HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-30 - Resolutions RESOLUTION NO. 06-30
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OFTHE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF AN
ORDINANCE TO ENACT DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT
DRC2005-01003, A REQUEST TO AMEND SECTION 17.32.030 OF THE
COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL LAND USE REGULATIONS WITHIN SUBAREA 4
OF THE FOOTHILL BOULEVARD DISTRICTS TO ADD HOTELS, MOTELS,AND
MAJOR HOTEL FACILITIES AS A CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED USE AND
COCKTAIL LOUNGES WITHIN MAJOR HOTEL FACILTIES AS A
CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED USE; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT
THEREOF.
A. Recitals.
1. Charles Joseph Associates filed an application for Development Code Amendment
DRC2005-01003, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject
Development Code Amendment is referred to as "the application."
2. On April 12, 2006, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a
duly noticed public hearing on the associated General Plan Amendment and Development District
Amendment applications and issued Resolution No. 06-28 and Resolution No. 06-29, respectively,
recommending to the City Council that General Plan Amendment DRC2005-01006 and Development
District Amendment DRC2005-01002 be approved.
3. On the 12th day of April 2006, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and recommended approval.
4. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of
the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A,of
this Resolution are true and correct.
2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the
above-referenced public hearing on April 12, 2006, including written and oral staff reports, together with
public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
a. The application applies to the property located within the City; and
b. The proposed amendment will not have a significant impact on the environment; and
C. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will
provide for development within the district in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with the
surrounding development by permitting joint development of varying uses already listed in the General
Plan including, but not limited to, office, hospitality, food, and commercial land uses that will provide
support uses and services for the nearby Regionally-Related Commercial Districts; and
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 06-30
DRC2005-01003 — CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES
April 12', 2006
Page 2
d. This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Development Code by
allowing the innovative use of existing development standards to expand the range of uses within a
development project; and
e. This amendment would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare,
materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties and would not have a significant impact on the
environment, nor on the surrounding properties; conversely, the amendment will allow for office, retail,
hospitality, and food uses to be integrated into a master-planned development under one land use district;
and
f. The proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan and objectives of the
Development Code by continuing a policy encouraging quality development through the innovative
application of existing design standards.
3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the
above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2
above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows:
a. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will
provide for development,within the district, in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related
development; and
b: This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Development Code, and;
C. The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety,orwelfare or
materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and
d. The subject application is consistent with the objectives the Development Code; and
e. The proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan.
4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative
Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the
application,the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a
significant effect upon the environment and recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a Mitigated
Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, based upon the findings as follows:
a. That the Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated
thereunder; that said Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the
independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and, further, this Commission has reviewed and
considered the information contained in said Mitigated Negative Declaration with regard to the application.
b. Although the Mitigated Negative Declaration identifies certain significant environmental
effects that will result if the project is approved, all significant effects have been reduced to an acceptable
level by imposition of mitigation measures on the project that are listed in the Mitigation Monitoring
Program.
C. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the California Code of
Regulations, the Planning Commission finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the Initial
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 06-30
DRC2005-01003— CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES
April 12, 2006
Page 3
Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project
will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife
depends. Further, based upon the substantial evidence contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration,
the staff reports and exhibits,and the information provided to the Planning Commission during the public
hearing,the Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section
753.5(c-1-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations.
5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this
Commission hereby recommends approval of Development Code Amendment DRC2005-01003 to amend
Section 17.32.030 of the Community Commercial Land Use Regulations within Subarea 4 of the Foothill
Boulevard Districts to add hotels, motels, and major hotel facilities as a Conditionally Permitted Use, and
cocktail lounges within major hotel facilities as Conditionally Permitted Use as described in the Resolution
and shown as Exhibit A of the Draft City Council Ordinance by adoption of the Draft City Council
Ordinance and including the condition shown below.
Planning Department
1) The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought
against the City, its agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance
of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The
applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees,for any
Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or
employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The
City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense
of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his
obligations under this condition.
