Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2018-09-26 - Agenda Packet - PC-HPC
r9*_17�0 SEPTEMBER 26, 2018 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA A. 7:00 P.M. — CALL TO ORDER Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call: Chairman Macias Vice Chairman Guglielmo Commissioner Munoz Commissioner Oaxaca Commissioner Wimberly B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The 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 individual 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. C. CONSENT CALENDAR/HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and non -controversial. They will be acted upon by the Commission at one time without discussion. Any item may be removed for discussion. C1. Consideration to adopt Regular Meeting Minutes of August 22, 2018 Page 1 of 7 r9*_17�0 SEPTEMBER 26, 2018 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA D. DIRECTOR'S STAFF REPORTS The following items do not legally require any public testimony, although the Chairman may open the meeting for public input. NONE E. 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 or less as determined by the Chairman. Please sign in after speaking. E1. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20140 - PARKVIEW FINANCIAL - A proposal to subdivide a vacant 9.11 acre parcel into 14 residential lots for future single-family development within the Very Low (VL) Residential District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan located at 6527 Etiwanda Avenue; APN 0227-051-03. Related Files: Tree Removal Permit DRC2017-00823 and Sign Permit Notice of Filing DRC2017-00824. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. E2. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2017-00823 - PARKVIEW FINANCIAL - A request to remove 13 Blue Gum Eucalyptus Heritage Trees within the Very Low (VL) Residential district, Etiwanda Specific Plan located at 6527 Etiwanda Avenue - APN: 0227-051-03. Related Files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 and Sign Permit Notice of Filing DRC2017-00824. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. E3. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2018-00104 - SC RANCHO DEVELOPMENT CORP. - A request for site plan and architectural review of a proposed 10,243 square foot recreational building, two ancillary support buildings totaling 1,541 square feet, and an outdoor recreation area on a vacant site totaling 1.93 acres of land within the Empire Lakes Specific Plan, Planning Area 1, located north of 4th Street, south of 6th Street, west of Milliken Avenue, and east of Utica/Cleveland Avenues. The specific location of the project site is at the southeast corner of 6th Street and the future alignment of the Resort Parkway; APN: 0210-102-01, -02 and -03. Related file: Pre -Application Review DRC2017- Page 2 of 7 r9*_17�0 SEPTEMBER 26, 2018 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 00885. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 2015041083) on May 18, 2016 in connection with the City's approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project. E4. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2018-00092 — SAINT MARY'S MONTESSORI - A request to establish a combination child care and preschool/elementary school use in an existing 6,600 square foot building and in a proposed 9,974 square foot addition on 1.85 acres of land, located in the Low -Medium (LM) Residential District, Victoria Planned Community, north of North Victoria Windrows Loop and south of Plum Way; APN: 1089-471-25. Related file: Minor Design Review DRC2018-00095. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA guidelines under CEQA Section 15301 — Existing Facilities and CEQA Section 15303 — New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures. E5. MINOR DESIGN REVIEW DRC2018-00095 — SAINT MARY'S MONTESSORI — A request for site plan and architectural review of a proposed 9,974 square foot addition and outdoor play areas to an existing 6,600 square foot child care facility on 1.85 acres of land, located in the Low -Medium (LM) Residential District, Victoria Planned Community, north of North Victoria Windrows Loop and south of Plum Way; APN: 1089-471-25. Related file: Conditional Use Permit DRC2018-00092. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA guidelines under CEQA Section 15303 — New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures. E6. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2017-00658 — CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS - A proposal to amend the General Plan land use designation from Industrial Park to Mixed Use in conjunction with a proposed mixed-use development comprised of two buildings consisting of 207 multi -family units, including 14 live/work units and 14,300 square feet of commercial/office area on a 5.21 acre site located within the Industrial Park (IP) District and Haven Avenue Overlay (HADD) District at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and 26th Street at 10451 26th Street — APN: 0209-131-01. Related files: Pre -Application Review DRC2016-00428, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017-00657, Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656, Design Review DRC2017-00654, Minor Exception DRC2017-00872, and Uniform Sign Program DRC2017-00659. A Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was prepared for consideration. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. Page 3of7 r9*_17�0 SEPTEMBER 26, 2018 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA E7. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DRC2017- 00656 — CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS - A proposal to amend the Development Code to allow for residential uses within the Haven Avenue Overlay (HAOD) District when part of a mixed-use project. This amendment is being proposed in conjunction with a mixed-use development comprised of two buildings consisting of 207 multi- family units, including 14 live/work units and 14,300 square feet of commercial/office area on a 5.21 acre site located within the Industrial Park (IP) District and Haven Avenue Overlay (HAOD) District at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and 26th Street at 10451 26th Street — APN: 0209-131-01. Related files: Pre -Application Review DRC2016-00428, General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017-00657, Design Review DRC2017-00654, Minor Exception DRC2017-00872, and Uniform Sign Program DRC2017- 00659. A Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was prepared for consideration. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. E8. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENT DRC2017-00657 — CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS - A proposal to amend the Zoning Map to change the zoning designation from Industrial Park (IP) District to Mixed Use (MU) District in conjunction with a proposed mixed-use development comprised of two buildings consisting of 207 multi -family units, including 14 live/work units and 14,300 square feet of commercial/office area on a 5.21 acre site located within the Industrial Park (IP) District and Haven Avenue Overlay (HAOD) District at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and 26th Street at 10451 26th Street — APN: 0209-131-01. Related files: Pre -Application Review DRC2016-00428, General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658, Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656, Design Review DRC2017-00654, Minor Exception DRC2017- 00872, and Uniform Sign Program DRC2017-00659. A Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was prepared for consideration. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. E9. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2017-00654 — CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS - A proposal to construct a mixed-use development comprised of two buildings consisting of 207 multi -family units, including 14 live/work units and 14,300 square feet of commercial/office area on a 5.21 acre site located within the Industrial Park (IP) District and Haven Avenue Overlay (HAOD) District at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and 26th Street at 10451 26th Street — APN: 0209-131- 01. Related files: Pre -Application Review DRC2016-00428, General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017-00657, Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656, Minor Exception DRC2017-00872 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2017-00659. A Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was prepared for consideration. Page 4 of 7 r9*_17�0 SEPTEMBER 26, 2018 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA E10. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2017-00659 — CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS - A proposal to establish a uniform sign program to set sign guidelines and standards for a proposed mixed-use development comprised of two buildings consisting of 207 multi -family units, including 14 live/work units and 14,300 square feet of commercial/office area on a 5.21 acre site located within the Industrial Park (IP) District and Haven Avenue Overlay (HADD) District at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and 26th Street at 10451 26th Street — APN: 0209-131- 01. Related files: Pre -Application Review DRC2016-00428, General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017-00657, Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656, Design Review DRC2017-00654 and Minor Exception DRC2017-00872. A Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was prepared for consideration. E11. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2017-00872 — CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS - A proposal to reduce the amount of required off-street parking by approximately twenty-one (21%) percent for a mixed-use development comprised of two buildings consisting of 207 multi -family units, including 14 live/work units and 14,300 square feet of commercial/office area on a 5.21 acre site located within the Industrial Park (IP) District and Haven Avenue Overlay (HAOD) District at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and 26th Street at 10451 26th Street — APN: 0209-131- 01. Related files: Pre -Application Review DRC2016-00428, General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017-00657, Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656, Design Review DRC2017-00654 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2017-00659. A Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was prepared for consideration. F. COMMISSION BUSINESS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION INTER -AGENCY UPDATES: COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS: Page 5of7 ro*-,7�0 SEPTEMBER 26, 2018 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA G. ADJOURNMENT The Commission will adjourn to a workshop in the Rains Rooms to discuss Pre -Application Review DRC2018-00434. I, Susan Shaker, Acting Executive Assistant II of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on Thursday, September 20, 2018, seventy two (72) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive. st.t.. Gap . <Shgker Susan Shaker Acting Executive Assistant II City of 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. 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. Page 6of7 SEPTEMBER 26, 2018 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 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 $2,793 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.CitvofRC.us. Page 7of7 Vicinity Map Historic Preservation and Planning Commission Meeting September 26, 2018 Base Line Church Foothill Arrow B c d .�E 8th y o C7 6th L � y 4th L ¢ 3:_ E6 -E11 E3 Base hurch E1 -E2 . Foo ill N L d � � Arrow E4 -E5 6th w 4th r Meeting Location: City Hall/Council Chambers 10500 Civic Center Drive E1 -E2: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2017-00823 E3: Design Review DRC2018-00104 E4 -E5: Conditional Use Permit DRC2018-00092 and Minor Design Review DRC2018-00095 E6 -E11: General Pian Amendment DRC2017-00658, Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017-00657, Design Review DRC2017-00654, Uniform Sign Program DRC2017-00659, and Minor Exception DRC2017-00872 +i i d Mol i E s a I U � t 1 110 aCi 19th St Base Line Church Foothill Arrow B c d .�E 8th y o C7 6th L � y 4th L ¢ 3:_ E6 -E11 E3 Base hurch E1 -E2 . Foo ill N L d � � Arrow E4 -E5 6th w 4th r Meeting Location: City Hall/Council Chambers 10500 Civic Center Drive E1 -E2: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2017-00823 E3: Design Review DRC2018-00104 E4 -E5: Conditional Use Permit DRC2018-00092 and Minor Design Review DRC2018-00095 E6 -E11: General Pian Amendment DRC2017-00658, Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017-00657, Design Review DRC2017-00654, Uniform Sign Program DRC2017-00659, and Minor Exception DRC2017-00872 AUGUST 22, 2018 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA A. 7:00 P.M. — CALL TO ORDER 7:00 PM Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call: Chairman Macias _X Vice Chairman Guglielmo _X Commissioner Munoz X Commissioner Oaxaca X� Commissioner Wimberly X_ Additional Staff Present- Candyce Burnett, City Planner; Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney, Brian Sandona, Senior Engineer; Jennifer Nakamura, Associate Planner; Dominick Perez, Associate Planner; Susan Shaker, Administrative Assistant; Vincent Acuna, Assistant Planner B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The 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 individual 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. C. CONSENT CALENDAR/HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION Page 1 of 7 Cl Pg1 rwuu71 LL9 'Cu 10 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION !MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and non -controversial. They will be acted upon by the Commission at one time without discussion. Any item may be removed for discussion. C1. Consideration to adopt Regular Meeting Minutes of August 8, 2018 Moved by Munoz, seconded by Guglielmo, carried 3-0-2 (Wimberly and Oaxaca abstaining), to adopt the Regular Meeting Minutes of August 8, 2018. D. DIRECTOR'S STAFF REPORTS The following items do not legally require any public testimony, although the Chairman may open the meeting for public input. NONE E. 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 or less as determined by the Chairman. Please sign in after speaking. E1. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19948 — FOCUS RANCHO CUCAMONGA, LLC - A request to subdivide an existing 379,901 square foot parcel containing seven industrial/warehouse buildings into three parcels within the General Industrial (GI) District, located at 9007 to 9087 Arrow Route; APN: 0209-012-19. Staff has determined the project to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Section 15315, Minor Land Divisions. Vincent Acuna, Assistant Planner: gave the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). Page 2 of 7 C1 Pg2 CIN OF RANCHO CUCAM NGA A UUU01,L47AV10 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Richard Ortwein, a senior partner with Focus Real Estate, stated that the project goal is simple and not challenging. He thanked the City and staff for doing a remarkable job guiding and helping them through the process and paperwork, Chairman Macias opened the public hearing_ Seeing no comments, Chairman Macias closed the public hearing. Moved by Munoz, seconded by Wimberly, carried 5-0 to adopt the Resolution of Approval for Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19948 as presented by staff E2. MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT DRC2018-00605 — CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to amend Title 17 of the Municipal Code to amend requirements and standards for the development of Hotels. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA guidelines under CEQA Section 15061(b)(3). This item will be forwarded to City Council for final action. CONTINUED FROM AUGUST S, 2018 Jennifer Nakamura, Associate Planner, gave the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). She noted the item will no longer be forwarded to City Council. She said that staff is now asking for the Commission to remand the item back to staff with suggestions and feedback. Chairman Macias asked for clarification on what staff is now recommending. Vice -Chairman Guglielmo asked how staff will ensure the accuracy of the market feasibility report and who will be responsible for making that determination. Ms. Nakamura responded that the Applicant could engage with the City to find an appropriate consultant to do the study. Another option would be for them to find their own consultant to do the study, and then that study would be subject to peer review from an independent consultant which the City selects to look at the validity of the report_ She further stated that there are specific guidelines within the Draft Ordinance pertaining to what the City is looking for in the market feasibility study including: how the hotel will be run if owned by a private franchise group with brand affiliation, where the applicant thinks the market demand for another hotel in Page 3of7 C1 Pg3 AUGUST 22, 2018 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA the City is coming from, and where does their operation fit into that market demand to keep the City's occupancy rates at a good level. Chairman Macias asked if the staff will work with the applicant to develop the scope of work for the market study and then take that report to peer review for evaluation. Ms. Nakamura said another option would be to keep economists on hand who would be able to produce the report at the City's request and have the applicant pay the fees. Vice -Chairman Gughelmo asked if a set of amenities would be required by all hotels. Ms. Nakamura replied there is a set list of amenities that are required, but also the ordinance includes, a list of optional amenities to choose from, as well as allowing some flexibility for choosing amenities not listed which the City can approve for presentation to the Commission for consideration_ Commissioner Oaxaca noted his concern about the number of calls for service referenced in the staff report and is interested in hearing from staff in a future meeting on how we are addressing the current inventory of hotels. He would also like to hear more specifics about how we would look at the market feasibility study and it's result because feasibility is a spectrum and if there is a threshold at which staff would say it is unacceptable. Chairman Macias asked what is specifically looked at when the peer review panel evaluates the report. Ms. Nakamura stated it would be similar to what is done now with Initial Studies and the CEQA process, in which the validity and the methodology used is evaluated, and if that methodology supports the conclusions of the report. Further, if there are issues not adequately addressed, the applicant has the opportunity to address those issues. Chairman Macias said he is concerned about the fine line between appropriate methodology vs public interest. The report can be written well, with great methodology, but it could still be a bad idea to have another hotel in the City. He stated there is a need to figure out how these market feasibility studies are going to be evaluated within the spectrum Commissioner Oaxaca mentioned and what are the values the City will put in place to keep what is best for the public interest in mind. Page 4 of 7 C1 Pg4 J--%00071 LLx LU 10 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Commissioner Oaxaca said he has seen deterioration of quality and amenities in hotels that leave franchise agreements to go independent and would like to know if there is a condition the City could apply and enforce to require hotels to maintain a relationship with a franchised chain. Ms. Nakamura stated that staff could research and address if needed. Chairman Macias noted the public hearing is still open from the August 8, 2018 Planning Commission meeting_ Seeing no comments, Chairman Macias closed the public hearing. Commissioner Munoz -requested staff to review the different types of hotels and where they are permitted, specifically to look at zoning and where hotels can exist, Ms. Nakamura asked if there was a specific type of hotel Commissioner Munoz was concerned with_ Commissioner Munoz stated that he doesn't know much about different types of hotels and would like further education on the different types of hotels and where they can be located. Ms. Nakamura replied that staff could provide that explanation for the Commission_ Moved by Munoz, seconded by Oaxaca, carried 5-0 to remand Municipal Code Amendment DRC2018-00605 back to staff for revisions and present back to the Planning Commission at a future date. F. COMMISSION BUSINESS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION INTER -AGENCY UPDATES: NONE COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS: NONE Page 5 of 7 C1 Pg5 AUGUST 22, 2418 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA G. ADJOURNMENT 7:27 PM I, Susan Shaker, Administrative Assistant of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on August 16, 2018 seventy two (72) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive. scrsaw shaker Susan Shaker Administrative Assistant City of Rancho Cucamonga INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view, To allow aJl 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. Page 6 of 7 C1 Pg6 Muuuo 1 LLq LV 10 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 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 $2,793 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.CltyofRC.us. Page 7 of 7 C1 Pg7 STAFF REPORT DATE: September 26, 2018 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Candyce Burnett, City Plann INITIATED BY: Vincent Acuna, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20140 — PARKVIEW FINANCIAL -A proposal to subdivide a vacant 9.11 acre parcel into 14 residential lots for future single-family development within the Very Low (VL) Residential District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan located at 6527 Etiwanda Avenue; APN: 0227-051-03. Related Files: Tree Removal Permit DRC2017-00823. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2017-00823 — PARKVIEW FINANCIAL - A proposal to remove 13 heritage trees within the Very Low (VL) Residential District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan located at 6527 Etiwanda Avenue; APN: 0227-051-03. Related Files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission take the following actions: Adopt the attached Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts; and Approve Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2017-00823 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: The project site is a 9.11 acre undeveloped parcel located at the southeast corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Highland Avenue. The project site is generally rectangular in shape and slopes down from north to south, from about 1,424 feet to 1,412 feet. The site is currently vacant and is covered by non-native grasses, ornamental vegetation, and includes 13 heritage trees (Blue Gum Eucalyptus). The existing Land Uses, General Plan, and Zoning Designations for the project site and surrounding properties are as follows: E1—E2 Pg1 Land Use General Plan Zoning Very Low (VL) Residential Site Vacant Very Low Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan North 210 Freeway N/A N/A E1—E2 Pg1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUBTT20140 — PARKVIEW FINANCIAL September 26, 2018 Page 2 ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant, Parkview Financial, is proposing to subdivide a vacant 9.11 acre parcel into 14 residential lots for future single-family residential development, with a density of 1.53 dwelling units per acre. The Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan allows for a maximum of two dwelling units per acre. Six lots front directly along Etiwanda Avenue, while the remaining eight lots take access from a proposed cul-de-sac which branches off from Highland Avenue. The proposed tentative tract map includes 14 numbered lots and 4 lettered lots. Lettered Lot A will be used as a drainage basin, and will be maintained by a Home Owner's Association, while lettered lots B, C, and D will be used for perimeter landscaping. The minimum lot size in the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan is 20,000 square feet and the proposed minimum lot size for the project is 20,000 square feet. The minimum average lot size required for this area is 25,000 square feet and the proposed lots range in size from 20,000 to 38,362 square feet, with an average lot size of 25,436 square feet. The minimum required lot width at the required front yard setback is 90 feet and the required lot depth is 200 feet. All the lots meet the required lot width and lot depth. B. Future Development: No development is proposed with the subdivision. However, the applicant has conceptually showed the pad location for each future residence. The maximum permitted lot coverage in the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan is 25 percent. According to the conceptual plan, the lot coverage ranges from 10.53 percent to 25 percent. Also, as shown on the project plans, each lot conforms to, or exceeds the minimum required building setbacks of 30 feet (front yard) 60 feet (rear yard) 10 and 20 feet (side), and 25 feet (street side). C. Equestrian Trails and Animal Keeping: Although the project site is not within the Equestrian Overlay, equestrian uses and animal -keeping are allowed on all of the proposed residential lots, since each lot is 20,000 square feet or larger. To accommodate this, the project was designed to include community and local feeder trail improvements. A 20 -foot wide community trail will be provided at the northern perimeter of the project, along Highland Avenue. This will bridge the gap between existing community trail sections that currently end at the northeast and northwest corners of the site. A 15 -foot wide local feeder trail will also be provided throughout the tract to provide access to the rear of every lot and will connect to the community trail. This is consistent with Section 3.4 of the City's Trails Implementation Plan, which requires local feeder trails to provide a logical E1—E2 Pg2 Very Low (VL) Residential Vacant Very Low Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan Cucamonga Valley Very Low (VL) Residential South Water District Water Very Low Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Storage Facility Plan Single -Family Very Low (VL) Residential East Residential Very Low Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan Single -Family Low (L) Residential District, West Residential Low Residential Victoria Planned Community ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant, Parkview Financial, is proposing to subdivide a vacant 9.11 acre parcel into 14 residential lots for future single-family residential development, with a density of 1.53 dwelling units per acre. The Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan allows for a maximum of two dwelling units per acre. Six lots front directly along Etiwanda Avenue, while the remaining eight lots take access from a proposed cul-de-sac which branches off from Highland Avenue. The proposed tentative tract map includes 14 numbered lots and 4 lettered lots. Lettered Lot A will be used as a drainage basin, and will be maintained by a Home Owner's Association, while lettered lots B, C, and D will be used for perimeter landscaping. The minimum lot size in the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan is 20,000 square feet and the proposed minimum lot size for the project is 20,000 square feet. The minimum average lot size required for this area is 25,000 square feet and the proposed lots range in size from 20,000 to 38,362 square feet, with an average lot size of 25,436 square feet. The minimum required lot width at the required front yard setback is 90 feet and the required lot depth is 200 feet. All the lots meet the required lot width and lot depth. B. Future Development: No development is proposed with the subdivision. However, the applicant has conceptually showed the pad location for each future residence. The maximum permitted lot coverage in the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan is 25 percent. According to the conceptual plan, the lot coverage ranges from 10.53 percent to 25 percent. Also, as shown on the project plans, each lot conforms to, or exceeds the minimum required building setbacks of 30 feet (front yard) 60 feet (rear yard) 10 and 20 feet (side), and 25 feet (street side). C. Equestrian Trails and Animal Keeping: Although the project site is not within the Equestrian Overlay, equestrian uses and animal -keeping are allowed on all of the proposed residential lots, since each lot is 20,000 square feet or larger. To accommodate this, the project was designed to include community and local feeder trail improvements. A 20 -foot wide community trail will be provided at the northern perimeter of the project, along Highland Avenue. This will bridge the gap between existing community trail sections that currently end at the northeast and northwest corners of the site. A 15 -foot wide local feeder trail will also be provided throughout the tract to provide access to the rear of every lot and will connect to the community trail. This is consistent with Section 3.4 of the City's Trails Implementation Plan, which requires local feeder trails to provide a logical E1—E2 Pg2 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUBTT20140—PARKVIEW FINANCIAL September 26, 2018 Page 3 riding loop within subdivisions, and Section 17.70.040 of the Development Code that require feeder trails to provide direct equestrian access to the rear of all lots. The proposed equestrian trail will also include corner cutoffs to allow a vehicle to maneuver at trail ends. The applicant has indicated the location of future 6 -foot high block walls located along the east and south project boundaries, which abut the proposed feeder trail. Although the project does not propose the development of homes, the applicant has conceptually showed the location of a 24 -foot by 24 -foot horse corral on each lot on the project plans. Each horse corral can be directly accessed from the proposed equestrian trails and is located at least 70 feet from any adjacent primary residence on an adjacent lot, pursuant to City standard. D. Point of Historic Interest: The Cultural Assessment prepared for the project determined that the project site was the location of the now demolished Ross House, which was designated as a Point of Historic Interest by the City of Rancho Cucamonga on November 17, 1993. A condition of approval requiring the applicant to install a plaque commemorating the Ross House is included in the tract map. E. Tree Removal Permit: The site currently includes 13 Blue Gum Eucalyptus Trees, which are considered heritage trees by the City. Only one out of the 13 Blue Gum Eucalyptus trees are in good condition. The remaining trees are either dead or in poor health and will need to be removed. The applicant will be required to replace removed trees on a one-for-one basis as well as plant the required two trees in the front yard area of each residence. Prior to building permit issuance, Planning staff will assess the viability of transplanting the single healthy Blue Gum Eucalyptus tree to an area that does not conflict with the proposed development. F. Technical Review Committee: The project was reviewed by the Technical Review Committee (TRC) on May 1, 2018. The Committee accepted the proposal and recommended approval. The Committee recommended approval of the project to the Planning Commission. G. Design Review Committee: The project was reviewed by the Design Review Committee (Wimberly, Guglielmo and Granger) on May 1, 2018. No major or secondary issues were discussed, as reflected in the Design Review Committee Comments (Exhibit E). The Committee recommended approval of the project to the Planning Commission. H. Trails Advisory Committee: The project was reviewed by the Trails Advisory Committee on May 9, 2018. No major or secondary issues were discussed, as reflected in the Trails Advisory Committee Comments (Exhibit F). The Committee recommended approval of the project to the Planning Commission. Neighborhood Meeting: On April 9, 2018 a neighborhood meeting was conducted by the applicant at the Victoria Gardens Cultural Center located at 12505 Cultural Center Drive. The intent of this meeting was to invite property owners within a 660 -foot radius of the project boundaries for input relating to the project. There were three attendees. During the meeting, the applicant presented the tentative tract map and conceptual grading plan for the proposed project. The attendees were generally curious about the project and, otherwise, did not identify any concerns or major issues with the application. E1—E2 Pg3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUBTT20140—PARKVIEW FINANCIAL September 26, 2018 Page 4 J. Assembly Bill 52 (AB52) Tribal Consultation: On March 19, 2018, per AB 52, the City sent letters to the San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians, San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians, Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians — Kizh Nation, and the Morongo Band of Mission Indians notifying them of the project. The purpose of that notice was to determine if any tribe desired consultation to discuss the proposal. On March 23, 2018, staff received an email from the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation, requesting consultation. Staff attempted to contact the tribe on multiple occasions but did not receive a response. In an effort to reduce the direct and indirect impacts that this project could have on Native American tribal cultural resources to a "less than significant" status, staff included a mitigation measure that requires the applicant to obtain the services of a qualified Native American Monitor(s) during construction -related ground disturbance activities, such as pavement removal, pot -holing or auguring, grubbing, weed abatement, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching. K. 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, cultural resources, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hydrology and water quality, noise, public services, and tribal cultural resources, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. A Mitigation Monitoring Program has also been prepared to ensure implementation of, and compliance with, the mitigation measures for the project. FISCAL IMPACT: The project site currently is assessed an annual property tax. A percentage of this annual tax is shared with the City. The proposed development will increase the value of the project site and the City's annual share of the property tax will increase accordingly. The project proponent also will be responsible for paying one-time impact fees. These fees are intended to address the increased demand for City services due to the proposed project. The following types of services that these impact fees would support include the following: library services, transportation infrastructure, drainage infrastructure, animal services, police, parks, and community and recreation services. COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: Although a specific current City Council goal does not apply to the project, the project is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and the objectives of the Development Code. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing with a regular legal ad 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. To date, no comment or phone calls have been received regarding the project notifications. E1—E2 Pg4 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUBTT20140 — PARKVIEW FINANCIAL September 26, 2018 Page 5 EXHIBITS: Exhibit A - Aerial Photo Exhibit B - Project Plans Exhibit C - Design Review Committee Action Agenda and Comments Exhibit D - Trails Advisory Committee Action Agenda and Comments Exhibit E - Initial Study (Parts I, II, and III) Draft Resolution of Approval for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 Draft Resolution of Approval for Tree Removal Permit DRC2017-00823 E1—E2 Pg5 IDt •�1 ..�_ IV V rlta9v, Dr /Vrop?ha RC t _ - ' i1'Z'J „._.—.a.v-__�c®v+�rsr�-.awcer::�A wj .W Ar 9 rtyardal too '•11 y • y?, r- IWO �k- . ,p "�-� _ '•*a fUS'A'6ricultural m 1 _ e artm0kFire,,St - • 'a,�li sr..�- P aY -7w Rl ra, ` n S� Dr MIwi Y' 3_ y is isS { t x EXHIBIT B 77 1 1 5 ➢ a' e' 1 1 e h� k = k 1 9 8 8 8 1 � - g • - a E1 -E2 Pg7 �pK$ •a '�€Y� i � ^8� �Y � 3 s p :� EXHIBIT B 77 1 1 5 ➢ a' e' 1 1 e h� k = k 1 9 8 8 8 1 � - g • - a E1 -E2 Pg7 �pK$ •a '�€Y� ani � ^8� �Y � 3 s p :� EXHIBIT B 77 1 1 5 ➢ a' e' 1 1 e h� k = k 1 9 8 8 8 1 � - g • - a E1 -E2 Pg7 T c.. nxiw.l�1^rt a l n or.w 1 am OEfAIL ISA Co MUMiv-N_OP.9EtwRSEcnoN \� fEE�0.HORSE (RAIL SECTON � �.r. W: 11 � as .• x...W w T M SEWER FASEYpli9ECTW . re wW= oeran z c TYRLAL PRNPIE M ,Mr. eTOPb EASEMENT 9ECIgfi ._ M�q;I Lwh:Rr (Ww.wrr Ryet�Jl�IAr �W4 �+i-¢v.r x 9NVM PaOis n „ W+v I . VrR;L jljAll_.FI.I QNcMNI =Vx + ♦ wM x wr mar µw xrr wvMtlri a Eawu b�n�rN ,uw a Wf Two rt)YBn 4lru -7c:.�( q nvwra a wwa[ yanf —i_ u W { J ,5uv4 c.. nxiw.l�1^rt a l n or.w 1 am OEfAIL ISA Co MUMiv-N_OP.9EtwRSEcnoN \� fEE�0.HORSE (RAIL SECTON � �.r. W: 11 � as .• x...W w T M SEWER FASEYpli9ECTW . re wW= oeran z c TYRLAL PRNPIE M ,Mr. eTOPb EASEMENT 9ECIgfi ._ M�q;I Lwh:Rr (Ww.wrr Ryet�Jl�IAr �W4 �+i-¢v.r x 9NVM PaOis n „ W+v I VrR;L jljAll_.FI.I QNcMNI + µw c.. nxiw.l�1^rt a l n or.w 1 am OEfAIL ISA Co MUMiv-N_OP.9EtwRSEcnoN \� fEE�0.HORSE (RAIL SECTON � �.r. W: 11 � as .• x...W w T M SEWER FASEYpli9ECTW . re wW= oeran z c TYRLAL PRNPIE M ,Mr. eTOPb EASEMENT 9ECIgfi ._ M�q;I Lwh:Rr (Ww.wrr Ryet�Jl�IAr �W4 �+i-¢v.r x 9NVM PaOis n „ W+v iECiION Bit "" fcnoNc c secnon o -u 19 MI W"m E£ .ru �, ,• sEcnoluu •�� 41 L 1 uu a ilu EiiNAN�AAVEIAI�gr •� WnFur o N u en • .M1 wY� wr /Yn�HGl1W�AYEN� uuorrfn ur�vvla�c TENTATIVE TRACT MAP #20140 INTER® ETIWANDA OEVELOPEMENT IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONOA I VrR;L jljAll_.FI.I QNcMNI \. iECiION Bit "" fcnoNc c secnon o -u 19 MI W"m E£ .ru �, ,• sEcnoluu •�� 41 L 1 uu a ilu EiiNAN�AAVEIAI�gr •� WnFur o N u en • .M1 wY� wr /Yn�HGl1W�AYEN� uuorrfn ur�vvla�c TENTATIVE TRACT MAP #20140 INTER® ETIWANDA OEVELOPEMENT IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONOA GRADING GENERAL NOTES: .1. 1, aWl,I.IF1 ..1.C).11 TF, AP w AP.. ,mmue•T..mr. ,`iai:nof°`O.A".i'.LPC. `ar+l' FACT CAT IFFIEfl.nlw TV.- «I CAL oeuaw Plw To M ST.PT a PA.i,. IwCALL PAFFFPC ACT ..wwM d. LLL :'TO.. �I- �; ..I. .�1.e...-1.-AwTIFIVIr GRADING GENERAL NOTES (CONTINUED]: 1n..nW ) „.AT rP APACTIFICLAT. FTI I. VACV- I. 11.OF 9 �YURn uwn AFTY.I.w. P.PwC, ... W.. . CIE-IOP.I.L01'. W �CTOCIA �a F F. To "` =*LAw.Imn.. OFF 1.MCm1. ��1..Fn®rz.IF. TPATiwmmam.nP.MW.�. CAP,.ACCAP CT,F. �� .,IP •Iw a,L u s . CC OFF. �. , m1.Imw.,c 1. B,c YmRS u. ad„6 1�.MnCa¢ uO nNI1n n96 P..M n,. EWY¢,IW IO,O,YINIw, -'A if F, ��FACT-I-Y6��� -- � VA I. ^� Leo CYOYr1e69m1 P,-1. II fuw M. �m��L,.. IC imCIC4 Pic ,¢ 1 .. NU 4, C, SIW CAVY ` IM1 M .1M IN51nCM.6 FIT " LA, ¢ Su..m N m: wi[m n. 9..nT.P1uN¢m. amnAa Pl �wmlw 1.L. TFc smI..war ITF PAP im. , IeuPAPPI ai LFITCAP m"ecwACCIPACT'L Im:,l�`'IA""M1I`" I..l. Ann 1011FIrmMwP' moanwnA� Man AC _a. AT FIC nn wlv'mM I. la. lass sl`F'A w1., �1. ICATIC�oe°�ee�ICAP,,1°,rcrowcWm: 'PI`ilcl am..1 AP1vNaOP mFICITA.1.TO HEM lmr.r 111 �AIIAP F��un -Al.. nIFIII 0A. Kif.R iMYisiw o! -1. 0 I1 m W.WPLT. Mw mMou`>•'£11 .oRAW T,.1.°1.. A;..SanI,."Fw mFF'.PF` P,1.Zi,E'�CL A 9wL .. ..L tm.mlmwT1w OW VP J r ,r n n. 1,[Io,F CF w... CIVIL HELL LT. . 1ml. .w.m a4:-In....1.1 av1.. w. In. ACT) nVOTIO, 1. . 11JI. ms.nn..I"�`..+o r.1. m.1.mALRvm llr�rI` I. rR -,I.F - FPAA . TA CAPurw � .AlrsOOL°d CAPIT. iO Eir�A°c"FIT . CAST IT. AT NI MT .WCTwl AFT,. aPM1(FIFT111CATICAT (F �IM10X T.CwnFLAFF,La .Im vOCAP nnPP m I-.1. ,I, w.m10wna1Y I A.aWarHE AT o.aM TO. A CEPTIFFICITC FA` .rti (C v m -1. nwL nLsmluL nnu Pam WA..InP.1... CrAPF.�1`MT�Sr nTFF ATCrA.Om�p .I" sn OF -1.1 n.ar RI.. 1 TO I. In FLICI ¢nii`wT@``CAPPICA Pro(A"w L.sm„ca ...nP�n ,KMK i WNOIAVC,OTO ¢Lim! w �W m PLATT ML`FI 9d NIC. iO, 161M MVATw 1f lmunW ". ..I .OFF.,FC LICA. 1 P CAP w FAI-- ALL, AnaERFCC) AT. C ac....1. CIDLSIffi TWA PACCOLP POINT. 1. ITT. AT 1. OF 1 w CWLiI'.CF[`9WL tFIFF 61 wT9 .LL .I �SITI�AWL¢=, thAV6I.�RrYRTIn mMi...m: 'i Ant. OPPAITAFF II�nF.1..a.. .. I... 1. LTLFFV FIC CAT, =n OFFr1..mllmu¢�� �®l.lJ O.�M � 0 I..m,N.m Ian 1. A,TO C 1.L. [i1W AOFFIFFIEFF AT OF .1. PO..m.S 9a1wl .% n.En,.ut.. I.. Rm..Tw mACT. s.u. P1w..m.1 AL 11.. 1. Cu�mi l.Anr In a vOCIAG Frall¢.11... rc mxm.nm CAP CLATC A P CA VIVO- .,.I. IVO Act PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN FOR TRACT #20140 6725 ETIWANDA AVENUE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P1YrtA6w I 1. IF NO ACPPLrrtlM1 Plazd TO Fn CAPIC � PC nP ,KI nFnu11 R/ � N.9N`�91 Wei .Cull1 615 1®m HELP P PACT CUP mFF1 .0 PAY 1,.1. FIS I.wPmlw a. .. ITAPP . nL.0 .c m`.AAAAA...m.. 1. woimmMAi"i-w .AI.' mm.- TO CLOT � CAP TAT d.IM rrt IW..V6P-PT.3`L I.. P M .FOAT-LL IPHiC&..M 0.. P M CATIA OF AP J. M 611Pa9P I.. .,,I. A. IT,IA%W'.A1. IW .n. ..w..Iw CPL nWOu AA 1. CITIF81[.1 4I.WNn" .w 11.AC v.L,s CI[ AS A ^X 01)An.,(I) AiIFICACTIC TO rs CAVI wl",m (AT PLAN. AT ALL TO HEP vs'lol IN ,P ,. 1. HE.slw. 11 vE.slaL. CAmc,Pm aITA2,P 'IWv LTOFAII10w 1Y LOCATIONMAP UTILITY PURVEYORS: FIAT Iml `w.au. I...0 ma L 7FI. An. mrtw, u. rua [.4 COUT In F. CLI.P. APALPw C)TAP IF. (AC) mA ms FFn m'4WAP� CAP wLImWa IWm F®IF nm`� I. ICI I, Iwl ` T� .mn CI STREET GENERAL NOTES: 9IX' IFAI T �1[SOK�PFACTLA, InrsN�' 6�iW�C". � .11'.. w_r=...m.. .1�I.��AA. A CAP TOP OF of 9o�IW' A. T@ q.M YIMin� RIW16 unL1Y1R w INP ma, AVILL I. � M :r�o� .PC III wrFACCIFIir .1 smr.ua nm. roc nn n awe CACAP w A. .A ...LEInT mwPP.4ICAA. Pnn.4.nAAT ..l.a. .LS-..MP0 "ACTTIL. OAL¢--rVC PC. I � V I. Wmiw OFFIC PC mm�9C'C w�L a¢ B!OSYL. 1`121FOAFFIC AT A� FACT TO TC m.Anl n v woe eL.wIm. A.mm .1.l'I1.PC . FAIL .W ... 1. Mw�`P`maRa ,...,PLA .TOP .. m�lry sALILIITY OIL'(IFICAT.n OFFAC rA° FF �',�T i.aL P n, FALL usl�.LsliCArs w.rs�iz.o AFFIC TI. AmCOFFIL :% .. ,I LS 1. 6. m e�nwArl" sCnFAFA ""`O CI w.�c a"'w.l�la1,L�A. ACACTORIAL, OF III. OF .- FIFFILL FILLED ITTL A TIC 11 1.vr.L. .,I. a rL.mFIT aea.a.A m1u IFT1.1 FLIPI .T., M C.P.A. w, TIC .aA..... mA tt.M F2 nmlANaTa". ate. ii m,P Cs. FACT Nn OFF, T,PPP m.. CA.IInIW . nnOF m .Lan FIT I. F,.a naw n wr OPEC 11.1 ®,K 1. -r Ann .Lnrmisu PVL a. Am I m.s n1nc M . Fw POP . mar Srlw R oaA...1.1. Amm S,RACT -OF Hairs .C.,A 5�1 TOTAL TOTAL m6T . 10(3) o.lw CALF, I. TOM4urt La IFTCL PLATC, P, CIC ..www, FAPLAEP� 9.L mei R W.R..11AF .x41116 ACT NILIr, 11.q.Flwls YC mv.0 M � MCIEFFICALLP PC ALL �4 sn.nIFAC W WL M fln ntI.. LL u'f I YIILIn.1. Al s9J1a..0 -.1. 1. w.CIA, ..a.e+n nurs- ro¢s I..a L. CEP mm r. - C C. Crti,.rs AM w,orw Ilmm. msLr, IT w'm ACTIP 'CO, FLACTIC ITT-,, LEGEND ® IFFILIall., raw1 0 mWmIn PAP PACT EARTHWORK QUANTITIES nP P uA.oW Aa1mm LAND AREA: (ACIPLAT u. O..W.2 s,Ivu3 RI �4 �i°HI.m.- nu ,,..TOP C, .. OF TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. .v CIw- OWNERIDEVELOPER. -A.,F- AFFL INDEX OF SHEETS: Cl �FWPFAPFI I. .a .-5 . Cur�m'FIL F C.'f ly„ NOTE: .o.I..LxImnw. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Taaerre.u. IlnxwscuoEr+ � G CONCEPTUAL GRADING&&RMNAGE PIAN n9E1j.L6Ak€, i ■ P1YrtA6w I 1. IF NO ACPPLrrtlM1 Plazd TO Fn CAPIC � PC nP ,KI nFnu11 R/ � N.9N`�91 Wei .Cull1 615 1®m HELP P PACT CUP mFF1 .0 PAY 1,.1. FIS I.wPmlw a. .. ITAPP . nL.0 .c m`.AAAAA...m.. 1. woimmMAi"i-w .AI.' mm.- TO CLOT � CAP TAT d.IM rrt IW..V6P-PT.3`L I.. P M .FOAT-LL IPHiC&..M 0.. P M CATIA OF AP J. M 611Pa9P I.. .,,I. A. IT,IA%W'.A1. IW .n. ..w..Iw CPL nWOu AA 1. CITIF81[.1 4I.WNn" .w 11.AC v.L,s CI[ AS A ^X 01)An.,(I) AiIFICACTIC TO rs CAVI wl",m (AT PLAN. AT ALL TO HEP vs'lol IN ,P ,. 1. HE.slw. 11 vE.slaL. CAmc,Pm aITA2,P 'IWv LTOFAII10w 1Y LOCATIONMAP UTILITY PURVEYORS: FIAT Iml `w.au. I...0 ma L 7FI. An. mrtw, u. rua [.4 COUT In F. CLI.P. APALPw C)TAP IF. (AC) mA ms FFn m'4WAP� CAP wLImWa IWm F®IF nm`� I. ICI I, Iwl ` T� .mn CI STREET GENERAL NOTES: 9IX' IFAI T �1[SOK�PFACTLA, InrsN�' 6�iW�C". � .11'.. w_r=...m.. .1�I.��AA. A CAP TOP OF of 9o�IW' A. T@ q.M YIMin� RIW16 unL1Y1R w INP ma, AVILL I. � M :r�o� .PC III wrFACCIFIir .1 smr.ua nm. roc nn n awe CACAP w A. .A ...LEInT mwPP.4ICAA. Pnn.4.nAAT ..l.a. .LS-..MP0 "ACTTIL. OAL¢--rVC PC. I � V I. Wmiw OFFIC PC mm�9C'C w�L a¢ B!OSYL. 1`121FOAFFIC AT A� FACT TO TC m.Anl n v woe eL.wIm. A.mm .1.l'I1.PC . FAIL .W ... 1. Mw�`P`maRa ,...,PLA .TOP .. m�lry sALILIITY OIL'(IFICAT.n OFFAC rA° FF �',�T i.aL P n, FALL usl�.LsliCArs w.rs�iz.o AFFIC TI. AmCOFFIL :% .. ,I LS 1. 6. m e�nwArl" sCnFAFA ""`O CI w.�c a"'w.l�la1,L�A. ACACTORIAL, OF III. OF .- FIFFILL FILLED ITTL A TIC 11 1.vr.L. .,I. a rL.mFIT aea.a.A m1u IFT1.1 FLIPI .T., M C.P.A. w, TIC .aA..... mA tt.M F2 nmlANaTa". ate. ii m,P Cs. FACT Nn OFF, T,PPP m.. CA.IInIW . nnOF m .Lan FIT I. F,.a naw n wr OPEC 11.1 ®,K 1. -r Ann .Lnrmisu PVL a. Am I m.s n1nc M . Fw POP . mar Srlw R oaA...1.1. Amm S,RACT -OF Hairs .C.,A 5�1 TOTAL TOTAL m6T . 10(3) o.lw CALF, I. TOM4urt La IFTCL PLATC, P, CIC ..www, FAPLAEP� 9.L mei R W.R..11AF .x41116 ACT NILIr, 11.q.Flwls YC mv.0 M � MCIEFFICALLP PC ALL �4 sn.nIFAC W WL M fln ntI.. LL u'f I YIILIn.1. Al s9J1a..0 -.1. 1. w.CIA, ..a.e+n nurs- ro¢s I..a L. CEP mm r. - C C. Crti,.rs AM w,orw Ilmm. msLr, IT w'm ACTIP 'CO, FLACTIC ITT-,, LEGEND ® IFFILIall., raw1 0 mWmIn PAP PACT EARTHWORK QUANTITIES nP P uA.oW Aa1mm LAND AREA: (ACIPLAT u. O..W.2 s,Ivu3 RI �4 �i°HI.m.- nu ,,..TOP C, .. OF TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. .v CIw- OWNERIDEVELOPER. -A.,F- AFFL INDEX OF SHEETS: Cl �FWPFAPFI I. .a .-5 . Cur�m'FIL F C.'f ly„ NOTE: .o.I..LxImnw. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Taaerre.u. IlnxwscuoEr+ � G CONCEPTUAL GRADING&&RMNAGE PIAN n9E1j.L6Ak€, BEXCWUAN LEGEND HIGHIANDAVE a ' iig L= Ao=s9zi.cIiI �tl �Y zl auc°w sr \` \—L_L--L— _ GENERAsw O.E¢ m1 y J 1. ' ." ]. � _ .� I � ,� •i49 A - mmaso r.w.a.s .. aKx,¢ sa wu - zs,as so .r — q wwQ z o "_" — I a �. FNS Two. OT NG M Wva rmMc nxYnl �m K..,nsnr m .,Iw 6i,K >r :z PW 1zlo .. _ • Li j', ifE ut .w !iu — \ GI�YI rtn ZT du PM 160 . PM-191] �� r a GI— r. ' -PAO-9150 d /' •• • P.W-19120 I_ i 191] - r ' - I - • as •: �--'----_ I � __ ____ i � _ 1 �— —� . •'J ".SY°� _ r—s'0up• '1 J//' CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Iq It 'WmFl+ 3 BMP-2 - mzsErnvnuoAAvvrvuE CONCEPTUAL GRADING B DRAINAGE PLAN i PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN BMP MAINTENANCE SCHEDULE `�Iwrs`r.d ws°.rasi �r srsre'"w,. L. HIGHtANGAYL- +.yn.u\love\uoo\w'o\nv\cn....V......exaw w..¢w.om s/aNm......0 rrcnln pOPFN CATCH BASN DWRn OVI flpR9 ER wiwl � m (slI�IIu2v�ia w.M 'yam 1� XAI�✓, B e t ' IMPROVEMENT NOTES a _ I_ f.rtn 1RENCH ypz nINFlLTRATION .. I• m m III I `ym gym' m m '� nucramiea WNNS WTIEN 6IZSflf.VA`.MAHhUE CONCEPNN SiIXUI CPAIX RAN L. a.. .....� '•IBJ=m y� � m O m +.yn.u\love\uoo\w'o\nv\cn....V......exaw w..¢w.om s/aNm......0 rrcnln a X'DN."'.• n CYtr. W .1 XPo.l��.. �arNR�wo,�.��.rlo,. �C 16.➢ fix: uRlna w...o C.r M c' W.a� �sx�rtn is rvirueAm�iiuii�w ms:11 �Wio�irwrf _ a.• . vn�.m� n.nv en e pOPFN CATCH BASN DWRn OVI flpR9 ER wiwl � m (slI�IIu2v�ia w.M wu A uvD �s�sIIlaaa—�11r✓m%�� XAI�✓, IMPROVEMENT NOTES a X'DN."'.• n CYtr. W .1 XPo.l��.. �arNR�wo,�.��.rlo,. �C 16.➢ fix: uRlna w...o C.r M c' W.a� �sx�rtn is rvirueAm�iiuii�w ms:11 �Wio�irwrf _ a.• . vn�.m� n.nv en e pOPFN CATCH BASN DWRn OVI flpR9 ER wiwl � m (slI�IIu2v�ia w.M wu A uvD �s�sIIlaaa—�11r✓m%�� XAI�✓, I_ f.rtn 1RENCH ypz nINFlLTRATION .. Ns�'mn.vz er xMsnr wX CITU OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA © nucramiea WNNS WTIEN 6IZSflf.VA`.MAHhUE CONCEPNN SiIXUI CPAIX RAN L. e' e I 4tvi ma %H smu qwx w[ , 5qm [mu mM w[ M[ 4 I • 1 vS sm•n w'I J, I zl �sr. ttv�v, iM1 VM1 l v[mrt1�n�p n M R[ •. ' a 9w�rIL rl Si�M1 Xm�n I �a .m iV M1w a mar. I A. EL ntNw•. 6 r �r. _ _..m��m_ wopo ' o G smu qwx w[ , 5qm [mu mM w[ M[ 4 I • 1 vS sm•n w'I J, I zl �sr. ttv�v, iM1 VM1 l v[mrt1�n�p n M •. ' a 9w�rIL rl Si�M1 Xm�n I �a .m iV M1w a mar. I T. [�f n � G 914 1�BOC .wrtG� LL 4waw . y r ssvun Gl G •• nr Xreaa w•w� � Xtnu Niu e� smu qwx w[ , 5qm [mu mM w[ M[ 4 I • 1 vS sm•n w'I J, I zl �sr. ttv�v, iM1 VM1 l v[mrt1�n�p n M TYPICAL LOT DRAINAGE n •. ' a 9w�rIL rl Si�M1 Xm�n I �a -I iV I TYPICAL LOT DRAINAGE n 210 FREEWAY ELEVATIONS TABLE .na ma ■ ■ EARTHWORK QUANTITY_ ESTIMATE CITY OF RANCHO CIICAMONGA iNCi NJW rVR.L GiEV am mNsvn. we.we CONCEPTUAL GRADING & DRAINAGE PIAN CO AND FILL ENHIBD 'HIGHL DAVE SCHEDULE WE'S x¢xaxse �w/uxxlww¢ aoomoual caaowc uoTEs: an.m s>m ca�nn w..,a cwlue wue rs •osxc�`oxzw`�'mcro'Es. m \ w sA'm. MAINTENANCE .xxYxuY . .......... --a- —tax — me • NN. � SCHEDULE WE'S �w/uxxlww¢ ocv� ca�nn w..,a cwlue wue "T ti0A N 6C NMm w .xxYxuY . .......... --a- —tax — me • NN. � SCHEDULE WE'S �w/uxxlww¢ "T ti0A N 6C NMm w .xxYxuY onw uawur I.A.mol w ' CMA4 AREA = Po,a00- ocv�a -727d L----- - ---- ------- 2- In -- -- 1 II I LI n I r -t IC TYPICAL LANDSCAFE FlNISH f.RADF DEidll Ow 7 v 1 I Cariss_ic_f Arm ZVI IPI im N Legend k Project Site Awd 660 it Buffer Parcels 7 4L Michael Baker 1 7—_- lungo Ct to rot, 30N3AVVUNVMII3 E1 -E2 Pg16 -- -- -------- --- -------- Li ----- - - - ---- =1. - - - ---------- _LF wLU E111 QI......... . - - - - --------- 0�HEAO UTILIW Purim Fw --F--HO CUCAMONGAJ 1 �.m 5FT�A� I Ili -- -- -------- --- -------- Li ----- - - - ---- =1. - - - ---------- _LF wLU E111 QI......... . - - - - --------- 0�HEAO UTILIW Purim Fw --F--HO CUCAMONGAJ 1 �.m 5FT�A� m N 00 'I Cucamonga Valle, 1" = 376 ft Sub Title 0105x2018 Water District map represents a visua i oispa. of relaceC ..^,eegraphi_ ,n'C: r all 'aia provvicecl hereon i`s no* a guarantee of actual field conditions. To be sure of complete accuran pc�s._ unntart C!v. , staff :ham must r-,jrmancr. MAY 19 2018 - 7:00 P.m. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTIONS RAINS ROOM CITY HALL 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE A. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call: Ray Wimberly X Rich Macias Candyce Burnett Donald Granger X Alternates: Lou Munoz Tony Guglielmo Francisco Oaxaca X B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Committee on any item listed on the agenda. 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 to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Staff Coordinator, depending upon the number of individuals members of the audience. This is a professional businessmeeting 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. C. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS 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. C1. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20140 -MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL - A proposal to subdivide a vacant 9.11 -acre parcel into 14 residential lots for the future single-family development within the Very Low Residential (VL) EXHIBIT C El—E2 2 E2Pg19 MAY 19 2018 - 7:00 P.M. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTIONS RAINS ROOM CITY HALL 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan located at 6527 Etiwanda Avenue; APN 0227-051-03. Related Files: Tree Removal Permit 2017-00823. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. The Committee briefly discussed the project and recommended approval with no issues. D. ADJOURNMENT 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. ADJOURNED AT 7:06PM I, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on day, Thursday, April 19, 2018, at least seventy two (72) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA. rgs Lois J. Schrader Planning Commission Secretary City of 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. Page 2 of 2 E1—E2Pg20 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Vincent Acuna May 1, 2018 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20140 - MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL - A proposal to subdivide a vacant 9.11 -acre parcel into 14 residential lots for the future single-family development within the Very Low Residential (VL) District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan located at 6527 Etiwanda Avenue; APN 0227-051-03. Related File: Tree Removal Permit 2017-00823. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Site Characteristics and Background: The project site, a 9.11 -acre undeveloped parcel, is located within the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, at the southeast corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Highland Avenue. The project site is generally rectangular in shape and slopes down from north to south, from about 1,424 feet to 1,412 feet. It is covered by non-native grasses, ornamental vegetation, and includes 13 heritage trees (Blue Gum Eucalyptus). The Cultural Assessment prepared for the project determined that the project site was the location of the now demolished Ross House, which was designated as a Point of Historic Interest by the City of Rancho Cucamonga on November 17, 1993. The site is bound on the east and west (across Etiwanda Avenue) by single-family residences. To the south is a water storage tank operated by the Cucamonga Valley Water District. To the north is Highland Avenue and a vacant triangular shaped parcel. The properties to the north, south, and east are zoned Very Low (VL) Residential, Etiwanda Specific Plan, while the properties to the west (across Etiwanda Avenue) are zoned Low (L) Residential, Victoria Planned Community. Proiect Overview: The applicant is requesting to subdivide the property into 14 residential lots for future single-family residential development. Six lots front directly along Etiwanda Avenue, while the remaining 8 lots take access from a proposed cul-de-sac which branches off from Highland Avenue. The proposed tentative tract map includes 4 "letter" lots (Lots A through D). Lot A will be used as a drainage basin, and will be maintained by a Home Owner's Association, while Lots B, C, and D will be used for perimeter landscaping. The minimum lot size in the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan is 20,000 square feet. The proposed minimum lot size for the project is 20,000 square feet. The minimum average lot size required for this area is 25,000 square feet. The proposed lots range in size from 20,000 to 38,362 square feet, with an average lot size of 25,436. The minimum required lot width (at the required front yard setback) is 90 feet and the required lot depth is 200 feet. All the lots meet the required lot width and lot depth. No development is proposed with the subdivision. However, the applicant has conceptually showed the pad location for each future residence. The maximum permitted lot coverage in the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan is 25 percent. According to the conceptual plan, the lot coverage ranges from 10.53 percent to E1—E2 Pg21 DRC COMMENTS TENTATIVE MAP SUBTT20140 MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL May 1, 2018 Page 2 25 percent. Also, as shown on the project plans, each pad location conforms to or exceeds the minimum required building setbacks of 30 feet for the front setback, 60 feet for the rear setback, 10 and 20 feet for the side setbacks, and 25 feet for the street side yard setback. Although the project site is not within the Equestrian Overlay, equestrian uses and animal - keeping are allowed on all of the proposed residential lots since each lot is 20,000 square feet or larger. To accommodate this, the project was designed to include Community and local feeder trail improvements. A 20 -foot wide Community trail will be provided at the northern perimeter of the project along Highland Avenue. This will connect with existing Community trail segments that currently end at the northeast and northwest corners of the site thereby completing an unfinished part of the Community trail system at this location. A 15 -foot wide local feeder trail will also be provided throughout the tract to provide access to the rear of every lot and will connect to the Community trail. This is consistent with Section 3.4 of the City's Trails Implementation Plan, which requires local feeder trails to provide a logical riding loop within subdivisions, and Section 17.70.040 of the Development Code that requires feeder trails to provide direct equestrian access to the rear of all lots. The proposed equestrian trail will also include corner cutoffs to allow a vehicle to maneuver at trail ends. The applicant has indicated the location of future 6 -foot high block walls located along the east and south project boundaries, which abut the proposed feeder trail. Lastly, although the project does not propose the development of homes, the applicant also has conceptually shown the location of a 24 -foot by 24 -foot horse corral on each lot. Each horse corral can be directly accessed from the proposed equestrian trails, and is located at least 70 feet from any adjacent primary residence on an adjacent lot, pursuant to City standard. Staff Comments: Staff is in support of the proposed Tentativ configurations, ingress and egress, as we designed and complimentary to the existing Maior Issues: None Secondary Issues: None Staff Recommendation: Tract map SUBTT20140. The proposed lot I as trail access and connectivity are well - adjacent residential communities. Staff recommends that the Committee review the subdivision and provide comments as warranted. If the Committee finds the project acceptable, staff recommends the proposed Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 be forwarded to the Planning Commission for their review and approval. E1—E2 Pg22 DRC COMMENTS TENTATIVE MAP SUBTT20140 MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL May 1, 2018 Page 3 Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Vincent Acuna, Assistant Planner Members Present: Additional Staff Present: Mike Smith, Senior Planner; Dominick Perez, Associate Planner E1—E2 Pg23 MAY 97 2018 TRAILS ADVISORY COMMITTEE AGENDA ACTIONS CITY HALL 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE A. 6:00 P.M. -CALL TO ORDER 6:00 PM Roll Call: Francisco Oaxaca P Tom Tisler (Bicycle) P (Vacant) Carol Douglass (Equestrian) P Luis Munoz (Alt) P Mike Smith (Staff Coordinator)P B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Trails Advisory Committee on any item listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Trails Advisory 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 to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Staff Coordinator, depending upon the number of individual members of the audience. This is a professional businessmeeting 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. C. DISCUSSION ITEMS C1. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20140 - MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL - A proposal to subdivide a vacant 9.11 -acre parcel into 14 residential lots for the future single-family development within the Very Low Residential (VL) District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan located at 6527 Etiwanda Avenue; APN 0227-051- 03. Related Files: Tree Removal Permit 2017-00823. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Staff presented the project to the Committee for their review and discussion. The Committee accepted the project as proposed and recommended approval to the Planning Commission. D. IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR THE NEXT MEETING This is the time for the Trails Advisory Committee to identify the items they wish to discuss at the next meeting. These items will not be discussed at this meeting, only identified for the next meeting. EXHIBIT D Page 1 of 2 E1—E2 Pg24 e�r4.r. MAY 95 2018 TRAILS ADVISORY COMMITTEE AGENDA ACTIONS CITY HALL 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE Mr. Tisler requested an update on the "green" bike lanes. He recalled that during a report at a prior meeting last year (but neither he nor Staff were certain), the Engineering Department presented a report on the City's future Capital Improvement Project that was relevant to the Committee. In that report, the Engineering Department indicated that the City received a grant to paint the bike lanes at certain intersections in the City. He wanted to know the status of it. Staff will follow-up with the Engineering Department and provide an update at the next TAC meeting. NOTE: Mr. Tisler indicated that he would not be available for the meetings in June and July so the earliest this update would occur is in August. E. ADJOURNMENT 71 6:20 PM I, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on Wednesday, May 02, 2018, seventy two (72) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive. 4.9 Lois J. Schrader Planning Commission Secretary City of 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. Page 2 of 2 El—E2 Pg25 TRAILS ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMMENTS 6:00 p.m. Vincent Acuna May 9, 2018 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20140 - MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL - A proposal to subdivide a vacant 9.11 -acre parcel into 14 residential lots for future single-family development within the Very Low Residential (VL) District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan located at 6527 Etiwanda Avenue; APN 0227-051-03. Related Files: Tree Removal Permit DRC2017-00823. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Site Characteristics and Background: The project site, a 9.11 -acre undeveloped parcel, is located within the Very Low (VL) District, Etiwanda Specific Plan at the southeast corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Highland Avenue. The project site is generally rectangular in shape and slopes down from north to south, from about 1,424 feet to 1,412 feet. It is covered by non-native grasses, ornamental vegetation, and includes 13 heritage trees (Blue Gum Eucalyptus). The Cultural Assessment prepared for the project determined that the project site was the location of the now demolished Ross House, which was designated as a Point of Historic Interest by the City of Rancho Cucamonga on November 17, 1993. The site is bound on the east and west (across Etiwanda Avenue) by single-family residences. To the south is a water storage tank operated by the Cucamonga Valley Water District. To the north is the Highland Avenue right of way and a vacant triangular shaped parcel. The properties to the north, south, and east are zoned Very Low Residential (VL), Etiwanda Specific Plan, while the properties to the west (across Etiwanda Avenue) are zoned Low Residential (L), Victoria Planned Community. Proiect Overview: The applicant is requesting to subdivide 9.11 -acres of land located at 6527 Etiwanda Avenue, at the southeast corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Highland Avenue into 14 residential lots for future single-family residential development. Six lots front directly along Etiwanda Avenue, while the remaining 8 lots take access from a proposed cul-de-sac which branches off from Highland Avenue. The proposed tentative tract map includes 14 numbered lots and 4 lettered lots. Lettered Lot A will be used as a drainage basin, and will be maintained by a Home Owner's Association, while lettered Lots B, C, and D will be used for perimeter landscaping. The minimum lot size in the Very Low (VL) District, Etiwanda Specific Plan is 20,000 square feet and the proposed minimum lot size for the project is 20,000 square feet. The minimum average lot size required forthis area is 25,000 square feet and the proposed lots range in size from 20,000 to 38,362 square feet, with an average lot size of 25,436. The minimum required lot width (at required front yard setback) is 90 feet and the required lot depth is 200 feet. All the lots meet the required lot width and lot depth. E1—E2 Pg26 TRAILS ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMMENTS SUBTT20140 — MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL May 9, 2018 Page 2 Although the project site is not within the Equestrian Overlay, equestrian uses and animal -keeping are allowed on all proposed residential lots, since each lot is 20,000 square feet or larger. Additionally, the project site sits between two existing sections of a community trail. Therefore, staff has determined that it would be sensible to establish an equestrian trail system throughout the project site. Establishing a trail system on-site will bridge the gap between two existing sections of a community trail while providing future residents access to the City's equestrian trail system. Although the project site is not within the Equestrian Overlay, equestrian uses and animal -keeping are allowed on all of the proposed residential lots, since each lot is 20,000 square feet or larger. To accommodate this, the project was designed to include community and local feeder trail improvements. A 20 -foot wide community trail will be provided at the northern perimeter of the project, along Highland Avenue. This will bridge the gap between existing community trail sections that currently end at the northeast and northwest corners of the site. A 15 -foot wide local feeder trail will also be provided throughout the tract to provide access to the rear of every lot and will connect to the community trail. This is consistent with Section 3.4 of the City's Trails Implementation Plan, which requires local feeder trails to provide a logical riding loop within subdivisions and Section 17.70.040 of the Development Code that require feeder trails to provide direct equestrian access to the rear of all lots. The proposed equestrian trail will also include corner cutoffs to allow a vehicle to more easily maneuver at trail corners. The applicant has indicated the location of future 6 -foot high block walls located along the east and south project boundaries, and within the side and rear yard areas which abut the proposed trails. The required gates and equestrian step-thru posts will be provided where the private equestrian trails intersect with the community trail along Highland Avenue. The gate and equestrian step-thru configuration are depicted on Sheet 2 of the project plans. Additionally, the conceptual grading plans indicate the proposed trails will have a grade of no more than 4%, which is in compliance with the City's standards. Lastly, although the project does not propose the development of homes, the applicant has conceptually showed the location of a 24 -foot by 24 -foot horse corral on each lot. Each horse corral can be directly accessed from the proposed equestrian trails, and is located at least 70 feet from any adjacent primary residence on an adjacent lot, pursuant to City standard. Staff Comments Staff supports the proposed 14 -lot Tentative Tract Map (SUBTT20140) and the related equestrian trail design and layout. The proposed feeder trail loop provides convenient and direct equestrian access at the rear of each lot. Additionally, the proposed community trail along the south side of Highland Avenue will bridge a gap between the previously unconnected segments of the community trail within the immediate area. The project will include all of the requisite trail improvements including trail gates, trail fencing and a 4 -inch deep decomposed granite surfacing. Each lot conceptually provides a 24 by 24 -foot corral pad, which meets the 70 -foot minimum distance separation from an adjacent primary residence. Additionally, each corral pad will have direct access to an equestrian trail. Major Issues None E1—E2 Pg27 TRAILS ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMMENTS SUBTT20140—MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL May 9, 2018 Page 3 Secondary Issues: None Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the Trails Advisory Committee recommend approval to the Planning Commission of the proposed Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 as presented. Staff Planner: Vincent Acuna, Assistant Planner Action Comments: E1—E2 Pg28 Pririt Frirtn , ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM (Part I - Initial Study) RANCHO (Please type orprint clearly using Ink. Usethe tab key to move from one line to the next line.) CUCAMONGA Planning Depanmenl (909)477-2750 The)purpose ofythisz'forin,�is toinformithe Cttylof=the baste components'of theproposed.4 fpNect so thatthe Ct#y ma ,review the project pursuantto Ctty,Polictes, Ordinances; and`,: Gwdehnes,xthe 'Cahfomla Envtronmentall sQuahty , Act; ,and; rtfiei Ctty'siRules and;'! Proced6res5foilmplern ntY�CEQk Ittisimportant thattthe informationlrequestedainthlstµ applicatiori�be�prov�dedimfuU : .=•. ;: ''' r ` " a � � �; ;, Upon rev�ewtoflthecampletedtlntttal'•StudyCiPart,lland the deyelopment,applicatton,5 addittonalitriformationsueh as„butohi, olse,iilogcal, drgenteafi)ad ^; geologicalireports mey,be regwred The�prolect apphcatton wti! not be tleemed cornplete u`nlesstthe(tdentifiedfspecialjstudfesled' ports are'submittetl forreview and'accepte JAass � cotnplete'and#adequa'te The pro�ectjapphcahon wtll notbe scheduled}for,Commttteel. s, reviews{unless all}Frequired' reports karreasubmitted and Aeemed -complete, fortstafE�to, prepare.tne lnittal,Studya4Panji,as required'byjCEQA In addttwri to,the,flmg fee,�the I applicant wtll6be responstbleaoxpay or"reimburse,the Ctty, its agents,roificers;and/o�`; consQUili srfor ali,fc stsµfor 4Kd,aipreparation„ review, aanalysis recommendations;; ` Mitt gations, etc , of,anylspectal(studtes=or reports -r�... INCOMPLETEAPPLICATIONS WILL NOTBEPROCESSED 'Please note that it is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that the application is complete at the time of submittal; City staff will not'be available to perform work required to provide. missing Information. Application Number for the project to which this form. pertains: 17TMP-006216 .Project Title: Harris Gardens Name & Address ofproject owner(s): Parkview Financial 12400 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 350 Los Angeles, CA 90025 Contact: Andrew Benton Name & Address of developer orproject sponsor; same as above Updated 411112013 Page 1 of 10 N..-_ MI iTi ' .M - E1 -E2 Pg29 Contact Person & Address. Angel Cesar, P.E. 3536 Concours St, Suite 100 Ontario, CA 91764 Name & Address of person preparing this form (if different from above): Christine Donoghue 3536 Concours St, Suite 100 Ontario, CA 91764 Telephone Number, 909.974.4963 Information indicated by an asterisk(*) is not required of non -construction CUP's unless, otherwise requested by staff. '1) Provide a full scale (8-1/2 x 11) copy of the USGS Quadrant Sheet(s) which includes the project site, and indicate the site boundaries. 2) Provide a set of color photographs that show representative views into the site from the north, south, east, and west; views into and from the site from the primary access points that serve the site; and representative views of signi6cani features from the site. Include a map showing location of each photograph. 3) Project Location (describe): The Project site is located at 6527 Etiwanda Ave, City of Rancho Cucamonga. The project site is currently undeveloped and is bound by Etiwanda Avenue to the west, Highland Avenue and State Route 210 to the north, residential properties to the east, and a water storage facility to the south. 4) Assessor's Parcel Numbers (attach additional sheet if necessary): 0227-051.03-000 'S) Gross Site Area (adsq. R.): 9.2 -acre site •6) Net Site Area (lural site size minus area of public streets & proposed 6.03 acres dedications): 7) Describe any proposed general plan amendment or zone change which would affect the project site (attach additional sheet if necessary): The existing land use designation for the Project site is very low residential (0.1 - 2.0 DU/AC) (VLR) and zon very low residential as well. The Project proses to develop fourteen (14) one and or two story single family residences on lots of approximately 25,000 square feet. Therefore, the Project would develop approximately two (2) dwelling units per acre. Based on the proposed project and existing general plan and zoning, the Project would not propose to amend the general plan or change the zoning. Updated 4/11/2013 E1—E2 Pg30 Page 2 of 10 8) Include a description of all permits which wdlbe necessary from the City of Rancho Cucamonga and othergovemmental agencies in order to fully Implement the project., TBD 9) Describe the physical setting of the site as it exists before the project including Information on topography, soil stability, plants and animals, mature Imes, trails and roads, drainage courses, and scenic aspects. Describe any existing structures on silo (including age and condition) and the use of the structures. Attach photographs of significant features described. In addition, cite all sources ofinformation (i.e., geological and/or hydrologic studies, biotic and archeological surveys, tragic studies); (Please see attached document page 1) Updated 4/1112013 E1 -E2 Pg31 Page 3 of 10 10) Describe the known cultural and/orhislaricalaspects ofthesite. Cite alisourcesofinformation (books,published reports and oral history): (Please see attached document page 3) 11) Describe any noise sources and theirlevels that now affect the site (aircraft, roadway noise, etc.) and how they will affect proposed uses: (Please see attached document page 6) 1 Z) Describe the proposed project in detail. This should provide an adequate description of the site in terms of ultimate use that will result from the proposed project. Indicate if there are proposed phases for development, the extent of development to occur with each phase, and the anticipated completion of each increment. Attach additional sheaf(s) if necessary.- (Please ecessary:(Please see attached document page 6) 13) Describe the surrounding properties, including information on plants and animals and any cultural, historical, or scenic aspects. Indicate the type ofland use (residential, commercial, etc.), intensity ofland use (one -family, apartment houses, shops, department stores, etc.) and scale of development (height, frontage, setback, rear yard, etc.): (Please see attached document page 8) Updated 4 /1112 01 3 E1—E2Pg32 Page 4 of 10 14J Will the proposed project change the pattern, scale, or character of the surrounding general area or the project? (Please see attached document page 9) 15) Indicate the type ofshort-term and long-term noise to be generated, Including source and amount. Now will these noise levels affect adjacent properties and on -silo uses? What methods of soundproofing are proposed? (Please see attached document page 9) '16) Indicate proposed removals and/or replacements of mature or scenic trees: (Please see attached document page 7) 17) Indicate any bodies of water (including domestic water supplies) into which the site drains: The site drains into the Etiwanda Creek Channel and in the Santa Ana River Watershed. 18) Indicate expected amount of water usage. (See Attachment A for usage estimates). For further clarification, please contact the Cucamonga Valley Water District at (909) 987-2591. a. Residential (gatfday) 705 Peak use (gal/Day) 1,410 b. CommerciaUlnd, (gal/day/ac) Peak use (gallmin/ac) 19) Indicate proposed method of sewage disposal. ❑ Septic Tank © Sewer. If septic tanks are proposed, attach percolation tests. If discharge to a sanitary sewage system is proposed indicate expected daily sewage generation: (See Attachment A for usage estimates). Forfuftherclarification,please contact the Cucamonga Valley Water District at (909) 987-2591. a. Residential (gal/day) 270 b. CommerciaUlndustrial (gal/day/ac) _ Updated 411112013 E1—E2 Pg33 Page 5 of 10 RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS: 20) Number of residential units: 14 Detached (indicate range of parcel sizes, minimum lot size and maximum lot size: (Please see attached document page 13) Attached (indicate whether units are rental or for sole units): 21) Anticipated range of sale prices and/or rents: SafePdce(s) STBD to $TBD Rent(permonth) $TBD to STBD 22) Specify number of bedrooms by unit type: TBD 23) Indicate anticipated household size by unit type: TBD 24) Indicate the expected number of schoolchildren who will be residing within the project: Contact the appropdate School Districts as shown in Attachment B: a. Elementary: TBD b. Junior High: TBD c. Senior High TBD COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL, AND INSTITUTIONAL PROJECTS 25) Describe type of use(s) and majorfunction(s) of commercial, industrial or institutional uses: Na Updated 411112013 E1 -E2 Pg34 Page 6 0110 26) Total Boor area of commercial, industrial, or institutional uses by type: n/a 27) Indicate hours of operation: n/a 28) Numberofemployess: Total: n/a Maximum Shift: n/a Time of Maximum Shift: n/a 29) Provide breakdown of anticipated job classifications, including wage and salary ranges, as well as an indication of the rate of hire for each classification (attach additional sheet if necessary): n/a 30) Estimation of the number of workers to be hired that currently reside in the City: n/a '31) For commercial and industrial uses only, indicate the source, type, and amount of air pollution emissions. (Data should be verified through the South Coast Air Quality Management District, at (8 18) 572-6283): n/a ALL PROJECTS 32) Have the water, sewer, fire, and flood contml agencies serving the project been contacted to determine their ability to provide adequate service to the proposed project? If so, please indicate their response. Yes. A will serve letter has been provided to service water, sewer and fire need, Updated 4/1112013 El—E2 Pg35 Page 7 of 10 33) In the known history of this property, has there been any use, storage, or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic materials? Examples of hazardous and/or toxic materials include, but are not limited to PCB's; radioactive substances; pesticides and herbicides; fuels, oils, solvents, and other flammable liquids and gases. Also note underground storage of any of the above. Please list the materials and describe their use, storage, and/or discharge on the property, as well as the dates of use, it known. (Please see attached document page 14) 34) Will the proposedprojectinvolve the temporary oriong-term use,storage, or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic materials, including but not limited to those examples listed above? If yes, provide an inventory orali such materials to be used and proposed method of disposal. The location of such uses, along with the storage and shipment areas, shall be shown and labeled on the application plans. (Please see attached document page 14) 35) The applicant shall be required to pay any applicable Fish and Game fee. 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 Commissior✓Planning Director hearing: 1 hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for adequate evaluation ofthis project to the best or my ability, that the facts, statements, and information presented are hue and correct tot he best ormy knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional informationmaybe required to be submitted before an adequate evaluation can be made by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Date: 10-03.2017 Signature:—R'-�T� . Updated 4/11/2013 Title: Project Manager E1 -E2 Pg36 Page 8 of 10 ATTACHMENT"A" CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ESTIMATED WATER USE AND SEWER FLOWS FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT (Data Provided by Cucamonga Valley Water District February 2003) Water Usage Single -Family Multi -Family Neighborhood Commercial General Commercial Office Professional Institutional/Government Industrial Park Large General Industrial Heavy Industrial (distribution) Sewer Flows Single -Family Multi -Family General Commercial Office Professional Industrial Park Large General Industrial Heavy Industrial (distribution) 705 gallons per EDU per day 256 gallons per EDU per day 1000 gal/day/unit (tenant) 4082 gal/day/unit (tenant) 973 gal/day/unit (tenant) 6412 gal/day/unit (tenant) 1750 gal/day/unit (tenant) 2020 gal/day/unit (tenant) 1863 gal/day/unit (tenant) 270 gallons per EDU per day 190 gallons per EDU per day 1900 gal/day/acre 1900 gal/day/acre Institutional/Government 3000 gal/day/acre 2020 gal/day/acre 1863 gal/day/acre Source: Cucamonga Valley Water District Engineering & Water Resources Departments, Urban Water Management Plan 2000 Updated 4/1112013 Page 9 of 10 E1—E2 Pg37 ATTACHMENT B Contact the school district for your area for amount and payment of school fees: Elementary School Districts Alta Loma 9350 Base Line Road, Suite F Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909)987-0766 Central 10601 Church Street, Suite 112 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909)989.8541 Cucamonga 8776 Archibald Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909)987-8942 Eliwanda 6061 East Avenue P.O. Box 248 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 (909)899-2451 High School Chaffey High School 211 West 5th Street Ontario, CA 91762 (909)988-8511 Updated 411112013 E1—E2Pg38 Page 10 of 10 Cucamonga Valley -AMWater District — Martin E. 2vlrbulls Sccrctary / General 7Nanagw/CEO November 30, 2016 City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Department P.O. Box 807 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 10440 Ashford Street. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730.2799 P.O. Box 638, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729.0638 (909)987-2591 Fax(909)476-8032 Re: Availability of Water and Sewer Service APN: 022705103 Southeast corner of Highland Avenue And Etiwanda Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, CA To whom it may concern: You are hereby advised that APN: 022705103 located at the Southeast corner of Highland Avenue and Etiwanda Avenue is located within the service area of the Cucamonga Valley Water District. We have reviewed the tentative map for the development and have determined that the District has an adequate supply of water available to meet the needs of the development, including minimum fire flow requirements as established by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District. Also, the District anticipates the existing sewer system and sewage treatment plant capacity to be adequate for this development. Following the receipt of appropriate application, arrangements can be made for the installation of facilities required to meet the needs of the development and furnish public water and sewer utility service to the development in accordance with the District's policies, rules, regulations, and rate ordinances. If you have any questions or need further information, please contact me. Sincerely, CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT n.,. Ted Munson Jr. Lead Engineering Technician Oscar Gonzalez James V. Curatelo, Jr. Luis Cetins Randall James Reed Kathleen J. Tiegs President Vice President Direuar Director Dircclar E1—E2Pg39 9) Describe the physical setting of the site as it exists before the project including Information on topography, soil stability, plants and animals, mature trees, trails and roads, drainage courses, and scenic aspects. Describe any existing structures on site (including age and condition) and the use of the structures. Attach photographs of significant features described. In addition, cite all sources of Information (i.e., geological and/or hydrologic studies, biotic and archeological surveys, traffic studies): The project site is approximately 9.2 acres in size. Topography on the project site is relatively flat and the elevation of the site ranges from approximately 1,400 to 1,410 feet above mean sea level (msl) (Psomas 2016c). A home, known as the Ross home, was constructed in 1906, and then demolished in 1991. Currently, only the remnants of the concrete foundation is visible on the property. The project site is vacant, has a level surface, and no structures are present on-site. The entire proposed project area has surficial sediments composed of younger Quaternary Alluvium, derived as alluvial fan deposits from the San Gabriel (Psomas 2016d). Additionally, no drainages, which may include wetlands and "water o the U.S." were identified on the project site; thus, nojurisdictional areas occur on the project site. Biological Resources A tree survey and biological investigations Including a literature review and site visit of the project site concluded the following: Vegetation on site includes ruderal and ornamental vegetation. The south edge of the project site, within the project boundaries, Is lined with blue gum eucalyptus trees (Eucalyptus globulus) including dead individuals interspersed within it. The project site Is an abandoned agricultural area with the eucalyptus trees acting as a windrow. Additionally, a row of dead trees (likely a remnant windrow) is present approximately In the middle of the site, running from east to west. Understory vegetation is extremely sparse, generally consisting of doveweed (Croton sedger), jimson weed (Datura wrightfi), a few tree tobacco individuals (Nicotiano glauca), and non-native annual grasses. A summary of tree quantity and size is provided below in Table 1. TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF TREE QUANTITY AND SIZE TreeSpedes - A Oq_u_aL" •14 ,Trunk - Dhmeter Range (iri.)' I Average, Height;(fil ! 11 It Canopp� s ,WldtFi.lftY r ,Sdentlfic Na e - fa man Name Eucalyptus globulus blue gum 21.0-63.0 51.6 37.5^ Hymenosporum flavum sweat!hade 1 32.5 30 35 luglans sp. walnut 1 38.2 30 25 TOTAL 16 - - - 5ource: Psomas. 2016e. Tree Survey Report. Tree health assessments were based on an examination of the roots, trunk, branches, twigs, and foliage. Each tree component was rated on the following scale from 1 to 4:1=poor; 2=fair; 3=good; and 4=excellent. Generally, tree health was evaluated based on visual evidence of vigor, such as the amount of foliage; leaf color and size; presence of branch or twig dieback; severity of insect infestation; the presence of disease; heart rot; fire damage; mechanical damage; amount of new growth; appearance of bark; and rate of callous development over wounds. The tree's structural integrity was evaluated with respect to branch attachment, branch placement, root health, and stability. In addition, the health E1 -E2 Pg40 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM Part I— Initial Study continued... assessment considered such elements as the presence of decay, weak branch attachments, and the presence of exposed roots due to soil erosion. A total of 16 trees that meet the minimum requirements described in the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code are present on the project site. The City's Tree Information provides guidelines that would help identify if tree is or should be a protected tree. One of them is, any tree with a truck circumference an 20" inches or more. In this case, Table 1 shows that all trees identified onsite would exceed 20" inches in circumference. This includes 14 blue gum eucalyptus, 1 sweetshade (Hymenosporum%lovum), and 1 walnut (Juglonssp.). The walnut was not able to be identified to species using the botanical key in Hickman (1993) as no fruit was present on the tree, refer to Table 1, below (Psomas 2016e). Although all of the trees identified in the project site meet the minimum 20" inch truck circumference, the survey found that the line of blue gum trees located along the southern boundary show general signs of fair to declining health, likely due to drought stress, and show tattered leaves from insect damage. Additionally, the within the presumed windrow of blue gum trees located in the middle of project site, only one tree is living and also showing signs of fair to declining health. Other trees where considered dead. Additionally, based on the field survey, no jurisdictional areas occur on the project site and no suitable habitat is present an the project site for special status plant species, as explained below. Special Status Plant and Wildlife Species • A total of 31 special status plant species have been reported in the vicinity of the project site. However, the project site does not support suitable habitat for any of the 31 species and is not located within a designated critical habitat area (Psomas 2016c). • In addition to species formally listed by the resource agencies, a total of 21 species reported in the vicinity of the project site have a California Rare Plant Rank (CRPR) of 1B or 2 which may be considered constraints on development according to Section 15380 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. Three of the 21 species—mesa horkelia, Brand's star phacelia, and San Bernardino aster—have been reported at locations near the project site and can occur in disturbed areas; however, due to the consistent soil disturbance on the project site and lack of native habitats, these species are not expected to occur. The remaining species are also not expected to occur on the project site due to lack of suitable habitat (Psomas 2016c). • A total of 29 special status wildlife species have been reported in the project vicinity (CDFW 2016). Any impact on these species would be considered significant and would require permitting with the resource agencies. However, no special -status wildlife species were observed on site. The project site does not support suitable habitat for any State -listed Endangered or Threatened species, and is not located within a designated critical habitat area (Psomas 2016c). • Marginally suitable habitat for the silvery legless lizard —a USFWS Sensitive species, and a CDFW Species of Special Concern, and San Diego desertwoodrat have marginally suitable habitat within the dead trees, branches, and stumps located throughout the project site. The remaining species (Including the burrowing awl) are not expected to occur on the project site due to lack of suitable habitat (Psomas 2016c). Nesting Birds The ground surface provides suitable nesting habitat for killdeer. The site also contains forage habitat for raptors, and nesting and forage habitat for Cooper's hawk. Several raptor species (i.e., birds of prey) have potential to nest within mature trees (i.e., ornamental vegetation) on and immediately adjacent to the project site. Additionally, one red-tailed hawk nest was observed in a eucalyptus tree located in the southeast corner of the project site. If construction activities would occur during the raptor nesting season (i.e., February 1 to June 30), the loss of an active nest of any raptor species, including common E1 -E2 Pg41 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM Part I — Initial Study continued... raptor species, would be considered a violation of Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3513 of the California Fish and Game Code and would be considered significant. Mitigation Measure 810-1 is proposed to reduce impacts on active nests to a less than significant level. The trees within the site and surrounding residential areas could potentially be used by migratory and non -migratory birds for breeding. In addition, numerous bird species could use nesting boxes found on the project site. The project site has the potential to support birds (common and special status) subject to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (META). The MBTA protects the taking of migratory birds and their nests and eggs. Bird species protected under the provisions of the MBTA are identified by the List of Migratory Birds (Code of Federal Regulations, Title 50, Section 10.13). Any impact on an active bird nest would be considered a violation of the MBTA and would be considered significant. Mitigation measure BIO -2 is proposed to reduce Impacts on active nests to a less than significant level. MM 610-1 A survey for active raptor nests is recommended prior to commencement of any construction activities during the raptor nesting season (i.e., February 1 to lune 30). Restrictions may be placed on construction activities in the vicinity of any active nest observed until the nest is no longer active, as determined by a qualified Biologist. Typically, a 500 -foot buffer zone is designated around a nest to allow construction to proceed while minimizing disturbance to the active nest. Once the nest is no longer active, construction can proceed In the buffer zone. MM BI0-2 In order to avoid Impacts on nesting birds, vegetation removal shall not be scheduled during the breeding season (Le,, March 15—September 15) to the extent feasible. If vegetation clearing for construction must be conducted during the breeding season, prior to disturbance, a pre -construction survey or multiple surveys shall be conducted by a qualified Biologist for nesting birds to confirm the absence of active nests. If no active nests are found, vegetation removal can proceed. If the Biologist finds an active nest within or adjacent to the construction area and determines that the nest may be impacted, the Biologist will identify an appropriate buffer zone (typically, 100 to 300 feet) around the nest depending on the sensitivity of the species and the nature of the construction activity. The active site will be protected until nesting activity has ended to ensure compliance with the MBTA and the California Fish and Game Code. To protect any nest site, the following restrictions to construction activities shall be required until nests are no longer active, as determined by a qualified Biologist: (1) clearing limits shall be established within a buffer around any occupied nest, unless otherwise determined by a qualified Biologist and (2) access and surveying shall be restricted within the buffer of any occupied nest, unless otherwise determined by a qualified Biologist. Construction and/or encroachment Into the buffer area around a known nest shall only be allowed if the Biologist determines that the proposed activity would not disturb the nest occupants. 