wt. of Crucible (gm) 36.51 38.14 Moisture Content @ 105 °C(°/o) "as • received" 13.2 22.9 Dry wt. of Soil (gm) (1) 67.30 60.41 Wt. of Ash (gm) (2) 64.97 55.48 Ash Content (%) = [(2)/(1)]x no (3) 96.5 91.8 Organic Matter (%) = 100 - (3) 3.5 8.2 Remarks: Moisture content is calculated as a percentage of oven-dried mass. ■ ) oC Mond T-7 • LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JULY 2009 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 177 • • APPENDIX G NOISE STUDY • • R:\RNF0701\Initial Study\07_09 Initial Study\Appendice Slipsheecs.doc NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 177 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA • [ SA . (• March 2008 • NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 177. Submitted to: Rancho Cucamonga—Fire Protection District 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 • Prepared by: LSA Associates, Inc. 20 Executive Park, Suite 200 Irvine, California 9261 4-4 73 1 (949) 553-0666 LSA Project No.RNF0701 LSA . March 2008 i • TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2 LOCATION 2 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS 2 SETTING 5 METHODOLOGY RELATED TO NOISE IMPACT ASSESSMENT 5 CHARACTERISTICS OF SOUND 5 EXISTING NOISE ENVIRONMENT 10 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE 12 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES 16 LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS 16 SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES 18 MITIGATION MEASURES 22 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS 23 • REFERENCES 23 APPENDIX A: FHWA TRAFFIC NOISE MODEL PRINTOUTS • ( • R:\RNF0701\Noise\Noise-March 2003.doc FIGURES AND TABLES FIGURES Figure 1: Regional and Project Location 3 Figure 2: Conceptual Site Plan 4 TABLES Table A: Definitions of Acoustical Terms I 7 Table B: Common Sound Levels and their Noise Sources 8 Table C: Land Use Compatibility for Exterior Community Noise 9 Table D: Existing Traffic Noise Levels 11 Table E: Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Residential Noise Standards 13 Table F: Existing plus Project Traffic Noise Levels 17 Table G: Future Baseline without Project Traffic Noise Levels 17 Table H: Future plus Project Traffic Noise Levels 17 Table I: Typical Maximum Construction Equipment Noise Levels(L„„„) 21 • • R\RNF0701\NoiseWoise-March 2008.doc ii LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS MARCH 2005 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 177 1 • INTRODUCTION • This noise impact analysis has been prepared to evaluate the potential noise impacts and mitigation measures associated with the proposed Fire Station 177 project located in the City of Rancho Cucamonga (City), California. This report is intended to satisfy the City's requirement for a project- specific noise impact analysis by examining the impacts of the proposed project on noise-sensitive uses in the project area and evaluating the mitigation measures incorporated as part of the project design. • • • • R:\RNF070 I\NoisekNoise-March 2008.doc LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS MARCH 2000 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 177 • PROJECT DESCRIPTION LOCATION The proposed project site is located in the City of Rancho Cucamonga within the southwestern portion of San Bernardino County, California. The City of Rancho Cucamonga is located north of the City of Ontario, east of the City of Upland, and west of the City of Fontana. The proposed project site is located on the west side of Hellman Avenue, south of Hillside Road (Assessor's Parcel Number [APNj 1061-621-03).Figure 1 depicts the regional and project location. The proposed project site is located approximately 1.25 miles north of SR-210. PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS The Fire Station 177 project (proposed project) consists of the construction of an approximately 6,000-square foot fire station on approximately 1.1 acres fronting Hellman Avenue within an existing flood control basin. The 1.1-acre project site is part of a previously abandoned seven-acre flood control basin, with basin depths ranging from 25 to 45 feet. The seven-acre flood control basin would • be filled with approximately 116,000 cubic yards of soil by the San Bernardino County Flood Control District to bring the flood control basin to a developable grade. The import of 116,000 cubic yards of soil is analyzed by a separate environmental document prepared by the San Bernardino County Flood Control District and is considered to be part of existing baseline conditions for this project. The conceptual site plan is shown in Figure 2. The 6,000-square foot fire station would include an apparatus area (consisting of vehicle bays, a turn- - out locker room, a decontamination room, hose storage, as well as additional area for general storage), an administration area (consisting of a reception/lobby area, office space, a public restroom, a training room, ambulance private entry,break room with restroom, and storage), and a living area (consisting of a day room, a kitchen, a dining area, dorm rooms,restroom/showering facilities, an exercise room, laundry facilities, and storage). As illustrated in Figure 2, the station design would _ include drive-through capability for emergency apparatus, with driveways on Rancho Street. Rancho Street would be extended along the southern boundary of the project site. Additionally,the fire station would be equipped with an aboveground storage tank for fuel and an emergency generator. Staff parking would be provided on the western portion of the site, behind the station. Parking spaces for • the public would be provided on the southern portion of the site. The proposed fire station is expected to receive and respond to approximately 720 calls annually, with an additional 200 annual calls for mutual aid from outside the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. This equals an average of approximately 2.5 calls per day. With the proposed fire station expecting two to three emergency calls per day and approximately two additional non-emergency trips with the engine leaving the station, total engine trips leaving the station would be approximately four to five trips per day. It was anticipated that up to ten two-way (in and out) trips are estimated per day for fire station employees traveling to and from work based on an average of two trips per employee. • • R:\RNF070I\Noise\Noise-March 2008.doc 2 rI� \ �I � i ( / i 7 ) E 7a � s • f�q /y \, I ti cr y ; Jf. � r r(--) c � , , W f $UMM nom\ `� ' /', ✓-,♦J �J1 �� ',)l yy�) ••( el—JJ "` , IC/ t v° 1 'l. ! ° erg. •i� \ , ) \A ��' �(1� ! /; v,„� I✓ Ivl `"1�= b?.T �4 I -. { �a. lJl fir,) �,, h• Ij rav,� `1.. •. cL ." `q ...i ( .. :ti4,,o s 1�1 , ,d ' ...wra v \• .;i`4 iITIót — � _3....,, 1 w g " Project Location r / I I � e�att1 HILLSIDE ROAD ,i /^' _ P'�_R_ _ M O� A(JAb ass . � ___ l ® '. . , i „+ Tank�W� W nrenii. y IRegional Location `e' ylilialiill `• Q il I r - Lo Angeles San Bernardino County _ ill, l s/.Q �^_ yy a W C .e..S m I j• �Proj Project Area -'tr,IN14_QB vl,- .�∎ . • _- '.I, ?Jt14_ _ _III _^all a CC ' Iiiii; 411111,"h _.. m .\ ® _ m " •'2I5m�� _ W NN .I • i__ �Q5�1 ni 11 •I� �'2� �!Tanks 1 J NISI '!Y! fig a .m R ode County � �� d, , Orange e v N _ -,L_J(Oe® 1 i7nsecoun -1 ' w, _,,,Pacic ,ym o =o 20 �_•: ��•r Ocean �• MILES L S !