6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12TH DAY OF APRIL 2006.
PLANNING C MMI ION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
Patart, irman
A,,ATTEST:
Dan Coleman, Acting Secretary
I, Dan Coleman, Acting Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do
hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed,and adopted by the
Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission held on the 12th day of April 2006, by the following vote-to-wit:
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 06-30
DRC2005-01003— CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES
April 12, 2006
Page 4
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: FLETCHER, MACIAS, McPHAIL, MUNOZ, STEWART
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT CODE
AMENDMENT DRC2005-01003, A REQUEST TO AMEND SECTION
17.32.030 OF THE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL LAND USE
REGULATIONS WITHIN SUBAREA 4 OF THE FOOTHILL BOULEVARD
DISTRICTS TO ADD HOTELS, MOTELS,AND MAJOR HOTEL FACILITIES
AS A CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED USE AND COCKTAIL LOUNGES
W ITHIN MAJOR HOTEL FACILTIES AS A CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED
USE; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF.
A. Recitals.
1. Charles Joseph Associates filed an application for Development Code Amendment
DRC2005-01003, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the
subject Development Code Amendment is referred to as "the application."
2. On April 12, 2006, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the associated General Plan Amendment Development
District Amendment and applications and issued Resolution No. 06-28 and Resolution No. 06-29,
respectively, recommending to the City Council that General Plan Amendment DRC2005-01006 and
Development District Amendment DRC2005-01002 be approved.
3. On the 12th day of April 2006, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on this application and recommended approval
by adoption of Planning Commission Resolution No. 06-30.
4. On May 17, 2006, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly
noticed public hearing on the associated General Plan Amendment and Development District
Amendment applications and issued Resolution No. 06-28 and Resolution No.06-29, respectively,
approving the associated General Plan Amendment DRC2005-01006 and Development District
Amendment DRC2005-01002.
5. On May 17, 2006, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly
noticed public hearing on the application.
6. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred.
B. Ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and ordained by the City Council of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. This Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A,
of this Ordinance are true and correct.
2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the
above-referenced public hearing on May 17,2006, including written and oral staff reports,together
with public testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows:
CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO.
DRC2005-01003—CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES
May 17, 2006
Page 2
a. The application applies to the property located within the City; and
b. The proposed amendment will not have a significant impact on the environment;
and
C. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan
and will provide for development within the district in a manner consistent with the General Plan and
with the surrounding development by permitting joint development of varying uses already listed in
the General Plan including, but not limited to,office, hospitality,food,and commercial land uses that
will provide support uses and services for the nearby Regionally-Related Commercial Districts;and
d. This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Development Code
by allowing the innovative use of existing development standards to expand the range of uses within
a development project; and
e. This amendment would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare,
materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties and would not have a significant impact
on the environment nor on the surrounding properties; conversely, the amendment will allow for
office, retail, hospitality, and food uses to be integrated into a master planned development under
one land use district; and
f. The proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan and objectives
of the Development Code by continuing a policy encouraging quality development through the
innovative application of existing design standards.
3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the
above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1
and 2 above, this Council hereby finds and concludes as follows:
a. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan
and will provide for development, within the district, in a manner consistent with the General Plan
and with related development; and
b. This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Development Code,
and;
C. The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or
welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and
d. The subject application is consistent with the objectives the Development Code;
and
e. The proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan.
4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative
Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for
the application,the City Council finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a
significant effect upon the environment and adopts Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring
CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO.
DRC2005-01003— CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES
May 17, 2006
Page 3
Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as
follows:
b. That the Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines
promulgated thereunder; that said Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared
therefore reflect the independent judgment of the City Council; and, further, this Council has
reviewed and considered the information contained in said Mitigated Negative Declaration with
regard to the application.
C. Although the Mitigated Negative Declaration identifies certain significant
environmental effects that will result if the project is approved, all significant effects have, been
reduced to an acceptable level by imposition of mitigation measures on the project that are listed in
the Mitigation Monitoring Program.
d. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c)of Title 14 of the California Code of
Regulations,the City Council finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole,the Initial Study
and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project
will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife
depends. Further, based upon the substantial evidence contained in the Mitigated Negative
Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the City Council during
the public hearing, the City Council hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in
Section 753.5(c-1-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations.
