Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-07-24 - Agenda Packet - HPC / PC • THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE REGULAR MEETINGS OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 24, 2013 - 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Council Chambers 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER • Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call Chairman Howdyshell _ Vice Chairman Fletcher Munoz_ Wimberly_ Oaxaca _ II. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. • HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION I• AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA ;Rn4Ncno JULY 24, 2013 Page 2 III. CONSENT CALENDAR/HISTORIC PRESERVATION 11 COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION A. Approval of minutes dated July 10, 2013 IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required bylaw. The Chairman will open the public hearing to receive testimony. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Please sign in after speaking. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2007-00951 - BIANE BUSINESS PARK -A request to modify the Biane Winery, a complex comprised of • fifteen (15) buildings/structures and three (3) single-family residences located on two (2) parcels with a combined area of 10.41 acres of land by demolishing the existing Bottling Plant/Warehouse and Dry Wine Bottling Room and constructing an industrial warehouse building of 122,304 square feet in the General Industrial (GI) District located on the south side of Eighth Street, between Hermosa and Archibald Avenues-APN: 0209-201-19&20. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Related file: Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00475. THIS ITEM WILL BE RE-ADVERTISED. C. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2013-00475 — BIANE BUSINESS PARK - A request to remove 24 trees related to Development Review DRC2007-00951 for a 6.51 gross acre site in the General Industrial Development District located on the south side of Eighth Street, between Hermosa and Archibald Avenues -APN: 0209-201-19&20. THIS ITEM WILL BE RE-ADVERTISED. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS/PLANNING COMMISSION The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required by law. The Chairman will open the public hearing to receive testimony. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Please sign in after speaking. D. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-00201 - LENNAR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA - Site plan and design review for 30 single-family residences on 8.85 acres located on the west • side of Stable Falls Avenue within the Low Residential Development District of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan—APN: 0225-161-19, 32, 33 and 34. On March 10, 2010, a Mitigated • HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA C� JULY 24, 2013 Page 3 Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was adopted by the Planning Commission for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18744. The California Environmental Quality Act provides that no further environmental review or Negative Declaration is required for subsequent projects or minor revisions to projects within the scope of the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration. E. MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2013-00202- LENNAR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA-A request to construct walls over 6 feet high related to Development Review DRC2013-00201,a 30-unit, single-family subdivision on 8.85 acres within the Low Residential Development District of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, located on the west side of Stable Falls Avenue- APN: 0225-161-19, 32, 33, and 34. F. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM18904—SERGE BONALDO—A request to subdivide an existing office building that is part of a larger office complex into 12 individual condominium units for a site located at the southwest corner of Laurel Street and Red Oak Avenue in the Industrial Park (IP) Development District at 10837 Laurel Avenue — APN: 0208-353-22. Planning Department staff has determined that the project is exempt from the • requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines as a Class 15(CEQA Guidelines Section 15315)exemption which covers minor land divisions of four or fewer parcels. G. TIME EXTENSION DRC2013-00093 - LIFEWAY CHURCH MINISTRIES -A request for a time extension to the original approval for a review of a Master Phasing Plan for remaining phases of the Lifeway Church project development including a classroom wing, temporary classroom modules, and a multi-purpose hall on 5.03 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) at 7477 Vineyard Avenue at Calle del Prado - APN: 208-921-36. Related Files: Conditional Use Permit DRC2001-00439 and Non-Construction Conditional Use Permit DRC2007-00544. On April 24, 2002, a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was adopted by the Planning Commission for Conditional Use Permit DRC2001-00439. The California Environmental Quality Act provides that no further environmental review or Negative Declaration is required for subsequent projects or minor revisions to projects within the scope of the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration. H. TIME EXTENSION DRC2013-00507 - JACK HALL -A request to extend the duration of an existing entitlement approval by an additional two(2)years for DRC2006-00892,a proposal to develop 10 single-family homes on 2.975 acres within the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located at 6710 Beryl Street,which is located at the southwest comer of Beryl Street and 19th Street - APN: 0202-461-62, 63 and 65. Related files: Time extensions DRC2013-00509 and DRC2013-00510. The Planning Commission determined that the project was categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)and the City's CEQA Guidelines pursuant to State CEQA • Guidelines Section 15332 In-Fill Development Projects. Per Section 15162, no further environmental review is required as there are no changes to the project. AHISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION • AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA C�Co JULY 24, 2013 Page 4 I. TIME EXTENSION DRC2013-00509-JACK HALL-A request to extend the duration of an existing Minor Exception entitlement approval by an additional two(2)years for DRC2008- 00157, a proposal to increase the permitted wall height from 6 feet to 8 feet in order to construct property line walls related to the subdivision of 11 lots on 2.975 acres of land within the Low Residential District (2-4 dwellings per acre), located at 6710 Beryl Street, which is at the southwest corner of Beryl Street and 19th Street - APN: 0202-461-62, 63 and 65. The Planning Commission determined that the project was categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 In-Fill Development Projects. Per Section 15162, no further environmental review is required as there are no changes to the project. J. TIME EXTENSION DRC2013-00510 - JACK HALL - A request to extend the duration of an existing Tree Removal entitlement approval by an additional two(2)years for DRC2007-00457,a proposal to remove 13 trees from the property related to the subdivision of 11 lots on 2.975 acres of land within the Low Residential District(2-4 dwellings per acre), located at 6710 Beryl Street, which is at the southwest comer of Beryl Street and 19th Street-APN: 0202-461-62,63 and 65. • The Planning Commission determined that the project was categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 In-Fill Development Projects. Per Section 15162, no further environmental review is required as there are no changes to the project. VI. COMMISSION CONCERNS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION VII. ADJOURNMENT 1, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on July 18, 2013, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, • please contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. • HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA cHo JULY 24, 2013 Cko GA Page 5 INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak,given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others,the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and speak into the microphone. After speaking, please sign in on the clipboard located next to the speaker's podium. • It is important to list your name, address and the agenda item letter your comments refer to. Comments are generally limited to 5 minutes per individual. If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under"Public Comments." There is opportunity to speak under this section prior to the end of the agenda. Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the Planning Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of$2,486 for all decisions of the Commission. (Fees are established and governed by the City Council). Please turn off all cellular phones and pagers while the meeting is in session. Copies of the Planning Commission agendas, staff reports and minutes can be found at www.CityofRC.us • Vicinity Map Historic Preservation and Planning Commission Meeting July 24, 2013 r 130 --- - E — E* t o t a ' nAD U = Q 2 S t o 1 H � I i U l � O � o NE • 19St Base Line /Base J urch Church 1 Foothill Foothill N a Arrow E ■ Arrow J ey C et I o W G H, I, 6th a w 6th w J o 'a 4th a = _ 4th C$, D IF * Meeting Location: City Hall/Councll Chambers E 10600 Civic Center Driv� Item A: Approval of Regular Meeting Minutes dated July 10, 2013 THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE MINUTES OF ;RAm7 THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 10, 2013 - 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Council Chambers 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California • Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call Chairman Howdyshell X Vice Chairman Fletcher X Munoz X Wimberly X Oaxaca X Additional Staff Present: Candyce Burnett, Planning Manager; Jeff Bloom, Deputy City Manager/Economic and Community Development;Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney,Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer, Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary Mike Smith, Associate Planner This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the Isaudience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. ITEM A-1 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA A= July 10, 2013 Page 2 Luana Hernandez thanked everyone for their support of the Route 66 Car Show as it was a great success. In response to Chairman Howdyshell, Ms. Hernandez noted that photos of the event can be found on their website: Route661ECA.org and that they are developing a corporate support mailing list with the help of a public relations person. III. ('Cis<►.� i C et I an �li'iILrc�eztc PRI SI;►2� �► IOC � ��_ c � � ei `JyA`:• . y.. Ay .di' A. Approval of minutes from June 26, 2013 Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney noted the draft minutes do not note which Commissioners were present at the meeting and that he recalled that all Commissioners were present. The Secretary noted the correction. Moved by Fletcher seconded by Wimberly to adopt the Consent Calendar 5-0 with the • correction to the minutes. B. SELECTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIRMAN AND VICE CHAIRMAN OFFICER POSITIONS Moved by Fletcher, seconded by Munoz, for Chairman Howdyshell to continue as Chairman carried 5-0. Moved by Munoz, seconded by Wimberly, for Commissioner Wimberly to serve as Vice Chairman. The motion failed 2-3. Moved by Oaxaca, seconded by Howdyshell, for Vice Chairman Fletcher to continue as Vice Chairman carried 3-2 C. SELECTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DRC MEMBERS (DRC) Moved by Wimberly, seconded by Howdyshell, for Commissioners Fletcher and Oaxaca to continue serving on the DRC carried 5-0. Moved by Howdyshell, seconded by Munoz, for Commissioner Wimberly to serve on the DRC as First Alternate carried 5-0. • ITEM A-2 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Cft�,,,CHO July 10, 2013 ONGA Page 3 D. SELECTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TRAILS COMMITTEE MEMBERS Moved by Oaxaca, seconded by Howdyshell, to select Commissioners Fletcher and Wimberly to serve on the TAC and for Commissioner Munoz to serve as the First Alternate carried 5-0. The following items have been advertised and/orposted as public hearings as required by law. The Chairman will open the public hearing to receive testimony. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Please sign in after speaking. E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18870 - LENNAR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA: A request to subdivide a vacant parcel of about 3,047,614 square feet (79.67-acres) into 291 lots and eleven (11) lettered lots in the Low • Medium (LM) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan (South Overlay), located about 525 feet east of Etiwanda Avenue at the north side of Arrow Route; APN: 0229-041-09. Related file: Development Review DRC2012-01202. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. F. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2013-00483 - LENNAR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA: A request to remove trees in conjunction with a proposal to subdivide a vacant parcel of about 3,047,614 square feet (79.67-acres) into 291 lots and eleven (11) lettered lots in the Low Medium (LM) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan (South Overlay), located about 525 feet east of Etiwanda Avenue at the north side of Arrow Route; APN: 0229-041-09. Related file: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18870 and Development Review DRC2012-01202. Mike Smith, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. (Presentation on file.) He also reported that that just prior to meeting the City received a letter from the County of San Bernardino Public Works Department regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the tract. (Letter on file.) The letter cited concerns about burrowing owls found on site, RAFSS mitigation, riparian vegetation (mulefat scrub), and the slender-horned spineflower. The County Water Resources Division also commented. Mr. Smith stated that staff had reviewed the letter and believes that issues were already addressed in the Initial Study. He also stated that the developer had submitted a written response to the letter. (Response on file.) In response to Vice Chairman Fletcher, Mr. Smith said if even one burrowing owl nest is found, the applicant must follow the mitigations found on pages E-F 87. Also in response to Vice Chairman Fletcher, Mr. Smith deferred the request to salvage the wood from the black • walnut trees for the benefit of the Maloof Foundation to the applicant. Commissioner Munoz noted that the owls are there and therefore the applicant will have to ITEM A-3 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA R4NCHO July 10, 2013 C`x '°d°NGA Page 4 conduct a pre-construction survey 30 days prior to grading and they will have to provide evidence they did that. He said they would have to consult with CFDFW before proceeding. Chairman Howdyshell said there is still a window before that happens. Mr. Smith confirmed this must happen prior to grading and be performed by a qualified wildlife biologist. Chairman Howdyshell opened the public hearing. Ryan Combe, Project Manager for Lennar Homes,thanked staff for their perseverance. He said the project has support from neighbors to the north and south. Mr. Combe assented that an owl is present and it triggers the mitigation requirements to perform the survey. He said there will be a Homeowners Association and the two paseos that connect to the trails will be City maintained. He said because of the many restrictions of Southern California Edison,they are installing trees in rear yards because SCE will not allow them to be placed in their easement and this should soften the appearance of the easement from the homes. • There being no one else present wishing to speak, Chairman Howdyshell closed the public hearing. She noted new home construction is needed as the City's listing inventory is low and the project provides housing at a needed price-point. Commissioner Oaxaca noted the letters received tonight. He said the lateness of the letters put the Commission at a disadvantage. Vice Chairman Fletcher said last minute letters always problematic. He said he is not concerned if staff says we covered these issues- he is satisfied with the report and comments. He said it is a standard tract map and will provide good housing product for community. Commissioner Munoz said he believes this project is ready and that the City does need the housing stock but that he takes exception to receiving the letter on July 8 and being expected to digest it. He said a one page letter from a resident is one thing, but that this letter deals with some fairly significant issues. He said he is just guessing as to what is in these two letters based on a summary review by staff. He said he prefers to make decisions on an informed basis. He said if the issue is not as complicated as this, then it would be fine, but this a formal letter with a response and rebuttal. Candyce Burnett, Planning Manager said staff received the letter just this afternoon. Commissioner Munoz asserted that it does not make it right as this can be in abeyance. Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney said that if the Commission can continue the item • and come back later. He said there is no way to prevent late comments. ITEM A-4 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Fu[7WMOo July 10, 2013 Page 5 Chairman Howdyshell said she is confident staff is working with the applicant and that there still is a window of time to address the noted concerns. She asked how the Commission felt about that. Commissioner Munoz said staff needs to give the Commission time to deal with issues like these and there is no relevance to this project. Commissioner Wimberly said there is no summary of differences on the letter with respect to the facts and findings. Commissioner Oaxaca said he feels significantly disadvantaged in making a decision. Vice Chairman Fletcher said that he could recall this happening several times in the last 10 years. He said they often come in on the day of our meeting-it is a formality. He asked if we unnecessarily slow up a development because of a letter. He said he would tend to listen to staff and legal counsel regarding their analysis. • Commissioner Munoz said whether or not it is unusual, it does not make it right. He said the Commission is asked to make a decision only partially informed and he is advising staff to give the Commission more time. He said it is not about this project, it is what to do in the future. He said he does not want to see this on the dais and then have to make a decision on what was put before him the half-hour before the meeting. Chairman Howdyshell concurred and said she could see that the Commission is responsible for the decisions and would support a policy to postpone those items if a late document is received to allow time for a proper review. Mr. Flower said that if an item is agendized and noticed, staff cannot pull the item but that the Commission has the option to continue it. Commissioner Oaxaca said He said he would like a greater time period between the end of the environmental review up to the Planning Commission hearing date. Jeff Bloom, Deputy City Manager, Economic & Community Development stated that late comments come in response to the environmental review period and to the public hearing. He said even if the item is postponed the letters can be brought in at the last minute at the continued hearing. He said even if the City cut off the public review period, it does not prevent this from happening. He said the City does not want to punish the applicant by postponing, but if the Commission is uncomfortable, then it should continue the item and ask staff for further review. He said that the mitigations are there for the burrowing owl;that • the owls are protected, and that the applicant will not be bulldozing them without consequences. ITEM A-5 A* HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA RANCH0CJuly 10, 2013 Page 6 Mr. Flower stated that some persons will wait to comment at the public hearing; and that sometimes the Commission has gone forward when it believes it is safe to do so and sometimes it did not. He said it is a case-by-case judgment call. Mr. Bloom said it is very frustrating for staff in that it leaves the applicant and staff scrambling to figure out an appropriate response. He said the larger agencies are not always courteous. Moved by Wimberly, seconded by Oaxaca, to adopt Resolution 13-26 approving Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18870, and Resolution 13-27 approving Tree Removal Permit DRC2013- 00483- carried 5-0. N :.6 € 8:10PM • ITEM A-6 STAFF REPORT _ • PLANNING DEPARTMENT CRANCHO Date: July 24, 2013 UCAMONGA To: Chairman and Members of the Historic Preservation Commission From: Candyce Burnett, Planning Manager By: Mayuko Nakajima, Assistant Planner Subject: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2007-00951 AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2013-00475— BIANE BUSINESS PARK RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Historic Preservation Commission take no action at this time and receive the staff report and file for future reference. BACKGROUND: The Biane Business Park project (ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2007-00951) was originally advertised as a Public Hearing for the Historic Preservation Commission meeting. However, Counsel has recommended it be re-advertised for the Planning Commission agenda. Although the Biane Winery is a historic resource under the California Environmental Quality Act, it is not yet "designated" and therefore does not fall within the Historic Preservation Commission's purview. The Planning Commission has the authority to review • development projects. Therefore, the item was rescheduled and will be re-advertised for the August 14, 2013 Planning Commission meeting. Staff apologizes for any inconvenience. Respectfully submitted, Candyce urnett Planning Manager CB:MN/Is • ITEMS B & C STAFF REPORT • PL.ANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: July 24, 2013 RANCHO TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission CUCAMONGA FROM: Candyce Burnett, Planning Manager BY: Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-00201 - LENNAR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA - Site plan and design review for 30 single-family residences on 8.85 acres located on the west side of Stable Falls Avenue within the Low Residential Development District of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan — APN: 0225-161-19, 32, 33 and 34. On March 10, 2010, a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was adopted by the Planning Commission for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18744. The California Environmental Quality Act provides that no further environmental review or Negative Declaration is required for subsequent projects or minor revisions to projects within the scope of the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration. MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2013-00202 - LENNAR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA - A request to construct walls over 6 feet high related to Development Review DRC2013-00201, a 30-unit, single-family subdivision on 8.85 acres within the Low residential development district of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, located on the west side of Stable Falls Avenue-APN: 0225-161-19, 32, 33, and 34. • RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Development Review DRC2013-00201 and Minor Exception DRC2013-00202 through adoption of the attached Resolution with conditions. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Proiect Density: 3.39 dwelling units per acre North - Single-Family Residences; Etiwanda North Specific Plan, Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) South - SR-210 Freeway East - Single-Family Residences; Etiwanda North Specific Plan, Very Low Residential (.1-2 dwelling units per acre) West - Single-Family Residence on Large Lot; Etiwanda North Specific Plan, Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) B. General Plan Designations: Project Site - Low Residential North - Low Residential South - SR-210 Freeway East - Very Low Residential West - Low Residential C. Background and Site Characteristics: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18744 was approved on March 10, 2010, for the development of 30 single-family residences on 8.85 acres. The site is within the Etiwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP) and is surrounded by existing single-family • development to the north and east; by a partially developed lot to the west; and by the SR- 210 Freeway off ramp to the south. The development will have a single entry point from Stable Falls Avenue. The partially developed lot to the west has been master-planned with an extension of one of the streets into the project and may one day create a second point of access. The lots ITEMS D,E-t PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2013-00201 AND DRC2013-00202 - LENNAR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA July 24, 2013 Page 2 • range in size from 7,215 square feet to 21,201 square feet. A freeway sound wall has been approved along the south property line of the project site. ANALYSIS: A. Proiect Proposal: The applicant is requesting design and site plan review of 30 single-family residences ranging in size from 2,284 square feet to 3,870 square feet. There will be 1, single-story floor plan and 2, two-story floor plans, and each floor plan will be reverse plotted on approximately half the lots. The project includes 9 single-story plans in compliance with the 25 percent single-story requirement. The project conforms to all the related requirements outlined in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan and the "Day Creek" neighborhood in which the site is located. The specific plan outlines 4 primary and 3 secondary architectural styles that are acceptable for the "Day Creek" neighborhood. The applicant has chosen Bungalow and Country plans from the primary style list and San Juan from the secondary style list. B. Minor Exception: The applicant has requested a Minor Exception to permit the construction of walls exceeding the maximum 6-foot height allowed in residential development districts. One wall is necessary because of a grade difference between Lot 1 and the existing equestrian trail to the east. The second wall is necessary because of one of the streets in the project (Elkridge Place) terminates into a not-a-part lot to the west. The wall at the terminus of Elkridge Place will be removed when the street is eventually extended. The findings of facts below support the necessary findings, which are required by the City's Development Code: 1. The proposed development is of sufficient size and is designed so as to provide a • desirable environment within its own boundaries. The subdivision was designed to minimize the necessity and height of retaining walls. 2. The proposed development is compatible with the existing and proposed land uses in the surrounding area. The retaining walls will match the materials used for walls in the surrounding area. 3. The project does not include any exceptions to or deviations from the density, requirements, or design standards that would result in the creation of project amenities that would not be available through strict adherence to Code provision. It is a common practice to permit combination retaining walls over 6 feet high when there are grade differences along common property lines. 4. Granting the Minor Exception will not adversely affect the interest of the public or interest of residents and property owners in the vicinity of the premises in question. The walls are the minimum necessary to retain the adjacent slopes and are required to be constructed of materials used in the surrounding area. 5. The Minor Exception is consistent with the General Plan or any applicable specific plan or development agreement. The General Plan and the Etiwanda North Specific Plan provide flexibility to the regulations where the site conditions cannot otherwise be mitigated. 6. The exception is the minimum required in that it allows the specified improvement or development to occur, but does not provide additional development rights. The walls are • the minimum height necessary to retain the adjacent slope and provide a 6-foot high property line wall/fence. ITEMS D,E-2 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2013-00201 AND DRC2013-00202 - LENNAR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA July 24, 2013 • Page 3 C. Neighborhood Meeting: The applicant hosted a neighborhood meeting on June 26, 2013, and four residents attended the meeting. The main topics of discussion were the time line for completing the project, unit size and plotting, landscaping, and expected selling price. Each question was addressed to the attendee's satisfaction, and no issues were left unresolved. D. Design Review Committee: The project was reviewed by the Design Review Committee (Oaxaca, Fletcher, Granger) on July 2, 2013. The Committee approved the project with minor changes. E. Grading Committee and Technical Review Committee: The project was reviewed by each Committee on July 2, 2013. The Committee's approved the project as presented. F. Environmental Assessment: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration on March 10, 2010, in connection with the City's approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18744. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project unless: (i) substantial changes are proposed to the project that indicate new or more severe impacts on the environment; (ii) substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under which the project was previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts; or (iii) new important information shows the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered; or (iv) additional mitigation measures are now • feasible to reduce impacts or different mitigation measures can be imposed to substantially reduce impacts. Staff has evaluated Development Review DRC2013-00201 and Minor Exception DRC2013-00202 and concludes that substantial changes to the project or the circumstances surrounding the project have not occurred which would create new or more severe impacts than those evaluated in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration for each subdivision. The applicant proposes building 30 single-family residences on the previously approved 30-lot subdivision (SUBTT18744). Staff further finds that the project will not have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration, not have more severe effects than previously analyzed, and that additional or different mitigation measures are not required to reduce the impacts of the project to a level of less-than-significant. The previously approved lots are surrounded by existing single-family residential development and the proposed residences meet all development criteria outlined in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan and the City's Development Code, except for the requirement for walls that exceed the height limit because of minor grade differences between the project site and the surrounding development. Therefore, pursuant to CEQA, staff recommends that the Planning Commission concur with the staff determination that no additional environmental review is required in connection with the City's consideration of Development Review DRC2013-00201 and Minor Exception DRC2013-00202. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a • 660-foot radius of the project site. Staff has not received any letters or phone calls expressing concern with respect to the Conditional Use Permit application. ITEMS D,E-3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2013-00201 AND DRC2013-00202 - LENNAR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA July 24, 2013 Page 4 • Respectfully submitted, Candyce Bur It Planning Manager CB:TV/ge Attachments: Exhibit A - Complete Set of Plans Exhibit B - Design Review Committee Action Agenda, dated July 2, 2013 Resolution of Approval for Design Review DRC2013-00201 Resolution of Approval for Minor Exception DRC2013-00202 • • ITEMS D,E-4 mS" EDEND mn.r.-,m. m a DEVELOP R PgoJEcr W"= Lwww�me 'Ar Wi M.-. W _ A88EB $PARCEL NUMBER mY Y.wm� m !L LEGAL DEBCRIPpON [ •,•..• , -r• rt .� .•-.. .IILRV M"CE PRWN RB wmmw:ar":M w��."r� IYIJCY+y�,//rWl l� ' � -. ��wvurt wu-�e.n vavr-nv wrtn rur �r.rrev - mr.ry�imrT n�ian a Ai � ® .mr10 Yon O � � � Y-v. r Y�Ir1Y rrm M1�n Yn.rmp-�M mY rlw: m V r.ro+u roar � —7T DISMCw.... .m Ovn..�nm Y r..wr ortw Rmmi wY BCNOOL g8TeCT W JEdM Lwrw pwin en ._. .. ,,.�.�. .� .... W.M.D.WMBER Yrr.mn wY...am naY. "'r ••_• ,gym. -7, rmw rrm rrvwAua rrm y` ' -. 1 •.• 0 ire{ 1 � r..r,r..., EBTBMTED WTI RR OUAWR E w VICPM MAP rmrms..ut ® d _s f J N B a c ti BN}BWAIE NLET i OUTLET DETA0. N � n N TiBY C! _ rT O ! ! ! ar u111T am TI s - m tq < 1 - m _ wro 1 r hm 1 Z LL TVRCAL 11DUSE ADhtll 8 A -ry wrrm wv Z J rw r~ m W < J m / oma• ° rn.fl.x...mlulvm.p.o. N 1 w m nauxw<L]x. / frnnwa Our.rno•nw.l -�• �• �- wn EQ LL �� ���• ¢.mwo�ru•r.rcx,,,ul cn I W F � • • Q J ' l_ji•;tiI'l_9'L��' v� VL o 0 fammc axvi r.xx..morxri.V I � \ / o V �\ 20NING i LEGEND ¢° U f \ < 1 Q F q ' J LL S w f Z J I m 1 W < J h L-3`a SW311 2 r` , % - O l� A 1 1 1 c:x C I Ir-j _------ � I( I ----- —/ -- / / O ELKR®GES . \ F a?i<> --il p rurz_L --,_j h 05 1 All I� S�— li O, 1 /•�I l / / ""� E,c - is I I � I 1p'I I IN 1011 �I � ! ! I _ �• �:d � - ;-:� k!�� ��— �I� Iii If 11 j j ' zr r I- t Ibll 11 (1 J 11 j ;• "� :,; I�{ !§ a c / �_��I III , �1 I( ( / I ". '€?m ' g � • 'P' -_ _-- '""� �( r I IIS IEI _' /iiT T1 i=� r (I P I I I -� L DEER VALLEY" Elf ;CAUF4T .�•Q — 1111 1, Illsit ' �I I I I _ o rn� ub• m N in "�., r�{� '..' — �I I(' f li I I I I €• r ^~ p III I�� IL- I i }t 1j —_f1--�lL—�3�11 —E-_A—L,4 —-—TI — --A/Y-u 0ENTUE�E-3-I,— � o ---------1—T---o- -F -1 t-_ r_S.=---2yLSli-IlIr--tta —--TT --_ o 1 4Jp OIr7711OT I !ACT .3SL IIo I 0-T1p IIdlI '.12tJ !— --1 —v— -- - r / D�C,�,em 8 Arodotn L E N N A R SITE PLAN STABLE FALLS - TRACT 18744 DRC2013-00201 SHEET 3 OF 6 8-3'0 SV4311 3 j III i+ juy+' T I I I L 7u g yowl, r a nf�€/ �- 1111 11111 r�mV/x'71 11 11 llllll/lllllllll 1 I\ 1 ���' `�. ' llllllilllllgl/,r 4€/ /1111/llUl }�// I 1 1 - )11 Ifl� \ • \, , +: \ r � I J�/ I I p r\ l!lllllll�%lj 1/ y E/ lnUNr + 0 I 1 • �'�ox�x j ° t �--- + I ' Il IA Y�/♦, ' lull I /Ull l l r/ v . / �-.A,',/ii� '�' ... y I 1 1 0,11 � 111111lllllllll lI d ry/'ly'Uy/w l/ l/ I I' 1 � l J i� /�` '• � �'/ � y /�Il AiI eVl lllllllllly�! llI +'/ I l 1111 I r / ( c ;. II n \ M 1 Ir \, >r--•>, +V / �11 .,�9 lllllllll /r �l1 \ l l ,I . 1 d i � I � \ � Jtil r•. !\p '/ � . .11 l o 1/ VIIIIIIIIIIIIII X 'i //Ill II 1111 4➢111p, llllllllllllll �llin�ll l I Ca ( I \ / •1 1 +_ aJll�.-_ \ ky /�.i '// +S �I 11111 lr %lllilll /l / I_ — : I 1 J y��1 r. \ " -c�Zt�•-� +— i // / 1111' '/ .11 llll�lfllyl ! 0/iIIUI J/l 1-� r mil IA411 I• I E � t \ \ �� -=`— ��� / - �1I li I IIIIN II r 1.nFi •/ i / J IA 1 +_ \ \`';__� r °ll/IjUIllllj/y����r�l IJ 1' �•_', t +a �� s ! 1 ;Wi \\ \_€��� \ �t II UI 1 l�*115 lllllllllll l l�°✓-��', 111 --c. � � \�__ � °�+i \ +`�-- a}-->' Z .�F-; 1, IF-1 1° 11 �Y—I 1 / III' I 1 1 ll'' II III I, II j 1 I I \Jll�llll�ll l/ h U�J ��� 1' ' M \ •1 '•ILIt l f 1 �1�:� �tl j \�011lllll� QHplJ��/�� yl II I I1 I l/11111/l l /! lu \ ab °� \ I y r �� � •••?�>— - I I I II�11�� IIIIll11l.� l N/l ry F - :`X' gyp. tel-- 1,-1 %6 'iI I I �I11111 Z17lIM�Il I L,• �: '' t` f 'S + I L�:V� f II I I I I /ll�ll Illpl! 11/II j � - . 1�\ •7€ �; 1� �/� � s 1 i1 " �IIIIIII /1111 p III�IV IIII b \\ �r I � � I ID `4�11 IIIIPII IIIA I' I 1111d� rn F �/• _ `- 3 \�.'i•p+' i� I �-I{g t\: I L nll •Y�n i/ .. j I�u ��-r-i I I a III II III/�IIIOOI II� r lldl • I • ' .e € , - �';'" ___ - - - __ •p::}" `,I +, �^ _III �I i If 1 / 101tIf 1//I �Iil"I /�jl I �,. 4 ' `"° - 'rn �\^'!`• � III 1�r-{�� % IN rt L�p ill I i IIIJII I j jj ��I �/��14111I III - F; e,_ r J. 'IY. 1 \ ,• '- � 111 �L' j� /4 to Owl � ,ry�9,III /I� 1 �JII •� / n ' ` i, I � N ++� a_ I r f 01�� 'jljll�rrl€ ,: 1 �� i/_/ �� "t`-'o „ \"t •`\ � \\ I S"'. I1� 1-�-��_P � I K I VIII+. I I 1-I - �Il , -o I -0 1111 k \ I 1 42L I11 P t i I tel\ (J ili/ Hyl i I r =il ' a \II I IIIIIY (QC'� -Y�3FStl2 ®/110_901\ II ./O II `I� ttPllll �I'I +Irll= L_�E IIII�Oi 230! 03 IgVPirte-'--R 11 I� I I' 7 Y I r IIII + �t&71 I`Th.l�_.�— II•I-r _I Dei C•,e.a 6 A�aa� L E N N A R CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN STABLE FALLS - TRACT 18744 DRC2013-00201 SHEET 4 OF 6 7,-1 r �-- -'•� I - � ., _..chs _..tcs ""°' _•.tis ��� ������.+++ ri Asw ri 8EC7A7N N-N _.. SECTKW T- N T_,m OWNER _.< �.M.w_.-new�u.Wi,e•.wwa MiII n'••f,m•'� _ na,C� A,+� (SUHTT 18709) TENTATIVE TRACT No. 18744 RESIDENTIAL LOTS 1-30 SECIKaV L'-i' 9CC7K1V AI'-Ilf SECTpW N-N GRADING SECTIONS C(IT OF RANCFp CUCAMOHOA COUNfY OF SAH BBNAA7N0,STATE OF CALFIXNA DRC 2013 — 00201 SHEET 5 OF 6 it I'l __ 3-..®.. :, o..., :rCT/GW�O-•4......,. ewe fCC/KYJ P'P..,�,,. e..� v—,. ___-- ___� I16s SII mow.a ar 6lrnV[MN ro.wAa ° •'.+•, ,,,, • m.. e s i; exeno ar araat aur t4E r •4• y,-. »�� �..;.,, ,-i'^ ^w. _ 'i`yam;.•'�i„•ail. - �+u.w++•.. i -Ta�a�aEy „ WOYH6IIa 4mio x::. '• Y°+s csw' my'i`y�TF i.'•n[F+-I,,L.n rM1. �w4 RODEO omw n�,....,o...�.r..... .m:'i n..i.• ...,.imi” a ri rl rvrcu sCr vAm eEcnw APER dur wIm � oeru --r -s•• - -ur- Lp+atwv l'gIEWA1/r`��IIYaIIMr ` ___off___ Ing w aT�����Fj, +®e•ff»srroow�rcr 21 ,�," KA n�a>aauart rAm Ae.Aae la tsz d9 r,sz. 1� amr.aoraoraoot WA n Mu 3� I. '�I ' , vev wrouaaw++r nor t ro ff tso�a - 40mOI16eE'Iei SCQ WAIL W V WAM TRACT 13882 Iti etaeievrrolaur (EXISTW3 ShV5LE - d FAMLY RESIMM4L.) eAeaerr ro At3Wr '$ - ro Lw4:xr ro taer.Ae•a�aur ;eaon4+n 7 L.,„.wti- raLu rw,n,,.usa. {4roAeaur �1 �iwru�r4amAmw rA .{u �,v�'*"• muatCE neAa, 4o-W o aoa '•, ma4rrer wAu ro W waw n mor aaae wAu cnvr ro w a oon tm no-raor actio w. Da fw,.�6 A..�d.. �! ,n tae eF omnAa anAo wAu retro aouo wAu w �� wA Uri a mor sero wAu A6t rwtor eaR 4mCIHB/)a A�. e 4.01 nuCr mW Niatla®RiVA1E rlEr I1•E �+�� Ria09®n A AM (BUBTT)8744) /� i i aware sA�r TENTATIVE TRACT No. 18744 RESIDENTIAL LOTS 1-30 "'"` AI OFLOTS',WD2 GRADING SECTIONS CU OF PANCHO CUCAkMQ4 COLIM OF BAN BH3UP W WATE OF CALIFIXiNA DRC Z 013 - 0 0 2 0 1 SHEET 6 OF 6 L l-3'4 SW311 -- +1 p ' _a >•� fPf � fP — I n— t ,EL IDGE PLit `MI. - Im e. J _ ?s� �i EER VALLEY CT ^�-- •- ± 1 I GG G 00 'aI sLN 13� _ 3 u? Ll .BI a STABLE —'FALLS p> I' O � roa� -tel~ 'i0 I phi ry .i � D �J- ' LiN , L E N N A R CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE MASTER PLAN STABLE FALLS TRACT 1874d D R C 2 0 1 3-0 0 2 0 1 69 Iy IR ia j �. __ 1 � J� ` s11`�'T+ 1 r � ' U • Ip 'emn �?–_ n.�,i � t�.! �--�` '/�l � )' —RODEO DR. _ T 6 1 FACT IW I-fI ,.. . :. I - ..- I — . _'� Ilj -- � — _`'li Jj1 �-• 'j1 - � f v unawy e I iI 'IL Z o I K FEATURE LEGEND: y,,frY•YJIY•dl•d LL�YW.� — OYia y 1� O} V�bbYvr.Y•wAe–YW�Y n _ Qj �.L�T�w Ydd�r–Y YW4Y 0 Io OV'ada•I�.A�r.�–ewf�,YWC - — �ytiP�d w Qi �xLLMeLd ®ipadYd�+�v O1 YrWn WFT•M ^' 8'rr I 1©Sde•dmaad A.rW+6–n4nA XV e.ram � –os ,u.s....–�•--, Q G I ©(m�A–•TI�GfT-116u �'Taa – r Z W Q 6'NIGH SPUR FACE AND Z m �I '©"'":""�''^O'""1•—"�'" PNEQSION WALLS ],VADE TUBUTARSTEEL GATE 6'H,IGHPILASTER w a '®s�nyAr+-bwd..ede�.rY. 'n r 6'� J y '' ��• vices ro IOZ00-EIO1J4O rr(BI IDV M1 - S11Vd 11a VIS sye `_-`•wmk. ^ S4NVAINOi13TVD1dA1 1N3W3`.J!!b'1N3NVId1Vflld3DN0� 8 V N N 3l �evr�uri,w u 11 f i �o'oo 1 E 1 1 E N J 1 1 i i 1 I 3 t1 N qa !E 'a o� fj bo 1 '1 00000000 I Or O O O o o d l\vJ/ ITEMS D,E-13 V L-3'0 SW311 • 44A dz CON7 F-1 F-llF�IIIJ cl O O Cly 41 Li • �>t J O 8a �O C � — O - [ D 0 5858 8 Sp aaaa a a KEVIN L.CROOK L E N N A R PLAN 1 ARCHITECT STABLE FALLS - TRACT 18744 DRC2013-00201 .IN�.-C. ...I.It.:. _ - - . i1. ....... ........wif .1..� n:::in.nnnnn....o•. ..... . ..oun ....1.�. ....1�1..... \� .11.1...11.1...11,.1...... - '.....1..:...11i1i '...:'�:::: i.n.._...._L_:[. '� :.I'�. •LL ::.n..::O�:::::Y�:::::.::1�' (Y :il•, ••1 ....................... .. .. 11..'..11..... / _ ..1 -. ............ •�.I...Iltl. ,1 r EIRE I!III!'"Imp �.00.G[*g*OGis r.l. . it r -►/`\� /� 4".? 1 h �._ w1� • / an PAP ----------------- �.�.1.1..� _ ...11...1.11...1.��...1.11...1.11...1.11...1.11...x.11..11.11...1.11.....1......11... .�.�...........�......1.1..................1..• ::::..::.... :::....:::.....1...1......1..1.............1......1...1. ---------- --' - _-__ ____- - - .. .1...............1....1........1...........1......1.....1 ::. .- :• .1...11....• - 1.1....1.1p..1.1..0..1...0.0....•'ailU::�.. �.I�.111'I'I'lll,.. - -------- ..1 01....C_ .I...0 ••...:.11.... • ::1 ......1...1..1...1..1...1.. •::: :�::::�:1:1.:•:�:::.�.1.._ .:..�:1:. .1 ...__ _ ... -, s I oyr.1 ■�,i . uo:::'i- i:::.n;,i:. ::::r..;.r.,..;;,n::..r. .....r..;;r.,.:$i:i::i, .,..,... ...:;::u � u •�-u.:. = ....:r.:::::r..iu:r....r-r. ,,r... .r...............= ...:......r......r.r. ..;......;;.r... r..�;n...�.. - ................ ......r :r;r..., 1 I Inl1� pnC IIII_I IIII ICI II������m� n •. IC1T1��.. ul1.� 'i•.. .•� 1•: 1•�:;1��i , . i•� I����,�,���,��/� i t � � 'e �I ��'I II IIIb III I!I .. III 1 III �I III. �— .,..,, I I -:___.- _...__.�.�. ii............ i::iiouni.;nnonnununo;uun;nno; ;nunonm..n..::.. ..a:•'•• •:i iii•".::ini uuna.iiin::mrnu.. mmmmnn °•` nun nvn . ...n.n • - i.-uno-uuunw .,.onn...........unommu................... :.....................z......... -. -. ,onnonnnovnnnmm�nnor..nun....unn.rn.u.......-nnnnno ---'-G.�oG.%L.ri�i..�......�.ri.••nir.iii:•• _ wn::oiiiinon.nn::.:ui:.inn.........n:iuio:r:n....::n:.oii:i.:iu n::vino. .u.o..nnon _..... ii���i:i:iii��i •iu::iii�n:�o:i=• •:in�iiii�����iinn�:iiiiiiiiiiii: ........... ......ii::inii..�iin•.ii�iuii nn::i(ini:ii......i:iiic:.iii:iii:r� //\\ _ _ - ui:.inn:.in... fir ........... .�•_ ..i ...................... ............... o-... _Ilillll all n�G�Ii �illllllll� i srY N � �a o psp I �.• y B H Say. v+y la — 8 S ti. mm LEFT ELEVATION __ FRONT ELEVATION 1MlERNL HUTES CUNMn 5'TILL ROM.C-.S'TM Rao1P .4-13 V E. 12' E. 13' 2 ,� BWInO HMSM'17'a' m /W O SUm tW+w 000M T tlGMaap Parub SWvm Filub ~ Fmn Trim aI WmE(ialn u WYu6m NW a O &emn/rk!CWaLG Wm w t glMna W 1 I V � i Z a IL ROOF PLAN PITCH 4:12 s N --------------- U CJ O O - OOo m 0 r IJI.T U a F RIGHT ELEVATION SAN JUAN REAR ELEVATION Q Z LL W Z m W a J w H.>• y I S Jill Kul C�r.a P„b 61( KeI f w +It I ® ❑ � 1 1 1 1 � caner .mm 1 ' a 1 1 b99CFE0M �AL1yrMry _ I ni.y 0.o9 I Oen I I - n•1xEl 1 (n _ I 9etlroon�l Z O � EIOOm < - a DEN OPTION m T ® ror.n p ye rn°m9 M aom3 N BEDROOM 5 OPTION "" --- ® u SECOND FLOOR PLAN FIRST FLOOR PLAN m saw 1w-�a mw w�nra First Floor: 23S4 sq. ft. Second Floor: 833 sq. ft. Total Living Area: 3187 sq. ft. Garage: 480 sq. ft. T J Q < Z LL Z W m tV < J a nen nu 1�., ` i.. n:` /.�i/l/I/ •I _'1. . ...0 �� nunnnnumnllllm,.nnull.mnn��l n 1 n, . ' �� .nmm�numnnunmm�mnnnummnmmnnnn. .. _ ,, m ■ `i . ■ u nniiiii� . 1 - ` .yam n n"' in::iio::nii::iiuii`:n:.ii:ni`:::::i::::.num• � _ r� li � �� . 11 ou- , .,_� .�<• anmm�nn . noun.unnnnnnnunmm�mm�On.• •': ::Y :Yinnumnlnu 111 m... ,.om�... i mm�nnnunnnmm�.�.n unm 1_ nnnnnnnnunnummm�mnm umnm ter+. - :nnnamunnmmmn�=�\ inamunnnn..n _ OM-Mom _ goal .�Lone �•I •�••.1I•�_•�Ili III ■ ■ _ . I� n . 1 1'1 .�I`.` 1. I I III 1 1 \%1.—I\�%I—I •• -~ 1`I DX.ILX.ILX.ILX. • i�Yid�iRiiiii:::i��dN�u u u ■€ 'ii" ��al/Ifl'I���1/I�1• li Y::iiinnm,.11 n: 1 iim I � . umm 1: �n ••. ' . . unnn.....1....11 un n •,•ILII - J lu�� 1 ■■ ■■ "` 1:' non ME ::I iiiil Iiiii I "nllim rrl LE I' 1.'nunll " I I� F� 1 • • ni:::n••"�nnnnnn.-a 'y:..i:::.:: — nnuunmm�r ARM ni 1 ..:I a - .i�::ii:.ii::iin.....��•.:_ III I iii::i:iiii:i:i:i:::iiii::::iii::::. ••:::o.nnmm.�.'::n::::u......... - : .no: VIII 111111�1� u'i:oi.:.......... n...:n.................. - - -- q. nnnunnnnnnnnuuuuum. . � : S ::a::.. !-e a R.. .......::.ii..:::::: Vii:, ::::::ik'�tii}::iti::tiii'riiiiitititisi::+•• _ !. z • .: -•,' ..... .... - ------. . . .._...�_�.•.s:::::;.�::::::•a:•aw:.:::.:.. �......•• y:. i:: •r:;::;tiir::i: �� •�k1F ��illl1�I 1�lIII jail =1111=� r i kl' ililllili i1i111i11 _=11111_ II ���r—An� � r ��11I�11I��� %/ I IO ��I11 ����� I LJ I .,-,°IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIL. .::::::::... Mam ...:nn.:..n...n4.:...da..i::::�:::�u::...n:i•.•. ... - ----:..- .n............. . .................................... .,.................�',.: .. ill.. =11111111= : .:::: . .......... :: ...... ... ......:.:.......: .:...., — ................ ... .......... ........... :.. IIPIi 11111 111111 Ey11111IIIIlIIII�L'I! 'lII�1111iIIC . . - ••�i�• irrrri 111111 IIIIRRI1II 111 Illllr�rril�ll �III���II�•• Illllrr�i 11111 • 1 uiwe�:�.�.a�.au,.�a un�u.�...aa�.;::'a uuu.a�.aa,.�u.d.auua�.a�,�.�e.r ::::� •....• :::uu�� ---------------- ....�..... ..n.u...........nn....... . ... ..... ���� �.�. i li.: ::uu.. a.............................. ....... .. ...uu. ...............:....u.p. :. U111:1. ... "�.., ...::................ ................:. . ........................ .. ... ..� -�` - �' • I I ....III•, .�...__ /. // nu •' mgioiipoiilinoUoo�iiiiiliiiigiiiii I mm ME III I,lI o •• �� ��� i; — Ihy I���nnponpnnlinnpnnlo°i oiolio°�I I�IIIIIII� �� ■ _ � i�al=. on nm nin uto nio itoi ntn nm. - ...r. . �y+r. - - uu 3,131,iiib�:,ui�4:,uuuuu.aa,.,.,uu.,...,.,.,.,�,�i.,.-.•••., --- -_--- moll 11 on .11 .... .... .... : - All .,.. :::,:.:.:.ua:,:.. .:n,ay: u:,:.:,:, 00 IS ma 1.11 WIN modd soon ME ! II s on pq No No-0 IIIIINK jmomson -_ — 4s'� l !x ® ® 1 1 21 ❑ ________ tall II tt Jroo : II � YY,tI Y11111 11 M.11.1 MEtrown ANntl ❑ CmM h,b II d II II 3 u� I II I II II II _ I 1 I I \ 1 I I I I I I II t undry bvru� WaA W kKltt,.. —1 ® lllwvree/// 1 grcnm 1 F I 1 I mnx 1 L I Zi m w cn 1 z - ® I < N ® I I Mx SP" m' Kt 6 N A.d`AAm k roemt I I O ® I I N ® I I O IN O 7r II A II II 4 II II O C ,I PorA II N II II � II V SECOND FLOOR PLAN FIRST FLOOR PLAN 0 First Floor: 1708 sq. ft. �tyPrt Second Floor: 2162 sq. ft. Total Living Area: 3870 sq. ft. Q Garage: 677 sq. ft. �pPm+p 11 q Wok Kitchen Opt.: +144 sq. ft. to Living Aera Ir I „ Il 11 llyl, 2 LL C O o U U U L . a m Elevation 'C' Addenda W i J w _______ ___ ......................................................___.............................�, I --- ----' ------ ----' - ------"-- --- ----- iiriiiini'ni�.�iiin.....i......inii;gin;;;'iiin��'".......................iu =� ------------_ __ I'I• iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiii. a,�............................ ......nnnnn•. -e unnnn..... ' .. ....... ........ ...nm nnq..m n n;;. . 1 --•u_nnm. r•1 ........m . .uiinnirii. •pi I ,I'i'I't,l•��. •• - a / / •• •••• - I "B••• \�� ISI ISI ' \�I I ■I'' n •• � �,�I� , �••� �� r �� ••� yy✓ r ...n............mm. i: __- nn Ln oxallext T.. ISI =�■ -e ����� _:� 19'�.= ■ I � I 1= .... ' n. . u. .....................a ..........................un nnmum . •�'�'„n ';i"� , • , �I/I�i\I• -a .nnn .. u�unnnnmunn.on. nnmm.nnnnm �� • \\ i air ,� \\•\\ I \\ iu ,a� a. \\ I. =� - - - .......... ....... ... ...... ..::......................... nuw nnnunn , nnn..............vom;n.. ..f:u....... ..... . :.":::::.. .......'gloss................u::u:::.. ..;.......:.............nnm:u:du7u$nnauBduu nnnnnuvam.........- ..................... ....................... ......... .............. ------------------ — .. ... — �u� •I - sl..l ��nl�: L.I I��lA, `�illlli�� `- .......... � .. ......................... . . fii - .....nl.:�:.....::..:::: ... ...... . c. • �C�J�ii..�l nl.l..................u..q ��1�I.�.5::4I�,� u. •\I� .._._. � � �.' 11111! ILLgI iiiiuilmiim .'�._• •�wii a SII =m iliiipmiimm .............::: �.: ......... .:. ..•::v::.:sa::........................ - , :::.............................--..;.........;.;.....................,......... .::. ..., ......:::::.:::::.... : : _ _ ....... .... 1`111` ;111 111° `` 111111 ``11111`` 111111 `1i111'1=_``I111``� �� nu le �IIIII�I� c 111 111� `��■1111 `rllll{I� _I IIIIIIIII ri■1�1�—`��III`_�I Iil �U��� ; 111`. ;;111`1 - �II� I/ .I � �I'i. `I - -■11`11-1 ■■ I�I ��111`;� ;;111�� IIII � 111 IIIII��:. � ��I, � IIIIIIII � I�■ -------------- ;.• i ;-;p loll Ee��,� ��'�9e � .. � .. �.. ..y • �II::II� / .. II�IC::CI��I g::: �Iikalfill ��::11 11 � : nnpnnpnnUinipunpinilinolnoi .. .. — u1gn1111innpiolpunpnoloullooi I •'•li;:.:.ii:;il:I::I:;L:. :aaaa:aaaaaaaaaa: 444...J.4.:..44ay�,4c.Ji.AJi.APa..L.,.uJJAi.,6:y -- - - ------ ': 'JJi44;;L;L4 :.'J;4 4;Ji,u..::.• :,L:;'Jaa;�4 L;;a�4;i;ddi4�. un., .,.,.,.,.,/�.ni.e.,..ua..eueu.,.,....,/.= :1:1:1:1: .—uq:i.a...:u�.,.,u.\...,.,.,.,u.\P 11 u.,..,.,..,.,: L,;i;a�.;,�,;,y\.;,�i;...?%— •"'�':':',;uiii;il ;l ;'i:�:�epi II _ : III::II I� :II :: :: III::II II::�� •• ••• II :: _ _. b\ .um ::n ilii i L:: :: :: :: :: il �i'I ::I::� :::: �1: i. Is •i - w> Y�'r';`. trf j yU 77; 'A'BUNGALOW 'B'COUNTRY 'C'MONTEREY/SAN JUAN THERMA TRU OR EQUAL '°cn rte#' rz'_ ,-'. ME] j .t r r II Y{ i ,� LEXINGTON SONOMA SO'NOMA 'A'BUNGALOW 'B'COUNTRY 'C'MONTEREY/SAN JUAN R 0 0 WAYNE DALTON OR EQUAL o N U K a a � Q Q 'A'BUNGALOW 'B'COUNTRY 'C'MONTEREY/SAN JUAN Z LL w EXTERIOR LIGHTING W m J h THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE Fa- AGENDA C °o JULY 2, 2013 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER ACTION Roll Call 7:00 P.M. Regular Members: Richard Fletcher x Francisco Oaxaca x Candyce Burnett_ Donald Granger_ • Alternates: Frances Howdyshell_ Ray Wimberly_ Lou Munoz II: I'RO JEST REVIEW ITOAk The following items will be presented by the applicant and/or their representatives. Each presentation and resulting period of Committee comment is limited to 20 minutes. Following each presentation,the Committee will address major issues and make recommendations with respect to the project proposal. The Design Review Committee acts as an advisory Committee to the Planning Commission. Their recommendations will be forwarded to the Planning Commission as applicable. The following items do not legally require any public testimony,although the Committee may open the meeting for public input. A. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-00201 - LENNAR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA-Site Plan and design review for 30 single-family residences on 8.85 acres within the Low Residential Development District of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, located on the west side of Stable Falls - APN: 0225-161-19, 32, 33, and 34. On March 10, 2010, a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was adopted by the Planning Commission for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18744. The California Environmental Quality Act provides that no further environmental review or Negative Declaration is required for subsequent projects or • EXHIBIT B 1of2 ITEMS D,E-27 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA • JULY 2, 2013 C minor revisions to projects within the scope of the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration. III. PUBLIC COMMENTS. This is the time and place for the general public to address the Committee. State law prohibits the Committee from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Committee may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are limited to five minutes per individual. IV., ADJOURNMENT _ 7.24 P.M. The Design Review Committee has adopted Administrative Regulations that set • an 11:00 p.m. adjournment time. If items go beyond that time, they shall be heard only with the consent of the Committee. • 2of2 ITEMS D E-28 • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tabe van der Zwaag July 2, 2013 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-00201 - LENNAR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA - Site Plan and design review for 30 single-family residences on 8.85 acres within the Low Residential Development District of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, located on the west side of Stable Falls - APN: 0225-161-19, 32, 33, and 34. On March 10, 2010, a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was adopted by the Planning Commission for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18744. The California Environmental Quality Act provides that no further environmental review or Negative Declaration is required for subsequent projects or minor revisions to projects within the scope of the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration. Project Backaround: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18744 was approved on March 10, 2010, for the development of 30 single-family residences on 8.85 acres of land. The site is within the Etiwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP) and is surrounded by existing single-family development to the north and east, by a partially developed lot to the west, and by the SR-210 Freeway off ramp to the south. The development will have a single entry point from Stable Falls Avenue. The lots range in size from 7,215 square feet to 19,936 square feet. A freeway sound wall has been approved along the south property line of the project site. Project Proposal: The applicant is requesting the design review of 30 single-family residences ranging in size from 2,284 square feet to 3,870 square feet. There will be 1 single-story floor plan and 2, two-story floor plans and each floor plan will also be reverse plotted on • approximately half of the lots. The project includes 9, single-story plans in compliance with the 25 percent single-story requirement. The project conforms to all the related requirements outlined in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan and the "Day Creek" neighborhood in which the site is located. The Etiwanda North Specific Plan outlines four primary and three secondary architectural styles that are acceptable for the "Day Creek" neighborhood. The applicant has chosen Bungalow and Country from the primary style list and San Juan from the secondary style list. Staff Comments: Staff is pleased with the project and feels that it fully conforms to intent of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. Each plan has a recognizable architectural style, carries elements of the chosen style to each elevation and provides articulation to all wall planes. Multiple plans have front porches and courtyards and each plan includes a covered patio on the rear elevation. Staffs only outstanding comments are whether each plan should include sliding/French doors off of the great rooms to the covered patios and whether the lower half of the pop-out on the left elevation of Plan 3 (Bungalow) should be vertical siding or shake siding. Staff finds it visually confusing that each of the plans does not have a door directly to the covered patio. The applicant states that from their experience the customer would rather have a wall to place furniture against than direct access to the covered patio and rear yard. Providing the door as an option may be a potential compromise. Major Issues: None. Secondary Issues: • 1. Whether each of the plans should have sliding/French doors from the great room to the covered patio or to provide the doors as an option. ITEMS D,E-29 DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2013-00201 — LENNAR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA July 2, 2013 Page 2 • 2. Whether the lower half of the pop-out on the left elevation of the Plan 3 (Bungalow) should be horizontal wood siding or shake siding. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee resolve the two minor secondary issues and forward the project to the Planning Commission for final approval. Design Review Committee Action: The Committee recommended approval of the project with the following conditions: 1. Stucco may be utilized on the lower half of the pop-out on the left elevation of Plan 3 (Bungalow) in place of wood siding or shake siding 2. The Floor Plans may remain as is. Sliding/French doors are not required from the great room to the covered patio area. Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, Granger Staff Planner: Tabe van der Zwaag • • ITEMS D,E-30 • RESOLUTION NO. 13-28 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-00201, A REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN AND DESIGN REVIEW FOR 30 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES ON 8.85 ACRES LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF STABLE FALLS AVENUE WITHIN THE LOW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT OF THE ETIWANDA NORTH SPECIFIC PLAN; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 0225-161-19, 32, 33, and 34. A. Recitals. 1. Lennar Homes of California filed an application for the approval of Development Review DRC2013-00201, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Review request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 24th day of July 2013, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. • NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing July 24, 2013, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The site is within the Etiwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP) and is surrounded by existing single-family development to the north and east, by a partially developed lot to the west, and by the SR-210 Freeway off ramp to the south; and b. Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18744 was approved on March 10, 2010, for the development of 30 single-family residences on 8.85 acres; and c. The lots range in size from 7,215 square feet to 21,201 square feet. A freeway sound wall has been approved along the south property line of the project site. d. The 30 single-family residences range in size from 2,284 square feet to 3,870 square feet; and e. The project conforms to all the development requirements outlined in the Etiwanda Specific Plan for the Very Low Residential District and complies with the Planning Commission's • 25 percent single-story policy. ITEMS D,E-31 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 13-28 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-00201 - LENNAR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA July 24, 2013 • Page 2 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and any applicable specific plans except for retaining wall heights over the height limit for which the applicant has submitted a request for a Minor Exception (DRC2013-00202); and b. The proposed design or improvements are consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and any applicable specific plans; and C. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; and d. The design of the project is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; and e. The project is not likely to cause serious public health problems; and 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the application, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that no subsequent or supplemental environmental document is required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in connection with the review and approval of this • application based upon the following findings and determinations: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration on January 25, 2006, in connection with the City's approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18744 pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project unless: (i) substantial changes are proposed to the project that indicate new or more severe impacts on the environment; (ii) substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under which the project was previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts; or (iii) new important information shows the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered; or (iv) additional mitigation measures are now feasible to reduce impacts or different mitigation measures can be imposed to substantially reduce impacts. b. The Planning Commission finds, in connection with Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18744, that substantial changes to the project or the circumstances surrounding the project have not occurred, which would create new or more severe impacts than those evaluated in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration. The applicant proposes 30 single-family residences on the previously approved 30-lot Tentative Tract Map (SUBTT18744). Staff further finds that the project will not have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration, not have more severe effects than previously analyzed, and that additional or different mitigation measures are not required to reduce the impacts of the project to a level of less-than-significant. The previously approved lots are surrounded by existing single-family residential development and the proposed residences meet all development criteria outlined in the Etiwanda Specific Plan and the • City's Development Code. C. Based on these findings and all evidence in the record, the Planning Commission concurs with staffs determination that no additional environmental review is required pursuant to ITEMS D,E-32 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 13-28 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-00201 - LENNAR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA • July 24, 2013 Page 3 CEQA in connection with the City's consideration of Development Review DRC2013-00201 and Minor Exception DRC2013-00202. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Department 1) Approval is for the architectural and site plan review of a 30-lot subdivision - APN: 0225-161-19, 32, 33, and 34 2) All Conditions of Approval related to Tentative Tract SUBTT18744 (Planning Commission Resolution No. 10-10) shall apply. 3) Approval is predicated on the approval of Minor Exception DRC2013-00202. 4) The project shall conform to all recommended mitigation measures outlined in the acoustical study (Giroux & Associates, May 28, 2013) related to the City's interior noise standards. • 5) All wood and stone siding material shall be carried to the adjacent return wall or a change in wall plane. 6) All window and door surrounds shall be wood, a simulated wood product, or hard foam with a wood grain. Foam sprayed with stucco is not permitted. 7) Porch and patio support columns shall be constructed of solid block in order to take the stone veneer siding down to the finished grade. The Planning Manager may approve an alternate design which can be demonstrated to achieve the same result. 8) The open wood beam trellis structures on the front elevations of Plans 1 and 3 (San Juan) shall have a substantial appearance to the satisfaction of the Planning Manager. 9) The three Bungalow plans shall use a garage door similar in design to Wayne Dalton 6000 series (Brunswick) with the clear windows. 10) All garage doors shall have windows and be painted to either match the house or trim color. 11) All lighting fixtures used on the side and rear elevations shall match the lighting fixtures used on the front elevations. • 12) All walls exposed to public view shall be split face block. ITEMS D,E-33 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 13-28 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-00201 - LENNAR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA July 24, 2013 • Page 4 13) Side yard gates shall have a minimum 90 percent view obscuring metal privacy screen. 14) The three Bungalow plans shall use a front entry door similar in design to Wayne Dalton 6000 Series (Brunswick) garage door. 15) The single-story Bungalow plans shall use the same porch railing design as the two-story plans. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24TH DAY OF JULY 2013. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Frances Howdyshell, Chairman ATTEST: • Candyce Burnett, Secretary I, Candyce Burnett, Secretary of the Planning Commission for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 24th day of July 2013. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: • ITEMS D,E-34 RESOLUTION NO. 13-29 • A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2013-00202, A REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT WALLS OVER 6 FEET HIGH RELATED TO DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-00201, A 30-UNIT SINGLE-FAMILY SUBDIVISION ON 8.85 ACRES LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF STABLE FALLS AVENUE WITHIN THE LOW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT OF THE ETIWANDA NORTH SPECIFIC PLAN; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 0225-161-19, 32, 33, and 34. A. Recitals. 1. Lennar Homes of California filed an application for the approval of Minor Exception DRC2013-00202, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Review request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 24th day of July 2013, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. • NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing July 24, 2013, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The site is within the Etiwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP) and is surrounded by existing single-family development to the north and east, by a partially developed lot to the west, and by the SR-210 Freeway off ramp to the south; and b. Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18744 was approved on March 10, 2010, for the development of 30 single-family residences on 8.85 acres; and C. The lots range in size from 7,215 square feet to 21,201 square feet. A freeway sound wall has been approved along the south property line of the project site; and d. The applicant filed a Minor Exception (DRC2013-00202) for an additional 2 feet of wall height above the maximum 6 feet permitted by the Development Code. 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: ITEMS D,E-35 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 13-29 MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2013-00202 - LENNAR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA July 24, 2013 • Page 2 a. That the proposed development is of sufficient size and is designed so as to provide a desirable environment within its own boundaries. The subdivision was designed to minimize the necessity and height of the retaining walls. b. That the proposed development is compatible with existing and proposed land uses in the surrounding area. The retaining walls will match the materials used for the walls in the surrounding area. C. That the project does not include any exceptions to or deviations from the density, requirements, or design standards that would result in the creation of project amenities that would not be available through strict adherence to code provision. It is a common practice to permit combination retaining walls over 6 feet high when there are grade differences along common property lines. d. That the granting the Minor Exception will not adversely affect the interest of the public or interest of residents and property owners in the vicinity of the premises in question. The walls are the minimum necessary to retain the adjacent slopes and are required to be constructed of materials used in the surrounding area. e. That the Minor Exception is consistent with the General Plan or any applicable specific plan or development agreement. The General Plan and the Etiwanda North Specific Plan provide flexibility to the regulations where the site conditions cannot otherwise be mitigated. f. That the exception is the minimum required in that it allows the specified • improvement or development to occur, but does not provide additional development rights. The walls are the minimum height necessary to retain the adjacent slope and provide a 6-foot high property line wall/fence. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the application, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that no subsequent or supplemental environmental document is required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in connection with the review and approval of this application based upon the following findings and determinations: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration on January 25, 2006 in connection with the City's approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18744 pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project unless: (i) substantial changes are proposed to the project that indicate new or more severe impacts on the environment; (ii) substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under which the project was previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts; or (iii) new important information shows the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered; or (iv) additional mitigation measures are now feasible to reduce impacts or different mitigation measures can be imposed to substantially reduce impacts. b. The Planning Commission finds, in connection with Tentative Tract Map • SUBTT18744, that substantial changes to the project or the circumstances surrounding the project has not occurred which would create new or more severe impacts than those evaluated in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration. The applicant proposes 30 single-family residences on the ITEMS D,E-36 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 13-29 MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2013-00202 - LENNAR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA • July 24, 2013 Page 3 previously approved 30-lot Tentative Tract Map (SUBTT18744). Staff further finds that the project will not have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration, not have more severe effects than previously analyzed, and that additional or different mitigation measures are not required to reduce the impacts of the project to a level of less-than-significant. The previously approved lots are surrounded by existing single-family residential development, and the proposed residences meet all development criteria outlined in the Etiwanda Specific Plan and the City's Development Code. C. Based on these findings and all evidence in the record, the Planning Commission concurs with the staff determination that no additional environmental review is required pursuant to CEQA in connection with the City's consideration of Development Review DRC2013-00201 and Minor Exception DRC2013-00202. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Department 1) Approval is for the construction of combination walls with a calculated height up to 8 feet high related to Development Review DRC2013-00201 - • APN: 0225-161-19, 32, 33, and 34. 2) Approval is predicated on the approval of Development Review DRC2013-00201. 3) All walls exposed to the public view shall be decorative (i.e. stucco, slump stone, split face). 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24TH DAY OF JULY 2013. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Frances Howdyshell, Chairman ATTEST: Candyce Burnett, Secretary I, Candyce Burnett, Secretary of the Planning Commission for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning • Commission held on the 24th day of July 2013. ITEMS D,E-37 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 13-29 MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2013-00202 - LENNAR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA July 24, 2013 • Page 4 AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: • • ITEMS D,E-38 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT M DRC2013-00201 AND DRC2013-00202 SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW AND MINOR EXCEPTION APPLICANT: LENNAR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA LOCATION: APN: 0225-161-19, 32, 33, AND 34. ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: General Requirements Completion Date 1. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 2. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolutions of Approval No. 13-28 and 13-29 or Approval Letter, Standard Conditions, and all environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size). The sheet(s) are for information only to all parties involved in the construction/grading activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect. 3. The applicant shall be required to pay any applicable Fish and Game fees as shown below. The project planner will confirm which fees apply to this project. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary prior to the Planning Commission or Planning Manager hearing. a) Notice of Exemption - $50 X B. Time Limits • 1. Any approval shall expire if Building Permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 5 years from the date of approval or a time extension has been granted. 1 ITEMS D,E-39 Project No. DRC2013-00201 AND DRC2013-00202 Completion Date C. Site Development • 1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include Site Plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and grading on file in the Planning Department, the conditions contained herein, the Development Code regulations, and the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. 2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all Conditions of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Manager. 3. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all California Building Code and State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Services Department to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance and final acceptance granted prior to occupancy. 4. Revised Site Plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted for Planning Manager review and approval prior to the issuance of Building Permits. 5. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.) or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. 6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community, Specific Plans and/or Master Plans in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance. 7. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall _/_/_ • be located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the Planning Manager. For single-family residential developments, transformers shall be placed in underground vaults. 8. Street names shall be submitted for Planning Manager review and approval in accordance with the adopted Street Naming Policy prior to approval of the final map 9. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, including proper illumination and in conformance with Building and Safety Services Department standards, the Municipal Code and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Department (RCFD) Standards. 10. Six-foot decorative block walls shall be constructed along the project perimeter If a double wall condition would result, the developer shall make a good faith effort to work with the adjoining property owners to provide a single wall. Developer shall notify, by mail, all contiguous property owners at least 30 days prior to the removal of any existing walls/fences along the project perimeter. 11. For residential development, return walls and corner side walls shall be decorative masonry APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY SERVICES DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2710, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: NOTE: ANY REVISIONS MAY VOID THESE REQUIREMENTS AND NECESSITATE ADDITIONAL REVIEW(S). D. Building and Safety VHFHSZ ResidentialTract Standard Conditions • NOTE: The construction of this tract must be in accordance with the approved Fire Protection Plan and /or the California Building; this tract is located in the VHFHSZ. 2 ITEMS D,E-40 Project No. DRC2013-00201 AND DRC2013-00202 Completion Date • General Requirements 1. Submit five complete sets of plans including the following: a. Site/Plot Plan, b. Foundation Plan and reverse foundation plan (when applicable); C. Floor Plan; d. Roof and Floor Framing Plan and reverse Roof and Floor Framing Plan (when applicable), e. Electrical Plans (2 sets, detached) including the size of main switch, number and size of service entrance conductors, panel schedules, and single line diagrams; f. Plumbing and Sewer Plans, including isometrics, underground diagrams, water and waste diagram, sewer or septic system location, fixture units, gas piping, and heating and air conditioning; and g. Planning Department Project Number (DRC2013-00201 AND DRC2013-00202) clearly identified on the outside of all plans. 2. Submit two sets of structural calculations, two sets of energy conservation calculations, and a soils report. Architect's/Engineer's stamp and "wet" signature are required prior to plan check submittal. 3. Contractors must show proof of State and City licenses and Workers' Compensation • coverage to the City prior to permit issuance. 4. Separate permits are required for fencing and/or walls. 5. Developers wishing to participate in the Community Energy Efficiency Program (CEEP) can contact the Building and Safety Services Department staff for information and submittal requirements. Site Development 1. Plans shall be submitted for plan check and approved prior to construction. All plans shall be marked with the project file number (DRC2013-00201 AND DRC2013-00202) The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted California Codes, and all other applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations in effect at the time of permit application. Contact the Building and Safety Services Department for availability of the Code Adoption Ordinance and applicable handouts. 2. Prior to issuance of Building Permits for a new residential project or major addition, the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but are not limited to: City Beautification Fee, Park Fee, Drainage Fee, Transportation Development Fee, Permit and Plan Check Fees, and School Fees Applicant shall provide a copy of the school fees receipt to the Building and Safety Services Department prior to permit issuance. 3. The Building and Safety Official shall provide street addresses after tract/parcel map recordation and prior to issuance of Building Permits. • 4. Construction activity shall not occur between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. Monday through Saturday, with no construction on Sunday or holidays. 3 ITEMS D,E-41 Project No. DRC2013-00201 AND DRC2013-00202 Completion Date New Structures • 1. Provide compliance with the California Residential/Code Building Code (CBC/CRC) for property line clearances considering use, area, and fire-resistive construction. 2. Construction of the home must be in accordance with the approved Fire protection Plan and/or Chapter 7A of the CBC; this tract is located in the VHFHSZ. 3. Provide compliance with the California Building Code for required occupancy separations. 4. The structures in this tract must be equipped with automatic fire sprinkler in accordance with the approved Fire protection Plan and The California Residential Code. 5. Roofing material shall be installed per the manufacturer's "high wind" instructions. • • 4 ITEMS D,E-42 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 13-28 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-00201 - LENNAR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA July 24, 2013 Page 4 12) All walls exposed to public view shall be split face block. 13) Side yard gates shall have a minimum 90 percent view obscuring metal privacy screen. 14)--The4hfee-Bange4ew-plans-sh in design to c garage oor. 15) The single-story Bungalow plans shall use the same porch railing design as the two-story plans. 16) Prior to approval of any building permitsya fee of $1,000 per lot shall be paid as required by the Etiwanda North Specific Plan for the eventual construction of an equestrian center 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24TH DAY OF JULY 2013. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Frances Howdyshell, Chairman ATTEST: Candyce Burnett, Secretary I, Candyce Burnett, Secretary of the Planning Commission for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 24th day of July 2013. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: D,E-34 . GQ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 13-28 PeCO/L DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-00201 - LENNAR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA • July 24, 2013 Page 3 CEQA in connection with the City's consideration of Development Review DRC2013-00201 and Minor Exception DRC2013-00202. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Department 1) Approval is for the architectural and site plan review of a 30-lot subdivision - APN: 0225-161-19, 32, 33, and 34 2) All Conditions of Approval related to Tentative Tract SUBTf18744 (Planning Commission Resolution No. 10-10) shall apply. 3) Approval is predicated on the approval of Minor Exception DRC2013-00202. 4) The project shall conform to all recommended mitigation measures outlined in the acoustical study (Giroux & Associates, May 28, 2013) related to the City's interior noise standards. • 5) All wood and stone siding material shall be carried to the adjacent return wall or a change in wall plane. 6) All window and door surrounds shall be wood, a simulated wood product, or hard foam with a wood grain. Foam sprayed with stucco is not permitted. 7) Porch and patio support columns shall be constructed of solid block in order to take the stone veneer siding down to the finished grade. The Planning Manager may approve an alternate design which can be demonstrated to achieve the same result. 8) The open wood beam trellis structures on the front elevations of Plans 1 and 3 (San Juan) shall have a substantial appearance to the satisfaction of the Planning Manager. 'c The�bree-Btmg ans a door similar in design to W series runswic with e c 10) All garage doors shall have windows and be painted to either match the house or trim color. 11) All lighting fixtures used on the side and rear elevations shall match the lighting fixtures used on the front elevations. • 12) All walls exposed to public view shall be split face block. ITEMS D,E-33 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 13-28 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-00201 - LENNAR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA July 24, 2013 • Page 4 13) Side yard gates shall have a minimum 90 percent view obscuring metal privacy screen. 14) The three Bungalow plans shall use a front entry door similar in design to Wayne Dalton 6000 Series (Brunswick) garage door. 15) The single-story Bungalow plans shall use the same porch railing design as the two-story plans. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24TH DAY OF JULY 2013. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Frances Howdyshell, Chairman ATTEST: Candyce Burnett, Secretary I, Candyce Burnett, Secretary of the Planning Commission for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 24th day of July 2013. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: • ITEMS D,E-34 yk �F I is LEFT ELEVATION FRONT ELEVATION 11 11 art[rni«tee am Lmoek fV Tk m+arrenwr n.e r,w. +r emry MrCa,ra. i u.r ersr,r o.p tm. Mo FleF o>ryy � 9hmoFeler.e 1 Velaav Tlprwc Nyang li.e BtrV Ve,vw IVeoe,C.Leo srww area a eene s ere.xn.m waw Gra.Tmi r Oewe a w.racs ROOF PLAN PITCH4iff 'PIN 717 RIGHT ELEVATION BUNGALOW REAR ELEVATION a I FFT ELEVATION FRONT ELEVATION wrc411LL 4oTes � RON Cwvea sw rae 4afIMT G It 4wt li Fay tY 1 IW Btln N4 tlnb� w lar ipwaa e{em Fare � _ WUY ban TM1w{I LbvT{WNn. MFaa Bba V�aw(Na IFM 4e[�i TJnM10 L.CP b CYtl�N 9bV Li 3M9 Mm06�Inn al BYrq lcrvn ' BnMrn I' ROOF PLAN PITCH 6:12 RIGHT ELEVATION COUNTRY REAR ELEVATION .b � � l c LEFT ELEVATION FRONT ELEVATION NATERNI NplC9 (CWCIlEfE'S TILE Roel Gmcrale's Te Roof M",12 WM. 2 1 Cara 1I 4.MIq N,qM V9• — AYW S.[YxvI C+R.LIma tlli.0 TW PKw S E anK .wn TYw MlininK RWI ww.r+w CwmcK,«coum,.a wm wr �=y ROOF PLAN PITCH 4'1 IlIlMi.111,7E �a RIGHT ELEVATION SAN JUAN REAR ELEVATION 4 CUCAM ;t,f * 17 Plan 2 3 , 187 Square Feet k. II1 ur -1----------, a D min LEFT ELEVATION FRONT ELEVATION CONCRETE TLAT TILE MATERIAL NOTES .400L cv�nw fl.f nb C ... Ir cw Io e�rwq Twp.b'r MwN sm�r Gey.Dmn .w qv p.r Tm v.iyy 9Wcm LAMO Wv'000M1rN0 iqn�Trlm M ' ... PntiY 64i.V�w�-INo R.nv Ro[AI wl PIK..�9b1�C� Lbr.C.m.nl8ib�0 MUMf ' WUOC Tnn it ibp LmaMs YbW TyeeeE CAm.s ROOF PUN . u n.a rT Ln II ismLro RIGHT ELEVATION REAR ELEVATION BUNGALOW • r rMnC••..«^e�:SSR:l'Ziw";;S•.Ekit'SL'i:'.R'�I._\ 4�Y"1��"RN'!!iW •'A`r•''•b ' •. .� ■ � ..l III .• �.w._e.e.�.. ----- - ------ - - - =�„� ----------- LEFT -------- -LEFT ELEVATION _---- FRONT ELEVATION L_ CONCRETE'S'TILE f MATERIAL NOTES Mul D a. S'TP. � XCpl Vetlr.1 1] RBFB. IZ• 9wGiry.wKne.2I'a' Wlni Senmr Gerpe Doan 1 wOq Oew Tw P.n.l. SWcm E.brw b nw.Smoan Omn I S I' IbMi 6 Wbtta. TIMn M W I.Valalw. e.a vom r vacn..e v� Willow iROOF PLAN 112 VNU y F. ---- -------------- __ ____ -------- — i RIGHT ELEVATION REAR ELEVATION SAN JUAN (7tp of �'S i.! L Y i LEFI ELLVAIIUN , , KUNI III.VAiiUN CONCRETE FIAT TILE MATERIAL NOTES Rm1 Cvvae'F.r Tae RRM RIpL 3.129.-Q RMw IT E .M.IR' 1 / arx.�wyne ar+r =0.= eal SecOmM Cargs o 1 1 w Oq CYee Tao Pr.Ms 1 R��E� D Oa Y39.10F.B TM m RnuN SIdR VOR✓-(W RN Roell ROOF PLAN e«a«Rw aaRc" 12 M•. VL_._. . . . LMppC Trm�18l1epLwbrn MJ• VNOO TiR�tl CCMnM H L1 § FIICI LIM1 _. RIGHT ELEVATION REAR ELEVATION BUNGALOW ti �,; 1111 (_ 1111 •r �- 11111111111111 _. . -- - �� 'i 11111111111111111 MM �■ ■h � 111 NI -° 111111 �� ��u ■ ■ � 111 � 111111 ° nn LU JAVelk ol c IMP 00 LEFT ELEVATION FRONT ELEVATION MATERIAL NOTES Ir .. ili '. . s ■ • N // 1 ■■ #A las al/ RICkff ELEVATION PEAK ELEVATION SAN JUAN IUD 0 M(G-�� Added Condition of Approval • Prior to approval of any building permits , a fee of $ 1 , 000 per lot shall be paid as required by the ENSP for the eventual construction of an off-site equestrian center. 1, ONGA Conclusion • Staff recommends approval of Development Review DRC2013-00201 and Minor Exception DRC2013-00202 through adoption of the attached Resolutions with conditions . STAFF REPORT • PLANNINGDEPARTMENr Date: July 24, 2013 RANCHO CUCAMONGA To: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission From: Candyce Burnett, Planning Manager By: Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner Subject: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM18904 - SERGE BONALDO - A request to subdivide an existing office building that is part of a larger office complex into 12 individual condominium units for a site at the southwest corner of Laurel Street and Red Oak Avenue within the Industrial Park (IP) Development District, located at 10837 Laurel Avenue - APN: 0208-353-22. Planning Department staff has determined that the project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines as a Class 15 (CEQA Guidelines Section 15315) exemption which covers minor land divisions of four or fewer parcels. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18904 through adoption of the attached Resolution with conditions. • PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Office/Commercial Development; Industrial Park South - Office Development; Industrial Park East - Church; Industrial Park West - Court House; Industrial Park B. General Plan Designations: Project Site - Industrial Park North - Industrial Park South - Industrial Park East - Industrial Park West - Civic/Regional C. Site Characteristics: The 1.56-acre project site is part of a larger fully developed 8.38-acre office development made up of five separate office buildings on individual parcels. ANALYSIS: A. Project Proposal: The applicant is requesting to subdivide an existing 22,733 square foot office building into 12 individual suites for condominium purposes. No changes are proposed to the exterior of the buildings. All conditions related to Parcel Map 9103 will remain in force. • ITEM F-1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT , TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM18904— SERGE BONALDO July 24, 2013 Page 2 • B. Parking: There is a shared parking agreement between the five office buildings that make up the office park. The subdivision of the project site will not affect the number of parking spaces or the parking requirement for the development. C. Environmental Assessment: The Planning Department staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines. The project qualifies as a Class 15 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15315 — Minor Land Divisions — which covers the subdivision of real property into four or fewer parcels. Because the project consists of subdividing an office building on an individual parcel into multiple suites for condominium purposes, staff finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site. Respectfully submitted, Candyce Burnett • Planning Manager CB:TV/ge Attachments: Exhibit A - Complete Set of Plans Draft Resolution of Approval for Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18904 • ITEM F-2 m x TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP FOR be 10837 LAUREL ST. be",,d, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730 `"9'""""9 / D O - s iT \\ ,' VICMT YAP i LA) MEET INDEX; w U [ [ CVR COVER SHEET J d i `9v �./ SUM SIZE UIIIIIAIION MAP > I OF TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP �< i 1 WPROJECT SITE A-1 IST.FLOORDEMLSINGWALLPLAN ' 5 A-2 2ND.FLOOR DEMISING WALL PLAN COVER SHEET L1 - CVR 1 e bonaau wr.�ilr�na.- sootlaLL eLve.. - ■ eLla+ rv... rooTMnl BLVD. anpinaaang �'"�' •.I 1� - 'Iti I ,� .. .� t �. �A�Y1SI a i14}.�VIy11Y � m ,- t VAGIR tW - j- ♦ �. 1 r n VACANT LOT H ?T7'- t'fIpl _'i -T' CE wt / a g E a a11, w U lWWA @@8F aA p \•y.. gav liy ♦, w- 4� -H_ r OF CE OX L SITE -�� aFFIM w a�. UTILIZATION MAP SUM-1 SITE UTILRATgN AUP 1 IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA OWNERIDL LOPE, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO,STATE OF CALIFORNIA xe.rYy„ya,•+ LEL/ OESCRIPWN TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 18904 FN�IN FR rw� °`'mw k ASSESSORS PAItCEt NO: aas ennmaava�mea rvxa.mla i °��"a'a> m,dr aaau �r=urr gran uAa: 12 UNITS SOURCE OF EOPOGRAPHY 'A 'n""""a>"" ;wRw t" :� FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSESa _ I,VCRF GE 6il PROIECE SUM.WRY L ,a,>rar NSIS OF HEARING'I 9 SIS OF ELLYARON: n�iari Krw M m n�wu• m IWrIWr A s m Mw wvr>rr turn rrti 'WL' m vm mrwar_nc�urm mui�> Z rm•rv.v wx a Vrar w mr>c s wxr®r.o m.mxmx m , ..... .. .c�c p rsr rzooR PLaN - "_ J i...- !—._ ♦P'?l^l \ ^!' 1N0 FLOOR PL4N I Q •m Q txv- uA 10 �ARCEL 1,.' c AVENUE OAK / ra wxxm vena 6r��mi rnrtxrm rte xa. rw �>rt�xaw u.rtnm '»bra xa�wx..yA-A�Y� x'yv.r'xx�mw w xu• TENTATNE PARCEL W3 N0.189 C"OF RANCHO CUCAMONOA xv�Nx• r.x o rmra ry a. e bonal engineadng cm a 2 m fl < < Z4 7-7 FIRST FLOOR DEMISING F-� WALL PLAN A-1 FFsT FLOOR DEMSING WALL PLAN j A ......... a 00000000000 bonaldo englneedng ONO m -7T7777: rcF-- Fill < U Z F b5 SECOND FLOOR DEMISING WALL PLAN A-2 SECOND FLOOR DEMING WALL PLAN I RESOLUTION NO. 13-30 • A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM18904, A REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE AN EXISTING OFFICE BUILDING THAT IS PART OF A LARGER OFFICE COMPLEX INTO 12 INDIVIDUAL CONDOMINIUM UNITS FOR A SITE AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LAUREL STREET AND RED OAK AVENUE WITHIN THE INDUSTRIAL PARK(IP) DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, LOCATED AT 10837 LAUREL AVENUE; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF -APN: 0208-353-22. A. Recitals. 1. RC Laurel Properties, LLC filed an application for the approval of Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18904, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Tentative Parcel Map request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 24th day of July 2013, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found,determined,and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: • 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A,of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing July 24, 2013, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The 1.56-acre project site is part of a larger fully developed 8.38-acre office development made up of five separate office buildings on individual parcels; and b. The properties to the north and south are zoned Industrial Park (IP) and developed with office buildings;the properties to the east are zoned Industrial Park(IP)and developed with a church; and, the properties the east are zoned Industrial Park and developed with a San Bernardino County Court House; and C. The applicant is requesting to subdivide an existing 22,733 square foot office building into 12 individual suites for condominium purposes; and d. No changes are proposed to the exterior of the buildings; and e. There is a shared parking agreement in place between the five office buildings that make up the office park. The subdivision of the project site will not affect the number of parking spaces in the development. • ITEM F-8 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 13-30 SUBTPM1890- RC LAUREL PROPERTIES, LLC July 24, 2013 • Page 2 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The Tentative Parcel Map is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code,and any applicable specific plans; and b. The design or improvements of the Tentative Parcel Map is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and any applicable specific plans; and C. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; and d. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; and e. The Tentative Parcel Map is not likely to cause serious public health problems; and f. The design of the Tentative Parcel Map will not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. 4. The Planning Department staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines. The project qualifies as a Class 15 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15315 — Minor Land • Divisions—which covers the subdivision of real property into four or fewer parcels. Because the project consists of subdividing an office building on an individual parcel into multiple suites for condominium purposes, Staff finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Planning Department's determination of exemption, and based on its own independent judgment,concurs in the staff's determination of exemption. Planning Department 1) Approval is to subdivide an existing office building that is part of a larger office complex into 12 condominium units at the southwest corner of Laurel Street and Red Oak Avenue within the Industrial Park (IP) Development District, located at 10837 Laurel Avenue. 2) All conditions related to Parcel Map 9103 remain in force. 3) Submit a Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions agreement regulating the use and maintenance of the subject office building for Staff review priorto final map approval. Engineering Services Department 1) The final parcel map shall be submitted for review and approval to the Engineering Services Department. Plan check fees will be required and determined at the time of submittal. • ITEM F-9 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 13-30 SUBTPM1890 - RC LAUREL PROPERTIES,.LLC • July 24, 2013 Page 3 2) A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate landscape and lighting districts shall be filed the City Engineer prior to final map approval. 3) Any amendment on the existing Covenant, Conditions and Restrictions and Articles of Incorporation of the Homeowners' Association shall be subject to the approval of the Planning Department or the Engineering Services Department and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Parcel Map. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City Engineer. Fire Department 1) The CC&R agreement shall address proper fire suppression and fire access for the individual condominium suites. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24TH DAY OF JULY 2013. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA • BY: Frances Howdyshell, Chairman ATTEST: Candyce Burnett, Secretary I, Candyce Burnett, Secretary of the Planning Commission for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 24th day of July 2013, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: • ITEM F-10 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Ion DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT#: SUBTPM18904 SUBJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT PARCEL MAP APPLICANT: RC LAUREL PROPERTIES, LLC LOCATION: 10837 LAUREL AVENUE-APN: 0208-353-22 ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. General Requirements Completion Date • 1. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, _/_/_ its agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 2. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval No. 13-30 or Approval _/_/_ Letter, Standard Conditions, and all environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size). The sheet(s) are for information only to all parties involved in the construction/grading activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect. 3. The applicant shall be required to pay any applicable Fish and Game fees-as shown below. _/_/_ The project planner will confirm which fees apply to this project. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary prior to the Planning Commission or Planning Manager hearing. a) Notice of Exemption -$50 X B. Time Limits • 1 ITEM F-11 Project No. SUBTPM18904 Completion Date C. Site Development • 1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include Site Plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and grading on file in the Planning Department, the conditions contained herein, and the Development Code regulations. 2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all Conditions of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Manager. 3. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all California Building Code and State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Services Department to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance and final acceptance granted prior to occupancy. 4. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community, Specific Plans and/or Master Plans in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance. • 2 • ITEM F-12 I ^ {G A e 40� rit _ + 61 PF 7 0 I r � rL it aT A lfW�l10 L � STAFF REPORT P[ANNINGDEPARTMENT Date: July 24, 2013 RANCHO To: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission CUCAMONGA From: Candyce Burnett, Planning Manager By: Steve Fowler, Assistant Planner Subject: TIME EXTENSION DRC2013-00093 - LIFEWAY CHURCH MINISTRIES -A request for a time extension to the original approval for Conditional Use Permit DRC2006-00926 - A review of a Master Phasing Plan for remaining phases of the Lifeway Church project development including a classroom wing, temporary classroom modules, and a multi-purpose hall on 5.03 acres of land within the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located at 7477 Vineyard Avenue at Calle del Prado —APN: 208-921-36. Related files: Conditional Use Permit DRC2001-00439 and Non-Construction Conditional Use Permit DRC2007-00544. On April 24, 2002, a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was adopted by the Planning Commission for Conditional Use Permit DRC2001-00439. The California Environmental Quality Act provides that no further environmental review or Negative Declaration is required for subsequent projects or minor revisions to projects within the scope of the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration. • RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Time Extension DRC2013-00093 by adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval with conditions. ANALYSIS: A. General: On February 5, 2013, the applicant, Lifeway Church Ministries, submitted a request to extend the duration of the entitlement approval (hereafter referred to as a "time extension") for Conditional Use Permit DRC2006-00926. The applicant does not propose any changes to the project (Exhibit A). The project was originally reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission on October 22, 2008 (Exhibits B and C). Per Resolution of Approval No. 08-62 for Conditional Use Permit, Planning Condition 2, the approval of the project was set to expire "if Building Permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within five (5) years from the date of approval." This was not explicitly stated in the Condition but was referenced by Section 17.02.100. Thus, the approval of this project is set to expire on October 22, 2013. In September 2012 the City officially adopted an updated Development Code. Included in the update was a new Code section that allows for applicants to request time extensions for all entitlements. Per Section 17.14.090(C), an initial time extension request may be granted that extends the expiration date for two (2) years from the original expiration date. Near the end of that two-year period, a second, and final, time extension request may be granted that extends the expiration date for one (1) additional year beyond the expiration date granted by the first time extension. Both time extension requests are subject to the review and approval by the same authority that approved the original project. If the applicant's request is granted, the approval of the • project will expire on October 22, 2015. The applicant is still proposing to remove the remaining portable trailers as required by the original approved application as some of the trailers have already been removed. ITEM G-1 >r` PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2013-00093 — LIFEWAY CHURCH July 24, 2013 Page 2 • B. Design Review Committee: After the project was presented to the Design Review Committee during several meetings, on October 14, 2008, the project was conditioned by the Committee with a recommendation of approval to the Planning Commission. The Committee's conditions were subsequently incorporated into the Resolutions of Approval (Resolution No. 08-63) for the project. As the applicant does not propose any changes to the project in conjunction with this time extension request, no further action by any of the Committee is necessary. The Committee's original conditions of approval continue to apply and this is noted in the attached Resolution of Approval. C. Environmental Assessment: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration on April 24, 2002, in connection with the City's approval of Conditional Use Permit DRC2001-00493 for the approval of the initial project. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration is required in connection with subsequent or discretionary approvals of the same project unless: (i) substantial changes are proposed to the project that indicate new or more severe impacts on the environment; (ii) substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under which the project was previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts; or (iii) new important information shows the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered; or (iv) additional mitigation measures are now feasible to reduce impacts or different mitigation measures can be imposed to substantially reduce impacts. In 2008, staff evaluated Conditional Use Permit DRC2006-00926 and concluded that substantial changes to the project or the circumstances surrounding the project have not occurred, which would create new or more severe impacts than those evaluated in the previous Mitigated Negative • Declaration. At that time, the applicant proposed a less intense project by consolidating the initial Gymnasium and Fellowship Hall buildings into a smaller single structure that reduced the building height, square footage, and building mass by eliminating approximately 1,900 square feet. In the initial proposal, these two functions (i.e., the Gymnasium and Fellowship Hall) were provided in separate buildings on two levels. In the revised proposal, the buildings were combined into a single Multi-Purpose Hall that would be located on a lower, mid-plaza level. Staff has evaluated Time Extension DRC2013-00093 and concludes that substantial changes to the project or the circumstances surrounding the project have not occurred, which would create new or more severe impacts than those evaluated in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration since the applicant is proposing a time extension to the previous approval. Staff further finds that the project will not have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration, not have more severe effects than previously analyzed, and that additional or different mitigation measures are not required to reduce the impacts of the project to a level of less-than-significant. Therefore, pursuant to CEQA, staff recommends that the Planning Commission concur with the staff determination that no additional environmental review is required in connection with the City's consideration of Time Extension DRC2013-00093. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site. No correspondence has been received. Respec`�bmitted, Candyce Burnett Planning Manager • CB:MN/ge ITEM G-2 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2013-00093 — LIFEWAY CHURCH July 24, 2013 • Page 3 Attachments: Exhibit A - Time Extension Request Letters (prepared by the applicant) Exhibit B - Staff Report for Conditional Use Permit DRC2006-00926, dated October 22, 2008 Exhibit C - Resolution of Approval No. 08-62 for Conditional Use Permit DRC2006-00926 Draft Resolution of Approval for Time Extension DRC2013-00093 • • ITEM G -3 LIFE WAY CHURCH Pastor Chris A. Esteves, Ph.D. February 4, 2013 City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Dr. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Lifeway Church Ministries 7477 Vineyard Ave. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Re: Construction Extension. To: The City of Rancho Cucamonga, We are requesting a Construction extension at 7477 Vineyard Ave. Rancho Cucamonga,CA 91730 in regards to the already approved second phase of the Children's School building; Per highlights • CUP DRC2006-00926: Approved by the Planning Commission on October 22,2008 under resolution 08-26 for a 15,000 square foot Classroom Wand 10,000 square foot Multi-Purpose Hall. Approval expires on October 22, 2013. No changes are being requested in the demand and agreement of module removal by October, 2013. In addition, all modules will be removed by October,2013 per agreement. It should be noted that 50% off all modules have already been removed as of January 2013. The reason for the request is due to the hard economical times of the recession, which caused a delay in the construction progress of the Children's School building phase#2 of the project. We have began to see a remarkable progress economically, so things are now beginning to turn around. This has now allowed the construction to be placed back on track. We are presently in the process of completing the plans and the schedule to begin the construction in 2014. An extension would allow us the time and necessary coordination with the Architects,City officials and the Church to complete this project. It is with great gratitude as you consider this extension for approval. Sincer actor ste es Lifeway Church Ministries EXHIBIT A 7477 Vineyard Ave,Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Business Office(909) 948-5557 Fax(909) 948-5598 E-Mail: aesteves@iifewaychurch.org. ITEM G -4 l THE C I T Y O F RANCHO CUCAMONGA Staff Repcd DATE: October 22, 2008 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: James R. Troyer, AICP, Planning Director BY: Corkran W. Nicholson, Assistant Planning Director SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT- DRC2006-00926 - WLC ARCHITECTS - Review of Master Phasing Plan for remaining phases of Lifeway Church project development including a classroom wing, temporary classroom modules, and a multi-purpose hall on 5.03 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) of 7477Vineyartl Avenue at Calle del Prado. APN: 208- 921- 08- 921 36.Related Files, Conditional Use Permit ORC2001-00439, Non-Construction Conditional Use Permit DRC2007 00544. On April 24, 2002, a Mitigated Negative • Declaration of environmental impacts was :adopted by the Planning Commission for Conditional Use Perm"it 6RC200:1-00439. The California Environmental Quality Act provides that no further enviruhnmental review or, Negative Declaration is required for subsequent projects or minor revisions to projects'within the scope of the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration. ENTITLEMENT REQUIREMENT: The purpose of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is to create flexibility necessary to achieve the objectives of the Development Code and General Pian, and to ensure that the proposed use is compatible with neighboring uses. If necessary, conditions may be required to provide adequate mitigation of any potentially adverse impacts. The proposed site is within the Low (L) Residential district, Churches (synagogues) andpreschools are permitted uses within the Low Residential district subject to a Conditional Use Permit and Planning Cominission approval. BACKGROUND: On July 1, 2001, an application for Conditional .Use Permit DRC2001-00439 was filed for the construction and occupation of`a new master planned Lifeway church facility on Vineyard Avenue across from Red Hili Park. The facility included 'several phases of construction with a sanctuary, offices, education building, fellowship hall, and gymnasium. Following the Design Review Committee's approval on April 2,.2002, the Planning Commission approved the project on April 24, 2002, with 15 Planning conditions, as set forth in Resolution No. 02.43, which include the following: 7) The Master Plan is approved in concept only. Future development for each building proposed in Phases 2, 3, and 4 shall be subject to separate Development Review process. SEXHIBIT B ITEM G-5 I PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2006-00926—WLC ARCHITECTS • October 22, 2008 Page 2 9) This approval is for the operation of a church and office and does not include a daycare or private K-12 school. Development Code Section 17.02.100, and repeated in the Standard Conditions for DRC2001- 00439, is the requirement that building permits be obtained for buildings within five years,and diligently pursued toward completion. The Master Plan approved under DRC2001=00439 expired on April 24, 2007 without the building permits for the subsequent phases being issued i.e., for the education building, fellowship hall, and.gymnasium. The existing portable temporary classroom units were placed on the site in October, 2006, and as determined by the Planning Commission at their December 13, 2006, meeting, the portable temporary classroom units were part of Phase 1 and were not to be permanent but must be associated with a permanent building which has an active Conditional Use Permit. The permanent -building to replace the temporary units is the classroom building, which is part of Phase 2. With the expiration of the 2002 Conditional Use Permd; the subject Conditional Use Permit mustbeapproved for thelemporary classroom units to remain until the new classroom building is completed. The applicant submitted a new application, Conditional Use Permit DRC2006-00926, for the remaining phases of the Lifeway Church projectthat included an educational building, the temporary classroom modules, a,gymnasium and fellowship hall that had not obtained building permits priorto the expiration. In addition, the applicant submitted an additional application fora • Non-Construction Conditional Use Permit DRC2007-00544, to operate a private/parochial school, Kind erg aften,through grade 12, at the church facility. Both applications were accepted as complete prior to the April 24, 2007 expiration of the previous Conditional Use,Permit. The project received Design Review Committee approval on June 19, 2007. At the August 22, 2007 Planning Commission meeting, the above-referenced projects were presented at a single public hearing for-both related requests. The staff report arid.,exhibits,were presented and testimony by the applicant and neighbors was 341ken: The. Planning Commissioners.expressed serious concerns over several,aspects of both requests including school operation and coordination with the nearby public high school, traffic and parking impacts, substantial noise, site design, and visual impacts of the additional. phases 'and compliance for the southerly screen wall. The Planning Commission provided direction that a master phasing pian with potential negative impacts could not be favorably acted upon without reviewing more substantial ,architectural design drawings, receiving more school operation information and detailed,traffic and parking information. In an effortto-provide the applicant with an opportunity to rectify these concems, the items were continued to give Staff an opportunity to devise a draft set of procedures for the applicant to follow to address .the Commission's concerns adequately. The continued public hearing items were brought back to the Planning Commission on September 12, 2007, at which time and in conference with the Planning Department Staff, the church modified their application, as follows: 1. The Non-Construction Conditional Use Permit DRC2007-00544 for the private school operation was withdrawn; and, • ITEM G-6 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT • CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2006-00926—WLC ARCHITECTS October 22, 2008 Page 3 2. The application for the Master Plan for future phases was amended to take place without a phasing plan and to require a Development Review of the Classroom/Education Building and the Gymnasium. The Planning Commission accepted the above changes and adopted the following additional review procedures, as recommended by Staff for Conditional Use Permit DRC2006-00926, as the item was continued for the Commission's action at a future date: 1. The Development Review project D13=66-009. 26 should be continued by the Planning Commission to give Staff, the Design Review Committee, and the Planning Commission an opportunity to review the revised project and provide a further hearing opportunity for the site and building design. 2. The applicant shall provide full architectural drawings and a site plan for the Classroom Building and Gymnasium. If changes in grade are necessary,a Conceptual Grading Plan shall also be.submitted. 3. A detailed development schedule shall be provided to establish a timeline for the removal of the temporary classroom units and all other parts of the program. 4. The applicant shall provide a quality development package for review to Staff within 45 • days so that it can be docketed for review by the Design Review Committee at the earliest possible date. The Planning Commission will provide the final review of the project after the Design Review Committee is sufficiently satisfied with the design changes to make a recommendation. In accordance with the additional review procedures, as noted above for Conditional Use Permit DRC2006-00926; the applicant obtained DRC approval on October 14, 2008, and is now seeking the Planning Commission final review and approval of the project. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Project Description: Lifeway Church is seeking approval of a Conditional Use Permit to cornplete their existing facility by constructing an on-site 15,000 square foot, two-story Classroom Wing and a 10,074 square foot Multi-Purpose Hall. B. Surrounding Land Use and Zoninq: North - Single-Family Residential; Low Density (2 to 4 dwelling units per acre) Residential South - Single-Family Residential; Low Density (2 to 4 dwelling units per acre) Residential East - Single-Family Residential; Low Density (2 to 4 dwelling units per acre) Residential West - Park; Open Space C. General Plan Designations: Project Site - Low Density (2 to 4 dwelling units per acre) Residential North - Low Density (2 to 4 dwelling units per acre) Residential South- Low Density (2 to 4 dwelling units per acre) Residential • East - Low Density (2 to 4 dwelling units per acre) Residential West - Open Space ITEM G -7 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2006-00926—WLC ARCHITECTS • October 22, 2008 Page 4 D. Site Characteristics: The project site is terraced into several levels to accommodate the existing and proposed development, and is located on the east side of Vineyard Avenue and across from Red Hill Park. Currently, the site is developed with the church sanctuary, offices, and temporary classroom modules along with fully developed on-site parking and landscaping. ANALYSIS: A. General: The proposed Classroom Wing will be built first, and will provide the younger, elementary children with meeting rooms and nursery rooms on the lower level along with staff offices and other building support spaces. The upper level will provide meeting rooms for the older children along with a children's worship space. Access to the Classroom Wing will be from the existing upper parking lot,level and from the mid-plaza level. The upper parking lot access will also provide disabled access via an.elevator to the lower level, which will be at grade with the mid-plaza. This. building will maintain a northerly street side building setback of approximately 40 feet from the curb face on Calle Del Prado, approximately 365 feet from the neighboring residential property to the east of site, and approximately 170 feet from the neighboring residential properties to the south. Upon completion of the Classroom Wing, the existing portable classrooms will be removed from the site. The Multi-Purpose Hall will be the next structure built, and will provide a multi-purpose • room, storage room, serving kitchen, and restrooms. The multi-purpose room (approximately 6,189 sq. ft.) will be used for dining, social activities, gymnasium, church meetings, and instructional purposes throughout the week. This primarily single-story structure will also have a small second-story area for general offices. Access to the multi- purpose hall will be from the lower main plaza, which is directly across from the existing Sanctuary. Disabled access will be provided via the elevator in the.Sanctuary. The Multi- Purpose Hall will maintain a northerly building setback of approximately 170 feet from the curb face on Calle Del Prado, approximately 425 feet from the neighboring residential property to the east of site, and approximately 57 feet from the neighboring residential properties to the south. The architecture of the proposed buildings is consistent with the existing sanctuary and office building. Key features include the use of stacked-stone veneer; plaster reveals, textured stucco, and solar bronze colored window glazing. The maximum height for both buildings will be 30'-0" as measured from the lowest adjacent finished grade surface next to each building, as shown on the submitted Site Section 3 drawing on plan sheet Al.1. B. Use Description and Hours of Operation: Religious services take place on Wednesday evenings from 6:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. and on Sunday mornings into the afternoon from 8:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. The use of the proposed Classroom Wing and the Multi-Purpose Hall, as described above, will be in conjunction with the general services of the Lifeway Church. • ITEM G-8 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT • CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2006-00926—WLC ARCHITECTS October 22, 2008 Page 5 C. Development Code Compliance: The project complies with the Development Code requirements for setbacks, building height, the provision of required on-site parking, and an efficient on-site circulation system. The site is located on and served by a fully developed public street of the appropriate size and configuration to accommodate the proposed use. Although the applicant is proposing a substantial enhancement of the existing landscape buffer along the site's southerly property line and adjacent to the south side of the Multi- Purpose Hall, Staff is including a condition of approval inthe attached resolution to require that at least 50%or more of the new trees to be planted shall be a minimum size of 36 inch box. The larger tree sizes will aid in buffering the proposed development from the neighboring residential properties. Staff has also included a condition to clarify the status of the temporary portable classroom units in relation to the permanent facilities for that function. The intent of allowing,temporary facilities for temporary occupation is that there is the anticipation of a permanent occupation of a permanent building for the same function. The existing portable units serve as a temporary location to house the meeting rooms for religious educational purposes that cannot be housed in any of the permanent buildings currently on the site. The proposed Classroom Wing will meet this need for the.additional meeting rooms, as well as' provide nursery rooms, and other support spaces as the classroom • building is proposed as a two-story, 12;000 square foot structure and the temporary units are only about 4;200 square feet in floor area. Therefore, the temporary portable classroom units should be removed as "soon as the classroom building can be occupied or when the five-year life of this approval has lapsed,whichever is first. D. Parkin Calculations: Development Code Section 17.12.040(B) (5) (g), requires one parking stall for every 4 fixed seats in the sanctuary. Currently, the site provides 230 on- site parking spaces, which well exceeds the 140 spaces required by Code for the 557 fixed seats within the existing sanctuary. E. Neighborhood Meeting: The architect for the project, Jim DiCamillo, informed Staff that the most recent neighborhood meeting was held in the Lifeway Church Sanctuary on January 7, 2008. He estimated that there were approximately 12 to 15 neighbors in attendance along with about 75 to 100 individuals from the congregation. Following an introduction by Pastor Esteves, the architect stated that he presented a history of the entire project, an explanation of the.process, and a brief summary of where they are in the process. In addition, a slide show was provided that allowed those who attended the meeting to view the drawings that w04 submitted to the City. He also stated that he described the project and the changes that have been made at that time; focusing on the consolidation of the Gym and Fellowship Hail into a single Multi-Purpose Hall, and that the Pastor informed everyone that the church is not proposing a school with the current application. In his opinion, the project was`well received, with the exception of a few who have strongly opposed anything the church submits. F. Design Review Committee: The Design Review Committee reviewed the applicant's more recent proposal on November 6, 2007, January 15, 2008, and October 14, 2008, and made the following recommendations in the order of each meeting: • ITEM G -9 I PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2006-00926—WLC ARCHITECTS • October 22, 2008 Page 6 • November 6, 2007 DRC meeting: Per the direction of the Planning Commission, the applicant presented a preliminary concept plan for the Committee's feedback, which included a scale model of the church campus that offered the opportunity to visualize the building arrangement, site orientation particularly in relation to the neighboring down-slope residences, building mass, and architecture. Complaints from a neighboring property owner who attended the meeting were received that were primarily about building mass, view, and the unsightliness of the site's,southerly 6'-0" + high masonry wall that faces the neighboring residential properties. The Committee conveyed their concerns regarding the neighbor's.issues,and directed the applicant to return to the Committee with a complete presentation of the design. • January 15, 2008 DRC meeting: The applicant submitted a revised proposal that incorporated the following changes to address the design issues that were previously raised by the Design Review Committee: Issue: Consider a re-orientation of the gym so that the shorter dimension of the building faces the slope and the neighboring homes to reduce the massive appearance of the building. Plan Revision: The Gymnasium. and Fellowship Hall buildings were consolidated into a single structure. In the previous proposal these two functions were provided in separate buildings on two levels. In the revised proposal these buildings are combined into a single Multi-Purpose Niall that would be located on the lower mid • plaza level. Such a revision reduces both the building square footage and building mass by eliminating approximately 1,900:square feet. Issue:. It was suggested that a possible change in the pad elevation and/or landscaping would help mitigate the neighbor's view. Plan Revision: The pad elevation for the proposed Multi-Purpose Hall was dropped by approximately 14'-0", and substantial landscaping was added in accordance with the submitted Planting Plan. Issue: Can the gym be moved to the east portion of the site? Response: Staff and the applicant believe that the proposed location for the Multi- Purpose Hall, which includes a regulation basketball court, is best suited for their needs in terms of public safety when accommodating on-s'ite vehicular traffic and pedestrian circulation. The Committee and, Staff agreed that although a possible alternative, moving the Multi-Purpose Building to the east would create a non- integrated campus. Furthermore, the neighboring properties along Calle del Prado could be subject to additional traffic, safety, and noise concerns which would necessitate further environmental studies which were not covered by the original approval and environmental clearances. Issue: A solution is needed to mitigate the stark appearance of the southerly wall that faces the neighboring properties. ITEM G -10 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT • CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2006-00926—WLC ARCHITECTS October 22, 2008 Page 7 Plan Revision: The revised proposal provides for a much greater detail of the landscape and wall treatment along the southerly property line. The area between the wall and the property line is shown on the Proposed Planting Plan with substantial new trees, shrubs, and groundcover material; and according to the applicant the existing wall would receive a stucco finish of color and texture that would match the,existing church building. In addition, a 6'-0" high wrought iron fence will be installed to enclose .the rear portion of the parking areas, as noted on the submitted site plan. Issue: Several neighboring property owners attendedthe meeting and.expressed- their xpressedtheir concerns regarding grading, building height, the appearance of the southerly wall that faces the neighboring properties, conducting a school on the subject site, and a request to install "story poles:" They felt that such poles would provide further visual guidance .as to how high the proposed buildings may appear from the surrounding properties. Response and Revision: It was the,general.consensus of the Committee members that the church has gone to. great lengths to address the issues that have been raised through the review process, which has made the proposal very acceptable; therefore, the Committee recommended. that the proposal be forwarded to the Planning Commission subject to thefollowing conditions; • 1. Erect on-site story poles for the purpose of providing a visual aid to further convey to the,surrounding residences the proposed height of the new buildings. After the story poles are erected the applicant will notify the Planning Department of the completed installation of the pates, and request that notices explaining the purpose of story poles be sent to the surrounding residences. The story poles shall remain in place for a minimum of two weeks from the mailing date of the notices. 2. Submit a Conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan by a certified civil engineer for the purpose of identifying and verifying the placement and height of the story poles, proposed building heights, pad elevations, drainage.system, and the extent of grading that would occur to accommodate the new buildings. A reduced copy of the required Grading Plan was provided with each notice.to the surrounding residences to further explain the installation of the story poles. The notices were mailed out on May 13, 2008; however,the installation of the story poles was delayed until May 19; 2008. The poles were removed on.August 5, 2008. • October 14, 2008 DRC meeting: The applicant submitted a revised proposal that replaces the upward sloping shed roof design for the Multi-Purpose building with a lower profile parapet design. This redesign was recommended by Staff to ensure that the Multi-Purpose building will fully comply with the applicable. height requirements, and to further reduce the overall building mass. Additionally, staff informed the applicant of new conditions of approval that were further developed in conjunction with the review of the re-design. The added conditions include the application of the stucco finish to the southerly wall and its future maintenance as • well as the installation of wrought iron fencing along the southerly perimeter of the ITEM G-11 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2006-00926—WLC ARCHITECTS • October 22, 2006 Page 8 parking lot. The condition for the removal of the temporary modular units was reiterated to the applicant and it was made clear that these shall be removed prior to occupancy of the Classroom Wing., Staff also proposed a condition to require.some larger specimen trees (36-inch box) for the southerly portion of the property and along the southern slope above the neighbors' property line. The applicants acknowledged the conditions. The Design Review Committee (Munoz, Wimberly, Nicholson) approved the redesign as submitted by the applicant and commented that the applicant has gone to great lengths and great expense to respond to the concerns of the neighbors and to make the project better. One neighbor attended the meeting, and voiced his continued opposition and concern about the project, its purported impacts, and his perception of a lack of cooperation from the applicant and the City. G. Environmental Assessment: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's local CEQA Guidelines; the City adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration on April 24, 2002, in connection with the City's approval of Conditional Use Permit DRC2001-00493 for the approval of the initial project. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162; no subsequent or supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration is required in connection with subsequent or discretionary approvals of the same project unless: (i) substantial changes are proposed to the project that indicate new or more severe impacts on the environment; (ii) substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under which the project was previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts; or (iii) new important information shows the project will have new • or more severe impacts than previously considered; or (iv) additional mitigation measures are now feasible to reduce impacts or different mitigation measures can be imposed to substantially reduce impacts. Staff has evaluated Conditional Use Permit DRC2006- 00926 and concludes that substantial changes to the project or the circumstances surrounding the project have not occurred, which would create new or more severe impacts than those evaluated in the previous Mitigated Negative Dedaration. In that the applicant is currently proposing a less intense project by consolidating the initial Gymnasium and Fellowship Hall buildings into a smaller single structure that reduces the building height, square footage, and building mass by eliminating approximately 1,900 square feet. In the initial proposal these two functions (i.e., the Gymnasium and Fellowship Hall) were provided in separate buildings on two levels. In the revised proposal the buildings are combined into a single Multi-Purpose Hall that would be located on a lower mid plaza level. Staff further finds that the project will not have one or more significant effects not discussed in ,the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration, not have more severe effects than previously analyzed, and that .additional or different mitigation measures are not required to reduce the impacts of the project to a level of less than significant. Therefore, pursuant to CEQA, Staff recommends that the Planning. Commission concur with the Staff determination that no additional environmental review is required in connection with the City's consideration of Conditional Use Permit DRC2006-00926. CORRESPONDENCEThis item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site. • ITEM G-12 I PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT • CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2006-00926—WLC ARCHITECTS October 22, 2008 Page 9 RECOMMENDATION: Approval The Planning Commission should move to approve Conditional Use Permit DRC2006-00926 and adopt Resolution No.08-62; approving the applicant's proposal to expand the Lifeway Church factlity by constructing an on-site 15,DD0 square foot, two-story Classroom Wing and a 10,074 square foot Multi-Purpose Hall at 7477 Vineyard Avenue. Denial If the Planning Commission intends to deny this Conditional Use Permit application, the Commission should state the specific reasons for denial and direct staff to prepare the appropriate resolution incorporating the Commission's. decision and specific findings. Respectfully submit/ 'J'amesR. Troyer,AICP Planning Director • JT'CNIIs Attachments: Exhibit A-Aerial Photo of the Site Exhibit 8 -Site Plan Exhibit'C - Floor Plans Ext iit D-Architectural Elevations Exhibit E-Grading Plan Exhibit F -Landscape Plan Exhibit G- DRC Comments, November 6, 2007, January 15, and October 14, 2008 Exhibit H-Noticing of the Story Poles Exhibit I -Resolution No. 02-93 approving Conditional Use Permit DRC2001- 00 "3J for the.development of the initial Master Plan for the church Draft Resolution of Approval for Conditional Use Permit DRC2006-0926 • ITEM G -13 T � .#tL <r n t '•vF.�i' 0. t+ tttt r � � � �r .,� i ^� + � � - ! °' + { & t f Y m Oo - L= ------------ - WLC _ -_ _--___ _ _ ALLE'_DEL PRi9D0 'r � I O� 1 L&tWAY CHURCH W ; EUCATION BD D �I I UFEWAYCNJRCX 7477VNEYAADAVE RANCHO CUCAM.. . _ L ----- _---_-- G _.�x�..d.,.� 4NC.4 0 E.s, d) SI7E.SEC710N 2 io x Q s xsir SIfEPUW E ------------ srIE SECn0N „... a 0 Mo . 0 0 WLC LIFEWAY CHURCH EDUCATION -----, -- BUR.DINGS LFMi uw LY� 00 LEGEND D 7477VMEYAAIIAVE Mo 10 /r. •g DZia. 977Y0 j./ 1� ���I h Cir t ,• � ��. .PLAN. 1 9lAlllINGAFIPST [ IEVEl.FL.& N gj AAL1 E Err WLC UFENAY CHURCH -- EDUCAMON BUILDINGS FLOORPLANLEGEND uFmAya mi 0 �,• J _ k� 747TVNEYARDAVE ® ® RPAKM CEIGAG y . - p: 9173D 9177D a.n w L.'.BU9dN0AS P- E FLOONPLIN 5 WLC A----�• -o J� -- LIFEINAY CHURCH ' a o EDUCATION BUILDINGS _ P� -G' FLOOR PLAN LEGEND UFEWAYC7WNCN P PP O PO PP P .�•�- - __+Iry..7� 74"MNEWDAVE HO WNCCANGA CA BUILDING B SEQ0NDIEVEL FLOORPLAN 1 9770 T - CIL �� / o o- -/.� .. PO PO �` m0_ • PPP __--__ __ � � °'���^••• ❑-__ BUII➢INGBRODN � BUILDINGy AB21 �ryg .a wro WLC 1u ` 1 p�� BUILDING •NORTH ELEVAMN ®OCHURCH EDUCATION BUILDINGS A A A RIN.1' O• 'T !r. .L r- ',r4� .}>)yhY tl-iRANCHO 91730 ClUCMONGA CABUILDING A FAST . ®© 1\ BUILDI --- s � . : . M ELEVATION © - ��._. - mg ' n BUILDING A WEST[ELEVATION 141 AASA �� ■ HU m. Architects o _ �F •+T��I��I�I�Ig�ill�lie SdEl . MW MM 3nam ■■rill .r , _R= MS_-M zll=Mal r11d.�rww= MMIMM ,YJ= oo =—EIMMa=_Jl�llal Eat ay.d r� SII TT tl. }` Si,v .f,NY M a ,-.rh F o e -J-FA.i-i V .. _._ -„ •._.. _ 1 ■ WiLDING A-HEIGMANALYSIS W7 —7WLC edmeA BUILDING B-HEIGMANALYSIS m I AW I 0---ft LIFEWAY CHURCH EDUCATION WawiM BUILDINGS BUILDING BNORTH ELEVATION SULDINGSKEIGHTANALYSIS BI Q LFEWAYCHURCH 7477VNEYARDAVE RANCHO CUMWNGA,G 0� 'M91730 I -#.— ll�Mill BUILDING B SOUTH ELEVATION 2 � Q � q Q � QQ 0 BUILDING B EAST ELEVATION 1 --- 141 BUILDINGBWESTE TIN 1 --- 1311 0 WLC I bNTNEPMCIWF01p•. �14 LIFEWAY CHURCH EDUCATION BUILDING B SECTION 4 j 141 BUILDING B SECTION I t BUILDINGS LFEMYCMRCH A-11N T 74nANEYARDAVE KAMHO CUCAMOWGA.CA c K) F JILDING B.SECTION 2 TT � � � � q 0 BUILDING B SECTION 5 51 BUILDING B S 3 A852 �! pE - � _ Architects lrI�'gy14•4L1iy.���1 �� ��� otl-au�8ri u� a 4E z;mm -s � SI A' VDA SIP M., .JI 0 i 59 ®® • �. ® - A ie1'`T'1 i .y II a milli 1111 r.• L t i�r rti�FQ �Qa�tt e-I�13IQ •a�a ib F` 1 [oil ' �� •epQY� ei Qa�"@t!Q �Qtlb !Q! lIQI� t `Q'� �l.IS� ��� 9Q3b1lQ�QltIQ�lIQliiiiiti! to �1q �(! IR it ill l esea..tot Ii3seal.e.aa Q 4 !f Z V i� eR �Q O Z tto S It Q 6 Jeb � � — _ � W OR � � a it � I i�- S �tQ fill i.. s I Rp 9 SPC 10 Q 0 ' EXHIBIT E ' ITEM G -24 t rho ■���I���B � � f���w'--TTTreSip� �W•�f� r®�'���'" ���I���t 'r.'g1�T" f ��� �cia. �., ■i '.C� .. ° e > > • �i l l l l l l l I���'' � i I l t • a . �tOi�l' • '' 'Ova► , �� � > zst - __ a > n 0 r a :• amnnn �.....".. �,`�.. ............... LZ- D W311 � r 7 11 all iaf.� rF a 8 F g 9 I i F 8 q B B z � 9R •}} ov fR �rc i • K�zn ipi� R v di. 11E�i,a�'-0 6a -0!i�• d x���a. dq�E��. ' :� •l+R; €E��E3�� f71�3f� " OZ QT 4.rovw.^ r r. z fill Rit°9" ..R�a=6i-0 I st!illaa� jjgjyjib dH k d � Eiaq�d6a6d a l °! 118116. $ p F f 4 a. R baa i b I dill iv F. � :R�R3Piq� d 3 F E: g a q q q B R°f! > •-� wcw ''fig HIM • Iz Rk a ° � �`° 7 P6E� i"P�E E � r MENEM WLC SDVTME0.X EILLRORNN' WM4e�w 4w: PODOCARP,.jS GRACILIOR TRISTANIA COtV-ERTF ABEJA GRANDPLORA DETES VEGATA 4 ' + EDV/ARD GCI,:'-FP' ,-A•. I � Z 0 J_ m z REM@?OCALUS$ LMOVILyM PEREZp PETWSETLMSETACELFA T�AX PITOPOM TC3RARED PLOVERNG PFO LAS,N:)Owmg$ '`/AREGATI. z o U � Ea m C) P40TNA FRASERI W ARS EP5 MALA XYLOSMA CONGESTLiki PA4T�pO rl xr�lU FESTEJOA OVINA N TRIC-LMDATA 'GLAUCA' J CP d •+kir TRAC4ELOSPEPML.'M Qoslvw tJG OFFIO/VA_LF JASMINODES LOCKVIOOD DE FOREST' I _ _ I .'..j ro+c PRO SED j P TNG PALETTE wTM LPP.1 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:00 p.m. Corky Nicholson November 6, 2007 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2006-00926 - WLC ARCHITECTS - Review of Master Phasing Plan for the remaining phases of the Lifeway Church project development including an education building, temporary classroom modules, gymnasium and fellowship hall on 5.03 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located at 7477 Vineyard Avenue at Calle del Prado - APN: 0208-921-36. Related Files: Conditional Use Permit DRC2001-00439 and Non-Construction Conditional Use Permit DRC2007-00544. Design Parameters: On September 12, 2007, the Planning Commission directed the applicant to pursue a more complete design presentation for the remaining buildings for the church campus. The applicant is presenting a preliminary concept for Committee feedback. Drawings are attached with an explanation of the building program. More extensive presentation materials will be provided at the meeting. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends providing the applicant with direction and having the applicant return to the Committee with a full presentation of the designs. Attachment • Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: (Fletcher, Munoz, Diaz) Staff Planner: Corky Nicholson Also present at the meeting were: Corky Nicholson, Assistant Planning Director; Jim Di Camillo of WLC Architects, Elena Purice of WLC Architects; WLC Architects, Sylvester Mayberry, Lifeway Church; Pastor Chris A Esteves, Lifeway Church; Char Ransom, Lifeway Church. Jim Di Camillo, WLC Architects presented a scale model of the church campus that offered the opportunity to visualize the building arrangement, site orientation particularly in relation to the neighboring downslope homes, building mass and architecture. He highlighted a few features of the design such as the proposed education building that is tucked into the hillside; the fellowship hall (following the removal of the temporary classrooms); and the gym that now reflects a lowered profile. He confirmed that the gym will be placed approximately 15 feet closer to the roadway abutting the slope than the portable classrooms. He commented that the height of the proposed building is about the same as the two story homes previously proposed for the site. He said moving the gym to a different location on the site would produce a fire access problem. Public Comments Charles Rich, a neighboring resident expressed frustration that the Committee meeting tonight was not • advertised to the neighborhood. He complained that it is his understanding that the gymnasium will be PIC- EXHIBIT G ITEM G-29 DRC ACTION AGENDA CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2006-00926—WLC ARCHITECTS November 6, 2007 • Page 2 built approximately 15 feet closer to the "edge' than the existing portable classrooms and because of the height of the building, will be even more of a visual impact to the homes at the bottom of the slope. He complained that the neighbors have lost their view. He asked if there was going to be a balcony on the fellowship hall. Mr. Rich presented photos to the Committee pointing out the view from the homes. He remarked that he has been given different information on how much the height of the.gymnasium has been lowered. He implied that the grading presented to the neighbors prior to construction is different from what has occurred and that the road that leads up to the church is higher than what was presented. He said the path along the wall was not supposed to be there. He complained that the wall that was constructed looks bad from the neighbors' side but looks nice on the church's side. He expressed frustration that Planning Staff has not located the specifics of the materials used for the wall. He responded negatively to offers of mitigation unless they are different to what he has already heard to this point. He remarked that the church has a poor track record in following through. He said the neighbors are concerned about the additional traffic that would be generated if the church renews its application to run a school on site. He expressed concern that the church could have basketball leagues running every night. Corky Nicholson, Assistant Planning Director, reported that the current wall was required by the City, however, no specific conditions could be found that dictated the materials to be used. He said the wall was constructed to mitigate glare from headlights of vehicles traveling to and from the church. He reported that overall the slope is being well maintained. He added that the path was required for maintenance purposes. He noted there were four neighborhood meetings held prior to the original approval. He added that the use of the gym was included in the original environmental review and that • traffic concerns were considered with that approval. Pastor Esteves reported that the wall was constructed as it is to properly distribute weight loads on the geo grid related to the building pads and to hold the slopes in place and that it had nothing to do with the cosmetics of the wall facing the neighbors' homes. He said this wall was very costly. He said the church is willing to stucco the neighbors' side or do something to improve the appearance of the wall. He said the pathway was required for emergency and fire access and for maintenance of the slope. He said the pitch of the gym has been lowered as much as possible without losing the usability and intended function of the building as a gym. He said there will be a great deal of space that can be planted with trees and flowers. He commented that if adequate trees are brought in, it will help make the view more benign. He added that the church wants to do what they can to make the neighbors happy but they would also appreciate consideration because of the possible costs. He noted that the church already spent a great deal of money on grading a iticonstruction and now they have to spend money on something else. He personally offered to work wit�i Mr. Rich. Mike Diaz, Senior Planner, suggested they consider a re-orientation of the gym so that the shorter dimension of the building faces the slope and the neighbors homes rather than the longer side of the building so as to reduce the massive appearance of the building from the neighbors' homes. Commissioner Munoz commented that the model is helpful. He noted that the Pastor already offered to mitigate the appearance of the wall. He said the architecture seems fine but that he would prefer to see other alternatives. He suggested a possible change in the pad level and/or landscaping to help mitigate the neighbors' view. He said the hill appears higher from the neighbors' homes and that the view is harsh for the neighbors. He said there should be a halfway point and that what he is seeing thus far in compromise is not sufficient. He said he would like to see a landscape plan the next time they come to • the Committee and he would like them to explore more alternatives to take care of the problem. He said Mr. Diaz's suggestion of reorientation of the gym is the type of alternative he would like to have them explore. ITEM G-30 DRC ACTION AGENDA CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2006-00926 —WLC ARCHITECTS November 6, 2007 • Page 3 Commissioner Fletcher noted that this meeting is an open meeting but not a public hearing and that it did not need to be advertised. He commented that the way the wall was constructed was not a neighborly way of doing it, that it should be split faced on both sides. He suggested the gym building be lowered, not just the pitch and eaves, but the grade of the pad that it will rest upon. He said it appears the grading has changed. He said he would like to see a landscape plan. He suggested they explore the idea of a forested hillside with appropriate trees that do not produce debris when the winds come. He said they would need to have substance and height. He asked if the gym could possibly be moved to the east portion of the site. He added that he wants to see a solution to the appearance of the wall facing the neighbors. He noted that the City does not have a view ordinance. He added that the use of the gym is included in the church's Conditional Use Permit and that if the use became a problem, it would be addressed. • • ITEM G -31 • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:20 p.m. Corky Nicholson January 15, 2008 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2006-00926 - WLC ARCHITECTS - Review of the Master Phasing Plan for the remaining phases of the Lifeway Church project development including a classroom wing, temporary classroom modules, and a multi-purpose hall on 5.03 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located at 7477 Vineyard Avenue at Calle del Prado - APN: 0208-921-36. Related Files: Conditional Use Permit DRC2001-00439 and Non-Construction Conditional Use Permit DRC2007-00544. The above project description has been revised to include a proposed multi-purpose hall, which combines the previously proposed gym and Fellowship Hall into a single, smaller building as shown on the submitted plans. Background: This application was reviewed by the Design Review Committee on November 6, 2007. At that time, the applicant presented a preliminary concept plan, per the direction of the Planning Commission, for the purpose of receiving feedback from the DRC (see Attachment A - Design Review Action Comments dated November 6, 2007). Desiqn Parameters: Please refer to the Project Description dated December 20, 2007 (Attachment B). • Staff Comments: Maior Issues: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for discussion purposes; which include the revisions that were previously requested by staff and the Committee. The applicant's revisions are in italics: 1. Consider a re-orientation of the gym so that the shorter dimension of the building faces the slope and the neighboring homes to reduce the massive appearance of the building. The applicant is proposing a consolidation of the Gymnasium and Fellowship Hall buildings into a single structure. In the previous proposal, these two functions were provided in separate buildings on two levels. In the revised proposal, these buildings are combined into a single Multi-Purpose Hall that would be located on the lower mid-plaza level. Such a revision reduces both the square footage and building mass. 2. It was suggested that a possible change in the pad elevation and/or landscaping would help mitigate the neighbor's view. The applicant is proposing to drop the pad elevation for the proposed Multi-Purpose Hall by approximately 14 feet, and add substantial landscaping in accordance with the submitted Planting Plan. 3. Indicate if the gym can be moved to the east portion of the site. Staff believes that the proposed location for the Multi-Purpose Hall, which includes a regulation • basketball, court, is best suited for their needs in terms of public safety when accommodating on-site traffic and pedestrian circulation. ITEM G -32 DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2006-00926 —WLC ARCHITECTS January 15, 2008 Page 2 • 4. A solution is needed to mitigate the stark appearance of the southerly wall that faces the neighboring properties. The revised proposal provides for a much greater detail of the landscape and wall treatment along the southerly property line. The area between the wall and the property line is shown on the Proposed Planting Plan with substantial new tree planting; and according to the applicant, the existing wall would receive a stucco finish of color and texture that would match the existing church building. Secondary Issue: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the need for a Conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan for the purpose of identifying the extent of grading that would occur to accommodate the new Multi-Purpose Hall. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee approve the proposed improvements provided that the applicant submits a Conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan for staffs review and approval prior to the scheduling of the required Planning Commission hearing on the applicant's Conditional Use Permit proposal. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Munoz, Stewart, Diaz • Staff Planner: Corky Nicholson Corkran Nicholson, Assistant Planning Director, gave a brief overview and stated that this is the Church's proposal for the final phases of their development. He reviewed the overall design and stated that this meeting is to consider their proposed changes that address the concerns previously expressed. Jim DiCamillo WLC Architects, presented a material sample board, landscape plan and a model indicating the changes. He commented that they do not anticipate any traffic issues. He said they held a neighborhood meeting one week ago. He noted that they have combined the fellowship hall and gymnasium uses into one building to help mitigate the controversy. He said the building reduces their square footage by about 2,000 square feet; the parapet height has been lowered; the building has been dropped by about 15 feet; and new open spaces have been created. He added that they have significantly increased the landscaping to the inside and outside areas of the wall. He presented a photo taken from the corner of Zircon and Balsa. He remarked that the building mass tends to "fade away" visually the closer it is viewed from the homes. He said one would not be able to see into the backyards below from the church property above. An unidentified neighbor asked for a photo taken from the north side looking south because he believed that the building would block the view, particularly the tower. Commissioner Munoz remarked that if one stands directly behind the steeple it would block the view. He noted that Rancho Cucamonga does not have "view rights" and that the church is trying to come halfway (with compromise). He reiterated the proposed improvements and said that it is greatly improved from the proposals of November and December and that they have done much to mitigate the neighbors • concerns. ITEM G -33 DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2006-00926—WLC ARCHITECTS January 15, 2008 • Page 3 Mr. Rich asked if a traffic study would be performed. Mr. DiCamillo said that this development does not require it; it would be required if the school was still part of the proposal. Commissioner Munoz added that if the school was proposed there would also be the Conditional Use Permit for the school that would be an added protection. Mr. Rich retorted that the church is planning to run a school. Chairman Stewart reiterated that it is not part of their proposal at this time and is not on the table for discussion this evening. Mr. Rich complained that the building is only 8 feet lower and only 7 feet lower than what he was told last time. Mr. Nicholson said they are going by the approved grading plan. Mr. Rich claimed the building is higher than that. Mr. Nicholson stated that he and Mathew Addington spent two hours explaining the grading plans to Mr. • Rich and that the plans are signed and stamped by a registered engineer. Mr. Rich complained that the information he has asked for has not been provided and he cannot confirm what he has been told. Mr. DiCamillo offered to meet with Mr. Rich to review and discuss the issue. Mr. Rich indicated he does not believe the site is built according to plan and that he was told the road would be no higher visually than the wall at the top. Mr. Nicholson said there is some variation from the high to low points. Chairman Stewart asked for the record to reflect a 5 minute time limit on comments for the remainder of the project review because of the argumentative dialogue. George Guidera, a neighbor, stated that some cities require a "silhouette" or "story poles" of the proposed building to give neighbors an idea of the height of the proposed structures. He said they are shot by a surveyor and left up for a week or two; a notice is sent to the neighbors to look at it. He said it is a minimal cost. He expressed concern that the block wall was built with the split face side facing the church rather than the neighbors' property. He asked if decoration could be done and if the wall will continue to the east boundary line. He asked about drainage and a V-ditch. Mr. Rich questioned the use of sandbags along a portion of the southerly slope. Mr. Nicholson said the sandbags are required. • Pastor Esteves said that the sandbags would be removed when the V-ditch is done. ITEM G -34 DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2006-00926—WLC ARCHITECTS January 15, 2008 Page 4 • Mr. Nicholson said when they receive their approvals, the existing wall would not be extended. He said the "goat farm" portion of the property will not be altered. Wanda Knight, a resident, said she thought the sight poles are a good idea. Mr. Rich continued to complain that the sandbags were still there last Saturday and that he could not trust what anyone tells him because the path and wall were built differently than what was proposed to the neighbors. Mr. Rich continued to contend that he was unsure the development so far was built according to plan and that the computer generated photos being presented by the architect my not be trustworthy. Mr. DiCamillo remarked that this technology is as accurate as it gets. He noted that it is part of the proposal to "dress up" the existing wall with stucco. Mr. Guidera suggested they "break up"the wall with a pilaster treatment. Mr. DiCamillo commented that it might draw even more attention to it and would not accomplish the goal of visually minimizing the wall. He said they would be happy to do the story poles. Pastor Esteves said they have taken 4-6 months, have taken the advice and dealt with their board. He said they are now almost 3,000 square feet smaller that compromises the ultimate vision of the church. • He said the changes will require them to re-do all of their electrical that was already put in accordance to the master plan. He said this is costing hundreds of thousands of dollars more, and he would like his church membership to know that their wishes have also been considered and that they have done all they can; they too are "a neighbor'. Commissioner Munoz said the church has gone to great lengths to accommodate and mitigate. He said there is no way the hill will disappear but that they have done much to mitigate the visual impacts. He noted that when he first saw the development and the proposal he knew they had to go through this process and that whether it is 11 or 12 feet difference is not relevant. He noted they agreed to story poles and they have mitigated as much as possible and nothing more can be done without hurting the land owner; he filed plans that are within the Code. He added that he hoped the neighbors can live with this. Chairman Stewart remarked that the parties came together and the result is superb. She said it is now very acceptable and recommended the revised plans be forwarded to the Planning Commission. Mr. Nicholson added that the recommendation be conditioned upon submittal of new conceptual grading and drainage plans along with the erection of story poles. Mr. DiCamillo asked for direction on the protocol for the story poles because he was concerned the result would later be challenged. Mr. Nicholson suggested they be erected and remain up for at least two weeks and that it be done by a civil engineer. He noted this is for height purposes only. Commissioner Munoz cautioned the neighbors that the story poles do not determine if the project is "a go • or no go" it is only a reference point. ITEM G-35 DRC ACTION AGENDA DRC2006-00926—WLC ARCHITECTS January 15, 2008 • Page 5 Mr. Nicholson remarked that such poles were used for years before computer graphics and that the computer generated photos are a much better representation because the poles only reflect a representation of the height and not building mass. Mr. Di Camillo asked if a letter would be sent to the neighbors. Mr. Rich wanted additional reference points to show how close the buildings would be to their property. Commissioner Munoz said it would not show that. Chairman Stewart agreed to the proposal. In accordance with the Committee's final action, the applicant must complete the following items for staff's review and approval prior to the scheduling of the required public hearing before the Planning Commission for the consideration of the subject conditional use permit: 1. Erect .on-site story poles for the purpose of providing a visual aid to further convey to the surrounding residences the proposed height of the new buildings. After the story poles are erected, the applicant will notify the Planning Department of the completed installation of the poles, and request that notices explaining the purpose of story poles be sent to the surrounding residences. The story poles shall remain in place for a minimum of two weeks from the mailing date of the notices. • 2. Submit a Conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan by a certified civil engineer for the purpose of identifying and verifying the placement and height of the story poles, proposed building heights, pad elevations, drainage system, and the extent of grading that would occur to accommodate the new buildings. • ITEM G -36 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7:00 p.m. Corkran Nicholson October 14, 2008 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2006-00926 - WLC ARCHITECTS - A review of the Master Phasing Plan for remaining phases of Lifeway Church project development including a class room wing, temporary classroom modules and multi-purpose hall on 5.03 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located at 7477 Vineyard Avenue at Calle de Prado - APN: 0208-921-36. Related files: Conditional Use Permit DRC2001-00439 and Non-Construction Conditional Use Permit DRC2007-00544. On April 24, 2002, a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was adopted by the Planning Commission for Conditional Use Permit DRC2001-00439. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) provides that no further environmental review or Negative Declaration is required for subsequent projects within the scope of the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration. The planner will provide an oral presentation and plans at the meeting. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Corkran Nicholson Members Present: Munoz, Wimberly Corkran Nicholson, Assistant Planning Director gave a brief introduction and noted that the last • time the project was reviewed was on January 15, 2008. He invited the architect to make a short presentation regarding the change on the roof design. Jim Di Camillo of WLC Architects noted that there are now two buildings proposed; the Education Wing and the Multi-Purpose Hall with no changes to the Education Wing. He noted that they erected story poles on many locations of the site. He said there was some concern of the height of the ridgeline of the building and so to address the concern, they changed the design of the roof, eliminating the ridge which lowered the overall height of the building. He said that was the intent of the story poles, to give people the impression as to how the building would appear. He said everything else stayed the same. Mr. Nicholson noted a sheet that makes the comparison of the old plan to that of the revised plans; Sheet AB5.3 indicates the resulting change in the reduction of the building mass. Commissioner Wimberly noted a significant reduction in mass. Mr. Di Camillo commented that the change makes the building appear lower from only from some perspectives. Mr. Nicholson invited the one neighbor in attendance to comment. Charles Rich, 8930 Balsa Avenue, said it is true the building height is lower but only to meet the City Code requirement of 30 feet and no more than that. He said that he believes there is a pitch to the roof. • ITEM G-37 • Mr. Nicholson clarified that there is a slight pitch to the roof for drainage but that they added a parapet to screen that. Mr. Rich stated that not all of the Commissioners came to view the story poles from his backyard. He said the project to the north of his and the neighbors yard (southerly slope of the church property) creates a 30-40 foot "wall." He said because of the grading the project is now lower on the bottom and higher on top. He said it does not make sense to totally destroy the homes to spread the wealth around. He said it is unfortunate that not all the neighbors received the information regarding the meeting this evening and he did not know why. He said it is no secret they are planning on building a school. He said almost everyone that has looked at this agrees that it never should have been approved the way it was approved. He said because it was approved, you have to approve the second phase. He said you are approving an education building that is planned to be a school and when a plan is presented for a school, it will be approved for a school. He said there are 11 large rooms. He added that the property is not fit to be a school and a lot of the neighbors have a concern about that. He said a dead tree has been there for a year. He said the retaining wall the church built seeps (his neighbor's property). He said it used to be a wooden fence but now it seeps and has algae growing on it and is a mess. He said he pointed it out to Trang Hyung (Building Official) and Mandi Aluzri, (DCM/Community Development). He claimed the neighbor has complained and nothing has been done to his knowledge. Commissioner Munoz confirmed with Mr. Rich that he had completed his comments. He noted the comment about the pitch of the main building. He asked staff to comment on the seeping wall. • Mr. Nicholson said he is aware of the wall condition and noted that the staff report for the October 22, 2008 Planning Commission meeting notes a condition stipulating that the church will be responsible for the maintenance and function of all the walls. He added that the church and the architect have been very willing to look into these matters and correct what issues may exist. He noted that Mr. Rich commented on the grading. He reported that on the southerly portion of the site, 19 feet of fill was added when the site was originally graded. He said Planning is now far more sensitive to these infill concerns than when the original proposal was presented. He said it is difficult to say what would be recommended at this time. He said that from working with the church on the original proposal, the plans have changed, that originally there was to be a gym and fellowship hall (two separate buildings), with the gym located at the current location/elevation of the modular trailers. He said they have tried to mitigate the infill by lowering the building pad 14 feet. He noted that if the original 19 feet of infill is considered, the difference between the 19 feet and 14 feet is a building pad elevation of 5 feet above the natural grade prior to development. He said that the extent of the lowered pad is consistent with the interior plaza area which will serve as access to the new Multi-Purpose Building. He noted that the re-design consolidated the gym and fellowship hall into one building with a net reduction of approximately 2,000 square feet. He said the new roof design lessens the building mass as well. He said Staff is conditioning (provided the project is approved) additional landscaping, stucco finish to the southerly wall and the installation of 6-foot high wrought iron fencing along the southerly perimeter of the parking lot (for added security). He commented that these are substantial improvements. He said this approval has nothing to do with the past approvals. He said this re-design has been to the DRC three times over the course of 6-7 months with more than '/� dozen revisions to mitigate the impacts on the adjacent property owners. He responded to Mr. Rich's comment about only some of the neighbors being invited to this meeting. He is reported that the property owners most affected by the project were invited and that although ITEM G-38 this meeting is not a public hearing, staff wanted to give them the opportunity to attend. He • added that the Planning Commission Meeting on October 22, 2008 will provide a specific, detailed staff report for a public hearing. He said that it has been fully advertised and all property owners within a 660-foot radius from the exterior property lines have been noticed. Mr. Nicholson responded to the comment about the church operating a school. He noted that prior to the January 15, 2008, meeting the Commission considered the phasing plan and their request for a school. The Commission heard the concerns of the neighbors and said that there was not enough information to support approval of a school use, that further environmental clearance, a traffic study and information from the other schools in the area was needed as well as additional staff review. Therefore, the church withdrew the application for the school use and asked that no further phases be considered. The Commission directed that their review would be through the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) process. The staff report for the upcoming meeting indicates there will not be a school and that he has a statement from the church detailing what is proposed for the Classroom Wing and the uses for those rooms that include meeting rooms and a youth worship area. He confirmed that upon completion of the Classroom Wing and prior to the Multi-Purpose room being built, the modular units must be removed from the site. Commissioner Munoz asked what would occur if the church wanted to establish plans for a school at a later time. Mr. Nicholson said they would be required to go through a new CUP process with environmental clearance, a traffic study and with input from the surrounding area schools. He said there are many issues that this proposal does not even address. He said there is no means for them to do that without going through the process. Commissioner Munoz asked the applicant if they are aware of the condition of the wall • maintenance and of the seeping wall and if they can accept the condition regarding its maintenance. Pastor Esteves stated they have already worked out this concern with the affected neighbor months ago. Commissioner Munoz summarized the concerns, the wall issue, plans for a school, seepage, the building height, the slope, maintenance, enhanced landscaping, stucco on the wall, security fencing for the parking area, etc. He said it is not a public hearing and the applicants are present to tell them about the changes. He stated he appreciated Mr. Rich's input and it is difficult situation for the neighbors and for the church to proceed with what they believe their mission to be. He said the DRC has dealt with this in a fair, drawn out and specific manner, that they have looked at everything, the building height, the mass, and they put up story poles to help the neighbors understand what the massing would look like and that the church changed their plans in good faith. He noted the story poles went up at great expense and that the church has gone further and with their new plans reduced the mass of the building closest to the neighbors by nearly one third. He said he believes the church has bent over backwards; it is a tough problem just short of putting the hill back the way it was 10 years ago. He said he did not believe any other solution would work here. He said he recommends the project be forwarded to the Planning Commission as presented. He reiterated that this meeting is not a public hearing, but that was his opinion and he deferred to Commissioner Wimberly for comment. Commissioner Wimberly concurred with all of Commissioner Munoz' comments and added that he felt the cooperation received from the applicant, their product, what they have done and their • ITEM G -39 • attempt to mitigate all that is out there is significant. He concurred with moving the project forward to the Planning Commission. Commissioner Munoz recommended the project move forward, that he would not debate the issue further but invited further comment from Mr. Rich. Mr. Rich reiterated they do not maintain things now, and that nothing gets done unless the neighbors complain either on the church side or the City's side. He said the lights were getting blocked, issues with landscaping being put in, gravel, sandbags and tree removal. He said he has no assurance they will do anything and he cited old concerns regarding sandbags, lights and the wall maintenance. He said the stucco treatment on the wall is a new wrinkle and that no one talked to the neighbors about it, that they won't take care of it and that he did not know if the neighbors want that. He insisted it would not be taken care of and that the church did not work with the neighbors as directed by the Commission. He said they did not work with them at all. He said they just came to us and told us what they want to do and they asked for their approval. He maintained the building could be moved to the other side of the property. He said the building is now compacted and on top of them and the height is higher than the City Code and it does not help them. He said there is a lack of working with the neighbors on their part (church) and the City. Commissioner Munoz said he appreciates the church working with the City. Jim Di Camillo said his company has done work for the City for 25 years and that this project is an example of the process working. He said the applicant has made numerous changes. He said the intent is to improve the project and there has been much compromise on the part of the • church. He said staff has done a great job. He said it is an example of a problem being resolved with people working together. Pastor Esteves thanked staff on behalf of the church. Mr. Rich said it would be impossible for him to be at that meeting (October 22, 2008). • ITEM G-40 Mayor DONALD J. KuRTH,.M.D. Mayor ProTcm L. DENNIS MICHAEL Counei[memben • REx GuTruaEz SAM SPAGNOLO DIANE WILLIAMS City Manager THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA JACK LAM,AICP -r P RANCHO C,UCAMONGA May 13, 2008 0208-592-03 Jonathan Mark & Lynette S. Wilson 8933 Ironwood Street Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 SUBJECT': LIFEWAY CHURCH LINE OF SIGHT "STORY POLES" Dear Property Owner, The Planning Department staff, in concert with the direction of the Design Review Committee, has been performing a review of the Master Phasing Plan for the remaining phases of the Lifeway Church project development including a classroom wing, temporary classroom modules, and a multi-purpose hall on 5.03 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located at 7477 Vineyard Avenue (APN: 0208-921-36). As a courtesy, and per the direction of the Design Review Committee, Lifeway Church will be erecting • "story poles" on their church property. Story poles ate simply PVC poles erected at precise locations'on the subject property for the purpose of providing precise vertical measurements. Such poles are sometimes used by the construction industry to help give visual guidance as to how the proposed height of a future permanent structure may appear from the surrounding properties. The poles will not aide in giving perspective of the mass of a future building but should be helpful to neighboring residents as to how high a building may appear from their own home/property. Lifeway Church plans to erect the poles within the week of May 12-16 and they will remain on the property for a minimum of two weeks time following the installation of the poles. Included with this letter is a map that denotes the precise location and elevation of each pole site (indicated with yellow dots) as well as the vertical elevation for the top of each pole. Should you have questions or concerns about the story poles, please feel free to contact Elena Purice, Senior Architect with WLC Architects, at (909) 987-0909. Sincerely, PLANNING DEPARTMENT �. ruf r Corkran W. Nicholson Assistant Planning Director CN\ma EXHIBITH Rancho Cuc=,wp,CA 91729-080?