Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991/09/11 - Agenda Packet0701 -02, SEPTEMBER 11, 1991 P.O. AGENDA ( 13 of 13 STANDARD RURAL.-MAILBOXES 203450 GRAS SUPPORTS WITH CHAMFERED ENDS {– WX5' POST WITH A CHAMFERED TOP AND ROUTED GROOVE NAME FIELD STAKE° ts•S4. FINISH GRADE TYPICAL MAILBOX STAND • DAY CREEK /OAKS /CHAFFEY s• ,a• �.— STANDARD RURAL WMLSOXES 2'X5" GRAB SUPPORTS WITH CHAMFERED ENDS 4 5'X52 POST WITH A CHAMFERED TOP AND ROUTED GROOVE BRICK BAS%l �a•so. FINISH VWDE TYPICAL MAILBOX STAND • ETIWANDA vK *NLIDS AML ,s• ,a• STAt+DAW #el , 4d L "LEOXES 2'X5• GRAB S %MTH CHAPAFERED ENDS v S'X5' POST WITH A CtwUIFERED TOP AND ROUTED GROOVE CUT STONE BASE tsssC�. FISH GRADE TYPICAL MAILBOX STAND • UPPER ETIWANDA EVilBIT 31 NOTE: EACH ALTERNATIVE IS SWJECT TO AmCEPTMWE Edwaanda North BY U.S. POSTAL SERVICE Specific Plan+ city of I1I -96 Lusdo CwAMRp DRAFT r � 1 r r •-•. 1 ]r WITH MANUAL I 7 RIGATION i `Y !41 IIMIIII bc STREET TREES PFR E. STREET TREE EASEMENT IF REOUIRED TYPICAL MAILBOX STAND STREETSIDE LANDSCAPE RE (subject to Post Offte approvW) APPLY TO FRONT AND CORNER LOT TYPICAL' STREETSIDE LA S API d'E? I Ay TREATMENTS 1 NOTE: ABOVE WPROVEMENTS TO BE MIST'ALLEB ON—SITE E*ilBff 32 By BlXUM PRIOR TO OCCUP #f . MINIPAU R; Egiw►anda North UP TO C5' WIDE LLOT'.3 TREES PER LOT Specific Flan UP TO 80' v ..DE LOT. 3 TREES PER LOT OVER 80' LfYT, 4 TES M !AT f My or III -97 DRAFT Undw Cmzmo"a LANIDSCAr- YARD SLOP REAR YARD f nR YARD 2:1 SLOPE GREATER THAN 5' SLOPE PLANTING TABLE VERTICAL. HEIGHT /SLOPE SLOPE TREATMENT 5 to 8 feet with >S:1 and Irrigated Ground Cover <2 :1 slope for Erosion Control 5 feet or greater with 2:1 Irrigated Ground rover slope or greeter 1 gal. Shrub per 100 st Slope Area 1598 Tree par 150 at Slope Area (5 gall. Max. for all Em Swiss) 8 feet or greeter with 2:1 Irrigated Ground Cover slope or greater 1 gal. Shrub per 100st Slope Area 5 gal. Trae per 250 of Slope Area 15 gal. Tree per 150 of Slops Area Q MOTE: TREES AND SHRUBS SHALL BE PLANTED IN STAGGERED CLUSTERS U-1%171o1 r v a TO SOIFT£Nl AND VARY SLOPE PLANE. SLOPE PLANTING REGUNIED ISpecific nPlain BY THIS SECTM SHALL X CLt1DE A IFING:I9B ..d SYSTEM TO BE MSTAI I BY THE DEVEL� TO OCCtXW4CY. MAlRTCEUNCE BY A EO S ASSOCQiATM IWVY BE AV THE C NgSSON ON A CASE -43Y� -CASE BASIS. .4 i III -9€ MFT Rsnettocracaawn>3a 1 a 1270 DF)MLMR-AffM STAhMARDS The site develo MMUM , p�ient standards are intended to provide minimum standards for development. These standards should be used in corjuncdok with the Design Guidelines in Section 11.0. This section shall not be construed to supersede more restrictive site '.development standards contair,ed in Covenants, Conditions and Ikesteletions, of any propw4v. HowzvAi;­in no case, shall- private deed restrictions permit 1, sae standard than the minimum standards of this section or permit ;a rzi)ter standard in the cal: of a maximum standard of this section. 12.2 SrrE DE3MDP1VI0T STANDARDS 12J Residential l Di rids The development standards for ri,padential dizvelopment are arranged into two categories: (1) A ;sic Development Stapdards, and ;,2) Optionai Development Standards. These standaiA are used in. conjunction with the AW1,61we Policies and Design. Guiddlines during le 10esidential lant/ development/design rv4ew,.,, process as discussed m the Development Code, Chapter 17.06. Fisch residential development must conforLa to either the Basic Development Standards or the Optional Development Standards. 0 Basic Development Standards (Table 8): These standards are intended to }pro basic standards which will ensure good and w quality -atible prqj;xts. These standards, as well as , the density hlmftatigw., are imended to create a development which will be' compatible with, and provide for proper transitions from more sensitive or less intense residential development. Optional Development Standard-, (Table.9): These standards are intended to provide high standards for the development Of projects of superior quality and compatibility within any Residential District, except the Estate Residential districts (HRE and BILE). However, the standards an-, development expectations have been increased above and beyond the basic standards lit M-99 DRAFT E order, P) ensure proper transitions and buffers from lower intense residential uses. Development in much of the Hillside Residential arms. should .,provide, for clustered development options in order to allow the preservation of open space areas. All projects developed under Optional, Standards must provide a minimum of one greemway or pasee, connection across the site, providing access to community and regional trails. 12.2.2 DEBITY The ultimate dimsity allowed in any :;.esidential district shall,, be determii;-d . through the residential land development/design review process and public hearings, as Idescribed in the Dmclopment Code, Chapter 17.06. e the Planning Commission shall have the authority to reason-ably conditir-a any residential development to ensure proper transition and compatibility to zdjacent residential developments, existing or proposed. 12 2.3 F-Mestrian Lela The entire Edwanda North Spa'fic Plan is within the City Equestrian Overlay Zone as estai ped in t1te General Plan. However, a 20,430 square-fooi. lot is required for the Wiping of horses -1 some subareas of the Specific Plan will permit lots as small as 7,200 square feet. Equestrian homesitess are encouraged in subareas adjacent to open space areas with convenient access to the Community and Regional Trail system (see Part IV, Subarea Design Standards). Any project which proposes lots of less than 20,M sWim feet steal! be conclitioned to contribute to an equestrian boarding facility to be located within the Specific Plan Area. M-100 DRAIFT 0 TABLE 8 BASIC DEVEIDPAUNT STANDARDS - RESEDEIl1TIAL DISTRICTS Q,IR - Nor IMUQlm) HRE VIE FOt (F) VL L LOTARPJI:. . MIND" NETAVERAGE(SQUARE FEET) NOR O) 40.000 NIR(I) 73.000 to.= MI- ,CA(UM NET (SQUARE FEET) N/a W 3C,o00 N/R O) 30.000 1,]00 MiOMKOF UWEIISNG UNITS (A) (P'-RiUITED PER ACRE) UP TO 1.(6 1 140.W0. MA):1I.OS UP T02(F) iRt03•. UP 704 MMIUM DWELLING UNIT Sit - IAW SQ. Pr. AA REGA]U) ESS OP E-W1 iCr . LOT DBIENSIONS: MINW M WIDTH 07 REQUMEED FRONTSLTaA= Nam 137 77 Nat W SO AVG, VARY t10 63 AVG. 'ARYf5 MINDSUM CORNEA LOTWWM N/R,M 140. O7 N/R 1p too 70' MIND" DEPTH NQ M IDS (F) KM (1) UW IV WN11 UM FRONTAGE (® FRONT PROPERTY LUKE) ... WR M C (F) N/R W 50• 47 mmmu i FLAG LOTFRONrAGEi® FRONT• PROPERTY LINE) NAt W 30' (F) WK (1) 3(r b' SETBACKS: Op FRONT YARD (GD) NIX M 47 M NIX (0 VARY t.S S AVO, VAEYt 5 37 AVG.. VARY t 3 CORNER SIDE YARD NAt.(O 9S (F) Nat M SP 2r _ WERPOR SIDE YARD NIX M 2r (F) N/A M IGM 5110 REAR YARD Nat M 47 0 NIR M 30 :0 AT URF2001tSCCE sot'M RY O7MMUIG UNIT /. ACCEWORY BURDO(G) Nrrt 0) 4.T (n NIX M 3W5 3015 HEK.III' L0.4CAYWNS R0 (G) -.. (0) (G) 35 3S IDT COVERAGE OLAX11" S:) NOR 20507 N/R 25s 40% STRPE SSE LANDSCAPING (PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY) MUQED REQU= REQUIRED REQUOtm REQUIRED - OPEN SPACE REQtMM PRIVATE OPEN DACE lF) .. (F) 2,000 1,000 ULVlIE OPEN SPACE W (PRIVATE MVO COMMON) (F) (F) (F) 0) (P) In 0% m5 NOTE[ i'at p(Witla W Ue1�il awy ��s i..�a.aw NOTES: A Excluding land necessary for secondary streets and arterials and in hillside areas shall be dependent on the slope /capacity factor contained in Development Code Section 17.24.080 B. B As measured from the ultimate curb face on public or private streets. C Variable front yards allowed pursuant to Development Code Section 17,08.040 H _ D Less Than eighteen (18) feet from back of sidewalk requires automatic garage door openers. DRAFT III -101 TABLE 8 - BA'1C DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS (CONTINUED) E Perimeter landscaping and interior street trees. p Environmental studies and investigations such as, but not limited to, geological, hydrological, seismic, slope and soil c =ditions, access/circulation, and biota, research,.shall be conducted for any. development in this-district. Basedonthis information, and the EM for this spea'sfie plan, the actual number of dwelling units shall be determined. To determine the buildable area, a cite must meet the criteria as oafuned in the Rancbo CucamongaDeyelopment Code Chapters 17,18 and 17.24. G In hillside areas, heights shall be limited to thirty (30) feet as specified in Development Code Section 17.24.00.' f li A single -family detached dwelling less than one thousand (1,000) square feet nay be authorized w%en s development ` exhibits innovative qualities in tract. Plot and architectural design through the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. 4 I hillside Residential development shall conform to Development Code Chapter 17.18: Minimum Parcel Size: No absolute minimum parcel widths rad depths aze required. Buildable area is considered to be a contiguous area or the lot which is less than thirty (30) percent in natural slope or the area determined through the environmental studies and investigation as buildable and is subject to slope /capacity factor calculations contained in Development Cale Section 17.24.080. Setbacks: Front, side and rear setbacks shall be determined `;used upon the precise development plan and environmental studies. j AA development smd resaItnat activity shall be prohibited within 100 fed of the high water mark of any stre>r-t bed with an additional 50 toot transitional zone. Where stream bed is located within a steeply banked V-cut canyon, development shall not be permitted within the batiks to the fust bench with an additional 50 -foot transitional zone. (RC T01) DRAFT A III.102 gg, D TABLE 9 - OPTIONAL DEVELOPAJIM STANDARDS - RESIM IUL D13TRICTS (Optional DevelaY,n —+ S_ tandards are not Enpli`-,Able to BRE and VLE designations.) (N/R = NQTREQUIRED) HR VL L MINIMUM SITE AREA (GROSS) NR 5 AC 3 AC LOT AREA VARIATION VARIATION VARIATION (MINIMUM NET AVERAGE) RFQURBD(H) REQUBtED(H) AEQURED NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS (A) UP TJ 2 (B) LIP TO 2 UP TJ 4 (^ERMIITED PEP ACRE) MINISUM'DWELL)NG UNITSME: 1,00D SQ. FT. (C) REGARDLESS OF DISTRICT LOT DIMENSIONS: MINWIM WIDrd (0 REQUIRED VARIATION VARIATION VARIATION FRONTSETBACK) REQUT.IFBD (ID REQUIRED (H) REQUIRED MII42 UMIDErm VARIATION VA3=nON VARIATION REQUMED (9) REQIIRED (H) I REQUIRED SSIBACKS: (D) LOCAL STREET 52' AVG 42' AVJ 42' ANG. VARY :k 10'(H) VARY f10= VARY t 5 PRIVATE ITREETORDRIVEWAY 25'(H) 2S'(H) +Z' CORNER SIDE YARD 25'(H) 25(11) 17' (F) INTERIORSIDEYARD 107201(11) 10 ,120'(H) 5,110' (0) HUMOR SITE BOUNDARY 40110(H) 3015 2015 (DWELLING UNITIAMESSORY BUILDING) RESIDENTIAL BUILDING SEPARATIONS: FRONT TO FRONT 40' 30' 25' OTHER 40' 30' 10' HEIGHT LIMITATIONS (E) 35- 35' OPEN SPACE REQUIRED: PRIVATE OPEN SPACE 5,000 2,000 1,000 COMMON OPEN SPACE (A) (MINIMUM 205 25% 30% USABLE -PEN SPACE (A) (PRIVATE SO% 65% 60% AND COMMON) FSTREETSME LAN.-4CAPING REQUIRED REQUIRED REQUIRED TABLE 9 (COrTTU4UM) OPTIONAL. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS - RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS NOTES: A .. Excluding land necessary for secondary streets and arts&h and in hillside areas dull be dependent on the ilopetcapaciiy actmr contained in Development Cade Section 17.24.030B. B Environmental studies and iavoWsations sub u, but not limited to, geolop.al, hydrological, seismic, alape and soil cowlitiws, accadeirvulation, and blom cseearcb, sb%U be conducted for aqv developmcat in this district. Based ou this info:matmn, `sad the ER for this speciLe plan, ehsacourl numberof t walling units A all be determimd. To determine the buildable area oi, a site must -tmot the criteria as outlined; a the Rancho Cnrasno p D41rolope of Coda Chaptem 17.18 and 17.24. C A singk tamily detacbad dwelling la,`a tCan nice bundrod ( 900) aqua* feat will require the approval, of a Coodidonal Use Permit per Development Code Sectwa 17.O9.03a, D As measured from the ultimate curb face on public and private streets. Refer to Table V..24.05.O40 -D of 2a DevelopmentCode ffar add'iti'on! setback W6=atiom. E In hillside areas, heights aball be limited to thirty (30) feet- sprciW 1i Developmwt Coda St 17.24.070.D.1. F leer than 13' from b ck of sidewalk requires automatic. Sara;: door openers. 6 Zew lot dwellhga permitted per Development Code Section 17 .06.040-0 H HM"e Raidg" devtlopno t xLa9 ecnfam to Dmrdopr=t r-..k chapiar 17.1s: brwismrm Famd sm No absclnte m ieimmss p cd widths mmd depths are rupim . BoldaMe seam is mom:dffi ►:4Q be a conl igooas am : the lot which is' ' Ow thirty (30) pereesst in atterti dope or the nest detnuiud tiraagi'-bt twirvuent studied and investigation u --' beadable aid is sabjad to do*cspwUy farmr oak-) fier.: eoaeabied is 1 krdapsteast Code Section 1739.080. Setbula t VQW Frant,, side sad mar setbmch shwa be detecm1sediat!et1 apoa the pneise ievelopmesc plan aad Bark ammmW stadieL NOTE: For def nitimne amt Devdopomt Code, .5wbm 17.02.140 (RC.T02) J i 'II III -10 DRAFT - tai i 12.2.4 arm -rcial District The regulations as shown in Tables 10 and 11 shall aplaJ to the neighborhood commercial districts. The neighborhood commercial district is provisional only, based upon Market Studies, appropriate lot consolidation and other criteria as described in Section 6.2.2.1. TABLE 10 - SITE DAH NSI(17,6 AND HEIGHT 1IIV11TATIONS -• COMMERCfAL DISTRICTS NOTE: For defmit3sas:s-- Development Code, Section 17:02.140 Notes: A Parcels created within shopping centers are exempt from these standards, as long as a ccnceptt� development plan for the entire center has been, developed and appropriate easements for reciprocal access, parting and maintenance is provided. (RC T0°) DRAn "111-1 05 ✓" y! -FEATURE 3TANt)ARD 1. Minimtm sitel.r t area (A) 10 acres for neighborhood center. 2. Minimum lot width (A) 300 feet 3. l�Um lot depth 300 feet 4. height limitations a.. Within 100 feet of a residential district b. Other locations 25 "feet 40 ,feet NOTE: For defmit3sas:s-- Development Code, Section 17:02.140 Notes: A Parcels created within shopping centers are exempt from these standards, as long as a ccnceptt� development plan for the entire center has been, developed and appropriate easements for reciprocal access, parting and maintenance is provided. (RC T0°) DRAn "111-1 05 ✓" y! TABLE 11- SETBACKS - COM? ERCiAL DLST1tiCTS a. I NOTES: • On existing lots of record, parcels less than 175 frost in depth, aced aotprovida a setback or landscaping greater than 0% of the depth of the property (excluding right-of-way saes). • Parking and loading - off - street puking and loading facilities shall be pre -vided for each use as prescribed in the development cbde. • Signs no sign, outdoor advertising stnt?ture, or display of any type shall be permitted except as prescribed in the city sign ordinance. 8 Service areas, rvkw collection areas and trash enclosures - all service areas, refitse collection areas and trash enclosures shall be completely screened by a solid wall or fence not ten than 6 feat is height, or shall be chz' —ed within a building. Exterior trash encloaues shall conform to City standards. (RC T04) l'I i� DRAFT s 111 -106 STAY WARD BUILDING PARKING LANDSCAPING sac• YARD t�ssstestaat�ieass® 1. Street yard setback (measured from face of the ultimate curb location): a. Major /SpecialBoulavanl 45 feet 30 fet 45'foat average, not less than 30' b. Secondary Collector streets/Local 35 feet 25 fact 35 foot average, not at�ee� Iess than 25, 2. hear property i1ne setback a. Adjacent to existing or planned 020 10 feet 10 feet residential development b. Adjacent to other existing or planned 0 0 0 commercial development 3. Interior side property line setback: a. Adjacent to existing or planned 020 to feet 10 feet residential development b. Adjacent to existing or planned 5 feet 5 feet. 5 feet commercial developma:L a. I NOTES: • On existing lots of record, parcels less than 175 frost in depth, aced aotprovida a setback or landscaping greater than 0% of the depth of the property (excluding right-of-way saes). • Parking and loading - off - street puking and loading facilities shall be pre -vided for each use as prescribed in the development cbde. • Signs no sign, outdoor advertising stnt?ture, or display of any type shall be permitted except as prescribed in the city sign ordinance. 8 Service areas, rvkw collection areas and trash enclosures - all service areas, refitse collection areas and trash enclosures shall be completely screened by a solid wall or fence not ten than 6 feat is height, or shall be chz' —ed within a building. Exterior trash encloaues shall conform to City standards. (RC T04) l'I i� DRAFT s 111 -106 M E F— L-1 12.2.5 OM SRace. Districts 12.2.5.1 Site D mensidris. Height imitation s-and SOM9M Development standards such as sitz dimensions, height limitations apd setbacks shall be determined on a site -by- site basis. AZonsideration, �hall be given to surrounding properties and developments in order to blend and remain consistent with the area. other factors for determination of standards " b,-. topography, water/drainage, chculation, use of site, and any other environmental factors lated to the site. 12.2.5.2 Development Criteria The following develcpment criteria is for the physical development of land within each one of the open space districts. The City shall continue to pursue joint use agreements with the various, utility and flood control enfrIes in the Edwanda North planning am. Compatible uses such as landscaping, parks and trails will be encouraged in these arms. The City Planner may, through the developmenttdesign review process, require additional improvements to it development in any one of the open space districts, if it is needed for the protection of the Public beald "',s"Oy or general welfare. Vftt follows is a discussion of each of the open space districts and their respective development criteria. QWn Space District (M Development within the OS district shall adhere to the following criteria: a Minimize alteration to the natural landfbrm. 9 Protect areas capable of replenishing groundwater supplies. M-108 DRAW o Protect the natural drainage of the area. o Protect waterways from indiscriminate erosion and pollution. i a protect lands having biological significance, especially riparian ( water - related) areas and their associated woodland vegetation. s protect areas with significant native vegetation and habitat value. 1 ! Protect natural areas for ecological, educational, and other scientific study purposes. Mood Controll&Wgn SImce Distii4;4 Cl All development and flood ontrol facilities shalt comply with the following development criteria. s Natural features such as trees, groves, and substantial physical features are to be preserved, wherever, feasible. Naturatuegetation will be retained to anchor soil in place and prevent erosion and sedimentation_: 1 * When removal of vegetation is necessary, and grading is to be undertaken, it shall be done in a manner which will mini iza soil erosion. Seeding and mulching, or other stabilization measures, are to be used to protect thy disturbed land following construction. ® No topsoil may be removed fmm the site except for that area to be covered by improvements. The topsoil from, such areas is to be, if practical, re lstributed on the site to provide a suitah`p base for seeding and planting. y v • Any fill proposed to be deposited in the floodv must be protected against erosion by rip rap, vegetation cover or bulkbeading. ` No fill may be permitted which, acting alone or in combinatior1with existing or fukm uses, affi3 is the capacity of the floodway or unduly increase% Nod heights. • Any structures or land; outside the FC District which could be subject to flood inundation, as depicted on the Federal Insurance Flood Rate Maps or otherwise by the City Engineer, shalt comp . with flood protection xneasses as outlined in Tift 19 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. • All str— tures shall be elevated to the level of the (base flood. -. ' e No structure shall constitute a debris- catching obstacle. t jjh� Corridor- n ace District (ITC) All development within utility corridors shall comply with AML qP the following criteria. 0 Buildings shall not be des;.: "d nor used for human habitatio ; -' i 0 All buildings gull be designed for compatibility with surrounding diMopment. relative to materials height, , size scale and setbacks. a Any development shall include provisions for landscaping, wind or water erosion control, and screesdng, if necessary. Fault Zone - Q[!en Space District Development withui the fault zones shall comply with the following criteria: ® Any Proposed structures shall be in accordance with a geotechnical investigation wk,�& identifies fault M -110 DR""T = J ,I �I location antl appropriate Seth —ack and mitigation criteria. ® No habitable or critical structures (as defined by the General Phan) shall be located within an identified fault zone. Resource Conservation -Qpgn Space District we Wdufla No,s2evexopment, except l°emited public xcess trails sensitive -am the conservai on goal of this use, shrill be permitted, and small comply with the following development criteria:' • There will be no alteration to the natural iandform.' • Conserve areas :with significant native vegetation and habitat valise. ' 9 Protect areas capable of replenishing groundwater .supplies. ® Protect the natural drainage of the area. a Notect ways from indiscriminate erosion and pi�llutioi:,, , V ® Protect lands having biological significance, especially riparian (water related) areas and their 'associated woodland vegetation. Protect areas with , significant native vegetation and habitat value. Protect natural areas for ecological, educational, and other scientific study purposes- Y] e, geeRI p RVA' ' � _legia 7 , ° ean , 7 - . y' pwposal bused 41 lli DRLil` A is PART IV AdEL SUBAREA DESIGN STANDARDS 13,0 SMJBAREA DESCRRMONS The intent of each subarea is to dcfW a ' 'ical areas to be master plauned (see $ecticn 10.2.4) prior to the approval of any f" . o "i project within that subarea. The mash plan shall he developed to ensure coeZrmity with the design guidelines in this plan. It shall provide appropriate access, circulation, paseo- feeler trail design, and otherissues which are not constrained by established parcel lines. The master plan s`iali also be coordinated with the Infrastructure Phasing Plan. All subareas are identFU�ed on the subarea Key Map, Exhibit 34. 13.1 DAY 9 IGI1B ®RHOQZlD —_ "�j� The P "-eek Neighborhood concept exemplifies an "Old California" street sce ;'i. 8cent of the early 4stoay of the a w. The neighborhood theme will L .mflucncca by the existing Eti -wmda area development and the Day Creek Wash area. subarea 1.1 Location Located along the west and east side of Day Creek Boulevard, north of the Route 30 fteeway corridor and Highland Averse, with a t i%rnia portion north 3f Summit Avenue an d soup of the Southern Cal III Edison (SCE) utility corridor. ? ,• nd Use - Icw Density Residential, School, Park, and Neighborhood Commercial as needed, per Sectior. 6.2.2.1. Community Design Features - Day Creek Boulevard is the major en l to the Specific Plan area from highland Avenue. Medjan island breaks will occur at Highland Avenue, Vintage Drive, Sumnu (Batiyan) Avenue and Wilson Avenue (24th Street). Day CreekBoulevard is aprimary scenic corridor with majesties mountain i views to the north and with an expansive view of tl,-- valley to the south. Landscaping in the Bay Creek median islands and adjacent utility corridor shall enhance the view potential of the corridor. IV -1 DIET J ForYSt E2 ..ands Wmh 51'safe Plaa LEGEND eawna station Subarea Reference I ', PLANNING AREA KE AP EXHIBIT Eli an a Aiorth Specific Flan ety of f 1 IV-2 DRAFT ituxhc t:wramo�ga SCE corridors provide significant open space and view opportunities in the subarea. View fencing shall be featured along the edge of residential development and the SCE corridors. Paseo access from residential development to the Community trails located along the SCE corridors shall - ,.e provided. landscaping and paseo opportunities sl a ll be developed along: the Metropolitan Water District (MWD) easement. 1 ° Interior paseos shall be incorporated into residential tract development. ; An Etiwanda North gateway shall be placed at Highland Avenue. A neighborhood gateway shall be placed at Vintage Drive. Neighborhood entry features shall be utilized at the primary access points of and subarea. A 10 -acre school site shall be provided in this subarea. A minimum 5- acre {net) unencumbered., 11 acre irv.91, developed park shall also be provded.,in this subarea. It is expected that the park and school sites will be adjoining and located in the vicinity of Summit and Hariley Bluegrass Avenues. Small parcel ownerships within this subarea shall be master planned with the whole subarea. Unique Design-Q9norMnjdes - A signi&ant edge on the vest side of the subarea is formed by two SCE corridors and the Day Creek Cb=el. . A double set of power t.,mmission lines run along the two SCr corridors which plank the channel. One corridor turns northeast approximately one- quarter of a mile above Wilson Avenue and forms the northern edge of the subarea. Day Creek divides the subarea and provides spectacular view opportunities to the north and the south. The view access is increased by the SCE reserve corridor which parallels the eastern side of Day Creek Boulevard, and turns northeasterly at Wilson Avenue (24th Street). . Imm6diately north , of the corridor is a 55 -am open space area (Subarea 12) which is b::anded by utility corridors and therefore has potential for intensive recreational use. IV -3 )GRAFT �i . Day Creek Channel is concrete -lined with a paved : .°ss road along the east side, and an unpaved dc- -ess .oad along the; west side. Three bridge crossings have been provided for th util=ity casements, one at Summit Avenue and one one- quafer of a is lie north of Wilson Avenue (24th Street). The third crossing is to Ci north of the subarea at the upper power line easement. A MWD transmission line easement traverses the eastern edge of the subarea turning south from Wilson Avenue (24th Street) at the extension of Hanley Avenue, and then turning west from 11inley,Avenue at Summit Avenue. landscaping opportunities exist at the north and south radius turns. A paseo should connect Wilson Avenue (24th Street) to the northern limit - of Hanley Avenue. the City's Red Hill Fault. Study Zone traverses the subarea on a northeasterly diagonal. one single - family residence is located within the alignment of Day Creek Boulevard in the vicinity of Highland Avenue. 13.1.2 ftAr_M 1:2 Locatign - North of the Route 30 freeway corridor and Highland Avenue, south of Summit Avenue, east of Day Creek Boulevard. Land - Low Density Wsidential Community g�i Feat res - Imerior paseos shall be provided in intemat tract deli -e] ;r Pasebs aid/or local trails shall connect development with the Community trail syst =gym along the utility corridor. Neighf r rhood entry features shall be utilized at the primary access points of the'jsubarea. Unique Design pgd an�ties - Future development must take into consideration three existing residences along fey ,Bluegrass Avenue. A nc h -south utility corridor provides the western fAge of this :subarea. IV-4 DRAFT d ,F d Amok The Edwanda Specific Plan governs the area to the east of this subarea with very low . ,sedential use and equestrian lot development. Portions of this subarea have been annexed into the City and tract approvals are pending; one tract has been recorded. 13„2 UFTER E JdiVARiDA MAREA The Upper FAwanda Neighborhood is transitional between the historic Edwanda agricultural area and the steeper, undeveloped, alluvial fan area. to the north. The neighborhood will be characterized by the use of cut stone elenenlr reminiscent of older, established neighborhoods. Pines and flowering treO, will reflect elements of the native SouthemDouglas Fir groves and Ceanothus anij Manzanita masses found in the hills to the north. A 13.2.1 Saba=, Nation - North of Wilson Avenue (24th Street), south and east of an SCE utility corridor, west of Etiwanda Avenue. ,a use - Low Density Residential. Community Design Features - Interior paseos shall be provided within the tract design. Paseos shall connect residential development to Community trails The neighborhood theme wall shall be featured along the north side of Wilscn Avenue (24th Street). View fencing shall be featured along the utility corridors. Neighborhood entr, --h. =nes shall be utilized at the primary access points of the subarea.; " ni Deign Qpy=nitles - This subarea has been previously annexed into •.ha City, with recorded Development Agreements pertinent to any future development. 13.2.2 Subarea 21 Wr - ,Located north of Wilson Avenue (24th Street), south of the SCE utility corridor, east of East Avenue, and west of Etiwanda Avenue. Allk IV -5 DRAA14T 1 &J i� c �,� - Low and Very Low Density Residential. o�rmuflfty Features - View fencing shall be featured along the edge of residential development and the SCE corridors. Pasco access, from residential development to the Community trails located along the SCE corridors shall, be pfovided. View fencing shall be featured along the edge of residential development and Edwanda Creek Wash. Pow access shall be provided linking residential development to the Community trails located along Etiwanda Creek Wash. The neighborhood theme wall shall be featured along the north side of V%ilson Avenue (24th Street). East Avenue provides a view corridor which €lxall be enhanced by landscaping. The fault zone corridor shall be retained ca an opera space feature. View fencing shall be used along the edge of residential developn nt and the corridor. Paseo access shall be provided linking residential development to Community trails located along the corridor. Neighb,�.%rhood entry features shall be utilized at the primary access points of the subarea. Uniove Design Q=rtunities - Much of Subarea 2 is bounded by util Lr - -` comdors, as in Subarea 1. A SCE corridor provides the north and west ed6e of the subarea. 'The M VD easement runs along the south side of Wilson Avenue (24th Saw) providing an opportunity for special boulevard treatment for trails and landscaping (see also Edwanda Specific Sian). An offset -extension of Ldwanda Avenue connects Wilson Avenue (24th Street) with an east-west collector road where it ends at a T-intersection. The purpose of the configuration of Mwanda Avenue north of Wilson ' Avenue (24th Street) is to divert traffic to Day Creek Boulevard and Fast Avenue in order to provide protection for the historic portion of Etiwanda Avenue south of Wilson Avenue (24th: Street). et^the�berbeed: (East Avenue forms the eastern Ieg of the Lipper Etiwanda Loop Road and Day Greek Boulevard forms the western leg.) IV -6 DRAFT F9 lu, The Red Hilt Fault Study Zone bisects the subarea between Edwanda Avenue and East Avenue. The Red mill fault is identified in this'exea and Will lsaovide an open space. — For., 13.2.3 North of Wilson Avenue (24th Street), south of an SCE utility corridor, east of East Avenue and west of Etiwanda Creek Spreading Grounds. Jaad-Ux - Very Low Density Residential, .ammunity Desig4LFeatum - This location r jacent to the Spreading Grounds is welt - suited to development of equestrian lots which should be enc?omaged, with local trails providing, links to the Community trail system. Neighborhood entry features shall be utilized at the primary access points of the subarea. Unique Design QRaQMnifles - Edwanda Creek Spreading Grounds provide the eastern edge of tine neighborhood and a unique open space Oppoty -- 13.2.4 ,Subarea 3.1 Location - A triangular area bounded on three sides by utility easements, east. of Day Creek Channel and south of the Los Angeles Department of -water and Power (LADWP) corridor. Ignd Use - Very Tow Density Residential. Community Design Features View fencing shall be featured along the edge of residential development and the utility corridors. '', Paseo access from residential development to the Community trails locai d along the corridors shall also be provided. This subarea adjoining the Day Crert Spreading Grounds is 0,41-suited to development of equestrian lots, tiierefore equestrian lot develol�ment is encouraged, with local trails providing links to Community trails:,; Neighborhood entry features shau be provided at the Upper and x her Loop Road intersections with upper Day Crack Boulevard. Am, IV -7 DRAFT neighborhood entry features shall be provided at the Upper and Lower Loop Road intersections with East Avenue. Unique Design OnpQrtunitics - This subarea 4 bounded on all sides by utility corridors. The Day Creek Spreading Ground (Chaffey Regional Park) adjoins the area to the west with access across utility road bridges at both the upper and lower utility corridor crossings. Equestrian lot development sh,,41S, -ccur in this unique location. 13.2.5 cubarea 3,2 j,ADgoni North of the Toyer SCE utility corridor, south of the double LADWP and SCE easwiri,! is, west of the extension of Edwanda avenue and east of an additioni l ."= utility corridor. Land Use - Very Low 11,ersity Residential. pmmuni D&9an F=Li,g - View fencing shall be featured along the edge of residential development and the SCE corridors. Paseo access shall be provide) from residential development to the Community trails located along the SCE corridors. Development of landscaped internal p:seos is encouraged. An opportunity exists for an east-west paseo between Eaet Avenue and Day Creek Boulevard. The location of a portion of tine subarea is nviih of the Upper Edwanda Loop Read and south of the double utility corridor. This location is well- suited to development of equestrian lots. Developers are encouraged to provide equestrian lots with local trails providing links to community trails. Neighborhood entry features shall be_1161t ed at the primary access points of the oabarea. niig1tg Design Qrnmities - SCE corridors form the north, south and west boundaries of this subarea, providing opportunities for oper. space and Community trails. 13.2.6 Subarea 3.3 Location - North of the lower, SCE utility corridor, south of the double LADWP and SCO, utility corridor easements, east of the extension of Etiwanda Avenue and wrest of Edwanda Creek d Use - Very Low Density Pasidential. Communi ;wan F a e - This subarea shares similar desiga feature 5 with Subarea 3.2. View fencing shall be featured along the edge of residential development and Etiwanda Creek Wash. Pasco access from residential development to the Community trails located along the Wash shall be provided. A 10 -acre school site shall be provided in this subarea., An adjoining minimum 5 -acre (net} unencumbered, 20 acre total, devOoped r--:k shall also be provided in this - ubarea. It is expected that thil`school and park will be located in the area .forth of the lower utility corridor. Small parcel ownerships within this subarea shall be master planned with the whole subarea. Udg den rtunities - Edwanda Creek forms the eastern edge of the subarea and provides views to the mountains and foothills, as well as opportunities for open space and Community trails. Until �Aood control facilities are provided, the eastern portion of this subaim is subject to flooding by Edwanda Creek. 13.3 ETIW 2 CREEK WASH SUBAREA 13.3.1 Marea 8 Imatip-n - TheEtiwanda Creek dwwm4 wash. Edwanda Creek drains the mountains to the north, emerging in Subarea 4, and spreads in numerous channels across the alluvial fan in a southeasterly direction throughout Subarea 8. This subarea serves as a uatural boundary between Etlwanda Highland neighborhood and, the upper Etiwanda neighborhood.' IV-9 D1ZdF'r IV-10 IDPAFT i Land Use - Hood Control. Community De�j Pea *eg - Etiwe a Creels provides a significant open space area for the community. The et�st and west edges of the Etiwanda Creek Wash shall be'enhanlxd by installation of a Community trail. The trail and its buffer zone sball be enhanced by landscaping which will serve to soften the edge between the built and the natural environment. The buffer zone will also function as a fire protection element. UniQue Ik9en_Opg=nities - The Edwanda Creek Wash Spreading Grounds must be defined and preserved. The Wash contains significant alluvial fan scrub habitat and may serve as a habitat mitigation bank area. The Wash also contains significant riparian habitat which must be preserved. The Wash presents a flooding hazard. 1:'lood protection facilities, including a debris dam and concrete channel, or levee alternative, are planned for the Wash. Once the planned flood control facilities, or alternatives, are in place, portions of the may _subarea be available for residential development. Use of a portion of the subarea for residential development must be weighed against conflicting uses for groundwater recharge /Spreading Grounds, wildlif corridors, alluvial fan scrub habitat, mitigation banking, riparian habitat reservation, passive recreation and aesthetic use. The Wash presents a wildfire hazard. Transitional landscaping along the edges of the Wash will redjr^ the hazard. The Red EM 'Fault Study Zone traverses a portion of the subarea. IV-10 IDPAFT i Location - This is an irregularly shaped area formed by utility corridors �! generally located cast of Day Creek Wash and southeast of *he "lower" utility corridor. Land Use - Open Space. mm ni DCSIi:n Features - This site is fully buffered by utility corridors to the north and south, the Cucamonga County Water District Royer- Nesbit Water !rmtment Plant on the east, and Day Creek' Boulevard and additional open space leading to Day Creek Wash on the west. E Approximately 55 acres are availabIle. to the east of Day Creek Boulevard which could be used for intensive recreation purposes and should be investigated as the site for a public equestrian boarding, training, and show, facility. The open space area to the west of` w,,Creek Boulevard may be appropriate for use as an equestrian trail head, with access to Day Creek Wash available across the utility easement bridge. Umigue Dcsien rtu>?iti_ - This site is SCE "surplus land ". The parcels have irregular shapes formed by three utility corridors which angle through them to provide a transition from a north -south alignment to an cast-west alignment. The parcel* will also be bisected by Day Creek Boulevard. Cucamonga County Water District's Royer- Nesbit Water Treatment Plant is situated at the eastern apex of two of the utility corridors and provides additional buffering for the site. A portion of the SCE surplus property extends north of the middle corti , and is naturally aligned with Subarea 3. The east -west collector road should be aligned to facilitate the use of th?s parcel within Subarea 3. The Oaks neighborhood is nestled at the mouth of Day Creek Canyon, at the top of a magnificent alluvial fan. The Oaks neighborhood concept features the um- of native fieldstone. Native Oaks, including Canyon Live Oak and Califor i a Black Oak, shall, be incorporated into the landscape design of the area, along IV-11 with native S California Walnut. . ' - {Qxereas 13.5.1 Subarea 4.1 Location - North of the double utility corridor, st -tth of the apex of Day Creek as it emerges from the canyan at the top of the alluvial fan, east of Fttwanda Creek Canyon flowing frem steeply .sloping hills, and west of Day Creek as it flows along the edge of steeply sloping hills to the Day Creek debris dam and conctet ,diiannel. Land Use - Hillside Residential; Open Rip=. Community sign Features - Because of moderate to steep ;'s1o1__, ithis subarea is subject to the Hillside Graft '.Development Ordinance, Development Code, Section 17.24. Fifty foot structural setbacks are required: from identified faults. To e Sure the integrity of the fault zone, the setbacks shall be set aside in zutl -foot wide fault zone corridors which will become an open space element in the subarea. View fencing shall be featured along the edge of residential development and the fault conidors, The area north of the southern boundary of the northern branch of the Cucamonga Fault shall be designated open space, for health and safety reasons, as well as for wildlife habitat purposes. Further, a conservation easement shall be sought in order to secure ywtection for the bog, for its hydrological source, for rRuvail fan scrub habitat, and to facilitate wildlife use of the area. View fencing shall be used along the Perim *W of the bog and its 200 -foot buffer of alluvial fan scrub habitat to ensure preservation of this unique feature. The fault knoll shall be set aside as a public park contiguous with the bog. Pax uses shall include passive recreation, rest rooms, and trail head parking for his and bicyclists. The alignment of the Front Line Fire Trail right -of -Bray shall be located prior to development approvals and constructed prior to issuance of building permits. IV-12 DRAFT <s Nelahborhood -entry features shall 1- v,Pu` diced at the primzzy access points of the subarea. - , Small parcel ownerships in Subareas 4.2 and 4.3 adoin 4.1 and shall be coordinated` for master planning. Union n P Aga -ft tunities - This entire subarea is currently under one ownership, which could facilitate master planning objectives. The Alquist- Priolo Special Study Zone for the Cucamonga Fault traverses the botto -n third of the site. The fault is well identified and splar3 into two C main east-west c- rridors with further fracturing in the vicinity of R,Iiwanda Creek. A prominent knoll has been foamed by the fault and is the rite of a former Forest Service fire station. Historically, the site has been used by the public as an overlook of the valley with views on a clear day to S,Rn Gorgonio and San Jacinto to the east, Saddleback Mountain to the south,:: and the ocean to the west. The knoll shall be retsined for public use. A unique bog the last of an estimated 1000 such bogs in tli'e San Gabriel, Saar &,a dino Basin at the turn of the century is located to the c s. sf the knoll and shall be preserved. According to previous studies the bog was formed by tilted . fault blocks which capture underground and surface runoff water in a shallow depresdon. The bog must he fully- identified and preserved. Its water sources shall also, be identified and protected. If development is proposed adjoining or above the bog, an independent hydrologieJm study sball be required to determine not only the source of water which maintains the bog, but mechanisms which would be required to pketect the bag from urban runoff water contaminated by oil, gasoline, pesticides, herbicides, and exotic plant materials and seeds. Day Creek traverses the western portion of the area entering the aalu._ fan `Tom a steep V-c rayon. A historic water- gaging station is, mated within the canyon an i is ancessible via an abandoned water company ervice road. Cucamonga County 'Mater District (CCWD) maintains incilities within the canyon and maintains a road to their facilities.,- the .eater supply in Day Creek Canyon shall be protected. Tire Day Creek flebiis Dam is located adjacent to the knoll area. A flood control earement is located along Day Creek north and south oft a` cram, extenwng approximately one - and -a- quarter miles north of the da; , IV-13 per. Et w-mida Creek traverses the eastern portion of the area from north to south, entering the alluvial fan from a sterys V- canyon. The CCWD maintains facilities within the canyon and maintains a service road to the I zapper limit of their ,faciliitiec: The water supply in Edwantia Canyon should continue to be protected. r; The San Bernardino County Flood Control District (SBCFCD) plans to - build a debris dam at the mouth of Edwanda Creek and a concrete- lined best channel, or levee alternative, from the dam southward. Turnouts are planned to di- i water to the Etiwanda Creek Spreading Grounds located adjacent to Subareas 2, 3, and 6.. A flood control easement a -tends aver r portions of the Edwaiida Creek floodway. c Existing flood control easements to the north and to the south should be 'i connected within the subarea. The existing springs which are located within this subarea should be located and protected. The National Forest boundary is located along the northern edge of the area and provides the logical limit of development. St.-*, hilly slopes define the northern edge of the subarea. Wildfire spread from the National Forest is a hazard for the area. The Front Line Fire Trail traverses the area from east to west meandering in and out of the foothill slopes. Thee road suggests the northern limit of development and will provide fire protection for the perimeter of development. The Front Une Fke Trail is planned as an unpaved, all- weather fhe access road which doubles as the main east -west regional trail I` along the base of the San Gabriel Mountains (see Exhibit 10, Open Space and Trails Plan). i 115.2 Subarea 4.2 location - North o the double utility corridor, south and west of J Subarea 4.1, and east of Day Creek Channel. Land - Hillside residential. Community Resign Features - This area should be master planned in conjunction with Subarea 4.1. W -14 DRAFT R s ��ti 1 ri4ue D %ienn QpTI unity - An Alquist -Mok; Special Study Zone covers this subarea. A portion of the Cucamonga Fault han been identified is Subarea 4.1 and can be inferred to traverse these parcels from past to west. . Seismic studies must be completed prior to development aDcrovals for this subarea. The double utility corridor bounds the property to the south. Day Creek Channel bounds the subarea to the west. 13.5.3 Subarea 4.3 Location - North of the double utility corridor, south and east of Subarea 4. 1, and west of Etiwanda Creek. Land Use - Hillside Residential. S ^ommunfty_ Design Features - Tht area should, be master planned in conjunction with Subarea 4.1. 'Unique Designg ft=n -An Aiquist- Priclo Special Study Zone covers this subarea. A portion of the Cucamonga Fa_ has .been identified in Subarea 4.1 and can be inferred to traverse these p2rcels from east to west. Seismic studies must,be completed prior to development approvals for this subarea. The double utility corridor bounds the property to the south. Etiwanda Creek Channel bounds the subarea: to the east. 13.6 E —WANDA HIGHLANDS NEIGT(B_RH_QO D SUBAREAS The Edwanda Righlands neighborhood theme wEl extend the cabaacter of the ripzxian environment found in the foothills and be distinguishM primarily by native Sycamore tree;.. Pines and flowering oeft-;md shrubs will be used as an accent. Fired brick masonry elements will be used to create an inviting, yet impressive, atmosphere. 13.6.1.` I-cocatign North of Wilson Avenue (24th Street), south of the double utility corridcri east of Wardman Bullock Road, and w�_. v.--:he San S name Wash. IV-15 DRAB I I Land Very Low Density Residential (Note: Density will be clustered to provide the open space preserve mentioned below) Community DesigpF -m= - San Sevaine Wash provides a major open she element along the eastern edge of this subarea. A 37 -acre wildlife habitat area shall be enhanced and preserved along the restern edge of the San Sevaine leash. View fencing shall be featured for residential development along San Sevaine 1-ave to take advantage of the view of the Wash and foothills. aaprovide gt seos huld p rr vi acce to Community tails along the San Sevaine Wash. View fencing ahall be featured along the edge of residential development and the utility corridors. Hood centrol channel service roads should W utilized as part of the community trail system. Community tail, 'peel Xrian amenities, and landscaping shall be incorporated within the boundaries of the MWD easement. :e neighborhood theme- wall shall be featured along Wardman- Bullock Road, with neighborhood entries at the southerly portion of the subam& Unique Designnortunities - This subarea has been annexed Into the City and is controlled by an approved San Bernardino County Final Plan of Development for Tracts 13554 and 13555. A development agreement vnth the City of Rancho Cucamonga further conditions the use of this subarea. San Sevaine Drive and the adjoining levee and wash provide the edge of project development. Thirty -seven acres of wash have been set aside as permanent open space as part of the alluvial fan scrub habitat of the wash. A SCE utility corridor bisects the subarea. Along the northern edge of the utility corridor a concrete box channel drains Henderson and WWardman creeks through the subarea to the wash. The Wardman boy channel provides an additional barrier in the northwest IV -16 Dh.A�bT e a IE corner of the subarea. The SBCFCD maintains service roads on either side of the box channel. A IIWD easement bisects the southern portion of the subarea: 13.6.2 Sabana 6 I.M - North of Wilson Avenue (24th Street), south of the double u'dlity co?ridor, west of Wardman Bullock Road, and east of the Etiwanda Creek Wash. Land Use v- Very Low Density Residential, School, Park and Neighborhood Commercial as needed per Section 6.2.2.1. Community Design Features - Equestrian lots shall be encouraged in this subarea. Paseos and/or local trails shall provide access to the Community trail system along Etiwanda- Creek Wash and the upper and lower utility corridors. View fencing shall be featured for residential development along Edwanda Creek Wash to take advantage of the view of the Wash and foothills. View fencing shall be featured . for residential development adjacent to the utility corridors. Where present, the lied Mill Fault corridor shall be enhanced by Comniunit�r tail, pedestrian amenitim, and access to surrounding residences. The neighborhood theme wall shall be featured along the residential portion of WilsonAvenue (24th Street) and aL^ng Wardman- Bullock Road. Neighborhood entry features shall be utilized at the primary access points - of the subarea. Unique Design rtunipgq Edwanda Creek Wash provides a major open space element along the western edge of this subarea. Until flood control facilities are constructed, this subarea is subject to periodic flooding from Ettwanda Creek. IV -17 DRAFT The double utility corridor provides the northern edge of the subarea. The lower rtility corridor bisects the subarea, The MWD transmission f zee easernerC traverses the subarea from east tiz- west on the north sUe of Wilson Avenue (24th Street): An inferred portion of the Red Hill Fault traverses the upper portion of the subarea. Studies, shall be completed to identify the fault. Henderson Channel also traverses the upper portion of the subarea. An east -west collector street traverk; the upper portion of the subarea and must bridge the Etiwanda Wash.' A 1C -acre school site shall be provided in this :subarea. An adjoining minimum 5-acre Owo unencumbered, l5acretotal,develagedparkshall also be provided 'a this subarea. it is expected that the school and park will be located in the area south of the lower ;_ "' ity corridor. A minunum 33 -acct neighborhood com>fereiai site may be located at the southwest corner of Wasdman- Bullock Road and Wilson Avenue (24th Street). The location of this subarea adjoining Etiswanda Creek Spreading Grounds is suitable,`= as_equestrianlots. 13.6.3 Subarea 9 Location - North of the double utility corridor, primarily south of the National forest Boundary, east of the San Sevidne 'Nash and/oz the Fontana City Limits, and west of the Etiwanda Creek Wash: Lad - 1?.illside Residential Estate; Op;,n Space. Commuolly Design Features - The subz,ea is primarily foothill area and subject to the Hillside Developmenjregulate t s, Development Coda Section 17.24. Natural streams stall be protected to the tcp ridge of their'V- cauy0is, plus an additional 25 -foot view - buffer zone along the ridge top. At a minimum, there shall be a SD -foot natural open spark buffer from the stream bed to the edge of the development. IV -1$ D,R ti The alignment of the Front Line Fire Trail right -of -way shall be located prior to development approvals and constructed prior to issuance of building permits. Neighs orhood entry features %hall be located at the primary acces!' points of the subarea. i Unique Design =rtunities - This subareais primarily characterized by moderate to steeply sloping foothills. Three all-year streams (Henderson Creek, Wardman Creek, and Morse Creek) flow through V- canyons which traverse the subarea from north to south. These canyons are subject to flooding. They also provide significant riparian habitat and must be protected. 1 Several springs are located in this subarea which should be identified and protected. The bottom third of the area is traversed from east to west by the Alquist Priolo Specirl Study Zone for the Cucamonga Fault. Based on the identified faults in Subarea 4, four branches of the Cucamonga Fault can be inferred nitining east to wes through the subarea. - Studies must be made prior to development to locate the actual faults. The area is subject to wildfire hazard to the north from the National Forest. The Front Line Fire Trail traverses da, subarea east to west through the moderately - sloping hilly terrain which characterizes the area (sue , R-Nbit 10, Open Space and Trails Plan). The subarea contains four existing residences and accessory structures. Access for these residences and other needs must be considered in any development proposals. Notwithstanding multiple ownerships in this subarea, the entire subarea should be developed under one waster plan for circulation, fire protection, and resource management. Access must be indicated for all developable parcels. 13.7 SAN SEVAM WASH SMIAREA IV-19 DRAIFT This subarea serves as a natural boundary between the city of Fon`4m -m and AMIRL the Etiwanda Highlands neighborhood. 13.7.1 Subarea 11 laolo �iYorth of Wilson Avenue (24th Street), sc-uth of the double utility &c idor, east of Edwanda Highlands and west of the City of Fontana boundary. Land Hood Control. Community Design Features, - The San Sevaine Wash provides a nitural buffer between the City, of Fontana and the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Community trails will be located along th ; east and west sides of the Wash. The: eastern trail will be constructed 'as part of the Hunter's kedge project in the City of Fontana. The western trail will be constructed as part of the Edwanda Highlands project adjoining to the west. Umigue Design O,q- rtunibm - San Sevaine Creek Channel is a natural Wash contained by levees_ along its east and west banks. This entire subarea between the east and west levees is subject to flooding. The area serves as a natural spreading ground for ground -water supply. The subarea contains sensitive alluvial fan scrub habitat. Therefore, the subarea is a prime candidate to serve as an alluvial fan scrub mitigation bank for development in the Eidwanda North area. Approximately 37 acres of theEtiwandaHighiands projecthas already been incorporated into the floodway and set ante as permanent open space for the purpose of preservation of alluvial fan scrub habitat. The SBCFCD plans to construct a debris basin at the mouth of San Sevaine Creek, which may be in conflict with the alluvial fan scrub mitigation bank potential. The reason, here is a potential conflict is because alluvial fan scrub habitat depe..ds on intermittent scouring by debris -laden flood flows. 13.8 CEMFE1t BMIB-ORHOOD MARMS The Chaffey neighborhood theme will extend the character of the alluvial environment found in Chaffey Regional Park and the Day Creek Spreading Grounds and be distinguished primarily by native Sycamore trees and Canyon IV.20 DRAFT Live Oak with native flowering accent trees and shrubs i dcluding Western Red Bud, g fm&a Toyon and Matilija Poppy. Native stone elements will be usad to create a vw.m atmosphere connected YMA the alluvial character of the area. 13.5.1 Subarea 10.1 Laoft - North of Banyan Avenue, south of the LADWP utility corridor, east of the existing Day Creek Wash Izvee, and west of the j -� extension of Milliken Avenue. ! , Land Use - Flood Control (potential for Low and Very Low Density Residential, and Very Low Estate Residential else) therefore, design criteria is discussed below: Community Design - ea= - Internal pasees should be incorporated into the design of the low - density residential area. - =- Paseos and Community trails shall connect residential development with the high school site and neighborhood park. Equestrian bits shall be encouraged north of Wilson Avenue (24th Street) wiPr'ocal trails connecting to Community and regional trail systems. "; a Day Creek Regional Trail shall be sited and constructed as a condition of any development in the Chaffey neighborhood. '.This trail may be relocated if aggregate miming is activated within Day Creek Spreading Grounds. View fencing shall be provided where - sidential lots adjoin permanent open space areas. An Edwanda Nordi gateway shawl be installed on Rtr°_son Avenue (24th Street) and on Banyan Avenue at their intersections with Milliken Avenue. Neighborhood entry features shall be utilized at the primary a . ,,ss points of the subarea. Unigue Design Qpportur_, - This subarea is located west of the eastern Day Creek Spreading Grounds levee. i IV-21 DRAFT A regional trail is planned for the top of the eastern Day Creek Levee. The regional trail shall be located and developed as a condition of development of any portion of the Chaffey Neighborhood. An aggregate mining lease has been recorded for the Day Creek Spading Grounds, but has been challenged by lawsuits. Aggregate shining could have negadve ainacts on residential development in this subarea. The northern portions of the subarea will adjoin a Resource Conservation Area,_ spreading grounds, ana future Chaffey Regional Park. The southsm portion of the subarea shall contain a 40 -acre high school site and a - minimum 10 -acre (net) neighborhood park. 13.5.2 Subarea 10.3 J&gatpon - North of the LADWP corridor, south of the National Forest boundary, east of the west boundary of the Specific Plan and west of the j Day Creek Channel; and Day Creek Canyon. land Use - Dillside Residential; Flood Control; Open Space. CommuniW Design Features - Residential development of this subarea should be master - planned with development to the west in upper Alta Loma. Because of moderate to steep slopes, lass subarea is subject to theIrdIsideDevelopment Ordinance, Deve?opment Code Section17.24. Unigge Design QWrtunities - The Day Creek debris dam is located in this subarea with the concrete chpRnel for Day Greek, providing the eastern boundary of the subarea.'; A flood control easement exists over approximately one -third of the subarea in the vicinity of Day Creek and includes the SBCFCD debris sterage area. The southeast portion of the subarea is identified a� an enclave of the San Bernardino National Forest. This subarea is p,imarily characteri6 -1 �i moderate- x- steeply sloping foothills. IV -22 DRAFT 1] E One unnamed stream flows through a V- canyon which traverses the subarea from north to south in the vicinity of the Western boundary of the subarea. Tins canyon is subject to flooding. It also prb-7des significant riparian habitat and must be protected. The existing springs in this subarea sbouldbe located and protected. The bottom third of the area is traversed from east to west by the Alquist Priolo Special Study Zone, for the Cucamonga Fault. Based on the j identified faults,in Subarea, 4, two bthnehes of the Cucamonga Fault can be inferred ru" ea f to west ,� through the subarea. Prior to development, studies must be made to locate the actual faults. i The area is subject to wildfire hazard to the north from the NationaU_ .Forest. The Front Line Fire Trail traverses the subarea, east to west along the toe of the sloping hilly : terrain which characterizes the area. The alignment of the Front Line Fire Trail must be established prior to development appr2vds and constructed prior to issuance of building permits. The portion of this subarea suitable for residentialdevetopment is adjacent to the western boundary of the Specific Plan area and virtually isolated. Development of this subarea is not expected to occur before development 13.5.3 Subarea 10.4 -North of Route 30 freeway corridor and Hrghl"d Avenue, south of Banyan Street, eRst ofRochester Avenue (Orange. Street), and west of Day Creeds Channel. Land Use _Lucy Density Residential. Community Desiom Featues. - The Day Creeds neighborhood theme wall should be pimided along the east side of Rochester M6)ue and the south side of Banyan Street. View fencing shall be provided along the edge between resientiat development and thechannel to promote views through the open space corridor. A neighborhood entry should be provided at Vurtage Drive and Rochester Avenue. rV 23 DRAFT ij ,The southern portion of the subarea shall contah) i3O 40 -acre high school site and a nAnimum 10 -acre (net) neighborb' park. r 13.9 DAY CREEK WASH SUBAREA TK subarea serves as a natural b undary between the Day Creel: neighborhood and the Chaffey neighborhood., 13.9.1 Subarea 10.2 Lgo 90 - North of Banyan Avenue, south of the LAri'WP utility corridor, west of the Day Creek channel, and east of the western levee for - the Day Creek Spreading Grounds. Land Use -Flood Control; Resource Conservation. Commrnity Design Features A regional trail is planned for the top of the eastern Day Creek Levee. The regional trail shall be located and developed as a condition of development of any porr_un of the Chaffey neighborhood. Unique Design _QgZortF , 'eses An aggregate mining lease has been recorder} for the Day Creek Spreading Grounds, but has been challenged by lawsuits. If the mining lease is removed, portions of this area may be suitable for other uses including Chaffey Regional Park. Potential uses include ground -water Spreading Grounds and wildlife habitat. In conflia: with these uses would be Vary Low Density residential devil- )pment. The northern 200 acres of the subarea has been set a-4de as a wildlife habitat mitigation area, for alluvial fan scrub habitat. This area is dedicated as permanent open space. A portion of the 200 acres has been developed as a flood diversion dike and spreading basin facility. Compatible uses for the wildlife habitat mitigation area are limited to trail developm. nt. ChaffeyReg, ^oral Park is planned for development as a compatible use for a portion of the Day Creek Spreading Grounds area.of the upfer Alta Loma area to the west. IV -24 DRAW 14' t 13.10 NA7`Ii 111, PUREST SUBAREAS The extension of the San Bernardino National Forest boundary shall be considered as the northern lin f "af residential development. Acquisition of privately -omed parcels above the boundary by the National Forest shall be encouraged. 13.10.1 Subarea 9.1 won - North of National Forest boundary in the vicinity of Day Leek Canyon. Land Use - Resource Conservation. Communily Design Feadn,s - Acquisition by the Forest Service is encouraged. Unique Design Ooi [Wnities - This subarea is a privately -owned enclave within the San Berardino National Forest. A Flood Control easement in the vicinity of Day Creek extends approximately one mile north from the southern boundary of :his parcel. Sensitive riparian habitat is located within Day Creek Canyon. Fire hazard is very high in this subarea. 13.10.2 Subarea 9.2 Location - North of the National Forest boundary in the vicinity of \' Etiwanda Creek Canyon. band i7se - Resource Conservation. Community Design Features - Acquisition by the Forest Service is encouraged: Unique Design Qp.% tunides - This subarea is a privately -owned enclave within the San Bernardino National Forest. A Flood Control easement in the vicinity of Edwanda Creek extends over the western tze -third of this parcel. A CCWD water supply easement is located within l tiwanda Canyon. IV-25 DRAFT' ( l u� I Sensitive riparian. habitat is located with' the Ftiwanda Creek Canyon area. _ i 1� Fire hazard is`very high in this subarea. 13.10.3 Subarea 9.3 I - North of the National Forest boundary, east of Wardman Canyon, and west of Morse Canyon.. Ind Use - Resource Conservation. Community gn Features - Acquisition by the Forest Service is encouraged. nigRe Design rtuni±ies - This subarea is a privnicty -owned enclave within the San Bernardino National Forest. Sensitive riparian habitat is located in Wardman and Morse Canyons.. One of the Cucamonga Fault fractures is inferred to extend in a northeasterly directio, toward this area. ' F-. hazard is very high in this subarea. LA a PART IMEPLFAIEN ATI ®N 14.0 ILL+IV+NI`A'1�I�►1TGI ,A tzinmentof the Specifici,1w,objec#;ves will requu-e the coordinated use of the development review procedures and 't�° implementation of Specific Pta objectives through sources of fman;ing. Material in Phis section discusses the regulatory procedures which are nec M f& development within she Edwanda North area. The regulatory procedures rely i �aviiy on the exisOzg City Code provisions. GENERAL B is not :. nr4ent of Cho., FAwanda North Sp miflc Plat i to accelerate or encourage' development in the plan area, nor is it the intent to hit►aler or discourage reasonable growth. Bather, its major purpose is to assure that when development does occm, it occurs ina � nanner that is consistent with the goals of the City as a whole, and is also sensitive to the opportunities and const-aints of the area as a whole. For that reason., the Etiwanda North Specific Plan is not an "action" document, and it contains no programs which woud put the City into the position of actively promoting development in the plan area. Co.erequently, the impetus for development will come from the private sector, and the Specific E an will be implemented by both the private developers on a project -by- project basis, and by the City ruid other public sigencies through the tinning and ;improvement of key public facilities. An Etiwanda North Specific Plan infrastructure Phasing Plan shall be prepared to provide infrastrot Lure implementation guidelines, and shall be completed no later than approval of any application for development within the plan area subsequent to the adoption of the Specific Flan, and shall be incorporated as Appendix A of this Specific Plana r The Infrashmeture Pius' 'Plan may be completed in two Phasing y p parts. tee Plan shall addrm iacl'rastrtacture on a neighborhood and sub -area bads. When completed foe plan shaR be incoiTorated into the appendix of the Specific Plan anc attached to the cimulatli '-: copy of the Plan. )�t J i Part I of the InffrastruLture Phasing Plan shall be prepared by applicants for development andlor the City, and s consist of the-timing "d sequence of infrastructure phasing, including but not limited to, roads (Section, parks, schools, drainage, water, and sewer facilities. Part U shall be provided by applicants for development and shall consist of cost estimates and financing mechanisims. Infrastructure costs are also associeled with police,and fire services .��d Shall be addressed by applicants for development as indicated in sections 9.4 and 4.8 of this element. Wildihe habitat preservati(n, inJuding, but not, imited'to preparation of a I Resource Mmage rent Plan, as well as a plan for acquisition of Conservation Easements,shall be'addressE�d by applicants for development andNr the City, and shall' be completed no latter than approval of any application of development within :he plan area subsequent to the adoption of the Specific Plan. However, it should be noted- -c,:at because of the pressure for development within the Specitie_ -Plan. atea, the City has cooperated with authotization of several funding mechauis: for the am, including:. " • Rancho Cucamonga hire Protection District, Community Facr7it es District 88-1, approved for tte purpose of building, staffing, and maintaining fire station in the vicinity of Wilson and East Avenues. • Comunity Facilities District 88-1, approved for the purpose of providing infrastructure and public services in the area, including, but not limited to, drainage facilities and police services. • Landsenpe A&Awment District, approved for the purpose of maintaining lan(Letayw in the public right -of -sway, specified landscape easements, and future neigbborhood parks • Lighting District, approved for the purpose of maintaining street lights in the area. a Edwanda School Dstrict Community Faciliti es District, approved for . the purpose of propft y acquisition and school construction in the area.. • Chaffey Unified High Eslhool District Community Facilities District, pend'eng, proposed for the propose of property acquisition and school construction in the area. ighlighted in this section is a discussion of various sources of financing implementation. This discussion is intended to provide a broad overview. The. City may wish to consider the various sources in more detail in the future. 14.1 1 AMUPROCEDURES Ul All regulatory procedures (Conditional Use Permits, Variances, Development Review, Non - Conforming Uses, Appeals, Land Use District (Zone) Changes; and Amendments to,Specifiq:, lan Bounds' s) of the Edwanda North Specific Plan shall be as contain d in the latest adopted edition of" City's Development Code. 14.2 DEVlELQFiKE1Nr PRdFtiSALS Further, it should be noted that processing and review of development proposals in Edwanda North shall be subjct to established procedures in effect in rbe entire City,, including Deveiopment and Design Review, Subdivision-Map eview, and Growth Management, as specified in the Cit 's Municipal Code. However, the criteria used in the evaluation of each development proposal in Ttiwanda shall be based on the objectives, policies, and specific < deveiopment standards specified herein. - _ 14.3 SOURCES C9F FINANCING If the Edwanda North area is to bp,-developed in an orderly manner and in a way which ensures proper utilization of the land, means must be ' found to finance area se -ving facilities, such as new roads, grade- separated crossing of roads and railroads, storm drain facilities, and schools. These are all needed to serve future development and, in most cases, are prere4u:ai +P for such development. Summarized below are iocsible methods of financing such improvements. Bond acts allow for pr(Vayment of the bond amounts at any specified time. However, benefit ,;ssmiments must be paid annually and do not aloes for prepayment pmeedures. V3 DRAFT J 14.2.1 DeWbursement Distract Under A*ticles 5 and 6 of the California Subdivision Map Act (as amended: in January 1990), fees can be collected to cover the costs of public improvements including roads, bridges, drainage and sanitary sewer facilities. Under these provisions, the City could enter into an agreement with the developer to reimburse that portion of improvemen tt and the actual cost of such improvements that extend beyond a project's boundaries. The City would then administer a reimbursement agreement between developers and/or property owners, or establish and maintain a local benefit district to levy and collect charges or costs from other" benefitted properties. It is possible, under this approach, to provide the improvements as -needed and defer reimbursement of charges or costs by other benefitted properties until such property is developers. 14.2.2 Improvement Act of 1911 The Improvement Act of 1911 (Division 7 of the Streets and Highways Erode, beginning with Section 5000), authorizes local agencies to impose assessments on benefitted property to finance the construction of various public improvements (Far! 3, Chapter 1, beginning with Section 5100), the acquisition of real property rights, sewer and drainage faelitiezt and certain, pre - existing assessments ( Section 5023.1), and the maintenance of sidewalks (Sections 5600 through 5630). Thr, Act also authorizes public agencies to issue bonds under the provisions contained therein (Part s,!beginning with Section 6400). 14.2.3 Municipal Improvement .Act of 1913 The Municipal Improvement Act of 1913 (Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code, beginning with Section 10000) authorizes local agencies to impose assessments on benefitted property to finance the construction of, various public improvements (Section 10100 and 10100.5); the''acquisition of real property rights and .various works and I improvements (Sections 10101 and 101('0, ' and the mainiesiance and repair of improvements coii'structed pursuant to this Act (Section 10100.8). The Act authorizes public agencies to issue bonds under the rirovisions of either the Improvement Act of 1511 or the Improvement Bond Act of 1915. V-4 DIOM J 0 14.2.4 Improvement Bond Act of 1915 The Improvement Bond Act of 1915 (Mvision 10 of the Streets and highways Code, beginning dvith Section 8500) Wntains provisions for the issuance of bonds to represent, and be secured .' by, assessments imposed under the Improvement Act of 1911, the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913, or other assessment proceedings which authorize the sale of bonds. 14.2.5' befit Assessment Act 9f 1982 The Benefit Assessment. Act of '1982 (beginning with Section 54703 of the Government Code) authorizes local agencies to se assessments en benefitted lroperty to finance the operation and maintenance of drainage, flood control and ,treet lighting services, and the instaliation..aiid - improvernent of drainage and flood control facilities. 'lie Act provides for the creation of a disc ct which can be divided into zones.' Zones can be exempted from the district or assessed differently depending on the type of service to be provided within each zone.: In the case of an assessment for flood control services, the Act provides that the benefit may be,determined wn the basis of the proportionate storm water runoff from each pared The proposed assessment must be submitted tc the eligible voters within the area of benefit, and be approved . =,a majority of those voting. Theiz --ft the legislative body may a&.ualiy determine the cost of the service ,wnich is financed by tl'.e assessment and determine and impose the:assessment. 141.6 Mel o-R sac Formaunitp_FacilitIIeAtl4f 1 The Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of'1982 (beginningwith Section 53311 of the Goverment Code) provides developers with an alternative to making dedications and paying in lieu fees as -thei u method of satisfying requirements to provide certain public capi?�,, a facilities and services. While not a true special assessment, 1"ie °special tax" upon ?.and offered by this Act pwvio:�i iniancing tool that is treated in part like an assessment V-5 DRAFT i A community facilities district may be established to provide, certain golice, criminal ,justices, fire, ambulance and paramedic facilities and services, recreatiosi programs, and the operation and maintenance `of parks.and parkways and of storm drainage .arms. It may also provide for the, purchase, constructipa, expansion, or rehabilitation of any real Jr other tangible property which the agency establ ..Mng the district may own, with an estimated useful life of five years or longer which is necessary tom , increased meet derr ;;ids placed upon local agencies as the result of or rehabilitation occurring within :khe disuict, such as parks, schools, libraries, telephone, gas ado';, electric utilities, aad other governmental facilities (Sections 53311-lnd 53313.5). Proceedings for the estab] shment of a district may be instituted by the legislative body, n petition signed by ':ten perwnt of._ the registered- voters within the propose district, or a petition signed`, by the owners of ten percent of the '4nd area within the propos'A district (Section z-, " 8 a 53S-19), The Act requires a notioLd hearini and that the resolution of intention to establish a district -peeify the rate and method of apportionment of the anntnlispecial tax in sufficient detail to allow each landowner or resident within the proposed district to estimate the annual amount v''such special tax (Section 53321). A tax" imposed pursuant V� this Act is a special tax and not a special ass=L ent, and there is no requirement that the tax be apportioaed on the basis �4 ben,!At. However, the tax may be based on benefit or other reasonable basis determined by the legislative body (Section 53325.3). If 50 percent or more of the rep ered voters,` or six voters, which, -T is more, residing within the pt'oposed district, file written protests, the formation of the district shall be abandoned (Section 53324). If there is not a majority protest and the legislative body determines to proceed, it must submit the levy of special taxes to the eligihle voters in the district (if 12 or more registered voters resole within. the district). A vole of two - thirds or more of the voters.. or the r wners of two- thirds or more of the land area of the district; is required to approve the district. In the cas< of recreation services and the operation and maintenance of parks and parkways, a minimum of 100 voters must vote in favor ig'order to approve. V-C DR XT K If tht 1proposition. fails to receive a two-thirds vote, no further action on the district can be taken for one year (Sections 53326 y �,. through 53329). Any changes to an existing district require the above procedure to be repeated. If the district wishes to sell bonds, that matter must also go through a similar hearing and election procedure; however, the two hearings and two elections may be consolidated into one i (Articles 3 and 5). 144:,.7 >i.QndWaoing and Mightinz Act of 4972 The Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 (Division 15, Fart 2 of the Streets and Highways Code, beginning with Section 22500) authorizes local agencies to impose assessments on benefitted property to finance the construction of various landscaping, lighting, park, recreational, and appurtenant improvements, and the maintenance and servicing of any of the �`oregoing (aection 22525). The Act provides for the creation of a district whi-b can be divided into zones. Zones can be exempted i � the district or assessed differently depending upon the type of service to be �vided within each zone (Section 22574). A report must be prepared and a public hearing held for each fiscal year for which assessments are to be levied. The report must include plans and 'specifications, an estimate of costs, a diagr,,m of the district, and an assessment of the costs (Sections 22565 through 2.2574). A copy of the Resolution of Intention must be pufilished and marled to each property owner a minimum of 10 days before the public hearing pertaining to formation of the district: (Section 22553). Notice for subsequent -year hearings can be given by publishing (Section 22626). /j The proceedings must be abandons ',e1 if a majority protest, by parcel area, is filed at the fast year �ubli. hearing, unless the protests are overruled by no less than'a,four -fifths vote of the legislative body (Section 22593): in subsecgn,�-k yew, an annual 'hearing must be held conc> rning the engineer's report as to the state and f tore of the improvements. Hoaicver, the above "'O provisions regarding abandonment and overruling do not apply) subsequent years. The cost of park or recreations! mpa�Vements can be raised by an assessment Ievied and collected in Installments over a period not to exceed 30 years,. - ad the cost of all other allowable improvements can be spread over a period not to exceed five years (Section 22560), The issuance of 1915 Act bonds is authorized to finance park or recreational improvements (Section 22662.5). i There is no set tern for the life of the district, and it exists until the legislative body acts to dissolve it (Section 22610), 1. t 14.2.5 Map Act Areas of B'ene it The Subdivision Map Act (Sections 66483 through 66484.5 of the Government Code) contains provisions for establishing areas of benefit for the purpose of funding the construction of drainage facilities, sewer facilities, major thoroughfare°, groundwater recharge facilities, and bridges. "Wdges" include structures, spanning waterways, rail,; � . , freeways and canyons. The Act permits locrI ordinances to require payment of a fe-', as a condition of map approval or, for bridge and thoroughfare improvements �! . only, as a condition of issuing a build:ng permit for any parcel located within the area to be benefitted by the project for which the fee is being paid. V -l3 DRAkT `N k AML 21, 14.2.9 elude Hazard A,batemant D` dcts� The Public Resources Code (beginning with 'Section 26500) Provides for the formation of a district to make and maintain improvements to pre-rent, mitigate or control land or earth movements, including earthquakes, landslides, land subs?dence or soil erosion. diG,Iggic hazard Abatement Districts may pay tip cost of improremc: i through use of the 1911 Act, the 1913 Act, or the 1915 Act. Mainte,-lance costs may be paid -,,,A special" assessments on benefitted property. Proceedings for the formation - of a district may be` initiate by , either a petition signed by owners of f0 percent of the prT to be included, or by resolution of the legislative "y of th6 local ,Jency. If the -owners of more than 50 percent of the assessed va:.nation of the proposed district file written objections to its formation, the district must be abandoned. 14.2,JA Strees. Lighting Act of 1919 Whe Streerl ighting Act of 1919 (Division lad, Part i of the Streets and Highways Code, beginning vAth - Section 18000) authorizes municipal corporations to assess benefitted property for the cost of maintaining , td fumishtng energy to stree_�= lighting systems (, lection 18030. A first-year report rust be prepared which includes plans and sperifrcations,`° �n estimate of costs, a diagram. of tha district, and 3 proposed assessment of the costs for each parcel (,°ctions 18040 through 11CO42), The resolutior- _of intention must state the ;period of time for the improvement of the street lighting system. The dis,. ct dissolves at the expiration of this term (Section 18,062). Although no requirement for mailed notices is stated, it is recommended that a ± ;opy of the resolution of intention be mailed to eaph property ownzr a minit..um of 10 days before the public hearing. �3 71 there is a majorityprmtst, by parr arts, by the owners within •any zone, the legislative, body must swim such zone from the r ,Vxeedings, unless the protests are t verruied by no less than a �; ur- -fifths vote of the legislative body (section 18076). V-9 DRAY T' ,L\ 14.2.12 i For each subsequent year a report must be filed which includes an Ak estimate of zosts, a diagram of the district, and an assessment of the costs to each parcel;.(Section 18091). Street LigbOwi Act of 1931 The Street Lighting Act of 1931 (Division 14, Part.2 of the Streets and Highways Code, beginning with Sectior 1 }8300) authorizes municipal corporations to assess benefitted property for the cost of maintaining and furnishing energy to street lightinb J systams (Section 18220). A first ye;�' report must be prepared which includes plans and specifications, an estimate of the costs, a diagram of the district, and a proposed assessment of the costs to each parcel (Sections 18340 and 18341). The resolution of intention must state the period of time for t;ie improvement of the street lighting system, which must not exceed five years. The district dissolves at the expiration of this perm (Section 18321). Although no requirement for mailed notices is stated, it is recommended thn a copy of the resolution of intention be mailed to each property owner a minimum of 10 days before AOL the public hearing. If there is a majority Protest, by parcel -irea, by--,*he owners within any zone, the legislative body must sifte such zone from the proceedings, unless the protests are o4-c ed by no less than a four - fifths vote of the legWai;ve body (Section 18364). For each subsequmit year an assessment of the costs each parcel must be made based upon an estimate of the following year's cTkasts (Section 183,00). Drainage and Sewer Facilities Sectiom 6641 "= through 66499.30 of the Government Code and the Subdivision Mai{ Act of Government Code Sections 66483 through 66484.5 authorize payment of fees to defray the costs of building drainage facilities for the removal of surface and stormwaters from local and neigkNorhoad drainage areas. Vld� 7 To, ^tact fts, an ordinance requiring payment of fees must be in etfett for a period of at least 30 days prior to the filing of a "A'' tentative map (or parcel map if no tentative map is required). The ordinance refers to a drainage or sanitary sewer area which contains an estimate of the total costs of conmcting the local drainage or sanitary sewer facilities required in the plan. The governing body Js the legislative body that has adopted the drainage or sanitary sewer plan'. The cost to the imposed, whether actual or estimated, is based upon the findings of the legislative body. Subdivision and development of property within the planned drainage ar local sanitary sewer area will. require construction of tx a facilities described in the plant. 14.2.13 midges and Qr Thoroughfares Section 66484 of the 'iiIYernment Code authorizes design, acquisition of rights - ,zlwE& administration of constmcdon cortracts and actual consttuc�tion. Local ordinance must refer to the circulation element of the General 1'lar and to the provisions of such element which identify those major thoroughfares whose primary purpose is to carry through- traffic and to provide a network connecting to the state-highway system. If one -half of the owners within the area of benefit protest the improvements, then proceedings are abandoned. The,�,.ial ordinances may require the payment of a fee as a condition of approval of a fine - �iap or as a condition of issuing a. building pm-dt. An ordinance adopted pursuant to this section may provide for the acceptance of considearation in lieu of payment of fees. The agency imposing fees may incur an interest - bearing indebtedness for the construction of bridge faciliti^', or major thoroughfares. i 14.2.14 Streets and A' hrg ways I Sections 22585 through 2252.4—d the Streets and Highway Code allows the legislative baby to construct or install improvements and to provide for themaintenance or servicing of those improvements. The assessment distdZI is initiated by legislative resolution. ! Proceedings for the assessment may oe abandoned if there is a majority protest rep_resen6ig property owners owning more than p 50 percent of the area or assessable lands within the proposed V -lI DRAFT. f U district. A four- fifths vote of all legislative body members can overrule the protest. +y 14.2.15 Other ImIjXgy rn n c S, atial Municipal Tax Dist acis are authorized under Sections 60000 through 60160 of the Govemment Code. The district created can maintain and operate Pay public improvement or utility of local necessity or convemience, furnish or perform any spacial local service i;.t,iuding music, rec.- °ation, or advertising. The gds, rni g body may appoint offcers and employees for the district as it deems necessary. Of'icers and eniployecs serve at' the plessure of the legislative bod and are not subject to civil service prov ;sions. Formulation is i vitiated by a petition of residents living within the proposed district. Tea percent of the registered voters within the proposed district must sign the petition. The = Iegisladve boo!, adopts a resolution of intention and, if no objections are sulta<hed, submits questions of formation of district and levy of tax t j rwid -nts of the district. A majority v;^te in favor of "he 9ist4ct allows the legislative body to declare the district ianed ariY, levy the special tax. The district has the authority to levy taxis upon C o—Ve property not to exceed $1 per year on each $100 or,assessed valw!ion. i 1 701 -02 o SEPTEMBER 115 1991 P. C. AGENDA ( 1 of 13 } ca ' CITY, OF 9ANCHO CLICAN"NGA % a PLANNING COMMISSION _ 1977 WEDNESDAY SEPTEMBER `9.1, 1991 7;00 P.M. RA;YCHO CUCA1' OXQA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBER 10500 CIVIC 'CEN'T'ER DRIVH RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA I. Pledge of Allegiance 11. Rail Call 1 Commissioner Chitiea Commis°:onor Tolstoy Commissioner McNiel Commis. ,J over A7allette• Commissioner Melcher I11. i Announcements IV. Approval of Minutes j August 14, 1991 Algust 2?, 1991 i V. Consent Calendar The following Consent Calendar items are,; expected 1 to be routine and neon - controversial. Thpt will be acted on by the !Commission at one "Dime without discussion. If ;anyone has concern over any item, it should be removed for discussion. A. TIME EXTENSION 'FOR DEVELOMNT REVIEW 8$- Qom...•• COCHRAN - The development of 20 apartment unite on 1.08 acres of land in the Med$.um High J Residential District (14 -24 dwelling .units per acre), located at the end sf Sierra Madre Avenue, west. Of Edwi,e Street APN.' 207-251-22. i i >i ' B. Sl"k WRY VACA'. \ION OF A PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF MILLIKEN AVENUE AND TERRA VISTA PARKWAY: NORTHWEST CORNER OF SPRUCE: AVE2dUE AND CHURCH STREET:') SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SPRUCE AVENU..At1D CHURCH STREET, AND - NORTHWEST CORNER; OF ELM NUE AND CHURCH STREET ',req�(c+st to . vacate excessive street - rights of -_ ` .'%; the intersections Of: Milliken Avenue iW,ti' ' °erru 1. Vista Parkway, Spruce Avenue with Burch Street, ;,and Elm Avenue with Church St;l t - APN: 22'i- 15_12,' 1077- 421 -58 1077 -421-5 and 1077- 421 -62. } VI. Public Heari`ngs � The following it;zms are public h�,aa:ings in which concarnod „individuals may voice their opinion of the related project. Please wait to be recognized by the Chairman and address the Commission by stating y ©ur name and address. All such opinions shat be l mitef,; to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Please sign ;n after speaking. C. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 91 -23 - ASPEN MEDICAL GROUP - The request to allow a mobile CAT scanner trailer to operate w thin the parking lot Of an existing Office complex on 1.57 acres of land i.n the industrial Park Disl:.'ict (Subarea 7): of the Industrial Specific Plan located it - 10837 Laurel Street APN: 208- `.52 -16. (continued from July 24, 1991.) WITHDRAWN BY APPLICAM D. % WVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 90 -01 AND OENERJ`1r,PLAN AMENDMENT 90-03B - CITY OE RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A public hearing to comment on the draft environmental impact report prepared for the Etiwanda North Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment 90 -*03B to prezone approximately 6,840 acres of territory in the Rancho Cucamonga sphere -of- influence to provide for 3,613 single family dwelling units on 2,473 acres of vacant land, 28 acrff,& of neighborhood commercial use, 4 schools,,,, 5 parks, an equestrian center, and praservation of`4,112 acres of open space generally located north of Highland- Avenue (State` Route 30) south of the San. Bernardino National Forest,,",, west of the City of Fontana, and east of ` Milliken Aven1::•. (Continued from August 14, 1991.) a raw Ak R 1 5 i E., ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND SPECIFIC PL- -. 90 -11 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to -- recommend approval of the Etiwanda worth Specific Plar,, prezoning approximately 6,840 acres of territory in the Rancho Cucamonga sphere of influence to provide for 3,613 single family dwelling units on 2,473 acres of vacant land, 28 acres of neighborhood commercial use, 4 schools, 5 parks, an equestrians center, and preservation of 4,112 C;`,res of; open spaoi3 generally located north of Highland Avenue ` (State Route 30), south of 'the San Bernardino National 'Forest, west of the City of Fontana, and east of Milliken Avenue. (Continued from August 14, 1991.) / F. ENV?'iZCNMENTAL: ASSESSMENT ANA GENERAL PLAN , AMENDMENT D0 -03B'- CITY OF RANCHO'CUCAMONGA - A request to recommend approval of -a General Plan - Amendment to provide consistency With the draft Etiwanda North Specific Plan, prezoning approximately 6,840 acres of territory in. the Rancho Cucamonga sphere of influence to provide for 3,613 single fam - ''dwelling units on 2,473 acres of vacant Ian,.) 4t_.acres of neighborhood commercial use, 4' s ools, 5 parks, an equestrian center, an&-,, eservation of 4,112 acres of open space generally located north of Highland Avenue (State Route 30), south of the San Bernardino National Forest, west of the City of Fontana, and. east of Milliken Avenue. (Continued from August 14, 1991.) G. CONDITIONAI USE PEIRMIT 78-03 SAMIS PLACE The consideration of suspaneion�or revocation - of <'� Conditional Use Perm, it allowing the operation of a bar ip conjunction with a restaurant located in' the Neighborhood commercial District at 6620 Carnelian Street, • northwest corner of 19th and Carnelian Streets APN: 201- 811 -56 through 60. J' H. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 78 -03 - SANI S P'-ACE - A review of compliance with conditions' of approval and consideration of -suspension ` or revocation of the Conditional Use Permit for a restaurant and bar located in the Neighborhood Commercial District at 6620 Carnelian Street, northwest corner of 19th and Carnelian Streets I. AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USF PERT 78-02 1 SAMIS PACE - A request to extend the hours of operation a: d amet.d the condition of approval probiibitincr- "live entertainment for an existing restaurant and bar located in.the Neighborhood Commercial District at 6620 Carnelian Street, northwest corner of 19th and Carnelian Streets APN: 201 -8:x" 56 through &0. (Continued from Au -Just 14, 1991.) J. ENTERTAINt4ENT PERMIT 91 -0 - SAM;S PLACE - A request to conduct live music in conjunction with ,,a restaurant and bar located in the Neighh�rho00 commercial District at _arnelqF,:� Street, northwest corner_ :)f 19th aitd Carnelian Streets AM, 201- 811 -56 through 60. (Cdnainu6d from August 14 1991.) X. EMRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 91 -02 ' ,CITY OF RANCHO CU=ONGA -- A "request to amend various development 0%;andards and design guidelines for multi- family regki?ential districts. staff recommends issrl ince of a Negative Declara*,Jon. ( Continued from August 22, 1991.) L. __T_RjgM_M'TJ TL ASSESSMENT AND SIANDA SPECIF1 Pil►N AMENDMENT 91-OZA 5ITY OF R CHo CUCAMONGA A request toU amend various development standards and dRsign guidelines for multi family residential district within 'the Etiwanda Specific Plan area, Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. (Continued from August 22,: 1991.) M. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TERRA VISTA CO MUNITY `MPNDMENT 91 -02 - CTTY nF _c:tiCATONr. A :.equest to ame -a various developpment standards and design guidelines for multi - family residelitial districts within the Terra Vista Planned Community area, Staff recommend; issuance of I a Negative Declaration. (Continued from August 22, 1991.) N. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VS "OR"`lk PLANNED COITY AMENDMENT 91 -02 - cTT1t 1 r RANCiii) Cucz 4,;�"G A request to amend l various development standards and design guirl ,dines for q, multi-family residential districts within the Victoria Planned community area. StLff recommends issuance of a Negative Decla =ration. (Continued from August 22, 1991;.) IE 7 O. MODIFICATION TO TENTA2'SVE TRACT 13717 -' LLFWIS $COMS A request., to modify a previouusly approved Tract Map,-to increase the nuiaoer of multi- family lots from 3 lettered and 12' numbered lots to 4 lettered and 16 numbered lots for 394' units -on 23.5 acres of land in the Medium -High Residential designation (14 -24 dwelling units per acre) of the Terra Vista Planned Community, located at the northeast, corner of Spruce Avenue and Church Street APN: 1077 - X421 -13. P, ENVIRONMENTAL 114PACT REPORT FOR VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 14475 - S %K� IRVESTMEKT.S A public hearing to comment on the final draft environmental impact report prepared for a residential subdivision and design review of 73 single fam.'�ly homes, on 113 acres of land in the Hillside Residential District (less" than 2 dwelling units per acre), ,located north of Almond Street. between Sapphire and Turquoise Streets :APN: a90- 051 -07, 55, 56, and 57. c1, CONDITIONAL U.9Z PERMIT 91 -27 - HQWD - A request tip establish an animal care facility within an existing building in the General Industrial District (Subarea 3) of K'e Industlal Area Specific Plan, located at §i75 Feron Boulevard -- APN: 209-- 032 -17. Vii. Now Susindgs R. DEVELOPMENT REVTZW ti -04 - WCLLS ''FARGO 6ANK - The proposed development of a 4,522 square foot bank on Pad 10 within the previously approved Vineyards Marketplace Shopping center, which consists of 22 buildings totaling 121,401 square feet on 12.8 acres of land in the Village Commercial District of the Victoria Community Plan, located at the southeast corner of Highland Avenue and Milliken Avenue APN: 227- 011 -22. VIII. Commission Business S. ROUTFF, 30 - (oral Report) IX. Public Comments This is the time and place for the general public to address the commission. Items to be discussed here are those which, do not already appear on this agenda. q �jl J vicinity map r1i *I 4 DATZ: TO: FRO:d BY: SUBJECT: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT i i September 11, 1991 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Brad Buller, City Planner Scott Murphy, TLssociate Planner TIME EXTENSION FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85 -03 - COCHRAN - The development of 20 apartment units on 1.08 acres of land 1n the Medium -High Residential District (14 -24 dwelling units per acre), located at the end of Sierra Madre Avenue, west of Edwin Street - APN: 207 - 251 -22. BACKGROUND: Development Review 88 -03 was originally approved on August 17, 1988, for the development of 20 apartments. On AuTzst Be '1990, the Planning Commission approved a one -year Time Extension for the project.. under the Development Code provisions; time extensions may be granted in one -year increments, up to a maximum of five years from the original approval date. During the preceding year, the applicant has been pursuing completion of the construction documents for the buildings and street improiements. Additionally, the applicant processed a Tentative Tract Map application for condom3zium purposes to allow the sale of the units. The Planning Commission approved Tentative Tract Map No.' 15172 on July 10, 1991. The Kpplicant is now completing the final tract map requirements prior to recordation of the map. Upon recordation of the map, the applicant anticipates obtaining building permits and commencing construction. ANALYSIS: Staff has reviewed the project for compliance with the Development Code requirements and finds the project in conformance with the Medium High Residential District. Additionally, stas:f has compared the plans with the multi- family standards being considered by the Commission and finds the project in substantial compliance with the proposed standards. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the . Planning Commission approve the final one -year Time Extension for Development Zteview 88 -03 through adoption of the attached Resolution. City `Planner BB;SMijfs Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Letter from Applicant Exhibit "B" — Location Map Exhibit "C" - Site Plan Exhi?'At "D" Building Elevations Exhibit "E" - Planning Commission Resolution No. 88 -117 Exhibit "F" - Planning Commission Reso ution,No. 90 -106 Resolution of Approval for Time 'extension for OR 88 -03 J ENGINEERING, CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEER � REC1tIVEd i rr CITY OF RANCHO CaJCAMdNa� R,.ANNING DIVISION AN August 6, 1991 Mr. Brad Buller Planning Division City of Rancho Cucamonga i 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 in response to the deadline of August 8, 1991 for DR 88 "U3, the applicant is requesting a time extension of one year. Please place this matter on the next agenda ofithe Planning Commission. Enclosed please find the application and a chet,k in', amount; of $62.00. 1 i i Jahn Kao i JW Engineering {I let40 99 "C" Stmt, Suite 209 • Uplemi,'Cslifomia 91786 + (Mlo 411NYk STREET STREET �k3ktT[i CITY OF rrE.Nt. RANCHO CUOMMOMA TITLE- tq °. s 44 I I. b _,. � sat►ravo s I � �• Y a S W K $ °siren : dommms lz I 3 ! -**Ti i CITY OF ITEM: PL.k\Ni. iG D[`'ISM EXHIF1T' C � sc-\LE' CITY OF rrF-%i: KANCHO CUCALIN10%XAT TITLE: AMIUVOW PLANNING DjNrSM EXHIBIT' 0-/ SCALE: R 1:1 �m 0 M r J ■ D < a 'r n r M s a �e 0 s 6 O e r e CITY CF ITEM:- fQ A�5?-Af RANCHO CL'', ,%vl?:�r� Trrl.E= �iirl�.a�' i�'r�� PLt1.'ti':l�t'�iG DIVISION EXHIBIT' P- 2 SC=ALE= lq - 6 i CITY OF PLA NM DIVLSM �I �yy IT'EXP TITLE- EXHIBr, 3 SCALE - ^7 s r s r e g� G a < v El RESOLUTIOR NO. 88 -117 A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO'CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING LEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 88 -03, FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 20 UNIT APARTMENT PROJECT ON 1.08 ACRES OF LAND IN THE MEDIUM -HIGH RESIDENTIAL DISTRIC LOCATED AT TFE `"ERMINUSES OF SIERRA MADRE AVENUE AND lt'dh STREET - APN: 207- 251 -22 A. Recitals. (i) Ala,. Smith has filed an application for the k,lproval of Development F.eview No. 88 -03 as described` in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in -`his Resolution,- the subject Development Review request is referred to as "the application ". (ii) On the 22nd of June, 1988, the i'.inning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a meeting on the application and concluded said meeting on that date. (iii) All legal prerequisites to the adoptini of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resoluti;;a. NGW, 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 ttie facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence preswnted to this Commission during the above- referenced meeting on June 22, 1988, including written and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: (a) The application applies to property located at the terminuses of Sierra Madre Avenue and Main Street and is presently vacant; and (b) The property to the north, east, and west is designated fog- residential uses. The property to the north and east is developed with single family residences. The property to the west is developed with a condominium project. The property to the south is designated and developed with railroad tracks operated by A.T. & S.F.; and (c) The project, with the recommended conditions of approval, complies with all ,minimum development standards of the 'City of Rancho Cucamonga; and (d) The development of 20 apartments on 1.00 acits of land is consistent with the Medium -High Residential land Ilse designation of the Development Code and the General Plan. 1 PLANNING COFJ41SSION RESOLUTION NO. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 88 -03 - ALAN SMITH June 22,1988 Page 2 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Caawstission during the above- referenced meeting and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraph 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: (a) That the proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan and (b) That the proposed use is in accord with the objective of the Development Code and tszl purposes of the district in which the site is located; and (c) That the proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code; and (d) That the proposed use, together ;nth the conditions applicable thereti), will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements it the vicinity. 4. This Commission hereb} finds and cert;fies that the project has been reviewed and considered in compliance With the- galifornia Environmental Quality Act of 1970 and, further, this Commission 'eby issues a Negative Declaration. S. Based upon the findings and conclusions, forth in paragraph 1, 2 and 3 above, this Commission hereby approves the appliration subject to each and every condition set forth below end in the attached, Standard Conditions attached hereto atd incorporated herein by this rzference, Planning Division \1') A spaijacuzzi shall be provided. The location, size, and design shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee rrior to the issuance of building permits. (2) Tt_ roof "eyebrows" on the rear elevation of the garage shall be enlarged to be more in scalta with the building or shall be eliminated. The plans shz3l be reviewed and approved by the City, Planner prior the issuance of building permits. (3) Thin € items shall, be incorporated into the final )- ,s,:cape plans which are subject to review 1p and approval by the City Planner prior to the issuanc,,`af building permits: { °9 PLmu �'• !ON RESOLIT;,ON NO. DEVELOPMENT fvEULEW 9E -03'- ALAN SMITH June 22, 1988 Page 3 (a) Accent treatment shall be provided at the entry off Sierra Madre Avenue. (b) Extensive landscaping shal,? ,be provided along the site boundaries, ;cularly the north and east boundaries., (c) A sample of the lexturized pavement material shall be submitted. (d) A decorative block wall shall be provided along the south property ? "ines. A wv!%ght iron fence with decorative block pi l ast-`rs' or a j'g— rative block wall shall oe required' 09 the north property line. In additio;. Ohs'. existing walls on the east and wow• ill be upgraded to provide a decor) eatment, such as stucco with a dec,J .tive w..p. (e) The limits of any easements and their restrictions on landscaping shall be Ilea *?fir delineated on the plans. (4) A final acoustical analysis shall be provided to address potential noise impacts from the A.T. & S.F. Railroad any necessary mitigation for exterior and interior noise levels. The analysis shall be reviewed and accepted by the City Planner prior to the issuance of wilding permits. Engineering Division (1) The developer shall obtain the necessary right-of- -way and construct full width improvements for'�ierra Madre Avenue from the project site northerly to the existing dedicated portion of Sierra Madre Avenue' prior to issuance of building permits. Siuewalks shall be constructed along the west side and shall cover the entiie parkway from the block wall to the curb. The developer is eligible for reimbursement for the cost of ,construction of the 'off -site improvements upon development or redevelopment of the adjacent property. The amount of the reimbursement will be prorated on a net acreage basis (minds street dedication) for the benefited, properties. PLANNING COMMISSION R'rSOLUTION 140. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 88 -03 - ALAN SMITH June 22, 1988 Page 4 (2) Storm drain facilities shall be constructed and an easement provided to convey flows from Sierra Madre Avenue through the site to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. (3) A 15 foot easement for the futurc- master planned storm -drain shall be .dedicated along the south property line"of the site to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. (4) The storm drain easements shall be accessible by City vehicles. Landscaping within the eas_ -ments shall be subject to the approval of t'�e City Eagineer. (5) An easement over the internal driie aisles shall be provided to the City to ensure access for City maintenance vehicles to -the City storm drain easements. (6) An in -lieu fee as contribution to the future undergrounding of the existing overhead utilities (ra#lroad communication lines) witt:n the A.T. & S.F. Railroad easement shall be paid to the City prior to the issuan.:e of building permits. The fre shall be half the City adapted unit imount times the length of the project site. (7) Main Street abutting the east property line shall be completed with a modified turn around (18 foot radius) to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. I 6. The Deputy Secretary to this Commission_ shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22ND DAY OF JUNE, 1988. PLANNING i C ISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA By:. arry rman ATTEST: ra epu y ecru ai"'ry Oak PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION N0, DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 88 -03 - ALAN SMITH June 22, 1488 Page 5 I, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning, Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution Was duly and regularly introduced, passed, a� ,adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 22nd day of June, 1488, by the fo; lowing vote -to-wit: _ AYES: COMMISSIONERS: TOLSTOY, EMERICK, 8LAXESLEY, CHITIEA, MCNIEL ADES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: C014MISSIONERS: NONE 2 1� Li 411 d 0 ��qsLqs NUY Gtt`tl�> �'OS �G CM '��C EW'.. _Y O1 •rY OAO�y/ LNy.YU °` Gypa N 0 t) pLC 6= ai 6 '� � '• O gi w C Y . a cw 3 w w s� RHY~ wsyCC H N y OYYL �Ye yq6 �M LiwC. °.0 C9�e/ !� tipsy � ♦♦L G. y� N CYUYy.� rniCS Hl9Ca .�t6 °c ra «M � Ry d' u L E I.''� �TV« VmY .Ea t Mi °iuT �t� ��Y_Y C4'IY ka a u Ya•Yw « d V � O .°. YC t� G� ��ooYYR ^wSs �E�4G uarS {TO.VU ^N9. PYwYN p{�y�O9 yYY p •r,^,� !11 V •1 C 6 Y N � d N did i C 4 6■ C p N� O Utz L g- 5P; did n L Y Q �w0 �a Lwow Yr OYN 04� IlA MwG wCCY16 6e�1Ym�q�G �.O e44 Q L VI4 9� YG ^V fid!p i OIQ a. C32 L3 % Y 93Zal 6.0 C �.. T. gyYYp 3aaC g it-la- Na. 'S u'�. a•c ±�u e N3Y9 ^ °sie .'Igas Y l dv.: Frca'.tn -1 as %vlT «mot �co�t� sgE cio Y J W T N Qv yYwGy� R F Q CCvvC p 60• My �Cti9d • J O i M�j ' q O.i�d. ®S7ONCad �:. �. �,1 'J O • CI.�:vN IY•p�p V. y M� 1' L t� yy 6yC 0p 0� V 6�O? O. a N� 6 Mnopop•fQ ®L C�.N p�Vi w �: O >Yyy n$VYC E tr _ 0 } y t6' � N H CLCNN47 >d YT > Y 70 �I d � ii 6wN.. a a � G �s�'rr�a �9 • s ,I e � 4 � � e i.U• /'Y��yC ,'��Cp P �GyNC� - L�L. _� N ly W i✓ ®{{{0111 t Iq _13 ,I i a.° W �i a �ML� Oe e1i CiC10�sp «Ka qL VPY C a N C 6^ W Y Q L s ^^ L^ Y C Q Y iO, 4 a �° qqp qqq q LM^ O T*L Y E N r p g d NN q �^� Y N 3 N a Y tSUY TfN^ pY •.q 11. C. �hY Qsp� p ..d d �Cq'. �O daq �V pQ O.V Yc i o �yy w _ p�l yy33{{ up p• Y 1� C ry n O V N # 6A �Y.O a°u` + G'. Y.L^ q ..d 40 0= N �aow q�V O YC M i� � =4N� Y �ady�w pe COZY ®Y 621 q.0 L.+.� =LN Gyl•1YL ya ` "V L Nj'¢ YvYti .Neu uL n.N� „� SAY = %sY u.. cYNCq ` yN ay. N ap it a` Y V” Y .i �. Y Y Lgg Y Y Y Y a y N q y�Spc nzo�mh My�B�'2yN «�s °stgti +a$ 'aNU gyv a`VyMYO a p l 5 n i xw yN N C . s pp -SSE L C p� y� C{qpCyy N q^ GN V L Y.Yr� ya�Y ^A CY r N`y W1Y ^� geg yQ�wn it N�3wi�' L��M �� L.gRLY wN w °c r. Mnp'Pit.N aya ~. Y A ° q {� CC pq c 8. $pg �g lY q 41gw. q� pq YQ�I. G. OGHL ^N �Yp Ss MO"w GO 4aCIS -six cr''py"N C «� ■e� pO�y{ y$Si'M" °$ oe^Yi ar e-."a. C I LYLwj 4% ;H YCm C l+l 6L�Q��0 Ow 0. Y YpLCLQO CC Gd �m.NN VNw1 Ww^lt 6: 6a. tsz N� V i 'p•.V 63 MppMC A 1'O y �Y qGV W at SR vTi. O q ^ M r...5. 4YA w 6" C A y 0 V 3 q� a".a ,• u .maw r C N L C C M q 47 c I- CYLV 60 yC N^ 4 VP .V. C V p q.. �4y W M i� yq Tesq two Qypi LN6O y L6`O `.4epw �$ Cw 6y O L =t.7 Lw me L .�. h � M q 'O4 Kt•� >'[� \ 1qq1�� Y M yy p C y V� M d. Y it L K BL Cyy V p cc. L O T O 7L t �� M� 'O Nx1Yi Y "L v CYYw,:jL`. O o® � p 2 "y9 1 S� O p 16 y �6 q p" ! $ y. Usi ~ al C4 i t $ N yw V. 41Q 'C NL _ W Sp2.0 k17l4�ppq' .is tl4w a °MVVg�YNV ��9Oq S�V�Yg € «_LVL Y q.;i1 yw gulf Wa s, gulf t.3 p y C q y D a0yy IL&'Z1 Z. Ch Yw3yr'4 �SaY{ 1. qG. 6�wYL1p CapVa O. aC e�;� ■. Piz Msv 'elf ��`rt��� + r a d o N w u"i d op.�.{st° itwIa �sy OrV JCa"-~C.. sao'rS 3 'yp wa L L C pCp d V 9 V 7, ny_ Y M Z_ CC p i� ar.w yp4 b L A �d N �..YLL bY. .+Y. q.L�1�d d0gl yM ■ ~y tsV LYt6JA {Y�.N V�p.Y00y <w°.NA NnyPY K.0 gS�Y'� 'qii pi w FMi6NCq C6-.! l E 1 N t 0 M f 1 yL C �O Ofi Y O aQV C 0 a ^Y Or CLIYC Yf �Nw O ^p t, -E,; Y .C.yp1 Y T "LO L Yb O^'CK b 014 tl % 5E.°- aG�C LLt 1.C11m4Y �Y' ♦ N oN.O CW L 6e N� 1[Y ' q_ Y.Y 4LW_Y. .10'4 010 q.010.m W Y L ^tl�� Ar y Y C C r fCV4 L YaQ + sl p�o C4 O�. 09 g1.V�1fl �O. Y04O1'OO MCCy �4 -g. C O tl pY��O .��. wtl.YNe C G� .4 YO q0 rf-b tl g0rogy 00004 Y�TpF�`�L YCQ DYO9 Ni lY`YU N1AY L `YS C A� • 9 Ne{�1Y ±YN N C'v 4 ^Z S LC= w.' .. C Y N V Y NC Cl ai VY.y �v� g110i.NNYY yrd @�1 �r1Ca OQ N L eeW LL y CN01 Yw'... w6NO.Or^.NCTw La a ,gip L 'JN C 1p NNaL O p M Y�}(� • OrN � �� 40 r CC �T L,�CC1�+ N4.trO OYY L@NOOL G 7 d 01 C H Q y C "• -.'Z S G= q M w Fag {G� N L' q- N T OMq s C +� e p �J Ycc SE O' M N w Y' Y V° OAL 60 b v LL a � ��11 t cr0040tlQ1rllb gr tt o 0p11 01M M�~ L � nYr'h wV LQ O� L ON. L ~�11L ~pMpY ��11YV NMYL.r CT 4 O'er ^�..0 i11L. Yp� 70�py CN�1 ^ v O.. M '� � C 0• ` G N j� 4� M Y0 V� t f l y tl Ol C� � 010,y N L N u+ L f N L NPN�N ■ LC'Y Y Vu M N~ V 2 N L L q- Y .5 ~ r CpCp /p. 4 0 L+ p 0 yY r i 0y A C tl O Y 6N� '�'N YNO F�°H `N Yw�Qi OlAM pO S W�V0. <y {�� ^'GM OLDY aYC VC OyC �Lp11 L1 6 w, O1�OC Cam` r 01 C0 1La.'L V Y 1. _ O ^3 rw 01 y NL r0 v O� i� C GLp {O{��•. y� MCCw C 6r �p °mom' . =ham NaCC NN' LLM p Oit YY 0.�1 YO y�C� L� tgyr Y OI C M V w CO yM„ A OC ANC Dr L Y ^ y� 1t f w. P tl0 CJY .yY' M M4rC q L Y SY� 0�0� C YG�y�laN YS'iY1 >.�$�j N VCVC Yq O'a M •g4Y4B tiw oY� Y—VG�` r qtC L aL� q yy tl`V} Q qN Y Y G t + I C L C '�� CC CCii C! Lip O pV Y Y N Y C NsOi'. ~� SGiaO LAC ynl. Nytl C+ EC NM ��0.07Ctl Lt 3 -t- Y tl� tl j 4 aY L' G~ YL Y N C YN M r Q�NO Vpp ` tlCC ev r Qw ja N .�. N v 'q l� O.v� ^� aC y�.0 1.L Ow a.�'1„C�a. 'L pL Y +N OIL VY4CC• as ^ea 4 O C CJ6 �YY� =.� YJtlG as4� M� O O ILr' Y WlCi.+; 1. 1��04 Ci LO Cr. 6 V. N ^10C rM 1.i yp.0 YYyLV 19 NCN�YyO pWp A� tl`�! C"��l pyqL V c oz R L q[t� +.�' MN L QY V a9 +C Y v� ywC�C .. LLMCg L m�i QM VQ OY"�01 L�q� LiL y CG+�C �C tl OV di0 iY yy dr CNwY L Y4 L /C� YN r •.Y� D y YaO,C AY C Y q OI Ctl Vr pL'Yr ` rit GN Ly N qM L .<. CN OLYw 2ON YM 9 O Q GGGG C •Y ^.wLp MO' 4o0L N 4LYiNd 0 LAw4m � O�� M hV LAy N .�� a.i Rw t y-0 d � �I C N 1'1. d f 1C1 tp w N M f H E =,= ,°_ eII C�w Y y� �vu v■ V cAq "iau` i`vc �u o a LyeY nN.�.p° u d o ° VNom` •�y�+ai vi T74 an OV +6,ipY�y4 Al na C ON • ti z IN gpyC U�c°q>> V f3 e �p VOA �1.d iY 9Cay i p� of CC Y=q. is pC .n A■ �s � 4 0 b VNN Cie gi >t Cuy pd �'cc�a Na�J aY$4� u •'N 4. �+ OI °° e Y 4 ` a CT ¢,� Y` N N. N C r N +VY4w M q� i° �� N M L M HS; cu C H `yS 0 C ggYly!. ITV dm tb mac. O.5 YIVYI p6L'gY{O +..O �V HLa 3 ,_• aY ^y u a 3 V C `V HIM Nq� 0��� a.Y.M -.W2 H E =,= ,°_ C+ L pCp�� O ZOaa M1Yi[ Y y� �vu v■ V Hot o °o �u o a LyeY nN.�.p° u d o VNom` •�y�+ai vi T74 OV +6,ipY�y4 ppv ,ONYa C ON AG.Vaq �°�,GY O� � Ci �p VOA pd a� .�zlg4 g- pp �c 4. rq lU-1,. N N. ACM N f U. e '° °gc HS; cu C C ggYly!. ITV dm tb mac. O.5 YIVYI p6L'gY{O +..O �V HLa 3 ,_• aY ^y u a 3 V C `V N H 6V.p 0��� a.Y.M Lj COLA 97�� C+ L pCp�� O ZOaa M1Yi[ Y v■ V q¢i jab VNom` .K Z py ;8 d T74 `B pea iY.L YP VN G pL yp V y �p VOA ` pp TL A ' W N '° °gc s II L.O 9. C _ G LM QI Cy4 va �y G YB C +7 Cp 3 V C `V .G°,.� 5C 5° OSwN 0��� a.Y.M -.W2 A`� ym� ■lye `gyp yA1 LL.C7 N ®YY ��N rw96 0 52 cp a+ °.A aw {�+C pLV 6G G i a^ O G. 6 > 2t y d V G12 G L Zug V+ ^ pY� � A IRS CN° YL 73 2i GYV 352A YQY MM n � GC {� Y + A r Y W �C ®N L NON B.G. 9M' C • +O.AVN G eAb +Q IC M1J O1•.' LP`y� �OmJ➢ �O1 Vp �tg n. A4y �NYGC yj Q pN ^ Yyy V 6 + C Op^ = =,.0 ��� NQ® ■yM. NL ytV =G Hit }. w.�CO G it 01 +d M `°�N_W Y � +Y �. bO +yV. N Y•a N Y pC OI��¢�r >p.11 OGi O9sY1• pQ AtL. TOY 8 �y i O C�VOt V V V �•.+ O N C M 4 1 O,6p�CO Yf15 'L I€ 4 p NL V'Y g C q G GCS O +P + 4Q� L C gMMMMM. O N V pY�s Lal,t. O 3� y QVO� 6 p ■6y 7 P J +w +w (6� Y N OVNP u C 1 E. B V l� I J M SIN JaP.- �oo.9 «rJe. N. -.SU Y c c c Noon ga $ !!- upa.6_ tooY p yo OpC uYLUe O NC— CCO S a� A Wd G UL. c= LC �s Ly V.N. to 4b LL w'YYNOr 'y 0t0 C V `�,' C O ^O« Lt: �Y,aN; M OI V L a• yYy A Np �W ,^e`er L CLL. -G p4 „ ^ a■O'" M ^ C� � M � v V � V -c CQ O N V N w ` N a■ N V y, N Y'O V YYY KO�V ppy .�xa y.-YY4 �G YY� YpO aD� yu? 3 r. NaL rte. 9�Ya� w La VMYCC 7NW8 �+ ` W Y Y O,.L L N Y9C�CpbT5. ayC1a bN�`N Ntl O�UnV1^ yy Gsix VY y + y� �f_ q CO Pw COtiC O■■i i C'�^ ^. {{if�' .....yyam.. u yyM�� Y.D■ u�C1 4 +�wwm O"-.B 1G 4 Nq�Lf. `M M .ei p`a..L 0 �.NLC +tl p C e w ;0_0 « w ..1 p1 3 w RI M O �. 1 q p �N Y6: �` y ^v°v, 8p NN °4, CCL YwC. L V cg-n. �` y L C.ww` ^ oOF YYV A 4. 9t1CM ��V 40YY001A L V -3 3N V �� I ' O 11 A 4 W L O' fl 't C M I ipLi V Y OC MK �yy^ y :Y y Yb =1 p. C OO�W GGG 1. LpOS _O 2 « W � i I (� CO OC C VzY Al CYY Q9 $ .• CC,z O.a .J O1� Cr �C O y�G �' L pM �yB® z7 �p i v Q S )6��g =C - Vw YO L K Y S 01.p C "'OOOY i ^^ NY� L .i. w. u C O y ®� AC C 3V _ La qqg 3 NOmY-9� s0 ^ u {a��'a vyyy Y�...M� V� vy GiY ^ YY O YaQS «ma� N1 Gq. LNgJJSw1ea. • ^ =?zr V O AML qa�. V C Yo v0 O VL $tl NC NA !1 ®N y «.y6b G�. V C fNiNY�a �Y!V� YyV OM Or PUS OYG ' V pO. OM �►. VO� 00 N ®YV.O. tlOabL V a s L Y $'o :3 S me.9 L 6y n« aC aY w aNi aw gp. yy4 =a1 N vo�p C >oa��vt^e1 ^tJ 0 etlw n.s0� O OO� ^tl VI.M L� a ®�.C� tl$ ON �`yO tLiii SL O ww0. tlUL A ^^FFF��� Y Y ii C w0 Mqq O4Yi `� oSsV. 1- wN vi oa H -9 sa x"U 9 Qa , 3� 'a�R r$ Its"a C� a N� 01d�. a' tl'y YG t'7 N �0�� doL(r ^�� LU.. o9 rp LpN L� ^ L.�6�.5 � V }� OOIO L. _« b mpA Up Cq$. C Np {y� (O�cp C --am O1 L pIM O�■■Vt� L� Yatl 6PTTy�y..' �q« �O taYd��MrlO 40 `.a 8i.y OIw �O O1N CL�� ."NAY y6 Y6 pww C N' 2! �p ML p4p09� NC1ttl1N�w Y C ^ ■a Y yy N O M .G N O O w OOH NI a K 9 W Q Ti Y 9 O C' �. R � b J � .CY M. a . -' 1Oy d tY 1V� NC WYU �b LJ'�bj. 1(M YG mi U. KPV 1"� ` A A V NI �I�I c9 �I PII01 � � ^ ` I 1 th ¢ o0 L nY ys w« r $ «rte C 6w °O]a � 4 gL N w W a➢ = t om N Y G� r 4 C � V4 . C•r Q $ «` 'p" `. V O.rS. +y = it E « S'ai o..G.?. N i L 0 49 « u n .°► •• O d ° M C = c am ■ °� Opp y!(V�LQV Y YC H U°. �•A.� N�� eV Y. °ycS '� y.2�°. �� 4.1 { rCW L • °N+ LL t�+c. ^ ♦+c. c° ° .rev 'Y'�'V 5� v6s' t� q ° S a Y N L Y 4::!• L $ n C roL ° 1 wL u MM Ya�O CL 4 -Y' Y°i Gtl. a�6'wpp. , w°.o.. g+�+ M� r r �' A ° � W V f.. M° V + ^� O� N' y Y �` V �` G u ►� ° C Yn tltlL s Ytl �tl >N. YL�Y�i �� A M tlGy Oa 7M� .Yariu s °S ` sn° QL''si 1°�uta°I <p"«R ° - �^I I I �•� 1I wI -I rI O +I NI �I. ♦I O M i Y Z e� v++ s N�s O M Y .w O a �NIII �pr.e 73 aC O L d Y Y Y V O e tl V C ppL� 0J Bell r'y0^ �L' N~ Y � 's^ a n M ,. Gs I 11 C all «s III tea. G ro`s�y YM � I. C4cG y` Re a= q�i p c i VL .. NM awV� NS v. caw w °' ` us +A er°i NFL Y�YY r V YY �= YGOecgl t'. M►�4Y/y`yO.. ydy urw bS� Y V` t t4r W 7 c It 7 7 c y \ \m CA J N 1R /4 IF L5 $ w.12, =+C My.NKO..� f ka �NIII �pr.e 73 aC m� ppL� 0J Bell r'y0^ �L' N~ Y � v n M ,. Gs I 11 C all «s III : rs /4 IF a r-1 EA L5 $ w.12, =+C My.NKO..� f ka 1PC �pr.e 73 aC ppL� 0J iiii ®yet r'y0^ �L' N~ Y v M ,. Gs I -wq q_ C all «s : rs L"$ "'-"� S o vm .mot °�' ,�aO 54. c Ltl pY A^ M A s. ail pCi. YGOecgl t'. M►�4Y/y`yO.. ydy urw bS� M E eo; V` Ga4t N at. t4r W 7 c a r-1 EA l W lu E 1 0 LZ - 6Pa VON •CC LY g ti ®s ^ � t Y_ ^1 Za CON � M aN °L'e Y o NYC ° Cya � C L � C Al 4LY 3E`o •l qS CV IJU OY� M Y O L �tq+ f N L OYO Ng� o N Y`� 0.4• �p °. Vim■ i 1 V ZOY bl +I 1 5 VON •CC LY g eis V • dVy °w CON � M y cpw 1.; Al 4LY GV •l qS CV IJU ^ � f a o oe �Yg �Yg $ ^ ++°Y NC ^6'. �n Yw YMM �y� yY �� py ^pei ��yy a- �N. _ q. se N L Y NpOp N� Y• Nf =: A LVyC Cyr NY VwCY 0.07 L �i VO yob M6QV w _ L� Cy +Q 60V~ Y� T N s M w Y ! d• Y� p 1M5 0 0 F 6 S. Y o 1 5 VON •CC LY g eis aaa 0Oc � M y cpw 1.; Al 4LY yuYYN LY � f a Y YI 7 aQ ewe �n YMM �y� yY N aYSY P �N. a$g eec�� O= Y NY ; N 4 `9YY V�N •�yN tyJeY.f O w _ L Y IL T pN j s ^p :bAp1A. Vip � 2OY. I a Y G d Y Y o L a N �I + N o 1 5 VON •CC LY g eis aaa y + O�W YGL V 1.; Al 4LY LY � f a Y YI 7 aQ ewe �n YMM �y� a$g eec�� O= Y ; N 4 `9YY V�N V�Y tyJeY.f w L Y L•. N. pN j s ^p :bAp1A. Vip � 2OY. I rNC RESOLUTION NO. 90 -105 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF. RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A TIME EXTENSION AND MODIFYING THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR DESIGN REVIEW NO. 88 -03, THE DEVELOPMENT OF 20 APARTMENT UNITS ON 1.08 ACRES OF LAND IN THE MEDIUM HIGH RESIOENTIAL DISTRICT (14 -24 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) LOCATED AT THE END OF SIERRA MADRE AVENUE, WEST OF EDWIN STREET, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APIA: 207 - 251 -22. A. Recitals (i) A.E. Smith has filed an application for the extension of Design Review No. 88 -03 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Time Extension request is referited to as "the application." (ii) On June 22, 1988, this Commission adopted its `-Resolution No. 88 -117, thereby approving, subject to specific conditions and time limits, Design Review No. 88 -03. (iii) On August 17, 19881 the City Council a��pted Resolution No. 88 -05, thereby approving, subject to all specific conditions and time limits set forth in Planning Commission Resolution No. 88 -117, Design Review 88-03. (iv) On June 28, 1990, the applicant 14led a request for a 12 -month time extension. (v) On the 8',_,. if August, 1990, . 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. (vi) All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the - Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission, including written and oral staff reports* this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: 14 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 90 -106 DR 88 -03 - A.E. SMITH AUGUST 8, 1990 Pagc- 2 (a) The previously approved Design Review is in substantial compliance with the City's current General Plan, Specific Plans, Ordinances, Plans, Codes, and Policies; and (b) The extension of the Design Review will not cause significant inconsistencies with tba � current General Plan, Specific ,';.`Plans,,. Ordinances, 'Plans, Codes, and Policies; and (c) The extension of the Design Review is' not likely to cause public health and safety` problems; and ., (d) The extension is within the time limits prescribed by state law and local ordip -ice. (e) The previously, approved- Design Review is not consistent t,M` Urgency Ordinance No. 395 pertaining to the evaluation of adequate school facilities for the proposed residential development. 3. Based upon t;ie findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and �n the Planning Comni'ssion Resolution No. 88 -117. (a) ...All conditions of approval, as contained in - Planning Commission Resolution No. 86- 117, shall apply except where modified herein. (b) Approval shall expire on August 17, 1991, if building permits have not been issued, unless extended by the Planning Commission. (c� Prior ti the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall ;consent to or participate in, the establishment of a Kello -Roos Community Facilities District pertaining to the project site to provide, in conjunction with the" applicable School District, for the construction and maintenance of necessary school facilities, however, if any School District has previously established such a, Community Facilities District, the applicant shall, in the alterrntive, consent to the- annexation of the project site hto `the territory of such existing 0istrict prior to the issuance of building permits. A -21 P- ANNINa COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 90-106 D R DR 88 -03 - A.E. SMITH AUGUST 8, 19901< Page 3 AWL Further, if the affected. School District has cot fom*.d a Mello -Roos Community Facilit,les Distr:cu:! within 12 months of the date of approval of the time extension and prior to the recordation of the Final '.Map or issuance of ; building permits for said project, this condition shall 'be deemed null and void. _ 4. The Secretary to this Commission, shall certify to the., adoption of this Resolution, ,> APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 8TH DAY OF AUGUST, 1999. " PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P BY: tarry T cNe a an " ATTEST. �--- -- ul I, Brad Buller, 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 Pla;►ning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the °fanning Commmission held on the Sth day of August, 1990; by the following vote -to- wits AYES: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL, MELCHER, TOLSTOY, WEINBERGEit NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NON'c, ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIIA ;. f RESOLUTION NO. EEE l A RESOLUTION OF THE PWXNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A TIME EXTENSION FOR JEVELOP.MENT REVIEW 88 -03, THE DE77ELOPMENT OF 20 APARTMENT UNITS ON 1.08 ACRES OF LAND IN THE MEDIUM -HIGH RESIDEV'TIAL DISTRICT (14 -24 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) LOCATED AT THE END, OF SIEL A MADRE AVENUE, WEST OF EDWIN', STREET, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT 'THEREOF - APR: a07- 251 -22. A. Recitals. (1) Jerry Cochran has filed an application for the extenzion of Development Review No. 88 -03 as described in the title, of this Resolution.. Hereinafter in this ResolLzion, the subi�ect Time Extension request is re£arreri to as "the application." (ii) On June 22, 1988, this Commission adopted its Resolution No 88 -117, thereby approving ;Development Review 88-03, subject to specific conditions and time limits. (iii) On August 17, 1988, the City Council adopted Resolution No. L- 88 -05, thereby approving Development: Review 88 -03, subject to specific conditions and time limits set forth in Planning Commission Resolution No. 88 -117. (iv) On August 8, 1990, this Commission adopted its Resolution No. 90 -106, thereby approving', subject to sp®oific conditions,` a one -year Time Extension for Development Reviow 88 -03. (v) All legal prerequisites pr'i'or to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution., NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and rasolved 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.-,re true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission, including written and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: (a) The previously approved Development Review is in substantial compliant. with the City's current General Plan; specific plans, ordinances, plans, crdes;'and policies; and r 14-2-3 �: PLANNING COMMISSION RESRLUTION'NO. DR 88 -03 - COCHRAN September 11, 1992 Page 2 (b) The extension of the Development Review will not cruse significant inconsistencies, with the current General Plan, specific ", plans, ordinances, plans, codee, and policies; and (c) The extension of the Development Review is not likely to cause public • health and safety problems; and (d) The extension is within the time limits - prescribed by state law and local ordinance. 3. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby grants a time extension fore Project Applicant Expiration DR 88 -03 Jerry Cochran August 17, 1J92 4. The Secretary of this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 1991.. - PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman ATTEST` Brad Buller, Secretary 1, grad Bullsr, Recreeary of the 'Planning Commission of the city of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certiy -that the foregoing Resolution was duly =and regularly introduced, passid, mild adopted by the Planning Commission of tre City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting rf the Planning Commission held on the 11th day of September 1991, by the hollowing vote -t� -wits AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERSa -a l; PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.- 90 -106 DR 88 -03 - A.E. SMITH ` AUGUST S, 1990 t Page 3 Further, if the affected School District has not formed a Mello-Roos Community Facilitic� District within 12 months of the date of approval of the time extension and prior to the recordation of the Final Map or issuance of building pera;its for said project, this condition shall be deemed null and void. 4. The Secretary tc. this Commission small certify to the aeoptior of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 8TH DAY OF AUGUST, 1990. PLANNING COMM 5SION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMOHC,A BY: arty T cNie a nan ATTEST: ul Secret y I. Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Ranch( Cucamnn.rn, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly, -an( regular F introduced, passed, and adopted by tine Planning Commission of` -th( City oy P.ancha Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission hel( on the 8th day of August, 1990, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS:- MC.NIEL, MELCHEF, TOLSTOY, WEINBERGER NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS CHITIEA 's RESOLUTION NO. A RESULUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF.THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A TIME EXTENSION FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 88 -03, THE DEVELOPMENT OF 20 APARTMENT UNITS ON 2.08 ACRES OF LAND IN THE MEDIUK -HIGH RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (14 -24 DWELLING UNITS PER ,ACRE), LOCATED AT THE END OF SIERRA MADRE AVENUE, WIEST OF EDWIN STREET, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT: 'THEREOF - APN: 207- 251 -22, i, A. Recitals. (i) Jerry Cochran has filed an application for the extension of Development Review 'No.. 88 -03 as described ,n the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject ^ime Extension request is referred to no "the application." (ii) On Juna 22, 1988, this commission adopted its Resolution No. 88 -?17, t hereby approving Developarant Review 88 -03, subject to specific conditions and time limits. (iii) On August 17, 1988, the City council adopted Resolution No. 88 -05, thereby approving Development Review 88 -03, subject to specific conditions and time limits set forth in Planning Commission Resolution No. 88 -117. (iv) on August -8, 1990, this Commission adopted its Resolution No. one-year Time 90 -106, thereby approving, subject to specific .conditions, a y Extension for Development Review 08 -03. (v) All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEn &FORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning C0=iwzicn of the City of Rancho Cucamonga ar follows; _ 1. This Commmission' hereby specifically finds that all of the facts sego forth in the Recitals, Part h, of this Revolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission, including written and oral staff reports, thLe Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: (a) The previously approved Development. Review is in substantial compliance with the City's current C3neral Plan, specific planar ordinances, plans, codas, and policies; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO: DR 68-.03 ,_ COCHRAN September 11, 1991 Page 2 (b) Vhs extension of the DEVelOwent Review will = not cause significant incc.nsstencies with they curfent General Plan, specific plans, ordinances, plans, codes, ar,d policies; and (c) The extension *f the Development Review is not likely to cause public health and safety problems; and (d) The extension - is w?.ttin the time limits prescribed by state law and local orm nano. 3. Based upon the findings and conclusions sat ;forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby grants a time extension for: PrC' Aoclicant g�iniration DR 88 -03 Jerry Cochran -agust 17, 1992 4.- The secretary of this Commission ®hall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTRD THIS 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 1931. PLANNING cOMNISSION OF THE CIT% OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. HCNie1s Chairman ATTESTS Brad Buller, Secretary I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the city. of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foretcing 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 hold on the 11th day of September 1591, by the following vote -ts -wit: 'f1 AYES: COMMISSIONERS. NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: D A DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMT ONGA STAFF REPORT ;r September 11, 1991 •J Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer Joe Stofa, Associate Engineer' StiMMARY VACATION OF A PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST. CORNER OF MILLIKEN - H STREET - A request o vacate - excessive street r g -o -way a the intersections of Milliken Avenue with Terra Vista Parkway, Spruce Avenue with Church Street, and Elm Avenue with Church Street - APN: 227 - 151 -22, 1077 - 421 -58, 1077- 421 -55, and 1077- 421 -62 BACKGROUND:. Lewis Homes of California is vequesting the vacation of strips of ancT� approximately 5 to 6 feet wide at variable lengths between 50 to 100 feet due to the current City ' s bus bay standards. The excess street right -of -way, created by the City's current standard, is not required for any public improvements. The vacation of the excess right -of -way will revert back to the adjacent property. The existing bus bay on the southeast corner of Milliken Avenue and Terra Vista Parkway will be reconstructed to provide for a bus bay consistent with the current standard. The remaining 3- locations along Church Street are in the process of being cox- structed. RECOMMENDATION: Staff reconLiends that the Planning ,Commission make the finding that the vacation conforms with the General Plan and the Development Code. This finding will be forwarded to the City Council for further processing and final approval. Respectfully submitted, Dan James Senior Civil Engineer DJ :JS: dl w Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Vicinity Map Exhibit "B" - Site Maps ITEM B Amok INDICATES LOCATION OF PROPOSER STREET VACATIONS VICINITY MAP N CITY OF NT5 CHO Ca �iCAMO GA � VICINITY MAP 2'l.iV 1 y� T.it.64 N 69�4li'36'E 53.BC 15 F TERRA VISTA PARKWAY : POINT OF BEGINNING uj &- 36.13'41' t..+t N769- 45'35'E 141.60. t T.6.32 J 1 31 EXtSYING DEEDICATION PER EXISTING DEDICATION PER vl INSTRUMENT NO. 69-219039 RECORDED "e 15. 1969. C.R. INSTRUMENT NO. 67- 310510 RECORDED SEPT. 04. 1957. O.R. � $ TRUE POINT OF DeGIN�IING W > °Z. &-51'45'51' R•24.00 L -21.65 j //� tl / T.it.64 N 69�4li'36'E 53.BC 15 F 9.4635"W 36.00 uj &- 36.13'41' t..+t Rr24.00 L. 16.01 T.6.32 J EXISTING DEDICATION PER " INSTRUMENT NO. 67- 310510 RECORDED SEPT. 04. 1957. O.R. PROPOSED VACATION l[ 11 CI'T'Y OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 'a 057 +03' 54'W 0.12 aR2r42142' -51 L-!20.22 T•10.24 N IT is ms SITE MAP "B.. 1 of 4 /3 -3 i ,eeraec�ntitArrc/� /4,/'JD�� i • Ad.•�p79�_ exrsr.re F z4m.; b �t�o� ovsrruTnn. L. ,yj 5B d 89 ;T?9rlGO..t RBCORq",p `� d•O/•23'S°J �!((d'.syl4'!2" ��Q; � Q "OY' P iR•23��OQ:' '{�.YpGO' ;IS r R "1 'LyUKGySTReE7 1 c w PROPOSED VACATION N CITY OF ME _ cars 4PANCHO CUCAMONGA SITE MAP G '`�i•'��T' DIEWRON JT, „$u 2 of 4 �'r W `gi _ l � • f R 4, ��� bc+w 9•!tt5:3S" o • �`�;i ,o� � $ � �r' � aitGo• � ¢4' S3 /CF/�� • q tC g��� q;� q� iT! A3` N ' 6 vw►. .c _. e.97•o6SS �` °.• L° T r7l �S/•7D e8' 6�6d/NN /Nd A%E Ali. aa¢' r� V711171 PROPOSED VACATION CI7 -Y r",F NTS RANCHO CUCAMONGA Trna. SITE ` ENGTN MING Drir oN IT.- „a„ 3 of 4 -: -fir-- a . ao•2n�- � 2aGV� 7A No. /'.52720 l a !n peno l . d• of 2l9a2 d.C/ LU9i' A7 /N7't7f r - er�sr. ,�wrre �- aysrt. - ,eecaexa x%oxe r.� Mdl. PROPOSED VACATION N CITY OF MIX. NTs 40ANCHO CUCAMONGA SITE MAP 1011 OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE. September 11. 1991 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission :ROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY. Steven Ross, Assistant Planner SDBJEC:': CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 91 -23 - ASPEN MEDICAL GROUP The request to allow a mal Ile CAT scanner trailer to operate within the parking lot of an existing office complex on 1.57 acres of land is the Industrial Park District (Subarea 7) of, tha Industrial Specific Plan located at 10837 Laurel S1'ieet - APN: 208- 352 -16. (Continued from July 24, 1991.) BAC :`GROUND: This iteR was continued from tba July 24 agenda to allow stafk to work with the applicant on alterna"i ,solutions for locating the trailer to screen it from public view. The applicant has now advised City staff they wish to withdraw the application. ;;e s ily s ed, ra B e Cit },, lanner BB:sR:js ITEM C } — RECOVEb -- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA j PLANNING DIVISION SEP 051991 ASPEN DIA.GNQSTtC MEDICAL CENTER 10837 Laurel Street, #103 Rancho Cucamonga, GA. 91730 (714) 941 -9600 3 September, 199.1 = Steve Ross 't;kncho_Cucamonga City Planning Po Box '807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA. 91729 Dear Mr. Ross: As I understand it, the only acceptable solution to the CT `I parking problem is a permane. -r pad site with retaining walls and necessary landscaping,. Given the space constraints in the proximity of Aspen Diagnostic, we see no way of fulfilling the requirements, therefore, w+, ere 'withdrawing our' - request for a conditional use permit. We are currently in the process of looking for a new site for.the CT scanner and ask to be given until- w�tober 30, 1991 to find the site and move the CT trailer. If you have any questions or concerns regarding this matter, please feel free to phone me, SincTrely, i Shawn Kolu Aspen Diagnostic: Center al L —2 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMCN4 A. STAFF REPORT ` DATE: September 11, 1991 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission °t FROM: Brad Buller, City planner BY: Miki Bratt, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 90 -01 AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 90 -038 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA- - 1# public hearing to z.6eive coma. ;ht on thdraft: I environmental impact r93ort prepared for the Etiwanda ei North Specifir Plan and ;enerai Plan Amendment "Ie0 -03B to I prezone approximately 6,940 acres of ,territory In the Rancho Cucamonga sphere -of- influence to provide for 3,613 single family dwelling units on 2,473 acres of vacant land, 28 acres of neighborhood commercial use, 4 schools, 5 parks, an equestrian center, and preservation (if 4,112 acres of open space generally hcated, north of .Highland Avenue (State Route 30) , south of the San 'Bernardino._ National Forest, west of the City of Fontana, and east of Milliken Avenue. ENVIRONMRv`4TAL'ASSESSMENT AND SPECIFIC PLAN 90 -01 - CITY OF a. RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to recommend apprc-al of th , Etiwanda North Specific Plan, prezoning approximately 6,840 acres 'n.f territory in the Rancho Cucamonga sphere -° of -infl 'o provide for 3,613 single fatiily dwelling units on 2, .,. _,3 acres of vacant land, . 28 acres of neighborhood ;.commercial use, 4 schools, 5 parks, an equestrian center, and preservation of 4,112 acres of open space genera'ly located north of Highland Avenue (State I Route 30), south of the San Herr '°3ino National Forest, west of the City of Fontana, and ea c of Milliken Avenue. 'LIMRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 90 -03B - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to recommend approval of a General Plan Amendment to " provide consistency with the draft Etiwanda North Specify -- prezon4;' %g approximately 6,840 acres of territory in'Ahe Ranc :: 'Cucamonga sphere -of- ;influence to provide for 3,b13.. single family dwelling units on 2,473 acres of vacant land, 28 acres of neighborhood commercial use, 4 schools, 5 parrs, an equestrian center, and preservation of 4, 112 acres of open space generally located north of Highland Avenue (State Route 30), south of the San Bernardino National Forest, west of the City of Fontana, and east of Milliken Avenue. Aim _ -. ITEMS: C,E,F e o PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SPECIFIC PLAN 90 -01 Sentember 11, 1991 Page 2 l - INTRMUCTION:,: The draft Final EIR (Part II) has heen completel. Also, recommenda_�ons for'- evisions of the General Plan needed for consistent' wi +,h the Specific Plan hata been completed, and revisions recommend'MA Oy the Planning Commission to the Etiwanda North Specific Plan ?1Ave Wen completed. Therefore, etas? recommends appro%al of the. attached. Resolutions recormeaJing approval of the project to the City Council. BACKGROUAD AND AW1.LYSISe A. Environmental, Impact Report: Notice of Preparation (NOP) ci. - -ilated. On January 9t 1909, a NOP of a Draft Environmental Impact Report :for the Etiwanda North l,roa_at area was rirculateaA'" yA that notice the project area was defined as 5,64C acres of land. The aroject aria remains the same, but the acreage .figure have been changed to reflect more accurate vgasure -mats now availsb.Le. Accordingly approximately 6,040 acres are i:3cluded in the plan area. The number of proposed dwelling units was stated as -E,000 to refle,t the application submitted by the Consortium of Etiwanda North Landowners:. The number of proposed dwelling anitr. bas been reduced to 3,619 to reflect the City�d alternative as tLe preferred alternative. In response to commenyr on the draft F.IP., additional land use changes discussed below have further reduced the proposed dwelling unite to 3,157. Dra=t EIR circulated. Accordingly, in May 1991, the draft EIR was circulated for comment. The notice of completion of the draft EIR was fzirwarded to the State Clearinghouse on Clay 3, 1991. The 45- day tr�_aent period of the State Clearinghouse ran from May 6, 1991E through June 20, 15;91. The City extended the comment period it order to receive public testimany on the draft EIR at the Planning Commission hearg on June 26, 1991. The rotice of availability of f a Draft EIR W.a mailed to property owners and interested parties oa May 7, 1991.- The notice of availability was published in the j Inland valley Daily Bulletin o;. May 10,: The notice was received by SCAG on May 7, 1991, and published in the May 29, 1991, intergovernmental Review Report. Response to coatmints prepared. In response to comrznts, mitigation measures have been revised- See attached Etiwanda hcrth Draft Final 7EIR (Part II), Executivr. Summary. Changes in the mitigations from the Draft EIR are indicated in bold for :additions and overstrike Pnr deletions. ,.enerallj'_ the changes are technical, reflecting comwents by responsible,.agencies. However, Ls discussed at the June 26, 1991, meeting of the Planning Commission, comments by wildlife agencies- - including t d California Department of Fish and Game, U. S. Fish " P{ PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SPECIFIC PLAN 90 -C`;.: Soptember 11, 1991 Ptige 3 and Wildlife Service, and U. S. Forest Service--indicate a need for a change in the :Specific Plan. The agencies have requested that the northern limit of development be dropped to the Los Angeles Department of TI7cter and Power utility corridor. There is an existing approval . in the County for 450 dcaelling units on 453 acres north of the utility corridor on the "Coussoulis property since purchased by Landmark Land Company. The feasibility of moving the limit of development would require a mechanism to acquire property. However, there is a substantial body of evidence,; including public health anel -- safety issues, that the limit of, development should be moved to below the northern branch of the Cucamonga Fault between Day Creek and Etiwanda Creek. Therefore a ` mitigation measure has been added to revise the Spec.;,�ic Plan accordingly.' The Specific Plan Land Use Map has been revised and the number of potwtial dwelling units reduced by 145. The aforementioned agencies have also request, . -hat flood t l(rss of velocities adequate to ;iaintain alluvial fan scrub habitat be resto°ed to Day Creak spreading grounds. Turnouts to release flood flows to the spreading grounds are in place; thereforsi, a mitigation v "asure to determine the necessary velocity cf flow and, if necessw*y, the feasibility of alteration 7f existing turnouts and /or flood control structures. The Cow,ty Flood Control District has raised objections to the alteration o:•1 structures, but caly the alteraticn of the east -west diversion dike and /or - additional turnouts from Day Creek Channel would be considered. Additional spreading a-r4 conservation of ground water could also be nehievecr by this mitigation. Therefore, a feasibility- study is reasonable. Based on the mitigation measures, a mitigation monitoring plan will be prepared amd roraarded to the City Council. Of the environmental impacts identified, most have been mitigated to a level of not significant. One item, Threat to the Bat .7,, is shown in the EIR as not having been reduced to a level of not significant. However, because the plan proposes reducing the limits of development to the southern boundary of the northern branch of the Cucamonga fault, the -level :has been reduced to not significant. Other items have been mitigated to the maximum extent feasible, but still have not been mitigated_ to a level of not significant, including: ? *ibstantial alteration of existing open space land use character: . Almost all of the total pro•ect area of 6,840 acres is currently in natural open space. Of the total, 4,442 acres will be designated as open space.. Nevextheless, 2,112 acres are proposed for development and W2_11 .result in the �.css;5f the existing open space land use character. I ,EF--3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SPECIFIC PLAI; 90 -41 September 11, 1991 _ Page 4 City transportation Policies and Traffic.. Applicants for development will mitigate all on -site- impacts and contribute to the City's Traffic Nexus Fee program for Off-Site impacts. Nevertheless, as a result 'of incremental increases to cumulative traffic impacts, off - site impacts will occur �",en after mitigation. Landform modification: Applicants for development will comply with the Hillside Development Ordinanco and City DevelcpmF:nt standards. Nevertheless, grading for development within 2,112 acres will modify; the existing character of the alluvial fan and port',Ions of the hillsides. Wildlife habitat impacts: The proje--t is designed to retain large, - defensib'a areas oi; open space whion will maximize the habitat value for the project area. A total of 4,442 acres will remain' in open -space land use desicnations. Nevejtheles, development of 2,112 acres will diminish on -site wildlife density and diversity and . fragment the remaining wildlife habitats. Alluvial fan scrub habf;at loss: Applicants for development will be condi�:toned to preserve cne acre of alluvial fan scrub habitat for _one acre of alluvial fan scrub habitat ;cat. Thee are significant areas of natural all.avial fan scrub habitat within the project area which are available for preservation or which can bo rehabilitated. 'Nevertheless, almost all of the 2,11? acres planned for development are alluvial fan scrub habitat which will be lost. Threat to r=iparian habitats; Applicants for development wi -z be 4nnditioned to retain existing riparian corridors, as well as to provide a buffer zone to protect the riparian corridors from degradation associated with urban development. Also, conditions will be enforced to protect the Resource Conservation areas including restriction of human use to do,sgnated trails, exclusion of domestic cats and dogs, Exclusion of off -road vehicles, and techniques to divert urban irrigation run -off and polluted Storm f7aWS. Nevertheless, urbanization of the area will remain s threat to riparian habitat. Short term; fugitive dust, Project applicants will be conditioned to implement actions to reduce fugitive dust during aonstruc;:ion to the maximum extent feasible. Nevertheless* so.ae construction dust will occur. Ask PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SPECIFIC PLAN 90 -01 September 11, 1991 Page 5 - Solid waste: project applicants will >q conditioned to participate in City wastfO minimization programs. Nevertheless, there will remain an impact on landfill capacity as a result of 'solid waste generated by devel-nr`ent of approximately 3,157 dwelling units, as well as up to 28`- a.,res of commercial, development. Accordingly, statement of overriding considerations has been prepared and incorporated snto the Resolution recommending certification of the EIR. (See attached). Changes in the Specific Plan to Reduce Environmental Impacts. i- response to environmental impacts, minor revisions in the Specific Plan have been made. First, the County Flood Control District has advised the City that their fee owned lands east of Milliken Avenue and west of Fhe western levee of Day Creek Regional Spreading Grounds are not available for development at this time. Accordingly, the land use status will remain under the flood control use designation until such time as the County General_ plan i4ap is revised and a similar application request is made by the County. However, the potential designation ic shown_ as residential. r Approximately 1137 dwelling units are estimated to eventually be approved on this site; therefore, tl+e infrastructure needed for this area should reflect the ez_�ected build -out condition. Second, in response to recommendations by responsible agencies,, staff is recommending that the area north of the northern branch of the Cucawncla Fault west of Etiwanda Creek and east of Day Creek channel be changed from Open Spat- and Hillside Residential use to Open Space use only. The site includes the bog, the presumed water supply for the bog, substantial amounts of alluvial fan scrub habitat, and the prominent knoll on which the U. S. Forest Service fire station site is located. Staff further recommends that a mitigation measure be , -'id in the EIR to investigate the- feasibility of acquiring x Area, in fee or eauellent, for resource conservation use. It is- :- xpected that a reduction of up to 145 dwelling units could occur in the teaks neighborhood ns s result of this change. This reduction in units is r,6t expected to substantially reduce traffic .impacts identified' in the traffic study Yor the Oaks neighborhood or the Specific Plan area. B. General Plan Amendment 90 -03B: Resolution of Intent to Amend General Plan and Preparal -Ion of Amendments. On November 7, 1990; the City Council passed a AMNL Resolution of Intent to prepare amendments to the General Plan as needed to provide consiAtenc*= with the Specific Plan. At the June 26, 1991, meeting, the Commission proposed - amendments to the Lo`�_ if PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SPECIFIC PLAN 90 -0.1 September 11, 1991 Page 6 AlUk General Plan for, the purpgse of consistency between the Specific Plan and the General Plan.,, •# list of Froposed Amendments to the General Plan will be prepared and distributed ,,under separate cover. C. Specific Plan 90 -01: I Resolution of Intent to Prepare a Specific Plan. A resolution of intent to prepare a Specific Plan was passed June' ?0, 1990. The _- plan has been prepared in accordance with the California Government Code. Nc Plan Review. Including workshops preceding the. City's Resolution of intent to Prepare a Specific Plan, twelve Planning Commission workshops and three community meetings have been-held to review the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, as well as meetings of the Parks and Recreation Commission and meetings of the 1�rails Committee. Comments have been received from the public and °;,,from the Camsoissions. The Specific Plan has been reviewed to reflect the iirection of the Planking Commission. On June 26, 1991�'the Planning Commission held a,public hearing on the Plan. (See attached draft Specific Plan, September Be 1991.) Planning Commission Hearing. At the Juno 26, 1991, meeting the AML Commission directed staff' to proceed with the documents recommending approval of the plan. (See attached Minutes, June 26, 1991.) CORRESPONDENCE: Seven letters have been received. The letters and staff's responses are attached under Correspondence. CONCLUSION: Following substantial public review and comment, the draft Final r %ivironmental Impact Report has been completed. Also, a final draft of the City's Etiwanda North Specific Plan has also been prepared. As a result o° -tnd use changes, as well as the level of detail available through the review process, changes in the Larrtd Use and Development, Environmental Resources, and Public Health and Safety Elements of the General Plan will s. made for consistency. RECOMMEF -)ATION; Staff recommends that the Planning commission make the following recommendations to the City Council: I. Approve a resolution recommending certification of the Final Environmental Smpgc`,: Report, including a statement of AM overriding considerations= � - r PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SPECIFIC PIM 90 -0.1 September 1'.:.: 1991 Page 7 2. Approve a resolution recommending approval of General Plan ' Amendment 90 -03; i 4_ 3. ..Approve a resolution recommending approval of Specific Plan - 90 -01. Respectfuliy / submitted, Ae& Brad Bul City Planner BB:MB:js Attachments: Etiwanda North Draft, Fina1..EIR, September 5; 1991 (Provided to Commissioners under separate cover) List _,o£ proposed changes to the General Plan, Se- .m+?er 11, 1991 (Provided to Commissioners under separate cover) Etiwanda North Specific Plan, Draft, September 5, 1991 (Provided to Commissioners under separate cover) _ Correspondence June 26, 1991 Planning Commission Staff Report June 26, 1991 Planning'Commission Minutes Resolution recommending certification of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan EIR, including a stritement of overriding considerations, September 11 1 991 Resolution recommending approval of General Plan Amendment 90 -038 /'i Resolution recommending approva }`?of Specific Plan 90 -01 ,f4' ail ` J` F-7 . i CORRESPONDENCE Comments on the Draft EIR are fully responded in the draft Final EIR distributed under separate cc ,Yer. The following correspondence offers commentary on the draft specific Plan. ? `nce, for the most part, the lett_rs repeat issues raised by comment letgnrs to the EIR, only selected issues are discussed below, using a comments and response format. `r. Chino Basin Watermaster, Letter of August 12, 1991: In support of "City's effort to protect and maintain existing "natural" recharge areas within the Chino Groundwater Basin as well as your own Cuca:aonga Groundwater Basin." 2. Standard Pacific of Orange County, Letter of Jny 2, 1991_ ` Comment Request for clarification of potential conflict between Development Agreement for Tract 13565 and Specific Plan. Response `to conflicts are expected to occur, because estrblished,City evelopment Code ordinances and implementation procedures recognize that a f, Development Agreement takes precedence over a Specific Plan and the Development Code. In i:istances where the Development Agreement is silent, the Specific Plan, and the Oeynlopment Code take precedence. The existence of Development Agreements and approved Tract Mapi• is recognized in the Specific Plan. Part IV, Section 13.6, Etiwanda Highlands Neighborhood, subarea 5, states: This subarea has been annexed into the City and is controlled by as approved San Bernardino County Final Plan of Development for' Tracts 13564 'and 1'z \565. a Development Agreement with the City of Rancho Cucamonga further conditions the use of this subarea. 3. Land Plan Design Grou , August 14, 1.191: Comment This representative of the property owner requests an indefinite ' ccutinuanee, or at least a four -month a<ratinuance. The reason given is that no action should be taken while the lawsuit lleging non - compliance with CEQA, which was filed by the City against the County of San Bernardino and the owners of the University /Crest property, is resolved. RSsponse Staff does not support a continuance for the purpose stated4 by tho, Land Plan Design Group. .5 J7 Et -� Further, the aforementioned lawsuit is oniy indirectly related to this project. Auk The purpose in moving forward with the City's Etiv.anda North Specific Plan is to establish an environmental record and the City's development guidelines_ for a significant- portion of the City's Sphere -of- Influence. Once the environmental record and development guidelines are approved, they will provide a standard of comparison for applications pending in the County. A1V.), certification of the SIR and adoption of the Specific Plan (pre- zoning) is a prerequisite for annexation. The City ,supports ^and annexation if outstanding issues can be resolved - annexation applications are pending before LAFCO. City staff , ecognlzes That ;'it this time there is considerable property owner opposition to annexation, 1ecause of tho videspsead perception that higher density, lower development standards, and fewer processing: requirements, such as no design review, are advantages available by retraining in the County= i Comment If the above - request for a continuance is not granted, a request is made for a continuance to September 25,1991 in order to review and comment on the draft Final Environmental Impact Report and the, revised draft Specific Plan. Response Staff does not support a continuance for further public review and comment, b —ause the revised SIR and Specific Plan are not substantially different frci:a the documents reviewed by the Planning Coae¢i.ssion on June 26, 1991. Comments and Zesponses to the 'draft SIR are intended to more fully inform decision makers on impacts a3c� essed by the draft SIR. CEQA guidelines do not require an additior'Al public comment period on the Comments and Response. Proposed changes to the draft Specific Plan r&snited from input from the Trails Committee meeting," January 16,1991; Planning commission workshop, January 17, 1991; Neighborhood meeting, January 28, 1991; and Parks commission Public Hearing, February 21, 1991. Further changes proposed to the Land Use Map as a result of comments on the draft SIR were discussed at the Planning Commissior. public hearing on June 26, 1991. Other minor, changes to the revised draft Specific Plan have been made to incorporate mitigation measures from the SIR. •7 �� i I; Comment ` The University /Crest project approved by the County is r significantly different from the land use and circulation proposals in the Specific Plan. Rc,spons�' j A The Planning Commissioi, and the City Council reviewed the project submitted to the County and recommended denial to the Board of Supervisors. Furthers the project - approved by the County is in conflict with the City's General Plan. I£ annexation to the City is proposed _.Z the future by the prcrerty owner, a Geneial Plan Amex.dment must be processed.. " arther, if any project approved in the County is in conflict -,`,th an approved ,Specific Plan, and annexation is proposed, tz Genera'_ Plan and Specific Plan Amendments would be processetirwith an annexation application. 4. Landmark Land Company of California, June 27, 1991 In general, the comments in this letter have been responded to in the draft Final EIR. Comment This'_,)rQperty owner objects to inclusion of their property within the Specific Plan and opposes annexation. a-sp Regarding inclusion of parcels in the Specific Plan, the City's go . is to provide for comprehensive planning rather than continue , project-by-project, piecemeal planning for the City's Sphere -of- Influence area north of Etiwanda. Further, as stated above, City staff recognizes that at this time there is property owner opposition to annexation. Comment Exhibits indicate the Landmark property has already bean annexed into the City. Response Because of reproduction problems in the December X990 draft Specific Plan, annexation areas vere pon_ly distinguished from Sphere areas. This problem has been corrected, for, example refer to draft Etiwanda North Specific plan, September 1991, Exhibit 6. Comment The Specific Plan does not r- Elect. the property owner application for development on file in the t,oilnty'. Response Staff has reviewed the property owner application for development on file in the County and has made recommendations in- �e Specific Plan which differ from -the aforementioned application+ As stated above, if a property owner obtains project a,,)provals in the County r which differ from the City's General Plan and an approved Specific Plan, and requests annexation, then applicatiors would also' be filed for General Plan and specific Plan amendments. 5. Deborah A. Webster, August S, 1991 M _ Comment This owner apposes an open spac•. designation for port,iond��Of this property. Response Portions of this property are proposed as Hillside Residential and portions as Open Space. The proposed land use for this.,property has not changed s:tbstantially from the existing City ana,County designations. (See attached Exhibit, CORK-ii f�', the location of., this property.) \ The primary difference is application of the County Hazards overlay maps for seismic hazards, flood hazards, and slope hazards in order to conceptually distinguish the, potential for residential development from opef, space uses .required because hazardous +nditions exist, The open space designation permits development o; . residence per 40 acres, as well as agricultural uses, and may conditionally permit commercial and recreation uses. This property is not planned for mitigation for any other property. However, e. flood control /riparian designation has been applied to Morse Canyon to recognize the riparian; corridor which is existing. If future development is proposed lfor the Webster parcels, then a conservation easement Mould be sought to protect the year round stream and related vecatation in Morse Canyon. Such a designati -w- would not interfere with existing Water rights for the property, 6. Netta Shannon, July 26, 1991 and 7. Reb as Mills, -Ssty 30, 1991 Comment The above letters are identical, by co- owners who oppose a "permanent" open space designation. IQ Response f \` A "permanent" opc' space designation is not proposed fos this property. (See Exhibit CORR -9 for location.) In the Specific Plan the "Resource Conservation designation is used too identify land for which "permanent"— habitat preservation easements have been obtained. A habitat preservation easement has not been identified for this property. However, because sovera, hazard _conditions overlay the property, an open space designation appears ''to better describe the >development potential than a Hillside Residential designation. AOL t i % 2 D 5F -rte San Illentudipir N.tion.t Forest OS FC r Frenclh G3 PC OS RC FC �e OS � .. AY OS OS FE �r •" A " O$ HR De.YS a:* O C FC OS FZ `i Fi FZ FC IiC YL YL FC FC y1. IRC WL PC UCH FC REarou PAW • ?iC tv FC l.) t V4 --1al t r UC L L 31�r � FG -�N i FC FCC nil Rrenu. u uro .yr. 30) LEGEND ..a, r«,n• var..rK ru. (, L*w Density Reskkniki (2-4 W rAC) •,•••• •" ® VI. Very Low Density P.esidentist K2 DUlaC) T Fnsya. :d Halt R..s �►' 062ft Stafk r I WW IVy Low Reaidantkl Estate ut DUrFC) ryopypdS4wa�!rlry�tY* ` Hillside ReskWilal (42 DU /Net Buildable Acrt e $ d Setro.l Sit. _ Hillside Residential Estate tO OU/Net lk Me Acre) t�teOeN PC` Slood control F4eyes.0 P.tR Sll. r UC utility corridor P lukte.p park SR. as open Space * NOTE r + IN Wtitutional t+r w...