4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above,
this Council hereby approves Development Code Amendment DRC2005-01003 to amend Section
17.32.030 of the Community Commercial Land Use Regulations within Subarea 4 of the
Foothill Boulevard Districts to add hotels, motels, and major hotel facilities as a Conditionally
Permitted Use, and cocktail lounges within major hotel facilities as Conditionally Permitted Use as
described in this Ordinance, as shown in attached Exhibit A of this Ordinance and including the
condition shown below.
Planning Department
1) The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action
brought against the City, its agents,officers,or employees,because of
the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such
approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents,officers,or
employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its
agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a
result of such action. The City may,at its sole discretion, participate at
its own expense in the defense of any such action but such
participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this
condition.
5. If any section, subsection,sentence,clause, phrase,or word of this Ordinance is,for any
reason, deemed or held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent
jurisdiction, or preempted by legislative enactment, such decision or legislation shall not affect the
CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO.
DRC2005-01003—CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES
May 17, 2006
Page 4
validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and each section,
subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or words thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more
sections, subsections, clauses, phrases, or words might subsequently be declared invalid or
unconstitutional or preempted by subsequent legislation
6. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance.
HOTEL Subarea One Subarea Two Subarea Three Subarea Four
USES JC R � C C � R RH C —IO R Rjr C CR JM
Hotel/Motel ��❑���❑❑�❑�_�❑�❑❑��I�JI r ❑❑❑
Fajor)a Fj❑�F��❑❑ FEUT-10111FIT-11
Useslary E,IJE❑ll❑I_JUI_I❑❑I_'EEII]FJ❑❑I_❑IJI-I'I
er Shtoy�/Barb
F-11-1101IM[H❑❑❑❑❑RI❑❑�❑❑�
b)Cafes ❑❑Q❑r❑I—]I]�❑�I_JI_JI-1❑❑❑QD 1_l[�❑❑❑
Servicesn9 ❑❑5F�❑LJ�❑❑❑❑❑❑❑IIII
d) Cocekta" �- DFJ0FJ�E]01El�EI�11F-1-
Loung
Development Code Amendment
DRC2005-01003
Exhibit A
Ordinance
City of Rancho Cucamonga
in . MITIGATION MONITORING
PROGRAM
Project File No.: General Plan Amendment DRC2005-01000, General Plan Amendment
DRC2005-01006, Development District Amendment DRC2005-01002, Development Code
Amendment DRC2005-01003, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM17594, Conditional Use Permit
DRC2005-00365, and Variance DRC2005-01124
This Mitigation Monitoring Program(MMP)has been prepared for use in implementing the mitigation
measures identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the above-listed project. This program
has been prepared in compliance with State law to ensure that adopted mitigation measures are
implemented (Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code).
Program Components -This MMP contains the following elements:
1. Conditions of approval that act as impact mitigation measures are recorded with the action and
the procedure necessary to ensure compliance.The mitigation measure conditions of approval
are contained in the adopted Resolution of Approval for the project.
2. A procedure of compliance and verification has been outlined for each action necessary. This
procedure designates who will take action, what action will be taken and when, and to whom
and when compliance will be reported.
3. The MMP has been designed to provide focused, yet flexible guidelines. As monitoring
progresses, changes to compliance procedures may be necessary based upon
recommendations by those responsible for the program.
Program Management - The MMP will be in-place through all phases of the project. The project
planner, assigned by the City Planner, shall coordinate enforcement of the MMP. The project
planner oversees the MMP and reviews the Reporting Forms to ensure they are filled out correctly
and proper action is taken on each mitigation. Each City department shall ensure compliance of the
conditions (mitigation) that relate to that department.