\ FIGURE 1 4 a I,000 2,000 Fire Station„ Noise Impact Analysis FEET SOURCE:USGS 7.5'Quad:Cucamonga Peak(1988),Mt.Baldy(1988),CA;Thomas Bros.,2006 Regional and Project Location I:UtNF0701\ReportsWoise\reg loc.mad(04/18107) F `V 'ate w W w p4 c CC a a' •G y y N c,-' 74 w • Y a a a 3f1N3AV NVW113H U Hf h 1 11 1 'I1 s E • F I I I g> II i / I inlang E i o r o _ . N o. a _.,D a. I g y P9l — v P U, 4 .Mit d y V O o N © w K J W 7 m o � • LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS MARCH 200E RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 177 • SETTING METHODOLOGY RELATED TO NOISE IMPACT ASSESSMENT Evaluation of noise impacts associated with a proposed fire station project typically includes the following: • Determine the short-term construction noise impacts on off-site noise-sensitive uses • Determine the long-term noise impacts, including vehicular traffic, on on-site and off-site noise- sensitive uses • Determine the required mitigation measures to reduce long-term noise impacts from all sources CHARACTERISTICS OF SOUND Sound is increasing to such disagreeable levels in our environment that it can threaten our quality of life. Noise is usually defined as unwanted sound. Noise consists of any sound that may produce physiological or psychological damage and/or interfere with communication, work, rest, recreation, • and sleep. To the human ear, sound has two significant characteristics: pitch and loudness. Pitch is • generally an annoyance, while loudness can affect our ability to hear. Pitch is the number of complete vibrations or cycles per second of a wave that result in the tone's range from high to low. Loudness is the strength of a sound that describes a noisy or quiet environment and is measured by.the amplitude of the sound wave. Loudness is determined by the intensity of the sound waves combined with the reception characteristics of the human ear. Sound intensity refers to how hard the sound wave strikes an object, which in turn produces the sound's effect. This characteristic of sound can be precisely measured with instruments. The analysis of a project defines the noise environment of the project area in terms of sound intensity and its effect on adjacent sensitive land uses. Measurement of Sound Sound intensity is measured through the A-weighted scale(i.e., dBA) to correct for the relative frequency response of the human ear. That is, an A-weighted noise level de-emphasizes low and very high frequencies of sound similar to the human ear's de-emphasis of these frequencies. Unlike linear units such as inches or pounds, decibels are measured on a logarithmic scale,representing points on a sharply rising curve. For example, 10 decibels are 10 times more intense than 1 decibel, 20 decibels are 100 times more intense,and 30 decibels are 1,000 times more intense.Thirty decibels represent 1,000 times as much acoustic energy as one decibel. A sound as soft as human breathing is about 10 times greater than 0 decibel. The decibel system of measuring sound gives a rough connection between the physical intensity of sound and its perceived loudness to the human ear. A 10-decibel increase in sound level is perceived by the human ear as only a doubling of the loudness of the sound. Ambient sounds generally range from 30 dBA (very quiet) to 100 dBA (very loud). • R:\RNF0701 WoiseWoisc-March 200S.doc 5 • LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS MARCH 2001 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 177 Sound levels are generated from a source, and their decibel level decreases as the distance from that source increases. Sound dissipates exponentially with distance from the noise source. For a single point source, sound levels decrease approximately six decibels for each doubling of distance from the source. This drop-off rate is appropriate for noise generated by stationary equipment. If noise is produced by a line source such as highway traffic or railroad operations,the sound decreases three decibels for each doubling of distance in a hard site environment. Line source noise in a relatively flat environment with absorptive vegetation decreases four and one-half decibels for each doubling of distance. There are many ways to rate noise for various time periods,but an appropriate rating of ambient noise affecting humans also accounts for the annoying effects of sound. However,the predominant rating scales for human communities in the State of California are the Equivalent-Continuous sound level (Leq) and Community Noise Equivalent (CNEL)based on A-weighted decibels (dBA). Leq is the total sound energy of time-varying noise over a sample period. CNEL is the time-varying noise over a 24-hour period, with a weighting factor of 5 dBA applied to the hourly Leq for noises occurring from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. (defined as relaxation hours) and with a weighting factor of 10 dBA from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. (defined as sleeping hours).The noise adjustments are added to the noise events occurring during the more sensitive hours. Day-night average noise(Ld„) is similar to the CNEL but without the adjustment for nighttime noise events. CNEL and Ldn are normally exchangeable and within 1 dB of each other. Other noise-rating scales of importance when assessing annoyance factor include the maximum noise level, or Lmax, and percentile noise exceedance levels, • or LN. Lmax is the highest exponential time-averaged sound level that occurs during a stated time period. It reflects peak operating conditions and addresses the annoying aspects of intermittent noise. LN is the noise level that is exceeded "N"percent of the time during a specified time period. For example, the L10 noise level represents the noise level exceeded 10 percent of the time during a stated . period. The Lso noise level represents the median noise level. Half the time the noise level exceeds this level and half the time it is less than this level. The Lino noise level represents the noise level exceeded 90 percent of the time and is considered the lowest noise level experienced during a — monitoring period. It is normally referred to as the background noise level. Psychological and Physiological Effects of Noise Physical damage to human hearing begins at prolonged exposure to noise levels higher than 85 dBA. Exposure to high noise levels affects our entire system, with prolonged noise exposure in excess of 75 dBA increasing body tensions and thereby affecting blood pressure,functions of the heart, and the nervous system. In comparison, extended periods of noise exposure above 90 dBA would result in permanent cell damage. When the noise level reaches 120 dBA, a tickling sensation occurs in the human ear even with short-term exposure. This level of noise is called the threshold of feeling. As the sound reaches 140 dBA, the tickling sensation is replaced by the feeling of pain in the ear.This is called the threshold of pain. A sound level of 160 to 165 dBA can result in dizziness and loss of equilibrium. The ambient or background noise problem is widespread and generally more concentrated in urban areas than in outlying less developed areas. Table A lists"Definitions of Acoustical Terms."Table B shows "Common Sound Levels and Their Noise Sources."Table C shows "Land Use Compatibility for Exterior Community Noise" • recommended by the California Department of Health, Office of Noise Control. R:\RNF0701\Noise\Noise-March 2008.doc 6 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS MARCH 3001 RANCHO CUCAMONCA FIRE STATION 177 • - • • Table A: Definitions of Acoustical Terms Term Definitions Decibel, dB A unit of level that denotes the ratio between two quantities that are proportional to power; the number of decibels is 10 times the logarithm (to the base 10)of this ratio. Frequency, Hz Of a function periodic in time,the number of times that the quantity repeats itself in one second (i.e., number of cycles per second). A-Weighted Sound The sound level obtained by use of A-weighting. The A-weighting filter Level, dBA de-emphasizes the very low and very high frequency components of the sound in a manner similar to the frequency response of the human ear and correlates well with subjective reactions to noise. All sound levels in this report are A-weighted, unless reported otherwise. Lm, L1o, L50, L90 The fast A-weighted noise levels that are equaled or exceeded by a fluctuating sound level 1 percent, 10 percent, 50 percent, and 90 percent of a stated time period. Equivalent The level of a steady sound that, in a stated time period and at a stated Continuous Noise location, has the same A-weighted sound energy as the time-varying sound. Level, Leq Community Noise The 24-hour A-weighted average sound level from midnight to midnight, Equivalent Level, obtained after the addition of 5 dBA to sound levels occurring in the evening CNEL from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. and after the addition of 10 dBA to sound • levels occurring in the night between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Day/Night Noise The 24-hour A-weighted average souixl level from midnight to midnight, Level, L. obtained after the addition of 10 dBA to sound levels occurring in the night between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Lm,x, Lm;a