•... ay wr w.nnr a.,»e t FE raw zone . wse.aia.r » »asrest»•er. IIC R.sourc conservation Area au a.• as a- 0.— (NC) Ne*hbxMdod Commercial * ....»e (L.VL.VLE) +m.a•rr.u.ete.auuw.s.aww CII'it OF TlEivl '� s RT UCAMONGA B ERT"° Y oWHEH, ac�sion: TME: WEWTER, FRENCH 3s� PLHNi #ld- F? TISIO t EXIT rr:coRR -i SCALE. *mE T) 15F13 WATERMAETFR DWIGHT F. FRENCH. Cho-ml GEORGE A. BORBA.. Vice-CTemnen JOHN L. ANDERSON, SeeertWi{reesYPK ANNE W. IUNIHUE. Mmaer BILL HILL, Member August 12, 1991, OONAL] R. OSTE--S. Vue6 wete -nasw S*rvIces Telenhohs (714)387•1;12 — RECEIVED CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Plc ^-'NING DIVISION AUG I a 1pQ1 FIN City of Rancho Cucamonga -4i$1VIN1(�1-# Planning Department P O B x 807 0 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 -0807 SUBJECT: LAND USE x'LM ETIRANDA FORTS dPECIPIC PLAN NIR LETTER OIP SUPPORT Gentlemen: Please accept this correspondence as our letter i:f support for yo'r Et.iwanda. North Specific Plan EIR, specifically the section devoted to land use as it relates to dedication of a significant area foY groundwater recharge purposes. \, As you may be aware, drought 'conditions within the China'` Groundwater Basin area has caused considerable concern due to the cutback of replenishment water deliveries which are normally` available throughout the wintex and spring,ionths from Metropolitan Water District. We are all hopeful however, weather patterns will change this winter and provide the rain we so..) desperately need. These open spaces designated and reserved as basin recharge areas are vital to Watermaster's basin recharge program. TherefLre, please accept this letter as support to he City's effort to protect and main -gain existing "natural" recharge areas within the Chino Groundwater Basin as well as your, own Cucamonga Groundwater Basin. sincere Dona d R. Peters, Res Watermaster Services qpl?/ces cc: Mark Kinsey Diana Leach CHINE BASIN WA 221MASTER 8555 ARCHiB -1iO "ENUE RANCHO CUCAUONGA. CALIFORNIA wtv.NG A06AF5S. P C BOX 697 R,'-ICM0 CUCAMONGA, CAUFORNIA 9172CK697 Ltf TE- STANDARD PACIFIC OF ORANGE COUNTY July 2, 1991 Mr. I.urry Henderson Planning Department City of Rancho Curamonga P.C. Box Sr37 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 -0307 RE: DRAFT ETIWANDA NORTI 1 SPIrCI"IC PLAN 90-01 (CITY 017 RANCHO CUCAMONGA) TRACT 13565 (BRENTWOOD COLLECTION) Deaf Larry: Pursuant to our con- aisation last week, this following represents my initial continents with regard to the Draft Etiwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP). Having personally written many specific plans over the years, I hope my comments will assist you in providing the Planning Coma .ion with a complete: and accurate specific plan document. I do not wish to comment at iength with regard to th° status of our project, however, I would apprecialle your understanding with regard to my comments, nce the bulk of them :,seal with thy existing approvals for Tract 13565. 1.2 AI ho t1X: "Development plans, site plans, and'Tutative Traci /Patcei Maps i,^-this area must be consistent with both Specif r Plan and the City's General flan." As you know, 'Trac,` 13565/1 -10 was approved and recorded in the County of San Bernardino (the C.ointy). All development approvals for Tract 13555 are governed by a Development Agreement between the City and Standard Pacific. With this, I am assuming the above swernent would not apply to Tract 13565 since, art of our approvals were obtained prior to the tract's anmtxation to the !pity. 1.3 California Environment Gualitk Act Colnplianr: " Mitigation measures h- .ded in t19is document may be applied to these projects." 'i.., folic -eying comment applies to "both the ENSP and the Draft Edwanda North Environmt:ntal Impact Report (ENEIR). On August 24,1981, the County Board of SupE,raigors approved Tentative Tract 13-5-33 and adopted a Negative Declaration. All recommended mitigation measure w -re included in the projects Conditions of IMS West WArthur Boulvord LETTER 2 Costa Mesa. Caldomia o2626,71:i6o8 -4300 Mr. Larry Henderson Planning Department City ,if Rancho Cucamonga July 2, 19911 Page 2 of 6 , Approval. These Conditions of Approval fall under the authority of the Development Agreement which ` Jvas in place at the time,' of the annexation. Therefore, any mitigation measures proposed by the ENSP Qor ENEIR I wo fld assume would not pet,ain to Tract :3565. Exhibit 4 Plnper y -gyp This exhibit denotes Tract 13565 as under tha ownership of the Caryn Development Company. IV would request that this c.,,iibit be revised to reflect the cor,:act ownership. Exhibit 10 Rgn Space and Trails Plan: This exhibit shows a community aquestr'an trail to be located north of Tract 13565 within the SrE Corridor. Tract 13565 was conditioned as a part of the County Developme-ett Plan W138 -49 Edwanda Highlands (the Development Plan) to construct are equestrian trail on the north side of Summit Avemie and along the east side of San Sevaine Avenue. The Development Flan, however, did trot provide for the construction of an equestrian: trail along the SCE Corridor. I have attached a copy of the approval Cour. y trail system map for your reference. Exhibit 12 (B) Street Sections: This exhibit, whit-h illustrates me cross - section for Wlson Avenue (Summit) adjacent to Tract 13565 does not :affect those plans as approved Sy the County. I : ave j enclosed a copy of the exhibit with the conect cross section dimensions per the approved street plans. Exhibit 12 (E) Str et Sectiong: Per this exhibit, I am assuming that the icp cross - section ref*rs to Wardman Bullock Road west of Tract IM S, I have enc osed a copy of this exhibit with the correct cross - section dimensions as indicated on the Coanty approval plans. j Exhibit 12 (F) 3treeL!5.gg QM: , I This exhibit is not necessarily incorrect, however, it does not apply to Tract 13365. I have enclosed a copy of the Specific Plan exhibit with'the cross - section dimensions that apply to Tract 13565, The two cross- sections provided occur at various locations viihin Tract 13565, and are shown on the county approved stre, improvement pi :ns. {' LETTER 2 Mr. Larry Henderson Pla thing Department City of Rancho Cucamonga July 2, 1991 Page 3 of 6 9.1 Water: Exhibit !I , Water Master Plait shows an eight inch waterline - to be installed. in Wardman Bullock Road and along the north bounrtary of IT ac_';13565. Standard Pacific has approved water plaits �:zom,-CCWD which do not r-how the Construction of waterlines as illustrated in this exhibit. 9.2 Sewer Exhibit 14, Sewer Master 'Plan shows an eight inch trunk sewedine to be cons?- ;mcied in Wardman Bullock Road. 'Tract 13565 has 4reud} received onoroval from WAID with respect to on and off -site sewer improvements. 019 iraprovement plans do not show the construction_of a trunk sewerline in Wardman Bullock Road; ainaae: 9.5 Flood Control Dr - Ai stated previously, Tract 13565 received conditions of approval and,?_iegative qW declaratior from the County wring the Development Plan and Tentative T&'=t Map approval process. it is my -assumption that it is the City's intent to reflect the San Bernardino County Flood Control District (SBCFCD) Master Plat-, and where, this exhibit and the SBCFCD Master Plan are in convict, then the SBCFCD Master Plan shall prevail. I also - gnt to confirm that the Conc:itionS L" Approval with regard to the fl5od control obligations for Traca 13565 shall;take prec ,dence over the SBCFCD Master Plan illustrated in the ENSP. This would include Jay associated conditions and niNgation measures with regard :o flood control improvements. Exhibit 16 3 9 -M_Qmn Master Plan: As a Part of the development of Tract 13565, Standard Pacific :const:ucted a 24" RCP , and a 60" RCP in 24th Street. , In addition, %s a understand that 'Tract V564-1 constructed a 66" RCP on the sm- .-rde of .24th Street. Both stgah drains eventu l i empty into the San Sevaine_ Sj aiweding Basin No. 1. With regard to the SBCFCD Master Plan Exhibit, T am assuming that the - actual site and locatiun of the ste.tn drains are concepts° in. nature-, `since they are not based on approved plans,-,, = s i L 1' I' _R 2 Mr. Larry Henderson Planning Department Citv of Rancho Cicam -mga -.- Bali 1, 1991 Page 4 of 6 11.4 Landscape Arehitertt=: Currently Standard Pacific has approved landscape plans for the landscape areas along 24th Strut and a portion of the h1WD easemznt. Both-of those areas have been landscaped and are ready to be accepted by the 'A-MD for maintenance. L am assuming that the landscape cross - section shown in the docvmeat are conceptual in nature and do not necessarily depict future landscape treatments foe t:aose are..z. Foi y^ur information, I have enclosed copies of those cross- sections which impact Tract 13565 with my comments, Exhib,_ 22 Commi"ttk-J* VI'i211 J ratty Manuttier $1 : 'This exhibit does not accurately reflect oar current approvals fo* our project. First, the wall plan shows a vew fence located along San Sevaine Avenue. Our cu €cent DRC approval is for a six (6) foot high stucco wall with a brick pilaster loca-,w at every other property line. I am assuming that our previous City approvals will take precedence should the ENSP be approved this way. Secend, the entry monument plan shows an entry monument located along Wardman Bullock Road into tour tract. Standard Pacific does not view Wardman Bullock Road as a major entry road deserving o: Zn entry statement, as shown on Exuibit 26(A). P mdard Pacific has already provsued an entry monument similar to that shown :.,ai "Exhibit'26 on 24th Street. 12.0 Dty_qWl_'nt %3a Tree folly rang comments also refer to Sections 100.1 and 102 of the Etiwanda North Spec& Plan. As stated previously, the Development Plan for Tract 13565 was approved by the Coun,v in September 1988. The Development Plan and 'Tentative Tract Map approval set forth cert 'n conditions of approval, as yell as specific development standards, all of which are ontained in the D :velopment Agreiment. In reviewing the ENSP, the General Plan Map and the Specific Land Use Plan have designated Tract 13565 as very low ,density (VI.). This designation allows up to two dwelling units per acre and sets forth specific demlopment standards for E properties that fall within this category. These development standard` (i.e., minimum lot sizes, setbacks, etc.) are inconsistent with the Developme,_, Plait standards and the Conditions of Approval for Tract 13565. in our opinion, Tract 13565, based on it's density and recorded lvt sizes, is more likely to be designated as low de_isity, However,; -ven this designation and associated standards are still irr conflict with our LETTER 2 Mr. Larry Henderson Planning Department City of Rancho Cucamonga July 2, 1991 Page 5 of 6 existing approvals. In order to eliminate any co! Ausion With regard to -the applicable standz;eds which apply to Tract 13565, I would suggest that a statement be added to this section which would clarify the development standards for Tract 13565. 1 think this would eliminate any confusion with regard to th"i p?icatle standards for Tract 13565. 12.2.4.2 Development Criteria: "Any structures or land outside the Flood Control District which is subject to flood inundation, as depicted on the Federal insurance Flood Bate Maps or otherwise by the City Engineer, shall.comnly with the flood protection measures as outlined in Title 19 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Standard Pacific has installed flood control protection facilities in accordance with the Conditions of Approval and the standards set forth by the SIBCFCD. Standard Pz;ific will comply with all standards set forth in the Conditions of Approval and Development Agreement. 13.4 Etiwanda Highlands Neighborhood Sub Areas 13.4.1 Sub Area 5: Community! :pesign Features: "View fencing shall be featured for residential development along San Sevaine, Drive to take advantage of the view of the wash and foothills." Tract 13565 will provide view fencing along the northern tract boundary of the project, however we received DRC approval to construct a theme wall along San Sevaine Avenue. "Paseos should provide pedestrian access to the San Sevaine Wash. Also, paseos should provide access to community trails along the San Sevaine Wash The in -tract improvement plans and landscape plans for Tract 13565 do not provid3 direct access tr,,San Sevaine Wash. Our landscape plans do, however, provide for pedestrian and ;if: estrian access along San Sevaine Avenue. Direct access to San LETT22R 2 Mr. Larry Henderson Planning Department - City of Rancho Cucamonga July 2, 1991 Page 6 of 6 4 Sevaine Wash is obstnicted by SBCFCD' right- ot:• -vay fencing. Larry, hu addition to the above comments, I hope to discuss with you specific issues ,. within these sections of the ENSP: Section 8.2.2, "Other Pertinent Access and Design., , Policies "; Section 10.1, "General Provisions "; Section 10.1.2;` "Relationship t^ ^tltcr' Regulations "; Section 10.13, "Conflict with 'Other Replatians "; Section IV A "Relationship to Rancho Cucamonga Development Code "; Section 10.1.10, "Agreements"; Section 10.2, "Land Use Regulations "; Section 11.0, "Design Guildelines ".. i hope my comments are helpful. I look forward to meeting with you and MIld on Wednesday. Sincerely, Standard Pacific of Orange County, a divisiokof Standard P inc, M chael J. V4'hite Project Manager cc: Bob Shiota, Standard Pacific Ray Allard, Fuscoe. Williams, h^_,igren & Short Greg Sanders, hlossaman Guthner, Knox & Elliot Joe Dilor o, Caryn Company Kevin Pohlson, Caryn'Company Miki Bratt, City of Rancho Cucamonga Brad Bullet City of Rancho .Cucamonga LETTER 2 1 If DESIGN GROUP August 14, 1991 Chairman McNeil and Metr>bers of the Planning Commission CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 10500 Civic Center Drive P. O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 92728 RE; City of Ran.-b,; s mmonga fob No.: NES 876 Environmental Impact Report for Specific Plan 90 -01 and General Plan Amendment 90 -03B, Envitonmsntal Assessment and Specific Plan 90 -01, Environmental Assessment and General Plan Amendment 90 -03B Dear Chairmani WNW: Four Month Continuance: The Caryn Company, University of California, and Etiwanda :Highlands LTD. agree that an exteusiun of time is necessary to allow completion of CEQA documents and adequate time for public review. However, The Caryn Company, University of California, and Etiwanda Highlands LTD - - .-.quest that the P'taning Commissions ennsider a significantly longer continuance, until 3anuarl, 1992, to allow resolution of the CEQA lawsuit filed by the City against the County of San Bernardino and .ne owners of the University /Crass -property before considering .his planning approval. We believe there are important legal and practical reasons for this continuance. It is obvious from the draft documents already r:leasedby the City that the University /Crest Project j is an important, if not central, element of the Specific PIan. As it currently stands, the County bas already determined that the Project will be developed according to County standards and with County- approved mitigations. The only way fw the City to control deve.opment of this territory III would be to win the pending lawsuit challenging the County's approvals -- and ultimately, to annex the properiy. Tjiereforo, development of what we would call the "centerpiece" cf the Specific Plan will necessarily be inconsistent with the City's current plans unless the lawasit.is successful. It only snakes good economic and Manning sense to wait until the lawsuit is decided betbre continuing the preparation and consideration of two very expensive -- and complex documents. By these comments we do not mean to sugf est that the County's Univemity /.Crest prajectapproval is likely to be oveMirned, fact, if the City does trot wat% we believe that the more likely result is .In that the Specific Plant and EIR wi'il be completed on the bas's ofproject criteria which are inaccurate and inapplicab°.e by the t ?me the Plan is zdopted. Under --here circumstances, completion of the Specific Plan id this time serves no purpose outer than hei]htening t► . conflict bctween the City, the County and the University Crest protect property owns. % ! 3 LM M3 2- "� OG _32 -AX: (714) 832 -2025 I:airman .McNiel' CITY OF RANCHO CUCAM©NGA Job No.: 1'',LS 876 August 14-1991 Paget We therefore urge the Planning Commission to defer any further consideration of the Etiwanda Norih Sjvcific Plan until after the i :andate hearing in the City's CEQA lawsuit. These are cases entitled to preference so a hearing is likely before the end of the year. Ifthe City is unwilling to � grant 3n indefinite continuance for these purposes, we suggest that this hearing be cc aVaued -- not to SeN ember, but to mid - January 1992 f Six- w'.�ek Contlauance: If, despit, .,16 compelling reasons for alrnger continuance, the Planning Commission wishes to proceed, is riecraest that this matter be continued until at least threeweeks after completiun and public di -I tiution of the Final EIR for the project. The current schedule calls for less than four working•".ys between distribution of the Final EIR and revised Specific Plan and the scheduled public hearing. This is not enough time for any meaningful review of the documents including the City's. response to comments which we havcnot yet seen. While it may meet the min' "aum legal requirements for public review, it does not allow at!;opportur3 _t fbr us to make substantive and -- we would hope -- helpful comments on the planning documents. As the final documents are not currently scheduled to be available urvil September 5, ;1991, we ask that the mat,;O be continued to September 25, 1991 >- if the Planning Commission reject,s our request for a longer cnntinuan4e. Sincerely, PtaTre'v- Associate ATM :1w cc: chron con n,. LETTER 3 •tvnrv.rens _� 1 June ^7,1991 — RECEIVED — CITY OF RANCHO CU.AMONGA Ms. Mikki Bratt PLANNING DIMON Associate Pl2 Planning Division JUL 15 1991 AN 10500 Civic Center Drive Ci�6�tulli��t� P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Mr_ Larry Henderson, ATCP Principal Planner Planning DirdGNon 10500 Civic Center Drive P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91721 RE: DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (DEIR , ETIV1'ANDA NORTH SPECIFIC PLAN STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 89012314 Dear Ms. Bract and Mr. Henderson, T hank you for your notification of the above referenced D21R and completed Draft Etiwanda Northh Specific Plan. Comments rerjpective to these documenu are contained on the following p?gas ano are also intended tt • rt as our public Tesponse to the notification we received from the City of Rancho Pia,, ng Commission dated June 11, 1,091 for the following proj2cts: , • Environmental. Impact Report for Specific Plan 90 -01 and General Pla.i Amendment 90-03D City of'°andbo Cucamonga. • Znvironmental Assessment anc'. Specific Plan 90-01 - City of Pzncho Cucamonga. • Environmental Assessment and General Plan Amendment 90-03B - City of Rancho Cucamonga. Each of these projects were to be discussed at the Rancho Cucamonga planning commission meeting on June 26,1991 at 7:00 p.m. ANNE ATION Landmark Laid Company of California, Ihtc. hereby cnters its objection to the City of Rancho Cucamonga for including Landmark's property in any p?an whose stated purpose is to create a platform for annexation of Landmark's property into the City' of Rancho Cucamonga. As stated in Section '1.1 of the cit, s Draft Etiwanda North LETTER 4 jr)T -z.3 Landmark Land Company of California, Inc Response to City of Rancho Cucamonga ENSP/ DEIR Fnne 27,1991 Specific Main (ENSP), the document would, a nong other things, "act as a pre- requisite to annexation of the [plan] to the CA r of Rancho Cucamonga." Accordingly, we object to our property and it,; ' %oundwjes being included in a document for this purpose. At the present time Landmark Land Cornpany enjoys property ownemiiip within the unincorporated territory of San Berns -.lino County - Tiutside of the corporate city limits of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Additionally, mucit of Landmark's property also falls outside of the Sphere of Influence of the City. We believe the maps captained within the ENSP, beginning with Exhibit 3 on Page 1 -8 as well as those it A-ntical maps copied to the`Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for same to be incorrect insofar as they to indicate certain lands owned by Landmark within the city's Sphere of influence. These maps should be corrected as well as provided in a scale suitable for proper analysis. Lastly, consistent with our objections stated in tine precedin; paragraph we further object to being annexed into the City of Rancho Cucamonga's Sphere of Influence. COMMENTS ON DRAFT ETIWAT+DA NORTH SPECIFIC VLAN 1. As stated previously, all exhibits contained in the ENSP document which Ask indicate land owned by Landmark Land Company of California being either within the city limits of the City Rancho Cucamonga or the Sphere of Influence of the City should be revised. Exhibit 4 on Page 1 -10 contains a small graphic in the lower left corner which: . a. Indicates property owned' by Landmark Land Company within the Sphere of Influence of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. b. indicates property owned by landmark to be in area "previously annexed to Rancho Cucamonga ". Consistent with our previous requests, traps such as these (including Exhibits 3 through 11, 13 and 14 ,16 and 17, 19 , 22, and 34 should be revised and subsequently provided in a scale suitable for proper analysis. 2. Exhibit 3 on Page 1=8 indicates an area.'wtlined in a eurvalinear pLttern and labeled "Bog". We will provide comment on this area later in this letter, however, :ve feel this area to be out of scale as well as factually incorrect since the nature and origin of this area has not been established Nyn, nd mare r,pinion. Since this exhibit acts as the base map for further generations of maps we also, by reference to ,xhibit 3 on Page 1-8, object to these succeeding exhibits. 2 LETTER 4 landmark Land Company of California, Inc. J Response to C:tyoF Rancho Cucamonga ENSPICEIR June 27,1991 3. Contained within Section 4.5 OPEN SPACE AND TRAILS is a .goal to "preserve and protect the fre zh water bog, along with a 201 -foot ride buffer of natural vegetation and the upstream recharge corridor, adequate access ti natural hydrological resources, and appropriate protective fencing." The nature and a ';gin of the "fresh water bog" i still an open issue. Accoi dingly, it maybe premature to attach such signncance to a feature whose "hydrological resources" have yet to be ascertained. It is equally premature to provide such non- specific and misleading language such as "the upstream recha, ire corridor" when such a feature may not exist. 4. Also contained w. hin Section 4.5 OPEN SPACE AND TRAILS is a goal to "preserve the Forev Service site and an adequate surrounding area for parking, trail herd, rest rooms, and picnic fticilities for public use and enjoyment" , r The former Forest Service s to mentioned in the ENSP is little more than one acre in size. The surrounding area is owned by Landmark Lartd Company who would not consider sale of'-il s property to the City for the purposes of providing such uses as parking and public iestrooms. Landmark i5 providing nearly 250 acres of open space, much of it in pristine natural area accessible by hiking trails. It is not clear why the City would provide for such a goal when superior public use and enjoyment has been incorporated into Landmark's plans. 5. Exhibit 9 provides the boundaries and orientatior a f the Neighborhood Themes for the ENSP. We have noticed that you designate the area of our property as "Oaks'' and state that "the neighborhood will be characterized by native field stone entries and pilasters with native Oaks and Sycamores." This theme is consistent with our plans for the area. For further information the City should further consult the Oak Summit Development Plan which is on file with the County of San Bernardino and which has previously been provided to the City. 6. Exhibit 9 also provides a curia= -S set of Unes indicating, apparently, the location of trees. TZiese areas do not conform in any way to our development plans or any appru;'ted street matrix in the vicinity. The map should be revised to indicate Wst?ng approvals and development plans. It is also debatable whether or not it is lie City'-s prerogative to provide precise future, 3 LETTER 4 Landrink Land C- npany of California, Inc: Response to City of ;Rancho Cu 4v, -mSa ENSY /DE21t June 27,1991 Iocations for It cal and collector streets, if that is what these areas are intended . to convey. 11` 7, Table 2 - the Land Use Statistical Sumntorl shown`, \n page 11-14.-::provides for 342 r cres of &sidential Net Aceage with 3::� Dwelling Units. This table is inconsfsteu with the general depiction of the Oaks er'ea provided on Exhibit 9 and fair to considir land use approvals pr tent ih the area. Landmark Land Company currently has approval for 453 units on 453 aces within th -; area. Ultimate development within this are;,, will include approximately L i dwelling units on 761.8 acres. The tim;l use matrix should be revised to provide for currently approved plans and a more realistic land use scenario. S. On page fl-19 of the Draft ENSP in the opening paragraph of Section 7.0 OPEN SPACE AND TFAILS CONCERT states, "the diverse biological and wildlife habitats found in the flog" is mentioned. Since it is yet to be determined if *,his feature is indeed a "`bog" this statement is questionable. 9. Par a R -21 in discussion of the -C— immunity Park /Equestrian Center provides that "contribution toward the acquisition ami development of the equestrian center shall be a condition of development for all tracts which havel i minimum lot size of less than 20,000 square feet which are in the General Plan Equestrian Overlay District." It is highly juesdonable why lots of less than 20,000 square feet should be singled out to bear the irripact of funding a regional facility, wren, by the very nature of their economy, they are less likely to meet the financial profile to afford a feature which proportionately few will utilize. Farther, no discussion is provided nor any criteria presented which aft npts to illustrate wl°.y 20,000 square feet is the correct size to levy fees upon, father than. an arbitrary finding that because the City is committed to equestrian activity we feei .:�, t the City must provide: a. The .cumber of residents within the extended comnrjnity which currently own horses and will likely do so in the future. b. Other, dstical data which support the aforementioned-'f <. -)n lots of 20,0(,_.. square feet or less. Adlk LETTER 4 Landmark Land Company of California, Inc. Response to Ci'y of Rancho Cucamonga ENSP /DEIR June 27, 1491 c Maps indicating L,-, Je boundaries of the existing and planned equestrian overlay district. d. The DEIR for the ENSP fails to address the health and safety Wides associated witl: having horses in close proximity to non- equestriart oriented land uses. The DEIR should be revised to include such a discussion. 10. Exhibit 10 - Open Space and Trails Plan provides two Community LKuQstrian Trails through property owned by Landmark Land Company. Thai plan fails to consider the fact that this property is under private ownership with approved land use plans. Further; subsequent plans have been made available to the City of Rancho Cucamonga which indicate the possible allowance of equestrian trails over and /or adjacent to this property in different locations. Exhibit 10 takes a capricious approach to this private property by ignoring the aforementioned and directly bisecting Landmark's . property with trails which are incompatible with current approvals and Landmarks futui- s. ,'evelnpment plans. Addition -ll the scale of trails depicted on the p 7eu would provide - d excess of 300 feet for each such trail.. The City should seek to plac. equestrian trails within areas currently designated as easements and again review the plans which Landmark has provided. These plans provide the links which the City is seeking and in land more scenic and ^,;table for such purposes. , 11. Section 7.33 on page U -25 provides that local equestrian trails shall be established as a condition of development within the Very Low and' ;Hillside Residential District planning areas where the minimum lot size is 20,000 square feet. The purpose of the trails is to provide safe equestrian access to community aid regional trails. As stated previously, there is no discrosion as to why lots n! less than 20,000 square feet are singled out whiie no criteria it presented which attempts to illustrate why 20,000 square feet is the correct si,Q to 1p:.y this exaction upon. Other than an arbitrary finding that because the. 0yy is committed to equestrian activity we feel that the City should pro ;Me those items listed in Number 9 above: 12. :.-d on 73.6 on Page ?1. -+7 illustrates that the site immediately ad 7,�ent to the Day Canyon Flood Control area provides a potential trail head locaiic n M . � L ER 61 L-2 Landmark land. Company of CaGfbmia,1,nc. Response to City of Rancho Cucamonga ENSP /DE1R June 27,1491 This area is completely unacceptable to Landmark Land Company. The provision of public faplities including public restrooms accompanizd by the waste assodated with ,- questrian activiti,!s is clearly incompatible with upscale housing.. As stated previously, equestrian trails are provided in our land plan. The city shouid explore other areas more compatible with the features of eouesuian activities and provide discussion of these alternative within the context of, the DEM 13. The Circulatiox Plan - ExhiNt 11 on Page 11-30 provides for a street matrix inconsistent with currently approved plans and the Corot, -nf San.- Bernardino General Plan. Property owned by iandmark•Land Company currently include, entitlement for 453 ciw_elling units on 453 'acres in the area adjacent to the northerlymost collector stir;,ets nhowrt on this exhibit. The exl :bit should be revised to indicate tha north /south oriented collectors to be aligned generally with Edwanda and Hanley Avenues. 14. Section 133.1 Sulx'rea 41 on Page ? ; requires that "the fault knoll he set aside as o public mark contiguous with Lie bog. Park uses shall include passive recreation, rest v. urns, and trails head parking for hikers and bicyclists:' i Please see our previous comments regarding the compatibility of placing a public park in this locztit-n at the expense of : -oLier more saitable sites. The same section goes on to_stai.- that this knoll was "formed by he fault". Data supporting this clzirr. st:3uld "be provided within the DEAL Ic is fur .er sta-ted that "historically, the site has 'been used by the- pp?'.-c a-q'an overlook of the valley with views oa a clear day to San Gorgonio a: 1 San Jacinto to the east, Saddleback Mountain to the south, and the cman a the West. The knoll should be retained for public use." Tlus statement is inaccurate and misleading in both fact and context. 5` nce the side-?• .A ,ote from existing urban lei i uses it stands to reason that only a minukcz2-t portion of "the public' has "historically" used *.e site as an overlook. Further, the portrayal that this feature should be "retained" as `; :ethit.g- of a corrmunicy zsource is also inconsistent with the hisw,`,dal use of the site for fire fighUngrwatthing purposes. It also fails to tw. mentioned that- the portion of t1e knell devoted to the previous virtgev station is only a very smail - crcentage of the knoll. The remainder of Site knoll 11s, as it always has been, u-:der private ownership. 6 LETSIER 4 L� ` 2-Y 0701 '02 o SEPTEMBER 11, 1991 P . C.. AGENDA ( 10 of 13 I U � o a � h A �, p; etc v�bN eC c u d o 8 u E3 E- o a C G iR BAD 4 Q R N i d W y..7 d d. ° si5 y a' C SOU m b ���rr per. O V 7 7 O RG o°. a°+ n► Q .°,+ w 22 C.O W w OIQ.. • i • Y V1 al E4 y o _r o A a d a m m e R u a e 1 22 2o O •r y Q cOU ozi O� p �i°q a T (j 3 I a e ti •� a E � 1"() w zz rat z e E+ �d y o � v ey o Wo >w a �`'^ om d > d o ro c tL0.1 Ax qQ pQw, W� in ® o • • e � H d E a � ID Sil W Q ri1 W aao z® GE Q G7 � ' t op w .. - Car M •v Sa °` ,. U am �� m C 3 o .. o � ai O ho •� ,� Imo„ G; a, rn .�7 y y 7. 'y �" •y .0 p 4 4315! .1•'�C... •a ''� C Q „ON,. ci .� ''�. tC J O., pp, s C '��'�' C � 7 .D. � � p .... � 01 .tom d Ii-•' a.`I �. r" i'.' •�. _=+, t� O „�A > � i! C� n r� "'� -,?—, `ko'1 c aoi Ca• a � •° 3`'-S `> �, y � m `3 cQ p.. v y_ a� ,� � '� 'cti Q p w G w O O y, G tCOCa a> N G C Iii, r p uyi tV eo '^; •e ;� ABM'= 'apoga`3�Sa R7o pm �. �a�a II a C m y �a;ala�ti �e ng ~f •� iQ E.c • q q �0' 2 e 1 '�. . ,•Op - A . B � u . a N •d.. i0 p C N o m c. A FL aoi m • ® Q w eg a 0° v> .0 0 !I m o y fJ a"i q >, a c � b •C H O 'Qyo Y •a Adk Gyp Fr�' i f 16- U 9 e v zz U� U" F Grr � c+ w I'1 W O R �1 7�n l ZO H •Ci•.V C W w W tC e�� f '� 1111 C1 w � ►O+ C� .�. U .. ° 9:6 ho E o. a � G4 o r[ •O O O N y •ey ��.� 00. rT ~ N o .d cc�� 91 3 C> •a W p= y U O G® y �9:yl�r� CJ V] 61 61N+ C Cy , u fd cc I RIO � �. •p v O O rG :O Ce y E ,A G 7�n y' 6z1 Cd I An O O C r a9 ru- 0 m y.. N .. •a r c•c o© g d a"ir� =A; ° a m Cd 00 p y ama �+'o qb 18 dai —.2 a E s �. mom• dQ,3m� yo:� .',r '? Z iYi tl � m m � � O ,� � w � O as � O C? •°'.• ,^.+g0 j',.; a� �, A p R° �,a� I� 'd c�mO a !g (iM+g'wm nn p. C'' tv.. rr i -'a m R. r7 E �a 64.10 V . : eC GG72 U 'O iii :.. C9 w 6 . o ss+ T] 11 40 J �py� t- rA m, U y 'Q so�o. U�`�•;,c''w 4 C 4 q � ��•� � ti•� O ti' m w yt W V eye ntt w O i� r _ w �+ CS G C to c�'Y a� � o y � a ao��A k„ d,�•� � a °� ai w cg rw V t � a. • o � C d ca �hmUU o=•;a�y° 03G�J� La rz to .11 Z5 E o.:: o - -A '" +u °beam ooh 1sS' ,w E9 av'8 g+A'W' o o. z E V k7 m E E V y -- i U d ? ..> d COO ca wa �•y SAO a F fl `mac o A � CI $ a � H pp ui d'� ayCi.. `�' � =; $ •; ro.. oA y p G y Gi 'O W A cJ r G M ''� S a w .�% S M C A R.. •C.. y t. � ie •y Rf •O' b ��„ ,�. Q •�O 6) O. �' 15 S g NN Q t!� � N '3 � O ` 7.a t� N ,�1N'1 ran �. �' "�•i � .�{. 8 � 'C :7 � � � d C$Ch to g� i' 1:6 Me M g r �yt rw f1�iA �O� �.•n L^ Ci N •k a �.� 7th ryj gnaw] °+w cgo`wcA�d$�ai ca 0 V �Rp stn C1 U dv A M 'z W 0 OD C '$ cn o� iL C^-� ? ..> } p a7 U L'" yam+ ea :3 boa v 0> 9 c c v - 6 $ Sao �_ Rk Loa>c�v� s O o a`�GC3i�`srs •E N . W � b -S W lz 7 �pp i1� � tp 3 c C c - R R y • 'dl C _„ offt_ 7 g i 4. p 13 - d om^ a y. C. " sh wa,. e C ftI C M .`�..W�,A cg o V N c �3 a d� � 9. .n�•> c`d ��3 � ! C s • •Std a GU c� 3 N C; d b0 d Gzl = w c c. a a°3c��•3q vi U 4,.. �.• f� O I w w rA. w .a t5.s gt,cm p+ exo� q G L e� �a cg c dm S O_ Q. y" F W 40. d CS °� O. to A. i3uUSL e cc o y, � ' a�o`�oen�i ,.°`�•c,W:s,°,'J3 oc� ©, `•°'ai W E. Gi 3 w °O •> >; c oe A c a, oo G -4-0 n� o W " '� v 's_',, c E E� � � E �`2 � o•°U � t2 °c+ o� �;g m A 2a .+a� o � e p• m�v ? av w ao,, s od � cow 4 SQ 3�•0 «, a rq..» �w � av� o Z 4 [s U W r F J U Gs3 re ..ter L N ^+ v� i'+ A - ."1. s O a � a' o � e5 w •ty is y W a aw O �ww. O m m c. w a � O N ,� • � ��„ 8 C m A t C�� p � pD��Qy�r p2.°L% e,Cr4CyS_U •},' N e m r w •r.Y ,C. y^ Cp V C+.. /r '�• �:. cd N. 0-,g � V.`a"�. � — — a bA .�ep d�A 4a- , m4 ccs �J -.ri 8vuC`aj C —a " _ RAO a a a acb Z E a R � a a. o 0 6 p, a O. pn W N O - o E CG ooh :: E ao�w 9Fc zzv r. UC O w Wa � W w C� C" y y N.r��C: �•� a i 6i C y on Vf W 3 C w�C. der% Faffi". C, a . = �p ~ tV N y� � G G G� qq m t3 <C �.> tCn N ip 9 N �+. N M Z p E" V o N 3 a E F 'o ;z Ck 0 �^ U c�a C` I Try f Uz d0 v� t4 F �a W� a i r C (� O C.� W z C N r�'• y t� (� L C.' C� C.� W tQ Vl ^ i � . C N r�'• y t� ti y N H. 4.. t7 �i 3j°, cn '� � d � •'^ 3 $ N v. aCi c. U �_ "fin V .0 .ri `�' K`t� !; G7 c u " • °— L) L) ed��m �� M`�° 9 cc 3 � T t y ^I � � w z !;-4: ,�j i ag �rw W 72 M z 72 C6 43, sp no 'a rV gg cc cc E do -80 is a-.2 79 R a W C 0 U " Q I a qI e Qr E !1 R T oq 6,0 '� •w G G v tJ- •w � � Q c a m e Qr E !1 R T oq 6,0 '� •w lw 4: v tJ- •w •w c a c c m sa cg "• e`d t E 0 1uys� c c ao+ NN6> w�°. � agg C•0q u •_ 'q y+t� o _ u Ix d w -^t d L tt CL �. ffi `� E•a � •� v{ ��Z O O a.o 4 u G p lh ayy_; ci vs % a. a cx en w 60 ^�.Et O� rs Z r •L' Y 40. xi ,1 � ".�'E� •C �. O y •C U .� a p , .aC " N d O � L GS7 `'3 � E M rOii v •� G. C w .y.. 'y N � � y y � Q _ gi W iO E p d y o w 3 3 U'vQ 1, � $ a .04 P.2 I N M -A - C Q tai/ C 0 Cy G Em E y = -:9 9 wyEB�'� CA a to d $° 75 w O Q a y it ` �7 O u cis i N tW.o rA 4+ ca pp ^_ o ts N y Z ;g N � � •e� � � ran R� ADO Z d w w° tai R t0 y C s � 8 u • u "C�ii•^ � � � CJ N cn [dry ►a N aci •� Q. ili v .r � N W." [,3 Is 0 ca r t' hw a• -'z ., ti j '� xx �d w z:, w� z Rj �- aA s 0 C ai O �Zc toV O W$ G co Am ci +v� Ci h moo° o a g w coo p 4Hzp iizaNG:C *MT oww.°oa y Vf C`� iyy n1 C CD i PROOF OF PUBLICATION (2015.5 C.C.P.) STATE JF CALIFORNIA, County of San Bernardino NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEIRING+ AND /OR ENVIRONMENTAL NOTICE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION The Rancho Cucamonga Flanning.- Commission will be holdings pubNC hearing at Z:00 P.m. rrtl. June 2P. 1991, aeihe ; Rancho Cueamx°s:CIvIG Center. Council Chamber, located ' at 1030° Civic Canter Drive. . Rancho Cucamonga, California I Jo E. Terry do 91A to ewlsltler the followln.9=ribed prefects. A eomplate envll pn1. assessment. nos been prepared t hereby declare that 1 am a citizen of the United t+ me profeet le nctea gs an Environmental assnsment. States end a resident of the Count afOreSaid' l Commenls will be recelved and the environmental assess• ! County mast maybe reviewed any time prior to final .Mibn. TM am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party _ Planning commission will be considering the assessment. to or interested in the above-entitled matter. I am staws'recommendations. and public input at their meeting Of June 26, 1991, prior to making a final determfnetlon. the Legal Advertising: Clerk of the - If any action requires final action by city council. Ii ISM �. rested. In such u9e the environmental assessment is available for revl,.rw and/or comment prior to In@ public INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN.,, gearing at the Planning Commission and up to tho public) (Formerly The Daily Report) ' hearing at the City Council. The date Of the Public nearing 1 bBore the City Council will be separately noticed. - - .' ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR SPECIFIC I a newspaper of general circulation, printed and PLAN 9641 AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 9043E ( CITY. OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -.A public hearing to 1 published daily in the City of Ontario, County-,of receive Comment On the draft envirafinentvt i(npact report. San Bernardino, State of California, and wl'ich Prepared for in* Etlwanda North Specific Plati.Sd General has L2en adjudged a newspaper of Plan Amendment 90-079 to proiono approximately S'.CaO 1 9 general acrr.. of territory fn the planChO Cucamonga sohem of- circulation by the Superior Court of the County of infW*k* to Provide for SAM singlefamny dwdning unite on 2,473 RTM Of V�Cant land. 21 ACM of neighbathood' San Bernardino, State of California, under the commercial use, a 900056 S parks, an equestrnln center, ate of August 24, 1951, Case Number 70663; that and preservation of 4,112 acres Of open space generally e notice, of which the annexed is a tinted Ixatbd north of Highland Avenue (State Route 30), seam of p3. (set in t p p) the San Bernardino National Farr?, west of the City of type not smaller than non areal ,has F HNVIROHMENTA601ASSESSMENT AND SPECIFIC been published in each regular and entire issue PLAN 941 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request of said newspaper and not in any supplement to approve the EHWanda Norm Specific Plan, preioning thereof on the following dates, to-wit: approximately 640 acres of territory in me Rancho Cucamonga sphere- of•Influence to provide for 7417 single family dwelling units on 2.477 acres of vacant lane'. 26 acres Of neighborhood COmmerdat 1". a schools, S narks, and June 5. 1991 equestrian center, and preservation of 4,112 acres of open space Q*W 11 ICC0W norm of Highland Avenue (State RoOiS 20). of the San Bernardino National Forest; TThif Spits wllbe Fontana, and to thee City Milliken for final action and the data of the Public Hearing before City I declare under y IY Council will be separately noticed. penalty of perjury that the ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ANO GENERAL foregoing is true and correct. PLAN AMENDMENT "433 - CITY GF RANCHO CUCA- MONGA - ArECvest to ammend the Gtric ral Plan to p.'ovide :onslstency with the draft E!!Wanda Norm Specific Plan. Dated at Ontario, California, this ._5� day of Praioning approximately 6,40 acres of tomitcry in the Rahctq C •"nnnya spftlW*- - WIUence to provide for 3.613 single far. .lire" units On 2,473 acres of vacant land. 20 June 1991 acres of r n ; commercial use, 4 xhoOls, s parts. an cquastrim Center. and Preservation Of 4.112 acres at open spacanwtarally located realm of Highland Avenue (state 30) Ratty . eOUdh Of . the San Bernardino National Forest, wait a the CIK Of Pomtana, and east of Milliken This action will be arced to city Council for final 4010n and the date Of the Public Hearing before City Council will be Separately noticed. / CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ntdS - SOUTHWEST .C.IgtS,�tUre 'CONDITIONAL GROUP -A regWl'i to establish a Whole9ale /retall !(lfJlJJ silk fIGWW arrulgemart CusMaf manufacturing use within G eit I�l� ubre] hel ndaei t rI t Dish (Subarea 3) the industrial SOWHC Plan, located at 9067 Arrow Route, 0170 • APM. 209• - Proof of Publication of °t ENVIRONMENTAL Assessi ir,NT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 91.17 - W1t.LOWS COMMUNITY CHURCH. - PASTOR FORRI751' NIHOLrY - The request to establish a church arm schism In a aasw space at 4AW square feet Notice of Public 9narirg w;min e6 - 4kiMIn9 aNtce park on 1239 acres of land in the - (Mice Prbasslcnal iota, located at We01 Church Street APP- 1077.411.71. Staff reegmmenda issuance of a Negative. Cloo art+llon. ty of Rancho Cucamon,a DC 24038 ENVIRONMENTAL 1 i5E3SMENT AND FOOTHILL - WATTSON COMPANY A Itquest Etd modify The mad an Break location on FOOmll1 8ouavard. to add • median. break )ocet(on on .Foothill gOUlavard, and fo Chang! i-I land use. designation from Light Industrial t0 Regional Relalad COmmerCiAl for an. area of spprOXlmafaly 21 acres larell 4), •- ocatedton he alst side of Interstate 15, sbinh of .Foothill BOulriard. These raguesls are In c=.11lon with the deVelopmem of a 4•/08 acre retail /commercial center located on the south std! of Footnlil Boulevard between 1.15 and Etlwands Avenue • APN:. 2.24-071.07 ihrOYgh 17. 1S. 16.. and 21i Staff fK0lntnofitlf (ss4ante 04 O PoegATiY! DlCaPa' 410n. RNOfed Files:' Who This Use Permit 40.77 afKl< Tentely 1 Parcel =' 177 o Tens action will be forwardm to ten City Council hrf.Ml aCt10n afo The data of the Publfac Hearing off City Council will Da xalariteiY noticed. - ENVIRQNMEriTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL. USE PERMIT WS? THE WATT"`ON COMPANY . A- request for maatar plan approval of a +f0 acre retail/ commersiet cafdAr eontalNng eppr0 timataly 550ACO square fast of laamable aPece and. t ragwst for approval:.of eonceptYil xih ptah and bu6dmd'Jtdva I for the Price Club facility In the Regional Relats'd Commercial and Light - Industrial designations Of the Folthlll boulevard Specific Plan (Subarea 4). located on thlr south sidt Of Foothill Bouiriard between Interstate 15 Ind Ettivando AV4hV2 - APN: 229 -MI-03 through 17, 15, 16, Alld Ili. Staff •ec om. mends Issuance of a Negative 130:11ation. Ael•ted Apes: Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan Amendment 90-03 and Tentative Parcel MAP 13724. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE. PARCEL MAP 12724 - THE WATTSON COMPANY - A subdivision Of 56.91 Acres Of land into 15 parcels In the RKICO21 p-tisted Commercial and Light Industrial deliOna• tans Of the Foothill 90uIjVard Specific Plan i.%abareo 4). located on the south side of Foothill 110018VL:d between Interstate 1S and Etiwenda Avenue - APN: 229-031-07 ttuougrl 13. 15. 16, and 20.. Staff recommends I&WAnCe Of a 116931/110, Declarallon. Related Files Foothill BwlavArd ;M!fO Plan Amendment IM and Conditional Use Permit 9(�n. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE subdlv�alon andMdesign r &vl� forty 3Tl0- AMMlnjurn units an 1.27 Acres of land In the Medium Residential District (5•14 dwelling units per acre), located on ten north side of Arrow �. RaWar east of tea eXtanflOfl of Madrd. Avenue • APN: 207- 201.10. 11, and 24. Staff recommends Issuance Of a Negative IENVINGiMENTAL AH NT AND - IVE eii uS - ISTI Of fDA HE aWi a PANY ildimitiasbdivis n single I &CM of land In Ina Very LOW Resld6r11al District 0-2 dwelling units per Acre) of the Eflwanda Specific Pfan. located On Inc north And South sides of Summit Avenue, apprO:JmatelY 1,300 het west of allwancia Avenue - APN: 225.111.71 and 225. 171-02, ifi. 11. and 16.. Staff rec0tnmends issuance O' • Ne9eNve /tKaraTlOn Associated With this peeled Is 7 fAe Removtl fMmlt 91.21. DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 9142 - CITY; Ola RANCHO CUCAMONQL A request to ,odd Ss1110n 17.05,00p and Sestlr,..- i7.01.ON-E to The Devel0.antem':ode - establlshlP.O property, maintenance standards and or -Ding maintenance roquirenWhia far multiPM family dWLSngL This action will be forwarded 10 the !Ill rWu1C11 ffk final Solon And the data of the public .w25rlrw b*,.'c City Council will be separately noticed.. Anyone having concMlS O? questl0ns Or wlSHing. f review or comment on the project and/or EnvironmemllI Assess - met on the foregoing Ifamo is welcome to cam•( r the City planning Division at (714) 1!9.1561. Or visit %W at"C" .located rt 10500 Civic Cartier Drive. Also, anyone objecting to Or In favor Of fed elegy, may 80=W In person ai the above-descrit ed ~109 or may submit their concerns in tyriling 10 the City Pr ar to Said melting. Written Comments a mid be addres 10 Its Panting Division. City of Rancho Cucamonga, P.O. BOX 8217. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 01729. IF YOU CHALLENGE +Y OF THE F)REGOING ACTIONS IN COURT, V MAY BE. LOMIITED TO RAISING ONLY THOSE JES-YGU OR %SOMEONE ACY ON DESCRISBED IN T OT CE. OR IN WRIITTEN CORRESPONDENCE PRIOR TO: THE THE HEAR- ING, 100240751 Publtyi June S. 1991 -l! e Curt Billings, Engineering Technician, replied that the gates would not be locked unless the residents provide a lock. Commissioner Melchor said he had wondered about a lock, as the staff report indicated several residences may be using the alley for access to their Iota. Chairman McNiel invited public comment, but there was none. Commissioner Melchor stated he was in total sympathy with why the alley is to be closed off, but he felt the situation may lead to problems. J Motion: Moved by Melchor, seconded by Tolstcy, carried 4 -0 -1 (Chitiem absent), to adopt the Consent Calendar. PUBLIC HEARINGS B. ENVIRO &'MENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR SPECIFIC PLAN,'4�? =01 ANB GENERAL P3 1 AMENDHENj,'30 -038 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCA QNGA A public hearing tc comment on the draft environmental lLpact report prepared for the Etiwanda North Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment 90 -03B to prezone approximately 6,840 acres of territory in the Rancho Cucamonga sphere -of- influence to provide for 3,613 single family dwelling units on 2,473 acres of vacant land, 28 acres of neighborhood commercial use, 4 schools, 5 parks, an equestrian center, and preservation of 4,112 acres of open apace generally located north of Highland Avenue (State R9ute 30), south of the San LJrnardino National Forest, west of the City of Fontana, and east of Milliken Avenue. C. ENVIRONKENTA& ASSESSMENT AND SPECIFIC PLAN 90 -01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMON - A public hearing to comment an the draft Etiwanda North Specific Plan, prezoning approximately 6,840 acres of territory in the Rancho Cucamonga sphere -of- influence to provide for 3,613 single- family dwelling units on 2,473 acres of vacant land, 28 acres of neighborhood commercial use, 4 schools, 5 parks, an equestrian center, and preservation of 4,112 acres �f open space generally located north of Highland Avenue (State Route 30), south of the San Bernardino National Forest, want of the City of Fontana, and east of Milliken Avenue. D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PLAN AMENDMENT 90-03B CITY OF RANC'JO CUCAMONGA A public -csariag to comment on the proposed General Plan Amendment to provide consistency with the draft. Etiwanda North Specific Plan, prezoning approximately 6,840 acres of territory in the Rancho Cucamonga sphere -of- influence: to provide for 3,613 single family dwelling units on 2,473 acres of vacant land, 28 acres of neighborhood commercial use; 4 schools, 5 parks, an equestrian center, and preservation of 4,112 acres of open space generally located north of Highland Avenue (State Rnute 30), south of the San Bernardino National Forest, west of the City of Fontana, and east of Milliken Avenue. Miki Bratt, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Planning Commission Minutes -2 June 26, 1991 Commissioner Melchor asked for clarification on the process of adoption of the Amkk final Environment ;l Impact Report (EIR). Ms. Bratt state4 dt the comments to the draft EIR and the written responses would become the final EIR. Larry Henderson, Principal Planner, stated the Planning 'Commission would review the written comments before the EIR is forwarded to City Council for final certification. He said the public comment process would technically and upon the close of tonight's public hearing, but _staff typically responds to all comments Pubmitted up until the final certification. Commissitter Melchor questioned the amount of park land being requested under the Quimby standard. Ms. Bratt replied that under Quimby standards a municipality can require up to 5 acres of park per 1,000 population if there is already existing parks at that ratio. She said the current City basis is 4.689 acres per thousand. Commissioner Malcher asked if the 4.689 figure is based on developed park acreage. Ms. Bratt responded that it includes land which is owned or developed including trails and trail heads. Commissioner Melchor asked about the comment that the impact would be less than significant. Ms. Bratt replied that there would be a significant impact if the City required less than the General Plan goal for parks, but the impact will be less than significant if the proper alpount of park land is provided. Commissioner Melchor asked if the development standards would change in the future if the Ri.11side Development Ordinance is changed. Ms. Bratt replied that development would be based upon the standards in effect at the time of approval for such development. Commissioner Tolstoy thought the Hillside Development Ordinance should be strengthened to avoid adverse impacts. Mr. Henderson commented that the act of grading will cause an impact, so impacts could not be reduced to less than significant. Commissioner Tolstoy thought the Planning Commission should reevaluate the Hillside Development Ordinance based on experience with the project now in process to be sure the Ordinance is accomplishing the objectives of the Commission. Commissioner Melchor agreed that the level of development achievable within the Ordinance guidelines is not the same as the goal of the Commission. He questioned if the wildlife corridors would remain viable. AWL Planning Commission Minutes -3- June 26, 1991 ^4 a Me. Brett reported that staff is currently reviewing the resource management lak plan to .address those concerns. Commissioner Helcher asked if all hiking and equestrian trails "VIll be available to all City residents. Me. Bratt responded affirmatively. Commissioner Malcher asked the level of development of East Avenue. Mr. Hratt replied that it will be a collector street. Commissioner Vallette questioned the upper limit of development. Ms. Sratt stated the forest station site on a prominent knoll and dsvelel;aaent would be north to that site, Chairman McNiel opened ti,e public hearing. Mike Kearney, Landmark Lind, 110 North Lincoln Avenue, Corona, stated their 762 acres is lce --tsd at the northwest portion of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. He said they had been working over two years on the preparation of the plan with both the City and the County. He stated they are currently processing their development within the County. He said only the lower portion of their project is located within the City's Sphere of Influence. He indicated they are opposed to any annexation into the Sphere of Influence ox the City boundary until the plan is approved. He- presente.`ia package of comments and stated he wished to reserve the right to pr %taint additional comments because some of the land uses had been changsllCl_s.nce the plan they had seen. Mike White, Standard Pacific, 1565 West MacArthur Boulevard, Costa Mesa, stated he is the owner and developer -9f Tract 13565 in the City. He said that when the tract was annexed in -the City in 1989 the City Council approved a Development Agreement which sets forth certain standards. He asked for clarification that the Development Agreement pm qr ement would not be superseded by the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. He said they planned to meat with staff during the next week. Anita Mc2eal, Land Plan Design Group, 14751 Plaza Drive, "A ", Tustin, submitted a letter with comments. She said their primary concerns regard land use, open space mitigation, the legality of the open space mitigation, and the Hillside Development Ord sane. She disagreed that estate lots would be more in line with the County General Plan. She said the County !i9ss not have a minimum 1 acre lot size, as the City would like to impose. Si.e reported that they had asked staff for documentation regarding the Quimby numbers. Sho expressed concern about the commercial land use locations and said it was her understanding that the area is not in the Equestrian overlay District. She \` said they would like to reserved the right to review stafils later materials and return to comment at a later time. Planning Commission Minutes -4 - June 26, 1991 a� n Richard Heilman, 5660 San Marine, Rancho Cucamonga, objected to the designation of Neighborhood Commercial in Subarea 6 at the northwest corner of Wilson and Wardman Bullock Road. He thought the designation is not consistent with the General Plans of either Rancho Cucamonga or San Bernardino County. He commented there is no other Neighborhood Commercial in the city north of Route 30 except for the Haven corridor, where it extends to Lemon. He felt the increased traffic, zoire, ,and parking lot lighting will create negative impacts in the residential area. He thought the density in the area will be too low to support Neighborhood Commercial. He complimented staff on the technical preparation of the document but asked w'i,? so much taxpayer money was being wasted on a plan when it was 'entirely posgible 'nothing will come of it. He was zoncerned about the financing for \the rest of the area s;.d commented he lives within a Mello -Roos District. ke thought the County and City were perhaps needlessly spending money bscauss<of bickering caused by egos. He suggested the county and City get togattt�,ryand produce a quality product. He reported that the San Sevaine wash h(!s-reen completed north of 24th Street and has been completely fenced in, ;- making animal movement impossible. He felt that with the vegetation erowin) iq the area it will be a j high fire area and he thought the fence presents a tr %g r to wildlife because of the fire hazard. He. wondered why the City's EZWW,,recommenaed the *area be left open but the County is fencing it off. Jim Lynch, 11640 Mt. Whitney Court, Rancho Cucamonga, said he appreciated the concerns regarding wildlife habitat and the development of tits foothills. He did not feel development should be allowed if the impacts cannot be mitigated. He asked why so much scrub habitat is to be eliminated if scrub habitat resources are dwindling. He was concerned that the wildlife corridors may not be viable. He suggested that hiking and equestrian trails should not be included in the wildlife corridors because of conflicts with the animals. He tt:ought development should be limited to south of the utility corridor in thr. Oaks area to protect against a human impact upon the bog. He J!vndarad about economic and tax liability for the City and dLd not feel a7 lot a residential development is good for the City. He thought the City is approaching a condition of being overdeveloped in the residential area and _feared future bankruptcy. Chairman McNiel thanked the participants for their comments, both written and oral. Motion: moved by Melchor, seconded ::3y Valletta, to continue Environmental Impact Report for Specific Plan 90 -01 and General Plan Amendment 90 -03B, Environmental Assessment and Specific Plan 90 -01, and Environmental Assessment and General Plan Amendment. 90 -03B to .July 24, 1991. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL, MELCHER, TOLSTOY, VALLETTE NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: .Planning Commission Minutes CHITIEA -5- 2$C' - carried June 26, 1991 11 Br °d Buller, City Planner, suggested that interested individuals could telephone the City to make an appointment to discuss their concerns regarding the items. E. ENVIRPNMENTAL_ASSESSMENT_ AND MODIFICATION_ TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 86 -06 - RICHARD STENTON - Modification of conditions of approval to 'allow land uses requiring a more intensive parking ratio than tha.ens provided for research and development (1 space per 350 square feet), within an existing industrial complex on 13.7 acres of land in the rsieral Industrial District (Subarea 11) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located on the' northwest corner of Buffalo and 6th Street - APN: 229- 261 -78. Staff recommends issuance of a Neyativo Declaration. (Continued from June 12, 1991.) F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 91-03 - JAMES PAGE - The request to establis: a .i -mall" (swap mest)V in a leased space of 103,552 square feet within an existing industrial center on 13.77 acres of land in the General Industrial District, (Subarea _1) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at 11530 Sixth Street APN: 229- 026 -28. Staff recommends issuance of a mitigated Negative Declaration. Related file Conditional Use Permit 86 -06. (Continued frcm'��une 12, 1991.) Anna -Lisa Hernandez, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner To,stoy asked what would happen if Condition 6 were deleted from Resolution 86 -78 and the proposed project does not materialize or does not continue as a use. He asked if that could cause a problem. Brad Buller, City Planner, -stated that when the project was first proposed, the Commission felt it was important that the leasing agent advise perspective tenants that the parking ratio is 1/3SO; quare feet. He said if the condition were deleted, the applicant would attll be subject to the same parking requirements. Commissioner Valletta questioned the justification for requesting a parking ratio at 1 /150 for the swap meet use. Ms. Hernandez replied that the applicant had submitted a detailed parking study which was deemed satisfactory to staff. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Rance Clouse, Lee & Associates, 10370 Commerce Center Drive, #100, Rancho Cucamonga, reiterated the applicant had provided a parking study demonstrating that a 1 /150 parking ratio would be sufficient. He suggested the Commission could modify the Resolution to require that the owners notify any, future tenants of the maximum parking ratio of 1/350 after processing of Conditional Use Permit 91 -03 for the swap meet. He requested that the condition requiring removal ? graffiti be changed to a 72 hour dead; "„ine to allow time to act because he felt 24 hours was unreasonable. He thought the requirement for a. Planning Commission Minutes -6- June 26, 1991 28t t, JAML 1 ACKNOWLEDG$MENMS Commission,; Cily Council Planning Dennis L. Stout, Mayor Larry McNeil, Chairman William Alexander Suzanne Chitiea Charles Buquet John Melcher Diane Williams Peter Tolstuy Pamela Wright Wendy K. Vallette Partici2afingfdt9 Staff Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager Rick Gomez, Community Develop! j"t Director = Brad Buller, City Planner Otto Kroutilj .Deputy City Planner Lwxy Henderson, AICP, Principal Planner Dan Colei.;an, Principal PIanner Milo Brett, Associate Planner Beverly Nissen, Associate Planifft Shintu Bose, Deputy City Engineer Rarrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer Betty Miller, Associate CIV'r Engineer j Laura Bonaccorsi, Landscape Designer *imrq Fulwood, Resource Service Director Ingrid Blair, Cartographer � CONSLTL,TANTS PL ANNINGISPECIFIC PLAN TEXT C M Engineering dissociates, Inc.. 225 East Airport Drive San Bernardino, CA 92412 ,1 ENVMONN WATAL IMPACT PAS T REVORT Michael Brandman and Associates 2530 Red Hili Avenue Santa Ana, CA 92705 T NMC STUDY Austin -Faust Associates 2020 North Tustin Avenue Santa Ana, CA 92701 FISCAL ANALYSIS Ernst & Young 10535 Foothill Boulevard, Suite 150 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 O rFRASTRUCTURE PHASING PLAN Planning Network 9375 Archibald. Avenue, Suite 101 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 MU i I FUSE PROTECTION SPfUP�7 Lunt Research Corporation P. O. Box 2a1 v Solvang, CA 93463 DRAINAGE EMPROWAIENT STUDY BSI Consultants, Inc. 1415 East 17th Street Santa Ana, CA 92701 ARCE[ITECTUR AL DESIGN Pekarelt Crandell, Inc. 23672 Butcher Drive El Toro, CA 92630 COMMUNITY DESIGN CONCEPTS - Land Plana Design Groug 14751 Plaza Drive, Suite A Tustin, CA 92680 RESOURCE At iNAIGEMOEN PLAN Michael Brandman and Associates 2530 Iced `1M Avenue y Sancta Ana, CA 92705 fff I4 DR [[IT Alk TABLE OF CONTENTS PART I C,,OAD4UNITY BACKGROUND ...._ . ... - 3 1.0]TRODUCTION , ................. 3 1.1 PURPOSE .. ............ 3 1.2 AUTHORITY' . . .. .... . .. 4 1..3 CALIFGANIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY • ACT C01"LIANCE ... . .... .. .... . .4 1.4 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION .. 5 2.0„TI'IIJ .. .. .......... .. .. R 2.1 LOCATION , . ... ... . 8 2.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS ..................... 8 2.3 EXISTING USES /OYINERSHIP 12 2.4 SURROUNDING USES .................... . 12 I 2.5 EXISTING' GENERAL PLAN AND SPECIFIC PLAN DESIGNATIONS . .. 14 3.0 OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS ............. 18 3.1 INTRODUCTION ... ....... ............ 18 3.2 OPPORTUNITIES .. ........ 18 3.3 CONSTRAINTS .. ......... ...... 18 PART Ii DEVELOP1 M FRAMEWORK ... ...... ... ... a 4.0 roALS AND OBTOC'IT`JiS ........................ 1 4.1 OVERAII, GOAL STATEMENT ....... ... . 1 4.2 CTTYiCOUNTY COOPERATION . ... 1 4.3 COMMUNITY DESIGN ... . .. 2 4.4 LAND USE AND CIRCULATION .................. 3 4.5 PUBLIC FACMITIES AND SERVICES ........... ; 4 = - 4.6 OPEN SPACE AND TRAILS .................. 5 4.7 CULTURAL AND MrORICAL ........ .. 9 5.0 CQhnfl ITY DESIGN CONCEPT .. .. .. .. . 10 5.1 INTRODUCTION . 10 Aft 5.2' 5.3 EXISTING COMMUv'IZ` FEATURES .. . 10 OVERALL DESIGN CONCEPT ................. 10 6.0 LAN-D JM!QDMEPT ................. ......... 16 6.1 LAND USE PLAN ......................... 16 6.2 LAND USE CATEGORIES ....... ............ 16 7.0 OPEN SPACE AND -TRAMS CONCEPT .................. 24 7.1 DEVELOPED PARKLAND ................ .. 24 7.2 UNDEVELOPED OPEN SPACE .... ............ 27 7.3 TRAILS ............................... 28 8.0 CIRCULATION CONCEPT ............... ........ 33 8.1 CIRCULMON IMPROVEMENTS ............ ... 36 8.2 CIRCULATION AND ACCESS POLICIES ......... 37 9.0 SMV-7M CQMEPT ....... 45 9.1 WATER ......... .... 45 9.2 SEWER .................... 47 9.3 SOLID WASTE ............................. 49 9.4 HAZARDOUS WASTE ........................ 9.5 FIRE PROTECTION ....................... . 49 49 9.6 FLOOD CONTROI►I)RAINAGE . ..... : .......... 53 9.7 UTHATIES ......... ...................... 58 9.8 SCHOOLS .................. ........... 58 9.9 LAW ENFORCEMENT ..................... 59 9.10 PARKS ........ ..................... 59 PART Ul DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES ....... 1 10.0 P-F.N OPMENT REGULATIONS .... ......... ....... 1 10.1 GI -aW-L PROVISIONS ...... ............... 1 10.2 LAND USE FMOULATIONS ................... 4 10.3 SPECM REMLATIONS ...................... 18, 11.0 PUMN - QJLT�D.S .......................... 21 11.1 SITE PLANNING ............ I ............. 21 11.2 GRADING .......................... 24 11.3 ARCE[=rURE .. ................. 27 11.4 LANDSCAPEARCHITECTURE ................. 53, 11.5 COM,11UNITY DESIGN FEATURES .............. 75 12.0 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS . .. .... ..... . 99 12.1 CE�ERAT, PROVISIONS . _ .. 99 12.2 SITE DEVELOPhM Yr STANDARDS .............. 99 G PART IV SUBAREA DESIGN STANDARDS ....... .. 1 13.0 SUBAREA DFSC8jEUQNS 4 ....... ... ..... 1 13,1 DAY CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD . .. ... '. ... 1` . 13.2 UPPER I :C WANDt3 WEIGE BORHOOD.SUSAREAS .... 5 13.3 MWAWA CREEK WASH SUBAREA ......,. 9 13.4 SCE SUR14 .-CS" PROPERTY SiJBAREA. .... .... 10 13.5 nM OAKS NEIGHBORHOOD SUBAREAS ..... , . ' .. ' 11 I 13.6 ETiIWANDA HIGHLANDS NEIrIIBORHOOD SUBA1'.EA�a' .. .... 15 13.7 SAN SEVAI E WASH SUBAREA . ...... 19 I 13.8 CHAFFEY NEIGHBORHOOD SU�AIZEAS .......... 20 13.9 DAY CREEK: WASH SUBARIIA . 24 i 13.10 NATIONAL FOREST SUBAREAS . ............. 25 1 PART'V M'iM1VIEi37CA` ION .. ................. 1 '�'F .. ......... 14.0 IAA2f�LENTFNTATIQN- �O.�G�... , 1 14.1 REGULATORY PROCEDMi ... . S < 3 14.2 DBVELOPIV EIdT PROPOSALS ............... 3 14.3 SOURCES OF FINANCING .... 3 _ t PA�F TITLE 1 Regional Context . .. ....... I -9 2 Project S_ *e .. .. ... .1 -10 3 Existing Conditions and Uses ....... ... . I-11 4 Property Ownership .................. 1-13 5 City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Land Use ............ 1-16 6 San Bernardino County Gene--A Plan Land Use .............. 1 - -1 i 7 View Potential Map ... . .I -20 8 Constraints Map . ... . ...... ... 1-711 9 .. . i .................. 1113 Neighborhood Theme Plan ........ 10 a:and Use Plan .. ... 11-17 11 Open Space and Trails Plan ... .... ... _ .....0 32 12 Circulation Plan ...,, ...... .. .. . IL-35 13 Typical Sections (A) Major Divided Arterial Street" ............. 1139 (B) & {C/ Special Divided Secondary Arterial Streets ....II -40 (D) Secondary Arterial Streets . ... .... 11-42 (E) Collector Streets ... .. .. 31-43 . ........ (F) Local Streets ..... • - - _ . .... 11-44 14 Water Master Plan ...... .. .... ...... ; ..... 31-46 15 Sewer Master PIan ................ .............. 11-48 16 Fuel Modification Concept ....... _ ..... ........ 1I32 17 Storm Drain Master 7Ian . ........ ... . 11-57 18 land Use Plan .. .. ....... .... . .111-6 19 - Architectural Tiv'jae.r (A) &(B) Victo ian ...... . .. ..... .11131 (C)&(D) Country . ... .. ..... AI 35 (E)&(F) ` Bungalow ... ... .. .. M -38 (G) &W) Ranch .. .. ...... ..... .. . M-41 - m &(n Monterey ... ..... .. . . ........ M,." (K) &(L) San Juan .... .... .... ... .III -47 M &(N) Santa Barbara Revival ....................... M-50 20 Landscape Theme Plan .... ... .III -54 21 Landscape Theme Section Key Map . ...... . M -55 22 (A 1) Landscape Street Sections .. .. ... ...... M-56 23 Community Theme WalllFntry Monument Plan .. ...... . M -77 DRAFT i L P 24 The Day Creek Neighborhood (A) Day Creek Neighborhood Entry ................. ff 111-78 (B) Slay Creek Neighborhood Entry Section .. .. .... ICI -79 (C) Day Creek Theme WVAs/View FP,-tces/Interior Private Lot Fent as ........ !` ..:. ... 25 The Upper Etiwanda Neighborhood (A) Upper Etiwanda Neighborhood Entry .... +......... M-81 (B) Up1w Et wands Neighborhood Entry Section ........III 82 (C) Upper Etiwanda Theme Walls/View Fences/Interior Private Lot Fences .. ... .. . .........III -83 26 The Oaks Neighborhood ... .... (A) The Oaks Neighborhood Entry' ..... .. M-84 (B) The Oaks Neighborhood Entry Section , ... .III -85 (C) The Oaks Theme .Walls/View: Fernces/Intesior? Private Lot Fences ... .. .III -85 27 The Etiwanda Highlec:dr Neighborhood (A) FAwanda highlands Neighborhood Entry .. . .. M -87 (B) Etiwauda Riighlands Neighborhood Entry . :c,tion . ...III -88 (C) Edwandr; Highlands _Theme Walls/V ew Fences/Interior Private Lot Fences ... . ... 111 -89 28 Chaffey Highlands Neighborhood (A) Chaffey Neighborhood Entry . .19 -90 (B) Chaffey Neighborhood Entry Section . .. .a : .III (C) Chaffe7 ,,7ieme Walls/View Fences/Interior -91 Private Lot Fences .. .. .... ..III -92 29 Equestrian Trails/Fencing .. .. .III -93 30 Equestrian Trail Typical Section .111-94 31 Atmosphere Lighting/Entry Sign Letters . ... M-95 32 Mailbox Treatments . ................ '. .. ....III -96 33 Typical Streetside Landscaping /Driveway Treatments . ........ M -97 34 Internal Private Lot Slope~. Treatments .. ......III -98 35 Planning Subarea Key Map , . .. ...IV -2 'r (RC.EX) DRAFT TABLESIi /,•�1. r, 1 land Use statistical Summary ... ........ . 31-18 2 Land Use Statistical Summary by Neighborhood , ... ..Ii -19 8. Use Regulations for Residential Districts ... .. .... .I11 -8 4 Use Regulations for Commercial Districts . , .. Ill -10 5 Use Regulations for Open Space Districts .. .... M-15 6 Slope Development Guidelines . .... .. . .III 26 7 Plant Materials Palette . .. .. .. .III -68 8 Basic Development Standards - Residential Districts . .. ..W 101 9 Optional Development Standards - Residential Districts . ... . M-103 10 Site Deminsions and Hiigtit Limitations ...... .III 105 11 Setbacks - Commercial Districts ........... - ............III -106 12 Required Buildig Footprints0evations .... .. . JI-52 n , ` APPENDIX NO. 7TT7,E A Infrastructure Phasing Plan ** B M Executive Summary C Mitigating Mani uriug Tian D Fire Protection Study E Resource Management Plan ** i * Document distributed under separate cover ** Document in preparation and will be distribute when compete (RC.EX) DRAiFT I NN PART I' BACKGROUND 1.1 PXBMSE T he purpose ofthe Etiwanda North specific Plan is to guide land use and community design within the north Etiw?nda are.. This will be accomplishers by a comprehensive set of !;tuiations, incentives and community design guidelines, along with related implementing actions designed to encourage optimum development. portions of this area are in the City of Rancho Cucamonga and portions are in the City's Sphere -of -bnuence within the' County of San Bernardino., The goals of the City General Plan and the County General PlanIcan best be met through the specific plan process. Also, the ideals of both public and private interests ran best be realized through the specific plan process which provides a lay link between the General II Plan Goals and specific implementation actions. It serves as 'a means of managing the use of land, establishing provisions for detailed community design wncepts, and 'promotes a comprehensive approach to the implementation of these actions. The ,Etiwanda North Specific Plan is a report consisting of 'next, con�ptuai plans, .design guidelines, and exhibits regulating development within the north Etiwanda area. The motivating purpose for this Specific Plan effort was to create a comprehensive master plan for land use, public facilities and infrastructure, circulation and financing of the impending development of the north E,tiwanda area. The Plan will also address phasing issues for developmettofthearea. Finally, the Plan will providepre- zoning for the Sphere4f- Infiuenre area as a pre - requisite to auu►exation of the 6,840 acre Specific F—�i area to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. j i I - -3 DRAW c r., 1.2 AUTfLOItITY The Edwanda North Specific Plan is estabiishe3 through the authority granted to the City of Rancho Cucamenga, by the California Government Code, Title 7, Division 1, Chapter 3, Article 8, Sections 65450 through t ` 65457 (Specific Plans). The California Government Code establishes ,the authority for alegisative body to adopt an ordinance or resolution requWgg that a specific plan be prepared when it is in the public interest to do s,, `,As with geperal plans, the Planning Commission must hold a public he, ing before the planning agency can recommend the adoption of a specific plan by ordinance or resoWtion. This Specific Plan is regulatory in nature. Upon annvWilon to the City, the Plan md serve3 as zoning laiv for the properties+ involved. Development plans, site plans and tentative tractiparcel snaps 111-this area must be consistent YAth both this Specific Plan and the City's General Plan. The scope of subjects covered in the Specific Plan is the same as thataf the General Plan, to the extent that the subject under consideration involve:- the no{'h Etiwanda area within Me City and the City's Sphere - of- Influence. 1.3 ipd,i tolmfi mTAL. QUALITY ACT COMPLIANCE j In compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and the City of Rancho Cucamonga environmental procedures, and in conjunction with the preparation of the Draft Specific Plan, an Environmental Impact Report (E1R) has been circulated to property owners within the Specific Plan art. - well as to the appropriate agencies for review and comment. The Edwanda North Spec ficPian EIR addresses the potential environmental impacts which may result from the implementation of the proposed Specific Plan, and discusses alternatives and =nitigating measures to actions contained within this docump L The E1R will be utilized in the processing of individual projects wr nin the study area as a "program MV as provided for in Section 15168 of the California Environmental Quality Act. It is anticipated that individual projects will be subject to environmental review by the City of Rancho Cucamonga to determine consistency of the project as described in this . document. A determination may be made that no further environmental. '«t' documentation is necessary. Mitigation measures included in tbic i document may be applied to these projects. However, where individual I DRAIT projects may result in impacu beyond the scope of those examined in this document, further environmental review — possibly in the form of an expand cod initial study or a supplemental EIR — may be required, and additional- mitigation measures beyond those included in this docrvnent s may be imposed. 1.4 PUBLIC P IUCIPATION The Edwanda North Specific Flan. has incorporated a high level of [[ I partic ,ation, from property Owners, residents, City Staff members, I` Planning Commissioners, City Council persons, and developers. as yell staff as County members and County decision makers within the Specific Plan area through a series of workshops and public hearings. L5 PLAN UR IANJ I A TION :.r The Etia+anda North Speefic Plan serves to identify the basic policies = affecting the subdivision, parcel map, master plan or site approval levels, _ and is the fundamental reference for determining basic use, residential densities and standards for development. It provides the framework individual projects must work within if the entire area .; to develop in a sensitive, orderly, ar_d cohesive fashion. The the following plan consists of major'sectioas: 1.5.1 Communf Baclzground The Community rtacsground section describes the setting as well as major opportunitics and constreTas of the. Edivanda North planning area. =r.. 1.5.2 &al§ and Objectives The Goals and Objectives section specifies the foundation for what the Specific Plan is designed to accomplish and establishes a ` framework of specific goals and objectives to be achieved. 1,5.3 QUWLBM The C64t Plans section d6: -Ihm the several component plans fiat form to framework of thl.` ' wanda North Specific Plan. The components address the foll&iing topics: I.5 DRANT ,t Community Design: Provides an overall .community design plan which details various elements that will enrich and enhance the overall character of the community. These include entry and theme walls, fencing, signage. and lighting features, r. TMd.U,%= Includes the overall land use plan and subarea concept plans. icular ,Circulatnon:,,. Descri circulation concepts, design standards, a�ignmentrrdd «nss -�aon standards. Public Ft!%MeC and Services: Describes the planned provision of infrastructure and services to the Specific Plan area. - ..j.4 DevelopmentStandr and uidelines \. The Development Standards and Guidelines section provides the necessary development standards to assure consistency with the Specific Plan objectives and policies. 1.5.5 Subarea Design Standards o " The Subarea Design Standards section describes master planning and unique design constraints of the planning subareas within each neighborhood. 1.5.6 Implementation The Implementation section describes strategiei "'related tc implementation of the Specific Plan: including phasing and financing programs. The Infrastructure Phasing Plan is included in the Appendix of this document (Appendix A -.4). 1.5.7 Environment Impact &Rgrt The Enviromental Impact Report section identifies environmental impacts associated with the proposer( Specific Plan and outlines mitigation measures. The E R was prepared byMidmel Brandman and Associates and is provided as a separate document. 7rbe Executive Summary of the EM (Appendix B) and the Mitigation Monitoring Plan (Appendix Q are included in #he- Almon -of this document . Also included is ft 1-6 ti DIET Rancho Cucamongk I Protection District, Ir ePcotwtion Study (Appendix F 4 P), asd the Resource ManS,,ement Plan (Appendix ltem j E). , I f 2.2 The Etiwanda North Specific Plan area is located at the northeasterly boundary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and is roughly bounced by Milliken Avenue!. the wes t; San Sevzine Creek on the east, on the south by Highland Avenue and Wilson Avenue (24th Street); and on the n;-th by the San Bernardino National Forest. Refer to Exhibits 1, 2, and :." Regioslal Context, City Context, and Project Site. PerVons have recently been annexed into the City and portions %t within the unincorporated.am of the County which an wit ;gnu the City'sSphere- of-Muence. The Specific Plan area comprises approximately" 6054 6,840 acres, of which approx[nately 1,155 acres are beyond the City's current Sphere of Influence. FXBMNG GONDI7IONS Presently the Edwanda North area is primarily vacant land. 'Improvements andfor structures in the area include the Cucamonga County Water District Royer Nesbit Water Treatrowt Plant, Southern California Edison and Los Angeles Department of W.: r and-"-;-%Ver utility towers, and eleven single-family residences. In addition, Tract 13565, located at the northeasterly comer of VtrAwr. Avenue (24th Street) and Wardman- Bullock Road, is now under construction. Refer to Exhibit 3, Existing Conditions and Uses. Access to the primary portion of the Specific Plan area, above Wilson Avenue (24th Street), is presently provided by Wardman-Bullock Road and Edwanda Avenue. Generally, all other access to the northerly portions orthe site an -is by unimproved roadways. About half of the Specific Plan area (over 3,000 acre:} is made up of a gently sloping alluvial fan, including the Day Creek, Edwanda mid San Sevaine Wash areas, An alluvial fan scrub plant community, which is typical of the southern baseDf the San Bernardino and San Ganiel mountains, occupies the alluvial areas. Thelower slapes of the foothills are occupiedprimarily by chaparral habitat. This comprises approximately one-fourth of the plannir-g arm The drainage courses within the fooffift and the alluvial fan area both support a variety of habitat including Oak, Sycamore, Widitut, and other woodlwds. Much of the vegetation in the alluvial fan is temporarily seduced as a result of the August 1989 fires. DRAFT 0 ISM 1 I Aop' LOS .ddmlk� 0 5 10 20 30 MR.Es 2 rWENWN�F. PALMS Etiwapda North' Specific Plaif ciC 66 Lvx:slo 1-9 DRAFT y t`4 s EVABff 2 Etiwanda Forth Specific Thus City et DRAFT L�ftrAhcoicuwm&00"p I -1 C DRAFT t - Front r Line ree Road VACANT LAND - NATIONAL. FOREST AREA j��_,..�- mar ffi r s i • Ea1s4i rdman Creek a `\j _ _-- J � Morse Creek i Et(Sttrfg i e ;_9 Wei t F. a1s41I9OadBuilding i! Spri"r. y 2 RQaldaneae ..I Day ''Tsek Dam' Two #lo es'sn Dr —{ Ranger Station Sher , + ay CP ek C�hailnel i -� rt '' +� C = t ' S� rtdi its • �� � Y. r st�ii' 7n CzQ k Chatutei ®r, fs sds. 28fyac ®%fi y S' rag ttnds � + r is w, tQ vtr tmenYPlw. _ H Basin + a / Ettiatintj,le cle mission U-16' ,t I F3 r:;r ?:•: }.: }}•.; :'•:.� 4erT r7;= 6-- �j'.;aj <�'L •s h ' - � � c aatment P? • � 4' aging Statlan =%�/ Vii_' Cro all � C!!!l!J 7n6cates Property Previously Annexed to Rancho CUCem onpa �" �• �°•� kC us" Orkloe Crosskq awkq Station Levse ,;,• .,L 11actrical Trana niaalon Una /Coal /or 1 ntvlD'..,aer"FrsnsmMion :hs j : T Major Pecharae Area Groundwater EXISMAIG CONDITIONS TIONS AN D USES EXHIBIT a Eff 72 0 0°' 20"'a®rmmis Etiwanrla Worth l ®. Specific Plan. MOIL City of Rancho Cucamonga I -11 DRAFT "1 of special interest is a peat bog (freshwater marsh) of aM,6ximatelY 11 acres, also contained within the Specific Plaa am. The bog is located north of the utility-line towers in the northwesterly portion of the planning area. Th;.; unique feature was created by fracturing, of the Cucamonga Fault. 2.3iL USTS Specific Plgl 71, The Edwanda North 'I ZI.M is a rural area with very little developnient or site improven.antc. As6,-zeribed inthepievious, section, only eleven single-family resider,:es are currently within this planning am. However, with Tract 13565 under c'�snstrucdon, the piemt land owner-dup pattern will begin to change. The present ownership pattern of the pkauung area is.identified on Exhibit 4, Property ownership. Parcel sizes range from 1 � acres to over arate lane,,,,wn 500 ac.r, "-,urrendy w;th a tota-I of 66 wp . ers, 'which ', includes -utility companiei,' County Flood Control, Metropolitan Wer District and private property interests. 2.4 SURROUNDING USES Th. I- area surrounding the Edwan& North Specific Plan is krtmarily rural in nature. However, suburban development is approaching the area from the east where the City of Fontana's Hunters RUge Specific Plan is located, and from the sout'i where the existing. Edwanda area lies within the present City limits. The planning area, is bounded on the north by the San Gabriel mountains and the San Bernardino National Forest. The northerly boundary of the Specific Plan actually includes approximately 1,100 acres of privately owned parcels within the National Forest area. The National Forest area will provide a major open spam vista fur the planning area and the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The easterly boundary of the planning area abuts Hunters Ridge Specific Plm, within the City of Fontana. Hunters Ridge is approved for a total o: 2,121 dwelling units and is separated from the Edwanda North planning area by the San Sevaine Wash. 1-12 DRAW Ben Bernardino Hationst Forest 1 ' 3 ! 1 31 35 32 41 32. 3 ` rl 1 40 `� 4 3 29 3 22 6..: 5 5 •25, 26 38: '7 .-4 — '9 33 _ 25 3 35 38 37 37 2 22 ✓22 '28 34 22 5 38 38 cg 25 2Y 7 4 2' 27 � 47 � 27 - ' 27 _ —r A— 42 2 24. 5 5. ; 5 12145 21 E 2 i 31 42 5 2 ? '13 43 d4. 5 2 ? .2 —'�. p 2 —2 4, 2 2 5•iµ :: '� 2 4 47 50��� 2 S7 16 5 49 4 '52 ;_�, "erg 38 h 2 2 2 4 _. __,�_.t 5 •4� 2 .18, 2 4 58 Is §. 2 pct Y ` ;19 w n lc , St 9 RANDNC11ti UHFFS —_ytyo �. n rj° Fs� a to E Sp.I'Sli 22 4� 9 ±4 ¢ - �1 r;-4 :mLn11r�- TZ I— �C•+e ^�`y. i �. I f .✓ �� . `; 46 q 88 62 65 ' 1 -sin Highland Prop. 23�. lurich 45 Barwick 2 San Bernardino Co. Flood Control 24 Stan$bert7 46 Remington Properties t 3 Landmark land CO. 25 Webeter r8 Pantie t 4 Go. California Edison Co. 23 French yw... ^• - ® 5 Caryn Devaiopment Co. 27 Chq of Loa Angeles 49 1'raigh 28 Morales 50 Sherry +� Gag" Mellon 6 Lavda 7 Smith . 29 Ethvsnfa Heights Day. 51 Madrid 8 Remington. Prop. 30Ctark 52Ventl 9 Regents of the Qnl7 1f Call. 31 Johnson 53 Lyon 10 Southern °anPlus Reulty "ua . 11 Laf;oa 32 isomer fJ 12 Battieste 34 Chao 56 Rodriguez 13 fOgnian. 35 Shang 57 Ahmanson to Little 36 Cordeiro 58 Watt Inland Empire .. 15 Sudeta 37'' Hayward Family Partners 59 Mot's 16 Matra. Water Dist, M So. Cagf. 38. La Poaite 60 DI lorio t 17 Cucamonga Cotiny Water tM 39 Ramsey 6t Kolo IS Wand Empire ltd 40 1i4lvard Martell Poore 62 Chun e i : • t9 f>:anfa'd 41 Pearson 63 Chang 20 L+anf 12 County of San Bernardino 64 Rusted . , 21 Hughes Investments , 43 McNey 65 Watt inland. Empke 22 Chan .: 44 Roach : die United states Government Land Note: PfoCerb' owners are current as of jape 1991 OInd7Lates Property Previously Annexed7o.Rancho Cucamonga PRO s•�TY ULNER�� (j� Ildt iY !!f/ cEXHOl� t 4f D 1 2000• 4000 Etinfandalfseth , Specific Plan city of Aa1s:l11r �ucamoa+g� 13 DRAFT The southeasterly boundary is adjacent to the Etiwanda Specific Plan within the present City limit. See Development the-�He PM ' is' aegimung to occur within the Etiwanda North plag Specific Plan area. Thhe ssagmeste* A, portion of the south boundary runs along Highland Avenue. Located on the south side of Highland Avenue is the Victoria Planned Community which has been built -out from Etiwanda Av rue westerly to Day Cree.: Adjacent to the westerly boundary is the Caryn Planned Community-,.now referred to as Vintage Highlands, which is located fil,'-i Highland ; enue northerly. to Banyan Avenue and from Rochester Avenue westei'y to 1liiilliken Avenue. To the west of Milliken Avenue north of Banyan Avenue is the Compas Rose development. 2.5 EXISTING GENERAL PLAN AND SPECIFIC PLAN IDF�S"IGNATIONS The City of Ra-_.u,_% Cucamonga General Plan has designated land uses within the entire sphere-of-Influence area. The existing City general plan designations as well as the Etiwanda Specific Plan land use designations arc illustrated in Exhibit 5. Along the base, of the foothills the land use d signation is primarily Open Space (OS) and IM— leltie.Residential (HR), In the southerly portion of the sphere- area the land use designations are a combination of Flood Control/Utility Corridor (FClUC) and other Open Space (OS), along with Low (L) and Very Low (VL) density residential. Within the Etiwanda Specific Plan, land use designations are primarily Very Low (VL) density residential _;with; some Estate (ER) and Low Density (L) designations. In addition, a large area of open space remains in the northeasterly portion of the Etiwanda Specific Plan area due to water recharge and flood control need§. nI p ,a use map f s+ s penmft Manning .his CurTe tly, most of the F.tiv.;V °1a North. Specific Plan area is within the County of San Rerivirdino. County zoning is governed by the County General Plan Lard Use Map, July 1989, as shown on Exhibit 6. The County , Cenral Pin, the present land use document governing the North Edwanda Planning Area, also illustrates that much of the area is affected by utility functions and flaw control lands. The developable areas are primer'•` 1 -14 DRAW 41 ds Ne��0. Seeeifk e +ao. 0 1000,• 2000�„,000• LCVCfYV Eft Estate Residential at OU'arAc (Etiwanda Specific Plar.) X14 Very Low Q DMIAc 3 .s LOW 2-4 ouaiAC Mi `ow Medium 4- 8OUSrAC FL /UC' hood Control /Utility Corridor NG Neighborhood Commercial Hillside Residential z ovetawidawe Awe E Existing Schools OE ` Open space © Acquired Park Site GProposed Park Site tom. rM cues aACVn may we he ourtenay ormed N u da, beatlen ana epeNttc. Tin aaPkuen of n alte k an k+aoatk�rver s "Olm Tvr� nand awl m�1 be aywled Ceel' tNro a ew Cfty and ea snow CITY WO - r-111 ��i �t1���1VIC NGA 2 son Bomar no National Forest FW Pb OT PD1 /10 Pf PDt 1/10 Pp LJ z` I� �� ��%ri ►1cJ L _ °l- -- su'mm�fi 'rvenu.4_ t� --- LEGEND: NOTE Numerical reference fdiowitgttaLand PD 1/40 =1 DL 140 ACRES use deaWatlo rt represents alw.adedensity PD 1110 =1 UU /10 ACRES ormWmum parcel size. PD 1/2.5 =1 DU /25 ACRES ® PropertyPrewouslyMnexedto Rancho cucamongi PD 9l1 =1 DU /1 ACHE FW Flo: --ay !10 211 = 2 DUl1 ACHE `,IN Institutional, PD 3/1 = 3 DU /1 ACRE PD Planned Development PD 4/1 = 4 DU/1 ACRE RS Single Residential RS 2GM = 20,000 SO. FT. MW. (IN) Inferred Institutional Designation LOT SIZE GEIV RAL PLAN LAND USE EXHIBIT 6 D 1000' 20M 4000' - t ® Mol Eti North Specifipecifi c Plan City of Rancho Cucamonga 1 -17 DRAFT �f I LJ z` I� �� ��%ri ►1cJ L _ °l- -- su'mm�fi 'rvenu.4_ t� --- LEGEND: NOTE Numerical reference fdiowitgttaLand PD 1/40 =1 DL 140 ACRES use deaWatlo rt represents alw.adedensity PD 1110 =1 UU /10 ACRES ormWmum parcel size. PD 1/2.5 =1 DU /25 ACRES ® PropertyPrewouslyMnexedto Rancho cucamongi PD 9l1 =1 DU /1 ACHE FW Flo: --ay !10 211 = 2 DUl1 ACHE `,IN Institutional, PD 3/1 = 3 DU /1 ACRE PD Planned Development PD 4/1 = 4 DU/1 ACRE RS Single Residential RS 2GM = 20,000 SO. FT. MW. (IN) Inferred Institutional Designation LOT SIZE GEIV RAL PLAN LAND USE EXHIBIT 6 D 1000' 20M 4000' - t ® Mol Eti North Specifipecifi c Plan City of Rancho Cucamonga 1 -17 DRAFT ,.4 3.0 OPPAI 'rirreTr AN COI�TS�'ItAIN' S 3.1?TROIiUCTION The Etiwanda North Specific Plan area incorporates many character traits which: relate to the overcll community atmosphere of Etiwaada. The Etiwanda North area is primarily undeveloped with abundant open space. As developmentpressures reach theEtiwanda W Etiwanda w° areas, it is apparent that a transformation of the area is imminent. - A-,., - i %ed with change are various potential opportunities and constraints i,7zh become the foundason for the Specific Plan. A detailed discussion of project:. area opporhrnities is set forth in Section 13, Subarea IDescriptions. The visual opportunities of the planning area are illustrated of Exhibit 7, View Potential Map; the major constraints are illustrated on ' Exthibit S, Constraints Map. The primary opportunities and constraints are listed below_' 3.2 MEDR`i Dramatic backdrop of the San Gahrxel mountains dominated by Cucamc 4;ga Peak. Relationship to the National Forest for recreational opportunities such as biking and. natural conservation areas. �s impressive distant views from the site overlook the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the valley area. ]Manses of open space and vacant land. s Use of utility and flood control easements and rights -of -way as wildlife corridors and for regional trail purposes. • Opportunity to complement and enhance the historical character of the Etiwanda area. 3.3 C1►l'I'�A11�T�' Flooding hazards associated with the San Sevaine, Etiwanda and Day (seek Wash and recharge areas. I I -18 DT w Potential hazards of earthquake and ,round rupture because of faulting. The Alquist Pr olo Special,:,,Studies Zone for the Cucamonga Fault as well as the City adopts ,4JW Hill Fault Zone necessitate a complex analy(lis of faulting rn� area, s Design constraints imposed by a variety of utility corridors and easements within the planning area include the City of Los Angeli) Department of Water and Power transmission line, Metropolitan Water District pipelines, Southern California Edison transmission lines and unoccupied cz�ridors, and" Cucamonga County: Water District pipelines from Day. Creek and upper Etiwanda Creek. ® The potential for high fire hazard in the area north of Highland Avenue. Fire protection issues an discussed in the Rancho Cucamonga 7Fue Protection District iF M Protection Study, Appendix D. Steeply sloping ground (30% and greater) approaching the National Forest boundary. t ® The - existence of various biotic resources including st eamside woodlands, alluvial fan scrub, a peat bog and stream recharge arms. Wildlife habitat conservation stradEgies are discussed in the Etiwanda North Resource Management Plan, .AVpendix C. San BwtlargNo Mat 10 1 Forest s a --- — __�- — ±ry y Awn LEGEND' •.<, .� .,:. K ra V(ewsw fiegin0 S4tlatt —'— maw View Mina Vkvl - ~ NRL, 000000. Yea.r�t�e, MEW PCJ�'�i16ii�tL MAP EXHIBIT 7 o tnoo' 200W sacra �► Spec fic Plank I _ Q � 4 City RannctY ^�0 DRAFT +xsa Aga \y _ _ San Bamardim Haliomfor.i A t Jill !I ! {{ {�! t 1{ ! t, a �it f� 11 _ ' i • - -' Sag Rybobpy Study Ana a■�wt aaGmas® ......... � arr�aei�` X. ca • 3=✓`i ^: _ hv: 3 I - N ♦ 1� yr 6•Y ,. q {v:•: h —• t - .. r._ _•,.fit_ � �_. .} I - - !� LEGEND y a ».w rgytrr w.. cummm eaaq Waterways flea.+ a station MaW Rectaria Ate. fRecnaige Caaaury �. � !� .�4wwr�rrat Greater TMn 50 CiSI - .. • ( ® S"Ornside Wood" _ t Alw"ai Assoeittlon • l- ft" Wash Association Excessive AW Unstade Stouts IN ter Costal Saga Asocial 1 f SmunicAras o® Alp" doptelo Special 5toCM:Za+a '- oass :�'CN� ACOpteO Special Study Zone COM19TRAIN TS MAP EXHIBIT` 8 .. � Erlwant5a Nortl:� Specific Plan City of 1`21 DRAFT Raiiclto ��cateaaga PART II DEVELOPMENT FRANEWORK 4.0 GOADS Al M OW. Q The purpose of this section is to articulate the goals and objectives for the Edwanda North Specific Plan and begin the foundation for subsequent section] of this plan. Goals are broad statements that define the community's hope for the f ,+bore. They Z are general in nature and do not i,`kdicate when and how these gs As are to be accomplished. ' Objectives are statements of intent that gen -ally guide future decisions in �Tecific topic areas. 4.1 OVERALL GOAL STATEMENT GOAL- The natural and man -made environment of the Etiwanda North planning Specific Plan area shalt be designed anci coordinated to establish a unique living environment while respecting and enhancing the quality of life for pi�eut and future residents of Rancho Cucamonga. In an effort to further define this overall goal statement, goals and objectives are provided for the Community Dtdgp, Land Use and Circulation, Public Facilities and Services, Open bS ,gam and Qihrral and llistoriczd elements of C % Specific Plan. 4.2 CITY /COUNTY COOPERATION GOAL: City /County cooperatioL -k `invited in the Edwanda North area through use of the,Sperific Plain to guide urban development in the City of Rancho Cucamonga Sphere-of-Influence, Pxd by encouraging the County ter also adopt the plan. Objectives II 1 DRAFT r:, • Achieve consistency between City and County General Plan goals. • Consistent with County GenerrlRlan PolicyLI A, encourage County adoption of joint reguiationslplabs whenever possible through adoption of this Specific Plan, City Hillside Development Ordinance, City infrastructure studies, including tL. Cityts TSaffic Study, DMmige Study, and Fire Study, Resource Management Plan, an-4 infrastructure Phasing Plan. • Consistent with County General ran Policy LTEJ 9,d, encourage County, support for anne=tior, of the Etiwanda Noxfh Specit'=,r Plan amen to the City. e Consistent with County General Plan Policy LU 9e, encourage I the County t,,, recognize and implement growth control measures adopted by the City within the Etiwanda North - Sphere- of- Influen�, • Cousisteri ' `yith Caurdy General Plan Policy LU -9,f, encourage the County1to partiZjpate in Joint Power Agreements (QPAs) with the -City to allow for City s County development fees to be collected and dist :6uted accordingly. • Consistent with County General Plan P.r :.iLU9,g, encourage the County, to designate improve�uent levels and Land Use Map chauge� to more closely reflect tie.. - "City's General Plan, per- coning, iufmstrnctvre standards, and d -vO4 -. ;ent standards :within the Etiwanda North area. .._ • Consistent with County General PI?) Plan Policy LU 9,h, encourage the County to designate the ' tiwand Q Nox4h Sphere of Miluence area on the County Le d Use Aflps as v Special Planning area. 4.3. COMMUI 1 GOAL: Creal!e a' cemmuni y design image that re2eets Builds on the unique charriter and charm of the Old Edwa6da area while establishing a distinguishable community Identity within the City of Rancho Cucamonga: i -z aaFr AM f El .1 Qbjectives Create an adendiiiable "sense of place" within the City. by using nati -1 open space areas :aid major artTial streets to define individual neigiborhoods. U�^iize the major open space fei:ture's 0 create a framework for a' system of 1 Wng, biking and egyest i n trails. n Utilize a, streetseape and architectural theme to individualize each neighborhood zrea. o Capitalise oa the view potential provided by the San Gabriel moun acid the valley views of the suffoli.:ding area,. e Promote the use. of a `„tndscape theme than respects climate, d7.,ught tolerantt, soil conditions and ft natural sirmundings. • Promote the use of design Features such as walls, fencing, lihting and 6paZ- y to .enhance t:ie overall community image. 4:4 LAM-T)4'1 4"f A—IM4" ' GOAL- Proi ide a land use pattern is -k it t eyteuAing the low density image of the entire Etiwaudo Into the Etiw anda Not li Specific Plan area in conjunction with a chtolat on system Mat facilitates efficient and safe veldcuia ,,and pedestrian trmfic. St •ec�ives • Decrea-e density as slope and hazard conditions increase iailcng the north -south axis of-ae plan area. • Reserve for open space uses,_ lands on which hazardous coustraints exist and/or which have been identified as needed for preservation of signit'icaut natural resources. • Phase necessary backbone and locall, street improvements, to maximize the efficiency of tr "`tin as Development Ipgresses.' • 'Incorporate grading and site planning technigrs xnsidve to natural slopes and o en spaces. II3 DRAFT 1--'k " - Neighborhoods shou!d W designed with a community focal point, such as an elementary school or neighborhood parL o E.ncourage up to two neighborhood commercial centers designed to provide a village atmosphere. Discourage through traffic brori entering the small neighborhood unit. Mvelop and entrance the circulation in the area by increasing existing street capacititz. 0, Discomage additional traffic along Ethvanda Avenue. • Discourage non -.oval t-afic 1"Toin tm4ersing xhe City on collector and local 'streets. 4 Enwo -rage development of improved access to the 1-15 fi=wa:l tP accomm%-Za4�-, projected traffic and provide adequaFe access &T the future Route 30 freeway. a Tzaffie 1TpcL urIM e.-isting City streets outside of the, Ac Pian area FWzberxj-tigated. * interim -Arculation systems st ill include sufficient portions of tahe ultimate circulation system tc meet, A mitigation measures. 4.5 GOAL- Provide for time-y, li.)fical Imf, effeetWa development of publ7n, facilitlw-qud services. • Censistent with thv City's .Wovvth management policies, infr&.truc, ure cost- chall be bom,ety develortent projecti as R cost of development. 17--e My slw& support formation of a Cor-, 'vdty FeeflWes District fir the parpse of cons&i:dng and a 71,_Jlbpne, WirastmarWre, s,-, stem, kcJu&W4 moor res4i &►WP— URIC, IWPr3 ffW 3S M OVerA Property tax Tate I'AP is set-, q,rwonable level. U-4 DRAn ® The provision of improvements within the EtiwanOa North area' shall seek comprehensive solutions to service and iacilty needs. ase ® The nh&<hig of development .shall be coardLgated with the r development of.public improvements. s. • The public utility systems shall be designed to provide adequate seivjre for the maximum level of the planned deyelopmeaut. i N== y improvements Sit3ll be made to protect all development from flood hazards. 0 Parks shah be phased to be available for use as '- ;r!sidential de~, °` .-jrment occurs, lwnsiaient with the Qu mnby -Act). f i• Acquisition of school sites and construction of schuois shall be G p vvided as- i�ffiees and available for use as residential development oecum with increased school impulation. ® The City shall cooperate with School Distracts in- surport of the; ` formation of Commmilty Facilities Districts for new schools, ink I AQ ?'a_` as an overall property tax rate rap is set and maintained at a reasonable level. a Consistent with County Gedrerel Plan Policy LU Id, encourage the County to support annexation of the Etiwanda North Spec-fic Pian area to the City through an e-quitabRa reiistribution of property tax revcFmes,• ` To further this objective the City shall negotiate with the County to receive the City's b'storic a of Uk- revenue, nr,' :in addition, shall request' a tax allocation sufficient to co k a ` the full cost for police services from the County. -4.6 OUS SPACE AND �'RfaIL GOAL: Preserve the pr a luentand unigae natural environment for water conservation, wild life resources, recreational, and aesthetic purposes by utM- Fang developed, undeveloped and enhanced open space areas. II: S DP..AFT t �� wM j Ob„imtives for Preservapon of'tZpen Sne Maintain, open space where flood, fire, geologic, seismic, or noise conditions may endanger public health and safety and on ea'lity corridors and transportation rights -of -way, lrti rntify and preserve seismic corridors as public open space use and/or for public or private recreation, a ud - - pa4,1no-a ffor exignple golf course use, wits the exception of any structures)rand " Community trails. ® Maintain open space which has been identified as ground water spivading grounds and/or growd water recharge basins. Encourage retention of areas with significant native vegetation and habitat value: s Identify rip3ria:, corridors and preserve in nztarai condi lon wwhere health and safety is not jeopardised, especially in hillside areas. . Identify riparian corridors which n, ist be altered for health and safety purposes, and protect and/or,,restore riparian character following construction of flood control facilities for use as wilds fe corridors and for passive: and/or active recreation. o Identify and prese:` ,i - mas',capable of replenishing groundwater supplies. s Identify slopes in excess of 30% and preserve in natural state. • Help to protect ignificant unique - °+atural areas for ecological, educational ancf sciendfL;study purposes. e Preserve and protect the fkesh mater" bog, along with a 200 -foot wide buffer:of nat rA vegetation, as well as esd the upstream j recharge emlibf area.for .thej?` is water supply,., retaining adequate access to natural hydrological resources, and a'so provide appropriate protective fencing. • Preserve riparian and chaparral habitat at and above *he mouth of Day Canyon. ® Preserve riparian corridors associated with Day, Edwanda, San Sevaine, Henderson, Wardmzn, and Morse Greeks. -B R DRAW 9 !Preserve alluvial fan scrub habitat associations identified within Day, Edwanda; and San Sevaine Washes. - ® Preserve areas An private ownership above National Forest boundary as natural habitat areas through public acquisition or transfer of development rights and/or credits and other appropriate strategies. ii • Fncq :.rage exchange of private ]and above�the National Forest boundary for Forest Service land avaikl!e for development elsewhere. a Ems' Consider clustering of development to retain open space. = • £aeetkW Consider the exchange of publicly- owned iazd within the planning area for private land better suited for watershed protection and open space value. {I • Eneatlege Consider transfer of development rights and/or credits in exchange for dedication,of permanent open space, provided that reociving ;areas are specified and evaluated for ability to receive additional' intensity of use. ' • Yuvesi pate and if feasibfe,- establish a w:'dlife habitat mitigation ='bank fo_ the i urpose of serving mitigation requiremants identified in the environmental assessment for the area. Qb,lectives to Provide Uses'C:ompalft with Qr&n Svace Areas ® Preserve the Forest Service site aad an adequate surrounding area for paridng, trail head, est rooms,' and picnic facilities for public use and enjoyment. ® Permit free movement of wIdlife through identified preservation and mitigation areas, utility corridors, and" seismic easements. Establish equestrian hail standards that are tible -with sensitive to the speci c plate open space objectives and standards while msaintsining the intent of the City's adopted trail standards. o Identify areas and establish trails where bi§ ng, hiking, and equestrian systems are c . —ble. II7 DY FI' i�` �i Permit pedestrian access to preservation and miegatioa areas, - - utility corridors, z^d seismic easemuen2s. ® I?rowde a network of public equestrian; pedestrian, a, ;d. Bicycle trails, including, but- not limited to, utility and Road cont;! service roads and perimeter fire roads adjzcent to and through "qpen space arses. j Liniuit motrized access to utility service ras is for the purpose of maintenance and public safety uses by utility, flood con�rol,. fire, poli5,, and forest servi; a personnel and prohibit n 61irized use by the4general public. Motorized access to trails shall be prohibited, ,,txc ept for trail maintenance or public safety purposes. ® -where feasible, establish parks and schools Aaceat to the O-en space areas and link to the open space trail network. o Link neighborhoed eommerci&l arilas to thi,.iocai, community, and open space trail network. Link neighborhoods through development of the local, commu.+tity, and regional trait. system. Ash Utilize the wmny'utilityfflmo control easements and tights -of way as wildlife corridors to of able wildlife movement through developed areas to the Noth,malForest. . e Utilize natural or enh needy open space areas as a buffer between developable areas and high fire hazard eanycn areas. Preservation of existing watershed areas to rWtec't local groundwater supply. e Piwmote the regional find local trail systems by utilizing the open space c9porturdites within the plannnipa area. • Prowote development of trail: heads for access to the xegional trails. 9 Provide for adequate developed park spate and recreational facilities within each neighborhood. 4.7 CULTURAL AND HISTORICAL GOAL: IdentWy anil Pmerve cultur�l and historical vesaurces, vM& the3pecific'Man area. Owectives * Bstabllisb land uses which complement e;dstinr,,,, culM hitmical resource-4—within tfie,-Sp=fic Plan area. * p.equire noWprojects to incorporate exi5ing-cultural'And historical structuresfhcilLqes into design plan whenevk*r �fewl u fe. Doielop a pubEl. information program "to' pi')mote public awareness of culwal and historical Tmurces mdaa�L the Specift Plan area. Extend t1is hiatorical low dtnsltie� and architeeWral character of the origginalEdwanda community of Rancao Cucamonga northerly andi�esterly. Mr DRAIFT, 5.0 NMI `1`Y DESIGN CONCEIT 5.1 IN!'ROAIT�T'IIOh; This .section of the Specific Plan establishes parameters withir, which the 1 community char, r for the entire Mwanda North area can be cruted. The Commanity Design Plan is primaely Focused qn the cheat ' of aesthetic character. Its purpose is to encourage a visual environment,that evokes a distinctive -as well as unifying image unique to Edwanda North and the City of Rancho Cucamonga: 5.2 MOM COi ti'1' The area within and arouau ine`Etiibda'Ncrth Specitio Plan 'bauadaries offers a variety of nataral and cultural landscapes: l • the narrow canyons and rocky peaks of the .Ian Gabriel mountains; • the 'gentle alluvial slo rs located south CI V6',Uscs. Avenue end the local history of wine, "grape and -citrus -cult4t m the diverse wildlife habitats of Day Creek Canyon; Day Creek, Etiwanda and San Sevair., Wash areas; e the geologiclsmmic effects as evidenced by the &A- created bog mid the adjac nt knoll which rises sharply from the slopia; ground: 5.3 Ojokh. L D—FZPN CON E 5.3.1gighborhoot u The natural open space areas within Elie Day, P.tiwanda and San Sevaine Wash areas, along with the numerous - ttilit-j and flood control easements and, rights -of way: and the major 1,rIonalS such: as Day Creek Boulevard and Wilson Avenue, Le& to define logirel neighborhood areas. These have been dedgrawd.as Day C=k, Upper Edwanda, The Oaks, Edwanda Eaghiand% and Chaffey. T he,lvleighborhoodPlan, illnz` rtCl onExhibit g, combimvarious ,.,mmunity design elementq to create, a sense of place within each, 11 -10 fir' IlILAIT c; I' rA e yet they are 4t .nterreiated with the open space framework. I' Further detain of each neighborhood are providgO in Section 11.5. 53.2 Architecturll ConeeoLs { Each neighbofilood will be individualized hy'variatiom of the traditional Early Cali f4nnia styles of architecture. Within the Early i California tradition a ;variety of styles emerged, including Victorian, Country, Bun jalow, Ranch, Monterey, San Juan and Santa Barbara Revival. Appropriate groupings of these styles are outlined, with respect to the nighborhood concept within Section 11,3, f 5.3.3 Undscaty Archhtectaarst� onceni i The landscape will play a sigg,ficant role in establishing a distinctive character for the Edwa hda North Specific Plan area. Wherever possiole, native plant 4e-:ies shall he used in tho plant palette. The landscakne design is intended to.complement the. open space areas, the National Forest and the built environment of the Lt wands .North area. Again, each ne' hborhood will take advantFge of those features which are m prominent. 0; Palms ra -Elm- sesents used., d%idiift da. - n .s, s _ .a L itafiv , 0 and irefllee am8.!' -feend -e ag- t$iL�C 7' �}�8�4t y V�qu iy�.'iYA {NYifr {L�lZZ��rtp 7,� +„' -etteffi tiM1rff�auprng: -a=ph' f � SiGLivn 1. /' eflandseape Plant materials, as well as materials use for theme wslTs and neighbonccods entry monuments, will es'a,abli * neighborhood identity. , Day ,rase& Boulezard and WIlson- Aranue are designated special boulevards, Day I:, •h =. feature' formal rows of California pates is the median island and formal rows of Camphor trees along the parkway.; Wilson Avenue provides the F+ouAdsry newly reveiomnd II-l.1 DROT Edwanda North. 1n accordance with the Eawanda SP xific Plan, Eucalyptus windrows along the edge of the landscaped <; c parkway-; for Wilson Avenue will emphasize tk � historic boundary. Mediau island and parkv -sy plant materials wilt — r signify change in neighborhoods from east to west. Neighborhood plant palettes are intended to reflect the natural characteristics of the area. Native oaks ira the Oafs Neighborhood will emphasize the transition to tltP',pantains to the north. Willows and sycamores in the El hwa da IDgblands lveighboihobd reflect the wash environment of San Sevaine and Edwanda Creek washes.. Redbud and sycamores will reflect the alluvial, Can scrub character of th nay Creek Nel&borhood. Redbnd and pines suggest transition elements to the foothill environment in the Upper Edwanda Neighborhood. Sycamores and native oaks, along with shrubbery accents Of Toycn and 14atilltla POPPY, suggest the histokic open wash anvirorment characteristic of the Chaffey Neighborhood. There the Ludt environment iate rfaees with open space, the landscape palette shall use informal g'rom.)ings of native plant materials to create a transition area between urban areas and open space. These materials -+vial be compatible with the � guidaines of the b'tre. Pr9tection Study (Appendix D) and the Resource 11bnagement Plan (Apjxm,�Aw tP). Refer 40 Section 11.4 for d-scriptive details of lrn Scapa =terws. 11 LEGEND 1MOAKZK. Ae lwsr.rwenr.et.na . ser•.a+/ar -ronr .nkhn W"! ►Y.aYt �iR. �.n9.n tlr. q... w CYr, iN. Mkt ..nm tAttU tinsif. Ilan � GaiplfOt O.k.. �M ►e.witel CN1wN..'MiM.t. �,aa,,,,,,,® �EUealypttnwe;d a., estwi 'WtICGFLAMD3tuyfraAe.�.r>,. eA.nelxnnr'•M UN ►riet wttM� w tW..utL NiA Cwter W inM= C ry faWW PK Fdbud ag6s.An. w au.b.Y.n rre.s w tie. tf el Kee0ew. tyu Oaibtp w Crn. rrna. Q�ST GYtttmla Syerr r /A1 Attu @rn WAbw iA.. Cpt[K. r iprermea.r N —.—s u, A .. Gnyott Ltw OaKYCaMio(nia.BlaeK Oak x.u.uw wtri...w►w.tn...tu w.umtt.s.ew •rxcw S.n... W .ee.ni. st C{.NrW l.e.rans:OK GwA aowr.n _... —� i l• . ; Caafa is ByCan ora: cw4m uro Otis - +ratan ro...e cr,weet tre.. r c.At«nu ►.t...rWn +..s.. ftdb" /Altic P'aae TA. tMPif11 Ei14�AltOA KC.rawnow .r w cAr.cutuw eF +-j A~ rnt.uw wu n .m r uux ..w w..un aww we Otmao pad Budira& ltoFP Pars /Crape Myrdo M «cent. et an .4 ►..r Me Jxw.w 4* 0" Zr"tdnda Pok" t' •na CMAMT t.iseaorww.r tr een «u:t:w. ar wun 1w 'wa►...tMy MU NIM CwfmW ayeirW..w r -tj Saarw Ltw ai w wtwt. el t...fpn a.ww. rOT@ S&CFCO ftWMy: F.W. O.nW.7thunlW AN NM 0 1000' 2000' ZI -13 EXHIM I a Edwanda Nelth Specific Vin { City of DRAFT Rancho Cucamonga 5.3.4 `4'ultumiResources N'at'ive American res urces. Althoagh r..o Native American artifacts have been found within thr ,Flan area, Shoshonean- speaking Gabrielino tribes are known to have occupied the Etiwanda area and are thought to have used the area. sstor edl resources. In the 5ganisit period the area was used for cattle grazing by the Tapia herds in summer, l�'M of the availability of water. During the early pioneer settlement period, the historic Cucamonga -CqIon Road, a part of the Santa Fe Frail, traversed section 22. It was built iL 1851: O[ utmost interest in the area were the water-, rf x�,s for the year round streams located in the foothills.' rights were perfected by George Day around 187`j andl consolidated by Joseph S. Garcia, a retired Portuguese ssa,a captain, Into the 1000 acre Garcia Rauch. Garcia. built the fast house far the area in section 15. In sammary, early settlement sites include the Old Garcia Rancho house, the Cucamonga -C a`' jon road, a Da; residence, and crock walls adjficent to FAiwanda Avenue. is additioan several homestead sites have been identified, includingtheY.B. Shugart Homestead, C.W SmfthlC.W. Allen Homestead, A. Beinfort Homestead, and the Banbury Homestead. Examples of early use in the area include the George JOhnscod Afiiniag Complex,. a limesto3ne quarry operation, as we;i as numerous ",` examples of early water works. 7'he functioning Y os Angeles Department of Water and Power Transmission Lines, constructed in 1936 to transmit Bouldier Data hydro power to the Los Angeles Basin, also are classified as a historic resource. - 5.3.5 Open Space Network The open space system has been developed "by first defining the appropriate boundaries and uses for the different open 'space elements and ensuring that physical and/or visual accelc is available from appropriate portions of the development. The unusual amount of acreage that is contwIled by public and quasi-public agencies within the planning area has ccgtrilv, ted to the unique open space-network. The open space syst �A i� defined as developed parkland, natural or utAeveloped open space, enhanced open space and trails. Wildlife habitat mitigatian for development within, -,the Specific Plan a ea may ,tae substantial,. ; Chaffey Regional Park, located in tit; Day Creek Snteadinc Grounds, will Mn orpc x3� a nature ipturpreuve center for 1 mitigation areas. - _ r i i i i U -15 DRATT y S C® CEP T lam USL PLAN The overall land use concept is based on dividing the Specific Platt area into the five major neigbbprheods. The neighborhoods were determined by various environmental features such as topography, natural drainage paths and cirt ulatien mutes. a neighboehood has been dangned around a th rye based or, the existing unique `eaturos in the vicWty. See Exbi&t 9, tho Neighborhood Theme Plan. The DAY CRRgK neighborhood theme-, ,M W irfluenced by the existing Edwanda area &e ,dcpmew and the Alluvial Fan Scrub character, of the Day Creek Neighb&b -- -od and adjoining Day Creep Wash area. The UPFM ET1WANDA neighborhood is intended to be a transitional zone be=tween EfiwwK1*eW the *ePft all :vial fan scrub sees :e-tite ne�h and the VoothM environment., The 'OAKS neighborhood is intzndf d to reflect the trr;.Wtion to the mountains to the north and the character of the upper Day Canyon area, with gwves- efee�s-eed native oaks and accents ot^.�alifornia Walnut -end: The ET.lWl+:AD1 HIGHLANDS sr-1 hburhoxt reflects the wash environment of G,.:i Sevalne and EtM ands Creek washes and dralms upon elements found in the ripar'an enviromMat of the foothills to the north. The CHApp"EY nL. ,borhood will be influe=nced by the historic open wash and alluvian fait scrub habitat areas to the weA and east created by the Deer anti Day Creek drainages -Peer PelFantmaL,fea e- weal- s�esst. ^haraeteustic plant materials include native Sycamores and Tayon shrubbery. 6.2 LAND USE C AMGQR . The planning area has bin designed w a composite;, prirJmi y of residential land uses and'opaj space to retain thr character of th. area (See Exhibit 17, Land LTse Wan, Section X0.2)'• Spedfi% ly, these land use •.:%egories consist of the following components, and are lisbad oil%. Tames 1 and 2. ri 1"0701-02 o SEPTEMBER 11, 1991 P.C. AGENPA 11 of 13 � (cast Forest .EGEND .. '- a dL Veiy Low Density Residential (c2 DUTAC) �E Proposed Mk Hosd .� Very tow Residential Estate (( DUTACr Proposed Equestrian Facility a std- HUside Residential (c2 DISINet Buildable Acre) Nillside Residential Estate Kt. DU /Net SUIlds41e Aare) j c� 4J Proposed Setwot Site P Q Proposed Park ['Is 2C Flood ControifRiparlan 7C Utility Corridor P Existing Park Sat* )S Open Space * jt N. institutional TIM Moe rl.i..>..T ..f Lr N(Mny n.nN .tt M" M..Uen r1...0i1 TM _ oowuo+ ef. rte M Mta..o et. .rl.<f.a W= m.. M — T...60— d .EGEND .. '- Low Density Residential (2 -4 DU /AM) dL Veiy Low Density Residential (c2 DUTAC) �E Proposed Mk Hosd .� Very tow Residential Estate (( DUTACr Proposed Equestrian Facility a std- HUside Residential (c2 DISINet Buildable Acre) Nillside Residential Estate Kt. DU /Net SUIlds41e Aare) j c� 4J Proposed Setwot Site P Q Proposed Park ['Is 2C Flood ControifRiparlan 7C Utility Corridor P Existing Park Sat* )S Open Space * WOTE: N. institutional TIM Moe rl.i..>..T ..f Lr N(Mny n.nN .tt M" M..Uen r1...0i1 TM FZ .Fault Zone oowuo+ ef. rte M Mta..o et. .rl.<f.a W= m.. M — T...60— RQ Resource Conservation Area ...r t.n.,. ,n. Cry anT ua sq..a M.ukt NMMf• MC) Neighborhood Commercial L,VL,VLE,RC) roTSwTULrurunawoussoaswu•Twrqqp� L�`8N �+ !_9J L E FLAN EXHIBIT 17 Pr9 wands North Specific Plan J Ct1ty of I� -a% DRAFT Rancho Cuctnonga <a ` TABLE 1- ETJTW,ANDA NOR 11H S'PECMC PLAN LAND USE S'LrATIMCAL SIABIARY t" LAND U5): ACREAGE DWELLING POl?ULA�� UNITS ESTIMATE Re,Sidential (net AC) 2,112 3,157 10,830 j Major Roads* 90 ; Commercial (two sites) 28 Public Facilities 179 School (i elem/1 high) (70) Park (5 sites) (66) E,;C1estriaII (I Site) (36) Institutional (1 site) (7) Open Space 4,41 .' Utility Corridor ** "Other Open Space (741) 3,701 TOTAL 6,840 3,157 10,830 These statistics represert City staff recommendations $rr land use designations in the ENSP area. * City excludes Major Road AG from net Ref AC ** Estimated AC: need refined map analysis (RC.T10) 11-18 DRAT <a V TABLE 2 - ETIWANDA NORTH SPECIFIC PLAN LAND USE STATISTICAL SU1 -MARY BY NEIGHBORHOOD NEIGHBORHOOD '..AND USE ACREAGE DWELLING POPULATION UNITS ESTIMATE day Creek R:sidential (net AC) 221 662 2,270 Major Roads* 21 Commercial (1) 15 ' hiblic Facilities 21 School (1 elenf, (10) Park (1) (11) Institutional (0) Open Space 110 Utility Corridor** (110) Other Open Space (0) Subtotal 383 662 2,270 Upper Etiwanda Residential (net AC) 557 1,208 4,143 Major Roads* S Commercial 0 Public Facilities 73 r_ i School (1 elem) (10) Equestrian (1) (51) Park (1) 20 Institutional (1) (7) Open Space 465 Utility Corridor** (232) OIL= Open Space (233) Subtotal 1,221 1,208 4,143 The Oaks Residential (net AC) 397 278 953 Major Roads* 0 Commercial 0 Public Facilities 10 C7ehcol (0) Park (1) (10) Institutional (0) Open Space 603 Utility Corridor** (135) Other Open Space 468 Subtotal 1,010 278 953 * City excludes Major Road AC :rom net Res AC ** _ est. AC: need refined map anal) its I1 -19 DPW ,T (KC. 111) - City excludes Major Road AC from net Iles AC as _ esL AC: need refined mep analysis 6.2.1 Re9d@.*9fid 6.2.1.1 Hillside Residential District= The ` Hillside Residential District permits single- family residential dwellings either on separate lots or clustered together in u buildable area along with accessory structures only. Most uses, other than residential dwellings; are deemed to be too intensive and not consistent with the General Plan. The only exception being on the upper alluvial 'Rees, where some conditional uses msv, be compatible. The maximum dwelling unit density miry not exceed two units Per net buildable a:re (as defined by the City of Rancho Cucamonga Development' Code [Development Code] Section 17.18). 6.2.1.2 hillside Residen_t< fate iRi;l The Mnside Residential Estate district is intend`e to permit limited residential development ih the more rugged hillside terrain in the northwesterly p,t,,rlion of the Specific Plan area. Uses other than residential dwellings are deemed too intensive within this area ana 'rot consistent with the General Plan. The maximum deg iliq, shall not exceed one dwelling unit per net builds, Ae acre (as 'defined by Development Cade Section 17.18) 6.2.1.3 Very Low Residential District_ i/ This district is intended as an area for single family residential use with a minimum lot size of 20,OW square feet and a maximum residential density of up to two units per gross acre. 6.2.1.4 YM LDw Rgaidenti Estate District (VLEI This district is intended as an area for estate lots with a minimum lot size of one acre and a maximum density of up to one unit per gross acre. I� j U-21 DRAFT 6.2.1.5 Low Residential District This district is intended as an area for single- family rsidential use, with a minimum lot size of 7,200 square feet and a maximum density of four units per gross acre. In all residential categoelcr y /except Hn, additional uses may be compatible with th*. residential area. Such uses may include ch►rrches, day care centeis, park-and-ride facilities, golf `course, tennis club and other uses as outlined in Table 3, Section 10.2. 6.2.2 ,Commercial 6.2.2.1 W ;i_ghhnrhoad Commercial (I3C1 This district is intended to provide areas -for immediate day - today convenience shopping and services for the residen'3 of the immediate neighborhoods. Site development regulations and performance `standards are intended to make such uses compatible to and harmonious with the character of surrounding residential or Tess inter. land use areas. Both locations shown as (NC) on . the Land Use Plan (see Exhibit 17) are provisional in nature. Proposed development within the NC district will J \ire permitted only when substantiated by market,studies. Xppropriate lot consolidation will also be a key factor. iie. underl*g residential district shall prevail until the fir, - PlannefIllanning CommSssion determines, based on market analysis, that a NC project is desirable at one or both locations. 6.2.3 OM Snace ll'et c 6.2.3.1 awn Space District (OS) The OS district is intended primarily to protect environmentally sensitive land and areas of extreme slope (over 30%). The use regulations, development standards and criteria are intended to provide low intensity development {1 dtm{48 -ae (not to exceed an average density of 1 dwelling unit per 40 acres) and encouragement of Fecreational activities and preservation of natural resources. ;^ 1 11-22 DRAFT - 6.2.3.2 Flood Control - 9gen Sgm District (FCl This district is intended to allow necessary flood control facilities including groundwater recharge basins, channels, levoes, maintenance roads and bridges, diversion drains . and similar facilities to protect the public health, safety and general welfare from hazards of flooding. k 6.2.3.3 Utility Corridor - Ooen ,pace District iUCI This district is intended to allow certain land uses within utility corridors which could be compatible to both the utility function which includes high voltage transmission lines, regional water transmission pipelines, and surrounding existing or proposed land uses. 6.2.3.4 FauIt Zone - Own Spa_ rp District (EZ) The purpose of this district is to maintain as open space the areas where identified faults are located to protect the public from the dangers of ground rupture during a seisnic evant. Tir(< primary use of these areas will be trails and landscape corridors — 6.2.3.5 6.2.3.5 Resoource Conservation n,pace District tit9C" The purpose of the RC district is to preserve areas of significant native vegetation and habitat value. The habitat preservation: and mitigation areas shall be preserved in ar undeveloped natural state. JJ I I I II -23 DRAFTS 7V , IN 7.0 OPEN M&CE AND TRA.S CONCEPT One of the primary goals in developing the Edwanda North Specific Plan is the establishment of a comprehensive open space system (see Exhibit 10). The unique characteristics of the natural environment, including thenarrow canyons and rocky pea's of the San Gabriel mountain and the diverse biological and wildlife habitats found in the bog, and Edwanda and San SevaineWash areas, are included in the Edwanda North planning effort to ensure that these features become an integral part of the community. This can be accomplished by defining appropriate uses for the various open space elements and providing visual and/or physical access to diem from other portions of the development. Complete connection of the open space system, along with the provision of substantially ,moie open spac.- than is typical, is possible in Edwanda, North because of the unusually large amounts of acreage controlled by public and quasi-public aggencies, pursuant to negotiation of joint -use agreements. In addition, open space to the north, west and east ' is protected by existing National Forest and potential park and conservation lanids. The open space areas provide an abundant resource Ibr community design, active and passive remeation, and wildlife babitat conservation. These natural areas,, plus areas of landscaping and trail developmentas part of street rights-of-way, provide the major elements of the open space n( twork. The open space ilciwork provides opportunities for pedestrian,.rquestd2n, and bicycle transportation links throughout theEdwanda North community. The open space plan components are described as developed parkland, natural or undeveloped open space, enhanced open space and trails. 7.1 DEVEM)PED AlVID Parks are a high community priority in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. A hierarchy of parks is included.,"Ahe Mwanda North Specific Plan. Park designations, as shown on tlitliand Use FUm, Exhibit 17, and the Open Space and Trails Plan, Exhibit 10, are not site-specific, and are shown to m&-.ft the general location of parks within a neighborhood area. Improved park sites will be reqvired as a condition of developmenL Park development shall be to the specifications of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Community Services Department and Coramunity Develq,ment Department. U-24 DRAFT` a 7.1 p. Regional Park. The purimse of the regional park is to provide unique recteatioml opportunities for the West Valley area of San Bernardino County. An opportunity exists to establish a regional park in conjunction with the 200 -acre wildlife habitat preservation and mitigation area within the Day Creels Spreading Grounds. A"istorkay, a regional park has been identified in the vicinity of the Day Creek Spreading Grounds as Chaffey Regional Park. The primary purpose of Chaffey Ri2gionai Park ^vihin the Plan area will be passive recreation compatible with the habitat preservation xaluiYenent for the area. Trails are a compatible use and shall be permitted. Active recreation is not permitted with:' 1 a mitigation area, however, an area adjoining the habitat mitigata to area could be established for compatible, but more intensive uses, including picnic facilities, day- useplayirg fields, equestrian trailer- in facilities, rest rooms, and parking. Development of County fey Regional PayxvM would rWpire an County a ' "ter r aponsormp. 7.1.2 cammaility poilagli n Center An opportunity for a minimum 25 -acre eoff hinuaitk--eF equestrian center exists widtin atloining the Day Creek neighborhood on 55 acres of Southern California Edison surplus land. The site has exccllent aceda to the community and regional trail system planned wid in.tire utility, '' ,)rddors. The same utility corridors also provide a boundary for the site on the north and south. Day Creek Boulevard provides the western boundary and Cucamonga County Water District's, Royer-Nesbitt Water Treatment Plant provides a buffer to the east of the site. " The provision of a community egnesV= center is in addition to the park requirements. The purfwse of:the equestrian center is to provide boarding facilities in lieu of equestrian -size lots in order to be consistent with the rjpirements policies and objectives of the Equestrian Overlay District of the General Plan. Since the equestrian center is mitigation in lieu of equestrian lots within the Specific Plan, no park credit shalt be awarded for the center. An equestrian center shall include but not be limited to the following: U-25 DRAFT ' a buffer between equestrim use and rpsidential development a buffer between equestrian use and other active sport uses access to con,7,xuiiity andregional trail facilities. Contribution toward the acquisitivi and development of the equesvian center shall be a condition of development for all tracts which have a minimum lot size of less than 20,000 square feet wh-'% are within the General Plan Equestrian Overlay District. mamtenarice shall be supported by use fees. it is expected ' that the facility will be operated through a lease arraiigem,;nt. 'Acquisitioa and development of the equestrian center shall be consistent with the Etiwanda North Specife Plan liffiastructurePbming Plan (Appendix Item The- imighborhood park needs for the SWIfic Plan area me discussed in Section 9.9. However, potential neighborhood park facilities are de3cribed in this section as they relate to the Open Space Plan. A minimum of Rye neighborhood parks shall be Invvided within the Etiwanda North Specific Plan area. The purpose of a neighborhood park is to provide "walk to" recreation facilities serving a one-mile radius and shall be cenwAy located within each At least one neighborhood park shall belocated in each of the five Efwanda North neighborhoods. Consistent with the City's General Plan goal, neighborhood parks shall equal 5 acres per thousand population: Day Creek - minimum five acre unencumbered site, 11 acres total required. Upper Edwanda- minimum five acre unencumbered site, 20 acr-es total required. The Oaks - minin►um 9.4 acre' lima k site Etiwanda Highlands ., minimum five we unencumbered site, IS acres total required. Chaffey - minimum 10 acre unencumbered site (includes S acres for the Caryn Planned Community park development.) Where feasible a neighborhood park shall be located adjacent to a school site and joint use facilities shall be encouraged. HnwPver, cach facility shall be of adequate size to be a Rand -alone fccaLty. Neighborhood trails and paseos shall be located within adjoining developments to provide internal access to the park sites and Community trails. Also, internal paseos shall be encouraged to provide open space that is accessible to the public. A neighborhood park includes such facilities as: rest rooms; tot lot; picnic areas; baseball/softball, footban and soccer fields; and basketball, volleyball, and tennis courts. Park design and the type and number of facilities shall be subject to the review of the Park and Reemation Commission. Lighted playing fields shall mat be permitted above the double utility, corridor nor adjoining any resource conservation area or wildlife corridor and shall be discouraged throughout the plan Area. 7.2 Ems' P OPEN SPACE open space is the most prominent feature of the Edwanda North area. opc space is expected to remain a prominent feature even after urban development occurs, because of the proximity of the San Bernardino National Fo.. --st which forms the northern boundary of the area, large areas of stee-r, unstable slopes in the hillside area, numerous riparian corridors, groundwater recharge spreading grounds, seismic easements, utility corridors, and wildlife habitat preservation areas. In addition, undeveloped open space is necessary to preserve the watersheds of Day, Edwanda and San Sevaine Creeks, and the riparian corridors of the Henderson, Wardman and Morse tributary creeks. The existing spreading grounds for the Day, Edwanda and San Sevaine Creeks is an important source of water for Cucamonga- County Water District ! (CCWD). The Day Creek Sprea *ng Grouzis ;hay also be suitable for i the development of the-greP � 3 a Counter Regional Park. // 11-27 DRAL�T Upper Day Creek Canyon and upper Eflwauda Canyon also supports significant riparian habitat Sueh _8 seietees- Access to t#is these areas will be_via a developed trail to the CCWD diversion structures, with informal access only above that point. Also intended for preservation is the bog which features vegetation which is distinct from the surrounding area, and supports wildlife that would otherwise not survive on the adjacent slopes. This We b area. The recharge area north of the bog must also be protected to ensure long -term preservation of this distinct feature. Access maybe restricted as to numbers and time of year. II-e area north of the southern boundary of the : :northern'branch of the Cucamonga Fault is not recommended foie development in order to protect the bog and acij�Aning stands of alluvial fa( scrub habitat, as well as significant riparian woodlands. 72.1 Enhanced OM Space The Enhanced Open Space c4 ]ept shall be used in areas where a transition zone is necessary between developed and natural open space. This concept may also be utilized in areas where revegetation, slope stabilization or fuel modification for fire protection is required. The landscaping in these areas shall utilize native trees, shrubs and ground covers having fire retardant qualities for revegetation of disturbed natural areas and as well as to develop dte-� transition zones between urban development and natural open space. 7.3 T A$ 1 Trails provide links among all elements -of the Etiwanda North open space system, as well as the residential areas and the community. The trails (see Exhibit 10) for hiking, bicycling and equestrian uses, connect the regional trail system, as designated by the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan and County Regiontd Master Plan, to the community and local trails provided through each neighborhood. The community level trails provide access to various features of the commurAty, ,including parks, schools and community centers. U -28 DRAFT I Safety, ambibnce, destinations°, anlrecieation were considered in the trail system for Edwanda North, Moa' f the trails have been established as Hops ,-c ', #{ M1erent lengths, allowing the user to return to the point of origin. ' "iiraPsl also connect major and minor- wmmunity features ai d provide access acyond the immediate community area. A hierarchy of trails has been established consistent with the City of Rancho Cucamonga trail plan and guideline: The community trail'is . typically a dedicated rig:rtof- -way, 20 feet in width, maintained by the City. The local feeder trails and local paseos provide circulation through individual subdivisions providing general access to the Community trail, The local equestrian traits are typically dedicated easements that are maintained by the homeowner. The local paseos are dedications that are maintained by the City. 7.3.1 Regional Trails Regional trails compatible with the County of Sam Bernardino regional trail system shall be dedicated as a condition of development. Regional trails are multi- purpose pedestrian, equestrian, and bicycle trails and may be located on utility service reads, including the Front Line Fire Road; utility corridors; and San Bernardino County Flood Control District service roads. 7.3.2 Community Trails Community trails shall also be constructed estal)IiAed and maintained as a condition of development. The community trail network shall provide links between local and regional trails,: (, schools, parks, open space, commercial areas, and neighborhoods. Where feasible, Community trals shall be located adjacent to open W space arras, as well w, along special streets such as Wilson Avenue (24th Street). 7.3.3 I&W Trails and Passeos The local equestrian trails shall be constructed est$ ld" as a condition of development within the Very Low Fpd Hillside Residential District planning areas where the minimum. lot size is 20,000 mum feet. The purpose of local trails is to provide safe equestrian az.,cess to the community ar[d regional trails. 1129 DRAYT The local paseos -3ha1 be provided within all development where lots are less than 20,000 square feet in size. The paseos are intended to provided pedestrian. access to the community and regional mult%use nail system. 7.3.4 Bicycle Traits Three levels of bicycle Trails are provided within Etiwanda North and are reflected on the Open. Space and Trails Plan and the Typical.8tneet Sections with the Circulation Plan (see Exhibit 12, Section 8.1). The Class I Bike Path is fully separated from automobiles either in the parkway or, in some instances, within utility or RcQA control corridors. 7.3.5 The Mass II Bike Lane is striped on the roadway to provide a separate lane for bicycles. The Class II Bike Lane is appropriate on streets of rmdcram traffic flow and sufficient width to accommodate a 5 -foot wide lane. A Class III Bike Route is only a signed bike trail, with no separation between bicycles and automobiles. Most of the Meyele —trails Class I Bike Path's follow major roadways, and will typically consist of special paved and landscaped bicycle trails set apart from the street, or Wough and along the edges of open space/park areas. Bike stands will be provided, convenient to public buildings, shopping areas and parks. Walkers are the most flexible in their trail requirements almost any grade or any surface front finished concrete to cross- country is acceptable. For these reasons, waldng/hiking can be combined successfully with equestrian use on unpaved, natural area trails and with bicycle use on off- street paved surfaces. Walking trails are intended to provide an easily accessible natural trail for walkers and joggers, vAth the possibility of developing a par course on one. The community sidewalk system and shared,_. use of some bicycle and equestrian trails will provide the necessary access throughout all neighborhoods to their local parks, schools, and services. Shade from trees and large shrubs wilt be provided II -30 DRAFT -1 1 i D along major streets and wherever feasible in nat :, i areas. Seating areas ;should be provided where agpsopriate. MA Trailli -.ad At least one trail head with easy access to major roads t:nd bicycle and 3yl; strian trails should be provided. A second tt bead is desirable. The traA head should provide rest room facilities or have access to nearby Ziublic rest rooms. Parking should be available, including horse trailer Bees. in addition, it would be desirable to include hitihing pasts; water troughs, bicycle stands, benches, drinking fountaft —, and shade structures. the site immediately adjacent to the Day C' yon Flood. Control area provides a potential trail head location. A site north of the ZLADWP utility corridor and east of Wardrnan Bullock Road is also desEmable. (See Open Space/ Trail Plan, E: iibit 10). 7.3.7 Deveioument' RCquirements City of Rancho Cucamonga Frail Development Standards are incorporated into ilus Specific Plan by refeience. It should be noted that trail crossings shall be located at stree�- intersections, with a preference for controlled intersection crossings. Permission in writing, shall be required as a \condition of development for improvement and/or use of utility easements, Flood Control District roads and/or property for park and trail development. Special consideration shall be given for the development of trail crossings of Wilson Avenue at the San Sevaine and Edwanda Greeks. Ramped access under the bridge :along the Flood Control dike: shall be provid.�d, if possible. { 8.0 CIRCULAUON COQ This section addresses vehicular access and circulation. The Circulat14 Flan, Exhibit 11, illustrates alignment of all major and secondary arterials and collector streets. Austin =must Associates has prepared a detailed traffic study for the Specific Plan and the surrounding area. A copy of the Traffic Study can be found in the Appendix ftin Wbr6 �:of the EIR. The ncimary conclusions from the Traffic Study relati} :._he Edwanda North t Specific Plan are as follows: 0 Of major mpartanNe to the Specific Plan area is the piamied construction of the SR-30 sway, which will be located just north of fT:ghland Avenue. The tinning of the freeway is of significance to east-west traffic flow due to thelimited existing capacity on Highland Avenue (ivo =;es). The constru zon of SR P, -rough Rancho Cucamonga is assumed to tie - complete under buildout; atiops of the Specific Plan (year 2010). The design of the freeway wr cap l.: interchanges at either, onemile or two mile intervals throw' ' pity. if one -mile spacing is utilized, interchanges within ` .€ 3 'fin Plan area are anticipated at Milliken Avenue, Day Creeg.,ieulevard, and Fast Avenue. If the two -mile spacing IAMIL is utilized, the only area interchange will be providcd at Day Crwk Boulevard. ,, - , . _ ear, a h �38y- £- reelF$et�lv°Y�Fd;-tiie-ei� . . at t€ ere: The Truffd"ac Steady analyses the most likely scenario at this wcfitia ae interchanges at Milliken Avenue and Day Creek Boulevard, with the East Avenue iAterchange deferred until after 201;. • Day Creek Boulevard wnli sUst3in the greatest traffic impact. Immediately north of La ~ 1., - ADT ♦ - 34,1 iSR-30YYn eampletedwes"'I.S. '—.the eenneefien Us --- SR 30, Da.y Creek Eoulevard is projected to carry around 31,000 A1DT at project- builOout, compared to 13,000 under "no project" conditions.. South of SR -30,; the project is responssibie. for 9000 of the total trips in the yeas;, 2010. 11-33 DRAW j I • Access to the existing Devote (1-15) Freeway is provide) at the eastern boundary )f the study 'area by Cherry Avenue now and potentially by Wilson Avt ttpe an the Nture. • The combined prolecUou of 22,000 ADT m the new eas -west facilities will require six loves crossing Day Creels Channel. If for any reason only one dossing is available at build- oui,,a four lane facility (or two= i m) could handta he trafric, ',but My G:4 k Boulevard would be 'further, imparted by as much as :!.0,000 ADT • ` The prhnary onvsite mitigation measures that Must by construcw or f1mded by deveicpment within the 5petific Plan area ian.lude the extension of Wilson Avenue (across the Day Creek Wash) and 111i1likesn Aywiue (northerly) to reduce volumes on Highland Avenue•,, the prov&La of at least one two east West facility lies ir. addition try -and .two padeigagy L7 advance of, Wiisa Aveaue (Banyan Avl :de " ,d Vintage Drive), and the ^.umpletion e*tendog of Wilson A lenae beEw2en !tray Creels Boulevard and fie the east City li�cs Additional off -site mitigation measures include the extension, : jjay Creek Boulevard to Rise line !toad, Bast Avenue to Hng 'c Avenue., and Cherry Avenue to �•�'s US well as mlSeenaneoing interSeWon iusprovemeats throughout the City. i AMIL l ( 11-34 r� Sen BOM Uatlonsi Forsst f 1 — ` — aso, CURVE RADIUS. 1 t --3- -- -- - -•� _ �� !� t yla . . r r ! A3 Al Al t i xnt onAvewe 1 ✓. •= NllsonA venue. — Wes, 3 ' i� Banyan Street • _ ;,,\ ~ ®ice _ " ^: arts Awns uture5'.R: 0� LEGEND t w••�• wv,a sp�°+ro Ff.. cwaimiuma Major Divided Arterial A! Typical Section �•••,�••.® •Day Creek Soulerard. - 6e9Otg Snuon a m�n■ Special Divided Second ry Arterial •Wdson Avenue (east a( DnY Creak BtKU Secondary Arterial '�.. •Million Avenue. £tiwanD Avenue -Cherry Arenas -LCperDey Creek Boulevard �. Qieny AveMle Collector 'Banyan sine. ' -PwG aster Avam_� Vintage Drive %Vardrtmn au4Ock FIOAd •Summit Avenue -East Aware* •San Savaine -other Loco Streets CIRCULATION PLAN tiEXHIBIY t i o ao)O 200o soo(r EwaeZda Nortiit Specific Plan City of 11-35 DRAFT Rauchb Cucamonga i I r � 1 i 8.1 Ci QUI ATIION DIPPROVEMF.IdT'S / We can anticipate :significant increases in vehicular u.fo with the ;. development of the Edwanda North area. To accommodate futi: to traffic projections, the following specific improvements are necommer.'• red., Vie Ohvulation Flan is shown on Exhibit 11 and the typical sections illustrating each street-classification type are shown on Exhibits 12 -A through F. 5.1.1 Wilson Avenue t u (Daly Creek Boulevard to east City limit) to be constructed as a Special Divided Seco-ndary Arterial Street. (Milliken Ave ",auP toi ay Creek BouIev, � urd) tope constraeted as a Secondary 61erial Street. 5.1.2 Da:�C- .reeh B1pgle ar (Wilson �kvenue to SR-30) to be constructed as a Major Divided Arterial :street. Upper pay Creek Boulevard (Wilson Avenue to Lower Crest Collector) to be constructed as h Secondary Arterial Street. v-4-vme to Pay Greek Seeepidary . 8.1.3 BaMn due Street r (Rochester to 4,000 feet eaet`bf Rochester) to be constructed as a Collector Street. J+ 8.1.4 ®intage Driee (Rochester to 4,000 feet East of Rochester) to be constructed rn a collector street. ;I i 8.1.5 Milliken Avenue (Wilson Avenue to �3an Street Vie) to be constructed as a Secondary Arterial Street. jI -36 D. t a r- r 8.1.6 Eflwanda Avenue (North of Wilson Avenue) ha, Avzdy received tentative tract approvals as a secondary arterial street, although downsizing may be feasible with further development if future trBWxc - studies warrant. 8.1.7 Fact Avenue (Wilson Avenue to Highland Avenue, off-site) to be constructed as a Secondary Arterial Street. East Avenue north of Wilson Avenue will be constructed as a Collector Street. } 8.1.8 Other Collector Streets ns ^Shown 01129h'211111 1, Sufficient internal circulation shall be provided to permit two means of access to all portions of the de.,`4)ed area.. 8.1.9 Onite and Regional Street Ymprovemenis A number of off -.site street improvements that are of key importance to the City circulation system will also be included as mitigation measures, as outlined in the Austin FaustTraffic Study (Appendix Item No. 6). The off -site mitigation measures involve contribution to regional improvements such as SR-30 and portions of the City's backbone street system. An explanation of City's backbone system, as well as a description of all off -site mitigation measures is included within the Traffic Study. 8.2 -C CULATIUPd ACCESS PiD In ord_=:o ensure .the effectiveness and capacity of the circulation plan, it is ,pcessary to establish and enforce--a pegina kolicies. 1. 1 8.2.1 Policies Intended-for-0,91 �^r � "mss the Ft6w Area The policies which are consistent with the Etiwanda Specific Plan are as follows: 11-37 DRAFT 1, i� • In - recognid& of its historic character, discourage excessive '^ traffic on r -dwanda Avenue, particularly north of W se Line, �. in order to maintain current street widths and design character where possible, and to carefully define those areas i where change may be required because of traffic demand. I • Discourage traffic generated by future development in the areas beyond the current City limits from impacting the ]Edwanda core, as well as other sensitive areas of FAwanda. ® Di=urage through-traffic within residential areas, d j - , -she4d 8.2.2 tither Pertinent Access and Design Policies • DnvewB,y Policies per City Engineering Dlvisuoi, can bc. found in Appendix Item No. ?. _. • Street Design Miev per City Engineering Division can be found in Appendix Item No. 8. • Median island bi�iealts and left turn access should be limited to approximately quarter -mile spacings .on Major Divided Arterial Stree�.y. e For safety end efficiency, side friction along Major Arterial Streets should be minimized. Therefore, on- street parking should ` be prohibited, median obstructions should be minimized, and left turn movements and access to driveways should be confined to designated locations. • Intersection Line of Sight Design Policy per City Engineering Division can be found in Appendix Item No. 9. • Additional street design criteria will be required by the Etiwanda North Fire Management Ordmance/Study (Appendix Item Nos. 4 and 10). U -38 DP i MAJOR DIVIDED ARTERIAL STREET • DAY CREEK BLVD. II CLASS I V DIKE F COMMUNITY TRAIL MEANDERING VOLK 13' s0' 14' 40' IV 2W SCE went FLOW. STREET SECTIONS 1� NOT, PLANTING AREA BETWEEN CURB AND SIDEWALK TO BE W MINIMUM, EXHIBff 22(A) TYPICAL Etiwanda North Specific Plan t city of II -39 ! i%Ff Rambo twAmanga SPECIAL DIVIDED SEGONDAF0 (ARTERIAL STREETS a WILSON AVENUE (east of 088 Greets Blvd.) MEANDERING CLASS I COMMUNITY TRAIL 4' 1,M" 8' BIKE P�ATTH. tI�fEANDE. 4' 1 Q' 4Q' L EXISTING PIPE y 15' t+� fIIYU E PIPE q 16V �i north MOM- /i5 � _ south (A -1 as shown on Gircula-Lson,,,P1. 1) Z ti LW Y TRAY. CLASS I AMIL 7' BIKE PATH 14' k, t low North Re.Sa.W. south (A °2 as shown on Circulation Pears) � STREET SECTIONS EXHIBIT 12131 NOTE: PLANTING AREA BETWEEN CURB AND SIDEWALK TO BE 6' MINIMU%], TYPICAL 7anda II -4D DRAFT J, SPECIAL DIVIDED SECONDARY ARTERIAL STREET • WILSON AVENUE (east of Day Creek Blvd.) 4 4 WALK CLASS 1 COIdIti1UHITY TRAIL V BIKE PATH 12' 32' north i25• south R.O.W. qP (A -3 as shown on Circulation Plan' i STREET SECTIONS EXHIBIT 120) NOTE: PLANTING AREA BETWEEN CURB AND SIDEWALK TO BE 6' WHIMiN . TYPICAL �\ Etiwanda North Specific Flan � E City of I1 -41 DRAFT Asho crccanwrsga SECONDARY ARTERIAL. STREETS t WiLS®N AVENUE • E IWANDA AVENUE (West of Day Creek Blvd.) (North of Wilson Ave.) DAY CREEK (North o4 Wilson Ave.) * MILLIKEN AVENUE (Banyan St. to Wilson Ave.) Cuss n 5' BIKE LANE . 4' WALK 4' VIAL K 12' 84l t2' wtst R.Q.W. tact CLASS 0 5' BNtE LANCE COMMUNITY TRAIL 4' VVi %LLK 12,' 64' 20' gal Muth R.O.W. south (with Community Trail) STREET Si C NOTE: PLANTING AREA BETWEEK CURB AND SIDEWALK 70 BE v MMU M , TYPICAL Etiwanda North Specific City af' 1I -42 DPAFT �'' : COLLECTOR STREETS • BANYAN STREET • EAST AVENUE • SAWSEVAINE DRIVE (North of Wilson Ave.) • SUMMIT AVENUE ° VINTAGE DRIVE • ROCHESTER AVENUE • WARDMAN— BULLOCK ROAD (North of Wilson Avenue) • OTHER C OLLECTORS CLASS K 5' BIKE L %NE 4' WALK d' WALK. 66' (' north R.O.W. south I i COMMUNITY TRAIL rA.ASS 11 f' . E LANE- - d' WALK 11 75' Wst R.O.W. •aat (with Community Tiraili NOTE. PLANTING AREA BETWEEN CURS AND SEEWALK TO BE 5 MINIMUM. TYPICAL I twanda Spee lfic City a (` II -43 DRAFT Pr Cuc I' LOCAL STREETS s 12' mod' 12' b)! FLOW. S THE NOTE; PLANTING AREA BETWEEN CURB AND SIDEWALK TO BE V VA M UM, TYPICAL OCT S(HlE E an Spec r II -44 DRAT �. El I 7a0 1171MSll`U� /i IJBY.LAye�l.J!�S An tr i'rastructure Phaske Plan shall be prepare-to guide the orderly hn lementation of this plan. A discussion of the Phasing Plan, implementation philosophy, and mplenr,: `tation strategies can be found in Part V; Implementation. 9.1 WATER Water service *for the Specific 'Plan area will be provid d by the Cucamonga Ccunty Water District (CCWD). The District Lioes n3t presently have existing facilities sufficient to service the area. :The current Distecct Master Plan, however, :anticipates the type and size of facilities that will be required to accommodate development within the Specific Plan area. The District presently receives water supplies from wells in East Etiwandi,: Canyon, Day Canyon, and from Chino Basin. Municipal Water District'' (CBMIND) a member agency of the Metropolitan Water District (MWD). All canyon water collected is sent through the Royer- Nesbit TIVater Treatment Plan -, before being distributed throughout the water stistem. ANU Thy: Die -4ct recently zonstructed the Lloyd W. Michael Water Treatment . Plant, Vach will also treat water obtained from the MWD's pipeline, These racilities are ' s':j vn on Exhibit 13 ` Water Master Plan. This Exhibit is based upon the..CCWD Master Plan prepared in June of 1987.. Properties north of the Los Angeles Degattment of Water and Power (LADW°) corridor will zegWre annexe ;ca in the district alm g with the formation of additional pressure zones. The Master Plan does not address facilities required to serve properties north of the LADWP corridor. Annexation to the CCWD District and creation of a master plan shall occur as a condition of development. The a=_ above the upj per power lines is nlso outside the'CBMWD ,avice bJundary. Prior to development the area must be annexed to CBMWD and the MWD under regulation of MWD. k, II Pipeline ffanDaY CenYan Saagamardnoitp T . Pipeline from Smith Tunnel Pipeline Irom B T nnei - "N• "~ - ' i e --. ! Pipeline from East Etiwanda Res. No, 6C� ,, - � 2 mn �c .s z. WMcanneetion C111&6 — it u ®16iao� ® �>as<see� ®er a.126 ao ®ase 3 o n M.WA. 12. U, W. M1.114 re 9^ostwS. ANlbk LEGEND „..H«. ,..... Proposed CGWD Boundary Existing CCWD Boundary res12C pipeline and Diameter a Res©rvoir Metropolitan Water District (M.W.D.) Connection I o Booster Pump Station O water Treatment Plant (W.T.P.) V pressure Regulator Station INKIIIIIIIII Pressure Zone BtiUndely 4 Pressure Zone Numt*r raises ®.o Existing Pipeline. source.. Cucamonga county water Dispict(ccwD) Master Plan June 1887 - - wALER MASTER PLAN EXHIBIT 13 o itxio', 20a' ao0c €tiwanda letorW- Specific Plan AMIL City m# Rancho Cucamonga 9.2 SLR LIfJ''r Sewer service for the Edwanda North Specify. Plan area will also be provided by the CCWD. The District does not have existing facilities which are arYquate;to serve the area. The District has developed a Waster Plan, however, which indicates the type and size of facilities that wffi be needed in order to support development in the area. At present, the District's nearest fa^.ility is approximately th - (3) mile3 south of the project site. A wastewater treatment plant is currently under design by the CBllRWD. This facility will be constructed approximately five (5) miles south of the project area and wiIl serve as the primary treatment plant for the area. The new treatment plant will have approximately 28 million gallons per day treatment capacity. This will p ovide adequate capacity for developmrnt anticipated by the Specific Plan. : Thi6 fanhty is scheduled for wmpletion in 1994, with full capacity planned for the year 2007. The CCWD Master flan shows four major - trunk sewers occurring within the Specific Plan area. These run generally j in, a north-south direction and range between 9 to 12 inches in size. These are Identified as the Day Creek, Edwanda, ,-at Aver_ue and San Sevaine Trunks on the Sewer Master Plan, Exhibit 14. The area north of the upper power lines �s outside the CCWD service boundary and must be annexed to the District and masterplanned prior to development, us applicants far development shall apply for extra- territorial service t4hrougb CCW) D and CBMWD. , U-47 DRAW otlationat FOraat r IRA C 4 x — Nye l4aaun avenue lath - Street 3 � Y l.._ -- ���'�' •--.� 'cam jcw ea Straet LU Aft - mss_ - - _..��..• �.. __ i R t ,, y r ca/g stan LEGEND Present CCWD Boundary t moo&— Pipeline and Diameter *—V� sraa toisa■ Existing Pipeline ®Ill�itili!iie Proposed District Annexation Area F ty i Source: Cucamonga County Water D4trkt (CC4YD) Master Plan June 1907 SEWER MASTER PLAN 99 I o ,OW 2000' aow EXHIBIT 14 Etit♦vanda Ne►rih Plait Specific � k - City of Pancho cucantonga I1 -48 DRAT: 9.3 SQI.IID HAS Collection and disposal of solid waste is provided by privateli-owned companies. Solid waste is transported to a disposal site on Milliken Avenue near Mission Boulevard in the City of Ontario This landfill is a Class III facility owned and operated by San Bernardino County Solid Waste Management District. V ,the 196 aces at this site, 110 acres are currently in use for landfill purposes. If the entire site is fu'. utilized, the estimated life expectancy of the facility is to the year 200:. The City is preparing a solid waste managment program, i. cludlog `a waste minimization. coffipc►PP.nt, through such mechanisms as mandatory refuse pickup auq curbside recycling. 9.4 MZA>;»(3U5 WASTE The City, in 'coopeintion with the County Department of Health Services participates in a' hazardous waste management and minimization program. A household hazardous ` waste collection service is operated in the City by the Rancho Cucamonga Fim Protection DWdct at the € m station located at 12158 Base Line Road. Unused household cleaning fluids, motor oil, pesticides, paint, thinners, and amilar products are accepted on Saturday's from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. 9.5 FIRE PRt?TF•CTION_', Fire protection in and around the Edwanda North planning area is a key compongut to providing community safety. The Fire Protection Study prepared for the Etiwanda North Specific Plan dated January 1990, can be found in Appendix A kew New. '.Me : tudy describes the appropriate steps to protect the structures in the project from a wildland fire, and to protect the surrounding wiidlands from fires starting within the project:. - A Community Facilities District (CFD) has been set up with the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (RCFPD) to provide -- e€-the additional facilities and services for the plan area. Included in the provisions of the CFD is a fire station f to be located in the vicinity of Wilson and East Avenues. i 11-49 DRAFT �i i�l U (Y I A significant wildland fire threat exists in and adjacent to those planning a�= above the transmission line corridor. This area is designated "high fire hazard" by the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan and the RCFPD. Special fire safe;y mitigation uchniques are recommended for. r various vegetation areas and structure} within or exposed Q'�; this �� is Project level fire management plans shall be :required as x vonaition of development. A summary of the policies necessary to provide fire protection to the "high fire hazard" area includes: ® The San Sevaine, Bull'uck and Grapevine Canyons were most re=tly effected by the 1989 Texas Canyon Fire. This area will be considered a "low intensity fire risk ". until the year 2000. Development within theEdwanda Highlands neighborhood, should strive to m Intain a young age class fuel bed (ctaparral under 20 years). e Maintaining a fuel ,management pl:sa on the east-west transmission corridor is key to limiting the impact of a wildland fire in the . southern portion of the project. The Day end Deer Canyon areas currently I'.ve a high -fire risk facto *.due to existing vegetation and the rugged terrain. This area will be `of major concern from both firs safeq, and the fire -flood cycle dangers. • A full service helipad (minimum 50 -foot diameter), complete with a lour- profile hydrant and pad lighting, �}ould be beneficial in holding a wildland fire to its initial size. The helipad should be located on or near the Day Canyon Forest Service Station site. The helipad must be approved by that ,Forest Service, RCFPD, the State and Federal Departments of Transportation and the Fedearai Aviation Administration. Response time for the first arriving fire engine should be kept to under eight minutes in an attempt to keep wildland fires from expanding beyond their initial size. included within the Fire Protection Study for the Etwan Ja North Specific Plan is a recommended Fire Protection Plan. This is intended to be a , concept level plan. A detailed fire protection implementation plan will be required at the time each master plan undergoes' development/design II -50 DRAFT }1 review. in addition, all projects within the "High Fire hazard" area shall be required in submit a Fuel,Modification Plan as the basis for landscape design of the project. {Phe basic fuel modification r*n*t ,(see Exhibit 15) includes a lanoI! concept for each of the follova': °lg zones: ne 1 Following a !iunimum 20 -foot setback from the edge of the graded building site, the immediate 50 feet of native vegetation surrounding all combustible structures shall be selectively thinned to a minimuin of 60-7Q% of highly flammable vegetation, deadwood and °leaf litter to mineral soil level. This area shall be revegetated with fire resistant ar.d erosion control planting (see Resource Management Plan, Appendix No. 5, Fuel Modification.PlantPalette), and utilizing species suitable to be permanently it igr ted. Zane 2 Withal the second 50 feet a minimum 40-50% of highly flammable vegetation shall be selectively thinned. The area shall be revegetated with fire resistant ' and erosion control planting, of plant species compatible with the native ` vegetation and which do not require permanent irrigation (see Resource management Plap, Appendix No. 5, Fuel "Modification PWt Palette). Zone 3 The third 50 -foot width zone (120 to 170 feet surrounding each combustible structure) shall require a minimum of 30% removal of flammable vegetation and may otherwise remain relatively undisturbed for purposes of 04 modification requirements. Covenants, Condidons and Restrictions (CC&R's) ^sbali be utilized to regulate fuel modification policies to be implemented by private property owners. Enforcement shall be provided by the RCFPD through inspections. Conflicts between CCWs and local ordinance or code requirements shall be interpreted at the discretion of the Fire Chief with the more stringent requirements prevailing. 