Procedures - The following steps will be followed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
1. A fee covering all costs and expenses, including any consultants' fees, incurred by the City in
performing monitoring or reporting programs shall be charged to the applicant.
2. A MMP Reporting Form will be prepared for each potentially significant impact and its
corresponding mitigation measure identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Checklist, attached
hereto. This procedure designates who will take action, what action will be taken and when,and
to whom and when compliance will be reported. All monitoring and reporting documentation will
be kept in the project file with the department having the original authority for processing the
project. Reports will be available from the City upon request at the following address:
City of Rancho Cucamonga - Lead Agency
(Planning Department)
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Mitigation Monitoring Program
DRC2005-01000, DRC2005-01006, DRC2005-01002, DRC205-01003, SUBTPM17594, DRC2005-
00365, AND DRC2005-01124
Page 2
3. Appropriate specialists will be retained if technical expertise beyond the City staff's is needed,as
determined by the project planner or responsible City department,to monitor specific mitigation
activities and provide appropriate written approvals to the project planner.
4. The project planner or responsible City department will approve, by signature and date, the
completion of each action item that was identified on the MMP Reporting Form. After each
measure is verified for compliance, no further action is required for the specific phase of
development.
5. All MMP Reporting Forms for an impact issue requiring no further monitoring will be signed off
as completed by the project planner or responsible City department at the bottom of the MMP
Reporting Form.
6. Unanticipated circumstances may arise requiring the refinement or addition of mitigation
measures.The project planner is responsible for approving any such refinements or additions.
An MMP Reporting Form will be completed bythe project planner or responsible City department
and a copy provided to the appropriate design, construction, or operational personnel.
7. The project planner or responsible City department has the authority to stop the work of
construction contractors if compliance with any aspects of the MMP is not occurring after written
notification has been issued. The project planner or responsible City department also has the
authority to hold certificates of occupancies if compliance with a mitigation measure attached
hereto is not occurring.The project planner or responsible City department has the authority to
hold issuance of a business license until all mitigation measures are implemented.
8. Any conditions (mitigation) that require monitoring after project completion shall be the
responsibility of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division.The Division shall require the
applicant to post any necessary funds (or other forms of guarantee)with the City. These funds
shall be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report
on the mitigation measure for the required period of time.
9. In those instances requiring long-term project monitoring, the applicant shall provide the City
with a plan for monitoring the mitigation activities at the project site and reporting the monitoring
results to the City. Said plan shall identify the reporter as an individual qualified to know whether
the particular mitigation measure has been implemented. The monitoring/reporting plan shall
conform to the City's MMP and shall be approved by the Community Development Director or
City Planner prior to the issuance of building permits.
MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST (INITIAL STUDY PART III)
Project File No.: General Plan Amendment DRC2005-01000, General Plan Amendment DRC2005-01006, Development District
Amendment DRC2005-01002, Development Code Amendment DRC2005-01003, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM17594 Conditional
Use Permit DRC2005-00365. and Variance DRC2005-01124
Applicant: Charles Joseph Associates
Initial Study Prepared by: Donald Granger Date: January 17, 2006
Mitigation Measures . Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method . . .
Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/initials Non-Compliance
Aesthetics
A Photometric diagram shall be submitted and approved CP B Review of Plans C 2,4
prior to Building Permit issuance demonstrating that
illumination from the project is confined within the
project's boundaries and meets the City's foot candle
requirements.
Air Quality
All construction equipment shall be maintained in good CP C Review of plans A/C 2/4
operating condition so as to reduce operational
emissions. The contractor shall ensure that all
construction equipment is being properly serviced and
maintained as per manufacturers' specifications.
Maintenance records shall be available at the
construction site for City verification.
Prior to the issuance of any Grading Permits, the CP/BO C Review of plans C 2
developer shall submit construction plans to City
denoting the proposed schedule and projected
equipment use. Construction contractors shall provide
evidence that low emission mobile construction
equipment will be utilized, or that their use was
investigated and found to be infeasible for the project.
Contractors shall also conform to any construction
measures imposed by the South Coast Air Quality
Management District (SCAQMD) as well as City
Planning Staff.