The maximum and minimum A-weighted sound levels measured on a sound level meter, during a designated time interval, using fast time averaging. Ambient Noise The all encompassing noise associated with a given environment at a Level specified time, usually a composite of sound from many sources at many • directions, near and far; no particular sound is dominant. Intrusive The noise that intrudes over and above the existing ambient noise at a given location. The relative intrusiveness of a sound depends upon its amplitude, duration, frequency, and time of occurrence and tonal or informational content as well as the prevailing ambient noise level. Source: Handbook of Acoustical Measurements and Noise Control 1991. ) • R:\RNF0701\Noise\Noise-March 2008.doc 7 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS MARCH 200E RANCHO CUCAMONGA EIRE STATION 1]), • Table B: Common Sound Levels and their Noise Sources A-Weighted Sound Noise Subjective Noise Source Level in Decibels Environment Evaluation Near Jet Engine 140 Deafening 128 times as loud Civil Defense Siren 130 Threshold of Pain 64 times as loud Hard Rock Band 120 Threshold of 32 times as loud Feeling • Accelerating Motorcycle at a 110 Very Loud 16 times as loud Few Feet Away Pile Driver; Noisy Urban 100 Very Loud 8 times as loud Street/Heavy City Traffic Ambulance Siren; Food Blender 95 Very Loud Garbage Disposal 90 Very Loud 4 times as loud Freight Cars; Living Room 85 Loud Music Pneumatic Drill; Vacuum 80 Loud 2 times as loud Cleaner Busy Restaurant 75 Moderately Loud Near Freeway Auto Traffic 70 Moderately Loud Baseline Average Office 60 Quiet One-half as loud Suburban Street 55 Quiet Light Traffic; Soft Radio 50 Quiet One-quarter as loud Music in Apartment Large Transformer 45 Quiet Average Residence without 40 Faint One-eighth as loud Stereo Playing Soft Whisper 30 Faint Rustling Leaves 20 Very Faint Human Breathing 10 Very Faint Threshold of Hearing 0 Very Faint Source: Compiled by LSA Associates,Inc. 1998. • • R:\RNF0701 Woise\Noise-March 2008.doc 8 • LEA ASSOCIATES. INC. NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS MARCH 2001 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 177 • Table C: Land Use Compatibility for Exterior Community Noise Noise Range (Ld0 or CNEL), dB Land Use Category I II III IV Passively used open spaces 50 50-55 55-70 70+ Auditoriums, concert halls,amphitheaters 45-50 50-65 65-70 70+ Residential: low-density single-family, duplex, 50-55 55-70 70-75 75+ mobile homes Residential: multifamily 50-60 60-70 70-75 75+ Transient lodging: motels, hotels 50-60 60-70 70-80 80+ Schools, libraries, churches,hospitals,nursing 50-60 60-70 70-80 80+ homes Actively used open spaces: playgrounds, 50-67 — 67-73 73+ neighborhood parks Golf courses,riding stables, water recreation, 50-70 — 70-80 80+ cemeteries Office buildings, business commercial and 50-67 67-75 75+ — professional Industrial, manufacturing,utilities, agriculture 50-70 70-75 75+ — • Source: Office of Noise Control,California Department of Health 1976. Noise Range 1—Normally Acceptable: Specified land use is satisfactory,based upon the assumption that any buildings involved are of normal conventional construction,without any special noise insulation requirements. Noise Range II—Conditionally Acceptable:New construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features are included in the design. Conventional construction,but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air conditioning,will normally suffice. Noise Range III—Normally Unacceptable:New construction or development should generally be discouraged. If new construction or development does proceed,a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements must be made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Noise Range IV—Clearly Unacceptable: New construction or development should generally not be undertaken. R:\RNF0701 Woise\Noise-March 2008.doc 9 LEA ASSOCIATES. INC. NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS MARCH 2118 RANCHO CUCAMONCA FIRE STATION 177 • EXISTING NOISE ENVIRONMENT . Sensitive Land Uses in the Project Vicinity Certain land uses are considered more sensitive to noise than others. Examples of these include residential areas, educational facilities,hospitals, childcare facilities, and senior housing. Surrounding land uses generally consist of residential uses to the north, south, east, and west. Residential uses are located to the north between the proposed site and Hillside Road, as well as farther north of Hillside Road. Directly adjacent to the project site to the west is a flood control channel. Residential neighborhoods are present to the west (beyond the flood control channel)and to east (across Hellman Avenue). Land uses to the south are residential, including a newly developing cul-de-sac(Ioamosa Court) directly adjacent to the project's southern boundary. Two houses are currently completed on Ioamosa Court, one directly adjacent to the project's southern boundary, and one across Ioamosa Court, on the south side of the street. Residential uses are also present farther to the south. These residential land uses would be affected by noise from the project site during construction and operation activities. Overview of the Existing Noise Environment The existing noise environment includes traffic noise, mostly on Hellman Avenue between Wilson Street and Hillside Road. IIIII Existing Traffic Noise • Noise from motor vehicles is generated by engine vibrations, interaction between tires and the road, and exhaust systems. Hellman Avenue, Hillside Road, and.other local streets comprise the dominant source of traffic noise contributing to ambient levels in the project'vicinity. The FHWA highway traffic noise prediction model (FHWA RD-77-108) was used to evaluate highway traffic-related noise conditions in the project vicinity. This model requires various parameters, including traffic volumes, vehicle mix, vehicle speed, and roadway geometry to compute typical equivalent noise levels during daytime, evening, and nighttime hours. This screening-level traffic noise model assumes that the noise sources and receptor(contour) locations are at the same level, and provides the distance to the noise contour without any intervening structure. Based on our past experience with traffic noise projections using this model, the projected noise levels using "soft site"conditions have been close to the calibrated noise measurement results; therefore,no calibration is necessary for every model run at this screening-level analysis. For a more site-specific, detailed . analysis with known receptor locations, the calibration can be done with noise measurement and concurrent traffic count. Existing(2006) average daily traffic (ADT) volume along Hellman Avenue between Wilson Street and Hillside Road is 623 vehicles, provided by the City of Rancho Cucamonga.' Existing ADT volume along Hillside Road between Beryl Street and Hellman Avenue is 1,993 vehicles, and along Hillside Road between Hellman Avenue and Amethyst Avenue is 1,653 vehicles, also provided by 0 The traffic counts were taken on February 23 and April 18, 2006, by City of Rancho Cucamonga and provided by Dan Coleman at the City of Rancho Cucamonga. R:VWF0701\Noise\Noise-March 2008.doc 10 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS MARCH 2001 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 177 • the City of Rancho Cucamonga.' Existing noise levels associated with the traffic volume on Hellman Avenue and Hillside Road are listed in Table D.The resultant noise levels are weighted and summed over 24-hour periods to determine the Ldn values. As shown in Table D, traffic noise along the roadway segment is moderate,and the 70 and 65 dBA Ld1,traffic noise contours are confined within the roadway right-of-way for this roadway segment. The 60 dBA LdR contour extends to approximately 16 (within the roadway right-of-way) and 35 feet from the roadway centerline of Hellman Avenue and Hillside Road,respectively, in the project vicinity. Table D: Existing Traffic Noise Levels Ldn(dBA) 50 Centerline Centerline Centerline Feet from to to to Centerline of 70 Lan 65 LdR 60 Ldn Outermost Roadway Segment ADT (Feet) (Feet) (Feet) Lane Hellman Avenue between Wilson St. and Hillside Rd. 623 <302 <30 <30 50.6 Hillside Road between Beryl St. and