11-51 DRAFT r u TOP OF SLOPE RESIDENTIAL SMALL SCREENM TREES IN GROUPS OF THREE AND FOUR ' RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY LINE • ° ° �. LOCATION VARIES w ALLUVIAL FAN SCRUB AND OTHER EXIS. NGANDIOR P NEW NATIVE PLANTINGS 4 u° 60-70% 40,50K 30% e _ u CLEARING CLEARING CLEARINGM 20 ZONE 1 -50' ZONE 2 -50' ZONE 3 -50' Amok IRRIGATED NON- IRRIGATED N0N-IRRIGATED UNDISTURBED 150 "FUEL MODIFICATION ZONE NATIVE VEGETAYION ,. NOTE: REFER TO APPENDIX C, FIRE PROTECTION STUDY, JANUARY 19W I MODIFICATION CONCEPT FUE EXHOff 15 Etiwanda Nort61 Specific Pka b I -52 tr of EWAFZ ftecim Luca " a 'k 9.6 FLOOD C©NTROLIDRAWAGE The flood control and drainage improvements noted in this docament incorporates the Edwanda/San Sevaine Drainage Policy anproved'by the Rancho Cucamonga City Council under Resolution No. 89 -359. 1, This Drainage Policy is based upon the Master Plan of Drainage report prepared by BSI Consultants in August of 1989 (Appendix Them No. 11). The Drainage Policy sets forth guidelines and requirements for development of properties located. within the' Etiwanda North .Specific Plan. 9.6.1ng 111' rain Se Condntorvc The Etiwanda North Specific Plan i brokea into thv= (3) distinct drainage areas. These areas am described as the Day Creek, Etiwanda Creek and San Sevaine Creek drainage areas. The master planned drainage facilities which have btu! -Aentified are designed to provide comprehensive coverage to each of these drainage areas. Fachihit 3, Section 2.2, Existing Conditions and Uses, identifies key existing drainage features of the w ea. These are described according to their respective drainage area. 9.6.1.1 Existing nay Creek DWnage Area The Day Creek flood contrcl facility consists of a newly . constructed debris dam and a concrete lined channel as well as an east-west diversion levee to divert hillside flows between Deer Creek and Day Creek. Storm flow sprvAing facilities have also bepi constructed in Day Creek Wash. The Day Creek art.., is identified on the Federal Emergency Management Agency (>?F.MA) map as subject to flooding. An application tri have the current designation removed has been made by the San Bernardino County Tlood Control Distri("- i1CFCD). 9.6.1.2 Existing U%m-da Creek Drainage - Eliwanda Creek is an earth channel and levy system that runs in a southeasterly direction from the canyon mouth to an existing concrete -lined channel approximately 1,000 feet north of Highland Avenue. Edwanda Creek passes r :ider Highrand Avenue and the Devoxe freeway' (1 -1 - In a concrete -lined channel. It has been determined thal this 1153 DRAFT channel will be inadequate to handle fully - developed flows in the north Etiwanda area. The existing Edwanda Channel is subject to flooding as idenhffied by FEMA. The Edwanda Spreading Grounds are located a�j`aeent to and westerly of Etivanda Creek, both north and south of Wilson Avenue. The Spreading. Grounds consist of a series of small basins and meandering ditches with connecting culverts that convey flows 'through the Spreadingrt?unds southerly. The Spreading Grounds north of Wilson Avenue serve as a water conservation facility for turnout of flows from the channel taring small storms. The Spreading Grounds south of Wilson Avenue serve as the outlet for flows from the Wilson Avenue storm drain (a graded ditch taking flows north of Wilson Avenue easterly to the Edwanda Channel). The INTWD spreads imported water in the Spreading _ Grounds north of Wilson Avenue from its transmission line located along Wilson Avenue. Edwanda Greek has a tributary drainage area of approximately three square miles at the canyon mouth. Aft The IOD -year design flow at the canyon, mouth is ' approximately 4,000 cubic feet per second (cfs). The tributary drainage 'area for Pdwanda. Creek at Wilson Avenue is approximately six square miles with a 100 -year j design flow of 6,700 cfs. I 9.6.1.3 Existing San Sevaine Dray age Area - Drainage flows within the San Sevaine drainage area are currently controlled by fi° ^. *son Channtl and by levees bounding San Sevainr- Wash: Flows enter the area from Henderson Canyon, which is located adjacent to and east of Edwanda Creek. This canyon comprises a mountainous tributary drainage area of approximately 0.7 square miles as determined at the canyon mouth. After exiting the canyon, drainage runs in a southeasterly direction to the San Sevaine Greek Spreading Grounds. Henderson Channe. constructed by the SBGFCD, and consists of an earthen itannei and levy which intercepts the mountain flow and conducts it to the San Sevain-- U-54 DRAFT rl I,- L+J Creek Spreading Grounds. The existing channel is not constructed to sustain major flood flows. Flows from the Henderson Channel have broken out in the past and overflown area southeasterly of the chailnei. The San Sevaine Wash exists as an unimproved natural 1 Wash from the canyon mouth to Wilson Avenue. Additional flows from Wardman and Morse Canyons are tributary to San Sevaine Creek. This Wash area, bound on the mA and vo(st by levees, is subject to flooding as "-ZdenffA by FEIoI+ . The San Sevaine Creek Spreading Grounds accept flags from both the Henderson Channe ?-and the San Sevame Wash. The spreading basins are - located north of the ! intersection of I-15-and Highland Avenue and consist of a series of five basins. The basins were constructed for storm water management and are used for debris and storm water runoff detention.. I 9.6.2 Planned Drainage Facilities i ii The Storm Drain btaster Plata, Exhibit 16, describes Regional Mainline Flood Control Facilities, Secondary Regional Facilities, and Master Flan Facilities proposed for the:, Edwanda North Specific Plan. Regional Mainline Facilities are to be owned and ti aintained by the SHCFCD. These facilities serve major regin -al drainage areas and consist primarily of the following improee6mts • open channels where the flow is in excess of 3,000 c&; • Debris basins or dams at the upstream end of,#Regional Mainline Facilities; or • Spreading Grounds, percolation basins, and flood peak attenuation facilities on or adjacent to Regional Mainline Channels. Secondary Regional Facilities will be owned and maintained by SBCFCD, but serve smaller areas than the Regional Mainline Facilities. These facilities consist of the following: DRAFT a Open channels where the minimum Of °'�ed flow is 750 cfs; 1 c • Flood peak attenuation facilities a' xnt to a Regional Maij,A a Facility; or a Interceptor Channels collecting debris- ladenmountainrunoff. - Master Plan Facilities. will be funded by those properties which benefit from the facility. Funding will be obOned primarily through. developer drainage fees, and in some instances, through assessment district procedures. ,i DRf' IL-56 ,FT %i.,. Upper r:tlwanda---- Aegions NOW %� San SOValne III Avenue Regional - - - - - - - -- •�- ....^._ -- _.�__ ._ - Mainline per Etiwanda Regional an no Channetr Basins asaft statim LEGEND ® Regional Mainline Drainage Facilities Master Plan Storm Drain ao --s— Drainage Area Limits _j 1-- msSecondary Reg %)(wl Facility 4 }- FOOMWES lrrr (t) DrakwW /area bxxidarios sub(act to SSWCO approval (2) AN 4be sixes are apprWmate•, actual sbas to be deurmk*d by a final bydroWpyrbydraugc study. S TORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN EXHIBIT 16 Etiwanda Noriih Specific ��Pian �WT Gty of II -57 DRAFT ka(( ng cho Cuum a 7. 9.7 The Specific Plan area will be served by the following utility companies. Gas: Southern California •as Company P.O. BOX 3003 Redlands, CA 92373-0306 Contact: Ken Soverns, Planning Department Electricity t Southern California Edison company 1331 E. Francis Street P.O. Box 513 Ontario, CA 91761 Contact: MikL!Beard, Consumer Service Planner Telephone: General Telephone 585 North Mountain Avenue Upland, CA 91786 Contact: Marty Reeds Cable TV: DCA Cable ?• '55 Archibald, Suite H Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Contact- Pat Ezerski, Marketing Manager 9.8 SCHOOIS public educational facilities aim-rovided by the FAwanda School District and Chaffey High School District. The school districts utilize standard student genemtion factors to determine the basil educational heeds for the specifiovian area. According to the Edwanda School District, the IW. student generation rate for elementary schools is 0.42 students, 11 14 1 residence; for middle schools it k, 121 students p:x residence. The site requirement for an elementary school is 1() acres and for a middle school, 20 acres. According to Chaffey ngh school Dist ict, the IM srudent generation rate for high schools is 0.15 students per residence. The site xequireinent for a high school is 40 acres. U-58 'DRAFT �l gift Development of the Riwanda North area would generat° the following needs: Elementary Schools: Three schools needed within the Specifto Plan =area. Junior High School: Needs will be met by proposed Junior High Schoohsite located on Summit Avenue, eact; - -- . East A �eaue. High School: One High School site should be located; within the Specific Plan area. A Mello -) ;dos Community Facilities District will be implemented -(see i- Section 14.2) to provide financing for school facilities. 9.9 LAW EIeTFQRQOZENT Law enforcement is provided by Gee Rancho Cucamonga SheriWs Station located at the Civic Centr complex at 10500 Civic Center Drive., The law enforcement needs of the Etiwanda North areo will be f !filled from Us faeiiity. 9.16 PAS Deveaeped u w- ­0 be =fie Qum}b'!1et te --s uneneu of the Speeifie Plan is P h-f 4,009p �^z'` d far -It, Developed parkland shall he prov!ded in the Specific Plan area at a rate of 5 acres per 1,000 persons cok-sWTit with the City's General Plan goal of 5 acres of p nt1 emery 1100 persons. U-1,39 DRAW 4 l 9,-14,1 j�Rrk l vel1) Mandarr& (1. `� Five acres of park per a" thousand population is the City gr ] for i neighborhoLl parks. -:;.ne City uses the U. S. Census Data es&mte , of owv)v atcy for 'the multiplier for the guepom - Of calculating populate, >n. The single- family residence occupancyrate shall be used in the Etimc;anda North area, and is currently 3.43 44 persons per househdld.l W'jt n the Specific Plan area three acres per. thousand of ue-seloped, unencumbered park shall be contributed by the deve'.4er as a ronditior. of development Pursuant to joint -use agreements with Utility or Flood Control entities, an additional two acres per thousand;papuiation a developed, encumbered park shall be counted town *0,, lire five rivvs per thousand goal. Improved trails may also count toward the five acre park requirement pAr the formula used by, the Community Services ?fie )artnient. A neigh%orhoad park sLoll consist of a minimum of five —I ores and all acreage, shati be based on net yield for usabh- nark open space. The mi-:imum requirement Fhall be. for net acres of non-- restvcted, developab:e, unencumbered land. This includes; but is not limited to: e Clear title No easements ® No seismic faults • No grades greater than 10% Free 0-.a flood hazard ` A minimum five -acre (net) nei;hbarhood park may be located adjac,.nt to opei,+ space ea:wmentsi ,'.gereby ncreaSing the park - w :edge. However, the five acre, (net) area must be unencumbered as described hbove. Whcre feasible, additional park facilities may be provided within such open space easements. the Join use by schools and parr is encouraged. 1164)ever, the park must maintain the minimum' five -acre size, and the school shall be sized so that it can stared alone if necessary and .ot rely on the park to provide play area. 1160 ' Auk c� PART Ell DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND GUEDEELINES 10.0 DENITLOPI N a EEGT3I�� 1VS 10.1 9EleTIIt6iL ttflVlSlfliYS Ime following general Development Standards and guidelines address the architectural, landscape arcUtectural and sit, _development requirements that will create a' quality environment for Edwanda North. The`desired % ommunity character of the Etiwandd North area is an overall rural atmosphere with vishas of the mountains and large expokses of open space. The City of Rancho Cucamonga values its historic background related to the Etiwanda area. The neighborhoods within Edwanda North will incorporate master I Annmg and grading concepts sensitive to the -, natural environment, with architectural styles based upon locsl. historic ,. examples. Landscap themes will reflect both specific historical featmes and the character of the National Forest. It is the intent of the City of Rancho Cucamonga to utilize the various historic elements, combined with quality workmanship, to ensure commercial and aesthetic success. All new development in the ;Specific Plan area must oomph with tlis overall guidelines contained herein, and the Subarea Design Standards (Pant IV) to receive Planning C&. mission approval. The overall guidelines are used by the City as a basis for review of all projects. Proposals that do not address these guidelines will not receive City approval. , 161.1 consisteacv with the Qgneral Plan The Etiwanda North Specific Plan is intended to be consistent with all the elements of the Rancho Cucamonga General 'Plan. The Specific Plan includes policies, guidelines, standards, regulations, and implementing actions (which are more precise actions) for various policies 0 the General Plan. The north FAwanda area has a unique se*6ng, and the policies and regulations contained herein are meant to guide the future cf this area only, within the context of the City's General Plan. III Y D Nothing in this Specific; Plan should be construed to be in conflict with or modify the General Plan. Actions under the jurisdiction of this Specific: plan and City Gc .. Plan must be consistent with, both documents. 10.1.2 pfmordbip to Other Relations The Specific PIan will contain most of the information needed to guide the development of a particular parcel with n the study area. Hr,wevet, areas not specifically covered by this h n will continue to be governed by existing City regulations, and no provision of this plan is ind�ded to repeal, abrogatw, annul, impair, or into, ' with any exiing City ordinance except as is ecifically i_ bled by adoption of this Plan. 10,13 ronflict with t.;rtiier Regnlatioras Whenever the provisions of this Plan impose more restrictive regulations or otherwise establish more restrictive regulations than;, are imposed or required by any other City Ordinance, Code or,�. Regulation. the provisions of this Plan shall govern. 1,0.1.4 Relationship to the Rancho Cur Developments Ccde 1 This Specific Plan augments the development r6Yulations and standards of the Rancho Cucamonga Development Code (Development Code). When an issue, condition, or situation { occurs wluch is rot covered or provided for ,';n this Specific Plan, the regulations of the Developr',Int Code that are most applicable I to the issue,` condition, or, situation`-shall apply. In the event that the provisions •of the Spe -Me Plan are in conflict with the Development Code, the provisions- of the Specific Plan shall prevail. i 10.1.:5 Enfarcemen► The City Planner, City Engine-.r and City Building Official shall I enforce the provisions of this specific Plan and all applicable codes of all govemmental agencies and ,jurisdictions 'in such matters kciuding, but not limited ta: building, mechanical and etectri i codes; codes pertaining to drainage, Nvaste water, public utilities; M-2 D&A t D IC ....... ......... , subdivisions and grading. The Fire Chief of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (RCFPD) shall enforce all applicable fire codes. 10.1.6 R&n i Words, phrases and terms not specifically defined herein shall have the same definition as provid!O in the Development Code (Section 17.01.140). ,z 10.1.7 Severabilily If any regulation, condition, program or portion thereof cf the Specific Plan is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by aq court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a st- .�amte, distinct and independent provision and the invalidity of such provision shall not `affect the validity of the remaining provisions. 10.1.8 _LJ. g retaWn The City Planner or their designee, shall have the responsibility to interpret the provisions of the Specific Plan. In addition, the Fire Chief of the RCFPD shall be responsible for the interpretation of all fire code provisions of the Specific Plan. All such interpretations shall be in written form and permanently maintained. Any person aggrieved by such an interpretation may request that such mterpretatton oe =wewea uy the rlall mr, Commissio✓ 1 10.1.9 ?.mbiptities Unless otherwise provided, any ambiguity concerning the content or application of the Ptiwanda North Specific Plan shall be interpreted by the City Planner. 10.1.10 Agreement§ The provisions of tf►'s Plan are not intended to interfere with or abrogate any easemr nts, covet;ants, or other existing agreements which are more restrictive than the provirions of this Plan. M-3 MRAW Ki 10.1.11 Public Heaving and Notification Aft All public hearing and notification rc-quirements of the Development Code Section 17.02.110 shah apply to the development within the Specific Plan area. 10.2 s AND'USE REGULATYON4 This section contains the development regulations for all new development within the Etiwanda North Specific Plan area. The provisions contained within this section are intended to implement the City of Rancho Cut -. nionga's Genera Plan and are tailored to promote the goals and objectives a i, specified in Section 4.0; and support the Land Use, Circulation, (;bmmunity Facilities and Community Design concept plans. The intent is to establish" a distinctive, well- designed, high- quality residential master - planned community that - reflects the City & Rancho Cucamonga desire for excellence. 10.2.1 Land Use Categories There are three major ,anduse categories within the Specific flan (Residential, Commercial anJ Open Space) which are listed below with their respective sub- categories. Refer to the Specific Plan Laird Use Map, Exhibit 17, to determine the boundaries of each subcategory. No development shall occur north of the National Forest boundary line as indicated on the Lar.' `Ise Plan. �I��Is��� Ti E�RTF.S DESIGNATION - Residential Hillside Residential HR ( <2 du/net buildable acre)'. Hillsidb Residential Estate 11RE 1 ( <1 dulnet buildable acre) %ery Low Density Residential (<2 du/gross acre) A` Very Law Residentizl Estate «E (1 du/gross acre) M-4 DRAFT I LOW Density Residential L (2-4 d&gross acre) � �omanen.aaY Neighborhood Commercial NC ` Provisional only. (Sm Section 6.2.2.1) l Open Space Distdct OS Flood Control - Open Space District PC Utility Corridor - Open Space District UC Fault Zone - 01ra Space District F2 Resource Conservation - Open Space Distr m RC 7 M-S DRAW 0 1000' 2000' 4000' EXHIBIT 17 Eti"nda North Specific plan � 9 City of III_6 DRAFT Raoch!D Cucamonga Low Density Residential (2-4 DU /AC) ill.. Very Low Density Residential V2 DUTAC) Proposed T`ak Road Very Low Residential Estate ti DU/AC) proposed Equestrian FaWBy, Nilistde Residential V2 DUINet Buildable Acre) Maids Residential Fatale C <7 DU /Net Buildable Alta)VC Proposed SOhoW Site PC Flood ConhWlRiparlao P Proposed Park Site IIC Utility Contdor P Existing Park Site OS open Space * NOTE IN Institutional Is. w...w.e —1 sot se—uy e.ma FZ Fault Zone .er 1. Us Wsa n.. wic 7M a.pktwe W . gro Y ] kak.u.e el RC Resource Conservation Area P u— CKY a A"5d D"kt MC) Neighborhood Commercial * w..WO, (L,VL,VLE,RC). "UNnAL FUME UMtttaocsMAnoq . ,.,. LAJ/ f) ^. �.% i % I Jegl� Pl `AlV EXHIBIT 17 Eti"nda North Specific plan � 9 City of III_6 DRAFT Raoch!D Cucamonga f 10.2.2 Non- ConfoT_iWwn Uses and Struch�res All Development Code (Section 17.02.130,,provisions for non conforming uses and structures shall apply to'6- vvolopment within the Etiwanda Nortb.Specrfic Plane 10.2.3 RkReauiations ' Uses listed in the following tables are allowed as noted in the %- columns beneath each district heading: Table, 3, Residential Uses; Table 4, Commercial Uses;, and Fable ifs, Opea ;Space Uses. Where indicated by the letter "P ", the use shalt be permitted. Where indicated by the "V!e RC ", the use is subject to a Conditional Use Permit. This section shalt not be construed to supersede mare restrictive use regulations contained in the Covenants,; - Conditions and Restrictions of any property. 'However, in to case shalt uses be permitted beyond those allowed by this section. la the event there =s difficulty in categorizing a given u.-, in any District, the procedure outlined in the- Development ,.ode Section 17.02,040 shall be followed, i M-7 DRAFT _ s TABLE 3 USE REGULATIONS FOR RESIDENTIAL DLSIRICTS HR USE IiRE 7LE VL l �o®r ®tsaott 1. Single Family Detached P P P " p p B. Otber Ua-a I. Church C C C 2. Club, Lodge, Fraternity and Sorority C porUu4versity 4. Public FaciL7y C t C C C C C 5. Day Cite Facility Accessary- 6.orless P p p P P ^; 7ormom Noc Accessory'- C C C `[e and FoliCAtatioa C C C C - Autdeae -Reeec •- ���-`�ee-s�' 7. Golf Course, lennis Clob, Cow -4 y Club (private) C C C C C I a. Public Park aid Plggrounn P P P P 9. Residential Care Facility Accessory - 6 or less P p 2 P P Nan- Accessory - 7 or more 10. Scbcob , Private and Parochial C C C 11. Stalala, Comm.'=ial C C 12. Stable, Private (thin. 20,000 SF lot size) p' p p 13. Utility or Service Facility C G C C C 14. 6ei€ C Q C G C. cessory Uses _ \ccessory Stru-m ue p P P p 2. Antenna r F P p p p 3. Caretaker'sAbsideace C C C C C 4. Gucst Musa p p p p p III -8 lu USri B" P VLE P MR P VL P L P _ S. home Occupation 6. Lodging Unit P P P 7. Mer Accessory Uses P P P "± P P S. Private CT"a P p- F P 9. Pri'Lltte Swimming Pool V. P P P P P 10. Second Dwelling tint Occluding eltti °t cottage) C C C C it. Recreational Valucle Storage Yard C lx. Feed and Tiwk Store (if accessory to commercial arable) C C 13. Dormitory (if accasstxy to coutbt or school) C D. IemM) t 1. Temporary Uses as prescribed in Davtlopment Cod* Section 17.04.070 and subject to those provisions. 1. Temporary trailers for use in conjunction with religions and agriculturutuses for a gmificd interim period. P C P C 4 NOTE; For ttermitioas see Development Cotk, Section IIAL144 (PIC.T05) � \t TABLE 4 - USE REGULATIONS FOR NE16HBORHOOD CONMMCIAL DISIRICI'S lffice and commercialuses listed below are permitted only within a shopping :. eater. All shopping centera arc subject to a ;;.,iitional Use Permit and Development Code Section 17.10.050•F.5. The appropriate market studies and lot consolidation,. as der,rminedby the City Planner, are required in accordance with Section 6.2.2.1. A Offices USE _ I NC and Related Uses 1. Administrative and executive offices. 2. Artist and p,%,Aographic studios, not including the sale of equipment or supplies. 3. Clerical and professional offices. P 4. FluaneW services and institutions. P S. Medical, dental and related health a irvices (nonanimal re luding laboratories and clinics, only the sale of articles clearly incidental to the services provlc` shall be permitted. C 6. Prescription phrsmscies, (also when located within a building coni,iniog the offices of 5 or more medical practitioners). P 7. Public buik - .gs (librcry, city and county buildings, special districts and post o Moo). P 8. Public utility service offices. P 9. Public safety facility ( police, fire, ambulance and paramedics). C 10. Reike commercial uses (blueprinting, stationery, quick copy, etc.) v/ , r incidental to an office Wiling or complex. P B. C*eneral Commercid-TIml 1. Antique shops P 2. Adult business 3. Animal Care Facility (animal hospital, veterinari", commercial kennel, grooming). (a) Excluding exteriorkennel,pens, or runs. (b) Including exterior kennel, etas, or tuns. P Apparel storm» P S. Art, music and photographic studios and supply store, P Appliance stores and mpair. C 16. 7. Arcades (see special requirements per Development Code Section 17 10.031', F). C 9. Athledc and Health Club, gyms and weight reducing cWcc. I C P 111-10 LJ TABLE 4 -USE REGULATIONS FOR NEIGI]BORHOOD CONWRCLIL DISTRICTS (CONTINUED) 111-11 DRAFT USE NC 9. Automotive services ('including motorcycles, boats, trailer and camper) (a) ales (b) rentals (e) repairs (major engine • tork, muffler ahaps, painting, body work And upholstery. (d) Gain sp wasbing b (d) Automatic washing (c) Service or gasoline dispensing stations (including minor repair such as tune -ups, brakes, C batteries, tires, mufflers) (f) Pans am. 'supplies. P 10. Bakeries (retail only). P 11. Barber and beauty shops, P 12. Bicycle shops. P 13. Blueprint and photocopy services. C 14. Boat and camper tales and services. I.0 15. Book, gift and ustionery stores (other than adult related material). P 16. Candy stores and confectioneries. P 17. _ - Catering establishments. P 18. Cleaning and pressing estabiishmtmts. C 19. Carpi.nter shop or cabinet shop. 20. Coekwdlounge (i' .lounge, tsver4 including rolah.d enterviinm= (a) Operated independetw of a restaurant. (b) Accessory to a restaurant. _. C 21. Cor nercial recreation facilities. (a) Indooruse& such ss bo4ag, tit skrs, billisrds, C (b) Golf, Tennis, Outdoor dyes inch as badmiball, baseball, snmpoli :;., etz 22. Dairy product stores. P 23. Depamnent stores - junior. 111-11 DRAFT TABLE 4 - USE REGULATTONS FOR NEIGHBORHOOD COMNIENCIAL DISTRICTS (CONTDPJPT)) 24. USE Drive-in businesses, excluding theaters (other thim fast fboi restwartnti). NC C- 7-5. Drua stores and pharmacies. P 26. Fast-food restaurants. C 27. Feed/Tack go= C 28. Flofist shops. 29. Food stores and supermarkzts. P 30. Furniture gortz, P 31. Gener3l retail stores. P 32. Hardware stores, P 33. Home improvement --eater. (a) Material stored and sold wihia crilwad buildings (b) Ou �iocr storage of matmials --uch as lumb--r and buildi,:3 macrials. P 3*� let Madbiaer, (outdc!or). C 35. Janitorial services and 1upplics. C 36. Jevuvlry fitores. P 37. Laundry-self-service. P 33. Liquor stores. P 39. Yic%b for key shopa, film dropai, etc. in parift lots. C __j 40. 41. Locksmitli shop. Newspaper and magazine stores, printing and , :'31irhing. P C 42. Nw-scries &n—d garden supply gores; provided, ia4h0r-4iskia; all equipment, 1upplies and maorial are kept within an enclosed ares 43. Office and b-.-sinew machine stores. P 44. Optician a, A optometrical shops. -P 45. PoWcal or philanthropic hendquarters. C 46. Pet shoo. P 47. Photocopy 49 PrWals [,-.]I �J y' TABLE 4 _ USE REGULATION., FOR IEIGIB O RHXD C D MR CAL DSRCt s c U rMMD ) I USE NC 48. Rem autants (other than fast food). (a) With entertainment and/or serving of alechalic beverages C (b) Incidental serving of bees and wine bat without a cocktail lounge, bar, entertair,nentor, P .lancing 44- Shoe aMts, sales and repair. - P 59 . Sportmg goods stores. P St. Stamp and coin shops. P 52. Swin;Zing pool, supplies. C 53. Tailurw.� P 54 . Television, radio sales and service. 55. Toy stores. _ p 56 . n ravel agencies. _ P 57. Trr.!spcttation fac_i tics (train, av i •Nut, taxi depots) 3 58. Variety stocs. C. �ublir aril semi- uublie uses 1. Day Care Facilities C Z. Priva4: and public clubs and lodges, including YMCA, YVCA and similar youth group uses. C 3. Educational institutions, pa=hW, private (Including COM] gex�3 utiversiteaa). C 4. Libraries and museums, public or private. C S. Park -td roc: -,!!on facilities, public o, privato.. _ C 6. Public utilir, installadons. C 7. Vccatioral or business trade schools. C S. Churches, couy:nts, monuteries and other rt',igior• ins= Nations. C D. Aceesaory Usea 1. Accessory structures and uses cu--. Ima ly iadideiad to a portufai uA and eontainad oe the same "P site. _ ` 2. t=essr -'cturss and uses custotnatarp.. ',nd ure.and contained on tha eeme C sits, 3. Camt&ars residence C 111-13 iOL TABLE 5 - USE PEGULATiONS FOR OPEN SPACE DISTRICTS I0 DISTRICT OS FG UC F2 RC USE f. 1. Single Family dwellings (not to exc, d P - an average density of I unit per 40 .acres) 2. Caretaker quarters a. permanent (not to axe" an P - average density of 1 anit per . 40 acres) b. temporr•', t C - C 3. , home Occupations 4. Accessory structures such as detached garages, carports,caoannst guesthouse, barns, storage sheds, corms. a. Related to on-site angle family P dwelling b. related to on -site dwelling P - - S. Agricultutal Uses a. RcN crops, truck gacdtns IP P P P - b. Plant storage or propagation P (i P P - C. Orchards, vineyards, Christmas P P P P ` and other tree farms d. Communit- Gardens P P P P e. Greenhouses f. Livestock grazing, breeding (no fed lots) P P P P g. Hydrepanic culture P P P _ h. Oa -site sales of products grown on site P P P C 7. habitat Preserve and N- Itigation Areas P - P P ? r 3. Forest Maintenance FacilitiesIP"get P P Station TABLES (CONTINUED) USE i3EtIULATICINS FDn OPEN SPACE DISTRICTS DISTRICT USE OS FC UC FZ RC g. Recreato �le a Parks. Picnic wise, C C C `' C playgroun -, b. ITildng, bicycftp equestrian P P P P ..trails C. Greenways P P P P d. Golf courses C C C C C. Riding schools (equestrian) C C C C f. Commercial stables C C C g, Country club and related users !C _ C t_ C lo. P.- ,.r,,. ion and use ofHstorie rC i� C C Landmarks and related uses such as ! f naturo interpfttive center and food services to accommodate on -site uses, 11. Flood control strun.m s and iscilifies P v 12. Utility substations OcLated equipment C C C and structures) NJTE: For definitions see Development Code, Section 17.02.140 (RC.Tn AM $lann1 Tile intent of a master plan is - to provide far integrated deveopment at the earliest possible time in the review process. Through a master plan, there is an opportunity to coordinate he -r- efforts of singie:;or multiple property owners and discourage piecemeal deWr pment, Tie following criteria are is intended to apply to each neighbofnoad subama as shown ors Exhibit 34 Iaaat -vi, in Section 13.0 ;?;and should not Le constrained to pal . roes or- site boundaries, exc(Tt where off site parcel configur?tions should be ' respected. a Tar to approval of t€ a first phase of development within earl '):sigaborhood a, conceptual master, plan shA be requited of the entire neighborhood infra ct including but not limited tq�-'6llector sii'Wa;`access I, the circulation system . ar 41 parl.el­ which are planned for deselefinent, school, parR site, anti requimd drainage improve raents tv .prevent p ecemesl develogrueut or development in a manner not consistent with the intent of the Speck PIAU. `> it the Gi.�Vr J ef develep 'Aent&� o -A The conceptual master plan sl;'�1 ' be su: mitted for Planning j ommission approval, togeth m 'with any 3svclopment proposals and shall address all otbzr parcels as they relate to the master plan. a A The cOOPIC(Twal master plan shah contain, as a mbmimum, the rW�Srements as set ir>i: ' in Development Cole Section 17.20.030. 0 Any project proposal inconsistent with my previous nmder place .slxah; be submitted in conjfta ction With ,r request to alnen&jhhe approved spode plan. Aft M-17 DRMT I %r " ® Master plan review shall include a review of the conditions imposed by the mitigation monitoring pla;. WW including WhcI- structure phasing, a project specific Ores defe lse study, auy, market study, resource Ananagement plan requirements, and q-9en space r��aniremcots. 10Z SPECIAL IiEGiTA°17[® The following me sp,xial reglArementse 19.3.1 In n der to protect wildlMe`habitat, street lightim 4S ,lacent to open ATace buffer aeues and/or open space areui;> imali be of reduced in¢�ity and shielded in such a way that ill 3minnaation is directed to the street ,anu --alpy from open space auras. 1, Being for pub'.ac or private a aA: shall be prohibited north of the LAIDVYT utility. coridor, South of !use I.pMWP utility corridor;' public ',and private sports lighting shall be discouraged,, but may be considered on a case -by -case basis. Snch liCiting sball not be permitiod adjacent to a wildUj preserve or wildlife corridor. Exterioe residential lighting sbrA be restricted tbrergh deeeloputeat standards of the Specific Flan or Couditio0s, Covenants, and Restrictions as follows: • Sodium Vapor or Mecury `Jagor "bans lig ,,ing" shall be prohibited. ® The parpase -of residential exterior lighting shall bee functional. /Functional lighting, including s,,surity lighting, shall be shielded and facused so that illumivatiou, does not extend beyond property boundary. Decorative lighting shall be discouragad. 10.3.2 WUDLUE P7:0�'EC'k'dQO? Protect w 2dllfe by afAing and enforcing as Conditions, Covenants, >vmd Restriction:11or resident'ssal d +elopment: M-18 DFAF T • Hiking and equestrian use shall be dmifed to developed trails within the Resource Conservation areas, because the areas are dedicated to wildlife habitat preservation. a Household pets, including cats and dogs, smell be prohibited from use of Resource Conservation areas, en ; be the areas are dedicated to wildlife litat ,preservation. ii 6 O f Ro -d Vehicles shall be prohibi" from all trails and open mace areas within the Specific Plan, e DLwharge of Frearms shall be prohibited from all trails and within all open.e-pace areas within the Specific Plan. 10.3.3 SOLID WA,SE MANAGE1VIi'� :, . Promote solid waste management and minimization by adding and enforcing the following measure as Conditions, Covenants, and Restletions on propirty',: s .i, condition of residential tand'commereiai development: ® Mandatory refuse pick -up and curbside recycling. Participation in any City initiated solid waste minimization prograw. 10.3.4 HAZAR1iiU5 FiAB Promote hazardous waste management and minimization by adding and enfore ig the following measures as Cond buns, Covenants, and Restrictions on propety as a conditI u of re lde", and commercial developments. n Te'atticipation in any City initiated hazardous waste disposal program. ® Participation hi any Cky initi:,led hazardous, minimization program. lII -19 // DRAI+A� . I' } r �i 3 1I1 ®.3.3 Promote the reduction of energy usage by � dd�ng'le following measures as Conditions, Covenants, afid- restrictions on property as a co dition of development: End efficient h glcatieng systems and appliances shall be used in resia.`ntial units and buildings. 4 A e6anical systems or equipment shall be controlled with time doclzs or computer systems, where fea ble. b Wheneder possible, glared wir�ffows, wall insulation and efficient vcntilateon r„ ethrds s � j 111 be used, Promote improved sir qualityby adding the following measures as Conditions, Covewmts, . and Res4r4ctions a te. property as a condWov, of development. To reduce tmisslons from architectural Coatings and asphalt applicri i, the following Measures are recommended: , 3 Low- coating systems shall be used wherever feasible. N Nonreacdye solvents ihall be siL61tuted for T'eactive solvents whenever possible. - s Solvent based points should be used with Maxiimum transfer efficiency to minimize solvent emissions. i r IIT.2a Dllu IE 11 i 11.0 11.1 SITE PLANNINCT * �; '_ .Project design shall be guided by site- specific factors such as views, matt , vegetation, topography, and surrounding development. Natural features should be used to an advantage as design elements, including landforms, drainage courses, rock outcroppings and views tc - Minimize alteration to the existing landform. Conversely, undesirable(..e feature.4 can be_ minimiz through proper site planning and building orientation. It should ,tae noted that access shall comply wiflt O*y access regulations and shall n f l conflict with other plaztmed or existing acce points. L Two' points `of access shall be provided i'or all residential developments. Cut-de -sacs and temporary (partial) streets shall not be permitted to exceed 600' in length. The following characteristics should be considered in the design of indi -Adual projects: it5feass- t#- i'eft seeess- f.Ants. Twe psifts ap e—. Gul- atted -to exceed -�-W8 in4effgtlr • Curvilinear sr vets are encouraged wb,2never, icrsdble. • Driveways shall should not exceed 16' in width through public parkway frontages. • Property lines and setbacks should be staggered as much as possible to create variety. • At least 50% of dwellings shag should not be plotted parallel to the street frontage, • Driveway widths for two or thre car garages shalt not exe`d 16100" at curb. For every foot of building setback greater Warn "° 251, a one fact reduction in wit th of curb tint will Ire permitted to occur to a minimum of 121-0 with a two -car garage an,2 �, y M-21 DgAA Vii i orientation, homes should be designed to front onto ea' west streets, or should be;olotted to follow the natural contoui rather than fronting onto north/south streets. ® A continuous greenbeltis designed to link community and regional trails and open space to the neighboktoo; Pail system. At least one paseo /greenbelt connection shah be provided across, each site, and shA should (a) Have minimum average width of 20 feet, but at no point be less than 10 feet wide. (b) Have adequate provisions for pedestrian circulation. (c) Provide for local equestrian hails in the BR and VL districts. (d) Provids connections to any mcistiig or planned greenbelts located on adjacent parcels. (e) Be dedicated as an easement. • Further, paseos within tract layouts should be encouraged, especially to preserve natural laudform, bluefte streams, and seismic easements. M-23 DRAFT, a Commercial amhitecturai themes: shall reflect thri architectural'' style of surrounding neigbi orhood and shall ti reviewed on a case by case basis, • in the HR, ME, end-VL, and VLE districts, !intyard setbacks along the public streets skail:should be staggered by up to 10 feet. • Developments may be phased, provided that each ly base is integrated into a master plan which ensures completeness. of functional and visual eleme ts, and provides sufficient acceas and:, drainage protection. o 'Whenever p possible, b • Transitions between residential development and open' space shall be given sensitive consideration. Potential design conflirats should qP be identified early in the design process. Varying building theio i and setbacks are encouraged along open space and greenbelt edges to,.7phasize the open space quality. • The Etiwaaida North area provides major. view p{%(catial for development as =well a'_I an am providing a. majoruiewshed from the valley areas to the moue` t ns.:Notect z of the major scenic corridors through Day, Effivaildz, and San Sevaine Creeks should be protected through appropriate site. -t nit g and bai14 ing design in these areas. • The network of undevelopable open sptAx which currently characterizes die planning area is a valuable resource which should be ineorporated;into the community's identity. " • Encourage p. P.M designs that provide.: visu`,� `,links with the surround:ag environment b'r,_ ncorporating ci�erks and a as adjacent to chaime.'s ' with 1, open space of V ojects, and by landscaping to reflect the naturA riparian character of the canyons. • Utilize drainage wurses as nawif �l boundaries between neighborhoods. • Link tt-_ open space character of the community into development areas through the use of interior pa.seos, and through provision for paseo Ankag,,s from local streets aO cul-de -sac's to adjoining open i space areas. • Use public rights-okay and adjCamg landscape easements to carry tape open space character of the community through , ' developed areas, and alao to provide a visu4 buffer where major *pads provide thr boundary between development and open space. 11.2 fi&ADM The grading of any site shad coniorra to the sta,tdards contained in = Development eitde Chapter 11.24. in order to complement the overall character of tbp existing lanr3 orm within any project area the following guidelines shall be considered: M-24 DRAFT - v i 4` sf A , uatural ate of :5 % or less mny be graded with conventional fully-padded lots. 0 Grading within 5-7.9% natural slope is permitted, but existing landforms must retsia that natural character. Padded building Sites are petrutted in combination with techniques such as contour grading, combined slopes, , limited ` cut-and-fill, :split -level architectural prototypes, and padded area for structures only, to reduce the overal g,-a&g. • Grading within 8- 14.9% natural ,slope requires special hillside architectural and desig -i terftiques that minimize grading, _ o In both the 3= 09% and .-the 8- 14.9% slope ranges, the Planning Commission m -,_-n dcr padded lots adjacent to such special features as a golf :course, extensive open space or significant greenlwlts or paseos, when _ 5uch grading creates a better relationship between the spedR feature ind the adjacent lots. • Grading within the 15- 29:946 range is limited to no more than the less visually prominent slopes, and then only where `a' crau be shown that safety, environmental and aesthetic impacts can be minintized. Ux of larger lots, variable setbacks, and vsri6le structural techniques we required The impact of roadways is Aso ! to be r ainimv;ed by natum corcours�or using grade separztions. + Development iR r ,ohibittd when the, natural slope is 30% or 1'rester• The qxvific guidelines aad-standa ds for development in Hillside areas shall comply with !�ectiori:_.,:24.060 and 17,24.070 of the Development Code (see Fable 6). All grOed areas shall be protected from wind and water erosion through acceptable slope stabilization methods sz ch as watering, planting or netting. IU 25 Dille .4� 0701 -02 o SEPTEMBER 115 1991 P. C. AGE[QA 12. of 13 } Slope Percent Natural Guidelines - Zone Slope 1 Less than 10% This is "not a hilside condition. Grading* with conventional fully padded lots and terracing are acceptable. Z 10% - 19.9% Development with grading may occur in this zone, but cidsting landforms must retain their natural character. Padded building sites are permitted on these slopes, bu;.,split level architectural prototypes with stacking and clustering are expected. 3 20%-29.9% Special hillside architectural and design techniques are required within zone 3. . Architectural prototypes are expected to conform to the natural landform. Mass gn -Aing is to be discouraged. _ 4 30 %v - 39.9% Development should not normally , approved within this zone, except forlesa �r. wua:I *; prominent slopes, and then only in areas v h re it can be clearly demonstrated that -safety >.ndit'onmental and aesthetic impacts will be mNmized. Only. limited grading" is expected. 5 Greater than III& is an excessive slope and development 40% should be prolubited for public safety purposes and because of the difficulty of providing services. * Movement for redistribution of earth over large areas. However, disruption of the landform, drainage patterns, and on -site surface terrain and vegetation should be avoidecL ** the movement of earth for small projects such as individual building foundations, driveways, local roads, utility excavation, etc. 11.3 AIZCJ[iY'1'ECTIJRE , Architecture is a dominant , usual ,element within the mar made environment, and plays an important role in establishing thr " ^hh •M identity of a given community, For this reason, architecturar aII'M been identified as one of the community -wide design elements prus -a for the community of Etiwanda north. Basic architectural elerr 'ls include color, texfiar;, rhythm, shape, massing, and compor i Traditional corubinattons of These elements result in es ir .xd architectural styles. Several histori styles of Q .,Uornia styes -e€ architecture best," reinforce the community -wide ',&sign elegy g'delines- and cc _dements the existing Etiwanda SpeclAe.Plan. The ..1.. i+ -t:45. ., � -^di•' ^ ^..a... • :ttiiatisfdh nrn&atn^!+s -^t ..s..l_ Seven of these architectural stll : s have been established for ' the community of Mwanda North and include: Victorian Country Bungalow Ranch = , I Monterrey San Juan Santa Barbara Revival It is intended that the use of these, architectural guidelines will encourage a sense of neighborhood identity. Tine use of these guidelines is not meant to produce uniformity, but rather diversity within the stated parameters, as well as to recall the architectural and cWtural heritage of the Edwanda area. Recommendations for the use of each architectural style is included, and are based on an assessment of those styles which will best complement the , five neighborhood themes described in "The Community Design Concept" and the Maughborho3d Plan, Exhibit 9, which are both locale iIn Section 5.0. The use of these criteria will create five distinct and complimentary neighborhood identities. me eefiple a y; III 27 DRAB Consistent with the City's design guidelines concepts, design of all four ANIL qW Facades shall be reqn�yed (360 degree. architectural treatment). In, keeping with the ]high fire hazard conditions which exist north of the LADWP utility coridor, wood architectural elements shall be discouraged north of the aforemeutioneO ,corridor. However, some ext,,rior wood detail sball be allowed when in conformance with the Et? ivanda North Fire Protection Study guidelines. Finally, elements such as porches and balconies are intended to be functional. Verandas, extended porches, and most _ltslcon es, should be wide enough to accommodate porch furniture. These guidelines have been prepared, not as an exhaustive presentation of the architectural styles that are acceptable for the community of Etiwanda North, but as a guide for.further individual research. The builder and architect are encouraged to visit areas where they can view the different styles first-hand. ;the traditional appearance of these styles is encc .aged rather than a contemporary interpretation. It is understood ti it economics may necessitate some interpretation of these styles. This ir^'nrpretation, however, should follow traditional forms, kale and det,r L The plan goal is Q&, with these guidelines and the ndlvidual reaArch done by builders and architects, Etiwanda Nortki will become a special place within the Southern California area. 111-28 DRAFT v D Architectural Style Neighborhood ' Aimary Secondary Day Creek Victorian Monterey Country San Juan Bungalow Santa Barbara Revival Ranch Upper Edwanda Bungalow Country Ri71ch Victorian. Mi r7ey Santa Barbara KAval San Juan The Oaks �Sungalow Ranch Fafiell Country Santa Barbara Revival V ere ' (Monterey (fan Juan Edwanda Highlands ! i4anch Slictorial 1 Monte -ay Country 1.. San Juan Bungalow, ., Santa Barbara Revival 1 Chaffey Ranch s Victorian Monterey Country San Juan Bungalow Santa Barbara Revival The primary elemvts of each srehite turai `style are illustrate.i by the following exhibits {see Fxhibit 18, A -through 1D. Each Plusiration is accompanied by a written summary of the elements of that architecture style. Any combitsaticz I of primary styles may be incorporated in a respective neighborhoed development or subarea. However, it is intended that each of the five neighborhoods -would will be developed with more than one primary style. Up to 1 - 6-eth , hewever•, s A Maximum of 1/3 of the secondary group styles may be, selected. M -2J DRAFT Victorian AMIL ROOF FHCH- 8 :12 ROOF MATERIAL AND COLOR: Composition shingles permitted, varied shingle patterns encouraged. All colors permitted. OVERHANGS: 12" throughout. PARALLEL `TS. OPPOSING GABLES: 75% parallel gaMes with 25% opposing gables SIDING. Narrow lap siding on all four sides. STUCCO FINISH AND COLOR: None seen since siding is on all four sides; 01EVINEYS: Usually covered with siding w th'a base of brick and chimney cap. PORCUES: Extensive use of front porch with decorative porch -roof support-, and intricate railings. Parches are also used is the rear of the house with less detailing. BALCONIES: None. i PWOW TREA'_C1V3E M: Bay windows are used at primary wind; Its on 611 sides of the house. Accent shutters are used on upper level windows. Pane: are normally shown only on front windows and wood trim surrounds on all windows on all sides. DOORS: Entry doors are painted enamel with glass insets. Wood trim surrounds are simpl ; and sidelights are often used. 'E MY: The entry is covered by the porch and is sometimes raised. COLOR PALETTE: The siding is done in pastel colors with all accent wood, trim, garages and fascias in white. Accent colors are found on doors, shutters, vents and decorative shingles. VERTICAL VS. HORIZONTAL: Architeuitral elements tend to have a horizontal look with 70% horizontal and 30% vertical. GARAGE LOCATION: Can either have front or side entry garages. Garage may also be detached. III -30 DRAW i� I-] C� Country ROOF PITCH: 6:12 'ROOF MATERIAL AND COLOR: Flat cono -te the ranging in color from light brown to black OVERHANGS: 12" and 24" PARALTE• VS. OPPOSING GABLES: 75% parallel gables with 25% opposing gables. SIDING: Siding on all four sides, May also use sningles as accent with the siding. STUCCO FINNISH AND COLOR: Stucco, when seen, is a sand finish and cvior normally matches the siding calor. CHIlI KEYS: Chimneys are normally made of brick or have a brick veneer with a decorative brick chimney cap. PORCHES: California Country homes have extensive use of front porches with sticklik-e porch posts and spindle -like railings. Porches can also be used in the rear of the house along the first floor. BALCONIES: None. VMDOW TREATIv OM: Shutters are used on upper level primary windows on both the front and rear. Panes are normally shown only on the front windows. Wood trim surrounds on all other windows on all four sides. DOORS: Entry doors are simple with simple v' god surrounds so as not to conflict with the decorative detailing. Sidelights are used but no windows over the front doors. ENTRY: The entry is cot .red by the front porch. Entry is normally raised one or two steps. COLOR PALETTE: The siding should be in pastel colors ranging from white and yellow to pale blt a vtd gray. Wood trim, �cias, porch supports, and garage doors are done in white. Accentcol ors are found on doors, shutters, vents and decorative shingles. VERTICAL VS. HORIZONTAL: Architectural elements tend to have a horizontal look with 75% horizontal and 25% vertical. M-33 DRAFT t� :� �_ )RS &. ENTRY STUCCO BASE DETAILr"' It j E q WINDOW TREATMENT s 41— �ffi z PORCHES & BALCONIES UNIQUE DETAILS THEME.-COUNTRY EXHIBIT 18101 Speirific Plan E_ I Cur of III -36 DRAFT Rancho Cucamonita e U Bungalow ROOF PITCH: 4:12 ROOF MATERIAL AND CC' .311: Flat concrete tile ranging in color from light to dark brown. OVERHANGS: 36" and 24 ". PARALLEL VS. OPPOSING GABLES: 75% parallel gables with 25% opposing gables. SIDING: Horizontal siding on all sides. STUCCO FINISH AND COLOR: Stucco, w'ien seen, is a sand finish and color normally matches the siding color. CEMMNEYS: Chimneys have either siui -g, brick or stone veneer on them depending on their location. PORCHES: Limited front verandas with steps, normally not ex "4pding further th:aa just,' in front of the entry door. The "front stoop" was derived from the Bungalow Styi Porches are sometimes also used in the rear. BALCONIES: None. WINDOW TREATMENTS: Simple windows, shutters are not used. Wood trim surrounds on all windows on all sides. DGORS: Entry doors are simple with wood surround and side lights. ENTRY: The entry is covered with the veranda. Normally one or two steps lead up to the front porch making a raised entry. COLOR PALETTE: The siding is typically earthtore in color (white, ivory, light beige, brown) with contrasting lighter (often times white) trim, fascias, roof -porch supports and exposed beams. VERTICAL VS. HORIZONTAL: The architectural elements are low and simple with wide projecting roof. It has at most two stories, but usually one. The elements are 90% horizontal and 10% vertical. GARAGE LOCATION- Can either have front or side entry, �arages. Garage may also be detached. M--37 DRAM ,Ranch ROOF PITCH: 4:12 brealdng to 3:12 over front an d rear porches. ROOF MAZFRI AL AND COLOR: Flat concrete file ranging in color from reddish brown and terra. - cotta to brown and 'tobacco. 017IIiB MS: 30" at both hips and gables. I PARALIM, VS. OPPOSING GABLES: 90% parallel gables with 10% opposing gables. SIDING- Used as tn accent around the base of the house or under gable roof on all four sides can be used with stucco. STUC':O FINISH AND COLOR: Stucco finish ii- smooth and color ranges from white , to light brown. CBr,. MYS: Stucco chimneys with stucco covered chimney caps of back or stone. PORCBES: Porches are used both on the front and the rear of the houses, and are at ground level with no steps. BALCONIES: None. WINDOW TREAITAENTS: Shutters are used on primary windc- on the front elevation. Wood trim surrounds are used on all windows on all sides. DOORS: Entry doors are simple with wood surrounds, and side lights. Shutters are occasionally used on the sides of the entry door. ENTRY: The entry is normally covered by the front porch. Often tunes an open trellis above adds light to the entry. 'COLOR PALETTE: Wood trim, fascias, exposed rafters, poicb -roof supports, anu garage doors are normally earthtone colors range.; from light beige to brown. Siding is an accent but is usually the same color as the stucco. VERTICAL VS. HORIZONTAL: The architectural elements present a strong horizontal form. 95% horizonter, with a 5% vertical. This style is best suited for one story homes. GARAGE 10 CATION; Can either have front or side entry garages. Garcdz may also be dc,,ached. , M-40 DRAFT 4:12 PITCH{ 3Q" OVERHANG 3;12 PITC PITCH, BREAK ' OVERHANGS FIAT OR "S" TIL IB A, ROOF PITCH & 'MATERIAL, t -WOOD 'SIDING @ GABLES JJI CHIMNEYS EXTERIOR FINISH srucco �aryeael r�eue Etiwanda North Specific Plan i 11e7 OI DRAFT I1I -41 Ras�cieo a ucaanon�[a v F I'll'TIFIK//Xi"F.`F--`-`"--�--/"` I i= _ .i d it /.4 ✓,+ ,s Pt3RC!-iE & BALCONIES rrr I !Imo.( fisL ►_i� ; r��7A �; ii'• ®DOORS & ENTRY » rTr l rrh.a, hr� i.._.!- :. STUCCO SKIRT UNIQUE DETAILS WINDOW TREATMENT ® m.ma ■��is ®dA �• •.eft A ® MWO &0O A IMM' rIp ! F,. iA! / eAmIal l l of n/ faiwanda h3octi Specific Plan III -42 DRAFT R gncm Cu"" Monterey ROOF FITCH: 4:12 breal ng to 3:12 over front and rear porches. ROOF ]MATERIAL AND COLOR: Can use either flat concrzw tile, clay or concrete "S" tile ranging in color from red and terra -cotta to brown and tobacco. OVERHANGS: Tight Fakes and extended eaves with exposed rafters: kR.ALLEL VS. OPPOSING GABLES: 95% parallel gables with 5% opposing gable-. Form of house is typically one long hip roof with one opposing:gable. SKIING: Siding is usually used as an accent to differe.n&le between the first and second floor. Siding can also be used as a wainscot around the base of the house. STUCCO FINISH AND COLOR:_ Very little texturing to fne stucco. Color ranges from white to beige. CHflV KEYS: Stucco chimney with stucco w,-Aped plain chimney gaps. PORCHES: One story structures tyrcally have large open verandas with no steps on both front and rear. BALCONY: Two story structures are designed Vth large verandas below with balconies above on front and rear. WINDOW TREAT.IbIUM: Shutters are used to ac -*+.nt primary windowN and front windows ale normally paned. Mood trim surrounds on all windows on all sides, DOOMS: Entry doors are simple with wood trim surrounds. Bright accent colors are used to highlight the entry doors. ENTRY: The entry is normally recessed and cowed under a front veme da. I COLOR PALETTE: Paletu- consists of zarthton colors. Often times the siding is � painted the same color as the stucco and the contrast is simply in the matt-:9 change. Accent colors include: aqua, partine, blue, ochre and red. VERTICAL VS. HORIZONTAL: The overall architectural form is horizontal, however, this style is suitable for two story, homes. Architectural elements are 70% horizontal and 30% vertical. GARAGE LOCATION: More typically found in the front, but can be located on the side or detached. ffi-43 DRAFT afl.0 STUCCO WOOD 1 WOOD SIDING @ $AQE CHIMNEYS ATERIOR FINISH ZNoe°rt °-18(l) Ftieyanda North 1 *•r.t�iic Plan III -44 ®RAFT RaeKha C -a—nta `r DOORS & ENTRY PORCHES & BALCONIES WINDOW TREATMENT UNIQUE DETAILS f EXHIBIT 160 i te�a ianda wort, Specific Plan Ask City nt III -45 DRAFT Cucama>na San Juan ROOF PITCH: 4:12 with shed roof and second storm clerestories on one story houses. Roof also breaks to 3:12 over porches. ROOF MATERIAL AND COLOR: Clay or concrete "S" file rang in color from brick red to tobacco brown. OVERHANGS: Typically 12" overhangs at both rakes and eaves. PARALLEL ?EL VS. OPPOSING GABLES: 75% parallel gables with 25% opposing gables. SIDING- None, STUCCO FINISH AND COLOR.- Smooth finish to, {:i7e plaster look. Color ranges from white, off white, beige to pale brown. CHIMNEYS: Stucco chimney with detailed chimney rap. J PORCHES: Sometimes front and rear porches are used on this style. I BALCONIES: None. NVPMW TREATI AUM: Shutters are used on primary window locations on both front and rear. Wood trim surrounds on all windows on all four sides. Windows may also be recessed. DOORS: Entry doors are simple with wood trim surrounds and side lights. ENTRY: Entry courtyards are common, and entry is sometimes covered. The use of courtyard walls i� encouraged. _ COLON PALETTE: Woad trim, fasciao, -stn woo are either painted or stained in earthtone colors. Garage doors, entry 4wrs and shutters are either stained a lighter or darker contrasting color. VERTICAL VS. HORIZONTAL: Style is suitable for both one and two story structures, but tends to have a more overall horizontal look. GARAGE LOCATION: More suitable located in the front, but may also be located on the sues or detached. M-46 DRAFT i .1 LJ CLAY OR CONCRETE'S' ME PITCH BREAK- --.._," 3:12 PITCH 12" EAVE OVERHANGS '� 14'��j' II T• CHIMNEYS ROOF PITCH & MATERIAL EXTERIOR FINISH THEME.-SAN Ji CAM101i ldfnr E4iw.anda North Specific Plan III -47 DRAFT Rancho cut& ng, E U E Sang Barbara Revival ROOF PITCdi: 5:12 ROOF MATERIAL AND COLOR: Clay or concrete °S" barrel the ranging in color from reddish orange to deep terra - cotta. OVERHANGS: Tight rakes ad 12" eaves. PAP —ALLEL VS. OPPOSING GABLES: ` ;1% parallel gables with 50% opposing gables. SIDING: None. STUCCO FWISH AND COLOR: Stucco is smorA and ranges in color from white, off white, buff to beige. CIEHNIlVEYS: Stucco chimney with detailed chimn,iliy raps. FORCHES: No first floor porches. BALCONIES: Small exterior balconies project out the rear avid the front. Front balconies are often round over the garage to break up front exterior. WPMW TREATMENTS: Shutters are used to accentprimm7 windows on both the front and rear windows. Windows are often time recessed with stucco surrounds (can be used on all four sides of the exterior). Other windows, on all four sides, have simple wood trim surrounds. DOORS: Entry doors are sometimes recessed or simply have wood trim : urrrunds. Arched windows are sometimes found over the entry door. ENTRY: Tho entry is normally covered and is commonly designed in a courtyard fashion with a front wrought iron gate. The use of courtyard walls is encouraged. COLOR PALETTE: Wood trim;: fascias and shutters are done m a variety of colors; white, brown, "Santa Barbara Biuep, beige, etc. Shutters are often painted in a slightly contrasting or accent color. Accent colors are frequently brilliant shades of blue, aqua, ochre and red. VERTICAL VS. HORIZONTAL: The architectural elements are 70% vertical with 30% horizontal. Form is best suited for two story structures. GARAGE LOCATION- Best suited for front entry garage. May have a detached garage. M-49 DRAFT I 2.4" OVERHANG AT EXPOSED RAFTER' �}�jCy} 1' y r or OVERHANGS � I T CWlKA 9 i S 4:12 :ROOF PITCH ^ ONC;S- TILE ROOF PITCH & MATERIAL SMOOTH s EXTERIOR FINISH ARCHITECTURAL T URAL THEME: EXHIBIT 18(M) 01, Etiwanda North Specific Play ?j ' rl City III -50 DRAFT , �i �P i DOORS & ENTRY 1�AIA. Kl- v. PORCHES & BALCONIES HT EAVE i at 4t i WINDOW TREATMENT - UNIQUE DETAILS ARCHITECTURAL THEME- 57ANTA BARBARA REVIVAL EXHIBIT 18(N) 'erEttwanda North Specific Plan i Car of ifl -51 DRAFT a�a+chri tucamonf� TABLE 12 REQUIRED BUILDING FOOTPRINTS/ELEVATIONS Number of Single Minimum Number of Minimum Number of Family Dzellinas Foot Prints ElevationsMoot Prints 5 -10 3 2 11 -20 4 3 21-40 5 3 41 -60 6 4 61 -80 7 61 -100 8 - 4 Over 10 1 Additional ForEach A 40 DU s Over 100 Note: The following shall coin ',s additional footprints. I . Reverse footprints 2. Altemate garage orientation* The following shall pot as additional elevations: 1. Maas with 5' -0" to 6-V cwmty3W walls 2. Plans with porches, verandas in front of house 3. Each Plan with an alternate garage; orientation (Le., if a bunplow style elevation has both a fwni -ota garage and side -on garage floor plan, this slsail count as an additional elevation *An alternate garage orientation will caunt as zr� additional footprint. If thin i4an is reversed, it shall also count as an additional fooqrittt. II -52 D 1:2 V] 11.4 LLAMSCAPE ARC x[= 11A.1 Tntroductiun The use of landscape techniques and vegetation types will play a significant role in establishing the character of the Et1wanda North Specific Plan arei. Landscape design is intended to expand upon and enhance the vast Flood Control District and utility company holdings that shape the Etiwanda North 5pedfie Plan area as well as complementing the Edwanda Specific Plan area through the use of California native plant species. Refer do EAdbit 14, Landscape Theme Plan. Ground plane plantings are selected to portray rural app--=nce, with emphasis on native and drought - tolerant plantings. These include lore- growing ground covers, combined with medium and urge shrub masses. Flowering vines will. be located along perimeter theme -walls and entry areas P', Soften the appearance of man-made materials and to strengthen the visual unity between the man - mad:,, and natural environment. The Southern California Edison'�M), Metropolitan Water District (MWD) and other utility corridors small be planted with native, drought tolerantplant materials which will promote low maintenance and supplement the natural environment. The use of turf shall be kept to a minimum in City- maintained . areast.,,Turf is beiz used to focus on a landscape;entry statement, or when a place to sit, .play or picnic, is desirable. Turf shall W limited to 15% in parkway areas. The Landscape Street Sections (Exhibit 21-:A through n are referenced on the Landscape Theme Plan Section, Key Map (Exhibit 20). { U 63 Y. .11­1 F-sat �1 DAY ff LEGEND Camphor Osaa and ba.-I.., Wisnas ■7 Ewmlypwa Windrow Tai zTMANDA rACMLAMS mw--d 6. ..Carol- Canary island Pineffiedbud F�pjp,aoaaw tore A Subts, straboa s- mgtas� of K­oob, Pnd osa e.apd. was Garging Ststk-A C&Nfornim Sycantartr/Autttrakark WWRYar DAY mattrattoreatts .. b. m.mosse by ­ I M-Al" Canyon Live OakiCaUfairnia Black Oak a— Caul(, anial srd Pdast.2, .11. W..­ attabod abode. bod b,obaft of Mors", sycossarav Day u'"k 11"""d C&NfW" SyamtorafCaftyarti Uve Oak .. W.- — .1 c.*- .... ana o _. vast. -ft. o"..... RadbudiAldem Stanat UPPM OMWANDA Nghborasr.d .11 . by j =1 out ­ .114. d. ya-sen N.d%W so: Red Bud/Crzdf&d Pear/Craps UVU41 ovary ■stras Pa■ and u t t 11"I'd Pa. bar P".. It C111forr" M 'r. CHAFMY ..We."" PoO.-I-6d by sau- note ste'r, ­.. and Pft lars. �_. u. costn.... sts.■.r., .4 a Darren u" obs was mcmis at "star" ismsd atom. nuct) P,yeaty, raw* as,booporat Fat"mal LANDSCAPE THEME -PLAN EXHIBIT 19 EtiWaittla Aorth Spe6,Gic Plan City of DRAFT Rancho Cucamonga 1 Sea asmar tw National Forrest m g- -� o f r tdt! j� v KJ t ' ''•ti ' n r;i Av to t1 ` �.. Wilson Avenue .Wilson e •aa _ r 2 Banyan 'Street 9 +±omit AVe.45 •� I LEGEND Gaping Wo on A -1 Landscape Street Section Key LANDSCAPE THEME SECTION KEY MAP EMO T. =1 20 b 1000, 2 `OW Etiwandi North d4r, Specific Plan AWL City of . 111 -55 RarKNO Cucamaeiil- DRAFT — CAMPHOR CLA551 �., A OF E'84tE :PATH - 50% RE ➢BUD 30 %:AFRICAN"SUMAC l CALIF PALM ROtr\ (30 O.C) COMMUNITY TRAIL <� s NAriVE PLANT 4-WEANDERiN'G I ♦ ' ' , *} `f "TERIAL NOUN all VARIES ! �,., aF` is A0 t3 24` crest 17' MIN. + *330' SCE oast I A -9 Day Creek Boulevard 60% REDBUD (Day Creek Neighborhood 3C, AFRICAN SUMAC IQ CALIFONMA SYCAMORE, t12" r CLASSS 1 OWE TATk- ---}— MAX. 3:1 SLOPE COMMUNITY TRAIL crest sr• - O 20' s°• S&E oast Aar 00 X CANAPY ISLAND PINE (Daly Creek Neighborhood) 30% REDBUO _ 10 96 JAPANESE PAGODA TREE re1E3 C011iUU?kTY TRAIL !' OePAIIK . CLASS N S' BIKE LA V9 west .0 es �• ++' SCE sa oartt R.O.ttt. CONCRETE DRAINAGE SWALE A -3 (Upper Etlafands Neighborhood) LANDSeftADC STREET ,, EC ' IONS __EXHIBIT 21(A) LANDSCAPE EASEMENT WHERE APPLICAEI.E =OTE: PLANTING AREA BETWEEN CURS AND SWE -WALK geiwanda NDrth TO BE W MIW MUMjYKCAL SEltantcho ecific Plan y of III-56 QRAfT ucam onga 60'X. CANARY ISLAND PINE 30% REDBUD O,. i YARIES 44' a68' 41" vie�t _ �, •> �'- -- ---- east B -1 East Avenue (Upper irtiwanda Neighborhood) 60`K REDBUD 30% CANARY ISLAND PINE I . "166aJX 40'x JAPANESE PAGODA TREE COMMUNITY CLASS Ir TFlP�L i 6' BIKE LANE Mae SCE north 75' 7t south R.O.W. B-2 (Upper Etiwanndb Neighborhood) LANDSCARE STREET SEC TIO NS EXHIBIT 21 (8) LANDSCAPE EASEMENT MiSRE APPLICASLE NOTE: PLANTING AREA bETwEENt CURB AND SIDEWALK Etiwanda North to BF r W40 M, TYPICAL Specific Plan City of 111 -57 DRAFT Rancho Cucamonga . l 807E REDOUD 30% CANARY ISLAND PINE 10% JAPANESE PAGODA TREE I 1 (nj 0` WALK I' WALK na1h� e LANDSCAPE EASEMENT WHERE APPUCASLE NOTE: PLANTING AREA BETWEEN CUM AND SIDEWALK EtiWanda North To DE s• IAIfiIIRM, TYPICAL. Specific Plan s III -58 city of QRAf•r Rancho eueaenonr,A Mir i� 4, WALK 100% REDBUDS WITHIN EDISON CORRIDOR CLASS II 74 COMMUNITY TRAIL T-7 j°- 5' BIKE LANE SCE 7fEi 12' 1 ev 51 12 3' SCE rmth R.O.W. r, wh C-2 (Dwy-Creek Neighborhood) I % REDBUD 30% AFRICAN SUMAC 60% REDBUD 10% CALIFORNIA SYCAMORE 30% AFRICAN SUMAC 10% CALIFORNIA SYCAMORE 4' MEANiJERING WALK REDBUD 8' TH asr�c�- e COMMUNITY TRAIL ,3:1 SLOPE Vi Y max. # 12' 32' S__ 125' north N.O.W, south C °a7 (Day Crook Neighborhood) T7, SECTIONS, I LANDSCAPE EASEMENT WHERE APPLICABLE EXHIBIT 1(Q) 0) NOTE, PLANTING AREA BETWEEN CURB AND SIDEWALK ¢tiwanda North TO BE 5' MINIMUM, TYPICAL Specific Plan zz- rt , - 111 -59 City of . DRAFT Rancho Cucamonga ,I_ 60% REDBUD 30% CANARY ISLAND PINE EUCALYPTUS WINDROW 10% BRADFORD PEAR CLASS I MEANDERING V BIKE PATIO CRAPE MYRTLE" x - • 4•ME+WMRING -MLK �"9RADFORO PE4R: ' r +� q2VFQjWEPIPE north R.O.W. T sane C -4 Wilson Avenue 60% CALIFORNIA SYCAMORE (Upper Etiwanda Neighborhood) 30% AUSTRALIAN WILLOW 10X CRAPE MYRTLE (ACCENY) / EuCxwtuS W+mOROw COMMUNITY TRAIL 4' WALK CRAPE MYRTLE taurrr '$ FCD PIPE * FCD RO.W. 1—Uth MIEAOEC, C--a Wilson Avenue (Etiwanda Wash) �3EANOERNG EUCALYPTUS WINDROW DO% CALWORNA SYCAM ORE A. �C �� 30% AUSTRALIAN WILLOW 10% CRAPE MYRTLE ° -f-- CRAPE MYRTLE - 3-1 SLOPE •ar'q Ie' 9 tS' MPE nerlw RO.tY. Ex .sane NO TREES ALLOWED Wilson WITHIN N R LINE C�6 Wilson Avenue PIPE CENTER LINE (Etbwanda Highlands Neighborhood) * LAwDSCAS:E EuSEA"—VwT 4YflER£ APPLICABLE EXHIBIT 21(E) Etiwanda North NOTE PLANTING AREA BETWEEN CURB AMA SIaJEvwLls Specific i ;lae� OR TRAIL TO BE 8' MNIMBilMI.TYPIGL ; 111 -60 C#1• of DRAFT awnicho G.ca�onEi 60% CALIFORNIA SYCAMORE 30% AUSTRALIAN WILLOW �.r 10% CRAPE MYRTLE r MEANDERING EUCALYPTUS WINDROW C.OM1NA(RiTY TRAIL (8' O C a' CRAPE MYRTLE - CLASS t 7' BIKE PATI. SHRUBS ?w north 20' Mfii. 2T 14' 27' 6' 7' 3• t 102' R.O.W. C -7 (Etiwanda highlands Neighborhood) { 60% CALIFORNIA SYCAMORE AND COMMUNITY TRAIL 40% AUSTRALIAN WILLOW EUCALYPTUS WINDROW CRAPE MYRTLE (8' O.C.) k ' CLASS[ 1 8' BIKE PATH FCD 27' 14' 2 %' 4' CD 1012' Hach R.O.W. mouth C -8 (San SOvaine Wash)' LAN S�i41& STREET SEC, iF LANDSCAPE EASEMENT WHERE APPLICABLE EXHIBIT 2 1 Q Etiwanda Noah NOTE: PLANTING AREA BETWEEN CURB AND SIDEWALK Specific Plan TO 8Z W MINIMUM, TYPICAL City of III -6r DRAFT Rancho Cucamonga 3�1 SLOPE 60% CALIFORNIA SYCAMORE 30% CANYON LIVE OAK 10% REDRUD CALKORNIA SYCAMORE 4' WALK COMMUNITY TRA►L CLASS 11 \ 5' BIKE LANE I... elf TREE PLANTING - EASEMENT 6"h ®- i Banyan Avenue 6D% REDBUD (Chat foy iighborhood) 30% AFRICAN SUMAC 10% CALIFORNIA SYCAMORE CALIFORNIA SYCAMORE 1 ~' V WALK COMMUI*TY TRAIL Are. } CLASS N +— V BIKE LANE -} \ ° "� Ad TREE PLANTING * -- EASEMENT with 3:1 SLOPE Max 1 NO TPEES ALLOWED WITHIN IS' OF ie WD PIPE CENTER LINE. i0' MIND tuiigwi 0 -2 Summit 'venue (Day Crook Nofghborhood) LANDSCAPE EASEMENT WHERE APPLICABLE NOTE: PLANTING AREA BETWEEN CURB AND SIDEWALK TO BE 6` MINIMUM, TYPICAL III -62 v DRAFT 1Rarocho Cucatnenga '� z Box REDSUD 30% AFRICAN SUMAC 10% CALIFORNIA SYCAMOVIE CALIFORNIA SYCA.L40RE 3; COAQRi JWTY TRAIL yr� Oaz1•, CLASS M NE V HAKE LANE g di * EASEMENNTENG TREE PLANTING 3 EASEMENT X EXr.TWG PIPE R OkY. ESS RE PIPE q 9etttR Q sw IF WID ® -3 Summit Avenue (Day Creek Neighborhood) NO TREES ALLOWED a. WITHIN 15' OF UWD ail PIPE CENTER LINE. LA/ Fl iLs+` % -%Ap 4 T R E aECT1 aN. EXHIBIT 2 f(G d LANDSCAPE EASEMENT WHERE APPUCABLE tfi HOTS PLANTING AREA BETWEEN CURB AND SIDEWALKr4Specift n To HE V QUNIMU I, TYPICAL city of 31 1-53 DRAFT tan&O GucanwnSa 3:1 SI ma northwest north 60% AUSTRALIAN WILLOW 30% CALIFORNIA SYCAMORE 10% KNOBCONE. PINE t 4' vAkLK CLASS 11 $, VK 5 BIKE LANE R.O.W. southsast E -1 (Etiwanda Highlands Neighborhood) 60% CALIFORNIA SYCAMORE 30% AUSTRALIAN WILLOW 10% KHOBCONE PINE .r 4 *WALK .. 4' WALK CLASS 11 5' BAKE LANC-i- ILO.W. south E-2 (Etiwanda Highlands Neighborhood) f LANL�Sf AAE EAS'_MENT WHERE APf'LiCABLE I NOTE PLAV —•WG ARkk BETWEEN CURB AND SIDEWALK TO BE 6' MIMMUM, TYPICAL E, III -64 e El EXHIBI i' 2 ICM1 Etiwanda North Specific Pfa City of DRAFT Ra K'3 Cucamonga r 60% AUSTRALIAN WILLOW 3094 CALIFORNIA SYCAMORE 1 1096 KNOBCONE PINE F° I San Sevaine Road (Etlwanda Highlands Neighborhood) 60% AUSTRALIAN WILLOW 30% C ORNIA SYCAMORE 10% KNOBCONE PINE CLASS N BIKE LAP FLOOD WALL ROCKSCAPE AUSTRALIAN WILLOW J -1 Wardman- Bullock Road (E]iwanda Highlands Neighborhood) * LANDSCAPE EASEMENT WHERE APPLICABLE EXHIBIT 2 I NOTE: PLANTING AREA SEYW€EN CURB AND SIDEWALK EtiWdtldd North To et s MI�II�IUM, rvalcAL SPedfic Plan It, city of SIX -6S DRAFT Rancho Cucamonga 60% CANYON LIVE OAK 309E CALIFORNIA BLACK OAK 4' WALK 10% CALIFORNIA WALNUT 0' WALK CLASS it s - 6' BIKE LANE —F ' M West - j, ' J, .k-- ; ' ...gam- 1 east k -1 (Oaks Neighborhood) 60% CALIFORNIA BLA "K OAK 4' WALK 30% CANYON UVE Or.:* i0'X. CALIFORNIA WALHU'rr 4' WALK CLASS 11 ¢- V EWE LANE -"-, 0 north L -2 (Oaks Neighborhood) South LANDSC.J%#10m4In-E STREET SE&IONS +h LANDSCAPE EASF- MENTWHERE APPLICM M EXHIBIT 2 �0 Etiraanda North NOTE: PLANTING AREA BETWEEN CURB AND SIDEWALK Specific plan TO BE 6' MINIMUM, TYPICAL I 111 -6 City of 4 DRAFT 1 Rancho cucamonR 60% CANARY ISLAND PNB I 30% REDBUD I 10% JAPANESE PAGODA TREE V WALK COMMUNITY TRAIL CLASS It ' --�. 5' BIKE LANE -j- '` M -1 Etiwanda Avenue 60% CANARY ISLAND PINE 30% REDBUD '1% JAPANESE PAGODA TREE V WALK COMMUNITY TRAIL CLASS N W BIKE LANE M -2 Etiwanda Avenue (West Side Slope Alternative) +R LANDSCAPE EASEMENT Wi9RE APPLICABLE NOTE, PLANTING AREA BETWEEN CURB AND SIDEWALK TO BE f3' MINIMUM, TYPICAL III -6_7 DRAFT Etiwanda Worth Specific Plan City of TABLE 7 - PLANT MATE"MLS PAL-,=.E 713EES - EVERGREEN B!eTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME Arbutus menziesii Madruim Arbutus unedo Strawbeti`y Tree Brachychiton, populneus Bottle Tree Calocedrus decurrens Incense Cedar Ceratorua s1qua Carob Eucalyp. z camaldulensis Red Gum Eucalyptus citriodora Lemon Scented Gum Eucalyptus nicholii • Willow- Leafed Peppermint Eucalyptus polyanthemos Silver Dollar Gum Eucalyptus rudis Desert rum Eucalyptus viminalis Manna White GuF-- Geijera parvifolia Australian Willow Southern xagnolia Magnolia grandliflom Melaleuca lencadendra Cajeput Tree Pinus canariensis Canary Island Pint Pinus eldarica Mondell Pine Pinus halepensis Atlepo Pine Pinus pinea Stone Pine Pinus thunbergiana Japanese Black Pine Quercus agrifolia i G,eliforma Oak Quercus ilex Holly Oak N Rhus lancea African Sumac Note; Not ali plants listed herein are appropriate for use in publicly raalwLained landscapes. Please verify with the C' • -)f Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Division approved plant list. DRAFT III -68 r V TREES - IDECEDUOUS BOTANICAL NAME CC 1MON NAME Albizia julibrissin Mimosa Tree Bauhima variegate. Purple Orchid Tree Chorisia speciosa Silk Floss Tree Cercis occidentalis Redbud Ginkgo Bilcba riaidenhair Tree Rck; uteria bFpinnata Chinese Flame Tree W-- lreuteria panriculata Golder Rain Tree Lagerstroemia indica Crape Myrtle Uquidambar styraciflua tweet Gum Liriodendron tulipifera Tulip Tree Platanus racemosa California Sycamore Pyrus gaderyana "Bradford" Bradford Pear Salk babylonica Weeping Willow Tipuana Ppu Tipt Tree PALMS BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME Phoenix can .enesis Canary Island bate Palm Phoennc dactylifera Date Plum Washingtonia f NU --, California Fan Palm Washingtonia robusta iVlexican Fan Palm Ncte; Not al. plants listed herein are appropriate fir use in p►j?)licly maintained, = C� landscapes. Please verdiy with the City of Rancbn, C.ucaz::.unga Enlpneering Division approved plant lisit. DRAFT 111 -69 TABLE 7 (CONTINUED) SHRUBS BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAAM E Abelia "Edward Gouchef' Edward Goucher Abelia Acacia cngerup ✓ No Common Name Acacia redolens No Comae --gin Name Arctostaphylos species Manza.vta Cal'L,emon species Bottlebash Ceanothus species California l_,ilac Cistus species 2ockrose Cocculus 12urifeliva' _ Snailseed Rex species Holly Heteromeles Arbutifolia 'Tayon Mahonia aquifolium "Compacts" Oregon Grape Nandina domestics " Compacta" Heavenly Bamboo Osmanthus fragrans Sweet Olive Phormium tenax rlax Pittosporum tobira "Wheelers Dr.xV Dwarf Mock Orange Pittosporum tobira "Variegata" Variegated Mock Orange Plumbago sapensis Cage Plumbago Primus caroliniana Carolina Laurel Cherry Raphiolepis indica Pink India Hawthorn Rhus ovata Sugar Bush _ Ribes sanguineum Pink Winter Currant Ribes specinsum Xylosma congestum Fuchsia - Flowering Gooseberry Xylosi'm Note: Not all plants listed hetein are appropriate for use in publicly maintained _andssapes. Please vedly with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Division approved plant list. DRAFT 11 -70 Ll U U l Ti.RLE 7 (CONTINUED) SUB SHRUBS BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME Agapanthus africanus Lily of the bile Arctostaphylos species Mpnzanita Ceanothus species Hemerocallis species California Lilac Day Lily Lonicera japonica "Halliana" Hail's Honey suckle Moraea bicolor Fortnight Lily VIPiES BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME Maefadyena unguis - cati Cat's Claw Vine Ficus pumila Creeping Fig Jasminum polyanthum No Common Name Loniceraa japonica Japanese Honeysuckle Wisteria floribunda GROUND Wisteria COVER BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME Arctostaphylos edmundsii Little Sur Manzanita Baccharis pilularis "Twin Peaks" Coyote Brush Eschscholzia- California California Poppy Gazania splendens "Mitsuwa Yellow" Clumping C;azania , Hypericum calycinum Aaron's Beard Nandina domestics "Harbour Dwarf' Dwarf Heavenly Bamboo Trachelospermum jasminoides Star Jasmine Rosmarinum of6d utalis Rosemary Note: Not all plants listed herein are appropriate for use in publicly maintained landscapes. Please very with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Division approved plant list. DRAFT . 111.71 TABLE 7 (COl`Pi'INL M) ¶ • iJ TURF BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME i Preferred Mix: 90% tall Fuscue ' (50 % Rebel II/50% Apacbe) 10% Kentucky Blue (A-34,)::, NOTE: interior sheets, front yards and slopes shall conform to this plant list or to the City of Rancho Cucamonga approved plant list. (RC.T03) I Note: Not all plants listed herein are appropriate for use in publicly maintained;.. landscapes. Please verify with the City of Aanrho Cucamonga Engineering DPfision approved plant list. DRAFT 1114 ; 11.4.2 Landscape Desien and Plant M t : The plant palette (Table 7) reflects the use of plant species suitable li to this region and compatible with the community theme. Selections were made with respect to growth factors such as climate, drought tolerance, soil conditions and maintenance concerns. Plant materials with fire- resistant qualities will be used in areas adjoining the foothill;egion. Wherever possible, street trees should be evergreen on r; rrth/south streets to frame views, and deciduous on east/west streets to maximize solar potential and minimize damage from Santa Ana Wind conditions. All public common landscaped areas shall be installed with scree combinatictn of trees, shrubs, ground cover and vines, decomposed gra,ute material or native field stone as illustrated in the Landscape Street Sections. All streetside landscap iig on private lot areas shall ire based on the Landscape Street Sections and selected from the punt palette contained as part of these guidelines (Table 7). Gradual transitions from private lot areas to adjoining landscape areas are encouraged. The use of decomposed granite, native field stone and drought tolerant native plant materials shall be utilized wherever possible as a means of water conservation, particularly Ak in large landscaped areas and utility and flood control corridors. •t.a i 1 a x A .t,• ._ l *AD 7 cad SGE I.e r r r r , a the qpfeoate . Landscaping within publicly maintained areas (Landscape Mamtruance District) shall be approved by the City Engineer in accordance with Engineering Division approved . plant list, add planted according to the minimum spacings required. Th&,,xse of native and drought-tolerant trees, shrubs and ground covers shall be encouraged in public rights -of -way and landscaped easement areas. 11.4.3 SCE. 1'fllW_ FLOOD CONTIEOL The landscape concepts proposers within SCE, MWID, Flood Control and other rights-of-way shallbe conceptually approved by the appropriate entity. {, Most utility condors 411 renLain undisturbed and retain native vegetation. When lamkdscaping is proposed for M%M and SCE casem -mts, special landscape tmtment is required. The following guidelines shalt be followed: M -73 3? • A u_w Jencroachment license or letter authorization must be obtained from the utility. • landscape plans must be approved by the utility. • Shrubs and ground ;.over shall be emphasized. • Small accent trees having, at maturity, not more than 15 feet diameter canopy and 15 feet diameter root system may be used, provided that no tree is planted closer *:tan 15 feet from centerline of any NIWD pipeline. 11.4,4 ®PEN SPACE Bti?FF R Z(? To pr6\Ade a transition between maintained landscape areas and natural open space, a 'buffer zone shall be es`ablished consistent with the Resource. Management Plan and the Fare Protection Study. For areas intended for resource conservation, off-trail use shall be discouraged whew feasible by the use of strategically placed native bramiewegetation. 11.4.5 ;LM. CAPE STA1MM� i All landscape plans will be required to coply with the Xeriscape standards of Ordinance No.. 411 (Appendix Item No. 12) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code (Chapter 19.16). The xeriscape consep :Nines creative landscaping and efficient irrigation to conserve wataw usage. the main principles to consider in creating a xedscape are water conserving plants, reduction in lawn area, grouping plants according to watering needs and an irrigation system designed to meet plant needs. 11.4.6 horticultural Soils Test B- Wuicements Horticultural, sails tests are important for p �pmlandsca Pe design. Such reports are required for the public landscape areas and shall be obtained °prim, to landscape instaldation from 41 fib agricultural laboratorf. The test summaries shc4d include analysis of soil ferdlity and agricultural suitabilk and provide recommendations for pre -plant amendments, backfill mix and post- plant maintenance fertilization, and be pied €Erie -pity M-74 DRAFT, E l kspeeteF reviewed and apprt►.ed by the City Engineer prior to any planting. 11.4.7 Irri2gtl6u Standard Automatic, irrigation will be a required element of landscape development within public parkways and other common areas. Irrigation systems s4iall be designed with overlapping head to head coverage including compensation for summer wind paltms. Moisture sensors, low gallonage irrigation systems and 'other irrigation features shall be utilized in ace mane with the pity Xeriscape ordinance and public works 1a4dccape requirements. - Peg -up" irrigation spridider heads shall bey used. Additional equipment such as controllers' and backilow preventers should, be located to minimize their visual impact on the sireetscape Drip irrigation shall be used in the medians and r!her areas as determined by theXity`Engineer. 11.A.8 Ian Dernin enanee Standards The bighting and Landscape Mainv na *ice District will be responsible for the maintenance pfparkways, neighborhood entry mmiuments, neighborhood ggnage, theme walls and median islands along Major and &, dondary Arterial Streets and parWay areas along Collector Streets where singie- familyresidences are in a'rear- faci"%" condition;S Community trail landscaping and other areas may bo int hided Ohen determined necessary by the City Engineer during the de`relopment/design review process. Publicly -owned street trees planted within front and side yard areas of private lots shall be the responsibility of the homeowner. Utility corridors and flood control district Properties shall be ciaiatained l.t the controlling entity. 11.5 ikf3MMiJNYT%' L'a sIG1�T F��'I'UYi� The Community Design FreaW= include elements that enhanca the overall character of the community. Use iclude items such as neighborhood entry and theme walls, trail fencing, sgnage and atmosphere lighting. The follow ^g exhibits illustrate igie proposed design treatments for neighborhood entries and theme walls as shown on Exhibit 22. 11175 DRAFT r, r6 9 t eiah orhood Exhibit No. \ Day Creek 23 Upper Edwanda 24 The Oaks 25 Edwanda Highlands 26 Chaffey 27 The use of distinctive mztefsals and entry details re nfLrn,. -;'he neighborhood identity and community character. These and other a 6064` iand=ping shall be provided in accordance with the neighborhood design concept: The neighborhood entries are identified on Exhibit 22 as follWa: A. Day Creek, B. Upper Etiwxnda; C. Ste Oars; D. Edwanda highlands, and E. Chaffey. The community-wide design features include the following exhibits: Eques,lan Trails/Fencing 28 EquestriL.i Trails, Typical Section 29 -II Atmosphere•Lighting/Entry Sign Letters 30 The proposed design treatments for landscaping and other site amenities within each neighborhood include the following exhibits: Mailbox Treatments 31 Typical Streetside Landscaping 32 /Driveway Treatment Internal Private Lot Slope Treatment 33 III -76 DRAFT 0 1000' 20W of=. y LEGEND Thema Wa8 View Fence FeKtlbaIh.W E(" (le A pay Leek a Upper Eliwanda C Oaks 0 Elhvanda kiphlands e Chantey koeates theme type) V II MUI T • TI/ ., E 1' �p`� ! R L `pN MONUI III -77 4N, '� S�n J � .l���� 4P+ �� �Ii 1 ^ � :1��.".1 Ls - i� I'D <����4 �� ®� -•�� ����' i � J`� R'r�� ELEVATION as ^�uXtw'uw.�¢osroNEVe�avm�u.._ =' r GROUNDN OV rr SiGFI Pa W! qO SEA Lpwpusm F— SCREEN PLANTING NDSCAPE EASEMENT r ✓ jl 4 PEGTAL LANDSCAPE EASEME t a'-VE NATURAL PELD - B' VENEER NATURAL W1 CONC. CAP A PLASTER. PLAN -, III -78 e =1 Adllkl = 6' NATIVE MELD MNEVENEER WALL W/ CONCRETE CAP 3(Y' MAX. NATWE FIELD STONE VENEER SIGN WALL W/ CONCRETE CAP 4 SIDEWALK SHRUBS. AND GROMDCOVER • 8' PRIVATE LOT LANDSCAPE EASEMERT MCP1. SECTION l -DAY CREEK , 100d 8 � �V t I HQ Rt ; 6EC TI /M Etiwanda North specific PEan '�1 City of '111-79 ORAFT Ranchb Csrcamonga REDBUO CANARY ISLAND PINE JAPANESE PAGODA TREE A iA gr i ���.,���,,; �.'' ` ;\ / "fit "`�'t �� eQ• r3 �„i+ ` ! '1 �" ELEVATION \C. t PINES i 1 ICAPE EASEMENT J _ aP a Law PanSM z:r HmA cur STONE V06AR wAU u4l= GAP a PLASM LANDSCAPE EASEMENT .. \ sAEw�uc A A PLAN UPPER f Xh(1E:7i'24(Ai 00'itiwanda North Specific Platt city of III -g1 DRAFT a1mcho c a I 8' CUT STO E CVENEER CAQ 3W MAKCU ' STONE VENEER SIGN MALL IL - W! CONCRE7 `c GAf'. & MAX. CUT STONE MEANDERING rkl, Ar X"' _ BATTERED WALL 4' SIDEWALK SHRUBS AND ' 'GROUNCC07ER TURT' AREA F ^•14ATF LOT SE+''riON LAT§DSCAPE EASEMENT UPPER E 77 WA MDA i dwranda Mcp th s`pedfic Fhtn M -82 t/1F3 r z R :lea CONCRETE CAP PILASTMS 017' ,UR, NERY 4W TO 8O' A.G. HEIGHT VARIES FROM 5'6' TO 6'6' COAT STONE VENEER STUCCO WALL FINISH GRACE TUBULAR STEEL FENCE YATH 5/8` PICI fS @ 50O.C. BEIGE COLOR PILASTERS LOc:A`'¢'O AT PROPERTY 0-me HEIGNT VARIES FROM 5'6' 3'C 8'6' F (wISH QR"E -- - rm—ftc As umw NOW i_.IIRS WHERE 7'RF OCCURS ADJACENT TO Fi %CE THEME WALL0 ����� * FF M PRIVATE LOT F'E '- MOTE. REFLR TO COMMItITrY THI -AkE WALL /ENTR. MONUME_r. , PLAN FOR LOCATIONS OF EACH. 1I <33 > Wwanda North"" Specific Plan DRAFT Rancho .s, CANYON LIVE OAK CAWFOVNIA BLACK OAK. CALIFOfiNIA WALNUT j ELEVATION LANDFCAP n s- NIGH °rONEVE t4! CONC PLAN nN3 �m NOTE :CONCEPTUAL DESIGN ONLY. SEE TFXT EX1401 ' 2,5(A; itiwanda North S ecific Plan City of III-$4 DRAFT, Rrncho Cucamfmga . . r: 6' NATIVE HELD STONEVFNEER WALL W/ CONCRETE CAP _ I 30• MAX. NATIVE FIELD STONE VENEER SIGN WALL - W/ CCNrRET2 CAP P SIOEIAALK . y $HnJOS ANI GROUNOCOVER 77- (. . 6' s PRIVATE LOT LAN .=APE EASEMENT MIM SECTION E 'Bff 5(8) Etiwanda North S ecWt Plan, l City of 111-85 DRAFT `Rancho Cucamonga i vmw t-mut: AT PRIMARY ENTRY MONUMENT ALONG PERIMETER SITE 3OUNDARY CONCRETE CAP PILASTERS OCCUR EVERY 40' TO 60' HEICHT VARIES 5'6'TO 6'6" NATIVE FIELD STONE VENEER STUCCO WALL FINISH GRADE it TUBULAR STEEL FENCE WITH' /8' PICKETTS 0 S'O.C. BEIGE COLOR PILASTERS WMED AT PROPE11TY LINES HEIGHT VARIES &W 70 6'6' FINISH GRADE PROVIDE 6* VADE MOW CURB WHERE SURF OCCURS ADJACENT TO PENCE THEME WALL 5`11"VIEW FENCE SIINTERIOR PRI VAI TEE 1I.C. 0%, T FENCES - OAKS EXHIBIT 25(C) NOTE.REFER TO COMMUMITY THEME WALL /ENTRY MONUMENT -") I 'Etiwanda North PLAN FOR LOCATIONS OF EACH Specific Plan City of 111-86 05V q-r Rancho Cucamonga ELEVATION = 6' HIGH 89m;'K VENEER tY;.d Wf CONC. CAP & PILASTER - - -- ENTRY PORTAL I LANDSCAPE EASEMEPf' G� GROMMOVER � SIGN PANEL. i AM SMW •L�. r ti ¢ _ l VENEER WALL WI COMM CAP b IOW PLASTER - i• ,` SID[K ?.LIC r scewALK PLAN VVV i ET`I WA DA HiGHLA r CANYOU LIVE OAK FLOWERING REDBQD mod/ WES -rd,4 REDBBD --- �Cc�- ��,� -�,� may'-:- r•�;-- srr -r =.� ---- TOYON ti <�H'^.•....'i.A�v�f�'t /L:'1.. .v.s'�1'' Nor s.. :r.• Lcm`•`.r` t r J �^ K: Win. .�� �•� -nw :�?•. -. ELEVATION i r f s� MAX ,unru PIELO STONE VENEM wain", GROUNDCCVER r13-0. PANEL w /Co"I'm AP i LOW PRASTEr r. MRUIS 1�:.TJ •� a \ I x `' - ' A �. SCREEN ALAN', '-- -*-LANDSCAPE EASEMENT PORTAL ul�lllr `i� 1'�,ihF LANDSCAPE EASEMEN " ` — i 6• NIGH N.AArt FIELD 8TONEVENEER &ALL 7 W CONE, CAP i PILASTER - PLAN NO75• CONCEPTUAL DESIGN ONtY' Etiwanda WWI _ Specific Plan I 'City'-of DRAFT Rancho Cacamanga 7 l 11 1 }�.. 5' NATIVc FIELDSTONEW=NEER WALL W/ CON -'RES$ CAP W MAX NATIVE FIELD STONE YENEUP SIG', WALL • W/ CONCRETE CM ,. \ 1� .. ,V SIDEWALK $HRUBS AND GROUNOCOVER `` 1 MATH-LA POPPY; TOYON S' PRIVATE LOT MlN. SECTION i CHAFFEY NEIGHBORHOOD EN-7-17Y gjECTION EXH1,3fT 27f3I Efiwanda North Specific Plan C�Ey of 111 -91 Rancho Cucamonga DRAFT AT PR "MARY ENTRY MONUMENT A',IDNG PEMMETER SITE BOUNDARY tIF-W PENCE THEAl4E WA 1, CONCRETE CAP PILASTERS OCCLR EVERY 40' TO ice' O.C. HEIGHT VARIES 5'6"TO 6'6' NATIVE Flk% -O STONE VENEER I STUCCO WALL FINISH G;IADE TUBULAR STEEL FENCE V.-M S/$" PICK= Ti S U S•O.C. BEIGE COLOR PILASTERS LOCATED AT PROPERTY WNES DIET aHT VAI?!%S 5'6' TO 6'6' FINISH GRAIL* PROVIDE 6' WIDE MOW CURS W WERE TURF OCCURS ADJACENT TO FENCE NOTE-.REFER TO COMMUNITY - WALLIENTRY MONUMENT Spe ci PLAN VOR LOCATIONS OF EACI! Itipd L� G Rancho 1DRAFT. Im KA p1 -opO.C. PVC iY EQUESTRIAN TRAILSIFENCING NOM- REFM TO CM STAWARCS SECTlO[o{ IWO FOR EW— 8R' 28 CONSTIMTiON AND MIGN MP&S OF FENCE AND TRAIL. Etiwanda ..North Specific (elan IYI -93 cats of ©ROT c :, TTER EOUESTRIAM TRAIL TYPICAL SECTION "NOTEMEFER TO CITY STANDARDS FOR CONST11'=110N AND Dr-4" EXHIBff 29 DETAIL OF FENCE AND TRAIL EQI'i!!ifida Nwth Spe�Hic Plan _ III -94 City of . DRAFT �D`1, \\ « «2.\.. /O ' \ 3y2 ©» - io ����fly ° ° Aw 0701 -02, SEPTEMBER 11, 1991 P.O. AGENDA ( 13 of 13 STANDARD RURAL.-MAILBOXES 203450 GRAS SUPPORTS WITH CHAMFERED ENDS {– WX5' POST WITH A CHAMFERED TOP AND ROUTED GROOVE NAME FIELD STAKE° ts•S4. FINISH GRADE TYPICAL MAILBOX STAND • DAY CREEK /OAKS /CHAFFEY s• ,a• �.— STANDARD RURAL WMLSOXES 2'X5" GRAB SUPPORTS WITH CHAMFERED ENDS 4 5'X52 POST WITH A CHAMFERED TOP AND ROUTED GROOVE BRICK BAS%l �a•so. FINISH VWDE TYPICAL MAILBOX STAND • ETIWANDA vK *NLIDS AML ,s• ,a• STAt+DAW #el , 4d L "LEOXES 2'X5• GRAB S %MTH CHAPAFERED ENDS v S'X5' POST WITH A CtwUIFERED TOP AND ROUTED GROOVE CUT STONE BASE tsssC�. FISH GRADE TYPICAL MAILBOX STAND • UPPER ETIWANDA EVilBIT 31 NOTE: EACH ALTERNATIVE IS SWJECT TO AmCEPTMWE Edwaanda North BY U.S. POSTAL SERVICE Specific Plan+ city of I1I -96 Lusdo CwAMRp DRAFT r � 1 r r •-•. 1 ]r WITH MANUAL I 7 RIGATION i `Y !41 IIMIIII bc STREET TREES PFR E. STREET TREE EASEMENT IF REOUIRED TYPICAL MAILBOX STAND STREETSIDE LANDSCAPE RE (subject to Post Offte approvW) APPLY TO FRONT AND CORNER LOT TYPICAL' STREETSIDE LA S API d'E? I Ay TREATMENTS 1 NOTE: ABOVE WPROVEMENTS TO BE MIST'ALLEB ON—SITE E*ilBff 32 By BlXUM PRIOR TO OCCUP #f . MINIPAU R; Egiw►anda North UP TO C5' WIDE LLOT'.3 TREES PER LOT Specific Flan UP TO 80' v ..DE LOT. 3 TREES PER LOT OVER 80' LfYT, 4 TES M !AT f My or III -97 DRAFT Undw Cmzmo"a LANIDSCAr- YARD SLOP REAR YARD f nR YARD 2:1 SLOPE GREATER THAN 5' SLOPE PLANTING TABLE VERTICAL. HEIGHT /SLOPE SLOPE TREATMENT 5 to 8 feet with >S:1 and Irrigated Ground Cover <2 :1 slope for Erosion Control 5 feet or greater with 2:1 Irrigated Ground rover slope or greeter 1 gal. Shrub per 100 st Slope Area 1598 Tree par 150 at Slope Area (5 gall. Max. for all Em Swiss) 8 feet or greeter with 2:1 Irrigated Ground Cover slope or greater 1 gal. Shrub per 100st Slope Area 5 gal. Trae per 250 of Slope Area 15 gal. Tree per 150 of Slops Area Q MOTE: TREES AND SHRUBS SHALL BE PLANTED IN STAGGERED CLUSTERS U-1%171o1 r v a TO SOIFT£Nl AND VARY SLOPE PLANE. SLOPE PLANTING REGUNIED ISpecific nPlain BY THIS SECTM SHALL X CLt1DE A IFING:I9B ..d SYSTEM TO BE MSTAI I BY THE DEVEL� TO OCCtXW4CY. MAlRTCEUNCE BY A EO S ASSOCQiATM IWVY BE AV THE C NgSSON ON A CASE -43Y� -CASE BASIS. .4 i III -9€ MFT Rsnettocracaawn>3a 1 a 1270 DF)MLMR-AffM STAhMARDS The site develo MMUM , p�ient standards are intended to provide minimum standards for development. These standards should be used in corjuncdok with the Design Guidelines in Section 11.0. This section shall not be construed to supersede more restrictive site '.development standards contair,ed in Covenants, Conditions and Ikesteletions, of any propw4v. HowzvAi;­in no case, shall- private deed restrictions permit 1, sae standard than the minimum standards of this section or permit ;a rzi)ter standard in the cal: of a maximum standard of this section. 12.2 SrrE DE3MDP1VI0T STANDARDS 12J Residential l Di rids The development standards for ri,padential dizvelopment are arranged into two categories: (1) A ;sic Development Stapdards, and ;,2) Optionai Development Standards. These standaiA are used in. conjunction with the AW1,61we Policies and Design. Guiddlines during le 10esidential lant/ development/design rv4ew,.,, process as discussed m the Development Code, Chapter 17.06. Fisch residential development must conforLa to either the Basic Development Standards or the Optional Development Standards. 0 Basic Development Standards (Table 8): These standards are intended to }pro basic standards which will ensure good and w quality -atible prqj;xts. These standards, as well as , the density hlmftatigw., are imended to create a development which will be' compatible with, and provide for proper transitions from more sensitive or less intense residential development. Optional Development Standard-, (Table.9): These standards are intended to provide high standards for the development Of projects of superior quality and compatibility within any Residential District, except the Estate Residential districts (HRE and BILE). However, the standards an-, development expectations have been increased above and beyond the basic standards lit M-99 DRAFT E order, P) ensure proper transitions and buffers from lower intense residential uses. Development in much of the Hillside Residential arms. should .,provide, for clustered development options in order to allow the preservation of open space areas. All projects developed under Optional, Standards must provide a minimum of one greemway or pasee, connection across the site, providing access to community and regional trails. 12.2.2 DEBITY The ultimate dimsity allowed in any :;.esidential district shall,, be determii;-d . through the residential land development/design review process and public hearings, as Idescribed in the Dmclopment Code, Chapter 17.06. e the Planning Commission shall have the authority to reason-ably conditir-a any residential development to ensure proper transition and compatibility to zdjacent residential developments, existing or proposed. 12 2.3 F-Mestrian Lela The entire Edwanda North Spa'fic Plan is within the City Equestrian Overlay Zone as estai ped in t1te General Plan. However, a 20,430 square-fooi. lot is required for the Wiping of horses -1 some subareas of the Specific Plan will permit lots as small as 7,200 square feet. Equestrian homesitess are encouraged in subareas adjacent to open space areas with convenient access to the Community and Regional Trail system (see Part IV, Subarea Design Standards). Any project which proposes lots of less than 20,M sWim feet steal! be conclitioned to contribute to an equestrian boarding facility to be located within the Specific Plan Area. M-100 DRAIFT 0 TABLE 8 BASIC DEVEIDPAUNT STANDARDS - RESEDEIl1TIAL DISTRICTS Q,IR - Nor IMUQlm) HRE VIE FOt (F) VL L LOTARPJI:. . MIND" NETAVERAGE(SQUARE FEET) NOR O) 40.000 NIR(I) 73.000 to.= MI- ,CA(UM NET (SQUARE FEET) N/a W 3C,o00 N/R O) 30.000 1,]00 MiOMKOF UWEIISNG UNITS (A) (P'-RiUITED PER ACRE) UP TO 1.(6 1 140.W0. MA):1I.OS UP T02(F) iRt03•. UP 704 MMIUM DWELLING UNIT Sit - IAW SQ. Pr. AA REGA]U) ESS OP E-W1 iCr . LOT DBIENSIONS: MINW M WIDTH 07 REQUMEED FRONTSLTaA= Nam 137 77 Nat W SO AVG, VARY t10 63 AVG. 'ARYf5 MINDSUM CORNEA LOTWWM N/R,M 140. O7 N/R 1p too 70' MIND" DEPTH NQ M IDS (F) KM (1) UW IV WN11 UM FRONTAGE (® FRONT PROPERTY LUKE) ... WR M C (F) N/R W 50• 47 mmmu i FLAG LOTFRONrAGEi® FRONT• PROPERTY LINE) NAt W 30' (F) WK (1) 3(r b' SETBACKS: Op FRONT YARD (GD) NIX M 47 M NIX (0 VARY t.S S AVO, VAEYt 5 37 AVG.. VARY t 3 CORNER SIDE YARD NAt.(O 9S (F) Nat M SP 2r _ WERPOR SIDE YARD NIX M 2r (F) N/A M IGM 5110 REAR YARD Nat M 47 0 NIR M 30 :0 AT URF2001tSCCE sot'M RY O7MMUIG UNIT /. ACCEWORY BURDO(G) Nrrt 0) 4.T (n NIX M 3W5 3015 HEK.III' L0.4CAYWNS R0 (G) -.. (0) (G) 35 3S IDT COVERAGE OLAX11" S:) NOR 20507 N/R 25s 40% STRPE SSE LANDSCAPING (PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY) MUQED REQU= REQUIRED REQUOtm REQUIRED - OPEN SPACE REQtMM PRIVATE OPEN DACE lF) .. (F) 2,000 1,000 ULVlIE OPEN SPACE W (PRIVATE MVO COMMON) (F) (F) (F) 0) (P) In 0% m5 NOTE[ i'at p(Witla W Ue1�il awy ��s i..�a.aw NOTES: A Excluding land necessary for secondary streets and arterials and in hillside areas shall be dependent on the slope /capacity factor contained in Development Code Section 17.24.080 B. B As measured from the ultimate curb face on public or private streets. C Variable front yards allowed pursuant to Development Code Section 17,08.040 H _ D Less Than eighteen (18) feet from back of sidewalk requires automatic garage door openers. DRAFT III -101 TABLE 8 - BA'1C DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS (CONTINUED) E Perimeter landscaping and interior street trees. p Environmental studies and investigations such as, but not limited to, geological, hydrological, seismic, slope and soil c =ditions, access/circulation, and biota, research,.shall be conducted for any. development in this-district. Basedonthis information, and the EM for this spea'sfie plan, the actual number of dwelling units shall be determined. To determine the buildable area, a cite must meet the criteria as oafuned in the Rancbo CucamongaDeyelopment Code Chapters 17,18 and 17.24. G In hillside areas, heights shall be limited to thirty (30) feet as specified in Development Code Section 17.24.00.' f li A single -family detached dwelling less than one thousand (1,000) square feet nay be authorized w%en s development ` exhibits innovative qualities in tract. Plot and architectural design through the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. 4 I hillside Residential development shall conform to Development Code Chapter 17.18: Minimum Parcel Size: No absolute minimum parcel widths rad depths aze required. Buildable area is considered to be a contiguous area or the lot which is less than thirty (30) percent in natural slope or the area determined through the environmental studies and investigation as buildable and is subject to slope /capacity factor calculations contained in Development Cale Section 17.24.080. Setbacks: Front, side and rear setbacks shall be determined `;used upon the precise development plan and environmental studies. j AA development smd resaItnat activity shall be prohibited within 100 fed of the high water mark of any stre>r-t bed with an additional 50 toot transitional zone. Where stream bed is located within a steeply banked V-cut canyon, development shall not be permitted within the batiks to the fust bench with an additional 50 -foot transitional zone. (RC T01) DRAFT A III.102 gg, D TABLE 9 - OPTIONAL DEVELOPAJIM STANDARDS - RESIM IUL D13TRICTS (Optional DevelaY,n —+ S_ tandards are not Enpli`-,Able to BRE and VLE designations.) (N/R = NQTREQUIRED) HR VL L MINIMUM SITE AREA (GROSS) NR 5 AC 3 AC LOT AREA VARIATION VARIATION VARIATION (MINIMUM NET AVERAGE) RFQURBD(H) REQUBtED(H) AEQURED NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS (A) UP TJ 2 (B) LIP TO 2 UP TJ 4 (^ERMIITED PEP ACRE) MINISUM'DWELL)NG UNITSME: 1,00D SQ. FT. (C) REGARDLESS OF DISTRICT LOT DIMENSIONS: MINWIM WIDrd (0 REQUIRED VARIATION VARIATION VARIATION FRONTSETBACK) REQUT.IFBD (ID REQUIRED (H) REQUIRED MII42 UMIDErm VARIATION VA3=nON VARIATION REQUMED (9) REQIIRED (H) I REQUIRED SSIBACKS: (D) LOCAL STREET 52' AVG 42' AVJ 42' ANG. VARY :k 10'(H) VARY f10= VARY t 5 PRIVATE ITREETORDRIVEWAY 25'(H) 2S'(H) +Z' CORNER SIDE YARD 25'(H) 25(11) 17' (F) INTERIORSIDEYARD 107201(11) 10 ,120'(H) 5,110' (0) HUMOR SITE BOUNDARY 40110(H) 3015 2015 (DWELLING UNITIAMESSORY BUILDING) RESIDENTIAL BUILDING SEPARATIONS: FRONT TO FRONT 40' 30' 25' OTHER 40' 30' 10' HEIGHT LIMITATIONS (E) 35- 35' OPEN SPACE REQUIRED: PRIVATE OPEN SPACE 5,000 2,000 1,000 COMMON OPEN SPACE (A) (MINIMUM 205 25% 30% USABLE -PEN SPACE (A) (PRIVATE SO% 65% 60% AND COMMON) FSTREETSME LAN.-4CAPING REQUIRED REQUIRED REQUIRED TABLE 9 (COrTTU4UM) OPTIONAL. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS - RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS NOTES: A .. Excluding land necessary for secondary streets and arts&h and in hillside areas dull be dependent on the ilopetcapaciiy actmr contained in Development Cade Section 17.24.030B. B Environmental studies and iavoWsations sub u, but not limited to, geolop.al, hydrological, seismic, alape and soil cowlitiws, accadeirvulation, and blom cseearcb, sb%U be conducted for aqv developmcat in this district. Based ou this info:matmn, `sad the ER for this speciLe plan, ehsacourl numberof t walling units A all be determimd. To determine the buildable area oi, a site must -tmot the criteria as outlined; a the Rancho Cnrasno p D41rolope of Coda Chaptem 17.18 and 17.24. C A singk tamily detacbad dwelling la,`a tCan nice bundrod ( 900) aqua* feat will require the approval, of a Coodidonal Use Permit per Development Code Sectwa 17.O9.03a, D As measured from the ultimate curb face on public and private streets. Refer to Table V..24.05.O40 -D of 2a DevelopmentCode ffar add'iti'on! setback W6=atiom. E In hillside areas, heights aball be limited to thirty (30) feet- sprciW 1i Developmwt Coda St 17.24.070.D.1. F leer than 13' from b ck of sidewalk requires automatic. Sara;: door openers. 6 Zew lot dwellhga permitted per Development Code Section 17 .06.040-0 H HM"e Raidg" devtlopno t xLa9 ecnfam to Dmrdopr=t r-..k chapiar 17.1s: brwismrm Famd sm No absclnte m ieimmss p cd widths mmd depths are rupim . BoldaMe seam is mom:dffi ►:4Q be a conl igooas am : the lot which is' ' Ow thirty (30) pereesst in atterti dope or the nest detnuiud tiraagi'-bt twirvuent studied and investigation u --' beadable aid is sabjad to do*cspwUy farmr oak-) fier.: eoaeabied is 1 krdapsteast Code Section 1739.080. Setbula t VQW Frant,, side sad mar setbmch shwa be detecm1sediat!et1 apoa the pneise ievelopmesc plan aad Bark ammmW stadieL NOTE: For def nitimne amt Devdopomt Code, .5wbm 17.02.140 (RC.T02) J i 'II III -10 DRAFT - tai i 12.2.4 arm -rcial District The regulations as shown in Tables 10 and 11 shall aplaJ to the neighborhood commercial districts. The neighborhood commercial district is provisional only, based upon Market Studies, appropriate lot consolidation and other criteria as described in Section 6.2.2.1. TABLE 10 - SITE DAH NSI(17,6 AND HEIGHT 1IIV11TATIONS -• COMMERCfAL DISTRICTS NOTE: For defmit3sas:s-- Development Code, Section 17:02.140 Notes: A Parcels created within shopping centers are exempt from these standards, as long as a ccnceptt� development plan for the entire center has been, developed and appropriate easements for reciprocal access, parting and maintenance is provided. (RC T0°) DRAn "111-1 05 ✓" y! -FEATURE 3TANt)ARD 1. Minimtm sitel.r t area (A) 10 acres for neighborhood center. 2. Minimum lot width (A) 300 feet 3. l�Um lot depth 300 feet 4. height limitations a.. Within 100 feet of a residential district b. Other locations 25 "feet 40 ,feet NOTE: For defmit3sas:s-- Development Code, Section 17:02.140 Notes: A Parcels created within shopping centers are exempt from these standards, as long as a ccnceptt� development plan for the entire center has been, developed and appropriate easements for reciprocal access, parting and maintenance is provided. (RC T0°) DRAn "111-1 05 ✓" y! TABLE 11- SETBACKS - COM? ERCiAL DLST1tiCTS a. I NOTES: • On existing lots of record, parcels less than 175 frost in depth, aced aotprovida a setback or landscaping greater than 0% of the depth of the property (excluding right-of-way saes). • Parking and loading - off - street puking and loading facilities shall be pre -vided for each use as prescribed in the development cbde. • Signs no sign, outdoor advertising stnt?ture, or display of any type shall be permitted except as prescribed in the city sign ordinance. 8 Service areas, rvkw collection areas and trash enclosures - all service areas, refitse collection areas and trash enclosures shall be completely screened by a solid wall or fence not ten than 6 feat is height, or shall be chz' —ed within a building. Exterior trash encloaues shall conform to City standards. (RC T04) l'I i� DRAFT s 111 -106 STAY WARD BUILDING PARKING LANDSCAPING sac• YARD t�ssstestaat�ieass® 1. Street yard setback (measured from face of the ultimate curb location): a. Major /SpecialBoulavanl 45 feet 30 fet 45'foat average, not less than 30' b. Secondary Collector streets/Local 35 feet 25 fact 35 foot average, not at�ee� Iess than 25, 2. hear property i1ne setback a. Adjacent to existing or planned 020 10 feet 10 feet residential development b. Adjacent to other existing or planned 0 0 0 commercial development 3. Interior side property line setback: a. Adjacent to existing or planned 020 to feet 10 feet residential development b. Adjacent to existing or planned 5 feet 5 feet. 5 feet commercial developma:L a. I NOTES: • On existing lots of record, parcels less than 175 frost in depth, aced aotprovida a setback or landscaping greater than 0% of the depth of the property (excluding right-of-way saes). • Parking and loading - off - street puking and loading facilities shall be pre -vided for each use as prescribed in the development cbde. • Signs no sign, outdoor advertising stnt?ture, or display of any type shall be permitted except as prescribed in the city sign ordinance. 8 Service areas, rvkw collection areas and trash enclosures - all service areas, refitse collection areas and trash enclosures shall be completely screened by a solid wall or fence not ten than 6 feat is height, or shall be chz' —ed within a building. Exterior trash encloaues shall conform to City standards. (RC T04) l'I i� DRAFT s 111 -106 M E F— L-1 12.2.5 OM SRace. Districts 12.2.5.1 Site D mensidris. Height imitation s-and SOM9M Development standards such as sitz dimensions, height limitations apd setbacks shall be determined on a site -by- site basis. AZonsideration, �hall be given to surrounding properties and developments in order to blend and remain consistent with the area. other factors for determination of standards " b,-. topography, water/drainage, chculation, use of site, and any other environmental factors lated to the site. 12.2.5.2 Development Criteria The following develcpment criteria is for the physical development of land within each one of the open space districts. The City shall continue to pursue joint use agreements with the various, utility and flood control enfrIes in the Edwanda North planning am. Compatible uses such as landscaping, parks and trails will be encouraged in these arms. The City Planner may, through the developmenttdesign review process, require additional improvements to it development in any one of the open space districts, if it is needed for the protection of the Public beald "',s"Oy or general welfare. Vftt follows is a discussion of each of the open space districts and their respective development criteria. QWn Space District (M Development within the OS district shall adhere to the following criteria: a Minimize alteration to the natural landfbrm. 9 Protect areas capable of replenishing groundwater supplies. M-108 DRAW o Protect the natural drainage of the area. o Protect waterways from indiscriminate erosion and pollution. i a protect lands having biological significance, especially riparian ( water - related) areas and their associated woodland vegetation. s protect areas with significant native vegetation and habitat value. 1 ! Protect natural areas for ecological, educational, and other scientific study purposes. Mood Controll&Wgn SImce Distii4;4 Cl All development and flood ontrol facilities shalt comply with the following development criteria. s Natural features such as trees, groves, and substantial physical features are to be preserved, wherever, feasible. Naturatuegetation will be retained to anchor soil in place and prevent erosion and sedimentation_: 1 * When removal of vegetation is necessary, and grading is to be undertaken, it shall be done in a manner which will mini iza soil erosion. Seeding and mulching, or other stabilization measures, are to be used to protect thy disturbed land following construction. ® No topsoil may be removed fmm the site except for that area to be covered by improvements. The topsoil from, such areas is to be, if practical, re lstributed on the site to provide a suitah`p base for seeding and planting. y v • Any fill proposed to be deposited in the floodv must be protected against erosion by rip rap, vegetation cover or bulkbeading. ` No fill may be permitted which, acting alone or in combinatior1with existing or fukm uses, affi3 is the capacity of the floodway or unduly increase% Nod heights. • Any structures or land; outside the FC District which could be subject to flood inundation, as depicted on the Federal Insurance Flood Rate Maps or otherwise by the City Engineer, shalt comp . with flood protection xneasses as outlined in Tift 19 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. • All str— tures shall be elevated to the level of the (base flood. -. ' e No structure shall constitute a debris- catching obstacle. t jjh� Corridor- n ace District (ITC) All development within utility corridors shall comply with AML qP the following criteria. 0 Buildings shall not be des;.: "d nor used for human habitatio ; -' i 0 All buildings gull be designed for compatibility with surrounding diMopment. relative to materials height, , size scale and setbacks. a Any development shall include provisions for landscaping, wind or water erosion control, and screesdng, if necessary. Fault Zone - Q[!en Space District Development withui the fault zones shall comply with the following criteria: ® Any Proposed structures shall be in accordance with a geotechnical investigation wk,�& identifies fault M -110 DR""T = J ,I �I location antl appropriate Seth —ack and mitigation criteria. ® No habitable or critical structures (as defined by the General Phan) shall be located within an identified fault zone. Resource Conservation -Qpgn Space District we Wdufla No,s2evexopment, except l°emited public xcess trails sensitive -am the conservai on goal of this use, shrill be permitted, and small comply with the following development criteria:' • There will be no alteration to the natural iandform.' • Conserve areas :with significant native vegetation and habitat valise. ' 9 Protect areas capable of replenishing groundwater .supplies. ® Protect the natural drainage of the area. a Notect ways from indiscriminate erosion and pi�llutioi:,, , V ® Protect lands having biological significance, especially riparian (water related) areas and their 'associated woodland vegetation. Protect areas with , significant native vegetation and habitat value. Protect natural areas for ecological, educational, and other scientific study purposes- Y] e, geeRI p RVA' ' � _legia 7 , ° ean , 7 - . y' pwposal bused 41 lli DRLil` A is PART IV AdEL SUBAREA DESIGN STANDARDS 13,0 SMJBAREA DESCRRMONS The intent of each subarea is to dcfW a ' 'ical areas to be master plauned (see $ecticn 10.2.4) prior to the approval of any f" . o "i project within that subarea. The mash plan shall he developed to ensure coeZrmity with the design guidelines in this plan. It shall provide appropriate access, circulation, paseo- feeler trail design, and otherissues which are not constrained by established parcel lines. The master plan s`iali also be coordinated with the Infrastructure Phasing Plan. All subareas are identFU�ed on the subarea Key Map, Exhibit 34. 13.1 DAY 9 IGI1B ®RHOQZlD —_ "�j� The P "-eek Neighborhood concept exemplifies an "Old California" street sce ;'i. 8cent of the early 4stoay of the a w. The neighborhood theme will L .mflucncca by the existing Eti -wmda area development and the Day Creek Wash area. subarea 1.1 Location Located along the west and east side of Day Creek Boulevard, north of the Route 30 fteeway corridor and Highland Averse, with a t i%rnia portion north 3f Summit Avenue an d soup of the Southern Cal III Edison (SCE) utility corridor. ? ,• nd Use - Icw Density Residential, School, Park, and Neighborhood Commercial as needed, per Sectior. 6.2.2.1. Community Design Features - Day Creek Boulevard is the major en l to the Specific Plan area from highland Avenue. Medjan island breaks will occur at Highland Avenue, Vintage Drive, Sumnu (Batiyan) Avenue and Wilson Avenue (24th Street). Day CreekBoulevard is aprimary scenic corridor with majesties mountain i views to the north and with an expansive view of tl,-- valley to the south. Landscaping in the Bay Creek median islands and adjacent utility corridor shall enhance the view potential of the corridor. IV -1 DIET J ForYSt E2 ..ands Wmh 51'safe Plaa LEGEND eawna station Subarea Reference I ', PLANNING AREA KE AP EXHIBIT Eli an a Aiorth Specific Flan ety of f 1 IV-2 DRAFT ituxhc t:wramo�ga SCE corridors provide significant open space and view opportunities in the subarea. View fencing shall be featured along the edge of residential development and the SCE corridors. Paseo access from residential development to the Community trails located along the SCE corridors shall - ,.e provided. landscaping and paseo opportunities sl a ll be developed along: the Metropolitan Water District (MWD) easement. 1 ° Interior paseos shall be incorporated into residential tract development. ; An Etiwanda North gateway shall be placed at Highland Avenue. A neighborhood gateway shall be placed at Vintage Drive. Neighborhood entry features shall be utilized at the primary access points of and subarea. A 10 -acre school site shall be provided in this subarea. A minimum 5- acre {net) unencumbered., 11 acre irv.91, developed park shall also be provded.,in this subarea. It is expected that the park and school sites will be adjoining and located in the vicinity of Summit and Hariley Bluegrass Avenues. Small parcel ownerships within this subarea shall be master planned with the whole subarea. Unique Design-Q9norMnjdes - A signi&ant edge on the vest side of the subarea is formed by two SCE corridors and the Day Creek Cb=el. . A double set of power t.,mmission lines run along the two SCr corridors which plank the channel. One corridor turns northeast approximately one- quarter of a mile above Wilson Avenue and forms the northern edge of the subarea. Day Creek divides the subarea and provides spectacular view opportunities to the north and the south. The view access is increased by the SCE reserve corridor which parallels the eastern side of Day Creek Boulevard, and turns northeasterly at Wilson Avenue (24th Street). . Imm6diately north , of the corridor is a 55 -am open space area (Subarea 12) which is b::anded by utility corridors and therefore has potential for intensive recreational use. IV -3 )GRAFT �i . Day Creek Channel is concrete -lined with a paved : .°ss road along the east side, and an unpaved dc- -ess .oad along the; west side. Three bridge crossings have been provided for th util=ity casements, one at Summit Avenue and one one- quafer of a is lie north of Wilson Avenue (24th Street). The third crossing is to Ci north of the subarea at the upper power line easement. A MWD transmission line easement traverses the eastern edge of the subarea turning south from Wilson Avenue (24th Street) at the extension of Hanley Avenue, and then turning west from 11inley,Avenue at Summit Avenue. landscaping opportunities exist at the north and south radius turns. A paseo should connect Wilson Avenue (24th Street) to the northern limit - of Hanley Avenue. the City's Red Hill Fault. Study Zone traverses the subarea on a northeasterly diagonal. one single - family residence is located within the alignment of Day Creek Boulevard in the vicinity of Highland Avenue. 13.1.2 ftAr_M 1:2 Locatign - North of the Route 30 freeway corridor and Highland Avenue, south of Summit Avenue, east of Day Creek Boulevard. Land - Low Density Wsidential Community g�i Feat res - Imerior paseos shall be provided in intemat tract deli -e] ;r Pasebs aid/or local trails shall connect development with the Community trail syst =gym along the utility corridor. Neighf r rhood entry features shall be utilized at the primary access points of the'jsubarea. Unique Design pgd an�ties - Future development must take into consideration three existing residences along fey ,Bluegrass Avenue. A nc h -south utility corridor provides the western fAge of this :subarea. IV-4 DRAFT d ,F d Amok The Edwanda Specific Plan governs the area to the east of this subarea with very low . ,sedential use and equestrian lot development. Portions of this subarea have been annexed into the City and tract approvals are pending; one tract has been recorded. 13„2 UFTER E JdiVARiDA MAREA The Upper FAwanda Neighborhood is transitional between the historic Edwanda agricultural area and the steeper, undeveloped, alluvial fan area. to the north. The neighborhood will be characterized by the use of cut stone elenenlr reminiscent of older, established neighborhoods. Pines and flowering treO, will reflect elements of the native SouthemDouglas Fir groves and Ceanothus anij Manzanita masses found in the hills to the north. A 13.2.1 Saba=, Nation - North of Wilson Avenue (24th Street), south and east of an SCE utility corridor, west of Etiwanda Avenue. ,a use - Low Density Residential. Community Design Features - Interior paseos shall be provided within the tract design. Paseos shall connect residential development to Community trails The neighborhood theme wall shall be featured along the north side of Wilscn Avenue (24th Street). View fencing shall be featured along the utility corridors. Neighborhood entr, --h. =nes shall be utilized at the primary access points of the subarea.; " ni Deign Qpy=nitles - This subarea has been previously annexed into •.ha City, with recorded Development Agreements pertinent to any future development. 13.2.2 Subarea 21 Wr - ,Located north of Wilson Avenue (24th Street), south of the SCE utility corridor, east of East Avenue, and west of Etiwanda Avenue. Allk IV -5 DRAA14T 1 &J i� c �,� - Low and Very Low Density Residential. o�rmuflfty Features - View fencing shall be featured along the edge of residential development and the SCE corridors. Pasco access, from residential development to the Community trails located along the SCE corridors shall, be pfovided. View fencing shall be featured along the edge of residential development and Edwanda Creek Wash. Pow access shall be provided linking residential development to the Community trails located along Etiwanda Creek Wash. The neighborhood theme wall shall be featured along the north side of V%ilson Avenue (24th Street). East Avenue provides a view corridor which €lxall be enhanced by landscaping. The fault zone corridor shall be retained ca an opera space feature. View fencing shall be used along the edge of residential developn nt and the corridor. Paseo access shall be provided linking residential development to Community trails located along the corridor. Neighb,�.%rhood entry features shall be utilized at the primary access points of the subarea. Uniove Design Q=rtunities - Much of Subarea 2 is bounded by util Lr - -` comdors, as in Subarea 1. A SCE corridor provides the north and west ed6e of the subarea. 'The M VD easement runs along the south side of Wilson Avenue (24th Saw) providing an opportunity for special boulevard treatment for trails and landscaping (see also Edwanda Specific Sian). An offset -extension of Ldwanda Avenue connects Wilson Avenue (24th Street) with an east-west collector road where it ends at a T-intersection. The purpose of the configuration of Mwanda Avenue north of Wilson ' Avenue (24th Street) is to divert traffic to Day Creek Boulevard and Fast Avenue in order to provide protection for the historic portion of Etiwanda Avenue south of Wilson Avenue (24th: Street). et^the�berbeed: (East Avenue forms the eastern Ieg of the Lipper Etiwanda Loop Road and Day Greek Boulevard forms the western leg.) IV -6 DRAFT F9 lu, The Red Hilt Fault Study Zone bisects the subarea between Edwanda Avenue and East Avenue. The Red mill fault is identified in this'exea and Will lsaovide an open space. — For., 13.2.3 North of Wilson Avenue (24th Street), south of an SCE utility corridor, east of East Avenue and west of Etiwanda Creek Spreading Grounds. Jaad-Ux - Very Low Density Residential, .ammunity Desig4LFeatum - This location r jacent to the Spreading Grounds is welt - suited to development of equestrian lots which should be enc?omaged, with local trails providing, links to the Community trail system. Neighborhood entry features shall be utilized at the primary access points of the subarea. Unique Design QRaQMnifles - Edwanda Creek Spreading Grounds provide the eastern edge of tine neighborhood and a unique open space Oppoty -- 13.2.4 ,Subarea 3.1 Location - A triangular area bounded on three sides by utility easements, east. of Day Creek Channel and south of the Los Angeles Department of -water and Power (LADWP) corridor. Ignd Use - Very Tow Density Residential. Community Design Features View fencing shall be featured along the edge of residential development and the utility corridors. '', Paseo access from residential development to the Community trails locai d along the corridors shall also be provided. This subarea adjoining the Day Crert Spreading Grounds is 0,41-suited to development of equestrian lots, tiierefore equestrian lot develol�ment is encouraged, with local trails providing links to Community trails:,; Neighborhood entry features shau be provided at the Upper and x her Loop Road intersections with upper Day Crack Boulevard. Am, IV -7 DRAFT neighborhood entry features shall be provided at the Upper and Lower Loop Road intersections with East Avenue. Unique Design OnpQrtunitics - This subarea 4 bounded on all sides by utility corridors. The Day Creek Spreading Ground (Chaffey Regional Park) adjoins the area to the west with access across utility road bridges at both the upper and lower utility corridor crossings. Equestrian lot development sh,,41S, -ccur in this unique location. 13.2.5 cubarea 3,2 j,ADgoni North of the Toyer SCE utility corridor, south of the double LADWP and SCE easwiri,! is, west of the extension of Edwanda avenue and east of an additioni l ."= utility corridor. Land Use - Very Low 11,ersity Residential. pmmuni D&9an F=Li,g - View fencing shall be featured along the edge of residential development and the SCE corridors. Paseo access shall be provide) from residential development to the Community trails located along the SCE corridors. Development of landscaped internal p:seos is encouraged. An opportunity exists for an east-west paseo between Eaet Avenue and Day Creek Boulevard. The location of a portion of tine subarea is nviih of the Upper Edwanda Loop Read and south of the double utility corridor. This location is well- suited to development of equestrian lots. Developers are encouraged to provide equestrian lots with local trails providing links to community trails. Neighborhood entry features shall be_1161t ed at the primary access points of the oabarea. niig1tg Design Qrnmities - SCE corridors form the north, south and west boundaries of this subarea, providing opportunities for oper. space and Community trails. 13.2.6 Subarea 3.3 Location - North of the lower, SCE utility corridor, south of the double LADWP and SCO, utility corridor easements, east of the extension of Etiwanda Avenue and wrest of Edwanda Creek d Use - Very Low Density Pasidential. Communi ;wan F a e - This subarea shares similar desiga feature 5 with Subarea 3.2. View fencing shall be featured along the edge of residential development and Etiwanda Creek Wash. Pasco access from residential development to the Community trails located along the Wash shall be provided. A 10 -acre school site shall be provided in this subarea., An adjoining minimum 5 -acre (net} unencumbered, 20 acre total, devOoped r--:k shall also be provided in this - ubarea. It is expected that thil`school and park will be located in the area .forth of the lower utility corridor. Small parcel ownerships within this subarea shall be master planned with the whole subarea. Udg den rtunities - Edwanda Creek forms the eastern edge of the subarea and provides views to the mountains and foothills, as well as opportunities for open space and Community trails. Until �Aood control facilities are provided, the eastern portion of this subaim is subject to flooding by Edwanda Creek. 13.3 ETIW 2 CREEK WASH SUBAREA 13.3.1 Marea 8 Imatip-n - TheEtiwanda Creek dwwm4 wash. Edwanda Creek drains the mountains to the north, emerging in Subarea 4, and spreads in numerous channels across the alluvial fan in a southeasterly direction throughout Subarea 8. This subarea serves as a uatural boundary between Etlwanda Highland neighborhood and, the upper Etiwanda neighborhood.' IV-9 D1ZdF'r IV-10 IDPAFT i Land Use - Hood Control. Community De�j Pea *eg - Etiwe a Creels provides a significant open space area for the community. The et�st and west edges of the Etiwanda Creek Wash shall be'enhanlxd by installation of a Community trail. The trail and its buffer zone sball be enhanced by landscaping which will serve to soften the edge between the built and the natural environment. The buffer zone will also function as a fire protection element. UniQue Ik9en_Opg=nities - The Edwanda Creek Wash Spreading Grounds must be defined and preserved. The Wash contains significant alluvial fan scrub habitat and may serve as a habitat mitigation bank area. The Wash also contains significant riparian habitat which must be preserved. The Wash presents a flooding hazard. 1:'lood protection facilities, including a debris dam and concrete channel, or levee alternative, are planned for the Wash. Once the planned flood control facilities, or alternatives, are in place, portions of the may _subarea be available for residential development. Use of a portion of the subarea for residential development must be weighed against conflicting uses for groundwater recharge /Spreading Grounds, wildlif corridors, alluvial fan scrub habitat, mitigation banking, riparian habitat reservation, passive recreation and aesthetic use. The Wash presents a wildfire hazard. Transitional landscaping along the edges of the Wash will redjr^ the hazard. The Red EM 'Fault Study Zone traverses a portion of the subarea. IV-10 IDPAFT i Location - This is an irregularly shaped area formed by utility corridors �! generally located cast of Day Creek Wash and southeast of *he "lower" utility corridor. Land Use - Open Space. mm ni DCSIi:n Features - This site is fully buffered by utility corridors to the north and south, the Cucamonga County Water District Royer- Nesbit Water !rmtment Plant on the east, and Day Creek' Boulevard and additional open space leading to Day Creek Wash on the west. E Approximately 55 acres are availabIle. to the east of Day Creek Boulevard which could be used for intensive recreation purposes and should be investigated as the site for a public equestrian boarding, training, and show, facility. The open space area to the west of` w,,Creek Boulevard may be appropriate for use as an equestrian trail head, with access to Day Creek Wash available across the utility easement bridge. Umigue Dcsien rtu>?iti_ - This site is SCE "surplus land ". The parcels have irregular shapes formed by three utility corridors which angle through them to provide a transition from a north -south alignment to an cast-west alignment. The parcel* will also be bisected by Day Creek Boulevard. Cucamonga County Water District's Royer- Nesbit Water Treatment Plant is situated at the eastern apex of two of the utility corridors and provides additional buffering for the site. A portion of the SCE surplus property extends north of the middle corti , and is naturally aligned with Subarea 3. The east -west collector road should be aligned to facilitate the use of th?s parcel within Subarea 3. The Oaks neighborhood is nestled at the mouth of Day Creek Canyon, at the top of a magnificent alluvial fan. The Oaks neighborhood concept features the um- of native fieldstone. Native Oaks, including Canyon Live Oak and Califor i a Black Oak, shall, be incorporated into the landscape design of the area, along IV-11 with native S California Walnut. . ' - {Qxereas 13.5.1 Subarea 4.1 Location - North of the double utility corridor, st -tth of the apex of Day Creek as it emerges from the canyan at the top of the alluvial fan, east of Fttwanda Creek Canyon flowing frem steeply .sloping hills, and west of Day Creek as it flows along the edge of steeply sloping hills to the Day Creek debris dam and conctet ,diiannel. Land Use - Hillside Residential; Open Rip=. Community sign Features - Because of moderate to steep ;'s1o1__, ithis subarea is subject to the Hillside Graft '.Development Ordinance, Development Code, Section 17.24. Fifty foot structural setbacks are required: from identified faults. To e Sure the integrity of the fault zone, the setbacks shall be set aside in zutl -foot wide fault zone corridors which will become an open space element in the subarea. View fencing shall be featured along the edge of residential development and the fault conidors, The area north of the southern boundary of the northern branch of the Cucamonga Fault shall be designated open space, for health and safety reasons, as well as for wildlife habitat purposes. Further, a conservation easement shall be sought in order to secure ywtection for the bog, for its hydrological source, for rRuvail fan scrub habitat, and to facilitate wildlife use of the area. View fencing shall be used along the Perim *W of the bog and its 200 -foot buffer of alluvial fan scrub habitat to ensure preservation of this unique feature. The fault knoll shall be set aside as a public park contiguous with the bog. Pax uses shall include passive recreation, rest rooms, and trail head parking for his and bicyclists. The alignment of the Front Line Fire Trail right -of -Bray shall be located prior to development approvals and constructed prior to issuance of building permits. IV-12 DRAFT <s Nelahborhood -entry features shall 1- v,Pu` diced at the primzzy access points of the subarea. - , Small parcel ownerships in Subareas 4.2 and 4.3 adoin 4.1 and shall be coordinated` for master planning. Union n P Aga -ft tunities - This entire subarea is currently under one ownership, which could facilitate master planning objectives. The Alquist- Priolo Special Study Zone for the Cucamonga Fault traverses the botto -n third of the site. The fault is well identified and splar3 into two C main east-west c- rridors with further fracturing in the vicinity of R,Iiwanda Creek. A prominent knoll has been foamed by the fault and is the rite of a former Forest Service fire station. Historically, the site has been used by the public as an overlook of the valley with views on a clear day to S,Rn Gorgonio and San Jacinto to the east, Saddleback Mountain to the south,:: and the ocean to the west. The knoll shall be retsined for public use. A unique bog the last of an estimated 1000 such bogs in tli'e San Gabriel, Saar &,a dino Basin at the turn of the century is located to the c s. sf the knoll and shall be preserved. According to previous studies the bog was formed by tilted . fault blocks which capture underground and surface runoff water in a shallow depresdon. The bog must he fully- identified and preserved. Its water sources shall also, be identified and protected. If development is proposed adjoining or above the bog, an independent hydrologieJm study sball be required to determine not only the source of water which maintains the bog, but mechanisms which would be required to pketect the bag from urban runoff water contaminated by oil, gasoline, pesticides, herbicides, and exotic plant materials and seeds. Day Creek traverses the western portion of the area entering the aalu._ fan `Tom a steep V-c rayon. A historic water- gaging station is, mated within the canyon an i is ancessible via an abandoned water company ervice road. Cucamonga County 'Mater District (CCWD) maintains incilities within the canyon and maintains a road to their facilities.,- the .eater supply in Day Creek Canyon shall be protected. Tire Day Creek flebiis Dam is located adjacent to the knoll area. A flood control earement is located along Day Creek north and south oft a` cram, extenwng approximately one - and -a- quarter miles north of the da; , IV-13 per. Et w-mida Creek traverses the eastern portion of the area from north to south, entering the alluvial fan from a sterys V- canyon. The CCWD maintains facilities within the canyon and maintains a service road to the I zapper limit of their ,faciliitiec: The water supply in Edwantia Canyon should continue to be protected. r; The San Bernardino County Flood Control District (SBCFCD) plans to - build a debris dam at the mouth of Edwanda Creek and a concrete- lined best channel, or levee alternative, from the dam southward. Turnouts are planned to di- i water to the Etiwanda Creek Spreading Grounds located adjacent to Subareas 2, 3, and 6.. A flood control easement a -tends aver r portions of the Edwaiida Creek floodway. c Existing flood control easements to the north and to the south should be 'i connected within the subarea. The existing springs which are located within this subarea should be located and protected. The National Forest boundary is located along the northern edge of the area and provides the logical limit of development. St.-*, hilly slopes define the northern edge of the subarea. Wildfire spread from the National Forest is a hazard for the area. The Front Line Fire Trail traverses the area from east to west meandering in and out of the foothill slopes. Thee road suggests the northern limit of development and will provide fire protection for the perimeter of development. The Front Une Fke Trail is planned as an unpaved, all- weather fhe access road which doubles as the main east -west regional trail I` along the base of the San Gabriel Mountains (see Exhibit 10, Open Space and Trails Plan). i 115.2 Subarea 4.2 location - North o the double utility corridor, south and west of J Subarea 4.1, and east of Day Creek Channel. Land - Hillside residential. Community Resign Features - This area should be master planned in conjunction with Subarea 4.1. W -14 DRAFT R s ��ti 1 ri4ue D %ienn QpTI unity - An Alquist -Mok; Special Study Zone covers this subarea. A portion of the Cucamonga Fault han been identified is Subarea 4.1 and can be inferred to traverse these parcels from past to west. . Seismic studies must be completed prior to development aDcrovals for this subarea. The double utility corridor bounds the property to the south. Day Creek Channel bounds the subarea to the west. 13.5.3 Subarea 4.3 Location - North of the double utility corridor, south and east of Subarea 4. 1, and west of Etiwanda Creek. Land Use - Hillside Residential. S ^ommunfty_ Design Features - Tht area should, be master planned in conjunction with Subarea 4.1. 'Unique Designg ft=n -An Aiquist- Priclo Special Study Zone covers this subarea. A portion of the Cucamonga Fa_ has .been identified in Subarea 4.1 and can be inferred to traverse these p2rcels from east to west. Seismic studies must,be completed prior to development approvals for this subarea. The double utility corridor bounds the property to the south. Etiwanda Creek Channel bounds the subarea: to the east. 13.6 E —WANDA HIGHLANDS NEIGT(B_RH_QO D SUBAREAS The Edwanda Righlands neighborhood theme wEl extend the cabaacter of the ripzxian environment found in the foothills and be distinguishM primarily by native Sycamore tree;.. Pines and flowering oeft-;md shrubs will be used as an accent. Fired brick masonry elements will be used to create an inviting, yet impressive, atmosphere. 13.6.1.` I-cocatign North of Wilson Avenue (24th Street), south of the double utility corridcri east of Wardman Bullock Road, and w�_. v.--:he San S name Wash. IV-15 DRAB I I Land Very Low Density Residential (Note: Density will be clustered to provide the open space preserve mentioned below) Community DesigpF -m= - San Sevaine Wash provides a major open she element along the eastern edge of this subarea. A 37 -acre wildlife habitat area shall be enhanced and preserved along the restern edge of the San Sevaine leash. View fencing shall be featured for residential development along San Sevaine 1-ave to take advantage of the view of the Wash and foothills. aaprovide gt seos huld p rr vi acce to Community tails along the San Sevaine Wash. View fencing ahall be featured along the edge of residential development and the utility corridors. Hood centrol channel service roads should W utilized as part of the community trail system. Community tail, 'peel Xrian amenities, and landscaping shall be incorporated within the boundaries of the MWD easement. :e neighborhood theme- wall shall be featured along Wardman- Bullock Road, with neighborhood entries at the southerly portion of the subam& Unique Designnortunities - This subarea has been annexed Into the City and is controlled by an approved San Bernardino County Final Plan of Development for Tracts 13554 and 13555. A development agreement vnth the City of Rancho Cucamonga further conditions the use of this subarea. San Sevaine Drive and the adjoining levee and wash provide the edge of project development. Thirty -seven acres of wash have been set aside as permanent open space as part of the alluvial fan scrub habitat of the wash. A SCE utility corridor bisects the subarea. Along the northern edge of the utility corridor a concrete box channel drains Henderson and WWardman creeks through the subarea to the wash. The Wardman boy channel provides an additional barrier in the northwest IV -16 Dh.A�bT e a IE corner of the subarea. The SBCFCD maintains service roads on either side of the box channel. A IIWD easement bisects the southern portion of the subarea: 13.6.2 Sabana 6 I.M - North of Wilson Avenue (24th Street), south of the double u'dlity co?ridor, west of Wardman Bullock Road, and east of the Etiwanda Creek Wash. Land Use v- Very Low Density Residential, School, Park and Neighborhood Commercial as needed per Section 6.2.2.1. Community Design Features - Equestrian lots shall be encouraged in this subarea. Paseos and/or local trails shall provide access to the Community trail system along Etiwanda- Creek Wash and the upper and lower utility corridors. View fencing shall be featured for residential development along Edwanda Creek Wash to take advantage of the view of the Wash and foothills. View fencing shall be featured . for residential development adjacent to the utility corridors. Where present, the lied Mill Fault corridor shall be enhanced by Comniunit�r tail, pedestrian amenitim, and access to surrounding residences. The neighborhood theme wall shall be featured along the residential portion of WilsonAvenue (24th Street) and aL^ng Wardman- Bullock Road. Neighborhood entry features shall be utilized at the primary access points - of the subarea. Unique Design rtunipgq Edwanda Creek Wash provides a major open space element along the western edge of this subarea. Until flood control facilities are constructed, this subarea is subject to periodic flooding from Ettwanda Creek. IV -17 DRAFT The double utility corridor provides the northern edge of the subarea. The lower rtility corridor bisects the subarea, The MWD transmission f zee easernerC traverses the subarea from east tiz- west on the north sUe of Wilson Avenue (24th Street): An inferred portion of the Red Hill Fault traverses the upper portion of the subarea. Studies, shall be completed to identify the fault. Henderson Channel also traverses the upper portion of the subarea. An east -west collector street traverk; the upper portion of the subarea and must bridge the Etiwanda Wash.' A 1C -acre school site shall be provided in this :subarea. An adjoining minimum 5-acre Owo unencumbered, l5acretotal,develagedparkshall also be provided 'a this subarea. it is expected that the school and park will be located in the area south of the lower ;_ "' ity corridor. A minunum 33 -acct neighborhood com>fereiai site may be located at the southwest corner of Wasdman- Bullock Road and Wilson Avenue (24th Street). The location of this subarea adjoining Etiswanda Creek Spreading Grounds is suitable,`= as_equestrianlots. 13.6.3 Subarea 9 Location - North of the double utility corridor, primarily south of the National forest Boundary, east of the San Sevidne 'Nash and/oz the Fontana City Limits, and west of the Etiwanda Creek Wash: Lad - 1?.illside Residential Estate; Op;,n Space. Commuolly Design Features - The subz,ea is primarily foothill area and subject to the Hillside Developmenjregulate t s, Development Coda Section 17.24. Natural streams stall be protected to the tcp ridge of their'V- cauy0is, plus an additional 25 -foot view - buffer zone along the ridge top. At a minimum, there shall be a SD -foot natural open spark buffer from the stream bed to the edge of the development. IV -1$ D,R ti The alignment of the Front Line Fire Trail right -of -way shall be located prior to development approvals and constructed prior to issuance of building permits. Neighs orhood entry features %hall be located at the primary acces!' points of the subarea. i Unique Design =rtunities - This subareais primarily characterized by moderate to steeply sloping foothills. Three all-year streams (Henderson Creek, Wardman Creek, and Morse Creek) flow through V- canyons which traverse the subarea from north to south. These canyons are subject to flooding. They also provide significant riparian habitat and must be protected. 1 Several springs are located in this subarea which should be identified and protected. The bottom third of the area is traversed from east to west by the Alquist Priolo Specirl Study Zone for the Cucamonga Fault. Based on the identified faults in Subarea 4, four branches of the Cucamonga Fault can be inferred nitining east to wes through the subarea. - Studies must be made prior to development to locate the actual faults. The area is subject to wildfire hazard to the north from the National Forest. The Front Line Fire Trail traverses da, subarea east to west through the moderately - sloping hilly terrain which characterizes the area (sue , R-Nbit 10, Open Space and Trails Plan). The subarea contains four existing residences and accessory structures. Access for these residences and other needs must be considered in any development proposals. Notwithstanding multiple ownerships in this subarea, the entire subarea should be developed under one waster plan for circulation, fire protection, and resource management. Access must be indicated for all developable parcels. 13.7 SAN SEVAM WASH SMIAREA IV-19 DRAIFT This subarea serves as a natural boundary between the city of Fon`4m -m and AMIRL the Etiwanda Highlands neighborhood. 13.7.1 Subarea 11 laolo �iYorth of Wilson Avenue (24th Street), sc-uth of the double utility &c idor, east of Edwanda Highlands and west of the City of Fontana boundary. Land Hood Control. Community Design Features, - The San Sevaine Wash provides a nitural buffer between the City, of Fontana and the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Community trails will be located along th ; east and west sides of the Wash. The: eastern trail will be constructed 'as part of the Hunter's kedge project in the City of Fontana. The western trail will be constructed as part of the Edwanda Highlands project adjoining to the west. Umigue Design O,q- rtunibm - San Sevaine Creek Channel is a natural Wash contained by levees_ along its east and west banks. This entire subarea between the east and west levees is subject to flooding. The area serves as a natural spreading ground for ground -water supply. The subarea contains sensitive alluvial fan scrub habitat. Therefore, the subarea is a prime candidate to serve as an alluvial fan scrub mitigation bank for development in the Eidwanda North area. Approximately 37 acres of theEtiwandaHighiands projecthas already been incorporated into the floodway and set ante as permanent open space for the purpose of preservation of alluvial fan scrub habitat. The SBCFCD plans to construct a debris basin at the mouth of San Sevaine Creek, which may be in conflict with the alluvial fan scrub mitigation bank potential. The reason, here is a potential conflict is because alluvial fan scrub habitat depe..ds on intermittent scouring by debris -laden flood flows. 13.8 CEMFE1t BMIB-ORHOOD MARMS The Chaffey neighborhood theme will extend the character of the alluvial environment found in Chaffey Regional Park and the Day Creek Spreading Grounds and be distinguished primarily by native Sycamore trees and Canyon IV.20 DRAFT Live Oak with native flowering accent trees and shrubs i dcluding Western Red Bud, g fm&a Toyon and Matilija Poppy. Native stone elements will be usad to create a vw.m atmosphere connected YMA the alluvial character of the area. 13.5.1 Subarea 10.1 Laoft - North of Banyan Avenue, south of the LADWP utility corridor, east of the existing Day Creek Wash Izvee, and west of the j -� extension of Milliken Avenue. ! , Land Use - Flood Control (potential for Low and Very Low Density Residential, and Very Low Estate Residential else) therefore, design criteria is discussed below: Community Design - ea= - Internal pasees should be incorporated into the design of the low - density residential area. - =- Paseos and Community trails shall connect residential development with the high school site and neighborhood park. Equestrian bits shall be encouraged north of Wilson Avenue (24th Street) wiPr'ocal trails connecting to Community and regional trail systems. "; a Day Creek Regional Trail shall be sited and constructed as a condition of any development in the Chaffey neighborhood. '.This trail may be relocated if aggregate miming is activated within Day Creek Spreading Grounds. View fencing shall be provided where - sidential lots adjoin permanent open space areas. An Edwanda Nordi gateway shawl be installed on Rtr°_son Avenue (24th Street) and on Banyan Avenue at their intersections with Milliken Avenue. Neighborhood entry features shall be utilized at the primary a . ,,ss points of the subarea. Unigue Design Qpportur_, - This subarea is located west of the eastern Day Creek Spreading Grounds levee. i IV-21 DRAFT A regional trail is planned for the top of the eastern Day Creek Levee. The regional trail shall be located and developed as a condition of development of any portion of the Chaffey Neighborhood. An aggregate mining lease has been recorded for the Day Creek Spading Grounds, but has been challenged by lawsuits. Aggregate shining could have negadve ainacts on residential development in this subarea. The northern portions of the subarea will adjoin a Resource Conservation Area,_ spreading grounds, ana future Chaffey Regional Park. The southsm portion of the subarea shall contain a 40 -acre high school site and a - minimum 10 -acre (net) neighborhood park. 13.5.2 Subarea 10.3 J&gatpon - North of the LADWP corridor, south of the National Forest boundary, east of the west boundary of the Specific Plan and west of the j Day Creek Channel; and Day Creek Canyon. land Use - Dillside Residential; Flood Control; Open Space. CommuniW Design Features - Residential development of this subarea should be master - planned with development to the west in upper Alta Loma. Because of moderate to steep slopes, lass subarea is subject to theIrdIsideDevelopment Ordinance, Deve?opment Code Section17.24. Unigge Design QWrtunities - The Day Creek debris dam is located in this subarea with the concrete chpRnel for Day Greek, providing the eastern boundary of the subarea.'; A flood control easement exists over approximately one -third of the subarea in the vicinity of Day Creek and includes the SBCFCD debris sterage area. The southeast portion of the subarea is identified a� an enclave of the San Bernardino National Forest. This subarea is p,imarily characteri6 -1 �i moderate- x- steeply sloping foothills. IV -22 DRAFT 1] E One unnamed stream flows through a V- canyon which traverses the subarea from north to south in the vicinity of the Western boundary of the subarea. Tins canyon is subject to flooding. It also prb-7des significant riparian habitat and must be protected. The existing springs in this subarea sbouldbe located and protected. The bottom third of the area is traversed from east to west by the Alquist Priolo Special Study Zone, for the Cucamonga Fault. Based on the j identified faults,in Subarea, 4, two bthnehes of the Cucamonga Fault can be inferred ru" ea f to west ,� through the subarea. Prior to development, studies must be made to locate the actual faults. i The area is subject to wildfire hazard to the north from the NationaU_ .Forest. The Front Line Fire Trail traverses the subarea, east to west along the toe of the sloping hilly : terrain which characterizes the area. The alignment of the Front Line Fire Trail must be established prior to development appr2vds and constructed prior to issuance of building permits. The portion of this subarea suitable for residentialdevetopment is adjacent to the western boundary of the Specific Plan area and virtually isolated. Development of this subarea is not expected to occur before development 13.5.3 Subarea 10.4 -North of Route 30 freeway corridor and Hrghl"d Avenue, south of Banyan Street, eRst ofRochester Avenue (Orange. Street), and west of Day Creeds Channel. Land Use _Lucy Density Residential. Community Desiom Featues. - The Day Creeds neighborhood theme wall should be pimided along the east side of Rochester M6)ue and the south side of Banyan Street. View fencing shall be provided along the edge between resientiat development and thechannel to promote views through the open space corridor. A neighborhood entry should be provided at Vurtage Drive and Rochester Avenue. rV 23 DRAFT ij ,The southern portion of the subarea shall contah) i3O 40 -acre high school site and a nAnimum 10 -acre (net) neighborb' park. r 13.9 DAY CREEK WASH SUBAREA TK subarea serves as a natural b undary between the Day Creel: neighborhood and the Chaffey neighborhood., 13.9.1 Subarea 10.2 Lgo 90 - North of Banyan Avenue, south of the LAri'WP utility corridor, west of the Day Creek channel, and east of the western levee for - the Day Creek Spreading Grounds. Land Use -Flood Control; Resource Conservation. Commrnity Design Features A regional trail is planned for the top of the eastern Day Creek Levee. The regional trail shall be located and developed as a condition of development of any porr_un of the Chaffey neighborhood. Unique Design _QgZortF , 'eses An aggregate mining lease has been recorder} for the Day Creek Spreading Grounds, but has been challenged by lawsuits. If the mining lease is removed, portions of this area may be suitable for other uses including Chaffey Regional Park. Potential uses include ground -water Spreading Grounds and wildlife habitat. In conflia: with these uses would be Vary Low Density residential devil- )pment. The northern 200 acres of the subarea has been set a-4de as a wildlife habitat mitigation area, for alluvial fan scrub habitat. This area is dedicated as permanent open space. A portion of the 200 acres has been developed as a flood diversion dike and spreading basin facility. Compatible uses for the wildlife habitat mitigation area are limited to trail developm. nt. ChaffeyReg, ^oral Park is planned for development as a compatible use for a portion of the Day Creek Spreading Grounds area.of the upfer Alta Loma area to the west. IV -24 DRAW 14' t 13.10 NA7`Ii 111, PUREST SUBAREAS The extension of the San Bernardino National Forest boundary shall be considered as the northern lin f "af residential development. Acquisition of privately -omed parcels above the boundary by the National Forest shall be encouraged. 13.10.1 Subarea 9.1 won - North of National Forest boundary in the vicinity of Day Leek Canyon. Land Use - Resource Conservation. Communily Design Feadn,s - Acquisition by the Forest Service is encouraged. Unique Design Ooi [Wnities - This subarea is a privately -owned enclave within the San Berardino National Forest. A Flood Control easement in the vicinity of Day Creek extends approximately one mile north from the southern boundary of :his parcel. Sensitive riparian habitat is located within Day Creek Canyon. Fire hazard is very high in this subarea. 13.10.2 Subarea 9.2 Location - North of the National Forest boundary in the vicinity of \' Etiwanda Creek Canyon. band i7se - Resource Conservation. Community Design Features - Acquisition by the Forest Service is encouraged: Unique Design Qp.% tunides - This subarea is a privately -owned enclave within the San Bernardino National Forest. A Flood Control easement in the vicinity of Edwanda Creek extends over the western tze -third of this parcel. A CCWD water supply easement is located within l tiwanda Canyon. IV-25 DRAFT' ( l u� I Sensitive riparian. habitat is located with' the Ftiwanda Creek Canyon area. _ i 1� Fire hazard is`very high in this subarea. 13.10.3 Subarea 9.3 I - North of the National Forest boundary, east of Wardman Canyon, and west of Morse Canyon.. Ind Use - Resource Conservation. Community gn Features - Acquisition by the Forest Service is encouraged. nigRe Design rtuni±ies - This subarea is a privnicty -owned enclave within the San Bernardino National Forest. Sensitive riparian habitat is located in Wardman and Morse Canyons.. One of the Cucamonga Fault fractures is inferred to extend in a northeasterly directio, toward this area. ' F-. hazard is very high in this subarea. LA a PART IMEPLFAIEN ATI ®N 14.0 ILL+IV+NI`A'1�I�►1TGI ,A tzinmentof the Specifici,1w,objec#;ves will requu-e the coordinated use of the development review procedures and 't�° implementation of Specific Pta objectives through sources of fman;ing. Material in Phis section discusses the regulatory procedures which are nec M f& development within she Edwanda North area. The regulatory procedures rely i �aviiy on the exisOzg City Code provisions. GENERAL B is not :. nr4ent of Cho., FAwanda North Sp miflc Plat i to accelerate or encourage' development in the plan area, nor is it the intent to hit►aler or discourage reasonable growth. Bather, its major purpose is to assure that when development does occm, it occurs ina � nanner that is consistent with the goals of the City as a whole, and is also sensitive to the opportunities and const-aints of the area as a whole. For that reason., the Etiwanda North Specific Plan is not an "action" document, and it contains no programs which woud put the City into the position of actively promoting development in the plan area. Co.erequently, the impetus for development will come from the private sector, and the Specific E an will be implemented by both the private developers on a project -by- project basis, and by the City ruid other public sigencies through the tinning and ;improvement of key public facilities. An Etiwanda North Specific Plan infrastructure Phasing Plan shall be prepared to provide infrastrot Lure implementation guidelines, and shall be completed no later than approval of any application for development within the plan area subsequent to the adoption of the Specific Flan, and shall be incorporated as Appendix A of this Specific Plana r The Infrashmeture Pius' 'Plan may be completed in two Phasing y p parts. tee Plan shall addrm iacl'rastrtacture on a neighborhood and sub -area bads. When completed foe plan shaR be incoiTorated into the appendix of the Specific Plan anc attached to the cimulatli '-: copy of the Plan. )�t J i Part I of the InffrastruLture Phasing Plan shall be prepared by applicants for development andlor the City, and s consist of the-timing "d sequence of infrastructure phasing, including but not limited to, roads (Section, parks, schools, drainage, water, and sewer facilities. Part U shall be provided by applicants for development and shall consist of cost estimates and financing mechanisims. Infrastructure costs are also associeled with police,and fire services .��d Shall be addressed by applicants for development as indicated in sections 9.4 and 4.8 of this element. Wildihe habitat preservati(n, inJuding, but not, imited'to preparation of a I Resource Mmage rent Plan, as well as a plan for acquisition of Conservation Easements,shall be'addressE�d by applicants for development andNr the City, and shall' be completed no latter than approval of any application of development within :he plan area subsequent to the adoption of the Specific Plan. However, it should be noted- -c,:at because of the pressure for development within the Specitie_ -Plan. atea, the City has cooperated with authotization of several funding mechauis: for the am, including:. " • Rancho Cucamonga hire Protection District, Community Facr7it es District 88-1, approved for tte purpose of building, staffing, and maintaining fire station in the vicinity of Wilson and East Avenues. • Comunity Facilities District 88-1, approved for the purpose of providing infrastructure and public services in the area, including, but not limited to, drainage facilities and police services. • Landsenpe A&Awment District, approved for the purpose of maintaining lan(Letayw in the public right -of -sway, specified landscape easements, and future neigbborhood parks • Lighting District, approved for the purpose of maintaining street lights in the area. a Edwanda School Dstrict Community Faciliti es District, approved for . the purpose of propft y acquisition and school construction in the area.. • Chaffey Unified High Eslhool District Community Facilities District, pend'eng, proposed for the propose of property acquisition and school construction in the area. ighlighted in this section is a discussion of various sources of financing implementation. This discussion is intended to provide a broad overview. The. City may wish to consider the various sources in more detail in the future. 14.1 1 AMUPROCEDURES Ul All regulatory procedures (Conditional Use Permits, Variances, Development Review, Non - Conforming Uses, Appeals, Land Use District (Zone) Changes; and Amendments to,Specifiq:, lan Bounds' s) of the Edwanda North Specific Plan shall be as contain d in the latest adopted edition of" City's Development Code. 14.2 DEVlELQFiKE1Nr PRdFtiSALS Further, it should be noted that processing and review of development proposals in Edwanda North shall be subjct to established procedures in effect in rbe entire City,, including Deveiopment and Design Review, Subdivision-Map eview, and Growth Management, as specified in the Cit 's Municipal Code. However, the criteria used in the evaluation of each development proposal in Ttiwanda shall be based on the objectives, policies, and specific < deveiopment standards specified herein. - _ 14.3 SOURCES C9F FINANCING If the Edwanda North area is to bp,-developed in an orderly manner and in a way which ensures proper utilization of the land, means must be ' found to finance area se -ving facilities, such as new roads, grade- separated crossing of roads and railroads, storm drain facilities, and schools. These are all needed to serve future development and, in most cases, are prere4u:ai +P for such development. Summarized below are iocsible methods of financing such improvements. Bond acts allow for pr(Vayment of the bond amounts at any specified time. However, benefit ,;ssmiments must be paid annually and do not aloes for prepayment pmeedures. V3 DRAFT J 14.2.1 DeWbursement Distract Under A*ticles 5 and 6 of the California Subdivision Map Act (as amended: in January 1990), fees can be collected to cover the costs of public improvements including roads, bridges, drainage and sanitary sewer facilities. Under these provisions, the City could enter into an agreement with the developer to reimburse that portion of improvemen tt and the actual cost of such improvements that extend beyond a project's boundaries. The City would then administer a reimbursement agreement between developers and/or property owners, or establish and maintain a local benefit district to levy and collect charges or costs from other" benefitted properties. It is possible, under this approach, to provide the improvements as -needed and defer reimbursement of charges or costs by other benefitted properties until such property is developers. 14.2.2 Improvement Act of 1911 The Improvement Act of 1911 (Division 7 of the Streets and Highways Erode, beginning with Section 5000), authorizes local agencies to impose assessments on benefitted property to finance the construction of various public improvements (Far! 3, Chapter 1, beginning with Section 5100), the acquisition of real property rights, sewer and drainage faelitiezt and certain, pre - existing assessments ( Section 5023.1), and the maintenance of sidewalks (Sections 5600 through 5630). Thr, Act also authorizes public agencies to issue bonds under the provisions contained therein (Part s,!beginning with Section 6400). 14.2.3 Municipal Improvement .Act of 1913 The Municipal Improvement Act of 1913 (Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code, beginning with Section 10000) authorizes local agencies to impose assessments on benefitted property to finance the construction of, various public improvements (Section 10100 and 10100.5); the''acquisition of real property rights and .various works and I improvements (Sections 10101 and 101('0, ' and the mainiesiance and repair of improvements coii'structed pursuant to this Act (Section 10100.8). The Act authorizes public agencies to issue bonds under the rirovisions of either the Improvement Act of 1511 or the Improvement Bond Act of 1915. V-4 DIOM J 0 14.2.4 Improvement Bond Act of 1915 The Improvement Bond Act of 1915 (Mvision 10 of the Streets and highways Code, beginning dvith Section 8500) Wntains provisions for the issuance of bonds to represent, and be secured .' by, assessments imposed under the Improvement Act of 1911, the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913, or other assessment proceedings which authorize the sale of bonds. 14.2.5' befit Assessment Act 9f 1982 The Benefit Assessment. Act of '1982 (beginning with Section 54703 of the Government Code) authorizes local agencies to se assessments en benefitted lroperty to finance the operation and maintenance of drainage, flood control and ,treet lighting services, and the instaliation..aiid - improvernent of drainage and flood control facilities. 'lie Act provides for the creation of a disc ct which can be divided into zones.' Zones can be exempted from the district or assessed differently depending on the type of service to be provided within each zone.: In the case of an assessment for flood control services, the Act provides that the benefit may be,determined wn the basis of the proportionate storm water runoff from each pared The proposed assessment must be submitted tc the eligible voters within the area of benefit, and be approved . =,a majority of those voting. Theiz --ft the legislative body may a&.ualiy determine the cost of the service ,wnich is financed by tl'.e assessment and determine and impose the:assessment. 141.6 Mel o-R sac Formaunitp_FacilitIIeAtl4f 1 The Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of'1982 (beginningwith Section 53311 of the Goverment Code) provides developers with an alternative to making dedications and paying in lieu fees as -thei u method of satisfying requirements to provide certain public capi?