10) Describe the known cultural and/or historical aspects of the site. Cite all sources of Information {hooks, published reports and oral history): Historical Resources A Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment was conducted on June 20, 2016. The Phase I study resulted in the following existing conditions findings (Psomas 2016d): E1-E2Pg42 A single ceramic plate fragment, of unknown origin, and the remnants of a concrete foundation, possibly related to the Ross House, were the only identifiable historic items noted during the survey. The Local Register of Historic Resources and the City of Rancho Cucamonga's Historic Landmarks and Points of Interest directory list the Ross House, which is a residence that existed on the property and was recorded by Gallup in 1989. The house was constructed on the property around 1906. The house was owned by a prominent businessman, C. Newton Ross, who was a successful citrus grower. The house was evaluated by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in 1989. The evaluation found the house had been significantly modified over the years and, as such, no longer met the criteria necessary for inclusion on the National Resources of Historic Places (NRNP). Subsequently, the house was demolished in 1991. In 1993, the former location of the house was designated as a Point of Historic Interest by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The designation, in this case, is used because the historic structure has been removed and the site is the only remaining relevant feature. The designation is a recognition for historical purposes and is not subject to protective or restrictive provisions applicable to Landmark Designations. Based on evaluation of the project site, the assessment concluded that no historically significant buildings, structures, objects, or sites are located on the project site. . Archaeological The results of the records search Indicate that the property had not been the subject of an archaeological investigation, nor were any cultural resources previously recorded on the property. A single shard of patterned whiteware, several mortared bricks, small boulders with concrete adhering to them, and numerous unidentified metal objects were also observed at various locations on the property. It is possible that these are related to the Ross House, which was demolished in 1991. However, with the exception of the foundation, the other items observed could have been the result of unauthorized dumping once the property was vacant. Paleontological Resources A paleontological resources records search and scientific literature review for the project area and surrounding region. The records search documents fossil localities previously identified In and adjacent to the project area. Shallow excavations in the younger Quaternary Alluvium exposed In the proposed project area are unlikely to encounter significant vertebrate fossils. Deeper excavations that extend down Into older Quaternary deposits, however, may well encounter significant remains of fossil vertebrates. Any substantial and deep excavations in the proposed project area, therefore, should be monitored closely to quickly and professionally recover any fossil remains while not impeding development. Also, sediment samples should be collected and processed to determine the small fossil potential in the proposed project area. Any fossils collected should be placed in an accredited scientific Institution for the benefit of current and future generations (Psomas 2016d). Finally, grading and excavation activities would occur in fill materials and native sediments. There is a possibility that buried archaeological and or paleontological resources, could be discovered during shallow grading activities. For these reasons, the Implementation of Mitigation measures (CUL -1 and CUL -2) are proposed to reduce potential Impacts to archaeological and paleontological resources to a less than significant level. MM CUL -1 In the event that archaeological resources (historic or prehistoric) are inadvertently unearthed during excavation and grading activities, the Contractor shall Immediately cease all earth -disturbing activities within a 100 -foot radius of the area of discovery. The Property Owner/Developer shall retain a qualified Archaeologist (project Archaeologist), E1 -E2 Pg43 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM Part I — Initial Study continued... subject to approval by the City of Rancho Cucamonga, to evaluate the significance of the find and to determine an appropriate course of action. All artifacts except for human remains and related grave goods or sacred objects belong to the Property Owner. All artifacts discovered at the development site shall be Inventoried and analyzed by the project Archaeologist. If any artifacts of Native American origin are discovered, the Property Owner/Developer and project Archaeologist shall notify the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department and the appropriate local Native American tribe identified by the Native American Heritage Commission. The significance of Native American resources shall be evaluated In accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and shall consider the religious beliefs, customs, and practices of the tribe. All items found in association with Native American human remains shall be considered grave goods or sacred in origin and subject to special handling. Native American artifacts that cannot be avoided or relocated at the project site shall be prepared in a manner for curatlon and the project Archaeologist shall deliver the materials to an accredited curatlon facility approved by the city of Rancho Cucamonga within a reasonable amount of time. Non -Native American artifacts shall be Inventoried, assessed, and analyzed for cultural affiliation, personal affiliation (prior ownership), function, and temporal placement. Subsequent to analysis and reporting, these artifacts shall be subjected to curation or returned to the Property Owner/Developer, as deemed appropriate. Once ground -altering activities have ceased or the project Archaeologist determines that monitoring activities are no longer necessary, monitoring activities may be discontinued following notification to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department. A report of findings, including an itemized inventory of recovered artifacts, shall be prepared upon completion of the steps outlined above. The report shall include a discussion of the significance of all recovered artifacts. The report and inventory, when submitted to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department, shall signify completion of the program to mitigate impacts to archaeological and/or cultural resources. A copy of the report shall also be filed with the SCCIC. MM CUL -2 If any paleontological resources (i.e., plant or animal fossils) are encountered before or during grading, the Property Owner/Developer shall retain a qualified Paleontologist to monitor construction activities and 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 earth -disturbing activities. • Divert earth -disturbing activities away from the immediate area of the discovery until the Paleontological Monitor has completed salvage. If construction personnel make the discovery, the grading contractor shall immediately divert construction and notify the Paleontological Monitor of the find. E1-E2Pg44 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM Part I — Initial Study continued...) • Prepare, Identify, and curate all recovered fossils for documentation In the summary report and transfer to an appropriate depository (e.g., San Bernardino County Museum). • Prepare and submit a technical report describing the identification, salvage, evaluation, and treatment of ail fossils discovered during grading to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Transfer collected specimens with a copy of the report to the depository. 11) Describe any noise sources and theirlevels that now affect the site (aircraft, roadway noise, etc.) and how they will affect proposed uses: The primary sources of noise at the proposed project site are traffic on State Route (SR) 210, Etlwanda Avenue, and Highland Avenue. SR -210 is a major east -west freeway located approximately 160 feet north of the project site and 15 feet below the elevation of the proposed project site. Etiwanda Avenue is a two- lane road with a posted speed limit of 45 miles per hour (mph) that runs along the western side of the project site. Highland Avenue is a two-lane road with a posted speed limit of 40 mph that runs along the northern side of the proposed project site. There is a traffic signal at the intersection of Etiwanda Avenue and Highland Avenue northwest of the project site. The project site is vacant and no noise is generated. The nearest airport to the proposed project site is the LA/Ontario International Airport, located approximately six miles southwest of the project site. According to the LA/Ontario International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ONT ALUCP), adopted in April 2011, the project site is located outside the Airport Influence Area and outside the Airport's noise impact zones (Psomas 2016b). The Ontario International Airport Noise Impact Zones Map states that Rancho Cucamonga is not an affected jurisdiction for noise (OIA 2010). Noise levels at the project site were measured on Wednesday, June 29, 2016. Noise measurement results are shown in Table 2. TABLE 2: NOISE LEVEL MEASUREMENT RESULTS E1-E2Pg45 P:ao—&O-onD_escrjption. ------. Time 5tarted'�11Votse souices _ .. - ,jNcise level (d8A1" 3 r '- IDuratlon• 1UKaik 'intn� _ _1 ' ' (Leq j 4L -. n 1 Northwest corner of the project site, 10:22 AML Traffic from Etiwanda Ave, approximately 50 feet south of 30 minutes Highland Ave, and SR -210. 57 72 52 Highland Ave and 50 feet east of Audible distant landscaping Etiwanda Ave. noise. 2 Western edge of the project site, 12:09 PM Traffic from Etiwanda Ave and approximately 50 feet east of 20 minutes SR -210. 53 62 47 Etiwanda Ave. Audible distant landscaping noise. 3 Southern edge of the project site, CVWD maintenance building north of the maintenance building12:49 PM (possible coaling fan). and adjacent to the waterstorage 20 minutes Traffic from Etiwanda Ave, 57 60 56 facility. Highland Ave, and SR -210, Off site, In the open spacearea 1:30 PM 4 adjacent to 13038 Norcia Dr., 30 minutes Highland Ave and SR -210. 59 approximately 50 feet north of EF] Highland Ave. E1-E2Pg45 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM Part I - Initial Study continued... (IO,��iLmHotiOesalption.- .^ ';'flme5'tSrteB- . INoti'e,5ouices,,. `' ------ Ndse1evta.(dBA)�� i4q If_Irlffl i _ _ _ _I.R7a7t� Off site, In the alley east of the 2:05 PM Distant traffic. 5 southwest corner of the project site, 30 minutes Air conditioning units In nearby 52 60 47 adjacent to 6616 Murrietta Ct. house. Source: Psomas 2016b. Noise Impact Analysis. dBA: A weighted decibels; Lea: Average else level; Lmax: Maximum noise level; Lmin: Minimum noise level; CVWD' Cucamonga Valley Water 0 stria; SR: State Route For typical urban and suburban traffic, the CNEL Is estimated at 2 dBA higher than the average daytime noise level. The CN EL from freeway noise is generally 3 to 4 d BA higher than the average daytime noise level. Therefore, it is estimated that the existing CNEL on the project site ranges from 57 to 61 dBA (Psomas 2016b). The nearest noise -sensitive land uses to the project site are residential single-family houses located west of the site across Etiwanda Avenue, northeast of the project site northeast of Highland Avenue, and east of the site across an alleyway. The other land uses adjacent to the project site are not noise -sensitive. Land uses north of the project site across Highland Avenue include an empty lot and SR -210. The property south of the project site includes a Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD) water storage facility. Future project residences would also be noise -sensitive receptors. I2) Describe the proposed project In detail. This should provide an adequate description of the site in terms of ultimate use that will resultfrom the proposed project. Indicate if there are proposed phases for development, the extent of development to occur with each phase, and the anticipated completion of each Increment: The proposed project is comprised of the following elements: • Approval of the proposed Tentative Tract Map to subdivide the existing one (1) parcel (9.2 acres) into fourteen (14) parcels The project Applicant proposes to construct fourteen (14) single family residential units within an approximately 9.2 -acre property, with associated facilities and improvements such as parking, street Improvements, street lighting, utilities and landscaping. There are no existing structures on the project site that would require demolition prior to project construction (Psomas 2016d). The fourteen residential units vary in square footage; refer to Table 3, Lot Areas. All lots would exhibit a minimum of 30' feet front setbacks, 15' feet side setbacks, and 60' feet rear setbacks. Lots one through six would face Etiwanda Avenue. Lots seven through fourteen would have primary access via a new cul-de-sac road through Highland Avenue. Residential driveways would be designed and built In accordance with the City's driveway policy along with the following: LED street lighting, street trees along new section of Pinon Street, landscaping along Highland Avenue, connection to utilities, traffic striping and signage according to public works department recommendation. Construction is anticipated to occur over a duration of approximately 6 months, commencing in 2018 and the residential units would be habitable in 2019. TABLE 3: LOT AREAS E1—E2Pg46 ENVIRONMENTAL Part In . .. - LofNu_mber'--_ I -._ _._ . _ -`�Squarc_Feet- 1 21,123 2 21,200 3 21,000 4 21,800 5 21,000 (min lot size) 6 21,000 7 26,496 8 22,535 9 29,262 10 35,653 11 23,563 12 36,418 (max lot size) 13 30,769 14 22,101 AV 25,280 (average lot size) 13) Describe the surrounding properties, including information on plants and animals and any cultural, historical, or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land use (residential, commercial, etc.), intensity of land use (ane family, apartment houses, shops, department stores, etc.) and scale of development (height, frontage, setback, rear yard, etc.) Table 4 Existing Surrounding Uses, below, describes uses near the project site, as well as other relevant details. TABLE 4: EXISTING SURROUNDING USES Lotahart Mand Use „y SSR North -210 and Highland A fence separates Highland Avenue from SR -210. The San Gabriel Mountains are Avenue visible to the north, along with trees lined up along SR -210. South Cucamonga Valley The CVWD facility is surrounded by a chain -linked fence, bushes, trees, and palm Water District(CVWD) trees in order to screen the water tank. water storage facility East Single Family One- and two-story single Family residential units with mature trees along Etiwanda Residential Units Avenue. To the east of the project site, lots vary in size between 26,000 square feet to approximately 45,000 square feet. E1—E2 Pg47 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION Part I — Initial Study cant; Locatidri ;land use`"".: .Deuriptian West Single Family one- and two -story single family residential units with trees lined up an Highland Residential Units Avenue. To the west of the project site, existing properties lots are approximately 20,000 square feet, 14) Will the proposed project change the pattern, scale, orcharacter of the surrounding general area of the project? The area is predominantly residential in nature. The City of Rancho Cucamonga (My Community) portal Identifies the project site as very low density (VL). The surrounding residences are also zoned (VL). The project does not propose to change land use of the site. The proposed residential units would be similar in massing, frontage, setback, rear yard, and overall look to that of the adjacent residential units. Thus, the project isnot forecast to change the pattern, scale, or character of the surrounding general area. 15) Indicate the type of short-term and long-term noise to be generated, including source and amount. How will these noise levels affect adjacent properties and on-site uses? What methods of soundproofing are proposed? Short -Term Noise Construction would not occur between the hours of 8:00 PM and 7:00 AM on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. Mitigation measure (MM) NSE -1 would be Incorporated into the project to reduce construction noise levels at adjacent residences to less than 65 dBA Leq. With the implementation of MM NSE -1, construction noise would not exceed the applicable standards. It should be noted that MM NSE -1 requires that the temporary noise barriers that were installed during grading remain in place during subsequent construction, where feasible, to continue to provide noise abatement, and MM NSE -2 would provide additional noise abatement. Long -Term Noise Primary on-site noise sources during project operations would include heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems and vehicles entering and leaving the project site. There would also be the typical noise sources associated with residential development including but not limited to children playing, home and yard maintenance activities, and barking dogs, The nearest noise -sensitive land uses to the project site are residential single-family homes located across an alley on the eastern side of the site. There are also single-family homes located northeast of the project site across Highland Avenue and west of the project site across Etiwanda Avenue. Noise impacts to nearby residences from residential HVAC equipment and similar equipment would be less than significant with adherence to RR NSE -3 which requires that equipment be designed and installed to not exceed the noise limits of the City Development Code. It is reasonable to assume that the noise generated by the proposed project's residences would be similar in character and magnitude to the noise generated in the existing residential areas adjacent to the project site. Noise from driveway access, loading and unloading, trash disposal, and landscape maintenance would occur intermittently and would not be anticipated to exceed the noise ordinance limits (Psomas 2016b). Figure 1 shows the various levels of noise exposure ranging from normally acceptable to clearly unacceptable. Also, refer to Table 4 Typical Maximum Construction Noise Levels that are forecast to occur during project construction and long-term noise due to traffic, Table 5 Project -Generated Traffic Noise Increases. E1—E2 Pg48 ENVIRONMENTAL I rt I — Initial FIGURE 1: COMMUNITY NOISE EXPOSURE COmmunNy Naiw Exposure Ldn Or CNEL, d8A Land Use Category 55 60 65 70 75 60 RnNcnn.l -Lw Oemlty 6in9b Un.l. Ovpb., NabN Nara. Ne -Nd4p4 UNr. NY"ep U. UfO ____________________ ___ IS __r___ __ __— LuceFy Nad4 ____________________ i Sc4aH� LOr.rbs, Cnn.nudy 4a rs, ___ _____.__ ___ Nnpbnim4lWon., Ho.dYh, Nu n, W ndivu, Geneael NNh, Mdh>w1w+ Spon. Anw., Cuxu SDrcebr Spe.i.. _____ __ DY7prw�re.. Negnb«nma DNs. OWaeer Rrenarbn (Can W.ne Publc) ____________________ ___ ------ _—_____________________ ------------------------ ___ -- _____________________ ------------------------ ___ _ ------ ___55 55 60 65 70 75 60 y.Wyac:.uaG. ".9arbau Nb ufa Ir aarYa'vy W fe0 ym xwT'm sur d aY ..xsr�p.-n.a.ee re d iv'tiY arwJoltl RmYX3o. rrirnl a+y ..w.>J roar i`.Wean repienrrtaa � <�Suw.Y arxM+W lie. cGr*x+wr Or OtrM wu 1x eo cMtN.cr ov! a"y a !2Ylb0 anay^.nd Ck xiu rYacWn rq}MKS h V,e Lid xw>W mW eNiaM im+ef re reLC.E rb rn cn+t� Corvvaacl mwwnr bi w.� iai, .m.n arO tre.r m r-Odr.n'm! v e mrLm4q vC rvmvy wterc c2vv — No.Wy uvca.H+Ne Nr. wnw,Oxn a 4..canenr .nouN Or".r.rr mnrmr upm nnmmnrssm ae>+ebyncn Con l+'��. • a•..Na aiv*rw d Cre ru.c ranann rnw� onvu. rr.,u a rDa. win ruowt rLao YadaN 'cave. beatlee h Se Umgi QMtc. sw nn N vekb0 W&W cwrh wrunw. Naw maY,Abn G avMy.rar� VGSG Ge�.el rcl4e V.ferlal.en. CprLtlr}yr cotU b m110 en .'xtcr r+I ra.rwe aardaLb.N] b pd W ire s'tl M w+�ox ern Yanwr. wowf eu Go u.ane. 10 E1—E2Pg49 TION FORM continued.., PSOMAS TABLE 4: TYPICAL MAXIMUM CONSTRUCTION NOISE LEVELS -iE9WPrneMj •' .....tee_- .A atS-•,.._..`-:__'r-•-t'-�--- :Noise Level (dBA)at 50 fi; ). ;Arattstic UsagaFabton ; Auger Drill Rig 85 20% Backhoe 80 40% Blasting 94 1% Chain Saw 85 20% Clam Shovel 93 20% Compactor (ground) 80-82 20% Compressor(air) 80 40% Concrete MixerTruck 85 40% Concrete Pump 82 20% Concrete Saw 90 20% Crane (mobile orstationary) 85 20% Dozer 85 40% Dump Truck 84 40% Excavator 85 40% Front End Loader 80 40% Generator (25 HVA orless) 70 50% Generator (more than 25 KVA) 82 50% Grader 85 40% Hydra Break Ram 90 10% In situ Sail Sampling Rig 84 20% Jackhammer 85 20% Mounted Impact Hammer(hoeram) 90 20% Paver 85 50% Pile Driver, Impact (diesel orpneumatic) 95-101 20% Pile Driver, Vibratory 95 20% Pneumatic Tools 85 50% Pumps 77 50% Rock Drill 85 20% Scraper 85 40% Tractor 84 40% Vacuum Excavator(vac•lruck) 85 40% Vibratory Concrete Mixer 80 20% Source: Psomas 20166. Noise Impact Analysis. dBA: A-welghted decibels; ft: foot/feet; KVA: kilovolt amps 11 E1-E2PgSO ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM Part I — Initial Studv continued... TABLE 5: PROJECT -GENERATED TRAFFIC MM NSE -1 Prior to the Issuance of the grading permit, the Property Owner/Developer shall submit construction plans and/or specifications to the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department demonstrating that the installation of a temporary noise barrier between the construction area and the adjacent residences is required. The barrier shall be 12 feet high and solid from the ground to the top. The barrier shall be constructed with plywood that is at least Y2 inch thick or with another material that creates a noise transmission loss of at least 20 dBA. Where feasible, the barriershall remain in place until the completion of construction. MM NSE -2 Prior to the issuance of the grading permit, the Property Owner/Developer shall submit plans and specifications to the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department demonstrating that the construction plans and specifications include the following noise -abatement and control measures: All construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers and other State -required noise -attenuation devices. Stationary construction equipment shall be placed such that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive noise receivers. On-site and off-site construction haul routes shall be designed to avoid noise - sensitive uses, as feasible. If feasible, perimeter walls along the northern, eastern, and southern property boundaries shall be constructed as early as possible during the first phase of construction. '16) Indicate proposed removals and/or replacements of mature orscenic trees. Two features of the project site are noteworthy. First is a line of blue gums that are located along the southern boundary of the project site that were apparently planted to provide a windrow. These trees are generally in fair or declining health, likely due to drought stress, and have tattered leaves from insect damage. One additional blue gum is the last living tree that remains from a presumed remnant windrow In the middle of the project site. Several other dead trees are found in this portion of the project site that would have comprised this window. This remaining blue gum is in similar condition to the trees along the southern site boundary, exhibiting the same drought stress and insect symptoms. Multiple trees that would have made up each of the two windrows on the project site have already died and become snags 12 E1 -E2 Pg51 7raffle Volume -a; `TrafffeNatidlrt_aease •,,Ft - { '( " ,. ,• dBA CNEL, SExlstingjgD»t ibdsting P]„tupi;- ,�, T2 il Etiwanda Avenue 5,483 5,617 0.10 Highland Avenue 4,075 4,209 0.14 Source: Psomas 2016b. Noise Impact Analysis. ADT: average dally traffic volume; dBA: A -weighted decibels; CNEL: Community Noise Equivalent Level MM NSE -1 Prior to the Issuance of the grading permit, the Property Owner/Developer shall submit construction plans and/or specifications to the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department demonstrating that the installation of a temporary noise barrier between the construction area and the adjacent residences is required. The barrier shall be 12 feet high and solid from the ground to the top. The barrier shall be constructed with plywood that is at least Y2 inch thick or with another material that creates a noise transmission loss of at least 20 dBA. Where feasible, the barriershall remain in place until the completion of construction. MM NSE -2 Prior to the issuance of the grading permit, the Property Owner/Developer shall submit plans and specifications to the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department demonstrating that the construction plans and specifications include the following noise -abatement and control measures: All construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers and other State -required noise -attenuation devices. Stationary construction equipment shall be placed such that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive noise receivers. On-site and off-site construction haul routes shall be designed to avoid noise - sensitive uses, as feasible. If feasible, perimeter walls along the northern, eastern, and southern property boundaries shall be constructed as early as possible during the first phase of construction. '16) Indicate proposed removals and/or replacements of mature orscenic trees. Two features of the project site are noteworthy. First is a line of blue gums that are located along the southern boundary of the project site that were apparently planted to provide a windrow. These trees are generally in fair or declining health, likely due to drought stress, and have tattered leaves from insect damage. One additional blue gum is the last living tree that remains from a presumed remnant windrow In the middle of the project site. Several other dead trees are found in this portion of the project site that would have comprised this window. This remaining blue gum is in similar condition to the trees along the southern site boundary, exhibiting the same drought stress and insect symptoms. Multiple trees that would have made up each of the two windrows on the project site have already died and become snags 12 E1 -E2 Pg51 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM Part I— Initial Studv continued... or have been removed (remaining stumps are present). Refer to Table 1 for a summary of tree quantity and size. No scenic trees where identified to exist on the site. According to Section 17.16.080 of the Municipal Code, removal of the trees described in the Tree Survey report may require replacement with "...trees of species and quantity commensurate with the aesthetic value of the tree or trees removed," Though the ultimate tree mitigation requirement will be negotiated as part of the land entitlement process, it is assumed that a sufficient number of trees will be included in the landscape plan to adequately mitigate the loss of the existing trees (Psomas 2016e). RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS: 20) Number of residential units: 14 residential units would be developed. Detached (indicate range of parcel sizes, minimum lot size and maximum lot size): The following are a descriptive range of lot sizes for the proposed residential units: 0 21,000 (min lot size) 0 36,418 (max lot size) • 25,280 (average lot size) Refer to Table 3 for a complete description of lot area sizes. Attached (indicate whether units are rental or forsale units): 13 E1—E2 Pg52 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMA Part I— Initial Studv 33) In the known history of this property, has there been any use, storage, or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic materials? Examples of hazardous and/or toxic materials include, but are not limited to PCB's; radioactive substances, pesticides and herbicides, fuels, oils, solvents, and other flammable liquids and gases. Also note underground storage of any of the above. Please list the materials and describe their use, storage, and/or discharge on the property, as well as the dates of use, if known. The project site is not included in a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. The closest active site, as mapped by EnviroStor, is the Etiwanda Elementary School. This site is categorized as Certified and is described as a school cleanup located at 7128.7192 Etiwanda Avenue, approximately 1.0 miles south of the project site (EnviroStor 2017). The history and previous use of this property (Psomas 2016d) does not suggest that the site was ever utilized to store any hazardous, toxic materials, or underground storages. However, the project site Is described as an abandoned agricultural area (Psomas 2016d). In general, agricultural areas are known for their utilization of fertilizers and pesticides and have the potential to be present. 34) Will the proposed project involve the temporary or long-term use, storage, or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic materials, Including but not limited to those examples listed above? if yes, provide on inventory of all such materials to be used and proposed method of disposal. The location of such uses, along with the storage and shipment areas, shall he shown and labeled on the application plans. Temporary During construction of the project, hazardous and potentially hazardous materials would be routinely transported, used, and disposed of at the project site. These materials would include gasoline, diesel fuel lubricants, and other petroleum-based products used to operate and maintain construction equipment and vehicles. This handling of hazardous materials will be a temporary activity coinciding with the short- term construction phase of the project. Any handling of hazardous materials would be limited in both quantity and concentrations. Hazardous materials associated with operation and maintenance of construction equipment and vehicles may be stored on the project site, although only the amounts needed are expected to be kept onsite; excessive amounts are not expected to be stored onsite. Removal and disposal of hazardous materials from the project site would be conducted by a permitted and licensed service provider. Any handling, transporting, use, or disposal would comply with all applicable federal, State, and local agencies and regulations, including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Resource Conservation and RecoveryAct (RCRA), the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), and the San Bernardino County Fire Department (the Certified Unified Program Agency [CUPA] for San Bernardino County). Long -Term The project would result in the onsite use of common types of hazardous materials, such as cleaning and degreasing solvents, fertilizers, pesticides, and other materials used in the regular maintenance of the residential properties. Thus, the project would result in an increase in the use of products and other materials routinely used in residential maintenance and landscaping. These potentially hazardous materials, however, would not be of a type or occur in sufficient quantities to pose a significant hazard to the public and safety or the environment. Products are typically labeled to Inform users of potential risks and to instruct them in appropriate handling procedures. For these reasons, hazardous materials used during residential unit's maintenance would not pose any substantial public health or safety hazards related to hazardous materials. As discussed above, the project site Is not Included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. 14 E1—E2 Pg53 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM art I — Initial 5tudv continued... REFERENCES Project Specific Technical Studies Psomas. 2016a. Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis, 6527 Etiwanda Avenue Residential Project. Psomas. 2016b. Noise Impact Analysis, 6517 Etiwanda Avenue Residential Project. Psomas. 2016c. Biological Constrains Survey, 6527 Etiwanda Avenue Residential Project. Psomas. 2016d. Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment, 6527 Ethvando Avenue Residential Project. Psomas. 2016e. Tree Survey Report, 6517 Etiwanda Avenue Residential Project. Additional References DTSC (California Department of Toxic Substances Control). 2017. EnviroStor. htto://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/oublic/, accessed September 2017. Ontario International Airport (CIA). December 2010. Nose Impact Zones Compatibility Map. htto://www.ontariot)lan.ore/alucodor-ontario-international-a r ortaccessed September 2017. 15 E1-E2Pg54 City of Rancho Cucamonga ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM INITIAL STUDY PART II BACKGROUND 1. Project File: Tentative Tract Map No. 20140 (SUBTT00021) 2. Related Files: Tree Removal Permit DRC2017-00823 3. Description of Project: A request to subdivide an approximately 9.11 -acre vacant parcel for the future construction of 14 single-family residences within the Very Low (VL) Residential district, Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at 6527 Etiwanda Avenue. The project site is generally rectangular in shape and slopes down from north to south, from about 1,424 feet to 1,412 feet, with dimensions of approximately 660 feet by 470 feet. Six lots front directly along Etiwanda Avenue, while the remaining 8 lots take access from a proposed cul-de-sac which branches off from Highland Avenue. The site is covered by non-native grasses, ornamental vegetation, and includes 13 heritage trees (Blue Gum Eucalyptus), which is requested to be removed. Although the project site is not within the Equestrian Overlay, equestrian uses and animal -keeping are allowed on all of the proposed residential lots, since each lot Is 20,000 square feel or larger. To accommodate this, the project was designed to include community and local feeder trail improvements. 4. Project Sponsor Name and Address: Andrew Benton Parkview Financial 12400 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 350 Los Angeles, CA 90025 5. General Plan Designation: Very Low Residential 6. Zoning: Very Low (VL)Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan 7. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The project site is comprised of a single vacant parcel approximately 9.11 acres in size, located on the southeast corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Highland Avenue. The project site's frontage along Etiwanda and Highland Avenues currently do not have any street improvements. The property slopes down from north to south, from about 1,424 feet to 1,412 feet. The site is bound on the east and west (across Etiwanda Avenue) by single-family residences. To the south Is a water storage tank operated by the Cucamonga Valley Water District. To the north is the Highland Avenue right of way, and a vacant triangular shaped parcel, The properties to the north, south, and east are zoned Very Low (VL) Residential, Etiwanda Specific Plan, while the properties to the west (across Etiwanda Avenue) are zoned Low (L) Residential, Victoria Planned Community. S. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 9. Contact Person and Phone Number: Vincent Acuna Assistant Planner E1—E2 Pg55 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map No. 20140 (SUBTT00021) (909) 477-2750, extension 4323 vincent.acuna@cityofre.us City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 2 10. Other agencies whose approval is required: (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement) GLOSSARY — The following abbreviations are used in this report: CALEEMOD — California Emissions Estimator Model CVWD — Cucamonga Valley Water District EIR — Environmental Impact Report FEIR — Final Environmental Impact Report FPEIR - Final Program Environmental Impact Report NPDES — National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NOx — Nitrogen Oxides ROG — Reactive Organic Gases PMio — Fine Particulate Matter RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board SCAQMD — South Coast Air Quality Management District SWPPP — Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact," as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ( ) Aesthetics ( ) Biological Resources ( ) Greenhouse Gas Emissions ( ) Land Use & Planning ( ) Population & Housing ( ) Transportation/Traffic ( ) Mandatory Findings of Significance ( ) Agricultural Resources ( ) Cultural Resources ( ) Hazards & Waste Materials ( ) Mineral Resources ( ) Public Services ( ) Tribal Cultural Resources ( ) Air Quality ( ) Geology & Soils ( ) Hydrology & Water Quality ( ) Noise ( ) Recreation ( ) Utilities & Service Systems DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: () I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. (✓) I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect In this case because revisions in the project have been made by, or agreed to, by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. () I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Rev 4-17 E1—E2 Pg56 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 3 O I find that the proposed project MAY have a "Potentially S!gnificant Impact" or 'Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standard and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier ana'ysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed () I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects 1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant at earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation me res re impose upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. PreoaredBy. — pate: 0S 08 20/ Reviewed By E1—E2 Pg57 Date g%`g f 261$ Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 4 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project: Lees Than a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? () 5!gN5can1 Less ( ) Issues and Supporting Information Sources: pp Pmaneany 99n1ficent Mtn Mtgagon Than 9gniacanl No _9 Im act Incorporated In,act Im act EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? () (} (✓) ( ) b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but ( ) () () (✓) not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a Stale Scenic Highway? C) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or ( ) () (✓) ( ) quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, () () (✓) ( ) which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Comments: a) There are no significant vistas within or adjacent to the project site. Although the site is adjacent to a view corridor (Highland Avenue) according to General Plan Figure LU -6, the proposed project is similar in development type, aesthetics, and massing as the surrounding built environment along this view corridor. Therefore, a less than significant Impact would occur. b) The project site contains no scenic resources and no historic buildings within a Slate Scenic Highway. There are no State Scenic Highways within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Therefore, no impact is anticipated. C) The site is located on the southeast corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Highland Avenue and is characterized by single-family residential development to the east, and west, a water storage facility to the south, and by Highland Avenue and State Route 210 to the north. The visual quality of the area will not degrade as a result of this project because the project is similar in development type, aesthetics, and massing as the surrounding built environment. Design review is required prior to approval. City standards require the developer to underground existing and new utility lines and facilities to minimize unsightly appearance of overhead utility lines and utility enclosures in accordance with Planning Commission Resolution No. 87-96, unless exempted by said Resolution. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur. d) The project would increase the number of streetlights and security lighting used in the immediate vicinity. The design and placement of light fixtures will be shown on site plans which require review for consistency with City standards that require shielding, diffusing, or indirect lighting to avoid glare. Lighting will be selected and located to confine the area of Illumination to within the project site. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur. Rev 4-17 E1—E2 Pg58 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 5 2. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Less Than a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or () significant Less (✓) Issues and Supporting Information Sources: eer aay significant wnon Mitgati Than Significant No shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Impact Inco Gated Imoact Impact 2. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or () () () (✓) Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a () () () (✓) Williamson Act contract? C) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause re -zoning of, () () () (✓) forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220 (g), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as deflned by Government Code Section 51104 (g))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest () () () (✓) land to non -forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment, () () () (✓) which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non -forest use? Comments: a) The site is not designated as Prime Farmlands, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. The site is located on the southeast corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Highland Avenue and is characterized by single-family residential development to the east, and west, a water storage facility to the south, and by Highland Avenue and State Route 210 to the north. There are approximately 209 acres of Farmland of Local Importance, Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance within the City of Rancho Cucamonga according to the General Plan and the California Department of Conservation Farmland Map 2010, Concentrations of Important. Farmland are sparsely located in the southern and eastern parts of the City that is characterized by existing and planned development. Farmland in the southern portion of the City is characterized by industrial, residential, and commercial land uses and Farmland in the eastern portion of the City is within the Etiwanda area and planned for development. Further, a large number of the designated farmland parcels are small, ranging from 3 acres to 30 acres, and their economic viability is doubtful; therefore, they are not intended to be retained as farmland in the General Plan Land Use Plan. The General Plan FPEIR identified the conversion of farmlands to urban uses as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which,a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan for which the FPEIR was prepared and Impacts evaluated. Therefore, no impact is anticipated. b) There is no agriculturally zoned land within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. There are no Williamson Act contracts within the City. Therefore, no impact is anticipated. Rev 4-17 E1—E2 Pg59 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 6 C) There are no lands within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that is zoned as forest land or timberland. Therefore, no impacts would occur related to the conversion of forest land to non -forest use. Further, there are no areas within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that are zoned as forest land, timberland, or Timberland Production. Therefore, no impact is anticipated. d) There are no lands within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that qualify as forest land or timberland. Therefore, no impacts would occur related of the loss or conversion of forest land to non -forest use. Further, there are no areas within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that are zoned as forest land, timberland, or Timberland Production. Therefore, no impact is anticipated. e) The site is located on the southeast corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Highland Avenue and is characterized by single-family residential development to the east, and west, a water storage facility to the south, and by Highland Avenue and Slate Route 210 to the north. The nearest agricultural use is more than 1,500 feet miles southeast from the project site. Furthermore, there are no lands within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that qualify as forest land. Therefore, there is no potential for conversion of forest land to a non -forest use. Therefore, no impact is anticipated. 3. AIR QUALITY. Would the project., Less Than a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the () SignificantLess () (✓) Issues and SupportingInformation Sources: Palannaliy significant wys 6ldigakn man signi0canl No b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute lmoad Inco orated Unoad Imaaet C) There are no lands within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that is zoned as forest land or timberland. Therefore, no impacts would occur related to the conversion of forest land to non -forest use. Further, there are no areas within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that are zoned as forest land, timberland, or Timberland Production. Therefore, no impact is anticipated. d) There are no lands within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that qualify as forest land or timberland. Therefore, no impacts would occur related of the loss or conversion of forest land to non -forest use. Further, there are no areas within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that are zoned as forest land, timberland, or Timberland Production. Therefore, no impact is anticipated. e) The site is located on the southeast corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Highland Avenue and is characterized by single-family residential development to the east, and west, a water storage facility to the south, and by Highland Avenue and Slate Route 210 to the north. The nearest agricultural use is more than 1,500 feet miles southeast from the project site. Furthermore, there are no lands within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that qualify as forest land. Therefore, there is no potential for conversion of forest land to a non -forest use. Therefore, no impact is anticipated. 3. AIR QUALITY. Would the project., a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the () () () (✓) applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute () () (✓) ( } substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? C) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of () () (✓) ( ) any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable Federal or State ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant O (} (✓) ( ) concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial () () () (✓) number of people? Comments: a) As discussed in subsection b, the project would not exceed any air quality standards and would not interfere with the region's ability to comply with Federal and State air quality standards for Criterion 1 Increase in the Frequency or Severity of Violations (local air quality impacts) or Criterion 2 Exceed Assumptions in the AQMP (consistency with the 2003 AQMP). Therefore, the project is consistent with the 2003 AQMP, and no impacts, are anticipated. b) Both the State of California and the Federal government have established health -based ambient air quality standards (AAQS) for seven air pollutants. These pollutants include Rev 4-17 E1—E2 Pg60 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 7 Rev 4-17 ozone (03), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), coarse particulate matter with a diameter or 10 microns or less (PM,o), fine particulate matter less than 2.5 (PM25) microns in diameter and lead. Among these pollutants, ozone and particulate matter (PM,o and PM25) are considered regional pollutants while the others have more localized effects. In addition, the State of California has set standards for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide (H2S), vinyl chloride and visibility reducing particles. These standards are designed to protect the health and welfare of the populace with a reasonable margin of safely. The City of Rancho Cucamonga area is within the South Coast Air Basin, which is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The California Clean Air Act (CCAA) provides the SCAQMD with the authority to manage transportation activities at indirect sources. Indirect sources of pollution are generated when minor sources collectively emit a substantial amount of pollution. Examples of this include motor vehicles at an intersection, a mall and on highways. SCAQMD also regulates stationary sources of pollution within a jurisdictional area. Direct emissions from motor vehicles are regulated by the Air Resources Board (ARB). The combination of topography, low mixing height, abundant sunshine, and emissions from the second largest urban area in the United Stales gives the Basin the worst air pollution problem in the nation. The Basin experiences a persistent temperature inversion (increasing temperature with increasing altitude); this inversion (coupled with low wind speeds) limits the vertical dispersion of air contaminants, holding them relatively near the ground. Pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA) of 1970, the EPA established national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for six major pollutants, termed criteria pollutants: ozone (03), coarse particulate matter with a diameter or 10 microns or less (PM,o), fine particulate matter less than 2.5 (PM25) microns In diameter, carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and lead. Criteria pollutants are defined as those pollutants for which the Federal and State governments have established AAQS, or criteria, for outdoor concentrations in order to protect public health. Data collected at permanent monitoring stations are used by the EPA to classify regions as "attainment" or "non -attainment" depending on whether the regions met the requirements staled in the primary NAAQS. Nonaltainmenl areas have additional restrictions as required by the EPA. The EPA has designated the Southern California Association of Governments (SLAG) as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) responsible for ensuring the Basin's compliance with the FCAA. The South Coast Air Basin is in Non -Attainment Status for Ozone, PM,o and PM2 s. Specific criteria for determining whether the potential air quality impacts of a project are significant are set forth in the SCAQMD's CEQA Air Quality Handbook. The criteria include daily emissions thresholds, compliance with State and national air quality standards, and consistency with the current AQMP. As prescribed by SCAQMD, an Air Quality Impact Analysis (date) was prepared by PSOMAS that utilizes CaIEEMod (Version 2013.2.2) to evaluate short-term construction emissions and short-term construction emissions for localized significant thresholds, long-term operational emissions, operation emissions for localized significant thresholds, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions. E1—E2 Pg61 Less Than S9nlA.nt Le,: Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Pctanitany vrtn Tnan Signiriwnl hUdgauon SigNfiwnl Na Imoa:Y tnromaalad Imwq Impact Rev 4-17 ozone (03), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), coarse particulate matter with a diameter or 10 microns or less (PM,o), fine particulate matter less than 2.5 (PM25) microns in diameter and lead. Among these pollutants, ozone and particulate matter (PM,o and PM25) are considered regional pollutants while the others have more localized effects. In addition, the State of California has set standards for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide (H2S), vinyl chloride and visibility reducing particles. These standards are designed to protect the health and welfare of the populace with a reasonable margin of safely. The City of Rancho Cucamonga area is within the South Coast Air Basin, which is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The California Clean Air Act (CCAA) provides the SCAQMD with the authority to manage transportation activities at indirect sources. Indirect sources of pollution are generated when minor sources collectively emit a substantial amount of pollution. Examples of this include motor vehicles at an intersection, a mall and on highways. SCAQMD also regulates stationary sources of pollution within a jurisdictional area. Direct emissions from motor vehicles are regulated by the Air Resources Board (ARB). The combination of topography, low mixing height, abundant sunshine, and emissions from the second largest urban area in the United Stales gives the Basin the worst air pollution problem in the nation. The Basin experiences a persistent temperature inversion (increasing temperature with increasing altitude); this inversion (coupled with low wind speeds) limits the vertical dispersion of air contaminants, holding them relatively near the ground. Pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA) of 1970, the EPA established national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for six major pollutants, termed criteria pollutants: ozone (03), coarse particulate matter with a diameter or 10 microns or less (PM,o), fine particulate matter less than 2.5 (PM25) microns In diameter, carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and lead. Criteria pollutants are defined as those pollutants for which the Federal and State governments have established AAQS, or criteria, for outdoor concentrations in order to protect public health. Data collected at permanent monitoring stations are used by the EPA to classify regions as "attainment" or "non -attainment" depending on whether the regions met the requirements staled in the primary NAAQS. Nonaltainmenl areas have additional restrictions as required by the EPA. The EPA has designated the Southern California Association of Governments (SLAG) as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) responsible for ensuring the Basin's compliance with the FCAA. The South Coast Air Basin is in Non -Attainment Status for Ozone, PM,o and PM2 s. Specific criteria for determining whether the potential air quality impacts of a project are significant are set forth in the SCAQMD's CEQA Air Quality Handbook. The criteria include daily emissions thresholds, compliance with State and national air quality standards, and consistency with the current AQMP. As prescribed by SCAQMD, an Air Quality Impact Analysis (date) was prepared by PSOMAS that utilizes CaIEEMod (Version 2013.2.2) to evaluate short-term construction emissions and short-term construction emissions for localized significant thresholds, long-term operational emissions, operation emissions for localized significant thresholds, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions. E1—E2 Pg61 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 8 Short Term (Construction): Protect Emissions and Impacts The project proposes to subdivide an approximately 9.11 -acre vacant parcel for the construction of 14 single-family residences. The project site is currently vacant. The potential emissions associated with construction of the project are described in the following sections. Summary of Peak Construction Emissions (Emissions Summary of Overall Construction with Best Available Control Measures) TABLET ESTIMATED MAXIMUM DAILY CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS Enftstons (ibsfday) Lasa n,. I VOC NOx CO I SOX PM10 131112.6 2017 7 66 48 <0.5 11 7 2018 SgMGWn Lss 75 100 550 150 150 55 Issues and SupportingInformation Sources: 1, M cumma unigaxan &gr'k.m luo See Appendix A for CalEEMod model outputs Im as In Drat-, Im w 'm Pact Short Term (Construction): Protect Emissions and Impacts The project proposes to subdivide an approximately 9.11 -acre vacant parcel for the construction of 14 single-family residences. The project site is currently vacant. The potential emissions associated with construction of the project are described in the following sections. Summary of Peak Construction Emissions (Emissions Summary of Overall Construction with Best Available Control Measures) TABLET ESTIMATED MAXIMUM DAILY CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS Construction activities associated with the project will result in emissions of CO, VOCs, NOx, SO,, PM,o and PMzs and are expected from the following construction activities: demolition, grading (including soil import), building construction, painting (architectural coatings) paving (curb, gutter, flatwork, and parking lot), and construction worker commuting. Localized Significance Summary (Construction Emissions with Best Available Control Measures) TABLES LOCAL CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS Enftstons (ibsfday) Year I VOC NOx CO I SOX PM10 131112.6 2017 7 66 48 <0.5 11 7 2018 40' 24 18 <0.5 2 1 SCAQAID Thresholds (Table 6) 75 100 550 150 150 55 Exceeds SCAOMD Thresholds? No No No No No No tbslday, pmmdx per day. VOC volatile organic car pound. NOx. nitrogen oxides. CO carbon monoxide, SOx. sulfur oxides. PM10 respirable particulate matter with a diameter of 10 microns or less. PM2.5 fine particulate matter with a diameter of 2.5 mlaons or less. SCAOMD South Coast Air Ouallty Mar agement Disuict See Appendix A for CalEEMod model outputs The estimated VOC emissions from architectural coating were calculated manually Construction activities associated with the project will result in emissions of CO, VOCs, NOx, SO,, PM,o and PMzs and are expected from the following construction activities: demolition, grading (including soil import), building construction, painting (architectural coatings) paving (curb, gutter, flatwork, and parking lot), and construction worker commuting. Localized Significance Summary (Construction Emissions with Best Available Control Measures) TABLES LOCAL CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS Rev 4-17 E1—E2 Pg62 Emissions pbsfday) Emisslons NOx Co PM10 PM2.5 Protect maximum dally on-site emissions 52 40 11 7 LST: 5 -acre site 270 1,746 14 8 Exceed threshold? No No No No NOx. nttropen oxides, CO. carbon monoxide, PM10 pardcuiate matter with a dameter of 10 microns at Mss. PM2.5 particulate manor with a diameter 2 5 microns or less; Ibsiday pounds per day: LST localized simKicance threshold Note- Data Is for SCAOMD Source Receptor Area 34, Came] San Bernardino Valley Source. SCAOMD 2009 (thresholds)_ See Appendix A for CaIEEMod model outputs Rev 4-17 E1—E2 Pg62 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 9 Rev 4-17 Equipment Exhausts and Related Construction Activities Construction activities produce combustion emissions from various sources such as site grading, utility engines, on-site heavy-duty construction vehicles, asphalt paving, and motor vehicles transporting the construction crew. Exhaust emissions from construction activities envisioned on site would vary daily as construction activity levels change. The use of construction equipment on site would result in localized exhaust emissions; however, as shown in the tables above, the amount will not exceed any threshold of significance. Fugitive Dusl Fugitive dust emissions are generally emissions associated with land clearing and exposure of soils to the air and wind and cut -and -fill grading operations. Dust generated during construction varies substantially on a project -by project basis, depending on the level of activity, the specific operation and weather conditions at the time of construction. Construction emissions can vary greatly depending on the level of activity, the specific operations taking place, the equipment being operated, local soils, weather conditions and other factors. The proposed project will be required to comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403 to control fugitive dust. Architectural Coatings Architectural coatings contain VOCs that are similar to ROCs and are part of the 03 precursors. Based on the proposed project, it is estimated that the project will generate a maximum of 40 lbs of VOC per day (combined for all construction sources) during construction. Therefore, this VOC emission is the principal air emission and Is less than the SCAQMD VOC threshold of 75 lbs/day. Odors Heavy-duty equipment in the project area during construction would emit odors. However, the construction activity would cease to occur after individual construction is completed. No other sources of objectionable odors have been identified for the proposed project, and no mitigation measures are required. In compliance with SCAQMD Rule 402 the proposed uses are not anticipated to emit any objectionable odors. Therefore, objectionable odors posing a health risk to potential on-site and existing off-site uses would not occur as a result of the proposed project. Naturally Occurring Asbestos The proposed project is located in San Bernardino County and it is not among the counties that are found to have serpentine and ultramafic rock in their soils. In addition, there has been no serpentine or ultramafic rock found in the project area. Therefore, the potential risk for naturally occurring asbestos (NOA) during project construction is small and less than significant. Cumulative Impacts: Short -Term Construction Emissions Continued development will contribute to the pollutant levels in the Rancho Cucamonga area, which already exceed Federal and Slate standards. During the construction phases E1—E2 Pg63 Leta Than Significant Leas Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Palcmlaay wan man I signifi=1 WOgail spincanl No Im ad Inco galea lrnpad Im ad Rev 4-17 Equipment Exhausts and Related Construction Activities Construction activities produce combustion emissions from various sources such as site grading, utility engines, on-site heavy-duty construction vehicles, asphalt paving, and motor vehicles transporting the construction crew. Exhaust emissions from construction activities envisioned on site would vary daily as construction activity levels change. The use of construction equipment on site would result in localized exhaust emissions; however, as shown in the tables above, the amount will not exceed any threshold of significance. Fugitive Dusl Fugitive dust emissions are generally emissions associated with land clearing and exposure of soils to the air and wind and cut -and -fill grading operations. Dust generated during construction varies substantially on a project -by project basis, depending on the level of activity, the specific operation and weather conditions at the time of construction. Construction emissions can vary greatly depending on the level of activity, the specific operations taking place, the equipment being operated, local soils, weather conditions and other factors. The proposed project will be required to comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403 to control fugitive dust. Architectural Coatings Architectural coatings contain VOCs that are similar to ROCs and are part of the 03 precursors. Based on the proposed project, it is estimated that the project will generate a maximum of 40 lbs of VOC per day (combined for all construction sources) during construction. Therefore, this VOC emission is the principal air emission and Is less than the SCAQMD VOC threshold of 75 lbs/day. Odors Heavy-duty equipment in the project area during construction would emit odors. However, the construction activity would cease to occur after individual construction is completed. No other sources of objectionable odors have been identified for the proposed project, and no mitigation measures are required. In compliance with SCAQMD Rule 402 the proposed uses are not anticipated to emit any objectionable odors. Therefore, objectionable odors posing a health risk to potential on-site and existing off-site uses would not occur as a result of the proposed project. Naturally Occurring Asbestos The proposed project is located in San Bernardino County and it is not among the counties that are found to have serpentine and ultramafic rock in their soils. In addition, there has been no serpentine or ultramafic rock found in the project area. Therefore, the potential risk for naturally occurring asbestos (NOA) during project construction is small and less than significant. Cumulative Impacts: Short -Term Construction Emissions Continued development will contribute to the pollutant levels in the Rancho Cucamonga area, which already exceed Federal and Slate standards. During the construction phases E1—E2 Pg63 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 10 Rev 4-17 of development, on-site stationary sources, heavy-duty construction vehicles, construction worker vehicles, and energy use will generate emissions. In addition, fugitive dust would also be generated during grading and construction activities. While most of the dust would settle on or near the project site, smaller particles would remain in the atmosphere, increasing particle levels within the surrounding area. Construction is an on-going industry in the Rancho Cucamonga area. Construction workers and equipment work operate at one development site until their tasks are complete. Nevertheless, fugitive dust and equipment emissions are required to be assessed. The General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR) analyzed the impacts of Air Quality based on the future build out of the City. Based upon on the Urban Emissions Model (URBEMIS7G) estimates in Table 4.3-3 of the General Plan (FPEIR), Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2), Ozone (03), and Particulate Matter (PMss and PM1o) would exceed SCAQMD thresholds for significance; therefore, they would all be cumulatively considerable if they cannot be mitigated on a project basis to a level less -than -significant. This City-wide increase in emissions was identified as a significant unavoidable adverse Impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council as noted in the Section 4.3 of the General Plan FPEIR. Although the project will have a less than significant impacts, the implementation of the following best practices and mitigation measures from the City's 2010 General Plan FPEIR will further reduce the project's short-term air quality impacts: 1) All construction equipment shall be maintained in good operating condition so as to reduce operational emissions. The contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained as per manufacturers' specifications. Maintenance records shall be available at the construction site for City verification. 2) Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, the developer shall submit construction plans to the City denoting the proposed schedule and projected equipment use. Construction contractors shall provide evidence that low emission mobile construction equipment will be utilized, or that their use was investigated and found to be infeasible for the project. Contractors shall also conform to any construction measures imposed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) as well as City Planning Staff. 3) The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel powered equipment where feasible, 4) The construction contractor shall ensure that construction -grading plans Include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. 5) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. 6) 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. E1—E2 Pg64 Less Than Sigd6com Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g gnifiialy Slgnilaanl Ydm on Tan Significant No Imoscl Incorpo,ae .---. cl Rev 4-17 of development, on-site stationary sources, heavy-duty construction vehicles, construction worker vehicles, and energy use will generate emissions. In addition, fugitive dust would also be generated during grading and construction activities. While most of the dust would settle on or near the project site, smaller particles would remain in the atmosphere, increasing particle levels within the surrounding area. Construction is an on-going industry in the Rancho Cucamonga area. Construction workers and equipment work operate at one development site until their tasks are complete. Nevertheless, fugitive dust and equipment emissions are required to be assessed. The General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR) analyzed the impacts of Air Quality based on the future build out of the City. Based upon on the Urban Emissions Model (URBEMIS7G) estimates in Table 4.3-3 of the General Plan (FPEIR), Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2), Ozone (03), and Particulate Matter (PMss and PM1o) would exceed SCAQMD thresholds for significance; therefore, they would all be cumulatively considerable if they cannot be mitigated on a project basis to a level less -than -significant. This City-wide increase in emissions was identified as a significant unavoidable adverse Impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council as noted in the Section 4.3 of the General Plan FPEIR. Although the project will have a less than significant impacts, the implementation of the following best practices and mitigation measures from the City's 2010 General Plan FPEIR will further reduce the project's short-term air quality impacts: 1) All construction equipment shall be maintained in good operating condition so as to reduce operational emissions. The contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained as per manufacturers' specifications. Maintenance records shall be available at the construction site for City verification. 2) Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, the developer shall submit construction plans to the City denoting the proposed schedule and projected equipment use. Construction contractors shall provide evidence that low emission mobile construction equipment will be utilized, or that their use was investigated and found to be infeasible for the project. Contractors shall also conform to any construction measures imposed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) as well as City Planning Staff. 3) The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel powered equipment where feasible, 4) The construction contractor shall ensure that construction -grading plans Include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. 5) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. 6) 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. E1—E2 Pg64 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 11 Rev 4-17 7) 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. n 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 25mph) 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 PM,o emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. 9) 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. Project Long Term (Operational) Emissions and Impacts Long-term air pollutant emissions are those associated with stationary sources and mobile sources involving any project -related changes. The proposed project would result in a net increase in the amount of development in the area; therefore, the proposed project would result in net increases in both stationary and mobile source emissions. The stationary source emissions would come from additional natural gas consumption for on-site buildings and electricity for the lighting in the buildings and at the parking area. As shown in the following tables, project implementation will not exceed any significance thresholds. No long-term, operational impacts will occur as a result of the project. E1—E2 Pg65 Less Than S.19N.' ant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PCIcnQany W12Than PP g Slgnlfiwnl M11goeen Sigr Cwnl No Im act Inm CrateU I as Impact Rev 4-17 7) 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. n 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 25mph) 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 PM,o emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. 9) 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. Project Long Term (Operational) Emissions and Impacts Long-term air pollutant emissions are those associated with stationary sources and mobile sources involving any project -related changes. The proposed project would result in a net increase in the amount of development in the area; therefore, the proposed project would result in net increases in both stationary and mobile source emissions. The stationary source emissions would come from additional natural gas consumption for on-site buildings and electricity for the lighting in the buildings and at the parking area. As shown in the following tables, project implementation will not exceed any significance thresholds. No long-term, operational impacts will occur as a result of the project. E1—E2 Pg65 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 12 Summary of Peak Operational Emissions TABLE 9 MAXIMUM DAILY OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS Emissions (ibsiday) Less Thj3 CO 131111110 1311012.6 Source Slgmficar.l Less 1 Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g f«eawny sgwAo i wm Wgatw Than sgnfieem Nu <0.5 Imeseel In "Id Imnad 1-21 :1 m i;1 Summary of Peak Operational Emissions TABLE 9 MAXIMUM DAILY OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS TABLE 10 LOCAL OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS Emissions (ibsiday) VOC NOx CO 131111110 1311012.6 Source Area sources' 2 <0 5 1 <0.5 <0.5 Energy sources <0.5 <0 5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 Mobile sources 1 2 6 1 <0.5 Total Operational Emissions° 3 2 7 1 <0-5 SCAQMD Significance Thresholds 55 55 550 150 55 (Table 6) Significant Impact? No No No No No lbs/day pounds per day, VOC votatde organic compounds. NOx. nitrogen oxides, CO. carbon monoxide. PM10 resprabte particulate matter with a diameter of I microns or less, PM2,5 Me particulate matter with a diameter o1 2 5 microns or less Area source VOC emissions were calculated manually ° Some totals do not add due to rounding Notes Sox and lead emissions are rot shaven. these emaswns would be negliglDle for the proposed protect. CaIEEMod model data sheets are Ind tided in Attachment A TABLE 10 LOCAL OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS Rev 4-17 Cumulative Impacts (Long Term/Operational Emissions) The General Plan Final Program Environmental impact Report (FPEIR) analyzed the potential impacts to air quality based on the future build out of the City. In the long-term, continued development would result in significant operational vehicle emissions based upon on the URBEMIS7G model estimates in Table 4.3-3 of the General Plan FPEIR, therefore, all developments would be cumulatively significant if they cannot be mitigated E1—E2 Pg66 Emisstons (Ibsfday) NOx Co PM10 PM2.6 Project Emissions Prefect maximum dally on-site emissions 1 2 <0.5 <0.5 SCAQMDScreening Thresholds 270 1,746 4 2 Exceeds threshold? No No No No Ibslday pounds per day. NOx. nitrogen oxides; CO carbon mornxide. PM 10respirable particulate matter with a diameter of 10 microns or less, PM25 fun particulate matter with a diameter 2.5 microns or less. SCAOMD South Coast Alf Qila9ty Management OisBkt Note Data Is for SCAQMO Source Receptor Area 34. Central San Bernardino Valley. 5 -acre site Source SCAOMD 2009 (thresholds). See Attachment A for CalEEMod model outpum. Rev 4-17 Cumulative Impacts (Long Term/Operational Emissions) The General Plan Final Program Environmental impact Report (FPEIR) analyzed the potential impacts to air quality based on the future build out of the City. In the long-term, continued development would result in significant operational vehicle emissions based upon on the URBEMIS7G model estimates in Table 4.3-3 of the General Plan FPEIR, therefore, all developments would be cumulatively significant if they cannot be mitigated E1—E2 Pg66 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 13 on a project basis to a less -than -significant level. This City-wide Increase in emissions was identified as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council as noted in the Section 4.3 of the General Plan FPEIR. Although the project will have less than significant impacts, the implementation of the following mitigation measures from the City's 2010 General Plan FPEIR and the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Analysis prepared by PSMOAS (November 2016) are designed to further reduce the project's operational and cumulative air quality impacts: 10) Landscape with native and/or drought -resistant species to reduce water consumption and to provide passive solar benefits. 11) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate high-efficiency/low-polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water heaters. 12) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. 13) Projects shall be designed in accordance with the applicable California Green . Building Standards (CALGreen) Code (24 CCR 11). C) As noted in the General Plan FEIR (Section 4.3), continued development would contribute to the pollutant levels in the Rancho Cucamonga area, which already exceed Federal and Slate standards. The General Plan FPEIR identified the citywide increase in emissions as a significant and adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. Although the project will have less than significant impacts, the implementation of mitigation measures listed in subsection b) above from the City's 2010 General Plan FPEIR designed to minimize long-term, operational air quality Impacts, will further reduce the project's impact. d) Sensitive receptors are defined as populations that are more susceptible to the effects of pollution than the population at large. The SCAQMD Identifies the following as sensitive receptors: long-term health care facilities, rehabilitation centers, convalescent centers, retirement homes, residences, schools, playgrounds, child care centers, and athletic facilities. According to the SCAQMD, projects have the potential to create significant impacts if they are located within 1/4 mile of sensitive receptors and would emit toxic air contaminants identified in SCAQMD Rule 1401. The project site is located within''/, mile of single-family residences. Rev 4-17 According to the SCAQMD's CEQA Air Quality Handbook, land uses associated with odor complaints typically include agricultural uses, wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding (SCAQMD 1993). The proposed residential project does not include any uses identified by the SCAQMD as being associated with odors and therefore would not produce objectionable odors. As such, the proposed project would have no significant impact in regard to objectionable odors. No mitigation is required. E1—E2 Pg67 Less Than 9gnl6canl Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PClenllaay an Than I SgNAcant 6atigaion Sgnificanl No Im act IneO paled Impact Mead on a project basis to a less -than -significant level. This City-wide Increase in emissions was identified as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council as noted in the Section 4.3 of the General Plan FPEIR. Although the project will have less than significant impacts, the implementation of the following mitigation measures from the City's 2010 General Plan FPEIR and the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Analysis prepared by PSMOAS (November 2016) are designed to further reduce the project's operational and cumulative air quality impacts: 10) Landscape with native and/or drought -resistant species to reduce water consumption and to provide passive solar benefits. 11) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate high-efficiency/low-polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water heaters. 12) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. 13) Projects shall be designed in accordance with the applicable California Green . Building Standards (CALGreen) Code (24 CCR 11). C) As noted in the General Plan FEIR (Section 4.3), continued development would contribute to the pollutant levels in the Rancho Cucamonga area, which already exceed Federal and Slate standards. The General Plan FPEIR identified the citywide increase in emissions as a significant and adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. Although the project will have less than significant impacts, the implementation of mitigation measures listed in subsection b) above from the City's 2010 General Plan FPEIR designed to minimize long-term, operational air quality Impacts, will further reduce the project's impact. d) Sensitive receptors are defined as populations that are more susceptible to the effects of pollution than the population at large. The SCAQMD Identifies the following as sensitive receptors: long-term health care facilities, rehabilitation centers, convalescent centers, retirement homes, residences, schools, playgrounds, child care centers, and athletic facilities. According to the SCAQMD, projects have the potential to create significant impacts if they are located within 1/4 mile of sensitive receptors and would emit toxic air contaminants identified in SCAQMD Rule 1401. The project site is located within''/, mile of single-family residences. Rev 4-17 According to the SCAQMD's CEQA Air Quality Handbook, land uses associated with odor complaints typically include agricultural uses, wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding (SCAQMD 1993). The proposed residential project does not include any uses identified by the SCAQMD as being associated with odors and therefore would not produce objectionable odors. As such, the proposed project would have no significant impact in regard to objectionable odors. No mitigation is required. E1—E2 Pg67 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 14 Project construction activities would generale odors. Potential construction odors include diesel exhaust emissions and paving operations. There may be situations where construction activity odors will be noticeable by persons working nearby, but these odors would not be unfamiliar or necessarily objectionable. The odors would be temporary and would dissipate rapidly from the source with an increase in distance. Therefore, the proposed project impacts would be short-term, and would not be objectionable to a substantial number of people Although the impacts are anticipated to be less than significant, the mitigation measures listed under subsection b above and the following mitigation measure will further reduce any potential impacts. 14) All new development in the City of Rancho Cucamonga shall comply with South Coast Air Quality Management District's Rule 445, Wood Burning Devices. Rule 445 was adopted in March 2008 to reduce emissions of PM2.5 and precludes the installation of indoor or outdoor wood burning devices (i.e. firep] aceslhearths) in new development on or after March 9, 2009. e) Construction odors (Short-term) may include odors associated with equipment use including diesel exhaust or roofing, painting and paving. These odors are temporary and would dissipate rapidly. Operational odors (long-term) are not typically associated with this type of use. Odors from the proposed single-family residential subdivision would most likely be from activities such as cooking and lawn care however, these odors would be minimal and not considered to be significant. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Less Than a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or () sls,Ncant Lass ( ) Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g Palmlially spifaanl vran llillga0on man &1g 1ca31 No identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status Im act to orated Im acs Impact Project construction activities would generale odors. Potential construction odors include diesel exhaust emissions and paving operations. There may be situations where construction activity odors will be noticeable by persons working nearby, but these odors would not be unfamiliar or necessarily objectionable. The odors would be temporary and would dissipate rapidly from the source with an increase in distance. Therefore, the proposed project impacts would be short-term, and would not be objectionable to a substantial number of people Although the impacts are anticipated to be less than significant, the mitigation measures listed under subsection b above and the following mitigation measure will further reduce any potential impacts. 14) All new development in the City of Rancho Cucamonga shall comply with South Coast Air Quality Management District's Rule 445, Wood Burning Devices. Rule 445 was adopted in March 2008 to reduce emissions of PM2.5 and precludes the installation of indoor or outdoor wood burning devices (i.e. firep] aceslhearths) in new development on or after March 9, 2009. e) Construction odors (Short-term) may include odors associated with equipment use including diesel exhaust or roofing, painting and paving. These odors are temporary and would dissipate rapidly. Operational odors (long-term) are not typically associated with this type of use. Odors from the proposed single-family residential subdivision would most likely be from activities such as cooking and lawn care however, these odors would be minimal and not considered to be significant. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or () (✓) () ( ) through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on riparian habitat () () () (✓) or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? C) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally () () () (✓) protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native () () (✓) ( ) resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Rev 4-17 E1—E2 Pg68 initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 15 e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances () Less Tflan () ( ) protecting biological resources, such as a tree Signifeent Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: POlenllasy tvm rnan f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat SigniAWnl humvan SIImpad t Na Conservation Plan, Natural Community conservation Im act (neo waled Im eh Imao<I e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances () (✓) () ( ) protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat () () () (✓) Conservation Plan, Natural Community conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or Stale habitat conservation plan? Comments: a) The project site is located in vacant parcel surrounded by single-family residential uses. The site has been previously graded. According to the General Plan Figure RC -4, and Section 4.4 of the General Plan FPEIR, the project site is not within an area of sensitive biological resources; therefore, development will not adversely affect rare or endangered species of plants or animals because of the fact that the project is surrounded by urbanized land uses and is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Plan. A Biological Constraints Survey which included a field survey, a review of aerial photographs and databases, as well as a literature review was prepared for the project site by PSOMAS (January 9, 2018). Rev 4-17 The Biological Constraints Survey identified a total of 31 specials status plant species in the vicinity of the project site. However, the project site does not support suitable habitat for any of these listed species and is not located within a designated critical habitat area. In addition to species formally listed by the resource agencies, a total of 21 species reported in the vicinity of the project site have a California. Rare Plant Rannk (CRPR) of 1B or 2, which may be considered constraints on development per Section 15380 of the California Environmental Quality Act. Three species — mesa horkelia, Brand's star phacelia, and the San Bernardino aster have been reported at locations near the project site and can occur in disturbed areas. However, due top consistent soil disturbance on the project site and lack of native habitats, these species are not expected to occur. The remaining species are also not expected to occur on the project site due to lack of suitable habitat. A total of 27 special status wildlife have been reported from the project vicinity, which includes 7 federally and/or State -listed Endangered or Threatened species. The project site does not support suitable habitat for any of these 7 federally and/or State -listed Endangered or Threatened species and is not located within a designated critical habitat area. In addition, the project site is not located in a Recovery Unit (Ontario) for the Delhi - Sands flower -loving fly (one of the federally and/or State -listed Endangered or Threatened species) and Delhi soils are not mapped on the project site. In addition to the 7 species discussed above which are formally listed by the resource agencies, 20 special status species are known to occur in the vicinity of the project site. One species, the Southern California legless lizard has low potential to use portions of the project site. Marginally suitable habitat for the Southern California legless lizard is present within dead trees, branches, and stumps located throughout the project site. Due to the low quality of this habitat and the low potential for this species to occur on the project site, impacts to this habitat would be less than significant. Additionally, the Southern California legless lizard occurs throughout Southern California south of the Transverse Ranges into northern Baja California, Mexico. Disjunct populations also occur in the Tehachapi and Piute mountains in Kern County. Therefore, considering the expansive range of these E1—E2 Pg69 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 16 Rev 4-17 species in Southern California, the loss of approximately 9.11 acres of marginally suitable habitat would not be considered significant and no mitigation would be required. The project site contains potentially suitable habitat for nesting raptors, and has the potential to support birds (common and special status) subject to the Migratory Bird Act (MBTA) which includes the Burrowing Owl. Any impact on an active bird nest would be considered a violation of the MBTA and would be considered significant. Impacts on active nests would be reduced to a less than significant level with the implementation of the following mitigation measures: 1) A survey for active raptor nests is recommended prior to commencement of any construction activities during the raptor nesting season (i.e,, February 1 to June 30). Restrictions may be placed on construction activities In the vicinity of any active nest observed until the nest is no longer active, as determined by a qualified Biologist. Typically, a 500 -fool buffer zone is designated around a nest to allow construction to proceed while minimizing disturbance to the active nest. Once the nest is no longer active, construction can proceed in the buffer zone 2) In order to avoid impacts on nesting birds, vegetation removal shall not be scheduled during the breeding season (i.e., March 15—September 15) to the extent feasible. If vegetation clearing for construction must be conducted during the breeding season, prior to disturbance, a pre -construction survey or multiple surveys shall be conducted by a qualified Biologist for nesting birds to confirm the absence of active nests. If no active nests are found, vegetation removal can proceed. If the Biologist finds an active nest within or adjacent to the construction area and determines that the nest may be impacted, the Biologist will identify an appropriate buffer zone (typically, 100 to 300 feet) around the nest depending on the sensitivity of the species and the nature of the construction activity. The active site will be protected until nesting activity has ended to ensure compliance with the MBTA and the California Fish and Game Code. To protect any nest site, the following restrictions to construction activities shall be required until nests are no longer active, as determined by a qualified Biologist: (1) clearing limits shall be established within a buffer around any occupied nest, unless otherwise determined by a qualified Biologist and (2) access and surveying shall be restricted within the buffer of any occupied nest, unless otherwise determined by a qualified Biologist. Construction and/or encroachment into the buffer area around a known nest shall only be allowed if the Biologist determines that the proposed activity would not disturb the nest occupants. 3) Perform a Burrowing Owl Survey that is in conformance with the Department of Fish and Wildlife Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation and submit the written report outlining the findings to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the Planning Department within 30 days of groundbreaking activity. The Burrowing Owl Survey shall follow the following protocol: Burrowing Owl Survey methodology shall be based on Appendix D (Breeding and non -breeding season surveys and reports) of the CDFW Staff Report. Results of the pre -construction survey shall be provided to CDFW and the City. If the pre -construction survey does not identify E1—E2Pg70 Less Than SignificantLess Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g poleniidgy slgwnnl vnln Wigaugn Than Sigrficant Na Irnact Inco orator Im act ImLact Rev 4-17 species in Southern California, the loss of approximately 9.11 acres of marginally suitable habitat would not be considered significant and no mitigation would be required. The project site contains potentially suitable habitat for nesting raptors, and has the potential to support birds (common and special status) subject to the Migratory Bird Act (MBTA) which includes the Burrowing Owl. Any impact on an active bird nest would be considered a violation of the MBTA and would be considered significant. Impacts on active nests would be reduced to a less than significant level with the implementation of the following mitigation measures: 1) A survey for active raptor nests is recommended prior to commencement of any construction activities during the raptor nesting season (i.e,, February 1 to June 30). Restrictions may be placed on construction activities In the vicinity of any active nest observed until the nest is no longer active, as determined by a qualified Biologist. Typically, a 500 -fool buffer zone is designated around a nest to allow construction to proceed while minimizing disturbance to the active nest. Once the nest is no longer active, construction can proceed in the buffer zone 2) In order to avoid impacts on nesting birds, vegetation removal shall not be scheduled during the breeding season (i.e., March 15—September 15) to the extent feasible. If vegetation clearing for construction must be conducted during the breeding season, prior to disturbance, a pre -construction survey or multiple surveys shall be conducted by a qualified Biologist for nesting birds to confirm the absence of active nests. If no active nests are found, vegetation removal can proceed. If the Biologist finds an active nest within or adjacent to the construction area and determines that the nest may be impacted, the Biologist will identify an appropriate buffer zone (typically, 100 to 300 feet) around the nest depending on the sensitivity of the species and the nature of the construction activity. The active site will be protected until nesting activity has ended to ensure compliance with the MBTA and the California Fish and Game Code. To protect any nest site, the following restrictions to construction activities shall be required until nests are no longer active, as determined by a qualified Biologist: (1) clearing limits shall be established within a buffer around any occupied nest, unless otherwise determined by a qualified Biologist and (2) access and surveying shall be restricted within the buffer of any occupied nest, unless otherwise determined by a qualified Biologist. Construction and/or encroachment into the buffer area around a known nest shall only be allowed if the Biologist determines that the proposed activity would not disturb the nest occupants. 3) Perform a Burrowing Owl Survey that is in conformance with the Department of Fish and Wildlife Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation and submit the written report outlining the findings to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the Planning Department within 30 days of groundbreaking activity. The Burrowing Owl Survey shall follow the following protocol: Burrowing Owl Survey methodology shall be based on Appendix D (Breeding and non -breeding season surveys and reports) of the CDFW Staff Report. Results of the pre -construction survey shall be provided to CDFW and the City. If the pre -construction survey does not identify E1—E2Pg70 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 17 burrowing on the project site, then no further mitigation is required. If burrowing owls are found to be utilizing the project site during the pre - construction survey, measures shall be developed by the qualified biologist in coordination with the CDFW to avoid impacting occupied burrows during the nesting period. These measures shall be based on the most current CDFW protocols and will at minimum include establishment of buffer setbacks from occupied burrows and owl monitoring. If ground -disturbing actives are delayed or suspended for more than 30 days after the pre -construction survey, the site shall be resurveyed for owls. During the non -breeding season from September 1 through January 31, if burrows are occupied by migratory and non -migratory resident burrowing owls during a pre -construction survey, burrow exclusion and/or closure may be used to exclude owls from those burrows. Burrow exclusion and/or closure should only be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist In coordination with CDFW using the most current CDFW guidelines, During the avian nesting season from February 1 through August 31, if nests are discovered, they shall be avoided through the establishment of an appropriate buffer setback, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. The temporary "no construction" area would have to be maintained until the nest has completed its cycle, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. Once the nest cycle is complete and all nestlings have fledged and have left the nest, construction in that area may resume. b) The project site is located In an urban area with no natural communities. No riparian habitat exists on-site. Therefore, no impact is anticipated. C) No wetland habitat is present on-site. Therefore, no impact is anticipated. d) The City is primarily located in an urban area that does not contain large, contiguous natural open space areas. Wildlife potentially may move through the north/south trending tributaries in the northern portion of the City and within the Sphere of Influence. Although the currently vacant project site Is expected to be of some use for local wildlife movement, the site is surrounded by urban uses and is not part a regional wildlife corridor. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur. e) There is a total of 18 trees on the project site, 14 of which qualify to be classified as heritage trees. An Arborist Report dated February 27, 2018 prepared by Golden Stale Land and Tree Assessment was submitted to determine the condition of the on-site trees. The on-site trees include 3 Black Walnut trees, 1 Pecan tree, 1 Avocado tree, and 13 Blue Gum Eucalyptus trees, which qualify to be classified as Heritage Trees. Only one out of the 13 Blue Gum Eucalyptus trees are in good condition. 12 out of the 13 Blue Gum Eucalyptus trees which are dead or In poor health will need to be removed. The applicant will be required to replace removed trees on a one-for-one basis as well as plant the required two trees in the front yard are of each residence. Prior to building permit issuance, Planning staff will assess the viability of transplanting the 1 healthy Blue Gum Eucalyptus tree to an area that does not conflict with the proposed development. With Rev 4-17 E1—E2 Pg71 Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Pa:entwy slgniftant significant Wm bgrgagan Less Then slgnlficanl Ida Im ae1 Inco orated Im " Im an burrowing on the project site, then no further mitigation is required. If burrowing owls are found to be utilizing the project site during the pre - construction survey, measures shall be developed by the qualified biologist in coordination with the CDFW to avoid impacting occupied burrows during the nesting period. These measures shall be based on the most current CDFW protocols and will at minimum include establishment of buffer setbacks from occupied burrows and owl monitoring. If ground -disturbing actives are delayed or suspended for more than 30 days after the pre -construction survey, the site shall be resurveyed for owls. During the non -breeding season from September 1 through January 31, if burrows are occupied by migratory and non -migratory resident burrowing owls during a pre -construction survey, burrow exclusion and/or closure may be used to exclude owls from those burrows. Burrow exclusion and/or closure should only be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist In coordination with CDFW using the most current CDFW guidelines, During the avian nesting season from February 1 through August 31, if nests are discovered, they shall be avoided through the establishment of an appropriate buffer setback, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. The temporary "no construction" area would have to be maintained until the nest has completed its cycle, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. Once the nest cycle is complete and all nestlings have fledged and have left the nest, construction in that area may resume. b) The project site is located In an urban area with no natural communities. No riparian habitat exists on-site. Therefore, no impact is anticipated. C) No wetland habitat is present on-site. Therefore, no impact is anticipated. d) The City is primarily located in an urban area that does not contain large, contiguous natural open space areas. Wildlife potentially may move through the north/south trending tributaries in the northern portion of the City and within the Sphere of Influence. Although the currently vacant project site Is expected to be of some use for local wildlife movement, the site is surrounded by urban uses and is not part a regional wildlife corridor. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur. e) There is a total of 18 trees on the project site, 14 of which qualify to be classified as heritage trees. An Arborist Report dated February 27, 2018 prepared by Golden Stale Land and Tree Assessment was submitted to determine the condition of the on-site trees. The on-site trees include 3 Black Walnut trees, 1 Pecan tree, 1 Avocado tree, and 13 Blue Gum Eucalyptus trees, which qualify to be classified as Heritage Trees. Only one out of the 13 Blue Gum Eucalyptus trees are in good condition. 12 out of the 13 Blue Gum Eucalyptus trees which are dead or In poor health will need to be removed. The applicant will be required to replace removed trees on a one-for-one basis as well as plant the required two trees in the front yard are of each residence. Prior to building permit issuance, Planning staff will assess the viability of transplanting the 1 healthy Blue Gum Eucalyptus tree to an area that does not conflict with the proposed development. With Rev 4-17 E1—E2 Pg71 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 18 implementation of the following mitigation measure, the impact is considered less than significant: 4) Prior to issuance of building permits, developer shall submit a written report by a landscape architect or arborist which determines the feasibility of transplanting all 14 heritage trees identified by the arborists' report (Golden State Land and Tree Assessment; February 27, 2018). If removal is deemed necessary, the developer shall replace the 14 heritage trees on-site at the following rate: 5 trees on Lot A, 3 trees on Lot 10, 3 trees on Lot 11, and 3 trees on Lot 12. Replacement tree size shall be the maximum largest nursery -grown tree available as determined by the Planning Director or Planning Commission. f) Neither the City nor the SOI are within an adopted HCP, NCCP, or other approved Slate Habitat Conservation Plan area. The project site is not located within a local conservation area according to the General Plan, Open Space and Conservation Plan, Figure RC -1. No conflicts with habitat conservation plans will occur. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Less Than a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the () 519nifcanl Lass (✓) Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g Poteruauy slgificani Wilh KLIigabon man 5Lgni6carl No § 15064.5? Imoact Incomwated Impact Im act implementation of the following mitigation measure, the impact is considered less than significant: 4) Prior to issuance of building permits, developer shall submit a written report by a landscape architect or arborist which determines the feasibility of transplanting all 14 heritage trees identified by the arborists' report (Golden State Land and Tree Assessment; February 27, 2018). If removal is deemed necessary, the developer shall replace the 14 heritage trees on-site at the following rate: 5 trees on Lot A, 3 trees on Lot 10, 3 trees on Lot 11, and 3 trees on Lot 12. Replacement tree size shall be the maximum largest nursery -grown tree available as determined by the Planning Director or Planning Commission. f) Neither the City nor the SOI are within an adopted HCP, NCCP, or other approved Slate Habitat Conservation Plan area. The project site is not located within a local conservation area according to the General Plan, Open Space and Conservation Plan, Figure RC -1. No conflicts with habitat conservation plans will occur. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the () () () (✓) significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the () (✓) significance of an archeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? C) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological () (✓) () ( ) resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred () () () (✓) outside of dedicated cemeteries? Comments: a) The applicant has submitted a Phase I Cultural Assessment prepared by PSOMAS (January 15, 2018). The cultural assessment included archaeological records search by the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) of all properties within a 1 -mile radius of the project site. Data sources consulted at the SCCIC included archaeological records, Archaeological Determinations of Eligibility (DOE), historic maps, and the Historic Property Data File (HPDF) maintained by the Office of Historic Preservation (OHP). The HPDF contains listings for the NRHP and/or CRHR, California Historical Landmarks (CHL), and California Points of Historical Interest (CPHI). Additionally, the City of Rancho Cucamonga Local Inventory of Historic Resources (2011) and the Local Register of Historic Resources (last updated July 2012) were reviewed for any listings that might be relevant to the project. A pedestrian survey was also conducted on the property. The results of the records search at the SCCIC indicated that there have been at least 26 archaeological Investigations conducted within a 1 -mile radius of the subject property. However, of those, only 24 have a technical report on file at the SCCIC. Several of those reports are immediately adjacent to the property, but none of the 24 reports included any portion of the property. Rev 4-17 E1—E2 Pg72 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 19 The SCCIC maps indicate that 25 historical resources have been identified within a 1- mile radius of the property, one of which is on the property. It appears that all the technical reports and recorded sites are associated with historic structures or features dating to the early 20th Century. Those structures are primarily houses, related ancillary structures, and at least one cistern. One historic house and the cistern were in the northwest corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Highland Avenue. Those structures no longer exist. Additional data sources consulted at the SCCIC included Archaeological DOE, historic maps, and the HPDF maintained by the California OHP. The HPDF contains listings for the NRHP and/or CRHR, the CHL, and the CPHI. No cultural resources were identified from any of these additional research materials. The Local Inventory of Historic Resources did not contain any listings for either Etiwanda Avenue or Highland Avenue. However, the Local Register of Historic Resources and the City of Rancho Cucamonga's Historic Landmarks and Points of Interest directory list the Ross House, which is a residence that existed on the property and was recorded by Gallup in 1989. The house was constructed on the property around 1906. The house was owned by a prominent businessman, C. Newton Ross, who was a successful citrus grower. The house was evaluated by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in 1989. The evaluation found the house had been significantly modified over the years and, as such, no longer met the criteria necessary for inclusion on the NRNP. Subsequently, the house was demolished In 1991. In 1993, the former location of the house was designated as a Point of Historic Interest by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The designation, in this case, is used because the historic structure has been removed and the site is the only remaining relevant feature. The designation is a recognition for historical purposes and is not subject to protective or restrictive provisions applicable to Landmark Designations. Psomas Senior Archaeologist David M. Smith completed a field survey of the project site on June 23, 2016. While it is known that the Ross House once stood on the property, its exact location is unknown. However, the remains of a building, represented by concrete footings and an entryway slab, were observed near the southwestern part of the property. A single shard of patterned whiteware, several mortared bricks, small boulders with concrete adhering to them, and numerous unidentified metal objects were also observed at various locations on the property. It Is possible that these are related to the Ross House, which was demolished in 1991. However, with the exception of the foundation, the other items observed could have been the result of unauthorized dumping once the property was vacant. Based on the information obtained through the records search and from the field survey, there is sufficient information to conclude that the prosed development will not impact any historic resources. Based on this information, no impact is anticipated. b) There are no known archaeological sites or resources recorded on the project site; however, the Rancho Cucamonga area is known to have been inhabited by Native Americans according to the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.6). Construction activity, particularly grading, soil excavation, and compaction, could adversely affect or eliminate existing and potential archaeological resources. The General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR) analyzed the Impacts of Cultural Resources based on the future build out of the City. The following mitigation measures as identified in the FPEIR shall be implemented; Rev 4-17 E1—E2 Pg73 Less Than significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PGIenwly Vgr ficant wh Mitigation 1,ncorporWed Than slgniLwnt No Im atl Im act im act The SCCIC maps indicate that 25 historical resources have been identified within a 1- mile radius of the property, one of which is on the property. It appears that all the technical reports and recorded sites are associated with historic structures or features dating to the early 20th Century. Those structures are primarily houses, related ancillary structures, and at least one cistern. One historic house and the cistern were in the northwest corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Highland Avenue. Those structures no longer exist. Additional data sources consulted at the SCCIC included Archaeological DOE, historic maps, and the HPDF maintained by the California OHP. The HPDF contains listings for the NRHP and/or CRHR, the CHL, and the CPHI. No cultural resources were identified from any of these additional research materials. The Local Inventory of Historic Resources did not contain any listings for either Etiwanda Avenue or Highland Avenue. However, the Local Register of Historic Resources and the City of Rancho Cucamonga's Historic Landmarks and Points of Interest directory list the Ross House, which is a residence that existed on the property and was recorded by Gallup in 1989. The house was constructed on the property around 1906. The house was owned by a prominent businessman, C. Newton Ross, who was a successful citrus grower. The house was evaluated by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in 1989. The evaluation found the house had been significantly modified over the years and, as such, no longer met the criteria necessary for inclusion on the NRNP. Subsequently, the house was demolished In 1991. In 1993, the former location of the house was designated as a Point of Historic Interest by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The designation, in this case, is used because the historic structure has been removed and the site is the only remaining relevant feature. The designation is a recognition for historical purposes and is not subject to protective or restrictive provisions applicable to Landmark Designations. Psomas Senior Archaeologist David M. Smith completed a field survey of the project site on June 23, 2016. While it is known that the Ross House once stood on the property, its exact location is unknown. However, the remains of a building, represented by concrete footings and an entryway slab, were observed near the southwestern part of the property. A single shard of patterned whiteware, several mortared bricks, small boulders with concrete adhering to them, and numerous unidentified metal objects were also observed at various locations on the property. It Is possible that these are related to the Ross House, which was demolished in 1991. However, with the exception of the foundation, the other items observed could have been the result of unauthorized dumping once the property was vacant. Based on the information obtained through the records search and from the field survey, there is sufficient information to conclude that the prosed development will not impact any historic resources. Based on this information, no impact is anticipated. b) There are no known archaeological sites or resources recorded on the project site; however, the Rancho Cucamonga area is known to have been inhabited by Native Americans according to the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.6). Construction activity, particularly grading, soil excavation, and compaction, could adversely affect or eliminate existing and potential archaeological resources. The General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR) analyzed the Impacts of Cultural Resources based on the future build out of the City. The following mitigation measures as identified in the FPEIR shall be implemented; Rev 4-17 E1—E2 Pg73 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 20 1) If any prehistoric archaeological resources are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. With the assistance of the archaeologist, the City of Rancho Cucamonga will: a Enact interim measures to protect undesignated sites from demolition or significant modification without an opportunity for the City to establish its archaeological value. a 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. a Prepare a mitigation plan consistent with Section 21083.2 Archaeological resources of CEQA to eliminate adverse project effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric resources, including but not limited to, avoiding archaeological sites, capping or covering sites with soil, planning the site as a park or green space or paying an in-kind mitigation fee. Prepare a technical resources management report, documenting the inventory, evaluation, and proposed mitigation of resources within the project area. Submit one copy of the completed report with original illustrations, to the San Bernardino County Archaeological Information. Center for permanent archiving. C) The General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.6) indicates that the Rancho Cucamonga area is on an alluvial fan. According to the research performed at the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County and the San Bernardino County database, no paleontological sites or resources have been recorded within the City of Rancho Cucamonga or the Sphere-cf- Influence, including the project site; however, the area has a high sensitivity rating for paleontological resources. The older alluvium, which would have been deposited during the wetter climate that prevailed 10,000-100,000 years ago during the Late Pleistocene epoch of the Quaternary period, when the last 'Ice Age" and the appearance of modern man occurred, may contain significant vertebrate fossils. The project site is underlain by Quaternary alluvium per the Public Safety Element of the General Plan; therefore, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: Rev 4-17 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: a Assign a paleontological monitor, trained and equipped to allow the rapid removal of fossils with minimal construction delay, to the site full-time during the interval of earth -disturbing activities. E1—E2 Pg74 Less Than signi6cenl llmomwated Lm Issues and Supporting Information Sources: s 3Nrwm Antal o Sithan am No Im act Im act Im act 1) If any prehistoric archaeological resources are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. With the assistance of the archaeologist, the City of Rancho Cucamonga will: a Enact interim measures to protect undesignated sites from demolition or significant modification without an opportunity for the City to establish its archaeological value. a 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. a Prepare a mitigation plan consistent with Section 21083.2 Archaeological resources of CEQA to eliminate adverse project effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric resources, including but not limited to, avoiding archaeological sites, capping or covering sites with soil, planning the site as a park or green space or paying an in-kind mitigation fee. Prepare a technical resources management report, documenting the inventory, evaluation, and proposed mitigation of resources within the project area. Submit one copy of the completed report with original illustrations, to the San Bernardino County Archaeological Information. Center for permanent archiving. C) The General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.6) indicates that the Rancho Cucamonga area is on an alluvial fan. According to the research performed at the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County and the San Bernardino County database, no paleontological sites or resources have been recorded within the City of Rancho Cucamonga or the Sphere-cf- Influence, including the project site; however, the area has a high sensitivity rating for paleontological resources. The older alluvium, which would have been deposited during the wetter climate that prevailed 10,000-100,000 years ago during the Late Pleistocene epoch of the Quaternary period, when the last 'Ice Age" and the appearance of modern man occurred, may contain significant vertebrate fossils. The project site is underlain by Quaternary alluvium per the Public Safety Element of the General Plan; therefore, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: Rev 4-17 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: a Assign a paleontological monitor, trained and equipped to allow the rapid removal of fossils with minimal construction delay, to the site full-time during the interval of earth -disturbing activities. E1—E2 Pg74 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 21 p 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. p 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). p Submit summary report to City of Rancho Cucamonga. Transfer coliected specimens with a copy of the report to San Bernardino County Museum. d) The proposed project is in an area that has already been disturbed by development. The project site has already been disrupted by grading, and annual discing for weed abatement. No known religious or sacred sites exist within the project area. No evidence is in place to suggest the project site has been used for human burials. The California Health and Safety Code (Section 7050.5) slates that if human remains are discovered on- site, no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. As adherence to Stale regulations is required for all development, no mitigation is required in the unlikely event human remains are discovered on-site. No adverse impacts are anticipated. 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: Less Than a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Polennally mm Than death involving: significant Mtigapon 519rar'Unl No I) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as Impact InCOrPoraled Imaaet Im act p 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. p 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). p Submit summary report to City of Rancho Cucamonga. Transfer coliected specimens with a copy of the report to San Bernardino County Museum. d) The proposed project is in an area that has already been disturbed by development. The project site has already been disrupted by grading, and annual discing for weed abatement. No known religious or sacred sites exist within the project area. No evidence is in place to suggest the project site has been used for human burials. The California Health and Safety Code (Section 7050.5) slates that if human remains are discovered on- site, no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. As adherence to Stale regulations is required for all development, no mitigation is required in the unlikely event human remains are discovered on-site. No adverse impacts are anticipated. 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: I) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as (} () (✓) ( ) delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? () () (✓) ( ) iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including () () (✓) ( ) liquefaction? iv) Landslides? () () (✓) ( ) b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ( ) (✓) () ( ) C) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table () () () (✓) 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? Rev 4-17 E1—E2 Pg75 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 22 e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use () Less Than () (✓) of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal Slgmfi=l Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Pmenuauy Sigmfiwm WAh IAUgat:oa Than S19rv5caat Na disposal of wastewater? [.Pact hoorpomIM Im act Went e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use () () () (✓) of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? Comments: a) No known faults pass through the site and it is not in an Earthquake Fault Zone, nor is it in the Rancho Cucamonga City Special Study Zone along the Red Hill Fault, according to the General Plan Figure PS -2, and Section 4.7 of the General Plan FPEIR. The Red Hill Fault, passes within 1 mile northwest the site, and the Cucamonga Fault Zone lies approximately 2.5 miles north. These faults are both capable of producing Mw 6.0-7.0 earthquakes. Also, the San Jacinto fault, capable of producing up to Mw 7.5 earthquakes is 5.7miles northeasterly of the site and the San Andreas, capable of up to Mw 8.2 earthquakes, is 10.25 miles northeasterly of the site. Each of these faults can produce strong ground shaking. Adhering to the Uniform Building Code and Standard Conditions will ensure that geologic impacts are less than significant. b) The City of Rancho Cucamonga is within a designated Soil Erosion Control Area Exhibit 4.7-4 of the General Plan FPEIR. The proposed project will require the excavation, stockpiling, and/or movement of on-site soils. The Rancho Cucamonga area is subject to strong Santa Ana wind conditions during September to April, which generates blowing sand and dust, and creates erosion problems. Construction activities may temporarily exacerbate the impacts of windblown sand, resulting in temporary problems of dust control; however, development of this project under the General Plan would help to reduce windblown sand impacts in the area as pavement, roads, buildings, and landscaping are established. Therefore, the following fugitive dust mitigation measures shall be implemented to reduce impacts to less than significant levels: 1) The site shall be treated with water or other soil -stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) daily to reduce PMIo 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 PMIO emissions associated with vehicle tracking of soil off- site. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. 3) Grading operations shall he suspended when wind speeds exceed 25 mph to minimize PMIO 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 PMIO emissions. C) The General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.7) Indicates that there is a potential for the hillside areas at the northern end of the City and In the SOI for slope failure, landslides, and/or erosion. Areas subject to slope instability contain slopes of 30 percent or greater. Landslides may be induced by seismic activity, rain, or construction. The City Hillside Development Regulations prohibits the development within slopes of 30 percent or greater and limit the number of units that could be constructed within the Hillside Residential and Very Low Density Residential designations In the Hillside areas. The site is not within an Rev 4-17 E1—E2 Pg76 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 23 Less Than Significant Leu Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially vmn Than Signi6wnt Mdigauon significan I No Imeatl Inco orated Im Earthquake hazard zone or other unstable geologic unit or soil type according to General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.7-2. Soil types on-site consist of Hanford coarse sandy loam and Tujunga loamy sand soil association according to General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.7-3. No adverse impacts are anticipated. d) The majority of Rancho Cucamonga, including the project site, is located on alluvial soil deposits. These types of soils are not considered to be expansive. Soil types on-site consist of Hanford coarse sandy loam and Tujunga loamy sand soil association according to General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.7-3. These soils are typically have slow to medium runoff. No adverse Impacts are anticipated. e) The project will connect to, and be served by, the existing local sewer system for wastewater disposal. No septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal is proposed. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated. 7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or () () (✓) ( ) indirectly, that may have a significant Impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation () () oats hn act Earthquake hazard zone or other unstable geologic unit or soil type according to General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.7-2. Soil types on-site consist of Hanford coarse sandy loam and Tujunga loamy sand soil association according to General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.7-3. No adverse impacts are anticipated. d) The majority of Rancho Cucamonga, including the project site, is located on alluvial soil deposits. These types of soils are not considered to be expansive. Soil types on-site consist of Hanford coarse sandy loam and Tujunga loamy sand soil association according to General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.7-3. These soils are typically have slow to medium runoff. No adverse Impacts are anticipated. e) The project will connect to, and be served by, the existing local sewer system for wastewater disposal. No septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal is proposed. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated. 7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or () () (✓) ( ) indirectly, that may have a significant Impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation () () V)( ) adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Comments: a) Regulations and Significance — The Federal government began studying the phenomenon of global warming as early as 1979 with the National Climate Protection Act (92 Stat. 601). In June of 2005, Governor Schwarzenegger established California's Green House Gas (GHG) emissions reduction target in Executive Order (EO) S-3-05. The EO created goals to reduce GHG emissions for the State of California to 2000 levels by 2010; GHG emissions reduced to 1990 levels by 2020; and GHG emissions reduced to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. Additionally, on December 7, 2009 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) issued findings regarding GHGs under rule 202(a) of the Clean Air Act: (1) that GHGs endanger human health; and (2) that this will be the first steps to regulating GHGs through the Federal Clean Air Act. The USEPA defines 6 key GHGs (carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CHa), nitrous oxide (N20), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6)). The combined emissions of these well -mixed greenhouse gases from new motor vehicles and engines contribute to GHG pollution. Rev 4-17 Thewestern states, including Arizona, California, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, and Washington, already experience hotter, drier climates. California is a substantial contributor of GHGs and is expected to see an increase of 3 to 4 degrees Fahrenheit (OF) over the next century. Assembly Bill (AB) 32 requires that the California Air Resources Board (ARB), the lead agency for implementing AB 32, determine what the statewide GHG emission level was in 1990 and approve a statewide GHG emissions limit (427 million metric tons of CO2 equivalent) to be achieved by 2020 and prepare a Scoping Plan to outline the main strategies for meeting the 2020 deadline. Significant progress can be made toward the E1—E2 Pg77 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 24 Rev 4-17 2020 goal through existing technologies and improving the efficiency of energy use. Other solutions would include improving the State's infrastructure and transitioning to cleaner and more efficient sources of energy. The ARB estimates that 38 percent of the State's GHG emissions in 2004 was from transportation sources followed by electricity generation (both in -State and out -of -State) at 28 percent and Industrial at 20 percent. Residential and commercial activities account for 9 percent, agricultural uses at 6 percent, high global warming potential gases at 3 percent, and recycling and waste at 1 percent. It is not anticipated that any single development project would have a substantial effect on global climate change but that GHG emissions from the project would combine with emissions across California, the United Stales, and the world to cumulatively contribute to global climate change. Therefore, consistent with the ARB's Climate Change Scoping Plan, the proposed project was evaluated for consistency with the Early Action Measures (Scoping Plan is a recommendation until adopted through normal rulemaking). The proposed project is assessed by determining its consistency with the 37 Recommended Actions identified by ARB. In compliance with Senate Bill (SB) 97 and CEQA, the project has been analyzed based on a qualitative analysis (CEQA 15064.4). Additionally, the ARB was directed through SB 375 to develop regional GHG emission reduction targets to be achieved within the automobile and light truck sectors for 2020 and 2035. SCAQMD and ARB maintain ambient air quality monitoring stations in the Basin. The stations closest to the project site are the Upland station and the Fontana -Arrow Highway station. The Upland station monitors all criteria pollutants except PM1o, PM2e, and SO2 which are monitored at the Fontana -Arrow Highway station. The ambient air quality in the project area for CO, NO2, and S02 are consistently below the relevant State and Federal standards (based on ARB and EPA from 2007, 2008, and 2009 readings). Ozone, PMio, and PM2 a levels all exceed Slate and Federal standards regularly. Proiect Related Sources of GHG's — Based on the Guidelines for the Implementation of California Environmental Qualify Act, Appendix G, a project would normally be considered to have a significant effect on air quality if the project would violate any ambient air quality standards, contribute substantially to an existing air quality violation, expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, or conflict with adopted environmental plans and goals of the community. However, neither the CEQA statutes, Office of Planning and Research (OPR) guidelines, nor the draft proposed changes to the CEQA Guidelines prescribe thresholds of significance or a particular methodology for performing an Impact analysis. Significance criteria are left to the judgment and discretion of the Lead Agency. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has not adopted a threshold of significance for GHG emissions. However, a screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year is based upon South Coast Air Quality Management District staffs proposed GHG screening threshold for stationary sources emissions for non -industrial projects, as described in the SCAQMD's Interim CEQA GHG Significance Threshold for Stationary Sources, Rules and Plans. Project related GHG's would include emissions from direct and indirect sources. Based on the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Analysis prepared by Psomas (November 2016), total project related emissions would be 274 MTCO2eq/year, as shown in the following table: E1—E2Pg78 Lev Than slyNficart Lass Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Patantialy significant Win Wgatlon Than sl9NF,.nl No Irnpan inc orated I..ad Im act Rev 4-17 2020 goal through existing technologies and improving the efficiency of energy use. Other solutions would include improving the State's infrastructure and transitioning to cleaner and more efficient sources of energy. The ARB estimates that 38 percent of the State's GHG emissions in 2004 was from transportation sources followed by electricity generation (both in -State and out -of -State) at 28 percent and Industrial at 20 percent. Residential and commercial activities account for 9 percent, agricultural uses at 6 percent, high global warming potential gases at 3 percent, and recycling and waste at 1 percent. It is not anticipated that any single development project would have a substantial effect on global climate change but that GHG emissions from the project would combine with emissions across California, the United Stales, and the world to cumulatively contribute to global climate change. Therefore, consistent with the ARB's Climate Change Scoping Plan, the proposed project was evaluated for consistency with the Early Action Measures (Scoping Plan is a recommendation until adopted through normal rulemaking). The proposed project is assessed by determining its consistency with the 37 Recommended Actions identified by ARB. In compliance with Senate Bill (SB) 97 and CEQA, the project has been analyzed based on a qualitative analysis (CEQA 15064.4). Additionally, the ARB was directed through SB 375 to develop regional GHG emission reduction targets to be achieved within the automobile and light truck sectors for 2020 and 2035. SCAQMD and ARB maintain ambient air quality monitoring stations in the Basin. The stations closest to the project site are the Upland station and the Fontana -Arrow Highway station. The Upland station monitors all criteria pollutants except PM1o, PM2e, and SO2 which are monitored at the Fontana -Arrow Highway station. The ambient air quality in the project area for CO, NO2, and S02 are consistently below the relevant State and Federal standards (based on ARB and EPA from 2007, 2008, and 2009 readings). Ozone, PMio, and PM2 a levels all exceed Slate and Federal standards regularly. Proiect Related Sources of GHG's — Based on the Guidelines for the Implementation of California Environmental Qualify Act, Appendix G, a project would normally be considered to have a significant effect on air quality if the project would violate any ambient air quality standards, contribute substantially to an existing air quality violation, expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, or conflict with adopted environmental plans and goals of the community. However, neither the CEQA statutes, Office of Planning and Research (OPR) guidelines, nor the draft proposed changes to the CEQA Guidelines prescribe thresholds of significance or a particular methodology for performing an Impact analysis. Significance criteria are left to the judgment and discretion of the Lead Agency. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has not adopted a threshold of significance for GHG emissions. However, a screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year is based upon South Coast Air Quality Management District staffs proposed GHG screening threshold for stationary sources emissions for non -industrial projects, as described in the SCAQMD's Interim CEQA GHG Significance Threshold for Stationary Sources, Rules and Plans. Project related GHG's would include emissions from direct and indirect sources. Based on the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Analysis prepared by Psomas (November 2016), total project related emissions would be 274 MTCO2eq/year, as shown in the following table: E1—E2Pg78 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 25 Rev 4-17 TABLE 13 ESTIMATED TOTAL PROJECT ANNUAL GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Emissions Source (MTCO2eW) Construction Amortized 133 Operations (Table 13) 261 Total° 274 MTCO2e/yr metric tons of carbon droride equwafem per year Total denved by dividing construction emissions (see Table 11) by 30 ° Total annual emissions is the sum of amortized construction emissions and operational emissions As shown in the table, direct and Indirect operational emissions associated with the project as compared to the SCAQMD's interim threshold of significance of 3,000 MTCO2e per year would result in a less than significant impact with respect to GHG emissions. Cumulative Short Term (Construction) GHG Emissions — The General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.5) indicates (hat GHG emissions result from construction activities associated with diesel -powered construction equipment and other combustion sources (i.e. Generators, workers vehicles, material delivery, etc.). The GHG emitted by construction equipment is primarily carbon dioxide (CO2). The highest levels of construction related GHG's occur during site preparation including demolition, grading and excavation. Construction related GHG's are also emitted from of -site haul trucks and construction workers traveling to the job site. Exhaust emissions from construction activities would vary each day with the changes in construction activity on site. The combustion of fossil -based fuels creates GHG's such as CO2, Cha, and N20. CH4 is emitted during the fueling of heavy equipment. Based on the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Analysis (Psomas; November 2016), no significant impacts to GHGs from short-term construction impacts would occur as a result of the project as shown in the table above. Because the project would result in minimal emissions that do not exceed the SCAQMD's interim threshold of significance, the project's contribution to cumulative impacts is also considered minimal, and no significant impact is anticipated. Although a less than significant impact is anticipated with regard to cumulative short-term construction emissions, the following enforceable mitigation measures in accordance with Mitigation Measure 4.5-1 of the 2010 General Plan Update FPEIR will further reduce the project's short term impacts: 1) The project must comply with all rules that assist in reducing short-term air pollutant emission in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403 regarding fugitive dust including treating the site with water or other soil -stabilizing agent twice daily or replanting disturbed areas as quickly as possible. 2) The construction contractor shall select construction equipment based on low -emission factors and high energy efficiency and submit a statement on the grading plan that ensures all construction equipment will be tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufactures' specification. E1—E2 Pg79 Less Than slgnlfir�nl Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially w:n man significant Uligafion s:gmfiwnl r:o Imvacl laccracialed Im a.t Im act Rev 4-17 TABLE 13 ESTIMATED TOTAL PROJECT ANNUAL GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Emissions Source (MTCO2eW) Construction Amortized 133 Operations (Table 13) 261 Total° 274 MTCO2e/yr metric tons of carbon droride equwafem per year Total denved by dividing construction emissions (see Table 11) by 30 ° Total annual emissions is the sum of amortized construction emissions and operational emissions As shown in the table, direct and Indirect operational emissions associated with the project as compared to the SCAQMD's interim threshold of significance of 3,000 MTCO2e per year would result in a less than significant impact with respect to GHG emissions. Cumulative Short Term (Construction) GHG Emissions — The General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.5) indicates (hat GHG emissions result from construction activities associated with diesel -powered construction equipment and other combustion sources (i.e. Generators, workers vehicles, material delivery, etc.). The GHG emitted by construction equipment is primarily carbon dioxide (CO2). The highest levels of construction related GHG's occur during site preparation including demolition, grading and excavation. Construction related GHG's are also emitted from of -site haul trucks and construction workers traveling to the job site. Exhaust emissions from construction activities would vary each day with the changes in construction activity on site. The combustion of fossil -based fuels creates GHG's such as CO2, Cha, and N20. CH4 is emitted during the fueling of heavy equipment. Based on the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Analysis (Psomas; November 2016), no significant impacts to GHGs from short-term construction impacts would occur as a result of the project as shown in the table above. Because the project would result in minimal emissions that do not exceed the SCAQMD's interim threshold of significance, the project's contribution to cumulative impacts is also considered minimal, and no significant impact is anticipated. Although a less than significant impact is anticipated with regard to cumulative short-term construction emissions, the following enforceable mitigation measures in accordance with Mitigation Measure 4.5-1 of the 2010 General Plan Update FPEIR will further reduce the project's short term impacts: 1) The project must comply with all rules that assist in reducing short-term air pollutant emission in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403 regarding fugitive dust including treating the site with water or other soil -stabilizing agent twice daily or replanting disturbed areas as quickly as possible. 2) The construction contractor shall select construction equipment based on low -emission factors and high energy efficiency and submit a statement on the grading plan that ensures all construction equipment will be tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufactures' specification. E1—E2 Pg79 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 26 Rev 4-17 3) Trucks shall not idle continuously for more than 5 minutes. 4) Alternative fuel powered equipment shall be utilized in lieu of gasoline- or diesel -powered engines where feasible. 5) Construction should be timed so as not to interfere with peak -hour traffic.. 6) Ridesharing and transit incentives shall be supported and encouraged for the construction crew. Cumulative Long Term (Operational) GHG's Emissions — The primary source of GHG emissions generated by the proposed project would be from motor vehicles, combustion of natural gas for space and water heating, as well as off-site GHG emissions from generation of electricity consumed by the proposed land use development over a long term. CEQA requires the Lead Agency to review the project for "adequacy, completeness, and a good faith effort at full disclosure," to determine potential impacts of GHG's. Therefore, the project has been analyzed based on methodologies and information available to the City at the time this document was prepared. Estimates are based on past performance and represent a scenario that is a worst case with the understanding that technology changes may reduce GHG emissions in the future. To date, there is no established quantified GHG emission threshold. The project involves subdivision of a 9.11 -acre parcel and the eventual construction of 14 single-family residences, and therefore would result in an increase in the net increases of both stationary and mobile source emissions. The majority of energy consumption typically occurs during project operation (more than 80 percent and less than 20 percent during construction activities). The proposed project will incorporate several design features that are consistent with the California Office of the Attorney General's recommended measures to reduce GHG emission including: water efficient landscaping, shade trees, and walkways that provide accessibility to public sidewalks. The project is consistent with the California Environmental Protection Agency Climate Action Team proposed early action measures to mitigate climate change included in the CARB Scoping Plan mandated under AB 32. The proposed project will incorporate several design features Including: water efficient landscaping, shade trees, and walkways that provide accessibility to public sidewalks. Additionally, the City Is participating in the development of a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) with SANBAG for the San Bernardino County area pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 375. Based on the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Analysis by Psomas (November 2016), no significant impacts to GHGs from long-term, operational Impacts would occur as a result of the project as shown in the table above. Because the project would result in minimal emissions that do not exceed the SCAQMD's interim threshold of significance, the project's contribution to cumulative impacts is also considered minimal. The proposed project would have less than a significant long-term operational impact. Although a less than significant Impact is anticipated with regard to cumulative long-term construction emissions, the following enforceable mitigation measures in accordance with Mitigation Measure 4.5-1 of the 2010 General Plan Update FPEIR will further reduce the project's long-term operational impacts: E1—E2 Pg80 Less Than 51965wl Leas Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 F(lenha:ly slgniF.1 Men Wlgauon Than SlgMfimnI Na Imoatl Inc —p' -d lrn ah Lr as Rev 4-17 3) Trucks shall not idle continuously for more than 5 minutes. 4) Alternative fuel powered equipment shall be utilized in lieu of gasoline- or diesel -powered engines where feasible. 5) Construction should be timed so as not to interfere with peak -hour traffic.. 6) Ridesharing and transit incentives shall be supported and encouraged for the construction crew. Cumulative Long Term (Operational) GHG's Emissions — The primary source of GHG emissions generated by the proposed project would be from motor vehicles, combustion of natural gas for space and water heating, as well as off-site GHG emissions from generation of electricity consumed by the proposed land use development over a long term. CEQA requires the Lead Agency to review the project for "adequacy, completeness, and a good faith effort at full disclosure," to determine potential impacts of GHG's. Therefore, the project has been analyzed based on methodologies and information available to the City at the time this document was prepared. Estimates are based on past performance and represent a scenario that is a worst case with the understanding that technology changes may reduce GHG emissions in the future. To date, there is no established quantified GHG emission threshold. The project involves subdivision of a 9.11 -acre parcel and the eventual construction of 14 single-family residences, and therefore would result in an increase in the net increases of both stationary and mobile source emissions. The majority of energy consumption typically occurs during project operation (more than 80 percent and less than 20 percent during construction activities). The proposed project will incorporate several design features that are consistent with the California Office of the Attorney General's recommended measures to reduce GHG emission including: water efficient landscaping, shade trees, and walkways that provide accessibility to public sidewalks. The project is consistent with the California Environmental Protection Agency Climate Action Team proposed early action measures to mitigate climate change included in the CARB Scoping Plan mandated under AB 32. The proposed project will incorporate several design features Including: water efficient landscaping, shade trees, and walkways that provide accessibility to public sidewalks. Additionally, the City Is participating in the development of a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) with SANBAG for the San Bernardino County area pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 375. Based on the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Analysis by Psomas (November 2016), no significant impacts to GHGs from long-term, operational Impacts would occur as a result of the project as shown in the table above. Because the project would result in minimal emissions that do not exceed the SCAQMD's interim threshold of significance, the project's contribution to cumulative impacts is also considered minimal. The proposed project would have less than a significant long-term operational impact. Although a less than significant Impact is anticipated with regard to cumulative long-term construction emissions, the following enforceable mitigation measures in accordance with Mitigation Measure 4.5-1 of the 2010 General Plan Update FPEIR will further reduce the project's long-term operational impacts: E1—E2 Pg80 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 27 7) Construction and Building materials shall be produced and/or manufactured locally. Use "Green Building Materials" such as materials that are resource efficient, recycled and manufactured in an environmentally friendly way including low -volatile -organic -compound (VOC) materials. 8) Design all buildings to exceed California Building Code Title 24 energy standard Including but not limited to any combination of; • Increased insulation. • Limit air leakage through the structure. • Incorporate Energy Star or better rated windows, space heating and cooling equipment, light fixtures, and appliances. • Landscape and develop site utilizing shade, prevailing winds and landscaping. • Install efficient lighting and lighting control systems. • Install light colored "cool" roofs and cool pavements. • install solar or light emitting diodes (LED's) for outdoor lighting. 9) Prepare a comprehensive water conservation strategy appropriate for the project and include the following; • Install water efficient landscapes and irrigation systems and devices in compliance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. • Use reclaimed water for landscaping within the project if available or as required by the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD). • Design building to be water efficient by installing water efficient fixtures and appliances including low flow faucets, dual flush toilets and waterless urinals/water heaters. • Design irrigation to control runoff and to remove water to non -vegetated surfaces. 10) Reuse and recycle construction and demolition waste. Provide interior and exterior storage areas for recyclables and green waste in public areas. Educate employees about reducing waste and about recycling. b) The project involves the subdivision of a 9.11 -acre parcel and eventual construction of 14 single-family residences, which is consistent with the General Plan. No other applicable pians, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emission apply to the project. The 2010 General Plan Update includes adopted Rev 4-17 E1—E2 Pg81 Less Teen significant less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially significant With Iatigatan Than igifica nt No Im act Inc mad Imnact I act 7) Construction and Building materials shall be produced and/or manufactured locally. Use "Green Building Materials" such as materials that are resource efficient, recycled and manufactured in an environmentally friendly way including low -volatile -organic -compound (VOC) materials. 8) Design all buildings to exceed California Building Code Title 24 energy standard Including but not limited to any combination of; • Increased insulation. • Limit air leakage through the structure. • Incorporate Energy Star or better rated windows, space heating and cooling equipment, light fixtures, and appliances. • Landscape and develop site utilizing shade, prevailing winds and landscaping. • Install efficient lighting and lighting control systems. • Install light colored "cool" roofs and cool pavements. • install solar or light emitting diodes (LED's) for outdoor lighting. 9) Prepare a comprehensive water conservation strategy appropriate for the project and include the following; • Install water efficient landscapes and irrigation systems and devices in compliance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. • Use reclaimed water for landscaping within the project if available or as required by the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD). • Design building to be water efficient by installing water efficient fixtures and appliances including low flow faucets, dual flush toilets and waterless urinals/water heaters. • Design irrigation to control runoff and to remove water to non -vegetated surfaces. 10) Reuse and recycle construction and demolition waste. Provide interior and exterior storage areas for recyclables and green waste in public areas. Educate employees about reducing waste and about recycling. b) The project involves the subdivision of a 9.11 -acre parcel and eventual construction of 14 single-family residences, which is consistent with the General Plan. No other applicable pians, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emission apply to the project. The 2010 General Plan Update includes adopted Rev 4-17 E1—E2 Pg81 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 28 policies and Standard Conditions that respond to the Attorney General and the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). The General Plan policies and Standard Conditions guide infill and sustainable development reliant on pedestrian connections, re -use and rehabilitation of existing structures, link transportation opportunities, promote development that is sensitive to natural resources and incentivizes denser mixed-use projects that maximizes diverse opportunities. The proposed project includes water efficient landscaping, shade trees, and walkways that provide accessibility to public sidewalks and therefore is consistent with the sustainability and climate change policies of the General Plan. The General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR) analyzed the impacts of GHG's and determined that GHG emissions would be cumulatively considerable, which would be a significant, unavoidable adverse cumulative impact. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. Based on the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Analysis (Psomas; November 2016), no significant impacts to GHGs from short-term, construction impacts or long-term, operational impacts would occur as a result of the project. Because the project would result in minimal emissions that do not exceed the SCAQMD's interim threshold of significance, the project's contribution to GHGs from short-term construction and long-term operational cumulative impacts is also considered minimal. With implementation of the mitigation measures listed in subsection a), less than significant impacts would occur as a result of the project. In addition, the proposed project would not hinder the Slate's GHG reduction goals established by AB 32 and therefore would be less than a significant impact. B. HAZARDS AND WASTE MATERIALS. Would the project: Less Than a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the () SIgrgrunt Less ( ) Issues and Supporting Information Sources: pottiauy sigNfcant V'Rh Mligaban Than Significant No disposal of hazardous materials? 1. .d Inco orated Im a Imoaat policies and Standard Conditions that respond to the Attorney General and the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). The General Plan policies and Standard Conditions guide infill and sustainable development reliant on pedestrian connections, re -use and rehabilitation of existing structures, link transportation opportunities, promote development that is sensitive to natural resources and incentivizes denser mixed-use projects that maximizes diverse opportunities. The proposed project includes water efficient landscaping, shade trees, and walkways that provide accessibility to public sidewalks and therefore is consistent with the sustainability and climate change policies of the General Plan. The General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR) analyzed the impacts of GHG's and determined that GHG emissions would be cumulatively considerable, which would be a significant, unavoidable adverse cumulative impact. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. Based on the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Analysis (Psomas; November 2016), no significant impacts to GHGs from short-term, construction impacts or long-term, operational impacts would occur as a result of the project. Because the project would result in minimal emissions that do not exceed the SCAQMD's interim threshold of significance, the project's contribution to GHGs from short-term construction and long-term operational cumulative impacts is also considered minimal. With implementation of the mitigation measures listed in subsection a), less than significant impacts would occur as a result of the project. In addition, the proposed project would not hinder the Slate's GHG reduction goals established by AB 32 and therefore would be less than a significant impact. B. HAZARDS AND WASTE MATERIALS. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the () () (✓) ( ) environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the () () (✓) ( ) environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? C) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or (} () () (✓) acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 1/4 mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of () () () (✓ ) hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, () () () (✓) where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, () () () (✓) would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? Rev 4-17 E1—E2 Pg82 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 29 g) Impair implementation of or physically Interfere with an () Less Than () (✓) adopted emergency response plan or emergency significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Pc1PnU"ly `'"" Than h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of Significant tltliga4on slgmncan - loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including Wood Incor sated Impact g Im act g) Impair implementation of or physically Interfere with an () () () (✓) adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of () () () (✓) loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Comments: a) Development within the City such as the construction of single-family homes may utilize or generate hazardous materials or wastes. This is usually associated with individual households, small business operations, and maintenance activities like paints, cleaning solvents, fertilizers, and motor oil or through construction activities that would use paints, solvents, acids, curing compounds, grease, and oils. These materials would be stored and used at individual sites. The City participates in a countywide interagency coalition, which is considered a full service Hazardous Materials Division that is more comprehensive that any other in the State. The City has an Emergency Operations Plan that meets State and Federal requirements and is in the process of updating the approved 2005 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Compliance with Federal, Stale, and local regulations concerning the storage and handling of hazardous materials and/or waste will reduce the potential for significant impacts to a level less -than -significant. b) The proposed project does not include the use of hazardous materials or volatile fuels. The City participates in a countywide interagency coalition, which is considered a full service Hazardous Materials Division that Is more comprehensive than any other in the State. The City has an Emergency Operations Plan that meets State and Federal requirements and is in the process of updating the approved 2005 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Compliance with Federal, Slate, and local regulations concerning the storage and handling of hazardous materials or volatile fuels will reduce the potential for significant impacts to a level less -than -significant. C) There are schools located within 1/4 mile of the project site. The project site is located within a half mile of the nearest existing or proposed school. The project will be required to comply with existing State and Federal standards on the use and transport of hazardous materials. Typically, the uses proposed do not create objectionable odors. No adverse impacts are anticipated. d) The proposed project is not listed as a hazardous waste or substance materials site. Recent site inspections did not reveal the presence of discarded drums or illegal dumping of hazardous materials. Therefore, no impact is anticipated. e) The site is not located within an airport land use plan according to the General Plan Figure PS -7 and General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.8-1 and is not within 2 miles of a public airport. The project site is located approximately 7 miles northerly of the Ontario Airport and is offset north of the flight path. Therefore, no impact is anticipated. Rev 4-17 There are no private airstrips within the City. The nearest private airstrip, Cable Airport, is located approximately 2 1/2 miles to the west of the City's westerly limits. Therefore, no Impact is anticipated. E1—E2 Pg83 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 30 g) The City has a developed roadway network that provides emergency access and evacuation routes to existing development. New development will be located on a site that has access to existing roadways. The City's Emergency Operation Plan, which is updated every 3 years, includes policies and procedures to be administered by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in the event of a disaster. Because the project includes at least two points of public street access and is required to comply with all applicable City codes, including local fire ordinances, no adverse impacts are anticipated. h) Rancho Cucamonga faces the greatest ongoing threat from wind -driven fires in the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone found in the northern part of the City; however, the proposed project site is not located within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone according to General Plan Figure PS -1. No adverse impacts are anticipated. 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: Lass Than a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge ( ) significant Less ( ) Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g P=:endally significant WIn AStiga5on Than Sigrificant No b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere Impact IOW walm I atl IMP= g) The City has a developed roadway network that provides emergency access and evacuation routes to existing development. New development will be located on a site that has access to existing roadways. The City's Emergency Operation Plan, which is updated every 3 years, includes policies and procedures to be administered by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in the event of a disaster. Because the project includes at least two points of public street access and is required to comply with all applicable City codes, including local fire ordinances, no adverse impacts are anticipated. h) Rancho Cucamonga faces the greatest ongoing threat from wind -driven fires in the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone found in the northern part of the City; however, the proposed project site is not located within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone according to General Plan Figure PS -1. No adverse impacts are anticipated. 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge ( ) (✓) () ( ) requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere ( ) () () (✓) substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? C) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the () () (✓) ( ) site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the () () () (✓) site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result In flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed () () () (✓) the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? () (✓) () ( ) g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as () () () (✓) mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures () () () (✓) that would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of () () () (✓) loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? Rev 4-17 E1—E2 Pg84 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 31 j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? () () () (✓) Comments: a) Water and sewer service is provided by the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD), The project is designed to connect to existing water and sewer systems. The Stale of California is authorized to administer various aspects of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit under Section 402 of the Clean Water Act. The General Construction Permit treats any construction activity over 1 acre as an industrial activity, requiring a permit under the State's General NPDES permit. The Slate Water Resource Control Board (SWRCB), through the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), Santa Ana Region, administers these permits. Rev 4-17 Construction activities covered under the State's General Construction permit include removal of vegetation, grading, excavating, or any other activity for new development or significant redevelopment. Prior to commencement of construction of a project, a discharger must submit a Notice of Intent (NOI) to obtain coverage under the General Permit, The General Permit requires all dischargers to comply with the following during construction activities, including site clearance and grading: Develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that would specify Best Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent construction pollutants from contacting storm water and with the intent of keeping all products of erosion from moving off-site into receiving waters. Eliminate or reduce non -storm water discharges to storm sewer systems and other waters of the nation. Perform Inspections of all BMPs. Waste discharges include discharges of storm water and construction project discharges. A construction project for new development or significant redevelopment requires an NPDES permit. Construction project proponents are required to prepare an SWPPP. To comply with the NPDES, the project's construction contractor will be required to prepare an SWPPP during construction activities, and a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for post -construction operational management of storm water runoff. The applicant has submitted a WQMP, prepared by Michael Baker International (November 3, 2017), which identifies BMPs to minimize the amount of pollutants, such as eroded soils, entering the drainage system after construction. Runoff from driveways, roads and other Impermeable surfaces must be controlled through an on-site drainage system. BMPs include both structural and non-structural control methods. Structural controls used to manage storm water pollutant levels include detention basins, oil/grit separators, and porous pavement. Non-structural controls focus on controlling pollutants at the source, generally through implementing erosion and sediment control plans, and various Business Plans that must be developed by any businesses that store and use hazardous materials. Practices such as periodic parking lot sweeping can substantially reduce the amount of pollutants entering the storm drain system. The following mitigation measures are required to control additional storm water effluent: E1—E2 Pg85 Less Than significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Pa:enriagy Me, Than I significant Amligaton slgnificanl No Im act Incommletl finpad Lr acl j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? () () () (✓) Comments: a) Water and sewer service is provided by the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD), The project is designed to connect to existing water and sewer systems. The Stale of California is authorized to administer various aspects of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit under Section 402 of the Clean Water Act. The General Construction Permit treats any construction activity over 1 acre as an industrial activity, requiring a permit under the State's General NPDES permit. The Slate Water Resource Control Board (SWRCB), through the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), Santa Ana Region, administers these permits. Rev 4-17 Construction activities covered under the State's General Construction permit include removal of vegetation, grading, excavating, or any other activity for new development or significant redevelopment. Prior to commencement of construction of a project, a discharger must submit a Notice of Intent (NOI) to obtain coverage under the General Permit, The General Permit requires all dischargers to comply with the following during construction activities, including site clearance and grading: Develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that would specify Best Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent construction pollutants from contacting storm water and with the intent of keeping all products of erosion from moving off-site into receiving waters. Eliminate or reduce non -storm water discharges to storm sewer systems and other waters of the nation. Perform Inspections of all BMPs. Waste discharges include discharges of storm water and construction project discharges. A construction project for new development or significant redevelopment requires an NPDES permit. Construction project proponents are required to prepare an SWPPP. To comply with the NPDES, the project's construction contractor will be required to prepare an SWPPP during construction activities, and a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for post -construction operational management of storm water runoff. The applicant has submitted a WQMP, prepared by Michael Baker International (November 3, 2017), which identifies BMPs to minimize the amount of pollutants, such as eroded soils, entering the drainage system after construction. Runoff from driveways, roads and other Impermeable surfaces must be controlled through an on-site drainage system. BMPs include both structural and non-structural control methods. Structural controls used to manage storm water pollutant levels include detention basins, oil/grit separators, and porous pavement. Non-structural controls focus on controlling pollutants at the source, generally through implementing erosion and sediment control plans, and various Business Plans that must be developed by any businesses that store and use hazardous materials. Practices such as periodic parking lot sweeping can substantially reduce the amount of pollutants entering the storm drain system. The following mitigation measures are required to control additional storm water effluent: E1—E2 Pg85 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 32 Construction Activities: 1) Prior to issuance of grading permits, the permit applicant shall submit to the Building Official for approval, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) specifically identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that shall be used on-site to reduce pollutants during construction activities entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 2) An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, included in the Grading Plan, and implemented for the proposed project that identifies specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion from the time ground disturbing activities are initiated through completion of grading. This Erosion Control Plan shall include the following measures at a minimum: a) Specify the timing of grading and construction to minimize soil exposure to rainy periods experienced in Southern California, and b) An inspection and maintenance program shall be included to ensure that any erosion which does occur either on-site or off-site as a result of this project will be corrected through a remediation or restoration program within a specified time frame. 3) 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) 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. Post -Construction Operational: Rev 4-17 6) Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit to the City Building Official for approval of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), including a project description and identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on-site to reduce pollutants into the storm drain system to the maximum extent practicable. The WQMP shall identify the structural and non-structural measures consistent with the Guidelines for New Development and Redevelopment adopted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in June 2004. 7) Landscaping plans shall include provisions for controlling and minimizing the use of fertilizerslpesticides/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 E1—E2 Pg86 Less Than Slgnifcant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g Fetenliaay Sigpifranl With Ninigafon Than Signiscael Na Impact Incars..led Itnad Im act Construction Activities: 1) Prior to issuance of grading permits, the permit applicant shall submit to the Building Official for approval, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) specifically identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that shall be used on-site to reduce pollutants during construction activities entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 2) An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, included in the Grading Plan, and implemented for the proposed project that identifies specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion from the time ground disturbing activities are initiated through completion of grading. This Erosion Control Plan shall include the following measures at a minimum: a) Specify the timing of grading and construction to minimize soil exposure to rainy periods experienced in Southern California, and b) An inspection and maintenance program shall be included to ensure that any erosion which does occur either on-site or off-site as a result of this project will be corrected through a remediation or restoration program within a specified time frame. 3) 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) 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. Post -Construction Operational: Rev 4-17 6) Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit to the City Building Official for approval of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), including a project description and identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on-site to reduce pollutants into the storm drain system to the maximum extent practicable. The WQMP shall identify the structural and non-structural measures consistent with the Guidelines for New Development and Redevelopment adopted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in June 2004. 7) Landscaping plans shall include provisions for controlling and minimizing the use of fertilizerslpesticides/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 E1—E2 Pg86 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 33 a minimum of two years, shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. b) According to CVWD, approximately 35 percent of the City's water is currently provided from water supplies coming from the underlying Chino and Cucamonga Groundwater Basins. CVWD complies with its prescriptive water rights as managed by the Chino Basin Watermasler and will nol deplete the local groundwater resource. The proposed project will not deplete groundwater supplies, nor will it interfere with recharge because it is not within an area designated as a recharge basin or spreading ground according to General Plan Figure RC -3. Development of the site will require the grading and excavation, but would not affect the existing aquifer, estimated to be about 300 to 470 feet below the ground surface. As noted in the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.9), continued development citywide will increase water needs but will not be a significant impact. CVWD has plans to meet this increased need to the year 2030. No impacts are anticipated. C) The project will cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rale and amount of surface water runoff because of the amount of new building and hardscape proposed on the site; however, the project will not alter the course of any stream or river. All runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to handle the flows. The project design includes landscaping of all non-hardscape areas to prevent erosion. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. Therefore, the project will not result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site. The impact is not considered significant. d) The project will cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and amount of surface water runoff because of the amount of new building and hardscape proposed on a site; however, the project will not alter the course of any stream or river. All runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to handle the flows. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. Therefore, Increase in runoff from the site will not result in flooding on- or off-site. No impacts are anticipated. e) The project will cause changes in absorption rales, drainage patterns, and the rate and amount of surface water runoff because of the amount of new building and hardscape proposed on a site; however, all runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to handle the flows. The project will not result in substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. Therefore, increase in runoff from the site will not result in flooding on- or off-site. No Impacts are anticipated. f) Grading activities associated with the construction period could result in a temporary Increase in the amount of suspended solids In surface flows during a concurrent storm event, thus resulting in surface water quality impacts. The site is for new development; therefore, it is required to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) to minimize water pollution. With implementation of the mitigation measures specified under subsection a), less than significant impacts are anticipated. Rev 4-17 F1—E7.Pg87 Less— Signifiwnl Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Fmenuany vrm man Slgnifiwnl h4tigation Slgni4wnl No Im ecl Inco�coraleC Imcatl Imoad a minimum of two years, shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. b) According to CVWD, approximately 35 percent of the City's water is currently provided from water supplies coming from the underlying Chino and Cucamonga Groundwater Basins. CVWD complies with its prescriptive water rights as managed by the Chino Basin Watermasler and will nol deplete the local groundwater resource. The proposed project will not deplete groundwater supplies, nor will it interfere with recharge because it is not within an area designated as a recharge basin or spreading ground according to General Plan Figure RC -3. Development of the site will require the grading and excavation, but would not affect the existing aquifer, estimated to be about 300 to 470 feet below the ground surface. As noted in the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.9), continued development citywide will increase water needs but will not be a significant impact. CVWD has plans to meet this increased need to the year 2030. No impacts are anticipated. C) The project will cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rale and amount of surface water runoff because of the amount of new building and hardscape proposed on the site; however, the project will not alter the course of any stream or river. All runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to handle the flows. The project design includes landscaping of all non-hardscape areas to prevent erosion. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. Therefore, the project will not result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site. The impact is not considered significant. d) The project will cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and amount of surface water runoff because of the amount of new building and hardscape proposed on a site; however, the project will not alter the course of any stream or river. All runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to handle the flows. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. Therefore, Increase in runoff from the site will not result in flooding on- or off-site. No impacts are anticipated. e) The project will cause changes in absorption rales, drainage patterns, and the rate and amount of surface water runoff because of the amount of new building and hardscape proposed on a site; however, all runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to handle the flows. The project will not result in substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. Therefore, increase in runoff from the site will not result in flooding on- or off-site. No Impacts are anticipated. f) Grading activities associated with the construction period could result in a temporary Increase in the amount of suspended solids In surface flows during a concurrent storm event, thus resulting in surface water quality impacts. The site is for new development; therefore, it is required to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) to minimize water pollution. With implementation of the mitigation measures specified under subsection a), less than significant impacts are anticipated. Rev 4-17 F1—E7.Pg87 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 34 8) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality Management Plan prepared by Michael Baker International (November 3, 2017) to reduce construction pollutants from entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. g) The project site is not located within a 100 -year flood hazard area according to General Plan Figure PS -5. No adverse impacts are expected. h) The project site is not located within a 100 -year flood hazard area according to General Plan Figure PS -5. No adverse Impacts are expected. The Rancho Cucamonga area is flood protected by an extensive storm drain system designed to adequately convey floodwaters from a 100 -year storm event. The system is substantially improved and provides an integrated approach for regional and local drainage flows. This existing system includes several debris dams and levees north of the City, spreading grounds, concrete -lined channels, and underground storm drains as shown in General Plan Figure PS -6. The project site is not located within a 100 -year flood hazard area according to General Plan Figure PS -5. No adverse impacts are expected. j) There are no oceans, lakes, or reservoirs near the project site; therefore, impacts from seiche and tsunami are not anticipated. The Rancho Cucamonga area sits at the base of the sleep eastern San Gabriel Mountains whose deep canyons were cut by mountain streams. Numerous man-made controls have been constructed to reduce the mudflow impacts to the level of non -significance within the City. This existing system includes several debris dams and levees north of the City, and spreading grounds both within and north of the City. Therefore, no impact is anticipated. 10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? () less Than () (✓) b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or () Significant Less (✓) Issues and Supporting Inrormalion Sources: PP g Potenoafiy Significant vim WgaUon Than SISrO nt No project (including, but not limited to, a general plan, Wood Inca ailed Im al Inroad 8) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality Management Plan prepared by Michael Baker International (November 3, 2017) to reduce construction pollutants from entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. g) The project site is not located within a 100 -year flood hazard area according to General Plan Figure PS -5. No adverse impacts are expected. h) The project site is not located within a 100 -year flood hazard area according to General Plan Figure PS -5. No adverse Impacts are expected. The Rancho Cucamonga area is flood protected by an extensive storm drain system designed to adequately convey floodwaters from a 100 -year storm event. The system is substantially improved and provides an integrated approach for regional and local drainage flows. This existing system includes several debris dams and levees north of the City, spreading grounds, concrete -lined channels, and underground storm drains as shown in General Plan Figure PS -6. The project site is not located within a 100 -year flood hazard area according to General Plan Figure PS -5. No adverse impacts are expected. j) There are no oceans, lakes, or reservoirs near the project site; therefore, impacts from seiche and tsunami are not anticipated. The Rancho Cucamonga area sits at the base of the sleep eastern San Gabriel Mountains whose deep canyons were cut by mountain streams. Numerous man-made controls have been constructed to reduce the mudflow impacts to the level of non -significance within the City. This existing system includes several debris dams and levees north of the City, and spreading grounds both within and north of the City. Therefore, no impact is anticipated. 10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? () () () (✓) b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or () () () (✓) regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, a general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? C) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan () () () (✓) or natural community conservation plan? Comments: a) The site is located on the southeast corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Highland Avenue, and is characterized by single-family residential development to the east, and west, a water storage facility to the south, and by Highland Avenue and Stale Route 210 to the north. This project will be of similar design and size to site's surrounding residential development. The project will become a part of the larger community. No adverse impacts are anticipated. b) The project site land use designation is Very Low (VL) Residential. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and does not interfere with any policies for environmental protection, or SCAG's Regional Comprehensive Plan. The General Plan Rev 4-17 E1—E2Pg88 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 35 states that the Very Low (VL) Land Use District is characterized by detached, very low- density single residential units on 0.5 acre lots. The proposed lots average 25,006 square feet in size. Although the project is not within the City's Equestrian Overlay, the site is adjacent to a community trail, Therefore, the project will include a private equestrian trail system providing access equestrian access to each lot and to the community trail on the intersection of Etiwanda Avenue and Highland Avenue consistent with the Etiwanda Specific Plan. As such, no impacts are anticipated. C) The project site is not located within any habitat conservation or natural community plan area. According to General Plan Figure RC -4 and Section 4.10 of the General Plan FPEIR, the project site is not within an area of sensitive biological resources; therefore, development will not adversely affect rare or endangered species of plants or animals because of the fact that the project is surrounded by urbanized land uses and is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Plan. No adverse impacts are anticipated. 11. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: LessT an a) Result in the loss of availability Of a known mineral () s:grtfeanl Less (✓) Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PWenva]y wan Thee residents of the State? slgnir,=1 64Ugation SlgnifiWnI No b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important 1—'. Ia1cl00ldlCd IT dCl !..t states that the Very Low (VL) Land Use District is characterized by detached, very low- density single residential units on 0.5 acre lots. The proposed lots average 25,006 square feet in size. Although the project is not within the City's Equestrian Overlay, the site is adjacent to a community trail, Therefore, the project will include a private equestrian trail system providing access equestrian access to each lot and to the community trail on the intersection of Etiwanda Avenue and Highland Avenue consistent with the Etiwanda Specific Plan. As such, no impacts are anticipated. C) The project site is not located within any habitat conservation or natural community plan area. According to General Plan Figure RC -4 and Section 4.10 of the General Plan FPEIR, the project site is not within an area of sensitive biological resources; therefore, development will not adversely affect rare or endangered species of plants or animals because of the fact that the project is surrounded by urbanized land uses and is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Plan. No adverse impacts are anticipated. 11. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability Of a known mineral () () () (✓) resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important () () () (✓) mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local () (✓) () ( ) general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Comments: a) The site is not designated as a Slate Aggregate Resources Area according to the City General Plan, Figure RC -2 and Table RC -1; therefore, there is no impact. b) The site is not designated by the General Plan, Figure RC -2 and Table RC -1, as a valuable mineral resource recovery site; therefore, there is no impact. 12. NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in () (✓) () ( ) excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive () (✓) () ( ) ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? C) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise () () (✓) ( ) levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in () (✓) () ( ) ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Rev 4-17 E1—E2 Pg89 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 36 e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, () Less Than () (✓) where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 Slgmficant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Polenllally S:g'Ocam wm Wipum Tnaa slgNficanl No project expose people residing or working In the Im ad Inm aeled Imaad Im aet e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, () () () (✓) where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working In the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, () () () {✓) would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Comments: a) The project site is within an area of noise levels exceeding City standards according to General Plan Figure PS -9 at build -out. The applicant has submitted a Noise Impact Analysis by Psomas (November 2016) to review existing noise conditions and construction noise levels. The Analysis finds that the primary and highest noise levels at the project site would be from automobile and truck traffic on SR -2,10, Etiwanda Avenue, and Highland Avenue. Rev 4-17 Based on a very conservative, worst-case scenario, the exterior facades of the homes facing Etiwanda Avenue will have a noise level not exceeding 65 dBA. Because current building codes require Increased insulation for energy'efficiency, normal construction with windows closed will provide at least 20 dBA CNEL exterior -to -interior noise reduction and future interior noise levels would not exceed 45 dBA CNEL based on the conservative worst-case noise analysis. Therefore, the interior of all structures facing Etiwanda Avenue shall meet the maximum allowable interior noise limit per the Development Code. Additionally, the rear yard areas of all lots facing Etiwanda Avenue will meet the maximum 65 dBA CNEL noise limit set forth in the Development Code. A primary source of noise to the northern part of the project site is traffic on SR -210. Based on the noise study provided, noise levels of the project site facing Highland Avenue will not exceed 63 dBA CNEL. Therefore, all lots abutting Highland Avenue will meet the exterior and interior noise limits set forth in the Development Code. The analysis also finds that the highest construction noise levels will occur when construction activities take place near the edge of the project site. The unmitigated construction noise levels are expected to reach 66 dBA, at the nearby residences. To reduce noise impacts to below the level of significance, the following mitigation measures shall be incorporated into the project. Exterior: 1) . Prior to the issuance of any grading plans a construction -related noise mitigation plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval. The Plan shall depict the location of the construction equipment and how the noise from this equipment would be mitigated during construction. 2) Prior to the issuance of the grading permit, the Property Owner/Developer shall submit plans and specifications to the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department demonstrating that the construction plans and specifications include the following noise -abatement and control measures: E1—E2 Pg90 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 37 • All construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers and other State -required noise attenuation devices. Stationary construction equipment shall be placed such that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive noise receivers. • On-site and off-site construction haul routes shall be designed to avoid noise -sensitive uses, as feasible. If feasible, perimeter walls along the northern, eastern, and southern property boundaries shall be constructed as early as possible during the first phase of construction. b) The normal operating uses associated with this type of project normally do not induce ground borne vibrations. Construction related vibration may create short term noise and vibration impacts. With the mitigation measure listed in under d) below, any impacts will be less than significant. C) The primary source of ambient noise levels in Rancho Cucamonga is traffic. Because the project will not significantly increase traffic as analyzed in Section 16 Transportation/Traffic; it will likely not increase ambient noise levels within the vicinity of the project. Impacts will be less than significant. d) The General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.12) indicates that during a construction phase, on-site stationary sources, heavy-duty construction vehicles, and construction equipment, will generate noise exceeding City standards. The following measures are provided to mitigate the short-term noise impacts to a level that is less than signficant: Rev 4-17 3) Prior to the issuance of the grading permit, the Property Owner/Developer shall submit construction plans and/or specifications to the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department demonstrating that the installation of a temporary noise barrier between the construction area and the adjacent residences is required. The barrier shall be 12 feet high and solid from the ground to the top. The barrier shall be constructed with plywood that is at least '/2 inch thick or with another material that creates a noise transmission loss of at least 20 dBA. Where feasible, the barrier shall remain in place until the completion of construction. 4) 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. 5) Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards specified in Development Code Section 17.66.050, as measured at the property line. Developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly noise level monitoring as specified in Development Code Section 17.66.050. 