•Tel 909-477-2700•Fax 909-477-2849•w w.ciryofrc.w ITEM G-41 • RESOLUTION NO. 02113 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2001-00439 FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A CHURCH MASTER PLAN, INCLUDING A SANCTUARY, EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES,A GYMNASIUM,ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES,AND STORAGE ON 5.03 ACRES OF LAND IN THE LOW RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF VINEYARD AVENUE AND CALLE DEL PRADO, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF-APN: 208-921-36. A. Recitals. 1. Lifeway Church filed an application for the issuance of Conditional Use Permit DRC2001-00439, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditional Use Permit request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 24th day of April 2002, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. • NOW,THEREFORE, it is hereby found,determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the fads 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 24, 2002, 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 the southeast comer of Vineyard Avenue and Calle del Prado,with a street frontage of approximately 286 feet along Vineyard Avenue, and an approximate lot depth of 720 feet, and is presently vacant; and b. The property to the north, south, and east of the, subject site is zoned Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre), and the property to the west is zoned Open Space(existing Red Hill Park); and C. The application contemplates the immediate construction of 19,415 square feet of sanctuary, administrative offices, storage on-site, and master planned future development of another 21,900 square feet of building space for use as an educational center, a fellowship hall, and a gymnasium; and d. The property has a significant slope from west to east. The proposed project and grading concept contemplates the use of on-site retaining walls in the east parking lot. Development of the parking lot will require construction of retaining walls of up to 15 feet in height. • P� ��-aa-v8 EXHIBIT I ITEM G -42 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 02-43 CUP DRC2001-00439— LIFEWAY CHURCH April 24, 2002 • Page 2 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. b. The proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. C. The proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. d. The design of the project is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans sand wildlife or their habitat. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application,the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: • a. 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 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,which are listed below as Conditions of Approval. 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 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 orthe habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon substantial evidence contained in the 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 approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. • ITEM G-43 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 02-43 CUP DRC2001-00439 — LIFEWAY CHURCH • April 24, 2002 Page 3 Planning Division 1) Light fixtures shall be constructed at a maximum height of 15 feet (to include pedestal), and shall be shielded and directed away from residential areas. A detailed Lighting Plan, including a photometric diagram, shall be prepared prior to issuance of building permits to provide proper shielding of light sources from adjoining properties. 2) Additional landscaping and trees shall be provided along the south end of the property to screen the drive aisle along the south property line and the proposed parking lot in Phase 1, to the satisfaction of the City Planner. 3) All future building pads and parking areas shall be seeded and irrigated for erosion control. Detailed plans shall be included in the Landscape and Irrigation Plans to be submitted for Planning Division approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 4) Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with any sections of the Development Code, State Fire Marshal's regulations, Uniform Building Code, or any other City Ordinances. • 5) If operation of the facility causes adverse effects upon adjacent businesses or residences, the Conditional Use Permit shall be brought before the City Planner for consideration and possible termination of the use. 6) Any signs proposed for the facility shall be designed in conformance with the City s Sign Ordinance and shall require review and approval by the City Planner, prior to installation. 7) The Master Plan is approved in concept only. Future development for each building proposed in Phases 2, 3, and 4 shall be subject to separate Development Review process. 8) All landscaped areas shall be kept free from weeds and debris and maintained in a healthy growing condition, and shall receive regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing, and.trimming. 9) This approval is for the operation of a church and office and does not include a daycare or private K-12 school. 10) Construction or grading shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. 11) Lifeway Church shall not use Red Hill Park parking lots fortheir parking. 12) The applicant shall include a landscape planter in place of proposed • hardscape at the top of the north retaining wall located in the east parking lot. ITEM G -44 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 02-43 CUP DRC2001-00439— LIFEWAY CHURCH • Apri124, 2002 Page 4 13) The applicant shall add a detail cap at the top of the stacked stone pilasters proposed on the retaining walls located in the east parking lot, subject to City Planner review and approval. 14) The applicant shall provide a 6-foot high decorative wall (to match the proposed east parking lot retaining walls)along the southern end of the south drive aisle, terminating at first parking stall of the east parking lot to screen on-site vehicular traffic light glare and noise from existing single-family residences to the south. 15) Reduce the proposed grade from 2 percent to 1 percent at the southeast comer of the property to eliminate the necessity of a single large retaining wall, and incorporate terraced retaining walls, subjectto the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Engineering Division 1) Missing improvements along Vineyard Avenue shall be installed including, but not limited to, curb and gutter, sidewalk, streetlights, street trees, signing, striping, drive approaches, etc., and as required. Vineyard Avenue is a City'Collector Street.' 2) Calle del Prado cul-de-sac shall be fully constructed with curb and • gutter on the north side, curb and gutter and sidewalk on the south side, drive approach, streetlights, street trees, signing, striping, etc., in accordance with City "Local Cul-de-Sac," 36 feet curb to curb, and a 60-foot right-of-way. Dedication of right-of-way is required(30 feet from the existing centerline to southerly right-of-way). The cul-de-sac needs to utilize the existing right-of-way. 3) Water runoff from Calle del Prado will not be allowed to drain through the driveway to the parking lot. 4) Commercial driveways on Vineyard Avenue and Calle del Prado shall be 35 feet minimum per City standard. 5) Overlay Calle del Prado 0.10-foot minimum, including the north side of the street as directed by the City Engineer. 6) Complete the north side curb and gutter of Calle del Prado with the phased development for the gymnasium or the education building, whichever comes first. Environmental Mitigation Air Quality 1) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB)daily to reduce PMro emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. • ITEM G -45 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 02-43 • CUP DRC2001-00439— LIFEWAY CHURCH April 24, 2002 Page 5 2) Vineyard Avenue and Calle del Prado shall be swept according to a schedule established by the City to reduce PMio emissions associated with vehicle tracking of soil off-site. Timing may vary depending upon time of year of construction. 3) Grading operations shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed 25 miles per hour to minimize PM,o emissions from the site during such episodes. 4) Chemical soil stabilizers(approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB)shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM,a emissions. 5) The construction contractor shall select the construction equipment used on-site based on low-emission factors and high-energy efficiency. The construction contractor shall ensure the construction Grading Plans include a statement that all construction equipment will be tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications. 6) The contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel-powered equipment where feasible. • 7) The construction contractor shall ensure that construction Grading Plans include a statement that work crews will shut of equipment when not in use. Noise 1) During all project site excavation and grading, the project contractors shall equip all construction equipment, faced or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers consistent with the manufacturers' standards. 2) The project contractor shall place all stationary equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive receptors nearest the project site. 3) The construction contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction related noise, and the noise-sensitive receptors nearest the project site during all phases of project construction. 4) During all phases of project construction, the construction contractor shall limit all construction related activities that would result in high noise levels to between the hours of 6:30 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday. No construction shall occur on Sundays and public holidays. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. • ITEM G -46 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 02-43 CUP DRC2001-00439— LIFEWAY CHURCH • April 24, 2002 Page 6 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24TH DAY OF APRIL 2002. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY Rich Macias, Vice Chairman ATTEST: rad Bull cretary 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 the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 24th day of April 2002, by the following vole-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: MACIAS, MANNERINO, STEWART NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE • ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL, TOLSTOY • ITEM G -47 City of Rancho Cucamonga MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM Project File No.: DRC2001-00439/DRC2001-00444 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 Division 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 • ITEM G-48 Mitigation Monitoring Program Page 2 • 3. Appropriate specialists will be retained if technical expertise beyond the City staff's is needed,as determined by the project planner or responsible City department,to monitor specific mitigation activities and provide appropriate written approvals to the project planner. 4. The project planner or responsible City department will approve, by signature and date, the completion of each action item that was identified on the MMP Reporting Form. After each measure is verified for compliance, no further action is required for the specific phase of development. 5. All MMP Reporting Forms for an impact issue requiring no further monitoring will be signed off as completed by the project planner or responsible City department at the bottom of the MMP Reporting Form. 6. Unanticipated circumstances may arise requiring the refinement or addition of mitigation measures.The project planner is responsible for approving any such refinements or additions. An MMP Reporting Form will be completed by the project planner or responsible City department and a copy provided to the appropriate design, construction, or operational personnel. 7. The project planner or responsible City department has the authority to stop the work of construction contractors if compliance with any aspects of the MMP is not occurring after written notification has been issued. The project planner or responsible City department also has the authority to hold certificates of occupancies if compliance with a mitigation measure attached hereto is not occurring.The project planner or responsible City department has the authority to hold issuance of a business license until all mitigation measures are implemented. 8. Any conditions (mitigation) that require monitoring after project completion shall be the • responsibility of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Community Development Department. The Department shall require the applicant to post any necessary funds(or other forms of guarantee) with the City. These funds shall be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measure for the required period of time. 9. In those instances requiring long-term project monitoring, the applicant shall provide the City with a plan for monitoring the mitigation activities at the project site and reporting the monitoring results to the City. Said plan shall identify the reporter as an individual qualified to know whether the particular mitigation measure has been implemented. The monitoring/reporting plan shall conform to the Citys MMP and shall be approved by the Community Development Director prior to the issuance of building permits. I:\FINAL\CECA\MMP Form-rev.wpd • ITEM G -49 MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST (INITIAL STUDY PART III) Project File No.: Conditional Use Permit DRC2001-00439 Applicant: Lifeway Church Initial Study Prepared by: Kirt Coury Date: April 1. 2002 Mitigation Measures No. Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/initials Non-Compliance s+ ;rn s •rs:;'r n r t '^+�. tP`{r d'N. ;r 1 +nr CNv +�r .gg Air Quality ?. The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent CP C Review of plans A/C 2 (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB)daily to reduce PM,. emissions,in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. Vineyard Avenue and Calle del Prado shall be swept according to a CP C Review of plans A/C 2 schedule established by the City to reduce PM,o emissions associated with vehicle tracking of soil off-site. Timing may vary depending upon time of year of construction. Grading operations shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed CP C Review of plans A/C 2 25 miles per hour to minimize PM,o emissions from the site during _ such episodes. M Chemical soil stabilizers a y ) (approved i b SCAOMD and RWQCB shall CP C Review of plans A/C 2 be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM,o emissions. c:n The construction contractor shall select the construction equipment CP BIC Review of plans A/C 2 o used on-site based on low-emission factors and high-energy efficiency. The construction contractor shall ensure the construction Grading Plans include a statement that all construction equipment will be tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications. The contractor shall utilize electric or dean alternative fuel-powered CP C Review of plans A/C 2 equipment where feasible. The construction contractor shall ensure that construction Grading CP/CE B Review of plans C 2 Plans include a statement that work crews will shut of equipment when not In use. Noise During all project site excavation and grading,the project CP C Notes on Grading A 4 contractors shall equip all construction equipment,fixed or mobile, plans/site with properly operating and maintained mufflers consistent with the inspections manufacturers'standards. The project contractor shall place all stationary equipment so that CP C Notes on Grading A 4 emitted noise is directed away from sensitive receptors nearest the plans/site pmject site. inspections Mitigation Measures . I Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions . Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date 11nitials Non-Compliance The construction contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas CP C Notes on Grading A 4 that will create the greatest distance between construction related plans/site noise,and the noise-sensitive receptors nearest the project site inspections during all phases of project construction. During all phases of project constructor,the construction contractor CP C Notes on Grading A 4 shall limit all construction related activities that would result in high plans/site noise levels to between the hours of 6:30 a.m.and 8:00 p.m. inspections Monday through Saturday. No construction shall occur on Sundays and public holidays. 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 t -Withhold Recordation of Final Map M CP-City Planner or designee B-Prior To Construction B-Other Agency Permit I Approval 2-Withhold Grading or Building Permit K CE-City Engineer or designee C-Throughout Construction C-Plan Check 3-Withhold Certificate of Occupancy 0 BO-Building Official or designee D-On Completion D-Separate Submittal(Reports I Studies I Plans) 4-Stop Work Order cn PO-Police Captain or designee E-Operating 5-Retain Deposit or Bonds FC-Fire Chief or designee 6-Revoke CUP COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT#: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2001-00439 41,300 SQUARE FOOT SANCTUARY, EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES, GYMNASIUM, AND SUBJECT: ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES APPLICANT: LIFEWAY CHURCH LOCATION: SOUTHEAST CORNER OF VINEYARD AVENUE AND CALLE DEL PRADO ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. General Requirements Completion Date 1. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, Its agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 2. A copy of the signed Resolution of Approval or City Planner's letter of approval, and all Standard Conditions, shall be included in legible form on the grading plans, building and construction plans, and landscape and irrigation plans submitted for plan check. B. Time Limits 1. Conditional Use Permit, Variance, or Development/Design Review approval shall expire if J—j— building permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 5 years from the date of approval. No extensions are allowed. C. Site Development 1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include site plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and grading on file in the Planning Division, the conditions contained herein, Development Code regulations. • SC-02-02 1 ITEM G -52 Project No.DAC2001-00439 Completion Date 2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all Conditions of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Planner. 3. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Division to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. 4. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for J /_ consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.) or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. 6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 7. A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram, shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner and Police Department (4774600) prior to the issuance of building permits. Such plan shall indicate style, illumination, location, height, and method of shielding so as not to adversely affect adjacent properties. 8. Trash receptacle(s) are required and shall meet City standards. The final design, locations, and the number of trash receptacles shall be subject to City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 9. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall _J_J_ - be located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the City Planner. For single-family residential developments, transformers shall be placed in underground vaults. 10. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, including proper illumination. 11. Six-foot decorative block walls shall be constructed along the project perimeter. It a double wall condition would result, the developer shall make a good faith effort to work with the adjoining property owners to provide a single wall. Developer shall notify, by mail, all contiguous property owner at least 30 days prior to the removal of any existing walls/fences along the project's perimeter. 12. Slope fencing along side property lines may be wrought iron or black plastic coated chain link to maintain an open feeling and enhance views. 13. Where rock cobble is used, it shall be real river rock. Other stone veneers may be manufactured products. D. Building Design 1. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners and other roof mounted equipment and/or projections, shall be shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and streets as required by the Planning Division. Such screening shall be architecturally integrated with the building design and constructed to the satisfaction of the City Planner. Details shall be included in building plans. - SC-02-02 2 ITEM G-53 Project No.DRC2001-00439: Completion Date • E. Parking and Vehicular Access (indicate details on building plans) 1. All parking spaces shall be 9 feet wide by 18 feet long. When a side o1 any parking space abuts a building, wall, support column, or other obstruction, the space shall be a minimum of 11 feet wide. 2. All parking lot landscape islands shall have a minimum outside dimension of 6 feet and shall contain a 12-inch walk adjacent to the parking stall (including curb). 3. Textured pedestrian pathways and textured pavement across circulation aisles shall be provided throughout the development to connect dwellings/units/buildings with open spaces/plazas/recreational uses. 4. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances, and exits shall be striped per City standards. 5. Handicap accessible stalls shall be provided for commercial and office facilities with 25 or more parking stalls. Designate two percent or one stall, whichever is greater, of the total number of stalls for use by the handicapped. 6. Motorcycle parking area shall be provided for commercial and office facilities with 25 or more parking stalls. Developments with over 100 parking stalls shall provide motorcycle parking at the rate of one percent. The area for motorcycle parking shall be a minimum of 56 square feet. F. Landscaping 1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping in the case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed • landscape architect and submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. 2. Existing trees required to be preserved in place shall be protected with a construction barrier in accordance with the Municipal Code Section 19.08.110, and so noted on the grading plans. The location of those trees to be preserved in place and new locations for transplanted trees shall be shown on the detailed landscape plans. The applicant shall follow all of the arborist's recommendations regarding preservation, transplanting, and trimming methods. 3. Within parking lots, trees shall be planted at a rate of one 15-gallon tree for every three parking stalls. 4. Trees shall be planted in areas of public view adjacent to and along structures at a rate of one tree per 30 linear feet of building. 5. All private slopes of 5 feet or more in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than J /_ 2:1 slope, shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 6. All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater slope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as follows: one 15-gallon or larger size tree per each 150 sq. ft. of slope area, 1-gallon or larger size shrub per each 100 sq. ft. of slope area, and appropriate ground cover. In addition, slope banks in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5-gallon or larger size tree per each 250 sq. ft. of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary slope plane. Slope • planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. SC-02-02 3 ITEM G -54 Project No.ORC2001-00439 ' Completion Date 7. For multi-family residential and non-residential development, property owners are responsible for the continual maintenance of all landscaped areas on-site, as well as contiguous planted areas within the public right-of-way. All landscaped areas shall be kept free from weeds and debris and maintained in healthy and thriving condition, and shall receive regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing, and trimming. Any damaged, dead, diseased, or decaying plant material shall be replaced within 30 days from the date of damage. 8. The final design of the perimeter parkways, walls, landscaping, and sidewalks shall be —/—/— included in the required landscape plans and shall be subject to City Planner review and approval and coordinated for consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which may be required by the Engineering Division. 9. Landscaping and irrigation systems required to be installed within the public right-of-way on the perimeter of this project area shall be continuously maintained by the developer. 10. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, ��— the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division. 11. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of —J�— Xeriscape as defined in Chapter 19.16 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. G. Signs 1. The signs indicated on the submitted plans are conceptual only and not a part of this —/�— approval. Any signs proposed for this development shall comply with the Sign Ordinance and shall require separate application and approval by the Planning Division prior to installation of any signs. H. Environmental 1. Mitigation measures are required for the project. The applicant is responsible for the cost of implementing said measures, including monitoring and reporting. Applicant shall be required to post cash, letter of credit, or other forms of guarantee acceptable to the City Planner in the amount of $ 719.00 prior to the issuance of building permits, guaranteeing satisfactory performance and completion of all mitigation measures. These funds may be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measures. Failure to complete all actions required by the approved environmental documents shall be considered grounds for forfeit. I. Other Agencies 1. The applicant shall contact the U.S. Postal Service to determine the appropriate type and ��— location of mailboxes. Multi-family residential developments shall provide a solid overhead structure for mailboxes with adequate lighting. The final location of the mailboxes and the design of the overhead structure shall be subject to City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 477-2710, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: J. General Requirements 1. Submit five complete sets of plans including the following: a. Site/Plot Plan; b. Foundation Plan; C. Floor Plan; - SC-02-02 4 ITEM G-55 Project No.DRC2001.00439 Completion Date d. Ceiling and Roof Framing Plan; • e. Electrical Plans (2 sets, detached) including the size of the main switch, number and size of service entrance conductors, panel schedules, and single line diagrams; f. Plumbing and Sewer Plans, including isometrics, underground diagrams, water and waste diagram, sewer or septic system location, fixture units, gas piping, and heating and air conditioning; and g. Planning Division Project Number (i.e., TT 4, CUP #, DR #, etc.) clearly identified on the outside of all plans. 2. Submit two sets of structural calculations, energy conservation calculations, and a soils _J_J_ report. Architect's/Engineer's stamp and "wet" signature are required prior to plan check submittal. 3. Separate permits are required for fencing and/or walls. ��- 4. Contractors must show proof of State and City licenses and Workers' Compensation J�— coverage to the City prior to permit issuance. 5. Business shall not open for operation prior to posting the Certificate of Occupancy issued by the Building and Safety Division. K. Site Development 1. Plans shall be submitted for plan check and approved prior to construction. All plans shall be J�— marked with the project file number (i.e., CUP 98-01). The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, National Electric Code, Title 24 Accessibility requirements, and all other applicable codes, is ordinances, and regulations in effect at the time of permit application. Please contact the Building and Safety Division for availability of the Code Adoption Ordinance and applicable handouts. 2. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new commercial or industrial development or Jam_ addition to an existing development, the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but are not limited to: Transportation Development Fee, Drainage Fee, School Fees, Permit and Plan Checking Fees. Applicant shall provide a copy of the school fees receipt to the Building and Safety Division prior to permit issuance. 3. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building Official, after tract/parcel map recordation Jam_ and prior to issuance of building permits. 4. Construction activity shall not occur between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. Monday through Saturday, with no construction on Sunday or holidays. 5. Construct trash enclosure(s) per City Standard (available at the Planning Division's public counter). L. L. New Structures 1. Provide compliance with the California Building Code for the property line clearances ��— considering use, area, and fire-resistiveness. 2. Provide compliance with the California Building Code for required occupancy separation(s). ��- 3. Plans for food preparation areas shall be approved by County of San Bernardino Environmental Health Services prior to issuance of building permits. 4. Provide draft stops in attic areas, not to exceed 3,000 square feet, in accordance with UBC ��— • Table 5-A. SC-02-02 5 ITEM G -56 Project No.DRC2001-00439 Completion Date_ 5. Exterior walls shall be constructed of the required fire rating in accordance with UBC Table _1—�— • 5-A 6. Openings in exterior walls shall be protected in accordance with UBC Table 5-A. ��- 7. Provide smoke and heat venting in accordance with UBC Section 906. �-1- 8. Upon tenant improvement plan check submittal, additional requirements may be needed. M. Grading 1. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City —J—J— Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved grading plan. 2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of Califomia to —I—J— perform such work. 3. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at —(— the time of application for grading plan check. 4. The final grading plans shall be completed and approved prior to issuance of building ��— permits. 5. In hillside areas, residential developments shall be graded and constructed consistent with J�— the standards contained in the Hillside Development Regulations Section 17.24.070. 6. A separate grading plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for —��— existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The Grading Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and signed by a • California Registered Civil Engineer. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION, (909) 477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: N. Dedication and Vehicular Access 1. Dedication shall be made of the following rights-of-way on the perimeter streets (measured from street centerline): 30 total feet on Calle del Prado (South side right-of-way) 2. Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards. —�— O. Street Improvements 1. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: Street Name Curb& A-C. Side- Drive Street Street Comm Median Bike other Gutter Pvmt walk Appr. Lights Trees Trail island Trail Calle del Prado X X X X X X Vineyard Avenue X X X X X Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. (c) If so marked, sidewalk shall be curvilinear per Standard 114. (d) If so marked, an in-lieu of construction fee shall be • provided for this item SC-02-02 6 ITEM G -57 Project No.DRC2001-00439 Canoletion Date 2. Improvement Plans and Construction: • a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety _/__J_ lights on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in addition to any other permits required. C. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. d. Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all corners of intersections per City Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. e. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. I. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards, except for single-family residential lots. 3. Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in accordance with the City's street tree program. • 4. Install street trees per City street tree design guidelines and standards as follows., SEE ATTACHED STREET TREE REQUIREMENT FORM. P. Public Maintenance Areas 1. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting Districts shall shall be filed with the City Engineer prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. Q. Utilities i. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 2. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. - _/_ _/_ 3. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the _--/J_ Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CCWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. • SC-02-02 7 ITEM G -58 Project No.DRC2001-00439 Completion Date R. General Requirements and Approvals • 1. A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the estimated operating costs for _/_/_ all new streetlights for the first six months of operation, prior to final map approval or prior to building permit issuance if no map is involved. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2800, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: S. Security Lighting 1. All parking,common, and storage areas shall have minimum maintained 1-foot candle power. These areas should be lighted from sunset to sunrise and on photo sensored cell. 2. All buildings shall have minimal security lighting to eliminate dark areas around the buildings, with direct lighting to be provided by all entryways. Lighting shall be consistent around the entire development. 3. Lighting in exterior areas shall be in vandal-resistant fixtures. T. Security Hardware 1. A secondary locking device shall be installed on all sliding glass doors. 2. One-inch single cylinder dead bolts shall be installed on all entrance doors. If windows are within 40 inches of any locking device, tempered glass or a double cylinder dead bolt shall be used. 3. All garage or rolling doors shall have slide bolts or some type of secondary locking devices. 4. All roof openings giving access to the building shall be secured with either iron bars, metal _/�_ • gates, or alarmed. U. Security Fencing 1. All businesses or residential communities with security fencing and gates will provide the police with a keypad access and a unique code. The initial code is to be submitted to the Police Crime Prevention Unit along with plans. If this code is changed due to a change in personnel or for any other reason, the new code must be supplied to the Police via the 24- hour dispatch center at (909) 941-1488 or by contacting the Crime Prevention Unit at (909) 477-2800 extension 2474 or extension 2475. V. Windows 1. All sliding glass windows shall have secondary locking devices and should not be able to be lifted from frame or track in any manner. W. Building Numbering 1. Numbers and the backgrounds shall be of contrasting color and shall be reflective for _/ nighttime visibility. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE SAFETY DIVISION, FIRE PROTECTION PLANNING SERVICES AT, (909) 477-2770, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: SEE ATTACHED • SC-02-02 8 Ili ITEM G-59 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Imam ENGINEERING DIVISION • STREET TREE REQUIREMENT FORM (REVISED 3/5/02) LAST UPDATED 8/27/01 DATE: 11/6/01 TO: HENRY MURAKOSHI, ASSOCIATE ENGINEER COMMENTS PREPARED BY: JANELL DAVIS, CONTRACT LANDSCAPE PLAN CHECKER PROJECT. DRC2001-00439 LOCATION: VINEYARD & CALLE DEL PRADO DESIGNOT : 1. STREET TREES ON NEW STREETS ARE TO BE SELECTED FROM THE CITY'S APPROVED STREET TREE LIST, BASED UPON AVAILABLE PLANTING AREA (TYPICALLY BETWEEN BACK-OF-CURB AND THE SIDEWALK), ESTABLISHED STREETS SHOULD ALREADY HAVE DESIGNATED TREE SPECIES. CONTACT LAURA BONACCORSI AT 909-477-2740, EXT 4023 FOR INFORMATION. 2. STREET TREES ARE TO BE SHOWN ON STREET OR OTHER PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PLANS SIGNED BY THE CITY ENGINEER,AND CONSTRUCTED PER THE SAME. 3. STREETTREES SHOWN ON PLANNING DIVISION SUBMITTALS ARE CONCEPTUAL ONLY 4. INTERIOR STREETS WILL BE REQUIRED TO SELECT DECIDUOUS TREES FOR EAST-WEST STREETS AND EVERGREEN TREES FOR NORTH-SOUTH STREETS FROM THE CITY'S APPROVED STREET TREE LIST. WIND-PRONE AREAS MAYBE REQUIRED TO UTILIZE A MORE DECIDUOUS PALETTE. 5. INDICATED SPACINGS AND SIZES ARE REQUIREMENTS FOR CITY-MAINTAINED TREES ONLY. WHERE THE TREE CONCEPT GOES BEYOND AREAS OF INFLUENCE NEAR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AND/OR ANY CITY MAINTENANCE EASEMENT,SPACINGS AND SIZES WILL BE PER THE ON-SITE PLANS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING DIVISION. ON-SITE AND OFF-SITE PLANS SHALL BE COORDINATED. • 6. STREET IMPROVEMENT PLANS SHALL REFLECT THE LEGEND AND NOTES INDICATED BELOW. IN SOME CASES,WHEN DETAILS ABOUT PARKWAY SIZES OR UTILITIES ARE UNAVAILABLE AT THE TIME OF CONDITIONING,OPTIONS ARE PROVIDED FOR VARIOUS SITUATIONS. IT IS THE DESIGNER'S RESPONSIBILITY TO ASCERTAIN THE CONTEXT OF THE TREE PLANTING,SELECT THE APPROPRIATE TREE OPTION,AND OMIT ANY ERRONEOUS INFORMATION ON THE FINAL LEGEND. 7. STREET IMPROVEMENT PLANS SHALL REFLECT A LINE ITEM WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION LEGEND TO STATE: STREET TREES SHALL BE INSTALLED PER THE NOTES AND LEGEND ON SHEET ? (TYPICALLY SHEET 1) f3REpkT�NAM>r BOlA�UCAC NAME COMMON I, M►N�eROW_ �PACINQ :sa��. -�,Etat] �..; �. S-'d'. •-�: _ •5^�r'3",?i'.:•. �. - - 1 .�.`+� {'-q._ r-aL. . VINEYARD RHUSLANCEA .AFRICAN SUMAC 5' 20'O.C. 15 GAL. FILL ' (LOCAL ST) IN CALLE DEL PRADO PYRUS CALLERYANA NCN 3' 20'O.C. 15 GAL FILL 'ARISTOCRAT' ' IN *TREES SHALL BE 15 GALLON SIZE UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED. CONSTRUCTION NOTES FOR STREET TREES: 1. ALL STREET TREES ARE TO BE PLANTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY STANDARD PLANS. 2. PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY PLANTING, AN AGRONOMIC SOILS REPORT SHALL BE FURNISHED TO THE CITY INSPECTOR. ANY UNUSUAL TOXICITIES OR NUTRIENT DEFICIENCIES MAY REQUIRE BACKFILL SOIL AMENDMENTS, AS DETERMINED BY THE CITY INSPECTOR. 3. ALL STREET TREES ARE SUBJECT TO INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE BY THE ENGINEERING DIVISION. • 4. STREET TREES ARE TO BE PLANTED PER PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PLANS ONLY. ITEM G -60 FIRc- PROTECTION LiSTRICT FIRE SAFETY DIVISION STANDARD CONDITIONS FD PLAN REVIEW#: FD-01-0563-A PROJECT#: DRC2001-00439 PROJECT NAME: Lifeway Church DATE: January 12 2002 PLAN TYPE: Conditional Use Permit APPLICANT NAME: WLC Architects OCCUPANCY TYPE: Group A Division 2 and Group B FLOOR AREA(S): 14,304 s.f and 4,648 s.f. TYPE CONSTRUCTION: Type V-1 hr and Type V NR LOCATION: SEC Vineyard and Calle de Prado FD REVIEW BY: Steve Locati Fire Protection Planning Specialist PLANNER: Kirt Coury • ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE SAFETY DIVISION, (909)477-2770, EXT. 3009, IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS REGARDING THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: The following comments and conditions represent the minimum standard for Fire District approval of the project as submitted. These conditions are based upon review of the plans as submitted. Although we have tried, not all Fire District requirements for the proposed project may be included. Additions to or changes in the project may result in additional or changed Fire District requirements. Please make the necessary changes or corrections prior to resubmitting for review. "Bold" items identified below, as a"Required Note" shall be included as notes on plans resubmitted to the Planning Division to obtain Fire District approval. If your project is approved by the City of Rancho Cucamonga,all other Fire District conditions and comments must be addressed before construction permits can be issued. Contact the Fire Safety Division to schedule an appointment to verify compliance. A. Water Plans for Fire Protection 1. Prior to issuance of any building permit, the applicant shall submit a plan showing the locations of all new public fire hydrants for the review and approval by the Fire District and the Water District. 2. Prior to the issuance of any building permit, the applicant shall submit construction plans, specifications, flow test data and calculations for the private water main system for review and approval by the Fire District. Plans and installation shall comply with Fire District standards. Contac the Fire Safety Division for a copy of"Fire District Notes for Underground and Water Plans." 3. Required Note: When any portion of a facility or building is located more than 150-feet from a fire hydrant • located on a public street, on-site fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required fire flow shall be provided. The distance is measured as vehicular path of travel on adjacent access roadways, not line of sight. ITEM G -61 4. Required Note: Tt auired fire flow for this project shall bE _0 gallons per minute at a minimum residual pressure of 20 pounds per square inch. This requirement is made in accordance with Fire Code Appendix III-A, as amended. For site planning purposes one fire hydrant is required per 1000 gallons of required fire flow. • 5. Required Note: The required fire flow shall be delivered by fire hydrants located in accordance with Fire Code Appendix III-B, as amended. 6. Public fire hydrants located within a 500-foot radius of the proposed project may be used to provide the required fire flow subject to Fire District review and approval. Private fire hydrants on adjacent property shall not be used to provide required fire flow. 7. Required Note: All required public fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed, and operable prior to delivering any combustible building materials on-site (i.e., lumber, roofing materials, etc.). Water District personnel shall inspect the installation and witness hydrant flushing. The builder/developer shall submit test report to the Fire Safety Division. 8. Required Note: All private on-site fire hydrants shall be installed,flushed, and operable prior to delivering any combustible building materials on-site (i.e., lumber, roofing materials, etc.). Fire Construction Services representative shall inspect the installation and witness hydrant flushing. The builder/developer shall submit final test report to the Fire Safety Division. 9. For the purpose of final acceptance, an additional test of the on-site fire hydrants shall be conducted by the builder/developer in the presence of the Water District or Fire Construction Services, as appropriate. The builder/developer shall submit the final test report to the Fire Safety Division. 10. Existing fire hydrants and mains within 600-feet of the project shall be shown on the water plan submitted for review and approval. Include main size. 9. Prior to the issuance of a fire sprinkler system permit, the applicant shall submit construction plans, specifications, and calculations for the fire sprinkler system underground to the Fire Safety Division for approval. 10. If the system is private the applicant shall do the following prior to the issuance of the building permit: • a. Submit proof that provisions have been made for the annual testing, repair, and maintenance of the system. A copy of the maintenance agreement shall be submitted to the District. b. For developments with multiple owners, they shall establish a reciprocal maintenance agreement, that shall be submitted to the Fire District for acceptance. 11. Prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, all fire hydrants shall have a blue reflective pavement marker indicating the fire hydrant location on the street or driveway in accordance with Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Standard Plan 134, "Installation of Reflective Hydrant Markers." On private property these markers are to be maintained in good condition by the property owner. B. Water Availability 1. Required Note: Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall provide evidence of adequate fire flow. The Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Water Availability for Fire Protection Form shall be completed by the Water District and submitted for approval by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. If sufficient water to meet fire flow requirements is not available, an automatic fire extinguishing system may be required in each structure affected by the insufficient flow. C. Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems 1. Required Note: RCFPD Ordinance 15 or other adopted code or standard requires an approved automatic fire sprinkler system to be installed throughout the building(s). 2. Required Note: All commercial or industrial structures greater than 7,500 square feet, all Group A or E Occupancies with an occupant load of 50 or more persons, multi-family residential structures, and all • structures that do not meet Fire District access requirements (See Fire Access below), shall be protected by an approved automatic fire sprinkler system. ITEM G-62 3. Plans for the require somatic fire sprinkler system shall be SL ..ted to Fire Construction Services for review and approval. No work is allowed without a permit issued by =ire Construction Services. 4. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the fire sprinkler system(s) shall be tested and • accepted by Fire Construction Services. 5. The fire sprinkler system monitoring system shall be installed, tested, and operational immediately following the completion of the fire sprinkler system. Monitoring is required with 20 sprinklers in Group I Occupancies, or 100 or more sprinklers in all other Occupancies. D. Fire Access 1. Required Note: Fire District access roadways shall be provided for every facility, building, or portion of a building constructed when any portion of the facility or any portion of an exterior wall of the first story of the building is located more than 150-feet from Fire District approved vehicle access. The distance is measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building. 2. Fire District access roadways include public roads, streets, highways, as well as private roads, streets and designated fire lanes. 3. Commercial/Industrial and Multi-family Residential-Required Note: Prior to recordation of a subdivision/tract/parcel map or the issuance of any grading permit, whichever occurs first, the applicant shall submit plans and specification for the approval of the Fire District for all Fire District access roadways to within 150-feet of all portions of the exterior of every structure on-site. 4. Roadways and Fire Lanes-Required Note: Prior to issuance of any grading permits, the applicant shall submit and obtain approval of plans for all public and/or roads, streets, courts and cul-de-sacs from the Fire District in consultation with the Grading Committee. The plans shall include the plan view, sectional view, and indicate the width of the street or court measured flow line to flow line. All proposed fire apparatus tumarounds shall be clearly marked when a dead-end street exceeds 150-feet or when otherwise required. Applicable CC&R's, or other approved documents, shall contain provisions that prohibit obstructions such as traffic calming devices (speed bumps, humps, etc.), control gates, bollards, or other modifications in fire lanes or access roadways without prior written approval of the Fire District, Fire Safety Division. • 5. Private Roadways and Fire Lanes-Required Note:The inside turn radius shall be 20-feet. The outside turn radius shall be not less than 50-feet. The minimum radius for cul-de-sacs is 45-feet. The minimum unobstructed width for a Fire District access roadway or fire lane is 26-feet. The minimum vertical clearance is 14 feet, 6 inches. At any entry median the minimum width of traffic lanes shall be.20-feet. 6. Dead-end Fire District Access Roadways-Required Note: Dead-end Fire District access roadways in excess of 150-feet shall be provided with approved provisions for the turning around of fire apparatus. This may include a cul-de-sac,"hammerhead,"or other means approved by the Fire District. . 7. Required Note: All portions of the facility or any portion of the exterior wall of the first story shall be located within 150-feet of Fire District vehicle access, measured by an unobstructed approved route around the exterior of the building. Landscaped areas, unpaved changes in elevation, gates, and fences are an obstruction. 8. Approved access walkways shall be provided from the fire apparatus access road to exterior building openings. 9. Required Note: All buildings that have three or more stories,or are 30-feet in height shall be provided with fire apparatus access on at least two sides. Access to exterior walls shall extend from 5 to 50-feet horizontally, with no vertical obstructions. 10. Knox Rapid Entry System: A Knox rapid entry key vault shall be installed prior to final inspection. Proof of purchase shall be submitted prior to final building plan approval. Contact the Fire Safety Division for specific details and ordering information. 11. Required Note: Trees and shrubs planted in any median shall be kept trimmed to a minimum of 14-feet, 6- inches from the ground up, so as not to impede fire vehicles. 12. Required Note: Emergency access, a minimum 26-feet in width and 14-feet, 6-inches in height shall be • provided and maintained free and clear of any obstructions at all times during construction, in accordance with Fire District Standards. ITEM G-63 13, Prior to the issuance building permit, the applicant shall subn dns and obtain approval from the Fire District for required Fire District access roadways less than 40-feet in width. When fire lanes are required the plans shall indicate the locations of red curbing and signage. A drawing of the proposed signage that meets • the minimum Fire District standards shall be submitted to and approved. Contact the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District at(909)477-2770 for a copy of the "FD Access—Fire Lanes"standard. 14. Fire Lanes: Prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy,the fire lanes shall be installed in accordance with the approved fire lane plan. The CC&R's or other approved documents shall contain a fire lane map and provisions that prohibit parking in the fire lanes. The method of enforcement shall be documented. The CC&R's shall also identify who is responsible for not less than annual inspection and maintenance of all required fire lanes. 15. New buildings other than single-family dwellings shall post the address with minimum 8-inch numbers on contrasting background, visible from the street and electrically illuminated during periods of darkness. When the building setback exceeds 200 feet from the public street an additional non-illuminated 6-inch minimum number address shall be provided at the property entrance. 27. In multi-unit complexes approved address numbers, and/or building identification letters shall be provided on the front and back of all units, suites, or buildings. The Fire District shall review and approve the numbering plan in coordination with the City of Rancho Cucamonga. E. Traffic Signal Preemption Devices 1. Prior to the recordation of the applicable subdivision map,the Fire District in consultation with the City Engineer shall approve the locations of Traffic Signal Preemption Devices. F. Combustible Construction Letter 1. Required Note: Prior to the issuance of a building permit for combustible construction, the builder shall submit a letter to the Fire District on company letterhead stating that the minimum water supply for fire fighting purposes and the all-weather fire protection access roadway that meets Fire District • Standards shall be in place and operational before any combustible material Is placed on-site. The roadway shall be maintained at all times, G. Architectural Building Plans 1. Prior to the issuance of a building permit the applicant shall submit plans for the review and approval of the Fire District. Call the Fire Construction Services Unit at (909) 477-2713 for any required notes to be placed on the plans prior to submittal. H. Fire District Service Fees* 1. The following fees may be applicable to this project and are being Identified at this time to assist the applicant in planning for future costs. Other comments in this letter identify fire protection features or other required installations subject to approval by the Fire District. The fees for these additional plan reviews are to be paid at the time plans submitted. When the required plans are submitted the following fees will be assessed by the Fire Safety Division: •• $82 Start-up fee for commercial, industrial or multi-family dwelling projects(Paid prior to TRC) $66 Fire District Access Review(Includes Fire Lane Plans) $132 Conditional Use Permit Review Fee(CUP) $132 for Private Fire Mains or Fire Sprinkler Underground Water Supply $677 (per new building)for New Commercial and Industrial Development Plus a microfiche/laser-fiche fee of $1.00 per plan sheet for all final plans approved by the Fire Safety Division. • Note: Separate plan check fees will be assessed by the Fire Construction Services unit for review of tenant • improvement work, fire protection systems (fire sprinklers, alarm systems, fire extinguishing systems, etc.), and/or any consultant reviews upon submittal of plans. ITEM G-64 2. The following servic :s are due to the Fire District and payal .c this time: $82 Start-up fee for commercial, industrial or multi-family dwelling projects (Paid prior to TRC) $132 Conditional Use Permit Review Fee(CUP) • $214 -Total due at this time. Remit payment by check made payable to the"Rancho Cucamonga Fire District" Plus a microfiche/laser-fiche fee of $1.00 per plan sheet for all final plans approved by the Fire Safety Division. *Note: Separate plan check fees will be assessed by the Fire Construction Services unit for review of tenant improvement work,fire protection systems(fire sprinklers, alarm systems,fire extinguishing systems,etc.), and/or any consultant reviews upon submittal of plans. I. Hazard Control Permits 1. As noted below Special Permits may be required, dependent upon approved use(s): a. Operate a place of public assembly. b. To install any.access control device, system, or any material under, upon or within the required fire district access roadway. This includes any gate, barrier, traffic-calming device, speed bump, speed hump or any device that delays or slows Fire District response. c. Candles and open flame in public assembly. J. Hazardous Materials—Compliance with Disclosure and Reporting Regulations The below listed businesses, operations, uses or conditions require that the San Bernardino County Fire Department review your Business Emergency/Contingency Plan for compliance with minimum standards. Contact the San Bernardino County Fire, Hazardous Materials Division at (909) 387-3041 for forms and assistance. They are the CUPA for the City of Rancho Cucamonga. • 1. Any business that uses, generates, processes, produces, treats, stores, emits, or discharges a hazardous material in quantities at or exceeding 55 gallons, 500 pounds, or 200 cubic feet (compressed gas) at any one time in the course of a year. 2. All hazardous waste generators, regardless of quantity generated. 3. Any business that handles, stores, or uses Category (1) or (ll) pesticides, as defined by FIFRA, regardless of amount. 