�,, a facilities and services. While not a true special assessment, 1"ie °special tax" upon ?.and offered by this Act pwvio:�i iniancing tool that is treated in part like an assessment V-5 DRAFT A community facilities district may be established to provide, certain police, criminal ,justices, fire, ambulance and paramedic facilities and services, recreatioA programs, and the operation and maintenance of parks.and parkways and of storm drainage sy arms. It may also provide for the; purchase, constructipa, expansion, or rehabilitation of any real Jr other tangible property which the agency establ ..Mng the district may own, with an estimated useful life of five years or longer which is necessary tom , increased meet derr ;;ids placed upon local agencies as the result of or rehabilitation occurring within :khe disuict, such as parks, schools, libraries, telephone, gas ado';, electric utilities, aad other governmental facilities (Sections 53311-lnd 53313.5). Proceedings for the estab] shment of a district may be instituted by the legislative body, n petition signed by ':ten perwnt of._ the registered-voters within the propose district, or a petition signed`, by the owners of ten percent of the '4nd area within the propos'.,d district (Section , S 8 a 53S-19), The Act requires a notioLd hearini and that the resolution of intention to w3ablish' a district -- pacify the rate and method of apportionment of the anntnli special tax in sufficient detail to allow each landowner or resident within the proposed district to estimate the annual amount v''such special tax (Section 53321). A tax" imposed pursuant V� this Act is a special tax and not a special ass=L ent, and there is no requirement that the tax be apportioaed on the basis �4 ben,!At. However, the tax may be based on benefit or other reasonable basis determined by the legislative body (Section 53325.3). If 50 percent or more of the reg ered voters,` or six voters, which, -T is more, residing within the pt'oposed district, file written protests, the formation of the district shall be abandoned (Section 53324). If there is not a majority protest and the legislative body determines to proceed, it must submit the levy of special taxes to the eligihle voters in the district (if 12 or more registered voters resole within. the district). A vole of two - thirds or more of the voters.. or the r wners of two- thirds or more of the land area of the district; is required to approve the district. In the cas< of recreation services and the operation and maintenance of parks and parkways, a minimum of 100 voters must vote in favor ig'order to approve. V-C DR XT K If tht 1proposition. fails to receive a two-thirds vote, no further action on the district can be taken for one year (Sections 53326 y �,. through 53329). Any changes to an existing district require the above procedure to be repeated. If the district wishes to sell bonds, that matter must also go through a similar hearing and election procedure; however, the two hearings and two elections may be consolidated into one i (Articles 3 and 5). 144:,.7 >i.QndWaoing and Mightinz Act of 4972 The Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 (Division 15, Fart 2 of the Streets and Highways Code, beginning with Section 22500) authorizes local agencies to impose assessments on benefitted property to finance the construction of various landscaping, lighting, park, recreational, and appurtenant improvements, and the maintenance and servicing of any of the �`oregoing (aection 22525). The Act provides for the creation of a district whi-b can be divided into zones. Zones can be exempted i � the district or assessed differently depending upon the type of service to be �vided within each zone (Section 22574). A report must be prepared and a public hearing held for each fiscal year for which assessments are to be levied. The report must include plans and 'specifications, an estimate of costs, a diagr,,m of the district, and an assessment of the costs (Sections 22565 through 2.2574). A copy of the Resolution of Intention must be pufilished and marled to each property owner a minimum of 10 days before the public hearing pertaining to formation of the district: (Section 22553). Notice for subsequent -year hearings can be given by publishing (Section 22626). /j The proceedings must be abandons ',e1 if a majority protest, by parcel area, is filed at the fast year �ubli. hearing, unless the protests are overruled by no less than'a,four -fifths vote of the legislative body (Section 22593): in subsecgn,�-k yew, an annual 'hearing must be held conc> rning the engineer's report as to the state and f tore of the improvements. Hoaicver, the above "'O provisions regarding abandonment and overruling do not apply) subsequent years. The cost of park or recreations! mpa�Vements can be raised by an assessment Ievied and collected in Installments over a period not to exceed 30 years,. - ad the cost of all other allowable improvements can be spread over a period not to exceed five years (Section 22560), The issuance of 1915 Act bonds is authorized to finance park or recreational improvements (Section 22662.5). i There is no set tern for the life of the district, and it exists until the legislative body acts to dissolve it (Section 22610), 1. t 14.2.5 Map Act Areas of B'ene it The Subdivision Map Act (Sections 66483 through 66484.5 of the Government Code) contains provisions for establishing areas of benefit for the purpose of funding the construction of drainage facilities, sewer facilities, major thoroughfare°, groundwater recharge facilities, and bridges. "Wdges" include structures, spanning waterways, rail,; � . , freeways and canyons. The Act permits locrI ordinances to require payment of a fe-', as a condition of map approval or, for bridge and thoroughfare improvements �! . only, as a condition of issuing a build:ng permit for any parcel located within the area to be benefitted by the project for which the fee is being paid. V -l3 DRAkT `N k AML 21, 14.2.9 elude Hazard A,batemant D` dcts� The Public Resources Code (beginning with 'Section 26500) Provides for the formation of a district to make and maintain improvements to pre-rent, mitigate or control land or earth movements, including earthquakes, landslides, land subs?dence or soil erosion. diG,Iggic hazard Abatement Districts may pay tip cost of improremc: i through use of the 1911 Act, the 1913 Act, or the 1915 Act. Mainte,-lance costs may be paid -,,,A special" assessments on benefitted property. Proceedings for the formation - of a district may be` initiate by , either a petition signed by owners of f0 percent of the prT to be included, or by resolution of the legislative "y of th6 local ,Jency. If the -owners of more than 50 percent of the assessed va:.nation of the proposed district file written objections to its formation, the district must be abandoned. 14.2,JA Strees. Lighting Act of 1919 Whe Streerl ighting Act of 1919 (Division lad, Part i of the Streets and Highways Code, beginning vAth - Section 18000) authorizes municipal corporations to assess benefitted property for the cost of maintaining , td fumishtng energy to stree_�= lighting systems (, lection 18030. A first-year report rust be prepared which includes plans and sperifrcations,`° �n estimate of costs, a diagram. of tha district, and 3 proposed assessment of the costs for each parcel (,°ctions 18040 through 11CO42), The resolutior- _of intention must state the ;period of time for the improvement of the street lighting system. The dis,. ct dissolves at the expiration of this term (Section 18,062). Although no requirement for mailed notices is stated, it is recommended that a ± ;opy of the resolution of intention be mailed to eaph property ownzr a minit..um of 10 days before the public hearing. �3 71 there is a majorityprmtst, by parr arts, by the owners within •any zone, the legislative, body must swim such zone from the r ,Vxeedings, unless the protests are t verruied by no less than a �; ur- -fifths vote of the legislative body (section 18076). V-9 DRAY T' ,L\ For each subsequent year a report must be filed which includes an estimate of zosts, a diagram of the district, and an assessment of the costs to each parcel;.(Section 18091). 14.2.11 Street LigbOwi Act of 1931 The Street Lighting Act of 1931 (Division 14, Part.2 of the Streets and Highways Code, beginning with Section 1 }8300) authorizes municipal corporations to assess benefitted property iar the cost of maintaining and furnishing energy to street lightinb J systams (Section 18220). A first ye;�' report must be prepared which includes plans and specifications, an estimate of the costs, a diagram of the district, and a proposed assessment of the costs to each parcel (Sections 18340 and 18341). The resolution of intention must state the period of time for t;ie 1 improvement of the street lighting system, which must not exceed five years. The district dissolves at the expiration of this term (Section 18321). Although no requirement for mailed notices is stated, it is recommended thn a copy of the resolution of intention be mailed to each property owner a minimum of 10 days before the public hearing. 14.2.12 i If there is a majority Protest, by parcel -irea, by--',*he owners within any zone, the legislative body must sifte such zone from the proceedings, unless the priitests are o4-c ed by no less than a four -fifths vote of the leg iO t:ve body (Section 18364). For each subsequmit year an assessment of the costs each parcel must be made based upon an estimate of the following year's cTkasts (Section 1835'0). Drainage and Sewer Facilities Sectiom 6641 "= through 66499.30 of the Government Code and the Subdivision Mai{ Act of Government Code Sections 66483 through 66484.5 authorize payment of fees to defray the costs of building drainage facilities for the removal of surface and stormwaters from local and neigkNorhoad drainage areas. V lU: BRA UT 4 To, ^tact fps, an ordinance requiring payment of fees must be in etfett for a period of at least 30 days prior to the filing of a Tentative map (or parcel map if no tentative map is required). The ordinance refers to a drainage or sanitary sewer area which contains an estimate of the total costs of consmrcting the local drainage or sanitary sewer facilities required in the plan. The governing body Js the legislative body that has adopted the drainage or sanitary sewer plan'. The cost to the imposed, whether actual or estimated, is based upon the findings of the legislative body. Subdivision and development of property within the planned drainage ar local sanitary sewer area will. require construction of tx a facilities described in the plant. 14.2.13 midges and N;jjQr Thoroughfares Section 66484 of the 'ii vernment Code authorizes design, acquisition of rights - ,zlwE& administration of cons "uucdon contracts and actual consttuc�tion. Local ordinance must refer to the circulation element of the General 1'lar and to the provisions of such element which identify those major thoroughfares whose primary purpose is to carry through- traffic and ra provide a network connecting to the state-highway system. If one -half of the owners within the area of benefit protest the improvements, then proceedings are abandoned. The,�,.ial ordinances may require the payment of a fee as a condition of approval of a fine - �iap or as a condition of issuing a. building pemut. An ordinance adopted pursuant to this section may provide for the acceptance of consideration in lieu of payment of fees. The agency imposing fees may incur an interest - bearing indebtedness for the construction of bridge facilitI717, or major thoroughfares. i 14.2.14 Streets and A' hrg ways I Sections 22585 through 2252.4-d the Streets and Highway Code allows the legislative baby to construct or install improvements and to provide for themaintenance or servicing of those improvements. The assessment distrx.1 is initiated by legislative resolution. Proceedings for the assessment may be abandoned if there is a majority protest rep_resen6ig property - owners owning more than 50 percent of the area or assessable lands within the proposed V -11 DRAFT U district. A four- fifths vote of all legislative body members can overrule the protest. +y 14.2.15 Other ImIjXgy rn n c S, atial Municipal Tax Dist acis are authorized under Sections 60000 through 60160 of the Govemment Code. The district created can maintain and operate Pay public improvement or utility of local necessity or convemience, furnish or perform any spacial local service i;.t,iuding music, rec.- °ation, or advertising. The gds, rni g body may appoint offcers and employees for the district as it deems necessary. Of'icers and eniployecs serve at' the plessure of the legislative bod and are not subject to civil service prov ;sions. Formulation is i vitiated by a petition of residents living within the proposed district. Tea percent of the registered voters within the proposed district must sign the petition. The = Iegisladve boo!, adopts a resolution of intention and, if no objections are sulta<hed, submits questions of formation of district and levy of tax t j rwid -nts of the district. A majority v;^te in favor of "he 9ist4ct allows the legislative body to declare the district ianed ariY, levy the special tax. The district has the authority to levy taxis upon C o—Ve property not to exceed $1 per year on each $100 or,assessed valw!ion. i 1 0701 -02 o,SEPTEMBER 11 � 1991 P.C. AGENDA � 2 of 13' � i i Landmark Land Company of CzSifom3a,Inc. =' - Rmponse to (-.;ftyof Rancho Cuc monga ENSP /DEIR June 27,1941 Each of the major attributes of the knot described in the city's passage in this section can be achieved in a:superior fashion, affording far greater views; in areas made accessible bya:e plans provided by Landmark Land Company and currently 7n file with the County of San Bernardino. A courtesy copy has been previously provided to you for your`-reference. 15. Section 133.1 Subarea 4.1 or, Page N -14 also states that a unique bog is located to the east of the lmoll and shall be preserved. a bog was formed by tilted fault blocks which capture undereround and surface runoff water in a shallow depression. The bog must be fully4dentified and preserved. Its water sources shall also be identified and protecte,1d." This set of opinions should be reassessed with respect to the facts associated with this feature. Despite the information circulated about this feature to date, We were unaware that such hard evidence existed so as to provide the inescapable conclusions ,reached above. A reading of the DEIIR associated with the project failed to cast any additional light on this subject. a,{ NP 7 LETTER 4 C;Tlt aF R NCMQ VCS D M0N0A PLANNING QIYISION ;r,,UG 131991 PM Ciey of Rancho Cucamonga A August 8;-�' Attn: Miki Bratt 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91771 } Dear Ms. Bratt Below are some concerns i have regarding the preservation of 4,112 %cres of open space, limiting development from the National Forest boundry on the North side to the double powerline corriaor on the South side. It ha,o always been our dream to build a new home, set up stabla< for boarding horses, ' jid set aside a few acres for a;Christmas tree farm, with very little impact to the *.atural balance. This property is our nest ,egg. our retirement plan, our life. As it is now, we live on the property using a natural spring for our water supply. Preserving this open space and natural springs would cut 'off our current water supply Affikk and deny us the possibility of obtaining power and water from local agencies. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has developed at an alarming rate, a rate so fast that Rancho Cucamonga has been mentioned in "National Geographic's" August, 1991 issue. as one of ten major U.S. cities with the mostrapid growth rate (expanding by more than 60% ie less that a decade). I strongly oppose the use of my land as mitigation for the loss of habitat associated with this development, thus depriving me of my opportunity to develop if 7 so desire. Another area of concern I have is the annexation into Rancho Cucamonga, areas identified as LAFCO Reports #2623 and #2626. I have enclosed a copy of a letter to LAFCO from the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. I would especially li;e to hear your comments on mutual aid agreements, the equipment used to effectively fight a wildland fire not being part of mutual aid, the "Wildland Fire Protection Contract ", and who pays the costs of these contracts. Thanks for your time ana I am looking forward to hearing from you. Regards, n�xGtl�t'- LETTER Deborah A. Webster P. 0, Box 53. Etiwanda, CA 91739 Phone: (71.4) 899 -1347 �- 3 0 July 30,1991 SubjcDt: City of Rancho Cucamonga, Etiwanda North Specific Plan Ms. Niki Bratt, Associate Planner City of Rancho rUcamonga 10500 Civic Center rrive P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Dear Ms. Bratt, I am a co -owner of approximately 30 acres within the area r, bordering the national forest on the north and the double power line corridor on the south. I understanding this area is facing the possibility of being zoned as permanent open, space: I would like to add my opposition to this possibility. Property that is now privately owned, if zoned as permanent open space, would be worthless to the owners. A decision more fair to the owners would be to zone it for "'sidential develop- meat on a reasonable ratio conforming to ti :1 , °_*andards of prudent land use. The property would then retain 'som(' lIalus for its owners. , I plan to attend the Council meeting on August 14, and I request that my voice be added to those othsrs which strongly oppose the zoning of Etiwanda North property as permanent open space. With thanks and; jm�yy regards, %G /0 Rebecca Mills c -, 2319 Bayside Court Westlake Village -- RECEIVED — CA 91361 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING DIVISION (ale) 889 -4267 AUG 0 Sigel LETTER 7 i �FE�a cS�annon C> In 94a.iia do ak&, eafffowta 91362 Ms PFiki 6ratt, Associate Manner July 26;1991 City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center [Wave P.O. Box 607 Rancho Cu , J a CA 91729 g�, City ®f cusa+m egg, EtivrMdd North Sp@01ic Plans Dear Niki Brott • i As a co -owner of app samately 32 acres withip the aree i~rig rational forest on the north and::'he double power tine cwTi61, oh the south which is facing t�.�ossibi itil 9f being zoned as perrnapcnt open space, I should like to adsi! my oppgsition to this passibility. ' f Property that is now privately ovmd, if zoned as permanent oA-A space, would be worthless to the owners. A fair decision would be to zone it for residentlaidevelopment on a reasonable ratio coider:ning to the standards of prudent land Lase. The Orrpertg thU3 % ild retain some value for its owners. I plop to atteW the.0 it rneeting on Aupst 14, and 1 request that ry my voice be added to thm others whisk strwQ19 opm zoning Etiwanda North ptopartV as perma-�4nt shat spa+ With thanks and rep-ds LET ER 6 — Z 1 y i DATE: TO FROM: BY: SUBJECT: CI`i Z OF RANOR0 CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT Y ti W�) June 26, 1991 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Brad Buller, City Planner biLki Bratt, Associate Planner ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 90 -J1 AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 90 -03B - CIVT OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA A public hearing to comment on the draft environmental impact report prepared for the Etiwanda North Specific Plan and General Plan Ameil6ment 90 -03B to prezone approximately 6,840 acres of territory in the Rancho Cucamonga aphe_e- of- influen'.: to provide for 3,613 single family dwelling units on '2,473 acres of vacant land, 28 acres of neighborhood commercial use, 4 schools, 5 parks, an equestrian center, and preservation of 4,112 acres of open space generally 'locw; =.d north of Highland Avenue (State Route 30), south!-'of the San Ba- nardino National Forest, west of the City of rontana, and east of Milliken Avenue. MWIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND SPECIFIC PLAN 90 -01 - CITY OF R.ENCEO CUCAMOFGA - A public hearing to comment c3 the draft Etiwan,a North Specific Plan, prezoning approximately 6,840 acres of territory in the Rancho Cucamonga sphere -of- influence to provide for 3,613 single family dwelling units on 2,473 acres of vacant land, 28 acres of neighborhood commercial use, 4 schools, 5 parks, an equestrian center, and preservation of 4,112 acres of open space generally located north of Highland 'Avenue' (State Route 30), south of the San Bernardino National Forest, west of the City of Fontana, and east of Milliken Avenue. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 90 -03B - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A public hearing to comment on the proposed General Plan; Amendment to provide consistency with the draft Etiwanda North Specific' Plan., prezoning approximately 6,840 acres of ;s-erritory in the Rancho Cucamonga sphere -of- influence to provide for 3,513 single family dwelling units on 2,473 acres of vacant land, 28 acres of neighborhood commercial" use, 4 schools, 5 parks, a,.- equestrian center, and preservation of 4,112 acres of open -space generally located north of �� '33 PLANNING CriMMISSION STAFF REPORT SP 90 -01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA June 26, 1991 Page 2 Highland Avenue (State Route `30), south of the San Bernardino National Forest, west of the City of Fontana, and east of Milliken Avenue. I. ABSTRACT: The purpose of this hearing is to receive comment on the Etiwanda North Specific Plan .draft Environmental Impact Report, consider the Eti:aanda North Specific Plan, and to consider those changes in the City's 'General Plan which will be required for consistency with the Specific Plana Upon receipt of public testimony and Planning Commission - discussion, staff recommends that this hearing be continued to July 24, 1991, iz order to complete revisions. II. BACSGROUND/ANALYSIS: A. Draft Environmental Impact Report: The draft Environmental Impact Report has been completed and circulated for comment. A copy of the draft EIR was distributed to the Planning Commission on May,' 3, 1991. Tk,a official comment period was from May 6, 1991 to June 20, 1991. Oral and written testimony received at this hearing will be included in the final EIR. A summary of impacts and mLtigation measures is discussed in Table 1 -1, Executive Summztity (see attached). Several items cannot be mitigated tn_ a level of less than significant. Under the California Environmental Quality Act, a reasonable effort must be made to reduce environmental impacts. The draft EIR recommends two approaches. For aggregate resource areas and parks, a change in the Specific Plan is proposed. These changes are supported by staff. For the remainder of the impacts, a reasonable effort has been made, but the impacts are still significant. Therefore, a statement of overriding consideration must - be prepared and approved prior j to approval of the Specific Plan (see attached Exhibit "A" Discussion: Draft EIR Mitigation Measures). B. Draft Etiwanda North Specific Plan: The Etiwanda. North Specific Plan was distributed to the Planning Commission on December 21, 1990. As a consequence of review by the Planning Commission, the Trails CommLittee, the Parks an..? Recreation Commission, a community workvhop, EIR mitigation weasures,,._,and public comment, some revisions to the draft plan- ..'are proposed-. (See Exhibit "B ", Discussion: Draft Etiwanda North Specific Plan.) D65% -354 0 0 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SP 90 -0.1 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA June 26, 1991 Page 3 Accordingly, revisions are proposed to the Land Use and to the Park and Trails maps. Changes have also been made to several of the remaining maps to achieve clarity of presentation, to make technical corrections, or to provide consistency with the Land Use Map. (See Exhibits "C -1" through "C -12 ", Draft` Etiwanda North Specific Plan Maps.) C. Consistency with the General Plan: The draft Etiwanda North Specific Plan is consistent with the overall goals and intent of the General Plan. However, several changes are recommended to achieve actual consistency and specificity between the Specific Plan and the General Plan. (See- Exhibit "D "., Discussion: Consistency with the General Plan.) Changes are- recommended to the Land Use Plan, Circelation Plan, Parks and Recreation Plan, Master Plan of ,Trails, Community Design Resources, Natural Resources, and Open Space Plan. (See Exhibits "E -1° through "E -B ", Existing General Plan Maps.) III. SUMMARY: The Environmental Impact Report identifies a number of impacts and offers mitigations. However, because 2,500 acres will be changed from an undisturbed natural area to developed area, a, number of impacts cannot be mitigated to a level of less than significant. The Specific Plan is recommending a number of land use designations which are different from existing General Plan land use designations. The Specific Plea builds on the City's standards for development and provides detailed guidelines for development. A number of changes to the General Plan will be necessary to provide consistency with the Specific Plane These changes are consistent with the intent of the General Plan land use policies and with surrounding land uses.' IV. RECOMMENDATION: Comments are invited on the Environmental Impact Report, the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, and on changes to the General Plan necessary to provide consistency with the Specific Plan. Following public testimony and discussion by the Planning Commission, the Commission should direct staff to complete ' revisions to the Draft Specific Plan, prepare responses to comments- on the ' draft EIR, and to prepare a statement of overriding considerations for the final SIR. Accordingly, the public hearing for this item should be continuel to July 24, 1991, � 5 F -3S PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SP 90 -01 - CITY OF RANCRO'CUCAMONGA June 26, 1991 Page 4 to receive the draft Specific Plan revisions, the FFFR, the Environmental Determination, and for consideration of Resolutions recommending auoption of the Specific Plan and consistency amendments to the General Plana Respe+ ly sub ted, Brad Iler City Planner BB:MB:mlg Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Discussion:. Draft EIR Mitigation measu4es - Exhibit "B" - Discussion: Draft Etiwanda North Specific Plan Man Revisions Exhibit "C" - Draft F::iwanda North Specific Plan Maps j Exhibit "D" - Discussion: Consistency with the General Plan Exhibit "E" - Existing General Plan Maps Executive Summary Draft En7ironmantal j Impact Report Summary I I i { J I� II aS EXHIBIT "A" DISCUSSION: DRAFT EIR MITIGATION MEASURES DRAFT EIR MITIGATION MEASURES: Although mitigation is proposed to the maximum extent feasible, several impacts have not been mitigated to a level of less than significant, in these instances staff` supports issuance of ,s statement of overriding considerations. These items include tk) following: Loss of Open Space; Development will result in loss r•? approximately 2,.500 acrf.!s of natural open space. A Resour e Management Plan will be prepared to provide measures to prot24t sensitive resources, However, impacts will not be reduced to a level less than significant. Circulation: At buildout, and with developer cintribzt- i for intersection improvements, the following intersections are still projected to operate at less than level C: * Cherry at Wardman Bullock * Milliken at Base Line AMR, W * Rochester at Base Line * Day Creek at Base Line * Etiwanda at Base Line * East at Base- Line * Milliken at Foothill * Rochester at Foothill * Day Creek at Foothill * Etiwanda at Foothill Therefore, impacts are not reduced to a level of less than significant. Aggregate Resources: Significant impacts vIll occur as a result of development on County Flood Control property west of the Day Creek Wash levee. Since the County is not proposing development in the County's Specific Plan, staff proposes to reoise the plan to omit residential development on identified aggregate resource areas. This is consistent with the General Plan policy on Aggregate Resource areas. A floating park /school site designation will remain, and will require a separate assessment if actually located on aggregate resource land. Therefore, the impact will be reduced to less than significant. (See Exhibit "B ", Discussion: Aggregate Resource Area.) Parks: Staff originally identified the neighborhood park requirement as 3 acres per thousand population per the Quimby requirement standard in effect. This is not consi. it with the General Plan goal of 5 acres per thousand. Howei ..,.a revised EXHIBIT "A" — Page 1 3 ,y assessment of ( ; Quimby basis indicates'the Clicy can now require 4.689 acres pe; thousand. Therefore, proposes that the project be amended to provide at least 4.689 acres per thousand. The sites should be unencumbered neighborhoofi parks on minimum sites of 5 acres of developable land. Additionally, trail head or other smaller sites for related park use will be required and may J be applied to the 5 acres per thousand General Plan goal. This action will reduce the impact to a level of less than significant. Land forms: Development will result in loss of approximately 2,500 acres of natural land forms, ma-nly prominent alluvial fans. To reduce-impacts, measures that will be taken include: a * Development wT11 occur on gentler sloping terrain; * The Hillside Development Ordinance shall be used; and * The prominent knoll adjacent to the bog shall 'e reserved for a passivie park. These actions will reduce project impacts, but na} Vie. „a,l�oe� leas than significant. Regional Wildlife and Habitat Impacts: Development will..'esult in loss of appro imately 2,500 acres of wildlife habitat gcea. Measures will be taken to preserve significant. areas as natural open zpace, including: * Lands above the National Forest boundary; - Steep slopes: * Riparian corridors; * Wardman, Morse, and Henderson Creek riparian corridors upstream of the alluvial fnn; * San Sevaine wash; * Etiwanda Wash; * An adequate wildlife corridor connecting Etiwanda Wash and San Sevaine Wash; * Seismsc setback areas; * Day Creek spreading grounds; * Investigating the feasibility of restoring flood flows to Day Zreek spreading grounds; * Preserving natural vegetation within flood control and utility easements to the maximum extent feasible; * Establishing buffer zones between development and natural areas which vary from 10 to 50 feet in width; * Revegetation with native plants in buffer zones, consistent with the Etiwanda North Resource Management Plan and Etiwanda North Fire Protection Study; Prohibiting off' -road vehicle travel within open space areas; and Establishing a permit system for pedestrian use of open areas bordering the National Forest (addition per Planning commission workshop). EXHIBIT "A” - Page 2 Comments from wildlife agencies indicate that in addition to the alluvial fan scrub habitat within existing spreading grounds, recommended for preservation in the Specific Plan, the alluvial fan scrub habitat north of the double utility corridor should al�:ao be considered for preservation. (See Exhibit "H ", Discussion: Regional Wildlife and Habitat Impacts.) Aesthetic: Development will result in loss of approecimately 2,500 acrez of natural area with attendant aesthetic loss. Community Design, Development Standards, and the Design Gadelines of the Specific Plan shall be implemented. View potential areas shall be protected. However, impacts will not be reduced to a level of less than significant. Air Quality: Construction will cause a temporary rignificant increase- in partiaAate, matter. Dust suppression techniques shall be implemented. however, impacts will not be reduced to a level of less than significant. r�t EXHIBIT "A" — Page 3 DEl =-3� 4 EXHIBIT "B" Dr USSION: DRAFTS ETIWANDA NOR d SPECIFIC PLAN MAP REVISIONS The following discussion presents an overview of the Land Use proposals of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. An overview of the maps included in the Specific Plan are also included. ISSUES! The following items set policy for the Specific Plan: Aggregate Resource Area: In response to the impacts to the aggregate resource area, the residential designation for the area outside the Day Creek Wash Levee will remain Flood Control. However, the potential of the area for residential use is noted, and staff recommends support flT appropriate residential use following a County Land Use Amendment. Regional Wildlife and Habitat Impacts: In response. to potential impacts to the bog area, staff proposes that the limit of development on the alluvial fan north -of the bog be moved to the south side of the upper branch of the- -4icamonga Fault. This land use designation will protect the bog from urban runoff, protect the existing water sources of the bog, and permit wildlife access. In light of communication from the U'S. Department of Fish and Wildlife and the California Department of Fish and Game, this is a conservative approach. The wildlife agencies indicate that the- limit of development should be the upper power corridor and the alixvial fan north of the power corridor between Day Creek and Etiwanda Creek should be designated as a wildlife habitat and alluvial fan scrub mitigation area. The Planning Commission may wish to investigate the feasibility of designating all the aforementioned alluvial area north of the upper power corridor as a mitigation area. Hillside Residential Estate: The Specific Plan also proposes that the developable hillsides east of Etiwanda Creek carry a more restrictive land use designation. The proposed hillside residential estate designation would require 1 unit per developable acre with a minimum 1 acre lot size. This designation contrasts with the existing hillside residential designation which allows - z dwelling units per developable acre and does not spec.'ify a minimum lot size. The proposed designation is ragponsive L/- the terrain and closer to the designation of the County General Plan than the existing general hillside residential designation Neighborhood Commercial: The Specific Plan proposes two general Neighborhood Commercial areas. A site specific market study would be required to support any' commercial development in the Specific Plan area. EXHIBIT "B" Page t Park Sites: Five neighborhood park situ are proposed. There are 5 prop.:sed,t:lrk sites, one for each identified neighborhood. The recommended I ,te of the parks will be adjuster to reflect the 5 per thousand population goal of the General Plan for unencumbered, developable parks. It should be noted that Community Services has reviewed its parks requirement:a under the State Quimby Act Legislation, and is currently entitled to resource 4.689 acres per thousand. Supporting calculation is as follows: According to the 1990 Federal Census, the current population figure for the City of Rancho Cucamonga is 101,409. Taking these numbers into consideration, the calculated park acreage standard is: 233.75 acres developed 19.0 under construction 222.8 undeveloped 475.55 acres parkland 475.55 acres .00468 x 1000 4.689 acres 101,409 population 1000 population Trail heads will also provide park acreage. The 5 acre per thousand goal of the General Plan will be met on- site.. Trails and landscape utility easements shall not count toward the neighborhood park goal within the Specific Plan. L.7uestrian Site: A minimum 25 acre equestrian site is proposed to pruvide for equestrian boarding facilities within the City's E.ruestrian Overlay District. The equestrian facility is proposed- to meet the intent of the General Plan policy to provide lots large enough for keeping horses north of Highland Avenue. A 36 acre site on Southern California Edison surplus property has been identified as the preferred site for an equestrian facility with a trail head to be located immediately to the west on the other side of Day Creek Boulevard. A second trail head shall be located in the vicinity of the Upper Power tarridor and Regional Front Line Fire Road/Trail. School Sites: The Etiwanda School District indicates that three elementary schools are needed within the Specific Plan area. In addition, Chaffey High School District requests that a high school site be provided in the vicinity of Banyon and Milliken Avenues. Each school site must be a stand -alone facility, with adequate open space on -site to serve the student population. Schools shall *be located adjacent to parks to facilitate joint use of facilities, and also to provide a neighborhood focal area. MAPS: The plans and maps prepared for the Specific Plan are briefly discussed below. Review of these items provides an overview of the Specific Plan: EXHIBIT "B" - Page 2 jJF-/ �3 i Land Use Plan (see Exhibit "C -111: Single family residential land use with supporting uses of neighborhood commercial, parks# and school I's proposed, Substantial areas remain under open space designations. Circulation Plan (see Exhibit "C -2 ": See Discn,sSion, Exhibit "D -" Open space and Trails Plan (see Exhibit "C -3 ": Significant areas of open space are expected to remain ?undeveloped. A Resource Management Plan shall be. prepared to reduce the impacts of planning urbanization of ad,oining areas. Planning Area Key Map (see Exhibit +C -4 "): The Specific Plan provides for five neig�Jorhoods focused by a neighborhood parX and an adjoining school '-i:iter except in the Oaks neighborhood which does not have a proposed school site. Constraints Map (see Exhibit "c -5 " }: Maps significant resources and hazards affecting development. Existing Conditions Map ;see Exhibit "C -6 "): Maps significant existing conditions such as utility corridors, existing residences, and other built features within the area. View Potential Map (see Exhibit "C -7 ": Maps significant view potential areas identifLed within the Specific Plan area. Water Master Plan (see Exhibit "C -8 "): This map is updated to reflect the Cucamonga County Water District Xaster-lan. Sewer Master Plan (see Exhibit "C -9 "): This map is updated to. reflect the Cucamonga County Water District Master Plan. Storm Drain Master Plan Use Exhibit "C -10 "): This map is consistent with the City's VAster Plan of Storm Drains. City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Land Use (see Exhibit "C- 1111): This map is informational. San Bernardino County General Plan Land Use (see Exhibit "C -12") This map is informational+ EMBIBIT -B" - Page 3 - LEGEND r,r..ea, rsnn eo.srr< roe `(. Low Density Residential (2-4 DU /AC) '• •••• • ® Very Low Density Re"ri ial (<2 DUTAM 8' P)opnsed T.0 )tend begins Stsuon MHOlside Very Low F+estdantral Esta(e (t DUTAC1 Proposed EgwatHan Fataty t0side Residential (r2 DU/Net Buildable Acre) S proposed Sd" Site Residential Estate (<t DU /Nei Buildable Acre) fQp� �� I 4 PC Flood CantroURtsuian V veywsed AarR fitte 4'.. CC Ut%ty Corridor - P Existing, lark Site OS Open Space *' TAlTEt IN institutional tes rrro esan nsr eer er emr «ny w�ea _ f f F.$ EaultZarta wi+orr st.ta�i.n.n wcawnanmu Mkwm lawn aaea vat ear as "V.+ r '". WC Resource ConxrvationArea sm eme ae tee py w. M sews ouuwt (NC) NeighbXt ood Commercial (L,VL,VLE,WC) 0—mmasnrrwtasawuuouxl"norr LAND USE PLAN D iDrlp' 2 0' 4=1 E$IL9ld11i63 NtiT$h spef';�Jic Plan Ili` O !31 - H.. .4. LEGEND Major Divided .Arteriat I Typical: Section .,..... ,.... ® .omy Creak aolxrtrd c.okw satTai .� ■® ■et®v Special Divided 3econc'Iary Arterial •VAtsoe AwOA (aast of Day O%9k SNd) ,.... Secondary Arterial Vaun •MhWmn Avenue 'Upper aY Creek SmkY d *wry Averw 1j em,—e. Cr -,Odor I I OanyM Street iioCt"WAwnue -vintage Drive •vhranan auaxk Road . - 1' r -Summit AVUVA "twnauo ,San Savans -t x Loop strests QCIRCUL- A�°IQNd PLAN -�l loo, r f'��- `� l 7ftiwanda Rarlthl? CLt:a 7R9rlgd City.pf =� Y13 "8J• H.w� besil'ic 9sn ® LEGEND "0 ee1ii10N0N 9.0 Subarea Reference L ANNING AREA IKEY MA, eoo MIRRM z Etiwanda Nc►rth I--� Specific Plan. City of Rancho Cucamonga EXHIBIT C 4 S.o Bamardino Naonal F0r1s. st 1 Adak �����'1��.� i� •�� 1 � ill n'� _ J� a . - bag tiyawo¢y Study. An. — .......... _.. • Nti - •�: \: �IJ :ti1•: ::y} ♦ • to — rF i�-• a:� : :VXcl••. M ��_ -�'�' _ s �' - mac• �. - �� � " LEGEND- - --- -- —__ - . mom•• m Waterways oplrq Sts ® Ma'kr Recharge At" a f(Haetur eCCa> aC4 H ® Hard Chaparral StraamsM Woodland . •�. ' _ i Alluvial AssoCiatiM Open Wash Association - t Eaccsiv :a:'. Stops M.11111111111 Costa, Sago Association Seismic Amos r ®.® Aipuiat -Prtolo SWottl Stodiam Znne City Adopted Special Study Zone. CONSTRAINTS MAP o soda it;� Etiwanda North Specific Plan Amok City of Randto Cucarnur,�a Front Line Fire Road VACANT LAND NATIONAL FOREST AREA Ex(stin !Siring¢ i :rdmanCreek-, { kVorse 6sek Ing _ 8pp { Eadsttttg1A�s Eztst 11i5uildng 9a 2 Rasltisnoes anC Two Notnes an Bat�f ` Ro9J Ranger Station Site, X ,+ on .. r" - .'so-.= �_._....._._..: •: swu<. f T'• �.' iii ai !' ice• lt: - fil p kxN=teo ProPertrPcovfousiy A.vmxed to Rancho Cueamonpe. Li Usthv stwoe Crmasinp _ 'twee rJeatrleai TrafWAwas SLMSICO 16. tAK9. Water hr�iandWon L'ns I.tslw Rachaf p Area Q AWWWte4 I' EXISTING CONDITIONS AND USES AOVA le i 1' sNC Bamz neWtiorufFOns, vr� Avert e i '• WIIlar Av LEGEND .. mkwvlow 6epirq 54Uan �'� eMlot Vis�raMd vier.OerG(e, - VIEW POTENTIAL MAP o ,oar �o Etibvanda North �. Specific Plan r � ` City of IV �antiao Cucacnunga PEF- LEGEND "In 5—rr vrm .«.... Proposed CCWD Boundary w •. ••.. .r® Existing CCWD Boundary ®w.12` Pipeline and Diameter 0 Reservoir -01, Metropolitan Water District (M.W.D.) Connection o Booster Pump Station L 0 Water Treatment Plant (W.?.P.) t , v Pressure Regulator Station Pressure Zone Brrindary - ! 4 Pressure Zone Nomher e s. Existing Pipeline source: CwAm*w contr Water Mitt tccYlot weer p@n.kna tM7' WATER MASTER PLAN IL o ,oar zo 0 4000 h l:giWartda North Specific Plan city of Rancho Cucamonga �,- EXHIBIT C S 1),, ,E F Pipeline from r)eY Cen.yon i __ San eam oNStioneS FOrstl N N ~•�� .. •• •• Pipeline trprrr Smith TWewl •• • M• •• �* Aft e f f3 T.-el ors elokee __ J yPipeline from East Etnrands Canyon Res. No. t.( _ - - T S.0 I'll n __ wtr� air ® aysse• ®aa �126soe _ . _ ? c P.S. 86 KW.n. •Connection - M' Lloyd W. ►ticpa r t - _ - Ca -7 Lit = _t r ' I r -\ T� - •-t aW o..-. LEGEND "In 5—rr vrm .«.... Proposed CCWD Boundary w •. ••.. .r® Existing CCWD Boundary ®w.12` Pipeline and Diameter 0 Reservoir -01, Metropolitan Water District (M.W.D.) Connection o Booster Pump Station L 0 Water Treatment Plant (W.?.P.) t , v Pressure Regulator Station Pressure Zone Brrindary - ! 4 Pressure Zone Nomher e s. Existing Pipeline source: CwAm*w contr Water Mitt tccYlot weer p@n.kna tM7' WATER MASTER PLAN IL o ,oar zo 0 4000 h l:giWartda North Specific Plan city of Rancho Cucamonga �,- EXHIBIT C S 1),, ,E F i San Brrnar -��ai For 17 y (A .Wilson Avenue ' ll S e 2 g _.. SU mit _ro — Amok e _ . - i F� ra•Ua Yon. 4cnre flt. tieikai stauai LEGEND Present CCWD Boundary .W.001 Pipeline and Diameter . i ®...tou Existing Pipeline !1 /!l1i1 /i!i/ Proposed District Annexation Area .. t Souris :t,ixartangi(',pWliyih'>tttt MSir{Ct tCLViDTMasim Plan Jw+e S93T SEVER MASTED` PLAN o ,ow aot7p FwM EQiwSl3ua rio. :an Plan Sp4cific ' City of Rambo Cucaewnga EXHIBIT C,9 �W San 5•vaina __ _ ;Ragtonat valnAlno tipper Etlwanda Regional Usinllne annul"' daeins p stcttat LEGEND Main!lne 5 Regional Drainage Facilities �® Master Plan Storm Drain Drainage Area Limits oess.sSecondary Regional Facility t FOO7NarES (i) OMW41" /use WX4u n sublW to SaMt9 aponrral t?a AN Ms algm we acpoiarute aches stsa to to dstotmkwd . by aww hY*ctw1hYarauMc stu*. ` f JASTER oa„�000' 20t)I)' <OOn' Etiwanda north Specific Plan �W San 5•vaina __ _ ;Ragtonat valnAlno tipper Etlwanda Regional Usinllne annul"' daeins p stcttat LEGEND Main!lne Regional Drainage Facilities �® Master Plan Storm Drain Drainage Area Limits oess.sSecondary Regional Facility t FOO7NarES (i) OMW41" /use WX4u n sublW to SaMt9 aponrral t?a AN Ms algm we acpoiarute aches stsa to to dstotmkwd . by aww hY*ctw1hYarauMc stu*. ` f JASTER oa„�000' 20t)I)' <OOn' Etiwanda north Specific Plan City of Aancieo Cucamonga i EXHIBIT C 10 aait.mifr pion r' O too r, 40W LEGEND 9.9 Esttiq Residential o-1 watAc (Etiwanda Specific Plan) ® Vet�c [" cz mrs/AG Low 7-: :tramc LM Low Medium 4-s ws /Ac FL /UC flood Control /Utility Corridor NC Neighborhood Commercial Hillside Residential z 0tra /SUNAWS Am E Existing Schools OS Open Space fPj Acgt*ed park Site QProposed Park Site care The sRas Sloop, aa±nst be c—gy Owned nor to on tou*m Mta spades— The de*Vw of a OR* w an tndRatton dl a pPOieGt*d NUNS mad that amY be aOluated arx V SW a ON dty and en SOt" t4etrbt aVO`V- CITY fnf� J4ANCHO CUCAMO GA D F -53 Etiev «nda !�larth Specific Plan City of Rancho CucawAnga EXHIBIT C 11 Ex G r xx Mill LEGENM Nm PD 1140 =1 OU /40 ACRES . dew atk n. reprw is aibwade dKU-jr PO 1110 -1 DUI I O ACRES or mk*mm. parew aoe. PO 112.5 =1 DUMS ACRES ®t�rrypnrroosh ftme<riA RanotwGxamcege. PO 111 =1 DU(1 ACRE FW Floodway PO 211 = 2'DUI1 ACRE IN Institutional PD 311 — 3 DUM ACRE PD Planned Development PD 411 - 4 UU 1 ACRE RS Single Residential - - RS 20M - 20,000 $0. FY. MIR. (IN) Inf ® ,Ted Institutional Designation LO? SIZE / � [llKARDIIYO C�V W/nti ov � -NCAI=0111 PLAN LA�VLW I I Q WEST VALLEY FOOTHILLS_ PLANNING AREA 0 oar zo Etiwanda North Specific Plan City of Rancho Guetmoo5A EXHIBIT C 12 EXHIBIT "D" DISCUSSION: CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN The following are highlights of proposed changes in the General Plan which provides consistency with the Specific Plan. LAND USE PLAN (see Exhibit "E -Y ") Residential: The open space designation north of Highland Avenue, south of the upper utility corridor,. and generally ast of Day Creek Boulevard will be changed to Low Density Residential, consistent with surrounding land uses. The Low Density designation 'between the upper and lower- :itility corridor and west of Etiwanda Avenue will );e changed to`,`yery Low , Density Residential, consistent with surrounding land uses. Parks; A neighborhood park shall be located within each identified neighborhood. The size wi A be a minimum of 5 developable, unencumbered acres. Schools: Three elementary school sites shall be provided. Each site shall be located adjacent to a neighborhood park, but must be a stand -alone facill:ty. Commercial: Twn neighborhood commercial sites are provisionally designated, but 'the land use designation is conditioned upon- completion of a`,_;-e-specific market study supporting the use. Fault Zone: A 50 -foot setback is required for each side of an identified fault zone. The resulting 100 -foot setback shall be retained as public open space. A community trail is proposed within the fauli- zone designation. CIRCULATION (see Exhibit "E -211) The plan provides the backbone circulation system suggested.by the General Plan. Etiwanda Avenue: Etiwanda Avenue ends at a "T" intersection with an east /west collector loop road immediately north of the lower power corridor. Etiwanda Avenue between the "T^ intersection and Wilson Avenue is changed from a secondary art--rial to a collector street. The name of Etiwanda Avenue north of Wilson shall be changed. The purpose of these changes is to protect historic Etiwanda Avenue. Day Creek Boulevard: Day Creek Boulevard shrill meet Wilson Avenue wish a 4 -"ray intersection. The proposed curve shall be deleted. LL EXHIBIT "D" - Page 1 �4EF — 6 Wilson Avenues Wilson Rvenue shall ba completed across Day Creek Wash to provide one of two east -west arterials needed to facilitate AM emergency vehicle access to the area. The name Wilson Avenue shall Mr be extended from Milliken Avenue to the eastern city Limit to provide for ctatsistency. The road is currently variously designated "24th Street," in conflict with another 24th Street within the City, and "Summit Avenue" with which it now connects. Banyon Avenue: Hany:,;i Avenue shall be completed across Day Creek Wash, connecting with Summit Avenue on the east side of Day Creek Channel, to provide one of two east -west arterials needed to facilitate emergency vehicle access to the area. Vintage Drive: Vintage Drive shall be completed across Day Creek Wash to provide a low utilization collector to serve as a frontage road for the Foothill Freeway. Freeway off- Ramps: Freeway off - ramps are planned for Day Creek Boulevard and East Avenue. Therefore, the tipper ar< lower loop roads, as well as•Banyon and Wilson, shall connect to Day Creek and East Avenue to provide part rP the backbone circulation system. Lower Loop Road: The lower loop road shall follow the lower utility corridor in order to maximize the use of developable property north of the power corridor. PAkM AND RECREATION PLAN ttiee Exhibit I'E -3 "): Park sites shall be added as indicated in the Specific Plan. (Compare with Exhibit "C -3" ) MASTER PLAN OF TRAILS (see Exhibit "E -4 "): Trails shall be added as indicated in the Specific: Plan. (Compare with Exhibit "C -3 ".) COMMUNITY DESIGN rESOURCES (see Exhibit "E -5 "): viewshed shall be added as indicated in Specific Plan. (Compare with Exhibit 'IC -7 ".) AGGREGATE EXTRACTION RESOURCE AREAS (see Exhibit "E -6 "): . Wo changes are proposed for this map. NATURAL RESOURCES (see Exhibit "E -70); Several technical corrections are proposed for this map. The spreading ground a -eas shall be revised to reflect the San Bernardino County Fluod Control Dintrict Mao Designation. Also, the limits of vegetation shall be iavised to conform with the vegetation survey map `prepared for the Etiwanda North Spocifi.. Alft Plan. Finally, the bog and its hydrological study areas shall be 1p identified. (Compare with Exhibit "C -5 ".) EXHIBIT "D" Page 2 OPEN SPACE PLAN (see Exhibit "E -80): ` Several technical corrections are proposed for , *his map. The hillside residential. area shall be changed to refiect constraints' identi_`ied by the environmental review process. Ale.o, the streamside woodland an--"water recharge areas shall be revised to reflect the aforementioned vegetation survey. Finally, proposed parks,shall be added. (Compare with Exhib;lts "C -3" acid "C- 4 ".);, I! I i I i EXHIBIT °D" - Page.3 1 CLgJ W Li C-3 19 g ? 1 i w t Y 0 u 1 9 y 8) of 8 ic , UN CL) Mu 4 u m I I P 1 9001 1 EXHIBIT E I L-]l u 11 9 + ®. B W cc ,1 " w .�1 0 zo r u�iF3om o j 0 cc =104 T y cc 0 tu 0 a 1 1 cn .d Z 9 , t� 0 obi Lei 9L IL m 0 a ®0 W� ? g W,'- \ ts.� cis � � '�� Ca: 19 1 �': , 1 (vim- �.T.� :• l ♦I j LU ry1 �OV t rail Ia G10 0 to i _ 1 Eo _ � � 1 / u EXHIBIT E 3 " ti ap � aY -� (A zo oa 00- g rgx cc •ir 2 U. � W o < GSA cc 4 JU) 6 mo a �v z o 'Z gig N ILW x " p 0 u �e W 0 a�o`W' g0 d s � ® J � ,a J o T v= ® g ju- c ���R Q _=W zap Q (EXHIBIT E 5 alffAlh �Xe'lECiE f Q: d O LU N cc W . Cl V cm 0 iii 999cccc f cc a N g. 2 �. LAI CC alffAlh �Xe'lECiE f Q: d W g C9 �, _j <1 6 C7 2 x z L O } E E .11 k $ k 2 | k B.| � gk . .. . . ■��,� i 5 -.. . L) ■ $a� N t , g §k ■ » A o �k . Q . k $ k 2 | k B.| � gk . .. . . ■��,� i 5 -.. . L) Curt Billings, Engineering Technician, replied that the gates would not be locked unless the residents provide a lock. Commissioner Melchor said he had wondered about a lock, as the staff report indicated several resideness may be using the alley for access to their lots. chairman McNiel invited public com,�ent, but there was none. Commissioner Melchor stated he was in total sympathy with why the alley is to be closed cuff, but he felt the situation may lead to problems. Motion: Moved by MPZ.cher, seconded by zolstay, carried, 4 -0 -1 (Chitiea absent), to adopt the Consent Calendar. PUBLIC HEARINGS B. EVVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPPM -FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 90 -01 AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 90 -03B - CITY OF RANCHO M. ON - A public hearing to comment on the draft environmental impact report prepared for the Etiwanda North Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment 90 -03B to prezone approximately 6,840 acres of territory in the Rancho Cucamonga spherce-of- influence to provide for 3,613 single family dwelling units on 2,493 acres of vacant land, 28 acres of neighborhood commercial use, 4 schools, 5 parks, an equestrian center, and preservation of 4,112 acres of open space generally located north of Highland Avenue (State Route 30), south of the San Bernardino National Forest, west of the City of Fontana, and east of Milliken Avenue. C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AM SPECIFIC PLAN 90 -01 - CITY OF RANCENQ CUCAMONGA - A public hearing to comment on the draft Etiwanda North Specific Plan, prezoning approximately 6,840 acres of territory in the Rancho Cucamonga sphere -of- influence to provide for 3,6 ":1 single family dwelling units on 2,473 acmes of vacant land, 24' acres of neighborhood commercial use, 4 schools; 5 parks, an equestrian center, and preservation of 4,112 acres of open space generally ?:r :ated north of Highland Avenue (State Route 30), mouth of the San Bernrr6,az National Forest, west of the City of Fontana, and east of Y.illikeh- Avenue. D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN' AMENDMENT 90 -038 -• CITY OF ANCHQ CUCAMONGA - A public hearing to comment or the proposed General Plan Amendment sq provide consistency with the draft Etiwanda North Specific Plan, prezoning approximately 6,840 acres of territory in the Rancho Cucamonga sphere -of- influence to provide for 3,613 single family dwelling units on 2,473 acres of vacant land, 28 acres of neighborhood commercial use, 4 schools, ;a parks, an aquas: Inn center, and preservation of 4,112 acres of open spaca generally loeau north of Highland Avenue (State Route 30), mouth of the San Bernardino National Forest, west of the City of £on°ana, and east of Milliken Avenue. Miki Bratt, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Planning Commission Minutes -I- D, EF --6 L LI June 26, 1991 0 1 Commissioner Melchor asked for clarification on the process of adoption of the final Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Ms. Bratt stated that the comments to the draft EIR and the written .-eeponses would become the final SIR. .arry Henderson, Principal Planner, stated the Planning commission would review the written comments before the EIR is forwarded to City Council for final certification. He said the public comment process would teehnically end upon the close of tonight's public hearing, but staff typically, responds to all comments submttted up until tl4e final cgvtifica`cion. Commissioner Melchor questioned the 'amount of park "land being requested under the Quimby standard. Me. Bratt replied that under Quimby standards a municipality can require up to 5 acres of park pe- 1,000 population if there is already exiot ng parks at that ratio. She * �d the current City basis is 4.G8-9 acres per thousand. Commissioner M(.cher asked if the 4.589 figure is based on developed park acreage. me. Bratt .responded that it includes land which is owned or developed including trails and trait heads. Commissioner Melchor asked about the comment that the impact would be lose than significant., Me. Bratt replied that there would be a significant impact if the City required less than the General Plan gol for parks, but the impact will be less than significant if the - proper amount of park land is provided. Commissioner Melchor asked if the development standards would change -In the future if the Hillside Development ordinanea is changed. Me. Bratt replied that development would be based upon the standards in effect at the time of approval for such development. Commissioner Tolstoy thought the Hillside Development ordinance should be strengthened to avoid adverse impacts. Mr. Henderson commented that the act of 'grading will cause an impact, so impacts could not be reduced to least than significant. Commissioner Tolstoy thought the Planning Commission should reevaluate tho :*inside Development Ordinance based on experience with the project now in to be sure the Ordinance is accomplishing the objectives of the Commission. Condtssionbr Melchor agreed that the level of development achievable within the Ordlp.nce g -Aidelinss is not the same as the goal of the Commission. He questioned if the wildlife corridors would remain viable. Planning Commission Minutes -3- Suns 26, 1991 Dr EF - 6 7 I Me. Bratt reported that staff is currently reviewing the resour management plan to address chose concerns. Comcaissioner Melchor asked if all'' hiking and equestrian ti' _cls will be available to all City residents. Ms. Bratt responded affirmatively. Commismioner Melchor asked the level of development of East Avenue. Mr. Bratt replied that it will be a collector street. Commissioner Vallette questioned the upper limit of development. Ms.. Bratt stated the forest station sitt on a prominent knoll and development would be north to that site. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Mike Kearney, Landmark Land, 110 North Lincoln Avenue, Corona, stated their 762 acres is located at -the northwest portion of the Stiwanda North Specific Plan. He said they had been working over two years on the preparation of the plan wit:, both the City and the County. He stated they..are currently processing their development within the County, He said on7 the lower portion of their project is located within the City's Sphere of �tcZzuence. He indicated they are opposed to any annexation into the Sphere of Influence or the City boundary until the plan is approved. He presented a package of comments and stated he wished to raserve the right to present additional comments because come tf the land uses had been changed since the plan they had seen. Hike White, Standard Pacific, 1565 West MacArthur Boulevard, Costa Mesa, stated he in the owner and developer of Tract 13565 in the City. He said that when the tract was annexed into the City in 1989 the City Council approved a Development Agreement which sots forth certain standards. He asked for Clarification that the Developmatit Agreement would not be superseded by the Etiwand,,' North Specific Plan. He said they planned to moot with staff during the next week. Anita HCZeal, Land Plan Design Group, 14751 Plaza Drive, "A ", Tustin, submitted a letter with comments. She said their primary concerns regard land use, open space mitigation, the legality of the open space mitigation, and the Hillside development Ordinance. She disagreed that estate logs would be more in line with the County General Plan. She said the County does not have a minimum 1 acre lot size, as the City would like to impose. She reported that they had askod staff for do^umentation regarding the Quimby numbers.. She expressed concsrn about the commercial land use locations and said it %Is her understanding that the area is not in the Equestrian Overlay District. She said they would like to reserved the right to review staff's later materials and return to comment at a later time. Planning Commission Minutes -4- June 26, 1991 1ScF -�d' 1 a 1.1 11 Richard Hailman, 5660 San Marino, Rancho Cucamonga, objected to the designation of Neighborhood Commercial in Subarea 6 at the northwest corner of Wilson and Wardman Bullock Road., He thought the designation is not consistent with the General Plans of either Rancho Cucamonga or San Bernardino County. He commented there is no otbbi Neighborhood Commercial is the City north c!f Route 30 except for the Haven corridor, :share it extends to Lemon. He felt the increased traffic, noise, and parking lot lighting will create negative impacts in the residential area: He thought the density in the area will be too low to supprrt Neighborhood Commercial. He complimented staff on '.he technical preparation of the document but asked why so much taxpayer money' ,s being wasted on a plan when it was entirely possible notning will come aE it. He was concerned about the financing for the rest of the area and commented he lives within a Mello -Roos District. He thought the County and City were perhaps needlessly spending money because of hf^xering caused by egos. He eaggested the County and City get together and produce a cyaality product. Hu reported that the San Sevaine wash has been completed north of 24th Street and has been completely fanced in, making animal movement impossible. He felt that with the vegetation growing in the area it will be a high fire area and he thought the fence presents a danger to wildlife because of the fire hazard. He wondered vhy the City's EIR recommended the area be left open but the County-is fencing ,it off. Tim Lynch, 1164n Mt. Whitney Court, Rancho Cucamonga, said he appreciated the concerns regarding wildlife habitat and the development of the foothills. He did not feel development should be allowed if, the impacts ca..not be mitigated. He asked why sa much scrub habitat is ­�, be eliminated if scrub habitat reaqurces are dwindling. He was concerned thit, the wildlife corridors may not be viable. He suggested that hiking and equestrian trails should not be included in the wildlife corridors because of conflicts with the animals. He thought development should be limited to south of the utility corridor in the Oaks area to protect against a human impact upon the bog. He wondered about economic and tax liabiility for the City and did not feel a l.ot a residential development is good for the City. He thought the City is approaching a condition of being overdeveloped in the residential area and feared future bankruptcy. Chairman Maiel thanked the participants for thQkr comments, both written and oral. Motion: moved by Melchor, seconded by Vallette, to continue Environmental Impact Report for Specific Plan 90 -01 and General Plan Amendment 90 -03B, Environmental Assessment and Specific Plan 90 -01, and Environmental Assessment and General Plan Amendment 90 -03B to July 24, 1991. Motion carried by the following vctes AYES: COMHISSIONERSs MCNIEL, MELCHER, TOLSTOY, VALLETTE NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: CHiTIEA carried Planning %-_mmission Minutes -5- June 26, 1591 Brad Buller, City Planner, suggested that Interested individuals could telephone the City to make an appointment to discuss 'their concerns regarding the items. E. E rROMaNTAL � AND MOVIFZ(IATION TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 86 -06 - RICHARD STENTON - Modification of conditions of approval to allow land uses requiring a more intensive parking ratio than the one provide-.t for research and development (1 space pur 350 square feet) within an existing industrial complex on 13.7 acres of land in the 'General Industrial District (Subarea 11) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located on the northwest corner of Buffalo and 6th Street - APN: 229- 261 -78. Staff recommends issuance of a Negstiva Declaration. (Continued from June 12, 1991.) F. ENVIRONMFNT ASSESSME-NT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 91 -03 --JAMES PAGE - The request to establish a "mini -mall" (swap . � t) in a lwased space of 103,552 square feet within an existing industrial center on 13.77 acres of land in the General Industrial District, (Subarea 11) of the Industrial Arpa Specific Plan,- located at 11530 Sixth Street -- APN: 229 - 026 -28. Staff recommends issuance of a mitigated Negative Declaration. Related file Conditional Use Permit 86 -06. (Continued from June 12, 1992.) Anna -Liza Hernandez, Assistant Planner, presenter) the staff report. Commissioner Tolstcy asked what would happen if Condition 6 were deleted from Resolution 86 -78 and the proposed project does not materialize or does not continue as a use. He asked if t)=1 could cause a problem. Brad Seller, City Planner, *stated -hat when the project was first proposed, the Commission felt it was important that the leasing agent Advise perspective tenants that the parking ratio is 1/350 square :.mot. He said if the condition were deleted, the applicant would still be subject to the same parking requirements. Commissioner Vallette questioned the justification for requesting a parking ratio at 1/150 for the swap sweet use. Me. Hernandez replied that the applicant had submitted a detailed parking study which was deemed satisfactory to staff. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Rance Clouse, Lee 8 Associates, 10370 Commerce Center Drive, #100, Rancho Cucamonga, reiterated the an plicant had prc-ided a parking study demonstrating that a 1/150 parking ratio would be suffitiiant. He suggested the Commission could modify the Resolution to require that the owners notify any future tenants of the maximum parking ratio of 1/350 after processing o.' Conditional Use Permit 91 -03 for the swap meet. He requested that the condition requiring removal of graffiti be changed to a 72 hour deadline t-z allow time to act because he felt 24 hours was unreasonable. He thought the requirement for a to Planning Commission Minutes -6- June 26, 1941 D F 70 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLA.*TNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFY THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE ETIWANDA NORTH SPECIFIC PLAN., A. Recitals. (i.) There has been vresented to this Commission in conjunction with this Commission's consideration of the recommended adoption of the Etiwanda ; Specific PIP-n, a final S .vironmental Impact Report. (ii; The final Environmental Impact Report referred to in this Resolution consists of that document dated M'ay, 1991, entitled', "Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Etiwanda North Specific Plan," together with the draft Final Environmental Impact report dated September 11, 1991, including written comments on the draft LIR and written responses thereto submitted by staff of the City U11 Rancho Cucamonga, and testimony presented during the hearings on the recommended adoption of the said ,, °necific Plan insofar as that testimony pertained to the navironmental natters, as well as the revised executive summary, including revisions to mitigations measures, as well as the mitigation monitoring plan. HereinaftQ" `"e above- aeferenced ;cuments will be referred to as "the final Environmental'itapact Report.`' The entirety of the final Environmental Impact Report is hereby incorporated in this Resolution by this reference. (iii) All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution 'have occurred. I. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission c' the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Planning Commission. does 'hereby recommend that the City Council or the City of Rancho Cucamonga take the following actions witf, respect to the final Environmental Report: a. Certify that the fins; linv.l- -- -ntal Impact Report has been prepared on the Etiwanda N.,rth Specific Plan in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, California : Public Rerourcea Code Sections 21000 at seq. and in accordance with the regulations promulgated thereunder. Further, that the Council certifies that it has considered the contents of the final Environmental Impact Report in considering the adoption of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan; b. Find that the final Environmental Impact Report doss identify physical environmental impacts inherent in the - project and that changes or alterations have been incorporated in the project which mitigate or avoid ail significant br, .�ronmental effects reo' other than as follows: DE" 7J PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NC. ETIWANDA NORTH SPECIF'I'.' PLAN EZR = CITY OF R. C. September 11, 1995 Page 2 1) Subscan I a.l�teration _of existipc 2p n space land use! ch,'' cter_ Almost all of the total project area of 6,84 acres is curren`•ly in nar.':ral opsz space. Of the total, 4,442 acres will be aesirnated as open space. Nevertheless, 2,112 acres are propi.'s&d for development and will result,in the lose of the exist oven space land use character. i 2) city 'transportation policies and Traffic: Abplicants for development will mitigate all on -site impacts.and contribute to %he pity's Trafiic' Nexus Fee. program for off- site impacts.''nevertheles£, as a result of incremental increases t--.t cumulative traffic is pacts, ofa -IlLte impacts will occur c-,,aa after witigatton. 3) L ardform mod" ot-ions Applicants for development will comply with the Hillsiae Development ordinance and City Davelrpnent standards. Nevertheless, grading for development within 2,112 acres will moAlfy the existing character of the alluvial fan and portions of the hillsides. 4) wildlife habitat impacts: The project is designed to retain large, defensible areas of open space i.hich, will msximize the habitat value for the project area. A total of 4,442 acres will retain in open space land use designations. Nevertheless, - development of 2,112 acres will diminish on- site wildlife density and diversity and fragment the remaining wildlife habitats. ') Alluvial- fm scrub habitat loss: /Apple, :ants for di '&lopment will be conditioned to preserve one acre of alluvial fan scrub habitat for one acre of alluvial fan scrub Habitat lost. There are significant areas of natural alluvial fan scrub habitat within the project rrea which are available for preservah,on or which can be rehabilitated. Nevertheless, almost all of the 2;,112 acres planned for development are alluvial fan scrub habitat which will be lost. b) f;�_ as to riparian habitatut Applicants for development will be conditioned to retain existing riparian'eorridors, as well is to provide a buffer zone to protect the riparian corridors from degradation associated with urban development. Also, conditions will be enforc ;.i to protect the Resource ."•onservation arres including .rcztrictivn of human use to designated trails, exclusion of domestic cats and dogs, exclusion of off-road vehicles, and techniques 4c divert urban irrigation run -off and polluted storm flows. Nevertheless, urbanization of the area will remain a threat to riparia.-k habitat. qW PLANNIF' - COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. ETIWANDA NORTH SPECIFIC PLAN EIR CITY OF R. C SJpteflhar 11 -, 19.91 Page 3 AWk 7) Short„ term fugitive dust: Project applicants will hu- conditioned to implement actions to reduce fugitive dust during construction to the maximum extent feasible. Nevertheless, some construction duet will occur. 8) Solid' waste: Project applicants will be condit:oned to participate in City waste minimizetich programs. Nevertheless, there w4.11 %,-main an impact on landfill capacity as a result of solid haste generated by developmen-c of approximately 3,SS7 daellingunits, an well as up to 28 acres of commercial develDpment. •. C. Find that notwithstanding the unmitigated adverse environmental impacts specified in':Zuaragraph b above, that specific economic and social considerations make infeasible,. any project alternative specified in the final Environm9ntkii impact Report and con lutes an nv_rriding basi.a far.Counci:l ,pproval of the projertg and d. As to those impacts identified in the final Environmental Impact Report which cannot feasibly be avoidld by mitigation measures and project alternattfes, adopt a statement -of overriding considerations in substantial form to that set forth in Exhibit "A ", attached hereto and incorporated by this reference. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 11TH DAY OF SEPTFMHER 1991, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMGNGP. BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman ATTEST: ._ Brad Buller, Secretary I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Ccmmission 'of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and rGgularly introduced, paeeed,,and adapted by the Planning Commiusion of the City of Rancho Cuca"::��- at a regular meeting of the nanning Commissign held on the 17th :ay of Sept -zber 1991, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: l T9SENT.: COMMISSIONERS: �E� _�7 t t EXHIBIT "A" AUL STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS The final Environmental Impact Repert identifies Certain impacts which cannot feasibly be avoided by mitigation measures. Impacts which have been mitigated to the maximum extent feasible., but still have not been mitigated to a level of not signifscant, include the following: Substantial Alteration of Existing open space Land Use Character: Almost all the total project area of 6,840 acres is current.Ly in natural open space. Of the total, 4,442 acres shall be designated as open space. Nevertheless, 2,112 °acres are proposed for development and will result in the loos of existing open space 'and use character. City Transportation Policies! and Traffics Applicants for development shall mitigate all on -site impacts, specified off -site impacts, and contribute to the Cityfs Traffic Nexus Fee Program for off -site imr''°;cts. Nevertheless, as a result of incremental increases to cumulative traffic impacts, off- site impacts will occur even after mitigat'�:on. Landfcrm Modification: Applicants for development shall ccmply with the Iiillside. Development Ordinance and City Development Standards Also the proininent knoll, where the historic U.S.. Forest Service Fire Station site is located, shall be preserved as open space. Nevertheless, grading for development within_ 2,112 acres will modify the existing character of the alluvial fan and portions of the hillsides. Wildlife Habitat Impacts: The project is designed to retain large, defensible areas of open space which shall maximize the habitat value for the project area. A total of 4,442 acres will. remain in open space land use designations, including approximately 144 acres in the vicinity of the bog and north of the northern branch of the Cucamonga Fault, a portion of which was previously designated for residential development. Further, a Resource Management Plan shall be prepared and implemented. Nevertheless, development of 2,112 acres will diminish on -site wildlife density and diversity and fragrant the remaining wildlife habitats. Alluvial Fan Scrub Habitat Loss: Applicants for development shall be conditioned tr� preserve one acre of alluvial fan scrub habitat for one acre of alluvial fan scrub habitat lost. It is intended that 4,442 acres shall be designated as open space and that alluvial fan scrub habitat in Day Creek wash, Etiwanda Creek wash, San SeVraine Wash, and 145 acres in the vicinity of the bog and north of the northern branch of the Cucamonga Fault shall be retained as open space. Further to the maximum extent feasible, resource ��j� - a EXHIBIT ngu STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS September 10, 1991 Page 2 conservation easements shall be obtai -ned for the aforementioned wildlife habitat areas. Nevertheless, almost all of the 2,112 acres planned for development are alluvial fan scrub habitat which will be lost. Threat to Riparian Habitats: Applicants foz.,development' will be conditioned to retain existing riparian corridors, . an well as to j.rovide a buffer zone to protect the riparian corridors from degradation associated with - tarban development. Also, conditions will be enforced to pr `ect the Resource Conservation areas, insludincJ�""restrictir..i of human use to designated trails, exclusion of domestic cats and dogs, and exclusion of off -road vehicles, as well as techniques to divert urban irrigation run -off and polluted storm flows. Nevertheless, urbanization of the area will remain a threat to riparian habitat. Short -Term Fugitive Dust:, Project applicants will ba. conditioned to implement actions to reduce fugitive dust during construction to the maximum extent feasible. Nevertheless, some aL„struction dust will occur.- Solid Waste: ' Project applicants will be conditioned to i participate in City waste minimization programs. Neverthele 3s, there will remain an "impact- on landfi?.1 capacity as a result of solid waste generated by.'development of approximately 3,157 dwelling units, as well as up to 28 acres of commercial development. Notwithstanding these impacts project approval is recommended based upon a finding that specific eny;:ronmental, economic and si,cial considerations make infeasible "any" I project alternatives specified in the final Environmental Impact Report and accordingly constitutes an overriding basis for project approval.. Substantial environmental benefits will occur; as a result of approval of iv the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, and _associated General Plan Arendnpnt No. 90 -03B, as follows: * Of the total 6,844 -acre plan area, development will be limited to 2,112 -acres and 4,442 acres shall b= designated as open space. * Applicants for development shall contribut4l to the building of the circulation and transportation system of the community by mitigating all on -site impacts, specified off -site impacts:.,, and contributing to the City',n Traffic Ne; .lis Fee Program for all other off -site impacts. * Applicants for development shall comply with the Hillside Development Ordinance ; and City Development Standards. Also the prominent knoll, where the historic U.S. Forest Service Fire Station site is located, shall be preserved as open space. * The project is designed to retain large, defensible areas of open space which shall maximize the habitat value for the project area. A total of 4,442 acres will remain in open space /. land use designations, includin¢ approximately 145 acres In the vicinity of the.bog and ,north of the northern branch of the Cucamonga Fault, a' portion of which was previously designated for residential development. Further, a Resource Management Plan shall be prepared and implemented. Applicants for development shall be conditioned to . preserve one-,,,acre of alluvial 'fan scrub habitat for one acre cif alluvial fan scrub habitat lost. It is intended that 4,442 acres shall be designated as) open space and that alluvial, fan j!- scrub habitat' in Day Creek wash,,Etiwanda Creek { wash, San Sevaine Wash, and 145 acres in the vicinity of the bog and north of the northern branch of the Cucamonga Fault shall be retained as Alk open space. Further to the maximum extent feasible resource conservation fr rvatl�n easemeni,s shall be obtained for the aforementioned wildlifa habitat areas. * Applicants for development will be conditioned to retain existing xjiparian corridors, as well as to provide a buffer; zone to protect the riparian corridors from degradation associated with urban development. Also, conditions will be enforced to protect the areas " designated as "Resource Conservation,' including restriction of human use to designated trails, exclusion of domestic cats and dogs, and exclusion of off -road vehicles, as well as techniques to divert urban irrigation run- off and polluted storm flows. * Project applicants shall be cond;�::,ioned to implement actions to reduce fugitive dust during construction to the maximum extent feasible. * Project ap*�alicants shall be conditioned- to participate in City waste minimization programs to reduce the flow of municipal solid waste to landfills,"-' t Also, the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, and associated General Plan Amendment No. 90-03`S, are themselves measures to mitigate potential adverse impacts" of development on the existing community which would otherwise occur without �a3 planned and comprehensive approach to future development. 'The Specific t: +lan contains provisions tailorea to development of the sensitive alluvial fan and hillside environment, and is-meant to replace existing Citywide zoning regulations that do not address the unique qualities and community traits of that portion of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and its Sphere -of- Influence. Further, the Etiwanda North Specific Plan provides pre- zoning for the Sphere - li o£- Influence area and for the planning area north of the National Forest boundary where City zoning ordinances do not apply, Consequently, the adoption of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan will result in potential environmental effects that are substantially less sigfi ficant in scope and extent' than those effects which :could otherwise occur under the existing General Plan and .zoning regulations, including each alternative analyzed in the Final Eavironmental Impact Report. J` 7r"`9 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN'AMENDMENT NO. 90 -038, AIM',IDING THE LAND USE AND CIRCULATION MAPS, AND REVISING VARIOUS MAPS. A. Recitals. O on June 26, 1911. and continued" to July 24, August 14? and September 11, 1991, the Planning Commission. of the Ckiy of Rancho Cucamonga conducted duly noticed public hearings concerning the r6cc- Wended adoption of General Plan P=ndment 90 -03B. (ii) ine General Plan Amendment is set fortis in Exhibit "A" attached. (iii) All legal prarequisites prior to the adoption of phis Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. rok?, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, '3termined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. In all respects as pet forth in Recitals, Part.A, of this Resolution. 2. Prior to the adoption of" this Resolution, this Commission has reviewed the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Plan and recommended that the City Council certify. t,'ie Report, including adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations, in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines promilgat.ed thereundoi.. 3. Th, commission finds as follows: (a) the Amendment dies not conflict with the Land Use or Circulation Policies of the General Plan. (b) The amendment promotes the goals of the Land Use and Circulation ElemE °it. (c) The Amendment would noc be maY:)r ally injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties. 4: This Commission hereby recommends Lhat the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga adopt General Plan Amendment 90 -038, marked as Exhibit "A," attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. S. The Secretary to thin Commission shad certify the adoption of this Resolution. , � ^ 75— PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NOS' GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 90 -03;^3 September 11, 1991 Page 2 ` - tiJ APPROVED AW) ADOPTED THIS 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 1991. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman ATTEST- Erad Buller, Secretary 1, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the :ity of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Reeolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, aid adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commissk�n held on the 11th day of Septem:,er 1991, by-the following vote -to -wit: { AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIOIERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: i j ��-_ 7L RESOLUTION h0. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING.;OMMISJION OF THE CIa,Z OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL bF SPECIFIC PLAN 90 -01, THE ETIWANDA NORTH ;SPECIFIC PLAN A. Recitals. (i) On June 26, 1991, and continued to July 24, August 14, and September 11, 1991, the Planning Commission of the t;ity of Rancho Cucamonga conducted duly noticed public hearings concerning the recommended adoption of thr Etiwanda North Spocific Plan, hereinafter referred to as the Plan. (ii) The Plan comprises approximately 6,850 acres located generally north of Wilson Avenue (with a portion north of Highland Avenue), south of the National Forest (with portions within the National Forest), east of the extension of Milliken Avenue, and west of the City limi'- of the City of Fontana, all as referenced in the Land Use Map, Exhibit 17, of the Plan. (iii) on file in the City Clerk's office, and, incorporated herein by this reference, is a full, true and correct copy of the Plan. t� (IN') All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have 'occurred. I B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. In all respects to set forth in Recitals, Part A, of 'this Resolution; 2. Prior to the adoption of this Resolution,- -this Commission has reviewed the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Plan and General Plan 90 -03H, and recommended that the City Council certify the Report, including adoption of a Statement of Overriding Consideration, in compliance with the California Environmental Qu- %lity Act of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines promulgated thereunder. 3. Prior to the adoption of this Resolution, this Commission has reviewed General Plan Amendment No. 90 -038 ana recommended adoption by the City Council. 4. This Commission hereby finds that the Plan has been drafted to include, in text and accompanying diagrams all of the information as follows: a. The distribution, location and extent of the land uses, Including open apace, within the area covered by tha Plan. b. The proposed distribution, location, extent and intensity of major components of public and private transportation, sewage, water, �� C - F 7 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLU.' ON NO. %I SPECIFIC PLAN 90 -01 - CITY OF R. C. Septe.Rper 12, 1991 Page 2 .drainage, solid waste disposal, energy and other essential infrastructure proposed to be located within the 'area of the Plan and needed to support the land uses described in the Plan. c. The standards and o"11-teria by which development will nroc''eed for land uses within the Plan and startidards for the conservation, development' and utilization of natural resources where applicable within the a ,t of the Plan; and d. A description of the program :xf implementation measures, including regulations, programs, public works projects and financiti.g meacureR necessary to carry okt Chose provisions referenced ist subparagraph. a.,,-,b. and c. above within the area of the Plan. S. Thir. Ccmml eion hereby recommends that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucsmong*ltedopt Specific Plan 90 -01, the Etiwanda North specific Plan, or. fie in the city Clark's office and incorporated herein by this reference. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify the adoption of f this Resolut`nn. i " APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 11TH DAY DF SEPTEMBER 1993 ---:'' I PLANNING COMMISSION Or 5W CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Haller, Secretary I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Plr,,Miing Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby :.ertify that the foregoing Resolution waio duly and regularly introduced, passe:,,, and--adopted by by the Planning Commission of the City o Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on to 'filth day of September 1991, by tae following ". _.a•:o -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMHISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMIS LO10 8: 1 - 4D \ 1 \,e ETIV aMA NORTu SPECIFIC PLAN (PRE -ZONE) RECOMMENDED CONS1OTENCY CHANGES TO THE CITY OF RAX,;AO CUCAMONGP"6 GENERAL PLAN (GPA 90 -03H) The following changes to Rancho Cucamonga *s Gen -ral Plan are recommended. There are two categories of cha;_jes: one is changes to the General Planes maps and plans (see figure references below) and the other is changes to text. Text changes are short `additions to clarify objectives or policies brought into foc.s by the Specific Plan. Land Use Map and Circulation Map changes reflect policy changes. other map changes reflect additions of details in the Etiwandh North Sphere -of- Influence area. (Note: Recommended text changes ate in bold for additions and strike, -out for deletions.) I. GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT General.-Plan Text Revision The Etiwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP) is consistent with the Objective: and Policies of the General Plan Land Use Element. General Plan Land Use Mag: igure III' -1 Refer to attached Exhibit GP -1; modify as indicated. II. GE -CERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT General Plan Text Revision The ENSP is consistent with the objectives and Policies of the General. Plan Circulation Element. To Page III -26, Policies, regarding Etiwanda Avenue, add` the following: "Implementatian strategies to discourage the use of Etiwanda Avenue for through traffic should be developed and used for improvements to Etiwanda Avenue north of Hig.kjaud Avenue.*' Gc Iral Plan Circulation, lap: Fiaure Iil -3 RF _r to ENSP Circulaly on Map, Exhibit 11, modify to 1 icate backbone circulation system, as shown, including, riot limited to, the followings i h CONSISTENCY CHANGES - GPA 90 -03B t September 10, 1991 Page 2 * Day Creek Boulevard: Eliminate ^ :u ve at Banyan Street. * Day Creek Boulevard from Highland Avenue to Wilson Avenue: Special Major Divided Arterial. * Day Creek Boulevard from Wilson Avenue to SCE utility corridor: Secondary Arterial. * Day Creek Boulevard north of SCE utility corridor: Collector. !�_ * Wilson Avenue from Day Creek Boulevard to Cherry Avenue: ,special Divided Secondary Arterial: \ Ii Wilson Avenue from .Dei`., Creek Boulevard to � Milliken Avenue: Sectm -ry ��1. Arteri Etiwanda Avenue north of Wilson Avenue to north side of SCE utility corridor: Secondary Arterial. I * Etiwanda Avenue at north side of SCE utility �! corridor: Ends in a T -intr section. East Avenue north of Wilson AYA ue: Collector. * Wardman Bullock Road north of Wilson Avenue: Collector. San Sevaine D1.".ve north of Wilson Avenue: Collector. * Vintage Drive from Ro;hester Avenue to Bluegrass (Hanley) Avenue_: Collector. Lower East -West. Loop from East Avenue to Day Creek Boulevard: Collector. Middle Eaet -West Loop from _East Avenue to Day Creek Boulevard: Collector: * Middte. East -West Loop from East Avenue to Wardman Bullock: Collector. Upper East -West Link from Lay Creek Boulevard to the extension of East Avenue: Collector. I CONSISTENCY CHANGES - GPA 90 -03B September 10, 1991 Page 3 III. HOUSING ELEMENT The ENSP is consistent with the Objectives and Policies of the General Plan Housing Element. No changes ara recommended. Iv. PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT" PARKS AND RECREATION General Plan Text Revision The ENSP is consistent with the objectives and Policies of the General Plan Parks and Recreation section. Make the following text changes fzr clarification: To Page iII -56, Policies;`, regarding location of parks and school to facilitate, joint � use, add to the last paragraph: • However, each tacililty shall be of adequate size to be a stand-alone fac'i'lity.11-, General Plan Parks and Reareatigll Map FigueIl -f Refer to ENSP Open Space and Trail Pla1i.;;.. F.xhilbit 10, and modify Ls indicated, including the following:. * rive proposed neighborhoo a park * Four proposed school sites �,`Jacent to park sites, including three elementary school sites and one high school site * one special use facility, ovmmunity Equestrian Center. site MUM General Plan Te: t Le s The. ENSP is ccnsistelit with the Objectives and Policies of the General Plan's Riding, Hiking, Bicycling and Trails section. A,'.d the following text revisions fcr clarification: To Pagel: III -60, regarding the keeping of horses and consistent wil4i the General Plan's Land Use policy "to ensure, t11at development can accommodate equestrian i activttics,'" add text as follows*. "Where lot -sizes within the Equestrian /Rur^} dak Overlay District are insufficient for tha k®epinq of horses, public and privzte boarding facilities should be encouraged. Land dedication = •and /or in lieu fees should be establ:Lshed :n ardor to acmauire land for a public boarding faaility in the north -east area of the city's Sphere -of Ynfluence." To Page III -71, regarding the Egneveriar ( Overlay Zone, add text as follows: "As areas within the Equestrian /Rural District c, annex into the City, they should be i,corgoratad into the City's Equest " -ian Overlay Zone and appropriates: mechanisms -46tablished' fez trail maintenance.11 General Plan Mastnr Plan of: "Trails. - Icture 111-7 Refer E7SP Open Space a.td Trails plan, Exhibit 10, ne,dify as indicated, including but not limited to,, the following: * East -writ Community Trail lingo _long the middle of the SCE utility corridor. * East -West Communitj Trail link along the lower branch of the Cucamonga Fault seismic corridor. * East -hest Community `."rail link along the <;pper branch of the Cucamonga Fault seismic corridor. * East -West Community Trail link along the upper branch of the Cucamonga Feint seismic corridor. * North -South Community Trail link -along ray Creek Channel /SCE corridor. * Delete Et,iwanda Avenue Community Trail at Etiwanda Avenue T- intersection north of the middle S =3E Corridor, V. COM_°i' KITY DESI ^N ELEMENT General Man Text Revision The ENSP is consistent with the Objecti-res and Policies of the General Plan Community Design Elem,.a,�t. Add the following text changes for ciarification. rr\ Regarding Special Soulevaru Treatment: To Table 111-9: Special Divided secondary Arterial, a�ld: IiWilson Avenue between Day creek We-,zh and Chenry Avenue;. To Page- ':TII -85: Regarding Special B:�ulevz rd Treatment, -add discussion of Day Creek Boulevard and Wilson Avenue .,,as follows: BID Av Gael b:+uleaaxd: Becruse it adjoins a 330 foaw SCE- utility corridor, has value as �.;sceaic corridor" and a ma=jor, north-youth vi:ewshad, and serves as a Major north -south arterial st:reAt, JA!,z CreAk aouleverd should be dasign ,A and oure rut taC as a Ap6cial Boulevard to enfianct: its `t¢ts @n3c o�st�ortu�s +,tieP.,,� " Wilson, Avenue: ssecause. it follows the 121 foot R.O.-W, has value no a -genic corridor ar-A a major east -wash viewshed, forms the northern bac wdnry of the histosid Xtiwanda community and servcs as a mmior east - wash _, arterial.- street:, vilsou Avenue east of',, DAy Creek B.,iul.evard should i be deniSmated as a ,8paciak �c9'^ � evaxd ,;and designed and construct6d to enhance sto,ic and scenic op�orttLnit es. +a To Pine 7II -3G, regarding scenic corridors, add the follcw ng: "The County has also designated "2.I�:y creek Boulevard and 7ilson ,Avenue, in the tiito °•s of-Influence as as scenic corridors." To Page III• 7, 4agarding vista po *, -ts :at the termb."s of. major north - -vuth arterial streets, 'atLA the fallowing, II "ard Day CreaU. Daulevard at the praminert,, knoll J adjacent to the bog," General PlaE,, Community_ Design . `'eseurces - figure E :I- Modify as indicated below: I'I - I i Lard form * Refer ta''-ENSI� "View Poteztial Ma'u, Exhibit 7, and ' irAi.cate ;=omiment. knoll west of "the bog as::a 'pt, _i.neni land form. Creeks and Channels * Refer to ENSP Existing Conditions Map, Exhibit 3, and inWsate current al$gpment of Day Creek,. Also indicate- channelization Where constructed: Refer to ENSP Constraints Map, Exhibit S, and indicate ".Aain branch of San'Sevaine Creek, Ward'oan Creek,, a?'ld. Henderson Creek; also for ,, the `. - laFter ki creel`s, indicate chz..snelization V.here` constructed: Special Vegetation ' * Refer to ENSP constraints > Map, 7,xhib t 8, and indicate Riparian Vegetation for Henderson, Wardmu -, and More Creeks within the hillside areas. ._ Refer to ENSP Constraints Map, Exhibit 8;, and inli',cate bag and its hr rologic source. Major Arterial -_, Secondary Arter,als, Collectors * Refer to ENSP Circulation Map, Exh bit: 11, and indicate arts Gals and collector stree'_s as shown._ Transmission corridurs Refer to ENSP Existing Conditions Map, . E:_ilibit 3, and add existing utility trans.Asaion corridors as shown: Landmarks and Focal Points * Refer to ENSP Property Owmeiship Map, Exhibit 4; ENSP View Potential Map, Exhibit 7,1,iand constraints Map, -ixhibit i, and add.th,? U.S. Foreet Service Ranger Si-atinn Site, prominent knoll, and bog, as focal .points,"-, Scenic Corridors Rater to ENSP View Potential Map, Exhibit 7, and indicate Day Creek and Wilson avenue as scenic corridors, VI. BaVIR <)M4ENTKL RESOURCES LAND RESOURCES _ The ENSP is consistent with the Objectives and Policies of the General Plan Land Resources Section. PLANT AND ANIML RESOURCES General: Plan, Text•. Aevision The ENSP is gonsisteni with the Obje. rives end Policies of the General Plan Plant and Animal Resources Section. Add the following tent revisions for clarification: To Page IV -15, - egardin, objectives for laids of biological• significance, add the following: "Help to preserve .''A%nds haviucl .biological significance aspenia4ly.,'ripaxian (wester stream- related) areas and their a.lsociar,sd woodland vegetation, and alluvial fan sosub;),Abitat. The latter leakitat once predominated o•. , alluvial fan landforms in the region, but iIS a rapiCly disappearing habitat resource," Ts Page IV -15, ragarding policies,_ revise as fellows: "The Citv shall consider the streamsiae "�ioodland associations ?.:ong the Cucamonga- Day, Etiwanda, Henderson, Morse, Wardman, Byt +e- ereek, and San Sevaine tsanyons as areas of natr, a! significance and limit the encroachment of development into these areas (see Figure IV-3).11 To Page IV-16, regarding natural areas which can be used for educational or other scientific purposes, add the io2llcwing example: "Another example is the peat bog to the east if I the U.S. Forest Eervics site, the last example of If a habitat which was onaa abundant in the region," Ask - _ 0 General Plan.-Natural Resouress, FAqure TV -30 Refer to ENSP Constraints Maps ENSP Exhibit 8, modify as follows: Waterways Indicate San Sevaine, Morse, Wardman, and Henderson Creeks. �t * Indicate the current alignment of Dav Creek. _ Major Recharge Area Revise to be consistent with existing recharge capacity for San Sevaine wash, Streamside Woodland * Revise to be consistent with streamside Woodland associatiori,in billsids area for Morse, Wardman, and H nderirlon Creeks, Open Wash Association * Revise Day Creek tr., be consistent with channelization Bard Chaparral and Alluvial Association Revise boundary as indicat °d. OPEN SPACE SECTIf)N General Plan Text Revision The ENSP is consistent with the objectives and policies of the General P1a,. Open Space Section. No char ges -;,;moo the text are recommended. General Ulan Open Space Flan. Figure _IV -4 Modify as follows: Streamside Woodland & Water Recharge Area * Refer to ER *SP Constraints Map, Exhibit 8, and -revise to be consistent with Natui -- ^esource Map, FigLre IV-3. AML 1 ff Special Wegetation * Refer to ENSP Landscape Theme Plan, Exhibit 19, end: indicate special vegetation for Day Creek Boulevard from north. of Highland Avenue to Wilsvon Avenue and for ',`Wilson Avenue from Day Creek Wash to Cherry','Avenue. Hazard Prevention * Note that the zNSP identifies seismic setbacks for the pbrpose'of establishing open spac` easements, Yut no change is. recommended to the General Plan Open Space Plan. Recreational Opportunities Refer y:o ENSP Parks and Open Space Plan, Exhibit 10, and indicate five (5) proposed' part sites. Flood Control Land and Utility /Traneportatiota Right of Way Refer to ENSP Constraints Map, Exb,-bit 8, and indicate utility corridors. Refer 7t4 "WSi'I Enistin?, ConditLi ns Map, Exhibit 3, and modify flood control Easements as a resu.Lt of clianneiization work Qn Henderson and Morse Creeks. Refer to ENSP Land Use Map, Exhibit, 17, and modify floodway area shown within San Sevaint; Wash. * Refer to ENSP ConstYaints Map, Exhibit 8, and indicate flood control easements above the LADWP utility corridor. Limited Development * Refer to ENSP Land Use Map, Exhibit 17, and modify hillside residential area. VII. GENERAL PLAN HEALTH AND SAFETY ELEMENT The ANSP is consistent with the Objectivei� and Policies of the General Plan Health and Safety Element. -Modify the following text for clarification: i` To Page V -11, regarding seismic pollaies, add the following- Aft "* For resident"I tract dovRlopment ,of t or more units where fault traces ' are well identified (for exanpXe the Cucamonga Fault east of Day creek and north of the LADS utility corriftr),.rasidantia3 dsv ^elopmoont of 4 or more un#s hhculd require a :5s -foot ` setback from the idei �ified fault ar.;d establishtlent of a_ 140V oot seismic opEr . space eazement`; for the' resulting setbici " area,' v. i; ., g %r. I, ml�' k.�I. � i � � ��■ .2. t ay Cr Cr ,T Y, :J 3 Front Line Mro Road ` VACANT LAND -- NATIONAL, ARBy . For a[ Ezitetici SPrinBa _ r` rdma3in Creek _Morse Cr"k, ✓ gog - 7' Y E ct!!tS $ ... Ezlslitog Outk,3u!!�°:'g s 2 Reliioeires' M Two.Ho+oesan BartF�'\' T '� XRet! Ranger Station Site mono in ter T4lezac k! siYlt •a'k L.._ �'•`� sat as»nil. >'la 2111 Creek _ t .1"' ----------- - trltlQrl, t. •. . — � r �� w• ^nsiKYY.a �� Indicates Property Previously Annexed to Rancho Cucamonga. a `^`'•""' ® Li Existing Bridge Crossing /Oegingstat;m Levee \\ .. -,;,- fEteotrfeai Tranomiaaion Llnelcontdor MM Water Transmisa%ML. v .. - wggr e2tharge Aran woundester �H EX13 TING CONDITfO�1l, AND Uv83 EXHiSIT 3 06"000' 2%6MMMwj4'M0W Ettwanda (NaTth Specific Plan iz -City of "> Juncho q eamanga if - GPA.90.03B DRAFT :; ,1 - - -------- San Bernardino Nation►, Forest 1 ..1 1 39 3 1 31 '.. 36 32 41 t . r 32 3 40 _4 ,t_ 3 3 29 22 15. 5 5 25 28 38 i 9 - i 25 �.— 30, 38 37 37 2 22 Y2 _ 2630 '9 4^ --- L 2c 5 36 36 5_„ 25 7— 29 27 - 2T 42 ^ 27 .-^'— L7 i 5 5 4 29 :ff4 4 —� 42 2 2 ,5 5 4 5. '2 45 , t1 2 31 1,,. 42 2 _ - 5 36 i 2 2 2 2 2 '4 43 43 43 ' -. ! 5 51 2 2 2 a3 4. 2 2 5 5 44'x4- 474.E 18 5 38 4 4 2 ,_ 5. 2 2 ? �4 d01 —` - 5 . 52 r 36 4, 18 " jq B RtiY i3 _ y 2 2 < 2 4 9 4: A 69 Summit 60 It ME j _4 i 6 1 2 61 -.17414. _ uF"""'r� __..._. t Ethvanda 1RpIflaCrd Prop, 23 Terkh 45 Barwick 2 San 0ernardino Co. Flood Wntrol 24 Stansberry 46 Remington Properties r•, -1d, w..,n S-1� w.,, 3 Landmark Land Co. 25 Webster 47 Praetzel �..,. ,.... 4 So. California Edson Co. 26 French 48 Zanda _ ® 5 Caryn 0evelopinerlt Ca 27 City of Los Angeles 49 Trsigh aa91+q Station 6 Lewis 28 Morales 50 Sherry 75mith 23. Edwalda. Heights Day. 51 Madrid 8 Remington Prop. 30 Clark 52 Ventl 9 Repents of the Univ. of Calif. 31 Johnson 53 Lyon i .. 11 Lakosem.SurduaRS =1tY 33 32 54 Blo qua 12 BatNeste 34 Chen 13 Klantan 35 S 56 Rodriguez 14 Little 36 Ccrf>rdeiro 58 Watt Inland Empire • 15 Sudeta 37 Hayward Famiy Partnors 59 Moira 16 Metro. Water INst. of So. Calif 38 La Pointe 60 0t kl i. j 17 Cucamonga County Water Dist. 39 Remaly 61 Kota ry { 1 16 Inland Empire Ltd 40 Howard Htrrelf Poore 62 Chun ti 19 Stanford 41 Pearson 63 Chang _. 20 Arm tl 42 County of San Bernardino e4 Rutted 21 Hughes Investments 43 McNair :65 Watt Inland Empire 22 Chen 44 Roach '66 United States Government Land lr4catesRroperty Previously Annexed. To Rlncho Cucamonga hale. /p$� �/�. �1 onee/�cuns//n,^1- of ,�dit� 1991 pp �(y/ jyigY PO a`kt/ l E T Y O ENERS ! /0 " 1111h EXHIBIT 4 Riwanda Wirth Specific PV'ai rKA-911.09B City of Rancho'`utama�ga DRAFT BamatcHm ✓ellpral Fonaat Wham A 9 Wlisu+ - llvenue yY'" 3. S R y YL.• Z«..�n sMOm ri.. ��L++EGE�GEN*wQ�..es Gagrq Stall® .l' Na:ma Vlewsw -. Mafia View -. 0001300 ".Cad" VIEW POi'ENTIAL Alm ,OW 2=' , LAHIBIT 7 Mir ma Etiwanda North Specific Plaa city of GPA.90.030 DRAFT R.ncho- Cucamoga l San 9ern:rtltn0 National. .,, Dey Hy*. 4M 51.dy AN* - 1 Iqw. . +emu .. i. -- �P�nal �asr� a - 'ssa.�s•.' � �>.c��{i_a_ • � rte'.'- .':�.'. d► OP L...wJ• \.... 4yY.t.- M.e �y.•..as _.... ® Waterways GeNno� ©A1apt ReeharQe Ara. ,Mhaerg TAm 50 CryFS) nXU Hard CnaPamf ®. Stream" Woodt.^nd AUUra' Nsooatlort j — ® Opens Vash Association t • �' ® Eacessxe and Unstable Slopes MMTMM Costal Sage lssocation Seorme Areas —eeev A;:M -Pnolo Specat Stt4es Zone o.eee�s City. ACopted Speeal Stuay Zone - CONSTRAINTS MAP EXHIBIT 8 0 1000' 2(M r Etnv.anda North Specific -flan,, Sir city of 'A.�6.o3B f)6iAEY Itaereho CNcamonga OAX.— - '� � iJ�tJ yt y W � R F LEGEND Camphor L OMMD fwalyptus Wlndmw T" tTMWR*A HR—%ANGS v-o-~ -4 o. t­ttft" or foctt*4 e•lms "a P"sls- 'im cof—A (2=W C�(y Is nd pfftslft'v"� aqlrog SWuW �12 31.—. "...s Wft- aM ­."l st KMSt ft. . m". ur". C&"on U.. Oak/C&Ktofrft WCk OWL 'ww v" Wc .. mz— R—w CM atrltm. $. . Wn K.NIt..1 r..W- lvr .. Do, cr a .o PAOWIA-043n SUMO T" UPMM 11TIMUCA wwo.—. a u CIWNImiH.4 AM — .— -.W. — w Vft.j.,n ft.W. owme Red OW18raftrd PtulMape I- A c-7 tM.H P- Mtxewl..r 0" GtltorNi Pass TM CHA"IT Nhw." .4 � -". w, od.-.. .1. ol. CCN.1NWCIM s"—*. cs""L—wo�� lsc'ww.tmq"m� om, "U= P-",Yl F—A NF-10HRORHOM NEME PLAN EXHIBIT 9 0..1000 Etlw Apt r Spe ific l.an GPA.93.038 DRAFT Rancho Cucamonga To Gaping-Station ,°a Hvdra.yYi�°dy Aran E..yYNp Frp-E iss Flrs Trill r San Sa mar ne Dlatlawl For !r :. glit p L c.' _ .. J. - s w .sgr «.. LEGEND Caskv station � ®900 Rayicasl T.^ail rtt °sa...as,o Commuttlly Equestrian Ttall PecolT memdW Waatpass BicycleLan6 imv vknoot.gaasol Bicycle pkh +lnhrt.sy -cuss 4) !� tl' J i:i T�SSlliOad isNtroTtat.knt _ �'l � FYFk /SclIDOI NOTf,. TM aNa� y.n ens7 net W etnr,. #orntd nor b tkr o a4wf x a spaaltia TM QMvir-m sl • xts ii an :nWa..an of a Orslse4d i tutws nata lnat ensy a salustsd ertp -tyM a{ t�° Cny Eno �;Sahpat p4irkt OPEN SPACE AND TRAILS PLAN EXHIBIT 1 IOW' 2000' gtiwanda North. Specific P111 LIf Ra1Jt:! o da amenga G[`A.S'€2a'aEy DRAFT i �r l •.l r. .- 0701 -02 o SEPTEMBER 11, 1991 P. G, .AGENDA B of 13') 850'C RVE RADIUS_!A'i O °� ®��_w�� ®tea _��� °s•I�u ® I t a Wilson Avenue A3 AS All I All WlswlAveme iSSS c _= n Street 1� - s ea Banva — ss+a M Avame uture Sit: 0 -EGEND Major Divided Arterial A Typical Section _•�• ^••••• ®. ..Day Cretrk Boulevard ■tatse ■n Special Divided Secondary Arterial •wlson Avenue (east of Ody Creek BlvcU y I i t Secondary Arterial , ' I •Wilson Avanue •Etwv IMAvenue 1 -Milliken Avenue •tipper Day Creek Boulevard i -• { j -Cherry Avenue I f �• �.��� Collector 1ti1 /, l Barryan Street diochester Avenue ^ •VintapeOrive •Wardman Bullock Road .., •Summit Avenue -East Avenue - •SanSevas:e -Other Loop Streets �l 111 'A L A EX SIT 11 OLVV o t000' 200 soao Etiwanda North Specific Plan City of GDA.90.038 DRAFT Rancho Cucamonga San Bem®rdi oNational Farost ) 5 c eO mqr oS EEF) - i OS ! hl. u 1 � LEGEND 4. - Low Density Residential (2 -4 DU /AC) HL Very Low Density Rt. �kntial (<2 DU /AC) Proposed TnR Head VLK Very low ttesvleNial Estate (I DU /ACT. Proposed Equestrian Facility Hillside Residential t <2 DU/Net Buildable M.fe) ll�S ^ ^g I, Proposed Seh<rol Site t i HlPside Residential Estate W DU /Net Buildable Acre) P Proposed. Palk Site te FC Flood Control /plparian: UC utility.COrndor P Estate%PMk site as Open Space * NOTE: Ili Institutional TM .. ... +av n 1 es c nmly pwn a np(1 M 1 m y 1 p Inc. Tr. FY Fault Zme anon rpcinv vac nan or projKl e f t Mna e 1 p Oa Aul 1180 4 pC Resource Conservation Area Aw r A v av cur d tnp f.., Dauer (KC) Ne*fft(nood Commercial aMAp. -- ICTCe11ALFUTUASLAIm USEDESIGEATICU. .(LrVLrVLE,RC) 0 1000' 2000' 4000' ' r,I�asa.4as EXHIBIT 17 Wwanda North E Specific Plan 1 � City o6 DRAFT Rancho wcalnonga 'i� Rug �MO . ap_. �I#� u � g oom. \k2. 7$k U. 0 UJ »856 :F 9 BEI .. -j S; §s■' =43§ ■A� §2� ■ ■$7§ §■o- $ Z 2 §B §� §§$ §Ouzwo o en/ r E n m S ± »� � . I72 § R 2 d 2 1�u \ °§ .�W o ��k.k\§� \.\ j¢ «f w a)0 -3 $§22 !k Ik k /)�0� U.0 #20■ ®2& H 0LU0. !)! k§ / §� gLlEl ƒJLJ � ��]ag §��! a LA OSPA90.03P, R 1 i ■ LLI ul CSJ Z m0 R °3a ors e ® ` a x� 0_ r Rp�p'�J1 �cch� N < (P9� �(n U L26� cc d C3 g W a G7 10. N Jogo15 _ C , Q v X L: a a o GPAS0.03B i ® 0 Y. o o LE a 0 09 9 i cc J � �'' O I �M L , d 0 i 1 d I GPA90.03B �2 .z 1- (1) . R j z ; o-i E� . 00 IN . mh @ =o � �cc m ■ § 0 a EIx UJ m k kIL m � � k 2 2 x 2 2§�0 k �7 CF) LL « M$CC a■ _ �w kd « |$ « §> � � § l$�` 2 ■ � u 222 cc » U. $ q ul . f B 0 § � r Ago o3B P aowa 3 zo 6� `u s sag szLL,w if o z �gZ� and u a ° ®w5 a v C® s I" GPA!90.03B �s Cal. X > UA .40 1 W 9 ow cc U. UA r,PA.90.03B ad Z Q CQF O cc g V v w UJ �I o 1r® IINIIIN - a Q El M, GPA.90.03B _Nj Chaffey College Department of Biology T0: Rancho Cucamonga Manning Commission. SUBJECT: Comments concerning St€Zf Report dated 11 Sept. 1991. I. Landmark Land Company -seems to take issue with the identification and description of the "fresh water bog" (Page D,E,F 25, item 3 and D,E,F 29, item 15). The geological causes of the bog can be found in Matti, et. al. (1982) and Morton, et. al. (1982). The Historical presence of such formations in the immediate area has been documented (Clark, 1979). Various readily accessible documents descr -be the structure's character, soil type, mechanism of formation and biological significance, (West Valley FoothJlla Community Plan R.I.R. p. 48 -52. San Bernardino County Office of Planning; Brandman Associates, 1988). Blanchard (1979) provides a detailed description of the water projects developed in Day Canyon. None of those projects seem related to the presence of the bog. An Etiwanda Water Company map dated 1916 shows the presence of a "cienega" at the site of the bog at a time when no substantial water &welopment had occurred in the immediate vicinity of the bog. In any event the nature of the bog should no longer be in ::.: +ann. What should be serAously considered'is the exact nature of the.'f0ar supply to the bog as well as the exact nature and location of water discharge from the bog. The development comer's comment simply avoids that issue. II. Landmark Land Compare evidently disputes the asses -tion that the '`'Knoll" was formed by the fault, (page D,E,F, 28, item 14). May I refer interested readers to Matti, e__ al. (1982, p 36-43) and Morton, et. al. (1982). The tectonic origin of the moll is carefully described in their analysis. III. Staff recommendations regarding the modification of land use designation (page D,E,F 5) will result in much greater confidence for the long -term preservation of the bog and its water supply. This recommendation has my unqualified support. Sincerely,( S d n c. Lww+rE 4g. James des Lauriers, Prof. 11 Sept. 1991. REFEMCES. Blanchard, G.B. 1979. Development of gravity water sources for the Cucamonga County Water District. 54 p. MS (In the files of the Oicamonga Water Compare, Rancho Cucamonga). Brandman, Michael and Associates. 1988_ Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report: Rancho Etiwanda Planned Unit Development. San Bernardino County Clark, A.O. 1979. ,:hwternary evolution of the San Bernardino Valley. Quarterly of the San Ber ardano Cuuaty Museum Association. 145 p. 5885 Haven Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701 =3002 714/941-2354,941-2355 J 7S� d9 e f t; Matti, J.C., J.C. Tinsley & L.D. McFadden. 1982- Holocene faulting history as recorded by alluvial stratigraphy within the Cucamonga Fault Zone: a preliminary view. IN: J.C. Tinsley, et. al. 1982. Guidebook: Field trip #12. 78th Annual Meeting, Cordilleran Section, Geological Society of America.: p 29 -44. Morton,, D., J. Matti & J. Tinsley. 1982. Quarternary history of the Cucamonga Fault Zone, So Calif. 79th Annual Meeting, Cordilleran Section, Geol. Soo. Amer. 14(4): 218. i ,I� i September 11, 1991 Mr. Brad BuL'er City Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Honorable Chairman Larry T. McNeil And Members of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission RE: Planning Commission Hearing of September 11, 1991 on h ts; Staff report and associated exhibits for ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 90-111 ANr1 Dear Brad and Members of the Commission, This letter if, intended to serve as convey ance of our public comments for the above referenced projects. In the disposition of this obligation we feel it important to also convey our considerable dismay at the methois employed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in the formulation and management of the planning of Etiwanda North. The City is in possession of our previous comments regarding the Etiwanda :North DEIR> SP. We had not been informed that the Final Draft E:r, was available for Analysis until we received the staff report for this meeting. Therefore, at this time we are unable to analyze the responses to the technical areas in which we originally commented. We do reserve the right to comment later. We are also on record expressing confusion with the management of the information comprising the ENSP /DEIR. However, none of this frustration approaches that level which is felt when we review the history associated with this planning endeavor. Let us first provide our technical comments before returning to discussion on the city's handling of this project. 1. On the cover page of the staff report from City Planner, Brad Buller to the Planning Commission, the first, second and third paragraphs describe the projects and reference the request to approve the "prezoning of approximately 5,840 acres of territory in the Rancho Cucamonga sphere -of- influence...". As is stated later in the staff report, on page D,E,F -10, reproduction problems (which were mentioned by us in earlier correspondence) made annexation areas poorly distinguished from sphere areas. While not underemphasizing the fact that these exhibits are unchanged and continue to be confusing, the point of the matter is that a considerable area of the property owned by Landmark. Land Company, Inc., is not within the sphere of influence of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. We strongly object to it being referenced as such and oppose efforts to annex the property in the future. It is important to note for the record that the City is designating areas owned by Landmark as in the City of Rancho Cucamonga sphere of- influence when it is n.1t. Further, the City, as we will expand on later, is redesfgnating our property �d that porN,c of our property not within the sphere of- influence of the City, as (RC) or re:urce conservation area /open space. - This classification i= radically different than the historical dE'signations for residential development as provided by the City and the County of San Bert, 3rdino. LANDMARK LAND :OMPANY, INC., 110 N. Lincoln Ave., Suite 100, Corona, California 91720, 714- 272 -9970 We will provide comment on % fhat we feel to be the poorly articulated methods for achieving this redesignation below, 2. On page 13,11A, 2, under the section Rea. mnse to comments p pared• the report, lescritRs ccmmet_l; by wildlife agencies "which indicate a; -teed for change in .he :Specific Plan:' These agencies "requested" that the limit of development be dropped southward. The report goes on to describe the entitlement which is held by Landmark Land Company, *ne. and then states: "The feasibility of moving the limit of development would require a mechanism to acquire property. However, there is a substantial body of evidence, including public health and safety issues, that the limit of development should be moved to below the northern branch of the Cucamonga Fault between Day Creek and Etiwanda Creek. Therefore a mitigation measure has been added to revise the Specific Plan accordingly. The Specific Plan Land Use Map has been revised and the number of potential dwelling un:�s reduced by 145." This section and these statements compel us to ask the question, since the land use designations for this area have been devoted to low intensity residential land uses for over a decade by both the City and the County, whether previous city staff members and commissioners were aware of the designation of these lands? The same question would also necessarily be made about those staff members at the respective wildlife agencies. No doubt these agencies' comments were solicited with the same vigor and conviction at the time of the formulation of the City's general plan as they were for this specific plan. What makes this step by the City staff even more remarkable is that the city would abdicate creative advanced planning and site planning techniques due to a "request" by the wildlife agencies. If all staffs of all agencies were to heed such "requests" very little need for city planning staffs would exist. Equally inconsistent with solid preplanning is the fact that no mechanism to acquire these lands is articulated. This leaves little doubt thV such a mechanism has failed to be considered. Perhaps the most telling feature of this section of the report falls within its last paragraph. Amazingly, the "request" from the respective wildlife agencies along with the "substantial body of evidence (which has not been provided) of public health and safety issues converges to provide a mitigation measure that would eliminate the "threat to the "Bog ". Apparently, the city staff has chosen to ignore the substantial body of evidence that fails to agree on the origin and nature of the bog and in the process forsakes all future study and the delivery of empirical evidence fcr this feature. We cannot help but express our concern with the close minded and seemingly manufactured approach to this issue. 3. Page D,E,F -5 provides further discussion on Lie radical change in land use designation for the property owned by Landmark Land Company, Inc. This section exhibits inconsistency when it cites "the presumed watts supply for the bog." The haphazard thinking that has been present throughout these sections is again manifest when suggestion is made that "a mitigation measure be added in the EIR to investigate the feasibility of acquiring the area, in fee or easement for resource conse'vation use." It defies logic how the city staff could couple these alternatives. On the one hand, while implementing a radical change in historic land use, no compensatory mechanism is articulated. Additionally, suggestion is made for an easement, a device which would require dedication or would be acquired by a proceeding in eminent domain. Landmark would view either mechanism as a taking, and would contest any attempt to acquire this property. The most remarkaW:e aspect of this measure is that the City staff would propose radical, poorly articulated method3 to protect features which demand further study. Landmark has continuously proposed measures which are intended to protect these features while suggesting future study is needed based on the conflicting evidence in the record. The company has a national track record for designing its projects with features that protect the environment. The city staff, on the other hand, refuses to acknowledge that conflicting information exists for the feature ,hey seek to protect. In neglecting their professional obligations to ascertain the tn;e nature of the features they seek to protect, City staff compounds the problem by suggesting that tax payers dollars be blindly committed to costly litigation in the pursuit of acquiring a resource or resources whose nature is not fully known. 4. The staff report, although it correctly cites numerous instances of property owner objection to annexation, fails to provide reference to correspondence from James M. Raddy, Executive Officer of the San Bernardino County Local Agency Formation Commission to jack Lain, City Manger for the Cih'. This letter strongly recommends that the City withdraw its applications for annexation.' S. Page 13,E,17-4C, while admitting to problems in the reproduction of maps fails to mention that a portion of the property is not within the City's sphere -of- influence. Further, corrections have not been made to any of the exhibits which follow. In summary, we feel it important to provide some perspective on the long process which brim us to the hearing on the subject projects. Public controversy and complexity in the nature of large scale master planned development is the express purpose for the environmental review process and public comment. Unfortunately, it is our view: that the controversy existent in this project has caused the City staff to emotionally circumvent thoughtful, objective analysis of many of the project features. In 1990, Landmark Land Company provided written and oral testimony on the City's Hillside Grading Standards. These comments were developed in conjunction with experts in the engineering field. These standards, which the city admitted to be stringent were also described as "a starting point" from which reasonable alternaidves would be considared. t -ow appears the City has failed to develop a reasonable alternative other than no development. Throughout 1989, 1990 and 1991, the City was an active participant in the formulation of Etiwanda North by the consortium of landowners. However, instead of taking the active role early in the process, the city waited until conflicts reached a high level and then took the unfortunate role of reactive planning_ The best evidence is that which we the in our discussion on the City's proposal. to provide the costly mitigation measure of exploring mechanisms to acquire open space land that has for so long been designated as residential area. It is here that the evidence is most apparent that an otherwise capable and talented city staff has given way to emotion and reaction and forsaken creative planning in harmony with the environment. Sincerely, Richard P. Douglass, AICP Landmark Lard Company of California, Inc. RPD /rpd C.C. Valery Pilmer - %ounty of San Bernardino Mike Kerney Ell a CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: September 11, 1991 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning+Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner ,y: Nancy Fong, Senior Planner SUBJECT: WNDITIONAL USE PERMIT 78 -03 - SAM'S PLACE - The consideration Of suspension or revocation of a Conditional Use Permit allowing the operation of a bar in conjunction with a restaurant located in the Neighborhood Commercial District at 6620 Carnelian Street, northwest corer of 19th ,nnd Carnelian Streets - APN: 201- 811 -56 through 60. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 78 -03 - SAr9'S PLACE - A review of compliance with conditions of approval ar0 consideration of suspension or revocation of the Conditional Usc`Permit for a restaurant and bar, located in the Neighborhood Commercial District at 6620 Carnelian Street, northwest corner of 19th and Carnelian Streets- APN: 201- 811-56 through 60. (Continued from August 14, 1991.) AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 78 -03 - SAM'S PLACE A requeer. to extend the hours of operation and amend the condition of approval prohibiting live entertainment for an existing restaurant and bar located in the Neighborhood Commercial District at 6620 Carnelian. Street, nortizwest corner of 19th and Carnelian Streets - APN: 201 811-56 through 60. ( Continued from August 14, 1991.) ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT 91 -02 - SAM'S PLACE - A request to conduct live music in conjunction with a restaurant and bar located in the Neighborhood Commercial District at 6670 Carnelian Street, northwest corner of 19th and Carnelian Streets - APN: 201 - 811-56 through 60. (Continued from August 14, 1991.) BACKGROUND: on August 14, 1991, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to consider the above- described items. The Commission concluded the compliance review and directed staff 'co set a public hearing for the consideration of suspension and /or revocation of the Conditional Use Permit No. 78 -03 and evntinued the items to this regular meeting. ANALYSIS: At the meeting of August 14, 1991, rtie Commission took public testimony regarding the applicant's request to extend the hours of operation and conduct. entertainment. T-ere was one resident who objected to the nuisance problems created by Sam's Place. The applicant, however, did not indicate to the Commission whether he will comply with the conditions of approval. Based on the evidence presented in the uuly 24, 1995 staff report ?-,id the pWNlic testimony, the Commission determined that the business is not 'Operating in a manner consistent with the conditions of approval as comtainea in Conditional Ilse Pe::mit to. 78 -03. Specifically, the violationt were extending the hours of ITEMS G,E,I,J PLANNING COMMISSION, -STAFF REPORT CUP 78-03 - SAM'S PLACE September 11, 1991 Page 2 operation beyond the 11 p.m. limitation and p�'oviding live entertainment. The Commission directed staff to set a public healing to consider suspension and/or revocation of the Conditional Use Permit for the bar facility. Attached to this report are the draft minutes of the August 14, 1991, meeting and a Resolution to r.:voke Conditional Use Permit No. 78 -03 for a bar far1lity. Staff recommends that the Commission - require the use 'to cease and desist within 30 days. The applicant may continue to operate the restaurant business with incidental service of beer and wino. However, the bar facility must cease to operate within 30 days. Staff will inform the Alcohol Beverage Control (ABC) regarding the revocation of Conditional Use Permit No. 78 -03 for the bar facility. With regards to the proposed amendments to the Conditional lase Permit and the Entertainment Permit as described in the title of this report, the Commission continued these items so that they can be considered at the same time. At the August 24, 1991 meeting,. the Commission stated that they could not make the findings to approve them. Attached to thin ,report are Resolutions of Denial for the Entertainment Permit No. 91-02 and the Amendments to the Conditional' Use Permit No. 78 -03. CORRESPONDENCE: The item for the suspension and, /or revocation of Conditional Use Permit 78 -03 has been advertised in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property has: been posted, and notices have been sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the project. The applicant was notified by certified mail. The amendments to Condi�;ional Uea Permit No. 78 -03 and Entertainment. Permit No. 78 -03 are a continues- Wblic hearing. RECOMMENDATION. Staff recommends that t' ;�mmizsion reviaw the attached Resolutions for the revocation cf Conditio1 Eermit No.`78 -03 for a bar facility, the Resolutions of Denlal fur Enter:,. -nt Permit. No. 91 -02 and the amendments to Conditional Use Permit 3-*. 78 -03.`" if the Commission concurs, adaption of the Ata ^hed Resolutions would be in order. Respectfully /*,,!)mitte3, �. -, Brad Bullev City Planner BB:NF:m?" =+achments: Exhibit "A" - Draft Minutes of August 14, 1591 Commission Meeting Exhibit "B" - August "14 and July 24, 1991 Staff Raport with Attachments olution for Revocation of CUP 78 -03 :..'olutiun of Denial for Amendments to CUP 78 -03 Resolution of Denial for EP 91 -02 •�s't FOR DISCUS i 'ON PUMFI.O ES 01,41 -Y __may__ -__. __......_______ Au 22, 1991. I Chairman Me 1 thanked those who parricipated in th process. Motion: Moved by elbher, seconded by Valletta, to con ' �?e Environmental'. Asaeasmant and Devalo t Code Rmeildment 91-02, Envi ental Assessment and Etiwanda Specific Flan Am dment 91 -02A, Envira ntal Assessment and Terra Vista Planned Community Amen ant 91 -02, a Environmental Aflseaement and Victoria Planned Community Amendm t 4' to 3:30 p.m. on Augiist 22, 1991. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: 18A, MCNIEL, L48ERe TOLRTOY, VALL'ETTE NOES: COMMISSION NONE ABSENT: CO SIONEI NO -car 2a n-zcy from 8:40 p.n. to 8:50,3 m. J. ENTERTAIN PEP.Mx� 91 -02 - SAM'S PLACE - A request to condsct live music in conjunction with a restaurant and bar located in the Neighborhood Commercial District at 6620 Carnelian Street, northwest corner of 19th and Carnelian Streets - APN: 201- 511 -56 through 60. (Continued from July 24, 1991.) K. CONDITIONAL USE PE&MIT 18 -03 - SAWS PLACE A revirsw of compliance with conditions of approval and consideration of suspension or revocation of the Conditional Use Permit for a. restaurant and bar located in the Neighborhood Commercial District at 6620 Carnelian Street, northwest corner of 19th and Carnelian Streets - APN: 201- 811 -56 through 60. (Continued from 7' qty 24, 1:991.) L. AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT :78 -05 - SAM'S PLACE - A request to extend the hours of operation an3 amend the condition of approval prohibiting live entertainment for an existing restaurant and bar located in the Natghborkood Commercial District at 6620 Carrel�an Street, northwest corner of 19th and Carnelian Streets - APN: 201- 811 -56 through 60. (Continued from July 24, 1991.) Chairman McNiel excused himself from the meeting becausa of a possible conflict of interest as he plays on a. softb!tll team spaneored by Sam's Place. Brad Huller, City Planner, stated that the applicant's attorney hod indicated they would be reiresting a continuance. Vice Chairman Chi.tiea opened the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes -10 Auguat 14,'1991 D_ PIA .1- T john Mannerino, 9333 Base Line Road, Suite i19, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he represented Sam and Luanne Pellegrino.. He rec¢.ested the item be continued to August 28. 1991 because the applicant was currently in negotiations for a new location. He felt the new location would address the concerns of the City. vice Chairman Chitiea asked if there was a signed contract for the new location. Mr.. Mannerino responded negatively. He said the new location is the Straw Hat at Carnelian and 19th Street, which is Edjacent to route 30 anii Beryl Park. He said they were currently discussing the possible move with the building t. -ner- the bank which carries the loan on the property- and Lewis Homes, the owner of the property. He felt the new location c.ill sw lsfy the concerns of the City and the desires of the applicants. Commissioner Molcher asked is the matter were to be jontinued if it was the intent of the applicant to comply wita the assent conditions of the conditional Use Permit. He asked if Mr. Xanner:.no's client then intended to comply during any period os time it would t,ke =ve. He said that a few weeks may not seem long. to the applicant out even two days may xael like a long time to the neighboring residents Mr. Mannerino stated Mr. ),, ?..egrino would have to answer regarding his intention. He said that to his knowledge there had only been one complaint. He commented that not one neighbor had appeared during six previous public hearings. He said there have not been any complaints to the police or fi.xa department during the past 18 months. Commissioner Valletta asked if it is true that the operation of the business has been going on after the permitted hours.. Mr. Mannerino said he thought that had happenad. Commisaioner Valletta asked if there "is live entertainment which is not permitted under the current conditions. Mr. Mannerino said he understands there is an acoustic guitar player who plays without pay. He said that under City ordinance a permit would not be required if he were a solo piano player or a harpist. commissioner Valletta stated she felt commissioner Helche-` -s questi=s were f valid. Commissioner Tolstoy said he was not opposed to continuing the matter for a few weeks if the owner is willing to comply with the current donditional Use 4 Permit. (j Vice Chairman Chitiea said she was concerned about a continuance because there have been violations and she had not heard any assurances that the violations will cease in the next two weeks. She commented that even if the applicant were successful in negotia'icne For the new location, a public hearing would be required for a new conditional use permit and it would therefore probably be some time before the business is moved. Planning Commission Minutes -11- August 14, 1991 C O DRAB FOR DISCU,c 310N PURP"'— Commissioner Valletta agreed that the applicant has not shown that they are operating within the terms of the existing Conditional Use Permit.` Commissioner Helcher stated that approximately a year ago the Planning Commission approved extended houra for Sam's Place. He said that decision was overruled by the City Council and he felt the commission now has the Council's direction. He said that in spite of the Council's determination, the applicant has found it 3ej`ussible to comply with its current approvals. Hs felt that any extension of time beyond tonight would have to be tied to assurance from the applicant that they would abide by all of the conditions of approvals for whatever time they continue to do business at their current location. Commissioner vallette felt the Commission should hold the public hearing and receive testimony before deciding if the matter should be continued. Commissioner Tolstoy agresd. Nancy Fong, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Melchor zskeca how the commission should deal with the proposed amendment to the Conditional 'Use Permit. Ralph. Hanson, Dfputy City Attorney, stated the application should not have been accepted because the Development code specifies that when a matter has been denied the City should not accept for filing a substantially similar application for a period of ona year. He said staff made the error, but it had now proceeded to being placed on the agenda. He said the Commission could hear the evidence. He said if the Commission wanted to act on the application, he felt they could. vice Chairman invited further public comment. Mr. Mannerino felt the application for expansion of hours could be considered by the Commission because it had been accepted. He thought the conditions currently existing on the Conditional Use Permit are not viable to a successful business. He stated the applicants are not criminala.'merely business people trying to make a successful business out of what had been a very unsuccessful business. He stated -.it is true that there have been violations of the current cond�tiona existing on the business as set by City Council, but he said there " }a en no violations in terms of hours of operation which had originally been approved by the Planning Commission. He felt they have demonstrated during the last 18 months that they can operate such a business without unduly interrupting the peace of the neighborhood. He said he ?iad seen the letter of complaint which had been sent to the City but the sheriff has no record of any calla to the premises. He indicated his office had been in contact with the individuals who had written the letter and in ',pact it was his understanding that the people who had written the letter have gone into Sam's Place. F;e felt there in not one other bar /restaurant in the City which has had no reports to the police in IS months of operation.. He thought they were entitled to continue wsth the hours of tae ,i..` %.on which they have been keeping in Compliance with the suggested trial period which the PSaw�ing Commission Minutes _12. August 14, '1991 D�UA a= n FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES 0A, ::_.i' Planning Commission approved. He thought it would not be .aquita ),Le to close down their businesa because one person doesn't 11,ke it. Ke said they would like to add a singer to the acoustical guitar st. He thotitght the Planning Commission should not act as a punitive body. He said if the Code Enforcement department wants to cite his client for being in v- I.olation of an ordinance, then the validity of the ordinance can be decided is a court of law. He said the Commission's purpose is to determine if the business activities taking place on the premises are in compliance with the sort of business activities which should be taking place there. He said restrictions and conditions imposed by government should be for the purpose of allowing the maximum freedom for the use of the premises without unduly restricting the liberties and freedoms of others. He requested an expansion of the Conditional Use Permit and approval of the Entertainment Permit. Vice Chairman chitiea asked Mr. Mannerino if his client understood the direction from the City Council regarding the hours of operation and compliance so far as entertainment. Mr. Mannerino resaponded be would not speculate as to what Mr. Pellegrino understood. Vice Chairman Chitiea asked if Mr. Mannerino understood. Mr. Aannerino replied that, it was not relevant whether he understood. san Pellegrino, Sam`s Place, 6620 Carnelian, Rancho Cucamonga, stated there was nothing he could-say that hadn't been said by Mr. Mannerino. He said that during the 18 months he has been there, he has tried to keep problems out of his establishment. He felt he had not broken any laws because his liquor license cites hours of 6:00 P.m. to 2:00 a.m.. He said he understood that he had purchased the business with the prior problems that it had and he was trying to change it around. He commented that there have been no police reports or fire violations. He said he was given permission to stay open until 2:00 a.m. by the Planning Commission and he did not think it was fair for the City to change its mind. Vice Chairman Chitiea statedrthat the City Council is above the Planning Commission and can appeal any '`decia.ion made by the Planning Commission. She said it is the Council's decilrion that is final and binding over and above any decisions made by the Planning; Commission. Mr. Pellegrino said he cou3,d nor understand why the Council rated the way it did because one of the Council Members changed his mind >id v,.ted for him the first time but against him 'he second time. Ji5e Fabis, 6611 Topaz streEit, Rancho Cucamonga, stated be had written a letter to the Planning Commission: protesting the noise and disturbance created during late hours. He said he bad not previously appeared in person at any of the hearings because his wife'had undergone cancer surgery followed by radiation and chemotherapy last year and then %ad also felt Sam's Place should have an opportunity to perform under the guiodlines that had been passed. He said he would not again pass up an opportunity to report violations to the police or Awk Planning Commission Minutes -13- August 14, 1991 R-A fire department. He said activity has gone on. way past 2:00 a.m. on many occasions. He said when it, is h . and the doors are kept open the music can be heard all over the neigheorhoct., which would be acceptable du --ing certain hours of the day. He indicated the major problem is the rowdiness in the narking lot, the fights going on in the parking lot, squealing of tires, and loud vehicle radios playing. He said on one occasion a woman came out of the bar screaming "call the police " - and his wife called 911. He reported the police have been to the .bar on several occasions. He felt as a.resident he should be able to enjoy the peace and quiet of the neighborhood and his home when he comes home from work. He sai3 he understood that the lights from the public tennis courts in neighborhood parks have to be turned oif at 10 00 p.m. to avoid disturbing the neighbors and he felt similar conditions should be imposed for a bar which is next door to a neighborhood. Vice Chairman Chitiea closed the public hearing. si Commissioner Melcher stated that the concept in today'a - society seems to be that whether or not one is going by the _=19 book, if you can get away with it, it's okay. He felt it was the duty _< a Planning Commissioners to say than it is not okay. He. felt the Commission was given a clear signal from the City: Council that ll:OJ p.m. is late enough for the business. He thought that based on the evidence, the Commission should find that the Conditional Use Permit is not being conducted in an appropriate manner and suspension or revocation of the Conditional Use Permit shoult, be considered. He felt the Commission should deny the Entertainment Permir- because one of the findings which require denial would be that the premises or establishment is likely to be operated in an illegal, improper, or disorderly manner, which he said is currently happening. Mr. Hanson stated that one of the purposes of the hearing tonight was to consider whether to set for a hearing the possible revocation or suspension of the Conditional Use Permit. He said in essence the applicant would receive the continuance that he had requested. He suggested the Commission may vote to set a hearing to consider revocation or suspension and continue the other two applications until that time. He said that *.could give the applicant time to clear up whether they would be potentially moving to ,another site. Motion: Moved by Valletta to continue Entertainment Permit 91 -02, Conditional Use Permit 78 -03, and Amendment };o Conditional Use Permit 78 -03 for two weeks to consider possible suspensionzor raivacat ion of the Conditional Use permit. Mr. Buller stated that It would take four weeks to allow time for advertisement. Mr. Hanson stated that public hearing ,should be left open on the Entertainment Permit and Conditional Use Permit to avoid the need to re- advertise trose items. Vice Chairman Chitiea reopened the public hearing. Commissioner Vallette amended her motion to September 11, 1991. Commissioner AVOL Tolstoy seconded the motion but indicated he was distressed it had to be Planning Commission Minutes -14 august 14, 1991 ��, , Z T 7 p. ��.s pew continued for such a long period of time. Commissioner Vallette suggested thi Commis!'on give direction to the applicant that they would like }? see -ch8 busin operated under the conditions currently set forth by the Conditionah Use Pe.. Motion carried by the following voter AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, MELCHER, TOLSTOY, VALLETTE NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL carried NDMENT 90-MR - C TY OF RANCHO cUCAMONGA - A public hearing to -comet t o the draft environmental - impact report prepared for the Etiwanda rth Spe fic Plan and General Plan Amendment 90 -03B to prezonl exppro ately 6,840 cres of territory in the Rancho Cucamonga sphere -of-in uence to provide r 3,613 single family dwelling units on ;473 acr of vacant land, 28 a es of neighborhood commercial use, 5 parks,. an equestrian cen r, and preservation of 4,112 acreace generally located north o% Highland Avenue (State Route of the San Bernardino National wrest, wash of the City and east of Milliken Avenu,. (Continued from July 24, 1991.) N. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND SPECIFIC PLAN OF MCHO CUCAMONGA - A request t,o reco end approval of a Etiwanda North Specific Plan, prezoning approximately ,840 acres territory in the Rancho Cucamonga sphere of influence to ovide fn 3,613 single family dwelling units on 2,473 acres of vacant lan 28 res of ,neighborhood commercial use, 4 schools, 5 yarks, an equestr enter, and preservation of 4,112 -cres of open space generally locate north of Highland Avenue (State Route 30), south of the San Bernard o N ional Forest, west of the City of Fontana, and east of Milliken A Hue. ( ntinued from July 24, 1991.) O. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ENERAL PLAN NDME T 90 -03 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A requ t to recommend ap of a General Plan Amendment to provide con atency with the drafwanda North specific Plan, prezoning approx" ately 6,840 acres of itory in the Rancho Cucamonga sphere of i luence to provide for 3,gle family dwellling units on 2,473 acre of vacant land, 28 acres g orhoad commercial use, 4 schools, 5 parks, an equestrian center, re rvation of- 4,112 acres of open ace generally located north ghlan Avenue (Statc \Jul Route 30), s h of the San Bernardino Nationast, we t of the City of Fontana and east of Milliken Avenue. (Contifrom Jul 24, 1991.) Chairman Niel stated that staff had requested ems be con nued to $eptemb 11, 1991, tc allow time to complete the Final Envir ental Impa Report (EIR). Re opened the public hearing sked if anyone the a .lence wished to sneak because the would not be Planning Commission Minutes -15- August 14, 199f- CITY OF RANCHO C'UCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: August 14, 1991 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Nancy Fong, Senior Planner SUBJECT: ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT 91 -02 v SAM'S PLACE - A requeat to conduct 3ivef music in conjunction with a restaurant and bar, - -located in the Neighborhood Commercial District- at 6620, Carnelian Street, northwest corner of 19th and Carnelian Streets - APN: 201 - 811 -56 throvlwh 6O, (Continued from July 24, 1991. CONDI'Z_1` NM'."L USE PERMIT 78 -03 SAM'S PLACE - A review of compliance with conditions of approval and consideration of ,suspension or revocation of the Conditional Use Permit for a restaurant and b@Lr located in the Neighborhood Commercial District at 6620 Carnelian Street, northwest corner of 19th and Carnelian Streets APN: 201- 811 -56 through 60. (Continued from July 24, 1991.) AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE HERMIT 78 -03 /s,'AM'S PLACE' - A request to extend the hours of operation •ane" rmend the conditio;t_._of approval prohibiting live entertaink�refor an existing restat:r ,ht and bar located in the Neighborhood Commercial District a,; :)620 Carnelian Street, northwest corner of 19th and Carnelian Streets - APN: 201- 811 -56 through 60. (Continued from July 24, 1991.) BACKGROUND: The aLove described items were continued from the July.24, 1991 meeting to this one because of a lack of quorum. For clarification, the live entertainment Ding provided now (without an approved Entertainment Permit) consists of a one - person acoustical guitarist. The applicant is requesting an Entertainment Permit for a duet. Attached for your review is the July 24, 1991 Staff Report. RWiy.�� B C BB:NF:sp Attachments: Exhibit °A " - July 24, 1991 Planning Commission Staff Report Resolution of Denial for Entertainment Permit 91 -02 Resolution of Denial for amendments to CUP 78 -03 <: I y I I I �k' .. - C:1'i'Y Ui�' iiAiVl�riV l;Ut;ASYiVltiliH STAFF REPORT DATE: July 24, 1991 TO chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Nancy Fong, Senior Planner SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 79 -0'„,- S M *S .A.. - A review of compliance with conditions of approval and consideration of suspension, revocation, or modification \f the Conditional Use Permit for a restaurant and bar located in,oe Neighborhood Commercial District at 6620 Carnelian Street, r o,'It'hwest corner of 19th and Carnelian Streets APN: 201- 811 -�16 Ichrough 60. (Continued from July 10,1991.) E ERTAINME= PERMTT 01 -02 ;; +� S PLACE - A request to conduct lxve music in conjunction with ;;c restaurant and bar locate., in the Neighborhood Commercial District at 6620 Carnelian Street, northwest corner of 19th and Carnelian Streets - APK: 201 - 811 -56 through 60. (Continued from July 10, 1991,) WZNDMENT TO COMTTTONA7. UqV, PERMIT 79- - SAM_'S .PLACE -.A request to extend the hours of operation and amend the Condition of Approval prohibiting live entertainment for an existing bar and restaurant located in the Neighborhood Commercial District at 6620 Carnelian Street, northwest corner of 19th and Carnelian Streets - APN: 231- 811-56 through 60. _(Continued from July 10, 1991.) 1, AF:T ACT The purpose of this report is three -fold. ¢t is as follows: A. Conditional Use Pgrm;,t No 7® -03_ 'Review of compliance with the Conditions of Approval foz Sam's Place, specifically the hours of operation, and consideration of evidence for modification, suspension, or revocation of the Conditional Use Permit. B. En 'ert_airtMn Pemtit wo _ 91-02- Review and consideration of action on the Entertainment Permit request for Sam's Place to conduct live music consisting of a duet (singer player) from Tuesday through Sunday, 9 p.m. to l a.m. C. Conditional Uze Permit No. 78 -04 Am nd=)3t . Review of the requests to extend the hours of operation and to eliminate the condition of approval prohibiting live entertainment. II, aACKGROUND: The compliance review, the Entertainment Permit applicatioi'„ and the amendments to the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) were continued from July 10, 1991 to this regular meeting at the request of the applicant. The compliance review comes about because of a complaint received by the City regarding the hours of operation. A routine inspection of the subject business, Sam's Place, validated the complaint. To date, and as verified by the attorney, Mr. John Mannerino, representing Sam's Place, the businoss is operating beyond the it p.m. limitation until 1 or 2 a.m. in violation of the Conditions of App -oval and live entertainment is being offered from 9 p.m_ to 1 a.m. without the benefit of an approved Entertainment Permit. Attached for your reference is the May 8, 1991, Investigative Report by the City's Code Enforcement staff (Exhibit D). i PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT 1. CUP 78 -03 & EP 91 -02 - SAM'S PLACE JULY 24, 1991 Page 2 In order for the Commission to assess the CUP's compliance review and the Entertainment Permit, it is important to review the history of this business location, which is briefly outlined below. For more detailed information, please refer to Exhibit "E,° a chronology of the history of the business location. 1, In 1985 the Commission modified the CUP by lim4i ang the operating hours to 11 p.m,. and eliminating the live entertain"nt use as a result of complaints received from the surrounding reh3dents (see Exhibit "C° - Planning Commission Resolution No. 83- 117A). X`his decision was appeared to , and upheld by, the City Council. In May d', 1990 the applicant, who bought the business, requested the extension of t ;.' operating hours. The Commission reviewed the request in August o': 1990 and deliberated on the ` issue of whether the hours of. operation should be extended and if so, for how many days of the week. The Commission finally approved the amendment allowing the extension of the hours of operation from 11 p.m. to midnight, Sunday throt4i- Thursday, _and from 11 p \m. to 2 a.m. on Friday and c Saturday. The Commission also agreed that t1:e approval was for a period of six months subject to their review for any extension. a' The decision of the.Commission was timer, appealed by two members rjf the " Council. At the November 7, 1990, appeallbearing, the Council delikerated the issue of compatibility with the '��rrounding residences. At the on conclusion of the appeal hearing on December 19, 1990, the Council determined that extending the hours of operation would not be appropriate and upheld the appeal. It was determined the hours of operation should remain from 11 a.m. to 11 p.m. for this business, ' III. AUA•v¢ a: This section of the report will focus on the compliance review with options for the Commission to consider, the merits review of the proposed Entertainment Permit, and the related amendments to the Conditional Use Permit. Staff suggests that the Commission address these issues in the following order: A. ,5'ii. 70 -03. i, ,, i:+ +an -P, with Conditiong of Appraval. Based on 1, Rpaw of Ccznn the Investi.ga. Report, Sam's Zlace is now in non - compliance with the Conditions of Approval limiting the hours. Staif believes that the routine inspection, Investigative Report, and applicant's admission of violation are substantial evidence to warrant setting a hearing to consider the suspension, revocation, or modification to the CUP. 2, Options for the Commismien to Con2idgr, The Planning Commission, after conducting a hearing, may take one of the following actions: a. Find that the CUP is not being conducted in an appropriate manner and that modifications to conditions are necessary. RESULTS: This option would allow the Commission to Lmpose such reasonable conditions to correct problems ' regarding the operation of the business activity. However, the appli.k"ant has already demonstrated a disregard for conditions. Therefore, staff would recommend monitoring the use for six - months and reporting back to the Commission at that t.lme. f PLANNING COMMISSION S 7 ='REPORT CUP 78 -03 & EP 91 -02 SAM'S PLACE JULY 24, 1991- Page 3 b. Find that the CUP_ is not 1.,ing conducted in an appropriate manner and that modifications. are not available to mitigate the impacts and, therefore, suspend or revoke the permit which requires tit% operation to cease and desist in the time allotted by the Commission. RESULTS: Should the Commission choose to suspend the : CUP,, a time period for the suspension should be specified. If the Commission chooses to revoke the CUPr a miniumm time period to reconsider any new application for the CUP should be specified. In either case, Sam's Place could continue to operate as a restaurant without entertainment or bar (incidental sale of beer and wine only) because that is a use permitted by right for this zone. S. A=nd== a QM 78-03 extencUncr the hours of oneration- On May 13, 1991, the applicant submitted a request to extend the hours of operation. In reviewing this application, staff found that the previous request was denied by the City Council on January 2, 1991 (formal adoption of a resolution of denial). The Development Code has a provision stating that no new application for a CUP for the same or substantially the same request on the same site shall be filed within one year from the date of denial. Staff contacted the applicant to inform him of this Code provision and suggested that he withdraw the application. The applicant wished to purst;e the application as submitted (see June 27, 1991 letter from the attorney representing Sam's Place). Based on the above described Code provision, the Planning Commission cannot consider the request legally. Therefore, staff has no alternative but to recommend-hat the Planning Cortmis.Vion deny the request. The following are options for the applicant: , a. Withdraw the application, that is, the request to extend the hours of operation, at the public hearing. RESULTS: No act?4on will be needed from the Commission, This option allows'`the applicant to refile after January 2, 1992. b. Denial by the Planning Commission of the new application. RESULTS: The action will be consistent with the provision as contained in the Development Code. This option prohibits the applicant from refiling the same application untill after July 24, 1992. C. Entertainment PrM of i -0 Tn reviewing the merits of the Entertainment Permit applications staff found that the related CUP has a 3peci2ic Condition of Approval, prohibiting live entertainment (Exhibit C - Reselutiott No. 83- 117A). Therefore, the applicant has requested an amendment to the CUP to eliminate this condition. -' 1. gong+ d RntPZtajnmenr Activities% The applicant proposes to have live music consisting of a duet (singer r, guitar player) in his bar and restaurant. The live entertainment starts from 9 p.m, to 1 a.m., Tuesday through Sunday. The primary - NS. r PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 78-03 & E? 51-02 - SAM'S PLACE JULY 24, 1992 - Page 4 issue In reviewing the Entertainment Permit is the Compatibility of the use to the surrounding residents. Xmnediately to the west of the business location are existing single family homes. It Was the combination of live entertainment and long hours of operation into the morning hours by prevlous.--smers of previoue businesses that led to the disturbances and problems identified in the past. The City had responded by imposing an 11 p.m. closing, time and eliminating the live entertainment back in 1985: Following the iA,�o3ition of the 11 p.m. closing tiza, the City no longer received complaints`-' from surrounding residents. However, the City recently received a complaint from one Of the residents to the west of the business. The resident objected to the loud noise and music and the disturbances that occurred in the parking lot. 2. rire- and Sheriff nfMartmantzL Both the Fire and Sheziff's Departments have been contacted for g9mments. The Fire Department indicated that they foreseei.o problems with the Entertainment Permit. The Sheriff's Wvartment 3tated,that they have no record of calls for the business location sirce 1989. 3. Findings To consider- the Entertainment Permit, the Commission, must hear and determine all the facts and evidence relevant to the applicant and s=--5cvij-•,ory employees, at well as the entertainment propca*d, inc'k�uding the nature and location of the proposed entertainment. The Commission may deny the permit it it finds and determines any one of the following: a. The conduct of tnie establishment.or the granting of the application would be contrary to the public health, safety, =.al3, or welfare. b. The premises or establishment is likely to be operated in an illegal, improper, or disorderly manner. c. The applicant, or any other person associated with him as principal or partner or in a position or capacity involving partial or total control over the conduct of the business for which such permit is sought to be issued, has been convicted in any court of competent jurisdiction of any Offense involving the presentation, exhibition, or performance of any obscene show of any kind or of a felony at of any crime involving moral turpitude or has had any approval, permit, or license issued in conjunction with the sale of alcohol or the provisions of entertainment revoked within the preceding 5 years. d. That the granting of the application would create a public nuisance. e. That the'normal operation of the pxemiaes,,would interfere with the peace and quiet of any suz,,'�anding residential neigbX=%lood,, f. The applicant has made any false, misleading, or fraudulent statement of material fact in the required application. 13 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 78-03 a EP 91 -02 - SAM'S PLACE JULY 24, 1991" Page 5 4. ZQnZliAJDM r Baz3ed on the above analysis, staff concluded that the business has been operated in an illegal manner, inconsistent with the conditions, of approval contained in the CUP, including entertainment without a, proper permit. Further, staft foui.d that the proposed live "entertainment together with the extended hours of operation would be incompatible with the surrounding residents, in that, it interferaaL with the peace and,quist of the neigghborhord. Therefore, staff cannot recommend approval 6,,' Entertainment Permit No. 91 -02, nor the Conditional Use Permit amendment to eliminate the Condition of Approval prop. biting live .- entertaismtient.. IV.. CO RESPMM .NCE! This item has been advertised in the 7ninnd valley Daily Mullatin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were rent to all property owners within 300 feet of the project site. V. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Comm'- lion review the evidence and set a hearing to consider suspension orrevocation of Conditional Use Permit No. 79 -03. Further, staff recommends denial of the amendment to Conditions of Appro.,al for Conditional Use Permit No. 78 -03 wad Entertainment Permit 91-02. If the Commission disagrees with staff, other options are available as outlined previously in this report. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller City Planner BB:NF /Ifs Attachments: Letter from Applicant dated June Z$, 1991 Letter from neighboring resident Exhibit "A" —City Council Resolution N.. 91 -007 Exhibit "B" - 12/19/90 and 11/7/90 City Council Minutes Exhibit "C" - P.C.-Resolution No. 83 -117 A Exhibit "D" - 5/8/91 Code Enforcement Investigative Report xftibit "E ".- Chro.ology of the History of the Business' Location Exhibit "F" - EntertaL=ent Permit 91 -02 application Exhibit ' "G" - S,ocation Map Exhibit "H" - Floor Plan Resolution of Denial for Entertainment Pe=41t No. 91 -02 Resolution of Denial for Amendments to Conditional Use Permit No. 78 -03 JOHN D. MANNERINO SAL BRIGUGLIO June 27, 1991 ACS V2i�, FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION Mr. Brad Buller Planning Department CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Re: Sam's Place Dear Brad: When first we applied for an Entertainment Permit, on or bef=e May 26,E 1991, in regards to the above - captioned matter, it was only then that we were advised that the Commission wished to review the Conditional Use Permit. We requested that both be heard at the same time, which request was granted. When I inquired concerning the feasibility of re- applying to modify the hours of operation of Sam's Place, I was told that there were no limitations. We filed the application, paid th, filing fee and incurred the expense of obtaining mailing la els. Subsequently 'thereto, we were advised that (1) we were unable to apply for the modification; and (2) that it was necessary to modify the original Conditional Use Permit to obtain permission for live entertzintaent. At each juncture, we have followed the inattuctionu of the City implicitly. All we request is that those matters be held simultaneously before the Planning Commission. 7 have been recently informed that, because of the continued changes in instruction from staff, the application for live entertainment and the application to modify the Conditional Use Permit to allow for live entertainment will be gi:e°d on July 19, 1991 and July 24, 1991, respectively. The purpose of thsa letter its to respectfully request that, the hearing on all these matter be held simultaneously on the 24th of July, 1991. "This is not only for the sake of convenienceF but because ci my present unavailability on July 19, 1991 for the representation of my client. Very tr (arty yours, BRIGUGL*O By: JDM) di (�3-- cc: B. ellegrino 9333 BASEL; ?iE ROAD, SUITE 110 / RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730 /TEL (714) 980 -1100 / FAX (714) 941 -861c, �4 JJN KA I RESOLL 09 W. 91-007 A RESOi8}Y`L U or M CITY COMCIL Oj' ME OF RANG W CUCAMOMA, CALIMM, DASYIM THE AWBIMMMI' TO COMITIONAL USE RE4&�7i .T' NO. 78-03 FUR AN EXISrDn BAR /REMAVRW, SAWS Pl=, IMUM AT T;iE NCFMOMr O0<TWM OF 19M AM MVAEI,7 SEEPS IN Tim NEIL CUIGOM L DIS'IMU, AND NAKM MMINGS iu SIJprop i' THEREOF AM: 201-811-56, M, 559, AND 60: Alt,, (i) SEWS P3&-%T,, ;Wane R. Pellegrino, has filed an app:-ioaticn for tlhe amer&wnt to Conditional Lbe Permit No. 75-03 as described in the title of this Resolution. Herainaft4a in this Resolution, the subject Conditional. Use Permit request is referred to as "the application0. (ii) On the 22rd day of August 1990, the Planning 0=nassicn of the City of Rancho Cuca conducted a duly noticed public hear ng on the application and coscludsd said hearit-q. on,Sgstemb x 12, 1990. The Cmvission conditionally adopted its Resolution No. '90 -1n, approving the ame*ximmt ind w&wxiing the 1*.. = of operation. (i' i) The decision represented by said Planning C=aicaicn Resolution was tidy appealed to this mil. i (iv) On November 7, 1990, the City Council of the City of Rancho QJCamonga conducted a dully noticed Public Hearing and continued it to December 5, 1990. The City CcLmcil cmniuded said fwarirq an Deter 19, 1990. (v) All legal prerequisites prior to the i i)o s oomnxed. adop>gior► of this Pimsolution B. Rx�oution, NCW, 'ice, the City t7Mz cil of the City of Rancho ancanl nga does hwebyy find, determim, and resolve as follows: I. This Council hweby specifically finds that all of the facts set fortis in the Pacitals, Part A, of this Resolution are trus and correct. 