Hellman Ave. 1,993 <30 <30 35 55.7 Hillside Road between Hellman Ave. and Amethyst Ave. 1,653 <30 <30 31 54.9, Source: LSA Associates, Inc.,February 2007. • • • • • The traffic counts were taken on April 18, 2006, by City of Rancho Cucamonga and provided by Dan Coleman at the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 2 Traffic noise within 35 feet of the roadway centerline should be evaluated with site-specific • information. R:\RNF0701\Noise\Noise-March 2008.doc 11 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS MARCH 2001 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 177 • THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Existing"policies and regulations with respect to noise include those found in the General Plan for the City of Rancho Cucamonga,' noise standards for operations activities,and the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. General Plan for the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The objectives and policies of the City's Noise Element are aimed at protecting the citizens of Rancho Cucamonga from excessive noise levels that interfere with daily routine and comfort. The following policies of the General Plan, from Chapter V, Maintaining Public Health and Safety, are applicable to the proposed project: Policy 2.3.9.2 The City shall analyze in detail the potential noise impacts of any actions that the City may take or act upon which could significantly alter noise levels in the community. Policy 2.3.9.3 The City shall encourage proper site planning to reduce noise impacts. Policy 2.3.9.4 The City shall encourage developers to consider architectural layouts as a means of meeting noise reduction requirements. Policy 2.3.9.5 The City shall consider the use of noise barriers or walls to reduce noise levels generated by ground transportation noise sources and industrial sources. The City also acknowledges in its Noise Element that 60 dBA Lda is commonly accepted as the cutoff point in terms of noise measurements beyond which noise levels would be potentially disturbing and annoying. This level is considered normally acceptable for all land uses and is consistent with State and federal guidelines regarding protection of the noise environment. Therefore, 60 dBA Ld, is considered to be the City's exterior noise standard for noise-sensitive land uses, such as residences, schools, hospitals,place of worship, etc. Noise Standards for Operations Activities of the Proposed Project. The Guidelines for California Environmental Quality Act2 do not define the levels at which temporary and permanent increases in ambient noise are considered"substantial."A noise level increase of 3 dBA is barely perceptible to most people,a 5 dBA increase is readily noticeable, and a difference of 10 dBA would be perceived as a doubling of loudness. Based on this information, the following generally acceptable standards would apply to the operation activities of the proposed project: 2001 General Plan for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, adopted by the Rancho Cucamonga City Council by Resolution No. 01-237, dated November 17,2001. 2 California Code of Regulations,Title 14, Chapter 3, State of California, Sections 15000-15387, as amended December 1, 2004. R:ARNP070IANoiseANoise-March 2008.doc 12 LEA ASSOCIATES. INC. NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS MARCH 2101 RANCHO CUCAMONCA FIRE STATION 177 • • • Less than 3 dBA difference in noise levels would not be discernable; therefore,the difference would not be significant; • Between 3 dBA and 5 dBA would be noticeable,but not significant, if noise levels were to remain below the noise level standards of the City of Rancho Cucamonga; and • A noise level difference of 5 dBA or greater would be readily noticeable and therefore considered significant. In addition to the 3.0 dBA definition of a potentially significant change in noise levels,the applicable noise standards governing the project site have to be considered. Although a change in noise of 3.0 dBA or greater is considered substantial, it is not significant unless the total noise(background plus project) exceeds the City's noise standards. A significant impact regarding peak noise levels would occur if a project were to generate noise levels,measured in dBA LI,I,n or dBA Leg, that exceed the standards contained in the Rancho Cucamonga Development Code. Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. Several regulations with respect to noise are stated in the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code, specifically in Title 17,Development Code. Residential noise standards are located in the Development Code. No operation or activity may cause the ambient base noise levels to exceed the standards contained in Table E. Table E: Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Residential Noise Standards Exterior Interior* • Maximum Allowable 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. 55 dBA 40 dBA 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. 60 dBA 45 dBA Impulse or Simple Tone Noise 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. 50 dBA 35 dBA 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. 55 dBA 40 dBA Source:Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code,Title 17,Development Code,Chapter 17.08,Residential Districts,Section 17.08"080,Performance Standards,Table 17.08.080. * It is unlawful for any person at any location within the City to create any noise or to allow the creation of any noise that causes the noise level when measured within any other fully enclosed(windows and doors shut)residential dwelling unit to exceed the interior noise standard in the manner described heiein. • R:\RNF0701\Noise\Noise-March 2008.doc 13 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS MARCH 2001 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 177 • The Development Code outlines the standards for exterior noise:' 1. It is unlawful for any person at any location within the city to create any noise or allow the creation of any noise on the property owned, leased, occupied, or otherwise controlled by such person, which causes the noise level when measured on the property line of any other property to exceed the basic noise level as adjusted below: a. Basic noise level for a cumulative period of not more than fifteen minutes in • any one hour; or b. Basic noise level plus five dBA for a cumulative period of not more than ten minutes in any one hour; or c. Basic noise level plus fourteen dBA for a cumulative period of not more than five minutes in any one hour; or d. Basic noise level plus fifteen dBA at any time. Performance standards exemptions for noise are contained in the Development Code for the following:2 • 1. Emergency equipment, vehicles and devices; • 2. Temporary construction, maintenance, or demolition activities between the hours of six-thirty a.m. and eight p.m., except Sundays and national holidays. Thresholds of Significance A project will normally have a significant effect on the environment related to noise if it will substantially increase the ambient noise levels for adjoining areas or conflict with adopted environmental plans and goals of the community where it is located. There are six thresholds for significance associated with noise impacts. • Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundbome noise levels; • For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, exposure of people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels; • For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, exposure of people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels; • Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies; ' Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code, Title 17, Development Code, Chapter 17.02, Administration, Section 17.02.120,Noise Abatement, Subsection D,Exterior Noise Standards. • 2 Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code, Title 17, Development Code, Chapter 17.08, Residential Districts, Section 17.08.080,Petformance Standards, Subsection C,Exemptions. R:UWF0701\NoiseNoise-March 2003.doc 14 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS MARCH 7005 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 177 • • A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project; and/or • A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the proposed project. • • • • • R:ULNF0701\Noise\Noise-March 2008.doc 15 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS MARCH 2008 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 077 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Noise levels on and in the vicinity of the project site would change as a result of the proposed project. Potential noise impacts associated with the project include noises created from construction and during the operation phase of the project. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS Less than significant noise impacts include those related to vibration, airports,.short-term off-site construction traffic, and long-term off-site traffic. Off-Site Traffic Impact Short-Term Off-Site Construction Traffic. Construction crew commutes and the transport of construction equipment and material to the project site would incrementally increase noise levels on access roads leading to the site.There would be a relatively high single-event noise exposure • potential, at a maximum of 87 dBA Lmax at 50 feet from passing project construction vehicles, causing possible short-term intermittent annoyances. However, the effect in long-tenn ambient noise levels would be less than 1.0 dBA when averaged over a longer period of time such as an hour or 8 hours, which is the appropriate measure for roadway noise. Therefore, short-term construction-related impacts associated with worker commute and construction equipment transport and soil import to the project site would result in a less than significant impact on noise sensitive receptors along the access routes. • Permanent Increase in Off-Site Ambient Noise Levels (Traffic).Table F lists Existing plus Project traffic noise levels along Hellman Avenue and Hillside Road in the project vicinity. Tables G and H list Future(2026) Baseline and Baseline plus Project, respectively, traffic noise levels along Hellman Avenue between Wilson Street and Hillside Road and along Hillside Road between Beryl Street and Amethyst Avenue. The project is not expected to generate more than 18 daily trips. Future traffic volumes were obtained by applying a 3-percent annual growth rate to existing Hellman Avenue and Hillside Road traffic volumes, and the noise levels presented represent a worst-case scenario (i.e., no shielding is provided between the traffic and the location where the noise contours would be drawn). The specific assumptions used in developing these noise levels and the model printouts are provided in Appendix A. • I• R:\RNF0701\Noise\Noisc-March 2008.doc 16 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS MARCH 2001 RANCHO CUCAMONCA EIRE STATION 177 • Table F: Existing plus Project Traffic Noise Levels Increase.Ld„ Ldn(dBA)50 (dBA) 50 Feet Center- Center- Center- Feet from from Centerline line to 70 line to 65 line to 60 Outermost of Outermost Roadway Segment ADT Ld„(Feet) Ld„(Feet) Ld„(Feet) Lane Lane Hellman Avenue between Wilson St. • and Hillside Rd. 641 <301 <30 <30 50.7 0.1 Hillside Road between Beryl St. and Hellman Ave. 2,100 <30 <30 35 55.7 0.0 Hillside Road between Hellman Ave. and Amethyst Ave. 1,671 <30 <30 31 54.9 0.0 Source: LSA Associates,Inc.,February 2007. Table G: Future Baseline without Project Traffic Noise Levels • Center- Center- Center- Ld„(dBA)50 Feet line to 70 line to 65 line to 60 from Centerline of Roadway Segment ADT Ld„ (Feet) Ld.(Feet) Ld„(Feet) Outermost Lane Hellman Avenue between Wilson St. and Hillside Rd. 1,125 <301 <30 <30 53.2 • Hillside Road between Beryl St. and Hellman Ave. 3,600 <30 <30 51 58.2 Hillside Road between Hellman Ave. • and Amethyst Ave. 2.986 <30 <30 45 . 57.4 Source: LSA Associates, Inc., February 2007. Table H: Future plus Project Traffic Noise Levels Increase Lan Ld„(dBA)50 (dBA) 50 Feet • Center- Center- Center- Feet from from Centerline line to 70 line to 65 line to 60 Outermost of Outermost Roadway Segment ADT Ld„(Feet) Lin(Feet) Ld„(Feet) Lane Lane Hellman Avenue between Wilson St. and Hillside Rd. 1,144 <301 <30 <30 53.3 0.1 Hillside Road between Beryl St. and Hellman Ave. 3,618 <30 <30 51 58.3 0.1 Hillside Road between I•lellman Ave. and Amethyst Ave. 3,004 <30 <30 45 57.5 0.1 Source: LSA Associates,Inc., February 2007. 1 Traffic noise within 30 feet of the roadway centerline should be evaluated with site-specific 5 information. R:ULNF0701 WoiscWoisc-March 2008.doc 17 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS MARCH 2008 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 177 • Future traffic noise levels along Hellman Avenue and Hillside Road in the project vicinity would remain at moderate levels. The data in Tables F and H show that there is no measurable (0.1 dBA) change in the traffic noise levels associated with implementation of the project. As stated previously,changes in noise level of 3 dBA or less are not perceptible to the human ear in an outdoor environment; the proposed project would not result in any measurable existing and future noise level increases and is considered less than significant. • On-Site Traffic Noise Impact The proposed fire station would have a day room (kitchen, training, dining, lounge area, etc.) and dorm rooms that would potentially be exposed to traffic noise from Hellman Avenue.Therefore, mitigation measures may be required to ensure that the noise-sensitive area is not exposed to traffic noise levels exceeding City standards. Because there is no final decision on the exact location of the fire station on the project site, as a worst-case impact analysis scenario it is assumed that the fire station would be located along Hellman Avenue and directly adjacent to the existing residences to the north. Based on this assumption,the proposed fire station building would be approximately 120 feet from the centerline of Hellman Avenue and would be exposed a traffic noise of 50 dBA LdR. Standard construction standards (for walls, doors, and windows) for southern California buildings would provide more than 20 dBA in exterior-to-interior noise reduction with windows closed and 12 dBA or more with windows open • (national average is 25 (IBA with windows closed and 15 dBA with windows open). With windows closed, interior noise levels in the living area would be 30 dBA Lda or lower; thus, no building facade upgrades would be required. With windows open, the interior noise in the living area would also be below the 45 dBA LdI, standard (e.g., 50 dBA - 12 dBA=38 dBA). Therefore, no mitigation measures such as an air-conditioning system are required. SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES On-Site Operational Noise Impact As noise spreads from a source, it loses energy, so the farther away the noise receiver is from the noise source,the lower the perceived noise level would be. Geometric spreading causes the sound level to attenuate or be reduced,resulting in a six-decibel reduction in the noise level for each doubling of distance from a single point source of noise such as an idling truck to the noise-sensitive receptor of concern.Noise associated with operation of the proposed fire station would potentially affect noise-sensitive uses in the project vicinity. Such sources include engine noise, interior alarm noise with some overflow to external areas, siren noise, and generator noise. These activities are potential point sources of noise that cohld affect noise-sensitive receptors adjacent to the fire station such as existing residences adjacent to the project site. Station Alarm Noise.Temporary or periodic noise increases during operation of the fire station would include station alarm noise, which could result in the exposure of persons to noise levels in excess of standards. Operational noise impacts associated with the operation of the alarm would be • significant and could affect noise-sensitive receptors(such as residences) adjacent to the fire station. The proposed fire station would be expected to have two to three emergency calls per day. Station R:\RNF0701\Naise\Noisc-March 2008.doc 18 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS MARCH 200E RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 177 ( • alarms would be sounded internally, and fire personnel would carry pagers or, if they are outside,a Handi-Talkie to alert them of an impending call.The use of station alarms could