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 E1—E2 Pg91 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: ameM,ally Significant wlh Mtigason Than Significant No I Int ecl Incamot.'M Imoact Int am • All construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers and other State -required noise attenuation devices. Stationary construction equipment shall be placed such that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive noise receivers. • On-site and off-site construction haul routes shall be designed to avoid noise -sensitive uses, as feasible. If feasible, perimeter walls along the northern, eastern, and southern property boundaries shall be constructed as early as possible during the first phase of construction. b) The normal operating uses associated with this type of project normally do not induce ground borne vibrations. Construction related vibration may create short term noise and vibration impacts. With the mitigation measure listed in under d) below, any impacts will be less than significant. C) The primary source of ambient noise levels in Rancho Cucamonga is traffic. Because the project will not significantly increase traffic as analyzed in Section 16 Transportation/Traffic; it will likely not increase ambient noise levels within the vicinity of the project. Impacts will be less than significant. d) The General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.12) indicates that during a construction phase, on-site stationary sources, heavy-duty construction vehicles, and construction equipment, will generate noise exceeding City standards. The following measures are provided to mitigate the short-term noise impacts to a level that is less than signficant: Rev 4-17 3) Prior to the issuance of the grading permit, the Property Owner/Developer shall submit construction plans and/or specifications to the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department demonstrating that the installation of a temporary noise barrier between the construction area and the adjacent residences is required. The barrier shall be 12 feet high and solid from the ground to the top. The barrier shall be constructed with plywood that is at least '/2 inch thick or with another material that creates a noise transmission loss of at least 20 dBA. Where feasible, the barrier shall remain in place until the completion of construction. 4) 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. 5) Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards specified in Development Code Section 17.66.050, as measured at the property line. Developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly noise level monitoring as specified in Development Code Section 17.66.050. 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 E1—E2 Pg91 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 38 construction activities shall be reduced in intensity to a level of compliance with above noise standards or halted. 6) The perimeter block wall shall be constructed as early as possible in first phase. The preceding mitigation measures will reduce the disturbance created by on-site construction equipment but do not address the potential impacts because of the transport of construction materials and debris. The following mitigation measures shall then be required: 7) 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 and include appropriate noise mitigation measures. To the extent feasible, the plan shall denote haul routes that do not pass sensitive land uses or residential dwellings. e) The site is not located within an airport land use plan and is not within 2 miles of a public airport. The Project is located approximately 7 miles northerly of the Ontario Airport and is offset north of the flight path. No impact is anticipated. f) The nearest private airstrip, Cable Airport, is located approximately 2 112 miles to the west of the City's westerly limits. No impact is anticipated. 13. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: Less Than a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either ( ) Sgnifiwnl Less ( ) Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g potenfivy significant With MGigalion Than Significant Na businesses) or indirectly (for example, through I—— Ince aorated Inns act Impact construction activities shall be reduced in intensity to a level of compliance with above noise standards or halted. 6) The perimeter block wall shall be constructed as early as possible in first phase. The preceding mitigation measures will reduce the disturbance created by on-site construction equipment but do not address the potential impacts because of the transport of construction materials and debris. The following mitigation measures shall then be required: 7) 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 and include appropriate noise mitigation measures. To the extent feasible, the plan shall denote haul routes that do not pass sensitive land uses or residential dwellings. e) The site is not located within an airport land use plan and is not within 2 miles of a public airport. The Project is located approximately 7 miles northerly of the Ontario Airport and is offset north of the flight path. No impact is anticipated. f) The nearest private airstrip, Cable Airport, is located approximately 2 112 miles to the west of the City's westerly limits. No impact is anticipated. 13. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either ( ) {) (✓) ( ) directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, ( ) () () (✓) necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? C) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating ( ) () () (✓) the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Comments: a) The project is located in a predominantly developed area and will include the construction of 14 single family homes. Although the project will increase population growth in the area there will be a less than significant impact as the project is consistent with the underlying Zoning and General Plan Designation. The density was analyzed as part of the build out in the General Plan FPEIR. Construction activities at the site will be short-term and will not attract new employees to the area. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. b) Because the property is vacant there will be no displacement of housing or people. Therefore, no adverse impact is expected. Rev 4-17 E1—E2 Pg92 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 39 C) Because the property is vacant there will be no displacement of housing or people. Therefore, no adverse Impact is expected. 14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial Lev Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Fotentlmly Slgnifcant Im ah St9ni6cant W@ h41iger s rated Less Than SlIrnpad Im aN m pa Iact C) Because the property is vacant there will be no displacement of housing or people. Therefore, no adverse Impact is expected. 14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, In order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire protection? () () (✓) ( ) b) Police protection? () () (✓) ( ) C) Schools? () (✓) () ( ) d) Parks? () () (✓) ( ) e) Other public facilities? () () (✓) ( ) Comments: a) The site, located at the southeast corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Highland Avenue would be served by Fire Station 176, located approximately 1 mile from the project site. The project will not require the construction of any new facilities or alteration of any existing facilities or cause a decline in the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new facilities. Standard conditions of approval from the Uniform Building and Fire Codes will be placed on the project to lessen the future demand and impacts to fire services. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur. b) The increase in residential units may lead to an increase in calls for service. Although there may be an increase in calls, additional police protection is not required as the addition of the project will not change the pattern of uses within the surrounding area and will not have a substantial increase in properly to be patrolled as the project site is within an area that is regularly patrolled. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur C) The Etiwanda School District and the Chaffey Joint Union High School District serve the project area. Both school districts have been notified regarding the proposed development. A standard condition of approval will require the developer to pay the school impact fees, plus the Etiwanda School District special tax. This standard condition is also added as a mitigation below. With this, Impacts to the School Districts will therefore be .considered less than significant. 1) The developer shall pay the current residential school facility fee plus the Etiwanda School District special tax. d) The site is in a developed area, currently served by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The nearest park is located % mile from the project site. The project will not require the construction of any new facilities or alteration of any existing facilities or cause a decline in the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new facilities. A standard condition of approval will require the developer to pay Park Development Fees. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur. Rev 4-17 E1—E2 Pg93 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 40 e) The proposed project will utilize existing public facilities. The site is In a developed area, currently served by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The project will not require the construction of any new facilities or alteration of any existing facilities or cause a decline in the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new facilities. Cumulative development within Rancho Cucamonga will increase demand for library services. According to the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.14), there will be a projected increase in library space demand but with the Implementation of standard conditions the increase In Library Services would be mitigated to less than significant impact. Additionally, the closest public library, the Paul A. Biane Library, recently completed a second floor addition that added 13,500 square feel of specialized programming space. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan for which the FPEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur. 15. RECREATION. Would the project: Less Than a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and () slgNlcanl Less ( ) Issues and Supporting Information Sources: sg�Gcam IkligRy agan Than atgMleanl No substantial physical deterioration of the facility would Im act Inea awted Im act linpact e) The proposed project will utilize existing public facilities. The site is In a developed area, currently served by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The project will not require the construction of any new facilities or alteration of any existing facilities or cause a decline in the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new facilities. Cumulative development within Rancho Cucamonga will increase demand for library services. According to the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.14), there will be a projected increase in library space demand but with the Implementation of standard conditions the increase In Library Services would be mitigated to less than significant impact. Additionally, the closest public library, the Paul A. Biane Library, recently completed a second floor addition that added 13,500 square feel of specialized programming space. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan for which the FPEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur. 15. RECREATION. Would the project: a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and () () (✓) ( ) regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or () () (✓) ( ) require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Comments: a) The site is in a developed area, currently servedby the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The nearest park, Windrows Park, is located 112 mile southwest from the project site. This project is proposing the subdivision of the approximately 9.11 -acre project site and the eventual construction of 14 single-family residences. The project is in conformance with the Very Low (VL) General Plan land use designation and will not increase the use of parks or other recreational facilities beyond that contemplated by the General Plan. A standard condition of approval will require the developer to pay Park Development Fees. Therefore, Impacts will be less than significant, b) See a)response above. Rev 4-17 E1—E2Pg94 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 41 16. TRANSPORTATIONrrRAFFIC. Would the project: leas T an a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy () Signi6wnl Lcaa (✓) Issues and Supporting Information Sources: FCIemiNly ITR n performance of the circulation system, laking Into Slgm6car.1 A61iga4on SIgN6ran1 No account all modes of transportation including mass Imaael Inee ttaletl Im act Im act 16. TRANSPORTATIONrrRAFFIC. Would the project: a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy () () () (✓) establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, laking Into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non -motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management () () () (✓) program, including, but not limited to a level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? C) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including () () () (✓) either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that result in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature () () () (✓) (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? () () () (✓) f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs () () () (✓) regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safely of such facilities. Comments: a) Implementation of the proposed project will generate 133 vehicle trips daily. The proposed project includes the development of 14 single-family residences. The ITE Trip Generation Manual estimates that each single-family residence will generate 10 trips daily. As noted in the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.16), continued development will contribute to the traffic load in the Rancho Cucamonga area. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan for which the FPEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. The project is in an area that is mostly developed with street Improvements existing or included in project design. The project will not create a substantial increase In the number of vehicle trips, traffic volume, or congestion at intersections. The project site will be required to provide street Improvements (curb, gutter and sidewalk) along the street frontage of the site per City roadway standards. In addition, the City has established a Transportation Development fee that must be paid by the applicant prior to issuance of building permits. Fees are used to fund roadway improvements necessary to support adequate traffic circulation. No impacts are anticipated. b) The ITE Trip Generation Manual estimates that each single-family residence will generate 1 morning and 1 evening two-way peak hour trips daily. In November 2004, San Bernardino County voters passed the Measure I extension which requires local jurisdictions to impose appropriate fees on development for their fair share toward Rev 4-17 E1—E2 Pg95 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 42 regional transportation Improvement projects. On May 18, 2005, the City of Rancho Cucamonga adopted a Comprehensive Transportation Fee Schedule updating these development impact fees. As a result, the San Bernardino County Congestion Management Agency waived the Congestion Management Plan (CMP) Traffic Impact Analysis reporting requirement. This project will be required, as a condition of approval, to pay the adapted transportation development fee prior to issuance of building permit. The project is in an area that is mostly developed with all street improvements existing. The project will not negatively impact the level of service standards on adjacent arterials. The project will be required to provide street Improvements (curb, gutter, and sidewalk) along the street frontage of the site. No Impacts are anticipated. C) Located approximately 7 miles northerly of the Ontario Airport, the site is offset north of the flight path and will not change air traffic patterns. No impacts are anticipated d) The project is in an area that is mostly developed. The project will be required to provide street improvements (curb, gutter, and sidewalk) along the street frontage of the site. The project design does not include any sharp curves or dangerous intersections or farming uses. The project will, therefore, not create a substantial increase In hazards because of a design feature. No impacts are anticipated. e) The project will be designed to provide access for all emergency vehicles during construction and upon completion of the project and will therefore not create an inadequate emergency access. No impacts are anticipated. f) The project is residential. Although houses are not part of the proposal, when the houses are submitted for review, adequate parking, specifically an enclosed garage and a driveway, in compliance with standards of the City of Rancho Cucamonga will be required. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated. 17. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Lev Than Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: pp g nallr aolensignificant wen Mvtigauen man slgnlrmanl No Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural Impel into aa:ed Inroad Ln act regional transportation Improvement projects. On May 18, 2005, the City of Rancho Cucamonga adopted a Comprehensive Transportation Fee Schedule updating these development impact fees. As a result, the San Bernardino County Congestion Management Agency waived the Congestion Management Plan (CMP) Traffic Impact Analysis reporting requirement. This project will be required, as a condition of approval, to pay the adapted transportation development fee prior to issuance of building permit. The project is in an area that is mostly developed with all street improvements existing. The project will not negatively impact the level of service standards on adjacent arterials. The project will be required to provide street Improvements (curb, gutter, and sidewalk) along the street frontage of the site. No Impacts are anticipated. C) Located approximately 7 miles northerly of the Ontario Airport, the site is offset north of the flight path and will not change air traffic patterns. No impacts are anticipated d) The project is in an area that is mostly developed. The project will be required to provide street improvements (curb, gutter, and sidewalk) along the street frontage of the site. The project design does not include any sharp curves or dangerous intersections or farming uses. The project will, therefore, not create a substantial increase In hazards because of a design feature. No impacts are anticipated. e) The project will be designed to provide access for all emergency vehicles during construction and upon completion of the project and will therefore not create an inadequate emergency access. No impacts are anticipated. f) The project is residential. Although houses are not part of the proposal, when the houses are submitted for review, adequate parking, specifically an enclosed garage and a driveway, in compliance with standards of the City of Rancho Cucamonga will be required. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated. 17. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with the cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of () () () (✓) Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1 (K)? b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its () (✓) () ( ) discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. Rev 4-17 E1—E2Pg96 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 43 Comments: a) The applicant has submitted a Phase I Cultural Assessment prepared by PSOMAS (January 15, 2018) for the project site. The Study included an archaeological records search by the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) at CSU Fullerton of all properties within a 1 -mile radius of the project site, a paleontological records search, and a pedestrian field survey of the project site. Rev 4-17 The results of the records search at the SCCIC Indicated that there have been at least 26 archaeological investigations conducted within a 1 -mile radius of the subject property. However, of those, only 24 have a technical report on file at the SCCIC. Several of those reports are immediately adjacent to the property, but none of the 24 reports included any portion of the property. The SCCIC maps indicate that 25 historical resources have been identified within a 1- mile radius of the property, one of which is on the property. It appears that all the technical reports and recorded sites are associated with historic structures or features dating 10 the early 20th Century. Those structures are primarily houses, related ancillary structures, and at least one cistern. One historic house and the cistern were in the northwest corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Highland Avenue. Those structures no longer exist. Additional data sources consulted at the SCCIC included Archaeological DOE, historic maps, and the HPDF maintained by the California OHP. The HPDF contains listings for the NRHP and/or CRHR, the CHL, and the CPHI. No cultural resources were identified from any of these additional research materials. The Local Inventory of Historic Resources did not contain any listings for either Etiwanda Avenue or Highland Avenue. However, the Local Register of Historic Resources and the City of Rancho Cucamonga's Historic Landmarks and Points of Interest directory list the Ross House, which is a residence that existed on the property and was recorded by Gallup in 1989. The house was constructed on the property around 1906. The house was owned by a prominent businessman, C. Newlon Ross, who was .a successful citrus grower. The, house was evaluated by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in 1989. The evaluation found the house had been significantly modified over the years and, as such, no longer met the criteria necessary for inclusion on the NRHP. Subsequently, the house was demolished in 1991. In 1993, the former location of the house was designated as a Point of Historic Interest by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The designation, in this case, is used because the historic structure has been removed and the site is the only remaining relevant feature. The designation is a recognition for historical purposes and is not subject to protective or restrictive provisions applicable to Landmark Designations. Psomas Senior Archaeologist David M. Smith completed a field survey of the project site an June 23, 2016. While it is known that the Ross House once stood on the property, its exact location is unknown. However, the remains of a building, represented by concrete footings and an entryway slab, were observed near the southwestern part of the property. A single shard of patterned whiteware, several mortared bricks, small boulders with concrete adhering to them, and numerous unidentified metal objects were also observed at various locations on the property. It is possible that these are related to the Ross House, which was demolished in 1991 However, with the exception of the foundation, the other items observed could have been the result of unauthorized dumping once the property was vacant. Based on the information discussed above, no impact Is anticipated. E1—E2 Pg97 Less Tna^ SignJcant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: P^Ienraoy Mm r",^ siptifieant mliga-ow Si g^Ificant No Inroad Incm anted Im^ad impact Comments: a) The applicant has submitted a Phase I Cultural Assessment prepared by PSOMAS (January 15, 2018) for the project site. The Study included an archaeological records search by the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) at CSU Fullerton of all properties within a 1 -mile radius of the project site, a paleontological records search, and a pedestrian field survey of the project site. Rev 4-17 The results of the records search at the SCCIC Indicated that there have been at least 26 archaeological investigations conducted within a 1 -mile radius of the subject property. However, of those, only 24 have a technical report on file at the SCCIC. Several of those reports are immediately adjacent to the property, but none of the 24 reports included any portion of the property. The SCCIC maps indicate that 25 historical resources have been identified within a 1- mile radius of the property, one of which is on the property. It appears that all the technical reports and recorded sites are associated with historic structures or features dating 10 the early 20th Century. Those structures are primarily houses, related ancillary structures, and at least one cistern. One historic house and the cistern were in the northwest corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Highland Avenue. Those structures no longer exist. Additional data sources consulted at the SCCIC included Archaeological DOE, historic maps, and the HPDF maintained by the California OHP. The HPDF contains listings for the NRHP and/or CRHR, the CHL, and the CPHI. No cultural resources were identified from any of these additional research materials. The Local Inventory of Historic Resources did not contain any listings for either Etiwanda Avenue or Highland Avenue. However, the Local Register of Historic Resources and the City of Rancho Cucamonga's Historic Landmarks and Points of Interest directory list the Ross House, which is a residence that existed on the property and was recorded by Gallup in 1989. The house was constructed on the property around 1906. The house was owned by a prominent businessman, C. Newlon Ross, who was .a successful citrus grower. The, house was evaluated by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in 1989. The evaluation found the house had been significantly modified over the years and, as such, no longer met the criteria necessary for inclusion on the NRHP. Subsequently, the house was demolished in 1991. In 1993, the former location of the house was designated as a Point of Historic Interest by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The designation, in this case, is used because the historic structure has been removed and the site is the only remaining relevant feature. The designation is a recognition for historical purposes and is not subject to protective or restrictive provisions applicable to Landmark Designations. Psomas Senior Archaeologist David M. Smith completed a field survey of the project site an June 23, 2016. While it is known that the Ross House once stood on the property, its exact location is unknown. However, the remains of a building, represented by concrete footings and an entryway slab, were observed near the southwestern part of the property. A single shard of patterned whiteware, several mortared bricks, small boulders with concrete adhering to them, and numerous unidentified metal objects were also observed at various locations on the property. It is possible that these are related to the Ross House, which was demolished in 1991 However, with the exception of the foundation, the other items observed could have been the result of unauthorized dumping once the property was vacant. Based on the information discussed above, no impact Is anticipated. E1—E2 Pg97 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 44 b) In conformance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, a Phase I Cultural Assessment was performed on the project site by PSOMAS (January 15, 2018). The study consists of an archeological record search and field visit. The results of the records search and field survey are discussed in section a above. In conformance with California Assembly Bill (AB) 52, a, notice of the proposed project was sent to the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, the San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians, the Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians, The Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians — Kizh nation, and the Morongo Band of Mission Indians on March 19, 2018. On March 23, 2018, the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians — Kizh Nation contacted the City of Rancho Cucamonga requesting for a consultation. However, no further response from the tribe was received after several attempts to set up an appointment. Should any undocumented archaeological or cultural resources be discovered during grading activities, adherence to the mitigation measures listed below will ensure that all impacts will be less than significant. 1) The project Applicant will be required to obtain the services of a qualified Native American Monitor(s) during construction -related ground disturbance activities. Ground disturbance is defined by the Tribal Representatives from the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation as activities that include, but are not limited to, pavement removal, pot -holing or auguring, grubbing, weed abatement, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching, within the project area. The monitor(s) must be approved by the Tribal Representatives and will be present on-site during the construction phases that involve any ground disturbing activities. The Native American Monitor(s) will complete monitoring logs on a daily basis. The logs will provide descriptions of the daily activities, including construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. The monitor(s) shall possess Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) certification. In addition, the monitor(s) will be required to provide insurance certificates, including liability insurance, for any archaeological resource(s) encountered during grading and excavation activities pertinent to the provisions outlined in the California Environmental Quality Act, California Public Resources Code Division 13, Section 210B3.2 (a) through (k). The on-site monitoring shall end when the project site grading and excavation activities are completed, or when the Tribal Representatives and monitor have indicated that the site has a low potential for archeological resources. 18. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project., a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? () Less Than () (✓) b) Require or result in the construction of new water or () SI9N6cant Less (✓) Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g PdenvOy slgN6cant Mtn MdlgaLon Then slgni6Wnt No facilities, the construction of which could cause Impact incorporated Im ad Impact b) In conformance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, a Phase I Cultural Assessment was performed on the project site by PSOMAS (January 15, 2018). The study consists of an archeological record search and field visit. The results of the records search and field survey are discussed in section a above. In conformance with California Assembly Bill (AB) 52, a, notice of the proposed project was sent to the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, the San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians, the Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians, The Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians — Kizh nation, and the Morongo Band of Mission Indians on March 19, 2018. On March 23, 2018, the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians — Kizh Nation contacted the City of Rancho Cucamonga requesting for a consultation. However, no further response from the tribe was received after several attempts to set up an appointment. Should any undocumented archaeological or cultural resources be discovered during grading activities, adherence to the mitigation measures listed below will ensure that all impacts will be less than significant. 1) The project Applicant will be required to obtain the services of a qualified Native American Monitor(s) during construction -related ground disturbance activities. Ground disturbance is defined by the Tribal Representatives from the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation as activities that include, but are not limited to, pavement removal, pot -holing or auguring, grubbing, weed abatement, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching, within the project area. The monitor(s) must be approved by the Tribal Representatives and will be present on-site during the construction phases that involve any ground disturbing activities. The Native American Monitor(s) will complete monitoring logs on a daily basis. The logs will provide descriptions of the daily activities, including construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. The monitor(s) shall possess Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) certification. In addition, the monitor(s) will be required to provide insurance certificates, including liability insurance, for any archaeological resource(s) encountered during grading and excavation activities pertinent to the provisions outlined in the California Environmental Quality Act, California Public Resources Code Division 13, Section 210B3.2 (a) through (k). The on-site monitoring shall end when the project site grading and excavation activities are completed, or when the Tribal Representatives and monitor have indicated that the site has a low potential for archeological resources. 18. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project., a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? () () () (✓) b) Require or result in the construction of new water or () () () (✓) wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? C) Require or result in the construction of new storm () () (✓) ( ) water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Rev 4-17 E1—E2 Pg98 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 45 d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the () L man () (✓) project from existing entitlements and resources, or SigmGcanl less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: amenbay with Tha" e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment 519nifmanl U119211an &9g fiunl Na provider, which serves or may serve the project that it Imeaat mw waled Imaad Irpa,f d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the () () () (✓) project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment () () () (✓) provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted () () () (✓) capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with Federal, Stale, and local statutes and () () () (✓) regulations related to solid waste? Comments: a) The proposed project is served by the CVWD sewer system, which has waste treated by the Inland Empire Utilities Agency at the RP -1 and RP -4 treatment plants. The RP -1 capacity is sufficient to exceed the additional development within the western and southern areas of the City. The RP -4 treatment plant has a potential ultimate capacity of 28 mgd which is considered more than adequate to capacity to treat all increases in wastewater generation for buildout of the General Plan. The project is required to meet the requirements of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board regarding wastewater. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated. b) The proposed project is served by the CVWD sewer system, which has waste treated by the Inland Empire Utilities Agency at the RP -4 treatment plant located within Rancho Cucamonga and RP -1 located within City of Ontario, neither of which is at capacity. The project is required to meet the requirements of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board regarding wastewater. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated. C) All runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to handle the flows. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. The impact is not considered significant. d) The project is served by the CVWD water system. There is currently a sufficient water supply available to the City of Rancho Cucamonga to serve this project. No impacts are anticipated. e) The proposed project is served by the CVWD sewer system, which has waste treated by the Inland Empire Utilities Agency at the RP -4 treatment plant located within Rancho Cucamonga and RP -1 located within City of Ontario, neither of which is at capacity. No impacts are anticipated. f) Solid waste disposal will be provided by the current City contracted hauler who disposes the refuse at a permitted landfill with sufficient capacity to handle the City's solid waste disposal needs. No impacts are anticipated. Rev 4-17 E1—E2 Pg99 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 46 g) This project complies with Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations regarding solid waste. The City of Rancho Cucamonga continues to implement waste reduction procedures consistent with AS 939. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated. 19. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Less Than a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the () significant Less ( ) Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially significant Wth 1.44gation Than Signlfcant No habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or Impact Incorporated Impact Im act g) This project complies with Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations regarding solid waste. The City of Rancho Cucamonga continues to implement waste reduction procedures consistent with AS 939. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated. 19. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the () (✓) () ( ) quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually () () () (✓) limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the Incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? C) Does the project have environmental effects that will () (✓) () ( ) cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Comments a) Certain biological resources described at the Initial Study Checklist Item 4, Biological Resources may be adversely affected by the project. Additionally, as yet unknown cultural resources may exist within the project area. This IS/MND Incorporates mitigation that reduces potential biological resources impacts and potential cultural resources impacts to levels that would be less than significant. b) If the proposed project were approved, then the applicant would be required to develop the site in accordance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. The 2010 General Plan was adopted along with the certification of a Program FEIR, Findings of Fact, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations for significant adverse environmental effects of build -cut in the City and Sphere -of -Influence. The City made findings that adoption of the General Plan would result in significant adverse effects to. Aesthetics, Agriculture and Forest Resources, Air Quality, Climate Change and Mineral Resources. Mitigation measures were adopted for each of these resources; however, they would not reduce impacts to less -than -significant levels. As such, the City adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations balancing the benefits of development under the General Plan Update against the significant unavoidable adverse impacts (CEQA Guidelines Section 15092 and 15096(h)). These benefits include less overall traffic volumes by developing mixed-use projects that will be pedestrian friendly and conservation of valuable natural open space. With these findings and the Statement of Overriding Considerations, no further discussion or evaluation of cumulative impacts is required. Rev 4-17 E1—E2 Pg100 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 Page 47 c) Development of the site under the proposed land use change would not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. The Initial Study identified potentially significant impacts associated with the exposure of people to increased noise levels. Mitigation measures contained in this Initial Study will ensure impacts are at less - than -significant levels. EARLIER ANALYSES Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier PEIR or Negative Declaration per Section 15063(c)(3)(D). The effects identified above for this project were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in the following earlier document(s) pursuant to applicable legal standards, and such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. The following earlier analyses were utilized in completing this Initial Study and are available for review in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Division offices, 10500 Civic Center Drive (check all that apply): (T) General Plan FPEIR (SCH92000061027, Certified May 19, 2010) (T) General Plan FEIR (SCH#2000061027, Certified October 17, 2001) (T) Master Environmental Assessment for the 1989 General Plan Update (SCH #88020115, certified January 4, 1989) (T) Etiwanda Specific Plan EIR (SCH #82061801, certified July 6, 1983) (T) Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Report (PSOMAS, November 2016) (T) Biological Constraints Survey (PSOMAS, January 9, 2018) (T) Cultural Resources Survey (PSOMAS, January 15, 2018) (T) Geolechnical Investigation (Sladden Engineering, March 31, 2016) (T) Hydrology Report (Michael Baker International, November 3, 2017) (T) Noise Impact Analysis (PSOMAS, July 2018) (T) Tree Survey and Arborist Report (Golden State and Tree Assessment, February 27, 2018) (T) Water Quality Management Plan (Michael Baker International, April 24, 2018) Rev 4.17 E1—E2 Pg 101 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 Rev 4-17 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 48 This page left blank intentionally E1—E2 Pg102 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 APPLICANT CERTIFICATION City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 49 I certify that I am the applicant for the project described in this Initial Study. I acknowledge that I have read this Initial Study and the proposed mitigation measures. Further, I have revised the project plans or proposals and/or hereby agree to the proposed mitigation measures to avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant environmental effects would occur. Applicant's Signature: Date: / I u14 T Print Name and Title: Rev 4-17 E1—E2 Pg103 — W MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST (INITIAL STUDY PART III) Project File No.: SUBTT20140 Applicant: PARKVIEW FINANCIAL Initial Study Prepared by: VINCENT ACUNA, ASSISTANT PLANNER Date: 05/31/2018 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing ofMethod of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action nit for Mooring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Com fiance Sectional: Aesthetics,t 1 None Secttdnl2tA "ridulluraliResources . r' ` ` __ 1�None 'S&tion'3 AIr'Quality n - w _ - '_ .,...-.w.--:. ,mss.#_._.«.YS.. S'. _'. .. �.s .._ .. •.'�. .._' — _... -.._ -.. __ _ Short Term (Construction) Emissions 1) All construction equipment shall be maintained PD C Review of Plans A/C 214 in good operating condition se 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, PD/BO C Review of Plans C 2 the developer shall submit Construction Plans to the City denoting the proposed schedule and projected equipment use. Construction contractors shall provide evidence that low -emission mobile construction equipment will be utilized, or that their use was investigated and found to be infeasible for the project. Contractors shall also conform to any construction measures imposed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) as well as City Planning staff. 3) The construction contractor shall utilize BO C Review of Plans J A/C 4 electric or clean alternative fuel powered I equipment where feasible. . !I 4) The construction contractor shall ensure that BO C Review of Plans AJC 214 construction -grading lans include a Page 1 of 17 Mitigation Measures No./ Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use 5) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance So B Review of Plans AIC 2 standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. 6) All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed pD C Review of Plans A/C 214 performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1113. Paints and coatings shall be applied either by hand or high-volume, low pressure spray 7) All construction equipment shall comply with BD C Review of Plans A/C 2/4 SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403. Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions: • Reestablish ground cover on the BQ C Review of Plans A/C 2/4 construction site through seeding and watering. • Pave or apply gravel to any on-site haul BO C Review of Plans A/C 2/4 roads. • Phase grading to prevent the B0 C Review of Plans AIC 2/4 susceptibility of large areas to erosion over extended periods of time. • Schedule activities to minimize the BD C Review of Plans A/C 214 amounts of exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. • Dispose of surplus excavated material in Bp C Review of Plans A 4 accordance with local ordinances and use sound engineering ractices. • Sweep streets according to a schedule BO C During Construction A 4 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 BO C During Construction A 4 winds (i.e., wind speeds exceeding 25 mph) in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 requirements. • Maintain a minimum 24 -inch freeboard BO C During Construction A 4 ratio on soils haul trucks or cover Page 2 of 17 m i M N v 0 rn Mitigation Measures No./ Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /initials Non -Compliance payloads using tarps or other suitable means. 8) The site shall be treated with water or other BO C During Construction A 4 soil -stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and Regional Water Quality Control Board [RWQCB]) daily to reduce Particulate Matter (PM,o) emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. 9) Chemical sail -stabilizers (approved by BO C During Construction A 4 SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM,o emissions. Long Term Emissions and Impacts 10) Landscape with native and/or drought- BO C During Construction A 4 resistant species to reduce water consumption and to provide passive solar benefits. 11) All residential and commercial structures shall BO CID Review of Plans C 2/4 be required'to incorporate high-efficiency/low- polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water heaters. 12) All residential and commercial structures shall BO CID Review of Plans C 2/4 be required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. 13) Projects shall be designed in accordance with BO CID Review of Plans - C 214 the applicable California Green Building Standards CALGreen Code 24 CCR 11)- 1 .14) 14)All new development in the City of Rancho BO CID Review of Plans C 214 Cucamonga shall comply with South Coast Air Quality Management District's Rule 445, Wood Burning Devices. Rule 445 was adopted in March 2008 to reduce emissions of PM2.5 and precludes the installation of indoor or outdoor wood burning devices (i.e. fireplaces/hearths) in new development on or after March 9, 2009. �Sectioni4�"(BiologlcaliResources�-, �> ��'"' Page 3 of 17 _m I M N v La 0 V Mitigation Measures No. f Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring uencVerification �I Timing of Method of Verified Date /initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance 1) A survey for active raptor nests is PD B Review of Report B 2/4 recommended prior to commencement of any I construction activities during the raptor nesting season (i.e., February 1 to June 30). Restrictions may be placed on construction activities in the vicinity of any active nest observed until the nest is no longer active, as determined by a qualified Biologist. Typically, a 500 -foot buffer zone is designated around a nest to allow construction to proceed while minimizing disturbance to the active nest. Once the nest is no longer active, construction can proceed in the buffer zone Review of Report 2) In order to avoid impacts on nesting birds, PD B� B _ 214 vegetation removal shall not be scheduled during the breeding season (i.e., March 15— September 15) to the extent feasible. If vegetation clearing for construction must be conducted during the breeding season, prior to disturbance, a pre -construction survey or multiple surveys shall be conducted by a qualified Biologist for nesting birds to confirm the absence of active nests. If no active nests are found, vegetation removal can proceed. If the Biologist finds an active nest within or adjacent to the construction area and determines that the nest may be impacted, the Biologist will identify an appropriate buffer zone (typically, 100 to 300 feet) around the nest depending on the sensitivity of the species and the nature of the construction activity. The active site will be protected until nesting activity has ended to ensure compliance with the MBTA and the California Fish and Game Code. To protect any nest site, the following restrictions to construction activities shall be required until nests are no longer active, as determined by a qualified Biologist: (1) clearing limits shall be established within a buffer around any occupied nest, unless otherwise determined Page 4 of 17 ro I M N v 0 00 Mitigation Measures No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitorin Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date linitials Sanctions for Non -Compliance by a qualified Biologist and (2) access and surveying shall be restricted within the buffer of any occupied nest, unless otherwise determined by a qualified Biologist. Construction and/or encroachment into the buffer area around a known nest shall only be allowed if the Biologist determines that the proposed activity would not disturb the nest occupants. 3) Perform a Burrowing Owl Survey that is in PD B Review of Report B 214 conformance with the Department of Fish and Wildlife Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation and submit the written report outlining the findings to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the Planning Department within 30 days of groundbreaking activity. The Burrowing Owl Survey shall follow the following protocol: • Burrowing Owl Survey methodology shall be based on Appendix D (Breeding and non -breeding season surveys and reports) of the CDFW Staff Report. Results of the pre -construction survey shall be provided to CDFW and the City. If the pre -construction survey does not identify burrowing on the project site, then no further mitigation is required. If burrowing owls are found to be utilizing the project site during the pre - construction survey, measures shall be developed by the qualified biologist in coordination with the CDFW to avoid impacting occupied burrows during the nesting period. These measures shall be based on the most current CDFW protocols and will at minimum include establishment of buffer setbacks from occupied burrows and owl monitoring. If ground -disturbing actives are delayed or Page 5 of 17 M M N La v 0 Wo Mitigation Measures No.I Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date /Initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance suspended for more than 30 days after the pre -construction survey, the site shall be resurveyed for owls. • During the non -breeding season from September 1 through January 31, if burrows are occupied by migratory and non -migratory resident burrowing owls during a pre -construction survey, burrow exclusion and/or closure may be used to exclude owls from those burrows. Burrow exclusion and/or closure should only be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist in coordination with CDFW using the most current CDFW guidelines. • During the avian nesting season from February 1 through August 31, if nests are discovered, they shall be avoided through the establishment of an appropriate buffer setback, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. The temporary "no construction" area would have to be maintained until the nest has completed its cycle., as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. Once the nest cycle is complete and all nestlings have fledged and have left the nest, construction in that area may resume. B 4) Prior to issuance of building permits, PD g Review of Report 214 developer shall submit a written report by a landscape architect or arborist which determines the feasibility of transplanting all 14 heritage trees identified by the arborisls' report (Golden Stale Land and Tree Assessment; February 27, 2018). If removal is deemed necessary, the developer shall replace the 14 heritage trees on-site at the following rate: 5 trees on Lot A. 3 trees on Lot Page 6 of 17 Mitigation.Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance 10, 3 trees on Lot 11, and 3 trees on Lot 12. Replacement tree size shall be the maximum largest nursery -grown tree available as determined by the Planning Director or Planning Commission. Section°5CulturaResources JIf 1) 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 PD/BO C Review of Report A/D 3/4 undesignated sites from demolition or significant modification without an opportunity for the City to establish its archaeolo _ ical value. • Consider establishing provisions to PD/BO C Review of Report A/D 314 require incorporation of archaeological sites within new developments, using their special qualities as a theme or focal point. • Pursue educating the public about the PD/BO C Review of Report AID 3/4 archaeological heritage of the area. • Prepare a mitigation plan consistent with PD BIC Review of report A/D 2/4 Section 21083.2 Archeological and plans during resources of CEQA to eliminate adverse construction project effects on significant, Important, and unique prehistoric resources, including but not limited to, avoiding archeological sites, capping or covering site with soil, planning the site as a park or green space or paying an in-kind mitigation fee. • I Prepare a technical resources PD C Review of Report AID 3/4 management report, documenting the inventory, evaluation, and proaosed Page 7 of 17 m Mitigation Measures No. I Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance 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 PD B Review of Report AID 4 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 PD B Review of Report AID 4 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 BO BIC Review of Report A/D 4 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. o Prepare, identify, and curate all PD D Review of Report D 3 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 PD D Review of Report D 3 Rancho Cucamonga. Transfer collected Page 8 of 17 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance specimens with a copy to the report to San Bernardino County Museum. Section"{6y�-�Geology andiSoils€'�,�•,,,,`�_='= "_ • ;, - 1) The site shall be treated with water or other- BO C During Construction A 4 soil -stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) daily to reduce PMio 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 BO C During Construction A 4 according to a schedule established by the City io reduce PMro 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 BO C During Construction A 4 wind speeds exceed 25 mph to minimize PMia emissions from the site during such episodes. 4) Chemical soil -stabilizers (approved by BO C During Construction A 4 SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PMro emissions. sSection)7 Greenhouse)Gas,Emissions Short Term (Construction) GHG Emissions 1) The project must comply with all rules that BO C During Construction A 4 assist in reducing short-term air pollutant emission in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403 regarding fugitive dust including treating the site with water or other soil -stabilizing agent twice daily or replanting disturbed areas as quickly as possible. 2) The construction contractor shall select 80 C During Construction A 4 construction equipment based on low - emission factors and high energy efficiency and submit a statement on the grading plan that ensures all construction equipment will be tuned and maintained in accordance with Page 9 of 17 W Mitigation Measures No. I Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/Initials Non -Compliance the manufactures' specification. 3) Trucks shall not idle continuously for more BO C During Construction A 4 than 5 minutes. 4) Alternative fuel powered equipment shall be BO C During Construction A 4 utilized in lieu of gasoline- or diesel -powered engines where feasible. 5) Construction should be timed so as not to BO C During Construction A 4 interfere with peak -hour traffic. 6) Ridesharing and transit incentives shall be BO C During Construction A 4 supported and encouraged for construction crew. Long Term (Operational) GHG Emissions 7) Construction and Building materials shall be BO A During Construction C 2 produced and/or manufactured locally. Use "Green Building Materials" such as materials that are resource efficient, recycled, and manufactured in an environmentally friendly way including low -volatile -organic -compound (VOC) materials. 8) Design all buildings to exceed California BO C During Construction A 4 Building Code Title 24 energy standard including but not limited to any combination of: e Increased insulation. e Limit air leakage through the structure. Incorporate Energy Star or better rated windows, space healing and cooling equipment, light fixtures, and appliances. o Landscape and develop site utilizing shade, prevailing winds and landscaping. e Install efficient lighting and lighting control systems. s Install light colored "cool" roofs and cool pavements. a Install solar or light emitting diodes Page 10 of 17 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Datellnitials Non -Compliance (LED's) for outdoor lighting. 9) Prepare a comprehensive water conservation BO A During Construction C 2 strategy appropriate for the project and include the following: • Install water efficient landscapes and Irrigation systems and devices in compliance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. • Use reclaimed water for landscaping Within the project if available or as required by the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD). • Design building to be water efficient by installing water efficient fixtures and appliances including low flow faucets, dual flush toilets and waterless urinals/water heaters. • Design irrigation to control runoff and to remove water to non -vegetated surfaces. 10) Reuse and recycle construction and CE A Review of Plans C 2 demolition waste. Provide interior and exterior storage areas for recyclables and green waste in public areas. Educate employees about reducing waste and about recycling. SeclicnlB Ha ards,andsWaste Materia s- 1) None '•Sactionl9_'Hydr�ology,�andWaterOuality _ _" Construction Activities 1) Prior to issuance of grading permits, the BO BIC/D Review of Plans AIC 214 permit applicant shall submit to Building Official for approval, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) specifically identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that shall he used on-site to reduce pollutants during construction activities Page 11 of 17 Mitigation Measures No./ Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 2) An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, BO B/C/D/ Review of Plans A/C 2/4 included in the Grading Plan, and implemented for the proposed project that identifies specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion from the time ground disturbing activities are initiated through completion of grading. This Erosion Control Plan shall include the following measures at a minimum: a) Specify the timing of grading and construction to minimize soil exposure to rainy periods experienced in Southern California, and b) An inspection and maintenance program shall be included to ensure that any erosion which does occur either on-site or off- site as a result of this project will be corrected through a remediation or restoration program within a specified time frame. 3) During construction, temporary berms such BO BIC/D Review of Plans AIC 2/4 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, BO BIC/D Review of Plans A/C 2/4 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) Prior to issuance of grading or paving BO B/C/D Review of Plans A/C 2/4 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. Page 12 of 17 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance Post -Construction Operational 6) Prior to issuance of building permits, the BO B/C/D Review of Pians A/C 214 applicant shelf submit to the City Building Official for approval of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), including a project description and idenlifying 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. B/CID Review of Plans Y _ 7) Landscaping plans shall include provisions for BO A/C 214 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. Grading Activities 8) The developer shall implement the BMPs BO BICID Review of Plans A/C 214 identified in the Water Quality Management Plan prepared by (name/dale) to reduce construction pollutants from entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. _ Sectio_6;10�7— LrandiUseia_nd!Planning_�� 1) None~ Section 11 �`MlrferaltRisources - - ` 1) None Sectionrl2=Noise'-=r 1) Prior to the issuance of any grading plans a PD/BO B Review of Plans CIA 4 construction -related noise mitigation plan Page 13 of 17 0 - Mitigation Measures No, l Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance shall be submitted to the City for review and approval. The Plan shall depict the location of the construction equipment and how the noise from this equipment would be mitigated during construction. 2) Prior to the issuance of the grading permit, pD/BO B Review of Plans C 4 the Property Owner/Developer shall submit plans and specifications to the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department demonstrating that the construction plans and specifications include the following noise - abatement and control measures: • All construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers and other State -required noise attenuation devices. • Stationary construction equipment shall be placed such that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive noise receivers. • On-site and off-site construction haul routes shall be designed to avoid noise - sensitive uses, as feasible. • If feasible, perimeter walls along the northern, eastern, and southern property boundaries shall be constructed as early as possible during the first phase of construction. 3) Prior to the issuance of the grading permit, PD/BO BIC Review of Plans, CIA 4 the Property Owner/Developer shall submitDuring Construction construction plans and/or specifications to the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department demonstrating that the installation of a temporary noise barrier between the construction area and the adjacent residences Is required. The barrier shall be 12 feet high and solid from the ground to the top. The barrier shall be constructed with plywood Page 14 of 17 LV_ Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date linitials Non -Compliance that is at least %: inch thick or with another material that creates a noise transmission loss of at least 20 dBA. Where feasible, the barrier shall remain in place until the completion of construction. 4) Construction or grading shall not take place BO C During Construction A 4 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. 5) Construction or grading noise levels shall not BO C During Construction A 4 exceed the standards specified in Development Code Section 17.66.050, as measured at the property line. The developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly noise level monitoring as specified in Development Code Section 17.66.050. 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. 6) The perimeter block wall shall be constructed PD C During Construction A as early as possible in the first phase. 7) Haul truck deliveries shall not take place PO/BO C During Construction A 4/7 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 Page 15 of 17 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance land uses or residential dwellings. Sections.13-. Populationla nd t Hou s i ng; N 1) None Section+,14=,Public?Services . __ - : ... '. -B 1) The developer shall pay the current BO Review of Plans C z residential school facility fee plus the Etiwanda School District special lax. 1) None Section+l6GTirans ortatioNTraffic 1) None Sectionr17=8TribaltCulturaliResources 1)-~ The project Applicant will be required to PD B During Grading. B 4 obtain the services of a qualified Native American Monitor(s) during construction - related ground disturbance activities. Ground disturbance is defined by the Tribal Representatives from the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation as activities that Include, but are not limited to, pavement removal, pot -holing or auguring, grubbing, weed abatement, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching, within the project area. The monitor(s) must be approved by the Tribal Representatives and will be present on- site during the construction phases that involve any ground disturbing activities. The Native American Monitor(s) will complete monitoring logs on a daily basis. The logs will provide descriptions of the daily activities, including construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. The monitor(s) shall possess Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) certification. In addition, the monitor(s) will be required to provide insurance certificates, including liability insurance, for any archaeological resource(s) Page 16 of 17 M Mitigation Measures No./ Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Fre uenc Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance encountered during grading and excavation 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 activities pertinent to the provisions outlined in 5 - Retain Deposit or Bonds FC - Fire Chief or designee 6. Revoke CUP the California Environmental Quality Act, 7 - Citation California Public Resources Code Division 13, Section 21063.2 (a) through (k). The on-site monitoring shall end when the project site grading and excavation activities are completed, or when the Tribal Representatives and monitor have indicated that the site has a low potential for archeological resources. Seotion 8 UtilityanblServl�c( Systein 1) None Sectiliml9 = Mandatory. Findings of Significance 1) None Key to Checklist Abbreviations : Res"ponsibfe Person> "M " -) f:Mbnftori6g Fr6quian-ey, IiMefho&of.Verification eSahctions- 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 BO - Building Official or designee D - On Completion D - Separate Submittal (Reports/Studies/ Plans) 4 - Stop Work Order PO - Police Captain or designee E - Operating 5 - Retain Deposit or Bonds FC - Fire Chief or designee 6. Revoke CUP 7 - Citation Page 17 of 17 RESOLUTION NO. 18-55 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20140, A SUBDIVISION OF APPROXIMATELY 9.11 ACRES INTO 14 SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED LOTS WITHIN THE VERY LOW (VL) RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT IN THE ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN LOCATED AT THE 6527 ETIWANDA AVENUE; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF -APN: 0227-051-03. A. Recitals. 1. Parkview Financial filed an application for the approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20140 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Tentative Tract Map request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 26th day of September 2018, 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 September 26, 2018, 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 6527 Etiwanda Avenue with a linear dimension, from north to south, of approximately 665 feet and a linear dimension, from east to west of approximately 660 feet and is presently undeveloped; and b. With the exception of a vacant triangular parcel to the northeast, the site is surrounded by single-family residential in all directions. The zoning of the subject property and the properties to the north, south, and east is Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, while the zoning of the properties to the west is Low (L) Residential District, Victoria Planned Community. The project site and the surrounding properties to the north, south, and east are within the Etiwanda Specific Plan (ESP); and C. The applicant, Parkview Financial, proposes to subdivide a property of approximately 9.11 acres into 14 single-family detached lots for future development. The proposed density for the project is 1.53 dwelling units per acre. The maximum density allowed within the Very Low (VL) Residential District, ESP, is less than two dwelling units per acre. The average lot area for the project is 25,436 square feet and the minimum net average for the Very Low (VL) Residential District in the ESP is 20,000 square feet. The site layout is consistent with E1—E2 Pg121 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-55 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20140 — PARKVIEW FINANCIAL September 26, 2018 Page 2 the ESP's development standards such as lot width and depth, minimum and average lot area, street width, and wall design; and d. The project site slopes down north to south, from about 1,424 feet to 1,412 feet. The conceptual grading plan indicates the highest pad elevation is 1,427 feet at the northwest corner of the site, and lowest pad elevation is 1,413 feet at the south portion of the site; and e. The subdivision will have two points of access, one along the future cul-de-sac accessed from Highland Avenue and the other along Etiwanda Avenue. The Engineering Department has included conditions that require the construction of right -of way improvements including curb and gutter, and a community trail; and f. The design of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the surrounding residential subdivisions including the adjacent subdivision of 79 lots on approximately 57 acres, located directly east of the subject property that was approved by the Planning Commission on June 12, 2002 (Related file: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16279). The lots within Tract 16279 are similar in size and layout to the lots of the proposed project; and g. The project was reviewed by the Design Review Committee (DRC) on May 1, 2018. No major issues or secondary issues were discussed in the DRC Comments. The Committee recommended approval of the project to the Planning Commission; and h. The project was reviewed by the Technical Review Committee (TRC) on May 1, 2018. Preliminary conditions were discussed. The Committee accepted the proposal and recommended approval; and i. The project was reviewed by the Trails Advisory Committee (TAC) on May 9, 2018. No major issues or secondary issues were discussed in the TAC Comments. The project includes local feeder trails and will be conditioned to have trail improvements that meet City standards. The Committee recommended approval of the project to the Planning Commission; and j. On April 9, 2018, a neighborhood meeting was conducted by the applicant at the nearby Victoria Gardens Cultural Center. The intent of this meeting was to invite property owners within a 660 -foot radius of the project boundaries for input relating to the project. There was a total of three attendees, in addition to the applicant, Project Engineer, and Planning Department staff. During the meeting, the applicant presented the tentative tract map and conceptual grading plan for the proposed project. No concerns or major issues were brought up; and k. On March 19, 2018, per AB 52, the City sent letters to the San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians, San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians, Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians — Kizh Nation, and the Morongo Band of Mission Indians notifying them of the project. The purpose of that notice was to determine if any tribe desired consultation to discuss the proposal. On March 23, 2018, staff received an email from the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation, requesting consultation. Staff attempted to contact the tribe on multiple occasions but did not receive a response. In an effort to reduce the direct and indirect impacts that this project could have on Native American tribal cultural resources to a "less than significant" status, staff included a mitigation measure that requires the applicant to obtain the services of a qualified Native American Monitor(s) during construction -related ground disturbance activities, such as pavement E1—E2 F'g122 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-55 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20140 — PARKVIEW FINANCIAL September 26, 2018 Page 3 removal, pot -holing or auguring, grubbing, weed abatement, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching; and I. The Planning Department prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration that was circulated on August 15, 2018. Thereafter, City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration at a Planning Commission hearing that was scheduled for September 26, 2018. No correspondence was received. 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. That the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and the Etiwanda Specific Plan. The proposal involves a subdivision for residential development within the Very Low (VL) Residential Zoning District of the ESP and the Very Low Residential General Plan land use designation. The maximum density within this zone and General Plan land use designation is less than two dwelling units per acre. The proposed subdivision involves a density of 1.53 dwelling units per acre; and b. The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and Etiwanda Specific Plan. The project involves a request to subdivide a 9.11 -acre site into 14 residential lots for future single-family residential development. The minimum lot size is 20,000 square feet and the minimum net average for the Very Low (VL) Residential District in the ESP is 25,000 square feet. The project site layout is also consistent with the ESP's development standards such as lot width and depth, street width, and wall design; and C. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed. Currently the site is undeveloped. The project involves grading of the site to comply with the City requirements and to be consistent with previously approved tract maps within the vicinity of the subject property; 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. An initial study was prepared for the project that includes mitigation measures to reduce any potential impacts to humans or wildlife to less than significant; and e. The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems. The proposed project involves a residential subdivision. The included mitigation measures, along with the future single-family residential use,, will not cause serious public health problems; and f. The design of the tentative tract ties into the existing equestrian community trail system and 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. The project incorporates two points of access, one from a future cul-de-sac accessed from Highland Avenue and one along Etiwanda Avenue. 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 E1—E2 Pg123 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-55 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20140 — PARKVIEW FINANCIAL September 26, 2018 Page 4 Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds: (i) that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. C. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the Planning Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth in the attached Conditions of Approval and the Mitigation Measures listed below. Environmental Mitigation Air Quality 1) All construction equipment shall be maintained in good operating condition so as to reduce operational emissions. The contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained as per manufacturers' specifications. Maintenance records shall be available at the construction site for City verification. 2) Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, the developer shall submit construction plans to the City denoting the proposed schedule and projected equipment use. Construction contractors shall provide evidence that low E1—E2 Pg 124 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-55 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20140 — PARKVIEW FINANCIAL September 26, 2018 Page 5 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) The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel powered equipment where feasible. 4) The construction contractor shall ensure that construction -grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. 5) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. 6) 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. 7) All construction equipment shall comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403. Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions: O Re-establish ground cover on the construction site through seeding and watering. Pave or apply gravel to any on-site haul roads. • Phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large areas to erosion over extended periods of time. • Schedule activities to minimize the amounts of exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. Dispose of surplus excavated material in accordance with local ordinances and use sound engineering practices. ® Sweep streets according to a schedule established by the City if silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. • Suspend grading operations during high winds (i.e., wind speeds exceeding 25mph) in accordance with Rule 403 requirements. c Maintain a minimum 24 -inch freeboard ratio on soils haul trucks or cover payloads using tarps or other suitable means. 8) The site shall be treated with water or other soil -stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB)) daily to reduce PM,o emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. 9) 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. E1—E2 Pg125 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-55 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20140 — PARKVIEW FINANCIAL September 26, 2018 Page 6 10) Landscape with native and/or drought -resistant species to reduce water consumption and to provide passive solar benefits. 11) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate high- efficiency/low-polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water heaters. 12) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. 13) Projects shall be designed in accordance with the applicable California Green Building Standards (CALGreen) Code (24 CCR 11). 14) All new development in the City of Rancho Cucamonga shall comply with South Coast Air Quality Management District's Rule 445, Wood Burning Devices. Rule 445 was adopted in March 2008 to reduce emissions of PM2.5 and precludes the installation of indoor or outdoor wood burning devices (i.e. fireplaces/hearths) in new development on or after March 9, 2009. Biological Resources 1) A survey for active raptor nests is recommended prior to commencement of any construction activities during the raptor nesting season (i.e., February 1 to June 30). Restrictions may be placed on construction activities in the vicinity of any active nest observed until the nest is no longer active, as determined by a qualified biologist. Typically, a 500 -foot buffer zone is designated around a nest to allow construction to proceed while minimizing disturbance to the active nest. Once the nest is no longer active, construction can proceed in the buffer zone 2) In order to avoid impacts on nesting birds, vegetation removal shall not be scheduled during the breeding season (i.e., March 15—September 15) to the extent feasible. If vegetation clearing for construction must be conducted during the breeding season, prior to disturbance, a pre -construction survey or multiple surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist for nesting birds to confirm the absence of active nests. If no active nests are found, vegetation removal can proceed. If the biologist finds an active nest within or adjacent to the construction area and determines that the nest may be impacted, the biologist will identify an appropriate buffer zone (typically, 100 to 300 feet) around the nest depending on the sensitivity of the species and the nature of the construction activity. The active site will be protected until nesting activity has ended to ensure compliance with the MBTA and the California Fish and Game Code. To protect any nest site, the following restrictions to construction activities shall be required until nests are no longer active, as determined by a qualified Biologist: (1) clearing limits shall be established within a buffer around any occupied nest, unless otherwise determined by a qualified biologist and (2) access and surveying shall be restricted within the buffer of any occupied nest, unless otherwise determined by a qualified biologist. Construction and/or encroachment into the buffer area around a known nest shall only be allowed if E1—c2 Pg 126 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-55 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20140 — PARKVIEW FINANCIAL September 26, 2018 Page 7 the biologist determines that the proposed activity would not disturb the nest occupants. 3) Prior to issuance of building permits, developer shall submit a written report by a landscape architect or arborist which determines the feasibility of transplanting all 14 heritage trees identified by the arborists' report (Golden State Land and Tree Assessment; February 27, 2018). If removal is deemed necessary, the developer shall replace the 14 heritage trees on-site at the following rate: 5 trees on Lot A, 3 trees on Lot 10, 3 trees on Lot 11, and 3 trees on Lot 12. Replacement tree size shall be the maximum largest nursery -grown tree available as determined by the Planning Director or Planning Commission. 4) Perform a Burrowing Owl Survey that is in conformance with the Department of Fish and Wildlife Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation and submit the written report outlining the findings to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the Planning Department within 30 days of groundbreaking activity. The Burrowing Owl Survey shall follow the following protocol: • Burrowing Owl Survey methodology shall be based on Appendix D (Breeding and non -breeding season surveys and reports) of the CDFW Staff Report. Results of the pre -construction survey shall be provided to CDFW and the City. If the pre -construction survey does not identify burrowing on the project site, then no further mitigation is required. If burrowing owls are found to be utilizing the project site during the pre - construction survey, measures shall be developed by the qualified biologist in coordination with the CDFW to avoid impacting occupied burrows during the nesting period. These measures shall be based on the most current CDFW protocols and will at minimum include establishment of buffer setbacks from occupied burrows and owl monitoring. If ground, disturbing actives are delayed or suspended for more than 30 days after the pre -construction survey, the site shall be resurveyed for owls. • During the non -breeding season from September 1 through January 31, if burrows are occupied by migratory and non -migratory resident burrowing owls during a pre -construction survey, burrow exclusion and/or closure may be used to exclude owls from those burrows. Burrow exclusion and/or closure should only be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist in coordination with CDFW using the most current CDFW guidelines. • During the avian nesting season from February 1 through August 31, if nests are discovered, they shall be avoided through the establishment of an appropriate buffer setback, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. The temporary "no construction" area would have to be maintained until the nest has completed its cycle., as determined by a E1—E2 Pg127 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-55 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20140 — PARKVIEW FINANCIAL September 26, 2018 Page 8 qualified wildlife biologist. Once the nest cycle is complete and all nestlings have fledged and have left the nest, construction in that area may resume. 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. • 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 • Prepare a mitigation plan consistent with Section 21083.2 Archaeological resources of CEQA to eliminate adverse project effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric resources, including but not limited to, avoiding archaeological sites, capping or covering sites with soil, planning the site as a park or green space or paying an in-kind mitigation fee. • 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. E1—E2 Pg128 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-55 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20140 — PARKVIEW FINANCIAL September 26, 2018 Page 9 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 RWQCB) daily to reduce PM10 emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 or re -planted with drought resistant landscaping as soon as possible. 2) Frontage public streets shall be swept according to a schedule established by the City to reduce PM,o 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 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,o emissions. Greenhouse Gas Emissions 1) The project must comply with all rules that assist in reducing short-term air pollutant emission in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403 regarding fugitive dust including treating the site with water or other soil -stabilizing agent twice daily or replanting disturbed areas as quickly as possible. 2) The construction contractor shall select construction equipment based on low - emission factors and high energy efficiency and submit a statement on the grading plan that ensures all construction equipment will be tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufactures' specification. 3) Trucks shall not idle continuously for more than 5 minutes. 4) Alternative fuel powered equipment shall be utilized in lieu of gasoline or diesel -powered engines where feasible. 5) Construction should be timed so as not to interfere with peak -hour traffic. 6) Ridesharing and transit incentives shall be supported and encouraged for the construction crew. E1—E2 Pg129 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-55 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20140 — PARKVIEW FINANCIAL September 26, 2018 Page 10 7) Construction and building materials shall be produced and/or manufactured locally. Use "Green Building Materials" such as materials that are resource efficient, recycled and manufactured in an environmentally friendly way including low -volatile -organic -compound (VOC) materials. 8) Design all buildings to exceed California Building Code Title 24 energy standard including but not limited to any combination of; • Increased insulation. • Limit air leakage through the structure. • Incorporate Energy Star or better rated windows, space heating and cooling equipment, light fixtures, and appliances. • Landscape and develop site utilizing shade, prevailing winds and landscaping. • Install efficient lighting and lighting control systems. • Install light colored "cool" roofs and cool pavements. • Install solar or light emitting diodes (LED's) for outdoor lighting. 9) Prepare a comprehensive water conservation strategy appropriate for the project and include the following; • Install water efficient landscapes and irrigation systems and devices in compliance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. • Use reclaimed water for landscaping within the project if available or as required by the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD). • Design building to be water efficient by installing water efficient fixtures and appliances including low flow faucets, dual flush toilets and waterless urinals/water heaters. • Design irrigation to control runoff and to remove water to non -vegetated surfaces. 10) Reuse and recycle construction and demolition waste. Provide interior and exterior storage areas for recyclables and green waste in public areas. Educate employees about reducing waste and about recycling. E1—E2 Pg130 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-55 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20140 — PARKVIEW FINANCIAL September 26, 2018 Page 11 Hydrology and Water Quality 1) Prior to issuance of grading permits, the permit applicant shall submit to the Building Official for approval, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) specifically identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that shall be used on-site to reduce pollutants during construction activities entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 2) An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, included in the Grading Plan, and implemented for the proposed project that identifies specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion from the time ground disturbing activities are initiated through completion of grading. This Erosion Control Plan shall include the following measures at a minimum: a) Specify the timing of grading and construction to minimize soil exposure to rainy periods experienced in Southern California, and b) An inspection and maintenance program shall be included to ensure that any erosion which does occur either on-site or off-site as a result of this project will be corrected through a remediation or restoration program within a specified time frame. 3) 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) 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. 6) Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit to the City Building Official for approval of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), including a project description and identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on-site to reduce pollutants into the storm drain system to the maximum extent practicable. The WQMP shall identify the structural and non-structural measures consistent with the Guidelines for New Development and Redevelopment adopted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in June 2004. 7) Landscaping plans shall include provisions for controlling and minimizing the use of fertilizers/pesticides/herbicides. Landscaped areas shall be monitored and maintained for at least two years to ensure adequate coverage and E1—E2 Pg 131 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-55 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20140 — PARKVIEW FINANCIAL September 26, 2018 Page 12 stable growth. Plans for these areas, including monitoring provisions for a minimum of two years, shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. 8) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality Management Plan prepared by Michael Baker International (November 3, 2017) to reduce construction pollutants from entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. Noise 1) Prior to the issuance of any grading plans a construction -related noise mitigation plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval. The Plan shall depict the location of the construction equipment and how the noise from this equipment would be mitigated during construction. 2) Prior to the issuance of the grading permit, the Property Owner/Developer shall submit plans and specifications to the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department demonstrating that the construction plans and specifications include the following noise -abatement and control measures: • All construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers and other State -required noise attenuation devices. • Stationary construction equipment shall be placed such that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive noise receivers. • On-site and off-site construction haul routes shall be designed to avoid noise -sensitive uses, as feasible. • If feasible, perimeter walls along the northern, eastern, and southern property boundaries shall be constructed as early as possible during the first phase of construction. 3) Prior to the issuance of the grading permit, the Property Owner/Developer shall submit construction plans and/or specifications to the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department demonstrating that the installation of a temporary noise barrier between the construction area and the adjacent residences is required. The barrier shall be 12 feet high and solid from the ground to the top. The barrier shall be constructed with plywood that is at least '/2 inch thick or with another material that creates a noise transmission loss of at least 20 dBA. Where feasible, the barrier shall remain in place until the completion of construction. 4) 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. E1—E2 Pg132 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-55 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20140 — PARKVIEW FINANCIAL September 26, 2018 Page 13 5) Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards specified in Development Code Section 17.66.050, as measured at the property line. Developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly noise level monitoring as specified in Development Code Section 17.66.050. 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. 6) The perimeter block wall shall be constructed as early as possible in first phase. 7) 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 and include appropriate noise mitigation measures. To the extent feasible, the plan shall denote haul routes that do not pass sensitive land uses or residential dwellings. Public Services 1) The developer shall pay the current residential school facility fee plus the Etiwanda School District special tax. Tribal Cultural Resources 1) The project Applicant will be required to obtain the services of a qualified Native American Monitor(s) during construction -related ground disturbance activities. Ground disturbance is defined by the Tribal Representatives from the Gabrieleho Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation as activities that include, but are not limited to, pavement removal, pot -holing or auguring, grubbing, weed abatement, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching, within the project area. The monitor(s) must be approved by the Tribal Representatives and will be present on-site during the construction phases that involve any ground disturbing activities. The Native American Monitor(s) will complete monitoring logs on a daily basis. The logs will provide descriptions of the daily activities, including construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. The monitor(s) shall possess Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) certification. In addition, the monitor(s) will be required to provide insurance certificates, including liability insurance, for any archaeological resource(s) encountered during grading and excavation activities pertinent to the provisions outlined in the California Environmental Quality Act, California Public Resources Code Division 13, Section 21083.2 (a) through (k). The on- E1—E2 Pg133 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-55 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20140 — PARKVIEW FINANCIAL September 26, 2018 Page 14 site monitoring shall end when the project site grading and excavation activities are completed, or when the Tribal Representatives and monitor have indicated that the site has a low potential for archeological resources. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2018. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AN ATTEST: Rich Macias, Chairman Candyce Burnett, Secretary I, Candyce Burnett, 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 26th day of September 2018, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: E1—E2 Pg134 Conditions of Approval Rt�Cf1O Community Development Department Project #: SUBTT00021 DRC2017-00823, DRC2017-00824 Project Name: EDR - Harris Garden Location: 6527 ETIWANDA AVE - 022705103-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Sign Permit Notice of Filing, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Planning Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. All future structures facing Etiwanda Avenue shall be set back from the ultimate right-of-way line for an average of 30 feet, minimum of 25 feet, per Sec. 5.25.302(b) (Etiwanda Avenue Overlay District Setback) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Variable setbacks are strongly encouraged. 2. A plaque commemorating the Ross House historic point of interest shall be installed at the northeast corner of the project site, prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the first residential unit within the tract. The plaque design and verbiage shall be subject to the approval of the Planning Director, or his/her designee. 3. Neighborhood entry landscaping per Sec. 5.25.303(c) and as depicted on Figure 5-12 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan shall be installed on the northwest corner of the project site at the intersection of Highland Avenue and Etiwanda Avenue prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the first residential unit within the tract. 