1 of 10
Mitigation Measures No. Responsible Monitoring Timing of
of Verif led Sanctions for
Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date Anitials Non-Compliance
All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed CP C Review of plans A/C 2/4
performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1113.
Paints and coatings shall be applied either by hand or
high-volume, low-pressure spray.
All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards BO B Review of plans A/C 2
noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108.
All construction equipment shall comply with SCAQMD BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4
Rules 402 and 403. Additionally, contractors shall
include the following provisions:
• Reestablish ground cover on the construction site BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4
through seeding and watering.
• Pave or apply gravel to any on-site haul roads. BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4
• Phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4
areas to erosion over extended periods of time.
• Schedule activities to minimize the amounts of BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4
exposed excavated soil during and after the end of
work periods.
• Dispose of surplus excavated material in BO C Review of plans A 4
accordance with local ordinances and use sound
engineering practices.
• Sweep streets according to a schedule established BO C During A 4
by the City if silt is carried over to adjacent public construction
thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling.
Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of
construction.
• Suspend grading operations during high winds (i.e., BO C During A 4
wind speeds exceeding 25 mph) in accordance with construction
SCAQMD Rule 403 requirements.
• Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils BO C During A 4
haul trucks or cover payloads using tarps or other Construction
suitable means.
2of10
Mitigation Measures No.
Responsible g of Method of Verified Sanctions for
Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verif ication Verification Date/initials Non-Compliance
The site shall be treated with water or other BO C During A 4
soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and construction
Regional Water Quality Control Board [RWQCB]) daily
to reduce PM,o emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD
Rule 403.
Chemical soil stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and BO C During A 4
RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction construction
areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to
reduce PM10 emissions.
The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean BO C Review of plans A/C 4
alternative fuel powered equipment where feasible.
The construction contractor shall ensure that BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4
construction-grading plans include a statement that work
crews will shut off equipment when not in use.
All industrial and commercial facilities shall post signs BO C Review of plans A 4
requiring that trucks shall not be left idling for prolonged
periods (i.e., in excess of 10 minutes).
All industrial and commercial facilities shall designate CP C Review of plans A/C 2/3
preferential parking for vanpools.
All industrial and commercial site tenants with 50 or CP C Review of plans D 2/3
more employees shall be required to post both bus and
Metrolink schedules in conspicuous areas.
All industrial and commercial site tenants with 50 or CP C Review of plans D 2/3
more employees shall be required to configure their
operating schedules around the Metrolink schedule to
the extent reasonably feasible.
All residential and commercial structures shall be BO C/D Review of plans C 2/4
required to incorporate high-efficiency/low-polluting
heating,air conditioning,appliances,and water heaters.
All residential and commercial structures shall be BO C/D Review of plans C 2/4
required to incorporate thermal pane windows and
weather-stripping.
3 of 10
Mitigation Measures No.
Responsible . . of Verif led Sanctions for
Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verif ication Date/initials Non-Compliance
Cultural Resources
If any prehistoric archaeological resources are
encountered before or during grading,the developer will
retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor construction
activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or
preserve them for study. With the assistance of the
archaeologist, the City of Rancho Cucamonga will:
• Enact interim measures to protect undesignated CP/BO C Review of report A/D 3/4
sites from demolition or significant modification
Without an opportunity for the City to establish its
archaeological value.
• Consider establishing provisions to require CP/BO C Review of report A/D 3/4
incorporation of archaeological sites within new
developments, using their special qualities as a
theme or focal point.
Pursue educating the public about the area's CP/BO C Review of report A/D 3/4
archaeological heritage.
Propose mitigation measures and recommend CP/BO C Review of report A/D 3/4
conditions of approval to eliminate adverse project
effects on significant, important, and unique
prehistoric resources, following appropriate CEQA
guidelines.
Prepare a technical resources management report, CP C Review of report A/D 3/4
documenting the inventory, evaluation, and
proposed mitigation of resources within the project
area. Submit one copy of the completed report,with
original illustrations, to the San Bernardino County
Archaeological Information Center for permanent
archiving.