2. salad upon autstantial. evida= presenUd to this Council during the above - referenced public iearinga iraludang vritten and oral staff reports, together with public ,ty, this C:x=il hereby sl5ecificaily finds as follows: (a) Me app imticn applies to pruperty located :at. the north- west corner of 19th Street and Ca7miian 6iith a street frontage of 1,037 feat and 'at depth of 240 few and with a shopping eentar; and �t- cauJ "�3 s ( T i % r' RSSolutiO n No. 91°007 Pao° 2 (b) The prcpert r to the north of the subject, site is a future AIL IF freeway, the property to the south is an existing shopping centers the PAY to the east is an e-Ist ng shopping center, and the property to the west is existing single family residences. (c) `he dosed aroxIment contemplates o tending the hours of operation to coincide with those established by the applicant's alcoholic beverage control license,• that is, from the asrent closing how of 11:00 p.m. to a new closing hoar of 2 :03 a.m., Mar7ay thrArgh Saturday. (d) The a=rant limitation ; nonce of operation to 11:00 p.m. was established as a dizect revolt of a Y.Zstcry of public safety and public nuisance problems associated with this location. (e) The fcrmFS problems have riot occurred since the curtailment nt of the hms to 11 :00 p.m. and the elimination of related entertainment. (f) The extension of hours''of operation may be detrimental to the single family residences because of thier clue prmamity and because Of the nature of bar facilities. (g) 'h extension of bours of operation for a bar. facility wculd be incompatibile With the surrounding residential area. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence to this Coumil during the above - referenced public hearings and upon the specific findings of farts set forth in paragraYs 1 and 2 above, this Cmuission hereby finds and concludes as follows (za) That the proposed use is ,mot in accord with the General Plan, -- objeati — of the Devalcpment Code, and the purpmes of the district in which the site is located. (b) That the pfd use, tegeUver with the editions applic- able thereto, will be detrimental to fhe public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties in the vicinity. 4. Based upon then f bzUrip and ecnctuaiens set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 akxK %, this Coil busby denies than &-mbe t to the om-Aliticnal Use Permit 79 -03 for tA exteynsio n of Mora of npanratim. 5. This Coancil hem,* provides ratice to Sam's Place, Luanne R. Pellegrino, that the time within which judicial review of the decision by this PAsolution out ka v=at is gowwnsd by the provisions of California CDds of Civil Section 1094.6. 6. The City ClAwk of the city of ftncho Q=Mmxp is havjV directed to (a) certify to than a3goticet of this Pasolutic n; and (b) foitir ith transmit a certified ccW of this v solution, by certified pail return o recce � requested, i o Sam's PlacC, TAMMS R. PelleWino, at the address identified in Ci Iti I City Council Minutes December 19, 131P Page "i � E. COMSYRTS O$gYNANCES No Items Submitted. 1P. ADVERTISED PUBLIC Emilms c�}} Fl, CONSIneRATION OYr AN APPEAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 78 -03 AMENDMENT - SAM, S P171C - An appeal of the Planning Commission's decision to extend the houru of operation for an existing bar and restaurant located a t then northwest corner -ai Carnelian and 19th Street in the Neighborhood Commercial District - APNs 201 - 811-36, 58, 59, 60. (Continued from December 5, 1990) Mayor Stout stated this item had been continued from December 5, 1990 at the request of the appellant and re- opened the meeting for public hearing. Addressing the 'City Cquncil was: John Mannarino, 9333 Bass Line, Suite 110, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that he had seacarehed to see if there were any aeriAl photos in the possession of the city for this area and stated there were not, but that he had taken the liberty to have a survey done of the areas, of the commercial centers In the vicinity of 19th and Carnelian, 19th and ?xchibald, Carnelian and Ask Base Line, and Base Line and Archibald representing comnarcial activity 1p north of Foothill and west of Favan, and reported the information he had obtained about theme centers. He stated >he did not think Sam's Place was in the middle of a residential area, that It was in a commercial area. He added that since the Pellegrino's had taken over this business in March, there have not boon complaints filed against th.s establishment. Thera being no further response, the public heating was closed. Councilmember Williams stated she was present the first time this matter came before the City Courcil and had heard all the comments made. She commented she hale spoke with the residents on Topaz Street and that they were in favor of this establishment. She added she felt Sam's Place deserved a six month trial period with entendtd hours, thaugh she did not Feel Lt was an appropriate use for the neighborhood /commercial area, but stated that was not the question. MOTIONt Novel by Stout, asconded by Wright to geant the appeal, denying the extension of hours. Counc£lmember Alexandar asked for Mayor Stout to give details of what had occurred with this business while he was on the Planning Comiss,ion. Mayor Stout prsceadod informing the Council with this information and added he hart not changed his mind about this issue. Councilmamber Wright stated the business could be sold to someone else, and it might not be the good place that Sam's Place is. Cc�7 �� City Council minutes December i4, 1940 Page 10 Mayor Stout stated he did not feel this kind of establishment should be located in this type of center for this particular area. I John Mannerina asked if he could address the Council. again, stating that previously I- was the previous owner of the business that created, the problem and that they did not care enough to control ' the crowd, that their only concern was ¢a generate revenue. Councilmember Huquet stated he felt it would be fair to grant Hr. Pellegrino the opportunity for the six month trial basis as long as the c%Tter met the conditions of the Planning Commission and L conducted this extension in good faith. Mayor Stout stated that Hr. Pellegrino knew when he bought the business what the hours were and that he is requesting that the rlstriction be lifted. Motion carried, 3 -2 (Williams, Buqust no) which would grant the appeal. Ralph Hanson, Assistant City Attorney, stated a Resolution would come back at the next meeting in order for the Council to make this action official. F2. CONSIDZRATION OF TIMES HIRRORIS APPLI ,TION FOR A CABLE, TELEVISION FRANCHISN (continued from December S, 1499) Jack Lam, City Manager, stated staff Is requesting an Executiva_.,Session. Ralph Hanson, Assistant City Attorney, stated that the Council will recess pursuant to California Oovernment Code Section 549S6.9(b)l concerning a matter whether this is sijnLficant expouure to potential litigation. He ,staled this would be memorialized in a canfident).al memorandum to be givan to the City Clark, and wou;'d become publie ifter thw exposure to litigation her. passed. The Council recessed to Executive Session at 7 :37 p.m. and reconvened at 5:07 p.m. « «« «e« Jack Lam, City Kanager, introduced Carl Pilnick, the City's cable consultant. Carl Pilnick prseentQ4 an introduction to Times Mirror's applieaktion for a cable television franzhise. Mayor Stout stated he ;as in receipt of correspondence from one or more attorneys who are questioning the legality of whst the City is doings who were stating they are not prepared tonight and were requesting that this item be continued, and were making allegations regarding the noticing process. He asked for Ralph Hanson, Assistant City Attorney, to comment on this. J City Council minutes November 7,_1990 Page 10 AMOL Counc' member Alexander stated he felt it was the City's intent to d he under_ nding. .f Rick Gomez, unity Development Director, stated that Mr. mix a' ees to do the main undergrou ng, that it was only the part outside t; tract that the It developer was app ing. Councilmember Buquet ated he would like to 50MO of the additional ' undergrourding, but woul like to see some r u7!oment to Hix Development also. Councilmember Wright felt the un gro ding was a good idea, but did not agree with the 320 feet because it was ov a developer to be responsible ff and above what the City normally would ark Councilmember Alexander fe ull undergro ding should occur, but did not think it should necessmrily m responsibility this developer to have to pay far everything. Councilmember B at stated. ho felt the 460 feet ditional was a little too much. He add a would like to see some type of re moment agreement worked out on this MOTION* Moved by buquet, ieconded by Alexander for a Reno l Lon to come back at t next meetina which would state that Hellman should be dened, delete th 460 feet e-` ' , undergrounding to the south, accept t Mignonette r onstruction ra, sbmitted by staff, and with regards to the Am* at Street econstruction, chat this be deleted and condition No. 4 be modified add the langudge on page 115 of the staff report. Motion carried unanimcuw - 4 -0 -1 (Brown absent). e • e r � • P2. GON.^.IDEiiA M OF an aaar& or m�vnsn+�,.i -. H PHRMIT 7a -03 Aga =NDHENT - �.� sAM'g PLACE - A regnevt An appeal of the Planning _ ing Coemisaion s decision to extend the hours of operaticn for an existing bar and restaurant locatRd st the northwest corner of Carnelian and 19th Street in thm Neigh'adchood Commsrcial District - APHs 201- 811 -58, 58, 59, 60. Staff report presented by Nancy Fong, Senior Planner. Mayor Stout stated he is the appellant on this item. He stated this restaurant location was approved in 1979, and that alcohol was allowed to be nerved. He continued by stating that shortly after the problems started at the Scar's Head in l ?35, certain conditions were�Pidcmd an the restaurant and that alcohol would not be served after 1100 p.m. because the restaurant was in a residential area, that this type of activity would only be allowed in a eomsearcial area. Councilmember alright stated she was appealing this for the same reasons as hayor Stout. She stated she was appealing the use, not the user. City council Minute:) November 7 1990 Page 11 Mayor Stout asked if a now buyer coming in would have any previous conditions continued to be in affect. James Marlanan, City Attorney, stated yes. Mayor Stout opened the meeting for public hearing. Addressing the City Council were: John Mannerino, 9333 Base. Line, Suite 110, stated he felt the types of activity that went ail prior to 16?'-_ were what caused the 11:00 p.m� time limit to be pl..ced on this location. He felt the lounge was an important part of the business to make money. He added he did not feel this was in a total residential area and clarified this is a restaurant /.Lounge in a residentirl /cc=*vcial shopping center and felt the appeal should be denied, Councilmember Buquet asked if the property owner has any problem with this use. Mr. Hannerino stated no, Mike Mitchell, President of the Chamber of ccsweroe and business owner, and a resident at 5271 Turgsoise, stated he is present in defense of the Pellegrinos because he did not feel problemn existed. He felt skis was an opportunity .far the City Council to show they supported small businesses. He stated this situation is what is giving Rancho Cucamonga the image of being difficult to do business here. Rance Clouse, 5634 Dresden, real estate broker, and Chairman of the j Economic Development Committee for the Chamber, of Commerce, felt the` appeal was unfair and should be denied. There being no further response, the public hearing was alcsed. Councilmember Alexander stated he felt inconsistency was the issue, and that if i this is allowed in other locations, it Ghoul l also be allowed in this instance. Councilmember Buquet stated that he fol,.4 Councilmember Wright and Mayor Stout's appeal was valid, but did not ass this business as being like the Boar's Head. He suggasted the following conditions be added to those in the Planning commission Resolutions 6. No live entertainment. 7. That the Conditional Use Permit amendment be revoked upon transfer of ownership. John Mannerino stated that No. 6 ii^ -'a meet point because live entsrti,,ALmvat is already not allowed. City Council minutes' November 7, 1990 Page 12 Councilmember Buquet felt N3. 7 Should be added. He felt a trial period of six months should be given and then have it come back to the City Council for review. Councilmember Wright asked if this could be done legally. James Markman, City Attorney, stated he could not advise the Council that this could be done. He thought it would be worth a try, but was not sure it would work legally. Councilmember Wright stated she felt Sam's Place has good intentions, but fel,: the appeal should be uphald. Mayor Stout stated he did not like the Chamber's insinuation that the City 35 anti - business t ause they are not. He stated that the owns', when he bought the business ' .aw of the conditions, and wanted that point made. He stated no matter what ,ype of use was wanting to stay open until 2:00 a.m., he would not approve it. James Markman, City Attorney, stated if there was a tie vote, it would need the full City Council to break that appeal, and added that Councilmember -Elect Diane Williams was in the audience, and if this matter could wait until she is sworn in, it could be decided then. MOTION: Moved by Stout, seconded by Wright to grant the appeal. Motion tied, 2 -2 -1 (Buquet, Alexander not Brown absent). Councilmember Alexander suggested they be allowed to be open until 12:00 a.m. which would give the owners the opportunity to prove themselves. Counciimember Wright stated she did not agree with this because it is adjacent to a residential neighborhood. MOTION: moved by Alexander, seconded by Buquet to extend the hours of operation by one hour and that the Planning Commission standards would still apply with this exception. Motion tied, 2 -2 -1 (Stout, Wright no; Brawn absent). Mayor Stout Suggested that the public hearing be continued to December 5 and re- opened for any further discussion or questions by Councilmember- IlLact Diane Williams. MOTION: Moved by Wright, seconded by Buquet to continue the public hearing to December 5, 1990. Motion carried unanimously, 4 -0 -1 (Brown absent). ! 4 ! t e ! 73. zKVIROWW&L 210FIEMMENT 90-01A Z - _rlJV .k rsqu,; :zt_ to amend the General F e may from ylood Control /t t il'Lt i Cerridor to Low keoidential (2 Et units per acre) for 1.91 acres contained within two par and located nc south of an extension _t Highland Avenue, ad to the east and west side the Cucamonga Crest (s ,c _Z, _T - LS RESOLUTION NO. 83 -117 -A A RE --JLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, MODIFYING CONDITIONAL, c PERMIT 78 -03 FOR THE BAR, AND ENTERTAINMENT FACILI� ;S WITHIN THE BOARS HEAD ESTABLISHMENT LOCATED IN THE RPeCHO PLAZA, AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF 19TH STREET' AND CARNELIAN WHEREAS, on the 10th day of July, 1985, the Planning Commission determined a need to modify Conditional Use Permit 78 -01 and, WHEREAS, on the 10th day of July, 1985, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the above item. Nl:,, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga resolves as follows: SECTION 1: Additional conditions and changes are found to be needed for Conditional Use Permit 78 -03 in order to comply with the intent and purposes of the neighborhood commercial shopping district. Therefore, the following conditions are added to those conditions already in effect per Resolutions 78 -40, 82 -98, and 83 -117: 1. The hours of operation shall be from 11 :00 a.m. to 11:00 P.M. 2. '153t er.ertainment uses in conjunction with this business shall be eliminated. . 3. This Conditional Use Permit shall be reviewed annually by the Planning Commission. 4. This approval is granted for a restaurant with the incidential serving of alcoholic beverages. A lunch and dinner menu shall be served to maintain 'Z;he primary restaurant use. BY: ATTEST: APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24th DAY OF JULY, 1985. NMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA I, Jack Lam, Secretary of the Planning- Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certleffy 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 24th day of July, 1985, by the following vote -to -wit. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, MCNIEL, BARKER, STOUT R _. NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL 6OP71t5-0-3 COPY FOR YOUR qj caA2. rr INFORMATION CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CODE ENFORCEMENT BUREAU CASE ACTIVITY REPORT ® 4�, 6 Zv RILL LOCATIO�N1 /1 - HANDLED BY A. /-tLc ;,. ) �E� DAY L� DATE �_/ 8 1_21 TIME _P,ZO_� REGARDING: L 14iE &T5 E.,/ i - C• GW . i� �yn� Q. T• uicJS u�1 %�o ✓: S NAME AI,) f nFG L G/' PHONE ( ) _ INFO m, r .lA F_ i /!) f'GL.4n/R N,4n1� S r.✓G E2� /Gcl i7'i4r� i 5T PSRi ONAII.� CONTACT? N NAAItAT2VL C N/� C .>i� tGrritlC A S �I:FOUC Eo A2 -,�n1 EG7ia�✓ o�' T1��S To l��.Q /AFY G1ni TiNGi d G�/}?�L1, fFi1 � ^r C%BSF.2c /S OWE oylAL_c :5 /6_G.E gg?V51.✓f55 S .Ln nlTiy /�D i49�1S�Gf= 7Z5 77,115 [')wnl S2 CAI /i T4-1 Mg IA1;� .hriS c.�fic �iSGUSS T7� E 5aa- A4 J7Un/ S F'X�[Aii1J�y 7?,iAT zziler Alk o -flS A'L 'ECLa.4iTo�1/S .•4 qw :2i % /1 �;ry�S �'Ai h�:5 ,¢ 3'►�,�1 �Sr t.Ilr45 u.� 2 ��/j-'G Y 1A1k10Z.Z e;Q 5:4 Cl P�- �•i�4-1,2%,0f4f,�'0u1v2Z �- -�fiT di� T�, ,,�✓/� fTa,rANy E 1t / . l.1[ ,4/c../r ,,�vs�.9a1r5��5.y�1n �r ��.yTFG,r�rrS�S.ea, / O•v� �A�9,S 1,0C % /A/9F2 JAM-:5 f' 2 /ham Tr y "'Ve 441,45 T�9 G���y9 Ti.n f t e lV7-1 e- 0,o � T eA_1 A /1 F6- �t�s32 erv::t�,tifa 7-h" -OP' )7-W3 orc' �tfE �%Gl�� %y�t2� E•/1or,�/t1�S /;Se -j'y T/;',, -- rtiFE ;�c.�� / 2 7-� bl'34 QA✓77%46 > .Z, Cc 7-A -rrEC� >E S�/+<�6 �.?% �7�i},G�S7- iii✓ >E.�!/iPGJ �ir/"7„� /iz11//7 /1�G�tL 5, /J 7 9*r- l�i_SCr..✓ r,.Vu j::-' Ao(,,s Ar T_ fly LcJ.,.eLo - 7 ON ey. Ga GrE I c 1 4 117-1 j / ! ! 06, / ' NNI7E_DX&VRZDVT20N Y<LLOW -rXLZ VZNK- OPTXgKK 'i"'.1i iTAT OTOD.. AAtfA APN A=04 ILSU40 1191 AMERrAN S="ESS FORMS EM-UBIT E CUP 78 -03 CHRONOLOGY FOR THE HISTORv OF THE BUSINESS LOCA'x")N SAM`S PLACE On December 27, 1978. the Planning Commission conditionally approved the Boar's Head restaurant with bar and entertainment. D--!t to consistent complaints relating to 'aoise, loud music, lights, and loitering, the Plarwing Commission had reviewed the Conditional Use Permit several times and Tna-�ed the conditions of approval to mitigate these problems. ;Come of the mitigation measures added were limited hours of operation to 2 a.m., structural changes to buffer noise, and Installation of speed bumps within the shopping center. In 1983, the Planning Commission again reviewed this Conditional rse Permit due to complaints received and modified the conditions of approval through more restrictive hours of operation ( 11 p.m. closing ), addittoniA noise attenuating materials to reduce ex.erior and interior noise and required implemcntation of a ginner - =u. In 1985, the Planning Commission further modifL-d the Conditional Use Permit by keeping the operating hours to 11 p.m., and e►iminating the live entertainment use.On September 6, 1985. the City Council heard an appeal by the applicant and upheld the decision of the Planning Commission. In April of 1988, the Boar's Head closed due to fire damage The business was reopened as Strattons under different ownership. No complaints were received during the period that Strattons wac> open. hi March of 1990, the applicant, Sam & Luanne Pellegrino. - °rer the business of Strattons and renamed it Sam's Place. On May 22, 1990. the applicant submittee . .,west to extend the Hours of operation On August 22. 1990. the Commission reviewed the request. The Commission deliberated on the issue of whetter the hours of operation shovel be extended and If so, for how many days of the week. The Commission finally ,q1;. -.rued the amendment allowing the extension of hours of operation from 11 p:m.. to midnight Sunday through Thursday , and from 11 p.m. to 2 a.m. Friday and Saturday. The Commission four any �e nsion. The approval was tormializedd a tthhe months subject 12 1990 meeting. The decision of the r— immission was timely appealed by two members of the Council. On November 7. 1990. the Council heard the appeal. 7be Council deliberated on the issue of compatibility with the s- ,mounding residences. Due to a deadlocked 2:2 ,tie vote, the Council continued the bearing to December 5th regv ar ;meeting On December 5, 1990, the Council again continued the hearing to ecember 19. 1590 . at the request of the applicant. On December 19, 1390, the Council concluded the hearing and detanmined that extend', g the wav s of operation would not be appropriate. The Council formalize the deaolon by adoptuag a resolution upholding the appeal on January 2. 1991. On May S. 1991. Code -Enforcement Staff conducted a routine inspection of* the business for comptiance review. The bustric.�ss is operating beyond the 11 p.m. limitation to 1 or 2 am. on rL -gular basis oriel live entertainment is offered from 9 a.m. to l.am On May 13, 1991, the applicant submitted the Entertainment Permit application (EP 91 =02). � l C, - tJ CHRONOLOGY S PLACE (Cont.) _ On ]Viay 24, 1991, Staff send a letter try'the applicant Informing hiss of the incompleteae§s states. « . On May 28. 1991, additional infomaatcn w- a submitted. Staff determined the application to be cc pleta . f On June 10, 1991, the applicant submitted the amendment to the CUP to request for an extension of ha�", of operation. rMis same day, staff set the 7-1e, -91 Commission agenda), On June 17, 19%%: sialf ve � informed v' the staff, at tine ntt�u'n s I rbal info ed . 1e of a staff office for the a- ih`cant. thpv'tlie a �scudm ant ,to the CUP ro extend the hours of operation cannot bps reflle'a' within one ear of denial. which to the case for Sam's a •-cc Staff sugpsted that the appplicant withdraw, Emma the amendment application pad a AM refuE would he re,`ur d. One June, 24, 1991. �)taff again contacted the 'attorney's office to find out if the applicant desired to withdraw Staff also informed her that an amendment to the CUP to eliminate the condition of approval prohibiting live enttrtairm^,aent would be needed In order for the (',ommaissior� to ca*ssider the, Entertainment Permit 91 -e,2. The Commission has 2 options, either deny the EP 91=02 or continue it to the same date that the amendment to CUP was being advertised far. Ah I ENTE RTAINMEN'T PERMIT APPLICATION Applicants entertainrne:,Z for permits shall complete the following questionaire: PLEASE PRINT OR TIPS _ A. The name and permanent address of applicant ` Luanne R. Pellegrino -- °--------------------- - - - - -- --------------------------- Vame 6331 Semillon Place, Alta Loma, Cry 9i r'01 _-_- _--- °------------------- - - -' -- -1 ------,-------------ermanent Address B. The name, proposed and current, if any, and businez: address of the applicant: Luanne R. Pellegrino' dba Sat.'s' Place ----------- --------------- - - - - -- ---= - - - - - -_ * °---- - - - --- dame ;Current and Proposed) 6620 Ca nelian stY-,flt - - -- - -- - - -- - - -- -- - -- - - -- r•.ess Address Susi_b1ta- JoiDa. CA _,91701_----------------------------------------- C. A detailed description of the rropost d entertainment, including type of entertainment, and number of persons engaged in the entertainment (may attach seperate sheet,; if r <ecessary): Ask Guitar player - duet --- -- - - -- - -- -- -- - - -- - - - -° - -- - -- -= - - - - - -- -- -- - -------------------------------------- - -------------------- I - - - -- - ^---- ------ -- - -- ----- - - - - -- - -- --- - - - - -- - D. The date or day -of -week, hours and location of entertainment (attach floorplan), and the admission fee, if any, to be charged: Tuesday through Sunday No admissirn fee . r~�j3^ ---- - - - - -- - ----------------------- - - - - -- -- EP �- VT h� z --` E. The name(s) of the person(s) responsible for the management or supervision of applicant's business and of any entertainment; Salvatore N. Pellegrino F. A statement of the nature and character ol applicant's business, if any, to be carried on in conjunction with such entertainment including whether or not alcohol will be served as part of such business: Restaurant /Lounge, has full liquor license ------------------------------------------------------------ G. Whet!Aer or not the applicant or any, ,.erson responsible for the management or supervision of applicant's business have been within the previous ten years, convicted of a crime, the nature of such offense, and the sentence received therefor including conditions of parole or probation, if :a,Zy Not- applicable - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- - -- ^ - - - -- -- ------------------------------------ --- -�---- - - - - -- -- - - - - -- H. Whether or not applicant has ever had any permit or license issued in* conjunction with the sale of alc(nol or provision of entertainment revoked, including the date thereof and name of the revoking agency; Not applicable ----------------------------------------------- Any false, misleading or fraudulent statement of material fact in the required application shall be grounds for denial of the application for an entertainment Ask permit. !' r a _ - fill i' o lid' • 1 1 "i.? � W 1 1 < il! ( ►J (n _ s � �•_ �f0 O7p1�61 1 t . I I .3 i AV ' .. Lj _.:;- � � #`.F r,' fib '�' c ✓" zr' t,41 tllo � 0.1 Z-516 s� i�,T.- ;;%,ryr� � � � qC C � :. Esc. { °;�� {,;�" � ` ri. t.,.,,G.� le— .._.._! � ��• _. � r "•y roc. } at QLL RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE 'CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, REVOKING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 78 -03 FOR "SAM'S P,TACE ",. A BAR FACILITY, LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF 19TH AND CARNELIAN STREETS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - ARK: 201- 811 -56 THROUGH 60. A. Recitals. (i) On the 21th day of December 1-378 the City of Rancho Cucamonga approved Conditional Use,,Pe=it '78 -03 for a restaurant with related bar facilities and musical entertainment permitting hours of operation from 11 :00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. On the 10th day of July 1485 the City ef, Rancho Cucamonga modified Conditional Use Permit 78 -03 to restrl t.the hours to 11:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. and eliminate.the provision for entertainment at the facility. (fi) On the 10th day of July 1991 and continued to the 24th day of July and the 14th day of August 1991, the Planning Commisai�n of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the compliance review of Conditional Use Permit No. 78 =03. (iii) on 14th day of August 1991, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga received public testimony and concluded said compliance hearing on that date and out a now'publir, hearing on September 11, 1991 for the consideration of a suspension and /or revocation of Conditional Use Permit No. 78-03. . (iv) On September 11, 1991, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga concluded said hearings (v) All legal prerequisit ,u prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution, NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City or Ranch',' Cucamonga does hereby find, determine, and resolve as follows: 1. This commission hereby specifically finds that all f tne' facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of chic Resolution are true r'nd correct. l 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this commission during the above-referenced public heax-ings, including written end oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission herctby specifically finds as fellows: (a) The business location is at the northwest corner of 19th anu Carnelian Streets with a street frontage of 3,037 feet and lot depth of 240 feet and is presently improved with a shopping center. (sr/ ? 5_3 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. CUP 78-03 - SAM'S PLACE September 11-, 1991 Page 2 (b) The property to the north of the subject site Is a future frea ay, the property to the south is an 'existing shopping renter, the property to the east is an existing shopping center, and the property to the west is existing single family residences. (c) The owns- `has requested an amendment to extend'the hours of operation to coincide with those established by the applicant's alcoholic beverage control license; that is, from the current closing hours c 11x00 p.m. to a new closing hour of 2:00 a.m., Monday" t;:rough Saturdays and eliminating the conditions of approval prohibiting" live entertainment. Concurrentlj with the revocation review tbl',ss Planning commission has denied such modification request. -(d) The owner filed the same applicati „tn to extend the hours 61 operation on May 221 1990, and tie application was •denied on appeal by Ci' y Council on January 2, 1991 by adoption of their Resolution No. 91- -007. (ti) The current limitation on `;ours of operation to 11 :00'p:m• and the elimination of live entertainment -ere established as a direct result of a history of public safety and public nuisance problems associated with this location. (f) The former problems ha Q not occurred since the curtailment of the hours to 11:00 p.n.. and the elimination of live entertainment. (g) The owner Chas been operating the businss:s beyond the 11:00 p.m. limitation and offered live entertainment in violation of the con6itions at approval as contained in Resolutions` No. 83- 117, 83- 117 -A, and 91 -007 for . Conditional Use Permit Flo. 78 -0.1 and Ordinance No. 290 pertaining to Entertainment Permits. (h) The City received a written corilplaint in June of 1991 nbjecting to the business operation, specifically the Inure of operation and the live entertainment. ' (i) Such hours of operation beyond 11:00 p.m. together with live entertainment is detrimental to the surrounding single family residences because of their close proximity and becaueC %of the nature of bar facilities. (j) Such hours of operat ±:,r;`7syond 11:00 p.m. together with live enterl.ainment for a bar facility in dncompatible with the surrounding residential area. 3. Based upon gioubstantiai evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearings tnd upon the specific findings of facts net forth in paragraphs i and 2 above, this Commission hereby ;finds and concludes as follows: -; AdIlk PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. CUP 78-03 - SAM'S PLACE September 11, 1991 i^ Page 3 � AML <J (a) The Conditional Use Permit is not being .conducted in to appropriate manner and modifications are not available' te, mitigate the impacts. Thexefore, the permit should be revoked which requires the operation to cease and desist in the titbe allotted by the Commission. a 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 shover this Commission hereby revokes Conditional Vae, Permit No. 78 -03 and the use shall cease and desist within 30 days from tt�, �te,of the adoption of this Resolution. l .: APPROVED A=,,ADOPTED THIS 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER x.991. PLANNING COMMIS=ON'OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CV-C.aM ONGA 1 C. BY: Suzanne R._Chitiea, Vice Chairman � ATTEST: Brad Buller, Secretary I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of. Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolutio.a, was duly. and regularly introduced, paassd, and adopted by ttii Planning commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 31th day of September 1991, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIOFERSs NO ?AS: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: `i RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RLANN NG COWISSION OF Tiis, :CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING THE AMENDMENT TO (' CONDITIONAL O$E PERMIT NO. 78 -03 TO- EXTEND THE W)URS OF L OPERATION AND TO ELIMINATE THE CONDITION OF APPROVAL PROHIBIT.TNG LIVE ENTERTAINMENT FOR AN EXISTING BAR AND RESTAURANT, LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF 19TH AND CARNELIAN STREETS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL, DISTRfCT, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF a; APN: 201- 811 -56 THROUGH 60. A. Recitals. (i) John Mannerino, on behalf of Sam Pellegrino, has filed a petition to modify the conditions of approval for Conditional Usc Permit No. 78 -03 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditional Use Permit request is referred to as "the application." (ii) On the 10th day of July 1991 and continued to the 24th day of July and the 14th day of August 1991, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and continued that hearing to the September 11, 1991, malting. Alk (iii) on the 11th day of September 1991, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga received public testimony and concluded said hearing on that date. (iv) All legal preregalsites prior to the adoption of this Resoluti.cn 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 facto set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution ar. true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial eviden--E presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearings, including written and oral staff reports together with public testimony, this Con: ission hereby specifically findz as follows: (a) The application applies to property located at the northwest corner of i9th and Carnelian Streets with a street frontage of 1,037 feet and lot depth of 240 feet and is presently improved with a shopping center. +� (b) The property to the north of the subject site is -a future freeway, the property to the south is an existing shopping center, the property to the east is an existing shopping center, and the property to the west is existing single family residences., PI.i1NN.TNG COMMISSION RF~OLUTION NO. CUP 78 -03 - SAM'S PLACE September 11, 1991 :age 2 (c) The proposed'amendasnt contemplates extending the hours )f operation to coincide with those established by the applicant's alcoholic beverage control license; thaC` is,. from the current closing hours of 11:00 p-a, to a new closing hour;,,3f 2:00 a.m.., Monday through Saturday; and eliminating the conditions of approval prohibiting live entertaia_�ent. (d) The applicant filed the same application to bxtond the hours of operation on May 22, 1990, and the appiication was denied on appeal by City Council on January 2, 1991, by adoption of their Resolution No.. 91-007. . (e) The Development Code, Section l7.04.".CH, b;:ates that follGain ,e denies or revocation of a Conditional Use Permit: application, no application for a'-,onditional Use Permit for the same or Substantially the same use of f.'.he bame ��F substantially the same site shall be filed within one year from them drte of dsaial or revocation. (f) ,The applicant has been operating the business beyond the il.Arj p.m. limitation and offered live -entertainment in violation of the condit.':k`hs of approval r i in violation of Ordinance No. 290 pertaining to Enterta %,sent Perc4s. (g) The current limitation on hours of operation to 11:00 P.M. was established as a direct -exult of a history of publi.F safety and public nuisance problems associated v th this location. (h) The former problems have not occurred since the curtailment of the hours to 11:00 p.m, and the elimination of related live entertainment. (i) The extension of hours of operation together with the live entertainment may be detrtoVnt&1 to the surrounding single family residences because of their close proximity and because of the nature of.bar facilities. (j) The extension of hours of operation together with the live entertainment would be incompatible with the surrounding residdntial area. 3. Based upon the rubs , tial evidence pressated to this Commission during the above- r- ferenced public hearings and upon the specific findings of facts sat forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and csncludes as follows: (a) That the proposed uaie is not in accord with the General Plan, th4 objectives of the 0e"aelopment code, and the purposes of the district in which the site !;o located. (b) That the proposed use will be detrimental to the publ..c health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to propertiea at improvements in the vicinity. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. CUP 78-03 - SAM'S PLACE ! September 11, 1991 Page 3 4. Based upon the findings .,end conclusions set forth in paragraphs ;J< 1, 2, and 3 above, this Commission "=aby denies the request to amend the Conditional Use Permit No. 78 -03 for the extension of hours of operation and the elimination of the conditions of approval; rohibiting live entertainment. All conditions of approval containeu in City Council Resolution No. 91 -007 shall remain in full force and effect. S. The Secretary to' -his commission shall certify to the adoption of this Revolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 1991. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCV. - CUCAMONGA BY: Suzanne R. Chitiea, Vice Chairman- ATTiST: Affilk Brad Bull6rr Secretary I, Brad Buller, Secretary cif the P'; ..u►ing commission of `Elie City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing -�.Iosolution was duly, and regularly introduced, passed, and adapted `%y the Planning Commission of the city c�.. Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular mestin7 of the Planning Commission held on the 11th day of September 1991, by uhe Pollowing vote -to -nit: j< AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: l ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF Th'_' CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING E14TER:AINMENT PERMIT NO. 91 -02, A REQUEST TO CONDUCT LIVE .ENTERTAINMENT IN CON3UNCTION WITH A BAR AND RESTAURANT, LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF 19TH AND CARNELIAN STREETS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, ANU MAILING €I=INGS IN SUPF^RT THEREOF - APN: 201- 811 -56 THROUGH 60 A. R cig tsls (i) John Mannerino, on behalf cf Sam Pellegrino, has filed An application for an Entertainment Formit No. 91 -02 as described In the title o this Resolution. Hereinafter in ^lsis Resolution, the subje t Entertainmant Permit request is referred to as "th,, application." (ii) On the Itth day of July X991 and continued to the 24th day t July and the 14th day of August 1991.. tn,, Planning Commission of the City t4 Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noti —4 public hearing on the 'application and continued that hearing to the September 11,. 1991, meeting. (i-i) On the 11th day of September 1991, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga received public testimony and concluded said hearing on that date. is (ic) All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution hays occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City or Rancho cucamcnga does hereby find, determine, and resolve as follows: 2. This Commissit.. 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 substantialevidanca presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearings including written and oral staff reports together with pulolic testimony, this commission hereby specifically finds as follows: (a) The application applies to property located at the northwest corner of 19th and Carnelian Streatu with a street frontage of 1,037 feet and lot depth of 244 feet amt is prese:tly improved with a shopping centers and (b) The property to the north of the subject site is a t'ature freeway, the property to the south is an existing shopping canter, the prorarty to the Rant is an existing shopping center, and the propertgrcto the west i6 existing single family residences. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. t.` EP 91 -02 - SAC'S PLACE September 17., 1991 Page 2 (c) The applicant has been operating the business beyond the 11:00 p.m. limitation and offered live entertainment in violation of the conditions of approval as contained in Resolution Nos. 83-117 and 91 -007 for Conditional Use Permit No. 78 -03 and Ordinance No. 290 pertaining to Entertainment 2ermits (d) Ty-e City roc!aived a written- complaint in 7une of 1991 objecting to the lateness of the hours! -f operation and the live Entertainment. (e) Tho current limit -Aon �n hours of operation to 11:00 �.m. and the elimination of live untertainmert were established as a direct result of ,a history of public safety and public nuisance problems associated with this location. (Z) The former problems have not occurred since the curtailment of tho hours to 11100 p.m. and he elimination of live entertainment. (g) The extension of hours of operation together with live entertainment may be detrLasntal to the surro!'lding single family residences because of their close proximity and ka,cause of the natuve of bar facilities. (h) The extension of hours or cperat-`pn together wi -Sh live entertainment for a bar facility would be incompatiia., -with the surrounding residential area. 3. Esoed upon substantial eviderwe presentile., this Commission during the above- referenced public hearings, and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, thisamissiol hereby finds and concludes as follows: (a) The conduct of the establiehtiene or tl'4 granting of the application woosld be contrary to the public h alth, sla ety, morals, or welfare; and (h) The premises or establishment is likely to oe operated in an illegal, improper, or disorderly manner; and (c) Twat ,ranting the ,appl9cation would create a pub.Uc nuisance; and id) Thrt the normal operation of the promises would interfere with the peace C.-Id quiet of the surrounding residential neighborhood. '4. Based upon the fiYdtnya and concluaions not forty in paragraphs 1, 2,, and 3 above, this Commission f-treby denies Entertainment Permit No. 51 -02. . PLAN2IINts COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO, EP 91 -02 - SAM'S KACE , September 11, 1991 Page "3 APPROVED :AM ADOPTED '!MIS llTiI DA:: OF SEPTRYBOA 1S91- PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Suza-me R. Chitiea, Vice Chairman, ATTEST: Brad Huller, Secretary I, Brad Buller, Secretary . u-F''£he Planning COMMisaion cif the City of Ran :ho Cucamonga, do hereby aert.iy that the foregoing Pwjolntio. was. duly, and regularly introduced, passed, and, adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a re!plas:meating of the Planning Commtseion_ held on the 11th day of, 'September 1991, by the following vcta -to- wit:.' AYES: COMRYSSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERSs ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS,: i I - ', 4 r f eptember 11, 1991 Page T0: City of Rancho Cucamonga rROr: See undersigned RE: :SAM`S PLACE WE THE UNDERSIGNED ARE FRIEMS AND /OR CUSTOMERS OF SAM`S PLACE, 6620 CAI1MIAN SMM, RANCTO CUCAMONCA, CA. WE STRONGLY OPPOSE 'IHR, L-x ITATION OF HOURS THE CITY IS IMPOSING ON SAM`S. A.9 BUSINESS OWNERS AND RESIDENTS OF THE COMMUNI`fY, VIE WOULD LIKE TO STATE T.: r. MITUDE OF '.,_,KING BLAME IN ADVANCE ON A BUSINESS FOR THE ACTIONS OF pr,EV 07jS Owf -_pZ (--tX 1985 NO LESS) IS SL&CED,' DISCRIMINATOMY AND UN- CONSTITUMNAL. TG LI'rIIT THE RIORICS OF PEOPLE TO BENEFIT Fi2014 EARNING 1 Asi EQUITABLE LIVDG BECAUSE OF PRIOR PROBIMS DOES N92 JUSTIFY THE PHILOSOPHY TKAT T.JE ARE A DEhSOCRE!CY AND THAT PEOPLE ARE PRESUMM DMOCENT FIRST. WE SUPPORT SAM, Fill yAt� 0;y AND STAFF AND ASK THAT YOU CAREFt7t I,Y '.REVIEW A DECISION THAT SLX 'YEARS AGO WAS JUSTIFIED, BUT TODAY IS BIASED AND UNFOUNDZD. i c+,-i, t-p i name Signature Address TY1 c jk,t1.�t ; t�,,7 `� `� t t ;��!? � � `/� i l r'J'1'�'► ��yY_i- ! J �. �': �-� _ —_ IT u r "l • ` � ti Y � 's �' ",�,��� /%fir =�l� ��.��.d1��,�G��., 1 "� 7sCF t-Z r; fd• �. 7!7 .�jf -r. Ilfr ,,{ 1 ' '�,! ✓lT7•'jii/ � lt� �� % %i��rr F. ( iri; .l l.�rif� %I, wjc tr +l /_t r�� �'.� .l' September 11, 1991 Page r TO: City of Rancbo Cucamonga PROM: See undersigned FE: SAM'S PLACE NE THE UNDERSIGNED ARE FRIENDS AND /OR CUSTOIESRS OF SAM'S PLACE, 6620 CARNELIAN STRAP, RANCHO CUC.MNGP_, r ; *. WE STRW, --- r OPPOSE THE, LIMITATION Or HOURS THE CITY IS EMSING, ON SAM'S. AS BUSTY —P5S UAW AND RESIDENTS OF THE COM RMTY,-WE WOULD xuw TO .$TATE THE Ajr -TUDE OF PLACING BLAgE IN ADVANCE ON A BUSINESS Fra THE ACTIONS OF PREVIOUS OWNERS {AV 1985 NO LESS IS SLANTED,' D19CRJX[N 'CORY AMID UN- CONST::TIITIONAL. TO LIMIT THE RIGHTS OF PEOPLE TO BENEFIT FROM EARNING AN jspITABLv LIVING BECAUSE OF PRIOR PROBIRIS DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE PHILOSOPHY THAT' WE '-RE A' DEEIGti i{ACY''AN1M THAT PEOPLE ARE PRESUMED INNOCENT FIRST. TIE SUPPORT S.01q, Y' S FAMILY jjM SVM km ASF. THAT YOU L'AI.EFULLY :tEVIEt3 A DECISION THAT SIX YEARS AGO WAS , USTiFIED, BUT TODAY IS BIPSM) AND T- WOUNDED. Printed Name Signature ~Address °"_?;�� �. cc��ri. /.7�•J tlrl 7yhe /fi �tlfT tnr. Cry �L 7 !� C . nrd? i 5 September. 1,1, 1991 Page > . T0: City of Rancho Cucamonga FROli. See tuidereianed �1 RE SAM`S PLACE WE 1HE VVDERSIGNED ARE FRIENDS AND /OR CUSTOMERS OF SAM'S PLACE, 6620 CARNELIAN STREET,, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA. ,WE SY'RONGLY OPPOSE THE LIMITATION OF HOURS THE CITZ I:" IMPOSING ON SAY'S. AS BUSINESS OWNERS AND RESIDENTS OF THE C010MITY, WE WOULD LIKE TO STATE THE . ^TjjjjjDE OF PLACING. BLAME IN ADVANCE ON A BUSINESS FOR THr ACTIONS OF PREVIOUS OWNERS (IN 19$5 NO LESS) IS SLANTED, "DISCRIMINATORY AND UN- CONSTITUTIONAL. TO LIMIT THE RIMS OF PEOPLE TO BENEFIT FROM EARNING AN EkUITABLE LIVING BECAUSE OF PRIM PROBTLEMS DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE PHILOSCPFIY ULU 'eF- ARL A DEMOCRACZ AND THAT PEOPLE ARE PRES'r)ltED INNOCENT FIRST. WE SUPPORT SAM, WS FAMILY ,,M STAFF AND ASK ,,,LkT YOU *'AREFULLY REVIEW A DECISION THAT SIX YEARS AGO WAS JUSTIFIED, BUI!lTODAY IS BIASED AND UNFJUNDED. September 11, 1991 Page TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga FROM: See undersigned RE^ SAM'S PLACE WE THE UNDERSIGNED ARF FRIENDS AND /OR CUSTOMERS OF SAM'S PLACL,' 6620 STREET, kANCHO CL'CAMONGA, CA. WE STRONGLY OPPOSE THE LIMITATION OF HoT TFE; CITY IS IMPOSING ON SAM'S. AS BUSINESS OWNERS AND RESIDENTS OF THE COMMUNITY, WE WOULD LIKE TO STt 7E THE ATTITUDE: OF PLACING BMIM— IN ADVANCE ON A BUSINESS FOR THE ACTIONS O;F PREVIOUS OWNERS (IN 1935 NO LESS) IS SLANTED, DISCRIMINATOR_ AND UN- CONSTITUTIONAL. TO LIMIT THE RIGHTS OF PEOPLE TO BENEFIT FROM FFARNING AN EQUITABLE LIVING BECAUSE OF PRIOR PROBLEMS DOES NOT JUSTE'Y THE PHILOSOPHY THAT WE ARE A DEMOCRACT AND THAT PEOPLE PRE PRESbMED INNOCENT FIRST. WE SUPPORT SAM, HIS F&ffLY AND STAFF AND ASK THAT YOU CAREFULLY REVIEW A DECISION THAT SIX YEARS AGO I4AS JUSTIFIED, BUT TODAY IS BUSED AND UNFOUNDED. Printed Name Signature Address September 11, 1991 page- To: City of Rancho Cucamonga FROM: See undersigned RL: SAM'S PLACE � WE THE UNDERSIGNED ARE FRIENDS AND /OR CUSTO,.,4'j2S OF SAM'S PLACE, 6620 CARNELIAN STREET, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA WE STRONGLY`;DPPOSE THE LIMITATION OF LOt'RS THE CITY IS IMPOSING ON ,SAM'S. AS BUSINESS OWNERS AND RESIDENTS OF VZ COMMUNITY,, WE WOULD LIKE TO STN. -F THE ATTITUDE OF PLACING BLAME IN ADV&gCE ON A BUSINESS FOR THE ACTIONS OF PREVIOUS OWNERS (IN 1985 NO LESS) IS 'SLANTED: DISCRIMINATORY AND TM- CONSTITUTIONAL. TG LIMIT THE RIGRTS OF PEOPLE TO BENEFIT FROM EARNING AN EQUITABLE LIVING VMUSE OF PRIOR PROBLEMS DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE PHILOSOPHY THAT WE ARE A.DEMOCRAGI AND ULQT PEOPLE ARE PRESUMED INNOCENT HE SUPPORT SAM, HIS FABLZX AND STAFF AND tSK THAT YOU CAREP'JLLY REVIEW A DECISION TKAT SIX YEARS iiGO WAS JUSTIFIED :, BUT,,TODAT IS BIASEP AND UNFOUNDED Pri .nted Name Signature Address September 11, 1991 Page To: City of Paricho Cucamonga FROM- See undersigned RE: SAM'S PLACE 1WE M UNDERSIGNED ME FRIENDS AND/C)Il CUSTOMERS OF SAM'S PLACE, 6620 CARITELIPT STREET, r ,ANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA. jqE STr%ny OPPOSE THE LIMITATION OF HOURS THE CITY is imPosm ON SAM'S. As B,Ys =s owNERs Am RESIDENTS OF TO COMMUNITY, WE WOULD LIKE TC4`� T9TE THE ATTITUZ OF PLACING BLAME IN ADVANCE ON A BUSINESS FOR THE ACTIONS GF ,TzjTr)us OWNERS (m 1985 NO LESS) TS SLANTED, DISCRR=TORY AND UN CON,),,T°.,TIONAL. To LIMIT THE RIGHT,. OF PEOPLE TO, BENEFIT FROM EARNING'; ,aj EQUITABLF LIVING BECAUSE OF PRIOR PROBLEMS DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE PHILOSOPHY TRAT WE ARE A DEMOCRACY AND THAT PEOPLE ARE, --RFSWM INNOCENT FIRST. WE SUPPORT SAM, HIS FAMILY AND STAFF AND ASK T9-6T YOU CAPJ07-LY REVIEW A. DECISION TUAT SIX YEARS AGO WAS JUSTIFIEDt BUT TODAY IS BL'6M AND UNFOUll'ED- Printed Name Signature Address ,lI'af 'i L.;%S z- N Al li Ck 7 y September 11, 1991 Page T0: City of Rancho Cucamonga FROM: See uLdersigned RE: SAM'S PLACE WE THE UNDF?.SIGNED ARE FRIENDS AND /OR CUSTOMERS OF SAM'S PLACE, 6620 CARNELIAN STREET, RANCHO CUCAMONGA., CA. WE STRONGLY OPPOSE THE LIMITATION OF HOURS THE CITY IS IMPOSING ON SAM'S: AS BUSINESS OWNERS AND RESIDENTS OF TBE COMiUNITY, wFl WOULD LIKE TO STATE THE ATTITUDE Of PLACING BLAME IN ADVANCE ON A BUSINESS !OR THE ACTIONS OF PREVIOUS OWNERS (IN 1985 NO LESS) IS SLANTED, DISCJ,2IM�i. ORY AND UN- CONSTITUTIODLAL. TO LIMIT THE RIGITTS OF PEOPLE TO BENErIT FROM E&MMTG AN EQUITABLE LIVING BECAUSE OF PRIOR PROBLEMS DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE PHILOSOPHY TEAT WE AfM A DEMOCRACY AND THAT PEOPLE ARE PRESUMED INNOCENT FIRST. WE SUPPORT SAM, HIS FAMILY AND STAFF AND ASK THAT YOU CAREFULLY REVIEW A DECISION THAT SIX YEARS AGO WAS JUSTIFIED, BUT TODAY IS BIASED AND UNFOUNDED. Printed Name Signature Address September 11, 1991 Page TO. City of Rancho Cucamonga FROM. See undersigned RE: SAM'S PLACE WE THE UNDERSIGNED ARE FRIENDS AND /OR CUSTOMERS OF Wi41S PLaGE, 6620 CfiMLIAN STREET, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA. WE STRONGLY OPPOSE THE - IMITATION OF HOURS THE CITY IS IMPOSE ON SAM'S. AS BUSINESS OWNERS AND RESIDENTS OF THE CMIUNITY, 14B 140DID I=, TO STATE M ATTITUDE OF PLACING BLAME IN ADVANCE ON A BUSINESS FOR THE ACTIONS OF PRE,TIOUS OWNERS (IN 1985!,N0 lE.SS) IS SLANTED, DISCRIM=ORY ANP UN- CONSTITUTIONAL. TO LIMIT THE RIGHTS OF POPLE TO BENEFIT FROM1EAM ING AN EQUITABLE LIVING BECAUSE OF HUOR PROBLEMS DOES NM, JUSTIMe THE PHT.LOSOPHY THAT WE ARE A DEMOCRArf AND THAT PEOPLE ARE D°.ES WP INNOCENT FIRST, WE SUPPORT SAM, MS FAMILY Alw STAFF AND tuW THAT YOU CAREFULIX REV191 A DECISION THAT SIY- YEARS AGO WAS JUSTIFIED, BUT TODAY IS BIASER AND UNFOUNDED. '0. -intern Nama Sienature Address S"eptembF_r 11, 1991 Page TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga FROM: See tmdersigned > RE, SAM'S PLACEiI WE THE TJNDEkSIGNrM ARE FRIENDS AMID /OR CUSTOMERS OF SAM'S PLACE, 6620 CARNFVL T I STREET, CUCQNDNGA, CA. WE STRONGLY OPPOSE THE LIMITATION OF HOURS THE CITY IS IMPOSING ON SAM'S. AS BUSINESS OTZMS AND RESIDENTS � OF THE COMMUNITY, WE WOULD LIKE TO ' STATE THE ATTITUDE OF PLACT.NG BLAME IN ADVANCE ON A BUSINESS FOR THE ACTIONS OF PREVIOUS OWNERS (IN 1985 NO LESS) IS SLANTED, DISCRIMINATORY AND UN- COPISTITUTIONAL. TO LIhffT THE RIGHTS Os PEOi'LE TO BENEFIT FROM FARNIN AN EQUITABLE LIVING BECAUSE OF PRIOR PROBLEMS DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE PHILOSOPHY THAT WE ARE A DEMOCRACY AMID THAT PEOPLE ARE PRESUMIED INNOCENT FIRST. 1,1E SUPPORT SAM, ins FAMILX AND STAFF AMID ASK THAT Jou CARF;FfT Y REV1Et+T A DECISION THAT SIX YEARS AGO WAS JUSTIFIED, BUT TODAY IS BIASED AMID t?TFOUNDED. rcinted Name Signature Address c. at r ,. e f s % ! � ( �4lCG�; t I. L��1 i u t (ol 762 llb'V L5E,' / %/ tern (t !'fit f.{ :� `— 4-t k Otti ";� �i l l i .,•,t_�... .�`!�. /� Ci %'l ii � %�Li1,7 -Lr�'i.. Seutember 11, 1991 rage TO; City of Rancho Cucamonga FROM: See i ndersigned RE: SAM'S PLACE WE THE UNDERSIGNED ARE m=s AND /OR CUSTOMERS OF sm, s PLACE, 6620 LARMLIAN STREET, RANCHO GUC:,%, DINGA, CA. WE STRONGLY OPPOSE ME, maTATIOAT !fir' FOURS THE CITY IS IMPOSY'VG ON SAM'S. AS BUSINESS OWNERS AND RESIDENTS OF ` CO:FNIUNITY, WE WOULD LIKE TO STATE THE ATTITUDE OF PLACING BLAME IN ADVME ON A BUSINESS FOR THE ACTIONS OF PREVIOUS OWNERS (IN 1985 NO LESS) IS SLANTED, DISCRIMINATORY AND UN- CONSTITUTIONAL. TO LIMIT THE RIMS OF PEOPIX TO BENEFIT FROM EARNING AN EQUITABLE LIV110 BECAUSF OF PRIOR PROB;.,EMS;DOES NOT JUSTIFY TFM PHFT,OSOPHY THAT WE ARE A DEMOCRACY AND THAT PEOPLE AitctPRESUMED INNOCENT FIRST. id SUPPORT SAM, HIS FAMILY AND STAFF AND ASK THAT Y'OU CrRFTULLY REFSEW A DECISION THAT SIX YEARS AGO WAS JUSTIFD, BUT TODAY ' BzASID AND UNFOUNDED. IL' Printed Name Signature Address Azpa A. �� � 1 i� . �'-L•' 1 J! �.�. ,�' �it?� ���'4 X37 ��' {�N,'�/tr ����y1 /C) < � i y i h �k=9 � 'ZVl I _! Kt-7 �r?� %lSc_iu✓�_r_ n s — S t .� r•J`���.� �L'j� Sri • �Iliulwlf X777 r l �/��-f^�l� ".�i.lf� J ' September 17.�, 1991 Page T0: City of Rancho Cucamonga FROM: See undersigned RE: SAM'S PLACE WE THL UNDMSIGNED ARE FRIENDS Alo /OR CUSTOMERS OF SAM'S PLACE, 6620 CARNELIAN STREET, RAATCHO CL'CAMONGA, CA. WE STRONGLY OPPOSE THE LIMITATION OF HOURS THE CITY IS IMPOSING ON SAM'S. AS BUSINESS OWNERS ,'ND RESIDENTS OF THE COMMUNITY, WE WOULD LIKE TO STATE THE ATTITUDE OF PLACING BLAME IN ADVANCE ON A BUSINESS FOR THE ACTIO14S OF PREVIOUS OWNERS (IN 1985 NO LESS) IS SLANTED, DISCRIMINATORY AND UN- CONSTITUTIONAL. TO LIMIT TyiE RIGHTS OF PEOPLE TO BENEFIT FROM EAMUNG AN EQUITABLE LIVING BECAUSR OF PRIOR PROSLE<IS DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE 17=SOPHY THAT WE ARE A DEMOCRACY AND THAT PEOPLE ARE PRESUMED INNOCENT FIRST. WE SUPPORT SAM, iiIS FAMILY AND STAFF AND ASK THAT YOU CAREFULLY REVIEV A'/ DECISION THAT SIX YEARS AGO WAS JUSTIFIED, BUT TODAY IS BIASED AND UNFOUNDED. Printed Name Signature I Address Sep n'ler 11, 1991 Page To: city of Ranch:) Cucamonga 'JROff: See 'undersigned RE: SAM'S PLACE WE IM UNDERSIGNED ARE FRIMS AND/OR CUSTOMERS OF s&,Es PLACE, 66,90, CARNELIAN Ste, RANCHO CUCAMNG,i, C.A. WE STRONGLY OPPOSE THE L.LMITATION Ok' HOURS - Tpx CITY is IMPOSING ON SAM'S. AS BUSINESS %, RS AND RESIMTS OF THE COMMUNITY, WE WOULD LIKE TO MM THE ATTITUDE OF p-,ACM BLAF, IN ADVANCE ON A BUSINESS FOR THE ACTION 'S OF ppEnoUs ONNaL,3 (IN 1985 ND :MSS) IS '55WrT-M,'DISCRIlMaMRY MM UK CONSTITUTIGNAL. TO LIMIT THE RIMS OF PEOPLE TO BENMI: FROM EARNING AN EQUITABLE LIVING BECAUSE OF Pima PROBLEMS DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE PHnDsopHy THAT WE ARE' A DE KMA-CY AND THAT PEOPLE ARE PRESUMED Il"NOCENT FIPST. 11; 1, WE SUPPORT SAM, HIS FAMILY AND STAFF AND AM THAT YOU CA- MMy RMEW & DECISION THAT SIX YE,4RS AGO WAS JUSTIPIED, BUT TODA7' X.IT:BIASED Alit) UNFOLMED. Printed Name Signature Address I, 11RA 4 ,4 Jz - Ll I, 11RA 4 ,4 September 11, 1991 Page TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga FROM: gee undersigned RE: SAM'S PLACE WE THE UNDERSIGNED ARE FRIENDS W /OR CUSTUM S OF SAM'S PLACE, 6620 CARNELIAN STREET, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA. WE STRONGLY OPPt'SB THE LIMITATION OF dOURS THE CITY IS IMPOSING ON SEWS. AS BUSINESS OTOMS AND RESIDENTS OF WE COMM INITY, UE WOULD ."'M TO ST-ATE THE ATTITUDE Ole PLACING .BLAME IN ADVANCE ON A BUSINESS FOR THE ACTIONS OF PREVIOUS NNERS (IN 1985 NO LESS) IS SLANCi�-,N_ DISCRI11INATORY AND IN- CONSTITL'TIONAL. TO LIMIT THE RIGHTS OF PEOPLE TO .-SIT FROM EARNING APT EQUITABLE LIVING BECAUSE OF PRIOR PROBLEMS DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE PHILOSOPHY THAT WE ARE A DEMOCRACY AMID THAT PEOPLE ARE PRESUMED INNOCENT FIRST. 47E ,UPI'ORT SAM, HIS FAMII,Y AND STAB AND ASK THAT YOt} ARFti3LLY REVIEW A D =310N THAT SU YEARS AGO WAS JUSTIFIED, BUT TODAY IS BIASED AND UNFOUNDED. Printed Name Signature Address CXe .L C�v�s�l�trrrlee plak cawivn _% ✓�� T?r � �.+i•I_ {L�� C / ] �/5�1. Ftr '�j �' 1... / .� �? J• .'1 � � }L"'1 _ Jr I7 LLAlCe�'� .IiFI 1 {.�5 A it /��l't' �'' ta'u' ►S ''_,lrn 'ti t* 1 � t�1 1 S ''ice .,�'�'' ' � y ') ',�,' "-.7' JW � \L � ?fit t 2�t � �'z4 y ��� ►�`'��� .� � �" � i��l�` Tom. c.;� EJ+✓ -4t L �i2 �J. L = �:a f(F:su . H3Qt_ tow 0701 -02 o SEPTEMBER 11, 1991 P.C. AGE"A . { 4 of 13 } teptember 11, 1991 Page g TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga FROM: See undersigned RE: SAM'S PLACE WE T 7E UNDERSIGNED ARE FRIENDS AND /OR CUST0Z;r3LS OF SAM'S PLACE, 6620 (',ARNELIAN STREET, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA. 14E STRONGLY OPPOSE THE LIMITATION OF HOURS THE CITY IS IMPOSING ON SAM'S. AS BUSINESS OWNERS AND RESIDENTS OF THE COMMUNITY, WE WgULD LIKE TO STATE THE ATTITUDE OF PLACING BLAME IN ADVANCE ON A BUSINESS FOR THE ACTIONS OF PREVIOUS OWNERS (IN 1985 NO LESS) IS SLANTED, DISMMMaTORY AND UN- CONSTITUTIONAL. TO LIMIT THE RIGHTS OF PEOXS TO BENEFIT FROM EARNING AN EQUITABLE LIVING ?°CNUSE OF PRIOR PROBLEMS,:DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE PHILOSOPHY THAT WE ARE A DEMOCRACY AND THAT PEOPLE ARE PRFSUMED INNOCENT FIRST. WE SUPPORT SAM, HIS FAMILY AND STAFF AND ASK THAT YOU CAREFULLY REVIEW A DECISION THAT_ SIX YEARS AGO WAS JUSTIFIED, BUT TODAY IS BIASED AND UNFOUNDED- Printed Name Signature Address Sbptember 11, 1991 Page TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga I; FROM: See undersigned RE. SAM'S PLACE WE THE UNDERSIGNED ARE FRIENDS AND /OR CUSTOMERS OF SAM'S PLACE, 6620 CARNF1r. STREET, B_ANCBO CU":ONGA, CA. WE S70NGLY OPPOSE THE LIMITATION OF HOURS 7HE CITY IS IMPOSING ON SAM'S, 1 AS BUSINESS OWNERS AND RESIDENTS OF THE COMMUNITY, WE WOULD LIKE TO STATE f THE ATTITUDE OF PLACING BLAME IN ADVANCE ON A BUSINESS FOR THE ACTIONS OI,._ PREVIOUS OWNERS (?N 1985 NO LESS) IS SLANTED, DISCRIMINATORY AND:UN CONSTITUTIONAL. TO LIMIT THE RIGHTS OF PEOPLE TO BENEFIT FROM MRNING AN EQUITABLE LIVING BECAUSE OF PR 6P, PROBLEMS DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE PHILOSOPHY TUAT WE ARE A DEMOCRACY AND THAT PEON AFF PRESUME INNOCENT FIRST. WE SUPPORT SL%, HIS FAMILY AND STAFF AND ASK THAT YOU CAREFULLY REVIEW' A P,ECISION THAT SIX YEARS AGO WAS JUSTIFIED.,) BUT TODAY IS BIASED AND UNL'OUND,4M. September 11, 1991 Page TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga FR011, See undersigned RE: SAM'S PLACE WE THE UNDERSIGNM A'tE FRIENDS AND /OR CUSTOMERS OF Sl' "S PLACE, 6620 CARNRL.IAij STREET, RANCHO CUCAM)NGA, CA. WE STRONGLY OPPOSE THE LIMITATION OF HOURS THE CITY IS I14POSING ON SAM'S. AS BUSINESS OWNERS AND RESIDENTS OF THE COkMMITY, WE WOULD LIKE TO STATE THE ATTITUDE OF PLACING BLAME IN ADVANCE ON A BUSINESS FOR THE ACTIONS OF PR^VIOUS OWNERS (IN 1985 NO LESS) IS SLANTED, DISCRIMINATORY AND UN- CON,,g TUTIONAL. TO I;Il4IT THE RIGHTS OF PEOPLE TO BENEFIT FROM EARNING AN EQUITABLE LIVING BECAUSE OF PRIOR PROBLEMS DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE PHILOSvr3iY THAT WE ARE A DEMOCRACY AND THAT PEOPLE ARE PRESUMED INNOCENT FIRST. WE SUPPORT SAM, HIS FAMILY AND STAFF AND ASK THAT YOU CAREFULLY REVIEW A DECISION THAT SIX YEARS AGO WAS JUSTIFIED, BUT TODAY IS BIASED MID UNFOUNDED. Printed Name Signature 11 Address 41 September ?T, 1991 Page T00: City of Rancho Cucamonga FROM: See undersignel RE: SAM'S PLACE WE THE UNDFRSIGNED ARE F_-&DS AND /OR CUSTOMERS I)F SAM IS PLACE, 6620 CARNELIAN STRUT, MU4910 CUCAMONGA, CA. WE STRONGLY OPPOSE THE LIMITATION OF HOURS THE CITY IS IMPOSING ON SAM'S. AS BUSINESS OWNERS AND RESIDENT:: OF THE COMMUNITY, WE WOULD LIKE TO STATE THE ATTITUDE OF PLACING Broom IN PTNVANCE ON A BUSINESS FOR THE ACTI _NS OF PREVIOUS OWNERS (IN 1385 NO LESS) IS SLANTED, DISCP.]l=ORY AND UN- CONSTITUTIONAL. TO LIMIT THE RIGHTS OF I;APLE TO BENEFIT FROM EARNING `''AN EQUITABLE LIVING BECAUSE OF PRIOR PROBLEMS DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE PHILOSOPIff TffAT WE ARE A DEMOCRACY AND THAT PEOPLE ARE PRESUMED INNOCENT FIRST. WE SUPPORT SAM, HIS FAMILY AZID STAFF AND ASK THAT YOU CAREFULLY REVIEW A DECISION THAT SIX YEARS AGO [jAS JU8TIFIF.D, BUT TODAY IS BIASLD AND UNFOMED. Printed Name Sigmture :address September 11, 1991 Page T0: City of Rancho Cucamonga FROM: See undersigned RE: SAM'S PLACE WE THE UNDERSIGNED ARE FRIENDS AND /OR CUSTOMERS OF SAM'S PLACE, 6620 CARWLIAN STREET, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA. WE STRONGLY OPPOSE THE LIIffTATION OF HOURS THE CITY IS IMPOSING ON SAM'S. AS BUSINESS OWNERS AND RESIDENTS OF THE COMMUNITY, WE 1%10',---) 'LIKE TO STATE THE ATTITUDE OF PLACING BLAME IN ADVANCE ON A BUSINESS FOR THE ACTIONS OF PREVIOUS OWNERS (IN 1985 NO LESS) IS SLANTED,' DISCRIMIN3ATORY AND UN- CONSTITUTIONAL. TO LIMIT THE RIGHTS OF PEOPLE TO BENEFIT FROM EARNING AN EQUITABLE LIVING BECAUSE OF PRIOR PROBLEMS DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE PHI-OSOPHY. THAT WE ARE A DEMOCRACY AND THAT PEOPLE ARE PRESUMED INNOCENT FIRST. WE SUPPORT SAM, HIS FAEILy AND STAFF AND ASS =C YOU CAREFULLY REVIE4 A DECISION THAT SIX YEARS AGO WAS JUSTIFIED,. BUT DAY IS BIASED AND UNFOUNDED. Printed Name Signature Address t11t9Pt4r 40 210 (Ohll V ' — - \ \,t� L��� t12 �c �z�4 S/ eac2. 13 :��. - l am Cg �,� ;' � � 9A Ace /7 071 (�; ktf , R1; lI S-t 30 September 11, 1991 Page TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga FROM: See undersigned PSI: SAM'S PLACE WE THE UNDmsIGNED ARE FRIENDS AND /OR CUSTOMERS OF SAM'S PLACE, 6620 CARNELIAN STREET, P,41= CUCAMONGA, CA. WE STRONGL2. OPPOSE THE LIMITATION OF HOURS THE CITY IS IMPOSING ON SAM'S. AS BUSINESS OWNERS AND RESIDENTS Or THE COMMUNITY, WE WOULD LIKE TO STATE THE MITUDE OF PLACING BLAME IN ADVANCE ON A BUSINESS FOR TO ACTIONS OF PRE`IIOUS OWNERS (IN 1985 NO LESS; IS SLANTED, DISCRIMINATORY AND UN- CONSTITUTIONAL. TO LIMIT THE RIGHTS OF PEOPLE TO BENEFIT FROM EARNING AN EQUITABLE LIVING BECAUSE OF PRIOR PROBLEMS DOES NOT JliSTIFY THE PHILOSOPHY THAT WE ARE A DMECRACY AND THAT PEOPLE. ARE PRESUMED INNOCENT FIRST. WE SUPPORT SAM, HIS FAMILY AND STAFF AND ASK THAT YOU CAREFULLY RE6iEW A DECISION THAT SIX YEARS AGO WAS JUSTIFIED, BUT TODAY IS BIASED AND UNFOUNDED. September 11, 1991 Page TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga FROM: See undersigned RE: SAM'S PLACE WE THE UNDERSIGNED ARE FRIENDS AND /OR CUSTOMERS OF SAM'S PLACE, 6620 CARNELIAN . STR,T, RANaM CUCAMONGA,.CA. WE STRONGLY OPPOSE THE LIMITATION OF HOURS THE CITY IS IMPOSING ON SAM'S. AS BUSINESS OWNERS AND RESIDENTS OF TIC COMMUNITY, WE WOULD LIKE TO STATE THE ATTITUDE OF PLACING BLAME TN ADVANCE ON A BUSINESS FOR THE ACTIONS OF 1 PREVIOUS OWNERS (IN 1985 NO LESS) IS SLANTED, DISCRIMTNATORY AND UN- CONSTITUTIONAL. TO LIMIT THE RIGHTS OF PEOPLE TO BENEFIT FROM EARNING AN EQUITABLE LIVING BECAUSE OF PRIOR PROBLEMS DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE PHrI,OSOPHY THAT WE ARE A DEMOCRACY AND MAT PEOPLE ARE PRESUMED INNOCENT FIRST. WE SUPPORT SA:•f, HIS FAMILX AMID STAFF AND ASR THAT YOU CARRY REVIEW A DECISION THAT SIX YEARS AGO WAS JUSTIFIED, BUT TODAY IS BIASED AND UNFOUNDED. V —A Signature I Address September 11, 1991 TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga FROM: See undersigned RE: SAM'S PLACE Page WE THE UNDERSIGNED ARE FRIENDS AND /OR CUSTOMERS OF SAM'S PLACE, 6620 CARNELIANT STREET, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA. WE STRONGLY OPPOSE Tim LIMITATION OF HOURS THE CITY IS nwPOSlNG ON SAM'S. AS BUSINESS OWNERS AND RESIDENTS OF THE COMMUNITY WE WOULD LIKE TO STATE THE ATTITUDE OF PLACING BLAME IN ADVANCE ON A BUSINESS FOR THE ACTIONS OF PREVIOUS OWNE2t S (IN 1985 NO LESS) IS SLANTFD, DISCRTMA r'ORY AND UN- CONSTITUTIONAL. TO LIMIT THE'; RIGHTS OF PEOPLE TO BENEFIT FROM EARRING AN EQUITABLE LIVING BECAUSE OF PRIOR PROBLEMS DOES NOT JU'STI'FY T11E PHILOSOPHY THAT WE ARE A DEMOCRACY AND THAT PEOPLE ARE PRESUMED INNOCENT FIRST. WE SUPrORT SAM, HIS FAMILY AND STAFF AND ASK THAT YOU CAREFULLY REVIEW A DECISION THAT SIX YEARS AGO WAS JUSTIFIED, BUT TODAY IS BIASED AND UNFOUNDED. ` September 11, 1991 Page d2 TO: City or Rancho Cucamonga FROM: See tmdersigned RE: SAM'S PLACE WE THE UNDERSIGNED ARE FRIENDS AND /OR CUSTOMERS OF SAM'S PLACE, 6620 CARNELIAN STREET, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA. WE STRONGLY OPPOSE THE LIMITATION OF HOURS THE CITY TS IMPOSING ON SAM'S. AS BUSINESS OWNERS AND RESIDENTS OF THE COMMUNITY, WE WOULD LIKE TO STATE THE ATTITUDE OF PLACING BLAME IN ADVAME ON A BUSINESS FOR THE ACTIONS OF PREVIOUS OWNERS (IN 1985 NO LES ) IS SLOTEU, DISCRIMINATORY AND UN- CONSTITUTIONAL. TO LIMIT THE n6MS OF PEOPLE TO BENEFIT FROM EARNING AN EQUITABLE LIVING BECADSE OF PRIOR PROBLEMS 'DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE PHILOSOPHY THAT WE ARE A DEMOCRACY AND THAT PEOPLE ARE PRESUMED INNOCENT`' FIRST. WE SUPPORT SAM, HIS FAMILY AND STAFF AND ASK THAT YOLT CAREFULLY XMTTEW A DECISION THAT SIX YEARS AGO WAS RTSTIFIED, BUT TODAY IS BIASED N, POUNDED. Printed Name Signature Address September 11, 1991. Page T0: City of Rancho Cucamonga FROM: See undersigned RE: SAM'S P1210E WE THE UNDERSIGNED ARE FRIENDS AND/OR CUSTOMMS OF SAM'S PLACE, 6620 CARNELIAN STREET, R.MUM CUCAMONGA, CA. WE STRONGLY OPPOSE THE LIMITATION OF HOURS THE CITY IS lMPCSING ON SAMIS. AS BUSINESS OWNERS AND TMIDENTS OF THE COMMUNITY, WE WOULD LIKE TO STATE THE ATTItJDE OF PLACING BLAME IN ADVANCE ON A BUSINESS FOR THE ACTIONS OF PREVIOUS OWNERS (IN 1985 NO LESS) IS SLANTED, DISCRIM]NATORY'AND UN- CONSTITUTIONAL. TO Lr.IT THE RIGHTS OF PEOPLE TO BENEFIT FROM EARNING AN EQUITABLE LIVING BECAUSE OF PRIOR PROBLEMS DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE PHILOSOPHY THAT WE ARE A DEMOC'2ACY AND THAT PEOPLE ARE PRESUMED INNOCENT FIRST. WE SUPPORT SAM, HIS FAMILY AM STAFF AND ASK THAT YQU CAREFULLY REVIEW A D'ECTSION THAT SIX YEARS AGO WAS JUSTIFIED, BUT TODAY IS BIASED AND UNFOUNDED. Printed Name Signature — Address _l ��r�c � 1 Gtr; ~a •� �- C-yv I( 'F2"§z, K6srbll ^, ^.•� ��//'':•� 'l `'_' n (' Q" 972 7 GRv ✓w, t�1� -tl�r $egtei ber Il , 1991 j , Page TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga FROM: See undersigned RE: SAM'S PLACE WE THE UNDERSIGNED ARE FRIENDS AND /OR CUSTOMERS OF SAM`S PLACE, 6620 CARNELIAN STREET, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA. WE STRONGLY OPPOSE THE LIMITATION OF HOURS THE CITY IS IMPOSING 09 SAM'S. AS BUSINESS OWNERS tM RESIDENTS OF THE COMMUNITY, WE ROULD LIKE TO STATE THE ATTITUDE OF PLACM BLAME IN ADVANCE ON A BUSINESS FOR THE ACTIONS OF ?REVIOUS OWNERS (IN 1955 NO LESS) IS SLANTED,'DISCRIMINATORY AR') UN- wNSTITUTIONAL. TO LIMI- THE RIGHTS OF PEOPLE TO BENEFI''L FROM EARNING AN EQUITABLE LIVING BECAUSE OF PRIOR PROBLEMS DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE pMDSOPHY'THAT WE ARE A DEMOCRACY AM THAT PEOPLE ARE PgESU W INNOCENT FIRST. WE SUPPORT SAM, HIS FAMILY AND ITAFF AND ASK THAT YOU CAREFULLY REVIEW A DECISION THAT SIX YEARS AGO WAS JUSTIFIED, BUT TODAY IS BIASED. AM UNFOUNDED. Printed Name Signature Address Ile September 11, 1991 Page T0: City of Rancho Cucamonga FROM: See undersigned t RE: SAM`S PLACE WE THE UNDERSIGNED ARE FRIENDS AND /OR CUSTOMERS OF SAM'S PLACE, 6620 CARN'LMW STREET, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA. WE STRONGLY OPPOSE THE LIMITATION OF HOURS THE CITY IS IMPOSING ON SAM'S. AS BUSINESS 014NERS AND RESIDENTS OP THE COMMUNITY, WE WOTT; n -,TKE TO STATE THE ATTITUDE OF PLACING BLAME IN ADVANCE ON A BUSINESS FOR THE ACTIONS OF PREVIOUS OWNERS (IN 1985 NO LESS) IS SLANTED,' DISCRIMINATORY AND UN- CONSTITUTIONAL. TO LIMIT THE RIGHTS OF PEOPL-, TO BENEFIT FROM EARNING AN ,,SUITABLE LIVING BECAUSE OF PRIOR PROBLEMS DOES NOT JUSTIrY THE PHILOSOPHY THAT WE ARE A DEMOCRACY AND THAT PEOPLE ARE Pi'.ESUMED INNOCENT FIRST. WE SUPPORT SAM, US FAMILY AND STAFF AND'ASK THAT YOU CAREFULLY REVIEW' A DECISION THAT SIX YEARS AGO WAS JUSTIFIED, BUT TODAY IS BIASED AND UNFOUNDED. Printed Name Signature Addres.; I .1�..i1 �/•!^1'�..i }i 1� --..t Y. .i �l -f'.Y �a a��.trrj.l,L,T.•i! !ri �i ry _�i. -�j°�— % :i �/t �t� L -- September 11, 1991 Page t0: City of Rancho Cucamonga FROM: See undersigned RE: SDI's PLACE [vT, THE L>'N-DERSIGNED ARE FRTajDS A.VD /OR CU5TONIERS 0. SAM'S PLACE, 6620 CAR_NMAN STREET, RANCHO CUCAMO \'GA, CA. WE STRONGLY OPPOSE THE LIPLITATIJN OF HOURS THE CITY IS I`IPOSING GN 5.Lgls. AS BUS OjgNrRS AND RESIDENTS OF THE C01`L`IUNITY, IvE WOUISr LIKE TO STATE UM ATTITUDE OF PLACING BL*IE IN ADVANCE ON A RUSVESS FOR THE ACTIONS OF PF,EVIOUS OIjMS (IY 1955 ;;0 LESS) IS SL LNTED, DISCRIMINATORY AND UN- i-tiSTITUTIONAL. TO Lr-fIT THE RIGHTS OF PEOPLE; TO BENEFIT FROM EARN Ml A_, EQTJITABLE LIVIhr, BECACSE OF PRIOR PROBLEMS DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE PHILOSOPHY THAT WE ARE A DEMOCRACY AND THAT PEOPLE ARE PRESU.iED INN'QCEN FIRST. k-E SUPPORT SA�l' HIS FA-ffLY ADD STAFF AND ASK TIiAT YOU CAREFULLY IL�tiIEty` a PFCISIODi THAT SIX YF_An.S AGO JAS JUSTIFIED, BUT TODAY I5 BIASED AMID UTGEOL �iTJ�. Printed NP-me Signature Address .� s, ._ f� � .,'_� Et < .z r• Ct `,_.�Z{, �d'7 /G �'M,�,,'li[1dvz�v�?i' �� Ap- T � i �iA.F.DIE' ' September 11, 1991 Page T0: City of Ranchc Cucamonga .=ROP1: See undersigned RE: MV S PLACE WE THE LNDERSTGNED ARE FRIENDS _kND /OR CUSMERS OF SAi'S PLACE, 6620 CAR-NMIAN STREET, RANMO CUCAMONGA, CA. WE STRONGLY OPPOSE ME LLvLCTATION OF HOURS THE CITY IS IMPOSISG ION, SMI S. AS BUSI?NrSS O(jWMS AND RESIDENTS OF THE COM1UNTlY, WE TiOULD LIKE To STATE THE ATTITUDE OF PT kC2\G BLAME Pi ADVP. CE ON A BUSI`ESS FOR THE ACTIONS OF Pm,IDL`S OWNERS (ICI 1 985 via Lr-' S) xS SLMNTED, DISCRD11MORY MD UN- CONSTITGTIONAL. TO LD[IT THE RIGHTS OF PEOPLE TO BENEFIT FROM EARNING & EQUITABLE LIVING BE :173E OF PRIOR PROBLMLS DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE PHILOSOPHY THAT 14E ARE A DFIM ACX AND THAT PEOPLE ARE PRESUMED INNOCEN1 FIRST. WE SUPPORT SA,, HIS r,,NE .Y AND STAFF AiD ASK MkT YOU CAREFULLY °:EVIEW 3 DECISION THAT SIX YEARS AGO WAS JUSTIFIED, BUT TOP:1Y I5 BIASED AND L`t�OL-T'M.. xT.— Signature Address ' 3egtember 11, 1991 Page i G'tv of Rancho Cuca+onga -?OM: See undersigned RE: SAM'S PLACE :dE THE UNDERSIG^_NED ARE FRI&,D9 AND /OR CUSTOMERS OF SAM'S PLACE, 6620 CARNELLAN STREET, RANCHO CUCANDN'GA, CA. WE STRONGLY OPPOSE THE LU11TATION )F HOURS THE CITY IS IMPOSING ON SAM'S. aS BUSINESS 0lqNERS AND RESID&NES OF THE CMITI ITY, WE WOULD LIKE TO STATE UM ATTITUDE OF PLACIJG bLAME I-NT ADVANCE ON A 3USIVESS FOR THE ACTIONS OF PREVIOUS OWNERS (IN 1985 NO LESS) IS ST .•t4TED, DISCRIPIINATORY AND UM- CONSTITUTIONAL. TO LIMIT THE RIGHTS OF PEOPLE TO BENEFIT FROM EARNING Sig EQUITABLE LIVING BECAUSE OF PRIOR PROBMAS DOES NOT JUSTIFY S51E PHILOSOPHY THAT WE ARE A DEMOCRACY AND THAT PEOPLE ARE PRESUNID:INNOCENT FIRST. [dE SUPPORT SAM, HIS : k IILY AND STAFF AND ASK THAT YOU CAREFULLY REVIFT? A DECISION THAT SIX YEARS AGO WAS JUSTIFIED, BUT TODAY IS',SIASED AND UNFOL.'DED. Printed Nam Signature Address l ►�� cz e ye S O 'R 106 S Y b�/Evu 1 � ' be #qz- September 11, 1991 bage TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga rROM: See undersigned RE: SAM'S PLACE --E ThN UNDERSIGNED ARE FRIENDS AND /OR CUSTOMERS OF SAM`S PLACE, E620 CARNELIAN STREET, R.4gCHO CUCAMCrtiGA, CA. WE STRONGLY OPPOSE IHE LIMITATION OF HOURS THE CITY IS IMPOSING ON SAM'S. _fS BUSINESS OWNERS AIL,D RESIDENTS OF THE COMrnJNITY, WE WOULD LIKE TO STATE THE ATTITUDE OF PLACLVG BLAME IN ADVANCE ON A PUSI`iESS FOR THE ACTIONS OP PREVIOUS OWNERS (IN 1985 NO LESS) IS u ANTED, DIX- RIMIN TORY AND UN CONSTITUZION -4L. TO LIMIT THE RIGHTS OF OEOPLE TO BENEFIT FROM EAEL'viNG AN EQUITABLE LIVING BECAUSE OF PRIOR PROB,,EMS DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE PHILOSOPHY THAT WE ARE A DEMOCRACY AND THAT PEOPLE ARE PRESUMED lNi',TOCl--VT FIRST. WE SUPPORT SAM, HIS F3MIILY AND STAFF A13D ASK JMT YOU CAREFGLLY REVTEit A DECISION THAT SIX YEARS AGO 14AS JUSTIFIFE, BUT TODAY IS BIA; 7 AND`-[JNFOLTZTtDED. Printed Name Si gnattre Address n, , . , r F loo . nj'n,,.,`.J rl 00. U,, a S 7 3? 4 Cr, n ✓ C,, v a IC J r2 As !, i - � ! ��.. �I � Imo' /iJ ✓N Y`I'a' V�C� �• 1 nr► 4-(-, y f, �QCcI/2°tn> e GtI: iC 7 KIP September 11, 1991 Page_ o: City of Rancho Cucaron;a FROr: See undersigned RE: SAM'S PLACE 'WE THE UNDERSIGNED ARE MENDS ANL D /OR'G[iSTO'iERS OF SAM'S PLACE, 6620 CARNELIAN STREET, RANCHO CUCAL°'' NW, CA. WE STROIJGLY-OPPOSE L E LIMITATION OF HOURS THE CITY IS IHPOSI': -N -WVS. AS BUSINESS OT +T�EEo A� R SID rLS Of' Tf� COMMUi-jTY, WE WOULD LIKE TO STYE THE ATTITUDE C,,? PL•ACI\G.7jTAME PI ADVANCE CN A BUSTtiESS FOR 'II ACTIONS 0? PR..VIOUS OTTIMS (N 1985 NO LESS) IS SLANTED, i)ISCRIIiINATORY AND, TII3 CONSTITUTIONAL- TO LIMIT THE RIGHTS OF PEOPLE TO t3Et4EFIT z'ROlt EAtNIr . AN EQUITABLE LIVI?�G EECAUSE OF PRIOR PR)BLEMS DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE PHILOSOPHY TFLAT ;?E APM A DE"?rMCY MD THAT PEOPLE ARE PP.ESUMED iINj OCE_ -NT FIRST. t•" SUPPORT SkM, HIS FAQ of ANU STAFF AN K LgAT YOt? CAREFULLY REVIEty A CISION THAT SIX YEARS ?GO WAS JUSTIFIED, BUi TODAY IS BIASED AND 'UNFOUNDED. September 11 1991 Page T0: City of Rancho Cucamonga FROM: See-undersigned RE: SAM'S PLACL WE THE UiWSRSIG_NM ARE FRIENDS ACID /OR CUSTOMERS OF SAL-I'S PLACE, 6620 CAPNELIAN STREET, RANCHO CUCAMCI-�GA, CA. WE STRONGLY OPPOSE THE LIMITATION OF HOURS THE CITY IS IMPOSING ON SAWS. AS BUSINESS OWNERS Ati-D RESIDENTS OF THE COiklb -' QTY, WE WOULD LIKE TO STATE THE ATTITUDE OF PLACING BLAIME IN ADVA-CE ON A BUSINESS FOR THE ACTIONS OF PPEVIoUS OTItiERS (IN 1985 Z LESS) IS ST-ANTED, DISCRDIINATORY AND UN-� CONSTITUTIONAL. TO LIN,TT THE RIGHTS OF PEOPLE TO BENEFIT FROM EARNING AN EQUITABLE LIv7NG BECAUSE OF PRTOR PROBLEMS DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE PHILOSOPHY THAT WE ARE A D' IOC?'kCY AND THAT PEOPLE ARE PF,ESUMED INNOCENT FIRST. WE SUPPORT SAtl, HIS F_ANUlf ti� ,rrt.FF AND ASK = YOU CAREFLLLY REVIEW A DECISION THAT SIX YEARS AGO WAS JUSTIFIED, BUT TODAY IS BIASED AND UNTO ZZED. Printed Na. .a Signature Address 4_111ay1 }�l�olr �/) r�5'14� %t At AA-- 9 ,A,'-w1AA j ! "'b'A MICILO w ILI G �s 1 � irk• � w +J +�� 1 � r - I —September 11, 1991 ;age .�0: City of Rancho Cucamonga FROM: See undersigned RE: SAM'S PLACE �� 7".— UNDERSIZED ARE FRIENDS A QD CR CUSTOMER:- OF SAPf` S PLACE, 6620 CAR Vti IAN STREET, RANCHO CUCAAIONG_9, CA. 14E STi.' +iwLY OPPOSE THE L T ITATION OF HOURS ! E CITY IS MPOSING ON SAM'S. AS BUSINESS OWNERS A \D RE.,.IDFNTS OF THE CO-MAI N-17Y, WE WOULD LIKE TO STATE INE ATTITUDE OF PLACM- BLAME IN ADVANCE ON A BUSINESS FOR THE ACTIONS OF 2REVIOUS OWNERS (IN 1985 NO LESS) IS SLANTED, DISCR! "T ATORY AND UN- �OIvSTITUTION9L. TO LIMIT THE RIGHTS OF PEOPLE TO BK\EFIT FROM EARNING _4Ni EQUITABLE LIVING BECAUSE OF PRIOR PROBLalS DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE PlalbSOPHY THAT 14E ARE A DEMOCRACY AND THAT PEOPLE ARE PRESUMED INNOCEIV -T FIRST :� SUPPORT SAi4, HIS rAbD;LY AND STAFF A_vTD ASK T iAT YOU CAREFf3LLY REVIEIv DECT_STON THAT SIX YEARS AGO WAS JUSTIFIED, BUT TODAY IS BIASED AND UNFOL?IlED. =tinted Name Signature Address �Qrrry co1-4t"" I TA A-B 7J3 I 69 0 S-` -�- g� f A T CITE' OF RANCHO Cis CAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: September 11, '391 4-1 TO: Chairman and Nembers of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, Laity Planner BY: Nancy Fong, Senior Planner SUBJECT: NNSIIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 91-02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to amend various development standards and design' guidelines for multi- family residential districts. Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. (Continued from August 22, 1991 -) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND EEEIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 91 -02A - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, - A request to amend various development standards and design guidelnss for multi - family residential districts within the.".stiwanda Specific Plan area. Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. (Continued from August 22, 1991.) ENViRO11MNTAL ASSESSMENT AND TERRZ. VISTA PLANNED C01.9MUNITY AMENDMENT 41 -02 -CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -- A request to amend various development standards and design guidelines . for multi - family residential districts within the Terra Vista Planned Community area. Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. (Continued from August 22, 1991.) MMRONMSNT" ASSESSMENT AND VICTORIA PLANNED COMMUNITY AMENDMENT 91 -02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to amend various development standards and design guidelines for multi - family residential districts -ithin the Victoria Planned Community areFl. Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. (Continued from August 22, 1991.) BACKGROUND. At the continued hearing of August 14, 1991, the Commission ad'ourned th° meeting to a special workshop on August 22, 1991. The pui -Voce was to refine the language of the proposed Development Sthndards. At the August 22, 1991, meeting the Commission continued the public hearing to this regular meeting. For reference, copies of the August 14 and July 10, 1991 staff reports and the minutes of all the pLiblic hearings and workshops have been attached to this report. ANALYSIS: following summarizes the final changes to those proposed Development standards as discussed at the August 22, 1991, workshop, These changes are reflected in the attached Ordinance. ITEM KrLP14 N PLANNING COMKISSION STAFF REPORT DCA 91 -02:, TVPCA 91 -02, VPCA 91 -02, ESPA 91 -02 - CIT1 OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA September 11, 1991 Page 2 A. Building Separation. Representatives from Lewis Homes raised concerns with the proposed 20 -foot separation between balconies. Lewis Homes suggested a 15- foot separation. After much discussion on the need and the merits of separation between buildings, patios, and balconies, the Commission decided on the following standards: 1. A minimum of a 10 -foot landscape separation, without sidewalk, between patio fences thax are less than 5 feet in height. Between balconies, 5 feet eiia11 be added. 2. A minimum of a 15 -foot separation, with sidewalk, between patio fences that are less than 5 feet in height. Between balconic', 5 feet shall be added. 3. A minimum of a 20 -foot separation between patio fences that are more than 5 feet in height and between balconies. B. Laundry Facility. The Commission discussed the issue of whether a certain percentage of the number of units in a multi- family project should be equipped with a washing machine and clothes dryer in the dwelling. The Commission deliberated an the concerns of affordability and quality of life. The Commission, with a 3 -1 -1 vote (Vallette - noe, Chitiea - absent), recommended the following language for Laundry Facilities: "Laundry Facility. Each unit shall be provided with a hook -up for washing machine and clothes dryer in the interior of the dwelling; or., common laundry facilities shall be provided and be equipped with washing machines asad clotiies dryers at a rate of one Hashing machine and clothes - "dryer per five units. Common laundry facilities should be conveniently located for all residents. within the complex. Common laundry facilities can be withiu freestanding buildings, attached to dwelling units, or within the recreation building. The design of the common laundry facilities shall be architecturally compatible to the dwellings." C. Terra Vista Planned Community Amendment. Lewis Homes raised concerns with the proposed 38- foot average setback for uncovered parking. They proposed a 32 -foot average setback instead. At the workshop, staff clarified that the intent of the 38 -foot. average setback for buildings, detached garages or carports, and uncovered parking would maintains a landscaped street Frontage consistent with the standards of the Development Code and the Terra Vista Community Plan. The Commission decided that tha 38 -foot w- ierage setback should be maintained. l e4 A/° r U E PLANNING COMMISSION C "i'AFF REPORT DCA 91 -02; TVPC.A 91 -02,, VPCA 91 -02, ESPA 91 -02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA September 11, 1991 Page 3 D. Addition of design criteria to the Residential Design Guidelines. At the workshop, the Commission was concerned with 'the placement of buildings of three or more stories next to one -story buildings. The Commission directed staff to develop criteria to address this matter. Staff recommends that the following criteria be adc?ed to the Residential Design Guidelines: "The scale and height of buildings should relate to one another. For example, a three -story building should not be placed next to a one -story building." FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The Planning Commission must mgke the following findings in order to approve, all or in part,; -'the proposed amendments: '. A. Development Code•Amendment 91 -02 1. The proposed amendmr`., does not conflict with the land use policy of the Genern! Plan;; 2. The proposed amendment promotes the goals and objectives of the General Plan. 3. The proposed amendment would. not be materially injurious or detrimental to adjacent properties or have a- .significant impact on the environment. 73. Victoria planned Community Amendment, 91 -02. 1. The proposed amendment is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Specific Plan and the General Plan. 2. The proposed amendment would not have significant impacts on the environment nor the surrounding properties. C. Terra Vista Planned Community Amendment 91 -02. 1. The proposed - amendment is consistent with the .goals and objectives of the Specific Plan and the General Plan. 2. The proposed amendment will not have 3ignificant impacts on the environment, nor the surrounding properties. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing to review the proposed amendments and to consider public input. The following actions are requested from the Planning Commissionz A. Recommend approval of Development Code Amendment 91 -02 and issuance of a Negative Declaration to the City Council. PLANNING CONMISSZON STAPP RuPORf DCA 91 -02 TVPCA 91 -02, VpCA 91 -02, ESPA 91 -02 - CPPY Or RANCHO CLTCAMONGA September 11, 1991 Page sl B- Recommend approval o` Victorii�`�anned Communittj Amendment 91 -02 and issuance of a Negative, to the City Council- C. Recommend approval of Terra Vista Planned Community Amendment 91 -02 and issuance Of a Negative Declaratiiort to the City Council- W. 'Fable the Etivanda Specific Plan Amendment 91 -•02A through minute action E. Adoption of a Resolution amending Resolution No- 88 -161. is espe lly su fitted, ;rad e ity lanner BB:NP:ifs Attachments: Exhibit "A" - August 14 and July 10, 1991, Staff Report Exhibit "S" -Draft Minute*. of August 14 and August 22, 1991 Meetings Exhibit "C5/ Supplemental Questionnaire Bxhibi% �D" - Draft Chapter of.D� gn Guidebook a 88 Resolution Amending Resolution` ". -161 Resolution Recommending Approva�'df ACA 91-02 Ordinance for DCA 91 -02 Resolution Recommending` Approval of T[roCA 91 -02 Ordinance for TVPCA 91 -02 Resolution 'Recommending Approval of VPCA 91 -02 Ordinance for VPCA 91•-02 1, 1411 Al `� CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: August 15, 1991 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission I 'em, sm FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Nancy Fong, Sanior Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVI%OPMENT CODE Ai'iENDMENT - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to -amend various development standards ~ and design guideline• for multi - family residential districts. Staff recd muds issuance of a Negative. Declaration. (Continued from July 10 19914) ENVIRONME'TAL ASSESSMENT AND ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN AM -DMRNT 91 -02A - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to amend various -development standards and design guidelines for multi- family residential districts within the Etiwanda Specific Plan area. Staff recom ands issuance of a Negative Derlarativ'n. (Continued from July 10, 1991.) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TERRA VISTA PLANNED COMMUNITY AMENDMENT 91 -02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. - A request to amend various development standards and design guidelines for multi- family residential districts within the Terra Vista Planned Community area. Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. (Continued from July 10, 1991,) ENVIRONMEN'T'AL ASSESSMENT AND VICTORIA PLANNED_ COMMUNITY AMENDMENT 91 -02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to amend various development standards and design guidelines for multi - family residential districts within the Victoria Planned Comauni4 area. Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. (Continued from July 10, BACKGROUND: On July 10, 1991, the planning Commission conducted a public hearing to consider the above - described amendments and receive public input. The Commission raised concerns over severLl proposed development standards, specifically, the mini— lot width, the requirements of recreational area /facilities, the building separation and setbacks standards, the requirements of lockable storage space, and laundry facilities. The Commission continued the public hearing to this regular meeting so that they could conduct workshops to further review these identified items. Two workshops were held on July 18 and August 1, 1991. Representatives from Lewis domes and the William Lyon Company and design professionals attended the workshops and participated in the discussions. Draft minutes of hhe July 10, 1991 public hearing and the mirutes from the workshops of July x'18 and August 1, 1991, are included in th s report for your reference. A14 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DCA 91 -02-, TVPCA 91 -02, 11PCA 91 -02, ESFA 91 -02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA August 14, 1991 Page 2 ANALYSIS: This section c,2 the report focuses on the changes and refinements of the proposed development standards based on the July 16 and August 1, 1991, workshops. The July 10, 1991;;, Staff Report has been attached to this report for additional reference material. A. Minimum Lot Width, Minimum Frontage, and Flag, _Lot -- 2rontage Under the Basic Development Standards. The Commission was concerned with the proposed standard of a 100 -foot minimum lot width and a 50 -foot minimum corner lot width, as the standard implied that multi- family projects would have to provide a 100 -foot lot width. Another concern raised by the Commission was whether the parcels that ds not meet this standard would be allowed to be developed. The intent of this proposed standard., was to insure multi family projects comply with the design criteria of $ visually pleasing streetscape. Therefore, the proposed standard could be better reflected under the category of minimum street frontage and flat lot r street frontage. For parcels that do not meet the minimum street frontage, staff recommended that Footnote °L° be refined so that these substandard parcels can be developed at the lowest and of the permitted density range. The proposed changes gtre included in the attached Ordinance. B. Recreational Areas/Facilities. Concerns were raised at the July 100 1991, public hearing that the recreational amenities requiremtants could be too rest:'rictive. For example, the proposed minimum width dimension of 50 feet and 100 feet for iarqs� open lawn area and the required number of recreational amenities for development consisting of 31 -100 units appeared to be too restrictive. At the workshop of July 18, 1991, the Commission reviewed the identified concerns as well as the modification to the standard suggested by staff. The Commission recommended the following changes as discussed in that workshop: 1. Development 'consisting of 31 -100 units should provide two sets of recreational amenities. Staff also refined the - criteria by adding language to ,allow flexibility for the designer to provide the equivalent of two sets of recreational amenities. For example, a development could be equipped with one large spa (double title size) instead of providing two smaller spas, subject to Planning Commission review and approval. 2. The minimum width dimension of 50 feet and 100 feet for large lawn areas was modified to state that at least one of the dimensions shall be 50 feet for developments of 30 units or less and 100 feet for developments consisting of 101 to 200 units. Pi+MING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DCA 91 -02, TVPCA 91 -02, VPCA 91 -02, ESPA 91 -02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA August 14, 1991 Amtk Page 3 3. Water tap requirements were deleted from the barbecue facility. z 4. For development consisting of 101 -200 units, language was added to allow flexibility to provide the equivalent of the recreational amenities subject to Planning Commission review and approval. S. The criteria for maintenance of recreational amenities was revised to include property owners. According to the City Attorney, the private assessment district alternative should be retained in the criteria. C. Amenities 1. The requ�.rement of 125 cubic feet of storage space was refined as shown in the attached Ordinance. The word "lockable" was deleted. At the workr;:.op, the Commission also clarified that the storage space unit *A:4, Fin the fully enclosed garage may overhang into the parking space,._+r; long as it did not interfere with vehicle parking. 2. Laundry 'Tacilitys The proposed standards allowed a project to develop with a: «cmm m. laundry facility instead of providing each unit with 'a washing rachine and clothes dryer. The Commission felt that rental projects should provide a minimum percentage of the total number of units with a washing machine and clothes dryer and `he remainder percentago with the Flexibility of providing either washing machine and clothes dryer book -ups with those units or common laundry facilities at the rate of one washing machine and clothes dryer per 5 units. The following alternative standards are provided for your consideration: (al Alternative "A" Each unit shall be provided with a hook -up for a washing machine and elother dryer in the intorirm =f the dwelling.. Where washing machines and clothes dryars_-axa not providad, common laundry facilities shall be required at a rate of t washing machine and clothes dryer per 5 units, Common laundry facilities should be conveniently located for all residents within the complex. Common laundry facilities can be within free. - standing buildings, attached to dwelling units, or within the recreation room. The design of the common laundry facilities shall be architecturally conga *ale to the dwellings. (b) Alternative "e ": For non - rental development, cinch unit shell be provided with a hook -up for a washini'machine and clothes dryer in the interior of ; .the dwelling. ror rental. dewilopment, so percent of tht,Ttotal number of units shall be provided with a washing macf ne and clothes dryer in the dwelling unit, and the remaining 50 percent shall be provided PLANNING COMMISSION STAf. REPORT DCA 91 -02, TVPCA 91 -02, VPCA 91 -02 ESP& 91 -02 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Augue, 14, 1991 Page 4 with a. washing machine and clothes dryer hook -up in the interior of the dwelling unit or common laundry facilities at a rate of 1 washing machine and Clothes dryer per 5 units. In addition to these alternatives, the Commission could also direct staff to prepare an amendment to the Condomini. m Conversion Ordinance requiring each unit to be equipped with a washing machine and c1t ,,hex dryer hook -up prior to conversion. This new requirement would prohibit those developments that have been provided with common laundry (acuities, to be later converted to condominiums. D. Building Separations and Setbacks. Concerns were raised by Lewis Homes and the William Lyon Company that tha proposed standards were too restrictive. The Planning Commission reviewed these standards again rat the August 1, 1991, workshop• the Commission directed staff to modify the proposed standards as summarized below: 11 1. For development consisting of one- and two -story Product type, t Medium, Medium -High, anel High Residential districts, the front -to- front building separation should be as follows: (a) A minimum of 30 feet separation between buildings where there is no patio Fence or with recessed balcony. (b) A minimum of 10 feet betwaan two patio fences that are less than 5 feet in height. (c) A minimum of 20 feet between two patio fences that are more than 5 feet in height and between balconies. (d) A Minim= of 20 feet between a patio fence and a building wall. (e) A minimum of 30 feet betwoen two budding walls with a common patio fence or wall. 2. Development consisting of three stories or more product type, in Medium, Medium - High, c;° -High Residential districts, requires an additiontil 10 -foot separation between the two building galls for each floor or story above the second story. 3. The building to one- stor,* detached garage and accessory structures separation for High .Residential Districts was reduced from the proposed 20 feet Co 15 flt8t. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DCA 91 -02rt TVPCA 91 -02, VPCA 91 -02, ESPA 91 -02 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA August 14, 1991 Page § i 4. The building to earb separaticn for the High Residential district was reduced from the proposed 20 feet Lo.':5 feet for development consisting of two -story product types. An additional '5 -foot setback is rep,. red for each floor or story above'ihe second story up to a maximum of 25 feet. The above chenges are reflected in,Zible 17.08.040(Q) as Ohown in the -I attached Ordinance. E. Related items as Discussed at the August 1, 1991 Workshop. The commissioners also discussed - ifisues of location and maintenance problems created by downspout, the placement of meters /utility housing, and the maintenance problems for the section of wr13s between. garAges. Staff recommends the following design guidelines to address these issues: Downspouts should be architecturally integrated into the building design. Where downspouts end at a landscaped *rea, splash guards should be provided. Preferably, downspouts should be Piped to a paved surface or into the landscaped area. 2. Lan4scaped <•rsas between garage doors should be designed for tree or vertical shrub planting. Meters and other ground - mounted equipment z1hould not be ' Re .acated withia the 1.andsca , d arms.. , 3. The location and placeme -t of meters /utility housing should be oriented away from the d4elling unit entry. The =meter /utility housing should be architecturally integrated into the building. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The Planning Commiss -aa :r:tst make the following findings in order to approve, all of +.n part, the proposed amendments �►. Development code 2mendment 91 -02r 1. The proposed amendment does not conflict with the land use _ro- of the General Plana 2. The proposed amendment promotes the goals and objectives of the General Plan. 3. The proposed amendment would not be katerially injurim.a or detrimental to adjacent properties or have a significant impact on the environment. B. victoria Planne- Cozmuunity Amendmant 91 -02. 1. The proposed amendment is tcnrtistent with the goals acid ofJelc ives f of tae Specific Plan.and fiche General Plan. �,,✓U �/� FT.ANNING a:OMMISSION STAFF REPORT DCA 91 -02 TVPCA 91 -02, SPCA 91 -02,; EWA 91-02 CITY OF RANCHI) CUCAMONGA L August 14, 1991 Page 6 2. The proposed amendment would not have significant irj cts on the erviro -meat nor the surrounding properties. C. Terra Vista Planned Community Amendment 91 -02. 1. The proposed amendment is consistent with the goals-aad objectives of the Specific Plan and the General Plan. 4 ) '( 2. The proposed amendment will - no; have significant impc.cts On the 'r environment, nor the ssrrounding properties RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Comission conduct a ;- public hearing to review the proposed amendments and to consider public I input. The fellowin%� actions are --quested from the Planning Commitaions 1 A. Recommend approval. of Development ~Code ? amendment 91 -02 and issuance of _ a Negative Declaration to the City Council. B. Recommend approval of Victoria Planned Community Amendment 91 -02 and issuance of a Negative Declaration to the City Council, C. Recommend approval of Terra Vista Planned Community Amendment 91 -02 and j issuance of a :Negative Declaration to the City Council. D. Table the Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment 91 -02A through minute action. E. Adoption of a Resolution amending Resolution No. 88 -161. R.esn lly ted, Bra - er City lanner EB:N£:jfs Attachments: Exhibit "A" - July 10, 1991, Stafy Report Exhibit "B" - Approved Minutes of April 4, April 11, April 25, and Kay 8, 1991 Adjourned Meetings Exhibit "C" - Draft Minutes of July 10, Julg 18, and August 1, 1991 Meetings Exhibit "D" - Supplemental Questionnaire Exhibit "E" - Draft Chapter of Dosign Guidebook Proposed Resolution Amen3ing Reselution No. 88 -161 Proposed Resolution rtecvaaending Approval of DM 9`1 -02 `proposed Ordinance for DCA 91 -02 Proposed Resolut ±on Recommending Approval of T•J>CA 91 -02 Proposed Ordinance for TVPCA 91 -02 Proposed Resolution Recom!�enazq Approval of VPCA 91 -02 Proposed Ordinance for VPCX 91 -02 Im i -- -CITY OF RANCHO CUCA-MONGA STAFF REPORT �t i DATE: July 10, 1991 TO: Chairman and Members of Lhe Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Nancy Fong, Senior Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 91 -02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAXONGA - A request to amend various development standards and design guidelines for multi.- family residential districts. =Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. (Continued from Junes 12, 19910 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ETIWANDA SPBCIFIC PLAN BMENDMENT_ 91 -02A CITY OF RANCHO CUCA14ONGA A request „to amend various development standards and design guidelines fo7 multi- family residential districts within the Etiwanda Specific Plan area. Staff recommend$ issuance of a Negative Declaration. (Continued, from June 12,'1991.) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TERRA VISTA RF_ANNED COMHUNXTY AMENDMWf 91-02 - CITY OF RANCH CUCAMONGA A :%request to amend various etvelopment standards and design guidelines for multi- family residential ,districts within the, Terra Vista Planned Community area. Staff recormands issuance of a Negative Dealarati.on.. (Continued from June 12, 1991.) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VICTORIA PLANNED COMMUNITY AMENDMENT 91 -02 CITY OF RANCHD= CUCAMONGA A request to amend -!hricus development standards and design guidelines for multi- family residential districts within the Victoria Planned Community area. I Staff reco=enda issuance of a Negative D3claration. ( Continued' from June 12, 1999. ) 1. AHSTRAC : The puzpose of this report in for the Vlanning Commissica to review and consider action on various cods changes relating to multi- family development. The goal for these -nde changes is to enhance the community character and the quality of life for residents in multi- family projects. The following actiors are requested from the Planning Commission. A. Peaommand approval of Development Code Amendment 41 -02 and the issuance of a Negative Declaration to the Council. B. Recommend approval of Terra Vista Planned Community Amendment 91 -02 cad the issuance of a Negative Declaration to the City Council. PLANNING CObMISSION STAFF REPORT DCA 91 -02, TVPCA 91 -02, VPCA 51 -02, ESPR 9i -02 - CITY OF RXiCHO CUCAMONGA July 10, 1991 Aft Page 2 IF C. Recommend appraval of Victoria Planned Community Amendment 91 -02 and the issuance of a Negative Declaration to the City Council. D. Staff recommends tabling Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment 91 -02A (see discussion in the Analysis section of this report). E. Staff recommends Lp- provai of a resolution amending Resolution No. SS ^1vi regarding the landscape policy. Ii. BACKGROUND: on Februat-_r 26, 1991, the City Council adopted a resolution charging the Commission with the responsibility to modify the City's development standards and design guidelines to ensure high quality multi- family projects. To assist the Commission in this responsibility, staff prepared a study with recommendations for changes to various development standardil and design guidelines. The study and the proposed changes were based on staff analyzing the current development standards contained in the "velopment Co4e, comparing therm to t11e Terra Victa Planned. Community, the Victoria Planned C 'mmunity, and the Etiwanda Specific Man, as well as reviewing them with the past practices and policies of the Commission. The proposed - changea focused on various site development standards ensuring ste=ps for proper transition of ddnsity and compatibility of use, upgrading the open space requirements and the related r­ir.4aticnal amenities, upgrading the architectural requirements, aitor parking and other related pr ,7ject amenities. The Commission conducted a series or workshops to review the various proposed changes. Representatives from the property owners of the two planned commuuait.es, Lewis Homes and Williams Lycra Company, as well other developers and design professionals attended the workshops and provided ingat to the Commission and staff. Attached for your reference is the summary and action of the Planning Commission workshops of April 4, 11, and 25 and fty 8, 1991 (Exhibit 'A "). in the concluding workshop, the Commission provided arecific direction to staff to prepare the attached Development Code Amendments and Planned Community Amendments as discussed in the Analysis section of thi3 report. III. ANALYSIS: This section of the report focuses on describing, W scussinga and analyzing the various proposed changes to the development standards and design guidelines relating to multi- family projects within the citywide area, the two planned communities area anc the Etiwanda Specific Play. areta. The format consists o5f listing the existing codes, the proposed changes or the proposed new codes, followed by an analysis of the changes. PLANNII:G COMMISSION STAFF RCPORT OCA 91 -02, TVPCA 91 -02, VPCA 91 -Q2, ESPA 91 -02 - CITY OF'RK4CRO CUCP.MONGA July 10, 1991 Page 3 A. Development Code. 1. Development Standards. a. Establish" a minimum net ;.ot area under Basic and optional Standards.' -S Existing: No minimum,_ net lot area or acreage required. Proposed. 3 acres minimum for Basic Standards wad 'S acres for Optional Standards. Analysis: Requiring ' a minimum lot area would encourage lot eensolidation and thereby prov.;de a ,greater. opportunity for a more efficient site design. Undet;'the Basic Standards, lots of legal record but legs than'. 3 acres would be showed to develop at the lowest end (e.g., under 9 dwelling units per acre for the Medium Residential District) of the permitted density range The reasons are two fold. First, staff recognized that there are approximately 70+ lots which are under 3 acres and currently designated as Medium Residential with no development proposals. This provision would allow for development of these parcels if the applicant or developer is unable to assemble enough lots to meet the -minimum lot, area. Second, the Limitation of the allowab-le density -would increase the chances that the site design Would comply Frith all the development stOndards, design guidelines and policies as with thosa nor larger parcels. A 5 -acre minimum is proposed' for projects wishing to develop under the optional`:atandards. optional Standards exist to allow for development at a higher c end of the density range. Low (L) and Low Medium (LM) Residential Districts already require a minim- of 5 acres. Establishing the 5-acre minimum lot area In the optional Standards woald ba consistent with the other development districts. b. Establish a minimum lot width for Basic Standarus. Existing: M Go -foot lot width 30-foot corner lot width MH - No minimum requirement H No minimum requirement PLrMNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DCA 91 -02, TVPCA 91 -02, VPCA,91 -02, ESPA 91 -02 CITE OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA July, 1o, 1991 Page 4 it proposed; M - 100 -foot lot width - 50 -foot corier lot width HS - Same as above H - Same as Above, Analysis: At one of the Commission workshops, members of the commission brought up the issue of minimum lot width as a result of rq\,iewing a couple of narrow lot multi- family, projects.' ' "The cone were with the design of the entry to the project and the atreetscape: Establishing a minimum -lot width of 100 feet would facilitate more spacious site plans and comply with the minimum site design criteria. These design criiveria could include an estimated 40 -foot entry driveway a 40 -foot estimated building footprint, and an approximate 15 -n -'Oct setback from the property line.' This net+; standard could impact some of the lots on 19th StreC4 and Arrow Highway- . Modify and establish now standards for building separations and setbacks from property ;line for Basic and option&% Standards. the Analys The distances between buildings and setbacks from propartg line are established to provide for an element- of openness and human scale. Unfortunately, the dinimum standards become the design maximum in way projects. The Coamiisaion saw a need to improve the standards that will he, consistent with the policies in the Community Design` Element of the General Plano Under t3:e Basic Standards for the Mediums Residential District# the building separttion is 30 feet for front to front and 15 feet for ot'' r situations. In most cases, the buildings have J,atios ar�soached into the 30 feet separation distance' leaving perhaps 5-10 feet for landscaping and pedestrian walkways. These the separation between the buildings appears tc bs closer. The new standards, as z-hown in 8xhibit "F;s indicate that the building separation under the Medium Residontial District appears to be decreased. However, staff added .a provision that trill` .squire all building separations or setbacks to btj measured froth any enclosed balcony or enclosed patio' 3 feet or more in height. This, in Gftect, will increase the distances between buildings. For Radius High and High Residential districts, the building separations are AENL half the combined height of the two buildings. Staff qW expected that any development within these two i 4- Al V PLANNING COMISSION STAFF REPORT ., DCA 91, -02, TVPCA 91 -02 VPCA 91 -02, ESPA 91 -02 - s: CITY OF RANCHO CUC&KCNGA July 10, 1991 Page 5 districts may include/[a mix of twos -, three-, or fo r- story buildings. ByY using this formula to deter kne the distances for ('building separation, it would achieve the goal of providing openness within the project. For example, a three-story, building of 35 feet in height and a two -story building of 25- feet in height would require a distance separation�lof 30 - fest Again, the distances are measured from any enclosed balcony or patio. In 'addition to the bixildin,g teparation,- other new standards are established, as shown in Exhibit "g," to achieve the objectives of visually softening the building bulk, the building edges, and the density. Illustr4tive graphics for these new standards are developed to reiterate and support then. Staff would like to acknowledge the assistance of Lewis Homes who assisted in the development of these graphic illustrations. d. Pecreational Area /Facility. Existing: Required recreational amenities such as pools, spas,; courts, and re.:reation rooms within common open space. Proposed: Require Specific' types of amenities for projects under 30, units,,, projects 31 -100 ' units, and projects over 100 units, au shown in Exhibit "G." Analysis: Although the code currentiy requires recreational amenities,-an described above -, within the common open space, there are no provisions regulating the amount of amenitias provided to the size of the multi - family project. The Commiscion saw a need to improve the existing codes' by establishing new, standards foe regnairing amenities. The new codes set ",fni standards for providing recreational amenities by the size . of the project' While: also providing flexibility to the developer as to the types of amenities offered. Provisions are added to require proper and logical dispersal of recreational amenitiesn This provision is ,added to avoid the concentration of all of the amenities Within any one corsmon open ,.space area. . e. Establish nest standards for project .amenities to Include exterior lockable storage space and laundry facilities as shown in Exhibit "H," and as follows: 9. Exterior lockable strrage space of 12S cubic feet. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DCA 91 -02, TVPCA 91 -02, VPCA 91 -02, ESPA 91 -02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA July 10, 1991 Vage 6 2. Each unit shall be furnished with washers /dryers :n the interior or common facility provided at a rate of one washer /dryer per five units. Analysis-­_ :- The purpose of establishing, the new sta...uard is to enhance the quality of life for the residents (homeowners or renters alike) within multi- family projects. Further, this new standard would be consistent with the requirements as contained in the current Condominium Conversion ordinance. f. Establish new standards requiring proper signage to identify visitor parking as shown'jn Exhibit "I." Analysiss The concern is that visitor parking spaces are not :,properly identified where visitors may find it hard trying to locate them. Also, visitor parking spaces are often used by residents if they are not properly signed. The new standards re4aire the developer or the applicant to 'submit a signage package for visitor parking to the City Planner for review and approval. Signage may include individual signs labeled on the pavement, directory signs, etc. 2. Absolute Policies The Development Code has Absolute Policies that are intended to deal with the issues of neighborhood compatibi.ity, mitigate land use conflicts through bufferiuq, quality, -, site plan, circulation,.. and architectural compatibility, etc., as shown in Exhibit "J." At these workshops, the Commission reviewed the language and fouAd it- adequato. The only-modification that the Commission proposed is to change the word "can" to ,Shall" for one of the land use mitigation mmasuras as identified in Exhibit "J." The purpose is to strengthen the requiresents for transition of density. LaI 3. Design Guidelines The Development Cade has Design Guidelines which establish a high quality standard for building end site design. These a_uidelinos are based an the community design goals as I expressed in the General Plan. The Commission, has raviewed these guidelines and, in general, agreed that they j are adequate in ensuring high quality design. However, several areas should be 'strengthened and upgraded to be more to €lective of the community design goals as stated in the General Plan. The proposed changes are as shown in Exhibit •K" and are in bold print. i I NE E a PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DCA 91- 02,_TVPCA 91 -02, VPCA 91 -02, ESPA 91-02. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA July 10, 1991 Page 7 a. Building , orientation: Language added to encourage :a variety of building design. b. Parking: Language added to require solid walls for separation between individual single,, double, or multi garage units assigned to that unit Also, the inaide dimension of the single garagd-",uxit - increased to 10 feet by 20 feet. = _ C. Landscaping /Open Spaces Language added to strengthen the requirement for large masses of open space consistent with the policies.. as stated in the Community Design Element of this General Plan. d. Architecture: The language was modified to- -explicitly state that multi - family projects should have upgraded architecture. e. Scale: Language was added to require proportionate mass and scale of buildings bzth horizontally and verti"lly. This language is consistent with the - yolicies as stated in the Community Design Element of /the General Plan. i4 Materials and Colors' Language added to strengthen the need for choice of materials and color that compliment the architecture and building character.. Relatcd items not part of the Development Code Amendment. At the workshops, the Commission ^£scd concern with how to ensure high quality design for multi - family projects reflective of the City's desire, how to inform the development community of high standards of easign, and how to ensure quality of landscape materials. 'To address the Commission's concerns, staff recommends that a aw' lemental questionnaire be . developed requiring the dew; Oar to summit information pupporting the merits of the ",eilopment proposal. Staff also indicated an interim draft chapter of the design guidebook for multi- family projects could be prepared to assist the developammt community in designing projects consistent with the City's design goals. Staff also prepared a Resolution amending tke previous one by strengthening the policy to requite landscape architect's to inspect the quality of V)s landscape materials prior to planting. These requirements and procedures are described below: 4. e if 1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DCA 91 -02, TVPCA 91 -02, VPCA 91 -02, ESPA 91 -02 - CITY O . ANCHO CUCAMONGA July 10, 1991 Page 8 a. Supplemental Questionnaire. The format for tit s supplemental requirement is as shown in E =hibit "h." The burden of proof is on the developer and his designer to articulate in written form, graphic illustrations, or a c6obination of both, how the proposed development meets each one of the Absolute Policies and Design,Guidelines. The Development Code specifically requires-- -that all residential projects must satisfy the Absolute Policies and Design Guidelines before approval can be granted. Staff would review the supplemental questionnaire for completeness and adequacy. Upon completeness of the supplemental questionnaire, the City Planner or his designee Would make determination if the development proposals meet and satisfy each one of the policies and guidelines -prior to forwarding the project for Planning Commission consideration.. This new requirement and procedure would hopefully achieve the objective of ensuring high quality design. b. Draft chapter of Design Guidebook for taalti- family project. The Design Guidebook is on the planning work program, however, it is behind in schedule. In order to address the Commission's concerns on informing the development community of quality design, staff prepared a draft chapter oW the Design Qui.debook for multi- family projects as an irate --#.m solution. The . format of the Desiga Guidebook is as shown in Exhibit "M." Section 1 clearly states the design goals of the City. Section 3 lists the design objectives or design I goals as expressed in the .Genstal Plan followed by more specific criteria including graphic illustrations. The graph?l; Ulurtrat.4ons provided are simple and rough. This -,•aft chap:ar of the Design Guidebook is 'not cr.-.rplete. 'Staff will continue to prepare and add to the Guidebook pertinent design criteria with the accompanying graphics. Eventually when. staff is ready to prepare the entire design : Gaidebook this chapter will be incorporated. C. Proposed amxndmamt to Rssolutitc be. 88 -161. The CASStission on August 10, 1498, a3opted a formal policy requiring'vegistered landsG `-n_ Architects to prepare, ce=ify, and inspect the `,,,, ',nation of landscape materials and irrigation syatiaees. At the workshop, the Comission rained concerns with the quality of landocape materials, specifically trees, shrubs, and ground cover. To address the concern, staff recommends that the existing pol -�y be strengthened to require the Landscape Architect inspect and certify the quality ,or ,the landscape materials prior to planting. PLANNING COMMISSIlN STAFF REPORT DCA 91 -02, TVPCA 91 -02, VPCA 91 -02, ESPA 91 -02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA July 10, 1991 - Page 9 B. Planned Communities. At the workshops, they' Commission reviewed the comparison of development standards among the Development Code,, the two planned communities (Victoria and Terra Vista),' and the Etiwanda Specific_ Plan (sea Exhibit "C "). The comparison showed that there arm discrepancies and differences in the development standards, r,' ecifi {;ally the street setbacks, building separations,`, and burkiding s {�tbacks from the property line. Also, the community plan tea lacked general design guidelines and crite_-ia for transition of density. The Commission recognized that at the time of establishing the two pl ned communities, additional open space and open space links is were set aside in exchange,,-,for flexibility in the str,it setback.. The Commission direted staff to bring the i� standards of the two planned communities into consistency with j' one another. Representatives from both property owners, Lewis II Homes and William Lyon Company, agreed. The following sections describe and discuss the proposed changes to the two community plan texts. 1. Victoria Planned Community. a. Modify street setbacks for Medium, Medium High, and High Residential Districts as shown in Exhibit "O." The modification reflects the setback as measured from the ultimate curb face consistent with the Terra Vista Planned Community and citywide area. The -treat setback for arterial streets, except for ViLAoria Parkway, have been increased from 32 to 38 fe. `,. b. Establish a new standard requiring the addition of a 10 -foot setback when the project is adjacent to very Low ox Low Residential Districts. This now standard would be consistent with the Development Code Standards. The purpose is to allow for a pvo;fer buffer zone between conflicting land uses. C. Establis4 new building separations and setback standards from the property line by referencing the standards as contained in the Development Code. d. Establish new provisions by adding language requiring cluster development or multi- family projects to comply with Lhe Design Guidelines as contained in the Development Coda. e. Add new provisions requiring transition(of density as contained in the Development Cods. -2 0 -a PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DCA 91 -02, TVPCA 91 -02, VPCA 91 -02, ESPA 91 -02 - CITY OF RAMC -3 CUCAMONGA July 10, 1991 Page 10 2. Terra Vista Planned Community. I' a. Modify the street setback for Soc,%l, collectcr, and secondary streets by increasing the standards to be consistent with Victoria Planned Community 'and as shown in Exhibit "P." b. Establish a now standard requiring the additi<.pn of a 10 -foot setback when the project is adjacent, to Very Low or Low Residential Districts consistent with the standards in the Development Code. C. Establish new building separations and setback standards from the property line by adding languages referenatvig the standards as contained in the Development Code. d. Establish new provisions by adding langeeage raquiring multi- family projects to comply teeth -''x.a Design Guidelines as contained in the Development Zo3s. e. Add new p.- ovisioha requiring the transition of density a-% contained in the Development Code. Copies of the proposed changes to the two planned communities were distributed to the two property owners, Lewis Homes and William Lyon Company. Staff has net with theca to review the proposed amendments. They have agreed to most of the proposed amendments. C. Etiwanda Specific Plan: in reviewing and Comparing the multi- family development standards between the Development Code and the Etiwanda Specific Plan, the Cosmission determined that the Specific Plan has adequate provisions to guide multi - family projects. Therefore, amendments are not necessary. D. Environmental Assessments The proposed amendment consists of changing develupwnt standards and design guidelines which would not create a significant impact to the environment. Staff recommends isaua:ce of Negative Declarations. IV. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The Planning Commission must make the fo7l*ing findings in order -to approve, in all or in part, the proposed amendments: A. Development Code Amendment ,9 1-02. 1. The proposed amendment does not conflict with the land use policy of the General Plan. R4-,4910 P.1 a Ka PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DCA 91 -02, TVPCA 91 -02, VPCA 91 -02, ESPA 91 -02 - CITY 07 RANCHO CUCAMONGA July 10, 1991 Page 11 2. The proposed amendment promotes the goals and objectives of the General Plan. 3. The proposed amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to adjacent properties 'or have a significant impact on the environment. B. Victoria Planned Community Amendment 91 -02. 1. The proposed amendment is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Specific Plan and the General Plan. 2. The proposed amendment would not have significant impacts on the environment nor the surrounding properties. C. Terra Vista Planned Community Amendmrnt 91 -02. 1. The proposed amendment is consist nt with the goal - and objectives of the Specific Pi.,. and the General Plan. 2. The proposed amendment will not have significant impacts on the environment, nor the surrounding properties. V. CORRESPONDENCE: The above described proposed amendments have been advertised in the 'Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper as a public hearing under an 1 /8th page ad. In addition, public hearing notices w;te sent to all 1-- oparty owners that have land designated as Medium, Med,!m High, or High Residential Districts and with,3ut a development proposal. VI. RECOV14ENDATIONs Scaff recommends that The Planning Commission conduct a public herring to review the proposed amendments and to consider public input. The following actions are requested from the Planning Commission: A;. Approval of Devela;.ment Code Amendment 91 -02 and issuance of a Negative Declaration to the City Council. B. Approval of Vietoria Planned Community Amendment 91 -02 and issuance of a Negative Declaration to the City Council. C. Approval Terra Vista Planned Community taendment 91 -G2 and issuance of a Negative Declaration to the City Council. n. Table the Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment 91 -02A. E. X&iption of a Resolution amending Resolution No. E9-161. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF RkZORT DCA 91 -02, TVPCA 91- 03,VFCA'91 -02, ESPA 91 -02 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA July 10, 1991 Page 12 Res pa- ily submitted, ' Bra ler City Planner BB:.NF:jfs Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Summary and Actions of April 4, April 11, April 25, and May , 1991 Workshops Exhibit "B" - Approved Minutes of April 4r and Unapproved Minutes of April 11, April 25, and May S, 1991 Adjourned Meetings Exhibit "C" - Table S Comparison of Street setbacks Exhibit "D" - Table 17.08.040 -8 - Basic 1:6valopment Standards Exhibit "E" - Table 17.08.040 -C - Optional Development st tidasds Exhibit "F" - Table 17.08.040 -9 - Building Separations and Setbacks Exhibit -G- - 17,08.040 -G - Racreltion/Yacility Exhibit "S" - 9 ^x-tcm 17.08.040 -R - Project AAwdties Exhibit "I" - set—za 17.08.040 -K - Visitor Parking Exhibit "J" - Section 17.08 -050 - Absolute Policies Exhibit "K" - Section - Design Guidelines Exhibit "x" - supplemental Questionnaire c Dxhibit "M" - Draft Chapter of Design Guidi:+ook Exhibit: IN ", - Amendments to Resolution 88-1fi1 Exhibit "O" - Amendments to Victoria Planned Community Exhibit "P" - Amendments to Terra Vista Planned Community' Proposed Resolution Amending Resolution Ito. 88 -16% Proposed Resolution Recommending approval of DCA 91 -02 Proposed Resolution Recommending Approval of TVPCA 91 -02 Proposed Resolution Recommending Mpp,�Va1 of 17PCA;-91 -02. Proposed Ordinance for DCA 91 -02 Proposed Ordinance for TVPCA 91 -02 Proposed ordinance for VP,% 91 -02 2 -3 Ll FOR DISC: U SS!0`1 CHITIEA,--TOL5TOY N ?ES: CC4MISSIONZASe MCNIEL, MELCHER, VALLETTE ABSENT: �40MMISSIONERS: NON" - 70ry Motion: Moved�by Melchor to adopo Sne resolution r an 8 -1/2 foot by JS�oot uniform parkin_ space subject t':af ^ orrected exhibits tt +\ pport the to be ratsion for approval. � Ralph Hanson, City Attorciey, �svggf a matter were to be returned to the Commission, that zhQ pubbcontinued so that a definite recommendation could be -mada to the oil- Xby commissioner Melchor withd:.ew the 2iu`ir «.• Moved by Melchor, seco -tte, ° :o continue Environmental Assessment and Development Cod 'Amendment 9 Dl and En,,,Lronmental Assessment and Industrial Specific P1an endment 91- to` ugust 28, -991, to permit the exhibits and proposed ordi nces be corrected wit the understanding that the B-1/2 foot x IS foot spa be the �asie for the Corr tions. Chairman McNiel reo ad the public hearing. '\ Motion to conti a to August 28, 1991, carried by the followLi.,g vote: ,ff TOLETOY, VALLET2'E AYES: `OHHISSIONERS: MCRIEL, MELCHER, NOES: ZOHMISSIONERS: CHITIEA F. EgdViRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ANl DF'd�LOPY?ENe CODE 1�ENAHEhT 91 -02 - CITE C1F RANCHO Cu':AMON - A rsqu -'St to ameiad,various development standards and design guidelines for multi- family residential districts. Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. ..(Continued from July 10, 1991.) G. FNVIRntlHENTAL_:ascvcSMENT ANY; ETIWANA SpECIFIC PLAN AHENDMVNT 91 -02A - CITY OF_ RANCHO COCrMONGA - A raquest to amend various developmend standards and design guidelines for multi - family sesidential districts within the Etiwanda Specific Plan area. Staff recommends, issuance of a Negative L- claration. ( Continued from July 10, 3991.) rRrnrzTY AMENDMENT -03 H. ',�7JIRONME AJ ASSR &SMENT AND TERRA _ VISTA PLANNED �,� �� OF RANCHO CYICAHONGA - A request to amend various development _c�TX standards and design guidelines for multi - family residential districts within the Terra Vita Planned Community area. Staff recommends issnanco of a Negative Declaration. (Continued from -July 10, 1991.) Yy Planning commission Minutes -a- August 14, 1991 I. ENVIRONY.ENTAL ASSESSMENT -.?W VICTORIA PLANNED COMMUNITY AM7U2MENT 91-02 - 212Y OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to amend various development standards and design guidelines for multi - family residential districts within the Victoria Planned Community area. Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. (Continued from uuly 10, 1991.; Nancy Fong, Senior Planner, presented the staff report and some ruplaceraent pages to exh&Lits, including graphic changes to the building' separation, changes to the Terra Vista Planned Community text, Lind Victoria Planned Community tex`n. Chairman McNiel questioned the separatlon between buildings if the minimum separation between third - story building w Ile is�40 feet, but each third - story bui''^ling has a 7 --foot deep deck. He t, sought that would reduce the actual building separation to only 26 feet. Dan colemsn, Principal Planner, stated that the minimum separation for the lower two floors of a three story' milding would remain 30 feet. He said that the guidelines require an additional 10 foot sstbac for evary,story over two; therefore; a three -st —y building requires 40 feet between b Ilding walls, a four -story buildinu " ires 50 ze.Bt, etc. Chairman McNiel requested that the 30 -foot dimension be shown on Exhibit E -3. He opened the public hearing. Dan Richards, Stephen Daniels Commercial Brokerage, Inc., 8311 Haven Avenue, • 200, Rancho Cv:amonga, questioned the timing of the implementatian of the proposed changer:, Brad Buller, City Planner, ,stated they would bscome� wffective the day the Ordinance is adopted in its final fcrm by the City Coui,fril. Mr. Richards asked if the staadards would apply to prcjects in process. Mr. Buller stated the standards would not apply to projects which had pulled permits. He said the standards would apply to any project in process which had not been approved. Mr. Richards stated Lincoln Propert3.es has 01,ent in excess of $1,250,000 on their project at the northeast corner of Base Line and '-illiken. He said they have been in the process for almost two full years and are within a month of submitting a completely redesigned project which they feel meets all the criteria and concerns previously raised by the City. YZ stated the City council had given direction to reeubmit the project without prejudice, waving all the fees. He said they had acted on faith and the new standards' "would sabotage the project. .a asked that their project be"permitted to continue to process une'er the currant standards. He said the project is not feasible with implementation of the new guidelines. Ho did not feel it Le fair to apply the new standards to a` project which had alr:-ldy been through Planning commission and City Council and was being resubmitted at the direction of City Council. He thought the standards should only apply to projects not already submitted. Chairman McNiel agreed that Lincoln's project had been in process for a long fe Planning Cunnission Minutes -6- August 14, 1991 i ^C time and had been through the process several times, but he did not feel the City is responsible for the position the project is currently in. He thought the lack of approval was a direct result of the applicant's failure to listen to the comments of the neighboring residents, staff, and the Planning Commission. Mr. Richards stated that Lincoln has a0mowledged they did not initially listen to direction. He said that Lincoln new feels they, have complied with the City'a wishes and they are almost ready to submit a new packag?- He felt that to adopt the new standards and tel., developers they had to.coz&ply'if they had not already pulled building permits was unfair. Mr. Buller said that when the City started the standards update process, staff evaluated how "ny, projects were in process or had,Ipprovala and Lincoln. was one of the developure in thrt category. He said t:.e developers were invited , to participate in the workshops so that developers could keep in step with the potential new changes as they were developing their plans. Cammsssioner- Valletta stated that several members of the development community attended the workshops and their project submvttals reflect their attendance and knowledge of what 'will soon be transpiring. She felt that it was Lincoln'e decision not to attend become informed on what to expect. Joe Oleson, Lewis Homes, 1156 North Mountain Avenue, ,Upland, stated they have projects which have been appzcmed under the old standards but for which building permits have not yet been pulled. He said they had operated under the assumption that projects which ware already approved would not be subject to the new standards. Mr. Buller stated that if a project approval comes up for an extension, it is a discretionary action for the Planning Commission to apprQvO the extension. Mr. Oleson agreed that was his understanding., He expressed &;epreciation for the opportunity to participate in the workshops. He "stated it is an enormous amount of detail. He thought the specific issue of the balcony separation was not addressed at workshop -. He requested that the separation between ba= conies be a minimum of 15 feet instead of the 20 feet shown on Exhibit E -2. He commented that the star lard depth of balconies is 6 - 9 feet. Fie said if the building footprint separation is 30 feet, the balconies could only be 5 feet deep to allow the x2psration between balconies at 20 feet. Mr. Oleson thought the nrmbers on Table V -4 in the Terra Vista plan had, been switched for the buildiaa setback in the collector road category. He thought the setback should be 27 -foot average, -22 -foot_ minimum for lower than three- story and 32- fact .avera53, 27 -foot minimum of three story or higher. Ms. Fong agreed the figures should'be switched. Mr. Oleson questioned why the uncovered parking setback would be the same as a full garage or carport. He requested reducing the uncovered parking setbacks to a 32 -foot average nn a maj" arterial, 23 -foot average on a secondary arterial, and 27 -fact average on a collector road. He also said they were under the impression that if s project were desig +Rd to be a rental project, Planning Commission Minutes -7- August 14. 1991 ti 1 % .`rr.�,Y .•� is _ ,�� ..• there would be an option to provide a common 'laundry facility instead of individual hook -ups within the units. Commissioner Melchor stated that he thought 'tne understanding at the last workshop )..as that laundry equipment hook -ups would be required in a;.l "for sale" unite.aad there would be an opportunity to provide central laundry areas in lieu of Book -ups in rental projects. He thought there was agreement that there would be an amendment to the Condominium, Conversion ordinance to require hezk -ups within individual units upon conversion. Mr. Oleson agreed that was his understanding as well. Gary Luque, William Lyon Company, 7270 Victoria Park Lane, Rancho Cucamonga, complimented the Commission and staff for involving the private sector-.in the review process. He felt a lot ;lad been accomplished. Fs, hoped th €. din the future tho groups would work, together on other projec,a. He stated his recollection of the laundry facilities issue - coincided with Commissioner Melcher's, Commissioner Melchor asked that the Commission consider continuing the item for two weeks because he felt the subject deserved additional time to study how the standards relate to the four important documents which control development in the City. Chairman McNiel concurred with Commissioner Melchor with respect to the laundry issue. Commissioner Tolstoy thought they had discussed providing a minimum 50 percent` of the rental units with individual hook -ups. Commissioner Melchor stated the 50 percent figure had been discussed but it was felt it should be possible to develop rental properties which have only central laundry facilities in the name of affordable. Commissioner Chitiea concurred. Commissioner Vallette thought the distances for building separation were to be measured from stairways as well enclosed balconies or patios. Commissioners. Keleher, Tolstoy, and Chitiea concurred. t Commissioner ValLitte asked if "architecturally integriLted could be added to the description yf -ihv exterior, lockable storage space. section. She stated sir would like to xcv he draft chapter for the Design Gu`4ebook referenced in the Development Cade because she felt it would strengthen;thn validity of the book and give curent criteria for design requirements. .0he felt that would permit the design criteria to be modified by simple minute action of the Planning Commission, making it a more fluid document, but wiV.n the strength of the Development Code. She thought the Commission had agrood not to dictate that driveways in multi - family projects would be treated ?iith streetscape, curvilinear lanes, and "street side landscaping, as referenced in h'eu,ion if IM C. of the draft Design Guidebook. She asked if "knowledgi of current City Ii I Planning Commission Minutes -0- August 14, 1991 requirements" could be added to paragraph l of Resolution 88 -161A. She thought the Commission had discussed and agreed there is a need for multi- family units to include an entry statement for each project. She asked that the language in the Design Guidebook be strengthened from "less preferable" to "unacceptable unless justified." She thought a statement should be included under the Community Design Goals section in the Design Guidebook that any project submitted with the intent to meet only the minimum standards would ndt be acceptaUa. Chairman McNiel felt that to change the language in the Design -Guidebook to "_snacceptable" would be too restrictive because there may be:epportunities for the "less preferable" options to be desigiL6d into a project and work reasonably well Commissioner Tolstoy felt that in the design review process those problems could be worked out. Commissioner Valletta stated she would like to see the development community come to the design revaaw process with a firm idea rather than a book of suggestions. she thouljilt by referencing the Design Guidebook in the Development Code it would'not be a surprise when the developers arrive at the Design Review Committee, a '� Commissioner Tolstoy thought that small- lot - projects would need to use some of I� the "less preferable" items in order to be developed. Commissioner Chitiea questioned if Commissioner Valletta would prefem charging the wording to "undesirable." Commissioner Melcher suggestad chsnging the language to "like this" instead of "preferable" and "not like this" instead of "less preferable." He did not think an architect would need the diagrams. Me. Fong stated the draft cha!bter of the Design Guidebook was included for informational purposes only to; ®how that something could be developed to be handed out to the development cQ=un ty. She said staff would be developing the Design Guidebook and could most with the Commission to discuss the format gad language. Mr. Buller stated that in'the Hillside Development Ordinance the terms "this" "nd "not this" are used. Chairman McNiol agreed that would to acceptable. Chairman McNiel felt that development becomes less imagint4ve the mcre things are specifically defined as to the parkAstsrs. He thought flexibility must, be allowed. Commissioner Valletta fet her comments were not restrictive so far as detail concerns. 1 Planning Commissiy- n,!Atnutes -9- August 14, 1991 fi L.A)°9 Mr. Buller suggested the Commission may wish to continue to a workshop on August 22, 1991. i Chairman McNiel thanked those who participated in the prrcess. Motion: Moved by Melchor, seconded- by Valletta, to continue Environmental Assessment and Development Code Amendment 91 -02, Environmental Assessment and Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment 91 -02A, Environmental Assessment and Terra Vista Planned Community .Amendment '91 -02, and Environmental Assessment and Victoria Planned Community Amendment 91 -02 to 3:30 p.m. on August 22, 19el. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, MCNIEL, t�WSCHER, TOLSTOY, VALLETTE NOES: COMMI.S.SIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:'. NONE carried J. ENTER TA'ZNHENT PERMIT 91 -02 - SAM'S PLAgj - A request to Conduct live music in conjunbtion with a restaurant and bar located in the Neighborhood Commercial D%rict at 6620 Carnelian Street, northwest corner of -19th and Ash Carnelian Stree - APH: 201- 611 -56 through 60. (continued from July 24, 1991.) K. CONDITIONAL "Cr SAM'S P2ACe^ - A,revio— of compliance with conditions of approval ihd consideration of suspens2,'i or revocation of the Conditional Use Permit for restaurant and bar located in the Neighborhood Commercial Distkkct at 6620 Carnelian 'Street, northwest corner of 19th and Carnelian treeeta - APH: 201- Bil -56 through 60. (Continued from July 24, 1991.) L. AMENLMENT_ TO _CONDITIONAL USA: PERMIT 7 :Q SAM'S PLRO - A request to J extend the hours of operation and amend the condition of approval prohibiting live entertainment for an existing restaurant and bar lccatv-1 in the Neighborhood. Commercial District at 6620 Carnelian Strofti:, northwest earner of.19th 'and Carnelian Streets = -,,hPN: 201- 911 -56 through 60. (Continued from 4uly 24, 1991.) Chairman McNiel exe.Aisd himself fram the meeting %b,.,. .if a possible conflict ol- inter ant as he plays on a softball team sponsared y Sam•s.Place. Brad Buller; City Planner, stated that the applicant's attor.�ney \had icated they wo d be requesting a continuance. V . _ -t caring. Planning Commission Minutes -10- August 14, 1991 I D AFT FOR DISCUSS10i+1 PURPOSES ONLY CITY OF RANCHO CdCAMONGA WTES PLANNING COMMISSION W Adjourned Meeting August 22, 1991 i Motion: Moved by Melchor, seconded by Vallette, carried 3 -ti -2 (Chitiea, McNiel absent) to appoint.Tolstoy as Temporary Chairman. Temporary Chairman Tolstcy csalled the Adjourned Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning CommS.ssion to order at 3:40 p.m., The meeting wc3 held in the Rains Room at Rancho Cucamonga's Civic Center, 1.-300 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cu, lmonga, California. ROLL C COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Larry McNiel karrivod at 3:55 p.m.), Zohn Melcher, Peter'Tolstcy, Wendy Vallettr,' t ABSENT* Suzann Chitiea STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner; Nancy Fong, Senior Planner; Anna -Lisa Hernandez, Assistant Planner MU TI ^FAMILY nousiNG STANDARDS A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMEI'T AND DEVELOPMENT v'ODE &MWDMENT 91-02 ---CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to amend varioui. development standards and design guidelines for multi- family residential districts. Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration.. (Continued from June 1991.) B. ENVIRONMENTAL rASESSMENT AND ETIWANDA SPECIETC ZW An T 91 -02A - CITY OF RANCHn' CDCAMONGA - A request to amend various development standards and design guidelines for multi- family residential districts within the Etiwanda Specific Plan area. Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. (Con%;=ued from June 18, 1991.) C. EN. IRO NMEN AM TEREA VTCTD pa=p rnAfRf MIX AMENDMENT 91'02 CITY OF RANCHO COCAMoNCA A request to amend various development 'standards and design guidelines 1'or multi- family residential districts within the Ta %=k Vista Planned Community area. Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. (Continued from June 18, 1,991.) D. ENVIRONME I' AL ASS ,lS$MENT WM VICT68IA PLA=p COMMUgITi' AMENDMENT 91 -02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to amend various development standards and design guidelines for multi - family residential districts within the Victoria Planned Community area. Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. (Continued from June 18#'1991•) DRAF Nancy Fong, Senior Planner, stated that one of the issues that needed to be resolved was the proposed 20 -foot separation between balconies. She explained the reasons for such proposed standards. Joe oleson, Lewis Homes, proposed a 15 -toot separation between balconies. Commissioner Melchor suggested that a solution would be to allow the 15 -fact separaticn between balconies if the separation between patios is 10 feet. If the separation between patios is 15 feet, he felt the separation between balconies should be 20 feet. Chairman McNiel arrived at 3:55 p.m. Commissioner Tolatcy questioned whether there would be sufficient area for landscaping within the 10 -foot separation. Staff responuad that typically there may a 4 -foot padeatrian walkway within this 10 -foot area, leaving perhaps a 3 -foot area on each side of the patio fences for landscaping. Commissioner vallst.M stated that she would like to maintain 'the proposed 20 -foot separation between balconies,. The consensus of the Commission was that the 10 -foot separation between patios is not wide enough to 4rovide- landscaping if pedestrian walkways are to be included. The Commission decided on the following standards: a minimum 10 -foot separation without sidewalk between patio fences that are less than 5 feet in height, rAus 5 feet betwain balconies; a minimum 15 -font separation with sidewalk between patio fences that are more than 5 feet in height, plus 5 feet between balconies; ana, if the separation between patio fences is 20 feet, then the separation between balconies shall be 20 feet. Pete Pitassi, Pitassi & Dalmau a Associates, requested clarification as to the separation between a two -story and a throe -story building and between a three - story and a four -story building. Staff indicated the separation between a two -story and a three -story building would be 40 feet at the third story and the separation between a three -story and a four -story building would be 50 feet at the fourth story. Commissioner Tolstoy raised concerns that a three -story building may be placed next to a one -story building creating a disproportionate appearance in scale and height. The Commission ayzeed that design triter" should be developed to address this issue and directed staff to prepare appropriate language to be added to the guidelines. The Commissiontre agreed. Planning Commission, Minutes -2- August 22, 1441 -3:2 Cry Y +.r FOR VISCUSZZ.'01-4 Commissioner Melchor commented that requiring urlts to be equipped with a was:iing machine and clothes dryer could affect tl.�"ffordability of those units. Commissioner Valletta stated that providing the laundry 'facility i an increase in quality of life. `t " Some members of the Commission stated that affordability is a separate 3Zsue and the Commission should deal with the Development Code amendment. The majority of the commission agreed that the I*undry facility ebould,be a, choice of either providing a hook -up for''each unit or providing common laundry faclities. ✓r' �. Commiusioner Valletta disagreed. Mr. aleaon brought up the issue of the p- opened 38 -foot average setback for uncovered parking in the Terra Vista Planned Community. "e proposed a 32 -foot average setback. Commissioner McYiel asked staff for clarification. �� II Ms. Fong responded that the 38 -foot setback is for',,�he building, the detached struc -uses, and uncovered parking in order to maintain a, consistent strestacape consistent with the requirement in the Development Code." It was pcinted out that the 38 -foot setback is already'less than the requirements of. the Development Code.' In a minimum, the two Planned Communities standards are consistent with ore another. The Commission's direction was to maintain the proposed 38 -foot average setback from a majof "'arterial. The meeting was adjourned at 5:15 p,m. and the Commission continued the public ` hearing to the September 31, 1991, regular meeting. , Respectfully submitted. Brad Buller . Secretary Planning Commission Minutes -3- August 22, 1991 r I ary or RANOo vicAmomA SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATIOS 71-R RESIDENTIAL DEVELOFIZNT RESIDENTIAL APPLICATION ZVALUATIOlY A OenersL^ All new residential development ara subject to the Evaluation as described in Section 17.06ri.030 . except for the folio -Ang: a New residential development 4 units or less ® New residential subdivision 4lots or less ® Individual a!V. a family constn-,ction E Othtrs as determined by the City Planner - R Purpose : The intent of the Supplemental Residential Evaluation is to ,ensure that the development will meet and satLsfy the City s goals and objectives . This=„ review is based upon community objectives egnvssrd in the General Plan. Criteria evaluation used In the of a residential project and in conjunction with the Development/ Design Renew considerations are described in Section 17.060.010 , These criteria are listed as follows: ■ Absolute Policies - Section 17,08.050 • Development Standards - Section 17.08.00 • Design Guidelines - Sc.e-4in, 17.08.090 C. WiIcAtIon procedure : The submi:'tal to the Supplemental QuesUorinaire ►< . required for development. The Aliplication he to the C►, residential shall stt — ed Planner fo: evaluation on the completeness and accuracies. of the informatl3u' submitted. The City Planner shall determine if the project complies with each of the Absolute Policies and Design Guidelines prior scheduling the project for Planning Commission consideratto. /Z ,MA) r A Supplemental Questionnaire L Acknowledgement of the CIW* sreguixements. , I. the applicant. (Name) (Tale) (Firm's %dame), representing the developer. property ow,{er and members of the profe{ Ronal team am reasonably familiar with all the pe:tinb—",t Codes. Laws. Ordinances `Policies etc.. that apply to the developrrmU of this prop"project . ~( :'X { Check the documents that apply to the project t ,j O Development Code D General Plan O Etiwanda Sped4c Plan Terra Vista Planned Communi y O Foothill Blvd Sr=jnc Plan 0 Victoria Planned Community © other. Please specify I - I Stgnaturt 3 I 2 Absolute Melee. These are abseute requirements each project must satisfy before approval can bt granted. The Absoiute policies have been developed in respponse to the most critical issues associated with residential development These incluc a assuringg ne +ghborhoad compatibility, compliance with adopted plats, adequaccyy of pubric facilities anG services. and protection of the public envi.�onment and publls health. Thew Absolute Polities sre contained in Section I.:080,050 Describe , W written. form, illustrated graphics or a Z- ombination of both . how this pro s. project has been designed to meet each of the criteria as stated in Section 17.080 0 ( Attached additional z,74rets as neceww; 8 D=etopmeat star udp, These are the development standards dealing with minima= rec;,31rcments for setbacX\\lot area, building height. open space, etc. The specific development standards whici�, a pprrooj�ect must sat' re d am upon the base development dlstrtct .These st> asiud4 are contain in 8ecttorL 17.08.M of the Development Code-.-- ode. Projects with�tn Spk niIIc Pipes and Planned CcmmuAitles areas must satisfy She dew- pment Sandards contain in that SpecLic Plan and Community Plan Describe . in written form, illustrated graphics or a combirltioi' of both .itor this project has been designed to meet and exceed the minis I 1 requirements of the development standards ( Attached additional sheets as n--tediary ) 1 ; he guldeltnbs are based up*�It commurL y de&gn goals as expressed in the General Pitts and xneourage the order and harmoniotis appearancti of siructtuat and pprierty tncludirig netghborh coaapatibiltty site p anntng. architecture aizd laniiscaping, Tote g..i eUnes ante intended to be e�tbte enouy� to ailtas fndividu�l expreaston and innovation wtthfrt a framewrork of am esta6Ttshed htgli ataadard fast design quality. 'tilt design gutdeltnes.ait contained is Section 17.080 090 . Describe . in written form. illuwated graphics or a combiriktlon of both, how this project has 1.,een destpied to meet each cC ttte design guidelines. / ,AM) '� Co mural Design Goals (3 General Resign Principles Fite ca *=munity's - expectations for development ark influenced lay d strong desis s f'or` "quality design." 2':te ptiticiples which influence this direction for developments arc as follows: - Innovativc design, regardless of its style, in atone important to thS achievement of "quality" than the use of any predouirmined them. Innovative design promom the use of ucvel %viations to solve common and uniqu> pidblems in urban development. ! - i =`legit quality tip Molt of extensiva consideration in providing ,innovAdve and ! apPmpriaw wl?jtiws to all aspects of ft desigm - Developmc-tts sho"I be designed tv seervc the crramttjty'° resi&nts anal rsi*crs and reflect tiro ca,�unety's aesthetic valves. - Pesigners are expected to recognize aM work in concert with cosntnunity gnats as wa=ll as z.Mressing regtta:sts of t4%air c1:anr - Desipc s should not vk v their rmjccts singly, but as apart of a Urgra msstet plan area in w .ich dMy age sespcns ^1x14 ffot design cuc�M!Pty and c�ampatibility. Standardiwil design solutions, "off the,- Ix7A6 njP w)nch may be accepted (.fiOWheM, are M neaWsarily, the ace* able. tmeasura of quality design in this commuttaty. acknowledge !tie;asitive OJPCM of W-by exis&g buildings by insotlaoracing compatible feattmm in the ne« deVelap"nts, " Wr" design concept i3 ex;KxVd ire all site and architectural It this coacepL r - sides .ad pons of x design i6t �cp vteei to =4. a the ware n=ntion to deceit and in►ssest in desiS4 foMnkh ion. GPpg.IIl. 75) new general princ:pIts alt the t mmunity's expectaao s W asa: dons in, isle tiMew pf dr'ielop- m= tpmposalsandshouktsaeiutcaa! T= mdintotheiurdivWusidzdpe &f(n=tlw, onofdesignsolutiom. a ICI Sit6 And Landscape Design Q A. Structures (residential) should Ne sit-ed to retain outs ,ard vie +ts from each urdt (GP p8:1II -100) } 1. Buildings in multi- amity p ojectsiertw skewed in relationship to each other to create a variety of vnw c ientation for increased visual inierest ' (Gs pgs III -10�) 1 G 6` �4 i.. :,... ,, j' .� . ;I rcr - j v, it � r. t� IV chit 13 A. Emphasize horizontal over vert --al fea -itrs to reduc- •hc overall appearance of t;aight. ,, b. Projection AM w-,Fl ti J J a C. Orient buildings around common facility this - 1 Irk this - not ,' As ti Irk not ,' As ti B, Change in roL" lever or planes p Zvi s4 architectural interest. (DG 17.08.090D.2) jm=xx to be avoideO� roof shapes complicated and indiscri� Ay mixed creates rest- less, chaotic appearamm.(M U) ,. -� ..mow" - �e*"'�•" M1 not this t all roofs simple -and unMrm prwid�iquiat outline, but tending to*; � I monotony if numbeie of un...,, is very lacge.(MMA) this ; gr.. •cps arVculated by distinct shapes can ac ieve unity with variety. (Ally) 0701 -02 0 SEPTEMBER 11 , 1991 P. C AGENDA ( 5 of 13 � I, RESOLUTION NO. 88 -ICsA A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF PANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE ESTABLISHED POLICIES RECA RING LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION DRIMTNGS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, on August 10, 1968, adopted Resolution No. 88 -161 establishing certain policies regarding landscape and irrigation drawings to implement the City's goals and objectives. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determined that there is a need to add a policy to ensure the quality of the landscape materials. NOW, THEREFORE, HE IT RESOLVED,,,that the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cur7,�oonga does hereby amend,their policy to read: 1. The developer is responsible for the proper installation and completion of all required landscaping. 2� The developer shall submit landscape and irrigation plans for review and approval to the Planning Division in a manner prescribed by the City Planner. Said plans shall be prepared by a rt'gietered Landscape Architect whose stamp shall be conspicuously affixed to se.16 plans. i 3. The developer shall retain the services of a registered andscape Architect to provide inspection of the instal:rip "nor, c,f the landscape and irrigation system. It shall be the Landscape Arc2t.'tectI4 responsibility to inspect or direct the inspection of the installatioa Of plants, materials, and irrigation systems in compliance with the approved plans and with City Standards requirements and Conditions of Approval. 4. The developer's Landscape, Architect shall inspnat and certify the quality and health of the landscape materials. Such certification shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to installation of the landscape materials. S. The developer's: Landscape Archi -ect shall notify th,`.Planning Division immediately upon the installation of any material or equipment other than shown on the approved plans. All changes are subject to approval by the Planning Division. S. Upon completion of the project, the developer's Landscape Architect shall submit a written report to the Planning Division including: a. A certification in a .form prescribed by the City Planner that the work was completed in accordance with the approved plans and with City standards, except as listed in (b) below. b. A listing of any deviat',ons <=i7om the approved plans or,from City standards and the date of approval and by whdm, in the Planning Division, approval was granted for said deviation. PLANNING C014HISSTON RESOLUTION NO. 88 -161A DCA 91002 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA September 11, 1991, Page 2' qP C. An "as built" set of landscape and irrigation plats. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 1991. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. i Larry T. McNiel, Chairman -j ATTEST:— :brad Buller, Secretary I, Hrad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the forgoing +Res-Dlution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and, adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 11th tray of September 1991. COMMISSIONERS: - AYES: ;t NOES: COMMISSIONERS; i„SSENT: COMMISSIONERS: 1 i I l 6'3 l�'tia RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PWANING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, SALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF 'DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 91 -02, AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING VARIOUS DE."4LOPHENT STANDARDS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES FO$ MULTI- FZMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, AND- 1AKING FINDINGS IN SUPPCRT THEREOF. A. Recitals. (i) The City of Rancho Cucamonga has filed an application for mevelopment Code Amendment 91 -02, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development District Amendment request is referred to as "the application. (ii) On April 24, and continued to May 8, June 12, July 10, August 14, August 22, and September 11, 1991, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted duly noticed p • '.a a hearings on the application. On September 11, 1991, the Commission conclv:ed said hearings. (iii) All legal prerequisites to the ad . ion of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and reeolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the a..ove- referenced public hearings on April 24, May 8, June 12, July 10, August 14, and September 11, 1991, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a) That- the Amendment will provide for development of a comprehensively planned- urban community within, the District that is superior to development otherwise_ allowable under alternate regulations, and b) That the Amendment will provide for development within the District in ,a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development and growth management policies of the City. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearings and upon tha specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby findo and concludes as follows: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DCA 91 -02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA September 3J, 1991 ... Page 2 a) The Amendment $-i in conformance with the General Plan. b) The' Amendment will not create a significant advert- effect on the environment: 4. This CommissioA hereby finds and certifies that the project has been reviewed and considered in compliance with -the California Environmental , Quality Act of 1970 and, further, thin Commission hereby, recommends to the City Council that a Negxtiva Declaration be issued. S. Based upon that findings and conclusione net forth,in paragraris 1, 2, 3, and 4 ab^ve, zhis Commission hereby resolves as follows: (a) The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve and adopt Development Code Amendmenr. 91 -02 to codify the Municipal. ctec per the attached Ordinance. . (b) That r Certified. Copy of this Rewzilution turd related material hereby adopted Yy the Planning Commission shall ire, forwarded to the City Council. 6. The Secretary to th {s Comm!,ssicn shall cart'Lfy to the a:�optien of this Resolution. i APPROVEJ AND ADOPTED THIS 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 1991. PLFNNIKG COMMISSION OF THE CITY O F RANCHO CUCAMO &GA i BY: Larry T. McNie1, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Secretary I, Brad Buller, 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 thek City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a- regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 11th dry of September 1991, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ORDINANCE NO. AN ORnIVANCE OF THE 'CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT LODE AMENDMENT 91 -02, AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE, REGARDING VARIOUS DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS F,ND DESIGN GUIDZLINES FOR MULTI- FAMILY RLSIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. A. Recitals. (i) On April 24 and continued to May 8, Juns 12, July 10, and August 14, August 22, and September 11, 1991, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing with respect to the above- referenced Development Code Amendment. Following the conclusion of said public hearing on September 11 1991, the Planning Commission - adapted Resolution No. ,` thereby recommending that the City Council adopt De- elopment Code Amendment No. 91 -02. (ii) On , 19_:, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public haarirg and concluded said hearing prior to its adoption of this Ordinance. l f (iii) All legal prerequisites prior to tho adoption of this Ordinance have cccurred. 