4. Landscaping shall be installed on the triangular shaped parcel located on the north side of Highland Avenue prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the first residential unit within the tract. Landscaping for the said area shall be subject to the approval of the Planning Department. Standard Conditions of Approval 5. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 6. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval or Approval Letter, Conditions of Approval, 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. 7. The applicant shall be required to pay California Department of Fish and Wildlife Notice of Exemption and Mitigated Negative Declaration fee in the amount of $2,330.75. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary prior to public hearing. 8. This tentative tract map or tentative parcel map shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, unless a complete final map is filed with the Engineering Services Department within 3 years from the date of the approval. R nled.. 8762018 www.CltyofRC.us E1 -E2 Pg135 Project #: SUBTT00021 DRC2017-00823, DRC2017-00824 Project Name: EDR - Harris Garden Location: 6527 ETIWANDA AVE - 022705103-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Sign Permit Notice of Filing, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT., Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 9. 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. 10. Access gates to the rear yards shall be constructed from a material more durable than wood gates. Acceptable materials include, but are not limited to, wrought iron and PVC. 11. Construct block walls between homes (i.e., along interior side and rear property lines), rather than wood fencing for permanence, durability, and design consistency. 12. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) shall not prohibit the keeping the equine animals where zoning requirements for the keeping of said animals have been met. Individual lot owners in subdivisions shall have the option of keeping said animals without the necessity of appealing to boards of directors of homeowners' associations for amendments to the CC&Rs. 13. 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 Services Department 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. 14. The developer shall submit a construction access plan and schedule for the development of all lots for Planning Director and Engineering Services Department approval; including, but not limited to, public notice requirements, special street posting, phone listing for community concerns, hours of construction activity, dust control measures, and security fencing. 15. Provide a 24 -foot by 24 -foot or 12 -foot by 48 -foot corral area in the rear yard adjacent to the Local Feeder Trail. Grade access from corral to trail with a maximum slope of 5:1 and a minimum width of 10 feet. 16. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include Tentative Tract Map and grading on file in the Planning Department, the conditions contained herein, the Development Code regulations and the Etiwanda Specific Plan. 17. 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. 18. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property owner, homeowners' association, or other means acceptable to the City. Proof of this landscape maintenance shall be submitted for Planning Director and Engineering Services Department review and approved prior to the issuance of Building Permits. Printed: 916/2018 mnv.CityofRC.us Page 2 of 75 E1—E2 Pg136 Project#: SUBTT00021 DRC2017-00823, DRC2017-00824 Project Name: EDR - Harris Garden Location: 6527 ETIWANDAAVE - 022705103-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Sign Permit Notice of Filing, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 19. Local Feeder Trail entrances shall also provide access for service vehicles, such as veterinarians or hay deliveries, including a 12 -foot minimum drive approach. Entrance shall be gated provided that equestrian access is maintained through step-throughs in accordance with Engineering Services Department Standard Drawing 1006-B and 1007-B. 20. Local Feeder Trail grades shall not exceed 0.5 percent at the downstream end of a trail for a distance of 25 feet behind the public right-of-way line to prohibit trail debris from reaching the street. Drainage devices may be required by the Building and Safety Official. 21. Where corner side, interior side or rear yard property lines are adjacent to local equestrian trails, construct minimum 6 -foot high decorative masonry walls. Decorative masonry shall mean split -face double sided block, 'slump stone' or an alternative material that is acceptable to the Design Review Committee. 22. For single-family residential development within the Equestrian/Rural Overlay District, at least one model home shall be provided with a constructed 24 -foot by 24 -foot corral with appropriate fencing. 23. 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. 24. 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. 25. 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. 26. 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. 27. For residential development, return walls and corner side walls shall be decorative masonry. 28. Where rock cobble is used, it shall be real river rock. Other stone veneers may be manufactured products. 29. Slope fencing along side property lines may be wrought iron or black plastic coated chain link to maintain an open feeling and enhance views. 30. 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 Printed: 9/6/2018 w w.CltyofRC.us Page 3 of 15 E1—E2 Pg137 Project #: SUBTT00021 DRC2017-00823, DRC2017-00824 Project Name: EDR - Harris Garden Location: 6527 ETIWANDA AVE - 022705103-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Sign Permit Notice of Filing, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 31. A detailed plan indicating trail widths, maximum slopes, physical conditions, fencing, and weed control, in accordance with City Master Trail drawings, shall be submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to approval and recordation of the Final Tract Map and prior to approval of street improvement and grading plans. Developer shall upgrade and construct all trails, including fencing and drainage devices, in conjunction with street improvements. 32. 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. 33. Front yard and corner side yard landscaping and irrigation shall be required per the Development Code and/or Etiwanda Specific Plan. This requirement shall be in addition to the required street trees and slope planting. 34. 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 for the development or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. For development occurring in the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, the landscape plans will also be reviewed by Fire Construction Services. 35. 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. 36. 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. Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. The existing overhead utilities on the project side of Etiwanda Avenue shall be undergrounded from the end of line pole on the north side of Etiwanda Avenue to the first pole off site south of the south project boundary, prior to public improvement acceptance or occupancy, whichever occurs first. 2. Provide LED street lights. The street lights shall be owned by the City. Developer shall be responsible to coordinate and pay all costs to provide street lights and power to serve the street lights. Coordinate with City staff for design and installation requirements. 3. All improvements shall be in accordance with the latest ADA standards including access ramps. Provide access ramps at the curb returns of the proposed street. Also update the ADA access ramp at Highland and Etiwanda to meet current ADA standards. This may add additional traffic signal equipment. Also relocate values located within the existing ramp. 4. Provide a neighborhood entry per the Etiwanda Specific Plan at the intersection of Highland and Etiwanda. vnvw.CityofRC.us Printed: 9/62018 Page 4 of 15 E1—E2 Pg 138 Project#: SUBTT00021 DRC2017-00823, DRC2017-00824 Project Name: EDR - Harris Garden Location: 6527 ETIWANDA AVE - 022705103-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Sign Permit Notice of Filing, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Enaineerina Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 5. Complete the improvements along the project frontage on the north side of Highland Avenue, including curb, gutter, and sidewalk. The full extent of improvements is subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer but shall include pavement, curb, gutter, sidewalk, and street lights. The developer may request a reimbursement agreement to recover the City adopted cost for public improvements from future development as it occurs on the parcel directly to the north. If the developer fails to submit for said reimbursement agreement within 6 months of the public improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. Standard Conditions of Approval 6. Private drainage easements for cross -lot drainage shall be provided and shall be delineated or noted on the final map. 7. Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards. 8. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quit -claimed or delineated on the final map. 9. 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. 10. 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. 11. Trees are prohibited within 5 feet of the outside diameter of any public storm drain pipe measured from the outer edge of a mature tree trunk. 12. ** CD Information Required Prior to Sign -Off for Building Permit Prior to the issuance of building permits, if valuation is greater or equal to $100,000, a Diversion Deposit and a related administrative fee shallbe paid for the Construction and Demolition Diversion Program. The deposit is fully refundable if at least 65% of all wastes generated during construction and demolition are diverted from landfills, and appropriate documentation is provided to the City. Applicant must identify if they are self -hauling or utilizing Burrtec prior to issuance of a building permit. Proof of diversion must be submitted to the Environmental Engineering Division within 60 days following the completion of the construction and / or demolition project. Contact Susan Shaker, Environmental Engineering, at (909) 774-4062 for more information. Instructions and forms are available at the City's website, www.cityofrc.us, under City Hall / Engineering / Environmental Programs / Construction & Demolition Diversion Program. Printed: 9/6/2010 w w.CityofRC.us Page 5 of 15 E1—E2 Pg139 Project#: SUBTT00021 DRC2017-00823, DRC2017-00824 Project Name: EDR - Harris Garden Location: Project Type: 6527 ETIWANDA AVE - 022705103-0000 Tentative Tract Map Sign Permit Notice of Filing, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 13. Prior to approval of the final map, a deposit shall be posted with the City covering the estimated cost of apportioning the assessments under Assessment District among the newly created parcels. 14. 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. 15. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting Districts shall be filed with the Engineering Services Department prior to final map approval or issuance of Building Permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. The project shall be annexed into CFD 85-1, LIVID 9, SLD 1, and SLD 8. 16. Construct the following perimeter street improvements per City Standards and the Etiwanda Specific Plan including, but not limited to: Cobble Curb (Etiwanda) & Gutter Curb & Gutter (Highland) A.C. Pvmt Sidewalk Drive Appr. Street Lights Street Trees Comm Trail Median Island Bike Trail Notes: (a) Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. 17. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 16.37.010, no person shall make connections from a source of energy, fuel or power to any building or structure which is regulated by technical codes and for which a permit is required unless, in addition to any and all other codes, regulations and ordinances, all improvements required by these conditions of development approval have been completed and accepted by the City Council, except: that in developments containing more than one building, structure or unit, the development may have energy connections made in equal proportion to the percentage of completion of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval, as determined by the City Engineer, provided that reasonable, safe and maintainable access to the property exists. In no case shall more than 95 percent of the buildings, structures or units be connected to energy sources prior to completion and acceptance of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval. Printed: 9/6/2010 www.CityofRC.us Page 6 of 15 E1—E2 Pg140 Project #: SUBTT00021 DRC2017-00823, DRC2017-00824 Project Name: EDR - Harris Garden Location: 6527 ETIWANDAAVE - 022705103-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Sign Permit Notice of Filing, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 18. Improvement Plans and Construction shall confirm to the Etiwanda Specific Plan: a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of Building Permits, whichever occurs first. b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Services Department in addition to any other permits required. c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction project along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals connectivity and interconnect wiring. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR, or any other locations approved by the City Engineer. Notes: 1) Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets, a maximum of 200 feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer. 2) Conduit shall be 3 -inch pvc with pull rope or as specified. e. Access ramps for the disabled shall be installed on all corners of intersections per latest ADA standards or as directed by the City Engineer. f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards, except for single-family residential lots. h. Street names shall be approved by the Planning Manager prior to submittal for first plan check. Printed: 9/6/2018 www.CityofRC.us Page 7 of 15 E1—E2 Pg141 Project#: SUBTT00021 DRC2017-00823, DRC2017-00824 Project Name: EDR - Harris Garden Location: 6527 ETIWANDAAVE - 022705103-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Sign Permit Notice of Filing, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.- Engineering ROJECT: Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 19. 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 1." Where public landscape plans are required, tree installation in those areas shall be per the public landscape improvement plans. Street trees shall conform to the Etiwanda Specific Plan per Figure 5-26 and Figure 5-17A. Tree types are subject to change, based on the recommendation by the Public Works Department. 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 City inspector. Any unusual toxicities or nutrient deficiencies may as determined by the City inspector. 3) All street trees are subject to inspection and acceptance Department. Street trees are to be planted per public improvement plans only. 20. Intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the City adopted policy. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight intersections, including driveways. Local residential street intersects driveways may have lines of sight plotted as required. report shall be furnished to the require backfill soil amendments, by the Engineering Services Engineer for conformance with shall be plotted for all project ons and commercial or industrial 21. 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. 22. 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. 23. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. 24. 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. 25. 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. 26. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CVWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. vnvw.CityofRC.us Printed: 916/2018 Page a of 15 E1—E2 Pg142 Project#: SUBTT00021 DRC2017-00823, DRC2017-00824 Project Name: EDR - Harris Garden Location: 6527 ETIWANDA AVE - 022705103-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Sign Permit Notice of Filing, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 27. Dedication shall be made of the street centerline): 44 total feet on Etiwanda Avenue 42 total feet on Highland Avenue following rights-of-way on the perimeter streets (measured from 28. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. Building and Safety Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. When the Entitlement Review is approved submit complete construction drawings including structural calculations, energy calculations and soils report to Building and Safety for plan review in accordance with the current edition of the CA Building and Fire Codes including all local ordinances and standards. All new structures are required to be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers per the CBC and Current RCFPD Ordinance. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 1. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the precise grading and drainage plan shall follow the format provided in the City of Rancho Cucamonga handout "Information for Grading Plans and Permit". 2. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with current adopted California Building Code and/or the California Residential Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The Grading and Drainage Plan(s) shall be in substantial conformance with the approved conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan. 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 grading and drainage plan submittal for review. Plans shall implement design recommendations per said report. 4. The final Grading and Drainage Plan, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be completed, submitted, and approved by the Building and Safety Official prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. A separate Grading and Drainage Plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and wet signed by a California licensed Civil Engineer prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit. 6. The applicant shall comply with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Dust Control Measures and place a dust control sign on the project site prior to the issuance of a grading permit. All dust control sign (s) shall be located outside of the public right of way. 7. If a Rough Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit are submitted to the Building and Safety Official for review, the rough grading plan shall be a separate plan submittal and permit from Precise Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit. Printed: 9/6/2018 %"vw.CityofRC.us Page MIS i6 E1—E2 Pg143 Project #: SUBTT00021 DRC2017-00823, DRC2017-00824 Project Name: EDR - Harris Garden Location: 6527 ETIWANDA AVE - 022705103-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Sign Permit Notice of Filing, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 8. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall obtain written permission from the adjacent property owner(s) to construct wall(s) on property line(s) or provide a detail(s) showing the perimeter wall(s) to be constructed offset from the property line. 9. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the grading plan shall show that all manufactured slopes shall be a minimum 2 -foot offset from the public right of way, permitted line, or the adjacent private property. All slope offsets shall meet the requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. 10. The applicant shall provide a grading agreement and grading bond for all cut and fill combined exceeding 5,000 cubic yards prior to issuance of a grading permit. The grading agreement and bond shall be approved by the.Building and Safety Official. 11. The final grading and drainage plan shall show existing topography a minimum of 100 -feet beyond project boundary. 12. Grading Inspections: a) Prior to the start of grading operations the owner and grading contractor shall request a pre -grading meeting. The meeting shall be attended by the project owner/representative, the grading contractor and the Building Inspector to discuss about grading requirements and preventive measures, etc. If a pre -grading meeting is not held within 24 hours from the start of grading operations, the grading permit may be subject to suspension by the Building Inspector; b) The grading contractor shall call into the City of Rancho Cucamonga Building and Safety Department at least 1 working day in advance to request the following grading inspections prior to continuing grading operations: I) The bottom of the over -excavation; ii) Completion of Rough Grading, prior to issuance of the building permit; iii) At the completion of Rough Grading, the grading contractor or owner shall submit to the Permit Technicians (Building and Safety Front Counter) an original and a copy of the Pad Certifications to be prepared by and properly wet signed and sealed by the Civil Engineer and Soils Engineer of Record; iv) The rough grading certificates and the compaction reports will be reviewed by the Associate Engineer or a designated person and approved prior to the issuance of a building permit. 13. Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the permitted grading plan (or architectural site plan) set shall show in each of the typical sections and the plan view show how the separations between the building exterior and exterior ground surface meet the requirements of Sections CBC1804.3/CRC R401.3, CBC2304.11.2.2/CRC R317.1(2) and CBC2512.1.2/CRC R703.6.2.1 of the current adopted California Building Code/Residential Code. 14. Prior to approval of the project -specific storm water quality management plan, the applicant shall submit to the Building Official, or his designee, a precise grading plan showing the location and elevations of existing topographical features, and showing the location and proposed elevations of proposed structures and drainage of the site. Printed: 916/2078 www.CilyofRC.us Page 10 of 15 E1—E2 Pg144 Project #: SUBTT00021 DRC2017-00823, DRC2017-00824 Project Name: EDR - Harris Garden Location: 6527 ETIWANDA AVE - 022705103-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Sign Permit Notice of Filing, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 15. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the grading and drainage plan shall show the following information in the equestrian trails: — Provide PVC fencing per city standards, provide a 4" thick decomposed granite (DG) surface, provide a drainage V ditch parallel to the trail, provide a bridge over the V ditch where necessary for access to corals, and gates to corrals. The equestrian bridges shall be capable of carrying vehicle loads where necessary. Where the longitudinal slope (s) is S< 5% the cross fall shall be 2%, if S>5% the cross fail may be 4% maximum. Where water bars required, the spacing for the water bars is: 50' maximum for longitudinal slopes of 4% to 6%, 40' maximum for longitudinal slopes of 6.1% to 9%, 30' maximum for longitudinal slopes of 9.1% to 12%, 20' maximum for longitudinal slopes greater than 12%. In the equestrian trails water bars shall also be placed at the top and bottom of the trail where the gradient of the trail changes, i.e. a steep downhill slope which will cause additional erosion to the trail. 16. A drainage study showing a 100 -year, AMC 3 design storm event for on-site drainage shall be prepared and submitted to the Building and Safety Official for review and approval for on-site storm water drainage prior to issuance of a grading permit. The report shall contain water surface profile gradient calculations for all storm drain pipes 12 -inches and larger in diameter. All reports shall be wet signed and sealed by the Engineer of Record. In addition, the project specific drainage study shall provide inlet calculations showing the proper sizing of the water quality management plan storm water flows into the proposed structural storm water treatment devices. 17. The site shall be rough graded to eliminate all cross -lot drainage, (except in approved facilities adjacent to private trails). All slopes and retaining walls necessary to accomplish this shall be installed prior to final map approval. 18. Flow lines steeper than 6 percent could be erosive. The applicant shall provide hard lined gutters and swales where concentrated flows exceed 3fps, and anywhere that flow lines exceed 10 percent. This shall be shown on the grading and drainage plan prior to issuance of a grading permit. 19. Prior to issuance of a grading permit and in accordance with Planning Commission Resolution 92-17, if a lot may not directly drain off-site directly to the street or other acceptable drainage device (such as a drainage ditch adjacent to an equestrian trail), then: a) drainage may flow from only one lot onto only one other lot; b) a drainage easement shall be provided over the lot accepting the drainage; c) the drainage shall be contained within either a concrete/rock lined swale/channel or a reinforced concrete pipe; and d) the drainage shall be designed with excess capacity to account for the probable lack of necessary maintenance, therefore, it shall be designed to convey two (2) times the runoff from a 100 -year storm event with the minimum diameter of the pipe being 12 -inches. 20. Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the latest adopted California Plumbing Code. Private storm drain improvements shall be shown on the grading and drainage plan. 21. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy or final sign off by the Building Inspector the engineer of record shall certify the functionality of the storm water quality management plan (WQMP) storm water treatment devices and best management practices (BMP). 22. Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WQMP shall include a copy of the project Conditions of Approval. Printed: 91612018 %"vw.CityofRC.us Page 11 of 15 E1—E2 Pg145 Project#: SUBTT00021 DRC2017-00823, DRC2017-00824 Project Name: EDR - Harris Garden Location: 6527 ETIWANDA AVE - 022705103-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Sign Permit Notice of Filing, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 23. Reciprocal access easements for all parcels and maintenance agreements ensuring joint maintenance of all storm water quality structural/treatment devices and best management practices (BMP) as provided for in the project's Storm Water Quality Management Plan, shall be provided for by CC&R's or deeds and shall be recorded prior to the approval of the Water Quality Management Plan. Said CC&R's and/or deeds shall be included in the project site specific Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) document prior to approval of the WQMP document and recording of the Memorandum of Agreement of Storm Water Quality Management Plan. 24. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit the City of Rancho Cucamonga's "Memorandum of Agreement of Storm Water Quality Management Plan" shall be submitted for review and approval by the Building Official and recorded with the County Recorder's Office. 25. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall obtain a Waste Discharge Identification Number (WDID). The WDID number shall also be shown on the WQMP Site and Drainage Plan document. 26. The applicant shall provide a copy of a completed EPA Form 7520-16 (Inventory of Injection Wells) for each underground infiltration device, with. the Facility ID Number assigned, to the Building and Safety Services Department Official prior to issuance of the Grading Permit and/or approval of the project -specific Water Quality Management Plan. A copy of EPA Form 7520-16 shall be scanned and pasted onto the permitted grading plan set, and a copy of said form shall be included in the project -specific Water Quality Management Plan. 27. The land owner shall provide an inspection report by a qualified person/company on a biennial basis for the Class V Injection Wells/underground infiltration chambers to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis all best management practices (BMP"s) as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 28. The land owner shall provide an inspection report on a biennial basis for the structural storm water treatment devices, commonly referred to as BMPs, to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 29. The land/property owner shall follow the inspection and maintenance requirements of the approved project specific Water Quality Management Plan and shall provide a copy of the inspection reports on a biennial basis to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. 30. A final project -specific Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) shall be approved by the Building and Safety Director, or his designee, and the City of Rancho Cucamonga's "Memorandum of Storm Water Quality Management Plan" shall be recorded prior to the issuance of a grading permit or any building permit. 31. Prior to the start of landscaping operations, the landscape architect and the landscape contractor shall provide a sample of the weed fabric barrier to the Project Planner, City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department. The weed barrier shall be permeable. w�,vw.CilyofRC.us Printed: 9/'0/2018 Page 12 of 15 E1—E2 Pg146 Project#: SUBTT00021 DRC2017-00823, DRC2017-00824 Project Name: EDR - Harris Garden Location: 6527 ETIWANDA AVE - 022705103-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Sign Permit Notice of Filing, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.- Grading ROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 32. The final project -specific water quality management plan (WQMP) shall include executed maintenance agreements along with the maintenance guidelines for all proprietary structural storm water treatment devices (BMP's). In the event the applicant cannot get the proprietary device maintenance agreements executed prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant is required to submit a letter to be included within the WQMP document, and scanned and pasted onto the Site and Drainage Plan which states that prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy with applicant shall enter into a contract for the maintenance of the proprietary storm water treatment device. If the proprietary storm water treatment device is part of a residential subdivision, prior to the sale of the residential lot, the developer shall include maintenance agreement(s) as part of the sale of the residential lot to the buyer. A copy of the maintenance agreements to be included in the sale of the property shall be included within the WQMP document. 33. Prior to issuance of a grading permit and approval of the project specific water quality management plan all private storm water catch basin inlets shall include insert filters to capture those pollutants of concern as addressed in the in the final project -specific water quality management plan (WQMP). At a minimum catch basin insert filters to capture trash and other floating debris. All catch basin insert filters shall be maintained on a regular basis as described in the "Inspection and Maintenance Responsibility for Post Construction BMP" section of the final project -specific water quality management plan. 34. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the Final Project -Specific Water Quality Management Plan shall include a completed copy of "Worksheet H: Factor of Safety and Design Infiltration Worksheet" located in Appendix D "Section VII — Infiltration Rate Evaluation Protocol and Factor of Safety Recommendations, ..." of the San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans. The infiltration study shall include the Soil Engineer's 'recommendations for Appendix D, Table VI1.3: Suitability Assessment Related Considerations for Infiltration Facility Safety Factors". 35. Prior to approval of the final project -specific water quality management plan the applicant shall have a soils engineer prepare a project -specific infiltration study for the project for the purposes of storm water quality treatment. The infiltration study and recommendations shall follow the guidelines in the current adopted "San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans". 36. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy by the Building Official, or his designee, the civil engineer of record shall file a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Post Construction Storm Water Treatment Devices As -Built Certificate with the Environmental Programs Coordinator, City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Services Department. 37. As the use of drywells are proposed for the structural storm water treatment device, to meet the infiltration requirements of the current Municipal Separate Storm Sewers Systems (MS4) Permit, adequate source control and pollution prevention control BMPs shall be implemented to protect groundwater quality. The need for pre-treatment BMPs such as sedimentation or filtration shall be evaluated prior to infiltration and discussed in the final project -specific Water Quality Management Plan document. Printed: 9/6/2018 `n"nw.CityofRC.us Page 13 of 15 E1—E2 Pg147 Project#: SUBTT00021 DRC2017-00823, DRC2017-00824 Project Name: EDR - Harris Garden Location: 6527 ETIWANDAAVE - 022705103-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Sign Permit Notice of Filing, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.' Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 38. GROUND WATER PROTECTION: Prior to approval of the final project specific water quality management plan (WQMP), the WQMP document shall meet the requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board Order No. R8-2010-0036 (NPDES No. CAS 618036), the San Bernardino County Municipal Separate Storm Sewers Separation (MS4) Permit reads: Section XI.D(Water Quality Management Plan Requirements).8(Groundwater Protection): Treatment Control BMPs utilizing infiltration [exclusive of incidental infiltration and BMPs not designed to primarily function as infiltration devices (such as grassy swales, detention basins, vegetated buffer strips, constructed wetlands, etc.)] must comply with the following minimum requirements to protect groundwater: a. Use of structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause or contribute to an exceedance of ground water quality objectives. b. Source control and pollution prevention control BMPs shall be implemented to protect groundwater quality. The need for pre-treatment BMPs such as sedimentation or filtration should be evaluated prior to infiltration. c. Adequate pretreatment of runoff prior to infiltration shall be required in gas stations and large commercial parking lots. (NOTE: The State Water Quality Control Board defines a large commercial parking lot as '100,000 sq. ft. or more of commercial development to include parking lot (with 100 or more vehicle traffics), OR, by means of 5,000sgft or more of allowable space designated for parking purposes'). d. Unless adequate pre-treatment of runoff is provided prior to infiltration structural infiltration treatment BMPs must not be used for areas of industrial or light industrial activity{77}, areas subject to high vehicular traffic (25,000 or more daily traffic); car washes; fleet storage areas; nurseries; or any other high threat to water quality land uses or activities. e. Class V injection wells or dry wells must not be placed in areas subject to vehicular{78} repair or maintenance activities{79}, such as an auto body repair shop, automotive repair shop, new and used car dealership, specialty repair shop (e.g., transmission and muffler repair shop) or any facility that does any vehicular repair work. f. Structural infiltration BMP treatment shall not be used at sites that are known. to have soil and groundwater contamination. g. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall be located at least 100 feet horizontally from any water supply wells. h. The vertical distance from the bottom of any infiltration structural treatment BMP to the historic high groundwater mark shall be at least 10 -feet. Where the groundwater basins do not support beneficial uses, this vertical distance criteria may be reduced, provided groundwater quality is maintained. i. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause a nuisance or pollution as defined in Water Code Section 13050. Printed: 91612018 www.CityofRC.us Page 14 of 15 E1—E2 Pg 148 Project#: SUBTT00021 DRC2017-00823, DRC2017-00824 Project Name: EDR - Harris Garden Location: Project Type: 6527 ETIWANDA AVE - 022705103-0000 Tentative Tract Map Sign Permit Notice of Filing, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 39. The City of Rancho Cucamonga does not allow on-site storm water quality treatment BMP devices within the individual single-family lots which will be required to be inspected and maintained by each individual homeowner. As a condition of approval for this single-family residential project (including tentative tract maps and parcel maps, and final tract maps and parcel maps of 2 parcels or more) a common storm water treatment system will be required which shall be maintained by a homeowners' association prior to the approval of a water quality management plan and issuance of a grading permit. Printed: 916/2018 mm.cityofRC.us E1—E2 Pg149 Page 15 of 15 RESOLUTION NO.18-56 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2017-00823, A REQUEST TO REMOVE 13 TREES FROM AN EXISTING VACANT SITE RELATED TO THE SUBDIVISION OF APPROXIMATELY 9.11 ACRES INTO 14 SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED LOTS WITHIN THE VERY LOW (VL) RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT IN THE ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN LOCATED AT THE 6527 ETIWANDA AVENUE; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 0227-051-03. A. Recitals. 1. The applicant, Parkview Financial, filed an application for Tree Removal Permit DRC2017-00823, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Tree Removal Permit is referred to as "the application." 2. On 26th day of September 2018, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a 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 the Planning Commission during the above -referenced public hearing on September 26, 2018, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property located within the City; and b. The application applies to the property located at 6527 Etiwanda Avenue with a linear dimension, from north to south, of approximately 665 feet and a linear dimension, from east to west of approximately 660 feet and is presently undeveloped; and c. With the exception of a vacant triangular parcel to the northeast, the site is surrounded by single-family residential in all directions. The zoning of the subject property and the properties to the north, south, and east is Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, while the zoning of the properties to the west is Low (L) Residential District, Victoria Planned Community. The project site and the surrounding properties to the north, south, and east are within the Etiwanda Specific Plan (ESP); and E1—E2 Pg 150 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.18-56 TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2017-00823 - PARKVIEW FINANCIAL September 26, 2018 Page 2 d. The applicant, Parkview Financial, proposes to subdivide a property of approximately 9.11 acres into 14 single-family detached lots for future development. The proposed density for the project is 1.53 dwelling units per acre. e. The proposed removal of 13 trees is to accommodate the proposed subdivision. The applicant will be required to replace removed trees on a one-for-one basis as well as plant the required two trees in the front yard area of each residence. f. The proposed project meets or exceeds all Development Code standards. The site also meets all applicable Very Low (VL) Residential standards within the Etiwanda Specific Plan for residential developments. g. The Planning Department prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration that was circulated on August 15, 2018. Thereafter, City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration at a Planning Commission hearing that was scheduled for September 26, 2018. No correspondence was received. 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, and the findings outlined from Section 17.16.080, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. Only one out of the 13 existing Blue Gum Eucalyptus trees on-site are in good condition. The remaining trees are either dead or in poor health and will need to be removed. Prior to building permit issuance, Planning staff will assess the viability of transplanting the single healthy Blue Gum Eucalyptus tree to an area that does not conflict with the proposed development. b. The Tree Removal Application is associated with a Tentative Tract Map application (SUBTT20140). The trees in question present a threat to public health and safety and must be removed, as they are either dead or in poor condition. Prior to building permit issuance, Planning staff will assess the viability of transplanting the single healthy Blue Gum Eucalyptus tree to an area that does not conflict with the proposed development. C. The removal of the trees will not have a negative impact on the health, safety, or viability of surrounding trees, nor will it negatively impact the aesthetics or general welfare of the surrounding area. An Arborist Report prepared for the site determined that none of the trees were ecologically dependent on one another. The applicant will be required to replace removed trees on a one-for-one basis as well as plant the required two trees in the front yard area of each residence, which will maintain adequate landscaping onsite. The replacement trees will mitigate any potential impacts that may occur with the proposed Tree Removal Permit request and preserve the aesthetics and general welfare of the surrounding area. 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: E1—E2 Pg151 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.18-56 TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2017-00823 - PARKVIEW FINANCIAL September 26, 2018 Page 3 a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQX) and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds: (i) that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. C. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the Planning Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents, are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth in the attached Conditions of Approval and the Mitigation Measures listed below. Environmental Mitigation Air Quality 1) All construction equipment shall be maintained in good operating condition so as to reduce operational emissions. The contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained as per manufacturers' specifications. Maintenance records shall be available at the construction site for City verification. 2) Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, the developer shall submit construction plans to the City denoting the proposed schedule and projected equipment use. Construction contractors shall provide evidence that low emission mobile construction equipment will be utilized, or that their use was investigated and found to be infeasible for the project. Contractors shall also conform to any construction measures imposed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) as well as City Planning Staff. E1—E2 Pg152 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.18-56 TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2017-00823 - PARKVIEW FINANCIAL September 26, 2018 Page 4 3) The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel powered equipment where feasible. 4) The construction contractor shall ensure that construction -grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. 5) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. 6) 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. 7) All construction equipment shall comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403. Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions: • Re-establish ground cover on the construction site through seeding and watering. • Pave or apply gravel to any on-site haul roads. • Phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large areas to erosion over extended periods of time. • Schedule activities to minimize the amounts of exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. • Dispose of surplus excavated material in accordance with local ordinances and use sound engineering practices. • Sweep streets according to a schedule established by the City if silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. • Suspend grading operations during high winds (i.e., wind speeds exceeding 25mph) 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. 8) The site shall be treated with water or other soil -stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB)) daily to reduce PM,o emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. 9) 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. 10) Landscape with native and/or drought -resistant species to reduce water consumption and to provide passive solar benefits. E1—E2_ Pg 153 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.18-56 TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2017-00823 - PARKVIEW FINANCIAL September 26, 2018 Page 5 11) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate high- efficiency/low-polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water heaters. 12) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. 13) Projects shall be designed in accordance with the applicable California Green Building Standards (CALGreen) Code (24 CCR 11). 14) All new development in the City of Rancho Cucamonga shall comply with South Coast Air Quality Management District's Rule 445, Wood Burning Devices. Rule 445 was adopted in March 2008 to reduce emissions of PM2.5 and precludes the installation of indoor or outdoor wood burning devices (i.e. fireplaces/hearths) in new development on or after March 9, 2009. Biological Resources 1) A survey for active raptor nests is recommended prior to commencement of any construction activities during the raptor nesting season (i.e., February 1 to June 30). Restrictions may be placed on construction activities in the vicinity of any active nest observed until the nest is no longer active, as determined by a qualified biologist. Typically, a 500 -foot buffer zone is designated around a nest to allow construction to proceed while minimizing disturbance to the active nest. Once the nest is no longer active, construction can proceed in the buffer zone 2) In order to avoid impacts on nesting birds, vegetation removal shall not be scheduled during the breeding season (i.e., March 15—September 15) to the extent feasible. If vegetation clearing for construction must be conducted during the breeding season, prior to disturbance, a pre -construction survey or multiple surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist for nesting birds to confirm the absence of active nests. If no active nests are found, vegetation removal can proceed. If the biologist finds an active nest within or adjacent to the construction area and determines that the nest may be impacted, the biologist will identify an appropriate buffer zone (typically, 100 to 300 feet) around the nest depending on the sensitivity of the species and the nature of the construction activity. The active site will be protected until nesting activity has ended to ensure compliance with the MBTA and the California Fish and Game Code. To protect any nest site, the following restrictions to construction activities shall be required until nests are no longer active, as determined by a qualified Biologist: (1) clearing limits shall be established within a buffer around any occupied nest, unless otherwise determined by a qualified biologist and (2) access and surveying shall be restricted within the buffer of any occupied nest, unless otherwise determined by a qualified biologist. Construction and/or encroachment into the buffer area around a known nest shall only be allowed if the biologist determines that the proposed activity would not disturb the nest occupants. E1—E2 Pg154 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.18-56 TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2017-00823 - PARKVIEW FINANCIAL September 26, 2018 Page 6 3) Prior to issuance of building permits, developer shall submit a written report by a landscape architect or arborist which determines the feasibility of transplanting all 14 heritage trees identified by the arborists' report (Golden State Land and Tree Assessment; February 27, 2018). If removal is deemed necessary, the developer shall replace the 14 heritage trees on-site at the following rate: 5 trees on Lot A, 3 trees on Lot 10, 3 trees on Lot 11, and 3 trees on Lot 12. Replacement tree size shall be the maximum largest nursery -grown tree available as determined by the Planning Director or Planning Commission. 4) Perform a Burrowing Owl Survey that is in conformance with.the Department of Fish and Wildlife Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation and submit the written report outlining the findings to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the Planning Department within 30 days of groundbreaking activity. The Burrowing Owl Survey shall follow the following protocol: • Burrowing Owl Survey methodology shall be based on Appendix D (Breeding and non -breeding season surveys and reports) of the CDFW Staff Report. Results of the pre -construction survey shall be provided to CDFW and the City. If the pre -construction survey does not identify burrowing on the project site, then no further mitigation is required. If burrowing owls are found to be utilizing the project site during the pre - construction survey, measures shall be developed by the qualified biologist in coordination with the CDFW to avoid impacting occupied burrows during the nesting period. These measures shall be based on the most current CDFW protocols and will at minimum include establishment of buffer setbacks from occupied burrows and owl monitoring. If ground -disturbing actives are delayed or suspended for more than 30 days after the pre -construction survey, the site shall be resurveyed for owls. During the non -breeding season from September 1 through January 31, if burrows are occupied by migratory and non -migratory resident burrowing owls during a pre -construction survey, burrow exclusion and/or closure may be used to exclude owls from those burrows. Burrow exclusion and/or closure should only be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist in coordination with CDFW using the most current CDFW guidelines. During the avian nesting season from February 1 through August 31, if nests are discovered, they shall be avoided through the establishment of an appropriate buffer setback, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. The temporary "no construction" area would have to be maintained until the nest has completed its cycle., as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. Once the nest cycle is complete and all nestlings have fledged and have left the nest, construction in that area may resume. E1—E2 Pg 155 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.18-56 TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2017-00823 - PARKVIEW FINANCIAL September 26, 2018 Page 7 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. • 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. • Prepare a mitigation plan consistent with Section 21083.2 Archaeological resources of CEQA to eliminate adverse project effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric resources, including but not limited to, avoiding archaeological sites, capping or covering sites with soil, planning the site as a park or green space or paying an in-kind mitigation fee. • 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. E1—E2 Pg156 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.18-56 TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2017-00823 - PARKVIEW FINANCIAL September 26, 2018 Page 8 • 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 RWQCB) daily to reduce PM,o 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 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,o emissions. Greenhouse Gas Emissions 1) The project must comply with all rules that assist in reducing short-term air pollutant emission in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403 regarding fugitive dust including treating the site with water or other soil -stabilizing agent twice daily or replanting disturbed areas as quickly as possible. 2) The construction contractor shall select construction equipment based on low - emission factors and high energy efficiency and submit a statement on the grading plan that ensures all construction equipment will be tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufactures' specification. 3) Trucks shall not idle continuously for more than 5 minutes. 4) Alternative fuel powered equipment shall be utilized in lieu of gasoline or diesel -powered engines where feasible. 5) Construction should be timed so as not to interfere with peak -hour traffic. 6) Ridesharing and transit incentives shall be supported and encouraged for the construction crew. E1—E2 Pg157 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.18-56 TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2017-00823 - PARKVIEW FINANCIAL September 26, 2018 Page 9 7) Construction and Building materials shall be produced and/or manufactured locally. Use "Green Building Materials" such as materials that are resource efficient, recycled and manufactured in an environmentally friendly way including low -volatile -organic -compound (VOC) materials. 8) Design all buildings to exceed California Building Code Title 24 energy standard including but not limited to any combination of; Increased insulation. • Limit air leakage through the structure. • Incorporate Energy Star or better rated windows, space heating and cooling equipment, light fixtures, and appliances. • Landscape and develop site utilizing shade, prevailing winds and landscaping. • Install efficient lighting and lighting control systems. • Install light colored "cool" roofs and cool pavements. • Install solar or light emitting diodes (LED's) for outdoor lighting. 9) Prepare a comprehensive water conservation strategy appropriate for the project and include the following; • Install water efficient landscapes and irrigation systems and devices in compliance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. • Use reclaimed water for landscaping within the project if available or as required by the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD). • Design building to be water efficient by installing water efficient fixtures and appliances including lowflow faucets, dual flush toilets and waterless urinals/water heaters. • Design irrigation to control runoff and to remove water to non -vegetated surfaces. 10) Reuse and recycle construction and demolition waste. Provide interior and exterior storage areas for recyclables and green waste in public areas. Educate employees about reducing waste and about recycling. E1—E2 Pg 158 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.18-56 TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2017-00823 - PARKVIEW FINANCIAL September 26, 2018 Page 10 Hydrology and Water Quality 1) Prior to issuance of grading permits, the permit applicant shall submit to the Building Official for approval, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) specifically identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that shall be used on-site to reduce pollutants during construction activities entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 2) An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, included in the Grading Plan, and implemented for the proposed project that identifies specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion from the time ground disturbing activities are initiated through completion of grading. This Erosion Control Plan shall include the following measures at a minimum: a) Specify the timing of grading and construction to minimize soil exposure to rainy periods experienced in Southern California, and b) An inspection and maintenance program shall be included to ensure that any erosion which does occur either on-site or off-site as a result of this project will be corrected through a remediation or restoration program within a specified time frame. 3) 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) 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. 6) Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit to the City Building Official for approval of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), including a project description and identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on-site to reduce pollutants into the storm drain system to the maximum extent practicable. The WQMP shall identify the structural and non-structural measures consistent with the Guidelines for New Development and Redevelopment adopted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in June 2004. 7) Landscaping plans shall include provisions for controlling and minimizing the use of fertilizers/pesticides/herbicides. Landscaped areas shall be monitored and maintained for at least two years to ensure adequate coverage and stable growth. Plans for these areas, including monitoring provisions for a E1—E2 Pg 159 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.18-56 TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2017-00823 - PARKVIEW FINANCIAL September 26, 2018 Page 11 minimum of two years, shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. 8) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality Management Plan prepared by Michael Baker International (November 3, 2017) to reduce construction pollutants from entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. Noise 1) Prior to the issuance of any grading plans a construction -related noise mitigation plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval. The Plan shall depict the location of the construction equipment and how the noise from this equipment would be mitigated during construction. 2) Prior to the issuance of the grading permit, the Property Owner/Developer shall submit plans and specifications to the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department demonstrating that the construction plans and specifications include the following noise -abatement and control measures: • All construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers and other State -required noise attenuation devices. • Stationary construction equipment shall be placed such that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive noise receivers. • On-site and off-site construction haul routes shall be designed to avoid noise -sensitive uses, as feasible. • If feasible, perimeter walls along the northern, eastern, and southern property boundaries shall be constructed as early as possible during the first phase of construction. 3) Prior to the issuance of the grading permit, the Property Owner/Developer shall submit construction plans and/or specifications to the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department demonstrating that the installation of a temporary noise barrier between the construction area and the adjacent residences is required. The barrier shall be 12 feet high and solid from the ground to the top. The barrier shall be constructed with plywood that is at least 1/2 inch thick or with another material that creates a noise transmission loss of at least 20 dBA. Where feasible the barrier shall remain in place until the completion of construction. 4) 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. E1—E2 Pg 160 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION N0.18-56 TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2017-00823 - PARKVIEW FINANCIAL September 26, 2018 Page 12 5) Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards specified in Development Code Section 17.66.050, as measured at the property line. Developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly noise level monitoring as specified in Development Code Section 17.66.050. 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. 6) The perimeter block wall shall be constructed as early as possible in first phase. 7) 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 and include appropriate noise mitigation measures. To the extent feasible, the plan shall denote haul routes that do not pass sensitive land uses or residential dwellings. Public Services 1) The developer shall pay the current residential school facility fee plus the Etiwanda School District special tax. Tribal Cultural Resources 1) The project Applicant will be required to obtain the services of a qualified Native American Monitor(s) during construction -related ground disturbance activities. Ground disturbance is defined by the Tribal Representatives from the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation as activities that include, but are not limited to, pavement removal, pot -holing or auguring, grubbing, weed abatement, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching, within the project area. The monitor(s) must be approved by the Tribal Representatives and will be present on-site during the construction phases that involve any ground disturbing activities. The Native American Monitor(s) will complete monitoring logs on a daily basis. The logs will provide descriptions of the daily activities, including construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. The monitor(s) shall possess Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) certification. In addition, the monitor(s) will be required to provide insurance certificates, including liability insurance, for any archaeological resource(s) encountered during grading and excavation activities pertinent to the provisions outlined in the California Environmental Quality Act, California Public Resources Code Division 13, Section 21083.2 (a) through (k). The on- site monitoring shall end when the project site grading and excavation E1—E2 Pg 161 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.18-56 TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2017-00823 - PARKVIEW FINANCIAL September 26, 2018 Page 13 activities are completed, or when the Tribal Representatives and monitor have indicated that the site has a low potential for archeological resources. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2018. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ATTEST: Rich Macias, Chairman 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 26th day of September 2018, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: E1—E2Pg162 Conditions of Approval CR{Y10 oaAnION _ Community Development Department Project #: SUBTT00021 DRC2017-00823, DRC2017-00824 Project Name: EDR - Harris Garden Location: Project Type: 6527 ETIWANDA AVE - 022705103-0000 Tentative Tract Map Sign Permit Notice of Filing, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. All future structures facing Etiwanda Avenue shall be set back from the ultimate right-of-way line for an average of 30 feet, minimum of 25 feet, per Sec. 5.25.302(b) (Etiwanda Avenue Overlay District Setback) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Variable setbacks are strongly encouraged. 2. A plaque commemorating the Ross House historic point of interest shall be installed at the northeast corner of the project site, prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the first residential unit within the tract. The plaque design and verbiage shall be subject to the approval of the Planning Director, or his/her designee. 3. Neighborhood entry landscaping per Sec. 5.25.303(c) and as depicted on Figure 5-12 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan shall be installed on the northwest corner of the project site at the intersection of Highland Avenue and Etiwanda Avenue prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the first residential unit within the tract. 4. Landscaping shall be installed on the triangular shaped parcel located on the north side of Highland Avenue prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the first residential unit within the tract. Landscaping for the said area shall be subject to the approval of the Planning Department. Standard Conditions of Approval 5. 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 attomey's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 6. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval or Approval Letter, Conditions of Approval, 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. 7. The applicant shall be required to pay California Department of Fish and Wildlife Notice of Exemption and Mitigated Negative Declaration fee in the amount of $2,330.75. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary prior to public hearing. 8. This tentative tract map or tentative parcel map shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, unless a complete final map is filed with the Engineering Services Department within 3 years from the date of the approval. Printed: 916/2018 www.CityofRC.us E1—E2 Pg163 Project #: SUBTT00021 DRC2017-00823, DRC2017-00824 Project Name: EDR - Harris Garden Location: 6527 ETIWANDAAVE - 022705103-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Sign Permit Notice of Filing, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 9. 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. 10. Access gates to the rear yards shall be constructed from a material more durable than wood gates. Acceptable materials include, but are not limited to, wrought iron and PVC. 11. Construct block walls between homes (i.e., along interior side and rear property lines), rather than wood fencing for permanence, durability, and design consistency. 12. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) shall not prohibit the keeping the equine animals where zoning requirements for the keeping of said animals have been met. Individual lot owners in subdivisions shall have the option of keeping said animals without the necessity of appealing to boards of directors of homeowners' associations for amendments to the CC&Rs. 13. 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 Services Department 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. 14. The developer shall submit a construction access plan and schedule for the development of all lots for Planning Director and Engineering Services Department approval; including, but not limited to, public notice requirements, special street posting, phone listing for community concerns, hours of construction activity, dust control measures, and security fencing. 15. Provide a 24 -foot by 24 -foot or 12 -foot by 48 -foot corral area in the rear yard adjacent to the Local Feeder Trail. Grade access from corral to trail with a maximum slope of 5:1 and a minimum width of 10 feet. 16. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include Tentative Tract Map and grading on file in the Planning Department, the conditions contained herein, the Development Code regulations and the Etiwanda Specific Plan. 17. 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. 18. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property owner, homeowners' association, or other means acceptable to the City. Proof of this landscape maintenance shall be submitted for Planning Director and Engineering Services Department review and approved prior to the issuance of Building Permits. 9 Printed: 916/2078 www.CltyofRC.us Page 2 of 15 E1—E2 Pg164 Project #: SUBTT00021 DRC2017-00823, DRC2017-00824 Project Name: EDR - Harris Garden Location: 6527 ETIWANDA AVE - 022705103-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Sign Permit Notice of Filing, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 19. Local Feeder Trail entrances shall also provide access for service vehicles, such as veterinarians or hay deliveries, including a 12 -foot minimum drive approach. Entrance shall be gated provided that equestrian access is maintained through step-throughs in accordance with Engineering Services Department Standard Drawing 1006-B and 1007-B. 20. Local Feeder Trail grades shall not exceed 0.5 percent at the downstream end of a trail for a distance of 25 feet behind the public right-of-way line to prohibit trail debris from reaching the street. Drainage devices may be required by the Building and Safety Official. 21. Where corner side, interior side or rear yard property lines are adjacent to local equestrian trails, construct minimum 6 -foot high decorative masonry walls. Decorative masonry shall mean split -face double sided block, 'slump stone' or an alternative material that is acceptable to the Design Review Committee. 22. For single-family residential development within the Equestrian/Rural Overlay District, at least one model home shall be provided with a constructed 24 -foot by 24 -foot corral with appropriate fencing. 23. 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. 24. 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. 25. 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. 26. 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. 27. For residential development, return walls and corner side walls shall be decorative masonry. 28. Where rock cobble is used, it shall be real river rock. Other stone veneers may be manufactured products. 29. Slope fencing along side property lines may be wrought iron or black plastic coated chain link to maintain an open feeling and enhance views. 30. 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 Printed: 9/6/2018 w v.CityofRC.us Page 3 of 18 E1—E2 Pg165 Project#: SUBTT00021 DRC2017-00823, DRC2017-00824 Project Name: EDR - Harris Garden Location: 6527 ETIWANDAAVE - 022705103-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Sign Permit Notice of Filing, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 31. A detailed plan indicating trail widths, maximum slopes, physical conditions, fencing, and weed control, in accordance with City Master Trail drawings, shall be submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to approval and recordation of the Final Tract Map and prior to approval of street improvement and grading plans. Developer shall upgrade and construct all trails, including fencing and drainage devices, in conjunction with street improvements. 32. 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. 33. Front yard and corner side yard landscaping and irrigation shall be required per the Development Code and/or Etiwanda Specific Plan. This requirement shall be in addition to the required street trees and slope planting. 34. 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 for the development or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. For development occurring in the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, the landscape plans will also be reviewed by Fire Construction Services. 35. 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. 36. 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. Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. The existing overhead utilities on the project side of Etiwanda Avenue shall be undergrounded from the end of line pole on the north side of Etiwanda Avenue to the first pole off site south of the south project boundary, prior to public improvement acceptance or occupancy, whichever occurs first. 2. Provide LED street lights. The street lights shall be owned by the City. Developer shall be responsible to coordinate and pay all costs to provide street lights and power to serve the street lights. Coordinate with City staff for design and installation requirements. 3. All improvements shall be in accordance with the latest ADA standards including access ramps. Provide access ramps at the curb returns of the proposed street. Also update the ADA access ramp at Highland and Etiwanda to meet current ADA standards. This may add additional traffic signal equipment. Also relocate values located within the existing ramp. 4. Provide a neighborhood entry per the Etiwanda Specific Plan at the intersection of Highland and Etiwanda. Printed: 9/6/2018 www.CltyofRC.us Page 4 of 75 E1—E2 Pg166 Project#: SUBTT00021 DRC2017-00823, DRC2017-00824 Project Name: EDR - Harris Garden Location: 6527 ETIWANDA AVE - 022705103-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Sign Permit Notice of Filing, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.- ROJECT:Engineering EngineeringServices Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 5. Complete the improvements along the project frontage on the north side of Highland Avenue, including curb, gutter, and sidewalk. The full extent of improvements is subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer but shall include pavement, curb, gutter, sidewalk, and street lights. The developer may request a reimbursement agreement to recover the City adopted cost for public improvements from future development as it occurs on the parcel directly to the north. If the developer fails to submit for said reimbursement agreement within 6 months of the public improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. Standard Conditions of Approval 6. Private drainage easements for cross -lot drainage shall be provided and shall be delineated or noted on the final map. 7. Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards. 8. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quit -claimed or delineated on the final map. 9. 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. 10. 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. 11. Trees are prohibited within 5 feet of the outside diameter of any public storm drain pipe measured from the outer edge of a mature tree trunk. 12. ** CD Information Required Prior to Sign -Off for Building Permit Prior to the issuance of building permits, if valuation is greater or equal to $100,000, a Diversion Deposit and a related administrative fee shall be paid for the Construction and Demolition Diversion Program. The deposit is fully refundable if at least 65% of all wastes generated during construction and demolition are diverted from landfills, and appropriate documentation is provided to the City. Applicant must identify if they are self -hauling or utilizing Burrtec prior to issuance of a building permit. Proof of diversion must be submitted to the Environmental Engineering Division within 60 days following the completion of the construction and / or demolition project. Contact Susan Shaker, Environmental Engineering, at (909) 774-4062 for more information. Instructions and forms are available at the City's website, www.cityofrc.us, under City Hall / Engineering / Environmental Programs / Construction & Demolition Diversion Program. Printed: 9/6/2018 vnvw.CityofRC.us Page 5 of 15 E1—E2 Pg167 Project#: SUBTT00021 DRC2017-00823, DRC2017-00824 Project Name: EDR - Harris Garden Location: 6527 ETIWANDA AVE - 022705103-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Sign Permit Notice of Filing, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 13. Prior to approval of the final map, a deposit shall be posted with the City covering the estimated cost of apportioning the assessments under Assessment District among the newly created parcels. 14. 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. 15. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting Districts shall be filed with the Engineering Services Department prior to final map approval or issuance of Building Permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. The project shall be annexed into CFD 85-1, LIVID 9, SLD 1, and SLD 8. 16. Construct the following perimeter street improvements per City Standards and the Etiwanda Specific Plan including, but not limited to: Cobble Curb (Etiwanda) & Gutter Curb & Gutter (Highland) A.C. Pvmt Sidewalk Drive Appr. Street Lights Street Trees Comm Trail Median Island Bike Trail Notes: (a) Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. 17. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 16.37.010, no person shall make connections from a source of energy, fuel or power to any building or structure which is regulated by technical codes and for which a permit is required unless, in addition to any and all other codes, regulations and ordinances, all improvements required by these conditions of development approval have been completed and accepted by the City Council, except: that in developments containing more than one building, structure or unit, the development may have energy connections made in equal proportion to the percentage of completion of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval, as determined by the City Engineer, provided that reasonable, safe and maintainable access to the property exists. In no case shall more than 95 percent of the buildings, structures or units be connected to energy sources prior to completion and acceptance of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval. wvnv.CityofRC.us Page6of 15 Pfintad: 9/6(2018 E1—E2 Pg168 Project#: SUBTT00021 DRC2017-00823, DRC2017-00824 Project Name: EDR - Harris Garden Location: 6527 ETIWANDA AVE - 022705103-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Sign Permit Notice of Filing, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 18. Improvement Plans and Construction shall confirm to the Etiwanda Specific Plan: a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of Building Permits, whichever occurs first. b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Services Department in addition to any other permits required. c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, , street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction project along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals connectivity and interconnect wiring. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR, or any other locations approved by the City Engineer. Notes: 1) Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets, a maximum of 200 feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer. 2) Conduit shall be 3 -inch pvc with pull rope or as specified. e. Access ramps for the disabled shall be installed on all corners of intersections per latest ADA standards or as directed by the City Engineer. f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards, except for single-family residential lots. h. Street names shall be approved by the Planning Manager prior to submittal for first plan check. Printed: 9/6/2018 vAvw.CifyofRC.us Page 7 of 15 E1—E2 Pg169 Project #: SUBTT00021 DRC2017-00823, DRC2017-00824 Project Name: EDR - Harris Garden Location: 6527 ETIWANDA AVE - 022705103-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Sign Permit Notice of Filing, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 19. 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 1." Where public landscape plans are required, tree installation in those areas shall be per the public landscape improvement plans. Street trees shall conform to the Etiwanda Specific Plan per Figure 5-26 and Figure 5-17A. Tree types are subject to change, based on the recommendation by the Public Works Department. 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 City inspector. Any unusual toxicities or nutrient deficiencies may as determined by the City inspector. 3) All street trees are subject to inspection and acceptance Department. Street trees are to be planted per public improvement plans only. 20. Intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the City adopted policy. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight intersections, including driveways. Local residential street intersects driveways may have lines of sight plotted as required. report shall be furnished to the require backfill soil amendments, by the Engineering Services Engineer for conformance with shall be plotted for all project ons and commercial or industrial 21. All public improvements (interior streets, drainage facilities, community trails, paseos, areas, etc.) shown on the plans and/or tentative map shall be constructed to City Interior street improvements shall include, but are not limited to, curb and gutter, AC landscaped Standards. pavement, drive approaches, sidewalks, street lights, and street trees. 22. 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. 23. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. 24. 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. 25. 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. 26. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CVWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. Printed: 9l6/2016 www.CityofRC.us Page 8 of 15 E1—E2 Pg170 Project 9: SUBTT00021 DRC2017-00823, DRC2017-00824 Project Name: EDR - Harris Garden Location: 6527 ETIWANDA AVE - 022705103-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Sign Permit Notice of Filing, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 27. Dedication shall be made of the street centerline): 44 total feet on Etiwanda Avenue 42 total feet on Highland Avenue following rights-of-way on the perimeter streets (measured from 28. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. Building and Safety Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. When the Entitlement Review is approved submit complete construction drawings including structural calculations, energy calculations and soils report to Building and Safety for plan review in accordance with the current edition of the CA Building and Fire Codes including all local ordinances and standards. All new structures are required to be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers per the CBC and Current RCFPD Ordinance. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 1. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the precise grading and drainage plan shall follow the format provided in the City of Rancho Cucamonga handout "Information for Grading Plans and Permit". 2. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with current adopted California Building Code and/or the California Residential Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The Grading and Drainage Plan(s) shall be in substantial conformance with the approved conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan. 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 grading and drainage plan submittal for review. Plans shall implement design recommendations per said report. 4. The final Grading and Drainage Plan, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be completed, submitted, and approved by the Building and Safety Official prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. A separate Grading and Drainage Plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and wet signed by a California licensed Civil Engineer prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit. 6. The applicant shall comply with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Dust Control Measures and place a dust control sign on the project site prior to the issuance of a grading permit. All dust control sign (s) shall be located outside of the public right of way. 7. If a Rough Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit are submitted to the Building and Safety Official for review, the rough grading plan shall be a separate plan submittal and permit from Precise Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit. www.CityofRC.us Printed: 916@018 Page 9 of 15 E1—E2 Pg171 Project #: SUBTT00021 DRC2017-00823, DRC2017-00824 Project Name: EDR - Harris Garden Location: 6527 ETIWANDAAVE - 022705103-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Sign Permit Notice of Filing, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 8. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall obtain written permission from the adjacent property owner(s) to construct wall(s) on property line(s) or provide a detail(s) showing the perimeter wall(s) to be constructed offset from the property line. 9. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the grading plan shall show that all manufactured slopes shall be a minimum 2 -foot offset from the public right of way, permitted line, or the adjacent private property. All slope offsets shall meet the requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. 10. The applicant shall provide a grading agreement and grading bond for all cut and fill combined exceeding 5,000 cubic yards prior to issuance of a grading permit. The grading agreement and bond shall be approved by the Building and Safety Official. 11. The final grading and drainage plan shall show existing topography a minimum of 100 -feet beyond project boundary. 12. Grading Inspections: a) Prior to the start of grading operations the owner and grading contractor shall request a pre -grading meeting. The meeting shall be attended by the project owner/representative, the grading contractor and the Building Inspector to discuss about grading requirements and preventive measures, etc. If a pre -grading meeting is not held within 24 hours from the start of grading operations, the grading permit may be subject to suspension by the Building Inspector; b) The grading contractor shall call into the City of Rancho Cucamonga Building and Safety Department at least 1 working day in advance to request the following grading inspections prior to continuing grading operations: i) The bottom of the over -excavation; ii) Completion of Rough Grading, prior to issuance of the building permit; iii) At the completion of Rough Grading, the grading contractor or owner shall submit to the Permit Technicians (Building and Safety Front Counter) an original and a copy of the Pad Certifications to be prepared by and properly wet signed and sealed by the Civil Engineer and Soils Engineer of Record; iv) The rough grading certificates and the compaction reports will be reviewed by the Associate Engineer or a designated person and approved prior to the issuance of a building permit. 13. Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the permitted grading plan (or architectural site plan) set shall show in each of the typical sections and the plan view show how the separations between the building exterior and exterior ground surface meet the requirements of Sections CBC1804.3/CRC R401.3, CBC2304.11.2.2/CRC R317.1(2) and CBC2512.1.2/CRC R703.6.2.1 of the current adopted California Building Code/Residential Code. 14. Prior to approval of the project -specific storm water quality management plan, the applicant shall submit to the Building Official, or his designee, a precise grading plan showing the location and elevations of existing topographical features, and showing the location and proposed elevations of proposed structures and drainage of the site. Printed: 9/6/2018 www.CityofRC.us Page 10 of 15 E1—E2 Pg172 Project#: SUBTT00021 DRC2017-00823, DRC2017-00824 Project Name: EDR - Harris Garden Location: 6527 ETIWANDAAVE - 022705103-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Sign Permit Notice of Filing, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 15. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the grading and drainage plan shall show the following information in the equestrian trails: — Provide PVC fencing per city standards, provide a 4" thick decomposed granite (DG) surface, provide a drainage V ditch parallel to the frail, provide a bridge over the V ditch where necessary for access to corals, and gates to corrals. The equestrian bridges shall be capable of carrying vehicle loads where necessary. Where the longitudinal slope (s) is S< 5% the cross fall shall be 2%, if S>5% the cross fall may be 4% maximum. Where water bars required, the spacing for the water bars is: 50' maximum for longitudinal slopes of 4% to 6%, 40' maximum for longitudinal slopes of 6.1% to 9%, 30' maximum for longitudinal slopes of 9.1% to 12%, 20' maximum for longitudinal slopes greater than 12%. In the equestrian trails water bars shall also be placed at the top and bottom of the trail where the gradient of the trail changes, i.e. a steep downhill slope which will cause additional erosion to the trail. 16. A drainage study showing a 100 -year, AMC 3 design storm event for on-site drainage shall be prepared and submitted to the Building and Safety Official for review and approval for on-site storm water drainage prior to issuance of a grading permit. The report shall contain water surface profile gradient calculations for all storm drain pipes 12 -inches and larger in diameter. All reports shall be wet signed and sealed by the Engineer of Record. In addition, the project specific drainage study shall provide inlet calculations showing the proper sizing of the water quality management plan storm water flows into the proposed structural storm water treatment devices. 17. The site shall be rough graded to eliminate all cross -lot drainage, (except in approved facilities adjacent to private trails). , All slopes and retaining walls necessary to accomplish this shall be installed prior to final map approval. 18. Flow lines steeper than 6 percent could be erosive. The applicant shall provide hard lined gutters and swales where concentrated flows exceed 3fps, and anywhere that flow lines exceed 10 percent. This shall be shown on the grading and drainage plan prior to issuance of a grading permit. 19. Prior to issuance of a grading permit and in accordance with Planning Commission Resolution 92-17, if a lot may not directly drain off-site directly to the street or other acceptable drainage device (such as a drainage ditch adjacent to an equestrian trail), then: a) drainage may flow from only one lot onto only one other lot; b) a drainage easement shall be provided over the lot accepting the drainage; c) the drainage shall be contained within either a concrete/rock lined swale/channel or a reinforced concrete pipe; and d) the drainage shall be designed with excess capacity to account for the probable lack of necessary maintenance, therefore, it shall be designed to convey two (2) times the runoff from a 100 -year storm event with the minimum diameter of the pipe being 12 -inches. 20. Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the latest adopted California Plumbing Code. Private storm drain improvements shall be shown on the grading and drainage plan. 21. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy or final sign off by the Building Inspector the engineer of record shall certify the functionality of the storm water quality management plan (WQMP) storm water treatment devices and best management practices (BMP). 22. Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WQMP shall include a copy of the project Conditions of Approval. Printed: 9/6/2018 www.CityofRC.us Page 11 of 15 E1—E2 Pg173 Project #: SUBTTOOD21 DRC2017-00823, DRC2017-00824 Project Name: EDR - Harris Garden Location: Project Type: 6527 ETIWANDA AVE - 022705103-0000 Tentative Tract Map Sign Permit Notice of Filing, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 23. Reciprocal access easements for all parcels and maintenance agreements ensuring joint maintenance of all storm water quality structural/treatment devices and best management practices (BMP) as provided for in the project's Storm Water Quality Management Plan, shall be provided for by CC&R's or deeds and shall be recorded prior to the approval of the Water Quality Management Plan. Said CC&R's and/or deeds shall be included in the project site specific Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) document prior to approval of the WQMP document and recording of the Memorandum of Agreement of Storm Water Quality Management Plan. 24. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit the City of Rancho Cucamonga's "Memorandum of Agreement of Storm Water Quality Management Plan" shall be submitted for review and approval by the Building Official and recorded with the County Recorder's Office. 25. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall obtain a Waste Discharge Identification Number (WDID). The WDID number shall also be shown on the WQMP Site and Drainage Plan document. 26. The applicant shall provide a copy of a completed EPA Form 7520-16 (Inventory of Injection Wells) for each underground infiltration device, with the Facility ID Number assigned, to the Building and Safety Services Department Official prior to issuance of the Grading Permit and/or approval of the project -specific Water Quality Management Plan. A copy of EPA Form 7520-16 shall be scanned and pasted onto the permitted grading plan set, and a copy of said form shall be included in the project -specific Water Quality Management Plan. 27. The land owner shall provide an inspection report by a qualified person/company on a biennial basis for the Class V Injection Wells/underground infiltration chambers to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis all best management practices (BMP"s) as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 28. The land owner shall provide an inspection report on a biennial basis for the structural storm water treatment devices, commonly referred to as BMPs, to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 29. The land/property owner shall follow the inspection and maintenance requirements of the approved project specific Water Quality Management Plan and shall provide a copy of the inspection reports on a biennial basis to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. 30. A final project -specific Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) shall be approved by the Building and Safety Director, or his designee, and the City of Rancho Cucamonga's "Memorandum of Storm Water Quality Management Plan" shall be recorded prior to the issuance of a grading permit or any building permit. 31. Prior to the start of landscaping operations, the landscape architect and the landscape contractor shall provide a sample of the weed fabric barrier to the Project Planner, City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department. The weed barrier shall be permeable. vnm.CityofRC.us Pae 12 of 15 Printed: 9/6/2018 9 E1—E2 Pg174 Project #: SUBTT00021 DRC2017-00823, DRC2017-00824 Project Name: EDR - Harris Garden Location: 6527 ETIWANDA AVE - 022705103-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Sign Permit Notice of Filing, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 32. The final project -specific water quality management plan (WQMP) shall include executed maintenance agreements along with the maintenance guidelines for all proprietary structural storm water treatment devices (BMP's). In the event the applicant cannot get the proprietary device maintenance agreements executed prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant is required to submit a letter to be included within the WQMP document, and scanned and pasted onto the Site and Drainage Plan which states that prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy with applicant shall enter into a contract for the maintenance of the proprietary storm water treatment device. If the proprietary storm water treatment device is part of a residential subdivision, prior to the sale of the residential lot, the developer shall include maintenance agreement(s) as part of the sale of the residential lot to the buyer. A copy of the maintenance agreements to be included in the sale of the property shall be included within the WQMP document. 33. Prior to issuance of a grading permit and approval of the project specific water quality management plan all private storm water catch basin inlets shall include insert filters to capture those pollutants of concern as addressed in the in the final project -specific water quality management plan (WQMP). At a minimum catch basin insert filters to capture trash and other floating debris. All catch basin insert filters shall be maintained on a regular basis as described in the "Inspection and Maintenance Responsibility for Post Construction BMP" section of the final project -specific water quality management plan. 34. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the Final Project -Specific Water Quality Management Plan shall include a completed copy of "Worksheet H: Factor of Safety and Design Infiltration Worksheet" located in Appendix D "Section VII — Infiltration Rate Evaluation Protocol and Factor of Safety Recommendations, ..." of the San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans. The infiltration study shall include the Soil Engineer's recommendations for Appendix D, Table VIl.3: Suitability Assessment Related Considerations for Infiltration Facility Safety Factors". 35. Prior to approval of the final project -specific water quality management plan the applicant shall have a soils engineer prepare a project -specific infiltration study for the project for the purposes of storm water quality treatment. The infiltration study and recommendations shall follow the guidelines in the current adopted "San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans". 36. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy by the Building Official, or his designee, the civil engineer of record shall file a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Post Construction Storm Water Treatment Devices As -Built Certificate with the Environmental Programs Coordinator, City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Services Department. 