4 of 10
Mitigation Measures No. Responsible of Verified Sanctions for
Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/initials Non-Compliance
If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal CP B Review of report A/D 4
fossils) are encountered before or during grading, the
developer will retain a qualified paleontologist to monitor
construction activities, to take appropriate measures to
protect or preserve them for study. The paleontologist
shall submit a report of findings that will also provide
specific recommendations regarding further mitigation
measures (i.e., paleontological monitoring) that may be
appropriate. Where mitigation monitoring is appropriate,
the program must include, but not be limited to, the
following measures:
• Assign a paleontological monitor, trained and CP B Review of report A/D 4
equipped to allow the rapid removal of fossils with
minimal construction delay, to the site full-time
during the interval of earth-disturbing activities.
Should fossils be found within an area being cleared BO B/C Review of report A/D 4
or graded, divert earth-disturbing activities
elsewhere until the monitor has completed salvage.
If construction personnel make the discovery, the
grading contractor should immediately divert
construction and notify the monitor of the find.
• Prepare, identify,and curate all recovered fossils for CP D Review of report D 3
documentation in the summary report and transfer to
an appropriate depository (i.e., San Bernardino
County Museum).
Submit summary report to City of Rancho CP C Review of report A/D 3/4
Cucamonga. Transfer collected specimens with a
copy of the report to San Bernardino County
Museum.
Geology and Soils
The site shall be treated with water or other soil- BO C During A 4
stabilizing agent(approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) construction
daily to reduce PM,o emissions, in accordance with
SCAQMD Rule 403 or re-planted with drought resistant
landscaping as soon as possible.
5 of 10
Mitigation Measures No. Responsible Monitoring Timing of
of Verified Sanctions for
Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/initials Non-Compliance
Frontage public streets shall be swept according to a BO C During A 4
schedule established by the City to reduce PM10 construction
emissions associated with vehicle tracking of soil
off-site. Timing may vary depending upon the time of
year of construction.
Grading operations shall be suspended when wind BO C During A 4
speeds exceed 25 mph to minimize PM10 emissions construction
from the site during such episodes.
Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and BO C During A 4
RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction construction
areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to
reduce PM,o emissions.
Hydrology and Water Quality
Prior to issuance of Grading Permits, the permit BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4
applicant shall submit to Building Official for approval,
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
specifically identifying Best Management Practices
(BMPs) that shall be used on-site to reduce pollutants
during construction activities entering the storm drain
system to the maximum extent practical.
An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, included in BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4
�rading?lan,and implemented for the proposed project
that identifies specific measures to control on-site and
off-site erosion from the time ground disturbing activities
are initiated through completion of grading. Thislrosion
%ontrol7lan shall include the following measures at a
minimum: a) Specify the timing of grading and
construction to minimize soil exposure to rainy periods
experienced in Southern California,and b)An inspection
and maintenance program shall be included to ensure
that any erosion which does occur either on-site or off-
site as a result of this project will be corrected through a
remediation or restoration program within a specified
time frame.
6of10
Mitigation Measures No. Responsible . . of Verified Sanctions for
Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/initials Non-Compliance
During construction, temporary berms such as BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4
sandbags or gravel dikes must be used to prevent
discharge of debris or sediment from the site when there
is rainfall or other runoff.
During construction, to remove pollutants, street BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4
cleaning will be performed prior to storm events and
after the use of water trucks to control dust in order to
prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site.
The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4
the Water Quality Management Plan prepared by
Associated Engineers, June 9, 2005, to reduce
pollutants after construction entering the storm drain
system to the maximum extent practical.
Landscaping plans shall include provisions for BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4
controlling and minimizing the use of
fertilizers/pesticides/herbicides. Landscaped areas shall
be monitored and maintained for at least two years to
ensure adequate coverage and stable growth. Plans for
these areas, including monitoring provisions for a
minimum of two years,shall be submitted to the City for
review and approval prior to the issuance of grading
permits.