1 B. Ordinance. The City Council, of the City.ef Rancho Cucamonga ordains as follows: Section 1:' This Council hereby specifies and finds, that all of the facts set forth ir. the Recitals, Part A, of the Ordinance are true and correct. Section 2: This Council hereby finds and certifies that the project has been reviewed and considered in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, and furthor, "this Council hereby issues a Negative Declaration. Section 3: The Rancho Cucamonga City Council finds as follows: a) The proposed Amendment would not have significant adverse impacts on the environment nor the surrounding properties; and b) The proposed Amendmant is in conformance with the General Plan. i Section 4: The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby approves Development Code Amendment 91 -02 as follows: CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. DCA 91 -02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Page 2 ^ a) Title 17 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code is hereby amended by modifying Table 17.08.040E - Basis Development Standards, and Table 17.03 „0400 - Optional Development Standards, attached hereto 'as Exhibits "A” and "B" and incorporated heroin by this reference. b) Title 17 of the Rzucho Cucamonga Municipal-Code is hereby amended by modifying Section 17.08.040G - Recreation Area /Facility, attached hereto as Exhibit, "C" and incorporateC herein by this reference. c) Title 17 if the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal `Code is hereby amended by modifying Section 17.08.0408 - Visitor Parking, attached hereto as Exhibit "D" and incorporated herein by this reference. d) Title, 17 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding a new Section `17.08.040E, and Table 17.08.040(E) - Building Separations Standards, attached hereto as 'Exhibit "E " and incorporated herein by this reference, and a'l subsequent sections renumbered accordingly. e) Title 17 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code is hereby AWLk amended by adding Section 17.08.04OR - Amenities, attached hereto as Exhibit IF" and incorporated herein by this referencq. f) Title �';7 of the; Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code is hereby amended -hv mod,fyi.ner Section 17.08.030F1d(3) - Absolute Policies, to read as follows: An entire site plan shall be oriented so that the activities and functions are aligned hierarchically - placing those least compatible furthest from the' common boundary between land uses and those most compatible near that boundary (i.e., single story adjacent to single story). g) Title 17 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code is hereby amended by modifying Section 17.08.090 - Design Guidelines, attached hereto as Exhibit "G" and incorporated herein by this reference. Section 5: The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same 'to be published wii:l£n 15 days after its passage at least once in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, a-yewspaper of general circulation published in the City of Ontario, California, and circulated in-the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. 11 TABLE 17.08.040 - B BASIC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS (NIR o Not Requlrod) VL L LM M MN H LOT AREA: 22500 8000 6000 3AC 3AC 3AC Minimum NetAcerage (L) (L) (L) MINIMUM NET 20000 7200 5000 3AC 3AC - ' 3AC (L) W W NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS (A) Permitted per acre HE Up To S Up To 11 Up To 19 UP To 27 MINIMUM DWELLING UNIT 90: (1) Singto Family Attached and 1.000 SQ.FT. (H) Regardless Of Disuk t Detached Dwelling MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLINGS (.) EFFICIENCY /STUDIO 550 SOFT.RegardessOfDistrict ONE BEDROOM 650 W. Fr. RaW., ess Of Dim:M TWO BEDROOM 800 SOFT. Regardless Of District TH REE OR MCR OOMS PaO`e3s sulct LO 7 DIMENSIONS Minimum width (® Required 90 Avg. 65 Avg. 50 Avg. NiR N/R N1R From Setback) Vary 41.10 Vary 4- 5 Vary +/- 5 MINIMUM CORNER LOT WIDTH 100 70 - 50 WR WR MR MINIMUM DEPTH 150 100 00 N1 AINIMUM FRONTAGE 50 40 30 100 100 . 100 (Q From Property Lino) MINIMUM FLAG LOT FROW-AdE 30 20 20 50 50 50 (@ From Property Une) SETBACKS: (Q) From Yard (C.E) 42 Avg. 37 Avg. 52livg. 37Avg NUR MR VARY41.5 VARYW -5 VARY41 -5 VARY 41.3 CORNER SIOTE YARD 27 27 22 27 MIR NI INTERIOR SIDE YARD 10115 5l10 5/70 10 N19 N/R (D) REAR YARD 30 j 20 15 10 WR NLR ro AT INTERIORS BOUNDARY =5 2W5 15/5 1515 1515 155 ( Dwelling UnIt/Accessory Bldg.) 1 (I)) (D) (D) OBIT A i TABLE 17.08.040 - B BASIC bVELOPMENT STANDARDG (Continued) (N R = Not Required) N1R L LM IA I Mill H RESIDENTIAL BUILDING SEPARATIONS N/R WR Required Per Section 17.48.040-E HEIGHT LIMITATIONS 35 35 35 35 (F) 40 (F), 55 (� LOT COVERAGE ( maximum %) 25% 40% 50°/e SO °h 50% 50% OPEN SPACE REQUIRED Private Open Space (Ground Floor/Upper Story Uni)) 2,000 / N 1,000 / 300/150 225!150 150!100 154/,00' COMMON OPEV SPACE (A) (Minimum °lo, NIR ' NIR N1R 30% 30% 30% USEABLE OPEN SPACE (A) (Private and Common) 65% 60% 40% 35% 35% 35% RECREATION AREAJFACILITY WR OUALITES AND A SALNN%E MO(OF LNIT SIZES MIOTYPES . 17.08.040-H Required Per Se-Ran 77.0$:O4 -17,,Q8 LANDSCAPING" (G) (G) (G) Required Per Section 040-G - -ilni1 BIT M, AMENITIES N!R N1R N/R Required Per Section. 17.Q8,040 -R A. EXCLUDING LAND NECESSARY FUR SECONDARY STREETS AND ARTERIALS AND iiH4LSDE AREAS SNALLBEQ £KWMTON1M SLOKICIWACITY FACTOR CONTAINED N SECTION 1724A10 -8 . 8. AS MEASURED FROM THEtXTMATECURBFACEONP UBLICANDPRIVATESTREET SREFERTOTA9.E17 .00.080 -D RRADDR76.YAL.SETBACK. . C. VARIME FRONT YARDS ALLOWED KRSUANrTOSECT "i7A&W-FL D. ADDTEN (I0)'& -r FAWACENTTOVLLORLMDWsRICT . E. LESS THAN EIGHTE EN(181 FEET FROM MCKQF8IlEWALKRECU OPEREIM F LIMIT ONE (I) STORY WITHIN ONE MPMR6)(100) FEET OFVLORILDISiR ICT FOR MU1TIPLEFAMLYDWELL.IM .. G. PERIAETER LANDSCAPING AND INTERIOR STREET TREES . H. ASNGLEFAMLYDETA04M DWELLING LESSTHAINd TF10ilSlU VOMKIVAREFEET MAYBE AMWZEDV*ENADEvac"1EMr EXHIBITS INNOVATIVE OUALRIES IN TRACT. FICT AND ARCHITECTURAL I- 0W THIKKKIH THEAPPROVALOFA CO O)TION& USEPERMR . L SENIOR CITIZENS PROJECTS ARE EZEMPTED FROM THIS REOUIREPNENT . J. TO ASSURE THAT SMALLERUNTS ARE NOT CONCENTRATED IN ANY ONE AREAM PRMCT.IM FOLLOWINGPERCMAGE 111ATTATIONS OF THE TOTAL NUMBER OF UNITSSHALL APPLY TEN (10) PERCENT FOR EFFICENCYSTUdC ANDTFWTY FM VM PEACENTFOR ONE BEDROOM OR UP TOTHJRTY FIVE M PERCCRCOUSIED . SUBACTTO A= DITV" USE PEIWR . THE K AWING COMUSSOOM MAY AUTHORIZE A GRFATER RATIOOF EFFI6[NCYOR N E (1) SEDFKOM LINTS "CN A DEWIOPMENT E76MS NN7vATIvE DESM OUALITES AND A SALNN%E MO(OF LNIT SIZES MIOTYPES . IL IN HI LSIOE AREAS. HEIGHTS SHALL BE LIMITED TOTHNR)Y (30) FEET AS SPECIFIED IN SECTION VZA .070 - Q1 . L ON EXISTING LOTS OF RECM. PAKELS LESS THAN THREE P ACRES AND LESS-THAN THE REQUIRED MINIMUM FRONTAGE MAY ONLYBE DEVELOPEDATTKELOWFSTEOOORTHEPERMITIEDDENSITYRAW' _ - -ilni1 BIT -f E TABLE 17.08.440 - G OP7gONAL DEVELOPMENT STAWDARDS (N!R = Not Re.;utrW) L LM W MINIMUM SITE AREA (Gross) SAO SAC SAC SAG SAC LOTA V n VaI anon (AgNmum fdetAverage) Required (1) Required SAC SAC ' RUMBER OF DWELLINGEMITS (A) (Permitted per Acre) Up To 4 Up To a Up To 14 Up To 241 V Ta 30 INIMUM W LLIN UNI S : (J) Single Family Attached and 1,000 - SO.FT. (G) Regardless Of District Detr.ehed Dwelling MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLINGS (IQ EFFICIENCY /STUDIO NIR 550 SO.F''. Rugardle; Y District I ONE SEDROOM MR 6W SOFT. Regardless Of Dirrict TWO SEDROCM NJR 800 SOFT. Regardless Of District THREE OR MORE BEDROOMS WR 950 SQFT. Regardlaas & Diatdct LOT DIMENSIONS Minimum width (0 Required Vats lion (1) � Vardawn WR NIR Front Sebaclt) Required Required MINIMUM DS:ITH VZ6 Requirmd In W SrC2 Fanny Qjbk ,4V= S G :(8) Local Street 42 AVG. (q 42 AVG. 42 AWL 47 AVG. VARY41 -5 VARYahS VARY+1.5 VARY+1-5 PRIVATE STREET OR DRIVEWAY 32 AVG. 15 AVC» 5 5 5 VARY41.5 VARY+f45 (E) (E) (E) (E) CORNER SIDE YARD 17 10 5 NIR MR (E) (E) (E) INTERIOR SIDE YARD 5110 (1) 10 WR W _ (H) (D.H) AT INTERIO SRE BOUNDA Y 2015 -T 1515 2075 2013 2016 ( Dwelling Unit I Accessory Bldg.) (p) (D) (D) EY1 n B Igo TABLE 17.08.040-C OPTIONAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS C- ontinued) (N1R a NOt RDquiTett) L }.}A T� :eb MH t RESIDENTIAL BUILDING SEPERATIONS 25 Required Per Section 17.95.940•E OTHER 10 10 Required Per Secticn. 17.08 -E HEIGHT LIMITATIONS 35 35 35 tC) 40 (c) 55 (C) OPEN SPACE a CQUIRF.D Private Open Space (Ground Floo. 7pper Story Unit) 1,0001N/R 30W150 2251150 1501100 1501100 COMMON OPEN SPACE (A) (Minimum 01.) 5010 10°'0 35% 35% 35% JSEABLE OPEN SPACE (A) (Private and Common) 60% Z450/o 40% L40% 40% RECREATION AREAIFACILITY VR PUrsu antTo Sarno i'TW8.0�W H LANDSCAPING (F) Rtaquirt+ Pursuant To . jctian 17.Q040-G FRONT YARD LANDSCAPING Required pursuant To S.eotiOn 17.08.040 - ENERGY CONSERVATION N/R Required Pursuant To Section 17.08.040 -I AMENITIES N/R N/R Required Per Section 17.08.040•R A EXCLUDING LAND NECESSARY FORSECONOARYSTREETS AND ARTERWA AND ki HILLSIDE ARM SH71i3 .tt£1>OVANNTOHiM SLOK CAPACRY FACTORCONTAVED N SECTION 17.2f.OW0`0 -B . B. AS MEASURED FROM THE ULTIMATE CURB FACE ON PUBLIC AND PRIVATE STREETS. REFER TO TAKE 1724MMO • D FOR ADDRTK*M SETBACK NFCRMATrW. C. LAIR ONE (1) STORY WITHIN ONE HUNDRED ( 100) FEET OF VL OR L DISTRICT FOR MULTIPLE FAMLLYOWELLMKi . 0. ADOTEN (10)FEET FADJACENTTOVL.LORLMOISTRICT E. LESS THAN EIGHTEEN (1 81 FEET FROM WCK OF SIDEWALK WM41N COFl00MNUM.TGi4PN01J3E OR APARTMENT REOUFF -S AUTCMATIC GARAGE DOOR OPENERS. GARAGE SETBACK i0 TL3d (10) FEET MCIi UM F SLOE WAY GARAGE ARE USED PURSUANT TO SECTION I?At ?At= -M VA" SINGLE FAMILY DETACEDISEMI OETACHMDEVELOPMEW . F. PERNAETER LANOSWING AHD tHTERCH STREETTRE°_S . G. ASNGLE FAMILY DETACHED OWELIXI LESS TWNNNEFASMkiEDW M SQUARE FEET W )LLREGUMEMe APPROVAL OfACOMMONiL USE PERMIT PURSUANTTO SECTION 17.0&= . H. 2_RO LOT LM OWELLMIGS PERMLm.,D PURSUANT TO SECTION Mftoi0 - P . L IEFERTOTAME17 AL010•C.IAMTAMEIT.SWSOW -C:2. J. SENIOR CITWI S PROJECTS ARE E (EMPTEDFROMTHIS REOUIRENENT. K. TO ASSURE THAT SMALLER UNTS ARE NOT CONCENTRATED IN ANY ONEARE-A OR PERCMAGEtIMITAMONSOF THE TOTALNUMBEROF UNLTS SHALLAPPLY. TEN (10) PERCENT FOR EFFIC ENCYISTMO AND THIRTY FIVE M PERCENT FOR ow BEDROOM OR LIP TOTHRI'' FIVE M PERCENT COMBNEO. SLKW .CTTOAOOMMONAL USE PE:UT. THE PLANN GCOMMISSIONMAY AUTHWREAGREAMRRATK)OFEFFXe CYO ROtgtt) DF ,0A000LWSWHENADE611PMME10iT nNdi O.MVEOavm OUALRES AND A BALANCE MIX OF UNIT SIM AND TYPES . L. NHxLSHDEAREAS, HEIGHTSSHALLBELIMIT EOTOTHIiTY PC) FEET ASSPECLFIEDNSECTNDNi72C O70 -D.1 41.1 11 r-, O 11 lu E i v Section 17.08.040 - G O Rreanal A{ IPac City Whet�t required In Table 17.05.040 - C . dev- .toper shall provide recreational amenities in conjunction with common open slydce as follows 1. Development consisting of 30 units or less shall provide three of the following recreational amenities (a) Large open lawn area , one of the dimension shall be a minimum of 50 feet . (b) Enclosed tot lot with multiple play equipment. (c) Spa or pool . (d) BBQ facility equipped.with grill , picnic benches , etc 2. Development, - onsisting of 31 units to 100 units sban provide another set of recreational amenities as described In Section 17.08.040 - sl , or equivalent , as approved by the Planning Commission . 3. Development consisting of 101 units to 200 units shall provid€ five of the following recreational amenities or equivalent , as approved by the Planning Commission (a) Large open, lawn one of the dimension dull be a minimum of 100 feet. (b) Multiple enclosed tot lots with multiple play equlpment.The tot lots shall be conveniently located throughout the site. The number of tot lots and their location shall be subject to Planning Commission review and approval (c) Pool and spa. (d) Community multi- purpose room equipped with kitchen, defined areas for gam=s. exercises . etc. (e) BBQ facilities aqufpppeed with multiple grills. picnic benches. etc. The BBQ facilities shag be conveniently lour,'soughout the site. Tiie number ber of BBQ facilities and their lccaizon sz:21 be subject to If) Court fga.._Ctfes I e.g.t oIl ll, basketball. etc.). (g) Jogging/walking trails with a mrcise stations. 4. For Each 100 units above the first 200 units, another set of recreational amenities as described in Section 17.08.040 - G3 shall be provided. 5. Other recreational amenities not listed above may be rAnsidered subject to; Planning Cozunission review and approval. 6. Related recreational activities n,ay be grouped together and located at any one area of tho common open space. 7. Dispersal of recreational facilities thro `tie shall be required for development with multiple recreatio nal fpphh acilities 8. All recreation areas or facilities required by this section shall be maintained by private homeowner's association property owner or private assessment districts. 1. E8ITQ1 n l tit � f�3 J r it r Section 17.0$.G Q - K , R Visitor per. For projects with private streets,,, driveways visitor parking requi,ed by Section i7.12.Q4Q shall i e provided in off. street visitor parking bays within 15t? feet of all dwelling units . Visitor parking shall be clearly delineated through proper side to the satisfaction of the City Planner. SisnaKe may include , but is not-lirnited to: pavemeat marking . free standing l sign designating the stalls as visitor parking . and directory .signs guiding visitors to the visitor parking area- I' i \. 1 i t fl Gs I Section 17.08.040 - E E "goarauons. Where required in Table 17.08.040 - B and P . this section sit:. forth minimum requirements for buuding separation and setback standards. TABLE 17.08.040- E BUILDING SEPARATION AND SETBACK STANCFARDS - DISTRICTS BUILDING SEPARATION AND SETBACK (A) M (C) F11i (C) H (C) (in feet) THREE OR MORE STORY BUILDINGS. (D) BUILDING TO BUILDING (B) A MAXIMUM OF' 1WF.'.tM,'r`TVE FEEL' FOR THREE OR MORE STORY BUILDINGS. (E) 1. FRONT TO FRONT AREA PROVIDED A MINIMUM 10 FOOT AREA SHAM BE MAINTAINED FREE AND a. No pat',a or recessed patio 30 30 30 b. Between patio fence/wall leas than 5 ft. in height (F) - without sidewalk (F) 10 10 10 - with sidewalk (F) 15 15 is c. Between patio fence/wall more than 5 ft. in height and between balconies 20 20 20 d. Between a patio femawall and a building wall 20 20 20 e. With common patio fencelwali 30 30 30 2. OTHER 15 15 15 BUIL". ING TO ONE -STORY DETACHED GARAGE/CARPORT OR OTHER ACCESSORY 15 15 15 STRUCTURES(E) BUILDING TO CURB (E) ISM 15 (0) 15 (D) BUILDING TO CURB AT PROJECT ENTRY (patio wall 20 20 25 or fence shall not project into the setback area) (A) BUILDING SHALL MEAN DWELLING UNITS. (B) BUILDING SEPARATION STANDARDS FOR BUILDING TO BUILDING SHALL BE FOR TWO-STORY DEVELOPMENT ONLY. (C) ADD TEN FEET FOR EACH FLOOR /STORY ABOVE THE SECOND FLOOR /STORY FOR THREE OR MORE STORY BUILDINGS. (D) ADD FIVE FEET FOR h� CH FLOOR /CORY ABOVE THE SECOND FLOOR/STORY UP TO A MAXIMUM OF' 1WF.'.tM,'r`TVE FEEL' FOR THREE OR MORE STORY BUILDINGS. (E) PATIO WALL /FENCE; AND PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY MAY Pi1OJECT INTO THE SETBACK AREA PROVIDED A MINIMUM 10 FOOT AREA SHAM BE MAINTAINED FREE AND CLEAR FOR i.ANDSCAPING.. AOL (F) BETWEEN BALCONIES ADD 5 FEET . EXHIBIT " E O �� I . 177 I "I'll 6-► - , it X""SV IORM AQ(As tl� or lxli� - AV I" VIM 13e7' AW*r swolous A.PD s EXMBIT E-2t' a ED I� IBIT -E 3' ,I i` Section 17 08.040 - R R pmenities.TO enhance quality of life for multi - family development. additional amenities shall be required as follows: s 1. Storage space. Each unit shall be ar "id with a minimum of 125 cubic feet of exterior lockable storage s ' ,.The *forage space sbsall be located outside of the dwelling at de -.,.door level ana easily ace.essible , by the resideLfs. The design of *]hb'exterios storage space shall be architecturally integrated and /ol ; compatible to the, dWeltings. The individual storage spate units can be located tivlthin thefuily enclosed garages designated for that dwelling unit. 2. Laundry facility. Each unit shall be provided with a hook-up for iwashing machine and clothes dryer in the interior of the clw TP39 -; . or . common laundry facilities shall be provided and be equ!p'ocd'-;i ;�h washing mad:ines and cloy ho-dryers at a rate of one *.asking iBAubine ann=%;..bes dryer per five W Common `laundry facilities should be conveniently located for all rf �tr with►at the _.ter'.- C:.dmm¢on laundry facilities can be within free q�ag; billet n -s . attached to dwelling units or within ^ o the laundry facilities shall be the recreation ae desi.� common architecturally . j �leto the dwelling*. l AML 0 Section 17.08.090 Section 17.08.090 0eranl Design G delnes A. Intent The intent of the guidelines is to assist the developer in understanding and coi pEying with the City's standards for building and site design. The guidelines are based upon nom munity design goals as expressed in t!h Qe.neral Plan, and Qcicaurage the orderly and harmonious appearance of structures and property alohZ with associated facilities such as signs, landscaping, parking areas, and streets. The guidelines establish a high standard for design quality but are flexible enough to allow individual sxprssion and imaginative solutions. B. applicability. The provisions of this section shall apply to all development within all districts, unless otherwise specified herein. Aoy addition, remodeling, relocation as, construction requiring a building permit within any residential district subject to Development/Design Review pursuant to Chapter 17.05 shall adhere to these guidelines where applicable.. C. Site Plan Design 1. Existing Site Conditions. Hatural features should be used to an advantage as aesign elements; sue as, mature vegetation, landforms, .drainage courses, grading, rock autcroppings and views. Conversely, undesirable site features can be minimized through proper site plaining arA building orientation. 2. Building Orientation. Placement of the buildings shall be done in a manner compa'ti55--wiM— sumoundinC existing and planned uses and buildings. The setback from streets and adjacent properties should relate to the scale of the Amok proposed building. Larger buildings require more setback area for a balance -102- IFEMB ►► ►► }{ �3'7,lIJ G 9 i 3. 4. a Section 10$.090 of scale and compatibility with adjacent uses. Buildings should be oriented along a !forth -south axis, as much as possible, to encourage energy conservation. For multi - family development, attached dwellings should be provided with relief and a sense of variety. This could be achieved by staggering the units. The pltcemeRt of buildings should relate to one another and create a variety of view orientation for increased interest and openness. This could be achieved by skewing or angling the buildings. Buildings should be cluster around con m on :F. =<ciliUes Access/Circulation. The access and circulation should be designed to provide a safe and eV ent system for vehicles and pedestrians. Pnintr of access shall comply with city access regulations and shall not conflict with other planned or existing access points. Two points of actass shall be provided for all but the smallest residential developments. The circulation system should be designed to reduce conflicts between vehicular and pedestrian traffic, minimize impacts on adacent properties, combine access where possible, and provide adequate maneuvering areas. Curvilinear streets are encouraged whenever possible. Vehicular and pedestrian treffic shall be separated, to the extent possible, tlrrouyh the use of a continuous system of public and private sidewalks. i, Parking Areas. rarR:..; 'areas should be designed to minimize visual o srup onon of the overall project design. Parking areas should be screened from streefisthro),jyh combinations of mounding, landscapNo, low profiie walls and grade separa'Jons. The design of parking areas should also minimize auto noise, glare, and increases let ambient air temperature. This can be accomplished through sound walls, screening with fences or hedges, trees, and separation of parking spaces and driveways from residences. (a) Site Design: Openness, reduced structure mass and convenience of use should be characteristics of panting area design asimplemented by the follow.ng: o Parking areas (open and covered) shall be designed to provide parking spaces conveniently located to the units they are intended to serve. o long, unbroken tines of opposing garages carports on each side of a drive aisle should be. avoided. This type of design results in a "constricted alley" be. avoided. a -Free standing garages/carports should be located not to disrupt the primary view of residential structures: o: Views to landscaped areas should be maitrtained at the ends of drive aisle;L Vistas should not be o5scured by facing garages or carports. s Planter breaks and special paving should be included along the parking aisles. These features add interesting patterns to the driveway /parkway area rhythm. ;l —103- S. S. _ Section 17.(19.090 �f o In order to open up more of the parf;ng area to, adiacent landscaped. areas and reduce the "alley" affect along the drive aisle, offset facing garages/carports aka encouraged on - lengthy drive aisles. (b) Architecture: Garage and carport structures s'ho�ld exhibit; designs which are compatible, supportive and fully integrated ihto the overall architectural theme as implemented through -the following provisions: o Long structures present difficulties in keeping pivportions appropriate with ''the original design intent on the main structures, and therefore, the garage/carport structures should be limited to 8-12 ears. o RF.cognize garage doors as an element of design rhythm and use to create varying patterns. Extensive use of single width garage doors should be avoided. The perception of increased density Zan result from a parking area with large numbers of garage doors. An overly repetitious pattern of doors can be monotonous and should be avoided. o "Flimsy ", ",tick -like" carport designs which portray an add- on, non - permanent perception are otdesirable characteristics of a parking area. Substantial design elements should be integrated into the. structure to convey a more permanent concept for the carports. ® Storage units should be :designed as an integral part of the carport structure. o Within multiple space garage structures, each car space shall be separated with a solid well except where- -6wo or more spaces are designated to a single dwelling unit. For single aaage units, the Inside dlmet`aion shall be Increased to a minimum o} ten feet by twenty, fast for convenience of Us*. �t Landscapin /0gen Space. Landscaping and open spaces must be designed as an lRegral part or prqJsct deign and enhance the building design, enhance public views and spaces ond,�provide buffers and transitions where needed, with emphasis on eomple,*err:±ng grading and softening slope banks. Landscaping most provide for solar, t�ccess and shade to facilitate energy conservation. Open space; should be ;9mvided in concentmted areas large enough to pmvtde oppor°tunii.as for actNe uses by groups Fencing /Screening. Fencejt and walls are discouraged unless needed for a specific screening or safety, "purpose. Where they are needed, color, material and variation of the vertical and horizontal planes are needed to blend with the site and building design. The N.p_ of any fencing or walls should be consistent with the overall .design they,..; I -104- Section 17.08.090 i. Lighting. Adequate on -site lighting should be provided to ensure a safe enWr —di ment white at the same time not cause areas of intense Tight or glare. Fixtures and poles sha 31 be._ isigned and placed in a manner consistent and compatible with the overall site and building design character. S. Utilities and Ancillary Equipment. On-site utilities and equipment shall be located in inconspicuous areas, away from public view. Where they are located in public view, they shall be screened with a combination of material that best suits the overall design theme. 9. Grading. Development should relate to the natural surroundings and minimize grading by following the natural contours as much as possible. Graded slopes should be rounded and contoured to blend with the existing terrain. Split- level pads, built -up foundations, stepped footings, etc., can be used in areal, of moderate to steep gradient. Above all, grading shall be designed i., complement the project's orientation, scale, height, design and transitions, with surrounding areas. 10. Fire Safety. Development should be designed in .accordance with Firs District requirements for two points of L'= >e and ready access. Areas designated as high fire hazard areas should minimize fuel buildup around residences through greenbelts or cultivated fuel breaks. 11. Transition of Density. The site plan should 'consider compatibility with surrounding neignoornood through providing proper transition of density, particularly on infnl sites adjacent o lower densities. Comparable densities, open space buffer zones, increased setbacks and architectural compatibility are encouraged along common boundaries to p -wide proper transition of density. Clustering units can provide large open space areas as a buffer. 12. Street Design. Vary street pattern to reduce- streetscape monotony. ur wear streets, cul-de -sacs, front yard landscaping, and single-loaded streets are encouraged to provide streetscape variety and visual interest, particularly in the Low - Medium District- 13. House Plotting Clustering houses around common space, zero lot line, reverse p oWng, angling house to the street, and side enlry garages may be perwir d if they provide stmetscape variety and visual interest, particularly in #0 Low- Medium District. D. Building Design 1. Design Theme. A recognizable design theme shall be established which is compa1155le ilh surrounding planned or Wnting developments and should be based upon prominent design features in the immediate area (e.g., trees, landforms, histmric landmarksl. Subtle variations are encouraged which provide visual interest but do not create abrupt changes causing discord in the overall character of the immediate neighborhood. It is not intended that one style of architecture should be dominant but that individual structures shall create and enhance a high quality and harmonious community appearairce.' -lOS -- I L,� 7a- Section 12.08.0910 Z. Architecture. The architecture should consider compatibility with surrounding character, including harmonious building style, form, size, color, mat . --d, and roof line. Individual dwelling units should be distinguish la fro, another and have separate entrances. Shadow patterns created areh:....:tural elements such as overhangs, projection or recession of stories, 1 balconies, reveals, and awnings contribute to a building's character while aiding in climate control. Further, changes in the roof level or planes provide f architectural interest. -_ in particular, Lbw- Medium density and molt family residential development should be designed with upgraded arenitecture i through increased delineation of surface treatment and architectural details. The architectural concept should also complement the grading and topography of the site. a. Scale. The mass, and scale of the building should be proportionate to the site, open spaces, street locations and surrounding developments. Setbacks and overall heights should provide an, element of openness and human scale. Multiple family product type (i.e. , apartment, condominium, townhouse) is discouraged Immediately adjacent to lower density single family areas. AL' attached projects adjacent to existing one -story single family developments shall be one story, unless the impact of two- story structures on the existing one -story neighborhood is fully mitigat d ' .h emphasis on privacy, views, and general compatibility. dissgs mphasize horirc 14 as well es vertical vppearanee, This could be achieved by the use cif pro�ltions or moons of sto "es,; balconies, windows and doors, and changes in roof levels and planes. 'cular for multiple gamily product type, tefildmgs over 3 stories STbJto ; rD$q SrrAPoAtt"i AwtC 4. Materials and Colors. Colors, textures and materials shall be coordinated to achieve total compatibility of design. The materials aid`- colors chosen should complement the bufldingviviractW7 . 5. Si in . Every building shkI be designed with a precise concept for adequate signing. Vrovisions for sign placement; sign scale in relationship with building end readability shall be' considered in developing the signing concept. While p,. viding the most effective signing, it shell also be highly eotnpatible with the building and site design relative to color, material and placement. 6. Equipment Screening. Any equipment, whether on the roof, side of building, or ground, shall be screened. The method of screening shall be architecturally compatible in terms of material, color, shape, and size. The screening design shall blend with the b_llding design. Where individual equipment is provided, a continuous screen is desirable. Iv A) [,�1A) LI RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL Or----, TERRA VISTA PLANNED - COMMUNITY AMENDMENT 91 -02, AMENDING VARIOUS DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND DESIGN GUIDEL'ZNES FOR MULTI - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEPXOF. A. Recitals. (1) The City of Rancho Cucamonga has filed an application for Terra Vista Planned Community Amendment 91 -02 as described, in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Terra Vistry Planned Community Amendment request is referred to as "the application." (ii) on Apr11 24 and continued to May 8, June 12, Ju1y 10, August 14, August 22, and Septf�abcr 11, 1991, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga concsetnd duly noticed public hearings on the application. On September 11, 1991, the Commission concluded said hearing. (iii) All legal prerequisites 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 na 2ollows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts 1' set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upf-Ir -substantial evidence presented to this. Commission during the above- referenced public hearings on April 24, May 8, June 12, July 10, August 14, and September il, 1991, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Coimaiasion hereby specifically finds as follows; a) That the Amendment will provide for development of, a comprehensively 7e4wmed urban community within the District that is superl'ir to development othi,rwise allowable under alternate regulations; and b) That the Amendment will provide for development within the, District in a manner consistent with the General Pluh and with related \\" development and growth management policies of the City. 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 l and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TVPCA 91 -02 - CITY OF RANCHU CUCAMONGA September 11, 1991 Page 2' a) That the proposed amendment would not have significant impacts on the environment nor the surrounding properties, and b) That the proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan. 4. This Commission hereby finds and certifies that the project has been reviewed and considered in compliance with;, the California nviron -antal Quality Act of 1970 and, further, this Commission hereby recommends to the City Council that a Negative Declaration be issued:, S. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, Land 4 above, this Commission hereby rss1.�).'vee 8s follows: i a) The Planning Commission hereJiy- irecommends that the City Council approve and adopt Terra Vista Communityl15ian Amendment 91 -02. per the attached Ordinance. i 5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 19a1- PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman ATTEST Brad Buller, Secretary I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the 21anning 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 mestxng of the Planning Commission held on the Slth day of September 1991, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMFISSIONE.RSd ABSENT: COMMISSIONEjS: .- 7 U ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING "ERRA VISTA PLANNED CQMMUNIT] AMENDMENT 91 -02, AMENDING VARIOUS DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR MULTI - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, AND MAILING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. (i) On April 24 and coi:tinued to May B, Jung 12, July 10, August 14, August 22, and September 11, 1.491, the Planning commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted duly noticed public hearings with respect to the above - referenced Terra Vista Planned Community Amendment. Following the conclusion of said on September\\�11, 1991, the Planning COmmIasion adopted Resolution No. , thereby recommending that the City. Council adopt Terra Vista Planned Community Amendment No. 91 -02. (ii) On , 19,__, the ;"?'y council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing and concluded said hearing prior to its adoption of this Ordinance. (iii),. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurtid. 8. ord ice. " The City Council. of the City of Rancho Cucamonga ordains as follows: Section 1: This Council,�reby specifies and finds that all of the facts sat forth in the Recital:t >Part A, of the Ordinance are true and correct. Section 2: This Council hereby finds and certifies that the project has been reviewed and considered in compliance with the California Envir)nmental Quality Act of 1970, and further, this Council hereby issues a Negative Declaration. Section 3: The Rancho Cucamonga City Council finds as follows: a) That the Planning commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, following a 'public hearing held in the time and manner prescribed by law, recommended approval of the community Plan teat amendment hereinafter described to the City Council. This City Council has held a public hearing in the time and manner prescribed by law and duly heard and considered said recommandatit\ b) That this community Plan text amendment is consistent with the General; Plan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga._; 1 76 CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE 140= TVPCA 91 -02 - CITY OF RANC[?P C CAHONGh Page 2' r 1f L J c) That this Community Plan text amendment consistent with the Development Code of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. d) That this Community Plan text amendment: will have no significant environmental impact as provided in the Negative Declaration filed herein. Section 4: The-Aty Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby approves Terra Vista Planned Community Amendment 91 -02 as follows: a) The Terra Viet% Community Plan text, Part IV, Design Guidelines, Subsection "Residential Design Guidelines," commencing on page IV -35 is hereby amended, in part, to read as attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. b) The Terra Vista Community Plan text, Part IV, Design Guidelines, Subsection "Residential Design Guidelines," commencing on page IV -38 is hereby amended in part, to read as attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. c) The Terra Vista Community Plan text, Part V, Community Development Standards, subsection "Residential Developmenti AOL Standards," Table V -3, Building Setbacks for Cluster and Innovative Development (LM and M uses) is hereby amended, in part, to read as attached hereto and incorporated herein_ by this reference. d) The Terra Vista Community Plan text, Part V, Community Development Standards, subsection "Residential Development Standards for Medium and: ;Aedium High Density," commencing on page V -14 and endin on page V -15 is hereby amended, in part, to read as attach:�d hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. e) The Terra. Vista Community Plan .Part V, Community Development; Standards, subsection "Residential Development Standards,., Table V-4, Building Setbacks for multi - family development (MH and R- 'uses) is hereby amended, in part, to read as attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. �f f) The Terra Vista Community Plan text, Part V, Community Development Standards, subsection "Residential Development Standards for High Density," commencing on page 7-18 is hereby amended, in part, to read as attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. , z AI 7 7 CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO'. TVPCA 91 -02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Page 3 Section 5: The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published within 15 days after its passage at least once in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Ontario, California, and circulated.in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. c N•O1 N ��v d. ►0+ ICI _ O U C e V y N� 0 •al 01 t0 !n U A N C in C0L L aci Na In emus �� a 14�uiE; m E In > �QE� ci-oN cod U L L w C cn 0 s- _ E o li aoc Eu N >. of m o c M E v In `m� o al c EcvyG "o wu�>ulo 0 N «. N 0 V� 0; w N d d w C�� 00 0. C 0 L 0 L >. X k; .0 In f6 M 3• T N 0 e w U 601 N U a01 QI V woo g pSC O tLOt+>.p1 A•d In V « a.G; Q1Q)� .T -c N. N tn e f00 °= rrp 7lQ to •-.O s 0 CL «- F- >ur..sv1« t-3 • • Al M dui p i +NtnL� 3 -0csN Q•c�c�> c M; � a, c a —22-0 o •0 a• c 0 o M v 0 CC7 0� m r �O G ip al U U .0 A M ?i 0O V V C �+�-.r C, _ �W� mM malacE C w~ T� wTpSQ C O ax S C C« S C OZ) d 1-0 th V y T in — L U OM C- �o3EMO mtcoLoE UNO> 0161 C. O m"UV CL Ca� w >+.L. r C-0 0 �O �O.Ciddo.�. AML C yw�CLa ceof(` LCc7.0.Z3 dO /0u EG> j wow i °E c L alFm= `oM E0 c`e�o G N C U L U N IL .O U 0 0 Q. 601 y �o .n 0 C Or al CL C U 3: LV r.;; oe asN,o. cm«� ' 0 1°� ' In co c E ui : c°1'In oLmay_ Aw mu --6.0— - o 4 Npr d 0. w E O� N C C m >. C.fig - N 0-cL O• N In u L0 O'C�n• Y'10000LLN.N fo J L. W In .•' .`�' u me C. M MB L L A� 7 N ��O ZC Ct —Nn u .rOLPL 0 '00N N f0O E'"7C010C p0:e+ w w O CON ' C0 -0 tQ1 O >. ' R W•�0N -ee O v)m CL c C0� Lcy�dyC y>.i+LONd ms a� o c o awi a ra i9a LL In im F" O«a w.aE.o S. 0 N M C3 w. s • d C c l l ' «�• 0 0 al d Ir mOUS cucccc w u G u — O D U !0 _ � o «'ate. aM 0-UU0 0 C C G G lO .0 w «'t7 gn �doCa`°i3C 94uM 0 f0. O. U A.d «M d ON. w _ L L W w b, N 0« E w wO. C1.R E`U -01N >. wO.N to 30 'wc V EQ��Fv 0?Aa1LS> to oCiw t cy -C Cu, �_v 7 ;. Li O.A �; N V A w 0n.... @ C a. L2 QI a•88 0 6°'i rauimCl toG to c in Cm C L 'A _ wa. D. U wC.+;,7Cn cC61t0LM aaYY 'r o �o>a a 61.." V oL u 0V -0 —uR ..vmcuEu u a.: ° r .+ ., tZ mole - '0 61 C L E al g6'oo ac+lCwpiCN odd amo VE w in CA :c 9rCp.OG C wU {—en «0 w. •C °O oLLw�L •a •oa e u Cw t 3Ot +fttM w 1 a s. G7 CG U = AtU vii v1 O. • /<W 7 Z-A � O Cl /a . tp 1 L Q) +� d. 1 CU 1 C) C) L +' M Cn 3 c. a) ` to W C • L y 1 N ..r y ti � s .0 N u C) O C. A_ s L L. L. p O p C 9 A. d 'O .0 to .N O ... N O— y L y C) � O 7 L. .+ Ql O• L LL O u O .�.+ O 7.�.CusC00��O0 to 35:.0 't7 CQ.Qj E�•�G o y f- CL p to s > �' a� C71 to O a C '� " y N _s C C11 u •— �. L L w U O 0) C'. r.) C 'C - to d+ to to C N U 3 ++ 'O ++ (cy «+ O O Y E d sue+ to O w« 1a O °L7 C u H C` U.2 ,v i CO3 y N >.Z m.+ y L. +' 01 L� r O C '� 0 i0 to i to ._ ,C O C O s N C N O 7 0 to 4"0 :..tl7 CL L (n .,,,, y u: ro r E a N n m m v u E .� L'c E c y c u y N i >, °' 4 r t° .r o y ��- R N .A, C) �! CAw .+ C r tp. ? t s N C y t" O O N a+'6 •C A L "' 61 d t" to CU L.M � C c�_ �� o � d_ > (>a-p v1 3 r a) .u. r c E tmo i-p.E i Q) 0 m c C p o> 3 «gym a M.o0 M Al e.. EM Y rut; 0 ui O> O N i i ?I C yd.. C) L. d .G C CA tV A 0 C C:. ..+ C C off„ C N m y C. L> y s O QI .� L w v« O .— >.." i .. CL m '— tU . >- • s v a) a) --_ — y.0+9aL � C y t yi:. W—, O u en3.t'a v> C y m 'L ~ 7 "•• U 4) C) O O to MC- � s-0 O 0.= y +' p. O 'O y o u O ....w O� 7 3 a) y� N j m —N o� ro E 5 ¢d y d y 01.E fl� pa tom y as a�w tM c�.. su L_ o p..•O v w> .+ C L U 'O � l y c C) .— O C "a CL, �... C O d Q) 0 7 .G N C' CL.• L c CL C .fir •c c ro d •- a L> '^. c 3 to 0 c c v-o ya o o c E o m`0 0 .+ ado > r. o m ro a� s u" l to Z 1 3 a) E CLC.0 uN to m �w.. « «. d a.. C -t9- o u to O C E F Cw toy p O pd'°.C.0 ytu C)= .prL n+ >L u C— 'C .0 y — .— O— y w C L O— O CL t19. C C> �9 'O = C7 O V: O O Sd..u+ C ru+ d O C O c tB ,w a) t•) L C ty to .+ r" p E w> O.0 0f L p y �.•C13 CL ° � 5,0 3 T> E c 61 � ` QS � ° ~ � E > o � t�o�$.:'e -map y 0 y 01 a M C i tU 0. E i .+ 7 s w0. t"o >. r0" ai y d. s E t. •- vi o y t «°= 3a`)�L>,'°yp $,OLe..C7 E„3C•d ISO. E:"Ct��w M30'A " ~O(DM L C u y w - 11Q:. w> L• O O (0 u L L L d L V 04. to > V >. (P> to fl' F' w «C° CSC EOOp. �C>+.•pys�+ CIC� to VO..vyC = °ep• -CC� "''Zf' -UC. O t0 O C L 6: > N "'' p �"+ - O O p 5 L �..� a M to C u. 0 C .p+ C J CL to C .,,. C «+ y to ' d C s w. O+y, y y ,L. •Q. C L1`+yO ro as�°'CO�p.+NCL CL2U.0B�i y Oa C Ur+nC)- >O'pa3 = �u0i�a�paj m� d 5]�'F L��7dOMy- �d)"t0 >OO4) C OyEQ)2too =.0 C L .+ 7 C to y° N L ' a O N C 6'r O W L .;f 7 O .+ O r .+ (o (o.+ d Q u y y.� >> 3 Es.�+I -� E O C C�� O CLlo y LL Oa Clb u v 0.0 ?N� C F-w y C y .O O u C71 to us y to L. m 0 1-*°' 0D m -0-0 d most a 0 R. tv > 3 ( > V-0 E Lt -: -• E L p41 to p �a as C 9 M. O v d c° tv Ga) $ s. a w� y L L W i to C' y. W �`'a O 3 0 E to. d y �.r c Ar; L.`03., dyE`wL•OZ'L�cnd E X� v �6�,a 9 u L119 0_ G > y p _ d u > L°) O1� �u v'g�� v aL° o •p;dw 1 eo.y+d r iL.+?�La o > >.3 C E L to o �_ `y e.0 u CL E a O O >.v C `. �� C.O,C C ("� 61 y.p �w w ®Lq L V/ Q3 C� E O -,— y yO Z L 1 r' e .p y�'°° C_ a GV .+d Q)aO> °�0� to= yy 0C`!� d Yr'p• OO. d y. (0) C y 81 d °_ i w y E •a O L to d•v ,^, ` CL O >ro 0 W u° u y s= C �� a ra > d f y y C� m to r "8 C S O y o N y yy ca. yv to C L. - y� �L o ®O `o Li c or. °a Ur. 3-pyto ClyC �OQS' COLL= cl Q.v �i ytu . govt° dt� Et"(at" «'cc`i EL-0 0.2 a.,, C �p"'r G> i u Oi 00 O(rtiy L. O C .+y CLV 0 t ato >C0)`' dC..0 d� 4) 'Do � V y t. fu 0 z M. CL Q! a9 p u 0 y y f >a y u �° to Ck U d) _ O° L 4i L E O a) to 0 .0 y y '0 6) u to O `^ a to 0` U AE = �"..tv yL�TJLu>.us t)o soC' 'wv a a w C y cC E'°' in =°aCi °'tri to °('° c cta00 L C��M °� s•_auw to 0, c3oz�, to y CR r ��= 7 `d L c= d Z7 E ;a9 w L C: = V •O �1 7 C O'iC. 07 s C �' d d •Q. C tq > y Cy41 �. X .0 �:•a -,a . �; ty y A° @ #., G.'�' O d > Lk. -sue O> 0 u i „e V sr O U toLOC N'o low °mrR u0 �3 kM vC.e® M m O i 0 LI LU� e � c ° d Jt c+ of AA m ¢ CL llbyj � d' fn en i UA C O d d V m e+f in (° 04 �I ANIL M'. 1 J > > w ti to ¢ v se O CL 0. ~ C M 0 U N 43 n • O �. o M Im M c iii E E E ® LL. y W 4 CD w ® o a ade sc',* d ~ ua > m o w Lo J z C U. E O n7 s U ® o 2.- E C= v�•�y ,c ®L w ,o a� y� ,D O CL l0 E . ® C a X 61 d. N '� dc.. o_ E 6 1 ivo a i C y d 4 G • O o$ w -- ova E y W rn c CL OQ2 0 $ d �Jrv� it W, U. 1 C I U Z m Q � tU N _ L tv W t � 0 W O x W t4 � 41 N _ O Z N °t7 Z { Z M � Y � U IC J � m to C i LL to ' .r LL E V.. z m m O m a E c C 0 of w r: W N U to S. H�iS V C W N o M U Oc!' d OZ R °_ C 6! ui •� O Q a.� Q _ c � �v C: b in o 3Ea0i L. = .� to o d m ,��, tv � yv to SSQ N i C wadi�at L E S. c ccy 2 U 8i O t C a 61 O �E �.�C �C:L U. a {r .'cio dU "�� acts EUy s+ i U Q H M�� CU 41 L. c CL O N W 0— 6 o toOto ro CD � U — c 'E' > U. Oil •i C ' O G i °.3 a o t0 y m U .0 CLFA 0 to N .+ u A. N i tv cn in ttY m m C C O Y y O � cn C M m to ' .r LL E V.. m O E c C to of w r: W N U H�iS V C S V Oc!' d OZ R °_ C 6! O Q a.� Q _ c � �v C: ,i 0`J UI �. N •O G G G d N -. 'A, y •Oy SL: C. a «• V A A D M R N �1 tG71 �° a CL G y w '.� C A�qq U ul G C W .� C M m toa—a � =M-mo= X. � G�• GC`�Cr R7 O C �QC.ie�CN F G Lo N N i7o c R to N C S t7 R U C C C w �p R ul C G N N ��� V•N WC •L41 v. G N N G -{N� �G. E < G O. pp�� y m Eil � �Gr w A C AC d tom •� dq� t ;a• ' L o j G �QaG GG•� N y ')+d , 7 tnt9� �6' L 5%r C1L C7 OR R•R� ANN CLOON• a �, 9iydL >'�F QGG CLL'Q %^LC 3"�3v .Cy`�re�c #i•v qq �nV We LWM- m� •� L Tom' Ci • C AY A'° A 31 � A U � QD1 « ,oCNww•�tr�ig� R e C `' Al tRi �Sa�eECAQea� •� i N &..s d .� R, Z C L L Chi N C�O'7. �.Q►i rF'. �ac ac�c o a Al aX QM jr N Ri Y •� tt � •g ui =� A C .C'� `� is b di 1L9 « EI 'OV� y,d �+N C'.A C f3,y L w 'R9 R L 5 y` aft Q 47 S i -gain g i;.,a ON A i7 R'!Z C L!i •mss &0. .0 AM ,Cu AW�{B jx —I G)� � 6C7 , q •' R > R pLO W .-'a a it i9 1�. *° ; 8 R ( C ! , C .� N C C N.0 X1.8 L liM iRi� R �1a !n I .a. ,M M W O C N �. C. cm CL In - G N ;% V i.� C C i� a C i C A Ni 'CA LRNd •�� LY -a CA LL,s 9®L Cccm M G b' ig S •D e u tit 'fl CO N ° w — r /G /nN -83 ffip Z _f C wfe to p, tLU W> O �yy al O C. M a) -0 c aJ s al N N Ln W No ~ONC ~re�07�•' re L. zdft p'' .0 a+ --"a d O y y'o re 'o N pU 3.�O.EtiwO9L O H m � O W Are 1.9 O lLO �L.•@' tdV aLl .+ Q 97 Mw= w> c O C1 E N d p eo d 0 «.Q ' Mai E y C .ro C C Zra O w Z.N 0 C, w .0 « E re L m IM a ++ L g y O. CA •!9 Id C Ll a Q. u�d C Y:. Q O N N yd re.g �3 of q7 Ca=C��er reU, O re r{ L al 41 CQaiSi Ems~ C 9m w 12S tj C• •� y. re 0 t d' L yo H �. am N .N C � *aa-0 MNt�4LiC� ar m tE cnCL u4 a�Eda 06ECa �.OL° .9 w 'M °C _44) �'urei �re Ha a.o•`aEECL 'tlG s_ a a v coc. reo c0 'ail..y. t80J. W. O r C. N 0..0 (nom m< fn m iB� C w� yS; L W C' p w 'O Q1 re'd �S Qyp T C > In cn Cf tit .i�a)waita)�C m NL � ��'OONtV N.r+fa reC. 0(nc0c6i'J+NN =4) 40 ,FAT IM CN re S. C� L SO.1 o fre..0 L Q C d>d0 yreyd G «'LI$ r C, 07 Q1 aJ� v 0 y.> a1 C N ��— i+ L O 0.64,9•red�a1 C c y01� C� 0 �- es CL e: E c L ? F- .G • > 0'a -.a, ' re eya..�y ar n�J1 � c � , E d t".2 L L. N L>1. a•�AO y COL = b W C R1 uA rear- LS1.O0y- W C,a C'L1C _ y V E cooH ..�o�._�w CpIL-0 'w gEw C N „ C'o .N <V d V V'^ N ® iii W 6i re P s � 0 0 d 'a Ca 41 •O �• A �0.+ C N L a1 C Ct'O tCS0iOtn .B jC tnd0 C 0 N N v CD 0.d0c1 �L1lC `0L COCO fl c9 E N .0 ar N d y._ Ca C, to 7 81 L d o .0 X L'a JT >._ C MI' NCB' areL A C 0 ul co 4? sc.�ooiE3eEo ._ .p'drn>• d C. m C 0 E Ot � In O O C- y ._ ua. w L o W d y C1 CL re O N C C V « °Q City o O M.0 — ® f�a L Q C. y O N O °a ) N o._ " ++ l C L— re .. rem �� 9.NO._°+�3.CNC> >NE Z mto ow CM o r 2 «� N U do m C7Y011 o� reC Cre._ sCa1 `dCV�a v1 d -0C V E ID 10,5 O i;_C �w y1 C�� H 10 CN _ ewe 9 re .A v l Cu�da1 dS C A 1p z w d O W s Q 1 > y. LL J_ J g F Lis. J L� Mi 1i U. Y u m W � I 2 J m ILI Q IL j C U R m U IS7 d y in V M 9? tea m Ll: U .0 m z m b n Air V 4, M® N m e r Qi M 0 v ' I Qt tS Q H s cn r ®f °�.� J D 1 m m t0 c D Q � e L 0c � M ,E N M. ..m L «y ctf M x:41 �%� An pe ari _ a LCL rjD 1,12 Le °tR� An d {j a av6 0m U C e O 'L `+A Q0L1O J➢°'A ��A 3"'A O.LyO i A A..A A~ A CL ®' U e U AMD V D w' ~LO ~QL1O m L WAD ui us CIA 41 In w L. M 3' N O D (� M D , = Y y to 0 NN ap \. �_$yYY s, NM. NM C; C; a o a ZZ rr >> Q LL. 1 I 33e 3 dl i i :L 'iL E° f 0 0 0o cc CA L. i �°�` CL CL EE M M a ♦ IV fn Ian FSi iR usw Y[f iff � � N M N M �A `vl1Q 3 33 M8 ti e�°i tali ® 90 i0 i0. O O b n Air V 4, M® N m e r Qi M 0 v in .e 0 CM to s A cn � H s cn r ®f °�.� J D 1 ol c1 tt! c O c D to � e L 0c � M ,E N M. ..m L «y ctf M x:41 �%� An pe ari _ a LCL rjD 1,12 Le °tR� uc 1a.`0c0 d {j a av6 0m U C e O 'L `+A Q0L1O J➢°'A ��A 3"'A O.LyO i A A..A A~ A CL ®' U e U AMD V D w' ~LO ~QL1O m L Q '® E 6 L. M 3' N O D (� M D {� 3 N t7 0 = Y y to 0 -may t0 0 L P s, �JNa`OJM JtY iiD9JM L �. LJM L,M SL r Q LL. 1 I { 1 1 1 dl i i :L 'iL E° f 0 0 JEW V .. 13 Im it Q10 10 3 C I 97. e C .'O tm A N �3 t. k- lul �r � O m. M v C t r �01 1. « 3 C yT w� C � N « .0 Qj � a��o v io G1 i w w O �= ICJ u0i 7 v_ Q, N 01 G� C .. aD y2c.� QI dP C pCp1� 0i f' S9 C "g Q. t�. tc $ 5G1 a m a jj pCOC'�'0 P L ,..� p e 'm 69 0y+ N U E ,. yj . A G�1 .� d vc,°OV) a1 E .v O� C a. UM L w L 0 ,fig O i7 LO« � v o a °� 2 J., N t _ 0 V O g w � V� r C V a ai G `� S'0 h ay O���0 al Y1 P® d O E E R C o V C.i. N C L wy N _. >O. o. I�r ar. N 0 0n. E O o O1.A Mill 0 Ci N m C M C dl' d .Y. -a O..°' v .0 .r m ° m ®fv 8� � a C L �� ��_ �C1 y�j 9 ? S' L d. t o y tl N $� NC. a t9 O °A i N m QfO 'D 0 dy L i0 _ ; a R '®CC(aOO.� d ° aIV 00i EO 7:0 Ceps W ay �h« Li «c a Ta °L� w a1ma.Ua 0 O a w 3 E O li 1� w C) z. r N t" a' 18 , �—t Q N 'cc p.0 C N 0 3 cx ro rn— aj E EE 3 d otQ C C•'.. N a Fy (mu N V 'C re E+= C N Ozro �'3Caiyi m�Cm' N��,�.aj.a�`� '«BOG m A 9 E00 pN 3oa,C radar E 0��.� o�c3wy:+d La '0 19 ymvo w NON d n'1 CL z�+. Qa q .. co :E , Q ai o O Harr C b y c 1v -0 ".. O p W 'a.. L. Ma+ Lq O.> �d N w C R p V's O C p N A L N V D C w CL G� a 10O M 3"a (D � I CLc �, YA � yN jz :s m 0 @ C.C� X O O�'Q CL 0) C C O Qa' E" E pa ro c L a.aLr ro N �°�eo��.t� «ds jai «�� :. Hm 'O 01. 43 cn mN4) NU AMNL CL E u G� 70+' O 7 N roL En. a°� L;ry rd c rz M 01ut`. c m c � w A r e ' « '" N u 0) C s a C) .6� 4) 4) C p N -. .:} y. tea►. �. U COLI CL m >yn usa.a N p w QT C Q, y N L e9 !0 ®a V > d t N 0 >- n. Oil N �' C E Q y '° '' ui c �'° v —° ci w sYea � " � v s � CwCi d 3 N �• C j. « ~ �� ~ « Obi y C IN U: � w � to H � C " a QOM Cel C cm CL .. wo C L Q1 E � N C «.� E. d �. �_ : t0 'O _r v► :S �. L O V 7 t0ID tt 'O �. C a w ,fl ? O1 Q. n.�. Li �' m .' 1L� 0. L7 (A Vf C CO E M N - d u l RESOLUTION 140. i A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Ore, THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF VICTORIA PLANNED COMMUNITY AMENDMENT 91 --02, 'AMENDING VARIOUS DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR MULTI - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, AND MAKING FINDINGS ILl SUPPORT THEREOF. A. (i) The City of Rancho Cucamonga has filed an application for Victoria Planned Community Amendment 91 -02 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subjiect Victoria Planned Community Amendment request is referred to as "the ai4pl1cation.* (ii) on April 24, and continued to May S. June 12, July 10, August 14, August 22, and September 11, 1991, the Planning Commission ^f }he City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted duly noticed public hearings on the application. On September 11, 1991, the Commission concluded said hearing. (iii) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have j occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, 'P AFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning CommissJtIn of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the fsots set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearings o: April 24, May 8, June 121 July 10, August 14, and September 11, 1991,. including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a) That the Amendment will provide for deve' `ment Of a comprehensively planned urban -community within the Distri;!* thi, 9 superior to development otherwise allowable :ender alternate regulations; anzt b) That the Amendment will provide for development within the District in a manner consistent with the Genera! Plan and with related development and growth management policies of the City. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commii9ion during the above- referenced public Hearings and upon the specific findizt.�s of facts set forth in paragraphs i and 2 above, this commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NC. VPCA 91 -02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA September 11, 1991 Page Z A) That the proposed amendment would not have significant impacts on the environment nor the surrounding properties; and bj That the proposed amendment is in conformance t'ith the General Plan. 4. This Commission hereby finds and certifies that the project has Caen reviewed and considered in compliance with the California Evvironmental Quallty Act of 1970 and, further, th_—Commission hereby recommends to the City Council that a degativa Declaration be issued. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in'-paragraphs, 1, 2, 3, and 4 nbove, this Commission hereby resolves as follows; a) This Planning Commission hereby recommends' that the City Council approve and adopt Victoria Community Plan Amendment 91 -02 per the attached. Ordinance. 6. The Secretary to this Caaaission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 1991. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman I ATTEST: 1 Brad Buller, Secretary I I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Pia:ining 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 11th day`vf September 1991, by the following vote -to -wits AYRS! 6ONHISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONnW,. ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF '�nBE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING VICTORII PLANNED COMMUNITY AMENDWB?NT 91 -02, AMENDING VARIOUS DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR MULTI- FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, AND MAXING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. i, A. Recitals. (i) On April 24 and continued to May1'd, June 12, July 10, August 14, August 22, and September 11, 1991, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted duly noticed public hearings with respect to �e above- referencri Victoria Planned Community Amendment. - Following the conclusion r` said public hearing on September 11, 1991, the Planning Commission opted Resolution No. , thev4by, recommending that the City k Council ad pt Victoria Planned Community Amendment No. 91 -02. (ii) On , 19 , the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing and concluded said hearing prior to its adoption of this Ordinance. (iii) All legal prerequisites prior to the adopciou of this Ordinance have occurred. B. Ordinance. The City Council of the -"ity.of Rancho Cucamonga ordains as follows: Section 1:- This Council hereby specifies and finds tiia'N, wall of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of the Ordinance` are, true and correct. Section 2: This Council hereby finds and testifies that the project has been reviewed and considered .in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, and further, this Council hereby issues a Negative Declaration. Section 3: The Rancho Cucamonga City Council finds as follows: a) That the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, following a public hearing held in the time and manner proscribed by law, recommended approval of the Community Plan text amendment hereinafter described to the City Council. This City Council has held a public hearing in the time and manner prescribed by law and duly heard and considered said recommendation. b) That this Community Plan text amendment is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. VPCA 91 -02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Page 2 C) That this Co( "-aunity Plan text amendment' [consistent with the Development Code of the City of Ran�u:S;?Cucamonga, d) That this Community Plan text amendment will have no significant environment jl impact as provided in the Negative Declaration filed herein. Section 4: The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby approves Victoria Planned Community Amendment 91 -02 e's follows: a) The Victoria Community Plan text, Part In, Section I, Regulations and Standards for Development, subsection "Residential Design Guidelines Medium Density Residential commencing on page 224, is hereby amended, in part, to read as attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. b) The Victoria Community Plan text, Part III, Section 1, Regulations and Standards for Development, subsection "Cluster and Innovative Housing Setbacks, commencing on page 225, is hereby amended in part;, to,l.gad as attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reasance. c) The Victoria Community Plan text, Part III, Section I, ',regulations and Standards for Development, subsection ,Residential Development Standards Medium High Density Residential," commencing on page 229, is hereby amended, in part, to read as attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. d) The Victoria Community Plan text, Part III, Section I, Regulaticx►s and Standards for Development Standards, subsection "Cluster Housing Setbacks," commencing on page 231 is hereby amended to 3:ead as attached hereto and incorporated, herein by this reference. e) The Victoria Community Plan text, Part III, Section I, Regulations and Standards for Development, subsection " Residantial Development Standards High Density Residential," commencing on page 232, is hereby amended, in part, to read as attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. f) The Victoria Community Plan text, Part ZRI, ;,Action I, Regulations and Standards for Development, `subsection "Cluster Housing Setbacks," commencing on page 233 is hereby amended to read as attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. ,i 4 n AN a CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. { VPCA 91 -02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCANONGA Page 3 Section S. The,,,Pity Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cau #s the same to be published within 15 days after Its passage at least once in the Inland valley Daily Bulletin, a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Ontario, Califo.nia, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. i �- % RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ( continued) J) 4. Medium Density Residential (" M " Land Use PIRn Designation) Land Idsesignated as Medium Density Residential is intended for residential The following regulations area applicable or tthhegse ai aser adjusted gross acre. a Use Permitted: detached or attached residential dwellings not exceeding fourteen dwellings per adjusted gross acre. includhig but not limited to 1. Single family dwellings - attached or detached . including, but not limited to townhouses. triplexes. fourplexes. and condominiums. 2. Ciusterhousing, 8. Community facilities, page 241 i , h site Development Standards 1. Clusterhousin& (a) Building site area: 3 acres minimum. (b) Building site coverage : As permitted by -required setbacks and private open space (c) Building Whacks : See building setback diagrams on the following pas "for typical setbacks. 14) Building separation : The standards from the Rancho l Cucamonga- ?cvelopment Code shall apply, (e) Building' "`)t : 40 Feet maximum. (0 Bsetbac�ks. site width acid depth : As permitted by required I (g) Transition of density The site plat; should consider compatrollity with surrounding neighborhood thro�:i ;h providing groper transition of density, particularly on I sites adjacent to lower densities. Comparable densities. open space buffer zones, increased setbacks and architectural compatibility are e:ncouragets along common boundaries to provide proper transi! ion of densi Clustering of units can provide large open space areas as a buffer. (h) All cluster housing development and multi- family development within the Planned, Community -Area must comply with the Design Guidalmes as outlined in the Residential Section of the Rancho Cucamonga Development Code. 224 1% 2. Innovative st^gle family pausing. (a). Building site area , 3.5W sq. ft.. minimum. 4.000 sq. it. average. (b) Building site coverage : As permitted by required setbacks In and private open space. (c) Bfaiding setbacks : Sec' b,90ing setback diagrams on the following page for typical setbhelm. (d) Building separation • pee Building setback diagrams on the following page Jar typical aeibacks. (e) Building beight : 95 feet maxinram. 111 Building site width and depth ; As permitted, by required (g) Private open space : 300 a . ft, minfmuln. The above site development standards apply to projects which are deemed innovative. Innovation in single family development means providing creative design solutions which address the critical aw- Icer+ns of neighborhood compatibility, density transition. and design quality. Innovattve projects are characterized by an.attractive streetscape which is not monotonous. nor is the street scene don:.M%ted by asphalt /concrete, garages: and cars innovative les+�a'means g cr�aiiue ways to create well- designed space, particularly usable yarn space. 4 a 1 a� f 44 5 I . °u E P?7)Rt a. Y �r ♦ Y �ut0 It S 'J Lctj r� w Eu mu . J j u >> � y UK { � M V Y U CtYW y gg p C cis � 3 y. ,g+� .7 >��•a�� Vv C12 9 0 3 W LU "0 to E cc - o ° u qg la IOU gfle g w W ol��'ep +:.�L`t�;•i RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ( continued ) S. Medium High Density Residential (" MH" Land Use Plan Designation ) Land designated as Medium High Density Residential housing is intended for - residential development that ranges from 1.4 to 24 dwelling units per adjusted gross acre. The following regulations are applicable for these areas- a . Uze Permitted: I. Multiple family dwellings including. but not limited; to , apartment projects, cand. ^±uium projects, and cooperative apartment projects. 2. Accessory buildings. struci 'fires a:td uses where related and incidental to a permitted use: j 3_ Community facilities. page 241 I! h Site Development Stands= , r 1. Building site area: 3 acres min1mum ` 2. Buis -- -",setbacks, -, -,ee building setback diagrams e , rthe following' pab...a'typicai seta, ux:3. 3. Building separation : The standards from the Rancho Cucamonga Development Code shall }apply. l' 4. Building height : 40 Fc4rc maximum, l C. 'Erar.sition of density The site plan should consider compattbility with surrounding nelghbushood through providing proper transition of density . particularly on infill sites adjacent to lower densities . Comparable densities, open space buff& zones , , increased setbacks and architectural compatibility are eneou xq j ad along common boundaries to provide proper transition of jdensity . DlustaT.ing of units can provide large open space areas as 5?bufer. d. All eluf ler housir,,g development and multi - family development within the Planned Community area must comply-with the Design Guidelines as outlined in the Residential Section of the Rancho Cucamonga Development Code. 229 Alft o rT .a a E Al to `+,.,,III y � � '°Q [a` � �'Z•.�a, v 1 � e+� a+ i a u (� d `yam _ Ubq 3 uQ Je fpV s Pw ZVI 1 to ro " 0" Y= _ oa EsoE y s U9 a S� a ivs a �l �p= oijCa`" LU to C uJ�' ,y c9 � . �fli u v m :; o 0 $ a $ a x 6 NM6=0 U� e a � �+CVt74 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPbMNT STANDARDS ( continued ) AWL 6. High Density Residential ("H" Land Use Plan- 'aignat!On) : Lanni designated. as High_ Density' Residential is intended for residential dev" ko ment that ranges nom 24 to 30 dwelling units per adjusted gross acre. The following regulations are applicable fort em areas: a Use Permitted: 1. Multiple- family dwellings including, but not lim-Oted to prjec projects. q cooperative apartment projects. condominium ra ects, a apart me t projects- p 2. Access Dry buildings. structures and uses where related and incidental to a pESmitted use. & Community facilities. page 241 h Site Development Standards 1. Building site area . 3 acres minimuM 2. Building site coverage : 60 96 3. Building setbacks See building setback diagrams on the following,] page for typical setbacks. 4. Building separation : The standards fmm the Rancho Cucamonga DeveiopaT t Code shall apply. 5. Building height : 53 feet maximum. C. Tr ,1131 is i of density: The site plan should consider compatibility wil ii surrounding neighborhood through provia:ng_nroper transition of density . particufariy on iniili sites adjacent to lows densities . Comparable densities, open space buffet zones . increased setbacks and architectural compatibility are encouraged alon common Ciustezin boundaries to provide proper transition of density , I of units can provide large open space areas as a buffer; d All cluster housing-development and multi- fazaiily development within the Planned Community area must comply with the D Guidelines as outlined in the Residential Section of the R� Cucamonga Development Code. _ l 132 vim/ g ,� a � ` • A V -it $.. • 1 i i m V qc b ®gyp , a *•� V r ! '� No IL u�"� • I 1 1 . US E 1,14 mvvE Uqp ME ag; ?a T ffi �aa0C =Q,: 0. s 11 / C6 IJ u z -o tri C ou IL V 23.5. i(� J L]� DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: i CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMG ?GA STAFF REPORT \ September 11, 1991 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Brad Buller, City Planner Anna -Lisa Hernandez, Assistant Planner MODIFICATION TO TENTATIVE TRACT 13717 -. LEWIS HOMES - A request to modify rr previously approved Tract Map to increase the number of multi- family lots from 3 lettered and 12 numbered lots to 4 lettered and 16 numbered.,, lots for 394 units on .23.5 acres of land in the Medium -High Resit-lential designation (14 -24 dwelling units per acre) of the Terra Vista Planned Community, located at the northeast corner of Spruce Avenue and Church Street - APN% 1077- 42t -13. PROJECT AND SXT8 DESCPEUVI ®R: A. Project Density: 16.8 dwelling units per acre B. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Single family homes and vacant= Low- Medium Residential (4 -8 dwelling units per acre) South - 9acants Office Park East vacant and apartments.- ==mentary school and Medium and High Residential (8-14 and 24 -30 &Telling units per acre). West Vacant; High Residential (34 -30 dwelling units per acre).. C. General Plan Designations: Project Site - Medium and Medium High Residential North - Low - Medium Residential South Office East - tleelium Residential West High Residential D. Site Characterist ;cs: The site is presently vacant wirh �om`e "grapevine vegetation. The site slopes approximately 2 percent from - "'north to south. An east -west row of 12 eucalyptus trees exists near th- •:southwestern edge of the project. In addition, 33 olive trees of some historical value have been boxed for relocation, a minimsm of 12 of these will be pl&*xted within the future La Mission Park, located directly southenat of the tract. (Additional conditions have been added through a previous modification to :.ie project to ensure protection of these trees'- Resolution 90 -20A). ITEM 0 r PLANNING C0MMISSION STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT 13717 - LEWIS HOMFS', Septembat 11, 1991 Page 2 »,ISIS: A. Bask ound: Tentative Tract 13717 was app. °owed by the Planning commission on February 14, 1990• The tract was approved for the development of 394 condominium units within 52 bui. dings. The applicants are curre ntly in the Plan Check process and are nearing completion. B. General: Under the ' Plaanning Commission's original approval of the 12 numbered lots would have been, created Tentative Tract, 3 lettered and for the condominium project (see Exhibit "D "). The applicant is now requesti r that the lettered and numbered Tots be Increased to 4 and 16, reopectivUy (see Exhibit "C "). Under the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act, the numt'er of %fits within a subdivision cannot be increased unless a2provcd by the Planning item has been V)'�ught before the Planning Commission. As a result, this Commission for consideration. while the number of Tats is increasing'i no a%terationF will occur to thy.+ number of units or the design of the project- c. Environmental Assessment: In approving the project in 1990, the Planning Commission adopted a Negative Declaration for the project. Ia staff's be created by the addition of five lots opinion, no additional impacts will in that the number of units and design of the project remain unchanged. - Therefore, no additional environmental review is required by the Planal,�tg Cemadssion= D. Correspondence: This item has been advertiser +,n the Inland valley Daily Bulletin newspaper as a publi.. hearing, the property has been posted, and notices have been sent to a':1 property owners within 300 feat of the project. E. Recommendationx Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the modification to Tentative Tract 13717 by adoption of the attached Resolution. Reall lly t*_ed, Brad lea City .lanner BB:AB:je Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location MaP Exhibit "B" ° Site Plan Exhibit "C" - Proposed Subdivision Exhibit "D° - Approved Subdivision Resolution 1p M t 12 �67' z I 6-1 RK C • sr ��., s� l f _X 11 s sari© 2� t 091 3 asu ? 9�� VOW (6l QP � tap tyg' q� o ®scut l _ 33a ft Pa[ i '�' iEtar✓ • Fuse ap9 • s t , •� ` �y 4 It Pot.! � "' �fDAe OfaN ° .. X"ft IL tOTWILL t� 0 l e n- 3 ^csa�uiowriusu` -' I ij .1 � s •w `4 u Cd \ _; . h1e�RrrJ61 aura -_ b . �• - _— �ua'araT'at _ 3`�� rc+rrroorm raun. r+ru xe c z «s rr.._Oi..%�rr i f � s •w `4 u Cd \ _; II J h ac r: iI Q w EH � 1 `�1 h ?� M•a / a r '^ � r 1 �'b a F � e .^ J' • / ill i It 3,14 Ic r 11ln�] wY I IrMON Y YWIO J � 1 `�1 h ?� M•a / a r '^ � r 1 �'b a F � e .^ J' • / ill i It 3,14 Ic r �" ea°w u: •; ••,m:,.>an v..r.,r�,loon�tc«ol.. — - -_ tarn wtraatyoatw+ltt. trsttaaaora tasttt�n - =#=4 Vim VWRL dM I*W LL vuvlm Ye ®mss._: vvnv,rw r. / % S ,� --"_v 'h d �� N• y�R �, 7e>tYi MOMw Yl rx .ti � � a �• j = � �'� � e". •jai t, T 1 ( ,i , b,;•OF' a t '� I ft ot r �rli <c Lu te.T ;iSH w:L � i r _w T PTO l A 1 l7.g13ISY NN A 1 ' _w T ij A a, nroa,r��a ou.aror.. N f �uzi3aaa�t r!✓; _ , psi #a ow ►y, cca•� ►�. �' : aa. D r' a .1 •' . j S w 13 0 iimae no F oMlt � i �1 WE N f �uzi3aaa�t r!✓; _ , psi #a ow ►y, cca•� ►�. �' : aa. D r' a .1 •' . j S w 13 0 iimae no F oMlt � i �1 f�~ F Alr. V. �.. ; S.r\ .yt•.- � 1. f . f �- h yi t. i;. 1�,,��r� r ` �•!'�` r ,� i . 1• ,J WAS �iiir'r. jr Lam r,,} 3. '"� ' .f '7' �. ITr�; a.�..��"� \'•I ��i.�rl�I �i.�, %•. �l s '`�Y< 7-f�_' s5 �✓ I tom•. a +�:� /it y�� � ;�a.�.' J'•+j I.�t }� -� s.^•v t a � *�i?Ln {�.,,��.�`�j1�'�^ �- ` i �� / • 'r' i it t-. Lj1 ' � •'�` 11 �. �� � � �i -.:��� ;.il r ` li C ITY of RANCHO CUCAMONGA t'TEA PLANNING DI MION ocHtur.. sCAL . C1' r] WE C, E RESOLUTION, NO. 90 -19A A RESOLUTIO.': OF THE PLANNIrs COMMISSION OF THE CITY. OF RANCHO CUCMQKGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A MOO IMCATION TO THE TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 13717, TO MODIFY A P_Rx*V%OUSS -X APPROVED TRACT MAP TO 7VCPEASE THE NUMBER QP MULTI ?MTLY LOTS IROM 3 LETTERED ;TIND 12 NUMBER: D TO A LETTERED AND 16 M.MEREG LOTS k1t 394 CONDOMINTr;dS ON 23.5 ACRES OF LAND IN THE ME,MIUM RIG.: 7.ESIDENTIAL DESIGNATION (14 -24 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE.) OF THE :TERRA VISTA PLANNED COMMUNITY, LOCATED WITHIN THE TERRA VIST:L PLANNED COMMUNITY ON THE NORTHER T CORNER 0?,r5PRUOE AVENUE AND CHURCH STREET, ANa MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT' THEREOF - APN. 1077- 421 -13. A. Recitals. (i) Lewis Homes has ; lsd 3n application €5r the approval of a modification to Tentative Tract Map No. 13717 as described in Inn title of i this Resolution. Hereinafter, the sntsjeet Tentative :tract Map is referred to as "the application." i (ii) On Febraary 14, 1990, the Planning; Comer ssion of the City of l Rancho Cacaiwnga apgroved Tentative Tract 13717 for -r-he development of 394 c- =dcminium units. (iii) On the llth.of September, 1991, the R?asming ;mission for the City of Rancho Cucannnga conducted a duly noticed public hearing 'iar,'the application and _concluded said hearing on that dat-L. I (iv) All 12-gal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. I &. Rseojvticn. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commi "ion of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finis that all of the facts set forth in the Recitclr', Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Coamisuior. during the above - referenced meeting on Soptember 11, 1991, Including written and oral staff repoxzs, together with pu ?alic testimony, this Commission hereby sp=ecifically finds as follows: (a) The application applies to property locatsi at the' northeast corner of Church Street and C—ucc - Avenue and is _presently - unimproved; and �r� PLANNING COMMISSION RwomrrION No.90 -19A TENTATIVE TP^.CT 13717 - IMnS HOBMS Septem')er11, 1991 Page 2 (b) That the property to the north of the subjec'c Rite is vacant land and single iamily homes, the property to the south or, the site consists of vacant land, the property to the east is vacant `land and apartments, and the property to the,west in vacant. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence - presented t-'i thin Commission during the above- referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth #n paragraphs 1 and 2 above, thins Commission hereby finds and conr)ludes as followsx ( -k) That the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, D ollopcent C:3e,.and Terra Vista Community Plan; and (b) That the design or improvements of the . tent&U -, tract is consistent with the General Plan, Developmsnt Mle, and 'err. Vie:ta CC .:,unity Plan; and (c) That tha site is physically suitable '.•or the type of development proposed; and (d) That the design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial awrironmental danage and. avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; and (f) That the tentative tract; -:ie pact likely to cause serious public health problems; and CI I (g) That tht4 design of the tentative tract will not conflict riith any sacrament acquired by the public at large, now of record; for access through or z_s of the property within the proposed subiipision. I 4. Basad upon the findings and conclusions set, forth in paragraphs 1, 2, aDd 3 above, thin Co- mission hereby approves the cpplicat':;>n subject to each and every condition set fc. -h belor, attached he_eto. sad incorporated hernin by thi.m ref - enca. Planning OivLijont 1. 217e tract shall be nubject to those comfitions put forth in Rcaoiuticns No. 90- 9r '90 -20 and 90 -200. 5. The Secretary to this c'-'-iission shall certify, the, aioption. of this Resolution. APPROVED ARTM '")OPTED THIS 11TH y. 1991, Pisi mur, GomisSIGN Oi iv cizz or Raw= C64At, ,v BYE Larry T. McNiel, Chairman PLAN -rING COMMIi''£ION RnSOUTION WO`, 90 -19A TENTATIVE TRACT 13717 - LEWIP HOMES r Septembar-1i, 1991 ' Page 3 „ ATTEST: Brad Buller, r . Brad' - Buller, Secretary of the Planning Comm$,ssion of the City of R:+ncho Cucamonga, do hereby cert,_.fy that th;) foregoing Resolution tsas duly and regularly introduced, ptaged, and adopted by the Planning Coinmission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning .^.ommiseion hold an the 11th day of September- 1991, b .V''the follokicg aote- to- .,it:: 7,YF;S: COMMISSIONERS: nor._, COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: CO-AISSIONERS: i � 1 f i A CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMON sA STAFF REPORT DATE: September 11 1991 TO: C;iairman and Meubers of the planning Commission PROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Scott Murphy, Associate Planner L'UBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL n1pACT REPORT FOR VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 14475 SAHAMA INVESTMENTS A pt-1-11ic, hearing to comment on the final ,.aft -,.uvironmental impact report prepared fir a residential suhdivjsion and design review of 73 single family homes on 113 acres ox land is thi. `Hillside Res3�lential District (less than 2 dwelling unite p =x acre), located north of Almond Street, between Sapphire and Turquoise Streets - APY: 200-051 -07, 55, 56, and 57. BACKGROUND: Following the submittal of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 14475, the City determined that an yrvironmental Impact I; -port (EIR) was necessrry to address the potential 'adverse environmental impacts which may b- created by the project. Working with loo, ir Environmental Services, a scope of rarvices was prepared outlining '.Ae contents of the EIR which was approved bfy the planning Commission,: Following approval of the Scope of Services, preparation of the dre t EIR commencFd and notice, where sent to affected government agencies notifying them that the report was being prepared and inviting Czmments on areas for inclusion. Aftrr receiving comments from the Agencies and property owners, the draft EIR was circulated for public review and comments for 45 days. During this timer interested parties provided written and oral comments about the Draft EIR. The 'planning Commission also received oral comments at a public hearing on,June 12, 1991. These comments vure then incorporated into the final draft EIR, which was transmitte miler seperate cover. CE Az As outlined in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the purpose of this public hearing is to determine the adequacy of the EIR. More specifically, the hearing should focus on whether the environmental issues have been identified and if appropriate and adequate mitigations have bean included to minimise rind /or eliminate potential adverse environmental impacts connected with the project Any comme-`s reneived at the public hearing will be responded to in written form &--,I attached as an addendum to the final draft. Upon. crmmpilakion of all comments and rasporses, the Final EIR will be submitted for certification by the Planaing Co®'eision. ITEM p P4ANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT - TT 94475 - SAHAM,A I1MESTMENTS September 11, 1991 Page 2 _ 11 t Presently, the tentative tract snap and design review are proceed }.nu i through the various committee reviews. Unon successful completion of�i the committee reviews, tha project and the Final EIR will be r`heduled�} for -a panic hearing before the Commission. The Final EIR is an informational document that. till be used in reviewing the proposed�l is approved, all mitigation measures outlined�� project. If the project sl\ ist the EIR will become part of the conditions of approval for the development. i CORRESPONDENCE: 9his item has been advertised as a public'hearing is 3 the inland Valley. Daily Bulletin, notices were sent to stil property owners within 300 feet, and the sits was posted. RECOMME &DATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing to receive testimony on the adequacy of the Final Draft EIR. If additional information is to be added to the EIR, staff 'should be directed to p!�:epare the necessary changes for inclusion in the i6al EIR. ` Respe y subs 1! Brad er City P annex BB,SM :Js I M7 Lill DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT, CITY uF RANCHO CUCAMONGA i STAFF REPORT 1 �} Al _ i September 11, 1959 Chairman an6lMembers of the Planning Commission �l•J` Brad Buller, City Planner Bruce Buckingham, Planning Technician CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 91-27' HOWD - A re.guest to establish an animal care facility s _ thin an existing building in the General Industrial District ( Subarea 3) of the industrial pxea f -cific Plan, located at 9375 Peron Boulevard - A>SN: 209- 032 -17. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPT:'04: A. Actio,. Requested: Appn_-vai of a Conditional.?:oe ParMit to allows a boarding ke.ael within the General Industrial District, Subarea 3, of thn Industrial Specif°z Pleni:ing. B. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning_: North - industrial Buildingi General Xndustrial, Stairea 3 South - Santa Fe Railroad; General Industrial, Subarea 3 East - Industrial, _Building; General 1-.dustrial, Subarea 3 West Industrial ,Building; General Industrial. Subarea 3 C. General Plan Designations: Project Site General Industrial North - General Industrial Soy; h - General Industrial East - General Industrial West - General Industrial D. Site Characteristics:_ The site is developed with two multi- tenant industrial buildings E. Parking Calculations: Number of U_%wber of Tppe Square Parking Spades Spaces at Use Footage 17atio Required Provided Boarding Kennel 1.962 1/400 5 Multi - tenant 40,008 1/400 10)3 ,l 41.970 1/400 105* 74= 4 The project was developed prior to Incorporation, at which time the parking requirem hL "Maas i space /1,000 square feet (42 spaces).- The parking .is legal non - conforming. ITEM Q PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 9127• - HOA'D September 11, 1991 Page 2 F. Applicable Regulations: A boarding kennel Is considered an Animal Care Facility as defined by the Industrial Specific Plan. Within Subarea 3, Animal Care Facilities are permitted subject to the approval of a Conditional Use permit. ANALYSIS: A. Canerai: The applicant is proposing a boarding kennel for dogs, ��ts, and birds and a groomi:q service. The proposed hours of rp,_::tions are 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 P.M., Monday through Friday; and 8:00 a.m;. to 1:30 p.m., Saturdays and Sundays by appointment only. There will be a maximum of three emplo -ees -or -site during business hours. • Boarding kennels and ezocming serv:,�as ,mast be license(". by the County of San Bernardino, Department of Pvbli^ Health, Preventive Veterinary Services. The County's initial site inspection confirmed that the site is adequate for the proposed use and that a maximum of 40 dogs and 10 cats cou73 be boarded. Further, the County has conceptually approved the floor plan (See Uxhihit "B ") and has generated con�itj,ous and stipulations based on the Department of Public Health's lode (See Exhibit "C "). B. Issues: 1. Noise Conflicts: Potential noise conflicts could zAse from animal noises. The building is of standard construction and no special provisions h-ve been Dude for noise attenuation. Therefore, it is possible that noise could adversely impact the child care facility contiguous with the proposed uve. However, staff notes that the child care facility and proposed animal care facility are the anomaly in this =Iti- tenant center designed for industrial .uses. 2. Coupetibility with Surrounding Usage The proposed site is within the "neral Industrial District of the Industrial Specific Plan The site currently has a variety of uses inelnding lig7k manufacturing, automotive repair, and a child care center. in looking at the mix of uses within the site, sta.'_ believes that the boarding kennel world not create any adverse impacts that would be incompatible with the surrounding users: other than the cue d4.scussed in the preceding paiag Avh. I 3. Parking: The existing site was built prior to the City's incorporation and Ls gnderparked by today's standards. Howe ^pa., this proposed use is, no more intenaive than permitted uses. Therefore, staff does i;,ot anticipate any parking problems. �. JI PLANNING COMMISSION SZAFF REPORT CUP 91 -27-- HOWD September 11, 1991 Page 3 FACTS FOR FINDINGS: In order to approve this application, the following findings need to bQ made by the Pl;.nning Commission:. A. That the proposed. use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Development code, and the purposes of the Industrial 'Specific Plan in which the site is locatsd. B. The propoa,ed use will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, of welfar6 or materially injurious, to properties or improvemauts in the vicinity. C. The proposed use complies with each of the appijcable provisions of the Development Cud-- and Industrial Specifit,, Plan. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertis4d as a public hearing -in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, af4 notices were sent Lo all property owners and exi,stiaag tenants within 36'01. feet of the project. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission :approve; Conditional Use Permit 91 -27 though adoption of the attached Resolution " of Approysl. Rena ally "tad, Bra le7c: / City lanner BB:BD:js Attachments': Exhibit "A" - Applicai:'s Letter Exhibit "B" - Floor Plzen Exhibit `G' - Department: of Health's Conditions and Stipulations Exhibit "D" Site Plan Exhibit "E" - Vicinity Map Exhibit °F" - Tenant Use R i Res- lutiun of Approval ' i i �( Q -3 / `1 l July 15, 1991 Rancho Cacdm4bga Planning DeE,t. Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91130 Gentlemen• '�, ; The Animal Car-. ,N, Facilit ^, anticipated for 9375 Feron Blvd, Suite C, Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91730, will be used as =a boArding kennel ror Sods and cats and birds. It is not expected thet -,the naximum number of dogs wiIX exceed 50, or cats 20 - it ever tYiat many of either. Since birds are rarely ever boa.-ded, very few,of those will be, expected. There will be no revisions to the interior, of the suite., ie, existing structure will remain as it now stands. Dog runs will be instal; =led in the approximate locations as Cihoti..n on the sketch, however, it : st be understood that revisions will be made in oraer to utilize th�l space in the most advantageous manner. .Cat cages are portalAe so wtll be placed wherever suitable for the Iea,tt amount of stress :jetween the dogs and felines .1 - birds the same, Upon arrival, dogs will be placed in a "holding" cage until they are examined for fleas or ticks if either are found the animal "-will be, 'dipped" before being placed in a kennel.. run. Upon leaving, all dogs will be bathed or groomed as required. -'Full grooming equigmsnt will be provided and a full -time groomer will- be employed to perfgrm this service. A "kennel boy" will also be Omployed for as much time au it takes to clean kennels and all facilities j n a daily basis. Animal ti_., ^�,e will be collected in deoderized disposable, bio- degradable, and sealed . containers, slich as used t y veter ,narians. All kennel runs will be 1-n compliance with County health requirements, I'I and maintenance of the facility will be the same. If anymore information is required, please advise and T will glad to,.,, cooperate. VerX truly yours, He en it . Howd 9007 Chianti Ct. Rancho Cucamonga, Ca.91730 ( 714 ) 9119 -3563 1 j. 0161r A � , avo� en -y�c�i ' CVain L�sk'r�p ya4C Zni Q Z 4 a 2. D m e v. P� u� -- -ok i rt: }s1 O zAX rivsor ovit7� � �,� Ilt 4 a 2. D m e v. P� u� _ CONDITIONS .AMD STXFU'LAII :IONS @'OR PROPOSED 20ARDING iGMML, .'�ATTBRY 'AHD GL60KING SHOP, OV MRS. HELZIN HOWDa CITY OF RANCHO � {CGCAXOKGA s . OA 1. Holding j,ens (xyz) for newly arrived dogs tt�bsz'checke,3 for. external parasite& (fleas, ticks. etc.). 2. There will be p2lrtabie caggs in grooming ;oom to "qgq that are brought in for grdjming only. 3 -. Office to be occupied by one person only.; Entry room 3oc .lustomers. 4. Walls up to a height o`. 41 to be covered with cement compo- sition for easy cleaning and dizin£ection. S. Solid pactitio,. betwedn runs will be of, concrete composition up to a height that, will prevent nos* t;o none contact. Maximum height based nn largest dog breed. " \ 6. Dot and cat food (" not canned) Fill be placed\ n hard plastic . trash containers w$ wheels and t3,.'-'ht fitting co`v`ers. 7. Feed and water containers to be atored in store room and on shelvos with- 44cquate protection from contamination. :Disposable paper dishes may be used for Feeding the animals. B. Cats to be 'boarded will bo houses in portaklLu cat cages meting the provisions of San Bernardino County Cat" %.ery Ordinance (1868). 9. No more than :10 cats will be allowsd tor be ho''taed in the cat room. (Applicant has applied for only 10 OIt3 to be boarde,9 . rf 10. There twill be a total of r26 dog pens. T�t Aximum nufter at dogs to be boarded is 40 regardl3os of size.' J 11. Grooming tub to be located in a suitable loe6tioti ether than inside the bathroom. 12. Applicant will co ®ply with existing county us.d city ordinanceo and regulations regarding aeya animal establishmanLl at all times. owXiii�fi PERON -, rt ` SOUL-EVARD a ptry Cfi1C ~` � . t---- --ei.o ---- -� 1700 S.F 1464 S.F. 1700 S.F. L A� 1952 S.F. 1760 S.F. I G 1 = D 1650 S.F. � 1952S 1464 S 4250 S.F. (� F. 1464 S.F. 3.400 S.k 1464 S.F. F � 9 � 1700 S.F. F N 3060 S.F. (� fi 710 S.F. N B v 6290 -S.F. g � i '� �, ;;-fife- tEdKt�1�t� ?•� �' _ N . :.. tK.aF „ � • �.. ��(t N..11. IL..7L � �7' aunt .. *s 4r ,r Pori , vr.5 —Pac6 a 0.6 •I 2 �' J U O G= � 6. ..a : Aar.) L23 AC i a~ I M • b Pptl • ZJBdC ars W. O+ G r6 re Par. d e Po a Par.2 Par.4' Pac7 Leper, 2314Ar „«, .4 I �'�aaca a=�xtf•\ ®a t 268 k,. `�Z < Par. 4 3' P • • ? 9 ,"' 1- ,,�".! a _ AQC 5 °S n 2.3140 ^ 16 Pat a c l e s �r b ID V "PC Par.2 - ¢ 1t 7 t 'A snoa tat ;s I Pc a.a 21'. riai,/r? i �� i a.ar• ` 2.1: �+a a tl 1 � Pull Patio �X 6 3c i : CJ ~ 0't PaO y� l.s ! • •- `./% P�3 t aa. Par r e 4.4Q�L. AM l.40T wv / LBBAG (.�V` 1 K es' ,u .ae.:! .MK sr � MJS A .• Ssrs. _ Yt� 6aM� Jaa ItVf 1 TS cis rest ao•aa. ® �' I r Pord Iec2 t;J.,-4 PAr.2 ;{ P46 2.744=. 2.7530. ZTi.C. 7LBZACYr Z94 4CIr /L 2JSACivr_ r �� t.tasa ,� tcet� sr .as aac P ,s I t Par.l 0 n ssarr i• `a u s4 R` u Par.4 c A01 ' _ R!tla1C. 'irosB Y P6r 7 x so 1 .��:•...� yak ,. �� � ..� •. � � .. Grubb6-,Sh hs August 29, 1991 RECFlvEt) CITY PLANNING DIIVISION NGA Mr. Bruce Buckingham SEP 0 4. 1991 l City o- Ranchos Cucamonga Planning -Dept. AAA 10500 civic center Drivef$f9flQfLtlZflf`�1�t�ff8 Rancho Cucamonga, Califosr:ia 91730 RE: Helen Howd - Animal Kennel (CUP) Review Dear Bruce: Per your request of August 28, 1191, the following ,hstruotion is presented f,-uar user, Cal. Land Business Park 9375 Peron Blvd., Rancho Cucamonga, CA 9:730 73n3 r Tenant ztse .%JALc A,B tbaffey College chi.ldr6n's Center 3r ►(� G vacant PkoPt.rP PplIfft. WIL4TY G q0. D Brooker Landscape Gardening 46 E,F,G,H,I,T Maury- AicroWave US Govt. Defence � Contractor 9395 Peron Blvd. A vacant (� B Greg Praytor Auto a+ -rvice j C, D Armstrong Motor Warks llu' o !ervicas 1.,r Master Pa gut Fabricator G,H S ' _ ..Ato Sal -vice 3, gDo I r- "ant t i aJ St2Lr of Ocean Food Distributor I hopa this add ra ,:ial information is beneficial in the evzluarion of the above prospective tenant's application. Thank you. Raspectfully subsittc-0, GRUBB & ELI+IS �z.-AWANY COMMERC AL RZAL ESTATE SERVICES David E. Geyer Industrial 'roperties Division Extension 32- AEG /cs � r•h,�'r_!!r•t'rmrl +:ntt `.nraarr�t,rlfir.dtt.rtr�<< ,.t�l�:r�t e + "�rrce;.�mrr'E�Ia.Ek ?atio.l :�,`tjii +� ':l�r� i.,:;: 0701-02 o SEPTEMBER 11 1991 P. C AGE A { 6 of 13 � L c RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANKING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF IW!C'RO CU:'AMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 91-27 FOR AN ANIMAL CARE FACILITY LOCATED AT 9375 FERON DOULEVARD IN THE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT, SUBAREA 3 OF THE TNDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 209- 032 -17 A. Recitals. (i) Helen Howd has filed an application for the issuance of the Conditional Use Permit No.s,91 -27 as described in the title of this Resoluti.;n. Hereinafter in this Resolutign, the subject Conditional Use Permit request is referred to as "the application." (ii) On the 11th of September 1991, the Planing Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. (iii) All legal prerequisites prior to thu adoption of t1iis'Resolution have occurred. a. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby fount , tdsta pined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cuoudone�& as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specificrIly finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing on September 11, 1991, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: (a) The application applies to property located at 9375 Peron Boulevard with a street frrtage of 181.79 feet and lot depth of approximately 390 feet and is presently improved with two industrial buildings. (b) The property to the north of the subrect site consists of industrial buildings, tho property to the south of the Bits consists of the Santo Fe Railroad, the property to the ea z= ; consists of industrial buildings, and the property to the west consists of industrial buildings. (c) The application 4�ontemplate� the operation of a boarding kennel for dogs, cats, and bird, and a grooming service, seven days a week. 3. Based upon the substant -'al evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hea&ing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2, „above,, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. CUP 91-27 - NOWD September -ll, 1991 Page 2 (a.) That the proposed use is in accard with the General Plan, the objectives of`.,the Development Code, and the 1,.,, ec���;'Pf the district in which the site is located. ;b) That the prolored use, together wii the conditions ,applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public, ealth, safely, or ' 11vvsments welfare, or materially In urious to properties or in the vicinity. i (c) ,that the proposed use compli on with'a -_.A of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. 4. 3a�— upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 above, this commission '?ereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth belaw. Condit ona of A22rOYA, 1. This approval shall apply to a boarding kennel for dogs, cats, and birds and a grooming service only. 2. approval of this request shall not 'waive ccmpli.an: a with all sections of,,the Industrial Specf'- 10 'plan, Development Code and all other appl {:able city ordinances. 3. if the operation of the facility causes .adverse effects upon adjacent businesses or operations, includingc 'Nut not limited to, noise or odor, the Canditional Use Permit shall be brought before the Planning Commission for consideration and possible revocation. 4. occupancy of the facility shall not commence until such time as all County of San Bernardino Public Health Code requirements are met. S. occupancy of the facility shall A= comma5ce until such time as all Uniform Building Code and State Fire Marshall's regulations have been,, complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall'';,, be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire ,. protection District and the Building and Safety Division,`to show compliance. The '.building shall be inspected for compliance prior to utilisation of the building. S. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the.adopticn of this Resolution. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. r° CUP 91 -27 - HOWD September 11'• 1931 Page 3 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 1991. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. MCHiel, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Stiller, Secretary I, Brad Buller, Secretary, of the Planning commission of, the Citk -` of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, 'passed, ar - - -- adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga at a re, 3lar mristing of the Planning Commission held on the 11th day of September 1995,. by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERSe ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ,J 2 L CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: September 11, 1991 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Steve Hayes, Associate Planner SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 91 -04 WELLS FARGO HANK - The proposed development of 'a A,525 square foot bank on Pad 10 within the previously approved Vineyards Msrkstplaca Shopping Center, which consists of 11 buildings totaling 121,401 •ware feet '- on 12.8 acres of land in the Village Commercial District of `.e Victoria Community Plan, located at the southeast corner of Highland Avenue and Milliken A►enua - APN: .27- 011 -22. - ROJECT tWj, SITE DESG:.3FTION: A. Action Regulated: Approval of Site Plan, Conceptual Landscapin, /Grad?ng Plans, and Building Xlea tions. B. Surrounding Land Use and Zoninge North - Cczszercial Center (under construction); Village Commercial South - Vacant; Medium Residential (e -14 dweal_'ng units per acre) East - Coebsercial Cent (under construction); Village Commercial West S+acantl Low Aed'.um Residential (4 -8 dweliing units per acre) C� General Plan ?Designations: Project Site = Neighborhood Commercial North - Neighborhood Commercial South - Medium High Residential (14 -24 dwelling units per acre) East. Neighborhood Commercial West 1 Low Medium Residential (4 -8 swelling units per acre) D. Site Characteristics: The site is a freestanding pad within the j Vineyards Marketplace Shopping Center, which is currently in the latter phases of construction. Since the entire site has been rough gradad, the pad in question slopes very gently from north to 1 south with a steeper slope occurring from the building pad down to Tenyon Way. ITEM R PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT; DR 91 -04 - WELLS-FARGV BANK September 11, 1991 Page 2 E. Parking Calculations: Number c.f Number of Type Square Parking Spaces Spaces of Use Footage Ratio Required Provided Bank 4,525 1/250 is 18 ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant is requesting design review approval for the construction of. a :.lank building on a freestanding pad within the Vineyards Marketplace Shopping Center, which was approved by the Planning Commission ^n November 19, 1969. Improvements on the parcel will include the 4,525 square, foot bank building, related parking areas, and Connections to the pedestrian plaza, which is • located immediatel;�•'-lest of the parcel in question. The building has been designed to be architecturally compatible with other buildings within the Vineyards Marketplace Shopping Center. The outdoor automatic teller machines will be located 'on the north face of the building, easily accemaible tzb,people arriving by automabile and pedestrians. No drive -thru teller machines or drive. -thru activities are proposed with this pa_•-ticu.'.nx bank. , B. Desaian Review Committee: Ater reviews, q the project on three separate occasions, the Committee (Valiette, Melcher, Bµller) recow, %.nded approval of the project subject to the following conditi±ns: 1. The specific design of the doors facing tha pedestrian plaza (east/west elevation) .should be reviewed by the Design Review Committee prior to the issuance of building permits. 2. A Minor Exception application for the Kenyon Way setback reduction of 2 feet should be submitted for review and approval by the City Planner prior to issuance of building permits. 3. Additional tree wells should be included along the north and east building frontages beyond the roof overhangs, to the satisfaction of the City Planner. C. Technical Review Committ_e: On June 19, 1991, the Committee reviewed the project and determined that with the recommended standard conditions of approval, the project is consistent with all the applicable 'standards and - ordinances. The Grading Committee conceptually approved the project at its meeting on June 18, 1991. i I J PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT { DR 91 -04 - WELLS FARGO BANK September 11, 1951 Page 3 D En vir onmental Assessment: sment. Upon review of �,.he Environmental e ntal Checklist for tl;a Vineyards Marketplace Shopping: CertAr, the Checklist did include potential; environmental impacts associated with this and all - freestandin4 pads within the project. No significant adverse environmental impacts- were found related to this freestanding padynt the tia2:,t1je original Initial Study was completed. Therefore;''a Negative Declaration was approved for the shorping center= RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Detailed Site Plan, Building Elevations, and Conceptual Landscaping /Grading Plans for DR 91 -04 through adoption of the atxAched Resolution. Respectfully submitted, L Brad ller City Planner BB:SB:mlg Attachments: Xxhibit -A" Cite Utilization Map Exhibit "B" - Site Plan for Vineyards Marketplace Shopping Center ":Exhibit "C" Detailed Site Plan : Exhibit - Conceptual Landscape Plan , arhibit "8;" Df� - Conceptual Grading Plan Exhibit =F" - 'Building Elevations Exhibit "G" - Floor Plan Resolution of Approval R-3 '3 RACT N� fa ! } F.= :FtC =L v MAP NC. ES1w.. + � t I 7Fili�1 Piu / � YACANT /.n ...- -. ?.'LAP G. y {' j. I T1dACLFi7 .t4RCE1 VACANT +.au�v PA:.. ND G re+cm. nrvwro�nme mwr+i au+wvry �2D LA/ 1 _ Jr /' VACANT CANT -br k4T ImAcT O ... VACANT. +� • L ^' \ 9ry •u+ar uCAlNT awm ..rJer VACANT t Y OF C C 4 UCAMONCA TrrryE.S,- PLA11TN ''.V s- D&ISION EXHIE M "4 \' SCALE: aESUME SITE ♦9EA (12 39 ACRES) $53.232 SF SERWCE STATHN PWEI 29.60, SE susaK rs• uss r.NC warm s vKn SMOPNNG CENTER RwCCI 527.;!1 SE aR f aROK ..Nf lu. a(. warm` w seas wseas z :�. �anq 4O . !sa as f Nlr.-LAtlt: AVENUE � i� �• I I r T ". N ,9,FS* �' a �, ti..:. '� r "',. t Its •r ;� of fA 1c, MYA 4; ITEM: 91 -oN CITY OF P.k3 i H O-.,„ CIUCAMONGA Trn.E: � vt AL: jr- 4& PLANNING DMSION s EXHIEIT: "t a SCALE: „�' k OY OF TCP�CA} �UCAMONGA s c TI1B'LE •A S,+. PI N PLANNING- IJMS)ION EXHIBrr: r. `' SCALE: %�'fD carts flu]CK"RMil ANA ICWQM A r ammw ro ®ao+om�aiw wa�xm �,u oor�'eunwom ulwrowur faCatDnseFtiuRl0roLe61Pw �CUai yyp�n[G1A.b. nmrrauN� CITY OF 1 tC' (� ;c I7C iMQNCaEi TME: !=.=k `PLAIT -MNG- iD.F STON EXHIBPP "D►• GALE: D! m: L re ac. rse OF _ "t 1 jL. I. �i�t '�� mtM��� ie..rr � \ ►7�• 7. � .— i "ciao �- • =MCWT- . r T- 41 mss= ,vg== arui �1 r I P r�',�(ci �� ���l��l� ,{:�� r''i� ±K„ ♦ � iti.! lrlfi!fi�� %..i/ s A,'4� r� i�.�'t"�", �� to R , �� ►`.,: rj _ �' :�, j' I i� Arl TAM r OIVIS�l ON scALE- E)MMrr- ey OF3•,`+:UCAMONiGA ITEMc t� 5 PLA NMfid DIVISION TM.E:[31. 4 C- &,..�, ExHmrr SCALE: I O�TnEVntor� OF ? , i iTCAMQI�TGA rrEm: , , TTI`l E: FI.MNINE DMSION EXFdBrr. 'SCALE: MQ a ICI 0 I o r n o o PTEm: 2i.-2W MY OF C140 :, .a i, CAMONGA �rra°;<.E:�a� PI Q >., _ LN� PLANLi` lqG DFIiSION EXHIBIT: Cr., SCALE• ri RESOLUTION NO. i A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING MMMISSION O? TN.'C`.TY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING 6 VELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 91 -04 FOR THE PROPOSLD BEVELOPMNT OF A 4,32S SQUAEE FOOT BANK ON PAD 10 WITHIN THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED VINEYARDS MARKETPLACE SHOPPING CENTER, WIRICH CONSISTS OF 11 :BUILDINGS TOTALING 121,401 SQUARE FEET ON 12.8 ACRES OF LAND IN THE VILLAGE..'1WIERCIAL DISTRICT OF THE VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN, O' I AT, THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF HIGHLAND AVENUE AND MI? EN AVENUE, AND XMING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF AP94- 227,- 011 -?2. A. Recitals. (i) Wells Fargo Bank has filer` an applies- on for the approval of Davelopment Review tic. 91 -04 as described is I the title oi, this Resolution. Hereinafter in this 1- '.tion, the subject DsvelaPmett Review Ydqueat is referred to as "the apj Atio.a." (ii) On the " sf September 1991, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucai ;ny, snducted a meeting on the application and concluded said meeting on tV / date. -I MRL (iii) All prerequisites prior to tn0 adoptf.oit°of this Resolution have occurred. R. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commissidi. of the City of Rancho Cucamonga an follows: 1. This Commilisior. hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Rocita -1-1 Part P F of this Resolution arm true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence preranted to this commission during the above- referenced meeting on ,September 11, 1991, including written and oral staff reports, thia Commission hereby s!scifically finds as follows; (a) The application, applies to property located on Parcel 10 of the previously approved Parcel Map for Vineyards varkstpl.ace Shopping Cantor, located at the southeast corner o:! Highland and Milliken Avenues with a Milliken Avenue street frontrga of 81.94 .feet and lot Cepth of 2.:.4.28 feet and is presently impacted with curb gutter, sidewalk, landscaping, and tomporsry erosion control soil stabilizers; and (b) The property to the north and east of the`iubject site is the remairder gortiops of the shopping center under construction, the property to the mouth of that' -site consists of vacant land and the property to the wash is vacant; and I 9 -/ PLANNING COMMISSION RDSOLUTION NO. DR 91-04 = Wells Largo Bank September 13-; 1991 Page 2 AOL (c) The proposed project is within the Vineyards Marketplace Shopping Center, which was Spproved by the Planning Commission originally, on November 29, 1989, and 'modified- on April 10,_ 1991, to allow .a pad switch between buildings 10 and 11, thereby allowing the bank greater visibility from the corner of Milliken Avenue and Kenyon Way; and (d) The property is zoned Village rpmmercial by'the Victoria .aa.`kunity Plan. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented 'a this Commission during the above- referenced meeting and upon the specific findings of facts get forth in paragraphs; "l and 2 above, this commission hereby finds and concludes as follows (a) That the proposa4 project is conoistent with. the objectives of the Genera?. Plant and (b) That the proposed use is In accord with the objective of the Victoria Community Plan and the pvj�poses of the district in which the site is located; and (e) That the proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable p=visions of the Victoria Community Pla.-i; and (d) That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or i.'aprovements the vicinity. 4. This Commission hereby finds and acetifies that the :reject has been reviewed and considered in compliance with the California Environmental Quality act of 1970 and that a Negative Declaration was previously approved on Novembea, 29, 1989. S. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the ap�)lication subject to each and every coadltion not torth below and in the attached Standard Conditions attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planninc Division 1) Tha specific design of the door facing the pedestrian plaza (i.e., want elevation) shall be neviewed and approved by the Design Review Committ+am prior to the issuance of building permits. 2) A Minor Exception ap?licaticn for the Kenyon Way setback reduction of 2 feet shall be submitted for review and approval of the City PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO._ DR 91-04 - Wells Fargo Sank September ll 1991 Page 3 3) Additional tree wells shall be included along F the north and east building frontages, beyond the roof overhangs, to the satisfaction of the City Planner. 4) All other applicable conditions from Resolution Noe. 69 -146 and 89-146 -A shall apply. G. The Secretary to this Commission shill certify to thee- adoption of this Resolution. A$PROVED AND ADOPTED - THIS'IITH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 1991.' PLANNING COMMISSION CF THE CITY Or RANOHO CUCAMONGA BY: = Larry T. MCNiel, Chair ATTEST, Brad Buller, Secretary I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby cmrtiPy that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, paSaed, and adopted by'the- Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular mestinq of the Plai':ning,Commission held on the 11th day of September 1991, by the following vote-to-wit: .AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS; ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: a' t\ CITY OF DEPARTMENT OF M9MOND CUCAilQOWea COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECTM m& -4 gevicv..r q / -og SUBJECT: NSaS 'F4, P -4 b,.; w.4 APPLICANT: LOCATION: �u -�aST lJsw f 1'�r �i ✓rv� l7rJPn Ih f(,r�l �c J1 /hc»vL. Those items checked are Conditions of App oval. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION, (714)989-1661, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. Timo umlio at_zi Approval shall expire, unisss extended by I[* Planning Commission, tf building permits are I not issued orapproveduae has riot commenced within 24 mnths from the date of approval. — 2. Development/Design Review shall be approved prior to __L _L_ . 3. Approval of Tentative Tract No. is granted subject to the approval of 4. The developer shall comrerce,panicipa's In, arid consummate atcausetobecornmenced partic /gated in, or consummated, a MeM -Roos Comnwnity Facilities District (CFD) for the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection M trill to finance construction and/cr maintenance of a fire station tc °erve the develcoppaient. The station shall be located, designed, and built to all spacilications of the Rancho Cuwinga Fire Protection District, and shad become the District's property upon compliton. The equipment shad be selected by the District in accordance with its needs. In any triftW of a station, the developer shalt comply with all applicable laws and regulalions. Ttwi CFD shall to formed by the District and the developer by the time recordation of the final map occurs. 5. Peer to recordation of the final map or the Issuance of bLMI g permits, whichever comes first, the applicant shall concert tcv, or participate in, the establishment of a Mello-Roos Cammunity Facilities District for ^the construction and maintenance of necessary school facilities. However, if any school district has previously established such a Community Facilities District. the applicant shag, in the akfir. . viva. consent to the annexation of the project site into the territory of such existing brsu" pdorto the recordation of the final map or the issuance of building permits, whichever comes first. Further, If the affected school dist `ct has not formed a Mello -Roos Conxnxmily Facilities District within twelve months from Ike date of approval of the project and prior to the recordation of the final map or issuance of Wilding permits for said project. this condition shall be deemed rill and void. SC - 2/91 s —J--J- ramplecun Doer. This condition shall be waived it the City receives notice that the applicant and all affected school districts have entered Into an agreement to privately accommodate any and all school impacts as a result of this project. 6. Prior to recordation of the final map or prior to issuance of building permits when no trap is involved, writtencertilicationfromtheaffected water district thatadequatesewerandwater facilities are or will be available to serve the proposed project shall be submitted to the Department of Community Development. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days priorto final map approval inthe case of subdivision orpriortoIssuance of permits in the case of all other residential projerrs. B. Sitte Development V 1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which - --1-1— include site plans. architectural49levatiom. exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and grading on file in the Planning Division, the conditions contained herein. Development Code regulations, and Specific Plan and -- Planned Comrwnhy. 2. Nor to any use of the project site or b!tslness activity being commenced thereon, all j _J__J Conditions of Approval sharrbe completed to the satisfaction of the City FLOW 3. Occupancy of the facility shall not commence until suchtimeas all Uniform Building Code and !�^ State Fire Marshall's regulations have been compiled with. Prior to occupancy. plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Division to show compliance. The building shall be Inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. a. Revised site plans and building elevations incorposating.all Conditions of Approval shall be — submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to Issuance of building permits. S. All site, grading, landscape, Ration, andstreet improvement plans shag be coordinated for J —�-- consistenoypriorto issuance ofar- ypamrtits (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 �j; ,his request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development —J—J- Code, at; other applicable City Ordinances, and appiic *M Community Plans or Specific Plans in Effect at the time of Building PerrA Issuance. ✓ 7. A detailed on -site lighting plan shall ta reviewed and approved by the City Planner and —J--J- Sheriff's Department (9139.661'. P pftr to the issuance of building iaermits. Such plan shall indicate style, illumination, lo,,olion, height, and method, of shielding so as not to adversely affect adjacent properties. 8. If no centralized trash receptacles are provided, all trash pick-up shW1 be for individual units J� with all receptacles shielded from public view. 9. Trash reeeptacle(s) are required and shall meet City standards. The final design, locations, —J--J- and the number of trash recapdacles shall be sub)ect to City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. 10. All ground-mounted utility aNwrlenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall J— l be located out of public view and adequ;,tAy screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry walls, berming, andfor laodscapintg to the satisfaction of the City Planner. SC -2/91 2+` !i E 11. Street names shalt be submitted for City Planner review and approval in accordance with / the adopted Street Naming Policy prior to approval of the final map. ✓ 12. ' tiding numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear aad concise manner, h. ang proper illumination. 13. A detailed plan indicating trait widths, maximum slopes, physical conditions, fencing, and weed control, in accordance with City Mastryr Trail drawings, shall be subrrdtted for City Planner review and approval priorto approval and recordation of the FinalTract Map andprior to approval of street improvement and grading plans. Developer shall upgrade and construct all trails, including fencing and drainage devices, in conjunction with street improvements. 14. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) shall not prohibit the keeping of equine animals wherezonirg requirements forthe keeping of said animals have been met. Individual lot owners In suhdivislons shall have the option of keeping said animatswithoutthe necessity of appealing to hoards of directors or homeowners' associations for amendments to the CC &Rs. 15. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC &Rs) and Articles of Incorporation of the Homeowners' Association are subject to the approval of the Planning and E°lgineerinq Divisions and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Map or prior to the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. A recar ;ed copy shall be provided to the City Engineer. 18. 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 City Planner and City Engineer review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. 17. Solar access easements shall.be dedicated for the purpose of assuming that each lot or dwelling unit shall have the right to receive sunlight across adjacent lots or units for use of a sotarenergy system. The easements may be contained in a Declaration of Restrictio+.s for the subdivision which shat! tyj recorded concurrently with the recordation of the final map or issuance of permits, whtcf±ever comes first. The easements shaft prohibit than casting of shadows W vegetation, smrotures, fixtures or any other object, except far utility wires and similar objects, pursuant to Development Code Section 17.08.f?80 -G2. Co npleucm Qz% 18. The project contains a designated Historical Landmark. The eke shall be developed and maintained in accordance wkh the Historic Landmark Alteration Permit No. . Any further moddreations to the site Including, but not kinked to, exterior alterations andfor interiorakerationswhich affeetthe exteriorof the buildings orstruciures, removal of landmark trees, demolition, relocation, reccnstructionof b lli sings orstructures, orchanges to the site, shall require a modification to the Historic t.anclmark Alteration Panrit subject to Historic Preservation Commission review and approval C. Building D®slgn 1. An alternative energy system is required to provide domestic hot waterfor all dwelling units and for heating any swimming pool or spa, unless other alternative energy systems are demonstrated to be of equivalent capacity andefficienty. All swinirrng pools Installed atthe time of irfalal development shall be supplemented with solar NOV. Details shell be included in the building plans and shall be submitted for City Planner review and approve' prior to the issuance of building permits. 2. All dwellings shall have the front, We and rear elevations upgraded with architectura treatment, detailing and incrRased delineation of surface treatment subject to City Planne review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. SC - 2/91 3 R -1q JJ _,.I —/_— —/—J- -J--J- w�i>•■t —J--J- CamnenonDau: 3. Standard patio cover plans for use by the Homeowners' Association shall be submitted for City Planner and Building Official review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. 4. All roof appurtenances, Including air conditioners and other sort mounted equipment and/or --J--J- projections. shag be shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacerzproperties and streets as required by the Planning. Division. Such screening shall be, architecturally Integrated with the building design and constructed to the satisfscfkin of the City Planner. Details shall be Included in building plans. D. Parking and Vehicular Aecesa (indicate details an building plans) ✓� 1 Ail parking lot landscape islands shall have a minimum outside dimension of 6 teet and shall JoJ� contain a 12 -inch walk adjacr: rnt to the parking stall (including curb). ✓� 2. Textured pedestrian pathways and textured pwiement across circulation aisles shall be - J—f — providedthrcughoutthe development to connect: dielings /unitslbuiidhwwiihot* nspaces/ / plazas/recreational uses. ?/ 3. All parking s; aces snail be double striped per City standards arr6 all driveway aisles, entrances, aml exits shall be striped per City standards. 4. Al units shall be provided with garage door openers it driveways are less Vian 18 feet In —J--J- depth from back of sidewalk. 5. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions shall reshietthe storage ofrecreatioi :alvehicles on this site unless they are the pdr ripal source of transportation for the owner and prohibit parking on Interior circulation aisles other than In designated visitor parking areas. 6. Plans for any security gates shall be submitted for the City P /a�ier, City Engineer, and Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District reviewanda�pro�:alpldorto issuanceof building permits. E. landscaping (for publicly maintained landscape areas, referto Section N.) --J--/— 1. Adetailedlandscr:;.anii tgitionpl an, fnckxMVsl opepiantingandmodalhome tartdscap- J--J— ing in the case of residential development, shalt be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submittedfor City Planner review and approval priorto the Issuance of building permits or prior final map approval in the case of a -n lot subdivision. 2. Existing trees required to be preserved in PI eShallbeproted3dwithaoonstns ;tfonballer - J-/-in accordance with the Municipal Code Section 19.08. 110, and sonot9d on the grading plat. 's. The IoWLicf those treestsbepreservedinplace and new locattonsfortransplantedtree's shalt be shoo ,m on the detailed landscape plants. The applicant shall follow ali of the arborisr► recommerKiAions reg fft preservation, transplanting and trimming methods. 3. Aminimumof treespergmosswe. comprisedofthefoRmAngstzes ,sha0bepmvided J—r within the project: %- 48- Inch box or larger. _%- 38- inch box orlarger,. % - 24- inch box or larger, % • 15- gallon, and % - 5 gaasl't. 4. A rninirrmum of % of trees planted within the project shall be specimen Size trees - I 24 -inch box or larger. 5. Within paving lots, trees shall be planted at a rata of one 15- gallon tree for every three parking stalls, sufficient to Shade 50% of the parking area at solar noon on August 21 < SC -2 /9t 4 R— 2 0 6. Trees shall be planted in auras of publiieview adjacerrito and along structures at a rate of one Comdetion Date! tree per 30 linear feet of building. — /—J- 7. All private slope barM 5 feet or less in vertical height and of 51 orgreater slope, but less than _/__J_ 2:1 slope, shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for eroslon control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 8. All private slopes in excess of 5teet,butiessthan6teet inverticalheightandot2 :1orgreater —J—! slope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as follows: one 15 -gallon or larger size tree per eaeh,150 sq. ft. of slope area, 1 - gallon or larger size shrub pereach 100 sq. ft. of slope area, and 4)propriate gmundcover. in addition, slope banks in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and of 2;1 or greater slope shall also include one 5 -gallon or larger size tree per each 250 sq. ft. of ,%lope area. Trees and shrubs st-ali be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary skrpa plane. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 9. For single family residential development, ,.,,A slope denting and irrigation shall be continu J--1 —• ousty maintained in a heathy and thriving corziltionb f the % leve"r until each Individual unit is sold and occupied bythebuyer. Pnortoreleasing0ty; gancyforthose units, aninspection shall be conducted by the Planning DI•,rision to dlilwdrre that They are in satisfactory condition. _ 10. For mul i- family residential and non - residential development, property owners are respon- slole for the continual maintenance of all landscaped areas on -eta, as well as oontiguous planted areas within the public right-of -way. AN landscaped areas shall be kept free from weeds and debris and maintained in a healthy and thriving condition, and shall receive regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing, and trimming. Any damm.*d, dead, diseased, or Ask decaying plant material shall be replaced within 30 days from the date of damage. 11. Front yard landscaping shall be required per the DevelopmerA Code and /or This requirement stmN be in addition 'm the required street trees and slope planting. 12. The final design of the perimeter parkways, wails, landscaping, and sidewalks shall be --J—J- included in the required landscape plans and shall be subject to City Planter review and approval and coordinated fsrconsistencywith any parkway landscapingplanwhichmaybe required by the Entgfneerkt Division. ✓ 13. Special landscape features such as mounding, alluvial rock, We -r°,atze trees. meander- — J---�— ing sidewalks (with ha*ontal c4ange), and intensified landscaping, is required along _tAli ll,k, -, ,4yan-P- L 14. Landscaping and Irrigation systems required to be installed within the pubic fight-of-way on the perimeter of this project area shall be cartfir umly maintained by the developer. _ X15. All walls shall be provided wihdecorativet^ eatment. if located in public maintenance areas,• the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division. 16. Tree maintenance criteria shag be devek4*d and submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to if t3uance of building permits. These errteda shall encourage the natural / growth characteristics of the selected tree species. V 17. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through ft principles of Jam_ Xeriscape as defined in Chapter 19.16 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. SC - 2/91 H. Other Agencies L 1. Emergency secondaryaxessshallb pvikiedina =irdancewkhl;ancmCucarnongaFire J—J- Protection District Standards. ✓ _2. Emergency access shallbe provided, maintenance free mid clear, a minimiumol2fifeetwide - -1--�— at all times during construction in accordance with Rancho Cucamonga Fire Pmtecton District requirements. 3. Prior to Issuance of b;uilfog permits for combustible constnution, evidence shall be J�J submitted tothe Rancho Cucamonga Flm Protection Distfkttthattemporary water supply for fire protection Is available, pending completion of requM fire proteicton system. ✓ a. The applicant shall contact the U. S. Postal Service to determine the appropriate type and -JJ location of mail boxes. Mukkamily residential devoodrnerds shall provide a wiid overhead structure for mail boxes with adequate lighting. The final location of the mail boxes and the design of the overhead stnucNre shag be subject to City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. S. For projects using septic tank facilities. written certification of acceptabiiity, including all --�-J supportive information, shall be obtained from the San Bernardino County Depattmert of Environmental Heaith and submitted to the Buil;F,,lg Official prior to the issuance of Septic Tank Permits, and prior to issuance of building permits. sc -2191 Sgmnieuon Date• F. Signs - ✓ 1. The signs indtcatedonthe submitted plans are conceptual oniyandnotapartof this approval- Any signs proposed for this development shall comply with the Sign Ordinance and shall requir oeparate application and approval by the Planning Division priorto installation of any signs. 2. A Uniform Sign Program for this development shall be submitted f orCity Planner reviewand --L_! approval prior to issuance of building permits. 3. Directory monument sign(s) shall be provided for apartment; wridominlum, or townhomes prior to occupancy and shall require separate application anii approval by the Planning Division prior to issuance of building permits. 0. Environmental 1. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the Fovirth Street Rock _f—J- Crusher project in a standard format as determined by the City Planner, priorto a=pting a cash deposit on any property. 2. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the City Adopted —J--J- Special Studies Zone for the Red Hill Fault, Ina standard format as determined by the City,, Planner, prior to accepting a Cash deposit on any prorvity. 3. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the Foothill Freeway project in a standard formal as determined by the City Planner, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. 4. A final acoustical report shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the -J--J- Issuance of building permits, The final report shag discuss the level of interior noLre attenuatonto below 4SCNEt „ the building mnatedaisand construction techniques provided, and U appropriate, verify the adequacy of the mnigaton measures. The building plans will be checked for confofirance with the r itigaton measures contained in the final report. H. Other Agencies L 1. Emergency secondaryaxessshallb pvikiedina =irdancewkhl;ancmCucarnongaFire J—J- Protection District Standards. ✓ _2. Emergency access shallbe provided, maintenance free mid clear, a minimiumol2fifeetwide - -1--�— at all times during construction in accordance with Rancho Cucamonga Fire Pmtecton District requirements. 3. Prior to Issuance of b;uilfog permits for combustible constnution, evidence shall be J�J submitted tothe Rancho Cucamonga Flm Protection Distfkttthattemporary water supply for fire protection Is available, pending completion of requM fire proteicton system. ✓ a. The applicant shall contact the U. S. Postal Service to determine the appropriate type and -JJ location of mail boxes. Mukkamily residential devoodrnerds shall provide a wiid overhead structure for mail boxes with adequate lighting. The final location of the mail boxes and the design of the overhead stnucNre shag be subject to City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. S. For projects using septic tank facilities. written certification of acceptabiiity, including all --�-J supportive information, shall be obtained from the San Bernardino County Depattmert of Environmental Heaith and submitted to the Buil;F,,lg Official prior to the issuance of Septic Tank Permits, and prior to issuance of building permits. sc -2191 APPLICANTS SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (714) 989.1863, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 01. She Development _ 1. The applicant 3halJ comply withthe latest adopted Uniform Building Code. Uniform Mechani- cal Code, Uniform Plumbing Cods,, National Electric Code, and all other applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations in effect at the time of issuance of relative permits. Please contact the Building and Safety Division for copies of the Code Adoption Ordinance and applicable handouts. 2. Prior to Issuance of .,wilding pe muits for a new residential dwelling ur*(s) or major addition to existing unft(s), the applicant shall pay Ovebpmentf &as at the established rate. Suchtees may include, but are not limited to: City Beautification Fee, Park Fee, Drainage Fee, Systems D(nrelopment Fee, Permit and Plain Checking Fees, and School Fees. / 3. Prier to issuance of building permits for a new commercial or lnd<ustdr) development or addition to an existing development, the applicant shah pay development tees at the established rate. Such fees may Inekrde, but are not limited to: Systems Development Fee, Drainage Fee, School Fees, Permit and Plan Checking Fees. 4. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building Offic . aftertractlparcei map recordation and prior to issuance of building permits. J. Existing Structures PM'-Xt e.- J)Pr,1 -uH Comr eaon Date, —J--J- 1. Provide compliance with the Uniform Building Codo for the Property line clearances 1 —J--J- considering use, area., and firs- resistiveness of oxistirg buildings. ( 2. Existing buildings shall be made to carnply with correct building and zoning regulations for the intended use or the building shall be demolished. 3. Existing sewage disposal facilities shall be removed, flied andloreapped to conr;,Vy with the I Uniform Plumbing Code and Uniform Building Code. 4. Underground on -site uIlPlas are to be locates and shown on b lUft plans submitted for I building permit appiication. K. Grading 1. Grading of the subjectpropertyshallbe in accordancewithtae Uniform Building Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shah be in substantial conformance with the approvod grading plan. 2. A soils report shah be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to perform such work. 3. The development is located within the soli erosion control boundaries: a ScH Disturbance Pemidt is required. Please contact San Berardino County Departinentof Agriwfture st (714) 387 -2111 forperrnit application. Documentation of such pemmllt shale be submitted tothe City prior to the Issuance of rough grading pem*. 4. A geological report shalt be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the time of appliication for grading plan check. a/ S. The final grading plans shall be completed and approved priorto issuance ofbuildirgpermits. - 2191 7 — 1 3 —J--J- -J--J— SC (Drat D) FINAL PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PART IT ETIWANDA NORTH SPECIFIC RICH ##99012314 City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Boat 807 10500 Civr Center Drive Rancho Cucainonga9 CA , 91729 .- September, 1991 ,r 1` i INTRQDUCTIG" " Part Ii of the Etiwa7ida North Environmental Impact Report contains the aPR Mrcice of Completion, cG =ment letters from responsible agencies, property owners, and interested pasties, as well, -7- responses to comments. It also includes additional information requested by the commentors, including revised maps and worksheets for project; statistics. This document also includes a copy of the revised mitigation measures incorpoiated into the Executive Summary Revised - section of the EIR. The final section included is Public,, Review Da umentazion, including ,`.he public notice, and minutes of public hearings. Upon certification of the draft Final EIR, the Resolution of Certification, including the findings and statement of overriding considerations will be included, along with the ° adopted mitigation monitoring plan: GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH 1400 TENTH STREET' ANSACRAMENT0. CA 95814 mss% Sun ?D, 1991 !? MIKI SRATT RANCHO CUCMONGA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY PO BOX 807 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730 _ Subject: ETIWANDA NORTH PROJECT AREA SCH # 89012314 Dear MIKI BRATT: The State Clearinghouse has submitted the above named draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to selected state agencies for review. The review period is now closed and the comments from the responding agency(ies) is(are) enclosed. On the enclosed Notice of Completion form you w1i note that the Clearinghouse has checked-the agencies that have commented. Please review the Notice of Completion to ensur.J that your comment package is complete. If the comment package its noil in' order, please notify the State Clearinghouse immeCiately. Remember to refer to the project's eight -digit State Clearinghouse number so that we may respond promptly.. Please note that Section 21Q4 of the Califor•'.a.Public Resources Code required that: qW "a responsible agency or other public agency ehall enly make` substantive comments regarding those activities involved in a project which are within an area of i&xpertise of the agency or which are required to be curried out or approved, by the agency." Commenting agencies are also required by this section to support their comments with specific documentation. These comments are forwarded for your use in preptiring your final EIR. Should you need more information or clarification, we recommend that you contact the commenting agency(ies). This letter acknowledges that you have complied with the 'State Clearinghouse Zov.iew = ,4quirements for draft environmantal' documents, pursuant to the California environmental Quality Act. Please contact Ken Sutton at (916) 445 -0613 if you have any questions regarding the environmental review process. Sincerely,; David C. Nunenkamp Deputy Director, Permit Assistance AL IW't:nclasures cc: Resources Agency ;3 1]• ) ale '...0. 1 .. J.•t I, .­d APPrCAIMJ­Ly bd--O .,,;rrn lirLur W .1Mt­.4Lt­ of WrrLL­1 11. 11, R4.mh. Ctic.­g., .•r uirwel;­ fur 1611 ­. , .,,.ily l.n:A. 1g Atrca o5 dw.J1Wg u.-.Jts a.-. 1473 of ho".1 :pure Trial I'-- '� P•k., m- aq., t rrQ­r,o.t­ -. .,)r 1-112 r,. ur ope.: M! H111114%:d Av­­ (%R in) . ..... tij of till, Ti,: 11 h 11 vast 01 the City of r­a.l.: FARIM"Houst CONTACT, a.&* Cottisw MG) 465-0613 I CHT IXT 'ATE NEVIrd HOAN, S-.6. :PT REV TO AG."MICY, U. wy, c. 3,P, 41 '29-r,:397 1.. Iron. ri 14) 989­86t -IL JR'0 Jj mate � t. MDIAPCO k--J-31 1211140mcces.- IATLaCZfLpf v. 7841$ ___M a— 42. —=I.. M. ___F­ vswl a). 24. smal, ',!A M, --------------------- a. mum., mx- UK a. to. rm- I*. St.— WT. ---a". --Mw 12. gal am at. malt It.; IQ. U. —Calllal -9 P__ U. -*K-- am Oner. SOJ•L - u. putty -LL— LvalIq U..1iJlsef allgq, 35. a'. +%—Au aaata;mm Ia. M. U. Ia. 27. LA-0 Irmax,, .S. —a." &,,,a 12. a. U. U. 7C jwl. I-&" lata- wf,,,,tm ammato M-L-am.". 22. H. --JybK- U. flop-I ftom a­--x6L_ ralta "I OMOalMLMLALXCM, Uper. Space and ResWencial 1]• ) ale '...0. 1 .. J.•t I, .­d APPrCAIMJ­Ly bd--O .,,;rrn lirLur W .1Mt­.4Lt­ of WrrLL­1 11. 11, R4.mh. Ctic.­g., .•r uirwel;­ fur 1611 ­. , .,,.ily l.n:A. 1g Atrca o5 dw.J1Wg u.-.Jts a.-. 1473 of ho".1 :pure Trial I'-- '� P•k., m- aq., t rrQ­r,o.t­ -. .,)r 1-112 r,. ur ope.: M! H111114%:d Av­­ (%R in) . ..... tij of till, Ti,: 11 h 11 vast 01 the City of r­a.l.: FARIM"Houst CONTACT, a.&* Cottisw MG) 465-0613 I CHT IXT 'ATE NEVIrd HOAN, S-.6. :PT REV TO AG."MICY, 6-1 R;�� ZKY SIV TO wx a -IL MDIAPCO k--J-31 1211140mcces.- - ­, Dir It$i; •. 6 Game E!17; cost%% & Voltage 6013t In CHI sm OtA Schnatoi &I'llifftsaM Altars 21-1-1 1 El Lj IL J 17 17 ETIWANDA NORTH SPECIFIC PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT LIST OF COMMENTS RECEIVED I. OPR: Notice Review Period Closed 6 /20191 2. CALIF. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION: June 13, 1991 Tony Calvillo, District 8, PO Box 231, San Bernardino, California 92402 3. NATIVE AMRICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION: June 12, 1991 Gail McNulty, 915 Capitol Mall, Room 288, Sacramento, CA 9581.4 4. CHINO BASIN MUNICI`'�AL WATER DISTRICT: June 10, 1991 Mark Kinsay, PO Box 697, Rancho Cucamonga, t'�a 91729 5. AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT -r Jane 4, 1991 Connie Day, 9150 Flair Drive,_El Monte; CA 91731 6. SLAG: June 24, 1991, Paul Hatanaka, 818 West 'Seventh Street, 12th Floor, Los Angeles CP. 90017 -x3435 7. CALIF. DEPT. FIS`i AND GAME: June 26, 1991, Kimberly K. 1.,7ee, 330 Golden ^re, Suite 50, Long Beach, CA 90802 8. UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE: July 3 1991, John Hanlon, 24000 Avila Road, Laguna Niguel, CA 92656 9. U.S. DEPT. AGRICULTURE - SAN BERNARDINO NATIONAL FOREST: June 19, 3991, Gary Barney, Star Route, Box lbo, Fontana, CA 92336 -9704 10. SOUTHERN CALIFOPNIA EDISON COMPANY: June 13, 1991, Cheryl A. Karns, 7951 Redwood Avenue, Fontana, CA 92336 11. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNINC4 June 3,1, 1991, Valerie Pilmer, 385 North Arrowhead hvenue, San Bernardino, CA 92415 -1080 ,12. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING: June 20, 1991, Kathleen Browne, 385 N. Arrowhead Avenue, San Bernardino, CA 92415 -1080 13B. SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TRANSIFLOOD May 28, 1991, Memo from Lewis Neeb, 825 East Third Street, San Bernardino, CA 92415 -0835 13B. SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TRANS fFLOOD: May 22, 1991, Memo from Ruben Montes, Flood Control Division, 825 East Third Street, San Bernardino, CA 92415 -0835 I 1! 13C. SAN BMAR131NO COUNTY TRANS /FLOOD: June 5, 1991, Memo from G.A. Kuhlman, Traffic tjivision, 825 East Third street, San Bernardino, CA 92415- 0W1j5; %C 1 14. CITY OF FONTANA: June ,''S, 1991, Darin Grossi, POpBox 518, Fontana, CA 92334 -0518 15. CHAFFEY COLLEGE: June 20, 1991, James des Lauriers, Department Of Biology, 5885 Haven Aenue, Rancho'Cacamonga, CA 91701 --3002 16. L-AND /PLAN /DESIGN GROUP: June 25, 1991, Jess Harris, 14751 Plaza Drive, Suite A, Tustin, CA 92580 17. LANDMARK LAND COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA: June 27, 1 91, �I Richard`Douglass,,2O Box 645, Calimesa, CA 92320 18. ETIWANDA HESGHTS DEVELOPRMNT CORPORATION: June 20, 1991, John Cheng, -153 Diamond street, #A, Arcadia, CA 91005 Aft :1 � A 11 INTRODUCTION TO RESPONSE TO COMMENTS Eighteen written comments have been received on the draft Etiwanda North Environmental Impact Report. The responses to the comments will focus on Environmental concerns. Several commentators : -aised the issue of the City's,zuthority to prezone the sphere ,.tea outside of the City's corporate limits.. Under State law the City has the responsibility to plan for its Sphere of Influence and annex urbanizing territory. The Cortese -Knox Local Government Reorganization Act of 1985 assigns the Local Agency Formation Commissions (LAFCO) responsibility for determining the probable ultimate physical boundaries and service areas of a local agency (Government Lode 56076 and 56425, et seq.) . Accordingly, the Rancho Cucamonga Sphere of Influence has been determined to be the territory north of the City limit, south of the National ForE'St Boundary, east of Cucamonga Creek, and west of the boundary of`che City of Fontana. Under the LAFCO requirements for annexation, prezoning 'is a prerequisi-ce to annexation, on May 16, 1990, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga approved resolutions to annex urbanizing territory into the City. In general, this is the area east of the extension of Milliken Avenue. Accordingly, applications were filed with the San Bernardino Local Agency Formation Commission and are pending. On June 20, 1990, the Council passed a Resolution of Intent to proceed with prezoning, which is one of the requirements for annexation. Preparation and approval of the City's - Etiwanda North Specific Plan serves as prezoning for the urbanizing area. Under State law, the prezoning does not take effect until annexation is completed, that is until the Cortese -Knox process is completed (Government Code Section 56000 et seq.) and certified by LAFCO. Under Government Code Section b5028 provisions are set forth for amending a Sphere of Influence. On May 16, 1990, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga approve: a resolution to expand the City's Sphere of Influence to include private inholdings north of the National Forest boundary, generally east of the extension of Milliken Avenue, and west of the extension of the boundary of the City of Fontana. Subsequently, an application was filed with the San Bernardino Local Agency Formation Commission and is pending. ThE County recognizes the City's responsibility for City planning and annexation of Sphere -of- Influence areas. As stated in the San Bernardino County General .,Plan, adopted July 1989 (p. I1 -D -107): "Section 65300 of the California Government Code places a dual mandate on both cities and counties relating to land use planning within spheres of influence. The land use policies adopted for the sphere -of- influence -8 gip, v� areas are designed to encourage annexations or incorporations." The County General Plan the also states following goal: "Develop a policy which encou?:ages implementation of compatible standards and facilities and encourages annexation for those lands located within the sphere of influence (SOT) of all cities." County General Plan policy "LU -9 states (p. II- D -IoS): "Because State law gives citie', the gltimate responsibility to manage lands witht,: their - Zidopted spheres of influence, and because cities are usually best able to manage urban growth through the provision of services, the County has a responsibility to coordinate its land use policies with the cities. The County needs, therefore, to pursue plans, policies and programs that support city standards and policies wherever such standards have been agreed to and r_ntly adopted. Until joint plans have been adopted, the County will exercise its authority to refer development applications to, affected cities and may require development to conform to city development policies and standards vhenever appropriate. in addi'- yn, the policies and standards than encourage Auk annexatie.n and the use of city standards within city spheres cif influence will be 'considered..." Further, the City recognizes that the County has the ultimate authority over development in the City's sphere of Influence until annexation is completed. As stated in the city of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan, adopted January 39, (p. IV -31): "Within the City's Sphere of influence between the northern City limits and the San Bernardiri National Forest, the City's authority to prescribe land use regulations is limited because this area is and -:the jurisdiction of the County. Legally, the County h,, gall ultimate decisions regarding the land use in "ihis area." In summary, under the above county and City policies, the City has the duty to plan its.Sphere -of- Influence areas to the maximum extent feasible, to work with the county to adopt joint plans, ?nd f policies as a prelude to annexation, and to proceed tv4ard annexation of urbanizing territory. Prezoning through"the specific plan process furthers the above County and City policies. 9 LE17ER ,� L11 S'AT'E OF CAL.UFORNIA PETE WLSON. Gov,? °cr GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF PLANN!NG AND RESEARCH t:� 1400 TENTH STREET Aff1kCRAMENTO CA 95814 Jun 20, 1991 .• ;_y MIKI BRATT RANCHO CUCAMONGA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY PO BOX 807 RA14CHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730 Subject: ETIWANDA NORTH PROJECT AREA SC:H # 89012314 Dear MIKI BRATT: The State Clearinghouse has submitted the above named draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to selected state agencies for review. The review period is closed and the comments from the responding agency(ies) is(are) enclosed. On the enclosed Notice of _Completion form you will note that the Clearinghouse has r.hecked the agencies that have commented. Please review the Notice ofC,ompletion to ensure that your comment package is complete. If the comment package is not in order - please notify the State Clearinghouse immediately. Remember to refer to the project's eight -digit State Clearinghouse number so that we may respond promptly. f Please note that Section 22104 of"the California Public Resources Code required that: "a responsible agency or other public agency shall only make substantive comments regarding those activities involved in a project which are within an area of expertise of the agency or which are required to be carried out or approved by the agency." Commenting agencies are also required by this section to support their comments with specific documentation. These comments are forwarded for your use in preparing your final SIR. Should you need more information or clarification, we reeomdand. that you coAtact the commenting agency(ies). i' This letter acknowledges that yo -'have complied with the State Clearinghouse review requirements for draft environmental documents, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. Please contact Ken Button at (916)_445 -0613 if you have any questions regarding the enviro,Imental review process. SincCrely, ?David C. Nunenkatmp Deputy Director, Permit Assistance Wnclosures cc: Resources Agency W r, tfb aMgas. loci TrY M-. acre lu. W— a tit - .ltr l au r ., — Y oesa a aa.tAM uo aev:antaro6 ltaTra.r r+...M oa is t y901 `31t_ 1. nna ro.. Fc:v u;JJ ::arch Sneelfi pUr .• i. ..a +rvtr:yjL•_- !ter.: hJ 1'J:.1na::_n 1, oa,r•n rvon,IJrry Ilerdefen %)!!ki R[trt ]•. rua .r..., •�;]n rl vlo i•w r nr /a• H. atT, Rec.•hn M1+; e- ..rQ, �Jl: 9a rr:J rL I,:J i.. (N, 917= 9 -n807 a. r.vv, -(714) 989 -1861 1pnxlapgy •• o•n,r,_jJr. A_..rr..r b. u,rlcsr,uT, Ra,:.•ho Cue era+ �p�- u. c,v. ,.trr, >_"•. °1' like.. )7'n SR30 7.e rwu. acct sw oan,ty, t. rerunl Woo. sou °1'-. •..v t tU to• rtt• r,i• a. LZ>♦ el. �,rrmru rlr .ts.+ ". ILjow at, wr.l6i tetr X6. 1 it. _.JQ a. ---tm .la �,nr "s. .1. �Ottiri i• li. -� a1. -Jrlr os .r. -%-.= .l. J•osru nr rimmus,t taa, smouros u. _an m a. �cm W. - .r.tt( r(n os. A:igWryoaimreut, �a. M 4.:`trYt m 01.. S,�1m.rLLn Yrr ?R ww St t a. - ,.j..titit tlr M. --wr 71• lt. ri. —0—.1y nr A-- - _ 4(Wta a. -'q.rt n, ---.w ttculusr ® - ,•� °_• Pl. rtr4fuu., Spa Qat a. .7R u. ICJ 1.. _Jo"ColUl.I -••••• Ct. , ssnuL_ 1.. ---7pp U: J It 1 -1600, moss m P. Tun oa. —1 A. _Jsrr n ,an am U. —nf tat. p. �aii. it.•rsiu 7176 U. 1„R ors. U. _jetty moot nos. 1t.._vi lli.r. It. -Jiro mr.,aa U. 2mao' Aq vomm u., j'r, -pryu Over.. snace - 4112 ac"m u• 11. V/A R. u. --Attt aprams, n.._Urss (6.111 U'v •�• -- Y. Xrludi.yAlap u. -i�6es afisiq a.,!- ,WAsq,,v .i. A- wirlw•l iw. r. X Qs A%wj W 17. tea" n..LLmwlsw pwiso .3. 4-Au 0aU0 u. Y `--' - " Wt,. la.. 1 .., 2,,00g l.. JLYUltt. ••• y "�- �°.WSlsr(at u. Y.AlstYr u. Y --togs. It. .,x -* iticua as. —Oros ra u. Y r�.+� a. . .- Lj.Luuo *- a., °"Lilt. (aritr N.. u, pwito eatta it. -XjwfLvmmL4uw n..L umasoon tCN V. .inn A.ra IA. .]�.— 37. -Lvta. r11.. 1e. yV U. 111= lover) sot" . - V It ...r ■ V/A riyl n /A (r• bra ®r Opel: Space ar.S Residencial u. 1WM1ZJM13MCX13, the prup•tt rm 7t1:Lr j Vlar. Jucr:d, -ea, .wool pr,- ,:(nu an?roaw i ccly 6840 acry prior Lu ar wx4tmr. got Lurrlu,r. it', Ur Rar:cho C.c.-,.I;. Sphere of lafluercc oral provldc. fur 1611 •,,,: :,rally of allir6 -1,%3 ur. 2670 acrev ui ww"nt l.md. 26 limes of neip .h�od�,p•(gIT1 c— crllal u.c, 6 arhmmin, 3 narks, i. equcacrim: ecrcer.. ar prosorvac ior, mf 6112 acres of oprut aM7ry Rerural ly located titahla.d Avccoe l5R !O), amrti, of tlru Sac. Xenard{ro s.triu,:.. ureiEfl� vac of the City of Portar«i a,e/ Mllllr. Avurnc ,••(. �♦ ' EAMR.- .00USE COCVACT, Cues Colllatt (91611 643- -0613 :ATE REVIEW MA Mi 5. 6 !PT REV TO AUNCYi e.Ae a a. TO VA s 6 'v cat ►LIA=U 7+tD /APCD�t (tuourraa; `�1) OR on OLA (school.) BRvirsar.nt Act- r• . Ions DE 1060 2 •*• . ofauE la - Z —MUl[h El r is !l LETTER 2 STATTE OF CALIFORNIA— BUSINESS tRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY �1 PETE WILSON, GG+erncr DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DistRICt 8. PO Box 231 + a SAN SFRNARDINO. CALIFORNIA V2402 TDD 74 3834009 June 13, 1991 08- SBd�30- 5.1,(10,.7 . SCH# 89012314 Mr. Larry Henderson, AICP City of Rancho Cucamonga Community Development Department Planning Division 10500 C2=Pic Center Drive P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Dear Mr. Henderson: Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR).- for Etiwanda North Specific Plan in the* We have reviewed the above - referenced document and request considerations of the following comments: o Increased runoff will directly impact the State Routd 30 freeway project. A method of collecting, distributing and pi�ssinq runoff through or under the freeway needs to be developed. This includes paralleling ups,ream collection, in those areas where a depressed freeway is desirable, and trans drtin to p cents g al flood control .facilities. O The DEIR needs to address the preservation of right of way for the future State Route 30 Freeway and its 2 2 interchanges. O The circulation element must address the east /west arterial traz,sportation system for local traffic movement. The State Route 30 (future freeway) fail ty 2.3 should not be used for these local trips. A1;2, C A proposal to replace the Cherry AvenueJI interchange with aa interchange at Summit is being considered. Please make,note of report, !Ut%1r'5 , 2.4 ur 0� !Ut%1r'5 , 2.4 ur Mr. Larry Hey derson, AICP June 13, 1991 Page i'wo o The report predicts that traffic will exceed capazity for State Routa;.30 (6 -lane freeway). Therefore, additional mitigations will be needed. This may include adding additional lanes to 2 d the freeway (Ste •: Route 30). o It is recognized that there is considerable public concern about noise levels adjacent to t.,avily traveled highways. Land development,_ir ords= to be z'-6 compatible with this concern, may require special noise attenuation measures. Development of this property should include j any necessary ,noise attenuation. o when available, we would like to receive the Notice of Determination, Finl Environmental Impact Report, Conditions of Approval and the date of any public 2.7 hearing on this project. Please send this information toy Tony Calvilio California Department o- "Transportation Transportation Planning, Branch B P.O. Box 231 San Bernardino, CA 92402 If you have any questions, please contact Tony Calvillo at (714) 383 -6285 or FAX (714) 383 -4936. Sincerely, /SABR;RV;EY �i'. S1.�ftY�Ft HARVEY J. SAWLER, Chief Transportation Planning San Bernardino County Coordination Branch TC: j l l bcc. • $$��ielgeson, Plan COord Unit, DOW u'RColliau, State Clearinghouse ARains, Development Review BKean, Traffic opps.' BPote, Design A 13 L. LETTER 2: DEPARTMENT OF TRAVPPORTATION June 13, 1991 2.1 Response All projects will be conditioned to conform to the Rancho Cucamonga Master Plan of Drainage per City Standards (Sea Exhibit 4.4 -2, Storm Drain Master Plan) . A parallel facility already exists north of Highland Avenue within the Etiwanda System. All development north of State Route 30 in the Day creek system will discharge to the Day creek channel north of the Freeway right -of- way. 2.2 Response Per City Policy, the State Route 30 Freeway right -of -way, shall be preserved. The Land Use Plan, 'Exhibit 3 -3, and the ^irc�ilation Plan, Exhibit 4.5 -5, have been revised to indicate the future Route 30 right -of -way and are hereby included in the FEIR. 2.3 Vintage Drive is designated as a through collector and will serve as the frontage road for .xie future Route 30 Freeway. Vintage Drive will also provide an alternate route for emergency vehicles. Ho! {:ver, it should be noted that the traffic study in the DEIR indicates that 5&n,yan and Wilson Avenues will carry the bulk of local east -west • .,os. 9..4 Response It is duly noted that the Cherry Avenuesl -15 Interchange may be replaced by a Wilson (Summit) Avenue /I -15 Intemhange (see DEIR, page 4.8 -7). The interchange alternatives are outside tW project area. 2.5 Response This comment is based on a capacity which does not include the HOV lanes which are a part of the proposed freeway (6 lanes plus 2 HOV lanes). The total lanes will provide. the needed capacity. In addition, the freeway volumes reflect traffic contributed by the entire region. Any excess traffic over capacity should be mitigated throughout the area in proportion to traffic added to the freeway. In this regard, planned reductions in density in the Specific Plan area will reduce tha plan's proportional impact on the freeway. _ 2.e Sound barrier walls shall be implemented per City Standards for development affected by the Route 30 FreewL.y� corri&43 and as described in the mitigation measures (Section 4.10). 2.7 Response Request for continuing notice-n noted. c, STATE OF CALIFORNIA WE atiSGN O NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION! ,•. 915 CAPITOL MALL, ROOM 298 - - SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95814- 916) 722.7791 ..CITY rr •+o CI:iA!IONGA.: 1 _ ..I•,ne 4, 1991 AM � IL N13 P U Larry Henderson I _,r31�r1 Planning Department r P A. Box 807 Rancho `ucamonga, CA 91739 - RE: Draft EIR - I f-wanoa North Specific Plan ECH #8901231 Dear Mr. Henderson: ASL I stated io you in our telephone conversation, I have concerns regarding some of ft wording in Page 4.8-14 of the above :mentioned EIR. My question to you, was who had given permission that 2..113�--haeologrAl resources would be donated to 3,1 a kcal institutian? I would higaly rai,ommend that app°: -priate Native American- groups be contacted for their input regarding the disposftion of;any archaeological f'osources. They may also be able to offer input regarding p;,eviously unrecorded sites in the rea, and prevent costly delays as the project progresses. Further, I would iecc nmend that mitigation measurrb- covering cultural resources be addressed, using the language found in the t"Jifornis Environmental C1 3.2 Allb u'..ky Act, Appendix KI Use of the iang;jage in Appendix K, or referee ze to the stRodardized procedures therein assures more adequate protection of such resources. Enclosed is a copy el brochure published by the Native American heritage Com nission for the use of planners,.:dovelope,is anu property ow. iers. It contains a breakdown of the California Codes pertaining to Native, American human remains and their disposition. If you need any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact'me. Sincerely, ail McNulty Staff Araiyst l - _t { AUk HAT J Z 1 Y . GUIDE FOR THE PRESERVATION AND PROTECTION OF NATIVE AMERICAN REMAINS AND ASSOCUTED GRAVE GOODS t= . Published by the California Native American j Heritage Commission . zap fussy till PETS WILSON, Govemor - g �t 17 WHAT TO DO The following actions must be taken immediately upon the discovery of retrains at a construction site: a)_ Stop work immediately and i contact the Coumy Coroner. b) The Cotoner has two wo. t ing days to examine remains after being notified by the person responAble for the excavrtion. If the retrains ,are Native American, the Coroner has 24 hours to notify the Native American heritage A RESOURCE G PE FOR: Commission. CORONERS c) , The Native A merican lReritage Commission w„lt immediately NATIVE AMERICAN notify the person it believes to be the most likely descendent of the MOST LIKELY DESCENDENTS deceased Native American. " CITY AND COUNTY PLANNERS d) The most likely descendent has 24 hours to m2ke recommendations PROPERTY OWNERS to the owner, or representative, for the treatment or disposition, with DEVELOPERS proper dignity, of the remains and grave goods. e) If the de�wende!nt doesn't make :recommendations within 24 ltourz. the owner may reinter the remains in an area of the property secura from further.disturbance, or: If the owner doest0t Fc+cept the descendent's rftomdaendations, the owner or the descendent may n request mediation by the Native American heritage Commission. '« ^k � �r~ ° ^ '~ The fallo'sing excerpts from California la�v ILI Section 27491 of the (3ovcmment Code orany oihid� concerning Native American remains are related provisions ofittiv concerning investigatiori'- circumstances, __ / Fmat Quipter 1492, Statutes of 19SZ, which the recommendations concerning the treatnient. and disposition of the human,remains have been made to added ' Section 7050.5 to the Health and Safety Code, t�—' person responsibie for the excavation, or EQ his or aneaded Section 5097.94 of die Public Resources Code and added Sections 5097.99 and 5097.99 to tila her authorized representadve, in the marme, T4,vided in Section 5097,98 of the PubUc Resou= Code. The Public Resources Code: cOwncr shall make his or her detennination within two (a) The Ueshiare f inds as follows- working days fmm thi-time the person responsible for the cAcavation, or his or heir auftrimd representative, (1) Native AmexiCart human burials and skeletal notifie� the coroner of the discovery or recogniltionO the A'tunan remains. remains are subject W vandalism and inadvertent destruction at art increastig rate. (C) If the coronerileterinines that the remains arenot (2) State laws& not provide for the promcdon of these burials and remains fnxn vandalism and bieCt to his or. ' I authority and if the coroner �cogni= the hv..,hn remains to be these of a Nalive i destruction. (3) Th= is no regular means at this time by American, or has luson to believe that they ate those 1 of 2 Nadv- American, he or she shall contact, by which Native American descendents can make known telephone within 24 how, the.Native American their concerns regaldingihe treatment and disposition Hwitage Cminission. of Native American burials, -tkelet;il remains, and items MOCialed with Native American burials. From Section SD97.94 of the Public (b) The purpose of " act is: Resources Code. (1) To provide- protection to Native American The commission shall have the following powers and dudes: huMM burials and simletal remains hom vandalism and inadvertent destra-tion. - - - M To mediate, upon apptcadon of either 04V � (2) To provide a ' tegularmears by which Na&z pardes,disputm arising between landowners and American descendrrits"c"an make known their concerns known deser, atin toftireatme an regarding the need for sensitive treatinent 2m 440or�itiort ofNative American human binials, disposition of Native American burials, skeletal skeletal remains, and itauts associated with Native remains. and imms associated with Native American American busials. ThO IlVdgMents shall ptavift protection to Native safety Code . vandalism ' (b) In ft event Of di=very or recognition ot any ' "=si",= titatment CA disposition of N&,-a American biirials� skeletal mmains, and associated giave goods human reirm*= in any location other than a dedicated consimm vAth the plartned use of, or the approved ' or Of thO 4ite or any nearby am Wsonably ~_~__—__ ' ~~.~°~.== dWrminod, in accordance with Chapter ' OT diSpOing, with appropriate dignity, of ,v ��� — -- --v ~^", =""=�.nquu�� � ���n��`�� ' provisions of ' "' From Section $097.98 of the Public SB 447 (Chapter 404. Statute$ or 1987). Resources Code. (( On January 1, 1988, Senate Bill 437 went imo effect. (a) Whenever the commission receives notification This legislation amended Section 5097.99 of 1te Public I of a discovery of Native American human mains. - re P. .. esc,;rces Code making is a felon to obtain or g Y from a county coroner pursuant to subdivision (c) of possess Native American remains a: associated grave ' Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Cgde, is goods: shall immediately notify those persons it (ielieves to i be most likely descended from the deceased Native (a) No person shall obtain or possecs''any Native American. The descendents may, with the 0 American artifacts or human remains which are taken .permission of the owner of the land or his or her , f v from a Native American or coin on or after !'m autlorized K " 'v ` site pt,.setttau e, Inspect. the ate of the otherwise v January 1;1984, except as otherNU., provided bylaw or discovery of the Native American remains: and may in accordance with an agreement reached P�--r t to recommend to the owner or the person responsible for subdivision (1) of Section 5097.94 or pursuant to the excavation work means for treating or disposing, Section 5097.98..'- ` with "priate dignity, the human remains and any asOcrared,grave, goods. The descendents shall (b) Any person. who knowingly or willfully obtains or complete their inspection.-and make their possesses any Native Americari artifacts or farman recommerviation within 7k hours of their notiicadon remains which are taken from a Native America, grave-= by the Nndve American Heritage Commission. The or cairn after January 1, 1988, except as otherwise recommendation may include the scientific removal provided by law or in accordance with an agreement ; and nondestructive wWysis of human remains and reached pursuant to subdivision p) of Section 5397,94 - items associated with Native. American burials. or pursuant to Section 50;7.98; is guilty of a felony which is punishable by impeisoounem in the state (b) Whenever the commission is unable to identify a prison. descendent, or the descendent identified fails to make a recommendation, or the landowner or his or her t,) (c) Any parson vvt:o removes, without authority of authorized representative rejects the recommendation law,: any Native American artifacts or human remains of the descendent and the medi ition provided for in nom a Native American grave or cairn with an intent to subdivision (k) of Section 5097:94 fails to provide sell or dissect or with malice or wanton ess is guilty of measum acceptab� to the landowner, the landowner a felony which is punishable by imprisonment in the or his or her authti ized representative shall, reinter the state prison. human remains and>tems associated with Native American burials with appropriate dignity of the property in a location not wlif ect to further subsurface disturbance �4 FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: call the NATIVE AMERICANHERITAGE CoMrVJJSSJOJV J;, at (916) 322-7791 o;�Lwrite to: NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE "I com-'NIISS�00 I 915 Capital Mail, itoom 288 Sacramento, CA 95814 LETTER 31. NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMHISSION Jline 4, 1991 3 =1 Resnanse The following mitigation measures .shall be= added to Cultural Resources, Section 4.6, and is' hereby incorporated into the Final EIR: NATIVE App Rrr AFOLOCYCAL RESOURCES 1.. Regarding possible Native tAvir can burial sites, burial remains, or Native American artifacts found in association with a burial site or burial remains, Sections 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code, and Section €?:5097.94, 5097.98, and 5097.99 of the Public Resources, Cade shall be followed, including; * Stop"-work immediatel} -,and contact the C!, 11ty Coroner. Following ',.otiZication, the Coroner has two working days to examine the remains and iV� the remains are Native American, has 24 hours to notify" the Native, American Heritage i Commission which must take actions to notify the most likely descendent and "to recommend disposition of the remains: and /or artifacts. As of June 1991, the - Native American Heritage Commission, can be contacted at 915 Capitol Mall, Room 288, Commission,, CA 95814, (916) 322- 7791. 