4. Any business that handles DOT Hazard Class 1 (explosives,found in 49 CFR) regardless of amount. 5. Any business that handles extremely hazardous substances (EHS's) in quantities exceeding the threshold planning quantity (T.P.Q.). Extremely Hazardous Substances are designated pursuant to the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act Section 302, and are listed in 40 CFR Part 355. 6. Any business subject to the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act (EPCRA), also known as SARA Title III. Generally, EPCRA includes facilities that handle hazardous substances above 10,000 pounds, or extremely hazardous substances above threshold planning quantities. There are some exceptions, including retail gas stations with up to 75,000 gallons of gasoline or 100,000 gallons of diesel fuel in Underground Storage Tanks (UST's) that meet the 1998 upgrade requirements. To get more information on EPCRA requirements call 1.800-535.0202. Due to State disclosure consolidation laws,Tier If forms need not be submitted to the various State and Federal agencies. Submission of your Business Emergency/ Contingency Plan will meet this requirement; however, EPCRA does require full annual inventory submission rather than a certification statement each March 1. Also, EPCRA facilities are bound by the trade secret limitations of EPCRA, and must sign every page of inventory. 7. Any business that handles radioactive material that is listed in Appendix B of Chapter 1, of 10 CFR. • ITEM G-65 8. If the facility is a N, Susiness, a Certificate of Occupancy is J by Building and Safety will not be finalized until the San Bernardino County Fire Department reviews your Business Emergency/Contingency Plan. California Government Code, Section 65850.2 prohibits the City from issuing a final Certificate of • Occupancy unless the applicant has met or is meeting specific hazardous material disclosure requirements. A Risk Management Program (RMP) may also be required if regulated substances are to be used or stored at the new facility. Contact County Fire, Hazardous Materials Division at(909)387-3041 for forms and assistance. 9. Any business that operates on rented or leased property, and is required to submit a Plan, is required to submit a notice to the owner of the property in writing stating that the business is subject to the Business Emergency/Contingency Plan mandates, and has complied with the provision, and must provide a copy of the Plan to the property owner within 5 working days after receiving a request from the owner. 10. The Fire Code adopted by the Fire District has a provision requiring collection of information regarding hazardous materials at facilities for purposes of Fire Code implementation and emergency response. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy a copy of the Business Emergency/Contingency Plan - New Business (Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventory) shall be submitted to the Fire District after it is approved by the San Bernardino County Fire Department. In some cases additional information that is not in the Business Emergency/Contingency Plan may be required in order to support local fire prevention and emergency response programs. K. Plan Submittal Required Notice 1. Plans shall be submitted and approved prior to construction in accordance with 1997/98 Building, Fire, Mechanical, and Plumbing Codes; 1999 Electrical and RCFPD Ordinances FD15 and FD32, Guidelines and Standards. L. Other Fire District Requirements or Comments 1. NOTE: The Fire Safety Division has previously met with representative of WLC regarding fire district access.The results of that meeting are not reflected in the current resubmittal. • Fire District Conditions of Approval-Template SL 11/20/01 Revision • ITEM G -66 • RESOLUTION NO. 08-62 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,CALIFORNIA,APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2006-00926 TO COMPLETE THE LIFEWAY CHURCH FACILITY BY ADDING A NEW CLASSROOM WING AND MULTI- PURPOSE HALL IN THE LOW DENSITY(2 TO 4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, LOCATED AT 7477 VINEYARD AVENUE;AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF—APN: 0208- 921-36. A. Recitals. 1. WLC Architects on behalf of Lifeway Church, filed an application for the issuance of Conditional Use Permit DRC2006-00926,as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditional Use Permit request is referred to as"the application." 2. On the 22nd day of October 2008, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. • B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on October 22, 2008, 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 7477 Vineyard Avenue,with a street frontage of approximately 297 feet and lot depth of approximately 720 feet, and is presently improved with the Phase 1 sanctuary and office building of Conditional Use Permit DRC2001-00439; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is single-family residential;the property to the south consists of single-family residential;the property to the east is single-family residential; and the property to the west is a public park; and C. The site has sufficient parking for the proposed uses at 230 spaces; and d. The substantial site improvements, landscaping, lighting, and circulation are in place; and • e. The portable classroom units are only temporary and will be removed as part of the completion of this project. EXHIBIT C ITEM G-67 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 08-62 DRC2006-00926—WLC ARCHITECTS October 22, 2008 • Page 2 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and b. The proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and C. The proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. 4. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)and the City's local CEQA Guidelines,the City adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration on April 24,2002,in connection with the City's approval of Conditional Use Permit DRC2001-00439 for the approval of the initial project. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration is required in connection with subsequent or discretionary approvals of the same project unless:(i)substantial changes are proposed to the projectthat indicate new or more severe impacts on the environment; (ii) substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under which the project was previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts; or(iii)new important information shows the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered; or (iv) additional mitigation measures are now feasible to reduce • impacts or different mitigation measures can be imposed to substantially reduce impacts. Staff has evaluated Conditional Use Permit DRC2006-00926 and concludes that substantial changes to the project or the circumstances surrounding the project have not occurred,which would create new or more severe impacts than those evaluated in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration. In that the applicant is currently proposing a less intense project by consolidating the initial Gymnasium and Fellowship Hall buildings into a smaller single structure that reduces the building height,square footage, and building mass by eliminating approximately 1,900 square feet. In the initial proposal these two functions(i.e.,the Gymnasium and Fellowship Hall)were provided in separate buildings on two levels. In the revised proposal the buildings are combined into a single Multi-Purpose Hall that would be located on a lower mid plaza level. Staff further finds that the project will not have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration, not have more severe effects than previously analyzed, and that additional or different mitigation measures are not required to reduce the impacts of the project to a level of less than significant. Therefore, the Planning Department has determined that no additional environmental review is required in connection with the City's consideration of Conditional Use Permit DRC2006-00926. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Planning Department's determination that .no additional environmental review is required,and based on its own independent judgment,concurs in the staffs determination. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Department 1) All conditions (including Standard Conditions) set for Conditional Use Permit DRC2001-00439(Planning Commission Resolution 02-43)shall pertain to this project. • ITEM G-68 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 08-62 DRC2006-00926—WLC ARCHITECTS • October 22, 2008 Page 3 2) The full five years permitted in Section 17.02.100(Lapse of Approval and Extensions) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code shall apply to this approval including the other requirements and limitations of that section,except that the temporary classroom units shall be removed from the site no later than the end of the five-year period regardless of the status of the progress of the proposed development or any extension that may be provided for this expansion. 3) In addition to the statement of absolute approval lapse for the temporary portable classroom units in Condition 2 above, the following condition shall operate as to the duration of these units on the site: The eventual location for the meeting rooms that currently house the religious educational programs by use of the temporary portable classroom units is the new Classroom Wing. Therefore, the temporary portable classroom units shall be vacated upon the approved occupancy of the new Classroom Wing or the end of the five-year approval period of this Conditional Use Permit,whichever is first. The units must not remain on the site more than 90 days after this date. 4) The temporary classroom units shall be maintained in good condition at all times including, but not limited to, paint. No signs and/or banners shall be installed and/or affixed to the temporary classroom units. • 5) That at least 50% or more of the new trees to be planted, as shown on the submitted Planting Plan, shall be a minimum size of 36 inch box to further buffer the proposed development from the neighboring residential properties. 6) That all existing and proposed fencing, retaining walls,and garden walls shall be maintained and repaired to function as so designed. 7) The wall on the southerly slope shall be enhanced with a stucco finish prior to the issuance of the Building Permits. 8) The installation of the proposed landscaping for the southerly slope as well as the wrought iron fencing shown on the Site Plan shall be completed in accordance with the approved plans and is subject to review and approval by the Planning Director prior to the issuance of any occupancy permits. 9) The Planning Director shall review the feasibility of the installation of a 6- foot high block wall along the easterly property line of the site in lieu of the wrought iron fencing currently shown on the Site Plan. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22ND DAY OF OCTOBER 2008. • PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ITEM G -69 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 08-62 DRC2006-00926—WLC ARCHITECTS October 22, 2008 • Page 4 BY: Richard B. Fletcher, Chairman ATTEST: Jame . Troyer, AICP, Secretary I, James R. Troyer, AICP, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 22nd day of October,2008,by the following vote- to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: FLETCHER, MUNOZ, STEWART, WIMBERLY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: HOWDYSHELL • • ITEM G -70 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT#: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2006-00926 SUBJECT: LIFEWAY CHURCH APPLICANT: WLC ARCHITECTS LOCATION: 7477 VINEYARD AVENUE ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. General Requirements comolatlon Data 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 attorneys fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may,at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 2. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolutions of Approval 02-43 and 08-62,Standard I_I_ Conditions, and all environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size). The sheets)are for information only to all parties involved in the construction/grading activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect. B. Site Development 1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include site plans,architectural elevations,exterior materials and colors,landscaping,sign program,and grading on file in the Planning Department, the conditions contained herein, and Development Code regulations. 2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon,all Conditions _/_/_ of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director, •SC-1-05 1 I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGC0MM\2008 Res 8 Stf rep\DRC2006-00926StdCond 10-22.doc ITEM G-71 Project No. DRC2006-00926 Comotetlon Date 3. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be • submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Department to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. 4. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for _/_I_ consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.)or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision,or approved use has commenced,whichever comes first. 6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code,all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 7. The developer shall submit a construction access plan and schedule for the development of all lots for Planning Director and City Engineer approval; including, but not limited to, public notice requirements,special street posting,phone listing for community concerns,hours of construction activity, dust control measures, and security fencing. C. Signs 1. The signs indicated on the submitted plans are conceptual only and not a part of this approval. _/_I_ Any signs proposed for this development shall comply with the Sign Ordinance and shall require separate application and approval by the Planning Department prior to installation of any signs. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE SAFETY DEPARTMENT, FIRE PROTECTION • PLANNING SERVICES AT, (909) 477-2770, FOR COMPLIANCE .WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: SEE ATTACHED 2 • I:IPLANNINGTINALIPLNGCOMMI2008 Rea&Stf repIORC2006-0092SStdCond 10-22.doc ITEM G -72 Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District • k Fire Construction Services STANDARD CONDITIONS April 26, 2007 Lifeway Church Modular Classrooms, Fellowship Hall, Gymnasium & Educational Building 7477 Vineyard DRC2006-00926 THE FOLLOWING STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLY TO THIS PROJECT This site is required to be annexed into the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District's Community facility District 85-1. The process must be completed before issuance of the Building permits; allow 6 months for the completion the process; apply now. The modular classroom buildings will also be required to be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers and/or a fire alarm system The RCFPD Procedures & Standards which are referenced in this document can be access on the web at htto://www.ei.rancho-cucamonaa.ca.us/fire/index.htm under the Fire Safety Division & Fire Construction Services section. Search by article; the preceding number of the standard refers to, the article. Chose the appropriate article number then a drop down menu will appear, select the Wcorresponding standard. FSC-1 Public and Private Water Supply 1. Design guidelines for Fire Hydrants: The following provides design guidelines for the spacing and location of fire hydrants: a. The maximum distance between fire hydrants in commercial/industrial projects is 300 feet. No portion of the exterior wall shall be located more than 150 feet from an approved fire hydrant. For cul-de-sacs, the distance shall not exceed 100 feet. b. Fire hydrants are to be located. The preferred locations for fire hydrants are: i. At the entrance(s) to a commercial, industrial or residential project from the public roadways. ii. At intersections. iii. On the right side of the street, whenever practical and possible. iv. As required by the Fire Safety Division to meet operational needs of the Fire District. V. A minimum of forty feet (40') from any building. • ITEM G-73 If any portion of a facility or building is located more than 150 feet from a public fire hydrant measured on an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, additional private or public fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required fire flow shall be provided. • d. Provide one fire hydrant for each 1,000 gpm of required fire flow or fraction thereof. FSC-2 Fire Flow 1. Public fire hydrants located within a 500400t radius ofthe proposed project may be used to provide the required fire flow subject to Fire District review and approval. Private fire hydrants on adjacent property shall not be used to provide required fire flow. 2. Fire protection water plans are required for all projects that must extend the existing water supply to or onto the site 3. The on all site plans submitted for review must show all fire hydrants located within 600-feet of the proposed project site. FSC-3 Prerequisite for submittal of Overhead Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems 1. Prior to submitting plans for an overhead automatic fire sprinkler system, the applicant shall submit plans, specifications and calculations for the fire sprinkler system underground supply piping. Approval of the underground supply piping system must be obtained prior to submitting the overhead fire sprinkler system plans. FSC-4 Requirement for Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems • Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Ordinance 15, the 2001 California Fire Code and/or any other applicable standards require an approved automatic fire sprinkler system to be installed in: 1. Assembly &Educational Occupancy Buildings. 2. Commercial buildings greater than 7,499 square feet or larger. 3. "All structures that do not meet Fire District access requirements (see Fire Access). 4. When buildings do not meet the requirements of the 2001 California Building Code and the RCFPD Fire Department Access - Fire Lane Standard 9-7. 5. When any applicable code or standard requires the structure to be sprinklered. FSC-5 Fire Alarm System 1. RCFPD Ordinance 15, based on use or floor area (or by other adopted codes or standards) requires an automatic and/or manual fire alarm systema Refer to RCFPD Ordinances 15 and 39, the California Building Code, RCFPD Fire Alarm Standard #10-6 and/or the California Fire Code. 2 • ITEM G -74 RESOLUTION NO. 13-31 • A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA,APPROVING A TIME EXTENSION DRC2013-00093, A REQUEST TO EXTEND THE DURATION OF AN EXISTING ENTITLEMENT APPROVAL BY AN ADDITIONAL TWO (2) YEARS FOR DRC2006-00926, A PROPOSAL TO COMPLETE THE LIFEWAY CHURCH FACILITY ON 2.975 ACRES WITHIN THE LOW RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), LOCATED AT 7477 VINEYARD AVENUE; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF -APN: 0208-921-36. A. Recitals. 1. Lifeway Church filed application DRC2013-00093 for the extension of the duration of the entitlement approval("time extension")for Conditional Use Permit DRC2006-00926 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject time extension request is referred to as "the application". 2. On October 22, 2008, this Commission adopted its Resolution No. 08-62, thereby approving the application subject to specific conditions and time limits. 3. On July 24, 2013, 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. 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 substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on July 24, 2013, including written and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The applicant does not propose any changes to the original project in conjunction with this time extension request; and b. The previously approved Conditional Use Permit is in substantial compliance with the City's current General Plan, specific plans, ordinances, plans, codes, and policies; and C. The extension of the approval of the Conditional Use Permit will not cause significant inconsistencies with the current General Plan,specific plans,ordinances, plans,codes,or policies; and d. The extension of the approval of the Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the • vicinity; and ITEM G -75 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 13-31 TIME EXTENSION DRC2013-00093—LIFEWAY CHURCH July 24, 2013 Page 2 • e. The extension of the approval of the Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and f. The extension is within the time limits established by State law and local ordinance. 3. Based upon the facts and information contained in the application, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application,the Planning Commission finds that no subsequent or supplemental environmental document is required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in connection with the review and approval of this application based upon the following findings and determinations: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration on April 24, 2002, in connection with the City's approval of Conditional Use Permit ORC2001-00493 for the approval of the initial project. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration is required in connection with subsequent or discretionary approvals of the same project unless: (i) substantial changes are proposed to the project that indicate new or more severe impacts on the environment; (ii) substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under which the project was previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts; or (iii) new important information shows the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered; or(iv) additional mitigation measures are now feasible to reduce impacts or different mitigation measures can be imposed to substantially reduce impacts. • In 2008, staff evaluated Conditional Use Permit DRC2006-00926 and concluded that substantial changes to the project or the circumstances surrounding the project have not occurred,which would create new or more severe impacts than those evaluated in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration. At that time, the applicant proposed a less intense project by consolidating the initial Gymnasium and Fellowship Hall buildings into a smaller single structure that reduced the building height, square footage, and building mass by eliminating approximately 1,900 square feet. In the initial proposal, these two functions (i.e., the Gymnasium and Fellowship Hall) were provided in separate buildings on two levels. In the revised proposal the buildings were combined into a single Multi-Purpose Hall that would be located on a lower mid plaza level. Staff has evaluated Time Extension DRC2013-00093 and concludes that substantial changes to the project or the circumstances surrounding the project have not occurred, which would create new or more severe impacts than those evaluated in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration since the applicant is proposing a time extension to the previous approval. Staff further finds that the project will not have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration, not have more severe effects than previously analyzed, and that additional or different mitigation measures are not required to reduce the impacts of the project to a level of less-than-significant. Therefore, pursuant to CEQA, Staff recommends that the Planning Commission concur with the Staff determination that no additional environmental review is required in connection with the City's consideration of Time Extension DRC2013-00093. b. Based on these findings and all evidence in the record, the Planning Commission concurs with the staff determination that no additional environmental review is required pursuant to CEQA in connection with the City's consideration of the Time Extension DRC2013-00093 for Conditional Use Permit DRC2006-00926. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 above,this • Commission hereby extends the duration of an existing entitlement approval by an additional two(2) years and modifies the conditions of approval contained in Resolution No. 08-62 to read as follows: ITEM G-76 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 13-31 TIME EXTENSION DRC2013-00093—LIFEWAY CHURCH July 24, 2013 • Page 3 Planning Department 1) Approval is for the extension of the duration of the entitlement approval (Time Extension DRC2013-00093) for Conditional Use Permit DRC2006-00926 and modification of the applicable approval time limit as described in Planning Condition #2 contained in Resolution No. 08-62 that was adopted by the Planning Commission on October 22, 2008, 2) The time extension of the entitlement approval is for two(2)years. The new expiration date for Conditional Use Permit DRC2006-00926 is October 22, 2015. 3) Any requests for future time extensions shall be subject to the procedures, conditions, and findings as set forth in Section 17.14.090 of the Development Code. 4) All other prior conditions of approval, including all of the Standard/special conditions of approval from other City departments for Conditional Use Permit DRC2006-00926 (Resolution 08-62) and Conditional Use Permit DRC2001-00439 (Resolution 02-43), shall apply. • 5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24TH DAY OF JULY 2013 PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Frances Howdyshell, Chairman ATTEST: Candyce Burnett, Secretary I, Candyce Burnett, Secretary of the Planning Commission for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 24th day of July 2013, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: • ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: ITEM G-77 • ��'Go2� CO j'�i CITY OF RANCHO COCA /MONAA July 19, 2013 JUL 2 4 2013 To The Planning Department,City of Rancho Cucamonga: RECEIVED - PLANNING The purpose of this letter is to put in writing some discussions we have had with Steve Fowler regarding the extension of the building request by Lifeway Church Ministeries. We are neighbors,directly south of Lifeway Church. Our property line is adjacent to theirs, and we bear the brunt of the inconvenience and the obstructed view caused by the elevated level of the land where their buildings are located. We have lived with this situation for five years now,and looked forward to the time when the portable classroom buildings,which are the most unsightly,would be removed. We have been assured by Steve Fowler that the church will not be granted an extension regarding the portable buildings,and that they will be removed by October of this year. We are enclosing a copy of a document that details an agreement that was reached between the city, and the church five years ago regarding further construction on the church's property. We have been in contact with Steve Fowler regarding this document,and he has assured us that the proposed building will begin from a level that is 14 feet lower than what it is now. We have copies of the plans, but not being architects ourselves,find it a little hard to be certain that this information is accurate. Before approving the extension,we would like those with expertise in the city to verify that the plans submitted are in accordance with the agreement that was made and dated November 19, 2008. In the past,we were given inaccurate information by the city staff including: • In the original construction we were assured that the road that parallels our property would end up being no higher than the top of our six-foot block wall,at the east end of our property. It ended up being about 10 feet higher by the time construction was finished. • When the portable buildings first appeared on the church's property,we were assured by city staff that they could not be there and would be removed. • In trying to determine if the buildings were built according to the original plans,somehow the city could not find the redline version that could document it. When we met with the city officials and expressed concern about how elevated the church was from what we were originally told,everyone seemed surprised about the height but we were told that it was too late to change anything. We simply don't want these things to continue to happen. Another concern is the landscaping agreement.We haven't said anything about it during the past five years (other than asking the church to fix sprinklers that break and shoot over into our property), because we were told that the city didn't require them to handle the landscaping mitigation until construction began. However, since the plan was to have the landscaping between our properties and the church's wall,complete within the five years, as a condition of extending the permit,we would ask that the planned landscaping between all the neighboring properties and the church's block wall be taken care of without further delay. We understand that while the landscaping on the church's property will be impacted by the proposed construction,the landscaping on the south side of the wall will not be ,r, G affected, so we should not have to wait another two years.The agreement was for five years, not seven, and by the city granting them the extension,they also ensure that we will have two more years of looking at their block wall,obstructing the view that we previously enjoyed, unless this landscaping is put in place now. Steve Fowler provided us a copy of the landscaping plan,but not having expertise in this area ourselves, it is hard to understand. We would request that someone from the city review the plans and assure in writing that they follow the agreement that was reached in 2008. Steve Fowler mentioned that he thought the landscaping had been done, but it appears to us that it has not. On the plans we have,it appears that 19 trees are to be planted. There are currently 9 large trees planted and three small ones. We would like the landscaping plan to be implemented as designed. We were led to believe this would include larger trees at the eastern end of our property,yet there are only two small trees. The landscaping plan also appears to show vines planted along the wall, and that hasn't been done. Including vines would definitely mitigate the starkness of the block wall, as was discussed in the memo from 11/2008. The landscaping currently between our properties does not sufficiently fill in the area,as we were led to believe it would. As mentioned earlier,due to previous encounters with city staff where we were given misinformation, we would like to have in writing what the expectation is, if the extension is granted,and an assurance that it will be carried out in accordance with the agreement from 11/2008. We appreciate your consideration of our concerns. 'Sionc�errpelly^,nC WIWYS C Charles C. Rich Barbara M. Rich MEMORANDUM RANCHO Date: November 19, 2008 CUCAMONGA To: Mayor and City Council Members Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager From: James Troyer, Planning Directo Corky Nicholson, Assistant Planning Director Subject: Neighboring property owner's concerns regarding the Lifeway Church project at at 7477 Vineyard Avenue This memo is in response to the letter that was submitted by Mr. Charles Rich to the City Council on November 5, 2008 (copy attached), which conveys his concerns in regards to the recently approved Lifeway Church project at 7477 Vineyard Avenue. Background On July 1, 2001, an application for Conditional Use Permit DRC2001-00439 was filed for the construction and occupation of a new master planned Lifeway Church facility on Vineyard Avenue across from Red Hill Park. The facility included several phases of construction with a sanctuary, offices, education building, fellowship hall, and gymnasium. Following the Design Review Committee's approval on April 2, 2002, the Planning Commission approved the project on April 24, 2002, with 15 Planning conditions, as set forth in Resolution No. 02-43, which include the following: 7) The Master Plan is approved in concept only. Future development for each building proposed in Phases 2, 3, and 4 shall be subject to separate Development Review process. 9) This approval is for the operation of a church and office and does not include a daycare or private K-12 school. Development Code Section 17.02.100, and repeated in the Standard Conditions for DRC2001- 00439, is the requirement that building permits be obtained for buildings within five years and diligently pursued toward completion. The Master Plan approved under DRC2001-00439 expired on April 24, 2007 without the building permits for the subsequent phases being issued i.e., for the education building, fellowship hall, and gymnasium. Furthermore, the existing portable temporary classroom units were placed on the site in October, 2006. The Planning Commission determined at their December 13, 2006 meeting, that the portable temporary classroom units were part of Phase 1 and were not to be permanent but must be associated with a permanent building which has an active Conditional Use Permit. The permanent building to replace the temporary units is the classroom building, which is part of Phase 2. The applicant submitted a new application, Conditional Use Permit DRC2006-00926, for the remaining phases of the Lifeway Church project that included an educational building, the NEIGHBORING PROPHUYY OWNER'S CONCERNS RL'GARDING'I'I-IE LIPI'WAY CHURCH PROJECT AT AT PAGE 2 7477 VINEYARD AVENUF NOVFMBER 19,2008 temporary classroom modules, a gymnasium, and fellowship hall that had not obtained building permits prior to the expiration. In addition, the applicant submitted an additional application for a Non-Construction Conditional Use Permit DRC2007-00544, to operate a private/parochial school, kindergarten through grade 12, at the church facility. Both applications were accepted as complete prior to the April 24, 2007 expiration of the previous Conditional Use Permit. The project received Design Review Committee approval on June 19, 2007. At the August 22, 2007 Planning Commission meeting, the above-referenced projects were presented at a single public hearing for both related requests. The staff report and exhibits were presented and testimony by the applicant and neighbors was taken. The Planning Commissioners expressed serious concerns over several aspects of both requests including school operation and coordination with the nearby public high school, traffic and parking impacts, substantial noise, site design, and visual impacts of the additional phases and compliance for the southerly screen wall. The Planning Commission provided direction that a master phasing plan with potential negative impacts could not be favorably acted upon without reviewing more substantial architectural design drawings, receiving more school operation information and detailed traffic and parking information. In an effort to provide the applicant with an opportunity to rectify these concerns, the items were continued to give staff an opportunity to devise a draft set of procedures for the applicant to follow to address the Commission's concerns adequately. The continued public hearing items were brought back to the Planning Commission on September 12, 2007—at-which time and in conference with the Planning Department Staff, the church modified'" their application, as follows: 1. The Non-Construction Conditional Use Permit DRC2007-00544 for the private school operation was withdrawn; and, 2. The application for the Master Plan for future phases was amended to a Development Review of the Classroom/Education Building and the Gymnasium. The Planning Commission accepted the above changes and adopted the following additional review procedures, as recommended by Staff for Conditional Use Permit DRC2006-00926, as the item was continued for the Commission's action at a future date: 1. The Development Review project DRC2006-00926 should be continued by the Planning Commission to give staff, the Design Review Committee, and the Planning Commission an opportunity to review the revised project and provide a further hearing opportunity for the site and building design. 2. The applicant shall provide full architectural drawings and a site plan for the Classroom Building and Gymnasium. If changes in grade are necessary, a Conceptual Grading Plan shall also be submitted. 3. A detailed development schedule shall be provided to establish a timeline for the removal of the temporary classroom units and all other parts of the program. 4. The applicant shall provide a quality development package for review to staff within 45 days so that it can be docketed for review by the Design Review Committee at the eafliest possible NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNER'S CONCERNS REGARDING'1'1-I1i LII�EW,%Y CI-IURCI I PROJECT A'I'A'r Pna1-:3 7477 VINEYARD AVENUE NOVEMBER 19,2008 date. The Planning Commission will provide the final review of the project after the Design Review Committee is sufficiently satisfied with the design changes to make a recommendation. In accordance with the additional review procedures, as noted above for Conditional Use Permit DRC2006-00926, the Design Review Committee reviewed the applicant's more recent proposal on November 6, 2007, January 15, 2008, and October 14, 2008, and made the following recommendations in the order of each meeting: • November 6, 2007 DRC meeting: Per the direction of the Planning Commission, the applicant presented a preliminary concept plan for the Committee's feedback, which included a scale model of the church campus that offered the opportunity to visualize the building arrangement and site orientation, particularly in relation to the neighboring down-slope residences, building mass, and architecture. Complaints from a neighboring property owner who attended the meeting were received that were primarily about building mass, view, and the unsightliness of the site's southerly 6'-0" + high masonry wall that faces the neighboring residential properties. The Committee conveyed their concerns regarding the neighbor's issues, and directed the applicant to return to the Committee with a complete presentation of the design. • January 15, 2008 DRC meeting: The applicant submitted a revised proposal that incorporated the following changes to address the design issues that were previously raised by the Design Review Committee: Issue: Consider a re-orientation of the gym so that the shorter dimension of the building faces the slope and the neighboring homes to reduce the massive appearance of the building. Plan Revision: The Gymnasium and Fellowship Hall buildings were consolidated into a single structure. In the previous proposal these two functions were provided in separate buildings on two levels. In the revised proposal these buildings are combined into a single Multi-Purpose Hall that would be located on the lower mid plaza level. Such a revision reduces both the building square footage and building mass by eliminating approximately 1,900 square feet. Issue: It was suggested that a possible change in the pad elevation and/or landscaping would help mitigate the neighbor's view. Plan Revision: The pad elevation for the proposed Multi-Purpose Hall was dropped by approximately 14'-0", and substantial landscaping was added in accordance with the submitted Planting Plan. Issue: Can the gym be moved to the east portion of the site? Response: Staff and the applicant believe that the proposed location for the Multi- Purpose Hall, which includes a regulation basketball court, is best suited for their needs in terms of public safety when accommodating on-site vehicular traffic and pedestrian circulation. NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNER'S CONCERNS RF"GAIMING 11115 LIFIw\Y CI1UIiC61 PROJVCI'AT AT PAGE,,4 7477 VINEYARD AVENUE NOVEMBER 19,2008 Issue: A solution is needed to mitigate the stark appearance of the southerly wall that faces the neighboring properties. Plan Revision: The revised proposal provides for a much greater detail of the landscape and wall treatment along the southerly property line. The area between the wall and the property line is shown on the Proposed Planting Plan with substantial new trees, shrubs, and groundcover material; and according to the applicant the existing wall would receive a stucco finish of color and texture that would match the existing church building. In addition, a 6'-0" high wrought iron fence will be installed to enclose the rear portion of the parking areas, as noted on the submitted site plan. Several neighboring property owners attended the meeting and expressed their concerns regarding grading, building height, the appearance of the southerly wall that faces the neighboring properties, conducting a school on the subject site, and a request to install "story poles" for the purpose of providing further visual guidance as to how high the proposed buildings may appear from the surrounding properties. It was the general consensus of the Committee members that the church has gone to great lengths to address the issues that have been raised through the review process, which has made the proposal very acceptable; therefore, the Committee recommended that the proposal be forwarded to the Planning Commission subject to the following conditions: 1. Erect on-site story poles for the purpose of providing a visual aid to further convey to the surrounding residences the proposed height of the new buildings. After the story poles are erected the applicant will notify the Planning Department of the completed installation of the poles, and request that notices explaining the purpose of story poles be sent to the surrounding residences. The story poles shall remain in place for a minimum of two weeks from the mailing date of the notices. 2. Submit a Conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan by a certified civil engineer for the purpose of identifying and verifying the placement and height of the story poles, proposed building heights, pad elevations, drainage system, and the extent of grading that would occur to accommodate the new buildings. A reduced copy of the required Grading Plan was provided with each notice to the surrounding residences to further explain the installation of the story poles. The notices were mailed out on May 13, 2008; however, the installation of the story poles was delayed until May 19, 2008. The poles were removed on August 5. • October 14, 2008 DRC meeting: The applicant submitted a revised proposal that replaces the upward sloping shed roof design for the Multi-Purpose building with a lower profile parapet design. This redesign was recommended by staff to ensure that the Multi-Purpose building will fully comply with the applicable height requirements, and to further reduce the overall building mass. The Design Review Committee approved the redesign as submitted by the applicant. On October 22, 2008, the Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit (CUP) DRC2006-00926 to complete the existing Lifeway Church facility by adding the new 15,000 square NEIGHBORING PROPF_RTY OWNER'S CONCERNS RP.GARDING,n-fE LIFEWAY CHURCI f PROJECT AT AT PAGE 5 7477 VINEYARD AVENUE NOVEMBER 19,2008 foot Classroom Wing and the 10,074 square foot Multi-Purpose Hall, as shown on the attached site plan. The proposed Classroom Wing will be built first, and will provide the younger, elementary children with meeting rooms and nursery rooms on the lower level along with staff offices and other building support spaces. The upper level will provide meeting rooms for the older children along with a children's worship space. Access to the Classroom Wing will be from the existing upper parking lot level and from the mid-plaza level. The upper parking lot access will also provide disabled access via an elevator to the lower level, which will be at grade with the mid-plaza. Upon completion of the Classroom Wing, the existing portable classrooms will be removed from the site. No portion of the facility will be used for a private school under Conditional Use Permit DRC2006- 00926, The Multi-Purpose Hall will be the next structure built, and will provide a multi-purpose room, storage room, serving kitchen, and restrooms. The multi-purpose room (approximately 6,181 sq. ft.) will be used for dining, social activities, gymnasium, church meetings, and instructional purposes throughout the week. This primarily single-story structure will also have a small second-story area for general offices. Access to the multi-purpose hall will be from the lower main plaza, which is directly across from the existing Sanctuary. Disabled access will be provided via the elevator in the Sanctuary. The architecture of the proposed buildings is consistent with the existing sanctuary and office building. Key features include the use of stacked-stone veneer, plaster reveals, textured stucco, and solar bronze colored window glazing. The maximum height for both buildings will be 30'-0" as measured from the lowest adjacent finished grade surface next to each building. Religious services take place on Wednesday evenings from 6:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. and on Sunday mornings into the afternoon from 8:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. The use of the proposed Classroom Wing and the Multi-Purpose Hall, as described above, will be in conjunction with the general services of the Lifeway Church. The project complies with the Development Code requirements for setbacks, building height, the provision of required on-site parking, and an efficient on-site circulation system. The site is located on and served by a fully developed public street of the appropriate size and configuration to accommodate the proposed use. The Planning Commission received only one letter in opposition at its meeting of October 22, 2008, which was submitted by Mr. Rich. Response Staff has spent a considerable amount of time researching the project files and reviewing the appropriate construction plans to adequately address some of the concerns that Mr. Rich expressed about the existing facility. Building and Planning Staff confirmed that the existing development is in accordance with the approved plans, and has made every effort to respond to all of his concerns and questions in a timely manner. Throughout the design review and CUP process the Building, Planning, and City Manager Staff have met with Mr. Rich on numerous occasions to explain the project and to further discuss his concerns. We have also worked diligently with Lifeway Church to make plan revisions that would further enhance the project and mitigate the ongoing issues raised by Mr. Rich. As a result of this process, the plans that were recently approved under Conditional Use Permit DRC2006-00926 incorporate the following design changes, which in staff's opinion; mitigate the impact of the proposed development on Mr. Rich's property: NEIG14BORINC PROPERTY OWNER'S CONCERNS REGARDING TML LIFEWAY CI IURCI I PROJECT AT AT PAGI'.6 7477 VINEYARD AVENUE NOVEMBER 19,2008 • The original Gymnasium and Fellowship Hall buildings were consolidated into a single structure to reduce both the building square footage and building mass. • The pad elevation for the proposed Multi-Purpose Hall was dropped by approximately 14'- 0", and substantial landscaping was added for slope stability. • The revised proposal provides for a much greater detail of the landscape and wall treatment along the southerly property line abutting Mr. Rich's property. The sloping terrain between the wall and the property line will be replanted with substantial new trees (a 24-inch box minimum with at least 50% or more of the new trees to be planted being a minimum size of 36-inch box), shrubs, and groundcover material. Additionally, the existing wall would receive a stucco finish of color and texture that would match the existing church building. • The upward sloping shed roof design for the Multi-Purpose building was replaced with a lower profile parapet to ensure building height compliance and a further reduction in the overall building mass. Staff believes that the project changes address the issues that have been raised through the review process, which include the noted lighting, removal of the dead tree, and wall maintenance issues raised by Mr. Rich. Our efforts will continue to ensure that the proposed development will be in accordance with the approved plans that provide for an appropriate site improvement. In addition, Planning, Building, and Engineering will make sure that construction proceeds in accordance with all conditions of approval and be available to address any concerns that arise during construction to ensure minimum disruption to neighboring property owners. Attachments pc: Mandi Aluzri, Deputy City Manager, Community Development fP� 7/� �r Zw Time Extension riAiIA D RC2013-00093 Lifeway Church 3 i -1� Previous Approval • Conditional Use Permit — Review of Master Plan for classroom addition and multi-purpose hall i I Site Planr ----------- rr �fll"1 i �l v • erre:: ar.:: .,..,. ..... .�•^ _ 7711/ri LI ' w w ��� �-�c-c� ■ gar N w uaie_ A! i 1= � r . r b h t {{ 1 i M 6 a 1 O 1 ` 1 8 U " n t - 14 ILI J.•l�uJ Df - Ol l 2r ` lu ft -- . L� Landscape v r4'�vr 1 �•' r Iy`4ky�.. y "r Landscape RAN i lip 1� �. rx• � r yli F'IA SJR P+� w A) � Landscape Plan -------------------------- ,, SII iljll � l II II , I II wain , �,,,,,8��►��►' ����i��!i�t�;; ;�Z���Z�: I I I I � I I � i I I ' I I I I I I - \s s ., ►�� 'r�'�'�.-� �.OS><(37 <CO3>ye`�����'� _ e P F e s eP3 e+ "i�c435gee e9fie2z's� s � a6 Asa Y •s•.. aha uv. _ _ 1, LII I ' III � I I +� t Y.: Eels J X I c f� • • ' I x, qQ � � �' I I a "�... i4 VAN • 1W� i r Modular Trailers • Two trailers have F already been -- removed . • All trailers will be ' removed by October 2013 Recommendation won 101M • Approve Time Extension with conditions . gin, P STAFF REPORT PLANNINGD PARLMWr Date: July 24, 2013 RANCHO To: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission CUCAMONGA From: Candyce Burnett, Planning Manager By: Steve Fowler, Assistant Planner Subject: TIME EXTENSION DRC2013-00507 - JACK HALL - A request to extend the duration of an existing entitlement approval by an additional two (2) years for DRC2006-00892, a proposal to develop 10 single-family homes on 2.975 acres within the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located at 6710 Beryl Street, which is located at the southwest corner of Beryl Street and 19th Street -APN: 0202461-62, 63 and 65. Related files: Time extensions DRC2013-00509 and DRC2013-00510. The Planning Commission determined that the project was categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 In-Fill Development Projects. 'Per Section 15162, no further environmental review is required as there are no changes to the project. TIME EXTENSION ORC2013-00509 -.JACK HALL - A request to extend the duration of an • existing Minor Exception entitlement approval by an additional two (2) years for DRC2008-00157, a proposal to increase the permitted wall height from 6 feet to 8 feet in order to construct property line walls related to the subdivision of 11 lots on 2.975 acres of land within the Low Residential District (2-4 dwellings per acre), located at 6710 Beryl Street, which is at the southwest comer of Beryl Street and 19th Street - APN: 0202461-62, 63 and 65. The Planning Commission determined that the project was categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 In-Fill Development Projects. Per Section 15162, no further environmental review is required as there are no changes to the project. TIME EXTENSION DRC2013-00510 - JACK HALL - A request to extend the duration of an existing Tree Removal entitlement approval by an additional two (2) years for DRC2007-00457, a proposal to remove 13 trees from the property related to the subdivision of 11 lots on 2.975 acres of land within the Low Residential District (24 dwellings per acre), located at 6710 Beryl Street, which is at the southwest comer of Beryl Street and 19th Street -APN: 02021161-62, 63 and 65. The Planning Commission determined that the project was categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 In-Fill Development Projects. Per Section 15162, no further environmental review is required as there are no changes to the project. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the three proposed Time Extensions (DRC2013-00507, DRC2013-00509, and DRC2013-00510) by adoption of the attached Resolutions of Approval with conditions. • ITEMS H,I,J-1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2013-00507, DRC2013-00509, AND DRC2013-00510 —JACK HALL July 24, 2013 Page 2 • ANALYSIS: A. General: On May 16, 2013, the applicant, Mr. Jack Hall, submitted a request to extend the duration of the entitlement approval (hereafter referred to as a "time extension") for Development Review DRC2006-00892, Minor Exception DRC2008-00157, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2007-00457. The applicant does not propose any changes to the project (Exhibit A). The project was originally reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission on June 11, 2008 (Exhibits B and C). Per Resolution of Approval No. 08-30 for Development Review DRC2006-00892 and Resolution of Approval No. 08-29 for the Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17769 that also included approvals for the Tree removal Permit and the Minor Exception, Standard Condition B.2, the approval of the project was set to expire "if Building Permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within five (5) years from the date of approval." Under the City's prior Development Code in affect at the time of the original approval in 2008, with the exception of Tentative Tract maps, a time extension for any Development Review entitlement was not allowed. Thus, the approval of this project was set to expire on June 11, 2013. In September 2012 the City officially adopted an updated Development Code. Included in the update was a new Code section that allows for applicants to request time extensions for all entitlements. Per Section 17.14.090(C), an initial time extension request may be granted that extends the expiration date for two (2) years from the original expiration date. Near the end of that two-year period, a second, and final, time extension request may be granted that extends the expiration date for one (1) additional year beyond the expiration date granted by the first time • extension. All time extension requests are subject to the review and approval by the same authority that approved the original project. If the applicant's request is granted, the approval of the project will expire on June 11, 2015. B. Grading, Technical, and Design Review Committees: On April 15, 2008, all of the review Committees analyzed the original project and recommended approval to the Planning Commission. The Committee's conditions were subsequently incorporated into the Resolutions of Approval (Resolution No. 08-29 and 08-30) for the project. As the applicant does not propose any changes to the project in conjunction with this time extension request, no further action by any of the Committees is necessary. The Committees' original conditions of approval continue to apply and this is noted in the attached Draft Resolutions of Approval. C. Tentative Tract Mao SUBTT17769: The associated Tentative Tract map is not included in this time extension request. Although the approval of the Tentative Tract map was set to expire on June 11, 2011, (three {3) years after the date of the original approval), because of new legislation, a time extension for the Tentative Tract map is not necessary at this time. The State legislature passed two bills, AB333 and A6208, in July 2009 and July 2011, respectively. These bills automatically extended the duration of the approval period for all Tentative maps that were set to expire on or before January 1, 2012, (AB333) and on or before January 1, 2014, (AB208). The duration of the combined time extensions granted by both bills is four (4) years. Therefore, the approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17769 is now set to expire on June 11, 2015. The Minor Exception and Tree Removal Permit approvals have been extracted from the Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17769 (Resolution No. 08-29) and are proposed to be extended by separate resolutions as their expiration dates are different. The approval for Tentative • Tract Map SUBTT17769 is not set to expire until June 11, 2015, but the Minor Exception and Tree Removal Permit approvals were due to expire on June 11, 2013, per Standard Condition B.2, of the ITEMS H,1,J-2 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2013-00507, DRC2013-00509, AND DRC2013-00510—JACK HALL July 24, 2013 • Page 3 original approval where the approval of the project was set to expire "if Building Permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within five (5) years from the date of approval." As a matter of Code consistency and housekeeping, in order to allow all aspects of the project to move forward and be extended, the Minor Exception and Tree Removal Permit are proposed to be extended by separate time extension approvals and resolutions. D. Environmental Assessment: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration on June 11, 2008, in connection with the City's approval of Development Review DRC2006-00892 and Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17769 for the approval of the initial project. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration is required in connection with subsequent or discretionary approvals of the same project unless: (i) substantial changes are proposed to the project that indicate new or more severe impacts on the environment; (ii) substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under which the project was previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts; or (iii) new important information shows the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered; or (iv) additional mitigation measures are now feasible to reduce impacts or different mitigation measures can be imposed to substantially reduce impacts. No changes are proposed to the project; no substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under which the project was previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts; and no new important information shows that the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered. There are no changes to the project or the circumstances surrounding the project • which would create new or more severe impacts than those previously evaluated. Staff further finds that the project will not have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration, not have more severe effects than previously analyzed, and that additional or different mitigation measures are not required to reduce the impacts of the project to a level of less than significant. Therefore, pursuant to CEQA, staff recommends that the Planning Commission concur with the staff determination that no additional environmental review is required in connection with the City's consideration of Time Extensions DRC2013-00507, DRC2013-00509, and DRC2013-00510. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site. No correspondence has been received with respect to the extension requests. Respectfull submitted, Candyce nett Planning Manager CB:SF/ge • ITEMS H,I,J-3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2013-00507, DRC2013-00509, AND DRC2013-00510— JACK HALL July 24, 2013 Page 4 • Attachments: Exhibit A - Time Extension Request Letter (prepared by the Applicant) Exhibit B - Staff Report for Development Review DRC2006-00892, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17769, and Minor Exception DRC2008-00157 Exhibit C - Resolution of Approval No. 08-30 for Development Review DRC2006-00892 Exhibit D - Resolution of Approval No. 08-29 for Tract Map 17769 which includes the approval conditions for Minor Exception DRC2008-00157 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2007-00457 Draft Resolution of Approval for Time Extension DRC2013-00507 Draft Resolution of Approval for Time Extension DRC2013-00509 Draft Resolution of Approval for Time Extension DRC2013-00510 • • ITEMS H,1,J-4 ws*D15647 Village Drive — Victorville, CA 92394 Western States Phone: 760-843-6719 Fax: 760-952-0295 DEVELOPMENT Email: jack(o)westernstatesdevelonment.com &Construction, Inc. May 10, 2013 City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning and Redevelopment ATTN: Steve Fowler Re: 6710 Beryl dr. (19`s &Beryl Homes) DRC2006-00892 Tract: 17769 APN: 0202-461-62, 63, 65 Mr. Fowler, In these past few years the project located at 6710 Beryl Dr. for the construction of 10 residential homes on the vacant lot APN: 0202-461-62, 63, 65 has been suspended due to the • economic downturn. In recent months this has been steadily rising to a point that we can again look to completing this project. However,the planning approval (DRC2006-008892) will expire on June 11, 2013. We have submitted an application for an extension to revive this project and would like to see this processed as soon as feasible. Please keep us informed if there is anything we still may yet need to complete this. Thank you for any and all assistance with this matter. Best regards, Jack Hall President, Western States Development *.XHIBIT A ITEMS H,I,J-5 T H E C 1 T Y O F RANCHO CUCAM O NGA Staff Report DATE: June 11, 2008 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: James R. Troyer, AICP, Planning Director BY: Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT17769 - W ESTERN STATES DEVELOPMENT-A request to subdivide 2.975 acres of land into 11 lots in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwellings per acre), located at the southwest corner of Beryl Street and 19th Street-APN: 0202-461-62,-63, and-65. Related Files: Development Review DRC2006-00892, Minor Exception DRC2008-00157, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2007-00457. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00892 - • WESTERN STATES DEVELOPMENT-A request to develop 10 single-family residences on 2.975 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwellings per acre), located at the southwest corner of Beryl Street and 19th Street-APN: 0202-461-62,-63,and-65. Related Files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17769, Minor Exception DRC2008-00157, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2007-00457. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2008-00157-WESTERN STATES DEVELOPMENT-A request to increase the permitted wall height from 6 feet to 8 feet in order to construct property line walls related to the subdivision of 11 lots located at the southwest corner of Beryl Street and 19th Street -APN: 0202-461-62, -63, and -65. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. P'roiect Densitv: 3.7 dwelling units per acre B. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Church/Apartments; Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) and Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) South - Single-Family Residential; Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) East - Existing Church; Low Residential (24 dwelling units per acre) West - Proposed Synagogue; Low Residential (24 dwelling units per acre) C. General Plan Designations: Project Site - Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) North - Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) and Medium-High (14-24 dwelling units per acre) • South - Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre). East - Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) West - Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) EXHIBIT B ITEMS H,I,J-6 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUBT717769, DRC2006-00892, AND DRC2008-00157 —WESTERN STATES DEVELOPMENT June 11, 2008 • Page 2 D. Site Characteristics: The 2.975-acre site is comprised of three parcels and slopes gently from north to south. The site currently has two residences situated on it. One will be demolished with the development of the site;the other has been designated an historic landmark and will be preserved in place. Existing churches are located across 19th Street and Beryl Street. A synagogue has been approved to be constructed on the vacant parcel to the west of the site. Existing single-family residences are located on all of the parcels to the south of the site. ANALYSIS: A. Proiect Overview: The applicant proposes constructing 10 single-family dwelling units on 2.975 acres of land. The proposed density of the project will be 3.7 dwelling units per acre, which is in the upper range of the Low Residential District(2-4 dwelling units per acre). The project consists of three floor plans ranging in size from 2,098 to 3,051 square feet. The project will have two single-story units and eight two-story units. Plan 1 is a single-story floor plan and will have two different elevations; Plans 2 and 3 are two-story floor plans; Plan 2 will have four different elevations; and Plan 3 will have three different elevations. The existing historic residence on the site will be preserved in place and be located on Lot 11. The project was designed to conform to the development requirements outlined in the Development Code for the Low Development District including lot dimensions, building setbacks, lot coverage, and building heights. B. Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17769: Concurrent with the Development Review application is Tentative Tract Map 17769. The Tract Map proposes 11 lots with the existing historic house located on Lot 11.. The lot sizes range from 7,448 to 11,897 square feet with the average lot size being 9.,570 square feet, which exceeds the 7,200 square foot minimum lot size requirement and the 8,000 square foot average • lot size requirement. C. Minor Exception ORC2008-00157: The project includes an application for a Minor Exception to allow an increase of the permitted wall height from 6 feet to a maximum 8 feet in order to construct property line walls. The additional wall height is required because of the grade differences between the applicant's site and the neighboring lots. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The purpose of a Minor Exception is to provide flexibility from the strict application of the development standards when special circumstances pertaining to the property such as size, shape, topography or location deprives such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and in the same district. In order to grant a request for a Minor Exception,the Planning Commission must make a series of findings. Generally, these findings focus on unique or special circumstances applicable to a specific property. The following are facts to support the necessary findings: 1. Finding: The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulations would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship inconsistent with the objectives of the General Plan and intent of the Development Code. Fact/s: Without the additional wall height the applicant would have to build property line walls that are lower than 6 feet, the City's minimum wall height requirement for new subdivisions as measured on the high side of the walls. 2. Finding: There are exceptional circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same district. Facts: There is grade difference between the subject site and the surrounding lots. • ITEMS H,1,J-7 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUBTT17769, DRC2006-00892, AND DRC2008-00157—WESTERN STATES DEVELOPMENT • June 11, 2008 Page 3 3. Finding: The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulations would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the same district. Fact/s: Without the additional wall height, the applicant would not be able to construct property line walls to the maximum height permitted by the Development Code as measured from on the high side of the wall. 4. Finding: The granting of the Minor Exception will not constitute a grant of a special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety,or welfare,or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. Fact/s: The applicant is only requesting to build 6-foot high walls as measured from the high side of the wall, which is required of all new subdivisions by the City's Standard Conditions of Approval. D. Tree Removal Permit DRC2007-00457: The applicant has submitted a request to remove up to 13 trees in order to accommodate the development of the site. An Arborist Report was prepared on March 2, 2007, which surveyed the site and found a total of 13 trees that qualify as Heritage Trees under the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance. Of these trees, all but three have been recommended for removal because of their poor condition. The report recommends preserving three trees K they can be incorporated into the landscape design for the project. The Development Code requires that new developments plant a minimum of two trees in the front yard of each single-family dwelling unit,which • translates into the applicant being required to plant 20 trees. In addition to these trees, the applicant will be required to plant trees in the public right-of-way. E. Design Review Committee: The project was reviewed by the Design Review Committee (Fletcher, Munoz, and Nicholson)on April 15,2008. The Committee was supportive of the overall design of the project and only asked that the applicant reduce the variation in roof color on selected models and that the wood siding on Model 3A be replaced with a different material. The applicant has complied with both requests. The contrast in the color of the roof tile has been reduced, and the wood siding on Model 3A has been replaced with brick. F. Grading Review Committee: The project was reviewed by the Grading Committee on April 15, 2008, and the project was conceptually approved. G. Technical Review Committee: The Technical Review Committee reviewed the project on April 15, 2008. The Committee recommended approval of the project subject to conditions contained in the attached Resolutions of Approval. H. Neighborhood Meeting: The applicant held a neighborhood meeting on April 24,2008, to discuss the proposed project. Property owners within 660 feet of the project were notified of the meeting and two neighbors attended. An attendee, whose grandmother lives on Beryl Street, just south of Lot 10, requested that the models on Lots 9 and 10 be exchanged in order to minimize the view loss from his grandmother's rear yard. The applicant complied and updated the plans to reflect this change. 1. Environmental Assessment: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA")and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures related to air quality,biological resources,geology and soils, • hydrology and water quality, and noise there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative ITEMS H,I,J-8 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUBTT17769, DRC2006-00892, AND DRC2008-00157—WESTERN STATES DEVELOPMENT • June 11, 2008 Page 4 Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. A Mitigation Monitoring Program has also been prepared to ensure implementation of and compliance with the mitigation measures for the project. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper,the property was posted,and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site. Staff required the applicant to post two large 4-foot by 8-foot Notice of Filing signs on the property, which was also used to post the City's public hearing notice. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17769, and Development Review DRC2006-00892, through the adoption of the attached Resolutions of Approval with Conditions and issuance of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve by minute action, Minor Exception DRC2008-00157. lspecffully submitt� ames R. Troyer, AICP Planning Director JT:TV\ge Attachments: Exhibit A - Site Utilization Map • Exhibit B - Site Plan Exhibit C - Conceptual Grading Plan Exhibit D - Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17769 Exhibit E - Conceptual Landscape Plan Exhibit F - Building Elevations Exhibit G - Floor Plans Exhibit H - Design Review Committee Action Agenda dated April 15, 2008 Exhibit I - Initial Study Parts I and II Draft Resolution of Approval for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17769 Draft Resolution of Approval for Development Review DRC2006-00892 • ITEMS H,I,J-9 . o ---------------- ------- --------- - r 'T-------r-----r -� 3 14 rum 07 s. ,a 2 ——-------------- ------- ------- I 1 „� 1o 5 -�gp9� �T/ �SIIE P4AN SUMM4M.ABLE --r—_i— , —r�--r10_ T—r—r—�_� Z >-`.---C;-- 1„�1 1h _ slmTnn6v J117j, � •.J ' ISS i t !�Y tm» h= �'� g I 1 y_L--J—� Western States Development �"�`09 G=am 1,,141 . � ice.�� � � � 0 _ _-� L= � L__i__� - vne.y�oas i i--------i i---------------� �--------� � �--f- i i i i i o}ter s TF UTILIZATION MAP® Site Utilization A-19 Map X11 li � nN EE .. . 0000100000 - �. • • m R. ROUGH GRADING PLAN TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 17769 � � $rwnoecuuoRLnw muxrr Draw eeRwwRowo,L«nmcrtroruucnococwHwos ANRIpx OEIm Y.daa b,CULMIdGA MLESiEM AY0MILNN$Iq'MpIbV SEWItOED o�.�+...: '.e. "^" Nc00R6.M4E 16pF WV�,NRELEA'E611EYN RRIN[RRI EO,IIT'RffLRLR �F 4 1 cn a;: l N — iTOIgL$LI'IIOX PERYL BIREET I ! / ..ly r • � '0 {`r j �I . - i $^s- ®. ' •• mor a r I RFTRNTION BASIN LEOEND I I _ t t r rna ._...,:.. ____ ___ — vu+ x �wm I I SUB=17769 DRC2006-00892 SCALL:I•.30' x 00 ' TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 17769 P�R>�Y• e !�(O� IN2'HE CTIYOP RANC![O CVCAMONOA.COUNf'Y OP SANLBRNARDLLV0.9iA18 OP O.II.IPOEWEA ' � AffRiGXRiBf1.dBO.fB.[WWOIGE MONESRAUASSCMIYRI AS SIKMIQikV LECOROED NFOULfi.flt£�fi OFNNB.NlImOlN[£6BE'.111DQNV[WtlrAMfT 4mRDlG 3IL _. __..L✓%BII✓ .� I �.._ PROJECTDATA �m ' RU CUSTbAER WNEElb.W4 • 19TH STREET I ' 6 NOFtMEMECItEEI.LL.0 ` � k I Weatam 9inv CeebPnm[ ! I V a I SGA.Fr.9o' Ratlan.e wNrro}<i M[•.ysr M ... I D+Dalmau w. N[.�•....0 BlTm •— ' �682-zbo-eauv a+v:BasslDoeso�m VICINITY MAP Fs Bx)9♦q;6861 1 8 11 reaEcr wDREss: �,^.�_.� i enls DRAWucTnNFRcwwn�Tui'so�icN�iAss ro O 1 _ E! AP.WwON1�8165.ON3�Di82. 4IF• Ra q i : OT02�6l4i m -' -------- EXB M IDNW ' 2 I W I RESICENML n T ncrnosm NUMDQalms-mors 9 � I tMLITY CONTACTS. $ _ i PLAN PREPARED BY. rule Tv. 3 m omm oo °8 8 a B000 moa COAiL"`T w i 10 E EttRK 4 5 �` ��' �•�•�� ��' SQJMQN ULIFORNN EP50N k � IH{E AMFADDEN AYENIIE NOT A PART _ . __-___. LOT AREAS, DEWK-WA= CU ONGAVALL WAMK OLR x.0 IN+..i..+ n.ix tOR10 ADHFORO bTREEi KA OCY RANOIOCULAMpiGAGBfRB i •..Y ... :'�.:.:a'j«...d�'..:.,_+ w..:n� :•.�...•.••� s nnsY1 e.in[ (8091OD)-T591 .v.•....�.. '.•-.: wn......... � I •�W 1[fL11[ ai111 ........ Y.Y•.IdY JYJD.4J TY�/Fi•D' _ nsssa[ arn+ s vn STORMORNN MONGA i C{ i 1169W 7 ECO.IO ! nnA� ansa k�m� E 1[xrmv a n) TFyE GENERAL IELEMON .TE) UN.tlIN 0.111) � M mm— TrrluL OfF.Tox '.� eIPEET ZILI AJ SEMI N istn MM T1TKN.flErnoN RRRn OEM SUBTT17769 DRC2006-00892 ..........--------- Ke C� co c 0 A 0*� 700Cz®r A— sn't H m �j ci 0 J ORC2906-00892 SUB7TI7769 Westem States Dmirtapi .1� 2Z :"ALLveerArtnnoXv— Front Yard Planting Typ. JLcm� 1-1L—''ILYJ! �� � � .�n• 7r F j_ d ie,tC33CC!I 'CCii -�-t •�lfir fig�II�-i .I�fGF: i�� � >a n� �„�ltw; � {�., _y ',� h • r x -0 a. "m 7 t"' ! t" Ells R �171"E7 �� �tlliIM m"ME 1 �:. {y �csr.-E sln vT �uik`� lY �'�yj� e°ee°a • I � d r ,s `A 7 ,le /itt 9(14.3:,5�OM1$A a ...... . rip -IMA .............i;- QR— -.11 p loo WING4— WING -! a VOUIq CIP4 r- cm Kris 41 a wai I k A;q .1'.h,fe.I'vo,•Pill...."'S- "S,.......... A N 0 1?E5 E-V -,I N C. Ar, w,,In,".PI"...Im.v.Vngbl ,hjkl ANDRESE I-. lec lilt it INC.- 4)(19 55-66SS ..........ib,,. . ........... 7 7 R ga 7- rU as t".400 rLl M.51 F-7'M�l ,�j�c,g To _ _JA CIA L i to its; It loon . !,� F• � ❑ y 'nP ri*i .T3•.Fit ^( Ta s+-+ { • + f .`I'ki liilrr!'•lun••t'l,lrr�-,iyrl •frr,�inrv•llirf + '_� fINDRL�CI `Air ttc'ctU�i' -;'� ` ``` �___ __"_— 11 _ __ T•:'T.°— :�: .air I I a'• �.` ::::is 7S' I r w` G.7 '3 ai:7 r'ic W G�1•---- •.�� 3 1 !'a�! Y 7 LTA€i "iJ If j�1� ;fair #yl m-a r. '' • ren ''ti. ' .nv mm . ....^,."dis Geo OR POP b Y'{'.']i.9:L+ �� I ie•J+ l�'dN �^cm_icZ coo- 11 ` ar J `m w� ^ L Alli—mil ^mi t WOMAN •! it .E r'I,Ifev In r.; f'7aminj-I-Iltllr NIi;Y� ti, Lam' �I1VC. {N I t ..l1�+ I�n�I�..Vv llyy l,n4y...11 11i..IlAly I � 11 11 _oLl P. n"' r i•I c,.'ll�� •{� LW 1 7 it fAT C I f�c��_ � 1, _ _ n 1.. (' l . . _ _..� �`��• n Yl 1 t oy.--., �:•s pir(nrr,' w 'Ilimmy I itl,TrOr�' ANDRE. 1.. 'A nl ilccict��.,, 1. INC. o- nby•.153•blr�V ,z I 1' 11 11 11 r..a`• `C 11 r.�. •r r. �.; t ..1 rt. r' >" .. - :. .may �f,jY'A :Z. IM .44 -:::.' .. ...-.. .... w.- r t al i _ ! r ' n IM ........ ....I ........ .. . now am-Ia "m q � zlrl so oral a mn! M3 ......... xl :Mg=mom GO M, rr. ;2n MM m Rij VITO C,' ca I!� II "MI �W� I 0 Q 41ra IOU .Ift.-C-1111i. IL 7_5 a 11111 ,r, Gil'Jil IPI 1 00 r 1: ti w sena 1 a aoaa 40130 . .... ...... .... hil Ti all 79 C'.'.133S .1 V ILA =LW asrS RM m M61' Ol ow!m �,� 3, 71 &V r ANr)RE INC., mamomrrdw ®e r" =' \♦ �••�.�: .—s.c:—.�.,. :. : 1 it. Z...--.unr.,`. �iir Man I �,��■�Ik i`)` ��i ':c ��.SOIt� ' •YsCi '"� n ___ —__ __ i 4TT.V" I .'•t^1'i•..�..fr*a .rte... its Ell Elk] (e I•aul�:� . � } I( 1 11.w1 I;all 7tit �"'7.- 6,.?3G`?s�>:�'�!!, Olin EMRAV 11 - wmowa �'"..•�-r�.,, [33111 � � R '• � X ie3�I+ � 1•rLlAvni� I`Lw.uy I i I r �--- ZINC. 13 9u�r•,t.15•Ilo,9,ti , m _ _ ® ® ® ® ® -- W „ C ii p 00 m sraKavw 40 406 � O O tem�¢av �J i low- 4D m5w R� IM. � IBi 00 00 m ® Now ® X49 i w i NFYI A i Floor Plan"B" Flom Plan"A" - ..DAC200640891 e w... .r..r Model 1 ,Y F1oorPlans A-4 ®vegwrw.rrr�w�rww.rrnwn.�r1.rr.r.w�+r4..w.wr.~.�r�.ti.wr�+.�wrtrwrwrw rp+rrr�nrtr wa it 4° ' _� • E k4i g 01 11 H 4 ;5a 444 tttttttt I tt4ttttt11 99�! Fy 1 41..`:x: .� •:1 ' 1 i o , 1 y i 1 1 e+s 1 t __________ ( j tt t i i }I E x[R 1 i 01 i ___s + � 1 i 1 I I ' J i 0 ITEMS H,I,J-25 O lei !!€� iti � ti � � e9 � i9999S999 � �� Qy � �! xw etl ��§e � kYlYYkt YkSk ktYSYSYSYY9! � � c skPs;�.F:Sj1'. I 1 s } ' 1 I � ' t I RR { O 9t „ Y i e — ! 1 ` } I = , P u�5 I i i ---------- ---------- ---------- _________R_5(__ I , i j l I i ft • 1 ITEMS H,I,J-26 p i ® - - ; � nNNNxcraou� I u �m O 0 ®.H (n .`lye; i 1 I ,..h •. kk .a. Y O �....s I --------------- 1 1 1 I Sean d Floor Plan SXIBM77W FtrstFloorPlan ye...� Mode!2 OINry LN .i 0Y9l. Elevation "C" 14-11 Floor Plans ON N s 10 €M ' i � ie � i9 � e9e i499 � 99996 �, 4 '�! Via, � f� g Y Y 4 Y Y Y Y Y Y i Y Y Y Y 4 Y Y Y Y Y Yf� Ct O g 6bi OOOD6 ivmd®®®®0 s 1 FdJ i L 1 { • Ps 1 ++ x --------- -' fj Y i 7 1 II F ---------------- r' i I � o j } I V= I j I I � 1 � 1 I I � I I I I 1 • I` I l I } r ° w 1 + e ITEMS H,I,J-28 40 cw ® am-- Am 909-355.6bSS fes"- I I O lWGS.. � 4 kid GY...� 9 4 m 00 - ss K I p 2 r do ; QD cc `vla±in�r.`,`":�„�...�.�,�..., � SLP ' j b �► i, ®•> •� ^� 5"um"A"Roo/ CEO IL i i ®.r. .. ..... DA0006-0OA93 Second Floor Plan Fbat Floor Plan SIfHFf]]]� Mode[3 ®• •• •,,• mNrrnar Elevation "A" A-16 Floor Plans ; war- ION"- D .40 maxrar 1 1 1 O O ; `--- - - ----- G -------- -- o o HOW 3 m o o q � � q 1 ; i� 1 1 ._________� r ; 1 1 ®.. .. �,. Second Flom Plan FftµFbor Plan SlmTn7769 Model 3 ® Elevation "Bxx A-17 Floor Plans ®mu.wu..rrl���rr//rrrwa�w.rr r/...r�.�++41.�+.gr.�ar...ti.lr.p�wwlwarrwq wwrl.+`r r..rt r.Wr —.io�— low- I , � I 0 0 ' o 0 -- ------- gage=s ea►r�c.. �r A a a r AM .4m WNW 41 p A a m 00cn N A � p A x i cw _ A A A ®•xD •D �— � Eleoation"C"Roof 1 � • ; ®x M ,o• I i � ®w • "s j D 1 ®rx w m t ®• DSUBM79992.. .. .D.M 5"nd Flo Plm First Floor Pian Imn177G9 ®r .m nYq xon � Model 3 ® � = Elevation ,len A-18 Floor Plans ®i�rl�."r Tr�r�w MM rr,wyy"x�r�I��rDY�r 4"rr,.lr�"rrr�.��w"D rI""1 W Mrwaw�rwwArYr�Irf w�lr RESOLUTION NO. 08-30 • A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DRC2006-00892, A REQUEST TO DEVELOP 10 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES ON 2.975 ACRES OF LAND IN THE LOW RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (2 TO 4 DWELLINGS PER ACRE), LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF BERYL STREET AND 19TH STREET; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF -APN: 0202-461-62, -63, AND -65. A. Recitals. 1. Western States Development filed an application for the approval of Development Review DRC2006-00892, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Review request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 11th day of June 2008, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution, NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: • 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing June 11, 2008, 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 at the southwest corner of Beryl Street and 19th Street; and south; and b. The 2.975-acre site is comprised of three parcels and slopes gently from north to C. The site currently has two residences situated on it. One will be demolished with the development of the site, and the other has been designated as a historic landmark and will be preserved in place. Existing churches are located across 19th Street and Beryl Street. A synagogue has been approved to be constructed on the vacant parcel to the west of the site. Existing single-family residences are located on all of the parcels to the south of the site; and d. The application proposes subdividing the site into 11 lots ranging in size from 7,448 to 14,859 square feet, and e. The existing historic residence on the site will be preserved in place and be located on Lot 11; and *EXHIBIT C ITEMS H,I,J-32 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 08-30 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00892—WESTERN STATES DEVELOPMENT June 11, 2008 • Page 2 f. The project consists of three floor plans ranging in size from 2,098 to 3,051 square feet. The project will have two single-story units and eight two-story units. Plan 1 is a single-story floor plan and will have two different elevations. Plans 2 and 3 are two-story floor plans. Plan 2 will have four different elevations and Plan 3 will have three different elevations; and g. The project was designed to conform with all the development requirements outlined in the Development Code for the Low Residential District; and h. Access to the lots will be from a new cul-de-sac off of 19th Street and from Beryl Street. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and any applicable specific plans; and b. The proposed design or improvements are consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and any applicable specific plans; and C. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; and d. The design of the project is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and • avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; and e. The project is not likely to cause serious public health problems; and 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reportsincluded for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all .comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds: (i) that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning • ITEMS H,1,J-33 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 08-30 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00892—WESTERN STATES DEVELOPMENT • June 11, 2008 3 Page 3 Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. C. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the Planning Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Department 1) Approval is for the design and site layout for an 11 lot subdivision located • at the southwest corner of Beryl Street and 19th Street. 2) All pertinent conditions of approval for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17769 shall apply. 3) The installation of all stone veneers requires 1/2-inch mortared joints. 4) Provide a detailed indoor noise analysis by a registered engineer submitted to determine the required building upgrades necessary, if any, to meet the City's indoor noise level requirements. 5) Approval of this application is contingent upon approval by the Planning Commission approving Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17769. Engineering Department 1) HOA to maintain Clarifiers and Private Drainage Easements. 2) Install private landscaping and irrigation systems in the parkways of Lots 1 and 8 adjacent to 19th Street prior to Building Occupancy Release. 3) Private drainage easements from cross-lot drainage shall be provided and shall be delineated or noted on the final map. • ITEMS H,1,J-34 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 08-30 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00892 —WESTERN STATES DEVELOPMENT June 11, 2008 • Page 4 4) Any catch basin in a sump condition shall be designed as 2 separate independent catch basins and provide for (2) Q100 intercepts for each to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 5) Abandon existing 20-foot wide easement along the westerly lines of Lots 1 through 4. 6) An in-lieu fee as contribution to the future undergrounding of the existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical, except for the 66 kV electrical) on the opposite side of 19th Street, shall be paid to the City prior to the issuance of building permits. The fee shall be one-half the City adopted unit amount times the length from the center of Beryl Street to the westerly project boundary on Beryl Street. Building and Safety Department 1) An HCOC exists for the downstream receiving water. The downstream, receiving water (Mill Creek, Prado Area) is experiencing significant degradation of its banks. The project must implement a volume-based treatment control Best Management Practice (retention/detention facility) on each log. 2) The site shall be rough graded to eliminate cross-lot drainage with the exception of Lot 3 (except in approved facilities adjacent to private trails or • public storm drain systems). All slopes and retaining walls necessary to accomplish this shall be installed prior to final map approval. 3) Storm water emergency overflows from the westerly project could be erosive. Provide hard lined gutters and swales where concentrated flows exceed 3fps. Storm water emergency overflows from the west shall be designed to the 100-year storm event. 4) The surface overflow drainage easement on Lots 4, 5, 6, and 10 shall be graded to convey overflows in the event of blockage in the storm drain system from the proposed project adjacent to the west project limits, and provisions shall be made for overflows to pass through any walls placed across the easement. This overflow system shall be designed for the 100-year storm event. The property shall be protected from erosive and flooding conditions. 5) A demolition plan shall be prepared and submitted either as a separate permit or as part of the rough grading plan. 6) All private storm drain facilities shall be engineered as part of the rough grading plan permit. 7) The cross lot drainage easement on Lot 4 shall be engineered per City of Rancho Cucamonga requirements. • ITEMS H,I,J-35 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 08-30 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00892 —WESTERN STATES DEVELOPMENT • June 11, 2008 5 Page 5 8) The water basins on each lot shall be engineered to prevent vector control issues. 9) The Water Quality Management Plan shall be approved, notarized, and recorded prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 10) All private storm drainage facilities shall be maintained by an entity such as a Homeowner's Association. Environmental Mitigation Air Quality 1) All construction equipment shall be maintained in good operating condition so as to reduce operational emissions. The contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained as per manufacturers' specifications. Maintenance records shall be available at the construction site for City verification. 2) Prior to the issuance of any Grading Permits, the developer shall submit construction plans to City denoting the proposed schedule and projected equipment use. Construction contractors shall provide evidence that low-emission mobile construction equipment will be utilized, or that their • use was investigated and found to be infeasible for the project. Contractors shall also conform to any construction measures imposed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) as well as City Planning Staff, 3) All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1113. Paints and coatings shall be applied either by hand or high-volume, low-pressure spray. 4) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. 5) All construction equipment shall comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403. Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions: • Reestablish ground cover on the construction site through seeding and watering. • Pave or apply gravel to any on-site haul roads. • Phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large areas to erosion over extended periods of time. • Schedule activities to minimize the amounts of exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. • Dispose of surplus excavated material in accordance with local ordinances and use sound engineering practices. • ITEMS H,I,J-36 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 08-30 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00892—WESTERN STATES DEVELOPMENT June 11, 2008 • Page 6 • Sweep streets according to a schedule established by the City if silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. • Suspend grading operations during high winds (i.e., wind speeds exceeding 25 mph) in accordance with Rule 403 requirements. • Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils haul trucks or cover payloads using tarps or other suitable means. 6) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and Regional Water Quality Control Board [RWQCB]) daily to reduce Fine Particulate Matter (PM,o) emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. 7) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM,o emissions. 8) The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel-powered equipment where feasible. 9) The construction contractor shall ensure that construction-grading plans • include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. 10) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate high-efficiency/low-polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water heaters. 11) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. Biological Resources 1) The three Deodar Cedars shall be protected in place if they do not conflict with the proposed development and can be incorporated into the landscape plan. 2) All heritage trees removed shall be replaced on a one-for-one basis with the largest nursery grown stock available. Species, size, and location shall be shown on the construction landscape plans prior to issuance of building permits. Cultural Resources 1) If any prehistoric archaeological resources are encountered before or during grading, the. developer will retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or • ITEMS H,I,J-37 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 08-30 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00892—WESTERN STATES DEVELOPMENT • June 11, 2008 7 Page 7 preserve them for study. With the assistance of the archaeologist, the City of Rancho Cucamonga will: • Enact interim measures to protect undesignated sites from demolition or significant modification without an opportunity for the City to establish its archaeological value. • Consider establishing provisions to require incorporation of archaeological sites within new developments, using their special qualities as a theme or focal point. • Pursue educating the public about the archaeological heritage of the area. • Propose mitigation measures and recommend conditions of approval to eliminate adverse project effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric resources, following appropriate CEQA guidelines. • Prepare a technical resources management report, documenting the inventory, evaluation, and proposed mitigation of resources within the project area. Submit one copy of the completed report with original illustrations, to the San. Bernardino County Archaeological Information Center for permanent archiving. • 2) If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal fossils) are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified paleontologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. The paleontologist shall submit a report of findings that will also provide specific recommendations regarding further mitigation measures (i.e., paleontological monitoring) that may be appropriate. Where mitigation monitoring is appropriate, the program must include, but not be limited to, the following measures: • Assign a paleontological monitor, trained and equipped to allow the rapid removal of fossils with minimal construction delay, to the site full-time during the interval of earth-disturbing activities. • Should fossils be found within an area being cleared or graded, divert earth-disturbing activities elsewhere until the monitor has completed salvage. If construction personnel make the discovery, the grading contractor should immediately divert construction and notify the monitor of the find. • Prepare, identify, and curate all recovered fossils for documentation in the summary report and transfer to an appropriate depository (i.e., San Bernardino County Museum). • Submit summary report to City of Rancho Cucamonga. Transfer collected specimens with a copy of the report to San Bernardino County Museum. • ITEMS H,I,J-38 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 08-30 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00892 —WESTERN STATES DEVELOPMENT June 11, 2008 • Page 8 Geology and Soils 1) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) daily to reduce PM10 emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 or re-planted with drought resistant landscaping as soon as possible. 2) Frontage public streets shall be swept according to a schedule established by the City to reduce PM10 emissions associated with vehicle tracking of soil off-site. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. 3) Grading operations shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed 25 mph to minimize PM10 emissions from the site during such episodes. 4) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM10 emissions. Hydrology and Water 1) Prior to issuance of Grading Permits, the permit applicant shall submit to Building Official for approval, Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan • (SWPPP) specifically identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that shall be used on-site to reduce pollutants during construction activities entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 2) An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, included in grading plan, and implemented for the proposed project that identifies specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion from the time ground disturbing activities are initiated through completion of grading. This Erosion Control Plan shall include the following measures at a minimum: a) Specify the timing of grading and construction to minimize soil exposure to rainy periods experienced in southern California, and b) An inspection and maintenance program shall be included to ensure that any erosion which does occur either on-site or off-site as a result of this project will be corrected through a remediation or restoration program within a specified time frame. 3) During construction, temporary berms such as sandbags or gravel dikes must be used to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site when there is rainfall or other runoff. 4) During construction, to remove pollutants, street cleaning will be performed prior to storm events and after the use of water trucks to control dust in order to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site. • ITEMS H,1,J-39 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 08-30 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00892—WESTERN STATES DEVELOPMENT • June11. 2008 9 Page 9 Post- Construction Operational: 5) Maximize canopy interception by planting trees and shrubs to maximize water retention and infiltration on the site. 6) Drain rooftops into adjacent landscape planters to minimize storm runoff from entering storm drains. 7) Drain impervious surfaces such as sidewalks, walkways, trails and patios into adjacent landscaping to minimize storm runoff from entering storm drains. 8) Construct on-site storm runoff retention facilities to increase storm water infiltration. 9) Provide an efficient irrigation system that includes the following: a. Flow reducer or shutoff valves triggered by a pressure drop will be utilized to control water loss in the event of broken sprinkler heads or lines. b. Timers will be implemented to minimize runoff of excess irrigation water. • C. Plants with similar water requirement will be grouped together to minimize excess irrigation water runoff. 10) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality Management Plan prepared by NM Civil Engineering Inc., dated March 12, 2008, to reduce pollutants after construction entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 11) Landscaping plans shall include provisions for controlling and minimizing the use of fertilizers/pesticides/herbicides. Landscaped areas shall be monitored and maintained for at least two years to ensure adequate coverage and stable growth. Plans for these areas, including monitoring provisions for a minimum of two years, shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. 12) Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit to the City Engineer for approval of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), including a project description and identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on-site to reduce pollutants into the storm drain system to the maximum extent practicable. 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. • ITEMS H,I,J-40 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 08-30 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00892—WESTERN STATES DEVELOPMENT June 11, 2008 • Page 10 13) Prior to issuance of Grading or Paving Permits, the applicant shall obtain a Notice of Intent (NOI) to comply with obtaining coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Storm Water Permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Evidence that this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Discharger's Identification Number) shall be submitted to the City Building Official for coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit. Noise 1) Exterior: Walls 6 feet high shall be constructed along the north and east property lines of the lots adjacent to 19th Street. 2) Interior: Submit the proposed house designs to an Acoustic Consultant for review and mediation recommendations to bring the houses into compliance with the City's 45dB interior noise standards. 3) Construction or grading shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. 4) Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120-0, as measured at the property line. Developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly noise • level monitoring as specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120. Monitoring at other times may be required by the Building Official. Said consultant shall report their findings to the Building Official within 24 hours; however, if noise levels exceed the above standards, then the consultant shall immediately notify the Building Official. If noise levels exceed the above standards, then construction activities shall be reduced in intensity to a level of compliance with above noise standards or halted. 5) The perimeter block wall shall be constructed as early as possible in first phase. 6) Haul truck deliveries shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. Additionally, if heavy trucks used for hauling would exceed 100 daily trips (counting both to and from the construction site), then the developer shall prepare a noise mitigation plan denoting any construction traffic haul routes. To the extent feasible, the plan shall denote haul routes that do not pass sensitive land uses or residential dwellings. • ITEMS H,1,J-41 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 08-30 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00892 —WESTERN STATES DEVELOPMENT June 11, 2008 • Page 11 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 11TH DAY OF JUNE 2008. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Pam Ste 'a—, Chairman ATTEST: 9. Jam R. Troyer, AICP,.Secret ry I, James R. Troyer, AICP, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 11th day of June 2008, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: MUNOZ, STEWART, WIMBERLY • NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: FLETCHER, HOWDYSHELL • ITEMS H,1,J-42 City of Rancho Cucamonga - MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM Project File No.: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17769 This Mitigation Monitoring Program(MMP)has been prepared for use in implementing the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration forthe 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 necessaryto 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 betaken 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 • ITEMS H,1,J-43 Mitigation Monitoring Proy.am TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT17769—WESTERN STATES DEVELOPMENT Page 2 • 3. Appropriate specialists will be retained if technical expertise beyond the City staffs is needed,as determined by the project planner or responsible City department,to monitor specific mitigation activities and provide appropriate written approvals to the project planner. 4. The project planner or responsible City department will approve, by signature and date, the completion of each action Item that was identified on the MMP Reporting Form. After each measure is verified for compliance, no further action is required for the specific phase of development. 5. All MMP Reporting Forms for an impact issue requiring no further monitoring will be signed off as completed by the project planner or responsible City department at the bottom of the MMP Reporting Form. 6. Unanticipated circumstances may arise requiring the refinement or addition of mitigation measures. The project planner is responsible for approving any such refinements or additions. An MMP Reporting Form will be completed by the project planner or responsible City department and a copy provided to the appropriate design, construction, or operational personnel. 7. The project planner or responsible City department has the authority to stop the work of construction contractors if compliance with any aspects of the MMP is not occurring after written notification has been issued. The project planner or responsible City department also has the authority to hold certificates of occupancies if compliance with a mitigation measure attached hereto is not occurring. The project planner or responsible City department has the authority to hold issuance of a business license until all mitigation measures are implemented. • 8. Any conditions (mitigation) that require monitoring after project completion shall be the responsibility of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning 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. • ITEMS H,I,J-44 MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST (INITIAL STUDY PART III) Project File No.: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17769 Applicant: Western States Development Initial Study Prepared by: Tabe van der Zwaaq Date: April 22, 2008 Mitigation Measures . I Responsible . . . Timing of Method . . . Implementing •q • Date/initials Non-Compliance e^�r—i.,+Rrj..an•. �a�- x�-p.�T"'F p�a'r`=�" �1 T— n€.M' :r' w 'i. �Ait Quali ! k i4as r _ k m <fi2 a nax All construction equipment shall be maintained in good PD 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. m Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, the PD/BO C. Review of plans C 2 y developer shall submit Construction Plans to the City = denoting the proposed schedule and projected equipment use. Construction contractors shall provide a 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. All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed PD 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 orexceed 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: 1 of 9 Mitigation Measures No.I Responsible of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/initials Non-Compliance • 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 Mthoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling. (, Timing mayvary depending upon thetime of yearof = construction. Suspend grading operations during high winds(Le., 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. 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 [RWQCBj)daily to reduce Particulate Matter (PMI,) 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 PM,emissions. The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean BO C Review of plans A/C 4 alternative fuel-powered equipment where feasible. 2of9 Mitigation Measures No.I Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Z Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/Initials Non-Compliance 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 residential and commercial structures shall be BO CID 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 CID Review of plans C 2/4 required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. Bwlo icallResoorces= , r �? r, a a na .Y .�.:gx•.....i 1c_.:. c. aRv..�w..4 �. .�'ai ftp.- �- :;. i:... L. - x ..ic .. Rr,.e.3�. . ! . ..-.�.. a h. w_ j �L; vv?.'•r a,rf-.x.*x,. The three Deodar Cedars shall be protected in place if PD B Review of Plans C 2 they do not conflict with the proposed development and can be incorporated into the landscape plan. rnAll heritage trees removed shall be replaced on a PD B Review of Plans C 2 N one-for-one basis with the largest nursery grown stock = available. Species,size,and location shall be shown on the construction landscape plans prior to issuance of A building permits. - s rGM i. h rt s a s 4n` z c i4',e CulturallResources E z yf E ,, �(^ggggvu. u > F "�i r, K ..�. . , 1....«_ ev ..•�. u.. .. �'_.�v . . aF.WN.6F .F'tv3•i •-.�A. i. Y3...Y1q"N Yif' ° `� ..601yy 1..J a ". r_ __ n + If any prehistoric archaeological resources are encountered before or during grading,the developerwill 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 PD/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 PD/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. 3 of 9 Mitigation Measures No. Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/Initials Non-Complian • Pursue educating the public about the PD/BO C Review of report A/D 3/4 archaeological heritage of the area. Propose mitigation measures and recommend PD/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, PD 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. MK If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal fossils) are encountered before or during grading, the Cn = developer will retain a qualified paleontologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to a protect or preserve them for study. The paleontologist Oe 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 PD 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. 4 of 9 • Mitigation Measures No. I Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date Prepare, identify,and curate all recovered fossils for PD 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 PD D Review of report D 3 Cucamonga. Transfer collected specimens with a copy to the report to San Bernardino County Museum. i". �. �' e b+ i F x 4• a v� -ft f w , -. f N .n a s er•i Geology aSods e a e Y 5 ,�. �,-_md �..:..nd `k t. <•, eS v. � „,�'�"!.c« „�, The site shall be treated with water or other BO C During A 4 soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and construction RWQCB)daily to reduce PMjo emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 or re-planted with drought resistant landscaping as soon as possible. KFrontage public streets shall be swept according to a BO C During A 4 schedule established by the City to reduce PMjo 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,,emissions. H drolo 'andiWaterQuay z zr �H • 3 ya• :_ 9y - ..-s. Cr Prior to issuance of grading permits,the permit applicant BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 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. 5 of 9 Mitigation Measures No. Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/initials Non-Compliance An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, included in BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 the Grading Plan, and implemented for the proposed project that identifies specific measures to control on- site and off-site erosion from the time ground disturbing activities are initiated through completion of grading. This Erosion Control Plan shall include the following measures at a minimum: a) Specify the timing of grading and construction to minimize soil exposure to rainy periods experienced in Southern California,and b) An inspection and maintenance program shall be included to ensure that any erosion which does occur either on-site or off-site as a result of this project will be corrected through a remediation or restoration program within a specified time frame. During construction, temporary berms such as BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 m sandbags or gravel dikes must be used to prevent N discharge of debris or sediment from the site when there = is rainfall or other runoff. e During construction, to remove pollutants, street BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 ocleaning 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. Maximize canopy interception by planting trees and CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 shrubs to maximize water retention and infiltration on the site. Drain rooftops into adjacent landscape planters to CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 minimize storm runoff from entering storm drains. Drain impervious surfaces such as sidewalks,walkways, CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 trails and patios into adjacent landscaping to minimize storm runoff from entering storm drains. Construct on-site storm runoff retention facilities to CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 increase storm water infiltration. Provide an efficient irrigation system that includes the following: 6 of 9 Mitigation Measures No. Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/initials Non-Complia Flow reducer or shutoff valves triggered by a CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 pressure drop will be utilized to control water loss in the event of broken sprinkler heads or lines. Timers will be implemented to minimize runoff of CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 excess irrigation water. Plants with similarwater requirementwill be grouped CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 together to minimize excess irrigation water runoff. The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 the Water Quality Management Plan prepared by NM Civil Engineering Inc., dated March 12,2008,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 M 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. 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)thatwill 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. 7of9 ImplementingMitigation Measures No. Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Date/initials Non-Compliance Prior to issuance of grading or paving permits, the BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 applicant shall obtain a Notice of Intent(NO[)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°- v5.fz� x_ 1 .3. ir. f,"_ .},.rF"-ru�'_�4f "� `.2*f f •.e s .:`,tw,a�`t'y'c{r"� ',�. �-=`....fa" i_�.�}4 � e..r.+ y�ivt•n 't .���. Exterior: Walls 6 feet high shall be constructed along PD B Review of plans A A the north and east property lines of the lots adjacent to 19th Street. m Interior: Submit the proposed house designs to the PD B Review of plans A A K Acoustic Consultant for review and mediation Cn = recommendations to bring the houses into compliance with the City's 45dB interior noise standards Construction or grading shall nottake place between the BO C During A 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. Developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly noise level monitoring as.specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120. Monitoring at other times may be required by the Building Official. Said consultant shall report their findings to the Building Official within 24 hours; however, if noise levels exceed the above standards, then the consultant shall immediately notify the Building Official. If noise levels exceed the above. standards,then construction activities shall be reduced in intensity to a level of compliance with above noise standards or halted. 8 of 9 Mitigation Measures No. Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date The perimeter block wall shall be constructed as early PD C During A A as possible in the 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. Key to Checklist Abbreviations m Resp`ons�tilelPerson Monttonng F egos cne y jMethodof�VerificaYton � ,' d Sanct�nns y� ,z`�r �'vW NCDD-Community Development Director or designee A-With Each New Development A-On-site Inspection 1 -Withhold Recordation of Final Map = PD-Planning Director 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 Cn BO-Building Official or designee D-On Completion D-Separate Submittal(Reports/Studies/Plans) 4-Stop Work Order w PO-Police Captain or designee E-Operating 5-Retain Depositor Bonds FC-Fire Chief or designee 6-Revoke CUP 7-Citation is\planning\final\cega\m mchklst-rev12-4-06final.doc 9 of 9 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT#: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT17769 AND DRC2006-00892 SUBJECT: SUBDIVISION OF 2.975 ACRES OF LAND INTO 11 LOTS APPLICANT: WESTERN STATES DEVELOPMENT SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 19TH STREET AND BERYL STREET-APN: 0202-461-62, 63, LOCATION: AND 65 ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. General Requirements Completion Date 1. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval,or in the alternative,to relinquish such approval.. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may,at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 2. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval No. 08-29, Standard _/_/_ Conditions, and all environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size). The sheet(s)are for information only to all parties involved in the construction/grading activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect. 3. The applicant shall be required to pay any applicable Fish and Game fees as shown below. The _/_/_ project planner will confirm which fees apply to this project. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary prior to the Planning Commission or Planning Director hearing: a) Mitigated Negative Declaration -$ 1,926.75 B. Time Limits 1. This tentative tract map shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, unless a complete final map is filed with the City Engineer within 3 years from the date of the approval. 2. Development/Design Review approval shall expire if building permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 5 years from the date of approval. No extensions are allowed. • 1 ITEMS H,I,J-54 Project No.SUBTT17769 and DRC2006-00892 Completion Date C. Site Development 1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include _/_/_ • site plans,architectural elevations,exterior materials and colors, landscaping,sign program,and grading on file in the Planning Department, the conditions contained herein, and the Development Code regulations. 2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon,all Conditions of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. 3. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Department to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. 4. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.)or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. 6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code,all _/_/_ other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 7. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall be located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. For • single-family residential developments, transformers shall be placed in underground vaults. 8. Street names shall be submitted for Planning Director review and approval in accordance with the adopted Street Naming Policy prior to approval of the final map. 9. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, including proper illumination. 10. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) and Articles of Incorporation of the Homeowners' Association are subject to the approval of the Planning and Engineering Departments and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Map or prior to the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City Engineer. The Homeowners' Association shall submit to the Planning Department a list of the name and address of their officers on or before January 1 of each and every year and whenever said information changes. 11. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property owner, homeowners'association, or other means acceptable to the City. Proof of this landscape maintenance shall be submitted for Planning Director and City Engineer review and approved prior to the issuance of building permits. 12. The project contains a designated Historical Landmark. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with Historic Landmark Alteration Permit No. DRC2006-00226. Any further modifications to the site including, but not limited to, exterior alterations and/or interior alterations which affect the exterior of the buildings or structures, removal of landmark trees, demolition, relocation, reconstruction of buildings or structures, or changes to the site, shall require a modification to the Historic Landmark Alteration Permit subject to Historic Preservation Commission review and approval. • 2 ITEMS H,I,J-55 Project No. SUBTT17769 and DRC2006-00892 Completion Date 13. The developer shall submit a construction access plan and schedule for the development of all lots for Planning Director and City Engineer approval; including, but not limited to, public notice • requirements, special street posting, phone listing for community concems,hours of construction activity, dust control measures, and security fencing. 14. Six-foot decorative block walls shall be constructed along the project perimeter. If a double wall condition would result, the developer shall make a good faith effort to work with the adjoining property owners to provide a single wall. Developer shall notify, by mail, all contiguous property owner at least 30 days prior to the removal of any existing walls/ fences along the project's perimeter. 15. Construct block walls between homes(i.e.,along interior side and rear property lines),ratherthan _/_/_ wood fencing for permanence, durability, and design consistency. 16. Access gates to the rear yards shall be constructed from a material more durable than wood gates. Acceptable materials include, but are not limited to, wrought iron and PVC. 17. For residential development, return walls and corner side walls shall be decorative masonry. 18. On corner side yards, provide minimum 5-foot setback between walls/fences and sidewalk. The 5-foot wall/fence setback and the parkway shall have landscape and irrigation in addition to the required street trees. Detailed landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. The parkway landscaping including trees, shrubs,ground covers and irrigation shall be maintained by the property owner. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the parkway maintenance requirement, in a standard format as determined by the Planning Director, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. D. Landscaping • 1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping in the case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. 2. Existing trees required to be preserved in place shall be protected with a construction barrier in accordance with the Municipal Code Section 19.08.110, and so noted on the grading plans. The location of those trees to be preserved in place and new locations for transplanted trees shall be shown on the detailed landscape plans. The applicant shall follow all of the arborist's recommendations regarding preservation, transplanting, and trimming methods. 3. All private slopes of 5 feet or more in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than 2:1 slope, shall be,at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 4. All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater slope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as follows: one 15-gallon or larger size tree per each 150 sq.ft. of slope area, 1-gallon or larger size shrub per each 100 sq.ft.of slope area,and appropriate ground cover. In addition,slope banks in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5-gallon or larger size tree per each 250 sq. ft. of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary slope plane. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 5. For single-family residential development, all slope planting and irrigation shall be continuously maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each individual unit is sold and occupied by the buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for those units, an inspection shall be • conducted by the Planning Department to determine that they are in satisfactory condition. 3 ITEMS H,I,J-56 Project No.SUBTT17769 and DRC2006-00892 Completion Date 6. Front yard and corner side yard landscaping and irrigation shall be required per the Development Cade, Section 17.08. This requirement shall be in addition to the required street trees and slope • planting. 7. Landscaping and irrigation systems required to be installed within the public right-of-way on the _/_/_ perimeter of this project area shall be continuously maintained by the developer. 8. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas,the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Department. 9. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of Xeriscape as defined in Chapter 19.16 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. Prior to issuance of Building Permits,the project landscape architect shall certify on the submitted plans that the xeriscape requirements have been met. E. Environmental 1. Mitigation measures are required for the project. The applicant is responsible for the cost of implementing said measures, including monitoring and reporting. Applicant shall be required to post cash, letter of credit, or other forms of guarantee acceptable to the Planning Director in the amount of$538 prior to the issuance of building permits, guaranteeing satisfactory performance and completion of all mitigation measures. These funds may be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measures. Failure to complete all actions required by the approved environmental documents shall be considered grounds for forfeit. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT, (909)477-2710, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: NOTE: ANY REVISIONS MAY VOID THESE REQUIREMENTS AND NECESSITATE ADDITIONAL REVIEW(S) • F. General Requirements 1. Submit five complete sets of plans including the following: a. Site/Plot Plan; b. Foundation Plan; C. Floor Plan; d. Ceiling and Roof Framing Plan; e. Electrical Plans(2 sets,detached)including the size of the main switch, number and size of service entrance conductors, panel schedules, and single line diagrams; f, Plumbing and Sewer Plans, including isometrics, underground diagrams,water and waste diagram, sewer or septic system location, fixture units, gas piping, and heating and air conditioning; and g. Planning Department Project Number (SUBTT17769 and DRC2006-00892) clearly identified on the outside of all plans. 2. Submit two sets of structural calculations, energy conservation calculations, and a soils report. Architect's/Engineer's stamp and "wet" signature are required prior to plan check submittal. 3. Contractors must show proof of State and City licenses and Workers'Compensation coverage to the City prior to permit issuance. 4. Separate permits are required for fencing and/or walls. _/_/_ • 4 ITEMS H,I,J-57 Project No.SUBT1`17769 and DRC2006-00892 Completion Date 5. Developers wishing to participate in the Community Energy Efficiency Program (CEEP) can contact the Building and Safety Department staff for information and submittal requirements. �. Site Development 1. Plans shall be submitted for plan check and approved prior to construction. All plans shall be marked with the project file number(SUBTT17769 and DRC2006-00892). The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted California Codes,and all other applicable codes,ordinances,and regulations in effect at the time of permit application. Contact the Building and Safety Department for availability of the Code Adoption Ordinance and applicable handouts. 2. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new residential project or major addition,the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but are not limited to: City Beautification Fee, Park Fee, Drainage Fee, Transportation Development Fee, Permit and Plan Check Fees, Construction and Demolition Diversion Program deposit and fees and School Fees. Applicant shall provide a copy of the school fees receipt to the Building and Safety Department prior to permit issuance. 3. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building and Safety Official after tract/parcel map recordation and prior to issuance of building permits. 4. Construction activity shall not occur between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. Monday through Saturday, with no construction on Sunday or holidays. H. New Structures 1. Provide compliance with the California Building Code (CBC) for property line clearances considering use, area, and fire-resistiveness. 2. Provide compliance with the California Building Code for required occupancy separations. • 3. Roofing material shall be installed per the manufacturer's"high wind" instructions. I. Grading 1. All City of Rancho Cucamonga standard grading conditions apply. 2. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with California Building Code,City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved grading plan. 3. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to perform such work. Two copies will be provided at plan submittal for review. Plans shall implement design recommendations per said work. 4. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or engineering geologist and submitted at the time of application for grading and drainage plan review. 5. The final grading and drainage plan, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be completed, submitted, and approved by the Building and Safety Official prior to the issuance of building permits. 6. A separate grading and drainage plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The grading and drainage plan shall be prepared, stamped, and wet signed by a California registered Civil Engineer. 7. Comply with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Dust Control Measures. • 5 ITEMS H,1,J-58 Project No.SUBTT17769 and DRC2006-00892 Completion Date 8. Rough grading and drainage plans/permits shall be a separate approval from Precise Grading and Drainage Plans/Permits. 9. A drainage study showing a 100-year, AMC 3 design storm event for on-site drainage shall be _/_/_ • prepared and submitted to the Building Official for review and approval for on-site storm water drainage. All reports shall be wet signed and sealed by the Engineer of Record. 10. Acquire off-site drainage easements. 11. Obtain written permission to construct wall on property line or provide a detail(s)showing the wall offset from the property line. 12. Implement City Standards for on-site construction where possible, provide details for all work not covered by City Standard Drawings. 13. All slopes shall be a minimum 2-foot offset from the public right-of-way. 14. Private sewer, water and storm drain improvements will be designed per the latest adopted California Plumbing Code. 15. Show existing topography 100 feet beyond the project boundary. 16. Provide a grading agreement for cut and fill combined exceeding 5,000 cubic yards. APPLICANT SHALL.CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: J. Dedication and Vehicular Access 1. Rights-of-way and easements shall be dedicated to the City for all interior public streets, community trails, public paseos, public landscape areas,streettrees,traffic signal encroachment • and maintenance, and public drainage facilities as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. Private easements for non-public facilities (cross-lot drainage, local feeder trails, etc.) shall be reserved as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. 2. Dedication shall be made of the following rights-of-way on the perimeter streets(measured from street centerline): 44 total feet on 19th Street. 3. Vehicular access rights shall be dedicated to the City for the following streets, except for approved openings: 19th Street. 4. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quit-claimed or delineated on the final map. K. Street Improvements 1. All public improvements(interior streets,drainage facilities,community trails,paseos,landscaped areas, etc.) shown on the plans and/or tentative map shall be constructed to City Standards. Interior street improvements shall include, but are not limited to, curb and gutter,AC pavement, drive approaches, sidewalks, street lights, and street trees. • 6 ITEMS H,I,J-59 Project No.SUBTT17769 and DRC2006-00892 Completion Date 2. Pursuant to City Council Resolution No.88-557,no person shall make connections from a source of energy, fuel or power to any building service equipment which is regulated by technical codes • and for which a permit is required unless, in addition to any and all other codes, regulations and ordinances, all improvements required by these conditions of development approval have been completed and accepted by the City Council,except:that in developments containing more than one building or unit, the development may have energy connections made to a percentage of those buildings, or units proportionate to the completion of improvements as required by conditions of approval of development. In no case shall more than 95 percent of the buildings or units be connected to energy prior to completion and acceptance of all improvements required by these conditions of approval of development. 3. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: Curb 8 A.C. Side- Drive Street Street Comm Median Bike Street Name Gutter Pvmt walk Appr. Lights Trees Troll Island Trail Other 19th Street X X X X X Beryl Street X X X X X X 4. Improvement Plans and Construction: a. Street improvement plans, including street trees,street lights,and intersection safety lights on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in addition to any • other permits required. C. Pavement striping, marking,traffic signing, street name signing,traffic signal conduit,and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. d. Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all corners of intersections per City Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. e. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving,which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. f. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards, except for single family residential lots. g. Street names shall be approved by the Planning Director prior to submittal for first plan check. • 7 ITEMS H,I,J-60 Project No.SUBTT17769 and DRC2006-00892 Completion Date 5. Install street trees per City street tree design guidelines and standards as follows. The completed legend (box below) and construction notes shall appear on the title page of the street improvement plans. Street improvement plans shall include a line item within the construction • legend stating: "Street trees shall be installed per the notes and legend on sheet_(typically sheet 1)." Where public landscape plans are required, tree installation in those areas shall be per the public landscape improvement plans. The City Engineer reserves the right to adjust tree species based upon field conditions and other variables. For additional information, contact the Project Engineer. Min. Grow Street Name Botanical Name Common Name Space Spacing Size Qty. 19th Street Lagerstroemia indica Crape Myrtle Hybrid-Lavender 3 ft. 20 ft.o.c. 24-inch Fill-in "Muskogee" box Beryl Street P.A. 8 ft.or greater Platanus acerifolia London Plane Tree 8 ft. 30 ft.o.c. 15-gal. Fill-in P.A.5 ft.to 8 ft. Geijera parviflora Australian Willow 5 ft. 20 ft.o.c. 15-gal. Fill-in P.A. 5 ft. or less Eriobotrya deflexa Bronze Loquat Tree' 3 ft. 25 ft.o.c. I 15-gal. I Fill-in Construction Notes for Street Trees: 1) All street trees are to be planted in accordance with City standard plans. 2) Prior to the commencement of any planting,an agronomic soils report shall be furnished to the City inspector. Any unusual toxicities or nutrient deficiencies may require backfill soil amendments, as determined by the City inspector. 3) All street trees are subject to inspection and acceptance by the Engineering Department. 4) Street trees are to be planted per public improvement plans only. L. Public Maintenance Areas 1. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting Districts shall be filed with the City Engineer prior to final map approval or issuance of building • permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. M. Drainage and Flood Control 1. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. 2. A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final map _/_/_ approval or the issuance of building permits,whichever occurs first. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer. N. Improvement Completion 1. If the required public improvements are not completed prior to approval of the final parcel map, an improvement security accompanied by an agreement executed by the Developer and the City will be required for: SUBTT17769 O. Utilities 1. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system,water, gas, electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 2. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. 3. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga Valley Water District(CVWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District,and the • Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from 8 ITEMS H,1,J-61 Project No.SUBTT17769 and DRC2006-00892 completion Date the CVWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits,whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval • in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. 4. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. Approval of the final parcel map will be subject to any requirements that may be received from them. P. General Requirements and Approvals 1. A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the estimated operating costs for all new streetlights for the first six months of operation, prior to final map approval or prior to building permit issuance if no map is involved. 2. Prior to the issuance of building permits,a Diversion Deposit and related administrative fees shall _/_/_ be paid for the Construction and Demolition Diversion Program. The deposit is fully refundable if at least 50% of all wastes generated during construction and demolition are diverted from landfills, and appropriate documentation is provided to the City. Form CD-1 shall be submitted to the Engineering Department when the first building permit application is submitted to Building and Safety. Form CD-2 shall be submitted to the Engineering Department within 60 days following the completion of the construction and/or demolition project. 3. Provide copy of final Water Quality Management Plan with submittal of Grading Plans to the Building and Safety Department. The WQMP and Grading Plans are subject to review by the Building Official, APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE SAFETY DEPARTMENT, FIRE PROTECTION PLANNING SERVICES AT, (909) 477-2770, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: SEE ATTACHED • 9 ITEMS H,I,J-62 Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection re 9 District - Fire Construction Services STANDARD CONDITIONS August 1, 2007 Rubber Tires & Custom Wheels 6710 Beryl Tract 17769 SUBTT17769 & DRC2006-00892 THE FOLLOWING STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLY TO THIS PROJECT. FSC-1 Public and Private Water Supply 1. Design guidelines for Fire Hydrants: The following provides design guidelines for the spacing and location of fire hydrants: a. The maximum distance between fire hydrants in single-family residential projects is 500-feet. No portion of the exterior wall facing the addressed street shall be more than is 250-feet from an approved fire hydrant. For cul-de-sacs, the distance shall not exceed 200-feet. b. Fire hydrants are to be located. The preferred locations for fire hydrants are: 1. At the entrance(s) to a commercial, industrial or residential project from the public roadways. 2. At intersections. 3. On the right side of the street, whenever practical and possible. 4. As required by the Fire Safety Division to meet operational needs of the Fire District. 5. A minimum of forty-feet (40')from any building. FSC-2 Fire Flow 1. The required fire flow for this project is 1750 gallons per minute at a minimum residual pressure of 20-pounds per square inch. This requirement is made in accordance with Fire Code Appendix III-A, as adopted by the Fire District Ordinances. 2. Public fire hydrants located within a 500-foot radius of the proposed project may be used to provide the required fire flow subject to Fire District review and approval. Private fire hydrants on adjacent property shall not be used to provide required fire flow. 3 Firewater plans are required for all projects that must extend the existing water supply to or onto the site. Building permits will not be issued until firewater plans are approved. 4. On all site plans to be submitted for review, show all fire hydrants located within 600-feet of the proposed project site. • - 1 - ITEMS H,I,J-63 FSC-9 Single-family Residential Sales Model homes require approved Fire District vehicle access and water supply from a public or private water main system before construction. • FSC-13 Alternate Method Application Fire Construction Services staff and the Fire Marshal will review all requests for alternate method, when submitted. The request must be submitted on the Fire District "Application for Alternate Method"form along with supporting documents and payment of the $92 review fee. FCS-15 Annexation of the parcel map: Annexation of the parcel map into the Community Facilities District#85-1 or#88-1 is required prior to the issuance of grading or building permits. Chronological Summary of RCFPD Standard Conditions PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS — Please complete the following prior to the issuance of any building permits: 1. Public Water Supply (Domestic/Fire) Systems: The applicant shall submit a plan showing the locations of all new public fire hydrants for the review and approval by the Fire District and CCWD. On the plan, show all existing fire hydrants within a 600-foot radius of the project. Please reference the RCFPD Water Plan Submittal Procedure Standard#9-8 All required public fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed and operable prior to delivering any combustible framing materials to the site. CCWD personnel shall inspect the installation and witness the hydrant flushing. Fire Construction Services shall inspect the • site after acceptance of the public water system by CCWD. Fire Construction Services must grant a clearance before lumber is dropped. 2. Construction Access: The access roads must be paved in accordance with all the requirements of the RCFPD Fire Lane Standard #9-7. All temporary utilities over access roads must be installed at least 14' 6" above the finished surface of the road.. 3. Fire Flow: A current fire flow letter from CCWD must be received. The applicant is responsible for obtaining the fire flow information from CCWD and submitting the letter to Fire Construction Services. PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY OR FINAL INSPECTION — Please complete the following: 1. Hydrant Markers: All fire hydrants shall have a blue reflective pavement marker indicating the fire hydrant location on the street or driveway in accordance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Standard Plan 134, "Installation of Reflective Hydrant Markers". On private property, the markers shall be installed at the centerline of the fire access road, at each hydrant location. 2. Public Roadways: Prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, the fire access roadways must be installed in accordance with the approved plans and acceptable to Fire Construction Services. 3. Address: Prior to the granting of occupancy, single-family dwellings shall post the address with minimum 4-inch numbers on a contrasting background. The numbers shall be internally or externally illuminated during periods of darkness. The numbers shall be visible • 2 ITEMS H,1,J-64 from the street. When building setback from the public roadway exceeds 100-feet, additional 4-inch numbers shall be displayed at the property entry. • • • 3 ITEMS H,I,J-65 • I RESOLUTION NO. 08-29 • A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,CALIFORNIA,APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUSTT17769, A REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE 2.975 ACRES OF LAND INTO 11 LOTS IN THE LOW RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (2-4 DWELLINGS PER ACRE), LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF BERYL STREET AND 19TH STREET; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF—APN: 0202-461-62, -63, AND -65. A. Recitals. 1. Western States Development filed an application for the approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17769, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution,the subject Tentative Tract Map request is referred to as "the applicdtion." 2. On the 11th day of June 2008, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW,THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced • public hearing on June 11, 2008, 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 at the southwest corner of Beryl Street and 19th Street; and b. The 2.975-acre site is comprised of three parcels and slopes gently from north to south;and C. The site currently has two residences situated on it. One will be demolished with the development of the site, and the other has been designated an historic landmark and will be preserved in place. Existing churches are located across 19th Street and Beryl Street. A synagogue has been approved to be constructed on the vacant parcel to the west of the site. Existing single-family residences are located on all of the parcels to the south of the site; and d. The application proposes subdividing the site into 11 lots consisting of the following square footages; and Lot 1 10,042 square feet Lot 7 7,448 square feet Lot 2 8,475 square feet Lot 8 11,897 square feet Lot 3 9,916 square feet Lot 9 7,628 square feet Lot 4 14 659 square feet Lot 10 8,359 square feet Lot 5 8,293 square feet Lot 11 14,494 square feet Lot 6 8,579 square feet Avera2e Lot Size 10 017 square feet e. The average lot size is 10,017 square feet which exceeds the 8,000 square foot average required in the Very Low Residential District; and EXHIBIT D ITEMS H,I,J-66 PLANNING COMMISSION f OLUTION NO. 08-29 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SLidTT17769-WESTERN STATES DEVELOPMENT June 11, 2008 Page 2 • f. Access to the lots will be from a new cul-de-sac off of 19th Street and from Beryl Street. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above,this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and any applicable specific plans; and b. The design or improvements of the Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and any applicable specific plans; and C. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; and d. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife.or their habitat; and e. The Tentative Tract Map is not likely to cause serious public health problems; and f. The design of the Tentative Tract Map will not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. 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 adapts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, • and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines,the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter,the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds: (i)that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii)that,based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. C. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program, and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the • ITEMS H,I,J-67 PLANNING COMMISSION ' :OLUTION NO. 08-29 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT17769—WESTERN STATES DEVELOPMENT June 11, 2008 • Page 3 Planning Commission's decision is based is the Planning Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. and have Planning Department 1) Minor Exception DRC2008-00157 is hereby approved for perimeter walls with a maximum height of 8 feet. 2) Tree Removal Permit DRC2006-00457 is hereby approved for the removal of 13 trees of various species. 3) Because of Borer beetle infestation, all Eucalyptus tree wood shall be chipped, removed, and buried at a dump site or tarped to the ground for a minimum of 6 months, sealing the tarp edges with soil, to prevent emerging Borer beetles from reinfesting other trees or wood. The movement of Eucalyptus wood containing live Borer beetles, or their larvae in trucks or trailers is prohibited by State law pursuant to Public Resources Code 4714.5. 4) Return walls and corner sidewalls are to be decorative masonry and compatible with the architectural style. "Decorative" means stucco finish, split-face, or • slumpstone block. 5) The developer shall provide each prospective buyer of corner lots written notice of maintaining the landscaped parkway. The written notice shall be signed by the prospective buyer prior to acceptance of cash deposit on the property. 6) Provide a 5-foot minimum landscape area between the back of the sidewalk and 6-foot block wall on all corner side lots. 7) All interior side and rear walls shall be of block material. 8) The cul-de-sac street name is not approved by this application and shall require separate submittal for review and approval pursuant to the Street Naming Ordinance (Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Chapter 12.12), 9) All Special and Standard Conditions included with the approval of Conditional Use Permit DRC2004-01173 and Landmark Alteration Permit DRC2006-000226 (Resolutions of Approval 06-01 and 06-44)shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director prior to approval of Rough Grading Permits for Tentative Tract SUBTT17769 Engineering Department 1) HOA to maintain Clarifiers and Private Drainage Easements 2) Install private landscaping and irrigation systems in the parkways of Lots 1 and 8 adjacent to 19th Street prior to Building Occupancy Release. • ITEMS H,1,J-68 PLANNING COMMISSION F OLUTION NO. 08-29 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUeTT17769—WESTERN STATES DEVELOPMENT June 11, 2008 Page 4 • 3) Private drainage easements from cross-lot drainage shall be provided and shall be delineated or noted on the final map. 4) Any catch basin in a sump condition shall be designed as 2-separate independent catch basins and provide for (2) Q100 intercepts for each to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 5) Abandon the existing 20-foot wide easement along the westerly lines of Lots 1 through 4. 6j An in-lieu fee as contribution to the future undergrounding of the existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical, except for the 66 kV electrical)on the opposite side of 19th Street shall be paid to the City prior to the issuance of building permits. The fee shall be one-half the City adopted unit amount times the length from the center of Beryl Street to the westerly project boundary on Beryl Street. Building and Safety Department 1) An HCOC exists for the downstream receiving water. The downstream, receiving water(Mill Creek,Prado Area)is experiencing significant degradation of its banks. The project must implement a volume-based treatment control Best Management Practice (retention/detention facility) on each log. 2) The site shall be rough graded to eliminate cross-lot drainage with the exception • of Lot 3 (except in approved facilities adjacent to private trails or public storm drain systems). All slopes and retaining walls necessary to accomplish this shall be installed prior to final map approval. 3) Storm water emergency overflows from the westerly project could be erosive. Provide hard lined gutters and swales where concentrated flows exceed 3fps. Storm water emergency overflows from the west shall be designed to the 100- year storm event. 4) The surface overflow drainage easement on Lots 4, 5, 6, and 10 shall be graded to convey overflows in the event of blockage in the storm drain system from the proposed project adjacent to the west project limits, and provisions shall be made for overflows to pass through any walls placed across the easement. This overflow system shall be designed for the 100-year storm event. The property shall be protected from erosive and flooding conditions. 5) A demolition plan shall be prepared and submitted either as a separate permit or as part of the rough grading plan. 6) All private storm drain facilities shall be engineered as part of the rough grading plan permit. 7) The cross lot drainage easement on Lot 4 shall be engineered per City of Rancho Cucamonga requirements. • ITEMS H,I,J-69 PLANNING COMMISSION f OLUTION NO. 08-29 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP Suc3TT17769—WESTERN STATES DEVLLOPMENT June 11, 2008 Page 5 • 8) The water basins on each lot shall be engineered to prevent vector control issues. 9) The Water Quality Management Plan shall be approved, notarized, and recorded prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 10) All private storm drainage facilities shall be maintained by an entity such as a Homeowner's Association, Environmental Mitigation Air Qualify 1) All construction equipment shall be maintained in good operating condition so as to reduce operational emissions. The contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained as per manufacturers' specifications. Maintenance records shall be available at the construction site for City verification. 2) Prior to the issuance of any Grading Permits, the developer shall submit construction plans to City denoting the proposed schedule and projected equipment use. Construction contractors shall provide evidence that low-emission mobile construction equipment will be utilized,or that their use was investigated and found to be infeasible for the project. Contractors shall also conform to any construction measures imposed by the South Coast Air Quality • Management District (SCAQMD) as well as City Planning Staff. 3) All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1113. Paints and coatings shall be applied either by hand or high-volume, low-pressure spray. 4) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. 5) All construction equipment shall comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403. Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions: • Reestablish ground cover on the construction site through seeding and watering. • Pave or apply gravel to any on-site haul roads. • Phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large areas to erosion over extended periods of time. • Schedule activities to minimize the amounts of exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. • Dispose of surplus excavated material in accordance with local ordinances and use sound engineering practices. • ITEMS H,1,J-70 PLANNING COMMISSION' ;OLUTION NO. 08-29 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT17769—WESTERN STATES DEVELOPMENT June 11, 2008 Page 6 • • Sweep streets according to a schedule established by the City if silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. • Suspend grading operations during high winds (i.e., wind speeds exceeding 25 mph) in accordance with Rule 403 requirements. • Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils haul trucks or cover payloads using tarps or other suitable means. 6) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent(approved by SCAQMD and Regional Water Quality Control Board[RWQCB])daily to reduce Fine Particulate Matter (PM,o) emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. 7) Chemical soil-stabilizers(approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB)shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM10 emissions. 8) The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel-powered equipment where feasible. 9) The construction contractor shall ensure that construction-grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. 10) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate • high-efficiencyAow-polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water heaters. 11) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. Biological Resources 1) The three Deodar Cedars shall be protected in place if they do not conflict with the proposed development and can be incorporated into the landscape plan. 2) All heritage trees removed shall be replaced on a one-for-one basis with the largest nursery grown stock available. Species, size, and location shall be shown on the construction landscape plans prior to issuance of building permits. Cultural Resources 1) If any prehistoric archaeological resources are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor construction activities,to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. With the assistance of the archaeologist, the City of Rancho Cucamonga will: • Enact interim measures to protect undesignated sites from demolition or significant modification without an opportunity for the City to establish its archaeological value. • ITEMS H,1,J-71 PLANNING COMMISSION'. SOLUTION NO. 08-29 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT17769 —WESTERN STATES DEVELOPMENT June 11, 2008 • Page 7 • Consider establishing provisions to require incorporation of archaeological sites within new developments, using their special qualities as a theme or focal point. • Pursue educating the public about the archaeological heritage of the area. Propose mitigation measures and recommend conditions of approval to eliminate adverse project effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric resources, following appropriate CEQA guidelines. • Prepare a technical resources management report, documenting the inventory, evaluation, and proposed mitigation of resources within the project area. Submit one copy of the completed report with original illustrations, to the San Bernardino County Archaeological Information Center for permanent archiving. 2) If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal fossils) are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified paleontologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. The paleontologist shall submit a report of findings that will also provide specific recommendations regarding further mitigation measures (i.e., paleontological monitoring) that may be appropriate. Where mitigation monitoring is appropriate,the program must include,but not be limited to, the following measures: • 9 Assign a paleontological monitor, trained and equipped to allow the rapid removal of fossils with minimal construction delay, to the site full-time during the interval of earth-disturbing activities. • Should fossils be found within an area being cleared or graded, divert earth-disturbing activities elsewhere until the monitor has completed salvage. If construction personnel make the discovery, the grading contractor should immediately divert construction and notify the monitor of the find. • Prepare, identify, and curate all recovered fossils for documentation in the summary report and transfer to an appropriate depository (i.e., San Bernardino County Museum). • Submit summary report to City of Rancho Cucamonga. Transfer collected specimens with a copy of the report to San Bernardino County Museum. Geology and Soils 1) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB)daily to reduce PM10 emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 or re-planted with drought resistant landscaping as soon as possible. 2) Frontage public streets shall be swept according to a schedule established by the City to reduce PM10 emissions associated with vehicle tracking of soil • off-site. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. ITEMS H,1,J-72 PLANNING COMMISSION I OLUTION NO. 08-29 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT17769—WESTERN STATES DEVELOPMENT June 11, 2008 Page 8 • 3) Grading operations shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed 25 mph to minimize PM10 emissions from the site during such episodes. 4) Chemical soil-stabilizers(approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB)shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM10 emissions. Hydrology and Water 1) Prior to issuance of Grading Permits, the permit applicant shall submit to Building Official for approval, Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) specifically identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that shall be used on-site to reduce pollutants during construction activities entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 2) An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, included in grading plan, and implemented for the proposed project that identifies specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion from the time ground disturbing activities are initiated through completion of grading. This Erosion Control Plan shall include the following measures at a minimum: a) Specify the timing of grading and construction to minimize soil exposure to rainy periods experienced in southern California, and b)An inspection and maintenance program shall be included to ensure that any erosion which does occur either on-site or off-site as a result of this project will be corrected through a remediation or restoration program within a specified time frame. 3) During construction, temporary berms such as sandbags or gravel dikes must be used to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site when there is rainfall or other runoff. 4) During construction,to remove pollutants,street cleaning will be performed prior to storm events and after the use of water trucks to control dust in order to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site. 5) Maximize canopy interception by planting trees and shrubs to maximize water retention and infiltration on the site. 6) Drain rooftops into adjacent landscape planters to minimize storm runoff from entering storm drains. 7) Drain impervious surfaces such as sidewalks, walkways, trails and patios into adjacent landscaping to minimize storm runoff from entering storm drains. 8) Construct on-site storm runoff retention facilities to increase storm water infiltration. 9) Provide an efficient irrigation system that includes the following: a) Flow reducer or shutoff valves triggered by a pressure drop will be utilized to control water loss in the event of broken sprinkler heads or lines. b) Timers will be implemented to minimize runoff of excess irrigation water. • ITEMS H,1,J-73 PLANNING COMMISSION'. ;OLUTION NO. 08-29 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT17769—WESTERN STATES DEVELOPMENT June 11, 2008 • Page 9 c) Plants with similar water requirement will be grouped together to minimize excess irrigation water runoff. 10) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality Management Plan prepared by NM Civil Engineering Inc., dated March 12, 2008,to reduce pollutants after construction entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 11) Landscaping plans shall include provisions for controlling and minimizing the use of fertilizers/pesticides/herbicides. Landscaped areas shall be monitored and maintained for at least two years to ensure adequate coverage and stable growth. Plans for these areas, including monitoring provisions for a minimum of two years, shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. 12) Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit to the City Engineer for approval of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), including a project description and identifying Best Management Practices(BMPs)thatwill 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. • 13) Prior to issuance of Grading or Paving Permits, the applicant shall obtain a Notice of Intent (NOI) to comply with obtaining coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Storm Water Permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Evidence that this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Discharger's Identification Number) shall be submitted to the City Building Official for coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit. Noise 1) Exterior: Walls 6 feet high shall be constructed along the north and east property lines of the lots adjacent to 19th Street. 2) Interior: Submit the proposed house designs to an Acoustic Consultant for review and mediation recommendations to bring the houses into compliance with the City's 45dB interior noise standards. 3) Construction or grading shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. 4) Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120-D, as measured at the property line. Developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly noise level monitoring as specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120. Monitoring at other times may be required by the Building Official. Said consultant shall report their findings to the Building Official within 24 hours; however, if noise levels exceed the above standards, then the consultant shall immediately notify the Building • ITEMS H,1,J-74 PLANNING COMMISSION F DLUTION NO. 08-29 . TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT17769—WESTERN STATES DEVELOPMENT June 11, 2008 Page 10 • 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. 5) The perimeter block wall shall be constructed as early as possible in first phase. 6) Haul truck deliveries shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. Additionally, if heavy trucks used for hauling would exceed 100 daily trips (counting both to and from the construction site), then the developer shall prepare a noise mitigation plan denoting any construction traffic haul routes. To the extent feasible,the plan shall denote haul routes that do not pass sensitive land uses or residential dwellings. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 11TH DAY OF JUNE 2008. PLANNIF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: G Pam S art, Chairman • ATTEST: Jam . Troyer, AICP, Sdicretaryl I, James R. Troyer, AICP, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 11th day of June 2008, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: MUNOZ, STEWART, WIMBERLY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: FLETCHER, HOWDYSHELL • ITEMS H,I,J-75 City of Rancho Cucamonga MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION The following Mitigated Negative Declaration is being circulated for public review In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act Section 21091 and 21092 of the Public Resources Code. Project File No.: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17769 and Development Review DRC2006-00892 Public Review Period Closes: June 11, 2008 Project Name: Project Applicant: Western States Development Project Location (also see attached map: Located at the southwest corner of Beryl Street and 19th Street-APN: 0202-461-62, -63, -65. Project Description: A request to subdivide 2.975 acres of land into 11 lots and a request to develop 10 single-family residences on 2.975 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwellings per acre). Related Files: Minor Exception DRC2008-00157 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2007-00457. FINDING This is to advise that the City of Rancho Cucamonga,acting as the lead agency,has conducted an Initial Study to determine if the project may have a significant effect on the environment and is • proposing this Mitigated Negative Declaration based upon the following finding: The Initial Study identified potentially significant effects but: (1) Revisions in the project plans or proposals made or agreed to by the applicant before this proposed Mitigated.Negative Declaration was released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur, and (2) There is no substantial evidence before the agency that the project, as revised, may have a significant effect on the environment. If adopted,the Mitigated Negative Declaration means thatan Environmental Impact Report will not be required. The factual and analytical basis for this finding is included in the attached Initial Study. The project file and all related documents are available for review at the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department at 10500 Civic Center Drive (909) 477-2750 or Fax (909) 477-2847. NOTICE The public is invited to comment on the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration during the review period. /1 4By June11. 2008Date of Determination • ITEMS H,1,J-76 • City of Rancho Cucamonga MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM Project File No.: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17769 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 betaken 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 • ITEMS H,I,J-77 Mitigation Monitoring Program TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT17769-WESTERN STATES DEVELOPMENT Page 2 • 3. Appropriate specialists will be retained if technical expertise beyond the City staff's is needed,as determined by the project planner or responsible City department, to monitor specific mitigation activities and provide appropriate written approvals to the project planner. 4. The project planner or responsible City department will approve, by signature and date, the completion of each action item that was identified on the MMP Reporting Form. After each measure is verified for compliance, no further action is required for the specific phase of development. 5. All MMP Reporting Forms for an impact issue requiring no further monitoring will be signed off as completed by the project planner or responsible City department at the bottom of the MMP Reporting Form. 6. Unanticipated circumstances may arise requiring the refinement or addition of mitigation measures.The project planner is responsible for approving any such refinements or additions. An MMP Reporting Form will be completed by the project planner or responsible City department and a copy provided to the appropriate design, construction, or operational personnel. 7. The project planner or responsible City department has the authority to stop the work of construction contractors if compliance with any aspects of the MMP is not occurring afterwritten 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. B. 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. • ITEMS H,I,J-78 MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST (INITIAL STUDY PART III) Project File No.: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17769 Applicant: Western States Development Initial Study Prepared by: Tabe van der Zwaaa Date: April 22, 2008 Mitigation Measures No.I Responsible . . of Method . . Implementing -. . Date/initials Non-CompliancEN -3AIr'QUall(y✓ m m.. `I'4�y. h. W w3:.rum• , ^'F1 -.n,� N,..} 'r'1 4{ �7 All construction equipment shall be maintained in good PD 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. M Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, the PD/BO C Review of plans C 2 developer shall submit Construction Plans to the City _ denoting the proposed schedule and projected equipment use. Construction contractors shall provide evidence that low-emission mobile construction equipment will be utilized, or that their use was investigated and found to be infeasible for the project. Contractors shall also conform to any construction measures imposed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) as well as City Planning staff. All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed PD 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: 1 of 9 Mitigation • ResponsibleMonitoring Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/initials Non-Compliance • 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 M thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling. N Timing may vary depending upon the time of yearof = construction. • Suspend grading operations during high winds(i.e., BO C During A 4 o 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. 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 jRWQCBj) daily to reduce Particulate Matter (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 PM,o emissions. The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean BO C Review of plans A/C 4 alternative fuel-powered equipment where feasible. 2 of 9 Mitigation Measures No.I Responsible of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/Initials Non-Complianc 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 residential and commercial structures shall be 80 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. Q1 s tt .r'vw.<a S41�yt i' 4, ' 6°'.}y':"£'a`'`r a4�,¢ k x i�£. . ti �y z^..yNll�.i ,jn5'a F 5 b zff7^ e+9'K r 4.d �-yam 3�?3�, K �1^n�. s.x w BI010 Ical Resouroesi�s �'+' 4r�:3 / yy w!hz-{ s - + .,>w b K -! }^ i �{ Y r° q., .9 rr .^m�_..+.-rp x:.�. �k. '.' < 2, .. H ,.h.x'.»3 f -495 '? ,k." < rk<`dim ' vrt .,-."a":', z....t..°5..., m:Y *h ..'SR :3�2.',"J. � f��. �'-0thR� u � �Y Y%i. {�k S, n".�`lv�,- ., The three Deodar Cedars shall be protected in place if PD B Review of Plans C 2 they do not conflict with the proposed development and can be incorporated into the landscape plan. m All heritage trees removed shall be replaced on a PD B Review of Plans C 2 K one-for-one basis with the largest nursery grown stock = available. Species,size,and location shall be shown on the construction landscape plans prior to issuance of o, building permits. �g r i +'c, , . f' urzj . ' ? , Y Culfu'al Resou`ices u o- y z ,„_ .�-.. ,G .-. .� �A aa,.�S.a..: .£, -w a� _", S :_%8 - �1�.,.m,�' .3" r_.,- - 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 PD/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 PD/80 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. 3 of 9 Mitigation Measures No. I Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/initials Non-Compliance Pursue educating the public about the PD/BO C Review of report A/D 3/4 archaeological heritage of the area. • Propose mitigation measures and recommend PD/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, PD 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. M If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal K fossils) are encountered before or during grading, the w = 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 (Le., 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 PD 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. 4 of 9 0 • • Mitigation Measures No. Responsible g of Method . Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/Initials Non-Complianc • Prepare, identify,and curate all recovered fossils for PD D Review of report D 3 documentation in the summary reportand transfer to an appropriate depository (i.e., San Bernardino County Museum). Submit summary report to City of Rancho PD D Review of report D 3 Cucamonga. Transfer collected specimens with a copy to the report to San Bernardino County Museum. _kand.SO11SxGeologyg,-- 2 ?, ¢A.'jl .in .G 1 ..�. J .Y'. 3. S•} -'il - 4 '. .Z.T The site shall be treated with water or other BO C During A 4 soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and construction RWQCB)daily to reduce PM,o emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 or re-planted with drought resistant landscaping as soon as possible. K Frontage public streets shall be swept according to a BO C During A 4 schedule established by the City to reduce PM,o 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 PM,o 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. ysTF.t HydlolOgy and Water QU811ty L Prior to issuance of grading permits,the permit applicant BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 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. 5 of 9 Mitigation Measures No.I Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/initials Non-Compliance An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, included in BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 the Grading Plan, and implemented for the proposed project that identifies specific measures to control on- site and off-site erosion from the time ground disturbing activities are initiated through completion of grading. This Erosion Control Plan shall include the following measures at a minimum: a) Specify the timing of grading and construction to minimize soil exposure to rainy periods experienced in Southern California,and b) An inspection and maintenance program shall be included to ensure that any erosion which does occur either on-site or off-site as a result of this project will be corrected through a remediation or restoration program within a specified time frame. During construction, temporary berms such as BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 m sandbags or gravel dikes must be used to prevent K discharge of debris or sediment from the site when there U' is rainfall or other runoff. 2 During construction, to remove pollutants, street BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 acleaning 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. Maximize canopy interception by planting trees and CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 shrubs to maximize water retention and infiltration on the site. Drain rooftops into adjacent landscape planters to CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 minimize storm runoff from entering storm drains. Drain impervious surfaces such as sidewalks,walkways, CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 trails and patios into adjacent landscaping to minimize storm runoff from entering storm drains. Construct on-site storm runoff retention facilities to CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 increase storm water infiltration. Provide an efficient irrigation system that includes the following: 6 of 9 0 • • Mitigation Measures No.I Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions f Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/initials Non-Compl • Flow reducer or shutoff valves triggered by a CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 pressure drop will be utilized to control water loss in the event of broken sprinkler heads or lines. Timers will be implemented to minimize runoff of CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 excess irrigation water. • Plants with similarwater requirementwill be grouped CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 together to minimize excess irrigation water runoff. The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 the Water Quality Management Plan prepared by NM Civil Engineering Inc., dated March 12, 2008,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 m controlling and minimizing the use of 3 fertilizers/pesticides/herbicides. Landscaped areas shall Zn 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. 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. 7 of 9 Mitigation .. g of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/initials Non-Compliance Prior to issuance of grading or paving permits, the BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 applicant shall obtain a Notice of Intent(NOI)to comply with obtaining coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Storm Water Permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Evidence that this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Dischargers Identification Number) shall be submitted to the City Building Official for coverage underthe NPDES General Construction Permit. .- e9� iTt ,Noislse{ e+4 jq.t--rs +�' . ..,!fP. E z R:?V�` � �: r . ,.. a:t., .+� t::' ,.�:. $ 'iW� � t {,� •p„ ¢ � -,� y , r,�`..,.� �; Exterior: Walls 6 feet high shall be constructed along PD B Review of plans A A the north and east property lines of the lots adjacent to 19th Street. mInterior: Submit the proposed house designs to the PD B Review of plans A A N Acoustic Consultant for review and mediation = recommendations to bring the houses into compliance with the City's 45dB interior noise standards rn Construction or grading shall not take place between the BO C During A 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. Developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly noise level monitoring as specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120. Monitoring at other times may be required by the Building Official. Said consultant shall report their findings to the Building Official within 24 hours; however, if noise levels exceed the above standards, then the consultant shall immediately notify the Building Official. If noise levels exceed the above standards, then construction activities shall be reduced in intensity to a level of compliance with above noise standards or halted. 8 of 9 • ResponsibleMitigation Measures No.I g of Method . Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/initials Non-Compliances The perimeter block wall shall be constructed as early PD C During A A as possible in the 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. Key to Checklist Abbreviations Res oas,ble Pe an `t onito�,n GFre'uen`c "y* MOO Venficationa �" ` " � ` `" � � ` m P,d. w, x ,; .� kms. .. 9. .-..Yr a,. 4 }tea ? Sanctions >} S a � y CDD-Community Development Director or designee A-With Each New Development A-On-site Inspection 1 -Withhold Recordation of Final Map = PD-Planning Director 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 co 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 Depositor Bonds FC-Fire Chief or designee 6-Revoke CUP 7-Citation i s\planning\final\ce q a\m m c h klst-rev 12-4-06fi n a I.d o c 9 of 9 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT#: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT17769 AND DRC2006-00892 SUBJECT: SUBDIVISION OF 2.975 ACRES OF LAND INTO 11 LOTS APPLICANT: WESTERN STATES DEVELOPMENT SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 19TH STREET AND BERYL STREET—APN: 0202-461-62, 63, LOCATION: AND 65 ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. General Requirements Completion Date 1. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents, officers,or employees, because of the issuance of such approval,or in the alternative,to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 2. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval No. 08-29, Standard Conditions, and all environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size). The sheet(s) are for information only to all parties involved in the construction/grading activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect. 3. The applicant shall be required to pay any applicable Fish and Game fees as shown below. The project planner will confirm which fees apply to this project. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary priorto the Planning Commission or Planning Director hearing: a) Mitigated Negative Declaration - $ 1,926.75 B. Time Limits 1. This tentative tract map shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, unless a _/_/_ complete final map is filed with the City Engineer within 3 years from the date of the approval. 2. Development/Design Review approval shall expire if building permits are not issued or approved • use has not commenced within 5 years from the date of approval. No extensions are allowed. 1 ITEMS H,I,J-88 Project No.SUSTT17769 and DRC2006-00892 Completion Date C. Site Development 1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include _/_/_ • site plans,architectural elevations,exterior materials and colors,landscaping,sign program,and grading on file in the Planning Department, the conditions contained herein, and the Development Code regulations. 2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon,all Conditions of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. 3. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Department to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. 4. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.)or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. 6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code,all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 7. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers. AC condensers, etc., shall be located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. For • single-family residential developments, transformers shall be placed in underground vaults. 8. Street names shall be submitted for Planning Director review and approval in accordance with the adopted Street Naming Policy prior to approval of the final map. 9. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, including proper illumination. 10. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) and Articles of Incorporation of the Homeowners' Association are subject to the approval of the Planning and Engineering Departments and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Map or prior to the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City Engineer. The Homeowners' Association shall submit to the Planning Department a list of the name and address of their officers on or before January 1 of each and every year and whenever said information changes. 11. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property _/_/_ owner, homeowners'association,or other means acceptable to the City. Proof of this landscape maintenance shall be submitted for Planning Director and City Engineer review and approved prior to the issuance of building permits. 12. The project contains a designated Historical Landmark. The site shall be developed and _/_/_ maintained in accordance with Historic Landmark Alteration Permit No. DRC2006-00226. Any further modifications to the site including, but not limited to, exterior alterations and/or interior alterations which affect the exterior of the buildings or structures, removal of landmark trees, demolition, relocation, reconstruction of buildings or structures, or changes to the site, shall require a modification to the Historic Landmark Alteration Permit subject to Historic Preservation Commission review and approval. • 2 ITEMS H,1,J-89 Project No.SUBT717769 and DRC2006-00892 Completion Date 13. The developer shall submit a construction access plan and schedule for the development of all lots for Planning Director and City Engineer approval; including, but not limited to, public notice • requirements,special street posting, phone listing for community concerns, hours of construction activity, dust control measures, and security fencing. 14. Six-foot decorative block walls shall be constructed along the project perimeter. If a double wall condition would result, the developer shall make a good faith effort to work with the adjoining property owners to provide a single wall. Developer shall notify, by mail, all contiguous property owner at least 30 days prior to the removal of any existing walls/ fences along the project's perimeter. 15. Construct block walls between homes(i.e.,along interior side and rear property lines), rather than wood fencing for permanence, durability, and design consistency. 16. Access gates to the rear yards shall be constructed from a material more durable than wood gates. Acceptable materials include, but are not limited to, wrought iron and PVC. 17. For residential development, return walls and corner side walls shall be decorative masonry. 18. On corner side yards, provide minimum 5-foot setback between walls/fences and sidewalk. The 5-foot wall/fence setback and the parkway shall have landscape and irrigation in addition to the required street trees. Detailed landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. The parkway landscaping including trees, shrubs, ground covers and irrigation shall be maintained by the property owner. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the parkway maintenance requirement, in a standard format as determined by the Planning Director, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. D. Landscaping • 1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping in the case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. 2. Existing trees required to be preserved in place shall be protected with a construction barrier in accordance with the Municipal Code Section 19.08.110,and so noted on the grading plans. The location of those trees to be preserved in place and new locations for transplanted trees shall be shown on the detailed landscape plans. The applicant shall follow all of the arborist's recommendations regarding preservation, transplanting, and trimming methods. 3. All private slopes of 5 feet or more in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than 2:1 slope, shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 4. All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater slope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as follows: one 15-gallon or larger size tree per each 150 sq.ft. of slope area, 1-gallon or larger size shrub per each 100 sq, ft. of slope area, and appropriate ground cover. In addition,slope banks in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5-gallon or larger size tree per each 250 sq. ft. of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary slope plane. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 5. For single-family residential development, all slope planting and irrigation shall be continuously maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each individual unit is sold and occupied by the buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for those units, an inspection shall be conducted by the Planning Department to determine that they are in satisfactory condition. • 3 ITEMS H,1,J-90 Project No.SUBTT17769 and DRC2006-00892 Completion Date 6. Front yard and corner side yard landscaping and irrigation shall be required per the Development Code, Section 17.08. This requirement shall be in addition to the required street trees and slope planting. • 7. Landscaping and irrigation systems required to be installed within the public right-of-way on the perimeter of this project area shall be continuously maintained by the developer. 8. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas,the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Department. 9. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of Xeriscape as defined in Chapter 19.16 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. Prior to issuance of Building Permits,the project landscape architect shall certify on the submitted plans that the xeriscape requirements have been met. E. Environmental 1. Mitigation measures are required for the project. The applicant is responsible for the cost of implementing said measures, including monitoring and reporting. Applicant shall be required to post cash, letter of credit, or other forms of guarantee acceptable to the Planning Director in the amount of$538 prior to the issuance of building permits,guaranteeing satisfactory performance and completion of all mitigation measures. These funds may be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measures. Failure to complete all actions required by the approved environmental documents shall be considered grounds for forfeit. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT, (909)477-2710, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: NOTE: ANY REVISIONS MAY VOID THESE REQUIREMENTS AND NECESSITATE ADDITIONAL REVIEW(S) • F. General Requirements 1. Submit five complete sets of plans including the following: a. Site/Plot Plan; b. Foundation Plan; C. Floor Plan; d. Ceiling and Roof Framing Plan; e. Electrical Plans(2 sets, detached) including the size of the main switch, number and size of service entrance conductors, panel schedules, and single line diagrams; f. Plumbing and Sewer Plans, including isometrics, underground diagrams,water and waste diagram, sewer or septic system location, fixture units, gas piping, and heating and air conditioning; and g. Planning Department Project Number (SUBTT17769 and DRC2006-00892) clearly identified on the outside of all plans. 2. Submit two sets of structural calculations, energy conservation calculations, and a soils report. Architect's/Engineer's stamp and "wet" signature are required prior to plan check submittal. 3. Contractors must show proof of State and City licenses and Workers'Compensation coverage to the City prior to permit issuance. 4. Separate permits are required for fencing and/or walls. _/_/_ • 4 ITEMS H,I,J-91 Project No.SUBTT17769 and DRC2006-00892 Completion Date 5. Developers wishing to participate in the Community Energy Efficiency Program (CEEP) can —/—/— contact the Building and Safety Department staff for information and submittal requirements. �. Site Development 1. Plans shall be submitted for plan check and approved prior to construction. All plans shall be —/—/— marked with the project file number(SUBTT17769 and DRC2006-00892). The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted California Codes,and all other applicable codes,ordinances,and regulations in effect at the time of permit application. Contact the Building and Safety Department for availability of the Code Adoption Ordinance and applicable handouts. 2. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new residential project or major addition, the applicant —/—/— shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include,but are not limited to: City Beautification Fee, Park Fee, Drainage Fee,Transportation Development Fee, Permit and Plan Check Fees, Construction and Demolition Diversion Program deposit and fees and School Fees. Applicant shall provide a copy of the school fees receipt to the Building and Safety Department prior to permit issuance. 3. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building and Safety Official after tract/parcel map —/—/— recordation and prior to issuance of building permits. 4. Construction activity shall not occur between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. Monday —/—/— through Saturday, with no construction on Sunday or holidays. H. New Structures 1. Provide compliance with the California Building Code (CBC) for property line clearances —/—/— considering use, area, and fire-resistiveness. 2. Provide compliance with the California Building Code for required occupancy separations. • 3. Roofing material shall be installed per the manufacturer's "high wind" instructions. —/—/— I. Grading 1. All City of Rancho Cucamonga standard grading conditions apply. 2. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with California Building Code,City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved grading plan. 3. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to _/—/— perform such work. Two copies will be provided at plan submittal for review. Plans shall implement design recommendations per said work. 4. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or engineering geologist and submitted at the time of application for grading and drainage plan review. 5. The final grading and drainage plan, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be completed, submitted, and approved by the Building and Safety Official prior to the issuance of building permits. 6. A separate grading and drainage plan check submittal is required for all new construction —/—/— projects and for existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The grading and drainage plan shall be prepared, stamped, and wet signed by a California registered Civil Engineer. 7. Comply with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Dust Control Measures. 5 ITEMS H,1,J-92 Project No.SUBTT17769 and DRC2006-00892 Completion Date 8. Rough grading and drainage plans/permits shall be a separate approval from Precise Grading and Drainage Plans/Permits. 19. A drainage study showing a 100-year, AMC 3 design storm event for on-site drainage shall be _/_/_ • prepared and submitted to the Building Official for review and approval for on-site storm water drainage. All reports shall be wet signed and sealed by the Engineer of Record. 10. Acquire off-site drainage easements. 11. Obtain written permission to construct wall on property line or provide a detail(s)showing the wall offset from the property line. 12. Implement City Standards for on-site construction where possible, provide details for all work not covered by City Standard Drawings. 13. All slopes shall be a minimum 2-foot offset from the public right-of-way. 14. Private sewer, water and storm drain improvements will be designed per the latest adopted California Plumbing Code. 15. Show existing topography 100 feet beyond the project boundary. 16. Provide a grading agreement for cut and fill combined exceeding 5,000 cubic yards. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: J. Dedication and Vehicular Access 1. Rights-of-way and easements shall be dedicated to the City for all interior public streets, community trails, public paseos, public landscape areas,street trees,traffic signal encroachment and maintenance, and public drainage facilities as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. • Private easements for non-public facilities (cross-lot drainage, local feeder trails, etc.) shall be reserved as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. 2. Dedication shall be made of the following rights-of-way on the perimeter streets(measured from street centerline): 44 total feet on 19th Street. 3. Vehicular access rights shall be dedicated to the City for the following streets, except for approved openings: 19th Street. 4. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quit-claimed or delineated on the final map. K. Street Improvements 1. All public improvements(interior streets,drainage facilities,community trails,paseos,landscaped areas, etc.) shown on the plans and/or tentative map shall be constructed to City Standards. Interior street improvements shall include, but are not limited to, curb and gutter,AC pavement, drive approaches, sidewalks, street lights, and street trees. • 6 ITEMS H,1,J-93 Project No.SUBTT17769 and DRC2006-00892 Completion Date 2. Pursuant to City Council Resolution No.88-557,no person shall make connections from a source of energy,fuel or power to any building service equipment which is regulated by technical codes • and for which a permit is required unless, in addition to any and all other codes, regulations and ordinances, all improvements required by these conditions of development approval have been completed and accepted by the City Council, except:that in developments containing more than one building or unit, the development may have energy connections made to a percentage of those buildings, or units proportionate to the completion of improvements as required by conditions of approval of development. In no case shall more than 95 percent of the buildings or units be connected to energy prior to completion and acceptance of all improvements required by these conditions of approval of development. 3. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: Curb& A.C. Side. Drive Street Street Comm Median Bike Street Name Gutter Pvmt walk Appr. Lights Trees Trail Island Trail Other 19th Street X X X X X Beryl Street X X X I X X X 4. Improvement Plans and Construction: a. Street improvement plans, including street trees,street lights,and intersection safety lights on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in addition to any • other permits required. —C. Pavement striping, marking,traffic signing,street name signing,traffic signal conduit,and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. d. Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all corners of intersections per City Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. e. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving,which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. f. Concentrated drainage Flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards, except for single family residential lots. g. Street names shall be approved by the Planning Director prior to submittal for first plan check. • 7 ITEMS H,I,J-94 Project No.SUBTT17769 and DRC2006-00892 Completion Date 5. Install street trees per City street tree design guidelines and standards as follows. The completed legend (box below) and construction notes shall appear on the title page of the street improvement plans. Street improvement plans shall include a line item within the construction • legend stating. "Street trees shall be installed per the notes and legend on sheet—(typically sheet 1)." Where public landscape plans are required, tree installation in those areas shall be per the public landscape improvement plans. The City Engineer reserves the right to adjust tree species based upon field conditions and other variables. For additional information, contact the Project Engineer. Min. Grow Street Name Botanical Name Common Name Space Spacing Size Qty. 19th Street Lagerstroemia indica Crape Myrtle Hybrid-Lavender 3 ft. 20 ft.o.c. 24-inch Fill-in "Muskogee" box Beryl Street P.A.8 ft.or greater Platanus acerifolia London Plane Tree 8 ft. 30 ft.o.c. 15-gal. Fill-in P.A. 5 ft.to 8 ft. Geijera parviflora Australian Willow 5 ft. 20 ft.o.c. 15-gal. Fill-in P.A.5 ft. or less Eriobotrya deflexa Bronze Loquat Tree' 3 ft. 25 ft.o.c. 15-gal. Fill-in Construction Notes for Street Trees: 1) All street trees are to be planted in accordance with City standard plans. 2) Prior to the commencement of any planting,an agronomic soils report shall be fumished to the City inspector. Any unusual toxicities or nutrient deficiencies may require backfill soil amendments, as determined by the City inspector. 3) All street trees are subject to inspection and acceptance by the Engineering Department. 4) Street trees are to be planted per public improvement plans only. L. Pubiic Maintenance Areas 1. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the.appropriate Landscape and Lighting Districts shall be filed with the City Engineer prior to final map approval or issuance of building • permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. M. Drainage and Flood Control 1. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. 2. A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer. N. Improvement Completion 1. If the required public improvements are not completed prior to approval of the final parcel map, an improvement security accompanied by an agreement executed by the Developer and the City will be required for: SUBTT17769 O. Utilities 1. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system,water,gas, electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 2. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. 3. 1 Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga Valley Water District(CVWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District,and the • Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from 8 ITEMS H,I,J-95 Projecl No.SUBTT17769 and DRC2006-00892 Completion Date the CVWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits,whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval • in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. 4. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. Approval of the final parcel map will be subject to any requirements that may be received from them. P. General Requirements and Approvals 1. A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City,covering the estimated operating costs for all new streetlights for the first six months of operation, prior to final map approval or prior to building permit issuance if no map is involved. 2. Prior to the issuance of building permits,a Diversion Deposit and related administrative fees shall be paid for the Construction and Demolition Diversion Program. The deposit is fully refundable if at least 50% of all wastes generated during construction and demolition are diverted from landfills, and appropriate documentation is provided to the City. Form CD-1 shall be submitted to the Engineering Department when the first building permit application is submitted to Building and Safety. Form CD-2 shall be submitted to the Engineering Department within 60 days following the completion of the construction and/or demolition project. 3. Provide copy of final Water Quality Management Plan with submittal of Grading Plans to the Building and Safety Department. The WQMP and Grading Plans are subject to review by the Building Official. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE SAFETY DEPARTMENT, FIRE PROTECTION PLANNING SERVICES AT, (909) 477-2770, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING apNDITIONS: SEE ATTACHED • 9 ITEMS H,1,J-96 _fr Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District ;r Fire Construction Services STANDARD CONDITIONS August 1, 2007 Rubber Tires & Custom Wheels 6710 Beryl Tract 17769 SUBTT17769 & DRC2006-00892 THE FOLLOWING STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLY TO THIS PROJECT. FSC-1 Public and Private Water Supply 1. Design guidelines for Fire Hydrants: The following provides design guidelines for the spacing and location of fire hydrants: a. The maximum distance between fire hydrants in single-family residential projects is 500-feet. No portion of the exterior wall facing the addressed street shall be more than • 250-feet from an approved fire hydrant. For cul-de-sacs, the distance shall not exceed 200-feet. b. Fire hydrants are to be located. The preferred locations for fire hydrants are: 1. At the entrance(s) to a commercial, industrial or residential project from the public roadways. 2. At intersections. 3. On the right side of the street, whenever practical and possible. 4. As required by the Fire Safety Division to meet operational needs of the Fire District. 5. A minimum of forty-feet (40') from any building. FSC-2 Fire Flow 1. The required fire flow for this project is 1750 gallons per minute at a minimum residual pressure of 20-pounds per square inch. This requirement is made in accordance with Fire Code Appendix III-A, as adopted by the Fire District Ordinances. 2. Public fire hydrants located within a 500-foot radius of the proposed project may be used to provide the required fire flow subject to Fire District review and approval. Private fire hydrants on adjacent property shall not be used to provide required fire flow. 3. Firewater plans are required for all projects that must extend the existing water supply to or onto the site. Building permits will not be issued until firewater plans are approved. 4. On all site plans to be submitted for review, show all fire hydrants located within 600-feet of the proposed project site. • - 1 - ITEMS H,I,J-97 FSC-9 Single-family Residential Sales Model homes require approved Fire District vehicle access and water supply from a public or private water main system before construction. • FSC-13 Alternate Method Application Fire Construction Services staff and the Fire Marshal will review all requests for alternate method, when submitted. The request must be submitted on the Fire District "Application for Alternate Method" form along with supporting documents and payment of the $92 review fee. FCS-15 Annexation of the parcel map: Annexation of the parcel map into the Community Facilities District#85-1 or#88-1 is required prior to the issuance of grading or building permits. Chronological Summary of RCFPD Standard Conditions PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS — Please complete the following prior to the issuance of any building permits: 1. Public Water Supply (Domestic/Fire) Systems: The applicant shall submit a plan showing the locations of all new public fire hydrants for the review and approval by the Fire District and CCWD. On the plan, show all existing fire hydrants within a 600-foot radius of the project. Please reference the RCFPD Water Plan Submittal Procedure Standard#9-8 All required public fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed and operable prior to delivering any combustible framing materials to the site. CCWD personnel shall inspect the installation and witness the hydrant flushing. Fire Construction Services shall inspect the • site after acceptance of the public water system by CCWD. Fire Construction Services must grant a clearance before lumber is dropped. 2. Construction Access: The access roads must be paved in accordance with all the requirements of the RCFPD Fire Lane Standard #9-7. All temporary utilities over access roads must be installed at least 14' 6" above the finished surface of the road. 3. Fire Flow: A current fire flow letter from CCWD must be received. The applicant is responsible for obtaining the fire flow information from CCWD and submitting the letter to Fire Construction Services. PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY OR FINAL INSPECTION — Please complete the following: 1. Hydrant Markers: All fire hydrants shall have a blue reflective pavement marker indicating the fire hydrant location on the street or driveway in accordance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Standard Plan 134, "Installation of Reflective Hydrant Markers". On private property, the markers shall be installed at the centerline of the fire access road, at each hydrant location. 2. Public Roadways: Prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, the fire access roadways must be installed in accordance with the approved plans and acceptable to Fire Construction Services. 3. Address: Prior to the granting of occupancy, single-family dwellings shall post the address with minimum 4-inch numbers on a contrasting background. The numbers shall be internally or externally illuminated during periods of darkness. The numbers shall be visible 2 ITEMS H,I,J-98 from the street. When building setback from the publicroadway roadway exceeds 100-feet, additional 4-inch numbers shall be displayed at the property entry. • • • 3 ITEMS H,I,J-99 RESOLUTION NO. 13-32 • A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA,APPROVING TIME EXTENSION DRC2013-00507, A REQUEST TO EXTEND THE DURATION OF AN EXISTING ENTITLEMENT APPROVAL BY AN ADDITIONAL TWO (2) YEARS FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00892,A PROPOSAL TO DEVELOP 10 SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES ON 2.975 ACRES WITHIN THE LOW RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), LOCATED AT 6710 BERYL STREET, WHICH IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF BERYL STREET AND 19TH STREET; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF-APN: 0202-461-62,63AND 65. A. Recitals. 1. Mr. Jack Hall filed an application, DRC2013-00507, for the extension of the duration of the entitlement approval ("time extension")for Development Review DRC2006-00892,as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject time extension request is referred to as "the application". 2. On June 11, 2008,this Commission adopted its Resolution No.08-30,thereby approving Development Review DRC2006-00892 subject to specific conditions and time limits. 3. On July 24, 2013, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duty noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. • 4. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This 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 above-referenced public hearing on July 24, 2013, including written and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The applicant does not propose any changes to the original project in conjunction with this time extension request; and b. The previously approved Development Review is in substantial compliance with the City's current General Plan, specific plans, ordinances, plans, codes, and policies; and C. The extension of the Development Review approval will not cause significant inconsistencies with the current General Plan, specific plans, ordinances, plans,codes, or policies; and • d. The extension of the Development Review approval will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and ITEMS H,I,J-100 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 13-32 TIME EXTENSION DRC2013-00507—JACK HALL July 24, 2013 Page 2 • e. There are two other time extensions associated with this project.An extension for Minor Exception DRC2008-00157 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2007-00457. The new case numbers for these applications are DRC2013-00509 and DRC2013-00510 respectively; and f. The time extension is within the time limits established by State law and local ordinance. 3. Based upon the facts and information contained in the application, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application,the Planning Commission finds that no subsequent or supplemental environmental document is required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in connection with the review and approval of this application based upon the following findings and determinations: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA")and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration in June 2008 in connection with the City's approval of Development Review DRC2006-00892. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project unless: (i) substantial changes are proposed to the project that indicate new or more severe impacts on the environment; (ii) substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under which the project was previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts;or(iii)new important information shows the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered; or (iv) additional mitigation measures are now feasible to reduce impacts or different mitigation measures can be imposed to substantially reduce impacts. • b. The Planning Commission finds, in connection with the Time Extension that substantial changes to the project or the circumstances surrounding the project have not occurred which would create new or more severe impacts than those evaluated in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration. No changes are proposed to the project; no substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under which the projectwas previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts; and no new important information shows that the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered. Staff further finds that the project will not have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration, not have more severe effects than previously analyzed, and that additional or different mitigation measures are not required to reduce the impacts of the project to a. level of less-than-significant. The applicant is requesting a time extension and is not proposing any changes to the project. C. Based on these findings and all evidence in the record, the Planning Commission concurs with the staff determination that no additional environmental review is required pursuant to CEQA in connection with the City's consideration of the Time Extension ORC2013-00507 for Development Review DRC2006-00892. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2,and 3 above,this Commission hereby extends the duration of an existing entitlement approval by an additional two(2) years and modifies the conditions of approval contained in Resolution No. 08-30 to read as follows: Planning Department 1) Approval is for the extension of the duration of the entitlement approval • (Time Extension DRC2013-00507) for Development Review ITEMS H,I,J-101 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 13-32 TIME EXTENSION DRC2013-00507—JACK HALL July 24, 2013 • Page 3 DRC2006-00892 and modification of the applicable approval time limit as described in Standard Condition B.2 contained in Resolution No. 08-30 that was adopted by the Planning Commission on June 11, 2008. 2) The time extension of the entitlement approval is for two(2)years. The new expiration date for Development Review DRC2006-00892 is June 11, 2015. 3) Any requests for future time extensions shall be subject to the procedures, conditions,and findings as set forth in Section 17.14.090 of the Development Code. 4) All other conditions of approval, including all of the Standard/special conditions of approval of other City departments for Development Review DRC2006-00892 (Resolution 08-30) and Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17769 (Resolution 08-29), shall apply. 5) Applicant shall complete all Special and Standard Conditions included in the approval of Conditional Use Permit DRC2004-01173, Landmark Alteration Permit DRC2006-00226 and Tentative Tract Map 17769 (Resolutions of Approval 06-01, 06-44 and 08-29)to the satisfaction of the Planning Manager prior to issuance of building permits for the • construction of the 10 homes. 5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24TH DAY OF JULY 2013 PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Frances Howdyshell, Chairman ATTEST: Candyce Burnett, Secretary I, Candyce Burnett, Secretary of the Planning Commission for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 24th day of July 2013, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: • NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ITEMS H,I,J-102 RESOLUTION NO. 13-33 • A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA,APPROVING TIME EXTENSION DRC2013-00509, A REQUEST TO EXTEND THE DURATION OF AN EXISTING ENTITLEMENT APPROVAL BY AN ADDITIONAL TWO (2) YEARS FOR MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2008-00157, A REQUEST TO INCREASE THE PERMITTED WALL HEIGHT FROM 6 FEET TO 8 FEET TO DEVELOP 10 SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES ON 2.975 ACRES WITHIN THE LOW RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), LOCATED AT 6710 BERYL STREET, WHICH IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF BERYL STREET AND 19TH STREET; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF-APN: 0202-461-62,63AND 65. A. Recitals. 1. Mr. Jack Hall filed an application, DRC2013-00509, for the extension of the duration of the entitlement approval ("time extension")for Minor Exception DRC2008-00157, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution,the subject time extension request is referred to as "the application". 2. On June 11, 2008, this Commission adopted its Resolution No.08-29,thereby approving Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17769 subject to specific conditions and time limits. 3. The Minor Exception was previously approved as Planning Condition 1 of Resolution • No. 08-29 for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17769. 4. On July 24, 2013, 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. 5. 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 during the above-referenced public hearing on July 24, 2013, including written and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The applicant does not propose any changes to the original project in conjunction with this time extension request; and b. The previously approved Minor Exception is in substantial compliance with the City's current General Plan, specific plans, ordinances, plans, codes, and policies; and is C. The extension of the Minor Exception approval will not cause significant inconsistencies with the current General Plan, specific plans, ordinances, plans, codes, or policies; and ITEMS H,I,J-103 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 13-33 TIME EXTENSION DRC2013-00509—JACK HALL July 24, 2013 Page 2 • d. The extension of the Minor Exception approval will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and e. The Minor Exception was previously approved as Planning Condition 1 of Resolution No. 08-29 for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17769; and f. There are two other time extensions associated with this project. An extension for Development Review DRC2006-00892 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2007-00457. The case numbers for these applications are DRC2013-00507 and DRC2013-00510 respectively; and g. The time extension is within the time limits established by State law and local ordinance. 3. Based upon the facts and information contained in the application, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application,the Planning Commission finds that no subsequent or supplemental environmental document is required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in connection with the review and approval of this application based upon the following findings and determinations: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration in June 2008 in connection with the City's approval of Minor Exception DRC2008-00157. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project unless: (i) substantial • changes are proposed to the project that indicate new or more severe impacts on the environment; (ii) substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under which the project was previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts;or(iii)new important information shows the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered; or (iv) additional mitigation measures are now feasible to reduce impacts or different mitigation measures can be imposed to substantially reduce impacts. b. The Planning Commission finds, in connection with the Time Extension that substantial changes to the project or the circumstances surrounding the project have not occurred which would create new or more severe impacts than those evaluated in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration. No changes are proposed to the project; no substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances underwhich the projectwas previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts; and no new important information shows that the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered. Staff further finds that the project will not have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration, not have more severe effects than previously analyzed, and that additional or different mitigation measures are not required to reduce the impacts of the project to a level of less-than-significant. The applicant is requesting a time extension and is not proposing any changes to the project. C. Based on these findings and all evidence in the record,the Planning Commission concurs with the staff determination that no additional environmental review is required pursuant to CEQA in connection with the City's consideration of the Time Extension DRC2013-00509 for the Minor Exception DRC2008-00157. • ITEMS H,I,J-104 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 13-33 TIME EXTENSION DRC2013-00509—JACK HALL July 24, 2013 • Page 3 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1,2, and 3 above, this Commission hereby extends the duration of an existing entitlement approval by an additional two(2) years and modifies the conditions of approval contained in Resolution No. 08-29 to read as follows: Planning Department 1) Approval is for the extension of the duration of the entitlement approval (Time Extension DRC2013-00509)for Minor Exception DRC2008-00157 and modification of the applicable approval time limit as described in Standard Condition B.2 contained in Resolution No. 08-29 that was adopted by the Planning Commission on June 11, 2008. 2) The time extension of the entitlement approval is for two(2)years. The new expiration date for Minor Exception DRC2008-00157 is June 11, 2015. 3) Any requests for future time extensions shall be subject to the procedures, conditions, and findings as set forth in Section 17.14.090 of the Development Code. 4) All other conditions of approval, including all of the Standard/special conditions of approval of other City departments for Development Review DRC2006-00892 (Resolution 08-30) and Tentative Tract Map • SUBTT17769 (Resolution 08-29), shall apply. 5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24TH DAY OF JULY 2013 PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Frances Howdyshell, Chairman ATTEST: Candyce Burnett, Secretary I, Candyce Burnett, Secretary of the Planning Commission for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 24th day of July 2013, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: • ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: ITEMS H,I,J-105 a' RESOLUTION NO. 13-34 • A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA,APPROVING TIME EXTENSION DRC2013-00510, A REQUEST TO EXTEND THE DURATION OF AN EXISTING ENTITLEMENT APPROVAL BY AN ADDITIONAL TWO (2) YEARS FOR TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2007-00457,A PROPOSAL TO REMOVE 13 TREES TO DEVELOP 10 SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES ON 2.975 ACRES WITHIN THE LOW RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT(2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), LOCATED AT 6710 BERYL STREET, WHICH IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF BERYL STREET AND 19TH STREET; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 0202-461-62, 63 AND 65. A. Recitals. 1, Mr. Jack Hall filed an application, DRC2013-00510, for the extension of the duration of the entitlement approval ("time extension")for Tree Removal Permit DRC2007-00457, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject time extension request is referred to as "the application". 2. On June 11, 2008,this Commission adopted its Resolution No.08-29,thereby approving Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17769 subject to specific conditions and time limits. 3. The Tree Removal Permit was previously approved as Planning Condition 2 of Resolution No. 08-29 for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17769. • 4. On July 24, 2013, 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. 5. 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 during the above-referenced public hearing on July 24, 2013, including written and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The applicant does not propose any changes to the original project in conjunction with this time extension request; and b. The previously approved Tree Removal Permit is in substantial compliance with the City's current General Plan, specific plans, ordinances, plans, codes, and policies; and C. The extension of the Tree Removal Permit approval will not cause significant • inconsistencies with the current General Plan, specific plans, ordinances, plans, codes, or policies; and ITEMS H,I,J-106 s PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 13-34 TIME EXTENSION DRC2013-00510—JACK HALL July 24, 2013 Page 2 • d. The extension of the Tree Removal Permit approval will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and e. The Tree Removal Permit was previously approved as Planning Condition 2 of Resolution No. 08-29 for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17769; and f. There are two other time extensions associated with this project. An extension for Minor Exception DRC2008-00157 and Development Review DRC2006-00892. The new case numbers for these applications are DRC2013-00509 and DRC2013-00507 respectively; and g. The extension is within the time limits established by State law and local ordinance. 3. Based upon the facts and information contained in the application, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application,the Planning Commission finds that no subsequent or supplemental environmental document is required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in connection with the review and approval of this application based upon the following findings and determinations: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA")and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration in June 2008 in connection with the City's approval of Tree Removal Permit DRC2007-00457. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project unless: (i) substantial • changes are proposed to the project that indicate new or more severe impacts on the environment; (ii)substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under which the project was previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts;or(iii)new important information shows the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered; or (iv) additional mitigation measures are now feasible to reduce impacts or different mitigation measures can be imposed to substantially reduce impacts. b. The Planning Commission finds, in connection with the Time Extension that substantial changes to the project or the circumstances surrounding the project have not occurred which would create new or more severe impacts than those evaluated in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration. No changes are proposed to the project; no substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances underwhich the project was previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts; and no new important information shows that the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered. Staff further finds that the project will not have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration, not have more severe effects than previously analyzed, and that additional or different mitigation measures are not required to reduce the impacts of the project to a level of less-than-significant. The applicant is requesting a time extension and is not proposing any changes to the project. C. Based on these findings and all evidence in the record,the Planning Commission concurs with the staff determination that no additional environmental review is required pursuant to CEQA in connection with the City's consideration of the Time Extension DRC2013-00510 for the Tree Removal Permit DRC2007-00457. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1,2, and 3 above, this • Commission hereby extends the duration of an existing entitlement approval by an additional two (2) years and modifies the conditions of approval contained in Resolution No. 08-29 to read as follows: ITEMS H,I,J-107 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 13-34 TIME EXTENSION DRC2013-00510—JACK HALL July 24, 2013 • Page 3 Planning Department 1) Approval is for the extension of the duration of the entitlement approval (Time Extension DRC2013-00510) for Tree Removal Permit DRC2007-00457 and modification of the applicable approval time limit as described in Standard Condition B.2 contained in Resolution No. 08-29 that was adopted by the Planning Commission on June 11, 2008. 2) The time extension of the entitlement approval is for two(2)years. The new expiration date for Tree Removal DRC2007-00457 is June 11, 2015. 3) Any requests for future time extensions shall be subject to the procedures, conditions, and findings as set forth in Section 17.14.090 of the Development Code, 4) All other conditions of approval, including all of the Standard/special conditions of approval of other City departments for Development Review DRC2006-00892 (Resolution 08-30) and Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17769 (Resolution 08-29), shall apply. 5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. • APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24TH DAY OF JULY 2013 PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Frances Howdyshell, Chairman ATTEST: Candyce Burnett, Secretary I, Candyce Burnett, Secretary of the Planning Commission for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed,and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 24th day of July 2013, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: ITEMS H,I,J-108 S s /may/3 ,ee60,1, CV, JA Time Extension For Development Review DRC2013-00507 Minor Exception DRC2013-00509 Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00510 Previous Approvals • Development Review — Construction of 10 single-family dwellings. • Minor Exception — Increase height of perimeter wall from 6 feet to 8 felt. • Tree Removal Permit — Removal of 13 trees on site . �a, 1 ■ ©W L(YU� �I 18 •� `JJi'II�Y���1 r i 1 fl - , l7 _ 1 a i - - F1 Ida- go IM gill WMI// MEN all min Iii /�j/♦�/I'��/�Ip[ r � � Condition bH0�1N1 • Applicant shall complete all special and standard conditions included in the approval of Conditional Use Permit DRC2004-01173 , Landmark Alteration Permit DRC2006-00226 and Tentative Tract Map 17769 ( Resolutions 06-01 , 06-44 , and 08-29) to the satisfaction of the Planning Manger prior to issuance of building permits for the construction of the 10 homes . Recommendation • Approve Time Extensions for DRC2013- 005071 DRC2013-00509 and DRC2013- 00510 . VIVA' ryi y' SIGN-IN SHEET RANCHO O PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ANcx cUCAMONGA J U LY 24, 2013 NAME COMPANY''= ADDRESS/EMAIL Ao) EPOS/L os