37. As the use of drywells are proposed for the structural storm water treatment device, to meet the infiltration requirements of the current Municipal Separate Storm Sewers Systems (MS4) Permit, adequate source control and pollution prevention control BMPs shall be implemented to protect groundwater quality. The need for pre-treatment BMPs such as sedimentation or filtration shall be evaluated prior to infiltration and discussed in the final project -specific Water Quality Management Plan document. Printed: 9/6/2018 �w.CltyofRC.us Page 13 of 15 E1 -E2 Pg175 Project #: SUBTT00021 DRC2017-00823, DRC2017-00824 Project Name: EDR - Harris Garden Location: Project Type: 6527 ETIWANDA AVE - 022705103-0000 Tentative Tract Map Sign Permit Notice of Filing, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 38. GROUND WATER PROTECTION: Prior to approval of the final project specific water quality management plan (WQMP), the WQMP document shall meet the requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board Order No. R8-2010-0036 (NPDES No. CAS 618036), the San Bernardino County Municipal Separate Storm Sewers Separation (MS4) Permit reads: Section XI.D(Water Quality Management Plan Requirements). 8(Groundwater Protection): Treatment Control BMPs utilizing infiltration [exclusive of incidental infiltration and BMPs not designed to primarily function as infiltration devices (such as grassy swales, detention basins, vegetated buffer strips, constructed wetlands, etc.)] must comply with the following minimum requirements to protect groundwater: a. Use of structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause or contribute to an exceedance of ground water quality objectives. b. Source control and pollution prevention control BMPs shall be implemented to protect groundwater quality. The need for pre-treatment BMPs such as sedimentation or filtration should be evaluated prior to infiltration. c. Adequate pretreatment of runoff prior to infiltration shall be required in gas stations and large commercial parking lots. (NOTE: The State Water Quality Control Board defines a large commercial parking lot as '100,000 sq. ft. or more of commercial development to include parking lot (with 100 or more vehicle traffics), OR, by means of 5,000sgft or more of allowable space designated for parking purposes'). d. Unless adequate pre-treatment of runoff is provided prior to infiltration structural infiltration treatment BMPs must not be used for areas of industrial or light industrial activity{77), areas subject to high vehicular traffic (25,000 or more daily traffic); car washes; fleet storage areas; nurseries; or any other high threat to water quality land uses or activities. e. Class V injection wells or dry wells must not be placed in areas subject to vehicular{78) repair or maintenance activities{79), such as an auto body repair shop, automotive repair shop, new and used car dealership, specialty repair shop (e.g., transmission and muffler repair shop) or any facility that does any vehicular repair work. f. Structural infiltration BMP treatment shall not be used at sites that are known to have soil and groundwater contamination. g. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall be located at least 100 feet horizontally from any water supply wells. h. The vertical distance from the bottom of any infiltration structural treatment BMP to the historic high groundwater mark shall be at least 10 -feet. Where the groundwater basins do not support beneficial uses, this vertical distance criteria may be reduced, provided groundwater quality is maintained. I. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause a nuisance or pollution as defined in Water Code Section 13050. Printed: 916/2018 www.CityofRC,us 7-1-E2 Pg 176 Page 14 of 15 Project#: SUBTT00021 DRC2017-00823, DRC2017-00824 Project Name: EDR - Harris Garden Location: 6527 ETIWANDA AVE - 022705103-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Sign Permit Notice of Filing, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT., Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 39. The City of Rancho Cucamonga does not allow on-site storm water quality treatment BMP devices within the individual single-family lots which will be required to be inspected and maintained by each individual homeowner. As a condition of approval for this single-family residential project (including tentative tract maps and parcel maps, and final tract maps and parcel maps of 2 parcels or more) a common storm water treatment system will be required which shall be maintained by a homeowners' association prior to the 'approval of a water quality management plan and issuance of a grading permit. Printed: 9/6/2018 www.CityofRC.us Page 75 of 15 E1—E2 Pg177 REPORT DATE: September 26, 2018 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Candyce Burnett, City Planner INITIATED BY: Dat Tran, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2018-00104 -- SC RANCHO DEVELOPMENT CORP. -- A request for site plan and architectural review of a proposed 10,243 square foot recreational building, two ancillary support buildings totaling 1,541 square feet, and an outdoor recreation area on a vacant site totaling 1.93 acres of land within the Empire Lakes Specific Plan, Planning Area 1, located north of 4th Street, south of 6th Street, west of Milliken Avenue, and east of Utica/Cleveland Avenues. The specific location of the project site is at the southeast corner of 6th Street and the future alignment of the Resort Parkway; APN: 0210-102-01, -02 and -03. Related file: Pre - Application Review DRC2017-00885. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 2015041083) on May 18, 2016 in connection with the City's approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015- 00115. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the following action: • Approve Design Review DRC2018-00104 through the adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval with Conditions. PROJECT SITE BACKGROUND: The project site is part of a 160 -acre property that was formerly developed with the privately owned and operated Empire Lakes Golf Course generally located in the center of the Empire Lakes Specific Plan (the "Specific Plan"). The Specific Plan has an overall area of 347 acres and is generally bound by 4th Street to the south, Milliken Avenue to the east, Cleveland Avenue and Utica Avenue to the west, and 8th Street and the BNSFIMetrolink rail line to the north. The Specific Plan is bisected into south and north halves by 6th Street. The golf course was closed in mid - 2016 following the City Council approval of amendments to the General Plan, Specific Plan, and Development Code (Related files: General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115). These Amendments were for the purpose of enabling the master developer, Lewis Management Corp., to develop a new mixed use and transit -oriented project ("Empire Lakes/The Resort") hereafter referred to as "the overall project". The overall project is intended to be developed in phases by E3 Pg1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DESIGN REVIEW DRC2018-00104 - SC RANCHO DEVELOPMENT CORP. September 26, 2018 Page 2 various developers. The first phase will include all of the southern half and a small portion of the northern half. PROJECT REVIEW BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission reviewed this project at a Pre -Application Review workshop on January 10, 2018 (Related file: Pre -Application Review DRC2017-00885, Exhibit H), The scope of the Pre -Application Review included the proposed recreation building and outdoor recreation area but did not include the two ancillary support buildings. The Planning Commission provided comments and generally praised the quality of the amenities provided (Exhibit 1). The applicant formally submitted the subject application on January 30, 2018. SITE DESCRIPTION: The specific location of the project site is at the southeast corner of 6th Street and the future alignment of the Resort Parkway (formerly referred to as the Vine). The location of the project site is generally within Placetype S-23 (Recreation (REQ of the Specific Plan. It is also partially within the Mixed Use Overlay. The site will have an area of 1.93 acres with a street frontage of about 255 feet along 6th Street. It will be bound on the west by the future, north -south primary street ("the Resort Parkway") of the overall project_ Following the construction of that street, the site will have a frontage along that street of 327 feet. The property has been mass graded in preparation for the pending development of the Empire Lakes/The Resort mixed use project. The existing land uses on and General Plan Land Use and Zoning designations for the project site and the surrounding properties (relative to the future street) are as follows: ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant is proposing to construct a 10,243 square foot recreation building within a 1.93 acre area that was designated for recreation in the Specific Plan. The proposed project, referred to by the applicant as "The Resort Clubhouse", will provide recreation and open space area for the future residential developments to the south and east of the project site. The recreation area and the future residential developments will be connected via a driveway that extends throughout the residential site and connects to the parking lot of the recreation area. Access to the recreation facility will be limited to residents of Empire Lakes/The Resort. The building will be located on the west side of the site, next to the Resort Parkway. The exterior of the building has been designed to consist of visually interesting fagades viewable from all vantage points. The design incorporates the use of manufactured stone and porcelain siding, complementing the stucco exterior. The structure also incorporates the use E3 Pg2 Land Use General Plan Zoning Site Vacant' Mixed Use Mixed Use (Planning Area 1)2 North Vacant (north half of former private golf course) Mixed Use Mixed Use (Planning Area 1)2 South Vacant' Mixed Use Mixed Use (Planning Area 1)2 Fast Vacant' Mixed Use Mixed Use(Planning Area 1)2 West Vacant' Mixed Use Mixed Use (Planning Area 1)2 --J -+T 1 a Dart of tho —dh hnlf nFfnnnor nriunto nnLf rnureo' 7 . Fmnirn 1 akar Snerlrir Plan ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant is proposing to construct a 10,243 square foot recreation building within a 1.93 acre area that was designated for recreation in the Specific Plan. The proposed project, referred to by the applicant as "The Resort Clubhouse", will provide recreation and open space area for the future residential developments to the south and east of the project site. The recreation area and the future residential developments will be connected via a driveway that extends throughout the residential site and connects to the parking lot of the recreation area. Access to the recreation facility will be limited to residents of Empire Lakes/The Resort. The building will be located on the west side of the site, next to the Resort Parkway. The exterior of the building has been designed to consist of visually interesting fagades viewable from all vantage points. The design incorporates the use of manufactured stone and porcelain siding, complementing the stucco exterior. The structure also incorporates the use E3 Pg2 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DESIGN REVIEW DRC2018-00104 - SC RANCHO DEVELOPMENT CORP. September 26, 2018 Page 3 of metal canopies and trims, and glass decorative windows to add architectural interest to the building. The combination of materials and variations in both the roof and wall planes create visually interesting facades and breaks up expansive blank facades. The roof is a modern flat design with parapets for limited rooftop screening. Screening of rooftop mechanical equipment are provided primarily by parapet and horizontally mounted textured stucco screen panels. Parapets have been heightened wherever possible to limit views of mechanical equipment from the public right-of-way. Standing seam metal roofs are also provided on the building for varied design. Overall, the design of the building enhances the overall visual quality of the site and meets the City's "360 -degree" design standards. In addition to the main clubhouse building, two smaller buildings are located onsite. An 809 square foot restroom is located along the northern boundary of the site, and a 732 square foot pool equipment building is located in the southeast quadrant of the site. Both buildings incorporate the use of exterior materials and finishes similar to the main building. Materials include a three -coat stucco finish with complementary porcelain siding veneer. The buildings also incorporate metal canopies, textured stones, and decorative windows to be compatible with the main clubhouse. Lastly, both buildings have a wainscot along the base of the building to help connect all the veneer together and reduce blank expanses of wall. The area in proximity to all the buildings consists of an outdoor recreation area consisting of landscaped areas, decorative walkways, an outdoor cooking area, a junior Olympic -sized pool, and adjacent seating areas. The recreation area includes a variety of surface areas, including: concrete, wood planks, modular paving, and artificial turf that enhance the overall site design. A decorative monument structure, which will also serve as an entry sign for the southern half of the overall project, has also been proposed, facing the corner of 6th Street and the Resort Parkway. This structure consists primarily of a wood porcelain tile veneer with a decorative waterfall feature and signage indicating entry to The Resort development. To the north of the project site, on the opposite side of 6th Street, is a proposed recreation area/facility. Access will be provided between the two facilities via an underpass ("The Ion") underneath 6th Street. To the west of the project site, on the opposite side of the Resort Parkway, is another proposed recreation facility that will serve a proposed multi -family residential project. Access between the two recreation areas is provided via a pedestrian crosswalk at the intersection of 6th Street and the Resort Parkway, and a second pedestrian crosswalk further south along the Resort Parkway. A semi -circular pathway extends from the clubhouse entryway all the way to the northeast corner of the site. The pathway connects to The Ion. A row of "Redi-Rock" retaining walls flanks the eastern side of the pathway. The wall is terraced and progressively steps back from the pathway. Vegetation will be planted on the wall to mitigate the aesthetic impact of the height and scale of the wall. There will be retaining walls on the west side of the pathway with heights of no more than 3 feet that are setback from the pathway pavement by a minimum of 9 feet. The low height of these retaining walls and their placement relative to the walkway improves line -of -sight into the pathway and enhances public safety. B. Development Standards: The site meets standards for building heights and all associated setbacks for the Empire Lake Specific Plan. The maximum height of the proposed clubhouse building is 27 feet, 3 inches, which is below the maximum 60 -foot height limit for buildings south of 6th Street. Both pool equipment and restroom buildings are one-story, with neither exceeding 13 feet in height. The buildings onsite collectively maintain a minimum 16 -foot setback from the Resort Parkway along the eastern boundary of the site and a minimum setback of 30 feet along the 6th Street northern boundary. The minimum setback required E3 Pg3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DESIGN REVIEW DRC2018-00104 - SC RANCHO DEVELOPMENT CORP. September 26, 2018 Page 4 for the Resort Parkway is 5 feet and the minimum setback for 6th Street is 10 feet. There is no landscaping minimum established for Planning Area 1. However, the Empire Lakes Specific Plan specifies a Tiered Landscape Program that establishes requirements for different scales, forms, colors and textures of plant materials. This includes a range of plant materials, from low spreading ground cover to tall standing shrubs and plants of up to 5 feet in height. The outdoor landscaped areas include 12 distinct types of groundcover, 30 distinct types of shrubs and 10 trees species, meeting the requirement for a varied plant palette. C. Parking: There is no parking requirement for the clubhouse or outdoor amenities per the Empire Lakes Specific Plan. However, the applicant has elected to construct a parking lot at the south side of the project site that will have 40 parking stalls. The parking lot will serve as the designated parking area for residents and their guests. The parking lot will make the clubhouse and recreation area more accessible for residents and reduce potential impact of off-site parking on adjacent lots or public rights-of-way. D. Neighborhood Meeting: The applicant held a neighborhood meeting at the Hilton Garden Inn on September 12, 2018. Two representatives from Sotamante Apartments located in proximity to the project site attending the meeting and posed questions regarding the proposed clubhouse and the overall Resort development_ Staff also did not receive any correspondence regarding the project prior to or after the meeting. E_ Design Review Committee: The project was presented to the Design review Committee (Guglielmo, Wimberly, and Smith) on August 14, 2018 (Exhibit K). The project is unchanged since the presentation at the Design Review Committee except for the stucco screening panels on top of the building. The stucco panels are currently isolated enclosures around individual rooftop equipment. Staff explained to the Design Review Committee that the stucco panels would be modified prior to the Planning Commission meeting to consist of connected panels screening multiple pieces of rooftop equipment. The Committee accepted the design of the project as proposed without revisions and recommended that the project be forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and approval. F. Technical Review Committee: The project was presented to the Technical Review Committee on August 14, 2018. The Technical Review Committee accepted the design of the project as proposed without revisions and recommended that the project be forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and approval. G. Environmental Assessment: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQX) and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on May 18, 2016 (SCH No. 2015041083) in connection with the City's approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115. Pursuant to CEQA, 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. E3 Pg4 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DESIGN REVIEW DRC2018-00104 - SC RANCHO DEVELOPMENT CORP. September 26, 2018 Page 5 To demonstrate that no subsequent EIR is required, the applicant's environmental consultant, Psomas, prepared an Environmental Technical Analysis Memorandum (Exhibit K) dated July 19, 2018. Staff evaluated this memorandum and concluded that the project is within the scope of the approved overall project and analysis included in the Final EIR identified above and no additional environmental review is required in connection with the City's consideration of Design Review DRC2018-00104. 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 EIR. The previous environmental review analyzed the effects of the proposed project. Staff further finds that the project will not have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR, nor 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. FISCAL IMPACT: The proposed clubhouse and recreation area is consistent with the intent of the overall project (Empire Lakes/The Resort) and will contribute to achieving the fiscal benefits that were discussed in the Staff Report for the associated amendments to the General Plan, Specific Pian, and Development Code that were approved by the City Council in May/June 2016. In a fiscal impact analysis prepared in March 2016, the annual revenue generated from items such as: property tax, sales tax, fees, and assessments; and the costs for government services including police, animal care, community development, public works, and other general government functions were analyzed. Per that Staff Report, the annual revenues/costs in the calculations in the analysis were based on the overall project when it was fully constructed and completed. The benefits include the project's contribution to Paris District 85 (PD85), Landscape Maintenance District 1 (LMD1), and Street Lighting District 1 (SLD1). These benefits would not occur without implementation of the project. As indicated in the revenue/costs analysis, a portion of these assessment fees will be used to maintain the clubhouse and recreation area. This substantial, additional revenue to these assessment districts would reduce the need for General Fund contributions. Other economic benefits were expected to accrue as a result of the overall project. The EIR certified for the overall project identifies the underserved and unmet housing needs in the region. The availability of new housing opportunity allows businesses to grow by providing additional housing for new and existing workers. Providing these housing opportunities in close proximity to the City's business and industrial core will facilitate an environment where individuals who work in the community will also reside in it and support existing businesses. Due to the transit and pedestrian -oriented approach of the project, environmental costs are lowered, and a healthier environment is created. Furthermore, higher value industrial businesses are increasingly relying on being near a supply of housing for potential employees when determining new locations for their operations. The overall project represents an opportunity to provide the needed housing in rental and price ranges that are affordable to early career workers. Also, an option is created for older residents looking to "downsize" and select a location which requires less driving to reach services. COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: The proposed clubhouse and outdoor area provides recreation space for future residential units in the Empires Lake/The Resort development. The proposed project will ensure that the overall E3 Pg5 PLANN NG COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DESIGN REVIEW DRC2018-00104 - SC RANCHO DEVELOPMENT CORP. September 26, 2018 Page 6 project (Empire Lakes/The Resort), when completed, will contribute to the realization of several General Plan and City Council goals. The General Plan discusses several land use policies including: 1) planning for vibrant, pedestrian -friendly mixed use and high density residential areas at strategic infill locations along transit routes; 2) implementing land use patterns and policies that incorporate smart growth practices, including placement of higher densities near transit centers and along transit corridors; and 3) supporting housing opportunities for workers of all income ranges. The City Council has two goals, Goals A24 and A25 that are relevant to the Project. The objective of Goal A24 is "to address 1) mixed use, high density, transit -oriented development (TOD), and 2) underperforming or underutilized areas" The objective of Goal A25 is "review the City's zoning districts and evaluate/investigate creating overlay districts or specific plan areas" that will create districts in order to revitalize underperforming or underutilized areas. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing with a regular legal advertisement 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 comments have been received in response to these notifications. EXHIBITS: Exhibit A - Vicinity Map Exhibit B - Aerial Map Exhibit C - Conceptual Development Plan (excerpt from the Empire Lakes Specific Plan) Exhibit D - Site Plan Exhibit E - Floor Plans Exhibit F - Elevations Exhibit G - Landscape & Amenities Plan Exhibit H - Staff Report for Pre -Application Review DRC2017-00885 (not including Exhibits) Exhibit I - Pre -Application Review Workshop Minutes Exhibit J - Design Review Committee Action Agenda and Comments Exhibit K - Environmental Technical Analysis Memorandum Draft Resolution of Approval for Design Review DRC2017-00104 E3 Pg6 IN 9fa 1jF C7 , 7% ilk It* Pinsbuigh Ave - F.z A CL asitL. 0 Z. RIM W I I i k 441-kv e .1 RAr. -0 CL 4iN pq -40 0 CUP E Kl IL- —ca 7 ctr L:: ell %N '4� .!= - In 1 ra IL LJQ 0 E- cn 4iW m df m J-1 0 L. '""M`illilie'n Ave m Mdii�a n Ave - '!Iv111IrkenlffaZf :ham f h ri E od Z 0 - it ' ii C `} � RT ECS Y _{ . j c'{{,�, � >a�` , + .a �• � i � 1 ' lar� " : • ' � 4k +Ofi l [ mm IRE .} � r, � #•'F.�• r' -a► * ��� � 1 S �� Y� r � � ,' is F� r Y y r� .� •7' � - 4 Al ii`Ye Ri Mn: 4 . • I i + �I � # s W 5` L' Mn: 4 . • I i + �I � # s W 5` L' Metrolink San Bernardino Line-- I -a -I -I�i i ihr. Pocket Park—-. Metrolink Rancho N-z Cucamonga N`1 7UN N-12 Station i n AC 7/44CUPC DMCL Ac MU LMAC gEM Mod: N-i t N4 :1MMk CL N-8 I+�C pIMG j 711 AS UN 16]7 DLMC 7 7J AAG I \ -10 34M DUIAC im kt� , Iah S:reaC CL M 664 AC - - 1535L,.•At CL •4 O ut)fYAC N7 '�� � � N8 1,14 VN e11Ac North, 1471 k I. 17 MxK • `. Urian Plaza . 8th Street Project Site - - - South S-14 CL S-i2 CL fmAC `. ,sCSwua 450AC i 1MspiAc , Pocket s 1s�N Park 51 VIN M7171 AE N11 MAC 657 \`. 5-21 �~ VN •F-.+wx,. `JIB{mak. ,., FI VIM O � ISSINc S-20 ' N\ MVN ti ; Placetype Legend • ` 141! 011'At Transit {T} k _ TMixed Use IMM i { ,a "h' i Urban Neighborhood (Ur)) F y + 4} • r Core Living (CL) r { Figure 7.6 ConcepClJCiI i &19 ti k+.:: Village Neighborhood Nrii gecrectionMECi Development, Plan by tr 5I ..aysu+�a I *'� , � MU Overlay � Plecetype " 4th Street 0 Aw rule F.gure not to SCa'a m ire Lakes EXHIBIT C E3Pg9 yfi•: � 4.� di100 IN3?WD1380 CH:)jIyu 03 LP.ca.c+ riu'ti�+d 9100"M.L.WntW S 7 12 L tTJ LLLY F cn LLJ a } D w U w F a 11 �X H 9 5 M23" PT um J 30S3d 3H! 133'JLS HIM 1:981115 3H1 Mdld 31JS (131111130 5' Ip rcF G' i I'"t x:5'IjY�3�% ['- Hili LAY U�$Bfi39is§92 LYhT4 RYb .1.]LI Lxiuy aayrs$ �X H 9 5 M23" PT um I 1. Lt1VS�ti �Hl • r - " .r 81 ! OZ iDV' l 3AII-VIN31 5' Ip rcF G' i I'"t x:5'IjY�3�% ['- Hili LAY U�$Bfi39is§92 L i fiYt I p Hili I 1. Lt1VS�ti �Hl • r - " .r 81 ! OZ iDV' l 3AII-VIN31 P 5 I'l %i HY7 0"Wl M_474' '- ell Tr 5 A As It tilt WY, PIP -1 ilimm] Hif lip, 1 H HIM .1i Sip IV 1 jj 1; 1; WN15 -M 1 H t fit I, P L LW. r 2A 9 opt 7 ;4 :4 pk� C:5 T. E3 Pg1 1 iUMH 3HI inN3AV HA NOomoDHI CP P 5 I'l %i HY7 0"Wl M_474' '- ell Tr 5 A As It tilt WY, PIP -1 ilimm] Hif lip, 1 H HIM .1i Sip IV 1 jj 1; 1; WN15 -M 1 H t fit I, P L LW. r 2A 9 opt 7 ;4 :4 pk� C:5 T. E3 Pg1 1 ?I WAMI"Vi injis Hims 1HOS3U 3HI Ej 3nN3AV H19 Wsmo3Hi ---------- i 7 g rr g HiN mi ce 13 4pl M -1. -W 13 Will nnSHal I E3 Pg12 :9 Aj ll C Mai 1p i. IOU Mu I OEMa. gPHI of W "I I I fi! '112 i ill 2 A 1 105 1 1. H IMCILGC3Nfj 'C:1 ISf) G94' 16 VJ 71 95P.L i- b ST ' vi -111 111 1 Hig 1 2 1 - k Mom top W" V3N0','1V3n3 CWTi'ld PM wmw WN ums MS Apo MG. IBM 3HI AO 0 2 DnNgAV HA WeniO 3HI it Al Q,Q w -nj hill4N to j. 70 Aj ll C Mai 1p i. IOU Mu I OEMa. gPHI of W "I I I fi! '112 i ill 2 A 1 105 1 1. H qui JIM .F b ST ' vi -111 111 1 Hig 1 2 1 - k 1 1151 lul"HII�JFHI WINS H1111HIP i2 it Al Q,Q w -nj hill4N to j. 70 L4 44 E3 Pg13 0 1 1 L7 a E3 Pg14 I . &.7 3mAV H19 Wsmo3Hi Alt 'JIM! --- e 0 1 1 L7 a E3 Pg14 I . &.7 0 1 1 L7 a E3 Pg14 I t�.;�=,vi3uh 0719577 54C:5Y3 Qt1:�dfl'Silii?h7til7ltlfi071'N95U o a df MIJ SOA31 z� v 7E7:HOlIl7�'tr9710P173i170H371:kf i � , �� J _ � 3f1PON4 NlAill vi (MY l338LS Himi IU0938 3H! aj. � �� !a' 3nN3AV H19 N0 05 3H1 r _ _. 3 3 - q oil.�I�a c m ;, r_' EXHIBIT F'- E3Pg15 'r. o a m ;, r_' EXHIBIT F'- E3Pg15 'r. Gg,e cam, aavj«An,m»r , rmL n - . dr ,s r p. YPOAV NlAnijapm i3ims ms{ �2 238 ]6 ®%k l 3nN3AV HA NO onto ]H± \� — E as ■ lBLE ; 22,;.2 i &°�Ek`2§$ `) �[ ;� �.-%%■R■I. :j E3 Pg1§ :03oG'�LCSj1s00:1357� �±Lfitl� p�771dh 3iiP13A7L.,71PYIL1S7 N9511 ) 4085 SIP*1 alrla�3llyO asvos'ltla�aall3:tva =:.s1 .�;- Zr - 3A'13AV N341111VI ONV I33UIS RIXLS AMU 3H1 3nN3AV Hlg NO omO 3Hl- ;�Lifl:ia � aC3 do¢ 4i LA I 8# u, � z O u' w "OU Mmw cl: =Er w Q S h E3 Pg 19 _ 41 G �U) Muz 1� O t � 01 d z Q (n z Vo �U cn LU 'I O J( N W J =O % O 4 =aa ! In ` as ur x aLu ¢ 2 ¢¢ .. a w c U Ln Cl cc O M �+ = p O i U WN 7� C uz JS u x 12_ `J W O J qq 2� t K LL �i �x � � Y �z 4D {g is ` _ LL u, � z O u' w "OU Mmw cl: =Er w Q S h E3 Pg 19 _ 41 G �U) Muz 1� O t � 01 d z Q (n z Vo �U cn STAFF REPORT DATE: January 10, 2018 TO; Chairman and Members of the Planning Commiss'on FROM: Candyce Burnett, City Planner INITIATED BY: Mike Smith, Senior Planner tooll- SUBJECT* PRE -APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2017-00885 — LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP. — A request for a Pre -Application Review of a proposed recreation/community building of 10,769 square feat and open space amenities on 3 parcels with a combined area of 1.94 acres within the Empire Lakes Specific Plan, Planning Area 1. located north of 4th Street, south of 6th Street, west of Milliken Avenue, and east of Utica/Cleveland Avenues. The specific location of the project site is at the southeast corner of 6th Street and The Vine.; APN: 0210- 082-92, Related fees: General Pian Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20073. REVIEW PROCESS; The Pre -Application Review process provides a project proponent with tho opportunity to present schematic designs to the Planning Commission prior to a forma application submittal, in order to receive broad, general comments and directions. The focus of the meeting is a discussion by the Planning Commissioners regarding the technical and design issues related to the proposed project. The meeting is not a forum for debate and no formal decision or vote is made. After the meeting, Staff prepares general minutes of the meeting, which are provided to the applicant. PROJECT SITE DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND: The project site is part of a property of 160 acres that was formerly developed with the privately owned and operated Empire Lakes Golf Course generally located in the center of the Empire Lakes Specific Plan ("Specific Plan"). The Specific Plan has an overall area of 347 acres and is generally bound by 4th Street to the south, Milliken Avenue to the east, Cleveland Avenue and Utica Avenue to the west, and 8th Street and the BNSF/Metrolink rail line to the north. The golf course was closed in mid -2016 following the approval by the City Council of amendments to the General Plan, Specific Plan, and Development Code (related files: General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115). These amendments were for the purpose of enabling the master developer, Lewis Management Corp., to develop a new mixed use and transit -oriented project ("Empire Lakes/The Resort") hereafter referred to as "the overall project". The subject property is bisected into south and north halves by 6th Street. The overall project is intended to be developed in phases by various developers. The first phase will include all of the southern half and a small portion of the northern half. The southern half currently consists of three (3) parcels with a combined area of about 84 acres_ An application to subdivide it into 27 parcels and one (1) "lettered" lot was approved by the Planning Commission on August 23, 2017 EXHIBIT H E3 Pg20 PLANNING COMMISSION PRE -APPLICATION REVIEW STAFF REPORT DRC2017-00885 — LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP. January 10, 2018 Page 2 (related file: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20073). The primary purpose of this subdivision was to allow the sale of parts of the overall project to other developers. The specific location of the project site is Parcels #1 through #3 (Exhibit C) of this approved subdivision. The site will have an area of 1.94 acres with a street frontage of about 328 feet along 6th Street. It will be bound on the west by the future, north -south primary street ("The Vine") of the overall protect, f=ollowing the construction of that street, a frontage of about 258 feet will be along the site. Conceptual plans for a proposed development on Parcel #26 located to the west of the project site (on the opposite side of The Vine) were reviewed by the Planning Commission during a Pre - Application Review workshop on May 24, 2017 (Pre -Application Review DRC2017-00170). That proposal has been formally submitted to the City for review (Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20118 and Design Review DRC2017-00642). Similarly, conceptual plans for a proposed development on Parcel #4 through #15 to the south and east of the project site were reviewed by the Planning Commission during a Pre -Application Review workshop on October 25, 2017 (Pre -Application Review DRC2017-00696). That proposal has been formally submitted to the City for review (Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20147 and Design Review DRC2017-00925). The master developer is also developing the designs for the various elements within The Vine that were generally described in the Specific Plan. They include functional features such as "tabletop" street crossings, roundabouts, and "pocket" parks, and decorative features such as art installations and landscaping. The Vine and these features will be presented to the Planning Commission during a separate, future Pre -Application Review workshop. The existing land uses on and General Plan land use and zoning designations for the project site and the surrounding properties (relative to the above -noted parcels) are as follows: A. GENERAL: The applicant proposes a private recreational facility consisting of a community building, several smaller structures, and a variety of open space amenities. This facility will serve the "for sale" component of the overall project located south of 6th Street. The "for rent" component of the overall project will be served by a separate private recreational facility. The floor area of the 2 -story building will be 10,769 square feet. Overall building height will be 28 feet. It will be located in one of the several areas that were generally identified and described for this purpose in the Specific Plan. The Specific Plan is divided Into twenty-four (24) "Placetypes". Eleven (11) Placetypes are located south of 6th Street. The land use characteristics of each Placetype are defined by six (6) different designations. The location of the project site (Exhibit D) is generally within Placetype S-23 (Recreation (REC)). With the exception of a small portion of the site, it is also within the Mixed Use Overlay. 1=3 Pq 21 Land Use General Pian Zoning Site Vacant' Mixed Use Mixed Use(Planning Area 1 2 North Vacant (north half of former private golf course Mixed Use Mixed Use (Planning Area 1)2 South Vacant' Mixed Use Mixed Use(Planning Area 1 2 East Vacant' Mixed Use Mixed Use(Planning Area 1 z West Vacant' Mixed Use Mixed Use(Planning Area 1 2 1- part of the south half of former pdvate golf course; 2 - Empire Lakes Specific Plan A. GENERAL: The applicant proposes a private recreational facility consisting of a community building, several smaller structures, and a variety of open space amenities. This facility will serve the "for sale" component of the overall project located south of 6th Street. The "for rent" component of the overall project will be served by a separate private recreational facility. The floor area of the 2 -story building will be 10,769 square feet. Overall building height will be 28 feet. It will be located in one of the several areas that were generally identified and described for this purpose in the Specific Plan. The Specific Plan is divided Into twenty-four (24) "Placetypes". Eleven (11) Placetypes are located south of 6th Street. The land use characteristics of each Placetype are defined by six (6) different designations. The location of the project site (Exhibit D) is generally within Placetype S-23 (Recreation (REC)). With the exception of a small portion of the site, it is also within the Mixed Use Overlay. 1=3 Pq 21 PLANNING COYjMISSION PRE-APPOCA'r ION REVIEW STAFF REPORT ORC2017-00865 -- LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP- January'10, 2018 Page 3 B. ARCHITECTURE BUILDING PLOTTING AND SITE LAYOUT: The Specific Plan permits numerous different architectural themes throughout Empire Lakes/The Resort. The applicant has elected to use a "contemporary" theme For the community building and associated smaller structures. This theme is characterized by rectilinear elements. Consistent with this, the building has prominent horizontal scale and massing, a flat roof with unadorned parapets, and horizontal metal,canopies. Stacked window systems at the main entrance of the building, and tall windows on all elevations reinforce this theme. The theme is also applied to various features on-site such as walls and shade structures. The floor plan of the building will feature two wings connected by a lobby. Amenities within the building include various rooms for meetings/gatherings, exercise activities, indoor entertainment, and food service. The building will be plotted at the southwest corner of the site and the remainder of the site will be developed with open space amenities that are typical for these types of facilities such as a centrally located large pool, spa, various open and shaded outdoor seating areas, and an outdoor kitchen with a BBQ and bar. Other amenities include dog washing/drying stations, a fire pit, areas for a variety of games (e.g, bocce ball, cornhole, and ping pong), and pedestrian walkways. Of these pedestrian walkways, one will be a pathway that connects The Vine with "The lon". The Ion (Exhibit F) will be within an existing tunnel beneath 6th Street near the northeast corner of the site. It is about 160 feet in length and was previously used as a golf cart path of travel between the north and south halves of the former golf course. The applicant will repurpose it for pedestrian use and incorporate aesthetic improvements including decorative lighting to enhance users' experience of the space. The building will be oriented with its main entrance on the southwest corner of the building (facing The Vine) on the public side. Near the entrance will be a fountain which will also serve as an entry point for the walkway that leads to the Ion. C, PARKING: The provision of parking for private recreational buildings is not required by either Table 7.6 (Parking Standards) of the Specific Plan or Table 17.64.050-1 of the Development Code. The rationale for this is that a private recreational facility such as this, would be used by the residents of Empire Lakes/The Resort, and they could walk to the facility consistent with the pedestrian -oriented intent of the overall project. However, as this may not be practical for all residents or compliant with accessibility requirements, the applicant proposes a parking area with 42 parking stalls on the south side of the project site. STAFF COMMENTS: Staff comments are provided in the outline below for consideration/discussion by the Commission. DISCUSSION OUTLINE: Architecture — The Specific Pian permits various different architectural themes throughout Empire Lakes/The Resort. The Specific Plan lists several standard characteristics that must be incorporated into the architecture to ensure that the design is consistent with the selected subject theme. Examples of these characteristics include flat roofs; simple, unadorned parapet walls; contrasting form and/or colors for trim materials; contrasting traditional colors; and vertically proportioned, stacked, or unbalanced placement of windows. Although the architecture of the building maybe further refined, Staff notes that the architecture is generally consistent with the intent and vision of the Specific Plan. As more information and details E3 Pg22 PLANNING COMMISSION PRE -APPLICATION REVIEW STAFF REPORT DRC2017-00885 -- LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP. January 10, 2018 Page 4 regarding the architecture are provided, and as it evolves further, Staff will provide comments/corrections accordingly. Building plotting -- One of the design goals for the overall project is an urban streetscape where the buildings functionally and aesthetically "frame" spaces such as streets, sidewalks, and open space areas. The applicant has utilized the street setback standards described in the Specific Plan. The building will be 5 feet from the property line along The Vine as allowed by the Specific Plan. Although the building is plotted about 102 feet from 6th Street, Staff does not consider that to be detrimental in this case due to the function of the project as a recreational facility where there are a substantial number of interesting outdoor amenities that complement the building itself. In the context of the 3 -story stack flats to the east (part of the neighboring project under review by the City), 6th Street to the north, and the ton, the project will function well as a public and private space. • Building massing and scale — Based on the elevations provided, the massing and scale of the building is interesting. It fits the eclectic architectural themes of the proposed residential development to the east and south that is currently under review by the City. Along with the various outdoor amenities associated with the recreation building, the result is a functional and aesthetic "landmark" at the intersection of 6th Street and The Vine. REQUIRED ENTITLEMENTS: The proposed project will require the following entitlements (minor applications are not listed): 1. Design Review - $91,187; and 2. Environmental Assessment, Initial Study - $2,853 NOTE: Fees are subject to change by Council Resolution and are revised annually on July 1st. SPECIAL STUDIES: The Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for the overall project evaluated it as a whole. To determine the environmental documents that must be prepared for subsequent site- specific projects, the following special studies will be required at the time of formal submittal: 1. Air quality study; 2. Noise study 3. Photometric study; and 4. Water Quality Management Plan NOTE: Additional special studies may be required following the formai submittal of the required applications. EXHIBITS: Exhibit A -- Vicinity Map Exhibit B — Project Description (prepared by the applicant) Exhibit C — Project Site Location (within Tentative Tract Map 20073) Exhibit D —Figure 7.6 — Conceptual Development Plan by Placetype Exhibit E — Placetype Description E3 Pg23 PLANNING COMMISSION PRE -APPLICATION REVIEW STAFF REPORT DRC2017-00885 — LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP. January 10, 2018 Page 5 Exhibit F — Figure 7.25 -- Conceptual Description of the Ion Exhibit G — Pre-Appllcation Review Department Comments Exhibit H — Full-sized Plans (distributed under separate cover) CB:MSIjy E3 Pg24 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES RAINS ROOM RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA A. 7:00 P.M.* — CALL TO ORDER Roll Call: Chairman Oaxaca X 7.15 P.M. Vice Chairman Macias —A_ Commissioner Guglielmo X Commissioner Munoz �X� Commissioner Wimberly _X_ I B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS I This is the time and place for the general public to address the Planning Commission on any Item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The 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 individual 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. ►►STT' C. DISCUSSION ITEMS PLANNING COMMISSION C1. PRE -APPLICATION REVIEW DRC20 r7-00885 - LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP. -A request for a Pre -Application Review of a proposed recreation/community building of 10,759 square feet and open space amenities on 3 parcels with a combined area of 1.94 acres within the Empire Lakes Speck Plan, Planning Area 1, located north of 4th Street, south of 6th Street, west of Milliken Avenue, and east of Utica/Cleveland Avenues. The specific location of the project slte is at the southeast corner of 6th Street and The Vine.; APN: 0210-082-92. Related files: General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015- 00040, and Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20073, Mike Smith, Senior Planner introduced the workshop item for a proposed recreation building at the Resort -Phase IC It will be private and gated for the use of the for -sale property owners in Phase 1B EXHIBIT I Page 1 of E3 Pg2S JANUARY 10, 2018 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES RAINS ROOM RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Public access will lead to the tunnel at the north side of the project side He noted contemporary architecture is largely acceptable and that this design incorporates 360 -degree architecture that will be visible from 6" Street He said there is -movement of the wall planes and it is an interesting building design Bill Kennedy, representing the applicant's learn said the facility will serve the for -sale dwelling owners both north and south of 6" Street and that there w►!1 be another facility further south for rental unit residents Cathy Baranger, of WHA Architects said she worked on the specific plan and analyzed the design for consistency with the plan -using materials such as non -fading wood tiles and high-quality windows Mr Kennedy provided samples of the exterior stucco and noted the wood tyle (2 variations) will be used both on the pool area pathway to the ION and on vertical surfaces of the building He noted the large rectangular cream -colored stone will be used for building cladding He reviewed the Interior spaces of the building plans Commissioner Gughelmo asked if the public art will be at a fixed location Mr Kennedy said there is an entrance piece proposed but will require levels of review He said there are 5 panels that are flexible -any medium can be used they are replaceable and removable He said the replacement program needs to be developed Commissioner Guglrelmo asked of the pool has a 'beach entry and if the dog area is separate from the pool area Mr Kennedy replied affirmatively and noted the pool entry tapers and then meets the lap pool entry, there is a gradual increase of depth He said there is pool fencing and there are two dog -washing stations that are separate from each other and have dedicated perimeter fencing Chairman Oaxaca asked for final Commission comments Commissioner Munoz said it is good work for a first shot -well done Commissioner Oaxaca said the applicant did a very nice job, they articulated the specific plan well with design and material choices He said great job by the team and we would expect no less going forward Commissioner Munoz said he likes how the architecture wraps in to the site location and works into the ION Page 2 of 4 E3 Pg26 { y 41/1"A JANUARY 10, 2018 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES RAINS ROOM RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Commissioner Guglielmo sard it looks great He likes the modern look and appreciates the provision for the taxi station Mr Kennedy said rt fits with the overall development concept (use of fewer vehicles walkabilrty. use of public transit/Metrolink) He said they plan to provide more of these stops elsewhere in The Resort as they will be useful getting people to the train He said they also plan to install 3 charging stations I D. ADJOURNMENT I 7:45 P.M. I, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on January 4, 2018, seventy two (72) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive. -49 Lois J. Schrader Planning Commission Secretary City of Rancho Cucamonga INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and speak into the microphone. After speaking, please sign in on the clipboard located next to the speaker's podium. It is important to list your name, address and the agenda item letter your comments refer to. Comments are generally limited to 5 minutes Page 3 of 4 E3 Pg27 JANUARY 10, 2018 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES RAINS ROOM RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 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 Commiss.on should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for disttibution 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 ori file in the offices of the Planning Department, City Hall. located at 10500 Civic Cehter 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 partywho disagrees with the City Planning Commiss:on 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 $2,725 for all dec-sions 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 atwww.CityofRC.us. Page 4 of 4 E3 Pg28 r►vvvv I 1-r) Amu I v -- r .vv r.nri. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION RAINS ROOM CITY HALL 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE A. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 PM Roll Call: Ray Wimberly X Tony Guglielmo X Candyce Burnett Mike Smith X Alternates: Lou Munoz Francisco Oaxaca B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Committee on any item listed on the agenda. 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 to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Staff Coordinator, depending upon the number of individuals members of the audience. This is a professional businessmeeting 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. C. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS 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. C1. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2018-00104 — SC RANCHO DEVELOPMENT CORP. — A request for site plan and architectural review of a proposed 10,243 square foot recreational building, two ancillary support buildings totaling 1,541 square feet, and an outdoor recreation area on a EXHIBIT J Page 1 oft E3 Pg29 AIVVVV 1 1"1'9 frV IV — ► ■VV rAyll. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION RAINs Room CITY HALL 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE vacant site totaling 1.93 acres of land, Located in the Mixed Use (MU) District of Planning Area 1, Empire Lakes Specific Plan, at the southeast corner of 6th Street and The Resort Parkway; APN: 0210-102-01, 02, 03_ Related Case: Pre -Application Review DRC2017-00960. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA guidelines under CEQA Section 15162 — Subsequent EIRs. and Negative Declarations. The project was approved as presented and forwarded to the Planning Director for consideration. D. ADJOURNMENT 7:45 PM The Design Review Committee has adopted Administrative Regulations that set an 99;00 p.m. adjournment time, if items go beyond that time, they shall be heard only with the consent of the Committee. I, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on day, Wednesday, August 8, 2018 at least seventy two (72) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA. 4S Lois J. Schrader Planning Commission Secretary City of 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. Page 2 of 2 E3 Pg30 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Dat Tran August 14, 2018 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2018-00104 — SC RANCHO DEVELOPMENT CORP. — A request for site plan and architectural review of a proposed 10,243 square foot recreational building, two ancillary support buildings totaling 1,541 square feet, and an outdoor recreation area on a vacant site totaling 1.93 acres of land, located in the Mixed Use (MU) District of Planning Area 1, Empire Lakes Specific Plan, at the southeast corner of 6th Street and The Resort Parkway; APN: 0210-102-01, 02 and 03. Related Case: Pre -Application Review DRC2017-00960. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA guidelines under CEQA Section 15162 — Subsequent EIRs and Negative Declarations. Review Background: The Planning Commission reviewed this project at a Pre -Application Review workshop on February 14, 2018 (Related file: Pre -Application Review DRC2017- 00960). The scope of the Pre -Application Review included the proposed recreation building and outdoor recreation area but did not include the two ancillary support buildings. The Planning Commission praised the quality of the amenities provided. Site Characteristics and Background: The project site is part of a property of 160 acres that was formerly developed with the privately owned and operated Empire Lakes Golf Course generally located in the center of the Empire Lakes Specific Plan ("Specific Plan"). The Specific Plan has an overall area of 347 acres and is generally bound by 4th Street to the south, Milliken Avenue to the east, Cleveland Avenue and Utica Avenue to the west, and 8th Street and the BNSFIMetrolink rail line to the north. The property has been mass graded in preparation for the pending development of the Empire Lakes[The Resort mixed use project. The specific location of the project site is at the southeast corner of 6th Street and the future alignment of The Resort Parkway (formerly referred to as the Vine). The location of the project site is generally within Piacetype S-23 (Recreation (REC)) of the Specific Plan. It is also partially within the Mixed Use Overlay. The site will have an area of 1.93 acres with a street frontage of about 255 feet along 6th Street. It will be bound on the west by the future, north -south primary street ("The Resort Parkway") of the overall project. Following the construction of that street, the site will have a frontage along that street of 327 feet. The existing land uses on and General Plan land use and zoning designations for the project site and the surrounding properties (relative to the future street) are as follows: E3 Pg31 Land Use General Plan Zoning Site Vacant' Mixed Use Mixed Use(Planning Area 1 2 North Vacant (north half of former private golf course Mixed Use Mixed Use (Planning Area 1)2 South Vacant' Mixed Use Mixed Use(Planning Area 1 z East Vacant' Mixed Use Mixed Use(Planning Area 1)1_ West I Vacant' Mixed Use Mixed Use(Planning Area 1 x I - Part of the south half of former private golf course; 2 - Empire Lakes Specific Pian E3 Pg31 DRC COMMENTS DRC2018-00104 — SC RANCHO DEVELOPMENT CORP. AUGUST 14, 2018 Page 2 Proiect Overview: The applicant proposes to construct a 10,243 square foot recreation building within a 1.93 acre area that was designated for recreation in the Specific Plan. The proposed project will, referred to by the applicant as "The Resort Clubhouse", provide recreation and open space area for the future residential developments to the south and east of the project site, The recreation area and the future residential developments will be connected via a driveway that extends throughout the residential site and connects to the parking lot of the recreation area. Access to the recreation facility will be limited to residents of Empire LakeslThe Resort_ The building will be located on the west side of the site, next to The Resort Parkway. The exterior of the building has been designed to consist of visually -interesting fagades viewable from all vantage points. The design incorporates the use of manufactured stone and porcelain siding, complementing the stucco exterior. The structure also incorporates the use of metal canopies and trims, glass and decorative windows to add architectural interest to the building. The combination of materials and variations in both the roof and wall planes create visually interesting facade and breaks up expansive blank facades. The roof is a modern flat design with parapets for limited rooftop screening. Screening of rooftop mechanical equipment are provided primarily by parapet and horizontally mounted textured stucco screen panels. Parapets have been heightened wherever possible to limit views of mechanical equipment from the public right- of-way. Standing seam metal roofs are also provided on the building for varied design. Overall, the design of the building enhances the overall visual quality of the site and meets the City's "360 -degree" design standards. In addition to the main clubhouse building, two smaller buildings are located onsite. An 809 square foot restroom is located along the northern boundary of the site, and a 732 square foot pool equipment building is located in the southeast quadrant of the site. Both buildings incorporate the use of exterior materials and finishes similar to the main building_ Materials include a 3 -coat stucco finish with complementary porcelain siding veneer. The buildings also incorporate metal canopies, textured stones and decorative windows to be compatible with the main clubhouse. Lastly, both buildings have a wainscot along the base of the building to help connect all the veneer together and reduce blank expanses of wall. The area in proximity to all the buildings consists of an outdoor recreation area consisting of landscaped areas, decorative walkways, an outdoor cooking area, a junior Olympic -sized pool and adjacent seating areas. The recreation area includes a variety of surface areas, including concrete, wood planks, modular paving and artificial turf that enhance the overall site design. A decorative monument structure, which will also serve as an entry sign for the south half of the overall project, has also been proposed facing the corner of 6th Street and The Resort Parkway. This structure consists primarily of a wood porcelain tile veneer with a decorative waterfall feature and signage indicating entry to The Resort development. To the north of the project site, on the opposite side of 6th Street, is a proposed recreation area/facility. Access will be provided between the two facilities via an underpass ("The Ion") underneath 6th Street. To the west of the project site, on the opposite side of The Resort Parkway, is another proposed recreation facility that will serve a proposed multi -family residential project. Access between the two recreation areas is provided via a pedestrian crosswalk at the intersection of 6th Street and The Resort Parkway, and a second pedestrian crosswalk further south along The Resort Parkway. A semi -circular pathway extends from the E3 Pg32 DRC COMMENTS DRC2018-00104 — SC RANCHO DEVELOPMENT CORP. AUGUST 14, 2018 Page 3 clubhouse entryway all the way to the northeast corner of the site. The pathway connects to The Ion. A row of "Redi-Rock" retaining walls flanks the eastern side of the pathway. The wall is terraced and progressively steps back from the pathway. Vegetation will be planted on the wall to mitigate the aesthetic impact of the height and scale of the wall. There will be retaining walls on the west side of the pathway with heights of no more than 3 feet that are setback from the pathway pavement by a minimum of 9 feet. The low height of these retaining walls and their placement relative to the walkway improves line -of -sight into the pathway and enhances public safety. The site meets standards for parking, building heights and all associated setbacks for the Empire Lake Specific Plan. The maximum height of the proposed clubhouse building is 27'-3", below the maximum 60 -foot height limit for buildings south of 6th Street. Both pool equipment and restroom buildings are one-story, with neither exceeding 13 feet in height. The buildings onsite collectively maintain a minimum 16 -foot setback from The Resort Parkway along the eastern boundary of the site and a minimum setback of 30 feet along the 6th Street northern boundary. The minimum setback required for The Resort Parkway is 5 feet and the minimum setback for 6th Street is 10 feet. Though there is no parking requirement for the clubhouse or outdoor amenities, the site includes 40 parking spaces for visiting residents and their guests. There is no landscaping minimum established for Planning Area 1. However, the Empire Lakes Specific Plan specifies a Tiered Landscape Program that establishes requirements for different scales, forms, colors and textures of plant materials. This includes a range of plant materials, from low spreading ground cover to tall standing shrubs and plants of up to 5 feet in height. The outdoor landscaped areas include 12 distinct types of groundcover, 30 distinct types of shrubs and 10 trees species, meeting the requirement for a varied plant palette. Staff Comments: Major Issues: None. Staff supports the proposed site layout and overall design of the proposed project. The project is well -integrated into the existing parcels. The buildings consist of visually - interesting fagades which meet the City's 360 -degree design standards. The building facade incorporates a variety of materials and architectural features, including porcelain siding, metal canopies, textured stones and decorative windows, thereby meeting the City's design standards for commercial developments. Adequate parking is provided onsite for the proposed building and landscaping is maintained to adequately screen the site from the public right-of-way, reducing any visual impact upon public roadways. Secondary Issues: Staff recommends the Design Review Committee require the applicant to modify the rooftop stucco screening panels to consist of a single, uninterrupted screening enclosure. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. All Double Detector Checks (DDC) and Fire Department Connections (FDC) required and/or proposed shall be installed at locations that are not within direct view or line -of -sighs of the main entrance. The specific locations of each DDC and FDC shall require the review E3 Pg33 DRC COMMENTS DRC2018-00104 — SC RANCHO DEVELOPMENT CORP. AUGUST 14, 2018 Page 4 and approval of the Planning Department and Fire Construction Services/Fire Department. All Double Detector Checks (DDC) and Fire Department Connections (FDC) shall be screened behind a 4 -foot high block wall. These walls shall be constructed of similar material used on-site to match the building. 2. All ground -mounted equipment, including utility boxes, transformers, and back-flow devices, shall be surrounded by a minimum of two rows of shrubs spaced a minimum of 18 inches on -center. All ground -mounted equipment shall be painted dark green except as directed otherwise by the Fire Department. 3. All walls, including retaining walls, exposed to public view shall be constructed of decorative masonry blocks, i.e., slump stone, split -face, or have a decorative finish such as stucco texture to match a concrete tilt up wall. 4. All wrought iron and tubular steel fences and sliding gates shall be painted black or similarly dark color. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that that the Committee accept the proposal as submitted and forward it to the Planning Commission for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: The project was approved as presented and forwarded to the Planning Director for consideration. Staff Planner: Dat Tran, Assistant Planner Members Present: Commissioners Wimberly and Guglielmo Staff Coordinator: Mike Smith, Senior Planner 1;3 Pg34 } : 10 ; .l'o: Dat Tran, Assistant Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga 1' UNIORANDUNI July 19. 2018 Subject: The Club ori 6"` Lnvironmentaf Review INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND From: -Tina Andersen Vice President, Environmental Planning SC Rancho Development Corp. is requesting design revie« approval (DRC2017-0088 ) for The Club on 6"' recreation center and adjacent parking area (proposed project), which %%ould implement a portion of the approved Rancho Cucamonga industrial Area Specific Plan (IASP) (also referred to as Empire Lakes) Sub -Area IS Specific Plan Amendment Project (Approved Project). The City of Rancho Cucamonga approved the Empire LakesilASP Sub -Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project and certified the associated Final Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) in May 2016 (Empire Lakes Specific Plan Amendment Final EIR or final FIR) (State Clearinghouse (SCI -1] No. 20150-41083). The Empire Lakes Specific Plan Amendment Final EIR was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, California Public Resources Cock, Sections 21000, et seq.) and the State CFQA Guidelines (California Cocle of Regulations, Title 14, Sections 15000, et seq.). The Empire Lakes Specific Plan Amendment Final EIR is intended to serve as the primary environmental document for all entitlements associated with implementation of Planning Area (PAI) of the Empire Lakes Specific Plan, including all discretionary approvals requested or required to implement the Specific Plan, Pursuant to Section 15 162 of the CEQA Guidelines, no subsequent EIR may be required for a project unless the City determines, on the basis of substantial evidence, that one or more of the foiloi%ing conditions are met: A. When an EIR has been certified or a negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following: (1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; (2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or (3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the negative declaration was adopted, shows any of the following: (a) The project would have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration; ,uite 200 • Santo Ana, CA 92707 • T: 714.751.7373 • F. 714.545.8883 EXH187"IT K E3 Pg35 Dat Tran July 19, 2015 Page 2 (b) Significant effects previously examined would be substantially more severe than shorn in the previous EIR; (c) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be leasible Mould in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or (d) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the prCVlOus EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. Consistent with this requirement, individual projects implementing the Specific Plan, including the proposed project (The Club on 6"), will be reviewed to determine if Iliey are within the scope of the development anticipated and evaluated in the Final EIR. If the Implementing project is within the scope of the Approved Project and analysis included in the Final EIR, no additional environmental review is required. Pursuant to Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the analysis presented in this docunient evaluates (lie proposed project in comparison to the Approved Project and [lie analysis in the Empire Lakes Specific Plan Amendment Final EIR for each impact category to determine if the previous analysis adequatelS addresses the proposad project. I'ROJECT DESCRII'TiON `rhe Empire Lakes Specific Plan Amendment Final EIR addres-sed [lie construction -related and operational environmental impacts that n ould result from redevelopment of the 160 -acre Empire Lakes Golf Course with a proposed mixed-use, high-density reside ntial.'coniniercial devclopnient. A maximum of 3,450 residential units and 220,000 square feet (so of non-residential uses is allowed by the Approved Project in PAI, Recreation/open space areas and infrastructure to serve the approved uses are also included. As further described below, the currently proposed project involves construction and operation of an approxiniately 1.5 -acre private community recreation center and adjacent 0.4 -acre parking area in PAI. The recreation center is located southeast of the intersection of 6"' Street and The Resort Parkway (formerly referred to as The Vine), consistent with the Conceptual Development Plan for the Empire Lakes Specific Plan (refer to attached Figure 7.6 from the Empire Lakes Specific Plan). The recreation center is located within Placetype S-23 (Recreation [RECD), The proposed recreation center will sere the "For sale" residential component of the overall project located south of 611 Street. The apartment homes will have separate recreational facilities for exclusive use by these residents. Conceptual site plans for the recreation center are attached. As shown, the recreation center will include an approximately 8,740-sf building, enclosed space, plus a 2,029-sf covered outside deck Totaling 10,769 sf that will accommodate various functions (e.g., meeting rooms, a club room office area, fitness room, restrooms, etc.), and amenities, including but not limited to a pool/spa, outdoor seating areas, outdoor kitchen area with a barbequelservice bar area, a fire pit, dog washing/drying stations, game areas and pedestrian pathways. These amenities are consistent with anticipated amenities identified in the Empire Lakes Specific Plan and evaluated in the final EIR. Psomas E3 Pg3b Dat Tran Jtily 19, 2018 Page 3 Vehicular access to the project site will be from The Resort Parkway only. Pedestrian pathways would be provided to link the recreLltion center to other areas. One oft lie pedestrian pathways wiIIcon nect The Resort Parkway with The Ion, %0ich will be located within the existing tunnel under 6'' Street, and accessed in the northwest portion of the project site (refer to the conceptual site plan). As the recreation center will serve residents living in the Specific Plan aiea, and there are no parkin_ requirements for this use included in the Specific Plan or the Cite of Rancho Cucamonga Development Code. However, a parking area with 42 stalls is provided south of and adjacent to the recreation center. This parking area will include up to 4 electric charging stations. Bicycle rack stations will also be provided north of the vehicular parking area. and will accommodate up to 12 bicycles. The entire project site has been disturbed b� mass grading operations that were recently completed. 6`i' Street borders the site to the north, and the areas to the north, cast, west and south are also undeveloped and recently subjected to mass grading operations. Construction of the recreation center and adjacent parking area is expected to be initiated in August 2013 and be complete by .lune 2019, and is within the overall construction timeframe assumed in the Final EIR for implementation of the Specific Plan development south of 6" Street (Phase 1) (estimated to be from 2017 to the spring of 2021). Consistent with the construction activities evaluated in the Final EIR, con,truction of the proposed project N� ill involve finish grading, building construction, utility installation, paving and architectural coatings. The construction -related analysis presented in the Final EIR assumed that there %%ould be up to 6 heavy truck trips per day during the Phase 1 grading phase, and up to 50 truck- trips rucktrips per da} during the period of time when building, utility and pavement construction activities for Phase I overlap. The finish grading required for the proposed recreation center and adjacent parking area will occur over a limited period of time (less than one month) and would not require import or export of soils and there will be no heavy truck trips associated with the transport of soils. Additionally, there would be a nominal number of truck trips during other construction activities for the proposed project, and no heavy truck trips. With respect to construction equipment, the construction -related analysis presented in the Final EIR for Phase l assuitted there would be up to 8 pieces of equipment on a daily basis during the grading phase (estimated to be 151 days), and up to l i pieces of equipment during other construction phases (up to 1.045 days). The construction activities on a daily basis would be nominal compared to the assumptions in the Final EIR. There \\ ould be a limited number of employees required to operate the recreation center (estimated to be approximately 1.5 full-time equivalent (FTE] inanagementladministrative positions and I ITE maintenance position). ENVIROti'MENTAL, REVIEW CONCLUSION Pursuant to Section 15168(c)(2) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, "If the agency finds that pursuant to Section 15162, no new effects could occur or no new mitigation measures would be required, the agency can approve the activity as being within the scope of the project covered by the program EIR, and no new environmental document would be required." With regard to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines: 1. The proposrd project does not propose substantial changes which will require major revisions to the Empire Lakes Specific Plan Amendment Final EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; PSOM05 E3 Pg37 Da: Tran July 19, 2013 Page 4 2. No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the proposed project is undertakers „hich will require major revisions to the Empire Lake -,i Specific Plan Amendment Final FIR due to the involvement of new significant em irontuental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and 3. No new information of substantial intpartaitcc vas found tlkat Would., (a) create new significant effects; (b) increase the severity of previously examined effects; (c) determine that mitigation measures oralternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible; or (d) introduce mitigation measures or alternatives Iliat are considerably different from those analy7ed In the Empire Lakes Specific Plan Aniendinent Final 1;IR Ilial would reduce significant impacts. In accordance with Sections 151 62 and 151 63 of the State CFQA Guidelines, and based on the analysis presented in this document, it is concluded that construction and operation of the proposed project, %Nhich implements the previously approved Empire Lakes Specific Plan Amendment, and adjacent parking area would not reSUlt in environmental effect, that 1wre not Claniined in the Empire Lakes Specific flan Amendment Final Program FIR. The proposed project was adequately covered by the C%akiation and mitigation measures in the Final I IR. No additional CEQA docllniCntation is required. R APro;ec,s%LEVMLEY:000700iGu5 on 6TAEnv Rev hromotrnr Ro rcr.v Me:no•07i978 Cot - Ps � -17as 1;3 Pg38 Metrolink San Bernardino Line ,:.`.�-F=-=i4 t'fi ti-t-'ri-i-•i':I��'='3 ��1 �"I�'E:Tr�;'I'1'I-I'�.-�f L'F'; F'{'-�' .T�, __L.�`i�f'�: f�i' .I'. `,�a'Q� '� .:�r'��'. Pocket Park v' Metrolink Rancho Fr,Cucamonga Station l.1U E' r :UN nAe U9x x.e•6 zZ. .a?MAC, I Y56t1 MU I .L{.,l�eoa�c C (a CL w z70AC •� i 7.3 AY y " itmWAC 7,1i Sn2t = Su: e$ry 5' ,b7i 1�3AC =,~: REc , (] }t.... , 7t'i sill'.:, faasCmAc' , . ACL ' x'14 % �s ! N•7X44 N-9 E V�j ' North VN ' . 1� RECD . '. . , • . : ,�. - - Urban Plaza ^ O, 5tres`t N. R,5 Sbuth • r REGClubon6th f Project Site RCS-223 5-14 7 CL seo7e' CL — �I4 SA AC •. id•1S01+AC - 4, ,i ,a3lbUAC' ' e Pocket�� 1 5.15 ti- Parl%ai, vN VN 7l7A r ' 9 x 1 S,21 F' '1 VN S 17 M;51 AC ft RLLA `- 4'414 / ,� •t ' f rt - ' { t� t� �. '� , VN i Pia Cetypega^d AG !jS ti El ' ,b_lI IE'AL , Tra-wt IT) � ` \ 1 ! pp Mixed Use i "U6 w�•IF. r I �'.��*� ,o C 'ti � • . � ` i.r.] f �.`�' F; �%f! Ur68ri Nfi.ghlCo,hood{'3N� '•' ..� Care Uv:ng (CE) p Village Netght)o.good (VN1 flLltl %.t {.s'If=ltl7f+f:=,k"fle[rKaLonIREl:I a "'� .�,,(" T �' *. �r' .gee, .+ri • DV-a Ivpll�-pt In by } +µs �#Mu Overlay 7. . rf -1 _ � }"IE ' Plac;.tyj)' ..w ... . r- . _ "i±4th Street ,� � re L a kes E]#ta- flgpfE not i# }tale. E3 Pg.39 Sixth Street ~ / ^ iT StX'H 57REET L Loll LOT 215 -A :Es V SPAZES Trr CUA -.4 S:XT-,4 F3 Pg4l CLUB ON 6r" PROJECT, ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS FOR PROJEC'MITII PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT 'I lie folio%Ong analysis addresses the potential impacts frons `I he Club on 6` and adjacent parking area (proposed project) in relation to the analysis presented in the Empire Lake s;hidirctr'ial Area 51mcirle Mall (I -ISP) Sub -Area IN Slyocrftr' Plan Amendin ent Pre feel I inal Pr agr•ctrn Irtl'irnnur4 rrlcri Intpuc'1 Repoo (EiR) certified in May 2016 (Empire Lakes Specific Plan Amendment Final EIR or Final UR) (State Clearilighouse [SCI 11 No. 2015041053). The discussion below is formatted to address each of the thresholds addressed in the Final EIR, and the thresholds that were addressed in the Initial Study prepared for the Empire Lakes Specific Plan Amendment Draft EIR, It should be noted that, consistent %%ith the conclusions in the Initial Study, there are no agricLilt ttral, forestry or mineral resou:'c:'s located in Planning Area (PA) I of the Empire Lakes Specific Plan area, i[icludinL ilia project site, and no further discussion of these topical issues is provided. Applicable Project Design Features (PDFs), Regulatory Requirements (Rlts), and Mitigation Measures, (NINIs) from the Empire Lakes Specific Plan Amendment Final EIR are incorporated into the proposed project, some ol'which are specifically referenced below. 1.0 Ai✓STnETICS Threshold 1.1 World the pri ject harc a sitbstantiul adi-erse effeel on a scenic vislu? 'Elie proposed project in%olves the development of a recreation center and adjacent parking area %% ithin PAI of the Empire Lases Specific Plan area south 01 6" Street and east of the I Ile Resort Parkway (relbrred to previously as the Fine), and complies %%ith the development standards in the Lnipire Lakcs Specific Plan and the Design Concept for vie%% corridors, including along The Resort Park%uiy. Consistent with the approved Empire Lakes Specific Plan Amendment project (Approved Project) and the analysis in the Final F -M. due to the proposed project's location in the sou'hern area of the City and the lack of scenic resources in the immediate ars{ i, the proposed recreation center and adjacent parking area will not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic ITSOUrM No new or substantially more Severe impacts will result from implementation of the proposed project. Threshold 1.2 lVould the project suhstautiallv degrade the existing visual character or qualili' of the site and its surroundinl;,s'? 'rhe* types and methods of construction activities for the proposed project are consistent with those Identified and evalluatud in the Final LIR. Construction staging %%iH be located as far its possible from residential development located over 250 feet east of the project site, and perimeter screening wiI I be installed around the project site, Which will obstruct vie%vs of ongoing construction activities from adjacent ground level vantage points (PDF 1-2). Trees previously located at the project site have been removed and mass grading has been completed. As preserved in the site plan in the Project Description, the proposed project will comply with (lie development stiindards and design guidelines (architectural and landscape) identified in the Specific Plan, including height restrictions (refer to PD1; 1-1) and will be port of a visually' cohesive urban community. Consistent with the conclusions in the Final EIR, the proposed project will not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings during construction or operation, resulting in a less than significant impact. No ne%c or substantially more severe impacts %% ill result from implementation of the proposed project compared to %%hat %%vas analyzed in the Final EIR for the Approved Project. E3 Pg42 Threshold 1.3 Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare which youthl adverselr affect dar or nighttime vienw is the area? The types and methods of construction activities For the proposed project are consistent with those identified and evaluated in the f=inal FIR. Construction staging will be located as far as possible from residential development east of the project site (PDI` 1-2), and temporary nighttime lighting will face downward and be shielded to minimize broadcasting light into the sky. A lighting plan and photometric study has been prepared for the proposed project to demonstrate compliance ss ith the lighting design requirements outlined in the Specific [']all and to ensure that proposed lighting does not spill over into adjacent uses. The plan shows that lights ssould be provided at the gaming plaza, senting areas, boardwalk, walkways, and parking area; around the recreation building, pool, spa, fire pit, and public art piece; along the pathway to llie Ion; at the outdoor kitchen/service bar, lounge areas, patios, cabanas; and on the trees. Light will not spillover intts adjacent uses to the cast and south; the site is bordered by roadways to the north and west. Further, the proposed building materials ss ill adhere to the architectural and landscape development staindards and design gutidelines outlined in the Specific Plan and Owse materials will not result in potential glare impacts. Connsistent w ith the conclusions in the Final EIR, the proposed project ss ill not create a nese source of substantial lialit or glare ss hick will adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area during construction or operation. No ness or substantially more severe impacts will result from implementation ol'the proposed project compared to what was analyzed in the Final EIR for the Approved Project. Would the project substantially danut, a scenic resources, inchWiug, but not limited to, trees, roel, outcroppings, « txl historic buildings within a state scenic highiva -? The proposed project is located in PAI of the Empire Lakes Specific Plan area and, consistent ss ith the analysis presented in the Initial Study of the Draft EIR, is not within the viewshed of a state scenic highway. No new or substantially more severe impacts will result from implementation of the proposed project compared to what was analyzed in the Final EIR for the Approved Project, 2.0 Alit QUALITY Threshold 11 i!'ould the project conflict with or obstruct implemeutaliou of the applicable air qualit}, Platt ? The Final EIR concluded that the Approved Project would result in a significant and unavoidable conflict with the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) 2012 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) due to long-term emissions of nonattainment pollutants exceeding SCAQibID significance thresholds and project trip generation substantially greater than trip generation anticipated in the City's General Plan for PAL The proposed project will not generate new residents and will have a nominal number of employees, is consistent with the Approved Project (as discussed under the Project Description), and incorporates applicable Final EIR RRs and h-IMs discussed in the analysis below. Therefore, no new or substantially more severe impacts related will result from implementation of the proposed project compared to what was analyzed in the Final EIR for the Approved Project, The SCAQ_MD adopted the 2016 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) in March 2017. The 2016 AQMP incorporates the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) latest growth forecasts as presented in the SCAG 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2016-2010 RTP. -'SCS). These updated growth projections include the growth that will occur from implementation of the Empire Lakes Specific Plan, including tate proposed project. Thresholtl2.2 IVoulrl the project violate title air qualio, standeird or contrihitte sit bst n tialty to all aristinb ar projected air quality violation? Construction -Related Impacts Maximum daily construction air pollutant emissions were estimated in the Final EIR to compare with limits (thresholds) established by the SCAQMD_ Emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) were determined to be potentially significant; the maximum average daily NOx emissions were estimated to be 128 pounds per day, compared with the SCAQMD threshold of 100 pounds per day. Emissions of all other pollutants were determined to be well below the SCAQMD thresholds. 'tile Final L' -IR concluded that with incorporation of RRs and IVIN-1s, regional and local construction emissions from the Approved Project, including NOx emissions. would be less than significant. With respect to construction -related emissions. the proposed project would comply with SCAQI%,lD regulations (refer to RR 2-1 and RR 2-2), and as discussed in the Project Description. daily construction activities (truck trips, equipment, etc.) w ill be nominal compared to the assumptions for the air quality analysis in the Final EIR_ Construction of tate proposed project will involve the use of the sante types of construction egUil)1hlCat assumed in the Final El1Z and in compliance with RR 2-1, RR 2-2, MI'vi 2-I and MM 2-2. Because (lie mass grading activities for the project site have been completed, the construction activities for the proposed project will not overlap with mass grading, which was the basis for the maximum average emissions analysis in the final EIR. Tile type and amount of equipment to be used during remaining construction activities for the proposed project NNill var) on a dally basks; but %pili be within the average maximunhs set forth in the Final DR. Additionally, the daily truck trips will be significantly less than the assumed in the final EIR analysis (50 truck trips per clay)_ "therefore, the equipment and it -tick emissions from daily construction activities at the site will not exceed that estimated in the air quality analysis presented in the Final EIR. No oe�� or substantially more severe impacts will result from implementation of the proposed project compared to %Ont was analyzed in the Final CIR for the Approved Project. Operational Emissions Even with incorporation of Final }SIR MiIM 2-3 through MM 2-6, long-term operational regional emissions of ozone (O,,) precursors (VOC and NOx), carbon nionoxide (CO), PVI10, and P�%'12.5 due to mobile and coihsunler product sources from the Approved Project were determined to be significant and unavoidable. The proposed recreation center, which implements a required recreational component of the Approved Project, incorporates or will otherwise comply with RR 2-4 (a gas fire pit is planned), RR 2-5 (bicycle parking), and RR 2-6 (compliance with odor, particulate matter, and air containment standards)_ Additionally, although not required, parking is being provided as a convenience to residents; the parking area will include up to four electric charging stations (refer to NIM 2-3 and MM 2-5). As discussed in the Traffic Memo included in Attachment A of this document, the recreation center will be restricted for use by residents in the "for sale" homes only and will not generate external vehicular trips. I rips generated by guests are considered in the overall trip generation for residential units. Minimal vehicle trips would be generated by the estimated 2.5 full-time equivalent (FTE) employees. Implementation of MM 2-6, which encourages use of transit services, wil l further reduce emissions associated with recreation center operations. Therefore, no new or substantially more severe impacts will result from implementation of the proposed project compared to what was analyzed in the Final EIR for the Approved Project. E3 Pgf!. T lrreshohl ? 3 Would the project resull hi a curuulative'll. considerable net increase of anycriteria pollutantfor r which the project region is in nun-attaiuinelrt urnler an applicable federal or slate ambient air qualitt, standard (incluilinl; releasin; emissions which eviceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors) ? `rhe Final EIR concluded that the Approved Project would result in less than significant cumulative regional and local construction emissions with the incorporation of Mi\ -1 2-1 and NIM 2-2. It was also concluded that the Approved Project would result in significant and unavoidable cumulative ion- term regional emissions of O, precursors (VOC and NOX), PM 10, and PM2.5, all nonattainment pollutants, due to mobile and consumer products sources. As discussed above, the proposed project incorporates applicable RRs and I`1111s in the Final DR; is consistent with the construction -related and operational aspects of the: Approved Project; and is consistent with the analysis assumptions used for the analyses in the Final EIR. 'therefore, no new or substantially more severe cumulative impacts related to construction and operation of the proposed project will result compared to what was analyzed in the Final EiR for the Approved Project. Threshold 3.9 Wouht the project c.rpu_tie sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? The Final EIR concluded that the Approved Project would result in a less than significant impact related to (1) off-site CO hotspots, (2) exposure of persons to construction and operational pha a criteria pollutants, (3) eXpn_ure of poisons to construction and operational phase toxic air contaminants (TACs) generated on site, and (1) TAC on-site impacts from offsite warehouse/distribution center and train operations. Existing sensitive receptors in pro.ximity to the project site are the residential use, approximately 275 feet to the east; these residential uses were identified in the final EIR and potential exposure of residences to pollutants were addressed. The proposed project will not generate external vehicular trips and will not increase average vehicle delay at any intersection. Therefore, the proposed project will not result in the creation of a CO hot spot. As discussed in the Project Description, the consu'ttction activities associated with the proposed project (e.g., number of truck trips and construction equipment per day, duration of construction activities) will not exceed and will be nominal compared to the construction assumptions that were the basis for the analysis in the Final EIR. Construction activities for the proposed project will not expose off-site receptors to significant criteria pollutant emissions and the impact will be less than significant. further. TAC emissions during construction will also be less than significant. The recreation center and adjacent parking area will not involve am uses or operations that %%ill generate 'TACs. Therefore, no new or substantially mare severe impacts "ill result from implementation of (lie proposed project compared to what was analyzed in the Final EIR for the Approved Project. Wluuld the project create objectionable odors affecting, a substantial number of people? The Initial Study prepared for the Draft EIR concluded that construction -related odors associated with the Approved Project would be short-term, would not affect a substantial number of people, and would be less than significant. It also concluded that odors from operation of proposed uses would be no different than in surrounding development, would not be considered objectionable, and would be less than significant. 'the proposed project will not involve construction activities, uses, or operational activities that would generate objectionable odors or were not anticipated for the Approved Project and analyzed in tite sinal EIR. Therefore, no new or s-.rbstantially more severe impacts will result from implementation of the proposed project compared to what was analyzed in tite Final EIR for the Approved Project. r n -Ig?l 3.0 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Threshold 3.1 Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either (lireclll, or through habitat modification, an ant• species identi/ted as a candidata, sensitive, orspecial status species in local or regional plans, policies, or reguilatious, or ht- the California Department of Fish and Gaine or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? The f=inal EIR concluded that PAI did not support native plant communities and did not provide suitable habitat for sensitive biological resources. As shown on the Conceptual Development Plan by Piacet) pe presented in the Project Description of this document, the physical impact area for the proposed project is entirely ss ithin PAI and does not include any areas that were not part of the Approved Project development area analyzed in the final EIR. I'lie project site has been mass graded and vegetation previously found at the site (including trees) has been removed in accordance with permits issued by the City. Therefore, the project site does not provide habitat for species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies. or regulations, or by the California Department of Dish and Wildlife (CDI' 1%N') or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (US1'%VS). No tiew or substantially more severe inipacts will result with implementation of the proposed project compared to vthlt was anal}zed in the Final E[R for the Approved Project_ Threshold 3.3 11"ould they project have as substantial rrrlverse effect on anrt- riparian habitat or other sensitive natural connnunily itlentif►ed in local or refgional pla►rs, policies, re lalatiorrs, or ht' the California Department of Fish and Game or U..S. Fish and 11i1ildife.Service? Threshohl3.3 1Voultl the project have it substantial adverse effect on feeleralhr protected iretlanrly as tlejined hr Section 404 of the Clean 1VaterAct {ancluddrq , but not limiled to, mur.sh, vernalpool, coastal, etc.) through tlirect removal,filling, ht,drological interruption, or other ureirns? The Final EIR concluded that that there yseie no Isetlands, riparian habitat, sensitive natural communities, or areas under the jurisdiction of the CDFW, U.S, Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), USF4t'S, or Regional Water Quality Coiutrnl Board (RWQCB) located within PAI, including the previous artificial ponds associated with the fortner golf course. The physical impact area for the proposed project is entirely within PAI and does not include any areas that were not part of the Approved Project development area analvxed in the Final EIR. The project site has been mass graded and the artificial ponds and vegetation previously found at the site have been removed in accordance with permits issued by the City. -Cherefore, the project site does not include wetlands, riparian habitat, sensitive natural communities, or areas under the jurisdiction of the CDF W, USACE, USFWS or RWQCB. No new or substantially more severe impacts will result with implementation of the proposed project compared to what was analyzed in the Final EIR for the Approved Project. Thresholt13.4 Woultl the project interfere suhstantiallt• ivith the movement of aurp native resident or inigratorj, fish or ivilrllife species or with estahliylred motive resitlent or rnigratorp wildlife corridors, or impetle the use of native wildlife nurseq sites? 'rhe [-incl LIR concluded that redevelopment oftltc previous Empire Lakes Golf Course would not affect regional wildlife movement through the Inland Empire or within the south coast region, and would not disrupt or adversely affect terrestrial wildlife species movement due to the lack of connectivity with open space areas. It was also concluded the removal of artificial ponds at the golf course would have a less than significant impact to migrating waterfowl and avian species. The Final EIR identified that vegetation and trees throughout the golf course had the potential to provide nesting opportunities for various birds and raptor species but compliance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and Sections 3503, 3503.5, 3511, and 3513 of the California Fish and Gauze Code, which protect nesting birds and raptors (refer to RR 3-1 and RR 3-2) would ensure that impacts to nesting birds and E3 Pa' -'.6 raptors are less than significant. Also, all tree replacement, protection, and maintenance would be conducted in accordance with City regulations (refer to RR 3-3 and RR 34). The vegetation and trezi located at the project site have been removed and mass grttdin�c, activities have been completed. Construction of the proposes[ project, which is located entire]%- within the physical impact area for the Approved Project evaluated in the f=inal EIR, will not involve any activities with the potential to disrupt nesting birds or raptor species. No new or substantially more severe impacts will result with implementation of tote proposed project compared to what seas analyzed in the Final EIR for the Approved Project. Threshold 3.5 1VoWit the project conflict with arlt' local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or orllinrince? "frees previously located within PAI, as identified in the final EIR, have been removed in accordance with required tree removal permits issued by the Cite. There are no trees currently located on the project site and the proposed project will not conflict with the City's tree protection policies outlined in the City's Development (i.e., Chapter 17.80, Tree Preservation, and Section 17.16.50). No new or substantially more severe impacts will result with implementation of the proposed project compared to what was analyzed in the final EIR for the Approved Project. lVould the project ronflia with the prorisions of tit rlttol) r Hahitat Conservation Mut, 1 antral Con1n111uitt, Conservation Plrttt, or outer approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? As identified in the Initi�ll Study prepared for the Empire Lakes Specific Plan Amendment Draft EIR, the City of Rancho Cucamonga is not located within an adopted Flabitat Conservation Plan; Natural Communities Conservation Pleat; or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan area. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project will not conflict with the provisions of an adopted plan. No nc1v or substantial[)' more severe impacts will result with implementation of the proposed project compared to what was analyzed in the Initial Study. 