2. Regarding, any other Native American Archaeological ftsource fartds, the Native American Heritage Commission shai`'y be consulted. Upon 'creir recommendation, �appropLiate Native American Groups shall be contacted regarding the dispositkc" of aforementioned Archaeological Resources." i VIa. t ! LETTER 4 TEL-7.14-987-1712 yIUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT FAX-7 11,989-6702 8555 Archibald Ave P.O. Box 697 t�� ^iluaTe�o Rancho Cyamonga. CA 91729 June 20, 1991 City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Attention: Larry Henderson, Principal Planner Subject; Etiwanda North Specific Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report, SCH ;tip 89012314 Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) prepared for the Etiwanda*North Specific Plan. In review of the DETR, it was noted that clarification is required concerning water and sewer related services through the Chino Basin Municipal Water D_atrict (CBMWD). In our response to the Notice of Preparation of a DEIR for this project in February of 1989, it was noted that a large portion of project area was outside the boundaries of CBMWD. For this portion of the project area, special procedures -will need to be followed prior to service availability. As noted in the DEIR, prior to the availability of imported potable water supplies through the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) the project area must first be annexed to the boundaries of Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), MWD and to CBMWD. The MWD has recently revised its annexation application procedures, requiring newly annexing areas to develop in a manner which will rromote efficient water usage. One of the MWD water efficiency guidelines, requires, when feasible, the utilization of reclaimed 4.2 water for the irrigation of golf courses, for the irrigation of landscaped areas greater than one acre and for the irrigation of landacaping associated with multi- family residential units. The guidelines also require the use of reclaimed water as a supply source for decorative laY.es. As a measure to offset water demand within the project area, the DEIR discusses the potential establishment of a development related fee to assist in the funding if future off -site water reclamation projects. The establishment of this type of program would in 4.3 effect, function to off -set or minimize increased potable water demands within the project area. While the concept presented within :.he proposed mitigation measure does not directly meet the water efficiency guidelines recommended by MWD, the concept sloes dmk merit further consideration by the involved water agencies. Dwight F. French Ger,e�e A Barba John L Anderson Anne W. Dunihue EW HIQ Thomas J. Homan Prrudent MCIPttdent stcretarf7maturer Director Arector Caeml.Nanua �3 Mr. Larry Henderson June 20, 1991 AMIN .� The DEIR correctly identifies that under the terms of the Regional Sewer Service Contract, "special arrange --" are required to permit wastewater, treatment services to the, portion of the project area outside of `our existing" service area boundaries. More specifically, under Section 12, ExtratlTerritcria_ l Sewer ;Service, of the Regional Contract, _a mechanism is provided to permit sewer service to 'areas within the boundaries of a contracting agency (CCWD) but outside of CBMWD. Approval of: sewer service to extra- territorial areas will be subject tee approval by th.=_ CBMWD Board of Directors after review and analysis by the Regional Program participants. The analysisi:ompleted will take into account items such as the availability & treatment plant capacity to.; service these areas and the ability of the severing agency to levy and collect the charges required under the Regional Contract. If you require any additional information or clarification` of the items presented above, please contact Mark Kinsey of our staff. Very truly yours, Vincent B. DePalma, Jr., P.E. Manager, Engineering and Planning VBD /MNK/ tC r LETTER 4% CURIO BASIN MUNXCSPAL WATER DISTRICT JUUG 20, 1991 4.1 geanonsa Please refer to the DPUR¢ p. 4.11 -9 and the following discussion for a review of the a!gnek.Miion territory to CCWD, CBMWO, and MWf . 4.2 Response " , Please refer to the DkR, Section 4.11.4, Mitis:ition Measure 7. 4,,3 espans• Please refer to Response 4.2. 4_ : us ads• - The .foV owih,,K statement shall be added to Section 4.11.5, Wastewater Serrvice,: Mitigation Measure 3, and is hereby . incorporated into the Final EIR: " . or apply for extra- territorial sewer service through CCWu and CBMWD.n LETTER 5 South Coast AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 9150 FLAIR DRIVE, is WONTE, CA 91731 (818) 572 -6200 June 4,1991, Mr. L. J. Henderson 4 Principal Planner �4 t City of Rancho Cucamonga CITY 4! NcHt ci�G,,.oN�� Piannin& Department Ju , 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga CA 91729 Dear Mr. Henders on:1`,�`lyl"�,1�IG1�l.'.�� Subject: Draft EIR Etiwanda North Specific Plan, City of Rancho Cucamonga. W-AQMD #SBC910507 -01. The South Coast Air Quality Management District (District) has reviewed the Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) for the proposed 12dwan -North Specific Plan located within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The District's review of the project indicates that the project has the potential to generate significant short- and long -term air quality impacts which have not been fully addressed in the Draft Elie. The District is responsible for adopting, im, lement"xig, and enforcing air quality regulations in the South C: ', Air Basin (Basin) which includes the City of Rancho Cucamonga. As a responsibly_ agency; � , District reviews and analyzes environmental documents for projects that may generate significant adverse air quality impacts. The District's role is-advisory to the lead agency, The attached staff review presents a detailed discussiron of the District's luialysis of the Draft EIR. The District appreciates the opportunity to comment on the proposed Etiwanda No,,h Specific Plan. If you have any questions re arding these coriments, please contact Connie Day, Program Supervisor, at (818) 30 -4597. Sincerel Mike A. Nazerm MAN:CAD:TS:PF Planning Manager Attachment 1 1 AWACHMENT SCAQIWD ASSESSMENT OF NORTH ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Project Description The- North Etiwanda Specific Plan proposes a General Plan Amendment and preaoning for annexztion of approximately 6,800 acres of land within Rancho Cucamonga's sphere of influence. Development standards are proposed for 3,656 single- family dwelling units on 2,473 acres of vacant land; 28 acres of neighborhood commercial uses; 4 schools; 5 parks; and an equestrian center. The preservation cf 4,112 acres of open space is also included in the proposal. Air Quality Setting S.Z The Draft EIle accurately chaff- Icterizes the air quality setting relative t) i the roposed project using the 1989 aii` quality data. The 1990 data presently avi able =11`al j (pattached), should be used in tl E 1 EIR. According to air quality moni _tiring conducted in 1990 at the District` --;:ti monitoringg ;Station at Fontana, the closest station to the project area, ozone levels excaedq,d th4; federal and state standards em 92 and 132 days respectively; and PM10 levels oxcceded federal and state standards in 5.1 percent and 72.9 percent respectively of the samples monitored. The federal and state standards for carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide and sulfur dioxide were j not exceeded. Short-Term Air Quality Impacts Short -term air quality ►m acts from the proposed protect :atild be due mainly to grading, excavation, and other construction- related activities. Architectural coatings, exterior paints, and asphalt used in both residential and commercial 5.3 buildings would result in the release of volatile organic compounds (VOCs). The Final EIR should address all sources of emissions relative to the proposed project. A list of VOC potential mitigation measures to reduce emissions, including erissions is provided in'I -ble 1. Construction Emissions Construction emissions would re ult, fiom fugitive dust, Heavy-duty construction equipment, and necessary vehicular trips (trucks and personnel). The proposed 92 . acres per day of construction activi •, including grading and leveling worn; would produce approximately 5.0 tans of daily fugitive dust emission: (Draft EIR, Page S 4- 77). Even if the proposed mitigation measures were to reduce emissions by 50 percent, approximately 2.5 tons of emissions would occur on any day of construction j work. E Mr. L. J.Henderson District staff recommends grading, and excavation ac and a ohased- construcdc fugitive dust emissions ,s should be mon tore( an should be imple . ails threshold limit of jvm; 4, 1991 nstruction equipr,:eit, y during construction, to prevent the dust $ Iky (SCAQ NMI 6I $� (mnact Reports). The c.owr- In sources, including anticipated lr, to closures and detours, and propose measures to mitigate short -term construction impacts. See Table 1 for a listing of potential mitigation measures. Arr,hitectural Coatings and Asphalt UsUe . The Final EIR should i�ialyze methods so.�reduce emissions from the use of architectural t^ ratings, paints, and asphalt. Splventless of high-solid and water-based coatings should be used wherever passible. High transfer efficiency should be achieved when solvent -based paints are --sed. Long -Term Air Quality Imp-icts Lon -term air quality impacts from the project are primarily due to approximately 153,686 daily vehicle tubs and the resulting vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Con -estion arising from -&� a increased VMT may generate additional emissions. The creation of over 1,400 �tevr obs, from the commercial and recreational activity may cause a slight reduction``in the ` ✓MT at build -out as jobs are made available in the project area. "ow.werl the overall traffic imppacts of the project from the proposed 3,600 reswentip.1 touts are significant. we, Final EIR should include additional mitigation measume, besides, -those proposed in the Draft EIR, for reducing emissions from irrreasad VMT, <' Transportation and Traffic Improvements The City of Rancho Cucamonga, is propo,- ; 'a comprehensive prograta of traffic improvements including their effective iu idling and nT' ,entation. 'iVis program, according to the Draft EIR, creates a nexus, procedure fu- 'ImpLment transportation performance standards aimed at reducing thy. `dverse effects of additional VMT. The implementation measures are well documented, and include a plan to reduce ►rips, increase ridership at commute -homs period2, and other methods to reduce new emissions as required under the California Clezm., Ir Act. - Staff commends the City's efforts documented in the Draft EIR, and recommends the implementation of coordinated Transportation Systems Management (TSM) and Transportation Demand Management (TDI%I) plans. The Finial EIR should analyze the im lementatiou of such integrated TSM and TAM plans as the primary method for reducing vehicle trips germafie to the project. The TSM programs that are proposed in the Draft EI2 include transit platis,park- and -ride lots, an6 shuttle services for commercial centers. Bicycle lanes, bustle parking facilitir.s, pedestrian walks, n;ght s .reet- repair. and nonpeak )tour maintenance work would further mitigate Gverail traffic impacts. r? 8 55 5.6 5.0 S9 >r Mr. L. J,Henderson -4- June 4, 1991 The TDM programs should include plans to teduce person-trips, vebic_e•trips, and 'T'rip congestion. Consideration should be given to the adoption �,i a Reduction Grdiaance by the City, which would enable the implementation of transportation specific plans, development agreements, parking code requirements, and a trip reductiorrplan (TRP), 411 of which would mitigate`the traffic- related impacts of the project. Energy Use The project's energy n -eds shG�sA be reduced siz staudally by using energy conservation methods. The Fina1.EIR should analyze direct and indirect energy- $ saving methods, such as: efficient heating ante cooling systems; passive solar design; i' increased thermal integrity of buildings, and ,educed thermal load using automated time clocks or occupant sensors. Proper insulation techniques including"- —ia '' windows, and efficient weatherization could also bs'used. Gro -th- Inducing Impacts The ,"Draft EIR refers to the City's aggressive ;policy of commercial and industrial development as a pczep ;;al VMI' -r-tigadon strategy. The _occupants of the 12 proposed 3,600 housirlp -:nits would absorb some of the ertsting add new jobs due to • the expansion of cotr aercial and industrial uses in Vie area However. the related issue of existing job sk,11s and the availability of housing should be analyzed in the Final EIR as a VMT reduction tr- ast!re . School Sipes and Equestrian Center The proposed school sites would generate additional vehicle 'trips relative: to the - number of students and increased enrollment. 71,e. center would generate increased vehicle trips during the egu;ar and special a mve s associated with it The Final EIR should analvae the powntial traffic volume, and a VMT' rec'nction plan for the school sites arid equestrian center that include the following strategies: peripheral park and ride lots preferential parking for high occupancy vehicles and shuttle services; pedestrian, bake, and bus access. Othei meaVtres to reduce the VNIT could include the following; restrictions on parking to discourage traffic; parking lot fees on low vehicle occupant; • demporary roadway controls such as one -way streets; d� ectional signs, and sync�tror ized tiefdc siggnals to relieve traffic congestion on surrounding st►cets; and an implementation an carry out p, the transportation goals. Intersection management within th., area of the schools and the equestrian center should also be analyzed in the EIR. 111 I The Final EIP, should include an analysis of site design requirements that woruldr I include lands(Aping for shade, using light colored roof and building materials, bast available cor.trol technology for enerLi use and conservat -eat, and site orientai'ion 5.14 for bus traffic. Vehicles that idle at curbside5 should also be discouraged 4y providing adequate ingress and ,egress at ull entrances to the school site. Thee,, should be plans for bus turnouts to encourage public: transportation as tt Zxcomo, available in the future. Mr, l J.Henderson 3utiz 4,,� 19Pt Sand and {gavel Mining Operation `hfte "raft EdF. prQposes 'initigi -tion measures for fugitive dust, and odor impacts caused by the proposed sand and gravel ;. ;ng operation. idential units are expected to be located at least 6QQ feet of the mining operation 'rite Final I12 snouid analyze the impacts of any wind- driven fugitive dust emissions reaching resid ;ntial areas a�iffiin a disiance of 60fl feet, bath inside and cutshle the project area. Planting of trees should serve as a trind Carrier separating the nunhig , oeration from the residential areas, 1•ilitigatipn ms asures should be in place to cortply with District Rule 403 to revent emissions fro p m the tnttttng .operation adversely impacting away sensP t ve receptors within`the vicinity of the pr6ject. Additional A�iysis and Mitigation I he addWoncl mitigation measures recommended by the l?istsiat in Table Z should „e inearporated into the list �f mitigatian measures proposed Araft rIR. A`strict permits are regtxi *ed fbr anyortable internal_combtstioi* en'�utes over I3HP used within t;te project area, est Avai'ab:i - onrl�,t Tecltnotogy (BAt, along v ith c:h ,r measures required under District rules and- r4gulations,should be provujee at the site. i J is TALE i Ask POTE1 TIAL MITIGATION MEASURES, FOR THE ETIWANDA NORTH SFECIFIC PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REi'UR9C i. Minimize Construction Activity and Fugitive Dust Emissions: o Water site and clean all equipment in the morning and evening.. o Spread soil binders oa site, unpaved roads, and parking areas; reestablish grout d -; cover through seeding and waterft $. o Employ activity management techniques. . -educe the number 'oi pseces of equipment ut bd simultaneousl} increase the distance betweett _line emission sources; reduce or change the hours of construction-, schedule :cdviey durin; off -pe k- hours; and require a phs sed- schedule for construction activities to ever, outs emission peaks, ` d Remove silt by paver+^' onstruction reads, sweeping streets,�iand, washing trucks leaving consm cttrt, site. o Suspend all exca ratinjt grading, and haaling operations when :winds exceed Z miles hour, during first and second siage smog alerts. _ o per zrc, Maintain construction equipment engines by keeping them tuned. o Use low- sulfur fuel fo_ equipment. o Avoid using temparary power; use power from the grid instead. o Traffic speeds c.n unpaved road surfaces should be reduced to preveui dLsi o ce nisstons. Trucks leaving cotistrarion sites should be required to have wheel - washers. : o Tree planting shou*J be used as wind- barriers in areas designated as open space to prevent wind eros%on and dust: 2. Reduce Construction- he.leted Traffic Congestiotiy • Provide rideshare incentives, and transit incentives for construction personnel. • • Configure construction parking to minimize traffic interferences. Minimize obstruction of through traffic lanes. • Provide a Eagperson to guide the traffic properly, • Schedule operations afl'ecy�ng traffic daring off -peak- hours. a. Limit Emissions From Vehicle Trips- * Operate a Trip Reduction Plan as per SCAQMD Regulation XV. o Promote Transportation Management Assoc*' tions (�). o Establish telecommuting programs, alternative work schedules, and satellite work centers. .o Scliedule goods movements fqr off -peak traffic hours. o ,s'rovide local shuttle and regional transit systems, transit shelter.% bicycle lanes, storage areas and arronib>es. and ensure efficient r`arking rnanagemcat. • o Provide dedicated turn lanes as appropriate. o `.York with cities /dcvelopem citizens to the region to implement TDMf goals. � l Ifs M-1: S. G. E 7. C. o Liiait Vehicle Emissions at School Sites: o Provide pen `.ieral park atid ride lots at school sites. Provide pra erentiai parking to high occupancy vehicles and shuttle services; and charge parking lot fees on low occupancy vehicles. o Provide temporary roadway controls at peak - hours, such as one -way streets• and - install direction► traffic signs, aacl synchronized traffic signals to relieve congestion on surrounding streets; and manage street intersectinris to improve Level of Service. ' o Provide aaa uate ingress and egress at all entrances to school sites to minimize vehicle - idling at curbsides. Minimize Indirect-Source Emissions; o Implement enargy conservation measures beyond state and local requirements. o Landscape with native drought - resistant species to reduce water consumption aa' to provide passive solar benefits. o Use aevices that ratnimize the combustion of fossil fpPis. Minimize Energy RegVirements ot'B01dings: o Improve thermal integrity of buildings, and reduce thermal load with automated time clocks or occupant sensors. • Introduce glared windows, wall insulation, and effrcl_mt ventilation methods; install window -s stems to reduce thermal gain and leis. • Ins oduce efficient heating and other appliances, such as water heater.,, cooking equipment, rvfrigerato.s, furnaces and boiler units. • Incorporate app;. riate passive solar design and solar heaters. 1 • Replace incandescent indoor _ightinj� vith fluorescent lamps, and outdoor I lighting with halogen lights. • C4pture waste heat and re-employ �s heat in nonresidential buildings, where feasible. • Control mechanical systems or equipment with time ciocks or a computer system. Limit c inissions From Architectmml Cuatings and Asphatf, Usage: • Use low• _oatin$ systems where possibip. • Substitute reactive solvents with nonreactive solvents. • Solvent -based paints should he used with msxire• ,tr- transfer efficiency to minimize solvent ernissioas. Minimize Potential EV. asure of the Public to ,fir Toxic Emissions: • Integrate additional mitigations measures into site design such as the creation of buffering areas between a potential sensitive r'eceptor's boundary and potential pollution sources. • Minimize or eliminate population exposure to both ixisting toxic acid future toxic emissions, and take precautions including, but not limited to, those recommended in SCAQMD Rules. 32 2 s t Y L Y Y.: E - s 8.•e !r V t tl a ° «� _g$aH8's�4, .Y LF y$ «iN -eo °II ' °II ° —Iolee to le °3 +�000 o °og� 4 sA XS« «N I714°.t3'in «.i•�I °:".Ivi$�... $wn d> vi �`, „� ej�}°o$$e$I IaeFIIeIII$OOg IIIIe3ile$I '1 Y �= �� P$eu ii +Il Fee$Ii•I$ #$me$ $$IIei�3blii, IOe�;i$e$I 8 Sffi $eo.b $$$Im$. s S ,eII3 r. ti a .i � else IaH$ Ia IIIaII is I siaAl e'3 ..we Nn.� e�w i w P� '•wi w s :t Ss z IStS,a3 g I cnII III .°s i 'm a s:I I EVAN I IlPiyI I 3 IC . F.Y,ii.•i�in I.^ -XY$ .'-.$► a N N P F. H - 4 1� e Iwf Z t $w ,N �Ioe. I"Fe IF.Ir i�I.F, Isla I.w. i «I E .� SDeisa I IsIa a I 'A IMsISfiI"ISIM i I[,%a 3I° _• ��Ce Y s yY SEe sJ■iyj' i 8 y It � F � E e a ± ;7 a g 11ii s b6 B•. E ! • .i. M � � � aHi Y R C s_ i >� � 6 $$ � 6•.. 5 �- t a I. m . � 1. M M: / ✓r w . Y P .e.. —. 'e i °e ✓a > K i�� ro - C W st 2 s t Y L Y Y.: E - s 8.•e !r V t tl a ° «� _g$aH8's�4, .Y ` Z w r ui «.00aneooS:S soee�oeeo €a3fEfibiS & °fi 3;g °� a N ►-g > ' v tiao tu ff N� sw�x'.g$ wea_ eaoo .aN_aaeoHe; He,�.o H$a §eH oHH.. CO . W'LN�3.7. `' *Sri -H x kEi •� � b i3 2 S a •s Rxe Cara °� z �- ��$s �-a O Rte` .;P_N .."' .. � Yl .go e.lrra •eeo sews onHmeHm °jgHrG °HPi' ®HH• �d y, +,� � Ar �•°+.� e°r0 aiees oaso awHm geoH ° lie P! w w m 6 ®_ a N o e !1 Ll A w A A e �` m e ■� a PR117a o .. e Em_l- e 6 Yfi a�a� �' S• g : 3���� $a�� Rm w N .• l b • h m e- .°. N P_ __ b iY • w` h �: q p :A A it Asi, + •• LETTER 5: SOUTH COAST AIF! QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 5.1 Respensl The advisory role of the South Coast Air Quality &anagement District (SCAQMD)- is acknowledged. SCAOMD's general comment regarding review of the air quality analysis containad in the DEIR is noted. No further response is necessary. 5.2 &e8yonse The 1990 air quality uata wac' not available at the time .1aft DEER was prepared and has since been published. Tablfi, 4.9 -7 otk.,page 4.9 -7 of the DEIR is hereby reii3ed (attached) to incl' > ±r,- thf, 1990 air quality data at the Fontana station. 5.3 Response The following sentence is hereby addea as the second sentence cr the first full paragraph on page 4.9 -11 of the WEIR, and is incorporated into the Final EIR as follnwp., "In addition, missions from architectural coatings, exterior paints, and asphalt associated with the construction of both residential- and -commercial structures covaL� contribute to regional ozone 1esels.11 The following discussion is hereby added 4o the text of the DEIR: AOL immediately following the second full paragraph on page 4.9 -12, ON and is incorporated into the Final EIR as follows: "Other Construction- Related Emission% Other construction - related emissions would be associated with the, development of the structures associated with the proposed project. Architectural coatings, exterior paints ' and asphalt !.A_ed in the development of botii rezidential and commercial structures release volatile organic compounds (vOC's) which contribute to ozone for - cation (termed 'ozone precursor emissions'). The short -term generation of ozone precursor emissions assoc ated with the proposed project would not be sufficient to measurably increase loc -1l ozone concentrations and, therefor€, would not represent a significant air quality impact. However, bLcause the ba,,in has not attained ozone standards, VOC emissions from construction materials would incrementally contribute to significant cumulative air ci-sality impacts. Although no mitigation measures are required, measures to reduce dOC emissions associated with the use of certain construction materials will be provideA." The following mitliga:ior, measures are hereby added to the "SAort Z:rm Emissions" subsect ion cf section 4.9.4 of the DEIR, aid is Aft Incorporated into the Tina.;:, EIR as follows: 112. To reduce emissions from architectural coatings; and asphalt application, the following mdasuras are recommended: • Low - crating systems shall be used wherever feasible. p #onreactive, solvente shall be substituted for reactive solvents wh^n�ver possible. Solvent based paints should be used.with maximum transfer efficiency to minimize solvent emissions. 0 fl 1 c t= _ -16 r' TABLE 4.9-2 SUJ-EMARY OF ANNUAL AIR QUALITY DATA` FON°ANA AM QUALc � Y MONITORING STATION 1986 1987 1988,, 1989 1990 Ozone (0,) -- State standard (1 -hr. avg. 0.09 ppm) Federal standard (I -hr. avg. 0.12 ppm) Maximum concentration 0.31 0.29 0.29 0.32 0.27 Number of days state standard exceeded 164 i65 170 155' 132 Number of days federal standard exceeded 421 116 124 113 92 Carbon Monoxide (CO) State standard (1 -hr, avg. 20 ppm18 -hr. an. 9.1 ppm) Federal standard (1 -hr. avg. 35 ppm/8 -hr. avg. 9.5 ppm) Maximum concentration (1- fir: /8 -hr. ppm) UNM 6'4 8/5.6 7/5.8 6/4.9 Number of days state standard exceeded (1- hr. /8 -hr.) 0/0 00 0/0 0/0 4,0 Number of days fedE.dl standard exceeded 0/0 Wo 0/0 0/0 010 Nitrogen Dioxide (NQ.) State standard (1-hr. avg. 0.25 ppm) Federal standard (0.0534 AAM in ppm) Maximum i-hr. concentration 0.18 0.18 O.`,: 0.18 0.20 ,,lumber of days state standard .xcesded 0 0 0 0 0 Percent federal standard exceeded 0 0 0 0 0 Total Suspended Particulates ("SP)° State standard (24 -hr. avg. 150 ug /ml) Federal standard (24 -hr. avg. 260 ug /m� 'c%ximt!m 24-hr. concentration 378 298 564 333 1,770 1'efciinr samples State 24-hr. standard exceeded NA NA NA NA NA Percent samples Weral 24-hr. standard exceeded 2 NA NA NA NA Suspendew 129rticulates (PMI0? State standaiu (24 -hr. avg. 50 utfm Federal standard (24 -hr. aq. ISO ug/m� Maximum 24-hr. consion NM 203 287 227 475 Percem samples state 24-hr. standard exceeded 6.':3 76.7 77.0 72.9 Facent samples fed; ra! 24-hr. smtlat,',exceeded 5.0 6.7 3.3 5.1 AAM - A uAI .V&=edc Mean NM - Not Monitored PPM : Parts p7 minion W& - micmg:ama per cubic m-mr- NA = Standard not appiic& -Je • Pollutants sh,,wa are ribose for which the South ['.cast Air Ilasin is designated as a federal nonattaiement area. SUM and federal stardxrds for both read and sulfa A'soxidc have been met everywhere in the basin for the past 5 years. ` The state TSP standard was superseded by the state PMt, standard in 1486 and the'ftxierrl TSP standard was supmedad by the federal PM,o standard in 1957. Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District Air Quality r-2ta 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988, and 1989. 17 t /r i= 5.4 Restionse The SCAQMD °s 1487 Handbook does not contain a threshold of significance for pollutants. It sets threshold levels, which were the SCAQMD °s then -NSR limits for operating sta-`ionary,._, sources. However, the NSR rule did not address constructions` emissions. These thresholds were to be used as the basis for° determining . an air quality analysis in an FIR is needed. (Underlined le guage from the Handbook.) As also stated in the Handbook under "Definition of significance," CEQA and*District Guidelines both state that a project will have a significant air quality impact on the environment if it will "'violate.aff.ambient air quality standard, contribute substantially to an axisting or (' projected air qu ality violation, or expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations " The Handbook a ?.so states it is the responsibility of the lead agency tc de'_ermine if impacts are significant. Although construction dust contributes to the regulated pollutant PM10 (particulate matter of 10 microns or less in diameter), the dust generated during construction activities is primarily composed of `large, particles which settle out rapidly on horizontal surfaces very near the source. After mitigation, the dust generated by construction of tie specific pian area would not cause an exceedance of the PM10 standard, contribute substantially to sn existing PHIO excnedance, nor expose sensitive receptors to nubstantial PM10 concentrations. Therefore, based on the CEQp, definition of significance, fugitive dust generated during construction activities would not represent a significant air quality impact after mitigatio.a. The first sentence of the first paragraph of action 4.9.5 on page 4.9 -21 of the DEIR is hereby deleted and 1eplaced by the following discussion, and is incorporatee"-into tits Final EIRas follows: "Grading and construction activities associated with the development of the proposed specific clan would be conducted in accordance with the requirements of the South Coast Air Quality Management District and, therefore, direct dust impacts would be mitigated to a level below significance." The EIR analyzed emizsions from all construction sources. No lane closures or detours are anticipated as a result of project construction. The mitigation measures provided on page 4.9-2,0,1 of he DEIR mitigate the construction dust impact to a level 16" than significant. No further mitigation (such as daily,:_ monitoring or a phased construction plzn) is necessary. S.S Reaconye Please refer: to the response to Comment 5.3. 5.6 Response Mitigation Measure 2 of Section 4.9, ; ►ir Quality of the DFTR would require the establi:shmant of a transportation mAnagNmi int association to implement an- ,_coordinate Transportation Damand Management (TDM) and Transpoz`,at:.on Systems Management (TSM) plans in conjunction with tha`:ttiwanda North Specific Plan. Mitigation Measures 3 and 4 of Section 4.9 would require fit -rre developers witair. the EtiwandL Noi+th Specific Plan site to encourage _transit use and to provide park- and -Lzide. lots. Further, the City of Rancho Cucamonga is proposing a co tprehensive program of traffic improvements, including their effe,tive funding and implementation. This program creates a nexus procedure to implement transportation performance standards aimed at reducing tea adverse effects of VMT. Implementation of coordinated TDX and TSM playas serve as the primary method for reducing vehicle trips germane to the proposed pro act. Along with the mitigation measures contained in the Air Quality Section of the DEIR, VMT &,td associated emissions would be mitigated to a less than siga;,ficant level. No further mitigation measures,are required. The comment is noted and included in the final project 'record for rp -iew and consideration by the appropriate decisionmakers. 5.8 Response This comment is noted and includid in the final project record for review and consideration by the appropriate decisionmakers. Please refer to the response to Comment 5.6. 5.9 8e2200VO Establishment of a transpor4 ;Lion demand management (TDM) program, as required by Mitigation Measure 2 of Section 4.9 of the DEIR, would include such actions as identified by the South Coast Air Quality Management District. As -ioted on page 2 -1 of the DEIP, the env.ronmentil do ument for the project has been prepared as a Program EIR, and as such will be subject to subsequent projt ct apprrvals and enviroauuenta :> review. The specific regr2ezts for implementation, of bicycle parking facilities, nonpeak -hour maintenance work., etc. may be demed appropriate measures to be incluOed in the TDM as svT)sequent project conditions of approval. (Personal communication, Connie Day, SCAQMD, July 24, 1991.) S. 10 AYMPnse Please refer to the response to Ccmmelit S.S. 5.31 rJOROASm The following discussion is hereby added to Sect an 4.9.4 which begins on page 4.320 of the DEIR, and is incorporated into the Final EIR. ,� 4 D "The following mitigation measures are recommended to reduce energy uszsget • Energy efficient heating /cooling systems and appliances shall be used in residential units and buildings. • Mechanical systems or equipment shall be controlled with time clocks or ca4prter systems, where feasible. • Mienever possible, glazed window „, wall, insulation and efficient ventilation methods' shall be uoed.” 5.12 POS100UPA At this time, it is not possible to predict who will occ-py the proposed residential units within the Etiwanda Specifti. Plan site. However, because the development is aimed at upper income units, it is anticipated that many employees residing within the Specific Plan site'would be in managerial positions and would work in the Inland Empire. It can be expected that individuals in non - managerial positions would also reside in the project site and would work in the inland Empire. k.rther,.employment opportunities would be availa:Dle within the Specific Plan site's neighborhood commercial centers. The City of Rancho Cucamonga provides housing opportunities in the city for low, moderate, and upper income families. Therefore, additional analysis on existing job shills and availability of housing is not considered necessary it this time. VMT has been reduced to the extent feasible by the measures contained in the DEIR and the responses to comments. 5.13 Rft"oasa The school sites repr_sent approximately two percent of the project- related trips and asscciated emissions. School uses typically include bus service, pedestrian, bike and bus access, and bicycle racks for storage. Reduction of trips to the equestrian center and accommodation of traffic accessing this type of land use would be covered by the comprehensive T-DM and TSM plans. Overall project - related VMT has been reduced to the extent feasible by mitigation measures contained in the DEIR and the responses to comments. No further mitigation is deemed necessary. 5.14 Re�ponma As noted in the response to Comment 5.9, this environmental. ocument as been prepared as a Program EIR `xhich may be subject to subsequent env- _anmental documentation ,nd approvals, including but not limit d to tract maps and conditional use permits. Conditions of approval may include such racommer,ded design features. Please also refer to the Etiwanda North Specific Alan which includes architectural and landscape 40 _ arcAtectural standards. Please also refer to the responses to Comments 5.6, 5.9, and 5.13. 5.15 ReaDOnae 3 The DEIR analyzes the dust and odor impacts of.thg neafty sand / and gravel mine c -uld have on the proposed project. Howevdr,;it must be noted (aa`it is in the DEIR) that these imparts are not project impacts and, .therefore,; no mitigation measures are. - required. it i,q acknowledged that the sand and gravel mine is required to q*tply with all S:tAQI+ %Rules, - including Rule 402 which requires that fugitive dust,, -be contro led so'. that the presence of such dust does not rem&Vi_, visible in the atmosphere beyond the property' line of that source and Rules. :03 which requires the implementation of dust suppr� rsion tuchnigques t? p :,vent fugit •.ve dust a from creating a nuisance off W i-�c ­ To ensure that r�,sidents of the proposed project are noy. ersely affected by the sand and gravel mine oF-,_rations, it,) is recommended in the mitigation section that residential units be,- located at least 60C feet from the mine Ijoundaariies. Although it is not within the scope° of they DEn to mitigate impacts from a non- pio?ec-t source., ceP• -iliance ;with siistrict Rules and a 600 foot buffer"is recommenduq,',46 redu0s any mine impacts to a level below significance„ _ "" No - further r, tigation is warraited. 5.16 RoyponsO Please refer to• pages 4.9 -20 and ` 4.9 -21 of the C IR and the resP:a!+ses to commmnts.. No further mitigation measures are required. FF Al LET. 6 ellr� 10 1Ra caufeaala *A tlandlOFWOYt"FURV 018 :'Vest Save ith Stroet,12th Floor • L63 Angeles, 0allfomin 90017- 3435 - (213) 236-ISN ' FAX (813) 236.1825 K] i J, June 24, 1991 Mr. Larry Henderson City of Rancho Cucamonga ` 10500 Civic Center Urive P. 0. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 RE: Draft EIR, Etiwanda Ncr�h Specific Plan SCAG Clearinghouse Numbe _58- 54}11 -EDR Dear Mr. Henderson: Thank you for submitting the Draft EIR for fhiwanOit North Specific Plan to SCAG for review and comment. Aa'- areawide clearinghouse fof regionally significant projects, SCAG assis.is cities, counties and other agencies to review projects and plans for consistency with the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA), the Regional Mobility (RMP), Growth Management (GMP), and Air Quality Management (AQMP) Plains, all of which are included in the State Implementation Plan (SIP). It has been brought to our attention thai,a similar plan has been submitted to San Bernardino, - County for -the game site by the current property owners. SCAG intends to develop its - -ments after assessing the regional impact of botis p •,ns rather than -c ;1 menting on the plans separately. SCAG staff is in the process of obtainir3 copies of the proposed plan submitteJ to the Count; and will be completing :2S analysis as soon as practicable. Un,'3rtunately, our analysis of t'.e the two ;clans will not be ,t plete in time for our comments to be incor irated in R &ncho Cucamong,.-x EIR for the Etiwanda North Specific Plan., We wit' submit copies of our cotanents on the t,ro plbr proposals to your affi,e as soon as our analysis is code *p. Since your'Draft EIR will h�t� ?een finalized by that timk, our comments will be formally sub ;,It!r d at the appropriate time during the course of the public hearing pi%;cess.. In the meantilnr, if you have tarry questions please cd Jim Hirckheed at (213) 236 -1515 r.- contact a► 14 (213) 236 -18n9. 'iincerely, .fjyk � A Clearinghouse Official ai►tl 6." 0701 -02 o SEPTEMBER ;11, 1991 P.C. AGE "A 7 of 13 } `i UTTER 6.: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION 6F\607ERMENTS Junw 24, 1991 6.1 Response The public review period for the`-Etiwanda; forth Specific Plan EIR project commenced on May 6, 1991, and ended on June ;20, 1991. The City of Rancho Cucamonga extended the review period to June ,.., 26, 1991, to provide an opportunity for public testimony on the DE %R. As noted its CEQA Guidelines, Section, 15088, Subd. (a),+ in the Final E_IR ' the , lead agency must evaluate and respond to all the comments on the DEIR it receives w thin the public review period. The agency may, but ;teed not, respond to comments received after the period ends.\; The, 'comment is noted and included in the final project record for review and consideration by the appropriate decisionmakers. JI �f LETTER 7 STATE OF C- IIFORMA —THE RESOURCES AGENCY PETE MtILSOh. iero• +e• DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME 330 Golden Shore, Suite 50 / a. ong Beach, California 90802 O, = 13 ). 590 -5113 �'! June 26, 1991 ;. City of Rancho Cucamonga Attention: Miki Bratt ! 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 -0307 �r Dear Its. Bratt: Department personnel have reviewed the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the,Etiwanda North Specific Plan, San Bernardino County, SCH 83012311. The project is a general plan ar,sndmeiNt and prezoning for approximately 6840 acres prior to annexation of territory in the "ancho Cucamonga Sphere of . Influence and provides for 3,61s'single family dwelling units on 2,173 acres of vacant land, 28 acres of neighborhood commercial use, 4 schools, 5 parks, an equestrian center,:-and to preserve 4,112 acres of open space 4enerally located north of Highland Avenue (SR 30), south of the San Bernardino National Forest, west of the city of Fontana, and east of Milliken Avenue. Approximately one -half (over 3,000 acres) of the specific pla:,� area is a gently sloping alluvial fan. This alluvial fan includes the Day Creek Wash, Etiwan +3a CrFtak" Wash, and San Sevaine Wash areas and contains the associaf 4 Riv�ersidian alluvial fan sage scrub vegetation and riparian Ldbitat. The alluvial fan sage scrub habitat was once widely distributed along the southern outwashes of the SAn Gabriel and San Bernardino mountains but has now become confined to remnant patches along unlltered streams and outwashes, as residential and flood control projects have eliminated it from most of its former range. The Department has the following concerns regarding this project: Streambed Alteration Department personnel have been working with your city and the County flood control agency to develop a streambed alteration agreement for the proposed channelizat$,on of Etiwanda and San Sevaine wash areas. Fill or channelizatlon of these washes is unacceptable to the Department and any proposed debris dams must allow the storm events to pass throLgr, �'1 the clams without reLucing the volume and velocity of the water below the dams. Agreement has not been reached as tb specific width of the channels with the streambed alteration aspects. Ms. Mi ti Bratt June 26, 1991 Page Two Hydraulic Condition - -; The final DEIR should allow for the re- creation of the hydraulic nature of the fan sage scrub habitat adjacent to Day Creek. This would include the reworking of Da-, Creek Basin and elimination of_the existing cross channel.. These measures could serve %,Lhewhat as mitigation for 7.2 the loss cf habitat associated with development. The Department concurs with the city's decision to avoid and preserve the drainages,. These areas should remain a natural open space to provide continued use as wildlife corridors and valuable raptor foraging areas while providing a buffer from the developed areas. Buffer Zones - The buffer zones presented in the DEIR are in adequate for the continued use of open spaces by fish and wildlife that currently exists in the region. The proposed development design will result in fragmentation of the wildlife 3 populations and cause disruption of the movement corridors, thereby reducing the resource va .a of the region. We have specific recommendations for the? ollowing areas: Streambeds - All development and rt, ltant activity must be prohibited within 100 feet of the hi5,r'water mark of any 7 streambed with an additional. 5o foot transitional zone. Peat Bog - The DEIR provides unclear information and proposed activity regarding the peat bog area that resides in the upper northwestern corner of the specific plan area. The document does not delineate the precise boundaries of this unique and highly sensitive bog area making the proposed 200 foot buffer 7.5 zone of questionab7:e value to its preservation. To preserve the proper amount of Laffer around the bog area, no development should occur north of the utility corridor. This would preclude any alteration of drainages that occur north or northeast of tha bog and eliminate any potential ' for -upstream interference of the bog's delicate ecological balance. Natural Springs - The QFIR identifies the need for the preservation of the natural springs that occur on the proposed project site using an "adequate" yet undetermined buffet zone of natural open space for continued wildlife access. These springs all occur north of the util-,ty corridor and are essential for 7.6 use by fish and wildlife on site and on adjacent National Forest � lands. Development proximal to the springs and the bog will reduce their resource value and will greatly degrade the existing wildlife access. Prohibition of development north of the utility corridor will accomplish the preservation and j continued value of the habitat, Aft Ms. Miki Bratt June 26, 1991 Page Three Bighoru Sheep - The DEIR identifies two bighorn sheep winter ranges that within the National Forest and adjacent to the specific plan Area and one that lies within the northwest corner of the area. The bighorn sheep 4s State - listed Threatened and ? 7 fully protected by the State. Considerable development is proposed adjacent to the Forest Service boundary and its influence will adversely impact the wintering rxeai. Aga n,_.the solution resides it the prohibition of development north of,-ch -e utility corridor. 1` All buffer zones and open `, ?paces shall retain native species indigenous to the region and all revegetation palettes should I also reflect these native species. The document recommends that these areas be designed to prev nt motorcycle and off road vehicle use and the Department concurs. The use of physical 7S barriers such as,fencirg and native bramble vegetation will restrict the mis'ase and degradation of open space intended as compensation for'.svelopment and will also i pede the ability of wildlife to stray into developed areas. The!iesources management plan for these preserved areao shi)uld include maintenance of barriers anO adequate patrol find protection. Ask Funding for slruh zecessazy functions will belbourne by the City. Loss of Habitat - The Department is gntensPly concerned with the preservation of the Rivarsidian alluvial fan 3agc_ scrub community unique to this area. Balancing the development needs of the landowners with the resource need of maintaining viable wildlife populations is a concern properly examined.by the City. Compensation for the loss of this fan sage scrub habitat should reflect a replacement ratio of 2:1. Loss of foraging habitat 7.7 to all wildlife, including raptor and species of apecial ' concern must be compensated as well.. The appropriate compensation should :.e the preservation, in perpetuity, of the drainages previously mentioned acrd the all propeuty north of the utility corridor. These large open space dedications would resolve much of the current fish and wildlife oncerns of the Department. Proximity to San Bernardino National Forest - Intense development adjacent to any National Forest is unacceptable td the Department. Human zncroachment will result in adverse impacts to the extant biota in the Forest and the existing significant 7Io buffer zone will be forced past the Forest Service boundary. Preservation of the wildernesslopen space north of utility corridor will act to salvage the existing buffer zone of the Forest. Ms. Niki Bratt June 26, 1991 JOMA, Page Four Listed Species and,Species of Special Concern - The "surveys presented in the DEIR regarding the absence of the endangered Santa Ana River woolly -star and the slender - horned spineflower. drought 7,1f are not convincing. The surveys were done during severe conditions and should have been fol'owed tip with a current survey. Compensation through habitat preservation for loss of habitat to and take of the orange - throated whiptail, San Diego coast horned lizard, and other species of concern to the Department has been previously discussed. in summary, the Department recommends the development plan be redesigned to include adequate lon5 -te1°m protection oaf all the major drainages and sufficient wildll,E& movement corridors to interconnect them. These unique and lsensitive'habitat areas support q-ignificant biological resources and require approriate action. Preservation can be accomplished through protection of the drainage areas as well as th.= property north of the utility corridor. Until the Etiwanda North Specific Plan incorporates these concerns, the Department recommends against certiEication of h the current document. The Vroject sponsor is subject to the uEkr fee provided by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4, and the fee is payable to the Am County Clerk when the Notice of Determination is i xed by the lead agency. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section '21.080(c), the 14,350 user fee is $1,250 for a Negative Declaration a nd for any type of Environmental Impact Report. Thank you for the opportunity to review this document. If you have any questions please contact Kimberly K. McKee of our f Environmental Services Staff at (223) 590 -5137. Sin ely, .. AR Fred WorthleyfWL Regional Manager Region 5 cc: M. Giusti, R -5 Sharon Dougherty, San Bernardino National Forest, Cahone Ranger District, Star Rt. Box 100, Fontana, CA 92336 LETTER 7: DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME June 26, 1991 Ap 7.1 Fasponae Please refer to Section 4.5, Mitigation:- '.Measure 15. 7.2 Besoonsa Please refer to Section 4.5, Biological Resources,- Mitigation Measure 11. According to the San Bernardino County Flood Control District, alteration of the Day Creek Debris Basin Channel - and interconnecting side basins would not be consistent with regional flood control protection for the area. For clarification, the following shall be added'to Mitigation Measure 11 and is hereby incorporated into the Final EIR: "Applicants shall also investigate the feasiaility of controlled flood flow releases from the Day; Creek Spreading Ground cross channel and Day Creek channel, south of the Day Creek debris basin,, sufficient to restore the velociy of flow needed to maintain alluvial fan scrub habitat .north of the cross levee within Day Creek's 200 -acre mitigation area." It should be noted that`,'-he aforementioned mitigation area would be for the purpose of providing mitigation for new development within the project ,area. According, to the CDFG (personal communication with Mike Guist.) a 200 acre mitigation, area has been set aside within�,,Day Creek Spreading Ground for mitigation of the Day Creek Water;,Project ,Facilities. 7.3 Resoonae Comment noted. Regarding inadequacy of wildlife buffer zones and CDFG, specific recommendations follow. 7.4 Response Section 4.5.5, Mitigation Measure 17, shall be replaced as follows and is hereby incorporated into the Final EIR:: 1°All development and resultant activity shall be prohibited within 100 feet of the high water mark of any streambed with an additional 50- foot transitional zone." /so 7.5 Response A Preliminary Plan of Development was approved by the County on a portion of this area in 1588 (Rancho Etiwanda, COU550uliS /PDP /PUD 86- 0130/W]7;0 -44). Included as Conditions of Approval were the Zollowing: "PDP 18. Coordination shall occur between the project applicant and the CDFG for a Streambed Alteration Agreement per Section 1601/1603 of the State Fish and Game Code (Rancho Etiwanda EIR 5 -18). PDPil. The peat bog ecological preserve would be better protected by eliminating the lots immediately 1 surrounding the bog and by setting back the proposed equestrian trail at least 100 feet from the edge of the peat bog. Consideration shall be given to fencing and signing any trails adjacent to the preserve in order tc further protect the bog and to alert trail users to its sensitivity. In addition,, the preserve shall ba deeded to Chaffey College (Rancho Etiwanda EIR 5 -17). PDP 12. Consideration shall be given to the purchase I of lands north of the peat bog for inclusion in the proposers ecological preserve in order to ensure the continued viability of the w;1itershed supplying the peat bog, as well as to preserve Riversidian sage scrub habitat to increase the diversity of the preserve (Rancho Etiwanda EIR 5 -17) PDP 13. Any grading in the vicinity of the fault that forms the sag pond shall avoid any possibility of breaching the underground fault dam that allows the peat bog to exist (Rancho Etiwanda EIR 5 -17). PDP 14. The interceptor channel shall be redesigned to avoid the peat bog (Rancho Etiwanda EIR 5 -17). PDP 15. Off - highway vehicles (OAVs) and firearm use shall bu prohibited in any open areas of the site. The use of OHVs and firearms would degrade the biotic value of the remaining open space Through the destruction of vegetation and by increasing wildlife avoidance of the area (Rancho Etiwanda EIR 5 -17).11 Consistent with the approved Conditions of Approval,, subsequent review by the CDFG and USFWS further emphasizes the need to preserve the bog, and the area north of the bog, to ensure the continued viability of the preserve. Since the bog is located immediately north of a significant rupture zone of the northern branch of the Cucamonga Fault, there is a risk that in the event of a future' seismic event, emergency services could be cut off from the area north of the upper branch of the Cucamonga Fault. Also, the area north of the bog is in a very high fire hazard zone. �r For these reasons the following mitigation measure shall be added AMk to Section 4.5.5 and is hereby incorporated into the Final. E'IR: 1129. The area east of Day Creek, west of Etiwanda Creek, and north of the northern branch of the Cucamonga 'Fault shall be retained as open space.. Also, a conservation easement shall be sought for the aforementioned area." Additionally, in response to the request by the CDFr; that t1.10 development should occur north of the utility corridor," the following uit:igation measure shall be added to Section 4.5 and is hereby incorporated into the Final EIR: 1130. The project area north of the Los Angeles Department of Water and mower utility corridor, south of the National Forest Boundary (including privately held land north of the National Forest Boundary), generally east of the extension of Milliken Avenue, and west of Etiwanda Creek shall be studied* for designation as a Riversidian Alluvial Fan Scrub Habitat Preserve prior to the issuance of new, or additional, development approvals." 10The study should be conducted as a joint study among the County of San Bernardino's Food Control District, the City of Rancho Cucamonga, the County of San Bernardino, the California Department of Fish and Game,-the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, with funding determined by the joint agencies. The study should be completed prior to the approval of the first tentative map within the affected area to determine if changes to the Specific Plan are deemed necessary." It should be noted that the feasibility of establishing and maintaining a Riversidian Alluvial Fan Scrub Habitat Preserve would depend, in part, on consistency on the part of lead and responsible agencies requiring replacement of Alluvial Fan Scrub Habitat throughout the greater San Gabriel Valley /West Valley basin. (Also, Sze Response 7.9 below.) i 7.6 Rl�L9r!!e Please refer to Response 7.5. Regarding the area north of the LADWP utility corridor and east of Etiwanda Creek, Mitigation Measure 19 of Section 4.5.5, Biological Resource, of the DEIR has been revised and is hereby incorporated into the Final EIR: "In consultation with the CDFG and USFWS,..." A7i 7.7 stpsponse �o Please refer to Response 7.5 -. 7.8 Resuonsm The following shall be added to Section 4.5, Mitigation Measure 12 and is hereby incorporated into the Final EIR: 10Physical barriers such as fencing and native bramble vegetation shall be used to restrict the misuse and degradation of open space intended as compensation for development and will also impede the ability of wildlife to stray into developed areas. The Resource Manat7ement Plan for the aforementioned preserved areas should include maintenance of barriers and adequate patrol and protection in conjunction w,'-''h fire maintenance activities under the Etiwanda North Specific Plan Fire Protection Study. Costs shall be borne by an assessment district or similar mechanism to be determined prior to the next project approva 'n the Specific Plan area." 7.9 Response The mitigation measure shall be e-;ded to Section 4.5.5, Biological Resources, and is hereby incorporated into to Final EIR: 1120. Becauue the loss of Riversidian Alluvia? Fan Sage Scrub Community unique to this basin is of intense concern to the CDFG, and further, since the loss of foraging habitat for raptors and species of Special concern must be co ^pensated as well, compensation for the lugs of h versidian alluvial Fan Sage Scrub Habitat shall reflect a preservation ratio ct 1:1. The COFG advises that appropriate compensation Phould be the preservation, in perpetuity, -of the Day Creek, Etiwanda Creek, and San Sevaxne drainages and all property north of the LADWP utility corridor which ^ar feasibly be retained as open space within a wildlife habitat preserve." 7.10 Response Refer to Responses 7.5 and 7.9. 7.11 Response The following mitigation measure shall be added to Section 4.5.5; Biological Resources, and is hereby .incorporated into the Final EIR: l 121. PriJr to the issuance of grading pezmits for any project in Day Creek wash, ,Mtiwandal' -Creek Wash, Adh San Sev' Me Wash, cr; for any �`rojgp north of the' ; ' LADWP �,tility corridor, th' .,area shad be 'i resurveyed for the,presence of''endangered spktcies, including but not limited to the Santa Ana River L ' woolly -star, the slender - horned spineflower, the San Diego coast horned lizard, and other species in consultation with the CDFG. If feasible, the project shall be resurveyed in the spring, f following an average, or above average, rainfall I, season. Should these species be located, additional mitigation and /or revisions to the Specific . Plan may be regiiired to mitigate potential effects -." 7.12 Response Comment noted regarding CDFG user fee. LETTER g United State Department o%ff'the Interior . FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE FISH AND WILDLIFE ENHANCEMENT at e SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA FIELD STAT70N �) Lagrza Niguel Office ' Federal Building, 24000 Avila Road Laguna Niguel, California 92656 July 3, 1991 Mr. L. J. Henderson City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, Cali4'-)rnta 91729 Attn: Miki Bratt Re: Draft Environmental Impact Report for Etiwanda North Specific Plan, Rancho Cucamonga, San ;4arnardino County, California Dear Mr. Henderson: The U.S.. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed the referenced document dated Hay 1991 and provides the following comments. The Service commends the City of Rancho - Cucamonga for their efforts to address long -term planning and the development of natural open space preservation. The Service finds that the referenced document adequately addresses the project and we fully s+.pport the intent and purpose_ ,�f the proposed Specific Plan. We., however, would like to share some commati wixh reference to $_t utility corridors and areas to be preserved. Utility corridors provide managed open space for maintenance purposes. Management includes vegetation control or removal'by chemical treatment or clearing. Because the habitat is reduced or eliminated, utility corridors should not be considered in any way for mitigation of development impacts. Natural open space preservation should be contiguous with the San Bernardino National Forest. The natural open space within the Specific Plan area should extend southward from the National FrTest boundary to the existing east -west $ electrical utility corridor and then follow Day, Etiwanda; and San Sevaine Washes southward. Tiis continuity is important to preserve wildlife movement, reduce fragmentation of habitat, and maintain alltriial scrub habitat by allowing flooding and scouring. Debris basins within or above the Specific Plan area would be contrary to this preservation. Mitigation for the loss of alluvial scrub habit &t resulting from the proposed development within the Specific Plan area could bye achieved by the restoration a 3 of flooding and scouring within the U. CeeP?- spm'adilng grounds. This would also provide for the recharge of groundwater, 'thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this important ,4roj -e t." Ste Mr. L. J. Henders on 2 -✓ We look forward to working with you in the implementation of the goals of the project. If you have any questio- , please feel free to contact John Hanlon at (714) 643- 4270. `Sins ely,, r r L,$r rper of ice Supervisor cc: CDFG, Region 5, Long Bauch, CA (Attn* H. Giusti) Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles, CA (Attn: H. Durham) vl I E I 'I v' r( `� -- j Si 1 ;.a c- LETTER 8: UNITED STAT�sd FISH AND WILDLIFE_SERVICE jr.4 3, 4991 8.1 R ®s;�n9s Response noted that utility corridors shall not be'eonsidered in any way for mitigation of development impacts. 8.2 Resaonso J Please refer to Letter 7, Responses 7.4, 7.5 and 7.9. 8.3 Hum" Please refer to Letter 7, Response 7.2. i It should be noted that planning for debris loading in streams which drain mountain and foothill areas is essential to the design of flood control facilities downstream. A debris dam within the Etiwanda 'Creek drainage area was identified in the 1983 SBCFCD Master Plan (the San Sevaine Dam was listed as an alternate). ;.a LETTER 9 UNITED STATES FOREST Sari 3ernarotno Star Rouze, box 100 DEPARlImENT OF SERVICE National Forest Fontana, CA 92335-9704 1560 JUN, -, 0 Eti .wanda N Sp Plan d (City of Rancho C) June 19, 1991 ,•tiki Bratt, Associate Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Division 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 ETIVANDA NORTH SPECIFIC FLAN DEIR Dear j4s. Bratt: This letter is a formal comment on the Draft Environmental Impact Report on the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, Sch. No. 89012314, dated May 1991. I understand that this DEIR is a Program EIR, a "specific plan" for the 9.1 Etiwanda North Area as a whole, and that future specific developments within this area will require further planning and analysis to one extent or anather on a case by case basis. In general► I feel that the DEIR has dome a good job of 0 bviding for responsible development in an area of many sensitivities wherein growth was inevitable. In particular, I feel that the treatment given to preservation of open spaces and wildlife habitat both north of the National forest boundary and 4•Z south of the Forest is commendable. I strongly support the Cityrs DEIR position of no development of any kind north of tho national Forest Boundary, and the sensitivity given to xransitioning into the forest environment as development occurs closer and cicssr to the Forest boundary (i.e. Mitigation Measure 45.5 bs 1 a 2). I have some specific comments, which may be more applicable to future site specific development proposals than to the Specific Plan. I include them here 9 -3 as a means of insuring that changes made to the DEIR before the final EIR is completed are not detrimental to but are supportive of the Forest's concerns.. These specific co�nents deal with National forest recreation opportunities, urban /wildland interface fire safety, ooundary location and control, and adces,,, q.0 to the t;ationai Forest. These issues have already been presented to the Cit in my 2 -7 -89 letter to you, a copy of which is attached and is self- explanatory. In addition, I have further specific comments not covered in my 2 -7 -89 letter, pertaining to Biological Resources and to Public Services and Utilities. Fs•6200•2et1•62r •C7 I I Relative to DEIR Section 4.3.5, Biological Resources t•tt:.'i3ation Aeazures, 1 have four requests: 1)'1 ask that a :)ensure be auoa;,,d that provides for exterior lighting not glaring into or lighting up open spaces, in order to maintain the critical value of presurvod open spaces to wildlife at ni5ht. 2) I ask that Measure 12. the first ac -cion, include provisions for long terci 9 5 . maintenance and _operatizn of the fencing and regulatory program, if sucn is not already included in the Rt-IP; that 3) the fourth action prt;vide for plants r specifically native to Southern California foothill habita'cz and that 4) an _ action be added.•,h4lt. requires deed restrictions to prevent'OHC use ana household pet access into the alluvial scrub habitats. Further, I observes that page 4.3 -18 has some incomplete - information on Golden Eagles. "Open spa-.e" in the San Gabriel Mountains is generally not suitable foraging habitat for many raptors (including eagles? due to topography, and vegetation. Golden Eagl--,s are known to nest in the front country cafe >ns north 9.6 of Etiwanda North, and is other similar areas of Southern California those birds have abandoned such historic nesting sites fullowing front country development. The cummulative effects of this are generally mentioned in Section 4.5.4. but I would like to stress my support for all measures in Section 4.5.!, char provide for transitioning of h,. =')tats into a forest environment as development occurs closer to the Forest boundary. Relative to DEIR Section 4,11.2 Public Services and Utilities, Fire Protection ;litigation Measures. I ask that a measure be adopted that provides for the �7 hiring of a professional wildland fire consultant for each future development proposal that abuts National Forest land, as mentioned in my 2-7-89 letter. This may have already been done and incorporated into the Etiwanda North Fire Protection Study, but I do not have a copy of tho Study. Please insure that sands 8 Recreation Officer Gary Earney is included in all significant meetings regarding 'the Spacific Plan that may impact th-National Forest. Gary can be contacted at the above address or by calling 714- 887 -2576 for any matters regarding Etiwanda North. In addition, please provide ,re with a copy of the Etiwairja North Fire Protection Study, with a.copy of the Resource Management Plan, and with a copy of the final EIR. I also ask to be contacted in a timely manner for comment/coordination on any specific developmont proposals within the Specific Plan area that are within one Nile of the National Forest Boundary. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the PE.7R. Sincerely, Eil io aham Distr Ranger cc; Sharon Dougherty, District Wi ;dlifs Biologist r Fs•e200•2e0•e2i UNITED STATES FOREST San Bernardino Star Route, Box 100 Ailk DEPARTMENT OF SERVICE National Forest Fontana, CA 92336 -9704 AGRICULTURE_ 2 1560 City of Rancho Cucamonga (Etivianda North Project) February 7, 1989 Miki Bratt, Associate Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Div. PO Box 807 Rancho CucarQnga, CA 91730 Dear Pis. Bratt: This letter is the Cajon Ranger District, San Bernardino National Forest formal response to your undAted notice of preparation of a draft EIR for the Etiwanda North Project Area. As Listrict Ranger, I am the line off 4 ;or responsible for the management of that portion of the San Bernardiro National Forest that forms the northern boundary of cf your project area. I understand that the project is basically a request by the City of Rancho Cucamonga to study the feasibility of annexation and devolopent of approximately 6,000 dwelling units on about 5.640 acres of land south of Day, Etiwanda, Henderson, and Morse Canyons. I also understand the. your request was for scoping information only at this time. I believe the EIR should address the following issue; 1) WATERSWED Your project lies in an area 44istoriceil, zubject to intense flooding, which could have devastating Impacts on any future davelopirants. In additions the National Forest here was created primarily for watershed protection and enhancement,., The flows from Day, Etiwanda..4enderson and Morse Canyons immediately 1:orth of the project area a:e critical for both immediate and downstream water users, such as the Cucamonga County Water Distric`, Any development would have to address the continued use of these waters by rightful users. Mors, importantly, development should not directly or indirectly negatively impact this Forest's ability to provide for such waiver production by maintaining autlity watershed environments. 2) REC.RS=ATYON gEeQRTUNITIES Our curmar Forost Land and Resource Mangement Plan Las spec:r'ic management direction for approximatel 2;QO0 acres immediately north of your project boundary. Roughly 5,000 acres are to be mainvainc6 in a custodial mode, emphasizing habitat improvements limitod human access zed re ource protection. About 1,500 acres are to be managed for non- n.oto,ized d.,I,versed recreation, mostly along the top of San Sevaine Ridge. It is !mpr,` to note that thld Forest should not, either directly or indirectly_ *� z xd as supplying either formal or informal recreational opport!?nities to any portion of the proposed developments. FS•C200.2611•821 eq &M�� Developments must be designed in such a manner that they contain their own recreational opportunities, `and specifically so that they preclude illegal AOL entry onto the Forest. For example, cul -de -sacs should be used to end :troets that run up to the Forest boundary, instead of of -n *ended deadends. This would preclude the "establishment" of places like "Party Point" at the north end of 5aphire in Rancho Cucamonga, which has been a continuing problem for the City and Forest alike. In essence, the lands immediately north of your project would be open only to dispersed recreational uses like hiking, and only then if the level of such activity did not adversely impact watershed quality and wildlife habitat, 3) WILDIJEE H 'TTAT Several hundred acres • __e above- nentionad 8,1:00 acres are critical wildlife habitat for an'..lrs' living in the chaparral foothills immediately north of the projx;ct area. These areas are essentially the bottoms of the front cor,ntry drainages, such as Day, Etiwandas Norse and San Sevaine.Canyons. People tend to hike and recreate in these types of areas in the foothills, instead of the chaparral covered steeper slopes. Although we would not encourage Such _. use we would I certainly permit it as long as human impacts on the Sin a = and vegetation were not unacceptable. If human use became detrime•ntalp v,s woui�; rjulate or exclude such use. TF�r .hs afore - mentioned desire to have any developments provide for rir rwn recreational opportunities. <) FIRE MaugrptiIEU Ni7 ; management kill have a critical impact on your project, from the pre< t, ,, jrotection standpoint. In addition, prescribed burning h, the t -v,est may have temporary. minor impacts. Regarding prevention/ protection, the northern portion of the project area has a dramatic history of numerous high intensity, ,fast - roving wildfires. Following the disasteraus 1981 Panorama Fire. a comprehonsive, multi - jurisdictional cooperative study was done in order to explore the possibility of a protective "greenbelt" buffer along the foothills of the San Bernardino Valley. This study resulted in the r'Fa thill Da,mun•t i a Pr0t2ctiv2 "GM Mel," er gram" (FCPGP). This action- ariented program is designed to reduce future losses from the fire- flood - erosion cycle so frequently triggered by lanle scale fires along the Valley's urban/wildland interface. The FCPGP has b ^yen adopted by the County (ordinance 03108), the City of San Bernardino, th, California Departmont of Forestry: thB Foothill Firo Protection District, the Test End Resource Conservation District, this Forest, and others. I strongly recommend that the FCPGP and Ord. 03108 be applied to your projact. (Advertisement of such measures would certainly be a good selling pout for any developers.) To faciliUts your review, understanding and application of the program and ordinace, 3 auggast that the City utilize a professional consultant specializing in community fire protection► fire service management# and fire protection interface -s it apolies 1:9 urban wildland fires. For your information, the use of su n a consultant was requried by the City of Fontana Planning Depar".mert for the 570 acre Hunter's Ridge subdivision along the eastern boundary of your project. That resulted in strong support by the City, County, various fare agencies and this Forest for the Hunter's ( Edge Project. An :example of the types of informatics such a consultant can supply may be found is the Wildland Fire Safety Report for the northern portion of the Hunter's Ridge Project, on file at the City of Fontana Planning Department. �S wa- a :oo•aeve2r fn p Prescribed burning is used by the Forest to improve wildlife habitat, to facilitate wildfire control. ani, ca sosbsn wilof.re impacts on soil, watersheds. and vegoitation. It creates a "mosaic" of different ages chaparral species that provides significantly more wildlife habitat than even -seed vigetation, and that can be used to affect wildfire spread rates and burn intensity. Prescribed burning activities could have temporary minor 1mPQcts via 'smoke accumulations, for very brief Periods of time, in the project area. :However, it should be noted that such burning will probably be restricted to less than 500 acres over the next 10 years. 4)N�JAR3 ATrtcxlSt��?i� Property lines should not only'be located along the Forest boundary. but they should be very visibly' mcrkod /delineated for easy location by the average future - property owner. Thlb Gould facilitate manag"aant of the above mentioned xatarshed, recreation, wildlife and fire concerns. It wu:ld also help preclude innecen. trespass by both developers and future horns /property owners. 5) EMU-AOCESS As the human population increases ij.aediatsly along the Forest boundary. our need to directly access affectdd party of the forest increases dramatically, relative to tte issues Oltscl °reed above. P urge any planning to consider this need, and to requires V?eZ a,avelopmontal access be coordinated with our needs. Such coordins'sion allows more positive interaction with property owners and ptner agencies, especially as it affects fire and watershed accts. B 6) 11 1LJTV _ COO JVa� r�T�fYU� Various utilities may exist in the project area that would need to be consulted regarding your project. One is the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, which has two 237KV power transmission lines running through the pigject. Another is the Cucamonga County Water District which operates an extensive system in, at a minimum, Deer, Day. and East Etiwanda ^anyons. Thank you for the opportunity to Comment an the draft EIR scaping efttrtt. Both I and my professional staff are eager to become involved in such an important planning effort as the Etiwanda North Project; we look forward to hearing from you and working with you. Proper planning and Coordination now and througOout the project will assure not only a harlwhious relationship between the Forest and the City, but also a higher quality development that Will benefit future property owners and the environment. i If you have any questions or commnts. :please c0fttact either Lands and Recreation Officer Gary Earney or myself at the above address (714987 - 2575). Gary will be the contact person for the Forest. Sincerely, Elliott Graham District Ranger 4 AWL cc: Forest Staff Officers M0200.26(1421 ZETTER 9: SAN BERNARDIITO NATIONAL FOREST June 19, 1991 9.1 Reseons® Please refer to "Introduction to Response to Comments." 9.2 Response Comment noted that Section 4,5.5, Biological - Resources, Mitigations 1 & 2 are supported by the Forst Service. f 9.3 M aons® Comment noted regarding the need for wildlife habitat review for site specific applications. 9.4 Respons® The following statemFTt: sets forth the current use policy of the San Bernardino NatioAaj sorest "[The San Bernardino National Forest's] current Forest j Land and f,,esource Management Plan has specific f management direction for approximately 8,000 acres immediately north of your project boundary. Roughly 5,000 acres are to be maintained in a- custodial mode, emphasizing habit improvement, limited human access and resource protection. About 1,500 acres are to be managed for non - motorized dispersed recreation, mostly along the top of the Sara Sevaine Rid%B. at iris innortdrit to nni-a i*hm*- tfi o.. El formal or informal recra lortunities to any Portion of the nroposnd devglc2Ments. Developments must be designed in such a manner that they ,contain their own recreational opportunities, and specifically so that they preclude illegal entry into the Forest. .in essence. the lancin immediately north of your nro ect would be 2RSD 1%) _ dispersed recreational uses like hiking and only then if the level of such Activity did no+ adv rsely imnac& watershed Cuali'E'y and wildlife habitat. (Emphasis added.)C° Iii respon: a to the above policy, the following Mitigation Measure shall Ir-g added to Section 4.5.5, Biological Resources, and is hereby incorporated into the Final EIR: 1122. Consistent with the policy of the San Bernnrl4no National Forest, the National Forest either directly or indirectly, be targeted as supplying either formal or informal recreaticnal C opportunities to any portion' of the proposed developments. Toward this goal, privately held ANIL land within the National Forest and National- For(.zt lands shall be open only, to diwpersed recreational uses like hiking, and' only them, if upon periodic review by the Forest ,Servica; the level of such activity does not adv: rsellr impact watershed quality and wildlife habit, ;c. 9.5 R®920096 Regarding exterior lighting, the following Mitigat do Measure shall be added to Section 4.5.5, Biological Resources, and is hereby incorporated into the Final EIR: 1123. In order to protect wildlife habitat, street lighting adjacent to open space 'buffer zones and /or open apace ares,,such lighting shall be-of reduced intensity and shielded in such a way that illumination is directed to the street and away from open space areas. i Lighting for public or private, sports shall by prohibited north of the LADWP 'utility corridor. South of the LADWP utility corridor, public and private sports lighting shall be discouraged, but may be considezed on a case -by -case basis. Such lighting shall not be permitted adjacent tc a wildlife preserve or wildlife corridor. Exterior residential lighting shall be restricted through development standards of the Specific Plan or Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions as follows: * Sodium Vapor or Mercury Vapor "barn lighti -ng" i shall be prohibited. j* The purpose of residential exterior lighting shall be funf,tional.. Functional lighting, including security lighting,. shall be shielded andir - focused so that illumination does not ex'Lend beyond property boundary. Becorativ6 1,1 kiting shall be discouraged." /I Regarding fencing, please ;refer toLLetter 7, ResponNe 7.5. Regarding vegetation, the'followirg Mitigation Measure shall be added to Section 4,5.5,!, Biological Resources, and is hereby incorporated into the'Fina:,l EIR 1124. All revegetatift within, preserved open space areas, including utility Corr-', + -s and wildlife buffer zones, shall be with vegetation native to the Specific Plan urea. Also, the landscape palette for public right -of'- way, parkways, and landscape easements within the Specific Plan ar.:a shall also use.native species to the maximum extent feasible." Regarding deed restrictions, t follow Mitigation Measure 'shall be added to Section 4.5.5, Biological Resources, and is hereby incorporated into the Final EIR: 1125. Measures to ensure protection for wildlife shall be required for residential development, through development standards and /or the mechanism of Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions,: to include: * Hiking and equestrian use shall be limited to developed trails within the habitat preserve -' areas. Household pets, including cats and dogs, shall be prohibited from use of habitat preserve areas. * OHV's shall be prohibited from all 'trails and open space areas within the Specific Plan." 9.6 Rernonsw Regarding foraging habitat for raptors, including Golden Eagles, the following Mitigation Measure shall be added to section of Section 4.5.5. 1126. open habitat, including Riversidian Alluvial Fan Scrub Habitat, shall be preserved to the maximum extent feasible, as described in the foregoing conditions, to provide foraging for raptors, including Golden Eagles." 9.7 its�oas® The Etiwanea;North Fire Protection - -Study re Aires that a Project Specific IPirs Defense Study Ye comj►leted prior to project approval within the Etiwanda N'Ptth Specific Plan area. Also, the following mitigation measure,''-shall be added to Section 4.5.5, Biological Resources, and is hereby incorporated into the Final EIR: 1127. A Project Specif.'6c Fire Defense Study shall'be prepared on a project -by- project basis and shall be completed;. prior to project approval." Ask 44 LETTER 1Q CITY 44' Southern California Edison Company 1.) JUNI °" 7951 REDWOOD AVENUE ( FONTANA. CALIFORNIA 82336 6{Si9vELluhLi�t�t� {t4r5tt �., CNERVL A. KARNS AREA ,.,ANAGER T£LEP40NE June 13;1991 City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Departmen¢ - `'0500 Civic Center 1 rancho Cucamonga, CA: SUBJECT; City of Rancho Cucamonga` -, Draft Environmental Impact Report Etiwanda North Specific Plan } Thank you for giving Southern California Edison an opportunity to, rev eyv the city's Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Etiwanda ,North Specific Plan. i_. Edison's comments specific to the Draft Environmental Impact Report are as follows: ® 4.5.5 MITIGATION MEASURES, ITEM #12, page 45 -31 ro•r Any designattl utility corridor should not be subject to these mitigation m�asures. ® 4.11.6 ELECTRISERVICf, page 4.11 -16 Add item #3 with the following wording under "Recommended Actions" 3. Project applicants shall consult with representatives of Southern California Edison Company to identify other energy conservat:bn treasures which can be incorporated into specific ;plan area design. SECTION 7 - INVENTORY OF MMGA.TION MEASURES to 3 e 4.11.6 ELECTRIC SERVICE, page 7 -18 ti5 y 2 Add item #3 with the following wording. 3. Project applicants shall consult with representatives of 10'3 Southem California Edison Company to identify other energy conservation measures which can be incorporated into specific plan area design. i� If you have any questions or require additional information, please call me at (714) 948 -1723. Sincerely. f Cheryl A. Karns Area Manager )) CAK:bmm i LETTER 10: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY Jun* 13, 1992 10.1 Response Regarding Secbtion 4. 5, Mitigation Measure 12, the intent of the Specific Flan is to subject utility corridors to these mitigation measures. 10.2 Resx+ons• The following recommended action: still be added. to 'Section 4.11.6, Electric Service, and is herq)�y incorporated into the Final EIR: "3. Applicants for deveT Amen -,, shall consult with representatives of Southiiin),' California Edison Compai.y to, identify othe' , 'energy; conservation measures which can be incokgg�strated into specific plan area design., ;1 Also, see Response 5.11 of Letter 5, Air ,Quality - Management District. 10.3 Response See Response 10.2, above. i i ` )� 47 �1lp' L �{ �! LETTER 11 PLANNING DEPARTMENT � �11!'Ill��r COUNTY OF SAN BEgNAgdINO' 11 .��\ ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT GROUP o 385 Noah Af awhsu Avenue • San 8amardno, CA 924150180 (714) 387.4091 'i/ R� Fax No. • (714) 387.3223 �jl�l` \��\� SHARON Oiroctor of Planning' June .u, 3.991 14R. MW HENEERSM Principal Plamler City Hall P.O. Boo 807 Rangy Cucamorga, CA 91730 Dear Mr. Haridersoa: E14E7 CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING 011" % AM JUN14 p� 7`8a9�D�I11S211r�;�����5�6 MA County of San Bernardino offers the following date as the Draft MR (WIR) of the City's Stiwanida Ahern Specific Pla'a. I would like to Point out that =, as amehOed-* AB 88C (fie), `�Bndittes a 45 day review period for DF.33tB siftitted to the State Cif. Rlwefcre, it appears. that the review period for the DEXR should end JUm 20, 1991 mace 11. the doamlent was not received until NW 6, i'@1. flowevir, the camofts herein arse being offered to be respomive to ths'j.NAr a 12, 1991.City Planning �Llesion hearing on the draft Plan and draft MR. Ommnts to date are primarily directed toward procedural issues and references to Sao Bernardino Cosunty. Rise Plananisng department enviramental staff are ccupleting a tec hni= ], review of the Dot and say be providing additionl oatmsats to tlww ptvi.ided below. to Mlle we believe that all of thaws ismm are significant, the public policy question of using funds an a plan and =R which the city has no legal authority to '==a is toora serious. Per Section 15131 of the Public Resources code, ecanmelie and social iWacte shall not be treated as 11-a significant effects on the wr4;vusnecnt (Sec. 15131 (a)) . This section further clarifies that 0= =dc M oociAl effects may be used to determine the significarnae of physical chwrjes ,-4d by a prorJect (Se-.. 15131 (b)) • Due to the potential severity of the s=mmic consequenIms of the city's spgrlsac33 to the plan area, wmm suggest that a fiscal iagact analysis be prepared to or s spwtnn oP eoarrmic iapscts resulting frm inplamsntatien flis City Plan. We ask that the final EM also consider the follcAng: 1. 20 City's ENSP botmdaries and those contained in the amrity plan are not the saws. In order to facilitate gaalii:ative and 11.1 quantitative oonper:isan the City may wish to adjust the proposed boundaries to match the County's Plan. 2. Page 1 -1, 3rd sentence: Mw EM refers to annasatic n. %1 has proposed such amm ation (Per the definition of landowner found in goverment Code Section 56048)? ire :are Wnwara of any landowner 11'12 Peril such annexation, n= arcs we aware of any Petition meeting any of the proscribed signature rieglir as ntz defined by Section 56752. !Q Ii El Mr. L=xy Her ders n Jum .]l, 1991 Page 2 t. Page 1 -2 2nd santance: M%is section stataa that the City has *r► approvals. MAB is not correct as i 14.,3 relates iu rporated area of the County. 4. Page 2 -1, Overview: The definition of the City's 'sphere does not always agree with other refermxaea fcuad in the doc ment. 'gte /1. 4- d=ment nsa`` , to be =mietent in the way it raferenoas promsein3 of develop* pzvpozals in the axistirg aterl area. S. Page 2-5, Pane Etiwrxia PM*. Ihis is now part of the Iaticimark project and analysis of previous designs is no longer appsoQriate. /!� Also, the knoll site referred to in the text mar or my net be 'Wrt of any fut=e approval. 6. Peg: 2-6, 4th paragraph: tine tvct states that ail of the of pzotjeats 'mould ultizately be am id :uxaer /!.6 the MV. .- No evidence is provided to substantiate the Lilmlihood of annexitio n cr the advisability of annemtion to provide needed services. 7. Page 3 -2, 2nd Sartence: 'This septa ce should be clarified to ry.T state "the +east laves of the San Smdris Wash^ sirrae the cash is part of the EMP area. s. E>diibit 3-3 and thereaftsr: The legatidl appearm to indicaba that the ct bilk of the proje is not. in the sphere of innuenm of the Cit- y . 9. Page 3 -11, 3rd paragraph: Me sam an item X13 above. 7h* City it I dues not Maw aut2=ity over the project lands unt!1 mch time as they are arwA d. 10. Page 4.7-5, 4th PM&Tm;h< Wit* ward Cxatty should be acted after 1!40 the wards son Bernardino. U. Pages 4.1-23 and 3 -24, AIZ : Itaa 7 would indlicate a pn k standard that is lets there than refer -Imme in the ffiR. Iketr 9 WCP= s the amsee¢vatian of aggregate aeyautaves. Is this a City policy ta-Drd ultimate development of those raeasroesn 12. Fagg 4.2-4: Does "An 6 restrict fdbms park � arri clubttousee? Item S Proposes a use far the kw31 for 4dch, as refammd above, the City has no amity. 13. Pugs 4.5-3, 3rd Paragralph: 'Inns text says "Approval of I`m EMP would result in the annoastion of the area in riandw Cucm=qa . e !r /3 . ". Mat statute mWorts this aSMMpt{cn? I 91�der:nnrn Pare 14. Forge 4.5 -21: ahe discussion of impact amts any rsferauuoe to t2n� positiNe impact of the praservation of the 675 acres prcpwe, Part of the M:iversity /Great project. l 15. Page 4#5-23 and 30-32. Maly of tte proservatim =wsurw deserve more exteruaive analysis. Some overlook oamootn practices of other govnriznent regulatery agencies. It:ew 15, for WOMPla, uaggests applies for laird use activities are to rsosive pzalIML* ry if !.5 approval for plalws fist coW and Carps of EngirAors prior to tentative tract map appxaval far the 2, 500th unit. CMG most often GOMM" bgrewents wit'a specific appliewft for specific anti crA. tdzil e a regional. amt Would be a use= toot it is unlikely that true Degnrboort would alter their practices. 16. Page 4.8-7 and &: Sint City's Mosel biewts masrous isil parcels which procluies an orderly and offioie t dwjgpw; asn of 14 16 la nth of the bAI7WP paw urftf. If that ('ths intmt*.i ' then pathaps it siAuld be opened Wt. 17. Page 4.", 2nd paragttph: M* Specific Plan unAer, c�asei'lea-atioa by the City is not lgca* In the n=Ux= portion of the City of 11 17 FAMCbm • VL tUally all of to u:tWv*1%sd Mabel is in t bm mated arse& of San Awrardino y M Av is mox than a bozxUzy queat crn, aus it effects - of tom` aratm>pticas end conclusions in the dmft NER. 1 Please amt these tents an WW"t!ibm for flrtbw MMaination by emmultantr and staff, if it is decide to meta farwntd with thin doe nwat. We would rewArve t'`,� right to offer =4n fttailsd critique. Mm ntc yet for yaw 6a:s ddexaticn. Verb tzul pupil mint VP:mm 74 LETTER 11: COUNTY OF 8AN BERMMDINo JL'ae 11 , 1991 11A Rftmosase The State Cle ringhouse review period for the DEIR was from May 6, 1991, to June 20, 1991. The City extended the review period to June 26, 1991, to provide an opportunity for public testimony on the DEIR. 11B Response As stated in the letter, par Section 15131 of the Public Resources Code, economic and social impacts shall not be treated as significant effects on the environment. 11.1 Response The worksheet for the City's Etiwanda North Specific Plan provides a subarea by subarea comparison wh!`_,.*h can be used to facilitate comparison between the City's Etiwanda North Specific Plan and the County's Etiwanda North Specific Plan. A copy of the worksheet, City of', " f `ncho Cucamonga Etiwanda North Specif is Plan, Draft Working Information on Density Calculations, was sent to the Planning Department of the County on February 11, 1991. Additional copies may be obtained from the City's Planning' Division. These - calculations are included in the appendix and are incorporated itto the Final EIR. 11.2 Response See discussion in "Introduction to Response to Comments.t' 11.3 Response The City is the lead agency for the actions specified, including prezoning through the means of a Specific Plan. The City would be the lead agency for subsequent actions, including master plan and tract map approvals,, after annexation to the City. 11.4 °tNsponse Page 2 -1 provides a correct statem_nt of the City's present and proposed Sphere of Influence. 11.5 AMSMMASI At the present time the County has project approval authority for the referenced projects. It is noted that the Rancho Etiwanda PUD has been superseded by an application by Landmark Land Company of California. Under they County General Plait open space element policies, the knoll is a =Arominent landform and should be considered for open space protection. Also, the ktioll has historically been used by the public as a view site and passive recreation destination, and this use,should"be protected in the ' future. Amok Further, it should -be noted that I:andmark, in their application to the County, is requesting, that the 25 percent density bonus which was gr;lnted by the county for the Cous -nulis PUD, be retained for their project through the mechanism of a County General Plat Amendment—, A density bonus was gral►ted to Coussoulis, in part, for 'L.,6 contribution of amenities'above the normal contribution, and /or for a preservation of a publicly valuable resource which would otherwise rzquiie the expenditure of public monies. Dedication and development of the knoll site fox use as a public, passive park, and the contribution in fee title of the bog and its Duffer zone to Chaffey College for the purpose of preservation and scientific research were conditions of the Goussoulir PUD which helped to meet the County's , conditions for granting a density bonus. Also, as noted in J Response 7.5, Letter 7, Department of Fish and Game, the Rancho Etiwanda EIR recommended that consideration be given to the purchase of Sands north of the peat bog for inclusion in the proposed ecological preserves to ensure the continued viability of the watershed supplying the peat bog as well as to preserve rive sidian sage scrub habitat. Therefore, these conditions should be under review and serious consideration given by the County in their review of the Landmark application for General Plan amendment. 11.6 Respons® Scc discussion in "Introduction to Response to Comments.1° 11.7 Response This paragraph is hereby revised and the following sentence is incorporated into the FEIR: "Tire east levee of the San Sevaine Wash and portions of the wash are within the City of Fontana ". X1.e Re. -san�a Specific: Plan Maps havL- been revised and are incorporated into the FEIR, including _dentificatioi, of the area north of the National. Forest Boundary as the proposed Sphere area. 11.9 Response See "Introduction to Response to Comments." 11.10 Resgonae The sentence is hereby revised and is incorporated into the Final,j , EIR as follows "The San Bernardino County General Plan..." k ''a 11.11 Ra2ponse Section 4.1.4, Land Use, Mitigation -7, shall be revised to s%.ate as follows and is hereby incorporated into the Final EIR: "The propsad project shall provide 5 acres of parkland ;per thousand population consistent with policy in the City's General Plan." project land use statistical summary hasp been amended �. ?r(�ingly, and is included in the Final EIR. hould be note d that Mitigation Measui °e 9 is consistent with F SM?,RA and currs;it County and .ity General. Plan policies on aggregate resources. 11.12 Response Regarding Section 4.2.4, Mitigation Measure 6, should be noted that consistent with City Development Standards, the Etiwanda Nc,:ih Specific Plan identifies Open Space and ,Parks as separate laid uses, governed by separate development standards. While nark structures are not prohibited at the Knoll site, it is intended that the site be used for passive recreation and that development be limited to restrooms, parking and picnic facilities. Regarding Mitigation Measure 8, please note that the City's Etivanda North Specific Plan provides prezoning for a portion of the City's Sphere- of- lnfluencs area, as well as planning guidelines for the proposed sphere area expansion. Also, refer to the "Introduction to Response to Comments" for a discussion of the relationship between City and County authority to plan for the project area. 11.13 Responses Please refer to the "Introduction to Response to Comments." The City of Rancho Cuuamonga has noted that LAFCO approval for annexation is required. 11.14 Response Section 4.5.3 of the DEIR discusses project impacts, with emphasis on the loss of Riversidian Alluvial Fan Scrub Habitat as an impact of development. Please refer to Section 4.5.5, Mitigation Measure 1 of the DEIR,, for a discussion of areas to be preserved within the National Forest Boundaries. The -675 acres proposed for preservation as part of the University /Crest project 7:s part of the referenced 915 a ^res of privately owned motinta nous open space located within the San Bernardino National Forest. 7� al.1s 2t�esponse It should be noted that the Consortium of Etiwanda North 4� Lai,.iowners and the city have consulted with the California Department of Fish and Game and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service since the inception of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan project. At a meeting on August 21`19$9, with staff representing the aforementioned agencies, principle landowners, San Bernardino County Flood Control District staff, and City staff, it was P.Ireed that wildlife resource fragmentaticn should be avoided and that a comprehensive plan for resource conservation should.'be prepared for the entire project area and become the basis for future 1601 and 404 permit approvals. 11.16 Response Regarding Section 4.8, Traffic and Circulation, the circulation system north of the, LADWP corridor is designed to provide two widely disperser) points of access across the southerly branch of the Cucamonga Fault, for which there is evidence of pronounced surface rupture. Generalized street `locations _ were selected an the basis of (1) spacing intersections along collector streets far enough apart to provide two distinct means of access to all areal, (2) avoiding intersections on curves, (3) perpendicular cross_.:gs of SCE, and LADWP utility easements, (4) avoiding the existing Ltiwanda Avenue alignment to foster' the protection of Etiwanda Avenue Aalk within historic Etiwanda, and (51 spreading t'he dedication requirements out across several properties. Shifting proposed streets to following existing property lines more closely north of the LADWP utility corridor, is acceptable within the context of the aforementioned objectives. The following mitigation measure shall be added to Section 4.5.4, Circulation: 114. The alignment of the extension of East Avenue across the LADWP utility corridor shall be moved eastward and follow property boundaries. The alignment of the extension of Day Creek Boulevard' across the LADWP utility corridor shall be adjusted pursue4nt to a consideration of alternative alignments prior to appttvai of the first tract map recfsiring construction of Day Creek Boulevard following approval of the Etiwanda North Specific plan." 11.17 Reataona�a Regarding page 4.9 -6, second paragraph, correction: -._:.- ed regarding the location of the Specific Plan as primarily in the City's Sphere of In luence and the first sentence of the secdnd paragraph is hereby changed and incorporated into the Final SIR j as follows: .. %Lc. 77MM-7Y, COUNTY OF SAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT ENVIRONMEN TAL MANAGEME NT GROUP z. 385 North Arrowhaaa Avenue • Son Oamardino, CA 92415.0189 • (714) 387.4091 •'��� \�� SHARON W. HIGHTOWER Fax Na. • 17141387-3223 i�j71��t11��4 Oirector of Pionntng Larry Henderson, AICP June 20, 1997 Planning Department P. 0. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91 729 RE: County Environmental Staff ConnPr -.S in Response to the City's Draft Environmental Impac; Report (DEIR) for the City's Etiwanda North Specific Plai." - r Dear Mr. Henderson: The following comments identify additioq,al major issues of concern regarding the referenced DEIR. The issues are hereby identified by topic. County staff will expand upon these issu es in g teeter detail between and'at the,time of any public hearings. 1. 7rom an environmental perspective, it is difficult to differentiate between the impacts which directly result from the proposed project, and the impacts which are a combined tZ'ai result of the as- yet - undeveloped portions of the proposed project and the developed portions recently annexed into the city. 2. Development, whether identified as Low Density or very Low Density, still results in environmental impacts. While less, density will proportionately reduce, some impacts, other environmental impacts will not necessarily be reduced !�'z proportionately. For example, lower density will result in less transportation /circul4tion impacts, ,yet the need to construct and extend infrastructure will still exist. This rationale can area be applied to impacts on biological resources. 3. On page 4.1 -2, the first paragraph d: scribes the land use adjacent to the southeast boundary, of the specific plan area lt', " as being the•Etiwanda Specific Plan area. Please clarify, i 4. In Table 1-i SLTDZWY, the Level of Significance after mitigation identifies cumulative air quality impacts (emissions) as reduced to a level less than significant. On (2.4 page 4.9 -22, cumulative air quality impacts (emissions) after mitigation are considered a significant unavoidable adverse impact. This is inconsistent. 7, 77 _7 5. Grading is identified as an impact. The Mitigation,V.easuresl specified in the Landform. and Topography Section of � the DEXR, call •Cor adherence to City standards and the Hillside Grading ordinance as mitigation for impacts caused by grading. Phased grading shkmld be-a requirement of. any major grading effort and mitigation ueasures should emrqhasi7..�__ this need-'and the need fol, seasonal grading G. On Page 4.3-4, the Red Hill Fault is described as heading in a northwesterly direction. This description does not match the illustration on Exhibit 4.3-1 and is inuonisisten t with the text on the preceding page. Also, clarification of the information regarding the Duncan Canyon Fauit in the secondl paragraph on this page is request,* . 7. Please ref erencte -the attached Interoff ice Memos -from Coun ty Flood Control District {CFCD) regarding CFCP use and land traffic issues. f2-7 8. Please correct the incorsistancy found in paragraph. 1 of page. 1-1 and piragraph 1 Of P&ge 4.10-9 regarding the total 12• P, acreage of.pri-Vately held parcels within V- San Bernardino National Forest. 9. on Page 5-3, paragraph S. 3 discusseg County General I Plan Amendment applications submitted for proportias within the ENSP area. Please note that the submittal of applications 12.9 does not guarantee project approvals. On Page paragraph S144 discusses the Coinuortium Stiwdndd North Lan6owners SP"ific Plan and ­11UR. Please note that this plan is cu__�ently being revised fzom. the originally submitted proposal. Again, staff will expand in much greater detail on all issues identified thus far, as well as any other issjses which may require comment prior to the June 26, 1991 hearing.'l If you have any questions, please call me at (714) 387-4111., sincerely, PLANNING DEPARTMENT KATHLEEN BROWFE ENVIRONMENTAL TEAM A=act; ts cco 2rd DistrictStaZE Valer.y Mkw Paftaxkian 77 LETTER-111 COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMONT June 11, 1991 11.1 asa one j j The j)roject statistics are on file in the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division and are available upon request. A draft copy, "City of Rancho Cucamonga, Etiwanda North. Specific Plan, Draft Working Information on Density Calculations," February' 11, .1991, was transmitted to County Planning staff. The statistical information includes a breakout of data by subarea and can be compared with the County's Etiwanda North Specific Plan subareas. A copy of the statistical information is included as an appendix incorporated in the Final EIR. The Etiwanda North Specific Plan EIR assesses project - specific impacts and the project's covLzAbution to cumulative impacts with its .implementation. Project- specific impacts, for this project, are those impacts associated with proposed future development within the 'ioundaries of the Specific Plan site. The cumulative impacts included those associated *with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future development, inclusive of approved development within the proposed boundaries, as defined by the City, of the Etiwanda North epecific Platt site. The comments are noted and included in the final project record for review and consideration by the appropriate, decision makers. 11.2 u4soonse The City concurs. The DEIR does not state tiat all envirot,mental impacts would be lower with reduced density. 11.3 Response Please refer to the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Copies are available in the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division. The boundaries of the Etiwanda Specific Plan are Wilson Avenue on the north, Hanley Avenue on the west, and the City Limits on the east. Thus, for planning purposes the south side of Wilson Avenue from the eastern City Limit to Hanley Avenue. is within the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Also, the ease side of Hanley Avenue from Wilson Avenue to Highland Avenue is within the Etiwanda Specific Plan. 11.4 RMSOC S2 The project- specific smissions associated with the project ccn be mitigated to a level less than significant. Therefore, the project's contribution to cumulative air quality impacts can be mitigated. However, the Etiwanda North Specific Plan site is located within an air quality non - attainment basin, which with or 7s ij without the proposed project, has significant unavoidable adverse air quality impacts. 11.5 Reegons+a Please refer to Response 5.4, Letter 5, South Coast Air (duality' Managment District. 4 21.6 Response The referenced sentenc;;�,-,ji' page 4.3 -4 is revised and hereby incorporated into the Final EIR: "From Etiwanda Avenue and Wilson Avenue and heading in a northeasterly direction, the Red Hill fault... "' The Duncan Canyon fault is outside the Specific Plan site. It is a "well located" fault which runs in a northwq %sterly - direction from its intersection with the Cucamonga Film at a paint approximately midway between Lytle Creek and San Sevaine wash. Please refer, to Generalized Geologic Map, U.S. Geological Survey, 1974. 11.7 Mes-p-Onse f Regarding comments from the San Bernardino County Flood Control District, see responses in Letter 13. 11.. s R ®r�aans® Both pages 1 -1 and 4.10 -9 should identify 915 acres of p, ,-ivate landholdings within the National Forest,area and the lzttter page,, first sentence is hereby revised accordingly. It is hereby noted0that the submittal of applications to -tte County, does not guarantee project approvals. It is' also noted that the County Etiwanda North Landowners Specific Plan is currently being revised from the originally submitted proposal. G d 12.3 Response Please refer to the Etiwanda Specific Plan. copies aye available in the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division.. The boundaries of the Stiwanda Specific Plan are Wilson Avenuc `i the north, Hanley Avenue on the west, and the City Limits ` >,i* the east. Thus, for planning purposes the south side of Wilson Avenue from the eastern City Limit to Hanley Avenue is within the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Also, the east side of Hanley Avenue from W*'lson Avenue to Highland Avenue is within the Etiwanda Specific Plan. 12.4 gesponse The project- specific emissions associated with the project can b? mitigated to a level less than significant. Therefore, the project's contribution to cumulative air quality impacts can be mitigated. However, the Etiwanda North specific Plan site is located within an air quality non - attainment basin, which with or Q^ LETTER 12: COUNTY OF SPUN BERMMINp PLANNING DEPARTMENT June 20, 1591 12.1 Response The project statistics are on file in tha Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division and are available upon request. A draft copy, "City of Rancho Cucamonga, Etiwanda North Sgacific Plan, Draft Working Infc—mation on Density Calculations,"'. : ?bruary - 1, 1991r was transmitted to county Planning staff. '''The statistical information includes a breakout of data by subarea and can be compared with the Countyfs Etiwanda North Specific Plan subareas. A copy of the statistical information is included as an appendix incorporated in the Final EIR. The Etiwanda North Specific Plan EIR assesses project- specific impacts and the project's contribution to cumulative impacts with its implementation. Project - specific impacts, for this project, are those impacts associated with proposed future development within the boundaries of the Specific Plan site. The cumulative impacts included those associated with part, present, and reasonably foreseeable future development, inclusive of approved development within the proposed boundaries, as defined by the city, of the Etiwar,';a North Specific Plan site. The comments are: Toted and included in the final project record for review and consideration by the appropriate decision makers. 12.2 Response Vie City concurs. The DEIR does not state that all environmental impacts would be lower with reduced density. 12.3 Response Please refer to the Etiwanda Specific Plan. copies aye available in the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division.. The boundaries of the Stiwanda Specific Plan are Wilson Avenuc `i the north, Hanley Avenue on the west, and the City Limits ` >,i* the east. Thus, for planning purposes the south side of Wilson Avenue from the eastern City Limit to Hanley Avenue is within the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Also, the east side of Hanley Avenue from W*'lson Avenue to Highland Avenue is within the Etiwanda Specific Plan. 12.4 gesponse The project- specific emissions associated with the project can b? mitigated to a level less than significant. Therefore, the project's contribution to cumulative air quality impacts can be mitigated. However, the Etiwanda North specific Plan site is located within an air quality non - attainment basin, which with or Q^ without the proposed project, has significant unavoidable adverse MAL air quality impacts. 12.5 Response Please refer to Response 5. 4, Letter 5, South Coast Air Quali!`y Managment District. 12.5 Response The :referenced sentence on page 4.3 -4 is revised and hereby incs,;porated into the Final,BIRr "From Etiwanda Avenue and Wilson Avenue and heading in a northeasterly direction, the Red Hill fault..." The Duncan Canyon fault is outside the Specific 'Plan site. It is a "well located" fault which runs in a northwesterly direction from its intersection With the Cucamonga Fault at a point approximately midway between Lytle Creek and San Sevaine Wash. Please refer to Generalized Geologic Map, U.S. Geological Survey, 1974. 12.7 Regnonse Regarding comments from the San Bernardino County Flood Control District, see responses in Fetter 13. 12.8 Rlspons! Both pages 1 -1 and 4.10 -9 should identify 915 acres of private landholdings within the Kational Forest area and the latter page, first sentence is hereby revised accordingly. 12.3 MAIMS! It is hereby noted that the submittal of applications to the County does not guarantee project approvt; -x>._, It is also noted that the County t iwanda North Landowners Specific Plan is currently being revised from the originally submitted proposal. t :•., G LETTER 13 A L N T E OFF uE M S B DATE may 28, 1991 PHONE FROM LEWIS S. NEEB, Etiwanda /San Sevaine Project Manager TO KEN A. MILLER, F.E. Cooney of San Semn7dino Director Transportation /Flood Control File 1(CO) -30 481 /LSN SUBJECT CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - DRAFT EIR ETIWANDA NORTH SPECIFIC PLAN The following are easements related to IIMVi T �IITI*AL iMPAQ" REFDAi' EI'IWANDA � FtTfI - 1PECIF1C PLAN (ENSP) SSCH No. 8 ?012314 Prepared for: City of Rancho Cucamcuqa ... by: Michael Brarkbian Associates ". ITEM M_- PAGE , 1 1-5 Table 1 -1• Smary Land Use (Section 4.11 Mitiraation me,7r - Fixs' i 2 3 4 12 13674=14.. 04% 1 -7 1 -9 1 -?2 c Paragraph x8Td=ling 'Presser a in Perpetuity 4,112 acres in Day and son Sevaine creels areas as permanent open space.." No specific definition is provided as to exactly where the proposed 4,x -acres are located, Exact property parcels affected try the ENSP proposal should be defined on a asap with parcel nubbers and osr,seIjbips stated. `hlie mar scales in the ENSP are too =03 to interpret and create ambiguity. Without enough accuracy to determine limits an-3 ownerships, it Mgxwible to adequately ad&ess the issues. tBt- Mea - First paragraph relating to arterim desilting basins. nup District dces not catione the use of interim desiltir, basins since, by their name, interim, it is assumed that 100 -year flood protection, is not provided. More notably, interim solutictl. `f normally re3L=p high - maintenance costs, provide lesser protection and the dollar costs for the intcram solution Cannot be rem in a permanent type solution. 13• a, 2 Ta>�le 1 -1 rir Landform and T2p==ohv (Section d 21 Mitioat`.' :. flood controlst paragraph relating to, 11 open space ar&)..and minor irpmWents" As rated before, it is difficult, at best, to detexzi where the open space areas actually, are. it appears that major 'flood control improvements will be needed in some of the spaces wash seem to be designated as open space. Some of the major items will include debris basins ar dams, revetted levers, reinforced concrete channels, turnouts, and other appurtenant facilities. t3 A 3 r.iruL p=-e'grapn regarzing contingency plans for police, fire aped paramedic. Although it is un3Akely that thane could be a flood and earthquake at the same time, pr6visiam to allow f fighting men and equipment could also be a Passibility and irzcl in the contingency Plan. 13,A-A- _ r 13�rr i� PAGE Fay ia, 199i Page 2 5 1 -13 MBLk,'..e 1-1 S1bmnalv ;Ivdroioav and Water Quality [Secti .d_ 41 Mitiaat n '. ° nist paragr -mph regarding Eti /Sm S 4ne Area Master Plan of Drainage prepared by BSI Consultants, ln� .n August,14 1989. The referred BSI Master, Plan has not been a=epted', approved by the District., RefAxence is made to the second paragraph relatuxj to flood control fad -Aitie Currently inadequate tolr=rUe +ht. 100 -year design storm. The District does have, in per, izproved or nearly constructed facilities designed to catty 100- -year design stomas. Wiese include the East and West Ievess on San Sevaine Creek, north of Summit Avenue, Herndersor and Wardman Channels downstream ox the powerl tales and the Etiwanda and San Sevaine Charnels frail Foothi.11 Blvd. r= th te) the I- is Freeway. Reference is made to the third paragraph relating to the expansion of ban Sevaine Basin No. 4 and 5 into a larger capacity system to attenuate peak flows in both Etiwanda and San Sevaina Creeks. This proposed expansion would probably not be cost effective sine the gradient of Basin No. 5 floor must rise several feet in ocher for the basin to drain and would limit the effectiveness of expanding Basin No. 4 and 5 into one basin. If the expansion of Basins 4 and S was considered, several hundred thousand cubic yards of_ -pmrth could be made available at a cost. Although the attm zt3 ,of peak flaws frsa both Etiwanda and San Sevaine Creeks at the same location has merit, Basin No. 5 would reit be the obvious place. To combine the flows at Basin No. 5 wwYd require 100 -year protection from the foothills all the way t;, the Santa. Ana River. This would include debri.basiis at Etiwanda, Henderson, Wardman, Morse, San,Savain_, Rich and Duncan canyons and several to rwed canyons in between Etiwanda and Duncan Creeks. In addition, it would be necessary to hardline the cxa WActions from the debris basins to Basin No. 5 to preclude debris. t3•A•5 6 1-16 Table 1 -1 Summarv,Biolocieal Resourrns f ;on 4 51 Mitigation, a First paragraph regarding applicants for dwelt shall] rZeserve 915, 365, 239 acres of natural open space. Ou ij yy posed if the 915, 365, and 239 acres are part of the 4,112 acres^ mentioned on page 1-5 or are these in fact in addition to the 4,112 acres. It should be marker^ that the Districts Day Creek Project has satisfied. all of the environmental oat=== for its construction. The agreed setasIde was approximately 200 acres in the upper limits of the Day Omer Spreading anon -4s.. Again, the smallness of the maps provided in the F:NSP makes it difficult to interpmt and evaluate. Reference is maw, to the second paragraph regarding: fvlhe riparian co;. ,ridors include Henderson, Wardman, and Morse Creeks. 'c U,should be noted that portions of Hende -son, Warctnan and Morse Cte-Jm have been =Proved. The improved portions and any proposed improvements should be reviewed'and.zddressed as part of this requirement. 13 A.'E, t 83 IZgt :ay 23, 395:. kO PAGE page 3 7 3-17 Table 1 -1 Swnmary Biological Resources (Section 4.5) Miticration Paragraph regarding preserving 191 and 270 acres in sari Sevaine and Etiwanda wash north of Wilson Avenue respectively, Question is pos:.a if the 191 and 270 acres are included in the 4,112 acres mentioned on page 1 -5 as noted in Item 6. With reference tc the minis width of 200 feet in addition to the exis-".ing strean course to facilitate the,.movemnt of large animals, the 'question is posed if the traffic from Wilson. Avenue and the proposed humar inhabitants adjacent to the areas will deter the.movemerst;`rf large animals? The same question would apply for the proposed 100 -ft, t widtl' corridor for wildlife habitat below Wilson Avenue. It isr -riot known exactly where the 191 acres, 270 acres and 200 -fm4- and 100 -foot corridors are located. 13 A-7 8 1 -18 Table 1-1 Sumsnary Riolnaical Racrxrm -a toe, -1-4r n RA M44- 4—+.;,,. 9 Measures First paragraph regarding Etiwanda wildlife corridor c0trACting San Sevaine Basins No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and S. Mis prcpose3 100 -foot corridor would sevt rely restrict the size of District's Basins 1, 2, 3, 4 ark S. She District would not object ii the 100 - foot corridor was p1med on private properties or properties owned by the City of Rancho • Due to the smallness of the map scales it is difficult to analyze °this statement since the exact locations ate not knmm. IB A -8 1 -19 Table 1 -1 Slmmary Bio ogical I=ien 4.51 Mmacts ,. Refer to first -' paragraph regarding 1,900 a�.�f alluvial scrub in Etiwanda, Day, and San Sevaine floodplains. It is not I=wn if these 1900 a are included in the 4,112 aczev mentioned on page 1 -5 or, are they addition to the 4,112 acres. In any event, the location is not ;mown and cannot be analyzed. 13.A•9 Mitictation Measures Reference is made to the. first' paragraph regarding restore 21 acres of disturbed habitat within Etiwanda wash in a=rrda-=-- with the MT. Mi.s paragraph is difficult to ada=ledge since the details of the Ids are not known and should be provided. Reference i;7 made to.'SG=Jd paragraph regarding preservation► of 700 acres of open space ih Day Creek including the „200 acmes mitigation previously sett aside by the District. Shis pasdgrapti is unclear and question is posed if the 500, 700 or 900 acres a- part of the 4,112 acres �rantioned on page 1 -5. Should thF,sea acreages be within or enccavass- the;.,District's facilities, then the District will not be able to operate and maintain the Day Creek Basin connecting levees intercept and appurtenant facilities in the area. Reference is made to memo dated May 22, 1991, from Mr. Ruben V. Monte., Day Creek project fir, regatcLAg this item. i ”! No- Sys Zs, -391 Page 4 I - I Reference is made to ti,;rtt Paragraphr'egardisg the feasibility of restoring flood flows to Day Creek /)wash and spreading grooms sufficient to maintain alluvial fan scata habitat. it may be more appropriate foss the City of Rancho Cucamonga to prepare this z nvesstigatio;i and spread the costs at the study to those pscpertiss that old benefit. She City should include a careful evaluation of the monies already spe t in flood proofing 1--he area against any benefits which would be received, if any, by such restoration and resultant liabilities, in general It atJmam that these 7Y Ugat2c! 4ivo surea will afi`ect the ability of the District to operate and maintain flood control facilities. 4he City should provide a. study t:he operation and maintenance St the flood control facilities, assuming the mtitigaticn measures are going to be eafo z d. in addition, the city should ==jx ire its duty to assume any liabilities and additional maintenance costs incurred by the mitigation measures represented in the FNSP. Reference is made to the c•+.cend and last sentence in the third paragraph relating that development may use Day Creek wash as a mitigation area .... to develop parcels within the project area is unclear. Does this mean that develalsmant pray occur within the Day Creek wash area as long as a portico of the wash area is used for mitigation sufficient to maintain alluvial fan scrub habitat? 130,•9 10 1 -20 Table 1- 1_Summary -Biol2gical Resources (Section _4.5) ... Regardirig fence design standards y o IW and c�.ty Fences adjacent to District's facilities and /or prcpert AM boundaries Shall be consistent with District's six cr eight-foot chain link fence standards, as :-,-plicable. l3 a•rQ 11 1 -32,33 Table 1_2 S ma *_tv 'Ii i Cim3tat;r,n 1 ^^';on 4j) - In geisNS31e the Transportation Departmentrs Traffic Division has gidres,5ed these issues in the attached rem db%' J1jm 5, 1991. it should be toted that if the City anticipates using any of District's rights-of-way for road purposes, then the District must )= cmpeihsated, at fair market value for the use of its properties or show that the District is receiving other fair and equitable rotgwnsatiom for the use of,' properties. The same compensation Would hold true for COXIty Peres. 13 A- it 12 3 -4 RrfWWM is made to Subarea 8, EtiWanda Creek trash Preserve, would be maintained as s flood control, groundwater recharge and resource conservation area. This subarea evidently refers t area 8 as shown on Exhibit 3 -4 (on the preceding seam page). In general, the District would connur that the area is needed for flood control, debris storage and graurhk-iter purposes. Hc7wever, the limits as defined on Exhibit 3-4 appear to extend way beyonrt the lim6ts necessary for flood control and groundwater purposes. This is difficult to ascertain because the exhibit is ?lot definitive. 7 TM limits necessary, for strictly flood control and groundwater purposes should be defined. i" L- PAGE Page a li { 13 3 -5 Reference is marls to Subarea 11, San Sevalne Wash Preserve,, aL II SIUM on Exhibit 374. For reasons as der -cibed in ::tam 12, it difficz.::t to resp irrl. Agin, the exact limits of the requi renrni.s for . flood control and gro water should be specified. 13. A. 1,$ 14 3-3 Flood Control -Chen 5bace Distxict tFC) Additional flood cartrol facilities not list. could include debris stor4ge areas, ates, appurtenant structural facilities and other items. The word "diversion " and similar --vds sh uld ?ae struck from the defi Lt on. 13•� -!4 i 15 3 -12 Stubpumgraph, 3 entitled 01ga= of San Bernardino - The County may wish to modify master plans for toads, flood control, regional parks /trails and other county general plan designations to be consistent with city general plan "2> We wish to acc3mo? "fie t%e Cit ,,,s offer of permission to modify master plans for zv& -, floes cor.drol, regional parks /trails and other county gr -:val plan: designations a--A will not hesitate to do so; however, x;: should be recognized that these modifir-ations may not be %insistent with city general plan. t•A t5 16 Exhibit 4.1-2 between' pages 4.1-1 and 4.1 -2 Refereaace is taade to Zch_bit 4 1 -2 relating to '!,naJor recharge area grour4water ". The areas for major recharge shown cm this exhibit are probably saaewhere beteen ten and twenty times that amount necessary 'to actually provide gs?�urmciwater activities. It is diffiw1t to analyzma cite to the small seate of the map and the large amount of acrewe -s Involved. u,Awever, there afar to be many more acres shown erg, „ 'map for mayor recharge cp:o MdW2kter in Lie. Day Creek, Wwatxia' Creek, Henderson Creek and Sevaine Creek :system V*:-- 4'vuid be necessary. ►3•e�: 17 4.1:4 } suer 'plan of Trails The Distract in general reserves coament on t`se proposed community trails and regicxrl aultisystem trails if the _ system of trails is going to be or,:- `istrick's right-of-way. If the city prcposes to use District's iii - of -spay for this purpose, then the District must receive fair and equitable just compensation for the use of its right -of -way. The District Would also oppose any umrster plan of trails in conflict with its =mtruction operation and m; ntenum ai any evi sti ng or future facilities. 13 Qom. is 4.1 -5 Second sentence under lid Rtsources which is "The General Plan identifies 1,600 acres of potential'; "aggregate. es resourc within the western portion of the specific J �f ar'ea (Day Creek Wasn and Canyon) 11. Due to the brevii 7 'of th -i m-stat ment it is Lil�iG lO m 7,�ie a this 1, 600 .acres of pot_ rtia` a�regate resource are actually situated. Does this meats that mining of aggregate resa=ces will be allowed anywhere Withinn the 1,600 acres? Are these 1,600 acres within the 4,112 acres of Proposed Presersmat-on? Again, it is difficult to analyze this statement 'since the ama is nor- shown precisely on a man.. 13 A 1 aF *` PAG.ti'J _Q {P YZy Page . 6 19 4.1-6 Refer to paragraph eider O w sbace -• The District in general corsairs w th the open spars designation of creeks and channels a) long �s the ;.eeeks- and .dwInels are delineated fr= other designath�;ons -- as, ,.,tut not inFluding utility corridors and tramportatim rights - of -clay. IB,. %;'I9 20 4.1 -11 Refzr to first paragr ,;.i under =ite Land Uses which statesthat the Plan includes 64q.`aC:'es of which apprOxitately 2,728 W=ilr? -be developed ` and 4,112 would • '.?e xesesvad for epen space. T' la,'jiara raph ?3q so states that ?,11 arses, an esserre, would be ;contained in baay, k7awanda, and San SeviAm Creeks drainage .areas.. Again, due to the mall scale of the maps provided, it is difficult, at-best, to fOUDW' these figures or ascertain if t,"hey are psozabie. it is ✓ery dma tful 112t, dnywhere near 4,= ac Ces are contained in the Day, Etiwanda, f an3.-San Sevaine C'reep's drainage: <greza, and if this was`txue,' why are - only tt*e drainage areas being preserved. 7hec District him, for decade., maith':cined flood control facilities within these areas in effort to provide flood protection and water copse nation and nahst continue to do so •without ' -q restrictions. . 13 a- 20 j a 4.1 -13 Refer to the s= )W- sen`.enx in .' .he next to last para p t1� pr-Vosed specific plzn ama includes : v ae preservation of the orsite' creeks and include open spaca areas adjacent to these creeks.'= This sentence is in Oirect conflict with the next paragraph life, property, W sense of well-being and to potsi&ially significant flooding and. seismic hazards. 13 a•Zc 22 4.1 -I5 Reference is made to ester Rlan of Trail,s - as depicted on Fkhibit 4.1 -6 or, tiya following page. Because of the snail scale of the map, it is very difficu t to tell wh=e property the,p.mposed trails will be located. If the trails are in fact not on District's rights -of- way, then there is no cement to be made. Should there be trails proposed on D Stsict's right- oj,-wavr: then the Di�rict sha==d- z�eiva fair and just resat ion is a: tkie use of V z right -of -way arri be held free from any liability associated vitl? the trails. The District will make additional assts on this item if the trails are proposes}.' tit be on District's right-of-way and at such time as it can be 2�%c,n than the trails will, in fact, be compatible with >Sistr 6—ws activities. The District recognizes that some uses of its prc+perties may be =npatible with the District's activities. '13 A. 22 23 4.iw-16 Reference is za`le to the next ^^o "last paragraph which quotes as foll.;ws, .,tlmprovment of all cri —s and d�antsels as open space and recreational. menities E; also a city policy.;' Before the Distri:at can provide appropriate its, the °recrejtional 'amenities== must_ be derined and delineated so it is nit in conflict with any of District's facilities. Again, any secxrxJaiy use of District's- properaes mSt be cmvatible with Distriei:!s interests and provide appropriate ration for the use of the land. 15 A -2.3 c:. 6 2ro PAGE CDNQifNP _ page 7 24 4.1 -17 Reference is made to paragraph on regarding approximately 247 acres of aggregate rests west of the Day Creek Levee; A question is posed whether this 247 acres of aggregate resou.-ces is part of the 1,600 acres of aggregate resa2srPS areviously me tionPr3, or is it part of the proposed preserves? 13 4.2 4 25 4.1-18 Refer to paragraphs on Own ,Shade. The last twr) sentasrps refer to flood, fire, geologic or seismic conditions may endanger the public are. hazardous areas (i.e., floodplain, fault zone). " hose sentences sew to conflict with other portions of the ISSP which relata to utilizing open space tai Sian trails, recreational amenities, and other items. 7,f. these '<oen space areas rare, in fact," an area that may endanger the publ,'c, tlm\ they ,should be posted /1No Trespassing" and only be used for, the sisiYle purpose activity which they are to function. V& A, Z5 26 4.1-18 Refer to pubd.ic Tdelth a,1 Safety Steer- Elrcnents - It is noted ;-hat the city includes- redaz flood risks and enhance groundwater rerhazge. it should be rioted that reduci6q: flood risk,n is intangible. Facilities should be constructed to fly proof for Via 100 -year frequency storm F ` dsvelcpebl s acres within the;_EdSP a • ,i any resultant downstream properties. 43 A ZG 27 4.1 -23 Refer. to 4.1.4 74itiaatian s, mss, Subparagraph 1, r ;a o the preservation and pexpetu; ty of ' -4,112 acres in Day, San ' Sevaine, creek areas as perma�+.rit open spare. Tae information, as presented, is riot clear enough to respond as to the adequacy of its intention nor the setasides for flood anal. Reference is made to Subparagraph regarding development regulations (stw%Iards or deed restrictions) tha preclude develmment in San Sevaim, Etimida, Day Creek and open space areas Shall be adopted. !! Should these standards or deed restrictions be adapted they , sr aald also include reservations for flood °op-itro1 and water conser4ation purposes' at no cost to the District.' ;g A. 27' 28 4.1 -24 Refer to Subparagraph 9 regarding the conservation of aggregate resources. if the aggregate resource areas are in Districts right of• -way, the District will reserve courant on this item until it is clarified. 11. A- z8 29 4.4 -1 Reference is made to last paragraph as follows, "Hieorical y, uncoordinated drainage planning for the Day, Et wanda, and San Sevaina- creek drainages has re- silted k inadecwtely sized drainage channels that cwmt provide proper flood protection 'or adjacent ar;ct downstream properties ". This statement is toC:ally incorrect t f.,-- hated planning for the Day, Etiwanda, and? San Sevaine Creek dr rages started in the early 1930s and 19405 long before the City of Rancho 0==nga exwtad. lhr developwits, such as those permitted in the ENSP, create t4_' -: need for itscr2ased flood )protection because of the increased runoff uhich will be created by the cave op=t proposed. ,5 a.yq 6 71 C atj " • 1'IiS2 140- PAG—E 30 N,ay 20, 1991 Page a Pefer also to the last sentence on page 4.4 -1 which states, "Gl=int cOUn=1 Plans have been incorporated into the Btiwanda /Sara sevair.- Area Master Plan of Drainage (BSI August 1989) and are depicters on Exhibit 4.4 -211. The County has no master plans that have been incorporated as stated by your reference "BSI August 1989". The District: does have a master plan of the Etiwanda/San Sevaine area as Produced by Bill Mann in 1983.. eaHr.13 -A 24, Exhibit Refer to the map ent:+tled Existim _Flood gM=jl Facilitie - The 4.4 -1 following facilities suxad be added to the man and shoran as iaiaraved• 31 Ekbibi 4.4 -2 32 4.4 -3 33 4.4 -4 34 4.4 -5 35 4.4-6 a) East and west levees along Hunter's Ridge Deve went arxi Ca yn Development north of 24th Street; b) ,Henderson ard, vlardman`, itlet Channels dmnL tream of Wardwn /Bullock Road aryl powerlines; cj Day Creek Channel; d) Dry Creek Debr � Basin; e) Intercept Chan-,1 west of Day Creek to east of Deer 'C reek; f) Etiwanda North /South Intercept Ievea along West edge of Section 22; g) Althourh not flood related, tyE llwt., of the Ei�SP study should :;a clearly marked. +3•A•3a' t Ref er- to Exhibit 4.4-°2 entitled Storrs Drain Ras —ter Plan. The District has not reviewed 14i is wster plan; ho-aever, Will Make 'the following limited comments. The three drains inletting into the Etiwanda Regional Spreadirg,,Inourds may not be permitted. The map ".hoUld also show &—r;is basin and dams at the Henderson, rlarftan, Morr-e, San Sevaine and other vzuu -mad canyons in *_'ze area, as well as reinforced concrete con netting crhanr el s from the debris basins to the regional systemse i3 a• 3r Refer to the paragraph at the top of the page regarding reports by Fuscoe, Williams, Lindgren & Short (FWL&S) and BSI Consultants. Please be advised that these sepoLts have not been approved by the District. Although, the reports by fW AS and BSI Ocumultants do have obvious merit, they do n t propose an overall solution to the drainage problems in the area agile to the District. (3_43t Refer to the first, statement in the last paragraph. The 100 -yc;ar flood would generate a peak flow of 5300 cubic feet per second (cfs) in Day Creek. This figure could be higher based on the 1986 San Bernardino County trydrology Manual. 13 A, 33 Please refer tr the paragraph marked Etiwanda Creels regnd ng the peak flow at, Wilson Avenue, which is 7466 cfs during the 100 -year storm event. 13 A�34 Reefer to the famth paragraph regarding 70 acres and 42 acres for water spreading activator mss.. It should be oaths that all of the 112 acres are necessary for active water spreading and debris disposal. this operation has nothing to do with the amount of "wetted spreading surface" or perimeter measurements. Refer also to the last paragraph on page 4.4-6 reqarding the debris potential for Etiwanda Cceex._ It is estimated at 4, 996,000 cubic y-,,rft in lieu of the 680,000 for an ultimate storm after a one year h=. The Yuen is 4,312,500 cubic yards. f3. 1F ca ITfIf Vay 23, 1991 O-. PAGE ' -' page 9 1 36 4.4-7 Please refer to the lest sentence of the next to last' paragraph wh3 is, "When constracted Henderson Channel would_acc=Cdate flood fl expected in the area". 1x� Ierson flows carry a large amount of debris and. the current .Henderson Channel, as constr=ted, was not designed to aodate any debris lidpn flows; tbuxefore, a debris- basin Will be necessary in the Henderson Ci�annel Canyon mouth ,t6 Prevent the debris from entering the ch�ulne7 . A similar debris basin will be required at Wardman Channel, Morse C mgon Channel, San Sevaine channel, and other unnamed creeks in the area. 13A. 36 37 4.4 -8 Rafer to subtitle - "San Sevaine Creek!' \j is debris in San Sevaine Carron is estimated to be 3, 595, 6000 ark 2,929,000 cubic ,yards for the ultimate and 100 -yeBr st9nn events, respectively# after a or- year Burn. Refer to the last paragraphs segar -d .rag, I".rhe, total ocubined inflow intoI-tM San S_vairA mains is 1�s mated ie( : °t 12,330 cfs for 'i a 100 -year design storm per Bill. Maim.' _ = ' 13 A-57 38 4.4-9 Refer to the top two paragnphs in the page. Strike the last sentence in the top paragraph start.ir)g with, I%ften the starm, outflow...:." Strike tk4 first sentence in the secand- paragraph which ends. with "Hickory Basin", as these flows no longer follow : :the path described. in the next sentence strike- the word ' "back" of ex "'Ihe Basin JH3.ck=y drainss.." ,1 13 A -3$ 39 4.4 -12 Defer to the last paragraph regarding a structural t=T=t into Sato seradm Basin for mitigationq,of it�reased flows generated by urban` develop�ezit. Flaw frcut Et�wanda; Gxee]c Drainage Area should not turned out into San Sevaine Basin No. 5 until it has been d2 er that no additional capacity is seeded to mitigate flows in the San . Sevaine system.. � would inelude`c�..� -tee. areas for- mitigation all the way dcwns°tream to the ty line and °iaito Riverside Minty. To the best of our knowledge, this has not been accatrplished. :: (3 A.37 40 4.4 -13 Please rewrite the third sentence ir- -the top paragraph to read as follows: Rhe 6aisting orrwedevelepment condition (in the EtNanda Creek C 1 after San (.6mLpe Basin :No. 5 contribution ) is `.mot { permitted due to debris - laden flows. 'The ultimate develcpme4 , scenario would increase total flows in the San Sevaim Basins to 12,330 cfs (bwludes San Sevaine SAvading Q=jds, hawker Crawford Channel and local tract inputs) and Etiwanda Creek flows will be 7,466 cfs. ALA strike the last two s noes its the first paragraph. Refer to the last paragraph on page 4.4 -13; the sentence starting with 101he plan calls for a diversion ... 11 shaild be struck from the ' ,,..:t in its entirety so that no reference to the diversion is Laentioned. 13 A. 40 Y_,, Q^ rrFa2 M. Nay 2'0, 1991 Page 10 Revised Jtsie 12, 1951 41 4.4 -14 Refer to Table 4.4 -1 Reduction of peak n; —u--- San Sevaine Basins sith th Rates 11LT1��t Jae of -Replace Table 4.4 -i with the or below. r � - TAME 4.4-1 \' RMUC=cu OF FM DID RATES' TMto= MM OF MN SE9AnM BAsnm Ultimate Davelcpment d condition ` i ?a utflca at Basins Fredso;.-lopat Without Ytiwaada -- Flow Diversion 7 flaws (cfs) F'= Hawker cmwford Channel 2,350 6,856 Through Basin 1 5,190 7,428 F= I4=1 Tra^ta 370 F= Etiwaay3a Diversion 400 0 0 mbinag Inflow (cfs).. 7,25G- 12,330 Catflvw from Basin S 6,210 4,743 y' Eti�wanda Flow Dcwiastrema of Basin 5 5,150 8,191 Total Flaw Downstream of Basin 5 (efs); 11,360 32,330 (see; oawbinea inflow) Nate: Peak discharge rates are sect to final 8esi alternatives g�^ considerations and detention 13 A.41 42 4.4 -17 Reference is made to seccnd paragraph t� 4.4.3 CL+++^ulat' Iz�acts in where the lash en sentce i.+, "Relocation of flood control facilities downstream beycjit_ the habitat to be preserved can Maintain regional flood management objectives as well as biological habitat mainterancell, This _sentence idealistically, is probably true, although it be noted biological habitat maint(Mance will ir=mase the mainten should am�tp coots of the flood management ea�trs'at objectives. Mlis would also prohibit aptneeat in certain a+-as and definitely move development downstream. DevelcPoent and /or the city should pay for these long term maintenance responsibilities and share in the liabilities created by this philosophy. Rap ,ding, s graPh 1 under MTHlGA C)N ">FASMM the District has not to approved the Hsi Report, therefore, dd'ie-.opment may have to adhere cm- it ons not kn ca at this time. 43 4.4 -18 Refer to Subparagraph 13 A . 4�2` 3 r@ esion of San Sevaine Basins 4 and S. As callnesated previously, this expansion ray not be feasible due to gradients and at this time it is not practical to attenuate flows from both E.tiwanda and Sant Sevaine Creeks at ti-Lis location. 13 'A 43 II' o. yK, PAGE - Page 11 44 4.5 -1 Refer to 4.5 -1 Overview - AS mentioned earlier, the report states various arweage figures within the specific plan area. Tfip-se acreages vary f 6e total 6841,) acres and breaks it down into other figures i.e. 6,310, 530, 3,306, 915, 183, 11, 462, 311, 300};200, and 1,500 -acre aggregate resource area, These acreage figures and their riaysical locations shou3d all be shown on one map along with she acreage requixcements.-for infrastruuctuxe such as but not limited to, transportation, electrical Power, flood contxol, local drainage, appropriate .4xjress /egr_ss to infrastructure facilities, schools, panes, and Libraries, etc.. The map Should provide enough detail and accuracy that all of the acreages can be plotted and their areas ba calculated to within ± 2 acres or 5% of the total parcel size, whichever is smaller. Although the Distrior is primarily interesteu in flood control and water conservation, it is difficult to perfc= a'review whet► so much of the infractnseture is interrelated. 13 A,4't, I I _l J , 4p Z= ay Page � I Brief MIE StA`M.RY The ENS? plan includes some 6,890 acres of which ?,728 ai:e proposed to be developed and 4,112 reserved for open space. The details of the report are limited and the small map scales without ownership definition makes this ENSP difficiu;.z analyze. One of tha major .items is the 1600 acres allotted for aggregate resources and if it is on D, itrict properties. The ENSP proposes toy divert Etlwanda creek waters into San Sevaine 4:,eek north of I -15 Freeway. 2Yais pruncsal may have merit, although could not take place until all of the facil.Wes are in upstream and downstream; in particular, complete attenuation and containment of all flaws upstream of the &znta Aria River and debris basins for each of 'the channels across the foothills. 7t.ere appear to be several joint uses of District's properties proposed, such. as ei ezrtriar. trails, parks, recreational amenities, which are mentioned 'bu`; not defined or accurately located. Although it is difficult to ascertain, withut appropriate ownership maps, it appears that District properties are the bulk of ne lands being proposed to mitigate nos of the development created items with '.he- exception of the peat bag 11 acres n the area of Iarzir wk. It appear -` that if an ultimate plan resolving the. flood control and water conservation issues were followed such as the plan for the Bureau of Reclamation project, ,a minim= of District's right-of-way i.Mld ±e required for mitigation of the necessary flood control and wncw consamtion facilities. As such, some •remaining District's rights- of-way could a made a%mi.lable for mitigation of developi3ent, and /or other outside agencies as long as the District rec ived fair, equity- ,31e and jrst compensation for its right -of -way. The Day Creek area is the same situation; any structural changes or right-of-way in excess of District uses, necessitated _ for development should be relinquished only after District recaive. full coupensatica. The ENSP infers that it will be nac2ssaYy to remove some of the Day Greek facilities and scruct-ures for the restoration of the canyon and downstream habitat. If this is L.-ue, the City should carefully evaluate the oasts of existing facili. i.e-- (most of which the City paid for) alternative flood cont wl measures and the liabilities incurred for such changes against the value, if any, of benefits recei%%d. The report does not cover any fundarq mechanisms for flood control or water con-- xvation facilities in the ENSP area or for related upstream and da ztr --zm improvements. The cost of these facilities and improvements is apprw&Aitely $27,000,000. . The transportation issu.a were reviewed by our Traffic Division and there are no significant technical issues. The znmrt estimates $22,820,000 of transportation related facilities for the general city /county area of which $18,228,009 is in; the EM county ale+. The County has no way of generating these estimated costs. LSN:c] Attachments: 1) 5/23 j 91 Memo /Ruben Montes 2) 6/5/91 "_--= /Gary Kuhlman cc: ✓Tim 3ohnson Ken Guidry Ruben V.'Montes JAS /Reading File 07 LET$ER 13A: Sl " BERNARDINO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT MEMO FROM LOUIS NEEB, MAY 28,1991 -J 13A.1 Response , The calculations for project statistics are included as an appendix and are incorporated into the Final EIR. 13A.2 Response Section 4.2.4, Landform and Topography, Mitigation Mews: -.e, Item 1, the reference to "interim desalting basins" shall b6'Aeleted and this change is incorporated into the Final EIR. It should lea noted that the use of interim desilting basins as an erosion control technique (Section 4.2) is not a flood protection measure, aithough they are occasionally provided in conjunction with such measures. 13A.3 Respon�±� One-thousand scale maps for the project site are on fS`:e in the City of Rancho ;ucamongals Planning Division. Copies are available upon request. Section 4.2, Landforms and Topography, Mitigation Measure 6, will be revised to add the following and is hereby incorporated into the Final EIR: "Where deemed necessary by the County of San.,Bernarnino- Flood Control District and permitted by the Army Corps of Engineers and the California Department of Fish and Game, regional and sub- regional flood control facilities shall_ be constructed to meet the Standards of the San Bernardino County Flood Control District." Also, it should be noted that regional spreading grounds, per the District's current master plan, are compatible with an open space designation_ 13A.4 R490onse Section 4.3,4, Geology, Soils, and Seismecity, Mitigation Measure 6, will be revised to add the following and is incorporated into the Final EIR: "As a condition of development, applicants for development shall consult with the San Bernardino County Flood Control District in order to V ovide a elan fcr emergency access in the event that flood conditions exist concurrently with an earthquake event." 94 1;A.r Response The BSI study is the basis for the City":- Etiwanda /San Sevaine Drainage Policy regarding fees and constru'u�, on of City master plan facilities in this area. The design 6.-I_ construction of regional flood control facilities i:ill be to the satisfaction of the Flood Control District. The regional mainline facilities listed in the BSI report came from the Day, Etiwanda and. San Sevaine Creek System Drainage Plan by Bill Mann ind Associ!tes, dated March 1983. Secondary regional facilities were added on the basis of more recent FCD reports listed in the BSI Bibliography. We acknowledge that dome of the regional facilities, designed to handle a 100 -year storm, are in place although the entire regional system is nut. Section 4.4.4, Hydrology, Mitigation Measure 1, shall be replaced and is hereby incorporated into the Final EIR: "Where warranted, or necessary and appropriate, all development shall adhere to the recnmm.andations for regional and sub- regional flood control facilities by the San Bernardino County Flood Control District, and for local storm drain facilities shall adhere to the recommendations of the City of ,,,Rancho Cucamonga Etiwanda /San Sevaine Area Master 'i+lan of Drainage prepared by BSI Consultants, Inc. in August 1989. Applicants for development shall consult with the County and City to resolve inconsistencies, if any, between regional, sub - regional, and local flood control facilities." It should be noted that this wov`d eliminate portions of the Alluvial Fan Scrub Habitat and t:.at alternative aitigation ft.r loss of Alluvial Fan Scrub Habitat would be requirad. St : :tion 4.4.4, Hydrology, Mitigation Measure 2, shall be'revised to add the following and is hereby incorporated into the Final EIR: "It should be noted that the following 100 -year storm facilities are in place or under construction: the East and West levees on the San Sevaine creek north of Summit Avenue; Henderson and Wardman channels downsteam of the Lcs Angeles Department of Water and Power utility corridor; and the Etiwanda and San Sevaine 'Channels from Foothill Boulevard north to the I -15 Freeway." Section 4.4.4, Hydrology, Mitigation Measure 3, shall be revised to add the following and is hereby incorporated into the Final EIR: "This measure shall be implemented if enlargement is determined to be feasible by the San Bernardino County Flood Control District." 12A.6 R9sronse Section 4.5.5, Biological Resources, Mitigation, Measure 1, is consistent with Table 3.2, DEIR pp. 3 -7. The total open space area within the Etiwanda North Specific Plan project area is 4,112 acres. Section 4.5.5, Biologica `,- Resources, Mitigation 2. shall be revis, %d for clarification bjr replacing the second sentence and is hereby incorporated int the Final EIR: "The riparian corridors include portion, of Henderson, Wardman, and Morse creeks upstream of their respective alluvial fans." 13A.7 8es,�onso Regan- ling open pace acreage, see Response 13A.6. Section 4..5.5, Bioingical Resources, Mitigation Measure 4,. • shall be revised to add the following and is hereby incorporated into the Final EIF,, "It should be acted that existing box culverts beneath W.,1son A °r4bnue at San Sevaine wash facilitate the mo.ement of wildlife. Box culverts of similar design or bri3ges shall be included in the design where public streets cross Etiwaida wa3h." The proximity of Wilson Avenue and human habitation to the wildlife movement corridor will not obstruct large animal movement. however, use of the corridor may decrease due to the proximity of these uses, 13A.8 R222-O Ss This condition is intended to be consistent with proposed conditiohs by ALOE and CDFG for permits for flood control improvements for Et Wanda Creek and San Sevaine b asins 4 and 5. Implementation of this condition shall be consistent with ACCE and CDFG permit conditions.. 13A.4 Rassonse acs Responses 13.3 and 13.6. Prepar&' ion of a Resources Management Plan is in process and will be circulated Zzr public review prior t-i incorporation into the City ,'s Etiwanda North Specific Plan. Section 4.5.Y, Biological Resources, Mitigation Measure 11. Regarding this item see responses to Letter 13B, Memo dated May 22, 1991, from Mr. Ruben V. Mantes. El 96 El 13A.10 Raip -snse Sectii�: 4.5.5, Biological Resources, Mitigation Measure 12, shall be rkvised to add the following and is hereby incorporated into the Final EIR as follows: "Fence desiqn shall kle to the standards and specifications of the `_?MF, the City, of Rancho Cucamonga, and the San Bernardino County Flood Control District." 13A.11 865201120 Consistent with Count,* and City policies, appli'6ants for development shall pay for all cost of development. Road improvement across proFarty owned by the San Bernardino County Flood Control Districf, shall be a condition of development and i follow normal County "and City procedures for acquisition and i standards for improvement. 13A.12 Response The size, boundaries,' and use of Subarea 8 is consistent with the County of San Bernardino's General Plan Land Use Hap. See Exhibit 4.1 -3 of the DEIR. 13A.13 R63201196 The size, boundaries, and use of Subarea 11 is consistent with the County of San Bernardino General Plan Land Use Map. See Exhibit 4.1 -3 of the DEIR. Also, approximately 39- acres have been defined by the west levee of the Sap. Sevr'ne wash and are designated as a habitat miti -action area as;,, required by ACOE 404 and California Fish and Game 1661,, permi'o�'iissued to the Caryn Con -any Conp-any for stream encroachment of San Sevaine, Wardman, and Hen6 ,irson creeks. Accordingly, ararciximately 39 acres have baT-r adder' to sub -area 11, San Sevaine bash. These designations have been incorporated into the City of Rancho Cucamonga's General Plan, Figure IV -2 and Table VI -1, attached. 13A.14 Easnons• Consistent with City Development Code, this district is intended to allow necessary flood .control facilities fax protection of_, public health, safety, and general welfare. - 6sooase, It should be noted that `ince the site is annexed, the County Gent l Plan should b4 cor' tstent. n� 13A.16 Response Exhibit 4.1 -2 ifs \':onsistent with San Bernardino County Flood control Facilities Planning Map, scale 1 inch = 2000 feet,; undated. Section 4.4.4, Hydialogy, Mitigation Measure 7, shall be added and is hereby incorporated inta the Final EIR: 117. Any proposal for reduction of aregional or sub- regional ground 'water recharge area within the project boundaries shall first be submitted to the Chino Basin "Water Master and to Cucamonga County Water District for review and comment." 13A.17 Response See Exhibit 4.1 -6, Open Space and Trails Plan. The '`Trails Plan is consistent with the County;,of San Bernard nolls Master Plan of Trails for the Front Line any,? Day Creek Trails. Also, please refer to the sar, Bernardino ' ''ounty Open Space Overlay- Maps; " i adopted June 1991. > Following adoption of the Specific.P�_an, additional trails within the Trails Plan may be proposed to the County ftor regional status consistent with County policy. For example, the County's General Plan 013n Space Element establishes goals epor regional trails in Section Cat -7, including: "Use lands already in public ownership or proposed for ID public acquisition, such as rights -of -way for flood control channels..." 13A.18 Refer to San Bernardino County Resource Overlay Map. Also refer to "Designation of Regionally Significant Construction Aggregate Resource Areas in the Claremont- Upland and San Bernardino Production Consumption Regi °?s," California Division of Mines and Geology, 3anuary 1387, to locate area D -3 (Day Greek Spreading Grounds, Deer Creek Spreading Grounds, and adjoining areas) and area 0-16 (Day CreeX wash port! - -,of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power utility corriddr.., T;.esa Designaticns have been ncorporated into the City of Rancho Cucamonga's General Plan, rigure IV -2 and Table IV -1, attached. 13A.19 Response Refer to Exhibit 3.3, Land Use Plan of the, DEIR. 13A.ZO Response See Responses 13A.3 and 13A.6. Ip qR - a 2 to 0 c iD V t� cr 1 Wz� IN 0 uj 0 4 ca 0 4) CC p a CV c cn n. u'¢ ul ar d c m a 2 to 0 c iD V t� cr U 0 0 ; ca 0 a CV c cn n. ar c m 99 tyatentre €,Aggregafe Resources' TABLE 1V » 1 POTENTIAL AGGREGATE RESOURCES, Sector Approx. Sizeiacre5j Aggrega..a Reserves City Gener ;t Plan land Usf A-4 460 " 1674 35% Open Space 30% Low Density Residential 10%1(ery Loin Density Reside itiat 2s% in County Foothill area A -7 118 210A 50% :Vx DensityResidentia! - 15O/6 High Density ReQdeittial. , 1S%Open$�xB 105k Low - Medium Derwity Resiaential C -1 75 101.5 15% Floor Control M. 6. Hillside Pesidetdial 35% Oper.Space C-2 35 n/a Fiord Control D -1 267 -va 116%, R,�s�-4ential 85% Flood Co.. ml D -3 13}x3 13.5 75% Fkod C%)ntrcl 2-W1 xisting i3a Proposed Residential - 1 welopment 0-16 220 n/a 70% Hillside Pesidentiat 306 Flood Coni'nll TOW 2605 439.1 Source: *Designation of R egionaHy Significant %:onstn lotion Aggregate Resource Areas in 111 e Claremont - Upland AnLZar. Bernardino Production Consumption Regions." California Division of Mines and Ge6ogy. Jarmary 1587. In Millions of short tons 3 Approximately 987 acres (380/6) of the total 2695 is planned for deveoment. rva in'armatien not avabble - General Ptasl: City of Rancho Cucamiang � In this contest the term'"drainagz area" refera to the creeks and their cributary sourc =s, including the hillside areas. 13A.21 Respoaee These paragraphs are consistent in that development is not proposed within open space areas. 13A.22 Response Please refer to Response 13A.17. 13A.23 Response Please note that trails are consistent with the County Regional Trail system and;or the City's community Trail system. Trails are the only recreational azenity grope -ad for flood control /open space use. 1.3A,24 Re900n9e Please refer to Response 13A.18. 13A.2S Response The City's policy is consistent with County General r`­ policy. It should be noted b.i,'e the use of interim desilt' g ;ins as an erosion control tei:�nniaue (Section 4.2) is not a tk protection measurp, althoug£) they are occasionally provided in conjunction with SUCK Measures. 13A.26 Zes- oniLe As voted, the Pan Bernardino County Flood Control District has primary responsibility for planing, A sign, and construction of regional and sub - regional i''i..:.;;jd control facilities. implementation of flood protec,.1)n facilities plans requires env.ronmental review t,-&d r CEQA and are .abject to ACOE and CDFG permit process. On urpo ,,e of the Etiwanda North Resource Management Plar is to coordi -ate mitigation for necessary loss of wildlife habitat and to preserve she maximum feasible amount of wildlife habitat. Regarding need for Alluvial Fan Scrub Habitat preservation, please refer ­u Respznasez 7.5 and 7.9, Letter Z, Califora' a Department of ,?ish ands Gaiue, taA.27 R @sII, P -ad control activ;.1_ _ Resource Conservatiol Land Use areas will be restrictek._ , ordaace with the terms of the adopted Resource Management Plar; and 1603/404 permit requirewtnts. A successful Resource Management Plan will require the cooperation of tha Flood CoWzrol District. Nitigation Measure 27 shall be added to Section 4.3.5, Biological Resource, and is hereby incorporated into the Final EIR as follows: "T.ha City shall consult with the San Bernardino County Flood Contrel District prior to adoption of the Etiwanda No=th [resource Management Plan.' 13F .7,i, Iiese2nse Please refer t,, Response 1;3A.18. 13A.29 RAVanSI -) As stated on page 4.4 -13 of the DEIR, "The change of land %se from open space into reside -ntial and commercial dw.- elonment would increase the percentage of impervious cover present and lead to greater volu:aL, if stormw,,ter runoff being generated foe a given rainstorm." Mitigation mea,ures are presented in Section 4.4 of the DEIR tc mitigate -the potential for flooding impacts. It should be noted that this paragraph goes on to referee7e planning for flood control in the project area. Also, se- the Bibliography from the Etiwanda /San Sevaine Area Master Plan of Drainage, tBSI, August 1989). Also, it shoalc be noted that, per the SBCFCD ,1s current Master Plan, Regional Spreading Grounds a?-c, compatible wit:: art_ open space designation. Regarding the first ser ence on page 4.4 -1: Reference is to.the ^.ity's Master Plan of St rm Drains (BSI, August 1989) which has incorporated Vie County's Master Plan for the Eti:randa /San Sevaine area 1983 (see aforementione:: 3SI, Bibliography, attached). 13At31 Fe_ � -1w Exhibit 4.4 -2 has been reproduced from Fig-re 1 -3 of the "City of Rancho Cucamonga. Etiwanda Ares Master Plan of Dr,tnage" (BSI, 139). All regional mainline facilities shown on L`.iat exhibit were drawn from the "Day, 2tiwanda and San Sevaine Creeks Syst,_,m Drainage Plan" (Mann, 1983), with the secondary regional fa ilities added cr, the basis of more recent reports (BSI Abliography attached.) The only debris basins indicated in the 1983 study were located on Day Creek %nd Etiwanda Creek, with an alternative on San.Sevai.ne Creek. LSee attached map, Mann 1983.) If the Flood Con }rol District adopts studies to justify additional faciliti,:j, tY,4n this report will be amended acccrdingly. All regional Facilities and connections thereto will require approvzl by the San Bernardino County Flood Contrcl District. Please reefer to Response 13A.5. fh2 The only debris basins indicated' in the County's 1983 master plan, were located on Day Creek and Etiwanda Creek, with an alternative on San- Sevaine Creek. 13A.32 Response It should also be noted that most of the facilities referer,;!ed in this comment are under construction and have not been accepted as complete by the City. Also, see Exhibit 4.1 -2, Existing Conditions and Uses. 13.A33 Response All volume figures provided in the text include an author and ' date reference. mitigation Measure 7 shall be added to-Section 4.4, and is hereby incorporated into the Draft EIR as follows: r' 117. Regional drainage faci3ities shall be designed to the satisfa^tion of thr San Bernardino County Flood Contr.: District. used on hydrological and hydrologic; tudies for the specific pr-ject. The 1986 San Bernardino County Hydrology Manual or its update at the time of development shall be used." 13A.34 Response Please refer to Response 13A.33. 13A.35 �2esDOnsd, Please refer to Response '.3A.33. 13A.36 Response The paragraph referenced does not exclude a debris basin. Please refer to Response 13A. ?I. It should be noted that ACaE and CDFG 404/1601 -3 permits will be r ^,duired. The purpose of establisning Reso,,rce Conservation Areas for the Specific Plan to be managed in accordance witty. a Res�.lrce Managemer.,t Plan is to avoid :loss of habitat w}iich occurs through piecemeal "applications for 404/3601. 3 permits. The rcrwit issue for rlood control facilities On Wardman Creek did not include concigc,ration of an upstream debris basin. 13A.37 Aeaponss Please refer to Responses 13A.31 and 13A.33. 13A.38 R®gponpe Please refer to Response 13A.31. 13 }x,.39 �7sp ®ns• Please refer to Response 13k.5. rna 13A.40 Res�onsQ „ , Refer to Responses r13A.5 and 13A.33. The diversion of excess flows from Etiwanda Creek to San Sevaine.Creek is one of several alternatives under study, not a,recommendation. 13A.41 Response' I( Please refer to Response 13A.33. �I 13A.-52 Response h , Please refer to Response 13A.11. \\� 13A.43 Response \� Please refer to Responses 13A.5 and 13A.40. .f 13A.44 Response Please refer to Responses 13A.1, 13A.3 13A.6. SUMMARY. Please refer to Responses 13A.1, 13A.3, and 13A.6. Also, as stated in;the responses above, the San Bernardino County Flood Control Diilitract has the primary , responsibility for regional and sub- regional flood control tacilities..,for the:= project .area. i k -- �__ . ^papa• - .�•_ -.t y ;�a- - - , �,j. _._ }`_? �- -rte•, c =sa -_� �_,�: •� � , o �•..ay_` _- apt_ i - 1 �� � ' JL- ul :V ]i ' r �- L�1 ��',•~.•� v. '�` •`FrS" i. �.F-� _\ems �`s•.•i- - .. db\ i _ - .M1s t.. 1 /'•_i'. • _ 1'r fir. ` y. ,4 Z v, \ �® ���+� R�,:�a -.-. �.O'%. �l'�i � � r�..c _ • S F ..,,cx'�. w In y�'i - ( a l tA�a`Ir r .(c atr a�_Qa z en fj 1,�...,,�ty;�_.5 '4.: •w'�{�•St�... -, +•� F JW 1� V: m._n.... Ul rv1 t t~l1Nz `4 it = •3 °°e \ X z a ZR `s'r ,2> `•.+a -- �. •,' ....... _ ..... \ i \ 7 ` �..t ,,., "• ,� R�z �'`7 2 ml.. ID W N C9 3 I tj K. TNT es6• _ _ 1 .� ''' � -.i%. •� ' ` of � jr' •! � + �.- a..+'+�ji ; �.1:� ._� . ?,_•_ 1 _ .. � o .� u is L ° y «�r13 "NA Sys __ VIII. BIBLIOGRAPHY AND REFERENCES 1. Bill Mann & Associates, Day. Etiwanda & San Sgyaine CCeeks System Drainage Plan, March 1993 UNA 2. Engineering- Science in 'Association with Bill Mann & Associates, Loan _Anplicatiun Report. Pr000 -ed San Sevaine Creek Water Pro;tC , February 1P87 3. Bill Mann & Associates, Funding Meehan fur the Day. Etiwanja and San_ Sevaine_ -Creek _System Dr.az,.�iacLe Plan, March 1983 4. City of Rancho C.ucamonc ,. Et,iw nda Area Draina .qr-_"LlaLn and Development Policies, Revised March 25, 1987 S. Dill Mann 5 Associates, 2::ti.ganda rez; Drainage Analysis, Public and Devslopiaent Issues, February 7, 1985 Manual, 6. County oZ San Bernardino, hydrology Augusi "19B6 7 City of Rancho Cucamonga, GeneKaj Plan for the CS. .y of Rancho Cucamonga, Fdbruary 17, 1981 S. City of Rancho Cucamonga, Etiwanda Specifies P11a, July 1983 9. City of Rancho Cucamonga, industrial Ar t,Specific Plan for the City of Rancho Cucamonga (3eSjisedj, September 17, 1986 10. Williamson and Schmid Consulting Ciiiii Engineers and Land Surveyors, Master Plan of Dra'na e. Etiw:nda -West Valley Foothill Area, September 9, 198 ` 11. Bill Mann & Associates and Fiala & Foreman,'Xnc., F?ydrolaoic Anal, sis and Modeling` of the San Sevaine Creek Wa`ershed, San Rernardina Comfy, Revised January 19E7 12. Bill Mann & Associates, Preliminary Drainage P-nd 'Flood Control Facilities ,tudv Rende=-- Morse and San Sevaine Canyons, Revised January 1981 13. Williax+son and Schmid Consulting Civil Engineers and Lana Surveyors, East rtiaanda Creek Flood Tim acts. Proposed nt_ropolitar Water Distr*cts Power Plant Site, DecpV114r 7, 1987 = ` BSB 1989 14. Williamson and Sohn, id, Consulting Civil Eng.:rieers and Lard - surveyors, Victoria Basin Design Analysis, August 6, 1987, 15. Williamson end. Schmid, Consulting Civil Engineers and Land `? Surveytro, S1113plemental Report. yi -to ria Basin esi n Anal ?,is, Aug' <st 26, 1987 16. Los P .,ngeles County Flood Control Distr:;,ct, Design Manual, ;} Hydraulic, 1982 . wu 1 11"TEROFFI CE MEMO May 22, 1991 387 -2620 DATE i� L.Gmd- 6. PHONE 10BFN V. InNI S FROM Day Creek Project M3nagsr TO LE�+1IS S. NEEB, P.E. Etiwanda`San Seer -isne Project Manager LETTER 13B toss tlt�ib j�f_ ss7yt������� County of San Bernardino _. rile No. 2(W)-30 SUBJECT RirSTW or EM - =W M. PIRM SnFCIFIC Pul; 12 1267 000 Re. I,$$ The fol.lawing are my cc*mnts relative to referenced report. Page s - 19 - Kitiaation Measures Second parag>alti refers to,.:restoring flood flows to Day Creek wash and spceading grounds sufficient to mavitain alltrrial fan scrub habitat. TYnis statement is ambiguous, as there is no way to restore the flood f .,as to the old wash. It no la'a7er exists since we constructed the debris dam, and concrete Channel dd�isfse'am. We would have to remove the dam and channel improvements w,tich is inconceivable and totally i--responsible. Nobody a their right mind who understanas their function and purr-ase in providing regional flood protection would even entertain such a proposal. The second part of the paragraph dealing c.ith the spreading grounds Afth stsaVests removal of the recently constructed inter=nnecti,n3 side basins go and their downstream levee embankments. These basins ware eot>.structed for the express purpose of meetir^r the Btaeau of Feclamatiaz loan application criteria for water _^oration as well as to provide a measure of flood protection for the lower spreading grounds area. This is I4cesSary in order to obtain the rrau Zone designation in the heading grounds and 'NO' zone designation below the old reception levee where development is note widespread. This has been coordinated and plan-nd with the City staff for several years. tqe ar+=, presencly working with FEMN to acamplish this goal. Pmov.6ng the basins would oomplet:ely stop our effort a;Yl introduce ,,n er -Irely ry-v sat of ci=mstances. Zhis would surely not be in the city's best Umere is in teens of reducing the flood risk designation iagosed by FEM over that area. T he very LSILM, for the 200 -acre open space easement, provided by the :lay _reek Prc;ect, was to mitigate impacts introduced by the project construction ircluding the debris dam, channel works and spreading rgxou 4s basins. Ali responsible re4glat cry agencies blessed the project and 3 psued the necessary permits for us — a=treo--t the facilities. The PAR writes are now prq=irg m tig►.tion which Includes elimination of the constructed Day -- a improvea n }s which have already .' +rit ic?at�i their own =pacts. Tius would seen totzll r inconsiunt with the ,ent=e environmental rev± ez v- -=ess, not to mt'ntion the time, effort and dollars spent to construct the improvements .tnd benefits derived. therefrom. %A ". i. l _ewis S. Neeb, P.E. i+Fiy 22, 1991 Page 2 In my opi.iion, this entire proposes mitigation soma•' ;,o should be removed from ?' fictthe reprt, u=lrlux the refs erces to a�di of tt e f impmve+w--its On pages 4.5 -2 and 7.6. "-=ft for the cWorhwzity to review. RVM:cl i t : Shintu Hose, City of Ranch] C.