Ponding areas on the south side of the project are CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4
depressed to promote the retention and infiltration of
treated runoff and irrigation water.
Rooftops drain to landscaping prior to entering storm CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4
drain system.
Collection inlets provided with trash guard/grate. CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4
Rinker Stormcepter installed to treat water before CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4
entering infiltration area.
7 of 10
Mitigation Measures No. Responsible Monitoring Timing of
of Verified Sanctions for
Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verif ication Verification Date/initials Non-Compliance
Prior to issuance of Building Permits,the applicant shall CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4
submit to the City Engineer for approval of a Water
Quality Management Plan (WQMP), including a project
description and identifying Best Management Practices
(BMPs)that will be used on-site to reduce pollutants into
the storm drain system to the maximum extent
practicable. The WQMP shall identify the structural and
non-structural measures consistent with the Guidelines
for New Development and Redevelopment adopted by
the City of Rancho Cucamonga in June 2004.
Prior to issuance of qrading or Paving �ermits, BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4
applicant shall obtain a Netice of Intent(NOI)to comply
with obtaining coverage under the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General
Construction Storm Water Permit from the State Water
Resources Control Board. Evidence that this has been
obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Discharger's
Identification Number) shall be submitted to the City
Building Official for coverage under the NPDES General
Construction Permit.
Noise
Exterior: An 8-foot high masonry wall shall be CP B/C/D Review of plans A,C 2,4
bonstructed along the north property line in order to
provide a sound attenuation and privacy between the
single-family dwelling units to the north and the project.
JatetioL All south facing windows and glass doors in the CP B/C/D Review of plans A,C 2,4
hotel building shall have an STC rating of 32 or greater.
A final acoustical report shall be submitted for City CP B Review of plans A,C 2,4
Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of
Building Permits. The final report shall discuss the level
of interior noise attenuation to below 40 dBA for the
hotel rooms, the building materials and construction
techniques required. The building plans will be checked
for conformance with the mitigation measures contained
in the final report.
8 of 10
Mitigation Measures No.
Responsible
Implementing Action for Monitoring . .n Date/initials Non-Comp
Construction or grading shall not take place between the BO C During A 2,4
hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, construction
including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a
national holiday.
Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the BO C During A 4
standards specified in Development Code Section construction
17.02.120-D, as measured at the property line. The
developer shall hire a donsultant to perform weekly
noise level monitoring as specified in Development
Code Section 17.02.120. Monitoring at other times may
be required by the Building Official. Said consultant
shall report their findings to the Building Official within 24
hours; however, if noise levels exceed the above
standards, then the consultant shall immediately notify
the Building Official. If noise levels exceed the above
standards, then construction activities shall be reduced
in intensity to a level of compliance with above noise
standards or halted.
The perimeter block wall shall-be-constructed as early CP C During A 2,4
as possible in first phase. construction
Haul truck deliveries shall not take place between the PO/BO C During A 4/7
hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, construction
including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a
national holiday. Additionally, if heavy trucks used for
hauling would exceed 100 daily trips (counting both to
and from the construction site),then the developer shall
prepare a noise mitigation plan denoting any
construction traffic haul routes. To the extent feasible,
the plan shall denote haul routes that do not pass
sensitive land uses or residential dwellings.
9 of 10
Key to Checklist Abbreviations
Responsible Person Monitoring Frequency Method of Verification Sanctions
CDD-Community Development Director or designee A-With Each New Development A-On-site Inspection 1 -Withhold Recordation of Final Map
CP-City Planner or designee B-Prior To Construction B-Other Agency Permit/Approval 2-Withhold Grading or Building Permit
CE-City Engineer or designee C-Throughout Construction C-Plan Check 3-Withhold Certificate of Occupancy
BO-Building Official or designee D-On Completion D-Separate Submittal (Reports/Studies/Plans) 4-Stop Work Order
PO-Police Captain or designee E-Operating 5-Retain Deposit or Bonds
FC-Fire Chief or designee 6-Revoke CUP
7-Citation
10 of 10