generate noise levels reaching 90 dBA Lmax at a distance of 50 feet. Assuming the worst-case scenario for the fire station location on the project site, the closest distance to the residences to the north or south would be less than 50 feet.The alarm is used inside the fire station building and when projected out to the nearest residences to the north and south,the noise would be attenuated by a minimum of 12 dBA. In addition, the 6-foot-high concrete block wall would reduce the alarm noise by another 5 dBA. The alarm noise would be reduced to 73 dBA Lnax at the nearest residences to the north and south. This range of exterior noise levels is higher than the City's maximum allowable nighttime noise standards for residential uses (see Section 17.08.080, Performance Standards, of the City's Development Code) and is a significant impact,requiring mitigation. Inside these nearest residences, with windows and doors closed,the alarm noise will be reduced to 49 dBA Lm,„or lower. Generator Noise. Emergency generators would be used during testing periods for approximately half an hour once a week and during crises, such as power outages.As part of the project design, emergency generators would be placed in enclosures to decrease noise impacts. In addition, based on current design, generators would be located at the northwest corner of the project site, surrounded by a 6-foot high concrete block wall. Noise levels associated with generators on site could reach 80 dBA Lm,.at a distance of 50 feet. Because of the height of these generators, the 6-foot-high concrete block wall would reduce the • generator noise by a minimum of 10 dBA. The generator would be approximately 50 feet from the residences to the north and receive no additional noise reduction when compared to the source noise • level measured at 50 feet. Thus, the generator noise would be reduced to 70 dBA Lmax at the nearest - .- residences to the north. Inside these nearest residences, with windows and doors closed, the generator noise would be reduced to 46 dBA or lower. This range of interior noise levels is below the City's maximum allowable daytime(60 dBA Lmax) and nighttime (55 dBA Lmax)noise standards for residential uses (see Section 17.08.080, Performance Standards, of the City's Development Code). The testing and use of generators would result in less than significant impacts for residential uses to the north, as the noise levels would be attenuated to below the City's maximum daytime and nighttime noise standards for residential uses with windows and doors closed. • Parking Lot Activity Noise. The proposed fire station would have a parking lot for station staff on the west side of the site as well as a public parking lot on the east side,with a driveway on the north side and a service drive on the south side. Noise associated with parking, vehicle movement, and pedestrian activity within the parking lot would potentially affect existing residential uses to the north and south. Most of the events at the parking lot would be intermittent in nature, and usually of a very short duration, lasting a few seconds.The combination of the intermittent activities, even over the course of a day, does not add up to a significant amount of time. Based on the preliminary site plan,the shortest distance from the existing residences to the nearest driveway/parking area is approximately 35 feet, separated also by a 6-foot-high concrete block wall. This concrete block wall would provide a minimum of 5 dBA noise reduction for residences to the north. • R:\RNF0701\Noise\Noise-March 2003.doc 19 1 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS MARCH 2005 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 177 • • Passenger vehicle movement noise in the parking lots for the proposed fire station would result in a maximum noise level of 75 dBA Lmax at 50 feet. Based on the above discussion, with the 5 dBA noise reduction provided by the 6-foot-high concrete block wall, vehicle movement noise would be reduced to below 73 dBA L .at the nearest residences to the north or south. This range of maximum noise levels is comparable to maximum(Lmax)noise generated by vehicular traffic on Hellman Avenue. No significant noise impacts from on-site parking lot activity are expected. Fire Truck Engine and Siren Noise.The proposed project will implement a "quiet station"design, eliminating outside speakers, horns, and bells. Alarms would be sounded internally, and fire personnel would carry pagers or, if they are outside, a Handi-Talkie.1 Flashing lights or buzzers, rather than sirens, would be used when appropriate. Sirens would be necessary to protect the public; however, those operating the fire response vehicles would use the warning sirens only when considered crucial. For example, if there were not a significant amount of traffic on Hellman Avenue, the fire response equipment would pull out and leave the site, and not turn on the sirens unless necessary to alert the public. Fire Station 177 would include an apparatus room, which would house firefighting vehicles and supporting maintenance spaces. The maintenance spaces would include maintenance and storage for vehicles and equipment (e.g., fire extinguishers, self-contained breathing apparatus, protective clothing, hoses, and firefighting agents). Sound-absorbing technologies, such as acoustic tiles, would • be included in its design, thereby reducing somewhat the diesel engine start-up noises. Noise levels associated with sirens and diesel engines could generate noise levels reaching 110 dBA Lmax at a distance of 50 feet. When projected out to residences adjacent to the project site, noise levels from fire truck operations would exceed the City's allowable maximum noise level standards. However, noise associated with sirens and fire trucks would be short in nature and sporadic. In addition, the City's Development Code Performance Standards state that any mechanical device, apparatus, or equipment used, related to, or connected with emergency machinery, vehicles, work or . warning alarms or bells is exempt from the provisions of Section 17.02.120 of the Development Code Performance Standards. Therefore, no mitigation measures are required for noise associated with fire truck operations. Construction Noise Impact Noise levels from grading and other construction activities for the proposed project may range up to 91 dBA at the closest residential uses to the north or south of the project site for very limited times when construction occurs near them. Construction noise impacts of the proposed project would be potentially adverse. Therefore, mitigation measures would be required. As previously discussed, short-term construction-related impacts that would be associated with worker commute and construction equipment transport to the project site would result in a less than significant impact on noise sensitive receptors along the access routes. Still, there are other construction impacts that would be caused by the project. Construction is completed in discrete steps, each of which has its own mix of equipment and, consequently, its own noise characteristics. These • An HT(short for"Handi-Talkie") is a handheld low-powered ham radio. R:\RNF070I\Noise\Noise-March 2008.doc 20 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS MARCH 100E RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 1]) • • various sequential phases would change the character of the noise generated on the project site and, therefore, the noise levels surrounding the site as construction progresses. Despite the variety in the types and sizes of construction equipment, similarities in the dominant noise sources and patterns of operation allow construction-related noise ranges to be categorized by work phase. Table I lists typical construction equipment noise levels recommended for noise impact assessments, based on a distance of 50 feet between the equipment and a noise receptor(e.g., a church or residences).Typical noise levels range up to 91 dBA Lmax at 50 feet during the noisiest construction phases.The site preparation phase, which includes excavation and grading, tends to generate the highest noise levels because the noisiest construction equipment is earthmoving equipment. Eartlunoving equipment includes excavating machinery such as bulldozers,backhoes, front-end