-mmanga /JAS/Peadinq File 7 ti [i s, LETTER 13B: MEMO FROM ZWBEN V. MONTES 'MAY 22, 1441. A' Section 4.5. .1 status: "Applicants for ,,az�­velopment shall nv stAc *ate the t•ea; bility of r€atoring\ flood flows to Day Creek *cash and spreading grounds sufficient to='-'maintain alluvial fan scrub habitat. If impZ;�m�ntedI npplicantci for development may use Day Creek., wash as_a mitigation area for the loss of alluvial fan scrub habitat to developed parcels within the project area." (Emphasis added.) Pease refer to Draft EIR text page 4.5 -2, last paragraph, for discussion. In particular note. "Portions of this wash may be restorable to natural floodplain conditid4,s through modification of existing flood control structktres, including, but not limited to, imi fication of' the east -west diversion dike bisectinu _ the 200- g9L,'s Dav Cre ^,;c water 7oroiect miticratior. aea. (Emphasis added.), The east -west diversion dike is designed t.-3-provide controlled flood flows to Day Creek Spreading Grounds for groundwater f recharge purposes. A feasibility study should determine the velocity of flow needed to maintain .11uvial fa:n scrub habitat AWL and the feasibility of increasing controlled floos1, flows to IF provide such velocities. Removal of Day Creek debris basin,, or the cgfkc ete box channelizatiun of Day creek Gash fray: th€ Gay Creek dWaris basin to the Victoria date,'lon basin has not been considered for inclusion in such a it 'sibil,ity study. however, the feasibility of dinterting controll, .i flood flows from the channel tc. Day ,the Creek Spreading grour.as'�nuld be part of the study. As stated by Mr. Mantes the 300 acre set asidK was to mAtigate impacts cr the D8y Cr'�k flood control project. According to Mike Giusti, California Department .,of Fish and 'Game (personal - com muni .ati.on) ; the 200 acre mitigation area in Day Creek -wash only mitigated the loss of alluvial fan scrub habitat directly affected by construction of the debris dam and co.crete channel. A so,•Mr. Giusti stated that CDPG has not yE: reviewed the 200 acre mitigation area for csmpiiarce with 1603 permit conditions. Ian - LETTER i3C INTEROFFICE MEMO) pass DATE PHONE FROM June 5, 1991 387-2619 a y G. A. KUHLMAt1 Traffic Division /lily TO Covwy of Su Baaudiao KEN 'A MILLER, P.Ei Director, Transportation /Flood Control File 2(CO) -36 SUBJECT COMMEWS ON ENSP DRAFT SIR FOR CITY OF P�WcHO CUCAMONGA Traffic Portion by Austin /Foust Associates 1. Onsite Los is "C" (ave"ge), -Iffsite Los is IV, on Links, not intersections. 2. "Key" future arterials are Wilson/ vintage & Banyan ACROSS Day Cree- Channel. I 3. Post 2010 traffic dist,,ibution are similar to University /Crest cumulative. 4. "Nexus" apportionments @ $222.8 million for City, $18.2 millions for.ENSP. AARL Nothing ix report is a surprise nor daps it vary 'greatly ram the Draft County EIR traffic portion. Planning Uepartment City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Sox 867 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Attn: L.J. Henderson, AICP LETTER 14 City of Fontana C A L I F Q R N I A June 25, 1991 Subject: Etiwanda North Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report, SCH 1189012314 Dear Mr. Henderson: Thank you for the opportunity to review the Etiwanda ;Yorth Specific Plan Environmental Ialp3ct Report. The proposed project area is located,.. along the City of Fontana's northwest boundary. The City of Fontana has concerns reprding continued cumulative impacts to the transportationn, zyster and we "commend that the City of Cucamonga continuLit to take the lead ie'`,ecuring developer's participation in fund gig improvements to mitigate project impacts. Development of this project area needs to add ^ess the Congestion Management Plan and particularly its impacts to intarchang :s -,long the I -15 and Route 30 frieways. City of Fontana staff .- .quests an opportunity to review and comment on the CNP traffic analysis when available. If you have any questions regarding Fontana's concerns, please contact Hr. Darin 6rossi, Associate T *anspo 3tion Planner at (714) 350 -6610. SincerelyVVI G -1 Director DJM: cc: Paul Balback, Deputy Plannilyg Manager Clyde Sweet, Acting Jepvty Public Works Dirsetor/Traffic engineer Darin 6rossi, Associate Transportation Planner 8353 SIERRA AVENUE(PO.BOX518) a FONTANA.CA6fVWMAS XU-1518 0 Q •9)3S0• -80G VSTEa CITY- KAMLOOK B.C. CANADA /ia 0701_02 o SEMETBER 113 1991 P, C. AGENDA { 8 of 15 � $'ETTER 14! CITY OF F0KTANA 1 June 25, 1991 Please refer to Section 4.9 *4, Air Quality, Mitigation Measure 2, N which requires the establishment of a transportation management association to prepare Transportation Demand Management and Transportation Systems Management plans. also, a special traffic study is underway, in which 'Fontana is not participating, to determine the effects upon Rancho Cucamonga streets, of changes - in Route 15 interchange locations in the Route 15 /Route 30 area. The interchange relocation is requested by Fontana. Further, Traffic Impact Analysis will be required of Specific Plan developments as they ,occur, under the Congestion Management Plan scheduled to be adopted by the city before the end of 1991. Thesd analyses will address impacts to Fontana and other adjacent areas. It should be noted; that Rancho Cucamonga is proposing the Etiwanda Norm specific plan which reduces the impact of development in the area with respect to the existing and other proposed plans. Through Transportation Develornent Zees and developer improvem_nts, impacts will be mitigated 4RZ development occurs. While the City of Rancho Cucamonga is supporti4 . rndPnctions of density in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan area, as well throughout the City, the City of Fontana. is u"piptirting high density development in the vicinity of the Roue 30 Freeway. several examples demonstrate the City of Fontana trend: Hunter's Ridge Specific Flan: Approved, plan norr -h of Route 30 and west of I -15 for 2,121 dwelling units on 359 acres, plus 5.5 acres of neighborhood commercial, as well as, park and school sites, which will generate an estimated 5,529 population (Hunter Is Ridgp; generation factor of 2.6 persons per household.) Westend (village of Heritacte` Specific Plan: Approved plan south of Route 30 for 3,429 dwelling units on 887 acres, plus 36 acres of commercial, 111 acres of office, and 443 acres of business park, as well as park and school sites, which will generate an estimated 8,447 population. Westgate Specific Plan: Application for development immediately south of Route 30 and east of I -YS, for 1660 dwelling units on 327 acres, plus 16 acres of commercial, 118 acres of business ' ,jz,rk, 15 acres of office and 209 acres of mixed use as Well as park and school sites, which will generate an estimated 4,316 population. Ild. ll California Landings Boegific Plan: Application for ! development immediately south of Route 30 for .31 dwelling units on 164 acres, 33,�acres of commercial, as well as a park site, which wit1 generate an estipateo., 2,420 population. The above residential, commercial, office, and light indu: 'yt; uses will have a significant impact on Route 30 and on the "' of traffic in Rancho Cucamonga which will be investigated furt br in pending environmental anal psis for the Westgate and ,Califs, • La Landings proposals. Ash 1 r i 4; Chaffer CoTege LETTER 15 1 I Department of Biolos Ct'ry OF PANC'40 COCa "'nowwA . . V'; - >. jUi�N d re. Environmental Impact Report and Assessment, Specific P1,a 90 -01 and General Plan Amendment W% -03B. Gentlemen; I would like to support the approval of the proposals. They represent a balanced approach to the problems of development and the pressing used to I proserve open space. There are three items that I would like, to reinforce specifically_ a. The Peat Bog in Day Canyon is the last of its kind in the region. It is an extremely fragile natural resource of the greatast scientific value to the community. The provisions that are suggested fr- ,Its long -term preservation are appropriate, responsible ones. b. The ex^lusion of roadways into Day Canyon is an 7�°ortant contribution to maintaining its pristine ecological status. Motor va ,le access to all the other large canyons in the region offer-abundant, and'�,eady access to the` mountains for our citizens. One roadleas canyon will provide yet another form for the many uses that vur wild lands can offer. I heard a recent proposal to establish a camp round in Day Canyon above the riparian woodland. Such r project would utterly destroy the peculiar charm that this canyon can offer: In the strongest terms possible I urge you to oppose such a project. c. There are several high level conversations presently underway ii, California attempting to find ways to protect the last vestiges of Coastal Sage Scrub communities in Sov,.hern California. Bndangered species of animals that inhabit this plant community continue to dwindle in spite of their protected status. The California,Gnatoatc`rwr is a conspicuous example. It is apparent that if we intend to protect such species it will be necessary to protect eubstantiai tracts of their only habitat. The entire Etiwsnda North project lies within tha Coastal Sage Scrub cc=mity. The specific plan ba£or, you makes efforts to Waaerve native plant communities in a way that recognizes the need to conserve intact systems. Sincerely. James dear Lauriers,'Professor 20 Juns 1991. JOk 5885 Haven Avenue. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701 -3002 714/941-2354.941-2355 LETTER 15: CHAFFEY COLLEGE DEPARTMENT 07 BIOLOGY June ?gyp, 1991. 15.1 Resaanse Comment noted that tho Peat Bog in Day Canyon is the last of its kind in the region rn-d that provisions for preservation must be implemented. Please refer to Se^tion 4.5. Mitigation,Measure is of the DEIR. Also, see .Letter 7, Response 5 "and Response 17.3, Letter 17, Landmark Land Company. 15.2 Response i; Please refer to Letter 91 ResponE= 4. 15.3 P&APonse Please refer to Letter 9, Response 4. 15.4 Response Please refer to Letter 7,,,Response S. AMh fw I i i Afth I I I C I 0®-PLAN DESIGN GROUP Plamm�4�Gpdsc�Fe in:hnttmrc June 26, 1991 Mr. L gHenri -rson, Senior Planner CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 10500 Civic Center Drive P O Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 RE: Response to City Etiwanda North Specific PIP, /EIR Job No.: N S 876.5 Dear Larry: As you are aware, Land Plan Design Group is preparing the Etiwanda Nodh Specific Plan within the County of San Bernardino. Ths comments that follow are prepared from nur perspective as 16-t land planners familiar with the area. They are intended to be profession 'Sservations, not political statements. The EIR has admirable goals but is inaccurate in many of its statements, particularly as related to land use, biological resources, par''" rnd open space uses. It also does not address fiscal impacts 16.2 which, when completed, could prove that the proposed development would be fiscally unsound and unworkable. The City is currently revising its General Plan for this Specific. Plan. The revisions to the General � 16•3 Plan -trust justify the proposed changes as well as the financial effects of the change. The City has indicated it would like to annex the property. As you ate aware a majority of landowners within Etiwanda North must vote in favor ofan annexation in order for the annexation to occur. The City Staff report, which became available only last week includes many proposed 16• k changes to the draft Specific Plan. Changes to land use designations within multiple ownerships, among other important areas of the plan are being recommended. If the City is desirous of an annexation, it would be appropriate to permit adequ to time for the iandowners(voters to become involved in a discussion of these changes. The comments that follow have been organized in the same frrmat as Table i - 1, page I - 5 of the summary text within the EIR. LAND tiSF The propped plan would allow for the development of 3613 dwelling units on 6814 acres. This converts to an overali gross density of approximately one -half dwelling unit per acre, by far the 6' 14751 Pty Onve, Suite A. Tustin. Cahtomia 92680 • (714) 832.4300 • FAX: (714) 832 -2025 Mr. Larry Henderson Job No.: NES 876.5 qV June 26, 1991 'Page 2 lowest density ot'gny largeproject currently approved or under consideration by the City. Even with this low density, the EIR proposes preservation a„3l_s acquisition of 4112 acres or nearly 60% of the total land area within the project boundaries. While it is a laudable goal to try to obtain and preserve open space for the City, it cannot be accomplished without some mechanism for 16.5 public acquisition of the large parcels of privately ,wried ptoperty within the preservation areas. It cannot }oe accomplished simply through the imposition of conditions of approval which require mitigation far in excess of the impacts of development. Preservation of-O en Space: The EIR attempts to justify the proposed "preservation° of 4112 acres of land on two grounds: (1) as mitigation for the claimed loss of "open space" and (21 as ts•e mitigation for the depletion of regional w:idlife and habitats. Neither of these two asserted impacts justifies the proposed requirement thatoearly 60% of the total land area in the Specific Fran be preserved. First, the EIR erroneously classifies all of the undeveloped property within the Specific Plan as "open space," despite its designation a-, residential on the City's General Pian. Under Section 6SS60 of the California Government Code, "open space land" is defined excluslveiv as an unimproved parcel which is "devoted to an open -space use as defined in this section, ggd which is 16.7 4,c igna edt on a local, regional or state open -space plant" as open space for one of four limited purposes. In this mw, the City and County General Plans have both shown most of the property within the Specific Plan as suitable a.d intended for residential development for more than 10 Afahk years. It is improper to identify the entire area as an "existing open space land use" for the purpose of evaluating project impacts. Second, the EIR both overstates the impacts of the residential development and proposes to require grossly excessive mitigations. For instance, the EIR states that it is necessacy to "preserve in perpetuity 4112 acres in Day Creek and San Sevaine" as mitigation for development of the residential areas. The EIR further statestha° "development regulations that preclude development in San Sevaine, Edwanda and Day Creek, and other open space areas shsll be adopted." As noted 16- e above, the bulk of the proposed residential development will not occur in areas which meet the statutory definition of "open space land." Further, there is no factual basis for requiring the developer of land designated as residential to acquire or otherwise provide for the "perpetual" preservation of more than 1412 tim" the area proposed to be developed. This requirement is obviously nothing more than a predetermined "toil" which the City intends to impose on future residential development, regardless of the actual environmental impact or any "nexus" to the proposed condition of approval. In addition, the City fails to identify the "other open space areas" which are proposed for I 16 4 preservation or to consider an equitable financing mechanism for acquisition of privately owned property such as San Sevaine Creek or those portions of Day and Edwanda Creeks which the San Bernardino County Flood Control District may deem eligible for development. Hillside Residential', Lind Use; The Specific Plan identifies a combim ion Hillside Residential- HR (up to 2 dwelling units per acre) and Hillside Residential Estate - HRE (up to t &k lling unit Jr'-1O per acre) land useti above the LADWP right -of -way corridor. The current City Staff report recommends that the HR land uses be changed to HRE uses east of Etwanda Creek, stating this is "closer to the designation of the County General Plan." I19 Mr. Zany Henderson Job No.: NES 876.5 June 26, 19:1 Pap. 3 It is reasonable to consider an allowance of 1 dweiliag unit per gross acre for these areas. However, it is incorrect to state that this is "closer to the ... County General Plan." The County General Plan permits 1 unit per acre over the entire site, the City proposal is based upon "net buildable acres" and would generally reduce the allowable dwellings far below the County, by 16-to 59% or more. If the revised designation by staff is accepted and densities are futtherreduced, will the City revise the EIR and various technical studies and mitigations to reflect reductions in traffic and other related impacts both on and off- -site? �v lopmen West of Dav Creek Wash Levee: The staff report recommends elimination of'' residential use west of the Day Creek levee. Should this change occur, a reduction of 244 dwelling . 6 ( units would result to the Specific Plan and in -turn a reduction in traffic and other related impacts on and off -site. This would impact the mitigations proposed throughout the Specific Plan and EIR. Thee correcticps should be made prior to City Council review and approval. Hillside Development Drdinance: In previous correspondence we have identified internal conflicts within the City of Rancho Cucamonga hillside Development Ordinance which render it t 6 t2 incapable of being properly implemented. The propm ed Land Una mitigation which incorporates the Hillside Development Ordhwnce is therefore subject to this objection. Quimby ggt geauirements: The project will be "required" to provide a total of 62 acres of park land or 5 acres per 1000 population. The City currently requires 3 acres of park per 1000 residents in accordance with the Quimby Act. City Staff has proposed a "recalculated" requirement of 4.69 16:13 scres per 1000 population based on a "new" City study. We have received no documentation in support of the higher requirement,' despite numerous requests, City Staff has also failed to indicate whether the higher requirement will be adopted by the City Council as a City -wide rn- quirement. Also, if the total dwelling units is reduced based on staffs recommendations on the Hillside areas and areas west of Day Creek Ievee, the total park acres requirement should be revised. COMMERCIAL L&M JUSE TOCeU045, With regard to the City a location of commercial uses at the intersection of Route 30 and Day Creek t4- Blvd., the City has previously rejected a similar proposal at Milliken Avenue and Route 30. On the grounds of access from Milliken and inconsistency with the City General Plan. This proposal would appear to have many of the same problems. Also, the proposed location of the commercial areas along the freeway instead of internal to the corttcnunity seems to go against a City policy of creating " Hubs" at major city , intersections. The 16-13 location of the commercial site at Summit/Banyan, acrow from the park and school sites seems to be more consistent with the Hub concept. This Hub site also would reduce, rather than encourage, traffic through Vintage Drive within the Vintage Highlands community. A second commercial site is shown on Wilson Avenue, along Wardman Bullock Road (on Flood Control District Property). This location seems to be in conflict with City Policy for minimum t6 spacing between commercial centers as noted in the Etiwanda Specific Plan (Section 3.52 and . 3.53.100). The Etiwanda Specific Plant currently identifies acommercial site only one half mile from this site. /? n Mr. Larry Henderson Job No.: NES 876.5 June 26, 091 Page4 EOL�STl�A t OVE T AV T�TC7 M. Equestrian Isssues The land uft section also indicates the project falls within the City's equestrian overlay district. The mitigation for lets less that 20,000 square feet requites landowneWdevelopers contribute to "a minimum 25 acre equestrian site and equestrian boarding facilities". It is our understanding that the equestrian overlay district is identified within current City boundaries and does not extend to 15.7 the project area. However, even if the overlay area ►aid cover the project area, it would be inequitable to require this project aloe c participate in rive 25 acre facilit3. Other areas such as the Etiwanda Specific Plan south of the project have equestrian overlay designations with lots less than 20,000 square feet, yet are not required to contribute to this facility. If the City is requi•ing a 25 acre equestrian facility, it must prepare an equitable solution City - wide. BIOLOGIC.AT MOURCES In addition to the general requirement that 4112 acres of the Specific Plan be preserved "in perpetuity," the EIR sp= cifically identifies approximately 2972 acres of mitigation w. ch must be provided by tM "applicants for development." AMk The following is a summary of mitigation and associated acres that are required to be fulfilled by Jp the 'applicants for development ". REQUIRED /6.18 ITPE$ �.CRES 1. "Preserve mountainous open space within the San Bernardino 915 National Forest (includes 365 acres in upper _DAy Creek and 239 acres in upper Edwanda Canyon." 2. ..."Preserve the steep slopes, chaparral, ripariae corridors, and ±750* wildlife habitat in the hillsides adjoining the National Forest ". ("The toad acres are not identified in the E1R, out estimate is ±750 acres) 3. ..."Preserve 191 utter of Natural Open Space, riparian corridor3, 191 and wildlife habit within San Sevaine Wash ". 4. .. "Preserve 270 acres of Natural Open Space, riparian corridors, 270 and wildlife habitat within Edwanda Wash, north of Wiles". S. .„ "Preserve Natural Open Space, walnut woodland, riparian 6 corridors and wildlife hablut below Wilson (100' width minimum) to facilitate the movement ofsmall mammaSs. (Note: Ibis is an off. site requirement) ". lad Mr. LarryllenC-rson Job No.: NES 876.5 June 26, 1991 Page 5 6. "Preserve 700 acres of natural open space and wildlife habitat in 700 Day Creek Wash and spreading grounds, including the 200 acres set aside as a mitigation area for the Day Creek Water Fmoject ". 7. ..."Retain 140 acres of riparian habitat as undeveloped and shall f6 s restore 3 acres of riparian habitat on the site. Total Acres 2,972 11 The MR attempts to justify this large amounts of mitigation by claiming that the project will (a) remove 2500 acres ;f 'natural open spare," diminish on -site wildlife density and diversity, fragment the remaining habitats and interrupt wildlife habitats on the project site; (b) remove 1649 approximately 1900 acres of alluvial fan scrub in Etiwanda, Dry Creak and Sa "-.vain flood plains; and (c) cause the loss of 3 acres of riparian woodland. All of these impacL a overstated in the EIR and the proposed mitigation fear exceeds any "nexus - based" requirements. - ral Omen Seace" Removal: As noted above, the Edwanda. North Development does not meet the statutory definition of `open space land" and is not fc- identified on the City or County General Plans. It is self- evident that all first -time development converts'4ndeveloped lmd to a /b•z- developed condition. This does not constitute a " loss of open space" risen it is consistent with the City's existing Genera, Plan. We also note that the Citj has never H,mviousiy required mitigation from any other project on the basis of open spate displacement. Is the City intending to require mitigation of all land converted from undeveloped to developed condition City -wide? Alluvial Fan Scrub It is erroneous to attribute the loss of 1900 acres of alluvial fan scrub to this deoject. demonstrably result oaf the of a alluvial Warub within the Efwanda North Specific plan are 16 2 losses within the re Creek Watershed or � , which "emadymitigated for all habitat Day approximately 2500 Acres within the pmject boundaries. This mitigation was found to be adequate through the CEQA review process for the entire Day Creek System. Similar to Day Creek, the Edwanda Creek project is responsible'frr most of the remaining impacts on alluvial fan acmb habitat due to its concentration of flood flaws away from areas previously sebject to flooding &ad into levees and channels. Even 2dd mt the Edwanda North Specific Plan, 1 16-22 impacts on the improvements arc required to protect existing hrising within downstream flood areas within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. It Is unlawful to require new development to mitigate for impacts caused by a flood control program larger- designed to protect existing residents. The EIR lists a total of 3 acres of imps` -ted riparian habitat. It nonetheless proposes that the applicants jg1 restore the impacted acres wd "retain 140 acres of riparian habitat." If the habitat is 16 3 restored, there is no passible justification for requiring a permanent set -aside of an area nearly 50 times as large for additional "mitigation " ».2 Mr. Larry Henderson AdIkk Job No.: NES 876.5 June 26, 1991 ftge 6 The City Traffic Model has been a useful tool to evaluate the City -wide traffic needs and mitigations. It should be nosed the impacts created by Etiwanda North contribute a small fraction of the off -site impacts to the City circulation system. Tlr^ statement that "implementation of mitigation measures world =Wgate project - specific and the projed's contribution to traffic impacts to a level less than signifacar s except at Day CtecluRnsseeline, Milliken /Foothill,'- Rochester/Foothin 16-24- and Dry. Creek/Foothill ", should be clarified to indicate that the Etiwanda North incremental addition to the total traVc of each intersection is generally 2% to 3%. If the City reduces the total project dwelling units as mcommended in the Staff report this number would be lest. AM Q ALITY The mitigation states that "future applicants for development shall establish a Tpansportat -on Management Association (TMA) to coordinate and Implement a rant -<,'�t »ion casaagement 16.2Y program to to a ---miploree vehicle trips ". The controlling entity for tMi tfort in the County h SANBAG. Does this condition match this controlling ageneys requirements? Another condition requites resldential units "not be comm:cted within 600 feet of the opc,ations of the Day Creek Sand do Gravel Mine..." The Gravel Mine is mot shown in the City lar"J use plan 16-26 and has not bean discussed elsewhere in the EiR - i.e., traffic section, etc. How is this issue being addressed througvout theEIR? NDISE The mitigation measures for proposed projects seems highly unusual compared to standards applied to current and proposed City projects. For example, the mitigation measure requires /6.2 7 perimeter wills varying 14W to 178' feat from the centerline of Willson Avenue between Milliken and Cherry Avenue. In effect, this creates a right -of -way area of 28W to 356, about 4 times the standard 80' to 100' righ.- of -wsy? Is the City planning this same approach City -wide? As mitigation for impacts on solid waste, the EIR states that "the applicants for development shall implement a sepa.^ation and recycling program to decrease the amount of potential generation of solid waste." It might be appropriate to require W1 new development, including the Etiwanda /6 2 North Specific Plan, to ap rticipate. through funding and possible one -time construction requirements, in a public waste- separation and recycling p;ogtam. It is wholly inappropriate to require a group of individual private property owners to establish, at their own expense, a solid waste reduction program without any assurances that the City will cooperate or even make it possible to implement. Without the participation of the City and other projects, it would be impossible for the Etiwanda North Specific Plan to take advantage of the economies cf scale Aft available to a public solid waste management program or to ensure the effectiveness of the IV progrma. Mr. Larry Henderson Job No.: IdES 876.5 June 26, 1991 Page Z I appreciate the opportunity to comment on the project. Please feet free to call should I be wile to answer any questions you miy have• Very truly yours. Jess Fiatx�s I aPrincipal cc: Joe DiIorio conr cbron i � a,t LETTER 16: LAND PLAN DESIGN GROUP June 26, 1991 16.1 Res Ouse Comment noted that Land Plan Design Group has prepared an Etiwanda North Specific Plan application for the Consortium of Etiwanda North Landowners and submitted the aforementioned plan to the County of San Bernardino for processing. It should also b- noted that Land Plan Design Group provided the original conceptual design for the City's Etiwanda North Specific Plan. 16.2 Response Regarding fiscal impacts, per, Section 15131 of the Public Resources Code, economic and social impacts shall not be treated as significant effects on the environment. 16.3 Response Changes are proposed to the General Plan, most of which provide a, level of technical detail which was not possible prior to he s'.udies which support the Etiwanda North Specific Plan and EIR. Changes are also recommended to the L,;,wid Use Map of the Specific Plan which will be consistent with the policies, goals and objectives stated in the General Plan. Regarding financial impacts, please refer to Response 16.2, above. _ 16.4 Response Regarding annexation, please refer to °Introduction to Response to Commants.° Regarding changes to land use designations, eleven Planning Commission workshops were meld on aspects of an Etiwanda North Specific Plan preliminary to drafting the City's Etiwanda Y Specific Plan. ,Based on those workshops, a draft Etiwanda Nor, -% Specific Plan was prepared and distributed for public comment in December, 1990. A Planning Commission workshop on the draft Specific Plan was held January 17, 1991, and a Community workshop on January 18, 1991. Proposed land use changes were presented by staff at both meetings. Following circulation of the draft EIR for comment, two additional land use changes were presented at the Planning Commission hearing on June 26, 1991. 16.5 Res.Bonse The 4,112 acres identified as open space under'the Specific Plan land use plan are under flood control easements, util;y corridor easements, seismic setback easements, or slopes in excess of 30 percent. In this eor. *,Kt a statement of gross density is meaningless. IPA Regarding a mechanism to acL --Ire parcels of privately owned eroparty within preservation areas see Letter 7, Response 7.5. 'n addition to requiring mitigation for loss of Alluvial Far, Scrub Habitat of ' a condition of development- of land on ,xs5ting Alluvial Fan Ser'ub Habitat, a mechanism shall be required to acquire a conservaticn easement, and /or fee title, over habitat areas identified for preservation. A mechanism for on -going oversight shall be a part of the conservation easement. Mizigation Measure 3, in Section 4.1.4 s3'311 be revised and is hereby incorporated into the Final EIR as 'follows: "Deed restrictions, or similar mechanisms, shall be required for identified resource conservation areas, following the precedent set by the Caryn Company in preserving 39 acres of Alluvial Fan Scrub Habitat in the San Sevaine Wash and dedicating same as permanent open space through transfer of title to the County of San Bernardino and placing a conservation easement on the deed. Conservation easements shall be sought for the prime Alluvial Fan Scrub Habitat areas, including but not limited; to, the area east of Day Creek Wash', west of Etiwanda Creek Wash, and north of the northern branch of the Cucamonga Fault in the vicinity of the bog, as well as portions of San Sevaine Wash and Spreading Grounds, and Etiwanda Creek Wash and Spreading Grounds, and Day Creek Regional Spreading Grounds. Further, mechanisms including, but not limited to, transfer or development rights, land exchange with the National Forest, shall be identified for the purpose of acf7.uisition of conservation easements, and /or fee title, over habitat areas identified for preservation with priority to lands to be preserved which are in private ownerships. A mechanism for on -going oversight shall be a part of the conservation easement. These mechanisms shall be in place prior to. approval of the first tract map subsequent to approval of this Specific Plan." 16.6 Response Of the 4,112 acres identified under the open space designation, 741 acres are controlled by utility corridor easements. The uaility easements are identified and quantified more precisely than the City's existing General Plan Land Use Map. Of the 4,112 acres, approximately 2,201.5 acres are controlled by flood control easements. Most of the flood control designated land is so indicated on the county and City General Plan Land Use Maps and is not recommends for any change in land use. Also, of the 4,112 acres, approximately 915 acres are private inholdings above the National Forest. Most of this acreage is designated as open space. The goal in the plan is to retain all the land above the National Forest as open space. Finally, the balance of the open space area is fault zonec, slopes in excess of '30 percent, and to riparian corridors within the hillside areas. 16.7 Re30onse One of the purposes of the project is to amend existing land use designations within the proposed Specific Plan site to allw4 for the preservation of significant biological resources. Exhibits 4.1 -1 and 4.1 -3, respectively, depict the existing City -of Rancho Cucamonga and County of San Bernardino land use designations for the Specific Plan site. Exhibit 3 -3 depicts the proposed, not existing, lend use designations for the site. The California Government Code, Title. 7, Division 1, Chapter 3,' Article 6, Section 653,E (aJ states that "If it deems it to be in the public interest, the legislative body may amend all or part of an adopted general plan. "' Article 10.5, Section 65561(c) states: "That the anticipated increase in the population of the state demands that cities, counties, and the state at the earliest possible dWte make definite plans for the preservation of valuable open -space land and take positive action to carry out such plans by the adoption and strict ar'tinistration of laws, ordinances, rules and regulations as authorized by this chapter or by other appropriate methods." The California Government Code goes on to sayz1hat the intent of open space legislation is "To assure that cities and counties recognize that open -space land is a limited and valuable resource which must be conserved wherever possible." (California Government Code, Title 7, Division 1, Chapter 3, Article 6, Section 65562(a).) The California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15125(b) states that "The EIR shall discuss any inconsistencies between the proposed project and applicable general plans and regional plans." Section 15125(c) states that "Where a proposed project is compared with an adopted plan, the analysis shall examine the existing physical conditions as well as the potential future conditions discussed in the plan." 16.8 RIA,.gonse The result of residential development on undeveloped land will ba loss of biological resources, primarily alluvial fan scrub habitat. Mitigation of that impact shall be a replacement ratio of 1:1. Please see Letter 7, Response 7.9.. + ,2a 16.9 ARMI use An environmental assessment must be made for project specific impacts subsequent to adoption of the Specific Plan, as well as for amendments to the Specific Plana 16.10 Response The traffic study is based on the proposed land uses in-the draft Etiwanda N�arth Specific Plan, December, 1990. 16.11 gesnanse The City of Rancho Cucamonga has employed tiering in the preparation of the DEIR. The Etiwanda North Specific. Plan DEIR discusses broad _ nvironmental issues affecting a large physical area. Subsequent environmental review may indicate the need for site - specific, project- level environmental documentation. This subseT ant environmental documentation would incorporate earlier analyses by reference and add specific details regarding the particular projects; in question, as well as the specific potential impacts associated with implementation, including traffic effects. A potential reduction of 244 residential units is not considered a significant change to the project which would require detailed analysis at this time. As noted, project specific environmental review will be performed as individual projects are proposed within the specific plan site. Further, consistent with State Law and the aggregate resource policy stated in the City's and the County's General Plan, this area shall be reserved for aggregate resource min'--- unless an alternative beneficial use is proposed, environmental analysis completed, and approval granted. However, because the County Flood Control District has stated their intention to pursue residential development in this area, infrastructure needs have been identified and included in the plan based on a potential for f-tture residential development. Accordingly, Mitigation Measure 9, Section 4.1.4 shall be revised and is hereby included in the Final EIR as follows: 'Residential use will remain a potential use for this area, therefore, infrastructure analysis which includes such use will remain unchanged." 16.12 Response Comments on the adequacy of the City's Hillside Development Ordinance should be forwarded to Planning staff under separate cover for adequate consideration and response. 16.13 s- r-0Raa The City's General Plan goal is 5 acres of developed park er 1000 population, therefore the Specific Plan requirement is 5 acres of developed park per 1000 population.. _I 16. Y4 Response The Specific Plan identifies Neighborhcs.d Commercial Use as an underlying land use. To implement the designation requires a market study and a Specific Plan Land use amendment. 16.15 Response The "floating" neighborhood commercial designation does not preclude a commercial site at Banyan and Davy Creek Boulevard. i 16.16 Response See Response 16.14. 16.17 Response The General Plan identifies the Equestrian Overlay District. Please refer to General Plan, Master Plan of Trails, Figure III- 7, which illustrates; the Equestrian overlay Zone, ` attached. In the past, projects in the Etiwanda Specific Plan area have been conditioned to provide equestrian facilitie., on a case -by -case basis. since an equestrian facility in Etiwanda North will be built in phases, future projects citywide will have an option to provide on -site equestrian facilities or to contribute to the expansion of the facility. it;. is Response The total open space area is 4,112 acrE_ The 2,972 acres are descriptions of particular location: wi" It-he 4,112 total open space area. 16.14 Response See Response 16.1, alove. 16.20 Response See R .;ponse 16.6, above. 16.21 Response According to a personal ccmmunicati.on with Mike Guisti, California Dapartment of Fish and Came, the 200 -acre mitigation area in the. Lay Creek Spreading Ground only miLklated the loss of alluvial fan scrub habitat directly affected by construction of the debris dew And concrete channel. Also, please refer to Response 11I.B.1i Letter 13B, memo from Reuben Montes. 16.22 See Response 16..u, above. 16.23 Response Sri that there will not be aii impact of development, retention of all existing riparian habitat within the Speci'2ic Plan -area is the goal of the mitigation measure. This goal ' consistent with i the policies in the City and County General Plans. The mitigation program for riparian resources requires the retention and restoration of riparian habitat as it currently ;exists on- site, not 50 times the amount. 16.24 Response The following comments are added clarify the relationship between the project and off -site traffic impacts. Impae -ted off -site intersections listed on Table 4.8 -3 - - Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road, Milliken Street & Foothill Boulevard, Day Creek & Foothill Boulevards -- are already impacted wits =:j no, proj€,ct.'0 The project impacts Day Creek Boulevard and-Bane—Line Road by an inc-l' Fa of 9000 ADT. The project impacts the remaining fees intersections by. between 1000 to 2000 ADT. The mitigation s ;as s call for construction of_ Day Creek Boulevard to an(- AncluctIng the Base Line Road intersection. The remainder of the -off -site improvements include the south half of Wilson Avenue, Cherry Avenue to the I -15 and east Avenue to Highland Avenue. The other intersections listed require payment of nexus fees. Therefore, Mitigation Measure 6, Section 4.1, should be revised and incorporated into the Final EIR as follows: Mitigation Measure 2, Section 4.8, should be revised and incorporated into the Final EIR as follows: The Citywide nexus apportionment for Etiwanda North is summarized in Table 4.8 -4 of this DEIR. The recommended mitigation measures for the proposed project are summarized in Table 4.5 -5, and incorporated into Table 1.1 of this Final EIR. The impact statement for Mitigation Measure 3, Section 4.6, should b_ revised and incorporated into the Final EIR as follows: "Without the project, two intersections would not be impacted to a level greater than 0.80. These intersections are Cherry Avenue at Wardman Bullock Road and Rochester Avenue at Base Line Road. Eight intersections are impacted with and without the project. The0e eight intersections are..." Ioi � � l Mitigation Measure 3, Section 4.8, should be revised and incorporated into the Final EIR as follows: "The recommended mitigation measures for the proposed projec-%:, summarized in Table 4.8 -5, call for inprovements which include the intersections of Cherry Avtanue /Wardman Bullock Road and Day Creek Boulevard /Base Line Road. All other impacted intersections involve a nexus contribution." 16.25 response uiti?ation Measure 2 of Section 4.9 of the DEIR requires the implementation of transportation management pr,.,arams. Such programs are typically prepared for and coordinated with the lead agency, which in this case would be the City of Rancho Cucamonga (subsequent to annexation into the City). It: should be noted that a citywide congestion management plan is in process and scheduled to be adopted before zFie end of 1:s9l. The Southern California Association - of 'Governments (SLAG) has prepared the Guidance for ImDleme ation of 1589 ROMP Conformity Procedures which apply to San F:rnardino County. SCAG has also prepared the G owth Manage�_ lar,, and ea' real Mobility Plana Together, SCAG and the SCAQdD have prepared the braft Final 1991 Air Quality Management Plan and 1989 Air Quality Management Plan. Theae documents would be used in preparing the TDM', and the City ' would coordinate with SLAG and the SCAQMD. 15.26 R1apon5IB No residential development is proposed fix the Surface' Mining and Reclamation Act resource area 0-3. (See General Plan Figwre IV -2, Aggregate Extraction Resource Areas, attached to Response to Letter 13A.) 16.27 Response The noise mitigations are consistent with current City methods of analysis and standards. The mitigation measure requires a project specific analysis based on the Specific Elan noise study. If residential development is requested closer tha: the 60 z1BA Ldn contour identified by the measurements listed, then sound barrier walls and other noise mitigations shall be required. 16.25 Response The City is preparing a solid waste management program, including a waste minimization component through such mechanisms_ as mandatory refuse pickup and curbside recycling. Mitigation Measure 1, in section 4.11.8, Solid Waste, shall be revised as follows: "Measures to assure waste minimization shall be .: LETTER 17 June 27,1991 v RECEIVED CITY Of RANCK1 CUCAMONGA Ms. Mikki 'Oratt PLANNING 11VISION Associate Planner JUL 15 1991 Planning Division 10500 Civic Center Drive` r �l3e�j�il��11���5�6 P,O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Mr. Larry Henderson, AICP Principal Planner Planning Division 10500 Civic Center Drive P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, C:A 91729 i RE: DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL. IMPACT REPORT (DEIR) ETIWANDA NORTH .SPECIFIC PLAN STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 89012314 Dear Ms. Bratt and Mr. Henderson, Thank you for your notification of the above referenced.DEIR and completed Draft Etiwainda North Specific PIan. Comments respective to these documents are contained on the following pages and are also intended to act as our public response to the notification we received from the City of Rancho Planning Commission dated June 11, 1991 for the following projects: • Environmental Impact Report for Specific Plan 90-01 and General 'Plan Amendment 90-03B - City of Rancho Cucamonga. • Environmental Assessment and Specific Plan 90-01 - C ty of Rancho Cucamonga. • Environmental Assessment and General Plan Amendment 90-03B - City of Rancho Cucamonga. Each of these projects were to be; discussed at the Rancho Cucamonga planning commission meeting on June 26, 1991 at 7:C0 p.m. ANNEXATIOh1 Landmark Land Company of California, hereby enters its objection to the City of Ralcho Cucamonga for including Landmark's property in any plan whose stated 17A purpose is to create a platform for annexation of Landmark's property into the City of Ran %:ho Cucamonga. As stated in Section 1.1 of the city's Draft Etiwanda North /3 Landmark Land Company of California, Inc. Response to City of Rancho Cucamonga ENSP /DEIR June 27, 1991 "act Specific Plan (ENSP), the document would, among other things, as a prey 17 A requisite to annexation of the [plan] to the City of Rancho Cucamonga." cpyr Accordingly, we object to bur property and it's boundaries being included in a document for this purpose. At the present time Landmark Land Company enjoys property ownership within the unincorporated territory of San Bernardino County - outside of the corporate city limits of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Additionally, much of Landmarks property also falls outside of the Sphere of Influence of the City. We believe the 17B maps contained within the ENSP, beginning with Exhibit 3 on Page 1 -8 as weu' s those identical maps copied to the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for same to be incorrect insofar as they to indicate `certain lands owned by Landmark;, within the city's Spherp of influence. These maps should be corrected as well as provided in a scale suitable for proper analysis. Jutly, consistent with our objections stated in the preceding paragraph we ku�Aher object to being annexed into the Cii;;v of Rancho Cucamenga's Sphere of Influence. COMMENTS ON DRAFT' F.TIWANDA NORTH SPECIF►C PLAN To PAGE $ 1. As stated previously, all exhibits contained in the ENSP document which indicate land owned by Landmark Land Company of California being either within the city limits of the City' of Rancho Cucamonga or the Sphere of AM Influence of the City should be revised. Exhibit 4 on Page 1 -10 contains a small graphic in the lower left corner which: a. Indicates property,owned by Landmark Land Company within the Sphere of Influence of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. b. Indicates property owned by Landmark to be in area "previously . exed to Rancho Cucamonga "- _Consiste'it with our previous requests, maps such as thesz (including Exhibits -3 through 11, 13 and 14 ,16 and 17, 19 , 22, and 34 s: Gtl —ld «'revised and subsequently provided in a scale suit;,le for proper analysis. 2. Exhibit 3 on Page I-8 indicates an area outlined in a curvalinear pattern and labeled "Bog ". We will provide comment on this area later in this letter, however, we feel this area to be out of scale as well as factually incorrect since the nature and origin of this area has not been established beyond mere opinion. Since this exhibit act, as the base map for further generations of knaps we also, by reference to Exhibit 3 on Page I -8, object to these succeeding exhibits. /3s C L ` li Landmark land Company of California, Inc. Response to City of Rancho Cucamongx NSP /DEIR June 27,1991 3. Cot.. ted within Section 4.5 OPEN SPACE AND TRAILS is a goal to "preserve and protect the fresh water bog, along with a 200 -foot wide buffer of natural vegetation and the upstream recharge corridor, adequate access to natural hydrological resources, and appropriate protective fencing." The nature and origin of the "fresh water bog" is still an open issue. Accordingly, it may be premature to attach such significance to a feature whose "hydrological resources" have yet to be ascertained. It is equally premature to provide such non - specific and misleading language such as "the upstream recharge corridor" when such a feature may not exist. 4. Also contained within Section 4.5 OPEN SPACE AND TRAILS is a ,goal to "preserve the Forest Service site and an adequate surrounding area for parking, trail head, rest rooms, and picnic facilities for public use and enjoyment" The former Forest Service site mentioned in the ENSP is`l;ittle more than one acre in size. The surrounding area is owned by Landmark Land Company who would not consider sale of this property to the City for the purposes of providing such uses as parking and public restrooms. Landmark is providing nearly 250 acres of open space, much of it in pristin2 natural area accessible by hiking trails. It is not clear why the City would provide for such a goal when superior public use and enjoyment has been incorporated into Landmark's plans. 5. Exhibit 9 p avides the b.undaries and orientation of the Neighborhood 'T`l..,nes for the ENSP., We have noticed that you designate the area of our property as "Oaks" and state that "the neighborhood will be characterized by native field stone entries and pilasters with native Oaks and Sycamores." This theme is consistent with our plans for the area. For further information the City should further consult the Oak Summit Development Plan which is on file with the County of San Bernardino and which has previously been provided to the City. b. Exhibit 9 also provides a curious set of lines indicating, apparently, the location of trees. These areas do not conform in any way to our development plans or any approved street matrix in the vicinity. The map should be revised to indicate existing approvals and development plans. It is also debatable whether or not it is the City's prerogative to provide precise future f Landmark Land Company of California, Inc, Response to City of Rancho Cucamonga ENSP /DE1R June 27, 3991 locations for local and collector streets, if that is what these areas are intended l`a to convey. 7. Table 2 - the Land Use Statistical Summary shown on Page U -14 provides for 542 acres of Residential Net Acreage with 379 Dwelling Units, This table is inconsistent with the general depiction of the Oaks area provided on Exhibit 9 and fails to consider land use approvals existent in the area. Landmark Land Company currently has approval for 453 units on 453 acres within this area. Ultimate, development within this area will include approximately 620 dwelling units on 761.8 acres. The land use matrix should be revised to provide for currently approved plans and amore realistic land use scenario. S. On pgZe II -19 of the braft ENSP in the opening paragraph of Ssction 7.0 OPEN SPACE AND TRAILS CONCEPT states, "the diverse biological and wildlife habitats found in the bog" is mentioned. Since it is yet to be determined if this feature is indeed a "bog" this statement is questionable. 9. Page II -21 in discussion of th- Community Park / Equesrrian Center provides that "contribution toward the acquisition and deve�41jnent of the equestrian center shall be a condition of development f&,.4p4acts which have a . minimum lot size of less than 20,000 square 6eet which are in the General ,' . Plan Equestrian Overlay District" It is highly questi -n-..0le -why lots of less than 20,000 square feet should be singled out to bear the impact of funding a regional facility, when, by the very nature of their economy, they are less likely to meet the financial profile to afford a feature which proportionately few will utilize. Further, no discussion is provided nor any criteria presented which attempts to illustrate why 20,000.square feet is the correct size to levy fees upon. Other than a�',, arbitrary finding that because the City is committed to equestrian activity",ve feel that the «ity must provider a. The number of residents within the extended `:=ammunfty which \\ currently own horses and will likely do so in the future. b. Other statistical data which support the aforementioned focus on lots of 20,000 square fee: or less. Landmark Land Company of California, Inc. Response to City of Ranchp Cucamonga ENSPlDEIR June 27 1991 C. Maps indicating the boundaries of the existing and planned equestrian overlay district. d. The CEIR for the ENSP fails to address the health and safety issues associated with having horses in close proximity to non - equestrian oriented Iand uses. The DEL° h- uld be revised to include such a discussion. 10. Exhibit 10 - Open Space and Trails Plan provides two Community Equestrian Trails through property owned by Landmark <Land Company. This plan fails to consider the fact that this property is ur1sH' private ownership with approved land use plans. Further, subseq�perit plans have been made available to the City of Rancho Cuoamong;j w huch indicate the possible allowance of equestrian trails over andlorif tdf�cent to this property in different locations. Exhibit 10 takes a caprlsaus approach to this private property by ignoring the aforementioned anc]`directly bisecting Landmark's property with trails which are incompatible with current approvals and Landmarks future development plans. Additionally, the scale of trails depicted on tha plan would provide in excess of 300 feet for each such trail. The City should seek to place equestrian trails within areas currently designated as easements and again review the plans which Landmark has provided. These plans provide the links which the City is seeking and in land more scenic and suitable for such purposes. 11. Section 733 on page U-2S provides that local equestrian trails shall be established as a condition of development within the very Low and Hillside Residential District planning areas where the minimum lot size is 20,000 square feet. The purpose of the trails is to provide safe equestrian access to community and regional trails: As stated previously, there is no discussion as to why lots of less than 20,000 square feet are singled out while no criteria is presented which attempts to illustrate why 20,000 square feet is the correct size to levy this exaction upon. Other than an arbitrary finding that because the City is committed to equestrian activity we feel that the City should provide those items listed in Number 9 above: 12. Section 73.6 on Page U -27 illustrates that the site immediately adjacent to the Day Canyon Mood Control area provides a potential trail head location. f� Landmark Land Company of California, Inc. Response to City of Rancho Cucamonga ENSP /DEIR June 27,1491 13. 14. This ar—k is completely unacceptable to Landmark Land Company. The provision of public facilities including public restrooms accompanied by the waste asnociated with equestrian activities is clearly incompatible with upscale hibusing. As stated previously, equestrian trails are provided in our land plan. The city should explore other areas more compatible with the features of equestrian activities and provide discussion of t�tese alternative within the context of the DEIR. The Circulation Plan - Exhibit 11 on Page 11-30 proviaes,for a street matrix inconsistent with currently: approved plans and the Cunty of San Bernardino General Plan. Property owned by Landmark Land. Company currently includes entitlement for 453 dwelling units on 453 acres in the area adjacent to the northerlymost collector streets on this exhibit. The exhibit should be revised to indim.,te the nor!; uth oriented collectors to be aligned generally with Etiwanda and Hanley Avenues. Section 13.3.1 Subarea 4.1 on Page IV -13 requii`q -_ that "the fault knoll be set aside as a public park contiguous with the bog. Park uses shall include " passive recreation, rest rooms, and trails head parking for hikers and bicyclists Please see our previous comments regarding the compatibility of placing'a public park in this location at the expense of other more suitable sites. The same section goes on to state that this knoll was "formed by the fault". Data supporting this claim should be provided within the DER It is further stated that " histoltizally, the site has been used by the public as an overlook of the valley with views-on a dear day to San, Gorgonio and San Jacinto to the east, Saddleback Mountain to the south, and the ocean to the west. The knoll should be retained for public use." This statement is inaccurate and misleading in both fact and context. Since the site is remote from existing urban land uses it stands to reason that only a minuscule portion of "the public" has "historically" used the site as an overlook. Further, the portrayal that this feature should be "retained" as something of a community resource is also inconsistent with the historical use of the site for fire fighting /watching purposes. It also fails to be mentioned that the portion of the knoll devoted to the previous ranger station is only a very small percentage of the knoll. The remainder of the knoll is, as.it always has been, under private ownership. /4� r Landmark Land Companv of California, Inc. Response to Caty of Rancho Cucamonga ENSP /DEIR June 27, 1991 Each of the major attributes of the knoll described in the -ity's passage in this section can be achieved in a superior fashion,'affording ,car greater views, in areas made ac=cessible by the plans provided by Landmark Land Company and currently on file with the Cotdntyy of San Bernardino. A courtesy copy has been previously provided toyou for your reference. 15. Section 233.1 Subo•ia 4.1 on Page N -14 also states that "a unique bog is located to the east -cif the kitoil and shall be preserved. The bog was formed by tilted fault blocks which capture undarstround and surface runoff water in a shallow depression. The bog must be fully4dentified and preserved.: Its water sources shall also be identified and protected." This Set of opinions .should be reassessed with respect to the facts associated with this feature. Despite the information circulated about this feature to date, we were unaware that such hard evidence existed so as to provide the inescapable conclusions reached above. A reading of the DEIR associated with f the project failed to cast any additional light on this subject. Ir4l Landmark land Company of (70fornia, Inc. Response to City of Rancho Cucamonga EN5P /1)EIR June 27,1991 COMMENTS ON DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL DYIPACT REPORT EITWANDA NORTH SPECIFIC PLAN SCH No. 89012314 Landmark Land Company of California, Inc. objects to the use of this document to support a prezoning procedure for the purposes of annexing its,r.operty into the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Bauch a discretionary action is presented in Section 1.Z. 17 -1 We further comment on the following areas and suggest revisions to the DEIR document as follows: Pages 1-6 and 1 -7 Proposed mitigation measures include a requirement that, since Oe project is in the city's equestrian overlay district, applicants for development of lots le>s than 20,000 square feet shall contribute to a minimum 25 -acre equestrian site and equestrian boarding facility in accordance with the infrastructure plan. 17.7. C„ac mmen : No criteria is provided to indicate the type of contribution which would be made, the nexus between the impact caused by the development and the benefit of the facility. Further, no data or criteria are provided to indicate the reason why 20,000 square feet is used, Lastly, no nAp' or illustratiowt is provided indicating the boundaries of "the city's" Equestrian overlay District. Page 1 -9 The prominent knoll adjacent to the peat bog shall be dedicated for a passive park of a minimum of 9.2 acres. Comment: This is not a mitigat on measure for the loss of open space. A passive 17.3 park which, as provided in the City of Rancho Cucamonga Draft Etiwasda North Specific Plan, would allow public facilities and associated wastes, adjacent to residences thereby creating other objectionable health and safety impacts. These impacts and issues should be analyzed. Further comments are reserved and provided in the later section of the DEIR related to this subject. {i 142 E IU Landmark Land Company of California, Inc. Response to City of Rancho Cucamonga ENSP/MiR June 27, 1991 Page 1 -22 Discusses the impacts to the "peat bog" and proposed mitigation measures for same. Further comments are provided in the detailed section of the DEIR relates to this subject. Pagel-42 and 1.44 Mitigation measure provides "applicants for development steal participate in the existing a (sic] Community Facilities District to fund site acquisitimi, and construction of and needed equipment for a new fire station, as well as ongoing operations and maintenance." Similar language is presented for participation in CFD for police services. 1711 Comments: Besides being overly broad, no specific criteria establishing a linkage between the needed facilities-," 4 is provided. Needed or riot, needs must be substantiated and go beyond the appearance of a "whit list" presented with broad generalities. The author of the DEIR should, take a stronger position vis a vis the city's "desires" and provide objective data to support arty general and open ended mitigation measures. - Page 2 -5 Reference is made to the Rancho Ettwanda Planned Unit Development Certifled Final EIR (SCH #870521)9), dated March 1988. This section states in its second paragraph that "conditions of approval included thi preservation of a peat bog and 9.2 amss of an unencumbered adjoining prominent knoll for a passive park." Comment: We believe the above comment to be inaccurate and misleading. Examination of the Rancho Etiwr.tda pro)exes EIR indicates that the knoll site featured residential lots while the maps within the county's project approval documents contain a land use legend indicating park area. No where within eiti?er document are illustrations or language setting forth 9.2 acres "on the prominent knoll for a passive park." The fact is that the specific language contained in the EWs mitiga►ior measures on page 5-41 states: The project proponent shall provide at least 6.8 park acres on the project site or provide the County with ftmds for nature park areasirk the vicinity of >a� 17 -S Landmark Land Company of California, Inc. Response to City of Rancho Cucamonga ENSP /DEIR June 27,1991 the project site. The funds would represent the project proponent`s proportionate /7.5 share of park acreage needed to adegt ately serve the project site." -.. oHT. This same language is reflected it -t', -e Statement of Overriding Consideration for the projects's EIR. A reading of the ANALYSIS section of the county's staff report for this project inch.des the following passage: "Several segments of the Cucamonga Fault cross the site, and one segment has formed a peat bog at the northern boundary. The 1 -3 iuliion yea* -old bog is a unique feature of regional importance which will be donated to Chaffey College as an ecological preserve. The preserve will be fenced, and surrounded by a buffer of open spano ,. The proposed 453 -unit Development Plan will result in an overall density of one unit per a -re. The applicant is requesting a 25% density bonus over the 363 base units permitted by the General Plan. A 10 bonus is requested for Excellence of design, based or, provision of 19 acres 06 improved open space, 85 acres of natural open space, community equestrian trails, and donation of the bog as an ecological preserve. The improved open spa,, area includes at least 9.4 acres which meet the City of Rancho Cucamonga's criteria for usable park land. To say the least, this passage differs somewhat in context from the information provided in the DEIR Finally, recent plans submitted by Landmark Land Company tt:Jak Summit Planned Development? present a superior alternative to park area upon the lower elevation of this site area by reserving and preserving nearly 250 acres of natural open space - much of it upon the highest elevations existent in* the specific plan area. This alternative woulca pr.-,;vide even greater view potential and access to hatuial surroundings. It is puzzling wl+y the city has 1 of recognized the positive aspects to this plan. This same plan provides approximately 14.5 acres for a community park. Lastly, it can be argued that since the city has taken such a rigid position in describing this area as "prominent hillsides ", then it stands to reason that excellent views are afforded over virtually the entire area. j lGt. Landmark Land Company of Cali crrv, Inc. Response to City of Rancho Cucamonga ENSP /DEIR June 27, 1991 .rage 2-6 St,, ,el; "all of the aforementioned projects are presently within the unincorporated to -- y of San Bernardino County and are part of the County of San Bernardino Ge,.t: .eal Plan, West Valley submgional Planning Area (RSA 28) of the Rancho- Cucamonga (sphere) planning area. They are also within the Sphere of Influence of uity, of Rencho Cucamonga, and as such would ultimately be anneked under the 17.6 '° w ,t7 z part of this development F•rogram and EIR process." comment: Aq stated previously, wa believe a portion of the property held by Landmark Land Company 1s not within the Sphere of Influence of the city. Further, we object to annexation into the city limits or sphere, This language should be corrected. Page 3-11 Nu,nber 3, of Section 3.5 DISCRETIONARY APPROVALS provides for prezoning of unincorporated territory in the city's sphere of influence as a prerequisite to 17.7 annexation of that territory into the city. These objectives should be stated in the DEIR. ANIL CorlL ent: This action is an arbitrary attempt by the city to forcibly annex territory. As stated earlier, Landmark Land Company objects to this course of action. Page 4.1 -7 As stated previously, we are presently in objection to any annexation of territory into the city limits or sphere of itifluence of the city. Page 4.1 -11 Discussion of Project Impacts in section 4.1.2 devotes considerable emphasis to the loss of open space. While this discussion is relevant and proper, the context of the /7- e discussion is slanted to the extent that little emphasis is giver to the fact that the vast majority C. this land is in private holdings and has had land use designations allowing development for nearly two decades. ; Page 4.1 -13 It is stated that the City of Rancho Cucamonga proposin to annex approximately 5,153 acres "in conjunction with the approval o' the; Edwanda North Specific Plan." � 17. , Ask i Landmark Land Company of California, Inc Response to City of Rancho Cucamonga ENSP /DEIR June 27,1941 A. Comment: This proposal is forwarded by the City of Rancho Cucamonga and not 17-9 by this property owner who objects to annexation into the city. cdWr. Exhibit 4.1.5 Comment The Circulation Plan should be revised to become consistent with County approvals (See Rancho Etiwanda Planned Development Circulation Plan) b 17• to aligning the northernmost north /south collector streets with Etiwanda and hanley Avenues. Page 4.1- 15/Exhibit 4.1-6 The description of and illustrations for the Open Space and Trails Plan indicates large areas within lands owned by L,uldmark Land Company as aside for Parks and /or community equestrian trails. Comment: The descril:tions and depictions indicated on the pages Mentioned are r�rl unacceptable to Landmark Land Company for the following real `s: I. The Community Equestrian Trails bisect property held by Landmark Land Company without regard or sensitivity to development previously approved ! plans or presently submitted development plans. These trails should be realigned to fall within the utility eaqements present in the vicinity and , should route equestrians northerly above and around property owned by' Landmark.. Landmark will assist local interests in traversing its property in suZ!h alignments wh,. h are presented on snaps on file with the County of San Bernardino. 2. Community Equestrian Trails in the vicinity of private housing prexilt objectionable risLs to the health and safety of these residents and ane clearly incompatible with approved and projected land uses. Such risks and /or impacts have not Wen addressed in this DEIR and should be. 3. The scale of the Community Equestrian Trails is unrealistic insofar as they would need to acquire lard which is not offered for such purposes. 4. The location of park areas on property owned by Landmark Land CQ --v is unacceptable. The City and aWbor of the DEIR should consult with the County of San Bernardino. to examine the location of park areas in the projec vicinity. The provision of Public facilities in immediate proximity to private Landmark Land Company of Callfornia, Inc. Response to City of Rancho Cucamonga ENSP /DEIR June 27,1991 housing is unwarranted and presents a clearly incompatible land use 7,11 relationship: COW.. 5. The "Bog Hydrology Study Area" is a misleading term and should ' "not be reflected in an open space and trails plan. ThLS section and the Exhibit 4.1-6 should be revised to reflect these comments and ' suggested changes. Exhibit 4.1 -7 This exhibit should be revised to remove the legends indicating "California 7 �� Sycamore /Southwestem Live Oak. Revisions should be made consistent with approved land use plans and /or plans presently on file in the County of San Bernardino. Page 4.1 -20 Under State of Califon A Relevant Planning Programs it is stated "impiementadon of the proposed project would require the annexation of approximately 5,155 acres into the City of Rancho Cucamonga and 1,155 acres into the civs Sphere of Influence." Comment: This statement is incorrect. Further`, objection is made to any inclusion of property. —.med by Landmark Land Company into either .the ci ty 'limits or sphere 17.13 of influeno. ,r the city at this time. For the DEIR to provide accurate information on this subject it shoWd be stated that the project is sponsored by the city despite the objections of local propert- owners in the area and that approval of the city's plan pP tys p ' will not be met with a requizentent that these areas be annexed. Page 4.1 -22 It is stated under the San Bernardino National Forest Land and Resource Management PIan that "the northern partion of the specific plan area lies within the boundaries of the national forest. No development is proposed north of this boundary line." Comment: This statement is inaccurate. Landmark Land Company proposed to develop portions of the its property within the national forest as a golf course. FOUq 17 it golf holes will be present in this location. This plan has been made available to the Landivirk Land Comprmy of California, Inc. Response to City of Rancho Cucamonga ENSP /DEIR June 27,1991 RP City of Rancho Cucamonga for some time and is on file with the County of San Bernardino. Page 4.I -24 Mitigation Measure No.8 Comment: This statement is misleading and inaccur ,� It is impossible for the project to be located within the city's equestrian overlay district since the project is not within the city limits. The language should be revised. . l7• /5 As previously stated, no correlation, nexus, or relatic %ship is presented either in the Specific Plan or DER substantiating the reason fa ,citing 20,000 square foot lots as best foc providing a minimum 25 acre equestrian facility. The author of the DEM should address the mandatory nexus relationships to this issue using similar methodology to that presented in the traffic section. Page 4.2 -2 The local setting describes "the northwesterly portion of this area includes a sag j pond in a marshy area generally north of a traversing fault segment which has resui ed in a peat bog condition." Comment_ The author should state whether the feature is or is not a peat bog, not 17-16 whether the result of a traversing fault has resulted in a peat bog condition. It would be accurate to state that there is disagreement as to the Origin and nature of this feature. Therefore, reference to this condition should be uniformly accurate with statement describing the disagreement. Simply referring to the feature by a term which conjures up a certain image for the purposes of easy discussion is only perpetuates misinformation or myth. Please reftir to Pacific Southwest Biological Services report dated February 15, 1990 which disputes the origin of this feature as well as the description of a 'Teat Bog'. Page 4.2.4 Mitigation Measure No. 8 Comment: This measure is wholly out of context with the preceding measures /7-17 insofar as it identifies a specific area, located on private property, to act as mitigation �I i I f I Landmark Land Company of California, Inc. Response to Cary of Rancho Cucamonga ENSP /DEIR June 27,1991 for an ent!,re specific plan. This heavy exaction is further deficient in that it provides iao mechanism for acquisition. In so failing, nq discussion is given to the , �� �� land use plans surounding this area, nor is their discussicn of alternative areas. rotyT. This section should, at a minimum, be revised to provide such discussion. A superior alternative would be to explore areas affording greater views within closer proximity to nature and natural settings. Placing the park in such close proximity to an area planned for private residences introduces impacts to the health and safety to those persons by exposure to noise, crirr6e and trash as well as animal wastes associated with equestrian activities. Each of these impacts s could be thoroughly, evaluated within the DEIR prior to a carte blanche decision as provided in the current document. he present plans for the area which are bn file with the County of San Bernardino have Landmark Land Company providing a 14.5 acre neighborhoo °' park southeasterly of this site. The Specific Plan and DEIR should Im r,. _ bsed to show this design. A copy of this plan was previously provided to the Cty of Rancho Cucamonga. P, ge 40-1 Onsite Soil; - "urficial Units _ f7. /g Comment: The language in this section should be revised to state "The project site ka partially within the Rancho Cucamonga Sphere of Influence.... Exhibit 4.3 -1 The Constraints map is inaccurate and misleadingnsofar as this area west of "the Bog" is not s±reamside woodland. The knoll area is well above the Day Creels area and trees present appear to have been introduced by man. 17 19 It is also premature to designate an area around "the Bog" is a major recharge area when no studies have been performed to confirm this. This exhibit should be revised to reflect accuraM_ conditions and should be shown its the correct scale. Exhibit 4.4-2 The Storm Drainage Master Plan is misleading insofar as a misleading,,and disproportionate area adjacent to Day Creek Channel is coded as a Regional 17. zo Mainline Drainage Facilities area. Further, categorization of the Upper Etiwanda ,, lea Landmark Land Company of California, Inc. Response to City of Rancho Cucamonga ENSP /DEIR June 27,1991 Intercept Channel as a "Secondary Regional Facilitlr' is improper due to the fact that no d(:finiticns or gradations fnr such facilities are rovided. These descriptions and illustrations thereby cast the area with features and facilities oNT- undefined. This Exhibit is also inconsistent with Exhibit 4.4-3 which indicate surface water flows in the area. Sources for this information should be.given and the exhibit should be revised. Page 4.4-11 This first paragraph on th s page, in the third sentence, contains the following: 'The Cucamonga fault that denotes the boundary between these basins has affected lc:!al grotradwater movements and may be responsible for maintaining the hydrology of the Unique peat bog found in the northern portion of the project site. Comment: These statements of opinion potentially have the affect of coloring the average readers judgement. Objective analysis of this statement would provide that I� 2 the faulting indeed may not be responsible for maintaining the hydrology of the feature termed a "peat bog''. If this is the case then the feature may not be "unique ". It is contended in some-reports that the feature is not a peat bog, but a mule fat and spike -rush wetland that appears to have developed at the discharge point of a Cucamonga County Water District Pipeline. Please see the report by Pacific Southwest Biological Services dated February 15, 1990. More comprehensive and objective discussion should be provided throughout the ,report wherever eiscussion of this feature is contained. Page 4.5-3 The second paragraph states "The 11 -ace peat bog in the northwestern portion of the site is a unique habitat within the San Gabriel Mountains. Preservation of this habitat and the hydrology supporting it is an important component of the ENSP. Mitigation for potential indirect impacts on the peat bog include establishment of a minimum 200 -foot natural open space buffer surrounding the bog and preservation of all drainages important in maintaining the hydrology of the bog to the satisfaction of CDFG and ACOE. Comment: We again make the statement that language of this nature is slanted j with opinions and hereby incorporate the same comments provided in the preceding section. M . r Landmark Land Company of California, Inc. Response to City of Rancho Cucamonga ENSP /DELR June 27,1991 We also find it highly Curious why a 200 -foot buffer is now suggested around "the. Bog" when a 100 -foot buffer was suggested in the Rancho Etiwanda Planned Unit Development Certified Final EIR 1(9M #8705209), dated March 1988 which was 7 • zz . prepared by the same consultan�,- paring this DEIR. CONY The discussion and associated exhtb`� denoting a 200 -foot buffer should be revised to be consistent with previous' approvals while containing objective discussion as t the potential origins and nature of this feature. Page 4.5-3 The third paragraph states: "Approval of the ENSP would result in the annexation /7.23 of the ENSP area into the City of Rancho Cucamonga, after wh:'t tentative tract maps and /or grading permits would require the approval of the city!' Comment: It is not true that approval of the ENSP would de facto result in the annexation of the area into the city. The approval of the ENSP would serve as a revision to the existing city General Plan primarily. Whether this same matrix would subsequently act as a prezoning designation followed by annexation is unclear. in fact, the City has gone on record as stating that project,, gaining approval in the County will never be annexed into the City. As previously stated, Landmark Land Company objects to its property being annexed into the City of Rancho Cucamonga or its Sphere of Influence. The language in this section should be revised. Page 4.S•5 Table 4.3 -1 should. be revised to provide language other than "Peat Bog". Please see our comments and justifications previously provided. Exhibit 4.S-1 Delineation of the `"Peat Bog" should be revised to provide objective language or deleted. Page 43-4114.5-12 This section contains the following language: "According to (dominant theory], the Cucamonga Fault has seated a subterranean darn, behind which runoff from Day Canyon and Etiwanda washes collects. This resulting accumulation of standing /SJ l t„ Landmark Land Company of California, Inc. Response to City of Rancho Cucamonga ENSP /DEIR June 27, 1991 water above a moist organic substrate, is referred to in this repot as a peat bog. This- [unusual resource] has also been referred to as a sedge bog (Karlin Marsh 1983, Planning Network 1985), I)ay Canyon bog (des Lauriers 1981,1989), sage marsh (County of San ,Bernardino 1983), wedge peat (soil specialist UC Mverside, County of San Bernardino 1983), peat bog (Tierra Madre 1987, LSA Associates, Inc 1989), xeric freshwater marsh (Vail Spec Taylor 1989), and anomalous zr Wefatlspike rush wetland ( Pacific Southwest Biological Services 1996), (No mat er what the nomenclature or origin of the bog, all investigators agree ihat`, wetlands an . unusual and sensitive biological resource, worthy of pre, a6wQ Emphasis Added. GaNt The statement above mixes opinion with fact tempered with a , onclusion which is { inaccurate. Further, the statement introduces that a "dominant theory" exists. However, it is not stated upon which empirical data such a theory has been established- The most unusual aspect to this "unusual resource" is that a hiok of experts fail to agree on its origin and description. It is therefore difficult to believe that a dominant theory exists at all. Lastly, the conclusion which this paragraph provides that "all investigators agree that this wetland is an unusual anti sensitive biological resource" is overstating the facts. Pacific Southwest Bi,!',A)gical Services provides that the feature is "an artificial wetland, not a millenni;, ", ,d natural feature." Further, correspondence from the Cucamonga County Wa„ , District tie the beginning of the feature to the time when discharge began from a CCWD 'pipeline. The author should provide all the facts within the context of the discussion, not simply those facts which seemingly confirm his opinions - or "theory". Page 4.5-13 The final sentence in the paragraph under Wildlife should be revised. 'Aie "peat bog' is not a water source The: source of this feature is in question. Page 4.5- 1714.5 -21 References to the "peat bog" on these pages should be corrected. Page 4.5-22 The conclusion that "other areas such as the peat bog would be functionally isolated from surrounding habitats after project implementation" is incorrect. Examination rya I'*z1 Landmark Land Company of California, Inc. Resporw to City of Rancho Cucamonga ENSP /BEIR June 27, 1991 of the development plans previously provided by us to the City and currently on file with the County of San Bernardino illustrate linkage of this area to open space areas. The DEIR should be revised to incorporate this aspect. Page 4.5-22 We Wlieve the statement contained within the ,first paragraph under Diminishing Wildlife Density and Diversity: "it is likely thai' �. , areas proposed to remain natural within the specific plan area boundaries currently support near- maximum , 17 24 capacities of these species and cannot support the populations of raptors and mammals that would be displayed if the specific plan was implemented" needs to be substantiated further. Page 4.5-23 The final paragraph contains the statement "Some of the resources, such as the alluvial scrub habitat and the peat bog, are important because they are uncommon and sensitive habitats." 17.25 Comment: With respect to the "peat bog' previous discussion contained in this correspondence express our views on this subject. This statement should be amended to provide a greater range of data. The first sentence on the following page (4.5 -24) should reflect these changes as well. Page 4.5- 26/4.5 -27 Under the 'Teat Bog" heading it is stated 'The peat bog reprer-ents the only habitat of its type on the coastal side of the San Gabriel Mountains." Comment: This statement is highly suspett in the vz that the origin of this feature has not been conclusively established. Further, this DEIR provides a 17.26 description of the plant and animal spades found in this area, of which none are completely unique or endangered. It cannot be clearly stated then that other deviations or very similar occurrences of the conditions found in this feature are not present elsewhere, or iuuld not be artificially created. At the beginning of page 4.5 -27 the DEIR calls for a minim_ um 200 foot buffer surrounding "the bog' on all side. We would once agai, '-'-e to point out that approved plans as well as a previous EIs7 prepared by thi!�*4nsultant have provided that a 100 foot buffer be provided. Our current plans provide 100 feet in accordance with these plans. Landmark Land Company of California, Inc, Response to City of Rancho Cucamonga ENSP /DEIR June 27, 1991 Further, the indirect impacts projected later in this section are questionable. For ;xample: "Invasive plant species introduced into the area by landscaping as well as weedy species associated with development and disturbed areas are likely to become established in the most soil of the bog. The introduction of these species would diminish the naive character and;diversity of the bog." ^omment: This area is subject to .sigh winds, among the strongest found in the 1 State of California. Air borne spores and other such species have every opportunity to be invasive to this area. ` Further, the final sentence of the statemew above is totally contradictor`' the fact that a host of air borne elements have settled in this feature is the real+.. why it is "unique" and diverse. How this would, in the future, 17,,17 diminish the "nai ;re character" is a matter of opinion. • "The soils, or peat, which provide the substrate for the vegetation of the bog are highly sensitive tt compaction and other disturbances associated with human foot traffic, bicycles, and equestrian activity. This sq t of acvivity is anticipated to increase if the area is not adequately buffered and protected." Comment: It is a surprise to see the DEIR close the question on the nature of the soil in this areas by snaking a determination that it is "peat". We are unaware of any soils samples which have been taken since we have had no requests for access to this feature. Further, previous samples or studies attesting to this conclusion are.,�dt contained within the DEIR Should this language be retained, the DER should provide data to substantiate these findings. Additionally, the disturbances cited in thhis section will be controlled by the land use and development plans provided by Landmark Land Company. These plans feaure a 100 foot buffer as has been previously proveti. The other activities cited wilLbe prohibited. The conclusions reached pertaining to the damage of these activities appear to be z cal but speculative. Accordingly, they should be presented as such and not as obJet:: `acz • 'The fa:+bterranean hydrology] which currently supports the bog must be rnoreughly'understocd prior to (disturbances of the drainages) north of the F7 L 17.2» i I f Landmark Land Company of Giifornia, Inc. r Response to City of Rar,lto Cucamonga ENSP /DEIR June 27,1991 bog. If the hydrology that supports the bog is interrupted, the �t soils will dry out], the anaerobic conditions that sustain the bog would �,... ,longer exists, and the [wetland plants] presently occupying the bog would be' replaced by annual gra.,ses and other native and non -native species." Comment: This connected set of suppositions assumes: a. That the hydrology which supports the bog is subterranean, despite evidence entered into the record to the contrary: , Evidently the author has chosen to ignore or dismiss Uds information. Data and support for this action should be offered _ in this section. However, since the same sentence says this aspect must be thoroughly understood (which evidently it is not; disturbances to the drainages should be avoided. We would argue that, since the Sources are not understood by the author, the author should refrain from conclusions. b. That the hydrology to the feature has never been u"rupted.. Examination of this site inuring the recent drought would have vrovid( -d evidence that the area does in fact dry out. The results which are projected in the DEIR have not been proven. c The soil is peat Please see our comments in this same section. Page 4.5 -,11 Mitigation measure No. 18. should be revised to indicate that a 100 foot buffer should surround "the bog". This is consistent with previously approved and currently submitted plans.' Please see the Rancho Etiwanda EIR, Page 2 -3. Page 4.7 -3 Surrounding Hillsides Majeska Peak is misspelled, the correct name is Modjeska. 17.30 17.31 Landmark Lane: Company of California, Inc. Response to City of Rancho Cucamonga ENSL' /DER June 27,1991 Page 4.8-4 -4.8.6 The Rancho Cucamonga Traffic Model seems to use 13 as the ADT rate for single family residences. The DEIR should highlight those studies which were used to establish this criteria which is above the Institute of Traffic Engineers Manual of 10 17'32 ADT. This trip rate, without the aforementioned studies as backup appears high rind would assess a disproportionate share of the casts burden to single famdiy residences. Additionally, all Exhibits within the traffic section should be revised to become consistent with County approvals (See Ranc ie Edwanda Planned Development 17, 33 Circulation Plan) by aligning the northernmost north /south collector streets with Etiwanda and Hanley Avenues. Page 5.3 The second paragraph states: As with development of the site under the City of Rancho Cucamonga's general plan designations, this altergative may lead tc* fragmented development and inadequate infrastructure ia'vhe project area as the project would not be developed under a comprehensive specific plan." Comment: This alternative may -or may not - lead to fragmented development The final paragraph states, among{ other things "Additional onsite development would have more vehicular traffic (69,508 ADT for the proposed project and 61,061 ADT for 4,607 dwelling units plus commercial develcpment), resulting in greater ambient air quality and noise - impacts, as well as higher demands on public services and utilities;' Comment: These statements assume that there will not be any advances in the te:hnology of emissions and noise control and assume that the higher demands on public services will not be- matched by a commensurate share of financial contribution. From this approach, it is to see why the authors quickly conclude that the County General Plan should be rejected from further consideration on page 5-4. /s n0 17-35 2 Landmark Land Company of California, Inca Response to City of Rancho Cucamonga ENSP /DMR June 27,1491 tt Page 71 Objections are made to the following mitigat;on measures contained in this section. As these measures are a summation of those containing the same la��guage in previous sections of the DEIR, the expanded comments contained in this correspondence earlier. are intended to be expressed again. J736 4.1 LAND USE -No. 8 4.2 L ANDFORM AND TOPOGRAPHY - No. 8 4.5 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Nc.15 4.8 TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION - Citywide Nexus Apportionment for Etiwanda North Specific Plan APPENDICES 1. Please review again `the letter from Pacific Southwest Biological Services 17-37 indicated on Page 10-4 2. The Notice of Preparation incorrectly (apparently) states under PROTECT: 17-36 approximately 6,000 dwelling unite For the record, the under--gned represents property owned by Landmark band Company of California, Inc The raspec!lirre parcel numbers affected by this plan are as follows: 0225 - 031 -06 0225. 051 -15 022-1-051-20 0275- 051 -21 0225-05117 0225- 051QZ6 Very Truly Yours, Richard P. Douglass Landmark Land Company of California, Inc. RPD /rpd cc John W. Ohanian Mike Kerney Planning Commission Secretary - City of 12ancho Cucamoaga Landmark Lana Company of talito:rda, Inc Response to City of Rancho Cucamonga ii June 27, 1991 City Clerk - City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission Chairman and Commissioners - City of Rancho Cucamonga Mayor Dennis Stout and City Council - City of Rancho Cucamonga , Brad Buller - City of Rancho Cucamonga Rick Gomez -City of Rancho Cucamen 6a. Valery :'ilmer - County of San Bernardino Charles Fahie - County dr San Bernardino Kathleen Browne - County of San Bernardino Curtis Aliing - Michael Brandman Associates Supervisor Jor; dikeis I i I(. l' lip r 'a I- t wvD It. LETTER 17: LANDMARK LAND COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA June 27, 1991 Response 17A. See "Introduction to Response to Comments" Response 17B. Exhibit 3 has no scale, as indicated in the bottom left hand corner. Table 4.5. -1 and Exhibit 4.5 -1 will continue to contain.•che scientifically aescy; tied condition of the peat bog (see Comment 2 below). Further, maps -will be revised to identify. the area north of the National Forest Boundary as proposed sphere area (see attached). Also, 1000 scale ihaps may be obtained from th-, City's Planning Division. "Part I: Comments on Drat Etiwanda North Specific Plan." These comments are not on the En-;ironmental Impact Report and will to addressed under separate cover and for- a.rded to the commentator. "Part II: Comments on DEIR." 17.1 Response Please refer to the "Response to Comments.1t El 17.2 Re Pon" ST See Letter 16, Response 16.17. In addition, under the City's Development Code, (Section 17.08.030), tree minimum lot size for keeping horses is 20,000 square feet. 17.3 Response The knoll is a prominent landform. Protection is consistent with County General Plan policies, including OR -50 and OR -57, as well . as with City General Plan policies to,.preserve viewsheds and prominent landforms. Regarding the peat bog, a detailed discussion on the issues raised by this letter follows: The "peat bog01 shall be referred to in the environmentp-' 4ocument as a peat bog. -. The City feels that the biological opinion of several documented and recognized authorities including; Karlin Marsh 1983, James des Lauriers 1981 e"d 1989, county of San Bernardino 1983, soil speciailst UC Riverside - County ;of San Bernardino 1983, Tierra Madres 1987, LSA Associates, Inc, 1989, and Vail Speck Taylor 1989, cannot be outweighed by one report (Pacific South ;rest Pin logical Services, ^ebruary 15, 1990). j lho One biological situation can be explained in several different ways. Scientific nomenclature can vary from one scientist to the other depending upon which reference guide they use. The bag on the Etiwanda site has been referred to as a edge bog, Day Canyon Bog, sage marsh, sedge peat, peat bog, and xeric freshwater marsh. No matter what the nomenclature.of the bog, all investigators agrees that this area is a wetland, and inherently a sensitive biological resource. -, The accumulation of water in a depression in the alluvial fan where the drainage from Day Creek and East Etiwanda Canyon crosses has resulted in a wetland, r_eferree to in the DEIR as a peat bog, The origin of the peat bog is not an issue in xaference to the significance of this wetland. The fact is that there has been a continued ;cater source, eithar manmads or natural, and that riparian vegetation nas propagated within this area and resulted in the establishment of a wetland under, the legal jurisdiction of the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and the United States Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE). The ACOE and t:ie CDFG consider all riparian areas important natural resources worthy of preservation. The presence of the peat bog on the project site in a predominantly xeric (dry) environment, is a unique situation and an important resource. Periodic drought conditions will naturally, and temporarily, have a negative but not significant effect on wetlands. However, manmade negative impacts to wetlands (such. as removing the: water source that supplies the watland) is not acceptable to the regulatory agencies. The peat bog provides for a variety of habitat types for the wildlife found in the project vicinity. The wetland conditions found in the peat bog provide water and food that attract wildlife to the area. Further analysis by CDFG and US'cWS indicates that adequate habitat protection requires moving the limit of development to the south setback boundary of the northern branch of the Cucamonga Fault and is therefore so recommended. Pleast refer to Response 7.3, CDFG Letter. 17.4 Response The Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District provides residential fire protection for the entire Specific Plan area up to the extension of the National Forest Boundary. The nexus for a fire station as well as operation and maintenance is found in the authorizing studies for the Fire District's Community Facilities District 88 -01. 17.5 Response The commentator correctly states that the Rancho Etiwanda FEIR did not mention the 9.2 acre park site adjoining the bog.' As referenced the County staff report and conditions of approval of to Preliminary Plan of Development and map indicate a 9.4 acre park site. 17.6 Response Please refer to the. "Introduction to Response to Comments." 1.7.7 Rgaponse Please rifer to the "Introduction to Response to Comments." Landmark's current objection to Annexation is noted. 17.8 Response Project based environmental review is required as a condition of project level development. Loss of open space is an appropriate consideration at the Specific Plan level, as well as on .a project by project basis. 17.9 Reff oo aaro Please refer to the "Introduction to Response to Comments." 17.10 Response Access to property north of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power utility corridor ii by unimproved roads. R condition placed on the Rancho Etiwanda Prelminar} Development Plan states: "Prior to Development Review Committee action on the Final Development plan, the applicant shall submit for review a street layout for the project which conforms to the Cfssnty Transportation/ Flood Control Department and (whcrp- considered appropriate by the County) the City of Ranchq Cucamonga'u standards and policies." Please refer to Response 11.16, San Bernardino County Planning Department "letter. 17 „11 Response It is hereby acknowledged that Landmark has an application -sor development pending in the County of San Bernardino. It should be noted that City staff has reviewed the application and forwarded preliminary comments on t►ae plan to the County.. The County has requested that an EIR be prepared on the aforementioned application. City staff has reviewed past and current land use proposals for the property owned by Landmark. WV City staff is recommending the land use and other proposals in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan which differ from the Landmark application. 17.12 Response Please refer to Response 17.11. Exhibit 4.1 -6 revised to reflect land use recommendations attached to these responses and hereby incorporated into the Final EIR. 17.13 Response Please refer to the "Introduction to Response to Comments.'$ 17.14 Response The Specific Plan proposes that no development occur north of the National Forest boundary and that conservation easements be acquired. 17.15 Response Please refer to Response 17.2. 17.16 Rasponas® The bog has been identified and conditioned for preservation in two previous EIR's, including the Lewis Hcmes ;,EIR, 1980, and the Rancho Etiwanda (Coussoulis) EIR, 1988. Also, please refer to Response 7.5, Letter 7, California Department. of Fish and Game. Please refer to Responsia 17.3. Further, on page 4.2 -2, the sentence -that reads, "The northwesterly portion of this area includes a sag pond in a marshy area generally north of a traversing fault segment which has resulted in .a peat bog condition, 10 is revised and is, hereby incorporated in the Final iIR, as follows: The northwestern portion of the area includes a peat bog located' generally north of a traversing fault . segment. 17.17 Re MI& Mitigation Measure 8 is consistent with County Generale Ylan policies, including OR -50 and OA -57, as well as with City General Man policies to preserve viewsheds and prominent landforms 17.18 R2200nss Ask Please refer to Response 17.B. Also, it is acknowledged and incorporates( into the Final FUR that a portion of tite project site is outside the City' Sphere -of-- Influence, pending an application for Sphere expansion before LAFCO. Adak 17.19 Response The streamside woodland area indicated is the Day Creek ziparian area upstream from Day Creek debris basin. The area is currently disturbed by dam construction but is expected to revegitate to streamside woodland. The area surrounding the bog is labEled "Bog hydrology sttidy ares... u 17.20 RespOn9O The map source is "City of Rancho Cucamonga, Etiwanda Area, Master Plan of Drai'.1age," BSI, August 1989. 17.21 Response Please refer to Response 17.3, above. 17.22 Response Please refer to Responss 17.3, above. 17.23 RPMOn s Please refer to Response 17.3, above. Also, based on an evaluation of Exhibit 4.5 -1 (Vegetation Map) and 3 -3 (Land Use Plan), the peat bog :would be functionally isolated from surrounding areas of open space habitat k.zause of project features that would surrount the peat bog areawl These features included flood control channels, hillside residential areas, and open space landscaped parks. These features would not be conducive to the movement of wildlife to and from the peat bog from surrounding natural rpen space areas. Further analysis by CDFG and USFWS indicates that adequate habitat protection..` requires moving the limit of development to the south setback boundary of the northern branch -:.,f the Cucamonga Fault and is, therefore, so recommended. Please refer to Responses 7.5, Letter 7 California Department of Fish and Game. 17.24 ASA OR-91 Please refer to Response 17A. 17.25 Res -Ran34 Please refer to Response 17.3, above. 17,26 RespOn$Q Please refer to Response 17.3, above. OIL 17.27 Response Please refer to Response 17.3, above,, Alao, the peat bog contains "native plant species" and.the :ntroduction,of invasive, non- native, and weedy plant species from development in o, the peat bog flora would diminish the native plant .species cc .position. 17.28 Resl�4nsw Please refer to Resp n.se 17.3, above. Further, on pa9`e 4.5 -27, the conclusions reached in the statement 10The,soils or peat, which provide the substrate for the vegetation of the bog are highly sensitive to compaction and other di_ turbances associated with human foot traffic, bicycles, and equestrian activity" is based on the knowledge of biologists who have observed natural areas thL,_i: have been disturbed b }= human activities. Further analysis by CDFG and USFWS indicates that adequate, habitat protection requires moving the limit of development to '',he south setback boundary of the northern branch of the Cucamonga_ Fau>t and is, therefore, so recommended. Please refer to Response 7,.: "5, Letter 7, California Department of Fish and Gare. 17.29 Resy aAsw Please refer to Response 17.3, above. 17.30 itespon=e Pleass refer to Response 17.3, above. As previously discussed, upon further analysis�,by habitat restoration specialists in the formulation of the Dz,aft Resource Management Plan for the Etiwanda North Specific Plat Area, Rancho Cucamonga, California - IMA January 1991, it was found that a 200 -foot natural open space buffer surrounding the peat bog and preservation of hydroloq'I would be required to protect the peat bog to the satisfaction of the CDFG and ALOE. 17.31 Respone& correct spelling of Modjeska is noted and is hereby incorporated into the Final EIR. 17.32 Respouge Substantiation for the use of 133 as tie ADT rate is on file in the City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Division, Traffic Department. A City field study 'indicates that the trip generation rate for predominantly uppev•,income housing is higher tt that the national average of 10. f 17.33 Rean®nsw ! Please refer to Response 17.10 above. �Y r' 17.34 Resnense Historically, development in the City, Sphere -of- Influence has AMk been piecemeal and fragmented and a Specific Plan has been decvmed necessary b;, the City to provide comprehensive pla, -ping for the area. 17.35 Response Information in the EIR is based on current Air Quality Standards and mitigation requirements as promulgated by the. South roast Air Quality District. See Letter 5 and responses for updo,--d AQMD, requirements. 17.36 Response Responses have been provided above on-an item by item basis, 17.37 Response The letter from Pacific southwest Biological Services „was not attached to Letter 17. See Section 4.5. Mitigation. Mea,i }ure 18, especially note: "If the drainages north and northwest of the peat bog are proposed to he altered, future developers shall investigate the hydrological system supporting the peat bog prior to disturbance of these drainages.” City policy provides that in order to ensure independent analysis, such studies will be under contract - to the City and paid for by the project applicant. Also, note that development of the bog azzea surrounding and north of the bog is not recommended. See Response 7.5, Letter 7, California Department of Fish and Game. 17.38 Resnons• Tho notice of preparation stated that the Etiwanda North Specific Plan was for approximately 6,000 dwelling units on 5,640 acres of land. During preparation of the EIR more specific measurements of the acreage become available indicating that the project area iw approximately 6,840 acres. Please note that the project boundaries are unchanged from the NOP. Also, during preparation of the EIR the preferred project tas changed from the Consortium of Landowners project for approximately '6000 - dwelling units, to the City's project for approximately 3,613 dwelling units. Upon further review, she ultimate build -oaL for the area is projected to be less than 3,613 dwelling units..- As less development is currently proposed, the NOP assumed a worst -case scnnario which has been revised through the planning process Etiwanda Heights Development Corporation= CITY OF RANCMG CUCAMONGA PLANNING 01vwrlti UTTER ti8 AM JUL 15 1991 W Mr. Larry Henderson City of Rancho Cucamonga Community Development Department Planning division 10500 Civic Center Drive P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 PUBJECT: COMMENTS ON DRAFT, SIR FOR T'(E ETIWANDA NORTH SPECIFIC PLAN (SCH 1 89012319), CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Dear Mr. Henderson: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the North Etiwanda Specific Plan Draft EIR. This letter provides the City of Rancho Cucamonga with comments on the subject Draft SIR for the Etiwanda Heights Development Corporation (EHDC), pursuant to public review provisions of the: California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The following comments are divided into two categories: general comments on the SIR or items that are of concern to the EHDC throughout the SIR; and specific comments on the SIR (pages or Exhibits cited). W GENERAL COMMENTS I. The EHDC owns an area of 171 acres generally referred to as they San Sevaine property, located withi.s the San Sevaine Wash area o the Etiwanda North Specific Plan site. A Preliminary Development Plan (PDP) for the EHDC San Sevaine Development was submitted to the County of San Bernardino in March 1991. The PDP, which proposes 16,A 1,06 acres of single family residential development and 65 acres of open space, is currently under review by the County. Given the active project status of the EHDC -171 -acre site at the County, it is apparent that the 171 acres are being cnsidered for uses other than the open space designation proposed by the ENSP project. Due to the circumstances cited above and the fact that the EHDC property is it current private ownership, it is the opinion of the EHDC that the 171 -acre site cannot reasonably be assumed for utilization as biological mitigation for impacts caused by the ENSP project. Further, it cannot be concluded in the EIR that the ENSP (a a impacts can be mitigated if the acquisition of mitigation lands Un San Sevaine Wash) cannot be guaranteed. In other words, - the 171 - acre privately owned EHDC site is unrealistically proposed for open space to mitigate the impacts of the ENSP project. Biological mitigation lands cannot be utilized by the Specific Plan until it Oak is reasonable that the lands can be acquired. we strongly object to it � these assumptions and findings throughout the Draft EIR. 2. Exhibits,. As a general co, =ent on the EIR exhibit_, the small inset i,aich identifies the Specific Plan area shows a hatched area identi °ied as "Sphere Area,',. Please describe and illustrate this area (National Forest) as it pertains to the EIR -. Is i;t not analyzed in the EIR due to nc._uses proposed? It is i••cluded in the Sgecific Flan boundary. is it included in the proposed annexation? This is not clear throughout the EIR. SPECIFIC COMMENTS (note: Any of the following requested changes or additions to the E[R t- shoOd include associated changes to the Table 1 -1 Summe %y, as nace,;aary and appropriate.] Section 1. E:.ecutive summary 1. Section 1_1,_ The above described challenge over the use of pri =..ate lands :for the project's open space (mitigation acreage) should be added to this lists the feasibility of obtaining private 1$-1 lands t,x the �toect's open, space /mitigation areas. Also, issues regardin, land purchase (funding) and maintenance to guarantee biological mitigation on a long -term basis 4houl4 be discussed., section 3: introc?uction 2. P_ag_e 2-3. Although the EHDC project EIR is not complete, the EHDC project shout be mentioned in the second paragraph after /g.z citing of the Hunter's R'ldge project, as the EHDC project pertains to the area in question ,and should be considered an active project. 3. Pa es 2_-66 and 2 -2. The EVDC project should again be mentioned in the last paragraph of page 2 -6 and first paragraph of page 2 -3 fe-S In relation to the acquisition of the San Sevaine Creek as mitigation. Section 3: Project D'eacrintion 4. Pages 3 -11 _and 3-13. Regarding LAFCO annexation and amending the City of Rancho Cucamonga sphe -e of Infl- .^e; it is not clear what z.zv7age /area (Exhibit) is proposed for annexation nzw: is the lg.4. entire project site to be annexed? Which portion(s) of the site are not currontly within tale City's Sphe :e? Please explain and illustrate in graphic form. Also, the required timing of annexation (and all other agencies' actions) in relation to current and subsequent project approvals should be explained on page 3 -12. 5. P_aae 3 -1 2. item S. "The project may require...a should be inn changed to "The project will require...", Based on other sections within the EIR pertaining to tiie CDFG Code Section 1601 -1603. Section 4:: Environmental Analysis 6. Exhibit 4.1-2. The legend references propertj greviiously annexed to Rancho Cucamonga. It is not Clear in the exhibL*,wheze these�«-6 areas are located. 7. Exhibit 4.1 -3. RS -1 is not identified on the legend. Pleas.e�16.7 er revis Exhibit. 8. Page 4.1 -2. Hunter's Ridge encompasses how many acres? I.IS -S 9. Exhibit 4.1 -7. The legend is confusing: the "Camphor" and "London Plane" appear the same, and the "Canary Island-Pine" is�1a'4 difficult to perceive on the exhibit. !LQ 10. PS3e 4.1 -18. Plant and Animal Resources. The statement: " the project includes the preservation of other onste allu-°131 scrub..." should be changed. Please refer to " General Comment" Al above regarding the incorrect assumrtion throughout the EIR that private lands can provide project mitigation acreage. Page 4.1-20_ top, paragraph. Repeat comment i10 above and �/g.11 General comment 111. 12. Pace 4.1 -20. LAFCO_ please explain more clearly and graphically illustrate the proposed Sphere of Lnfluence amendment, 16.12 proi sed annexation area, and previously annexed lands within -the proj:.ct site. this is not clear within this DETR. 13. Page 4.1 -22. cumulative impacts. How is the City satisfying its 1$13 affordable housing requirement? , 19. Page 4.1 -23. hitiaation Measures 1 and 3! The feast {lity if this mitigation measure is low, based on the private landho' ding of Is 14, a major portion of San Sevaine Wash (refer to General comment 11). San Sevaine Wash gannet be utilized for this Project's mitigation, until the lands can be reasonably secured. 1S. 2aae 4.1 -23, Measure 77.. The general locations of the 2e at •l.tional park acres should be identified, to understand this leis potential effects .on the proposod project. 16. Le 4.1 -24, Measure 9' This measure is vague.. Please quantify and °)eate the residenti" uses which are requested to be deleted by t s ,treasure, in order to assess the potential changes to ' he 18 Prc t; !LQ 17. Page 4.2 -4, Measure 6. Define "min", flood control 18-17 improvements." 18. Page 4.4 -1. The referenced do_uments should be cited and��81a incorporated by reference into the EIR. 19. Pages 4;4-8 and 4.4-9. The San Sevaine "Basins" are numbezedL�Bf9 in the text but the numbers are not described or illustrated. Please illustrate the numbers of basins in an exhibit. 20. Pages 4.4 -15, second paragraph. This paragraph is vague. The type o: flow should be identified at this time; will, the drainage 10.20 be channelized or will it sheet flow across the alluvial fan habitat? This could be a ractor in long term bitiogical habitat values. 21. Page 4.4 -17. dL.'igation. Me'Osure 1 should delineate who wot }d� 18.z1 determine the applicability if the Master Plan. Also, the Mas °ar Plan components should be illustrateul in an exhibit. 22. Page 4.4 -18. Measure 3: describe "expansion" and illustrate. Measure 4, last sentence: add "on a fair share basis." Measure 5: add "for each subdivision pro3ect." Measure 6 is vague in !z portions and would be difficult to implement, Add " on a fa--r share basis" to sentence ending with "... improvement, operation and mairtenance." The last two sentences are± not mitigable and should be .evised or deleted. 23. Page 4.5 -2. Again, the preservation of San Sevaine Wash as permanent open space is challenged as infeasible at 'this time 18 z3 (refer to General Comment 11). Also, no mention of Etiwanda Wash is made in this summary discussion. 24. Page 4.5 -4. At top of page regarding fires, it should be mentioned specifically where the fire destruction occurred. 18,24 consLderable disturbance to the alluvial fan sc -,mb habitat in San Sevaine Wash is Evident by resent surveys (Pacific Southwest 9iological Services, Inc., 1990). 25. Ea�a 4.5 -S, seconc to bottom EILISTaph. Again,-the reference to burning should be more specific.' Text should be revised to read: "...Much of the northern and eastern areas of the site,..." to reflect the burned condition of portions of San Sevaine Wash. 26. Page 4.5 -7, too. Again in _eeerence to fires: the area reduced in size" should be identified in an exhibit. 18 27. Page 4.5 -9. second to lsst paragraph. This paragraph strongly 2. st':,tes that the burned San Sevaine alluvial habitat would recover) /70 11 and "mature into the most diverse alluvial scrt.a habitat of the three washes." This statement is not supported by facts and should be deleted, Furt!iar, it is stated tiaroughout the section that the San Sevaine Wash is smallest the three. It 18.41 seems .that size of viable habitat is also an important factor i:Y habitat value and CoN-r diversity, when- comparing to available habitat within the entire specific plan site. San Sevaine, as `he smallest (by far) of the three washes and suurounded -)n three sides' by development, would appear to be lesr significant in overall biological mitigation value for these reasons. 28. Pale 4.5 -27, second paragraph. Of the 300 acres of mature alluvial scrub, 42 acres are to bs preserved. Please identify 300 and 42 acres in an exhibit. 29. P_aae5_ -23• Interzuntion of- wildlife Movement. The washes are contiguous to mountains to the north, but there is no mention 'Of the value os the width of each wash. Specifically, it should be mentioned in the text that" San Sevaine 13 smaller than the other 18.49 two washes, and further that`it 1. surrounded on the East and west by development and on t`'') souti� by Wilson avenue and flood control facilities, rendering the site less valuable from a wildlife corridor standpoint. 30. Page 9.5 -24. bottom. The acquisition of Sa. Sevaine for biological mitigation is critical, but may na;,bo feasible at this I J8.3c time. Further, the proposed mitigation would .,jc fully mitigate the biological impacts. 31. Page 4.5 -25. too. Thinning of vetiatatior a1z .,xd be quantified 18.31 and located. 32. Page 4.5 -29, Mitigation. Mitigation in general: the Preserved Open. Space Map appears to be missing, ''The map is critical to understand the mitigation concepts and Uhuuld le p,ovided. Open space acreage and locations should be shown it. detail in the exhibit. Also, the mitigation in this section does not cite or even explore the feasibility of land acquisition; the mechanisms to implement the measures; financing of programs, etc. because the biological mitigation; is critical to project approval, these factors regarding implementation of mitigation should be discussed in tha EIR, and progra ta� for implementation and monitoring s),ould be established at this t'ma. 16.3: Page 4.5 -30. Measu a 3: Based on General Comment #1, the EHDC objects to this measure. hsasure 6: Please provide an exhibit 18 3 illustrating the location and configuzation of the proposed corridor. / ?r - I Section 5: Alternatives;,` 39, Page 5 -4 The conclusion that tape Consortium alternative could 1l.6 have similar to greater impacts thar.' tha proposed project is not supported. Also, this ,aegtion is snort' -,nd not compieta from a 7,EQA standpoint. Please expand, Again, thank you for the opportunity to commert. If you hav'' any question concerning the above comments pl-ase contact John Cheng at (818- 4477633) or Larry Lazar at(71.4 -476- 2150). Sincerely Sing- i Jny Che President lb zt LETTER 18: ETIWANDA HEIGHTS DEVELOPMENT CGRPORATION June 20, 1991 1`'•, response It is noted that the commentator has submitted an application for development withir4 the Specific Plan area to the County of San Bernardino Planning Department. A County Development Review Com.aittee met �o consicar the completeness of the application on August 5, 1991, and continued the review to a date uncertain, pending receipt -,f revised plans. County staff has notified the applicant that thAy do not support this application. 1SE rs9Topot The aforementioned development site is designated Floodwry under the County';; GrAeral Plan Land Use and Zoning Map and open Space /Flood Ccntrol in the City's Generrwl Plan. No change of land use is proposed by the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. ISO a a se See Letter 17, Pesponse 17.2:. Further, the approximately 915 acres of privite; landholdings within the National Forest are AM eiscussed on page 4.5 -1 of the Draft :EIR and in Section 4.5.5, Mitigation Measure 1. in addition °co a land use open space designation in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, a corservat4.. easement shall be souri�t for the private lands within the National Forest and fc�r all land which it� intended to remain open to preclude development where hazardous conditions exist and for lands intended primarily for wildlife habitat use. Pleases refer to Resporse 16.5, Letter 16, Land Man Design Group, Regarding annexatis'c, an application for ex�."nsion of the City's Sphere -of- Influence has been filed with LAFCO for the approximately 915 acres of territory within the Natioral Forest. 1S.3 R12 ®ase Please refer to Letter 7, Pasponse 7.5. Please refer to Latter 7, Remponse 7.5. 16.2 Please refer to Response 7.5, Letter 7, rdlifornia Department of Fish and Game. Further, conservation easements shall be sought to the maximum extent feasible for all areas intended to remain in permanent open space. See Response 1£.5, better, 16,,Land Plan Design Group. - 18.4 resconse Three applications for annexation have been filed by the Ci'y with LAFCO and are pending (see attached maps); 1. An application to annex territory in private ownership above the National Forest Boundary to the City's Sphere of Influence; 2. An application to annex the area of the Sphere of Influence generally north of the existing? City Limit, south of the National Forest boundary, ease , of Etiwanda Creek, and west of the boundary of the City of Fontana; 3. An application ''-) annex the ,rea of the Sphere of Inflvence genes. -Ily north. of the existing City Limit, south of the National Forest oundazj', east . of the extension of Milliken Avenue, and west of �'. Etiwanda Creek Regarding timing, the annexation applications are on hold pending cez- tification of this EIR and approval of the Etiwanda North Spel.,ific Plan, (the prezone action for the area) , as required by LAFCO. Whei. the aforementioned actions are completed, the annexation kl ;plicatiores -rill f-gnntinue to be processed by LAFCO. Also, see °'Introduction to Rr.�ponse to Comments.1° 18.5 it®spcs8ls® Page 3 -12 of the CEIR has been revised and this information is hereby incorporated into YY= Final EIR a- follows: 1° The project would require a California Department of Fish and Game 160•r Stream 'and bake Alternation Agreement, in accordance with the ;Department of Fish and Game Code (Section 3601 - 160,1), because project implementation is expected to resu;t_ in the disturbance of riparian wetlands.4.11 The project applicants are required to conslilt with ACOE and CDFG prior- to grading. Please refer to Section 4.5, Mitigation Measure 16. 18.6 es Er0• Please refer to Exhibit 4.1.3 for an illustration of territory within the Specific Plan area previously Annexed to tI.e City. 18.7 Resgons® Please note that tze County Land Use Map does not include a legend explaining land use notations: Project applicants are expected to consult.the County General Plan and Development Code. RS -1 is a County Land Use designation: RS indicates- single family residential, "1" indicates that a minimum one -acre lot size is required. 18.8ss,. The Hunter's Ridge Specific Plan, located in Fontana east of the eastern boundary of the Specific Plan area, was approved for 2,121 dwelling units on 567.6 acres zpf land. 18.9 Response ! Exhibit 4.1 -7 is revised and incorporated into the Final £SR. Also, see the Etiwanda North Specific Plan for landscape planning detail. 18.10 Zms Pon s+ See Response 18.1, abo,,e. 16.11 Response See Response 18.1, above. Alh 18.13 Itesmcnse See Response 18.4, above. 18.13 Rexponsm The City's affordable housing Strategy is discussed in the Cit-Is Housing Element available in the Planning Division. A brief summary follows: As requires? by State law, the amity has prepared and adopted a Housing. glement as part of the General Plan. The Housing Element which was approved by city Council on April 17, 1991, sets forth an overall housing goal which is stated as the following: "The City shall provide opportunities and incentives for the provision of a variety of housing types for all eo: -)nomic segments which to reside in the community regardless of race, religion, sex, or income group." Toward attainment of this go,-_ the City evaluated the current and projected housing a, ads and developed a numbcr of programs and policies to facilitate the continued production and preservation of its hous.i.nc4 /7c stock. These programs are found in Chapter 2 of the City's Housing Elemeh.. A significant proportion of the programs put forth in the Element were designed to address the affordable housing needs in the City, including the needs of the homeless and other special needs populations. The estimated overe,il housing needs for the City as of December 1985, as identified In the 111ousing Element are shown in Table k--26 of the Element, a copy of which is attached. the total new construction reed for 7.04 as estimated in the Element were for 9,676 ncEh units of which 2,355 should be for lower intone aouseholds. However, th-)se needs were based on the assumption that the City's population growth and housing production would continue to increase at a' continuous rate. Since that time, however, due to the national economic recession, ithe.City's growth has lessened. tin addition, based upon existing vacant land, the C.'~y will be _able to meet the housing needs of all eoonoi c segments of its 'community heyond the five -year projection. There is an aduquate anount of vacant, higher density lard available to meet the affordable housing requirements o!= the City. As a result, annexations are currently not necessary to provide adequate sites for affordable housing. Consistent with, the City's; General Plan and he County's General Plan, residential development within the Etiwanda North Specific Plan shall be of -,tery low inten,Nity bemuse of the absence of existing infrastructure, because of the occurrence of flood, fire, slope, and seismic hazards, and because of the environmental sensitivity of the area. See Response 18.12 above. 18.1s RQA1 amfa Park locations will rot .chance, but will increase in size to reflect the additional 26 acres. See Exhibit 4.1 -6, Open Space and Trails Plan. Also, refer to rtiwanda North Specific Plan, revised August 1991, Table I, Land Use Statistical Summary. 18.16 IItlmpQns! The referenced area is generally north of Banyan Avenue, south of the LADWP utility corridor, east of the extension of Milliken Avenue, and west of the western 1 (ee of Day Creek Sproaeing Grounds. /7: RANCHO CUCAMP NGA HOUSING ELEMENT TABLE A•2kb NEED FOR NEW FIESIDENT:AL CONSTRUCTION AND SPECIAL NEEDS POPULATIONS AS OF DECEMBER 1988 Identified H�ous)n�; k. -s 1. 1936 Existing Dwelling Units 51,6;8 2. 19U Existing Households 29,80, 3. Lower Income Households ©verpayirg for Housing 31069 a. Total Very Low Income ' b. Total Low Incornm 4.6$9 c. Renters 1,346 Very Low Incoinq "3 Lovy incu;me 703 :. d. Owners 1,723 AV I Very Low invome Low Inwme 4, Special Newds Households 13,236 a. Handicapped;E+a6(1' b. Elderly -Headed 2,`,7(6 c. Large Famill @s 4,70S(3) d. Single Parent 2,02C(4) FOnVile Sisigle Pamnt 1,S83 e. Hamefts 25 5. OvWrowded l oufthalds ,349(5) 6. $ubsiandaivl Units 6) a. ."deeding Rehl bii agora Need.ng R6pleWaaent 1Q5 wrifin ed... General. Plan: City of Ras"Icho Ctigamonga 1 y\ RANCHO CUCA;MONGA HOUSING ELEMENT TABLE it -26 CONMNUED identifi4d Housing Needs 7. Five Year New Construc!.ion Needs 9.568, 7 'median) a. Very Low (0 -50% of J.117 b. Other Low (50 -80%) 1.258, c. Moderate (80.120 %) 1.729 i d. Above Moderate (1201) 5,463 8. Total New Construction NQfds (Line 6b + Una 7) 9.t,76 9. Needed Average Annual Housing Production to Achieve Five Year <. Goal 1,9358) 10. New Units Provided From I — 7/1189 to 1/1/90 1.890(9) (1) Estimaio from the Cky's 1M Hac Ring A&slsearc Plan. (2) Eatfmatad as 7.7 psrcatnt of aN accuoad , COrkF Writ vaN d* IWO popjlato.. (3) Estimate from the O.-M Af nUble KVj6kV Strategy, Tats I1-12. (5) Egiinwe fmm the City's 1S" Mou" (�lo. () Estimate trort: fY9@ Otyft Afftld'lb}i HCY:iitig Sfttegy, Table 11•2$, - (6) From the 1968 H&AIrig AtoEatan,e Plan N�". (7) I.Icbdes r pf3Ce -4 of d0flMMm per RkNA (a) IrVAIdes am replaCer;WA i&raU10; total Verapd mar a t>e ykV pa 4d. (9) . E?m2d can oli Fku= EsWimes for ti . GENEFtiAL PLAN,' CITY OF RANCHO C€fCA&tgNGA r, ,� t,; l Consistent Witt, State 1�4w and the aggregate resource policy stated, in the City's a0d 'the County's General Plan, this area shall be reserved frr aggregate resource mining unless an � alternative use is proposed. However, becauze the County Flood Ip Control District has stated their intention to pursue residential develcmuent in this area, infrastructure' needs have been `,dentified and included in the plan based on -the pc':ential for future residential development. Please refer to Response 16.11, Letter 16, Land Plan Design Crnup J 18.17 Rsaoonsr2 "Minor flood control improvements" refers to projact related ' improvements, which are reviewed on a case -by -case basis. !; 18,18 ROPIDonte See D£IR, pages 2 and 3. 18.19 Rejeonsw j There are 5 basins lacated within the San Sevaine Wash area south of Wilson Avenue. They are numbereu, 1 -5 from north to south, with basin one immediately south of Wilson Avenue. See Exhibits 4.4 -2, 4.4 -1, rnd 4..1 -2. For additional information,' please contact the San Bernardino County Flood. C-: rol District and /or the City's Engineering Division. 18.20 Aqsponse Please note that Mitigation Measure 3,- :Section 4.4.4 has beez. revised. The San Bernardino County FTiod Control District is reviewing alternative proposals for Flood Protsction for Etiwanda and San Sevrine Creeks at this alluvial fan scrub habitat within ttas aforementioned washes through a combination of levees and surf2ye flows above Wilson. Avenue. Hard lined channels are planned below Wilson Avenue, Regarding the increase of flow :ine *i urban s noff is quantified on a project by project basis upon consultation with the County of San Bernardino's Flood Control District and the City's Engineering Division. Also, see Sectio 4.4.#, Mitigation Measure i. The E'•tiwandaI5-nn 'Sevai.ne Area Master Plan of Drainage,, BSI, August 191,9 is on file in the tity's Engineering Division. 18.217cg$� This would be determined in cooperation with the San Bernardino Count: Flood Control District and the City. 18.22 Renonse Regarding Section 4.4.4, Hydrology, Mitigation Measure 3, please see Letter 13, Response 5. �i. U E Regarding Section t;4.4, Hydrology, Mitigation Measure 4, implementation will be on a project by project basis. Also, ar, Etiwanda North Specific Plan Infrastructure Phasing Plan shall be prepared to provide implementation guidelines. Further, the following mitigation measure shall be add6,2 as Mitigation Measure 7 to Section 4.4.4, Hyrdology, and is hereby incorporate, into the Final EIR: "An Etiwanda North Specific Flan Infrastructur,-%k Phasing Plan shall be prepared by the applicant and /or?thdcity to provide infrastructure implementation cfuic�2lines, to be completed no later than approval of any application for development within the plan area subsequent to the adoption of the Specific Plan." Regarding Section 4.4.44 Hydrology, Mitigation Measure 6, the MWD Conjunctive Use Program can be encouraged by project proponents. 38.23 as 4ns® Please refer to Responses 18A and 18.1, above. 28.24 Response Information on recent uildland fares is also available in the draft Etiwanda North Specific Plan Fire Protection Study, January 1990, which will be incorporated into the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. Copies may be obtained from the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, 6623 Amethyst, Rancho Cucamonga, Califorria 91701. 38.25 R@SD043l4 See Response 18.24. 18.26 ROSROUSO See Response 18.24. 18.27 R®SOODEC The Statement is the professional opinion of the biological consultants for the Specific Plan area, LSA and MBA. 18.28 Response In general, preservation areas sha ".1 be mapped in the Etiwanda North Resource Management Plan which will be completed and incorporated into the Etiwanda North Specific Plan prior to the first tract approval following approval of the Specific Plan. Also, it should be noted that preservation areas are located where development is not proposed. 1sz� i i c: 18.29 I I,1 Section 4.5, Bioloaicsl Resources, the San Sevaine has been identified as valuable for Als,uvial Fan = Scrub Habitat preoervation and wildlife�,1vovement. In Section 4.4, Hydroingy, the San Sevaine Wash ha i `. been identii ed as ` valuable Zor groundwater recharge. Gt8.30 RLs 2 one Se_ Response 18.29. Information on fire control measures including "thinning" is available in the draft Etiwanda North Specific Plan Fire Protection Study, JanuAry 2590, which will be incorporated into the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. Also see Response 18.24. 16.32 Response+ See Exhibit 4.1 -6, Open Space an-1 Trails Plan. Also. secs Response 18.2^ 18.33 Response► For location oc^ the San Sevaine Spreading Basins, see Response 18.19. 18.34 $,esponsee The DEIR indicates that the amount of priposed develc =dnt between the two projects is »i,nilar, althougia the consorlcii mis alternative may be developse'lin areas which contain sensitive biological resources. Pleas !refer to page . -4 of the PEIR. Further, the State CEQA f- tlelines Section 15126(d)(4) states that: "If an alteznativ:t would cause Ore or more significant effects 5 addition to those th9t would be caused by the prof' .ct as ?reposed, the significant .effects of alterna ive shall be discccssed`t: t In less detail (er- pbasis added) than the significant effects of- -.the pr;;ject as proposed." In summary, the Consortium's Specific Plan alternative proposes more area for development,, more dwelling units, and higher population, all resulting in greater �:::anpacts than the Gity's preferred alternative. �A� 1 0701-02 o SEPTEMBER 11 1991 P.C. AGELDA San Befnardi o Nattonst Forest as as as a lee (RC) PC` ®S s ` 03 1 Os „PS t p R = 1 yp Debts C O C' Storage PC OS FZ 1 - F2 F2 P :Si uG FC RC r YL XL FC(RC PC as PC WL. Re VIL PC (Rt.) uC It uc PnOF09ED- _ r — — •c,,, t r m, , FC AC NO RCl77oNAL RA7tl( ® �� ,. ., �"`'�� � (RC) (RC) uC L � Aver u - FC L N, atsnd Aveous uturo &A 39 t LEGEND ^� in�..a. v...,n��sf•..e t. CCw Cirstty Resthnttal ilN bUtlKh •,••.• ,,•. - ir(e Very t.ow Danaey Res4antiat V2 Du/AC) T %opoaoe 7ttee maid Gse's0 Stalbn Vdg. Vary Low Residential Estate tt DU /ACr Preposed F.tptaatrtaA FACINtr Meath Rest hmlisl K2 W /Not GuikiWe Acres —' KNside Rov%rsial Estate K, W /Net Buklaela Aare? S p,ogofae S.s,oai sins * i l 7 FC FMod C.MMUMtvafee UP ftWeaa part sHe k L UG utwty cw dor P [auttg tart Site op" Sbaoe - it sam. . IN institutional Tae our tue.esuf set w ar.nvr e.en w to M NciOM rtte rNetrN. TM --• •� r t FZ FAUll Zone areuttee a ...... weecmwt e..e a q.— I— .Kee vut e N eeN�ue • RaCaaee Resource Ctetaervation Area e.e. — ee — clt, see — sr WP beuKt (KC) N&*hbCrflwd Cotnmeraul * - (L.Vl. V%.E.RC) *onunu mum eeao use umaattoe LAND USE FLAN EXHIBIT 3-3 Air in o ,ot7a DRAFT i 3 t 17Z FHpWanl4vanu� r lS:1i[ O1 - - LEGEND , 1.0 Subarea Reference PLANNING APFA 6CFV MAP San G�m:rt no Rational Ferret OAKS i tTIWANDA HIGHLANDS - - UPPER E4 WANDA CHAQFIKY ! - - - -- - -_ —, LEGEND PYIaf W Pai.IM f Col i;PrM Lm aMa iai CMIMIr Naas _ �� OraWxarna NCPlarnq v.aevl. ...Q_ ®® MUM suempt" uvwraw nr k• WANDA MIGIM AIM luglax..aa e. „+,r • , MYNtanT 4 H I - _. as W.nrR nn CMlpna Ggpg ltauan. G-wdr" cumv wam tM- *MldWO 21enPa12 W .NVnr warm W Kasen of.KN PM uw n.rae. CatietM Syca tststAinvaMen Whew W —_ S.. IoW Cam rN tw N Mr ft Coil C+n7'a� LMa Cai /CeC'.' '7ie ®taat'0aR nlw our eaura W NNUn. slw waauri n C. pa.IrgP I faWa W — el C CPrarwa f.SW Co: an Cep LaMSrwe Catfarrtl0 S+JiMSetal.;Yrypi Ura Ott ti nala lase a CNVw wua aN CKiwaai ►us awmP IlaaR y L- IMNUQIAhkaR.ilasete na UPPER MTMAWA ftgSSs N..wN <ureetamN ar �— pv6Yp Had Ynt(tP]lI6rC hN! a.sler pl awei atnue W PastwR will: waelaM MNOat W s»y� wew CMVI IEINO P�6f W NaPla Or ttN16'1 MY W �PPpgN -- _ - 0#0" CattarnM Palb PaBP�P OINR e Tr CNflPtY bi{Marroa e' a eaalNUruai i. No-w uN Py. uN Pre. PP PN w sm11 t.a CPIaIaY 1.u1Nra. W Caa.M Y.0 CD 0. W N . la M wPtlpn n.a.P. . _ aaTt: ltCICD Prppwl.. Pam. 0Ra1.�oN1 PNPaiN NEIGHBORHOOD r EME PLAN EXHIBIT 31:5 PERM G E tom, ,�, ®WAFT /4a �� LEGEND Im Estate Residential 0-t WsIAO (Etiwanda S ® Very Low <z DUW/4 Specific Plan] a UZI LOW 2- 4Ws1A40 LM Low Medium +-s wvAc FL /UC FIc6dControl/UtitityCorridor 1 N Neighborhood tr ^mimercift Hillaide ReskY ;, let a w -mawww Acm E Existing Sehocia . as owswe P Acquired Psrk Site P Proposed Park 53.- %=&. no Biwa shown w" ml w ii"W" anwd h" )v tar baWa -2IP#d k. TM aepicum of a mme N h necawa M a omlectw tuned need • �N/ ft" 00 600t" WW th" 40 00 pry aM OW SO" Oftb et MvMLp. ��y\ m /p�F iA.�(iV'BCa®3C/ {�®C�UCAiV /�q �dV)��M'ay4//A t♦uOS�C!�! /�aw a fs.Y - {a! LAND USE, - EXHIBIT 4.1 -1 0 110800•• hoar DRAFT Y ff Y �WANES a I x _ slim LEGEND Im Estate Residential 0-t WsIAO (Etiwanda S ® Very Low <z DUW/4 Specific Plan] a UZI LOW 2- 4Ws1A40 LM Low Medium +-s wvAc FL /UC FIc6dControl/UtitityCorridor 1 N Neighborhood tr ^mimercift Hillaide ReskY ;, let a w -mawww Acm E Existing Sehocia . as owswe P Acquired Psrk Site P Proposed Park 53.- %=&. no Biwa shown w" ml w ii"W" anwd h" )v tar baWa -2IP#d k. TM aepicum of a mme N h necawa M a omlectw tuned need • �N/ ft" 00 600t" WW th" 40 00 pry aM OW SO" Oftb et MvMLp. ��y\ m /p�F iA.�(iV'BCa®3C/ {�®C�UCAiV /�q �dV)��M'ay4//A t♦uOS�C!�! /�aw a fs.Y - {a! LAND USE, - EXHIBIT 4.1 -1 0 110800•• hoar DRAFT Front Line Fire P,)ad VACANT LAND NATIONAL FOREST AREA ag&M Far t Ekistl .Spriogfs rdmea Mesk rn — —1 Mons Creek , Existing / 8� i Etcis�ig OutEunding rsi— - 2 Resklenoea Day ask Cast^. jl • Two Hornet an So" R" Ranger Statl n S8s ' e ` 'ay Cr ek Chasmel s SaaWaln ry _ EihratxirCre Chtuts.dt =: ii sa ands . _ w rA ;: Exist keg Letris 2r:• SS;x ;•:;:: ; r _ ��'.�:;�:�::�:�:;•: •.�.;;3 � fission Lns 9 :.;:.= z ter tipeilc _ '^ ;+ :•�.. Oatmset Pls se{t Station '*^ AiCFIJ 3aim Cr ''Q'• "••• On r— spMda n,. ® kt6vtaW Prpo" Prsvicu* Are*utl rp F01w:1-4 Cummonga. = Editing &494 CMSsWV coom Station ua. BgNtkal mveaaKfatoe LSAaleff"der . MWOWatH Traeamwsmo Loa • r t assist I eh&,IW Arne Orouearatar w EXISTING CONDITIONS AND USES EXHIBIT 4-1'2 1 DRAFT 'a � _ I�ie lemYr o Hstlo .l Ftlru! li FW P1111/110 Po ..i 1/10 PDij�10•— FD 1'. 11/2.8 Po 1/10 P011/2.8 RE-1 /110 P02/ 1 P02/1 PW (IN) • -- � - _ PDi /10 P _ -Igtr - PW po — • -- w 2 L"Tsi 7-9 ' � Q t3a n Street PD AdMk — — _ Eteic>LL_3emr: r»........ revr. ell tsaw LEGEND: NOTE M mortal m4rVnes f sordrq ms it ou d"W&tWm rawsw n neowne cwmkv or mtrimw pamm lim ftWyPrwl000ylumwedtoW ..KMGxamagt FW Floodway N/ Ioat"utional PAD Planned Development a PD 1 /40 -1 VU/40 " PO 1110 -1 DU110 PD 112.5 -1 OU/2.3 PD 1/1 =1 OU PD 2/1 R 2 DU PD 311 - 3 PO 411 - 4 ACRES ACRES ACRES /1 ACRE /1 ACRE DU /1 ACRE OU11 ACRE n.. ®. - nA - iIEEST o ,,oar ® I RS Single Residential (NI) Inferred 9nstitutional Des'tgltiatiat 1'" N BERNARDINO GENERAL FOOTHILLS RS 20M a 20,000 LOT COUNTY PLAN LAND PLANNING SO. FT. MIN. SITE USE AREA WMILLEY EXHIBIT 4.1 -3 DRAFT /ate LEGEND t�s Major Divided. Arterial All Typical Section -DaY•Ormk goukr ied mmumms Special Divided Secondary Arterial •W5[tm A vww (Nat of Day Crank cult.) Secondary Arterial 4jow pY Gak aouMra d �aW ao. Collector •eanm swat 'isoelw,r«AaWkp - •wtag a on" Nlaromtn euaoek mad •s.-m Mo. •Ens, h. unswans -0m Loraaftwa I ! �...��� ! �� San BarnaroMo Wtlontl forest I SS0' CURVE RADIUS ' �►�P °' ° °°��° 1 ® ssat°��o�� a! •�. t t` ti ` � I twson Aw A3 Al Al v atmn Awwa l e' �r ! era 4 ei A $!fat i _ _ ivaws ut a lS1E 0 LEGEND t�s Major Divided. Arterial All Typical Section -DaY•Ormk goukr ied mmumms Special Divided Secondary Arterial •W5[tm A vww (Nat of Day Crank cult.) Secondary Arterial 4jow pY Gak aouMra d �aW ao. Collector •eanm swat 'isoelw,r«AaWkp - •wtag a on" Nlaromtn euaoek mad •s.-m Mo. •Ens, h. unswans -0m Loraaftwa I C DRAFT iq4 EXHIBIT 4.1 -7 ,R fMQAKi MMwN11NLLNN[IWNI.rttN FKIM MW .Mi .. -�irLu rOrr•tw' T1.11 sL+G.]�E•�ND Wrti. cwnpmw OK. w KlM1Y of CW C .— OM. w CMIMM aw. �4rr1. w,. ♦i... ® ertnw..n c''�.�,.� WYYYY -.t•.t hm wkw" TY aTnUMA EN"AMS YYtyN11W� W N flslMq Statfan � CaMNY IitMW f+Y.OtRadkp MNWHItK. Y /IIN.pw. NLI.. W.Y.Nt4.M11. CMIpM' town. ma pearW IPawa w.K.Mt. KapMetw P.I. N 6 (WiOMW SrMn mlAWtiaten WM. — — t u'—= f^•.�.... �•I ^•LttiO tJaRifw7�iMMf Slier Gt T.. aY �QR a.y1nN.... N N MpKtpl... ►J vM1H Ilw.t .—..w K..tN..—".— II.a.NW t /� C SYCEIIIm/CMm UW ON fYN.i W a..Ml. CKINN.fR..IM..:aM CnKC aw...l. C H MI/. fpA N K.PYt YN. W CKI.rM PM MMw hNP - •� KiWWif MMW7�trkan SM.- i.. 9TiWA1®A - � tOCirfl ION MN /MM"pd flMiCtWNiW -0..1.. N• .nW WtM W ..Nl.r.• sR. Ntunl a..Y. W. CHIN. �JIN FYN WiMt..IMWIp. hNW JWM.N 0#0" cavio nta pa m h�.a. N.... • �' t TM CmAprxy .Ipp.N..a. N N sMKIPtItN a. +.•.. Nn ���. Iw WInN wMWWLMa Yn.P e.NNM friwn. w. I: lM OW w K..1 N wNtp.. apaK 116m ta:. aaaea hNN.t. •.M.a.NMPe..t NIMMY LANDSCAPE THEME PLAN DRAFT iq4 EXHIBIT 4.1 -7 ,R Is San aatnatai"o Nat—I Fotsst �. IIII�'y'� •' .'��1 i'jll� � � i i .II iil� i ' • �;i1'� !� q' � it iill � i;t �: � ��, 1!' �� a ; 1 •' . aaa Hy*QI y ahoy Ana i �'�T� •aal�aa�r.•sie�niw•alesoia ss ..�1 • GG// 1I�N'• ~ «•1ti....... y _�?:•f•. ? SSEC I • w /_ N _� J. LdGENO r•..,w. w..• �w.•i.. a.. ®•sacs• Waterways ....O41na itauen (A4o w" CameKy ■ t4st0 Chawtral - Qtaatar Than SC CFS) � �ifttnflda V1b0i1a11t1 ANaml Assoc ation ' COati Wash Asswatts'A tt ♦1 EIM4)" SAW "a w S taa � �. COStal Saps Aaaowtgn Semmc Atha ® • cwaa Akomst- PnoI*'too- Shj*n Ztw* a_ ®sass GryAO;OttOSpnaalSn#•Zav aONSTRAINTS SAP j Amt. EXHIBIT 4.3.1 l DRAFT PINES SPIN :t MRS, T. ,l. r.. c 111 1 " -- A 1 yyl I� 111 ..� n uA \ _ -+f-y . "1• !IN ul � i a, ., • ,: 41 AMS `t SF M. ON 1 Am EMCUrM SUMMARY lei dYlidOIDYTCTION The I3dwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP) area coiaprises approximately 6,840 acres, of which approxima'rly 530 wfes have recestly been incornoiateci into the city. Approximately 915 acres of tbA /,.-,QL=e specific plan area contains privately held parcels within the Sun Bernardino National i B crest, whim is outside the City of Rancho Cucamonges. Sphere of influence - The proposed II a mexation of Eawanda North would eate —rul the city's boundaries northto the San Bernardino Rational 1 Forest, as originally intended by the city's founders. It is the intent of the t-NSP to ensure that development of the study area occurs in a comprehens eve and systematic Me= that is consistent with the long- range development plans stated in the city's gen€ral plan The specific plan area is designed to extend ti:. ?ow %;cnsity image and neighborhood character of the original Edwanda community of Rancho Cucamonga north and west. Tne site is defined as having five neighborhoods: Day Creek, Upper Etiwanda, the Oaks, EdwandaHighlands, and Chary. Each JOIL of the neighborhoods is defined by large open spaces and is desigwsd to be distinct from the others. The project would allow for the implementRtion of 3,613 dwelling units, 28 aaes of neighborhood commercial development, public schools, and recreational Onog.- anitin, as well as retak ng 4,112 acres of the 6,640 -acre site in open space. —the open space system would include visually promiaeat zidgelines and hillsides; Bay-, Etiwanda, and San Sevaine creeks, and Day Canyon. The ridgelines, hillsides, and creek areas przvide a visual backdrop to the development areae and enhance the scenic nature of the ENSP area. The project includes a system of roadways designed to accommodate traffic from the specific plan area, as well as that projected to occur with development of the current general plan densities of the surrounding region. The ENSP establishes the arterial and collector circulation framework, while subsequent planning will define specific alignments and placement of local streets. The system of arterial roadways serving the specific plan am would be interconnecaxi with the Route 30 Transportation Corridor, which would traverse the soutbem portion of the specific plan are$. nruotecoosa 1 -1 1.2 Sil1AAV7ARY AE.SCREMON OF THE 1='SOPOSEW AMOIIT This document is a Program E1R. The City of Rancho Cucamonga is the lead agency for the proposed project and has discretionary authority over the primary project approvals as defined by Section 15051(6) of the State CEQA Guidelines. The city is requesting the review and approval of the following discretionary actions at this tirr;-,',; ® Certification of a Program Environmental impact Report (EIR) • Approval of an amendment to the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan • Approval of prezoning for parts of the ENSP • Adoption of tied Edwanda North Specific Plan Subsequent actions include, but are not limited to, master planning and tract map approvals. These actions would require an environmental assessment and may require additional and/or more detailed environmental study. Applicants o.' de 4cTwent within the ENSP area would provide additional environmental studies, as required by CEQA. 13 ]DE1VTffrIED AREAS OF COPITR(TYi AND j&%= TO BE RESOLVEQ There are several areas of controversy related to the project that were identified through the public review proness. The following summarizes those primary issues which could involve significant i environmental effects: I • Conversion of open space to planned community uses. 0 Intensification of urban land uses in proximity to existing residentiK uses neat the ENSI' area. • Loss of equestrian lots within the Equestrian Overlay District. • Extension of urban development easterly and northerly toward open space areas, and National Forest • Availability of future supplemental water supply aom the Metropolitan Water TMatrict. • Improvement of spreading ground facilities to -mprove groundwater n� ^• capacity. ® U ttimate flood control facilities at Day Creek, Etiwanda Creek, and San Sevaine t' Xk. Jszrota000sa 12 ?rt 0 lu • Doss of state responsibility area fire protection services for wildland fires. ® Future rjispositior of sand and gravel operation (rock cruaher) in Day Crete. • Funding for fuel modification maintenance in accordance, with the sNSP Fire Protection Study. • Funding for police services. Funding for parka to meet the city's general plan goal of 5 acres per 1,000 residences. • Removal of alluvial fan scrub ani biological habitat acreage. ® Generation -& substantial levels of traffic that will be added to the cirm. Agflon system. • View impacts to San Bernardino i+lstlonal Forest. • The impact o'.f the proposed. project on the natural and manmade environment, including but act limited to the following: - Existing and future circulation system - Biological resoure. - Aesthetic and topographical changes - Water and groundwater quality - Eloise increases - Air quality changes Issues to be resolved prior to project implementation include those to be considered in the review of the proposed project, and those to be considered during subsequent levels of planning. Within, this draft Environmental Impact Repork (DEM) are project altinnadves that are evaluated in terms of comparative em°ironmentai impacts. In the revie�,and consideration of the proposed project, the lead agency (the City of Ran ^.o Cucamonga) must als,i consider the project alternatives. Also during the review of this EIR, agency and public input may be received regarding potential impacts of theproject and whether or how to mitigate the significant impacts. Additions or changes to the mitigation m:asures identified in the DER may occur in conjunction with project approval and implementation. In addition to issues to be resolved as pary of this EIR, certaln environmental issues cannot be addressed at the specific plan or general pll�n level, because more precise development plans are needed. These issues will be addressed and resolved at future, more detailed levels of planning. Such issues are specifically identified within relevant sectim- ' this EIR (e.g., biology, topography, grading plan, traffic, hyd.- ology). I n�uts000s.i 1 -3 1.4 ALTLRNATIVl�.4 In accordance with Section 15125(d) of the t12QA Guidelines, alternatives to the proposed project are evaluated in this DEIR. The Alternatives Section (Section 5) provides a descriptive analysis and evaluation of the following alternatives; • No Project/No Development • City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan • County of San Bernardino General Plan • Consortium of Etiwanda North Landowners Alternative i.5 L+NVIYtONl61Et►1T1iL C 'S AND tiFiiTt('A'IION tIEASUM j The foliowtWg pages provide a setmmay of the pote;<tiat impacts i the proposed project, measures that would n Wgate project - specific and cumulative impacts to the extent feasible, and remaining impact of the specific plan project after the application of mitigation measures, The significance of each impact before mitigation is indicated by abbreviations that parenthetically follow the summary statement. These abbreviations are: S = significant impact as defined by the California Environmental I uality Act (aQA) and NS = impact that is not significant according to CEQA. ra2rotaoassa ` < 1-4 u I wd jal { 0 d oa w � N � `Y " . �' EB E N C� N . :^. °� •� °O • � `sad � e as � ,g � � ''� r � .. v ° 85 1p���WO= N- 4) N LL �,��`t E,a CIS •O nt �� BEgyy � oq G .sJ 0 i o` .5.3.5 G y • E D c� 1 m Nq, �••� U T o" b tee � E'n w `i caGn e3 G7 O Inn qq d V d � d o � a as a °c'Ga 4i 7 � v� g >a w a Ask •y` d E a„ W W � d ls �. GGPf�� ,o E I. y�M.•� p��'Q,�:70�� a',�$�m; °mac al�a � �xCab�b$CJq�j�'(•���a�yy,c,,,! •ate �wa�°°.� ya°�w Las e � � �CC E Ci. C. •. R L 9. ,� W yy W �. L ��yf+ +s 11 & v,''J �r�C`+s��. L a GJ��'iea a t,,$v� \�rn� �Z cg a�'.: w �o G�� F r r OW J c> � a y Cd r O G O "C d).,,y d N 611 ✓s+{� � C a' � ©= z+wQ e Z v v p �_ ari skaa 5- ° QH �o a 5 A aaIc tau-3 94909SmpD 3 w a `Se,s A .7 Orman —Ec . L am St'bE cc N �• cr�Qyc�.�3 �;n...N �•o e �a�`° � .v 1--M a v c. 00 �1-1 0 • Vl p1 r O W Wd E� a L E S r � er _ a C7 a, vg_S * =I D 'O O C VJ ni Zf •� 30°0�•�3@ o;Oto� N B ade Z p L �x �s °u!. any v r O. ego 1t •nq s r 2 o 3 .7 Orman —Ec . L am St'bE cc N �• cr�Qyc�.�3 �;n...N �•o e �a�`° � .v 1--M a v c. 00 �1-1 0 • [ 11, I E .4 zcc C� tog a M c-i M m n I n F-. rg- 5 g can I I E ID jo, 4 CC, cc A M. s bo J:l t4 cc -A . im 0 C2 CO C4 w do U 4• Gz7 E to w� a� w� - ca a U v C O u :i 3 r 'vrj Al rA c m a.� ° c Q $ m °.mac rs ea cb o Jo o o um «w a C a o tav°i w o "n, �,' w '� $UQ a o.c Z'620 � � � 5 I t', E I t', v WC U E• O� a� w a n -8 leg 1 .8 g Sw ' n t o s u n, � C4 mac. � b vii G g+ t0 E Al V Q S/ BE ,opt,.c a .c xs. d as c � •E � a � E 3 'tee+ E 'n 'a '°�' �. $o araaU �lfI z e � .d •� p W �yy y■ K n -8 leg 1 .8 g Sw ' n t o s u n, � C4 mac. � b vii G g+ t0 E Al V Q S/ BE ,opt,.c a .c xs. d as c � •E � a � E 3 'tee+ E 'n 'a '°�' �. $o araaU �lfI z a� a i h. ARL d 0 R Q 'iii .0 C: ca 6>i1 E a� `eta ^a *gb L3 yR M � N � d eyy C �. to � � N •� Q m � 'C, O bL.�+ 'fl t1. � > •... f9 bp T._ ro R i. O O ig =8 `"R =ate$ e«, , C Or u .a OCpC 'Ctsf SRS 42 �+ ro Gs7 �p ed c ° r ma yo "a ?: �od� fl per+ 1.m. .> LC'S . iii. z .4 Er v 7 = _U .o a 9<6 �a cw � tii A Plc I, G •.G d i Ap .> v a�1-0 > a 8 ° .maa y 8_" �a pw a C ay CA m oy w .omljF"Evaiy`�c`��;��''F+�' Mas �,,. Cd a�.i a •� � � � . � 4'. $ . � � C � y� y �O o � ,+ y � .�"�r �o mio SSV�' °U n <tv3 a.v eS cas �U, cm O ��rrrr W 2 ffi � =gam a y `a e S •E, y - o CIA „r 3 irk eG i+ fd � Aa Ug �d 47 y W W Wd a: G, a 1 X17 VJ 3h ,•orac6iR% ri y :5 R A O A O m40 a 0 6. v9 %0 a3 •a 6S E W B. d1l 'A l v �� 1 X17 C w zz ch �e v Fit I Q�:rr G Fi d s 8� �w � CG gag 4 s z. C rl �CeO G Ca.bQgCm V V o.�� I Q�:rr G Fi d s 8� �w s z. C rl �CeO G Ca.bQgCm V V o.�� C ... a V V "". •�. O a O R C O V & • •d C 6 °° p r= IS ^� bC m �^ � � o •G �d � � � �q O, C b. 4 O � � O � .�. N N � .i3 �,C�+ y d P N. r ZIA E-9 odd= t°do9 a All = E ,u E2'����'�E v ^^d ,per iy ;r nra O R � � g R W� E� ^1 Y ✓� C"� � C � y � tom. a�1 G. t'. G ii+ � �,• �' (y •� b0 C� y y C O O E V O 4:2 C. IT`� es c Y tiA � Q v •CC1 � y .Ci .�C'. �Y C.7 aa: av, oo,u c�:i nr5w� 4 Q 61 W �1 'u Vl •E��a 0000 0 C p 6 ° W tr: 9 C R A C� 6B �' 6Y � �• OAO U O t:. de Y w o ° N .0 - C= OA9 v u tdti � v �o •'� 3 . 'O N O 3 Q vv v N ®® 1 G " { a� r ° w O0 o av � N y l c W •� a � K rA rA ■ w <o UE �d 69 �+ rA X 099 W, � d W a od W i Q d F 2 w� Y�l RO 3�}+� u_^a° Jv crs O v 19 th a6,yoa �E3° $ �C°�CJV1fi,.a.� ��CGA^+UaN3mOJbA�v .c yj Q iy9q»� Y 4 0 Y CW �� C Y 6' m a Ci G rnP. - VA , a s.5 t ,. KR^ o•; 3 �`� au o y ff % c: d s ? c V . y O Y ?Y t0 its a C� do Noll a n'3p S a ae C a0.1 all ca r r a •R o ,. r• ... E m o'r °w' =� w en v.. c� e oa a� r w a q �•3 a $c_ aS 0y ` 3 n: a `° c�•,°�° y E� c© `aim o? yepn o y ro, t:pvppi°$w F S o 3 `g am L:-.- @ y i� $ 0 3�'" � u . •� N CC •� C o• �. .O l� "' .C�• N. d. .n. d 6i •L' C. G V S+ aRr. y V 'R d... E 'O 3 �c a N r s e+i v 1f II e a U_ Im) w Q O r W �- ,a � w w� w d ;•� w vs C4 h W a O' G t�o 3 4.a C1i1 t� d O O? N y O 4 a, O M $ ° o m� Agra qw may t° `' ago rn ai- ti as vs J. a Z O_ f w :1 U� 2 R Ee °0 k W � ed �. D.0 O''.0 43- 'aig �Ta O..G d O _ 2 � F� C3 v A- a >. O a�i � •.°. w y " o PEE OD a� as a '2 o ta 02, •6p'' e m rJ m l, :iL moo $ �`ip O R d �' °ai s,,,..� •� ~ L�i a+ G VJ !p 0 u �. e) C�C C+ 04 G 7 w a)cJ C wpO 6iC7 w ANIL C 3a-1.2 B av�A 3 i 3t� �'W 4cv( C o0 Or O '5 u O w A � � � G A 06 A c e ry m u . t Q .G E 4 //>� o-a zz S v p P� V7 srw 099 (NiJ vi 4 � All �fa w OFi E E oa,$^r�A •� oe� �i s�gap �.c v �y� ��� .moo ♦r .+.•� �.o '�«• �$ •_� 7 N via R 'o iii v L•'� 2 v"Cy� p pq�'�" N U O as ru�y�� C C N n 11440 2 h� E as s 6. m o0.° •r bra �� �•y I V .�•• C' 0 '� UU 6i tum r� 0 y9 aap qti, c01 �o.E�e3N ao G^ V E» cz � C� a al v on Via= k U ed .a 3 .fl o tr CO � QY y,{78' a� �; �c+,y9w a L�ea1 oc m _' IG ~ •g o a V b ^� F -Sp .Oo Q Q p �v T.' p O m.O Q G p" oU QQ A Q C Q 9:6C o 53`Mld a u c al v on Via= k U ed .a 3 .fl o tr CO � QY y,{78' a� �; �c+,y9w a =P. oc m ^� F -Sp .Oo Q Q p �v T.' p O m.O Q G p" oU QQ A Q C Q 9:6C o 53`Mld a u c y,o 3 r� to a U ld r1 �+ zz J C Gi Eii a � ^r $ 4 a E 6s. 0 m� N H ems= I'li o l tz} ' r"4 m Own$ Cd O9 a_neK» C N y.A aZ 3�CCy b c �t ��yyppll •-n°, w we n, ° o � E, v. O O u ra e v� v p 3� a� 3 iy tl cg ci fia 9_4 C6 d 1n A' {. dAlk yy \� L&� CA - Q n a >e� d _ l W ¢t .y �. � O �" �. w a•'�7 fl••3 .�C � � C eC C v O. C6 E3 ZCd�. Qy S y o /aDp t70 �y Sul E+ E cg G�$�.om ry Q ifs C9d 0. �ra�� y C .�. t C LEA 'a 3; >c G`� +a N 7 �A CO 4 d o, °' a -oi3q, yEdwIoayr. p aGi epe° a q ram 3 +di cm �i Co �' at �xt °p er tg A = L °'4.8 , V -a o'a a d J. s - dd E b j p7m aco d as c9 Gn a�La -4p cu aL_ a! l 8 d 5 9 co d� rn a7 _ Sao u q n w 04 �a w p ce a w M. a I w O 4 G9 G� • 4 0 0 �'$ as gsbal���•�`° wr��A �`� =`� �.� � Eimer Ott o e So— ca r co cs ci CD co CSC sGr r� C M�: l W U �O it - 0 61G W ;t .� O S.` o „�" � •G O C .215 � d. � � .. � L � � .e.. a. H Y � .L � � AWL FA A I C3 Al ry •� CO it1 F��q .s.. � C.L Wu.O .° �".•z pp as C4 CD pr w s1..a 96 N C G, a O d 4 U tea+ r 1 - a R� .�pO .� `i 3� �y�j � � D �. r $ j� •� ii � '.F y3 � � w W a. �. y. p v O .O 4s .tl O tl � (Yy � pp •OQA Ir tf�j' 6� Eli ca R IL o"� �cQ C 0 r r 40 w b W v 0. O� a "p• w .c� m �_ ate+ G ,��• w vi O y� W CL I es Ilp E' �•;��E a ®dm81 a m Z s E W rrt�� U Q a c�a U �C U G�p7' O� W ° � m Q%PCp,$e�% r m G x0 JRi y ° z ' a an an d C ° rA C G V, k, tSivs�� pEg N *" M o } M y C m4A 14 w e� '.b `.��9 CO��O V O� `°j'� � �..�0� �H d�t�L'M�U•' d � Q 'O yt �qa •r, •r 'O ,�.. .O Cr R E y . L 'O p •c Z E as s � � � �. � � � °o � a 3 .� � o x c a ���ea �a�oL:g = rny�° �b 8 „as _C1 y � _ s , n 'o ��jeyy� C OQ 1O �D 1�7 m L M �/ Zo •C ��QJj N � r. v m �: O x x�� x N y Q MIS OV �.' �•, G0 Vl. �O nor F. i.: V 96� rUn '�"•rw.� ".v vH'yv�i�.� � y � �.' r C4 6y e'tea s.�b$� vp�i�,6` 1R�` N R E. 5 �o I oa w w� .a d �� � � a., � m•� m m m�� m c c �M3 � _ � � •� ;mow ,,,,^ �,8 m� • :cl o mmo m'�'c'^�ee�cs,d$w mc°�c a" d' mMaE- vJ o.., w� ro;e oao�• d as is arm Uv�Ow e 6 O F lac AOL UE O� W D J M C H �} ``� N t0 q a.' y cd u. c. �. +4' O C O � v•C � � � � � d'.. c,i �%'� 7. � y C. id O CF4 W �In b a i3r C R O a`3 r -� m' v •ti N �+' pig Q' O TS C C1 q ►W.7 , v o.�o cz v v o° gym` ,': =: a `� akiar� E E �y „. "fig.. W O. ~ m srn Vl '�'i' y w. .� `� �p r�8 w e~�e G o `..i Cs cY �Cj E �w1 fV yR. O a .� .. _M '�•` '.ii. O: AR ti, c �•� l6 �i U v Q�i '�'a Q� V: L 1�/A .Cr' 6 itl OC •91 � F' m •~ C Q _ o e a o N '� rte• 7 C •C V Q Z o d I� i` 7`7 W w a gi too �. .,.. � Is 'Npsa �� ooh ° 3 tO 1 �'y°° �o"'n�S Ask j IN e e 0 iii w U 4 W _R a ^QQG� °�'o Sa ° Eb $t Eg 8 w e+D° m N• RS e� � V L G .+ . I ra y d � tq � � q. �• N �° '� y :.. �� c 6 r U I n I a oc� wo m C O Q�+,;m�ca�`rn,� 6y� m h o i u p w C Z R" •� C �L O °0 O 3 O y- LL a a. ep 2 .°. °o ooh a e 6 v z O E _ 9r.� cod 9 41 Z, A a Mg b a N E;j It .24 'A "21 s"m a fx Yol 1 .5 ag ,I .1 SID a 0 IOU eel C r 9 41 Z, A a Mg b a N E;j It .24 'A "21 s"m a fx Yol 1 .5 ag ,I .1 SID a 0 IOU eel i� L � ca w G H •$ Q v a � ar 1� w d O W a W a� 6° �y d d •" `ed a'i `i U G= p m.'� R nr 3 to d „ . cg C it '909 0 040 p4' N ' q+ a '! $'i M o M w AML ••gypp 55 ��. �(r� L� Q .00. :o so u lu-, 0 o ° O c5 "a ,° Ij •_ � 0 Zvi o .I R L <N .9 .y an •� '00 m p9 C i M YS ° a of "Ld °� CQ6 i9:9 1V 9:6 -9 1yf �p N .1: M-M lC 1'a QQ F V1 'O 91 tas cc I cc u -ice SAL n cd c � r d W p w d WS 4",. Q . r w C7 a CD 5:1 4.' a co r w °� izi H a c :a 3 aa. 9� -ZZ w a 4 f rr d I f c4 d gm C c:5 G y {i U CZ r a d+ W + .r O � � C ba y 'o �C o ° o �.Uw° •y to ^. ��ra P 7q o 3 y. ca N ° w LS e0 e,a i, °gym u F^i 1, A d ..�'. 0 C .a K y. � O � q p 924 G y 5 S= a la �+ ca a� o to ° >f3a$,;y� •5 �oy� N dt @ .0 'a Y � G y � T7 .np ♦a... � � Lam• � V � � � : N y'+ •��. u.Al cad a.°i�•o v c,a.nape'Da'$ d.a 6 ora e€: D 3 �wrr�° to°° c 3 .. ba a eo n ''sE= aac�iE�°,�e E6E CL !" Q. .�.' c�. :M „�.•> w a alt n O .��' _� � $ ' ..a-i <ar�i � ° f rb oc ° C4 to ^. ��ra P 7q o 3 F^i 1, A d cc g v xx � ° f rb oc ° PUB RE: im W r � a.t4i ci! wACI�U 1;� aq�q o e. s i •y 9 0 �u"`� C Ai UD w I mr 45 w-o eo z o. Ego cg Sao 0, IS at s CL Y'ow 6 Wrap ti{ ' o a S4 Saa f� va a W e, r G`n C Al cc -j OGN ^.. air••,, ..0 r. ^� aim A E+N� o a ee m �•r�h • • ® ® ® ®� • ao I ei O �V W U U -- EI J1 lable 4.8. Summary of Mitigation Measures (to be constricted or funded by ENSP development) TIMING` _COST ESTIMAIE LO—N-Srm VMM St (00"It awl of city .Pi; ;I froca Day Qw* Er.,d to cast city Limit) Gmpkft norm Bciofe imame, of aide of special bulkling perraiL.) for divkkd wrmduy ancrill Day Creek Blvd (Wilson St to SR -30) Ziinruue[ ms or Eddre binamncc , divided ameAl building percitis for Phase I PAJ*- StISMunit Ave (Rocbesta Ape to cowu= couccw Bilom finance or 4,000 ft cast) stteei buildint permits for 1.%0 DITs Vintage Dr (Rochester Aw to 4,000 ft. east) C..t.4 ,Uw� Bdom bouance oc street bWW4 p:FWj. f0f 2,500 DU o XVd= St (bMhkm Ave to Day C*A rihd) Coc'm Monday Bdom anulact a set l Wrxft P:Udts for Milliked Avc (WL= St to pAnpa St) Qkgtrxl major Befixe'�usass of buDdinZ pe-ft for 3,3W PM RcjkxW LrWcvcmewg EdW _ftq .h Sbj= Witt iMao= of 7,236,000 Oce) 'hadn Permits VW1100" St (Day Q-e* BIW to cm city am Backbone Edom bimmum or 3,140,000 waft Penzit. for Filacle I Day Cmrka!4d (SR -30 to Bssa= pA) Before brtzom at IMZ" &Aft PwWU for I coo atre Chem A-6 ORkon St to 1.15) Bxkboae seem %suance of I'S70,000 Waft PU-ft for I" DM Ha eH= M (E* Creek Blvd inwraeakitt) IMPUM to wlkuft Edme kmt= of 540w hill "I PC-us for jj 1,500 We But Ave (W-dsw St to K8bI Ave) B-AbTc; Beflom jl u . of bIng pxtju f- 3-1a DEP# Bab= or oNigation to dly of IWO Fair shah s< VAEb k" uswe of 193.00t; detEr'"dow �j buliclIc—petzits; TOTAL 9=10mcla mom J1 rzWza � o_ O � CIS C a .,sw e �yVi yy°°rs►�,� Voj R, •i9 tom'.. d. 61 �'' N .� 6i... y` � 66c77 � � vOuU ", C. � � ice... a4o Q� 3.:3. � .+ N �.p�•1 e7. ID bp cc cy A M4 w°Y���w6«�S 'CC Lei ts r Gr w O+ �• °,G v�bo�°d n, C �aim�.c 3�ati$ r 7 L-Y �F tea , w a � w- dd��°�°�ffi�� •���a�Il �� w y cif ZO Q SRI e � w g o F y� M w o 1.2 tea , � �� dd��°�°�ffi�� •���a�Il �� ,o o o E $ e'$?t y cif m 9 Q SRI y� a El cad ,gyp+ faaJ cu m y�.�: K T = S $ o,,� 10A I c CUII h F d? o R i -90 - ffi o: � a f.1 C N•py C v'S�+ W - i T.:. � t% ry 1 � r GOB Y. SA = e'a � � � d y Effi�s mug - t wa ID Ma 7 C y 6T i\ (al c7 y O > 60 ffi Ou ad Si .ct±� 12 e �o _ gm 6 A C z a) •C9 c Q •LO. O L� y Gl al 0 - W j AI V o 1•C1Y � Rf •�i o � � _ g Lfpoii � E Fd� 42 5�.�� rEp�, �" G. ',� f p�p��a� V .V. pp 0� dQ i o,E- = aa4 Jq Lo _ ;' d • e 4 �ang��O •Q a A O O' Z f�OJ v �y 7� C ; pp r 030.. cc OM 4C O' a�ye$a C0 X O '��Ee�a•'�a r �r� la w Qa W� a W � � g C z N 'a. T t3 C c a t; IZ d e � •o n °cc�'1t c°3a � Sig E S aL N t 1.4.2 UNA UO E! lu E C rf O W v m F �a �z �O ,�,■ O � rEl :ira Q r� T a 9 Fr O a E n go N � ^ encN " a O t. R CL [.cu MA E c3 ea 5 a y :3 ..�.. 6/ y 'fl Y i►� GC.. � 6. O6 d •� s G v ... Ra A Erk Ow c+ • a w C� C H Q G ^d U •(D. N •y b v cc LU) rA L^ •p G m N •� •� � ter. i/J 'y •d •G c7. !+ ''� .O N 1di 'Q Lq•' i� v .D.pi w° w p use •� d" U-- CIS o W a w.. o -a I 0 tin a O _ � cc cc U%SAW o o � U � ra a e _c ' a ,kld O �c cc zT .°> K iE �O o vi E c V4 O _m �.m N •N CN.. �43 r'Cn a cat O .1E w aC m _ • 'O [ 6, GTi nd c3�e�a �A G1.a ",04 o C' o v a aye m to u ao 'IV u Cry >c w d ° �y �� it e5 N AAL 35 2.2 Lip v Al rr asyy x� :_ ^ ace C �.. C m W y N _ U o p iY+ F a ZA0.Lt°. A 0 O • p. vx�'��