loaders, excavators, scrapers, and graders. Typical operating cycles for these types of construction equipment may involve one or two minutes of full-power operation followed by three to four minutes at lower-power settings. Table I: Typical Maximum Construction Equipment Noise Levels (Lmax) Range of Maximum Suggested Sound Levels Maximum Sound Maximum Sound Measured Levels for Analysis Level at 100 feet Type of Equipment (dBA at 50 feet) (dBA at 50 feet) (dBA) Pile drivers, 12,000 to 18,000 ft- Ib/blow 81-96 93 87 • Rock drills 83-99 96 90 Jack hammers 75-85 82 76 Pneumatic tools 78-88 85 79 Pumps 74-84 80 74 Dozers 77-90 85 79 Scrapers 83-91 87 81 Haul trucks 83-94 88 82 Cranes 79-86 82 76 • Portable generators 71-87 80 74 Rollers 75-82 80 74 Tractors 77-82 80 74 Front-end loaders 77-90 86 80 Hydraulic backhoe 81-90 86 80 Hydraulic excavators 81-90 86 80 Graders 79-89 86 80 Air compressors 76-89 86 80 Trucks 81-87 86 80 Source:Noise Control for Buildings and Manufacturing Plants,Bolt,Beranek&Newman 1987. Construction of the proposed project is expected to require the use of excavators,bulldozers, and water and pickup trucks. Noise typically associated with the use of construction equipment is estimated between 77 and 91 dBA Lmax at a distance of 50 feet from the construction effort for the grading phase. As seen in Table I, the maximum noise level generated by each scraper on site is assumed to be 87 dBA Lmax at 50 feet from the scraper. Each bulldozer would also generate 85 dBA • Lmax at 50 feet. The maximum noise level generated by water and pickup trucks is approximately R\RNF0701\Noise\Noise-March 2008.doc 21 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS MARCH 2008 RANCHO CUCAMONCA FIRE STATION 177 • • 86 dBA Lmax at 50 feet from these vehicles. Each doubling of the sound sources with equal strength increases the noise level by 3 dBA. Assuming that each piece of construction equipment operates as an individual noise source,the worst-case composite noise level during this phase of construction would be 91 dBA Lms, at a distance of 50 feet from an active construction area. As these noise sources are point sources,the noise decreases at a rate of 6 dB per doubling of distance. The nearest residences are located to the north and south of the project site along Hellman Avenue. These residences are less than 50 feet from the project boundary and may be subjected to short-term noise reaching 91 dBA Lmax intermittently generated by construction activities on site,based on the suggested maximum noise levels for Analysis in Table I. This maximum level of noise(in dBA Lmax) is comparable with maximum vehicular traffic noise(Lmax) on Hellman Avenue. Construction-related noise impacts of the proposed project would be potentially adverse and require - mitigation measures. To minimize the impact of the construction noise on residences adjacent to the project area, compliance with the City's Noise Control Ordinance is required. MITIGATION MEASURES I Construction Noise The following measures can be implemented to reduce potential construction noise impacts on nearby sensitive receptors. 1. During all site excavation and grading, the project contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile,with properly operating and maintained mufflers consistent with manufacturers' standards. 2. The project contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is • directed away from sensitive receptors nearest the project site. 3. The construction contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction-related noise sources and noise-sensitive receptors nearest the project site during all project construction. 4. During all project site construction, the construction contractor shall adhere to the City's standards, which includes limiting construction activities to the hours of 6:30 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday.No construction activities are permitted outside of these hours or on Sundays and national holidays. On-Site Traffic Noise No mitigation measures are required. Off-Site Traffic Noise No mitigation is required. R:'RNF0701\Noise Noise-March 2008.doc 22 • LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS MARCH 2101 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 177 �7 • On-Site Operational Noise • The following measures would reduce operational noise impacts from the proposed project: • I. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall provide to the City Planning Department and receive approval of site plans,which include a 6-foot concrete block wall along the project's north, west,and southern boundaries.The 6-foot concrete block wall shall meet all requirements as determined by the City's Planning Department. . • 2. Prior to the issuance of grading permits,the project applicant shall provide to the City Planning Department and receive approval of site plans which includes an enclosure surrounding the generator which meets City planning requirements and attenuates sounds levels by 6 dBA. 3. Prior to building occupancy,the project applicant shall install internal and external warning lights instead of audible station alarms. They shall be placed in appropriate places (as agreed upon by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department) along the equestrian trail as well as inside the fife station. Level of Significance after Mitigation No significant noise impacts from short-term construction or long-term traffic will result after implementation of the mitigation measures listed above. • CUMULATIVE IMPACTS On-site operations activities of the proposed project would create point sources of noise but would not contribute to offsite cumulative noise impacts from other planned and future projects above noise standards. Project-related traffic would contribute to cumulative traffic noise impacts in the vicinity . of the project site, but sound levels will not increase by more than 3 dBA from their corresponding • existing levels. This would be considered an insignificant impact. REFERENCES Bolt, Beranek&Newman. Noise Control for Buildings and Manufacturing Plants. 1987. City of Rancho Cucamonga. Development Code. City of Rancho Cucamonga.Noise Element. Federal Highway Administration Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model, FHWA RD-77-108. • 1977. • United States EPA. Protective Noise Levels: Condensed Version of EPA Levels Document. 1978. nn • R:\RNF0701\Noise\Noise-March 2008.doc 23 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS MARCH 200! RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE STATION 1)l • APPENDIX A • FHWA TRAFFIC NOISE MODEL PRINTOUTS • • • • • 1• R:\RNF0701 W oise\Noise-March 2008.doc TABLE HILLSIDEEX FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS f RUN DATE: 2/09/07 • ROADWAY SEGMENT: HILLSIDE ROAD HELLMAN TO AMETHYST NOTES: EXISTING TRAFFIC NOISE * * ASSUMPTIONS * * AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 1653 SPEED (MPH) : 35 GRADE: .5 TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES DAY NIGHT • AUTOS --- 88 . 08 9 .34 M-TRUCKS 1. 65 0 .19 H-TRUCKS 0. 66 0 . 08 ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 18 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: SOFT * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * * Ldn AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 54 .86 DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO Ldn 70 Ldn 65 Ldn 60 Ldn 55 Ldn • 0. 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 66 . 6 • TABLE HILLSIDE26WP FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS • RUN DATE: 2/09/07 ROADWAY SEGMENT: HILLSIDE ROAD BERYL TO HELLMAN NOTES: FUTURE (2026) WITH PROJECT * * ASSUMPTIONS * * ' AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 3618 SPEED (MPH) : 35 GRADE: .5 TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES DAY NIGHT AUTOS 88 . 08 9 .34 M-TRUCKS 1 . 65 0 . 19 H-TRUCKS 0. 66 0 . 08 ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 18 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: SOFT * * . CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * * Ldn AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 58 .26 DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO Ldn • 70 Ldn 65 Ldn 60 Ldn 55 Ldn 0 . 0 0 .0 ' 53 . 3 109 .6 . TABLE HILLSIDEWP FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS RUN DATE: 2/09/07 • ROADWAY SEGMENT: HILLSIDE ROAD HELLMAN TO AMETHYST NOTES: FUTURE (2006) WITH PROJECT * * ASSUMPTIONS * * AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 3004 SPEED (MPH) : 35 GRADE: .5 • TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES DAY NIGHT AUTOS 88 .08 9.34 M-TRUCKS 1 . 65 0 .19 H-TRUCKS 0 :66 0 .08 ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 18 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: SOFT * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * * Ldn AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 57 .45 DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO Ldn 70 Ldn 65 Ldn 60 Ldn 55 Ldn • 0. 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 97 .2 • 2 • TABLE HELLMAN26WP FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS • RUN DATE: 2/09/07 ROADWAY SEGMENT: HELLMAN AVENUE HILLSIDE TO WILSON NOTES: FUTURE (2026) WITH PROJECT * * ASSUMPTIONS * * AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 1144 SPEED (MPH) : 35 GRADE: .5 TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES DAY NIGHT AUTOS 88 . 08 9 . 34 M-TRUCKS 1. 65 0. 19 H-TRUCKS 0. 66 0 . 08 ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 18 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: SOFT * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * * Ldn AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 53 . 26 DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO Ldn 70 Ldn 65 Ldn 60 Ldn 55 Ldn 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 • 53 . 3 • TABLE HILLSIDENP FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS ( RUN DATE: 2/09/07 • ROADWAY SEGMENT: HILLSIDE ROAD HELLMAN TO AMETHYST NOTES: FUTURE (2026) BASELINE * * ASSUMPTIONS * * AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 2986 SPEED (MPH) : 35 GRADE: .5 TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES DAY NIGHT AUTOS 88 . 08 9 .34 M-TRUCKS 1.65 0 . 19 H-TRUCKS 0. 66 0. 08 ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 18 • SITE CHARACTERISTICS : SOFT * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS *. * Ldn AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 57.42 DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO Ldn 70 Ldn 65 Ldn 60 Ldn 55 Ldn • 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 96 . 8 TABLE HILLSIDE26NP FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS • RUN DATE: 2/09/07 ROADWAY SEGMENT: HILLSIDE ROAD BERYL TO HELLMAN NOTES: FUTURE (2026) BASELINE * * ASSUMPTIONS * * AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 3600 SPEED (MPH) : 35 GRADE: .5 TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES DAY NIGHT AUTOS 88 . 08 9.34 M-TRUCKS 1 . 65 0. 19 H-TRUCKS 0 . 66 0. 08 • - - ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 18 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: SOFT * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * * Ldn AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 58 .24 DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO Ldn • 70 Ldn 65 Ldn 60 Ldn 55 Ldn 0 . 0 0. 0 53 .2 109 . 2 • TABLE HELLMAN06 FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS ( RUN DATE: 2/09/07 • ROADWAY SEGMENT: HELLMAN AVENUE HILLSIDE TO WILSON NOTES: EXISTING TRAFFIC * * ASSUMPTIONS * * AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 623 SPEED (MPH) : 35 GRADE: . 5 TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES DAY NIGHT AUTOS 88 . 08 9 .34 M-TRUCKS 1.65 0 .19 H-TRUCKS 0. 66 0 . 08 ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 18 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: SOFT * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * * Ldn AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 50 .62 DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO Ldn 70 Ldn 65 Ldn 60 Ldn 55 Ldn • 0. 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0. 0 • • TABLE HILLSIDE06 FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS • RUN DATE: 2/09/07 ROADWAY SEGMENT: HILLSIDE ROAD BERYL TO HELLMAN NOTES: EXISTING TRAFFIC NOISE * * ASSUMPTIONS * * AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 1993 SPEED (MPH) : 35 GRADE: .5 TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES DAY NIGHT AUTOS 88 . 08 9 .34 M-TRUCKS 1 . 65 0 . 19 H-TRUCKS 0. 66 0 .08 ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 18 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: SOFT * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * * Ldn AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 55. 67 • DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO Ldn 70 Ldn 65 Ldn 60 Ldn 55 Ldn 0 . 0 0 . 0 0. 0 74 . 8 `• TABLE HELLMANEP FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS RUN DATE: 2/09/07 • ROADWAY SEGMENT: HELLMAN AVE HILLSIDE TO WILSON NOTES: EXISTING PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC * * ASSUMPTIONS * * AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 641 SPEED (MPH) : 35 GRADE: . 5 TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES DAY NIGHT AUTOS 88 . 08 9.34 M-TRUCKS 1. 65 0 . 19 H-TRUCKS 0. 66 0 . 08 ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 18 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: SOFT * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * * Ldn AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 50 . 74 DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO Ldn 70 Ldn 65 Ldn 60 Ldn 55 Ldn • 0. 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 TABLE HILLSIDEEP FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS 111 RUN DATE: 2/09/07 ROADWAY SEGMENT: HILLSIDE ROAD BERYL TO HELLMAN NOTES: EXISTING PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC * * ASSUMPTIONS * * AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 2011 SPEED (MPH) : 35 GRADE: .5 TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES , DAY NIGHT AUTOS 88 . 08 9. 34 M-TRUCKS 1. 65 0. 19 H-TRUCKS 0 . 66 0 . 08 ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 18 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: SOFT * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * * • Ldn AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 55 . 71 DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO Ldn • 70 Ldn 65 Ldn 60 Ldn 55 Ldn 0 . 0 0 . 0 0. 0 75. 3 • 1• TABLE HILLSIDEEP2 FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS • RUN DATE: 2/09/07 - • ROADWAY SEGMENT: HILLSIDE HELLMAN TO AMETHYST NOTES: EXISTING PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC * * ASSUMPTIONS * * AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 1671 SPEED (MPH) : 35 GRADE: . 5 TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES DAY NIGHT AUTOS • 88 . 08 9 .34 M-TRUCKS 1.65 0. 19 H-TRUCKS 0.66 0. 08 ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 18 SITE CHARACTERISTICS:. SOFT * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * * Ldn AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 54 .90 DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO Ldn • 70 Ldn 65 Ldn 60 Ldn 55 Ldn 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 67 . 1 • TABLE HELLMAN26NP FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS • RUN DATE: 2/09/07 ROADWAY SEGMENT: HELLMAN AVENUE HILLSIDE TO WILSON NOTES: FUTURE (2026) TRAFFIC NOISE * * ASSUMPTIONS * * AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 1125 SPEED (MPH) : 35 GRADE: . 5 TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES DAY NIGHT AUTOS 88 . 08 - 9.34 M-TRUCKS 1 . 65 0 .19 H-TRUCKS 0 .66 0.08 ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT) : 18 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: SOFT . * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * * Ldn AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 53 .19 DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO Ldn • 70 Ldn 65 Ldn 60 Ldn 55 Ldn 0.. 0 0 .0 0 . 0 0 . 0 • III Planning Commission Meeting of / 6 -7V--CI RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION SIGN-UP SHEET Please print your name, address, and city and indicate the item you have spoken regarding. Thank you. 594N44MErne ht./ ADDRESS CITY /0GITEM 2. 7,2h P/s �,t ,_ 3. j_GCa�vp� l gadder. 4. 5. 6. a (./?f f AA/e_ 7. 7-e4 /7 8. fra ,77■/ C-7"-Z) 9. `AN /14t.c ive,✓A f/ 10. Caro/ _AIC9�4iS3 11. Dim, tan4 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35.