4.0 CULTURAL RESOURCES Threshold 4.1 Would the project cause a stihstantittl adverse chit na, a in the sign iftcan ce of an archaeological resource ar defined in Section 13064.5' The Final EIR concluded that although not anticipated, there was a potential for discovery of previously unknown archaeological resources during deeper excavation activities in native sediment. Potential impacts %sere determined to be less than significant with implementation of identified mitigation measures, which identify actions to be taken if resources are discovered (refer to MM 4-1 and MM 4-2). Nlass grading activities for the Approved Project in the area south of 6'1' Street, including the project site, have been completed and no archaeological resources were discovered. Since finish grading and other ground disturbance activities for construction of the proposed recreation center and adjacent parking area will disturb soils previously disturbed by mass grading, these soils are not expected to contain archaeological resources. It should be noted that, as with the Approved Project, the provisions of Assembly Bill (AB) 52 are not applicable to the proposed project. AB 52 is applicable to projects that have a Notice of Preparation (NOP) or a Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration filed on or after Jule I, 2015. The NOP for the Empire Lakes Specific Plan Amendment Draft EIR %%as distributed in April 2015. AB 52 establishes a consultation process %with California Native American tribes, and establishes Tribal Cultural Resources as a new class of resources to be considered in the determination of project impacts and mitigation. AB 52 requires lead agencies to provide notice to tribes that are traditionally and culturally, affiliated with the geographic area of a proposed project, if they have requested such notice in writing. While project notification pursuant to AB 52 is not required for the proposed project, it is important to note that coordination with Native American tribes was conducted E3 Pg47 during preparation of the Empire Lakes Specific Plan Amendment Final EIR (rcier so Section 4.4, Cultural Resources, of the Draft EIR). The required mitigation measures «ould protect Unknown tribal cultural resources should they be present at the project site. However, no tribal cultural resources were encountered during mass grading activities. Since finish grading activities for construction of the proposed recreation center and adjacent parking area will disturb soils previously disturbed b) mass grading, these soils are not expected to contain tribal cultural resources. Therefore, construction of the proposed project, which is located entirely within the physical impact area for the Approved Project evaluated in the Final EIR, will not impact archaeological or tribal cultural resources_ No nese or substantially more severe impacts will result with implementation of the proposed project compared to what was analyzed in the final EER for the Approved ProjeA. Threshold 4 Z Wonld the project direcllf, or indirectll, destroy a unique paleontological re.sottree or site or tinique geologic feature? The final EIR concluded that although not anticipated, there was a potential for discovery of previously unknown paleontological resources during deeper excavation activities in native sediment. Potential impacts were determined to be less than significant with implementation ofidentified mitigation measure, which identify actions to be taken if resources are discovered (refer to NIM 4-3). Mass grading activities I,or the Approved Project in the area south of 6"' Street, including the project site, have been completed and [10 paleontological resources were discovered. Since Finish grading and other ground disturbance activities for construction of the proposed recreation center and adjacent parking area «ill disturb soils- previously oilspreviously disturbed by truss grading, these soils are not expected to contain paleontological resotu•ces. Therefore, construction of the proposed project, which is located entirely within the physical impact area for the Approved Project evaluated in the Final EIR, N% ill not impact pale011tological resources. No ne%k or substantially more severe impacts will result with implementation of the proposed project compared to what %vas analyzed in the Final EIR lai' the Approved Project. Threshold 4.3 JVottld the project dis'turh arrt• lutinan remains, iucludin^ those interred oilIside of formal cemeteries? The Final EIR identifies that it is unlikely human remains would be en€ountercd during construction of the Approved Project, and %%ith adherence to State regulations (i.e., Sections 7050,5-7055 of the California 1 lealth and Safety Code and Section 5097.95 of the California Public Resources Code), impacts would be less than significant in the event human remains are discovered (refer to RR 4-1). Mass grading activities for the Approved Project in the area south of 6`�' Street, including the project site, have been completed and no human remains were discovered. Since fine grading and other ground disturbance activities for construction of the proposed recreation center and adjacent parking area will disturb soils previously disturbed by mass grading, these soils are not expected to contain human remains. Therefore, construction of the proposed project, which is located entirely within the physical impact area for the Approved Project evaluated in the Final EIR, will not impact human remains. No nese or substantially more severe impacts will result with implementation of the proposed project compared to what was analyzed in the Final EIR for the Approved Project. JVinuld the project cause a substantial adverse change in the sigitiftcauce of a historical resource its defined in Seaton 15064.51 As identified in the Initial Study prepared for the Empire Lakes Specific Plait Amendment Draft EIR, no historic resources were identified in PAI and no impact to historic resources would result from implementation of the Approved Project. The physical impact area for the proposed project is entirely within the physical impact area for the Approved Project evaluated in the Final EIR. No historic resources exist on the project site, which has since been mass graded. No new or substantially more severe impacts will result with implementation of the proposed project compared to what was analyzed in the Initial Study. 7 5.0 GEOLOGY AND SOILS Thresholds 5.1 and 5.3 lYould the project elfloe people or•structures to potential substantial adverse effects, urclutlinl; the risk of loss, iujmrv, or death involvinf : (i) Strong seismic b round shaking, or (ii) Seismic -related grorrrtrl failure, including liquefaction The physical impact area for the proposed project is entirely within the impact area addressed in the Final 17 IR for the :Approved Project and there have been no changes related to seismicity or local geologic conditions. Additionally, there are no proposed changes to the type of land uses to be developed at the project site. Consistent with the conclusions of tile Final EIR, due to site conditions (groundwater depth at 350 feet or more below the ground surface), tite potential for seismic -related ground failure from licluefactian will be low, resulting in a less than significant impact. This is confirmed by the Preliminary Geotechnical investigation that was completed in April 20171 for the proposed project. I lowever, as with the Approved Project, the proposed project will expose people and structures to L,eoiechnical hazards associated with seismic ground shaking and potential geology and soils impacts «ill be the same. i�,lass grading of the project site has been completed in accordance with the reC011111lendatiOnS outlined in the Geoteclinical feasibility Study and the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation (refer to RR 5-2); applicable portions of the California building Code, and/or applicable City ordinances (refer to RR 5-1 and RR 5-2); and the recommendations identified in supplemental project -specific geotechnical investigations (refer to 5-1). The proposed project will be constructed in accordance with applicable regulations and pertinent geotechnical recommendations, resulting in a less than si_,nificant impact, consistent with the conclusions of the final ITER. No new or substantially more severe impacts will result With implementation of the proposed project compared to what was analyzed in Elie Final EIR for tine Approved Project. Threshold 5.3 Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? -las; grading activities at the project site have been completed and were conducted in accordance with applicable requirements identified in the Final FIR and subsequent site-specific geotechnical investigations. Proposed construCtion activities for [lie project will be consistent with those identified and analyzed in the Final EIR, will occur within the physical impact area for the Approved Project, and will also be conducted in accordance with applicable requirements. A5 identified in tine Final EIR, the project site is located in a soil erosion hazard area, and there is potential for soil erosion during construction. However, this impact is less than significant with adherence to local and state regulations developed to limit fungitive dust and erosion into surface waters. Chapter 17.66.060 of the City's Development Code requires development projects to comply with SCAQMD requirements for control of fugitive dust (refer to RR 2-I and RR 5-3). Further, construction activities will be conducted in adherence to applicable local and state water duality requirements, including implementation of erosion -control Best Management Practices (BNIPs) outlined in the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and in compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permitting requirements (refer to RR 8-3). As concluded in the Final EIR, once the proposed project is operational, the potential for soil erosion via wind and water will be minimized through the introduction ofdevelopment, including buildings, paved areas, and landscaping. landscaping will be installed in accordance with requirements in the City's Development Code to control soils erosion, among other purposes (refer to RR 5-4). No new or 1 LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc. (LOR). 2017 (April). Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, Empire Lakes Golf Course, Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County. California, Project No, 30631 G. 11. E3 Pg?1.9 substantially more si:vere impacts will result with implementation of the proposed project compared to what was analyzed in the Final EM for the Approved Project. Threshold 5.4 A'otrld lite project be located on a geologic !blit or sail that is unstable, or thal mould become tttislable as a result of the project, and pulential ty result iu onsite or offsile lanticlide, lateral spreading, subsidence, litliteftictioll, or collapse? As identified in the Initial Study prepared for the Empire Lakes Specific Plan Amendment Draft Elft. PAI, which includes the project site, is not in an area subject to landslides or liquCrUtion. The physical impact area for the proposed project is entirely within the impact area addressed in the Final EIR for the Approved Project and there have been no chanes related to seismicity or local geologic conditions. Additionally, there are no proposed changes to the type of land uses to be developed at the project site. As required by MM -1, site-specific geotechnical investigations have been prepared for the proposed project. 'Elle proposed project will be exposed to the same geotechnical issues related to unstable soils as the Approved Project and will be constructed in accordance with the recommendations from applicable geotechnical investigations. Mass grading operations have been completed at the site and the surrounding area in accordance with applicable portions of the California Building Code, the recommendations ofthe Preliminary Geoteclinical Investigation, and the Mass Grading Plan (LOR 2014)2, further, unsuitable soils were removed during mass trading activities. Therefore, potential impacts related to unstable soil are less titan significant, consistent with (lie conclusions of the Final EIR. No new or substantially' more severe impacts w ill result with iniplenteatation of the proposed project compared to what was analy'7ed in the Final EIR for the Approved Project, Threshall! 5.5 IYoulrl the project be located oil eyausive soil, as rlcfued ill Table 18 1 B of the Unifornl Builtling Coda (1994), erealing substantial ris6s to life or properly? `file physical impact area for the propose([ project is entirely within the physical impact area for the Approved Project evaluated in the final EAR. Supplemental geotechnical investigations conducted pursuant to M.Vl S-1 confirmed that the onsite soils have a eery low- potential for expansion. No new or substantially more severe impacts will result w ith implementation of the propo.;ed project compared to what was analyzed in the Final EIR for the Approved Project. Woultt the project efvpose people or structures to potential submintial attrerse efjeely, including the risk of loss, injurl-I or death hivolring.• • Rupture of a known ealthilitahe fault, as delineated oil the most recent flftluist-Priolo Earthquake Fault lonhtl; Nap issued ht, the State Gcologisl far the area or based oft ollieFr ,vub,stanital evitleijee of a Awown fault? (Refer to Division of Hines and Geologgy Special Publication 4Z) • Landslides? As identified in the Initial Study prepared for the Empire Lakes Specific Plan Amendment Draft EIR, PAI is not within a State of California Earthquake Fault Zone and no active or potentially active faults are known to exist lit or near the site. Also, the low relief of the site and surrounding area precludes the potential for landslides. This is confirmed by the Pieliminary Geotechnical Investigation that was completed in April 2017. The physical impact area for the proposed project is entirely within the physical impact area for the Approved Project evaluated in the final EIR; therefore, no impacts related to rupture of a known earthquake fault and landslide hazards will result. No new or substantially more severe 2 LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc. (LOR). 2018 (March), Geotechnical Building Pad Certification Letter. The Resort, Tentative Tract No. 20073, Rancho Cucamonga, California. E3 ?r -r7 impacts will result with implementation of the proposed project compared to what was analyzed in the [«ilial Stud\-. Would the project have soils incapable of atleguatelt, .supporting the use ofseplic tanks or alternates e 11'asle water disposal st•stems where sewers are not arailable fur the disposal of waste water? Consistent with the conclusions of the Initial Study prepared for the Empire Lakes Specific Plan Amendment Draft LIR, the proposed project will connect to existing sewer lines and treatment facilities, and septic tanks or an alternative wastewater disposal system will not be utilized- No new or substantially more severe impacts will result with implementation of the proposed project compared to what was analyzed in the Initial Study, 6.0 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Threshold 6.1 Would the project geaterate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or intlirectlj,, that total' have 0siglliflcant ianpact on the environnlent? The proposed project implements the Approved Project with the development of a recreation center within PAI, to serve adjacent proposed "for sale" residenti,,il units. The proposed project incorporates or will otherwise comply with Final EIR RR 6-1 (adherence to Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards); RRs 6-2 and 6-4 (adherence to applicable California Green Building Standards including as designated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga Green Building Compliance Nlatrices); RR 6-3 (installation of recycled water sNstenhs); RR 2-4 (no wood burning stoves kvill be installed); and PDF 6-1 (tree planting). The project will also implement iIMM 6-1 related to the use of high efficiency non -incandescent light bulbs and lighting futures. As discussed in Section 13 of this evaluation, the proposed project is consistent h�ith the development assumptions for Placetype 5-23 contained in the Final FIR and supporting Traffic Impact Analysis. Tlie proposed project will be for resident use only, and a_S concluded in the Traffic Memo, the project will not generate external trips, consistent with what was assumed ill the Final EIR for the Approved Project (for Placetype 5-23). Further, as discussed in the Project Description, the construction methods will be similar but the equipment will be nominal compared to those anticipated in the Final E' R. Therefore, (lie estimated greenhouse gas (GIIG) emissions from operation of the proposed project and construction activities (amortized over 30 year;) would not exceed the GFIG emissions assumed for the Approved Project and will be less than significant, consistent with the conclusions of the Final EIR. No nese or substantially more ses ere impacts will result compared to what was analyzed in the Final EIR for the Approved Project. Threshold 6.2 IVould the conflict svith an applicable phut, policy, or regulation adopledfor the purpose of retlucirtg the enti.ssious of greenhouse gas emissions? The proposed project implements the Approved Project and does not involve any changes to the type or amount of allowed land uses, or the amount of GFIG emissions that would be generated during construction and operation. Specifically, the proposed project involves development of a recreation center on a site designated for recreational uses within PAI. Consistent with the conclusions of the Final EIR, the proposed project will not conflict with applicable plans, policies or regulations adopted for the purposes of reducing GI -IG emissions, including, but not limited to, the SLAG RTClSCS and the San Bernardino Association of Governments (SANBAG) GFIG Reduction Plan. No new or substantially more severe impacts will result compared to what was analy2ed in the Final EIR for the Approved Project. 10 1=3pas 1 7.4 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Threshold 7.1 Would the project create ct significant hazard to the public or the em ironmeal through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous inaterials? The proposed project does not involve an)- changes to the I)pe of land uses to be developed as part of the Approved Project in PAI. Therefore, compared to the Approved Project, there will be no change in the types hazardous materials that will be used during construction and operation of the proposed project. It Should be noted that operation of the pool at the recreation center ►mould involve standard periodic use of sodium hypochlorite (chlorine) and muriatic acid for pool maintenance and water treatnlent and disinfection. Bulk storage tants for these materials that are not accessible to 13001 users or other individuals would be located in the pool equipment enclosure (chemical room). Periodic deliveries of pool chemicals would be made to the recreation center to resupply the storage tanks. The amount of these materials to be stored andlor used at the site would not exceed the quantities established in the California Building Code. f=urther, a programmable chemical automation system would be installed for the pool and spa for continuous monitoring of eater chemistry and for automatic control of the chemical feeders. As with the Approved Project, through compliance with existing, applicable fla7.an'dOLIS materials rcgulmion;; (e.g., Hazardous Material Transportation Act, the ReSpurce Conservation and Recover% Act RCRAj. the California Hazardous Waste Control Act, and the California Accidental Release Prevention Program included as RR 7-1 and RR 7-2 in the f=inal 1;[R), the proposed project will not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, storage, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. This impact will be less than significant. consistent with the conclusions of the Final EIR. No new or substantially more severe impacts will result compared to what was analyzed in the Final EIR for the Approved Project. Threshold 7.2 ff ottld the project errata ct . i,niftctattt hcrzard 10 the public or the cnrironi)teitt throttbh reFasonahly foreseeahle ttp.vel and accident conditions involi-ing the release of hazardous nnrterials into the euvironutent? The physfcal impact area for the proposed project is entirely w ithin the impact area addressed in the Final MR for the Approved Project. The previous golf course use and hazardous materials used for golf course operations have been removed and the project site has been mass graded. Consistent with the conclusion'; of the final EIR, the I)MVious use of hazardous materials at the project site or in the vicinity w ill not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. The proposed project implements the Approved Project and construction activities and operations will be consistent with that addressed in the final EIR. Also, consistent with the conclusions of the Final EIR, construction and operation of the proposed project will involve the use of hazardous materials that are typically associated with an urban environment. These materials will be transported, used, stored, and disposed of in compliance with applicable regulations (refer to RR 7-1 and RR 7-2) and will not create a significant liar-ard to the public or environment through reasonably foreseeable upset or accident conditions. No nese or substantially more severe impacts will result compared to what was analyzed in the Final FIR for the Approved Project. Threshold 7.3 For a project located within can airport land rise plan or, where such a plan has not been adolrfeel, within thvo rttiles of a public airport or public tise airlrort, x,otald ilae project result in a safety hazard or people residing or working in the project arca? The Los Angeles/Ontario International Airport is located approximately 1.25 miles southwest of the Approved Project, which is in the Airport Influence Area (AIA) established by the LA/Ontario International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ONT ALUCP). Specifically, the Approved Project is within the Airspace Protection Zones. The proposed project implements the Approved Project and will not change the type or use or structures to be built at the project site. In accordance with PDF 1-1 and -' �r.F? PDI. 7-1, the proposed project complies with the height restrictions outlined in 'Fable 7.4, Delelopn:ent Standards, of the Empire Lakes Specific Plan. Specifically, no building or structure over the 6046ot height limit is proposed for the area south of 6"' Street. further, construction activities, project structures, and operations «ill adhere to applicable requirements outlined in the ONT ALUCP as presented in RR 7- 4: Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77, Subpart C, and applicable obstruction clearance standards published by the FAA; avigation easement; and real estate transaction disclosure. Compliance with applicable ONT AI.UCP requirements will ensure that potential safety hazards related to airport operations are less than significant. consistent with the conclusions of the Final EIR. No new or substantially more severe impacts will result compared to what was analyzed in the Final EIR for the Approved Project. ff'ould the project entit hazardous emissions or handle holardous or oculel}• hazardous materials, suhstances, or waste ivithiu one -quarter -utile ofan rvisliug or proposal school? As identified in the Initial Stud}- prepared for the Empire Lakes Specific Plan Amendment Draft RIR, PAI, which includes the project site, is not within 1/4 -mile of a school. 'there have been no changes to the location of the proposed project or schools in the area. No new impacts will result with implementation of the proposed project compared to what was analyzed in the Initial Study. Would lite project he located on it site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, us a restrlt, would it create a significant hazard to rhe puhlic or the enviromnent? As identified in the Initial Study prepared for the Empire Lakes Specific Plan Amendment Draft LIR, PAI, which includes the project site, is not included on a list of llazardoUS materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.E and, as a result, will not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. The project site is also not on a current list of hazardous materials sites. No neN% impacts �Nill result with inplernomatiorn of the proposed project compared to what was analyzed in the Initial Study. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safer}' hazard for people residing or working in the project area? As identified in the Initial Stud1 prepared for the Fimpire Lakes Specific Plan Amendment Draft EIR, there are no private air strips in the vicinity of PAI, which includes the project site. There have been no changes to the location of the proposed project or private airstrips in the area. No new impacts will result with implementation of the proposed project compared to what was analyzed in the Initial Study. lVould the project impair implementation of or phtvsicallt, interfere ivith an adopted emergeuey response plan oremernency evacuation plan? As identified in (lie Initial Study prepared for the Empire Lakes Specific Plan Amendment Draft EIR, the Approved Project does not include any uses that %could impede or interfere with implementation of the City's Emergency Operations Plan, and would not exacerbate existing hazards conditions addressed in the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. The proposed project implements the Approved Project and does not involve a change in the type or location of uses in PAI, or a change in access and planned roadways. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the proposed project will not impair implementation of or physically interfere with ten adopted emergenc) responsti plan or emergency evacuation plan. No new impacts wili result with implementation of the proposed project compared to what was analyzed in the Initial Stud):. 12 E3 Pg53 jf:'iurlrt the project expose people or structures to a sig uiftcant risk of loss, injury, or rleath involving rvildland fires, inchtding where rrilrlkrurls are ae jacent to urhankcd areas or where residences tire intermixed avith wildlanrls? As identified in the Initial Study prepared for the Empire Lakes Specific Pian Amendment Draft EIR, PAI, which includes the project site, is not in an area subject to %vildland fires. There have been no changes to the location of the proposed project or identification of high fire ha7mrd areas in the vicinity of lite project site. No new impacts will result with implementation of the proposed project compared to what was analyzed in the Initial Study. 8.0 HYDROLOGY AND NATER QUALITY Threshold 8.1 Would the project violate any rt,ater gtrrrlity standards or waste discharge requirements? Thresholtl8. 2 Would the project otherwive substantially clegra(le water qualify? The physical impact area for titre proposed project is entirely ss ithin the impact area addressed in life Final LIR for the Approved Project and the receiving water bodies will be the same. Additionall), there are no proposed changes to the type of land uses to be developed at tine project site. ']'lie type of construction activities and equipment for the proposed project "-ill also be the same as analyzed in the final EIR for the Approved Project. Therefore, tine types of p0liutant3 that xill be generated by the proposed protect during construction and operation will be the same as the Approved Project. -I'he proposed project incorporates RR 8-1, s0ich addresses compliance with the NPDF.S General Permit for Storni Water Discharges Associated with Construction Activity (Construction General Permit) and implementation ora storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) during construction. further, as ss-ith [lie Approved Project, the proposed project sill comply with the Clean Water Act (CWA) and all ;applicable City, County, and Regional Water Quality Control Board (R%VQCB) regulations and water quality standards including compliance with applicable NPDES and municipal separate storm server (MS4) permit requirements. Notably, a Water Quality Management Plan (11'Q1\1P) li as been prepared for titre proposed project (per RR 8-2)3, which is consistent with the 1%9aster Plan of Storm Water Quality prepared for the Approved Project. Additionally, operation of proposed uses will be conduacd in accordance with Chapter 19.20 of (lie Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code, which k the City's Storm Water and Urban Runoff Management and Discharge Control Ordinance (per RR 8-3). Storm water runoff and nuisance flows from the project site will be intercepted by area drains and catch basins and will enter the primary settling chamber where trash, sediments, and debris will settle to the bottom. A floating sponge on the water surface xvill collect oils and other pollutants. Once the primary settling chamber is full, dual intake screens (for blocking large debris) will be connected to pipes that will route flows to tine adjacent injection "ell. The in ection Weil twill infiltrate water through the bottom of the manhole. Compliance with RR 8-1 through RR 8-3 and implementation of the project -specific WQNIP will prevent violations of water quality standards and the degradation of storm water quality. Water quality impacts will be less than significant, consistent with the conclusions of the Final EIR. No new or substantial]) - more severe impacts will result compared to what was analyzed in the Final EIR for the Approved Project. 3 Madole & Associates Inc, (Madole). 2018 (May)_ Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan, The Club on Stxth Street, The Resort, City Rancho Cucamonga: San 8c°mtird,no, State of Ca-tfcrnia. 13 Threshold 8.3 IJ"oultf the prt;ject srrhstaittialli, alter the evisthig tlrainag-e pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a streant or river, in a nurvtner which it,ould result in substantial erosion orsiltation onsite or offsite? Threshold 8.4 if"oald the project srtbs'tantiallr after the twisting drainage pattern of the site or area, inchrding through the alleration of the coarse of a stream or river, or srtbsfantialhr increase the rate or aniount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding onsile or offsite? The proposed project implements the Approved Project, and the physical impact area for the proposed project is entirely within the impact area addressed in the Final CIR for the Approt ed Project. There are no proposed changes to the type of land uses to be developed at the project site (recreational), the pattern of development relative to pervious and impervious areas, and tite proposed storm drain system. Therefore, the estimated increase in the amount and rate of runoff that will be generated by the proposed project during operation will be similar to the Approved Project, and the required storm drain facilities will be the same. As anticipated with the Approved Project, storm water Gom tine project site will connect to the storm drain line in The Resort Parkway in accordance with City regulations (RR 8-4), which will tlow in a southerly direction toward the 4th Street storm drain in tite City of Ontario, consistent %%ith tite pre-development drainage patterns. As identified in (lie Final 1=1R, PAI, including the project site, is in the defined hydrologic conditions of concern (HCOC)-exempt area on the County's on-line Siormwater Facility Mapping Tool. Therefore, additional detention (reduction) in peal: runoff from the storm water event is not required_ This is because runoff froin tine site enters tine C UaSti-Cucamonga Regional Park and Turner Basins. Thus, increases in runoff Irom development clue to implementation of ti-e proposed project will not lead to HCOCs. Changes in drainage patterns at the project site will be consistent with that evaluated for the Approved Project in the final CIR and will not lead to erosion, siltation, or flooding at downstream facilities. Impacts will be less than significant, consistent with the conclusions of the Final CIR. No neNN or substantially more severe impacts %%ill result compared to ghat was analyzed in tite final LIR for the Approved Project. Threshold 8.5 Woulrf the project create or contribute runoff mater which would eece ed the capacitp of eristinb or planned storiniv rter drainage s►stems or provide substantial atltlitional sources of polfulanr runoff? Threshold 8.6 Wouhl the project require or result in the construction of new storm ,rater rlraiutrge fitcilities or e.%pansion of wisth g ftcilitles, the construction of which could cause sihnifrcant environmental effects? As identified above, there are no proposed changes to the type of land uses to be developed at the project site or the pattern of development. Therefore, the estimated increase in the amount and rate of runoff that will be generated by the proposed project during operation will be similar to the Approved Project, and the required storm drain facilities will be the same. Storm water runoff from the Approved Project, including the project site, will increase flows in downstream lines, but will not exceed the capacities of the 4th Street storm drain. Storm water pollutants and storm «iter runoff quantities will be reduced by on-site best management practices (BMPs) as identified in the project-specific WQyIP required by RR 8- 2. Consistent with Final EIR conclusions for the Approved Project, no expansion of existing off-site storm drain facilities is needed for the proposed project. Additionally, the physical impacts associated with installation of onsite storm drain facilities will be tite same as evaluated for the Approved Project in the Final LIR. No new or substantially more severe impacts will result compared to what was analyzed in the Final CIR for the Approved Project. 14 E3 Pn55 Woulal the project stthstantialty deplete groundwater supplies or interfere srthstanfialty with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net alcfcit in aquifer rolunre or a lowering of The local groundwater table level (e.g., they production rate of pre-existing nearkv ►tells ivottl(1(trop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses -for which perntils have been rrrtrtcrl} ? As identified in the Initial Study prepared for the Empire Lakes Specific Plan Amendment Draft EIR, PAI is not within a groundwater recharge area and the Approved P►oject would not deplete groundwater supplies" The physical impact area for the proposed project is entirely within the physical impact area for the Approved Project evaluated in the Final FIR, and the proposed project implements the Approved Project. Therefore, the proposed project will not interfere with groundwater recharge or deplete groundixater supplies. No new impacts Will result with implementation of the proposed project compared to NNhat was analyzed in the Initial Study. 1Youltl the project place !rousing it thin a 1 p0 }'car flood hazartl are(( as inapped on a fe(leral Flood Hazarrtl Boundart, or Floor! Insurance Rate Hap or other flood hazard delineation Wrap? R'ould the project place within a 100year floor! hazard area structures which word(l intpetle or redirect floor! flows? Woul(l the project expose people or structures, to a significant risk of Ims, majurl, or death til-olvini; floodini;, including flooding ars a result of the failure of a levee or dant? lVotthl the project result in itmindation by seiche, tsunamti, or uua(lflow? As identified in the Initial Study prepared for the Empire Bakes Specific Plaa Amendment Draft PAi, which includes the project site, is (l) not x%ithin a flood hazard area, (2) not within a dam inundation area, and (3) not subject to inundation from a seichc, tsunami, or ►nudnow. No new impacts ,401 result with implementation of the proposed project compared to %%hat was analyzed in the Initial Study. 9.0 LANI) USE AND PLANNING Thresholtl M Woul(1 the proposed project conflict with atrr applicable laind use plait, policy-, or regadation of an agent' with jurisdiction over the project (Mch►din, but not liumitcal to, the general plait, specific plait, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted fol' the purpose of arohling or mitigating an emtironmental effect? With approval of the Empire Lakes/IASP Sub -Area Specific, Plan Amendment and associated General Plan Antendinestt and Development Code Amendment, the City of Rancho Cucamonga established new land use regulations and development standards for development within PAI of the Empire Lakes Specific Plan, including the project site. The Final EIR concluded that these land use changes would not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency n ith jurisdiction over the project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating; an environmental effect. As previous])-sho«n on Figure 7,6, Conceptual Development Plan by Placetype, PAI includes three central community recreation (REC) areas, one of which is the project site (PDF 12-3). The proposed project implements the Approved Project and complies with applicable development standards and other requirements outlined in the Empire Lake Specific Pian, As with the Approved Project, the proposed project will not conflict with any applicable local or regional land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. No new or substantially more severe impacts will result with implementation of the proposed project compared to what was analyzed in the Final EIR for the Approved Project, 15 E3.r,SG ll'oulrl the project plrt_sicallr divide an established communitr? The Initial Study prepared for the Empire Lakes Specific Plan Amendment Draft EER concluded that implementation ofthe Approved Project in PAI, which is surrounding by existing development. v%ould not divide an established community. The proposed project is located entirely within PAI, implements the Approved Project, and %%,ill not divide an established community. No new impacts will result vti ith implementation ofthe proposed project compared to ghat was analyzed in the Initial Study. Would they project conflict ivith rur_r applicable habitat conservation plan or uatteral connnanitr conservation plan? As previously discussed in the Biological Resources section of this document. PAI, %%hich includes the project site, is not within an HCP or NCCP. No new impacts will result with implementation ofthe proposed project compared to what was analyzed in the Initial Study. 10.0 NOISE Threshold 111.1 P"ould line project result in a srahstantial permanent increase in arnhient noise levels in the project Neinitr above levels existing without the project? The Final EIR concluded that the Approved Project N%ould result in less than significant increases in long- term antbiernt noise levels from project -generated traffic to off-site sensitive receptors, and at residences adjacent to the project site from noise generated on-site by traffic on project site roads. Additionally, the Final EIR concluded that potential noise impacts to on-site and off-site residential uses from operation of proposed uses in PA[ would be less than significant %%ith adherence to the noise standards outlined in the City's Development Code and the California Building Standards Code. With respect to traffic -generates[ noise, the proposed project, which implements a required recreational component ofthe Approved Project, will be for resident use only and is not expected to generate external vehicular trips. Therefore, it %� ill not increase traffic -related noise levels along roadways internal and external to the Specific Plan area beyond that anticipated in the Final EIR as result of implementation of allm%ed development. Existing semitive receptors in proximity to the project site include the residential uses approximately 273 feet to the cast. Additionally, the recreation center and adjacent parking area will be adjacent to planned residential t15CS «ithin PAI. These existing and planned residential uses were identified in the Final EIR and there are no new sensitive receptors in proximity to the project site. The proposed uses, operations, activities and mechanical equipment at the recreation center and adjacent parking area will be consistent with that anticipated in the Final EIR. Noise -generating operations/activities and equipment at the recreation center and adjacent parking area will comply with noise standards established in the City's Development Code, as identified in the Final EIR as RR 10-3 and RR 10-4. No new or substantially more severe impacts will result with implementation ofthe proposed project compared to what was analyzed in the Final EIR for lite Approved Project. Threshold 10.2 ff oulil the project e.rpose persons to or generation of excessive groundho•ue vibration or groundhorne noise levels? The Final EIR concluded that the Approved Project would result in potentially significant construction vibration annoyance impacts to residents of adjacent buildings (from heavy equipment operation close to buildings), but this impact is reduced to a less than significant level with implementation of MM 10-1. The Final EIR also concluded there would be a less than significant impact for structural vibration impacts. IG Pg57 The project site, which is entirely ssithin PAI, is not adjacent to existing residential uses, with the [1carest residential buildings located 275 feet to the east. Mass grading activities, which the final EIR concluded would result in potentially significant construction vibration annoyance impacts to residents of adjacent buildings (from heavy equipment operation close to buildings), have been completed pursuant to previously issued permits. No heavy grading equipment ssil] be used for the remaining construction activities associated with the proposed project. Also, construction of the recreation center and parking ss ill be completed prior to occupation of planned residences adjaccut to the site. Theiefore, no vibration annoyance or structural vibration impacts would occur with construction of the proposed project. `Ile Final EIR concluded that long-term vibration impacts to residences within 200 feet of the railroad tracks north of the project site would be potential]), significant, but this impact is reduced to a less than significant level with implementation oNAM 10-2, which requires a vibration analysis prior to the approval of building permits. The proposed project is south of 611 Street and not within 200 feet of the railroad tracks at the northern boundary of the Specific Plain area and does not Involve residential uscS; therefore, there would be no impacts related from operations along lire railroad. No new or substantially more severe impacts will result with inlplenlentatioil of the proposed project compared to what was analyzed in the f=inal EIR for the Approved Project. Thre.choltl 10.3 Mould the project result in it suhslautial lentporarr or petrlodie Mere*ase in ambient nois'c levels in the project vicinirr abore Ieircls c.vistin,( without the project? 'I'lie Final EIR concluded that construction of the Approved Project would result in temporary potentially significant construction noise impacts from site preparation, demolition, grading, concrete and asphalt crushing, green %%ante mulching, and similar construction activities. As previously identified, the project site is approximately 275 feet from existing residential uses to the east. Consistent with the conclusions of the Final EIR, these sensitive receptors may be exposed to temporary or periodic increases in noise during construction of the recreation center and adjacent parking area. 1 lowever, as discussed in the Project Description, the construction activities associated with the proposed project, including the number ofpieces of equipment being operated on a daily basis, will not exceed and will be nominal con_pared to the construction assumptions that sere the basis for the analysis in the Final EIR. Further, mass grading activities for the Specific Plan area south of 6"' Street were recently completed and the construction of the proposed project will not involve the use of heav) equipment. Construction of the project «ill also conlpl)' ss ith City regulations (refer to RR 10-1). MM 10-3, which requires installation of temporary noise barrier between the construction areas and existing residences within 500 feet, was completed as part of the mass grading activities and the barrier will remain in place during construction of the proposed project_ Similarly, the construction -related noise mitigation plan developed for the inass grading activities, as required by MM 10-4, will also be applied to construction activities for the proposed project. Therefore, no new or substantially more severe impacts will result with implementation of the proposed project compared to what was analy7ed in the Vinal EIR for the Approved Project. Threshold 10.4 Would the project expose persons to orgenerate noise levels iu Lrcess of stantlarily established in the local general plait or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? The Final EIR concluded that potential impacts related to operational noise that exceeds the General Plan noise and land use compatibility levels would be reduced to less than significant levels. Notably, it *vas concluded that future noise levels along 6th Street could exceed the established noise standards for interior habitable rooms of residential uses (45 dBA or less, as required by the California Building Code) and exterior noise standards identified in the City's General Plan (Conditionally Acceptable 70 dBA 17 "' POT CNEL noise compatibility limit). Therefore, the impact to residential uses along 6th Street waw determined to be significant prior to mitigation. Consistent with analysis is the Final EIR, exterior areas at the recreation center will be exposed to traffic noise from 6" Street; lloN�ever, the noise levels would be less than the General Plan Normally Acceptable 75 dBA CNEL noise compatibility limit for recreational uses. Further, the recreation center does not include anp residential uses than would be subject to the City's interior noise standards. There are no other noise sources that will impact the proposed recreation center. The I`inal EIR concluded that construction noise from the Approved Project would potentially exceed tile noise level limits established in the City's Development Code resulting in a potentially significant noise impact. With implementation of RRs and Mi FIs, impacts from construction noise that exceed the City Development Code requirements would be reduced, but not to a less than significant level. This impact is sit-nificant and unavoidable for tile Approved Project. As described in the Project Description, construction activities associated with the recreation center and adjacent parking area, including the number of pieces of'equipment tieing operated on a daily basis, will not exceed and will be nominal compared to the construction assunnptions that were the basis for the analysis in the Final EIR. Further, mass grading activities for the Specific Plan area south of 6'r' Street have been completed and the construction ofthe proposed project will not involve the use of heavy equipment. MM 10-3 was implemented for Current mass grading operations and will remain in place during construction of the proposed project. Construction noise mitigation tinder nM?v1 10-4 will also continue to be implemented. Therefore, no new or substantially more severe impacts will result with implementation of tilt proposed project compared to what was analyzed in the Final EIR for the Approved Project. Fur a project located within an airport !corm use plan or, inhere such a plan ha.� not been adopter[, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, ►cosld the project t po_ve people reshlinh or rvorltinl; in the project area to e:vicevsire noise lerely? Fur a project within the vicinity of a privale airstrip, would they project ectfrose people residing or workinz in the project area to e.vicessive n[nSe levels? The Initial Study prepared for the Empire Lakes Specific Plan Amendment Draft EIR identified that the 60 dB CNEL contour for the LA/Ontario International Airport does not tie within the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the ONT ALUCP identifies that Rancho Cucamonga is not an affected jurisdiction for noise. Additional[}', PAI is not lvithin tile vicinity of a private air strip. Consistent with the conclusion of tine Initial Study, the proposed residential uses, which are within PAi, are not within tile 60 dB CNEL contour for the LA/Ontario International Airport, and will not be exposed to excessive noise levels from airport operations. No new or substantially more severe impacts will result with implementation of the proposed project compared to what was analyzed in the Final EIR for the Approved Project. 11.0 POPULATION AND HOUSING Threshold 11.1 Woulrl the project induce strbstarrtial popntatiou growth in anarea, either directl}t (for example, bt' proposing new horses and businesses) or indircetIr (for evanrple, through the extension of roads or other infrastructure)? The proposed project involves tile development of a recreation center and adjacent parking area within PAI; no residential uses are proposed. The proposed project will create approximately 1.5 FTE management/administrative positions and I FTE maintenance position, which is a nominal portion of the employment estimated to be generated by the Approved Project (approximately 373 jobs), as discussed in the Final EIR. The proposed project is consistent with the Approved Project, and SCAG's latest growth forecasts as presented in the SCAG 2016-2040 RTP/SCS, adopted after certification of the Empire Lakes Specific Plan Amendment Final EIR, include the ggrowth that will occur from implementation of the is H PaS9 Approved Project. No new or substantially more severe impacts %W1 result from implementation of the proposed project compared to what «as analyzed in the Final EIR for the Approved Project. 11"ould lheproject displace suhstanlial lumbers of existing housing, nec'es►ilatiug the con.sirucliott of replacement housing elsewhere? !Would the project displace substantial numbers' ofpeople, necessitating the constrac?ion of rephicenleut housing elsewhere? As identified in the Initial Study prepared for the Empire Lakes Specific Plan Amendment Draft Elft, PAI was previously developed with the Empire Lakes Golf Course and the Approved Project Would not displace housing or people. The project site has been mass graded and there is no existing development. The proposed project involves the development of a recreation center and adjacent parking area and will not displace housing or people. No new impacts will restilt with implementation of the proposed project compared to what was analyzed in the Initial Study, 12.0 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION Thresholds 12.1 through 12.4 Woulrl the proposed project result in substantial adverse pl{tsieal unpacts associated nvilh the proi,isiou of new or pl{t,sically altered n ovcrntuettta! facilities, treed fur uciv or ph{l-sicalle aIle*red go►,eritnteittal facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environnrenial impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response dine` or other petfortmutce objectives for: • Fire Protection? • Police Protection? • Schools? • Libraries? The proposed project implements the Approved Project, and involves the development ofa recreation center and adjacent parking area within PAI: no residential uses are proposed_ The demand on public services (fire, police, libraries) from the proposed project will not exceed that assumed and evaluated in the Final EIR for the Approved Project. As %%ith the Approved Project, the proposed project incorporates RR 12-1 (compliance with applicable codes, ordinances and standard conditions, including the current edition of the California Fire Code and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (RCFFPD) Fire Protection Standards and Guidance Documents); RR 12-2 (payment of applicable development impact fees to the City for public services); and RR 12-4 (payment of developer fees to the impacted school districts). Further, the proposed project incorporates Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) features (refer to PDF 12-1) and the City has purchased a site for a potential future fire station (refer to PDF 12-4). Potential impacts to public services iNill be less than significant, consistent with conclusions of the Final EIR. No new or substantially more severe impacts will result from implementation of the proposed project compared to %Ghat was analyzed in the Final EIR for the Approved Project. 19 EI Pr:60 Threshold 13.5 Would the proposed projeLl result in substaruial adrerse ply,sical impacts associated with the provision of new or plrrsically altered goverrunental frtcilities, need for new or phtsically irllered go►verrtrtrerhtal facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental 1ipoets, in orller to inaintain acceptable service ratios, response limes or other performance objectives for parAs? Threshold 12.6 fYould the proposed project increase the use of e_visting neighborhood and regional parks or otter recreationtrl fttcililies srteh that .substantial phtsical deterioration of the faciliq, would occur or he accelerated'' Threshold 13.7 Would the project include recrealional facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? '['lie proposed project implements the Approved Project, and involves the development of a recreation center and adjacent parking area Mthin PAI; no residential uses are proposed. The proposed recreational center is one of ti.e required community recreation centers to meet the demand for parks and recreational facilities from future residential uses in PAI (refer to PDF 12-3), and ss ill not change the demand assumed and evaluated in the Final EIR for the Approved Project. As discussed in the Final EIR for the Approved Project. the proposed recreation conte:', which is a non-residential use, ssould not require payment of the City's Community and Recreation Center Impact Fee (RR 12-2). Additionally, the proposed project constitutes compliance with Chapter 16.33, Park and Recreational Land, of the City's iMunicipal Code, ss hich requires the dedication of land, payment of in -lieu fees, or a combination of both for the provision of neighborhood and Conumuttity park or recreational facilities (RR 12-3) since the project will provide park and recreational facilities in PAI within the REC (recreation areas) area, as identified in the Specific Plan. The proposed project will be constructed before occupancy of proposed residential units adjacent to the site. Therefore. impacts to parks will be less than significant, consistent with conclusions of the Final M. The physical impacts associated with the project have been analyzed in the Final EIR and this document. No nc%% or substantiall) more severe impacts will result from implementation of the proposed project compared to what was analyzed in the Final EIR for the Approved Project. 13.0 TRANSP011TAT1ON TRAFFIC Threshold 13.1 11Voultl the project conflicl with rrrhr applicable plan, ordinance orpolicy establishhal; measures of effectiveness for the perfornumce of the circulation si,stent, taking into account all nrotles of transportation inchrdin, mass transit and non -motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation st-stem, including bul not lindled to intersections, streets, higlnvt{I,s and freewaal-s, petlestrian and bicl-cle paths, and wass transit? The Final EIR concluded that vehicle trips generated by operation of the Approved Project would lead to study area intersections and freeway facilities operating at deficient level of service (LOS) (exceeding City of Rancho Cucamonga, City of Ontario, and/or Caltrans standards). Even with implementation of RR 13-2 and RR 13-3, and MM 13-1 through MIM 13-4, impacts would remain significant due to the lack of feasible mitigation or because the project Property Owner/Developer or the City of Rancho Cucamonga cannot guarantee the implementation of improvements in another jurisdiction. Significant and unavoidable impacts were identified at 1-10 and I-15 mainline segments and ramps under the Existing - Year xistingYear (2014) and/or Completion Year (2024) Plus Project and Cumulative Year (2036) traffic analysis scenarios. The proposed project involves the development of recreation center in PAI of the Empire Lakes Specific Plan area to serve future `'for sale" residental units constructed in PAI. Fehr & Peers conducted an analysis of the proposed project to determine its consistency with the Approved Project as it relates to the traffic analysis assumptions that were the basis for the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) conducted for and 20 presented in the Empire Lakes Specific Plan Atnendenent Final EIR. The EmI re Lakes Rvc-rculror Cenicr Trade Memo prepared by Fehr & Peers (dated January 23, 2018) is provided as Attachment A. As presented in the Traffic Memo, the proposed project is consistent with the Approved Project with respect to location (within the Speci fie Plan area), access (from The Resort Parkway only), size (1.5 acres compared to the totai 8.2 acres of recreational uses planned in the Specific Plan area), and access design (adheres to the Specific Plan guidelines and City standards). Also, the project would be for resident use only (for sale homes) and is not expected to have an external trip draw, As described in the Traffic Memo, the proposed project is consistent with (lie assumptions in the TIA prepared for the Specific Plan and therefore, the TIA accounted for the proposed project. It should be noted that resident guests are acounted for in the residential trip generation assumptions. There will not be an increase in trip generation with the proposed project compared to that a'isumed in the TIA. No new or substantiall), more severe traffic impacts at study intersections or frce«ay mainline segements will result with the use of the proposed project. % ith respect to construction-related traffic, as identified in the Project Description, theic will be no heavy truck trips on the local roadways associated with finish grading activitie.5_ There would be a nominal number of truck trips during other construction activities for the proposed project, and no heavy truck trips. Construction activities and associated truck travel will be required to comply with applicable City requirements, including Chapter 10.56, Truck Routes and Restrictions, of the City of Rancho Cucamonga %Municipal Code (refer to RR 13-4) and will implement a Traffic Control Plan (MM 13-53). No new or substantially more severe impacts will result from implementation of the proposed project compared to what was analyzed in the Final EIR for the Approved Project. 77tresholt11.3.2 Would the project conflict ivith an applicahle Congestion wanagement program, inchiding, hitt not limited to level of service s7andords and travel dennand measures, or other standarlls established hv the eorrnry congestion? The final EIR concluded that San Bernardino County Congestion Management Plan (CMP)-designated intersections and freeway facilities would operate at a deficient LOS with the Approved Projcct. Identified mitigation for certain intersections is not feasible and?or the Property Owner0cveloper and the City of Rancho Cucamonga cannot guarantee implementation of mitigation in the City of Ontario or for Caltrans facilities. Impacts to CMP intersections were determined to be significant and Unavoidable along with freeway mainline segments and ramps alone I-10 and 1-15. As described above for Threshold 13. I, there will be no external trip draw for the proposed project and there will be no increase in trip generation with the proposed project compared to that assumed in the TIA. No new or substantially more severe traffic impacts at study intersections or freeway niihil ine segements will result from implementation of the proposed project compared to what was analyzed in the Final EIR for the Approved Project. Threshold 13.3 Wotild the project suhstonlially increase hazards clue to a design feature (e.g., sharp enures or dangerors intersections) or inconrpatihle rises (e.g., farm equipment) ? Threshold 13.4 Would the project result in inadequate emergency access' The Final EIR concluded that the Approved Project would provide adequate project access and an internal circulation system (refer to PDF 13-1), which would be in compliance with applicable requirements for emergency access (refer to RR 12-1). Notably, it was determined that there would be: (1) sufficient internal accessibility throughout the site (Specific Plan area), (2) appropriate traffic-control devices, (3) adequate spacing between external access points, and (4) adequate emergency vehicle access. Impacts were determined to be less than significant and no additional mitigation was required. 21 As d'nsc}is;ed in Elle Traffic rNleruo, the proposed project maintains the sante internal and external circulation system and access points a= the Approved Project. The proposed project %ill not change the types of trses proposed in Specific Plan Placetype S-23, and N� ill not change the access requirements for this area (i.e., access to the project will be through an entry driveway on Tlie Resort Parkway), Further, the proposed project will adhere to applicable codes, ordinances and standard conditions, including the current edition of the California fire Code and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (RCFPD) fire Protection Standards and Guidance Documents regarding access (as required by RR 12-1). Therefore, no new or substantially more severe impacts will result from implementation of the proposed project compared to what was analyzed in the Final EIR for tite Approved Project, Threshold 1.3.5 lYotdd the project conflict nvith adopled policies, plaits, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian f vilifies, or otherwise decrease Nle perforinance or safe{v of srlch fileililies? The Final EIR concluded that the Approved Project would promote the use of alternative transportation systems (i.e.. sidewalks, bikeway's and bus service, transit). This "ould be accomplished by connecting pedestrians and bicyclists to locations on the project site; to the Rancho Cucamonga Metrolink Station adjacent to and northeast of the Specific Plan area; to nearby employment -generating and retail uses; and to bus transit facilities. The proposed project implements development allowed in the southeast portion of PAI, south of 61" Street. As shown in the conceptual site: plain included in the Project Description, consistent %pith Specific Plan requirements. the proposed project includes pedestrian pathways throughout the site that will serve recreation center users, pedestrians and bicyclists, and l% ill connect to Z Ile Resort Parkway, 6``1 Street, and 1 -lie fun. These pathways will facilitate pedestrian and bicycle travel, including to CXistirrg transit facilities and the northern portion of PAI (north of 6"` Street). As with the Approved Project, the proposed project will not preclude pedestrians, bicyclists, or transit users from traveling along existing and planned non - Vehicular facilities and will facilitate access to these alternative transportation facilities through tine site. Tlie proposed project will not conflict v, ith adopted policies, plans, or prograrns regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, nor will it otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities. Therefore, no new or substantially more severe unpacts will result from implementation of the proposed project compared to +Khat was analyzed in titre Final EIR for the Approved Project. lV ould the project res1111 in a change ill air traffic patterns, inchfrllnh either fill increase fn traffic levels or change in location that results ill snhstantial selfett, risks? 'File Initial Study prepared for the Empire Lakes Specific Plan Amendment Draft EIR concluded that tite anticipated increase in population and employment generated by the uses that would be alloyed by the Approved Project would not be of a magnitude that would impact air traffic volumes. further, the Approved Project would not include any uses that would change air traffic patterns. it was determined that no substantial safety risks would result from the Approved Project and no mitigation was required. Consistent with the conclusion of (lie Initial Sturdy, the proposed project, which would be located entirely within PAI of the Empire Lakes Specific Plan area and is consistent with the size and type of recreational uses anticipated by the Approved Project, will not impact air traffic volumes or change air traffic patterns. Therefore, there will no substantial safety risks from such changes. No new impacts will result from implementation of tile proposed project compared to what was analyzed in the Final EIR for the Approved Project. 317 G3 14.0 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEII'IS Threshold 14.1 lVoidd the project have .%uffrcie►rt water supplies available to serve the project from existing enlitlementc and resources, or are new or expanded entitlement needed? Threshold 14.1 111or)ld the project require or result in the construction of nen, water or wastewater treatment facilities or expa))sion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause sign fticanl environmental effects? Threshold 14.3 lVottld the project result in a determination by the wastewater treat)nent provider which serves or nrgv serve the project that it has inadequate capacill, to serve the project's projected de)nand in addition to the provider's existing conunilnrents? Threshold 14.4 I1'orrld the project be served by a laurlfrll with .srtffcient permitted capaci(v to acconrarndate the project's solid waste disposal needs? Threshold 14.3 1Potrld the project conrpll, with federal, state, and local statutes and re;;ulations related to solid waste? Threvhold 14.6 11'oidd the project require or result in the con.strtrction of new electric, ►ratttral -as or cor)t))1tltticatrt))r flrcilitie.S or e'.Lpan.vio►) of exis ing facilities, the constrltclion of which Could canse significant environmental effects? The proposed project implements the Approved Project, and involves the development of a recreation center within PAI consistent %%-ilh the RE;C designation of the site in the Specific Plan, and In adjacent parking area_ Therefore, the proposed project would not exceed the rrojected demand for slater or dry utilities or increase the amount of wastewater or solid waste generation anticipated from the Approved Project. Because the amount and types of use proposed %%ould be consistent wvith the Approved Project, the utility infrasiructurc (on site and off site) needed to serve the proposed project would be the same as with the Approved Project (e.g., waler, sewer, electric, statural gas, and telecoiumunications). As with the Approved Project, utility infrasu•ucture would be installed on site to serve the proposed use and would connect to existing and planned utility infrastructure adjacent to the project site in accordance with City and Cucamonga Valley Water District requirements, (RR 14-2). Landscape and irrigation plans will be prepared in compliance with Cite regulations (refer to RR 14-3 and RR 14-4). Solid waste disposal during construction and operations will comply with City requirements (refer to RR lel-S and RR 14-6). The physical impact area for the utility infrastructure for the proposed project is entirely within the physical impact area for the Approved Project and evaluated in the Final EIR. Consistent with cottclusiotl of the Final EIR, the proposed project will have a less than significant impact related to utilities and service systems. No newv impacts will result from implementation of the proposed project compared to what was analyzed in the Final EiR for the Approved Project_ T t'oultl the project exceed wastewater lreat►nent regttireme)rts of the applicable Regional Water Qtutlify Control Board? Consistent with the conclusions of the Initial Study prepared for the Empire Lakes Specific Plan Amendment Draft EIR, development within the City, including the Approved Project and the proposed project, is required to comply with all applicable wastewater discharge requirements of the NPDES prograin, as enforced by the Santa Ana RWQCB. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in an exceedance of wastewater treatment requirements and would be less than significant. No new impacts will result from implementation of the proposed project compared to what was analyzed in the Initial Study. 23 ATTACI111II.NT A TRAFFIC A71;NIO H. pgc,5 FEHRtPEERS MEMORANDUM Date: Updated July 17, 2018 To: Tim McGinnis, Lewis Operating Group From: Jason D. Pack, P.E, Subject: Empire Lakes Recreation Center Traffic Memo Fehr & Peers completed the Final Transportation Impact Analysis for Empire Lakes in October of 2015 (herein referred to as the TIA). The TIA provsded the full transportation impact assessment of the project as a whole and identified measures needed to m^tigate project impacts (including timing of the proposed mitigation measures_ The TIA represented the technical bass for the traffic impact section of the E1R prepared for the project. Currently, Lewis Operating Group is working on completing submittals to the City of Rancho Cucamonga for the propoied Recreation Center build!ng genera!,y located on the southeast quadrant of The Resort Parkway (formerly referred to as The Vine) and 611 Street. The purpose of this memorandum is to document tie assumptions from the TIA associated with the Recreation Center and note the current proposed project's consistency with those TIA assumptions 'rill to Proposed Rec:reatimi Center Comparison Table 1 compares key attributes associated with the proposed Recreation Center and the TIA assumptions that could potentially affect transportation. The Specific Plan land use assumptions are presented on Figure 1. The detailed site plan is presented on Figure 2. As shown in Table 1, the proposed project attributes are consistent with the assumptions contained in the TIA and EIR and no additional transportation impact assessment is needed as part of this effort. 63 Pg6G Mr. Tim McGinnis July 17, 2018 Page 2 of 4 Table 1: Recreation Center Attributes Attribute TiA Assumption Current Proposal Consistency Location Southwest Corner of 6`. Street and Consistent The Resort Parkway (The Vine) Access From The Resort Parkway Only Cons. -stent Size REC Place Type for the Whole Consistent (although the recreation center Specific Plan to be 8.2 total acres is 1.S of the 8.2 total recreation acres — future development amenities will complete the balance of the assumed size) Users For -sale unit residents only (e.g. will Consistent not be an external trip draw') Access Assumed to be consistent with the Consistent Design Specific Plan guidelines and City Standards We hope this information is useful. If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me directly at 714-941-8773. ' Residents guests are accounted for in the residential trip generation assumptions for the project. 7 Metrolink San Bern ardino Line Packet Park N'3 Metrolink --? '�-`- Rancho - h -z ` " Cucamonga N-1 UN V station UN I 7.7 Ac MU e 47AC 14 IV PUTA 1,0 Al - 77 7o PUJAC r iLii WIAC � N11 ' MU N- q 7-T pt 4473 bUlAt 73 AC 1135 ou/nc s7d N•10 7bts! Oaf- -13 ( x, ,*;.: 71h�iice REC CL ;'-N. .. d7pC 17IsbvlAC. . iy~ At ! IsbWAc 4 ' N•7, rt•s VN' VN Ic]erk}1AC. _ `:410AC Northl Urban Plaza ' 5Th 5t':'S't s=z s 14•..���:S ae s. ' SO>Llth 5.24 CL j ems' I3 .35 ou)nG REC 4.% sDU/ 1 iac _ Pocket \� i Park -1s•ic� VN VN ti rFhbuJxt 62A A , rAr . I i IF]i6 "v' SUBJECT SITE y + ! S-17 VN �� 1 X. 9.7 ti Platetype L egend r ' I,. 2A DUIAC N 1y+a T: A -.:Mixed Use (MU) rsr.� a °:j�� Urban Neighborhood (UN) Core Living (CL) 5.19 ' "- rIs e*+ V:IIage Neighborhood (VNI Mu l ,*i sa , , , + . _ Recreaq;On(RECI 3.L At �.� iC"i obvlAt MU Overlay41 _ 41nSllt7et - Internal CircMiflon Analyzed Intersect ons E3 Pr -,'u 1...,.'4'•,4�h1 Patr.iial PeQel:Aan E -..�� �� FL-, Canner Pn{TTP! CL 9 - �N L. Ct UN _ rt 9 N Ila-•' •lanr ert•c Mld Ir Hl CL cr: IS Pa.-,.l PPi 5:5 M 57, Qelv'ar. 7Ur [�..••potlTroJ ' -'� �•:n �nirii �� 'r: a' j S .-•r. ;- tit I% k�,.. -.�.= u-''l� f'� .-,'.'_ VN rp WOO {}:'�%•-iii ��Y. `}{'', y ,� F�\� :-.C� ���3lE6 526 03 j"��, i.3,,,`'] L+•1J3a�` XEIL r 1• � � P}IfnSLt Peifltl.ff� { - petal Sxr+•!}ry I�:� �_ x� �' / - — I - 52Ca " -- v !lY I LL4'!IS COZP CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN (11.22.17) FIGURE 2 1 ----- The Resort i 09ompl, - -- j I RESOLUTION NO.18-57 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW DRC2018-00104, A REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OF A PROPOSED 10,243 SQUARE FOOT RECREATIONAL BUILDING, TWO ANCILLARY SUPPORT BUILDINGS TOTALING 1,541 SQUARE FEET, AND AN OUTDOOR RECREATION AREA ON A VACANT SITE TOTALING 1.93 ACRES OF LAND, LOCATED IN THE MIXED USE (MU) DISTRICT OF PLANNING AREA 1, EMPIRE LAKES SPECIFIC PLAN, AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF 6TH STREET AND THE FUTURE ALIGNMENT OF THE RESORT PARKWAY, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 0210-102-01, -02 AND -03. A. Recitals. 1, SC Rancho Development Corp. filed an application for the approval of Design Review DRC2018-00104 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Design Review is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 26th day of September 2018, 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 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 September 26, 2018 including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to a project site located within the Empire Lakes Specific Plan, Planning Area 1, located north of 4th Street, south of 6th Street, west of Milliken Avenue, and east of Utica/Cleveland Avenues. The specific location of the project site is south of 6th Street and east of the future alignment of the Resort Parkway; and b. The project site has an area of 1.93 acres with a street frontage of about 255 feet along 6th Street. It will be bound on the west by the future, north -south primary street ("the Resort Parkway") of the overall project. Following the construction of that street, the site will have a frontage along that street of 327 feet; and C. The property is currently vacant. The site has been "mass" graded to prepare it for development. Currently, underground utility infrastructure is being installed beneath what will eventually be the right-of-way for the Resort Parkway, and r3 Qa71 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-57 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2018-00104 — SC RANCHO DEVELOPMENT CORP. September 26, 2018 Page 2 d. The General Plan Land Use designation of the project site and the properties surrounding the subject property is Mixed Use; and e. The properties to the north, south, east and west are also within the Empire Lakes Specific Plan, Planning Area 1 and are currently vacant, f. The application is for the site plan and architectural review of a 10,243 square foot clubhouse building, an 809 square foot restroom building and a 732 square foot pool equipment building; and g. The area in proximity to the buildings consists of an outdoor recreation area consisting of landscaped areas, decorative walkways, an outdoor cooking area, a junior Olympic - sized pool and adjacent seating areas. The recreation area includes a variety of surface areas, including concrete, wood planks, modular paving and artificial turf. A decorative monument structure, which will also serve as an entry sign for the southern half of the overall project, is located at the corner of 6th Street and the Resort Parkway; and h. The site meets standards for parking, building heights and all associated setbacks for the Empire Lake Specific Plan. The maximum height of the proposed clubhouse building is 27 feet, 3 inches, which is below the maximum 60 -foot height limit for buildings south of 6th Street. Both pool equipment and restroom buildings are one-story, with neither exceeding 13 feet in height. The buildings onsite collectively maintain a minimum 16 -foot setback from the Resort Parkway along the eastern boundary of the site and a minimum setback of 30 feet along the 6th Street northern boundary. The minimum setback required for the Resort Parkway is 5 feet and the minimum setback for 6th Street is 10 feet. Though there is no parking requirement for the clubhouse or outdoor amenities, the project includes 40 parking spaces for visiting residents and their guests. and i. The exterior of the building has been designed to consist of visually -interesting fagades viewable from all vantage points. The design incorporates the use of manufactured stone and porcelain siding, complementing the stucco exterior. The structure also incorporates the use of metal canopies and trims and glass decorative windows to add architectural interest to the building. Overall, the design of the building enhances the overall visual quality of the site and meets the City's "360 -degree" design standards. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed development is in accord with the General Plan. A General Plan Amendment (DRC2015-00114) was approved by the City Council in May 2016 to allow for the development of a transit -oriented, mixed use development in the 160 acres that was formerly developed with the privately owned and operated Empire Lakes Golf Course_ The Amendment, along with Specific Plan DRC2015-00040 and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115, established the land use patterns for the entire 160 -acre development. The proposed project site was designated as recreation space within the Specific Plan to serve the residential units in the Empire Lakes/The Resort community. The project is a proposed clubhouse and outdoor recreation area, and therefore, meets the intended land use established in the Specific Plan and General Plan. b. The proposed development is in accord with the objectives of the Development Code and the surrounding area. The zoning of the property and all properties surrounding the subject property is Mixed Use (MU), Empire Lakes Specific Plan, Planning Area 1 which allows the E-3 Pr172 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-57 DESIGN REVIEW ORC2018-00104 — SC RANCHO DEVELOPMENT CORP. September 26, 2018 Page 3 construction of residential units and recreation space to serve the residential units. The proposed project is a clubhouse and outdoor recreational area to serve nearby residential units in Planning Area 1. Therefore, the proposed development is consistent with the objectives of the Development Code, the Empire Lakes Specific Plan, and the area in which it is located. c. The proposed development complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code and the Empire Lakes Specific Plan. The site meets standards for parking, building heights and all associated setbacks for the Empire Lake Specific Plan. For example, the maximum height of the proposed clubhouse building is 27 feet, 3 inches, which is below the maximum 60-foot height limit for buildings south of 6th Street. The buildings onsite collectively maintain a minimum 16-foot setback from the Resort Parkway along the eastern boundary of the site and a minimum setback of 30 feet along the 6th Street northern boundary. The minimum setback required for the Resort Parkway is 5 feet and the minimum setback for 6th Street is 10 feet. Though there is no parking requirement for the clubhouse or outdoor amenities, the site includes 40 parking spaces for visiting residents and their guests. Therefore, the proposed development meets all standards outlined in the Development Code and the Empire Lakes Specific Plan, and the design and development standards and policies of the Planning Commission and the City. d. The proposed development, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The project site and surrounding land use are currently vacant. No improvements other than the 6th Street frontage is in vicinity of the project site. The proposed project is also consistent with the Empire Lakes Specific Plan, which allows for the development of recreation space to serve residential units and meets the expectations of the community. Furthermore, the applicant's environmental consultant, Psomas, prepared an Environmental Technical Analysis Memorandum dated July 19, 2018 that demonstrated that the subject project is within the scope of the approved overall project and analysis included in the Final EIR. No additional significant impacts are foreseeable with the proposed project. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) and Environmental Technical Analysis Memorandum, together with all written and oral reports included in 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 based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on May 18, 2016 (SCH No. 2015041083) in connection with the City's approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2015- 00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015- 00115. Pursuant to CEQA, 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. To demonstrate that no subsequent EIR is required, the applicant's environmental consultant, Psomas, prepared an Environmental Technical Analysis Memorandum dated July 19, 2018. Staff evaluated this memorandum and concluded that the project is within the scope of the approved PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-57 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2018-00104 — SC RANCHO DEVELOPMENT CORP. September 26, 2018 Page 4 overall project and analysis included in the Final EIR identified above and no additional environmental review is required in connection with the City's consideration of Design Review DRC2018-00104. 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 EIR. The previous environmental review analyzed the effects of the proposed project. Staff further finds that the project will not have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR, nor 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. 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 in the attached Standard Conditions incorporated herein by this reference. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2018. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Rich Macias, Chairman ATTEST: Candyce Burnett, Secretary 1, Candyce Burnett, Secretary of the Punning 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 26th day of September 2018, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS. NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS. Project #: DRC2018-00104 Conditions of Approval Community Development Department Project Name: EMPIRE LAKESITHE RESORT- PHASE 1(C) Location: 11015 6TH ST - 21008291-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Planning Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. The use of all onsite amenities at the recreation center will be restricted to for -sale unit residents and their guests. Appropriate signage shall be displayed at all entrances indicating that the use of the clubhouse and amenities are for members only. Standard Conditions of Approval 2. 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. 3. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include Site Plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and grading on file in the Planning Department, the conditions contained herein, Development Code regulations and the Empire Lakes Specific Plan. 4. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 5. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval and Conditions of Approval 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. 6. The applicant shall be required to pay California Department of Fish and Wildlife Notice of Exemption fee in the amount of $50.00. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary prior to public hearing or within 5 days of the date of project approval. 7. 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. Engineering Services De artment Please be advised of the following Special Conditions Pcr;ted 0'12'2016 tiwnv.CityafRC.us { P a 7 5 Project #_ Project Name Location. Project Type: DRC2018-00104 EMPIRE LAKES/THE #RESORT- PHASE 1(C) 11015 6TH ST - 21008291-0000 Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services De artmen Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. 1. 6th Street frontage improvements to be in accordance with City "Major Divided Arterial" anc Empire takes Specific Plan standards as required and including: A. Provide, protect, or repair curb & gutter, sidewalk, streetlights, and traffic striping & signage as required_ B, Street lights shall be owned by the City. Developer shall be responsible to coordinate and pay all costs to provide power on City owned street lights. Coordinate with City staff for design and installation requirements. 2. Resort Parkway frontage improvements to be in accordance with Empire Lakes Specific Plan standards as required and including: A. Provide, protect, or repair curb & gutter, sidewalk, streetlights, and traffic striping & signage as required. B. Street lights shall be owned by the City. Developer shall be responsible to coordinate and pay all costs to provide power on City owned street lights. Coordinate with City staff for design and installation requirements. C. Drive approach shall be in accordance with the City Driveway Policy including minimum width for a commercial approach. 2. All of the conditions of SUBTT20073 shall be satisfied prior to the final map or building permit, whichever occurs first. 3. All frontage improvements along The Viae (including the temporary access dedication 300 feet north of 6th Street), 4th Street, and 6th Street shall be secured, and an improvement agreement shall be executed, prior to the final map or building permit, whichever occurs first. 4. 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. 5. An irrevocable offer of dedication for roadway purposes shall be made for the private streets. Standard Conditions of Approval 6. All required public landscaping and irrigation systems shall be continuously maintained by the developer. 7. Add the following note to any private landscape plans that show street trees; "All improvements within the public right-of-way, including street trees, shall be installed per the public improvement plans." If there is a discrepancy between the public and private plans, the street improvement plans will govern. P•irted. 911212018 vnn1_01yofRC.us Pr 76 Pat- 2 of 112 Project #: DRC2018-00104 Project Name: EMPIRE LAKESITHE RESORT- PHASE 1(C) Location: 11015 6TH ST- 21008291-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 8. Developer shall install a dark fiber conduit package fronting the development. Two 4" Schedule 40 PVC conduits, along with three 1 '/" innerducts in one of the 4" conduits, per City Standard 145, with connection through the parkway to each lot or parcel (fiber -to -the curb, FITC). The size, placement, and location of the conduit shall be shown on the Street Improvement Plans and subject to Engineering Services Department review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permits or final map approval, whichever comes first. 9. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: Street Name Curb & Gutter A.C. Pvmt Side -walk Drive Appr. Street Lights Street Trees Comm Trail Median Island Bike Trail Other 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. 10. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 16.37.010, no person shall make connections from a source of energy, fuel or power to any building or structure which is regulated by technical codes and for which a permit is required unless, in addition to any and all other codes, regulations and ordinances, all improvements required by these conditions of development approval have been completed and accepted by the City Council, except: that in developments containing more than one building, structure or unit, the development may have energy connections made in equal proportion to the percentage of completion of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval, as determined by the City Engineer, provided that reasonable, safe and maintainable access to the property exists. In no case shall more than 95 percent of the buildings, structures or units be connected to energy sources prior to completion and acceptance of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval. n IVVla '--NJ -r.CRyofRC.us E3 Pr177 Project #: DRC2018-00104 Project Name: EMPIRE LAKESITHE RESORT- PHASE 1(C) Location: 11015 6TH ST - 21008291-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 11. `" CD Information Required Prior to Sign -Off for Building Permit Prior to the issuance of building permits, if valuation is greater or equal to $100,000, a Diversion Deposit and a related administrative fee shall be paid for the Construction and Demolition Diversion Program_ The deposit is fully refundable if at least 65% of all wastes generated during construction and demolition are diverted from landfills, and appropriate documentation is provided to the City. Applicant must identify if they are self -hauling or utilizing Burrtec prior to issuance of a building permit. Proof of diversion must be submitted to the Environmental Engineering Division within 60 days following the completion of the construction and / or demolition project. Contact Environmental Engineering at (909) 477-2700 for more information. Instructions and forms are available at the City's website, www.cityofrc.us, under City Hall 1 Engineefing / Environmental Programs / Construction & Demolition Diversion Program, 12. Improvement Plans and Construction: a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of Building Permits, whichever occurs first. b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Services Department in addition to any other permits required_ c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction project along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals and interconnect wiring. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR, or any other locations approved by the City Engineer. Notes: 1) Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets, a maximum of 200 feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer. 2) Conduit shall be 3 -inch pvc with pull rope or as specified. e. Access ramps for the disabled shall be installed on all corners of intersections per latest ADA standards or as directed by the City Engineer. f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. g. Concentrated drainage bows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards, except for single-family residential lots. h. Street names shall be approved by the Planning Manager prior to submittal for first plan check. x nnv_CityofRC.us Prirted: 9.12l2D38 Pj�;- 4 C' 37 �3 P.-= 73 Project #: Project Name Location: Project Type: DRC2018-00104 EMPIRE LAKES/THE RESORT - PHASE 1(C) 11015 6TH ST - 21008291-0000 Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 13. 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. Street Name Botanical Name Common Name Min. Grow Space Spacing Size Qty. Construction Notes for Street Trees: 1) All street trees are to be planted in accordance with City standard plans. 2) Prior to the commencement of any planting, an agronomic soils report shall be furnished to the City inspector. Any unusual toxicities or nutrient deficiencies may require backfill soil amendments, as determined by the City inspector. 3) All street trees are subject to inspection and acceptance by the Engineering Services Department. Street trees are to be planted per public improvement plans only. 14. Intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with adopted policy. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight shall be plotted for all project intersections, including driveways. Local residential street intersections and commercial or industrial driveways may have lines of sight plotted as required. 15. 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. 16. 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. 17. Private drainage easements for cross -lot drainage shall be provided and shall be delineated or noted on the final map. 18. Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards. 19. Easements for public sidewalks placed outside the public right-of-way shall be dedicated to the City. 20. Reciprocal access easements shall be provided ensuring access to all parcels by CC&Rs or by deeds and shall be recorded prior to the issuance of Building Permits. vnrnv.CityotRC.us Priv'^d S! i 2I2Q15 p�yp g 4f 12 E3 x.,179 Project #: DRC2018-00104 Project Name: EMPIRE LAKES/THE RESORT - PHASE 1(C) Location. 11015 6TH ST - 21008291-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 21. Developer shall execute a Line Extension Agreement electrical distribution facilities in accordance with such distribution facilities in accordance with such agreement requirements and dedicate such facilities to the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility shall be the electrical development. for electric service and shall construct agreement and shall construct electrical and Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility Cucamonga Municipal Utility. The Rancho service provider for all project related 22. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. 23. 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. 24. 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. 25. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CVWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. 26. Dedication shall be made to the City for the entirety of The Resort Parkway or Lot "A" as shown on Tract Map 20073. Building and Safety Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. When the Entitlement Review is approved submit complete construction drawings including structural calculations, energy calculations and soils report to Building and Safety for plan review in accordance with the current edition of the CA Building and Fire Codes including all local ordinances and standards which are effective at the time of Plan Check Submittal. The new structures are required to be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers per the CBC and Current RCFPD Ordinance. Disabled access for the site and building must be in accordance to the State of CA and ADA regulations. Grading Section Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. Prior to issuance of a wall permit, a copy of the Grading Special Conditions of Approval shall be included within the engineered wall plans and calculations. Standard Conditions of Approval 2. Prior to approval of the final project -specific Water Quality Management Plan the drainage area (DA) shall extend to the centerline of the street "The Vine". Pr rated 9112/2018 w-wi_0tyofRC.u5 12 J , :j:1 Project #: DRC2018-00104 Project Name: EMPIRE LAKES/THE RESORT- PHASE 1(C) Location: 11015 6TH ST - 21008291-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 3. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the precise grading and drainage plan shall follow the format provided in the City of Rancho Cucamonga handout "Information for Grading Plans and Permit". 4. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit the City of Rancho Cucamonga's "Memorandum of Agreement of Storm Water Quality Management Plan" shall be submitted for review and approval by the Building Official and recorded with the County Recorder's Office. 5. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall obtain a Waste Discharge Identification Number (WDID). The WDID number shall also be shown on the WQMP Site and Drainage Pian document. 6. The applicant shall provide a copy of a completed EPA Form 7520-16 (Inventory of Injection Wells) for each underground infiltration device, with the Facility 1D Number assigned, to the Building and Safety Services Department Official prior to issuance of the Grading Permit and/or approval of the project -specific Water Quality Management Plan. A copy of EPA Form 7520-16 shall be scanned and pasted onto the permitted grading plan set, and a copy of said form shall be included in the project -specific Water Quality Management Plan. 7. The land owner shall provide an inspection report by a qualified person/company on a biennial basis for the Class V Injection Wells/underground infiltration chambers to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis all best management practices (BMP"s) as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 8. The land owner shall provide an inspection report on a biennial basis for the structural storm water treatment devices, commonly referred to as BMPs, to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 9. The land/property owner shall follow the inspection and maintenance requirements of the approved project specific Water Quality Management Plan and shall provide a copy of the inspection reports on a biennial basis to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. 10. The Site and Drainage Plan in the final project -specific Water Quality Management Plan shall show the locations of all roof downspout drains. if required for storm water quality purposes, the downspouts shall include filters. 11. Prior to the issuance of a building permit or Engineering Services Department issued right of way permit, the applicant shall submit to the Building Official, or his designee, a final project specific water quality management plan for review and approval, and shall have said document recorded with the San Bernardino County Recorder's Office. 12. Prior to the start of landscaping operations, the landscape architect and the landscape contractor shall provide a sample of the weed fabric barrier to the Project Planner, City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department. The weed barrier shall be permeable. tirti',w.UyofRc.u5 Prin'_d 9112-2015 Pap 7 of 72 73fg81 Project #. DRC2018-00104 Project Name Location; Project Type., EMPIRE LAKESITHE RESORT - PHASE I(C) 11015 6TH ST - 21008291-0000 Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 13_ Prior to issuance of a grading permit and approval of the project specific water quality management plan all private storm water catch basin inlets shall include insert filters to capture those pollutants of concern as addressed in the in the final project -specific water quality management plan (WQMP). At a minimum catch basin insert filters to capture trash and other floating debris. All catch basin insert filters shall be maintained on a regular basis as described in the "Inspection and Maintenance Responsibility for Post Construction BMP" section of the final project -specific water quality management plan_ 14. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the Final Project -Specific Water Quality Management Plan shall include a completed copy of "Worksheet K Factor of Safety and Design Infiltration Worksheet" located in Appendix D "Section V0 — Infiltration Rate Evaluation Protocol and Factor of Safety Recommendations, ..." of the San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Pians. The infiltration study shall include the Soil Engineer's recommendations for Appendix D, Table V11.1 Suitability Assessment Related Considerations for Infiltration Facility Safety Factors 15. Prior to approval of the final project -specific water quality management ptan the applicant shall have a soils engineer prepare a project -specific infiltration study for the project for the purposes of storm water quality treatment. The infiltration study and recommendations shall follow the guidelines in the current adopted "San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans". 16. The subject project, shall accept all existing off-site storm water drainage flows and safely convey those flows through or around the project site, If existing off-site storm water drainage flows mix with any on-site storm water drainage flows, then the off-site storm water drainage flows shall be treated with the on-site storm water drainage flows for storm water quality purposes, prior to discharging the storm water drainage flows from the project site. 17. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy by the Building Official, or his designee, the civil engineer of record shall file a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Post Construction Storm Water Treatment Devices As -Built Certificate with the Environmental Programs Coordinator, City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Services Department. 18. As the use of drywells are proposed for the structural storm water treatment device, to meet the infiltration requirements of the current Municipal Separate Storm Sewers Systems (MS4) Permit, adequate source control and pollution prevention control BMPs shall; be implemented to protect groundwater quality. The need for pre-treatment BMPs such as sedimentation or filtration shall be evaluated prior to infiltration and discussed in the final project -specific Water Quality Management Plan document. Art;ad 912'2018 vNAv.0tyofRC,us - Pc -.82 Pap 8 cl 12 Project #: DRC2018-00104 Project Name: Location: Project Type: EMPIRE LAKESITHE RESORT - PHASE 1(C) 11015 6TH ST - 21008291-0000 Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 19. The final project -specific water quality management plan (WQMP) shall include executed maintenance agreements along with the maintenance guidelines for all proprietary structural storm water treatment devices (BMP's). In the event the applicant cannot get the proprietary device maintenance agreements executed prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant is required to submit a letter to be included within the WQMP document, and scanned and pasted onto the Site and Drainage Plan which states that prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy with applicant shall enter into a contract for the maintenance of the proprietary storm water treatment device. If the proprietary storm water treatment device is part of a residential subdivision, prior to the sale of the residential lot, the developer shall include maintenance agreement(s) as part of the sale of the residential lot to the buyer. A copy of the maintenance agreements to be included in the sale of the property shall be included within the WQMP document. 20. The subgrade for permeable paver storm water treatment devices shall have a level subgrade. prior to issuance of the grading permit and approval of the final project -specific water quality management plan (WQMP) the engineer of record shall provide a pad elevation for the permeable paver subgrade on the grading plan and shall provide a detail on the WQMP site and drainage plan showing the permeable paver subgrade as level. 21. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with current adopted California Building Code and/or the California Residential Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The Grading and Drainage Pian(s) shall be in substantial conformance with the approved conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan. 22. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified Engineer licensed by the State of California to perform such work. Two copies will be provided at grading and drainage plan submittal for review. Plans shall implement design recommendations per said report. 23. 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. 24. A separate Grading and Drainage Plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and wet signed by a California licensed Civil Engineer prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit. 25, The applicant shall comply with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Dust Control Measures and place a dust control sign on the project site prior to the issuance of a grading permit. All dust control sign (s) shall be located outside of the public right of way. 26. If a Rough Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit are submitted to the Building and Safety Official for review, the rough grading plan shall be a separate plan submittal and permit from Precise Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit. Fr. °A?'�za uwnv.Cdyo RC.us r3 PnS3 Pip 9 of 12 Project #; DRC2018-00104 Project Name: EMPIRE LAKESITHE RESORT - PHASE 1(C) Location: 11015 6TH ST - 21008291-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 27. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the Final Grading and Drainage Plan shall show the accessibility path from the public right of way and the accessibility parking stalls to the building doors in conformance with the current adopted California Building Code. All accessibility ramps shall show sufficient detail including gradients, elevations, and dimensions and comply with the current adopted California Building Code. 28. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall implement City Standards for on-site construction where possible, and shall provide details for all work not covered by City Standard Drawings. 29. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the grading and drainage plan shall show the maximum parking stall gradient at 5 percent. Accessibility parking stall grades shall be constructed per the, current adopted California Building Code. 30. The applicant shall provide a grading agreement and grading bond for all cut and fill combined exceeding 5,000 cubic yards prior to issuance of a grading permit. The grading agreement and bond shall be approved by the Building and Safety Official. 31. The final grading and drainage plan shall show existing topography a minimum of 100 -feet beyond project boundary. 32- This project shall comply with the accessibility requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. 33. Grading Inspections: a) Prior to the start of grading operations the owner and grading contractor shall request a pre -grading meeting. The meeting shall be attended by the project owner/representative, the grading contractor and the BuDdtng Inspector to discuss about grading requirements and preventive measures, etc- If a pre -grading meeting Is not held within 24 hours from the start of grading operations, the grading permit may be subject to suspension by the Building Inspector; b) The grading contractor shall call into the City of Rancho Cucamonga Building and Safety Department at least 1 working day in advance to request the following grading inspections prior to continuing grading operations: i) The bottom of the over excavation; ii) Completion of Rough Grading, prior to issuance of the building permit; iii) At the completion of Rough Grading, the grading contractor or owner shall submit to the Permit Technicians (Building and Safety Front Counter) an original and a copy of the Pad Certifications to be prepared by and properly wet signed and sealed by the Civil Engineer and Soils Engineer of Record-, iv) The rough grading certificates and the compaction reports will be reviewed by the Associate Engineer or a designated person and approved prior to the issuance of a building permit. 34. All roof drainage flowing to the public right of way (xx Avenue) must drain under the sidewalk through a parkway culvert approved by the Engineering Department. This shall be shown on both the grading and drainage plan and Engineering Services Department required plans. 9!12'2018%,A-A•/.CilyofRC.us Prin;.d 9!12'2018 P€;^ 10 ai i? Project #: Project Name: Location: Project Type: DRC2018-00104 EMPIRE LAKESITHE RESORT- PHASE 1(C) 11015 6TH ST - 21008291-0000 Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT., Gradinq Section Standard Conditions of Approval 35. Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the permitted grading plan (or architectural site plan) set shall show in each of the typical sections and the plan view show how the separations between the building exterior and exterior ground surface meet the requirements of Sections CBC1804.3/CRC R401.3, CBC2304.11.2.2/CRC R317.1(2) and CBC2512.1.2/CRC R703.6.2.1 of the current adopted California Building Code/Residential Code. 36. Prior to approval of the project -specific storm water quality management plan, the applicant shall submit to the Building Official, or his designee, a precise grading plan showing the location and elevations of existing topographical features, and showing the location and proposed elevations of proposed structures and drainage of the site. 37. A drainage study showing a 100 -year, AMC 3 design storm event for on-site drainage shall be prepared and submitted to the Building and Safety Official for review and approval for on-site storm water drainage prior to issuance of a grading permit. The report shall contain water surface profile gradient calculations for all storm drain pipes 12 -inches and larger in diameter. All reports shall be wet signed and sealed by the Engineer of Record. In addition, the project specific drainage study shall provide inlet calculations showing the proper sizing of the water quality management plan storm water flows into the proposed structural storm water treatment devices. 38. Roof water is not permitted to flow over the public parkway and shall be directed to an under parkway culvert per City of Rancho Cucamonga requirements prior to issuance of a grading permit. 39. Flow lines steeper than 6 percent could be erosive. The applicant shall provide hard lined gutters and swales where concentrated flows exceed 3fps, and anywhere that flow lines exceed 10 percent. This shall be shown on the grading and drainage plan prior to issuance of a grading permit. 40. All sump pumps shall be installed with an emergency backup generator to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. This shall be shown/noted on both the permitted grading plan and the architectural plan sets. 41. Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the latest adopted California Plumbing Code. Private storm drain improvements shall be shown on the grading and drainage plan. 42. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy or final sign off by the Building Inspector the engineer of record shall certify the functionality of the storm water quality management plan (WQMP) storm water treatment devices and best management practices (BMP). 43. Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WQMP shall include a copy of the project Conditions of Approval, 44. Reciprocal access easements for all parcels and maintenance agreements ensuring joint maintenance of all storm water quality structural/treatment devices and best management practices (BMP) as provided for in the project's Storm Water Quality Management Plan, shall be provided for by CC&R's or deeds and shall be recorded prior to the approval of the Water Quality Management Plan. Said CC&R's and/or deeds shall be included in the project site specific Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) document prior to approval of the WQMP document and recording of the Memorandum of Agreement of Storm Water Quality Management Plan. P 'rated: Sl 21201 B vnvnv.cityoraC.us E3 P 835 Page 11 0° 12 Project #: DRC2018-00104 Project Name; EMPIRE LAKESITHE RESORT- PHASE 1(C) Location: 11015 6TH ST - 21008291-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Condit ions of Approval 45. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall show on the site plan and the permitted grading plan set for non-residential projects the designated parking for clean air vehicles per the current adopted California Green Building Standards Code, section 5.106.5.2. 46. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for non-residential projects the applicant shall show on the electrical plans and the permitted grading plan set the location for a future installation of an Electric Vehicle (EV) charging station/parking area per the current adopted California Green Building Standards Code, section 5.106.5.3. +vvnv_CityofRC.us Printed. 911212018 Fags 12 cf 12 ti STAFF REPORT DATE: September 26, 2018 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planni mission FROM: Candyce Burnett, City Planner i S INITIATED BY: Dat Tran, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2018-00092 — SAINT MARY'S MONTESSORI — A request to establish a combination child care and preschool/elementary school use in an existing 6,600 square foot building and in a proposed 9,974 square foot addition on 1.85 acres of land, located in the Low -Medium (LM) Residential District, Victoria Planned Community, north of North Victoria Windrows Loop and south of Plum Way; APN: 1089-471-25. Related files: Minor Design Review DRC2018-00095. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA guidelines under CEQA Section 15301 — Existing Facilities and CEQA Section 15303 — New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures. MINOR DESIGN REVIEW DRC2018-00095 — SAINT MARY'S MONTESSORI — A request for site plan and architectural review of a proposed 9,974 square foot addition and outdoor play areas to an existing 6,600 square foot child care facility and preschool on 1.85 acres of land, located in the Low -Medium (LM) Residential District, Victoria Planned Community, north of North Victoria Windrows Loop and south of Plum Way; APN: 1089-471-25. Related files: Conditional Use Permit DRC2018-00092. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA guidelines under CEQA Section 15303 — New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission take the following actions through adoption of the attached Resolutions of Approval with conditions: • Approve Conditional Use Permit DRC2018-00092 and Minor Design Review DRC2017- 00095. PROJECT REVIEW BACKGROUND: The proposed project is a combination of the construction of a new building and associated site improvements (Minor Design Review DRC2018-00095) and an expansion of an existing day care use, and establishment of a private elementary school (Conditional Use Permit DRC2018-00092). Both applications are typically reviewed by the Planning Director_ However, the Director decided to refer both applications to the Planning Commission for review and action. This determination was based on the request to expand the existing use of the pre-school and day care to include the private elementary school, and increase the number of students to approximately 300 children. Notice of Application for the project was mailed on August 27, 2018 to all property owners within 660 feet of the project site (details of the public notice and public outreach are discussed E4—E5 Pg1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP DRC2018-00092, MDR DRC2018-00095 -- ST. MARY'S MONTESSORI September 26, 2018 Page 2 in the Correspondence section below), to determine the level of neighborhood interest for the project, SITE DESCRIPTION: The project site is a triangular parcel of 1.85 acres within the Law -Medium (LM) Residential District of the Victoria Planned Community. The site is located east of, and adjacent to, Windrows Park, north of North Victoria Windrows Loop and south of Plum Way. The west property line is shared with Windrows Park and the north property line is adjacent to the rear yards of existing single- family residential homes. The front property line curves around the south and east side of the site facing North Victoria Windrows Loop. The northern one-third of the project site consists of undeveloped vacant land. The southern two-thirds of the site, along the front property line, is improved with a 6,600 square foot building occupied by St. Mary's Montessori. The project site currently has two drive approaches with access from North Victoria Windrows Loop. The driveways lead directly to the site's 42 -stall parking lot. The entire site consists of relatively flat terrain. There is landscaping throughout the site, including groundcover, shrubs, and trees to provide shade. The following table shows the project site and adjacent site's Land Use, General Plan and Zoning Designations: ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant is proposing to construct a 9,974 square foot building and outdoor play areas to the existing day care facility_ The proposed building and play areas will replace the lawn area at the rear (north side) of the site. Following completion, the combined floor area of the two buildings will be 16,574 square feet. The proposed building will be located at the rear of the site, adjacent to the north and west property limes. The exterior of the building has visually interesting facades viewable from all vantage points. The design incorporates the use of composite wood cladding panels and stucco as the primary building materials. The base of the building is imbued with a graphic pattern stucco wainscot. The extensive use of the two primary materials and the wainscot helps break up expansive blank facade that usually occurs with the use of stucco materials. The roof consists of concrete tiles and open roof wood frames which complement each other. The roofing materials are also consistent with the roof design of the existing building. The proposed structure incorporates the use of standing seam metal roofs, decorative windows and doors, and aluminum screed to add architectural interest to the building. The architectural style and scale of the building is compatible with the existing building. Overall, E4—E5 Pgz Land Use General Plan Parks Zoning Site St. Mary's Montessori Day Low -Medium (LM) Care Residential District* North Single -Family Residential Low Medium Residential Low -Medium (LM) Residential District* South Single -Family Residential Medium Residential Low -Medium (LM) Residential District* west Windrows Park Parks Park (P)* East Single -Family Residential Very Low Residential Low-Medium(LM) Residential District* _ *All properties are within the Victoria Planned Community ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant is proposing to construct a 9,974 square foot building and outdoor play areas to the existing day care facility_ The proposed building and play areas will replace the lawn area at the rear (north side) of the site. Following completion, the combined floor area of the two buildings will be 16,574 square feet. The proposed building will be located at the rear of the site, adjacent to the north and west property limes. The exterior of the building has visually interesting facades viewable from all vantage points. The design incorporates the use of composite wood cladding panels and stucco as the primary building materials. The base of the building is imbued with a graphic pattern stucco wainscot. The extensive use of the two primary materials and the wainscot helps break up expansive blank facade that usually occurs with the use of stucco materials. The roof consists of concrete tiles and open roof wood frames which complement each other. The roofing materials are also consistent with the roof design of the existing building. The proposed structure incorporates the use of standing seam metal roofs, decorative windows and doors, and aluminum screed to add architectural interest to the building. The architectural style and scale of the building is compatible with the existing building. Overall, E4—E5 Pgz PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP DRC2018-00092, MDR DRC2018-00095 — ST. MARY'S MONTESSORI September 26, 2018 Page 3 the design of the proposed building enhances the overall visual quality of the site and meets the City's "360 -degree" design standards. The area in proximity of the buildings will consist of landscaped areas designed for a variety of play and outdoor entertainment uses for the building. This includes five rubberized playground areas with play structures, soft turf play areas, wood decks, and decorative pathways with drought resistant landscape which enhances the overall site design. The design of the playground areas and outdoor recreation spaces meets the Department of Social Services' requirement for outdoor activity space. The site meets the City's Development Standards for parking, building heights, and all applicable setbacks. The minimum setbacks for side property lines are 5 feet on one side and 10 feet on the other side in the Low -Medium (LM) Residential District. The proposed building is a minimum of 20 feet away from the north and west property lines, which form the side property lines of the site. The building also exceeds the minimum 32 feet front yard setback. All play structures are setback a minimum of 5 feet from property lines. There is no landscaping minimum established for non-residential facilities in the Low -Medium (LM) Residential District. However, the total amount of landscaped coverage on-site is roughly 25%, which exceeds the 10-15% landscaped areas required for most commercial establishments in the City. Additionally, the City's Development Standards establishes a minimum requirement for the number of trees on-site. The site will have 67 trees at buildout. exceeding the required 56 trees for the entire site. B. Conditional Use Permit DRC2018-00092: The Development Code (RCMC Section 17.16.120.A) identifies that a Conditional Use Permit provides a process for a determination of requests for uses and activities whose effects on adjacent sites and surroundings need to be evaluated in terms of a specific development proposal for a specific site. Uses qualifying for a Conditional Use Permit are considered minor in nature, only have an impact on immediately adjacent properties, and can be modified and/or conditioned to ensure compatibility. In addition to the proposed 9,974 square foot addition and outdoor play areas, the applicant is proposing a modification of the existing use. Per the original Conditional Use Permit DRC2012-01004 (Exhibit N), the applicant was given approval to operate a day care facility within the existing building. The facility is currently allowed a maximum of 100 preschool students and a maximum of 13 staff members on-site. The applicant proposes to increase the size of the day care facility, increase enrollment, and add a private elementary school. Due to the changes to the scope of the existing operations of the facility, a modification to the original Conditional Use Permit is required. This modification to the original entitlements will permit the modification of the day care use and addition of the elementary school. The proposed site improvements have been designed for the day care and school use, including outdoor areas and parking to meet the needs of the facility. The improvements are located entirely on-site and will not impact the public right-of-way or adjacent properties. All outdoor activity will be conducted on-site. The use of Windrows Park for recess or similar activities is not proposed by the applicant nor is this currently allowed by the City. If any use of the park was proposed, or requested, the applicant would be required to enter into a lease agreement with the City. This lease agreement would be subject to review and approval by the City Council. E4—E5 Pg3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP DRC2018-00092, MDR DRC2018-00095 — ST. MARY'S MONTESSORI September 26, 2018 Page 4 The proposed modifications include an increase in the number of day care staff to 18 and the number of day care students to 147. The proposed expansion also includes five new elementary classrooms, with a total of 156 students, nine teaching staff, and four administrative staff to provide support to the teaching staff and maintain facility operations. In total, there will be a maximum of 303 students and 31 staff on-site. All school -related outdoor activities will occur on-site and are prohibited from occurring in the nearby Windrows Park. Classrooms are assigned specific times to conduct outdoor activities, staggered over a period of 3 hours in the morning (roughly 9:00 am to 12:00 pm) and 2.5 hours in the afternoon (roughly 3:30 pm to 5:00 pm), to prevent overcrowding of play areas, provide adequate supervision of students, and to reduce the noise impacts to neighbors living in adjacent lots. The findings of facts below support the necessary Conditional Use Permit findings, which are required by the City's Development Code: Finding: The proposed use is allowed within the applicable zoning district and complies with all other applicable provisions of the Development Code, Municipal Code, General Plan, and any applicable specific plans or City regulations/standards. Fact: The site is located within land designated as Parks in the General Pian. The General Plan does not specify in detail the range of uses allowed within the Parks land use designation, but it does allow community facilities. For land use matters, the General Plan recognizes the Victoria Community Plan as the guiding land use document for the area the project site is located. Per the Victoria Community Plan, the day care facility is considered a community facility. Community facilities are permitted in the Low -Medium (LM) Residential District where the project is located with approval of a Conditional Use Permit. A Conditional Use Permit (DRC2018-00092) has been filed along with the Minor Design Review application for consideration. Community facilities are conditionally permitted in a Low - Medium (LM) Residential District because they complement and provide support to existing residential land uses. Additionally, the land use plan in the Victoria Community Plan identifies this site as a day care facility and therefore is consistent with the plan. The existing day care facility and addition of a private elementary school is located within proximity to existing single-family homes and will provide day care services to residents in the nearby communities All site improvements, including parking and landscaped areas, are designed to be consistent with all applicable Development Code provisions, the General Plant and the Victoria Community Plan, and will not impact neighboring residential properties. Finding: The site is physically suited for the type, density, and intensity of the proposed use including access, utilities: and the absence of physical constraints and can be conditioned to meet all related performance criteria and development standards, Fact: The Development Code designates the project site as Low -Medium (LM) Residential District within the Victoria Planned Community, The proposed day care facility is consistent with the land use intent of the Low -Medium (LM) Residential District and complements the existing single-family residential homes in the neighborhood. The height of the proposed building is roughly 23 feet, comparable in height to the existing building, which measures roughly 19 feet. The lot coverage of the entire site at buildout is 19.3% and is lower than the maximum lot coverage of 55% for the Low -Medium (LM) Residential District in the Victoria Planned Community_ Access onto the property is provided via existing driveways leading E4—E5 Pg4 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP DRC2018-00092, MDR DRC2018-00095 — ST. MARY'S MONTESSORI September 26, 2018 Page 5 directly to the parking lot on-site. There are no physical constraints which would prevent the development of the site as proposed. Finding: Granting the permit would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare, or materially injurious to persons, property, or improvements in the vicinity in which the project is located. Fact: The site is an established day care facility consistent with the land use intent of the Low -Medium (LM) Residential District it is located in. The operations on the site are expected to meet all Development Code standards. For example, a Noise Impact Analysis (Exhibit O - Kunzman Associates, Inc., June 2018) analyzed potential construction and operational noise impacts associated with the proposed project on neighboring properties. The analysis concluded that with a temporary, 6 -foot tall noise barrier during construction along the north property line, the exterior noise levels for all adjacent properties will fall below the maximum residential noise limits of 65 dBA per the Development Code. Noise associated with daily operations is expected to range between 45.5 and 57.4 dBA as measured from adjacent property lines and is not expected to exceed the 65 dBA limit. Furthermore, a Focused Traffic Analysis (Exhibit P - Kunzman Associates, Inc., July 2018) assessed the Level of Service (LOS) at various intersections in proximity to the project site. The City's Engineering Department reviewed the Analysis and concluded the project would not significantly impact nearby intersections and roadways. Therefore, the proposed use is not expected to be detrimental to public health, safety, welfare, and/or materially injurious to properties or improvements. C. Parking: The site currently has a 42 -stall parking lot located at the front of the site along North Victoria Windrows Loop. The original use established for St. Mary's Montessori, under Conditional Use Permit DRC2012-01004, permitted a maximum of 100 students and 13 staff members to be on-site at any given time. The Development Code specifies that for day care use, 1 parking space is required for each staff member and 1 parking space for every five students. Therefore, the existing use requires only 33 spaces, and currently has an excess of 9 spaces. Conditional Use Permit DRC2018-00095 increases the number of day care staff to 18 and the number of day care students to 147. Based on the increased number of students, the expanded day care operation requires a minimum of 48 parking spaces on-site to meet Development Code requirements. The Minor Design Review DRC2018-00092 adds a new building consisting of five new elementary classrooms, with a total of 156 students, nine teaching staff, and four administrative staff to provide support to the teaching staff and to maintain facility operations. Elementary schools are required to have 2 parking spaces per classroom. This results in an additional 10 spaces required beyond the number of spaces required for day care use. Administrative staff are parked at a rate of 1 space per staff member, increasing the number spaces required by another 4 spaces. In total, the proposed project will require 62 parking spaces per the Development Code. The parking lot will be enlarged to provide an additional 29 spaces resulting in a total of 71 parking spaces. The site will maintain an excess of 9 parking spaces as stated previously. Per Table 17.64.050-1 of the Development Code, the parking requirements for the existing and proposed uses are as follows: E4—ESPg5 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP DRC2016-00092, MDR DRC2018-00095 — ST. MARY'S MONTESSORI September 26, 2018 Page 6 D. Traffic Management: Access into the parking lot will remain unchanged, with two entrances located along North Victoria Windrows Loop. A new raised drop-off/pickup curb will be installed inside the parking lot to allow for guardians to drop off students without having to park in a parking stall. The drop-off/pickup curb is directly connected via a walkway to the front entrance of the proposed building and will be staffed with attendants who will escort the children inside in small groups_ A Stacking Analysis (Exhibit 1) conducted for the site showed that up to seven vehicles can be stacked in the driveway lane leading into the site before the line of vehicles begins extending into the public right-of-way. A second drop- off/pickup area has also been identified, along the same driveway, in a walkway area located between both buildings, The length of the driveway leading up to the second drop-off zone allows for an additional four vehicles to stack (eleven in total) before the line of vehicles begins extending into the public right-of-way. If the line of vehicles coming onto the site begins to stack into the right-of-way, the second drop-off/pickup area will be used to alleviate vehicle stacking_ School staff is responsible for all on-site traffic control and is required to divert traffic to designated parking spaces in the event parking begins to overflow into the public right-of- way. Staff will use a touch -screen digital tablet device to sign students in and out to their guardians. The device will be handed to the guardian in the vehicle by the attendant at the curbside, who will sign in/out their child. According to the applicant, the whole process of checking in/out students is expected to take less than one minute_ In addition to the use of a drop-off/pickup curb and digital technology, the hours of operations for the facility has also been staggered to facilitate on-site circulation_ The following table shows start and end times for the day care and elementary school use at St. Mary's Montessori and the nearby Windrows Elementary School' St. Mary's Montessori Day Care Elementary School 6:30 am -9:00 am 6:30 am -9:00 am 12:30 pm - 6:30 pm 3:30 - 6:30 pm Windrows Elementary School 8:15 am` 1.15 pm (Mondays) I 2:45 qm (Other Dav: E4—E5Pg6 Parkins Number of Number of Type of Use Count Ratio Spaces Spaces Required Provided Day Care Students 147 1 Space/5 Students 30 18 30 18 Day Care Staff 18 1 Space/1 Staff Elementary 156 Students 2 Spaces/Classroom 10 10 School 9 Staff Administrative 4 1 Space/1 Staff 4 4 Staff Total 62 71 D. Traffic Management: Access into the parking lot will remain unchanged, with two entrances located along North Victoria Windrows Loop. A new raised drop-off/pickup curb will be installed inside the parking lot to allow for guardians to drop off students without having to park in a parking stall. The drop-off/pickup curb is directly connected via a walkway to the front entrance of the proposed building and will be staffed with attendants who will escort the children inside in small groups_ A Stacking Analysis (Exhibit 1) conducted for the site showed that up to seven vehicles can be stacked in the driveway lane leading into the site before the line of vehicles begins extending into the public right-of-way. A second drop- off/pickup area has also been identified, along the same driveway, in a walkway area located between both buildings, The length of the driveway leading up to the second drop-off zone allows for an additional four vehicles to stack (eleven in total) before the line of vehicles begins extending into the public right-of-way. If the line of vehicles coming onto the site begins to stack into the right-of-way, the second drop-off/pickup area will be used to alleviate vehicle stacking_ School staff is responsible for all on-site traffic control and is required to divert traffic to designated parking spaces in the event parking begins to overflow into the public right-of- way. Staff will use a touch -screen digital tablet device to sign students in and out to their guardians. The device will be handed to the guardian in the vehicle by the attendant at the curbside, who will sign in/out their child. According to the applicant, the whole process of checking in/out students is expected to take less than one minute_ In addition to the use of a drop-off/pickup curb and digital technology, the hours of operations for the facility has also been staggered to facilitate on-site circulation_ The following table shows start and end times for the day care and elementary school use at St. Mary's Montessori and the nearby Windrows Elementary School' St. Mary's Montessori Day Care Elementary School 6:30 am -9:00 am 6:30 am -9:00 am 12:30 pm - 6:30 pm 3:30 - 6:30 pm Windrows Elementary School 8:15 am` 1.15 pm (Mondays) I 2:45 qm (Other Dav: E4—E5Pg6 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP DRC2018-00092, MDR DRC2018-00095 — ST. MARY'S MONTESSORI September 26, 2018 Page 7 The range and flexibility of drop-off and pickup times for St. Mary's Montessori reduces the number of vehicles potentially on-site at any given time. Parents and guardians have the option to drop-off/pickup their child at any time during the designated time periods and will likely have staggered arrival times. Furthermore, the end times are staggered with the start and end times of Windrows Elementary school. The earliest start time for St. Mary's Montessori (6:30 am) is 1 hour and 45 minutes before the start time for Windrows Elementary (8:15 am). The earliest end time for St. Mary's Montessori day care (12:30 pm) is 45 minutes before the earliest end time for Windrows Elementary (1:15 pm). The earliest end time for the proposed St. Mary's Montessori Elementary School (3:30 pm) is 45 minutes after the latest end time for Windrows Elementary (2:45 pm). Given the range of hours students can be dropped off and picked up, and the staggered start/end times with the Windrows Elementary School, significant traffic congestion is unlikely to occur. E. Neighborhood Meeting: The applicant held a neighborhood meeting at the Etiwanda Intermediate School on June 26, 2018. A total of 13 residents attended the meeting to ask questions and posed comments to the applicant and City staff. No objections were raised against the project. F. Desmon _Review Committee: The project was presented to the Design Review Committee (Guglielmo, Wimberly, and Granger) on July 17, 2018. The proposed building is architecturally similar to the existing building and is compatible with the design theme of the overall Victoria Community. The Committee accepted the design of the project as proposed, without revisions, and recommended the project be forwarded to the Planning Director for review and approval (Exhibit J). G. Technical Review Committee: The project was presented to the Technical Review Committee on July 17, 2018. The Technical Review Committee accepted the design of the project as proposed, without revisions, and recommended the project be forwarded to the Planning Director for review and approval. H. General Plan and Victoria Community Plan Consistency: The General Plan designates the proposed project site as Parks. Per the General Plan, the Parks designation is characterized by multi-purpose recreation land near residential developments. The General Plan does not specify whether other complementary land uses that provide community support, such as the proposed day care facility, are allowed under a Parks designation. However, the General Plan recognizes the Victoria Community Plan as the guiding document for development for the Victoria Planned Community. As outlined above in the Conditional Use Permit section, the existing day care and proposed private elementary school use is considered a community facility and is permitted in the Low -Medium (LM) Residential District subject to the review and approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Furthermore, the existing day care and proposed private elementary school facility is consistent with the residential use in the neighborhood. The facility fulfills the land use goal of community facilities within a residential community by providing parents and guardians a facility to obtain day care and school services. Therefore, the project would complement the existing residential neighborhood and would be generally consistent with the intent of the Parks land use of the General Plan. Environmental Assessment: The 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. The project qualifies as a Class 1 exemption under State CEQA E4—E5 Pg7 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP DRC2018-00092, MDR DRC2018-00095 — ST. MARY'S MONTESSORI September 26, 2018 Page 8 Guidelines Section 15301 — Existing Facilities and a Class 3 exemption under State CEQA Section 15303 — New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures. The project is an expansion of an existing day care use on the site. Portions of the day care operations will continue to occur within the existing 6,600 square foot building on-site. The project also includes the development of a new 9,974 square foot building and new outdoor play areas to accommodate additional day care students and new elementary school students. The development occurs within City limits on a project site of less than 5 acres in size, substantially surrounded by urban uses. The project site is located within the Low -Medium (LM) Residential District of the Victoria Planned Community. Development of a facility for day care and school use is permitted within the Low -Medium (LM) Residential District of the Victoria Planned Community with a Conditional Use Permit. The facility meets all applicable development standards and zoning regulations of the Development Code and the Victoria Planned Community. The site can also be adequately served with all required utilities and police and fire services. Two environmental studies were also prepared to assess any potential impacts that the project might have relating to traffic and noise. A Focused Traffic Analysis (Exhibit P - Kunzman Associates, Inc., July 2018) assessed the Level of Service (LOS) at various intersections in proximity to the project site. The City's Engineering Department reviewed the analysis and concluded that the project would not significantly impact nearby intersections and roadways. A Noise Impact Analysis (Exhibit O - Kunzman Associates, Inc., June 2018) analyzed potential construction and operational noise impacts associated with the proposed project on neighboring project sites. The analysis concluded that with a temporary, 6 -foot tall noise barrier erected along the north property line during construction, the exterior noise levels for all adjacent properties will fall below the maximum residential noise limits of 65 dBA per the Development Code. Noise associated with daily operations is expected to range between 45.5 and 57 4 dBA as measured from adjacent property lines and is not expected to exceed the 65 dBA limit. FISCAL IMPACT: The project proponent will be responsible for paying one-time impact fees. These fees are intended to address the increased demand for City services due to the proposed project. The types of services that these impact fees would support include library services, transportation, infrastructure, animal services, police, parks, and community and recreation services. The proposed development will increase the value of the project site and the parcels will be assessed an annual property tax. A percentage of this annual tax is shared with the City. The expanded day care facility and private elementary school will potentially also increase employment opportunities for residents and create additional patrons for the retail sector which, in turn, will generate safes tax revenue. COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: MID AND LONG RANGE PLANNING One of the City's Council goals is to revitalize under -performing or under-utilized areas and create synergy amongst the varying land uses. The subject site is located in the Low -Medium (LM) Residential District and among existing single-family residential homes, The day care and elementary school use is compatible with the residential neighborhood, providing residents in the neighborhood with access to educational services for their children. The private elementary E4—E5 Pg8 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP DRC2018-00092, MDR DRC2018-00095 — ST. MARY'S MONTESSORI September 26, 2018 Page 9 school addition would also allow for a semi -vacant lot to be utilized more efficiently. The proposed addition and play areas will replace the vacant area at the rear (north side) of the site. CORRESPONDENCE: Notices for this item were mailed out on three separate occasions. Notices were mailed out by the applicant to all property owners within a 660 -foot radius of the project site prior to the Neighborhood Meeting on June 26, 2018. A second notification was mailed by the City on August 27, 2018 to notify the same list of property owners of the proposed Conditional Use Permit. Following the determination to forward the project to the Planning Commission, a third notification was mailed by the City on September 13, 2018 to notify the same list of property owners of the public hearing. In addition to the mailers, the item was advertised as a public hearing with a regular 118th page legal advertisement in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, and the property was posted. Throughout the public notification process, staff received 54 letters and 19 emails in support of the project from residents (Exhibit K). Supporters cited the value of having a day care and elementary school in the neighborhood, and the quality of the existing facility. Staff also received 7 letters in opposition to the project (Exhibit Q. Two of the seven residents who wrote letters visited the Planning Department's public counter to express their opposition to the project. Residents who are against the project generally cited the potential decline in their property value, the loss of view caused by the new building, the increased noise associated with additional students, and the increased traffic to the site as the primary reasons for their opposition. No information was provided to staff, nor is staff aware of any information, which demonstrates declining property values following the construction and/or expansion of a school. Regarding the concerns about the loss of views, although the City has no ordinance to preserve existing views, the proposed building matches the existing building and has been reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee. Furthermore, the project site and the proposed building does not obstruct any scenic vistas, scenic resources, or view corridors (as identified in Figure LU -6 of the General Plan) as viewed from the adjacent residential lots. The noise concerns have been adequately addressed by the Noise Impact Analysis (Exhibit O - Kunzman Associates, lnc., June 2018) specified in the Environmental Assessment section above. Noise levels are expected to meet all Development Code requirements. Lastly, a Focused Traffic Analysis (Exhibit P - Kunzman Associates, Inc., July 2018), also discussed in the Environmental Assessment section above, concluded that no significant impacts are expected with the proposed project to nearby intersections. Traffic is further managed by having adequate parking on-site, dedicated drop-off/pickup areas attended by staff, and flexible drop-off/pickup hours that are staggered with the nearby Windrows Elementary school. The applicant provided a response to the opposition letters submitted. The applicant's response is submitted as Exhibit M. EXHIBITS: Exhibit A - Vicinity Map Exhibit B - Site Aerial Map Exhibit C - Site Plan Exhibit D - Floor & Roof Plans Exhibit E - Building Sections Exhibit F - Building Elevations Exhibit G - Landscape Plan Exhibit H - Site Amenities Plan E4—E5 Pg9 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP DRC2018-00092, MDR DRC2018-00095 — ST. MARY'S MONTESSORI September 26, 2018 Page 10 Exhibit I - Stacking Analysis Exhibit J - Design Review Committee Action Agenda and Comments (July 17th, 2018) Exhibit K - Correspondence in Support of Project from Residents Exhibit L - Correspondence in Opposition of Project from Residents Exhibit M - Applicant Response to Letters of Opposition Exhibit N - Approval Letter for Conditional Use Permit DRC2012-01004 Exhibit O Noise Impact Analysis (Kunzman Associates, Inc,, June 2018) Exhibit P Focused Traffic Analysis (Kunzman Associates, Inc., July 2018) Draft Resolution of Approval for Conditional Use Permit ORC2018-00092 Draft Resolution of Approval for Minor Design Review DRC2018-00095 E4—E5 Pg 10 R}� I `y, I !r 4` r 4. '�• ":"' iF}k JIi1II'r Kj �.` _t�-7 3{`i��' ��• q. _ Ir j; Fm r 1L- � ] '�{{{.11 �' �f {� '� �t �� LL�{ `� aG 1c � • �!4 ]��4�� +�_ `�, q^� ,�� �] � ! _ .. {y,,w�Ir Va t1 u � 1 � � _ }_��.rk� r tJ' .'! � �I!.'"'i: '•`, IRS � ,.yf .,+.. - � � �y��*5 ,'. �f.. tea = {y r ,�' • �k s .�;� • ,. '�. .1 •-} !�� �"��.��' I ��� F. i:l S�F, T+t Y �Ef•' 11 �� .AE Pi.iii r.'� °1�*�"�''� F+'j:.[irl J, 11,;YY! BLit Ar � ,µc; � � , •�' 1 u�,f � f flFt" iy:'�'.l .�%+�,r�9. ,�� - ,� s� ' • 5 � ��} - w rte.:' � r- r'�.. y moi, �'! '. c �u :�F.. •ice taL' Iha' w �r ✓�, �I 'p 1 L � . C7. .j •n�. � ... .t � -. � * � yk •� e � +��yl�?'4t4;Q� �acYL�4LI',�#t i � :� �' ' _ � I�L'�„ -' _ �_I�I {'� ^ '7,.� r � F�,y`:�'}y� ' +Ije �.,✓�• J ',.l T C},�"�C i � w 'S y f �� �_�A � ='�r.3' J r_rr,�•S � r� _ � w ,'.1" "f ' r�� L.1 � r��1 n�,,li�:a+ ,•y` ,44tM1,�I� ��'- , r�--Y I —.:� :1 rf '7?� r4" � ° �} fit, /.. '!. • ',�\ _� •� , ~ �"�. .1 1 ,�� r9.: /// f'' _ � re �' � �'� t � _ r F t' M �y� r r C:-. .'�!+�e.'{� . ya .t + t�� � �•�'' r �'r ti°�•'�� � r �.! -I+., '.:F , � i � _ I �1• •�� t'r "'a 'k•, •t� � '' `° f�� I,_� •1 ra �, `.krp'y ~•rl Sf �'..� �"�..•-�" _,� f �� - 1 JRA '+ �� � 4~ �j'~ar.7� _Otte _ � 1��.'� � r� � rc4 �r �y'� • 'VP�'� ��'� r� � �:S �7 � Yt r' • � �.F t. :.t' _ _ ! - t i L.: �a•�I t �. '�` S y O • ✓�14 � GS 1� r - , it-� . � __ l,� ,y-.•} • �_ a,i.°"'L, � � '•�� x r"`1Je�� }T '�1 J4ei ,�� ..ri 'A �3FA r r�k ka �r',�1 L. T� I � _� Fr f;a, �� `r "I�� rr.,,,t �_ -+M1 -'-r.-�•�� �1��°�-s' i+ cn +i r�,.,'r_..� j '•v. .rnr��.%C'r� �`3f.�,r�' �41��'S� �.., d o � �y, t'1 '+':''�• T�f'► rn .rte"����j;_�1„�� _ [I:'c�i` :�y�� +' :'� i, f d ..1 �p�. y. i+ ” �.r� ^�� !' 4� 7 k� ? t r`f:�'y* sY.•�i ['rr' TT F - . 11«'x, ¢r'J 1 LI S C� a�7'•1 J' y, ev °.ref ol f' L } F� v v4. ndro'hs LOOP 'rth, ' ' •' 97 to ic;r • ri 4 . rr j 414,1p ' yy i 4 � t . -r � b r..e• 6 ` 5 ` :INK: ry .0 jaU'lip@9�O15hf2 1600"tazndo OKI"I LL"GOL N a V h 8£L 6 V3 ' V0NOvyvonO OHONVU dOOI SMOHON1M VIU01OlA •N 0999 sa�aai���ae IOOHOS WOSS`31NOW Si�OdW 1S N1fld ails W "bM wf)7" EXHIBIT C E4—E5 Pg 13 W z II I } W n ot¢aot o: at oCal �¢I'�¢It o® N o- Y a� :� •ems � i•r �� � ,. 1 OOA CL W !.WA LL i W "bM wf)7" EXHIBIT C E4—E5 Pg 13 jau ilepauOlsbic ""'20 GOWSEU"V. N.V 6UL6 VO 'VE)NovqvonoOHONVH d001 SMOWNIM M0131A -N 0999 D, L Z) J U IOOHOS 18OSS31NOV4 SAUVIN 'IS flf.-ira F.� n�i nfl 'i - 0 T- NVId kJ001:1 0 Fig 10 X J .......... .. ..... . . . . . . . . . . . 40 EXHIBIT D E4—E5'P'gl4 rL o •: fy 0 Vl� 4:11 10 X J .......... .. ..... . . . . . . . . . . . 40 EXHIBIT D E4—E5'P'gl4 loullegnaumbie `x.°„""a 00001CILr4Y0lNdY crcmr 6UL 6 VO HEJNOINVOnO OHON" /d d00i SM080NIM VINOIDIA N 0889t-- s��aai����e IOOHOS RJOSS]INOVI S.AbHW Is Nylcf dooa E4—E5 Pg 15 w. MS&uo�Sb1B acl'�9.u__ti_ MIC":t.r M7G Nor iou-140 , F• ,,;^ ,� BSL eB VO 'V`JNotNvon0 ONONVN dOOI SM060NIM VIMOiOiA'N 0889 �F SjJ��I[lJJe 100HOS WOSS31NOW fi-9N01133S0.016 S, ,Hyvy •1S n v 1101133S 0,1218 , {' EXHIBIT E n a 1 I i j i I I I I I F m Sa--4 m� _ ❑E I � I z z it I I I I m I I I I z � I I I I K W ! EXHIBIT E n a 9 1 � F m I m� in U' Va i J U J � m _ Iall'Itu ouojsble rc.•a'. a crect. Kdr 6£Ll6 VD 'VSNOiAjvon0 OHONV8 q� .V /d dOO-1 SMOUONIM VWOIOIA'N 0999 CV s1,531gIale i IOOHOS IHOSS31NOW sNoildna,a I T EXHIBIT F z 0 a 5 J W H A z I E4 --E5 Pg17 I T I z O a LU F i� iF4 L6 V.) L�"cuv)ro CL, %LCZj j d 1s6ujpjoH Apadoid jcqojq 10OLIDS !JOSSO)Uow nueple—Aer siam S,fjew 'IS FLM 7j z R cl EXHIBIT G E4 -E5 Pg18 . 2 C L C- rim, a e « _ oE+ ;� ••�� §�R i �l'mm� N+W� MOM I o�aS�osS loom S,fj em 2 ® § A _pi _was i ]S §... ■ [/' )�|)�\§ ]_! � 11 E4 -E5 Pg]§ 2 §41 ;� � 2 ® § A [/' )�|)�\§ ]_! \ � � | � 1 �•� � 2 '� E4 -E5 Pg]§ 2 •[h ;� � 2 ® § A [/' )�|)�\§ ]_! E4 -E5 Pg]§ I sGGj.L I sqnjLIS �i7Zo, II ..CLLP; vi rf.,cwnn3 s i ell Q�s O'll 'SOUIP1014 AijodOJd 1eq0lo 10OLIDS ijossaluow 'IS outp-mcAer s!jtio S,fu EW +n �ko r.- W., —n a&—.-rxul r6 —J I sGGj.L I sqnjLIS i 3 ism JOA03punojE): E4 -E5 Pg20 I I -4 II r6 i 3 ism JOA03punojE): E4 -E5 Pg20 I I -4 ei�:a�,r:�• a ,:no n:x�: � {� INA JTi d;g a'_yiaSua70.'96 (oollo5 pos58,iiOw 3 -ll s6ulPIoH � jjsdad MOIS i f � - �\ ar�-.s,• ,o�wi�d :uxuec�a,�otic�a Lve� ! „ r 9 y O c'• g y n r 5 r a .. s 9 F Hu.U u p u EXHIBIT H —_ E4 -E5 Pg2, 0. In L) s a F Hu.U u p u EXHIBIT H —_ E4 -E5 Pg2, 0. (4: .QI 4-0 � � E � � cn �: �' mp ij 4'j; «oid aqole nepi muAc r@U B : ! i ! �;� � 100435 Nosskuow ° 44 am"_cf-wj ��jj\j| . � ] ! � E4-E5Pg22 | 0 ■` % r- 0 § �+�^�� ;au;;eanauo{stile SGDO OZ30 OOppSdSirE9p4 NQ > -=-- 6EL 16 VO 'VEJNOWVOf13 OHONV8 3 /d d00i smoHaNIM VIUOIOIA'N 0889 s �a�t�laa� IOQHOS WOSS31NOW wVa�ela n S.Al I 'W '1S ',]NINO'd15 31OH3A EXHIBIT E4—E5 Pg23 vVL! Kim f+V IW- r .VV r.Ivl. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION RAINS Room CITY HALL 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE A. CALL TO ORDER 7:OOPM Roll Call: Ray Wimberly X Rich Macias Candyce Burnett Donald Granger X Alternates: Lou Munoz Tony Guglielmo X Francisco Oaxaca B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Committee on any item listed on the agenda. 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 to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Staff Coordinator, depending upon the number of individuals members of the audience. This is a professional businessmeeting 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. C. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS 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. C1. MINOR DESIGN REVIEW DRC2018-00095 - SAINT MARY'S MONTESSORI - A request for site plan and architectural review of a proposed 9,974 square foot addition and outdoor play EXHIBIT J Page 1 of 2 E4 -E5 Pg24 vv` I Ila] A6%F IW— r .vv r.Iri. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION RAINS Room CITY HALL 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE areas to an existing 6,600 square foot child care facility on 1.85 acres of land, located in the Low -Medium (LM) Residential District, Victoria Planned Community, north of North Victoria Windrows Loop and south of Plum Way; APN: 1089-471-25. Related files: Conditional Use Permit DRC2018-00092. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA guidelines under CEQA Section 15303 — New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures. The project was approved as presented and forwarded to the Planning Director for consideration. D. ADJOURNMENT 7:16PM The Design Review Committee has adopted Administrative Regulations that set an 19:00 p.m. adjournment time. if items go beyond that time, they shall be heard only with the consent of the Committee. 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 day, Thursday, July 5, at least seventy two (72) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA. .rgs Lois J. Schrader Planning Commission Secretary City of Rancho Cucamonga It 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. Page 2 of 2 E4—E5 Pg25 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Dat Tran July 17, 2018 MINOR DESIGN REVIEW DRC2018-00095 — SAINT MARY'S MONTESSORI — A request for site plan and architectural review of a proposed 9,974 square foot addition and outdoor play areas to an existing 6,600 square foot child care facility on 1.85 acres of land, located in the Low -Medium (LM) Residential District, Victoria Planned Community, north of North Victoria Windrows Loop and south of Plum Way; APN: 1089- 471-25_ Related files: Conditional Use Permit DRC2018-00092. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA guidelines under CEQA Section 15303 -- New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures. Site and Surrounding Land Uses: The project site is a triangular parcel of 1.85 acres within the Low -Medium (LM) Residential District of the Victoria Planned Community. It is improved with an existing child care facility that consists of a 6,600 -square foot building approved for child care uses, 3 playground areas and a 42 -stall parking lot. The site also has a large, undeveloped lawn area at the rear of the site. The project site is located east of, and adjacent to, Windrows Park, north of North Victoria Windrows Loop and south of Plum Way. The west property line of the project site is shared with Windrows Park. The properties to the north, east, and south of the project are zoned Low -Medium (LM) Residential, Victoria Planned Community, and consists of single-family residences. The single-family residences to the east and south are separated from the project site by North Victoria Windrows Loop. The single-family residences to the north of the project site are directly adjacent to the project site. Project Overview: The applicant is proposing to construct a 9,974square foot addition and outdoor play areas to the existing child care facility. The proposed addition and play areas will replace the lawn area at the rear (north side) of the site. At buildout, the site will have a total of 16,574 square feet of space used exclusively for child care and educational uses. The area in proximity of the buildings will consist of a variety of play, landscaped and outdoor entertainment areas for the use with the building. This includes 5 rubberized playground areas with play structures, soft turf play areas, wood decks, and decorative xeriscaped pathways that enhance the overall site design_ The parking lot provided on the project site will also be enlarged to provide an additional 29 spaces resulting in a total of 71 parking spaces. Access into the parking Jot will remain unchanged, with two entrances located along North Victoria Windrows Loop. A new raised drop-off curb will be installed inside the parking lot to allow for parents to drop off their children without having to park. The drop-off curb is directly connected via a walkway to the front entrance of both buildings and will be staffed with attendants who will escort the children inside. The proposed building will be located at the rear of the site, adjacent to the north and east property lines. The exterior of the building has visually -interesting fagades viewable from all vantage points. The design incorporates the use of composite wood cladding panels and stucco as the primary building materials. The base of the building is imbued with a graphic pattern stucco wainscot. The extensive use of the two primary materials and the wainscot helps break up expansive blank facade that usually occurs with the use of stucco materials. The roof consists of concrete tiles and open roof wood frames that E4—E5 Pg26 DRC COMMENTS DRC2018-00095 — SAINT MARY'S MONTESSORI July 17, 2018 Page 2 complement each other. The roofing materials are also consistent with the roof design of the existing building. The proposed structure also incorporates the use of standing seam metal roofs, decorative windows and doors, and aluminum screed to add architectural interest to the building. The architectural style and scale of the building is compatible with the existing building. Overall, the design of the proposed building enhances the overall visual quality of the site and meets the City's "360 -degree" design standards. The site meets the City's Development Standards for parking, building heights, and all applicable setbacks. The minimum setbacks for side property lines is 5 feet on one side and 10 feet on the other side in the Low -Medium (LM) Residential District. The proposed building is a minimum of 20 feet away from the north and east property lines, which form the side property lines of the site. The building also exceeds the minimum 32 feet front yard setback. All play structures are setback a minimum of 5 feet from property lines. There will be 71 parking spaces provided for the project which will be in excess of the 64 parking spaces that is required. There is no landscaping minimum established for non- residential facilities in Low -Medium (LM) Residential District. However, the total amount of landscaped coverage onsite is roughly 25%, which exceeds the 10-15% landscaped areas required for most commercial establishments in the City. Additionally, the City's Development Standards establishes a minimum requirement for the number of trees onsite. The site will have 67 trees at buildout; 56 trees are required for the entire site. Staff Comments: Major Issues: None. Staff supports the proposed site layout and overall design of the proposed project. The project is well -integrated into the existing parcel. The buildings consist of visually interesting facades which meet the City's "360 -degree" design standards. The building facade incorporates a variety of materials and architectural features, including composite wood cladding panels, stucco, tile roofing and wood frames, thereby meeting the City's design standards for new buildings. Adequate parking is provided onsite for the proposed building and landscaping is maintained to adequately screen the site from the public right-of-way, reducing any visual impact upon public roadways. Secondary Issues: 1. None Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: All Double Detector Checks (DDC) and Fire Department Connections (FDC) required and/or proposed shall be installed at locations that are not within direct view or line - of -sight of the main entrance. The specific locations of each DDC and FDC shall require the review and approval of the Planning Department and Fire Construction Services/Fire Department. All Double Detector Checks (DDC) and Fire Department Connections (FDC) shall be screened behind a 4 -foot high block wall. These walls shall be constructed of similar material used on-site to match the building. E4—E5 Pg27 DRC COMMENTS DRC2018-00095 — SAINT MARY'S MONTESSORI July 17, 2018 Page 3 2. All ground -mounted equipment, including utility boxes, transformers, and back-flow devices, shall be surrounded by a minimum of two rows of shrubs spaced a minimum of 18 inches ort -center. All ground -mounted equipment shall be painted dark green except as directed otherwise by the Fire Department. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee recommend approval of the proposed project as submitted to the Planning Director. Staff Report: Staff presented the project to members of the Design Review Committee. No comments were raised at the meeting. Design Review Committee Action: The project was approved as presented and forwarded to the Planning Director for consideration_ Staff Planner: Dat Tran, Assistant Planner Members Present* Commissioners Wimberly and Guglielmo Staff Coordinator: Donald Granger, Senior Planner E4—E5 Pg28 ard iox �)cl iLlk -4,- t�A 13mv.he a 1 7)c--, 1 tl) ILS, IL+ C �J lu ' C'LNAI Irli�.1� � �Lf lil�il(Zl`• 11�it Ct IA C kyroL C U'se i'xWC'N,,A'5 CLIA �C) ixtbIlL -3tvlbokt EXHIBIT K E4 -E5 Pg29 April 26, 2018 To whom it may concern, I have been a resident of the Windrows Community since 1993 and have seen many changes in the area. It was a concern when the La Petite Pre -School across the street from my house (6880 N. Victoria Windrows Loop) closed down a few years ago and became vacant. When it was re -opened some time later and became St. Mary's Montessori School, owner Chris layawardana came to my house and introduced himself. He explained his vision of the school and passed out his business card inviting me to call him at any time with questions or concerns about his business. Since that time, the school has seemingly flourished with many more clients and activities during the week; success the previous tenant seemed to lack. Recently I learned of a proposed addition to the school which is supposedly going to include more parking along with additional classrooms. I totally support the addition and believe it will ease the already limited street parking surrounding the school. Mr. layawardana has been a great neighbor to the residents of this community and I look forward to the continued friendship and success of the school. Don Motts, - k Q" 6875 N. Victoria Windrows Loop Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 (909) 815-1904 E4—E5 Pg30 i11-74 (�A a9$o?s t 763 A 0L. A,4r-llo G4 q ? 73e,' elTy of�Gtla ?LAvt141yv T Allw ,-T 01 ��'= 1�1,�Rll� �4n t �S � R r t $ Z � C�H�+S i a r,�. 1M �-+R � 4 7� £. �✓R�✓,.,.9 t � �,, � ir.� �x � -ry l„��-� �R✓� i� n/�� �iG�`7/ �!�✓��,�}�i�.Q� 5G1f�Jo�. G✓1��f1� �✓iyr� i�-rrtz��' FAwL, s t ,',5 Tory L✓I � �'� Laa ', > lwe-7, va YOvyl,1� R ��w� rt -14 5 �L ✓r rf�L t �i� �Z�i� �j �,t r t a a v PA--.--ffo fl�'� 1�Q, ✓� GR J-�vvK� Vyil,/ -5 I,J T/Ji, GaaP Ov�� -rte � MA12NI13 A5 E4 -E5 Pg3l Drs. Aaron and Amy Heffner 13063 Los Cedros Ave Rancho Cucamonga, CA, 91739 202-641-0019 To City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Department: The community of Rancho Cucamonga would benefit from an expanded Montessori program via a new school building, as the school develops and promotes children who are independent and curious learners. These children grow up to become adults who will carry forth these same principles, and they will engage in the community in positive ways that give back to all its members. Additionally, expanded child care coverage will allow parents to become more active members of society. An educated and involved family is a family that promotes safety, compassion, and service. Montessori will continue to grow the sense of community in the immediate area. Sincerely, 2 Drs. Aaron and Amy Heffner E4—E5 Pg32 April 25, 2018 City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 RE: St. Mary's Montessori School — Rancho Cucamonga - Expansion 6880 N Victoria Windrows Loop Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 To Whom It May Concern: I am writing as a parent in support of the expansion for the St. Mary's Montessori school in Rancho Cucamonga. Expanding this school facility will greatly benefit the quality of life in Rancho Cucamonga. The Montessori approach instills life skills, coping skills, and respect for their community while children are very young. This program is not just a standard day-care — it is a significant asset in our community designed to give our kids a good start in life- The solid foundation for health, thinking and decision- making this program provides to our children results in reduced truancy, crime and drug use in the teen and young adult population in our community. The more children in our community that grow up to be responsible, community -minded teens and adults, the greater the social and economic benefits for our community. We are aware that several of the neighbors are concerned about the traffic. As a parent with two children at Montessori, I do know that many of the families have multiple children, including older ones, that could go to this facility instead of some other program in the region. Additionally, the families at Montessori are encouraged to consistently engage with each other therefore many of us routinely help each other by transport inglcarpooling children from multiple families. Allowing for the additional children to attend this campus could actually mean a decrease in overall traffic locally and regionally because it will eliminate the extra trips parents must make to transport their older children to different programs in other areas of Rancho Cucamonga. With respect to the concern over the potential increase in noise, the school has been in its existing location for about _5— years. Respect for community is a value instilled in the kids who attend the program, and the staff St. Mary's campus has worked very hard to practice what they teach. l know that they will continue this practice in the future as the student population grows. Thank you for allowing me to offer my support of this wonderful program that will only benefit the quality of life for our community. SNO Gall- U Run(' 1 C C ,-ICgm 0� Q CA 9 a l E4 -E5 Pg33 Oil E4 -E5 Pg34 Tapw4v s /Z 8-9-3 5a4r rn d ,Col ro, v -p"/ D 164d,,i - 77- sck. ! 4-pp�,I Pow o�pD�� p de*t4ftA,1;4 -�—�.�-amu._ 9 ��6� ��-• � ' ek��,,r,�., �/,�,,,,, . E4 --E5 Pg35 �+�.dl��v� OcE�ltiL Pv, Rpt 1,LLL0.ma"c�°� fe'l /Jo. Y,, 7- 'h46 I v\o o Lr VA _A j2"0%', 17LV %ol iV", A aO —p'Ae 7 r6tottuL7 OLj O -j C�A;,c1.,e A let C'vt• P� �d v\�n C sr�n Gtrav p A- +'47 °+ g vso� al ie C�Oii;v Q -io -�,t Q,�b�: t� yG�ao1 • wv� �7`�c,iQw� � a�p />--,Z,% r Z' E4 -E5 Pg36 `L [7 e,&4 � : +{, o %.x c o,u��sCr �y4 r. e'�W$"�'tio�si bso�(Lty� tinv� �1� v\o o Lr VA _A j2"0%', 17LV %ol iV", A aO —p'Ae 7 r6tottuL7 OLj O -j C�A;,c1.,e A let C'vt• P� �d v\�n C sr�n Gtrav p A- +'47 °+ g vso� al ie C�Oii;v Q -io -�,t Q,�b�: t� yG�ao1 • wv� �7`�c,iQw� � a�p />--,Z,% r Z' E4 -E5 Pg36 ` rr VEL-- ��tF� 'C��s,,-fir �`e e K�GZv�Stv✓1 0 � �. �"�°�,r � �s L&AU-1 -A p U r n rrr Qv opt 1 '1fA ri�1'1 CIA W-W4 (> t7-C-OAL-ol �00 E4 -E5 Pg37 J �� = C►five c� �{v,c���� C��t �{t�i�-vti�: � � }ct�,�sl�J j�z�c iw,J ovj)lli1( G 1 ill( Sz �Jcl�c, s Iti1 t�S�", Schco _J f i't inti tc��it�ti, J 43 it (S c-tyr c.urlhwi'c me,,tt«, +) w�l : Gtw� l'i�r� ��(�} ��� lnSh�ctJ s tn4 f I l," rrs ii� ollw— W0i"i1tSw.1 Scl r, I it cl A —ATI -e r(;(CjTti S tq I(' cur - �X'q Vv� t'G1C�c {�'�,��"1 ��ti�.�� } lS c� ��� Gil !.{�{2ti'LVcr�i`e �) ,laic E4—E5 Pg38 From: Humphrey & Linda Ahaiwe 5419 Covina place, Rancho Cucamonga CA, 91739 Cell 1: 909-802-9210 Cel l2: 213-220-1628 To: The City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department The following, are reasons why we think the community will benefit immensely from the new school building: A) The Montessori environment is highly organized and each child is given the opportunity to choose any activity of choice to work on B) We absolutely love the emphasis on learning by social development and hands on rather than answering to specific questions without knowing what the questions entail sometimes. C) The environment teaches self-discipline to everyone. D) Safety is our utmost priority and we feel our son is safe here. Our daughter was here as well. Thanking you, Humphrey & Linda Ahaiwe E4—E5 Pg39 Nle ha S huh L� z-T� zC)i� 5 �lg5a IF, Aiwan60 aye Konchu W(omon q CA C4n3q Te1,. liy z-99 -iL5 9 To s t of gQnLho (team on cl. P1 ann; n DepciO men � M un+essc)r .schools p-F(ec brcwWpar - a d\lc,In tci e5 G1 F -+'c,u l l- r ��1 e� ti m uss 61Com. P LO o f er- o+hf-r w0itc. Dene to .p menti woulcl hold Lhe �n+erest feC{cHerS crS Luell cAs GbLenbon of k,ds (ecw((Ie5s c) lec(n'4n LU c? E4 -E5 Pg40 �y -7 2,b -:5 � -�na�' I � �C CA qoc,\ L,e-b $�$D C+. 0� Kun( ho Cu cu m on a P ASS o \Ov k�� s V)e-,�.K y V e �o E4 -E5 Pg41 Angela and Shaan James 12268 Chantrelle Drive #2 Rancho Cucamonga CA, 91739 Tel No. 951 2551962 To: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department We think that the new building for St Mary's Montessori school will benefit the local community greatly. There are no other Montessori schools within our area and when looking for a high-quality education for our children they fit the bill. It is an alternative for us to public school. C_-,� f//t� E4—E5 Pg42 /4,-i,(, ► 6- an PM 3 W itby Dr . att c,6 C-cicc.ullovyk , CA 903 ci 00'b 701—.qq j q Lr'bj C,{ P�zhc.1 o C -u C4tJ'l t) 1 CL PIGIfini>1ClDePar fiylen-j- 1-1av1n5 01 ,1 cvLtj bULUn� uj ilk [Lo11p 1`/vIpc,c.f cc}rvtr�,h��-C� +,uE�-� �n ar�(�z•�r�y ,'�ov��ssc�r� ��� r.�u . c,61 11 In AP ll�s� ��l 9�Qr{� valvQ� �c uc L c/irld C/L Sapi k U I` c omtzt uvl( i oiJr J LTJ on v�'�.��C�U��-�'} I f k 1 E4-E5Pg43 1 t� Av �`a - 23 2P CCamu')�a, CA 91-737 714 (4 CiLe -bY3� CI� J ft*o �Ucomyv mmq iNvaYlmQn� inkikys0q, �Utldlm , moi ", bw j fi� -P/Q. .�� - Ute. d6 nes �- hcu� a �?on-1e)1a1� rn . �� j had 1 S /I he - Lea � � �� ynra �' our aU � ��rr ?Klrom UA1 1 � r oar COQ SCh CK -)j �wc� E4-E5Pg44 Leslie and Jason Romero 13548 Green Stone Drive Rancho Cucamonga CA, 91739 Tel No. 909 5617273 To: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department We are fully behind the building of the new structure to expand St Mary's Montessori school. It is a good alternative to the public schooling system, and high standard quality education for our children. The local community will benefit from the expansion as there a no other schools in the area that run a Montessori program, and this is what we want for our children. E4—ES Pg45 E4 -E5 Pg46 , LL) -u k - - t Anthony and Krysten Morel 12819 Silver Rose Court Rancho Cucamonga CA, 91739 Tel No. 909 9215666 To: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department We think the new building for St Mary's Montessori school will greatly benefit the community since there is no other Montessori school in Rancho Cucamonga. It would ensure a good education for our children in a Montessori setting. E4—E5 Pg47 -EQ0, V-% ✓N cc ✓\ Va./,clno Co cc-.hn"dt Ca qt -73D (hoq) S IS •c{ i -Sc( 0(r k✓\Ci kO CO C q mac)A)Lt Q iQ n�nfi A5 P( -par -I- "ne ,iV , JD tALk navre ► � -t:', rr �c+r► Ccs,/! ct,r1c -V rY► c�_ CQ �� �e►'�t o e A V�e c t 4-L� ?aeOlo Cuccx~cjG . 0(F Aye nem 5CVN o0 1 )DO O A t l c a5 14 k\ art ny nem �o�s qf\CA �Ptro0,4u ~,kc-s m y C o,nn nr\O e\ cece \,A , .\n con 8-0Ae - CAA - 2vj h d2o j e E4-E5Pg48 4&eA ZUv11 1 6)61B1 rbv P�lvc Fr �p�- - '--A I1G v lC, Cu C G YYnG�In—GI r QA- i I 3CJ A) 2 -GO - Ccp Zai To '. Gi-y 6 -�anc1w Cucannov���l N,hntYlJ bePaYv�r �Yj�. � -%nK our aw Sc,lml bwldt�c�J wk11 41� -HQ mmmuhk� D� RancVIo CucUMDAJCj ( becaqS-e -1AVrf-, is o,ny siYonl kAovh5san QrD�YGIIYi IVA cornrrtunt As U bnvtl ,)°v -s -h +he. c.6rvnrv�uAi }-y CAS W2A � . E4-E5Pg49 Brian and Tanya Beach 6648 Santolina Place Rancho Cucamonga CA, 91739 Tel No. 562 6825787 To. City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department We fully support the building of the new structure for St Mary's Montessori school and believe it will be of great benefit to the community. There is no other Montessori school within our area, and we feel our children receive quality education there. It is a good alternative for our family to public school. (r cl K 8z h C/'" E4—ES PgSO /,2W3 -1-11,�1tland /Iv -0 - CA -71-7-37. v -0 - CA -%I-739. 7111- yd: ;y- !/V,�. ✓-�� S�}'�` �..l�c.��- flu? 72P�-� %3u�--�c�.� jr� c� ��C.r�. S/ �z .�ErltC c�� -�c' � ��zcrj��e Sc'ho��("c« S ilj yl�'/� ccicl�' rev O#Zc;- ��7cs� � 7 Sc%oo a', U) a E4—E5 Pg51 Priti and Visant Sanathara 12223 Highland Ave #544 Rancho Cucamonga CA, 91739 Tel No. 714 350 5771 To: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department We believe that the new building for St Mary's Montessori school will be of great benefit to the local community. There is no other Montessori school within a 20 -mile radius and it's a good alternative to Public school. We love that our children can attend this school. mmm E4—E5Pg52 Gley D f '���cGi�o GcccG-rn8n9a A s a ?are-7Li , 1 kno9v / /don 4ess N -i Duca t7io n cfJ'e-,Y-s ouY . C4,,tdYe-h o� oY�unifi �S �o d�v�-IG� .�' �o�crn��'� % as Jhevy S1117 -f out the 4e World &s 2r-ya ya p Y(?,5FO)S ,, le , unr,( res f i ul W1+h a?L un Gle,-ry u td ir+j uh-- of � Yec r air on t tc4 6 leox-nb!y [ S f oY a /r'fe i hx.t'S w i t /ta, Iobk.;,vj f oYwo.Ycf �Jat the no, w Sch p0 bccj jv-xa.Y7 mon�czoyf to hej our- commvlt -Lo h aye a S�r6n3 M o rtteSs or i rroyra-M., ; My-rtw,m,e is pskam/wool Thane, ntxmbe;6-).b3)>7l3S f Hp7ae-&[dye,SS; r73S J,SpeYSLVEet-/ �-ancka Gucctl7wnja YS ha -m wu wy E4 -E5 Pg53 Adam M. Larson, Ph.D. Christina M, Larson, Ph.D. 13149 Loire Valley Dr. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 (516)532-84617 City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department To Whom it May Concern, We are the proud parents of two children who attend St. Mary's Montessori in Rancho Cucamonga; we fully support the addition of a new school building as there are few schools in the area that adhere to the Montessori program curriculum. Montessori programs offer a rich environment that is supportive of intellectual, social and emotional growth while fostering independence through a unique love of learning. Furthermore, a Montessori cultivates compassion for others, community and the world. Sincerely, 4 Adam M. Larson, Ph.D. Christina M. Larson, Ph.D. E4—E5Pg54 1 0: pia n n i j e Pa-r-kmeri c! -� y of paacko GCGca`non�a As fqr as r [<no vv, /Mont-egsayi 2oluca-tlon me*od is vprl good for -*e- cki jdre-n . ► Wi 9-h Rt, /00-Y� Mon eS S aYC of %foui cAo coca mon3c, can 0 e1 Y SCho 0/ -tv harms rare, ch r' f c(rm emg1lad A4� Warne is Una, fen� 5ot?L> number 6�6gy39-try home Gere sg : gOfo tarn wa�/ c t. vii � 6, !'arcchp Cucan2orc�c�. E4-E5Pg55 Stanley Shi and Allison Liu 12221 Fargo Ct Rancho Cucamonga CA, 91739 Tel No. 909 317 2027 To: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department We think that the new building for St Mary's Montessori school will benefit the local community greatly, There are no other Montessori schools within our area and when looking for a high-quality education for our children they fit the bill. It is an alternative for us to public school. E4—E5 Pg56 B To aA f Q 0;1 12A at a LiY.2. ih ��� Gsrnt.�►Gt�� � . Gt,-�%f �, �f^Cho &A- CC- nWIj O� Atki Ed -14 �/ Te 4c tik. C� G►ll�r r S are Gti. . E4-E5Pg57 �•� [/ / '�t-� �'� r% �✓� �f Gri,r,c '"rte �G. C G:ir-'►•ar.. ry c1 7- G�✓—L �U�r� .� s�v�-� . Gi�J l'—„C. ��z-�/r=.7QGC-e! NC`�cr� / .•�%�t G� �G' //7� /� �JcyG�c%� G��Y1G� Cic:.��7 �L-r r IC/ �d '"� / /.i�C-1 / i/ (i �-7 /� j -! G% ✓ < <i 7�r �_.+-� 7"--C�� E4 -E5 Pg58 t j Ci r1 [ � ' �_.t t i' �,, }�'f Gi � ,l i t t [,•V. ' r �� t'Y� r r -- ,' �- ICC(d r J E4 -E5 Pg59 ,I +, April 25, 2018 City of Rancho Cucamonga i 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 OLYMPUS FINANCIAL + RE: St. Mary's Montessori School — Rancho Cucamonga - Expansion 6880 N Victoria Windrows Loop Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 To Whom It May Concern: I am ariting as a business owner in support of the expansion for the St. Mary's Montessori school in r Rancho Cucamonga. I have first-hand knowledge this high-quality program because my grandchildren also attend. Allowing for more children to take advantage of this unique, quality program at this facility will benefit the quality of life in our city, which benefits us as business owners. My grandchildren have attended Montessori since they were infants. I have seen the high level of critical thinking and respect that Montessori has helped develop in my grandchildren, so I personally know that their program works. The solid foundation for healthy thinking and decision-making this program provides to our children results in reduced truancy, crime and drug use in the teen and young adult population in our community. The more people in a city who are responsible and community -minded, the more desirable the community becomes in which to live and work — this is good for business. We are aware that several of the neighbors are concerned about the traffic. Traffic throughout the city has grown exponentially over the last decade, and most notably over the past five years. Allowing for an increased student body at one campus could actually relieve traffic in other parts of the city because parents would not be trying to drop off their younger children at this facility and the older children at a different facility somewhere else in the city. As a grandparent, I attend a lot of school events, and I see first-hand how Montessori families support each other in many ways, including transportation/carpooling. Therefore, I personally do not believe the traffic will be any worse at this location due to the expanded campus than any other location in the city. As a business, the facility has a right to expand under the current City codes and ordinances, As a business owner, I would hope you would honor that right. Denying this rightful expansion will send the message to business owners that the City is no longer business -friendly, nor does it recognize the significant socio-economic benefit the Montcssori school has on the community. Thank you for allowing me to offer my support of this wonderful program that will only benefit the quality of life for our community. Si k David W. Nicothodes 7311-51 CarniAia11 :L., : Ilite #233, I"'all' u. 61i.1111011ki1, CA 91 fall 111urr1r. 900-945-6100 fax. Q09-9.15.5102 CA- _ r C,E kld.,-'&bL6 t Si Gt R / h s � � / r /Or' J��`,.ly� %ftp �'� r� !'') % v`'! /� r� / ley, J! . � �'l Gid'' � �•`�� �'� ��nr�-��_.�/t--o LGt �-t�1 I E4 -E5 Pg6l April 27, 2018 TO WI IOM [T MAY CONCERN As a nearby resident to St. Mary's Montessori School Iocated on North Victoria Windrows Loop in Rancho Cucamonga they have been a respectful business in the neighborhood. In the years that they have occupied the building, the parking lot and grounds have been well maintained. I am wishing them the best on their expansion oftheir facility, 4- Longo 6905 Tipu Place Rancho Cucamonga E4—E5 Pg62 J C� is tCc�j,, 1 I Ct r C�-kA ftl OY� dYTQr C'u SC,C_,,(' 12 e -A -Q- W.0,- S fav c rtr--.s f r1YLn—j 5orim,,ary y E4 -E5 Pg63 I f2 76 78 c r %� r '{1( PNN, i /�•'�i L, SSrU'�' � ���f-r�c>c__ L✓/ C L. Cfr_'c:;'-}%�-�f r� ^T/�±: ,l T G1v!? 4fulj vu/ - C_ C n�n�Llr✓1 T� ,� S /T T�� �:�! .�?V i�f�.-i`�/%rte �'�,,'L�4...- -aT'r•���~ / �f-� �?� r -S ,t,, u E'J�`(` c-:fL � 1�c�.;;l � sS�� '-J �1•r-�1 U � �' cJr�C_ r !� i �{.��J c .rl[.'�� / r,��r�r�• �T� (•5 t} L j [i od ? P1 ��-� TU ;t ! L C.f f 0 O E4 -E5 Pg54 5 I �G SeUt Yeeo 0-+ 9{h" bACaI'1Aon�)n tC� I�'�C-1 -ro: �( tut iii Olgo Oct 0 I/1i pe o (- - rvAeIli S4. .J r Vallij, l9v-vl�(f 4k mc oM�AuIA' t7DV '"�k5�u l 6r -t �o-y Gj , /1,16 �", of 46v- �p ( \ fl� k �--w q �- CVS wl&eSsoy'l 9d,cv i E4-E5Pg65 '& \W �FZ14�6�S MA �� � � E�-� Q `i 1f-•'i�-`'"�/I.�fla ,'Lf�l."'��,�J� "+' �t1� �i }(/�..4�i�'4fi�, I lNor'P.-ac, IIA/ *T-7 E4 -E5 Pg66 0 L U �� 1 % l I 1?-,] A o CA" 5 l) 0( 6 zl�8 9Gs�6S� ;7 � 5'�I'aJ Cc 19 L) �v r �( ��� �t� +` �� ��ca Co IL?G•:< <t J. -I V /./t tt4 5- �I L-rj w1� ezc!ca� r Y C!? 1drta,". qIQ l s16LD 1, E4 -E5 Pg67 Ll ~/ c. Azo Ct-ll,.Laiq -------------7----� --'---------- - '' -------------------' ---------------' -__---_--------�u 1A t 1, L- _ -----_----- ' _---__------ ---'_-------------_--_-_- --_'-_-------_____------_--_-_ CIA E4 -E5 Pg68 -------------- _- -- .-_.--------_'-_ ( 4. / MAKIMN AND iipFF- -5AY (0092 FIN& COI& W( RMcVto cGICAiMOW6tA,CA ct )736I (qoq) q33 CRI of RANCHO CUOUNL-lA PLANNING WPARgy%,- N -r Vvr-- NSD M 0f<-, MOM-cS50 R l !; Ho0 LS IN OU ARFA _K -TR-�,j ftvl m AN FACW-P-N-r MucAtl o NAL I'wlt?AM FOK Pte- K - ISN D kl NDq�C-�p�fz1 N C4 ILMeEW - -0& Mil- fihtl&T Trig aTa,610 N O:F ST• MARYs MON-Ff, S 1zf S ao L WOULD I3i-�N-Frr T4+� Locku COMMUNITY. 'llil@z& Aj�e No ptrl� MaN;�SsOR] SCftoLS wil-hN A 20 - MILS RAD OS - - t(s AL! Co gelAp4� MARY" k E4 -E5 Pg64 E4 -E5 Pg70 f �,\"� x'76 url, (G26) C r t-.ra °� fnnhsncf n�ar�.a►�,i` r mol` CSU rr10,-Q YY1 Ohre SSc r'� e. l F rrl.QYi'�I w[ C 1^i S U it \ j ,7 R n h Ine c,tAS- t"'I -1`nCi �i h-,- e1 n haflHrlkl 1, v, WES Pg71 r ti /,�j /rib - --- ----- —214 �25-holff E4-E5Pg72 < clCC\ ) Clv`k- bz�u J C�� g(Ny%c61v C+nCn�,tt of anh-141CI pV_carrly-4--.-r 0,-t r- cvl Cvl I is U. D- 1 � " ? / E4 -E5 Pg73 c)L%nq i -i] c11 Je k1`4i5 �1 ��p6 —% -lF'}Tl-'' S le�.r•t,,;,M -rte Msir �Y��rnrn C��t tell � c�g�Je%�,v.u.•x iv s, m n �- c..i S t, h-\ n� � r c 1to W S'�1� 4 1 �,A san 4-]z F�ucv1 �� 11R�"1 Cr��r,` �lii\Q-Ach -t- ? -Q-,, � `" 4 0,-t r- cvl Cvl I is U. D- 1 � " ? / E4 -E5 Pg73 .. - - Z-6- -Z A E4 -E5 Pg74 �r G��1v Ccomc)v66\, C � No 6) : C l y dl �l rt C�i � C� CA I" 0n J % v) h i n. .der rfim 6 k)t 117 .J � - ire ref{ .bye►� e '� t -t-he Is r � ce Pei�1,j8 �� kp04' jS r`7u NI�n7eSS'�r� SC•%�a �1 (j �_ls q -'r 6c�r OA71 Iv`? E4 -E5 Pg75 ik,(-,nLlrC� Ux, Onc\ -1ho A Ctli til l o 1Cjj') ' CuX(AON-. T% CZV cil l-341 `3C�1 a•35 3,VL, TG -ihG C,Yy i �'-f4���� Cuc�.lrr-+ ,,'Y, , �1��. t �hC�i? -�ti1C �"ktu i-7..,1t_�ti�-,,;� ��{ :11 i SLIT •.��- i-1q� i y�_`.`_Or, ;.x1�r� j �"•it %i�ctllf �%l:rli�il t~�Si 10�1F1,�,,,iti� 5}}��� t`, �l�i L�lh�r 2oiyol1 ra��lrltl�. `.E-4L\+��5 iJl�li1}C�SI.s, Sc.►�,.. � �(��� � a c�•;�c,1 Li11., E�cs�l..rc-4tc~c41,�'<�. (1u,' C1'111L1rs'rl �'ZC�,�Ut. t } Z— E4-E5 Pg76 t ��'� I U-2�,1' L'e.�v�u�u�1 �F�i. I�CI''�C L1� ��►fry>tC .ri ' til, Lk, rt3 /'/� / c ck oc L�-l� C11 i icl Y e n h�v e �a1 ��, n r�, -1--� s c.� c`.n 1 -4� � rt� r-� �� u� � �. ►-, � bo r-� my 1�u5b��t Oln4� ✓ny -te ctiCl U,—j 'G D rn,x C Uve �:� �, a of � F t i `� 1� �� •-ice � � � � �-�-t.t n � i i -�� 't"a C" r- 11\c11 L-3 e E4 -E5 Pg77 E4—E5Pg78 Samantha Townsend 11814 Montella Drive Rancho Cucamonga CA, 91739 Tel No. 909 9965616 To: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department We think the new building for St Mary's Montessori school will greatly benefit the community since there is no other Montessori school in Rancho Cucamonga. It would ensure a good education for our children in a Montessori setting. E4—E5 Pg79 P �,Acv� -A ul/A L c., �o C C�, 11v 5 CDl � 7q uln c , G VJL"Ci,-bC�tc.L 1 j GA�.c;��v1� Vl1't14� De� . ��. 4-3 PAkill o' sf s F E4—E5 Pci81 Sara Kaylor 6625 Bamboo PI Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 951-565-3190 To. City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department April 27th, 2018 We believe that the new building for 5t. Mary's Montessari school will be of great benefit to the community since there is no authentic pre elementary program within a 20 -mile radius. It would ensure a good education for our children in a Montessori setting, It is a good alternative for our family to the local public schools. E4—E5Pg82 Smith, Michael To: Burnett, Candyce Subject: RE: St. Mary's Montessori/RC Campus From: Amanda R. Crowther Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2018 2:59 PM TO:'DAT.TRAN CITYOFRC.US' <DAT.TRAN@CITYOFRC.US> Cc:'justine.g' <iustine. stma smontessorischool.com>; nel.j <nel.l stmaFysmontessorischool.com>; emily.t <emily.t@stmarysmontessorischool.com> Subject: St. Mary's Montessori/RC Campus To whom this may concern, It is with great pleasure that we support the expansion of St. Mary's Montessori School in Rancho Cucamonga. Montessori education is designed to meet the needs of the children, not the needs of the state. As parents in the Montessori environment, we have watched our 2 sons develop socially, mentally and emotionally at a higher pace than other children in their age group. We are beyond proud watching our boys engage with others and be able to develop in a faster and confident manner. Montessori teachers are able to foster a higher level of education that is based on the children's abilities and development rather than a state -based curriculum that does not work for all learners. Montessori classes are smaller allowing the children to grow in self-confidence and even intellectual independence. When you look up famous people that were educated in the Montessori system, you will find the founders of Google, founder of Amazon, actors, singers, chefs, Nobel prize winners, and even a couple of Princes. Wouldn't it be great to do a search 15 years from now and find students from the St. Mary's Montessori in Rancho Cucamonga on the same list? St. Mary's Montessori is a community of staff, parents, and students that work together to nurture each child's individual needs and strengths. We challenge Rancho Cucamonga to be part of this community and watch our children's growth and education expand_ Respectively, 909-549-9282 DISCLAIMER: Any views or opinions presented in this communication are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Fontana Unified School District. E4 -E5 Pg83 Tran. Dat From: Susan Grabarsky <sgrabarsky@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2018 6:13 PM To: Tran, Dat; Burnett, Candyce Cc: Nel_ J.: Emily_ T.; Alan de Leon Subject: RE: Project DRC2018.00092 Dear Ms. Burnett and Mr_ Tran, We are writing this letter in support of the proposed expansion of St. Mary's Montessori School. We are homeowners who have lived in Rancho Cucamonga for 15 years. Our son attended St. Mary's Montessori at the Windrows Loop location for four years, from the school's opening in 2013 through his kindergarten graduation in 2017. Based on this, we have knowledge of the traffic, parking, noise level, and other issues raised by the school's neighbors. We appreciate the opportunity to address their concerns, as well as bring to the city's attention other factors that outweigh any potential negative impact_ First, it is undisputed that St. Mary's Montessori is an excellent provider of early childhood education. The school is run by highly -qualified teachers and Montessori guides. Our son had a well-rounded, academically -enriched experience during his kindergarten year at St. Mary's Montessori, where he was introduced to first grade curriculum with science experiments and electives that included Spanish and Mandarin. The safety and security of the campus was extraordinary, with electronic check-in procedures and surveillance cameras that covered the entire school and parking lot. We would have continued to enroll our son at St_ Mary's Montessori for elementary school if the expansion had been completed by 2017. We are submitting this letter, even though our son will be too old to enroll by the time the expansion is completed, because we firmly believe that the proposed expansion will benefit our city's residents. Second, there is a need for another elementary school option in our district. Etiwanda School District's website states every single elementary school is "closed to intra and inter district transfers due to lack of available space." (See hftp://www. etiwanda. k 1 2.ca. us/d eartmentslenrollment.) Demographic trends indicate this problem will only get worse in the coming years, as more young families move to the east side of our city. Some of our district's public elementary schools have been using taxpayer funds to do exactly what St. Mary's Montessori proposes to do at its own expense: build more classrooms on existing grounds to accommodate more students. (See htt ,//www2.etiwanda.or Iw-content/u loads/2017/01/Etiwanda-COC-Re ort-1-24-2018- FINAL.pdf.) With respect to private education, there is a surprising lack of choice in this area, considering the growing population of upper -middle class families with young children who reside on the east side of Rancho Cucamonga. The California Department of Education's website lists only one private elementary school within the boundaries of Etiwanda School District in 2017-2018. (See hftps://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/si/psl.) Thus, the expansion of St. Mary's Montessori would provide a much-needed, additional, high-quality option for parents of elementary -age children in this part of our city. E4 -E5 Pg84 It is our understanding that the opposition to the proposed expansion is primarily based on the size of the parking lot and the potential for congestion during drop-off and pick-up hours. We appreciate the concerns of nearby homeowners, but they purchased homes in close proximity to Windrows Elementary School, which has a much larger student population, and adjacent to Windrows Park, which has two sports fields. The issues they raise are to be expected when one buys a home next to an elementary school and a park. Nevertheless, the residents should be reassured that: • St. Mary's Montessori's student body will be significantly smaller than Windrows Elementary. Even at maximum capacity after the expansion, there will be less than half as many students at St. Mary's Montessori. • St. Mary's Montessori drop-off and pick-up times are staggered and do not conflict with the Windrows Elementary drop-off and pick-up times. This is by design, to avoid traffic congestion. • The proposed new parking lot is larger, so as to minimize the burden of street parking in front of nearby homes. We have observed many cars park in the neighborhood near Windrows Park during sports activities; this proposed expansion will not worsen that problem. • The empty lot on which the proposed expansion will be built was not landscaped park space; it was a rocky, undeveloped field for years. Windrows Park visitors would sometimes toss trash in that empty lot, leaving an eyesore until St. Mary's Montessori staff or volunteers could clean it up. The neighborhood can only improve with the establishment of a clean, well -lit, professionally -maintained school in that space. • While the effect of proximity to a school can vary, proximity to a highly -regarded school like St. Mary's Montessori generally increases property value. • Nearby homeowners will benefit from having a well -lit building and parking lot, with 2417 security cameras instead of an empty lot. This should help deter loitering, vandalism, and petty crime which has been a problem at Windrows Park after sunset. In conclusion, we support of the proposed expansion of St. Mary's Montessori School because it is in our city's best interest. There is a growing need which this project helps to address at no cost to taxpayers, and any potential negative impact is far outweighed by the benefits this expansion will confer upon our city's residents. Sincerely, Alan & Susan de Leon 7510 Wellington PI Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 E4 -E5 Pg85 Tran, Dat From: allison hu <allisonl'3u330@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, September 17, 2018 3:08 PM To: Tran, Dat Subject: St. Mary Montessori School expansion Dear Mr. Dat Tran, My name is Allison Liu, a resident of Rancho Cucamonga, live in 12221 Fargo CT., I am writing to express my support to St. Mary Montessori School expansion issue. My daughter is 4 years old, and has been studied in St. Mary for a year, we can see her happiness, progress in the school, especially been very well cared by the school teachers. My family is very happy to hear the plan of school expension, and we believe it will be benefits our community. I know many of my friends have to wait almost one year on the waiting list to send their children to this school, we wish it can be changed after the expansion and more and more kids can come to this school for their early childhood education. As the resident of the community, my family fully support this expension and looking forward to the school life in a new campus soon. Thank you so much and best regards, Allison Liu 909-330-5541 E4 -E5 Pg86 Tran, Dat From: Humphrey Ahaiwe <ahaiwe99@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, September 17, 2018 12:31 PM To: Tran, Dat Cc: Linda Ogunewe Subject: St. Mary's Montessori Building Project Dear Mr. Dat Tran, The purpose of this email is to demonstrate our profound support for the expansion of St. Mary's Montessori Elementary at the Rancho Cucamonga campus. With multiple educational programs around, the inclusion of the underlying philosophy of the Montessori method of educating the future of our community is something we should all embrace. If any family is a better position to attest to end results of the proven success stories of St. Mary's Montessori school in the Rancho campus, the AHAIWE family has a proven success story to share. Our daughter graduated from St. Mary's Montessori in the Rancho campus and transferred to a nearby elementary school. Since her transfer day to this day, she has constantly received numerous certificates and recognitions from her teachers and the school principal for: Very Confident; Independent and needs minimal Supervision; Self -regulated and Self-disciplined; Caring for Others and a Team Player; Great conflict -resolution and Social skills. We must confess that these awesome qualities stemmed from the St.Mary's Montessori Rancho campus where they promote a calm, less stressful, supportive, carefully designed environment that promotes greater love for learning and self-motivation. St. Mary's Montessori in the Rancho campus promotes an environment that fosters in our children, respect for diversity, sensory and cultural perspectives to practical life, such as a platform that encourages mixed age and peer-to-peer learning, teaching one another. Let's not forget one of the most sensitive, yet important life skills our children acquire from St. Mary's Montessori in the Rancho campus, the inclusion and acceptance of other in our society regardless of any inherent differences therein. Mr. Dat, this is the type of community the lovely city of Rancho Cucamonga should promote by endorsing St. Mary's Montessori Building Project. My wife and 1 respectfully urge you and the other decision makers in our city to endorse this worthy project. We strongly believe, collectively, we can continue to take pride in the future of our community (our Children), and make a difference. I look forward to meeting you and other distinguished decision makers of our lovely city. Sincerely, Humphrey & Linda AHAIWE Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android E4—E5Pg87 Tran, Dat From: Nawrocki, Abigail <anawrocki@radial.com> Sent: Monday, September 17, 2018 11:09 AM To: Tran, Dat Subject: St. Mary Montessori School Mr. Tran, It has come to my attention that there will be a City Council Meeting on September 26th, Wednesday at 7:00 pm at Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, Counsel Chambers regarding the expansion of St. Mary Montessori School in Rancho Cucamonga. Although my family and i intend to attend the meeting I thought it necessary to reach out individually and state our stance on this issue, My husband and I are the parents to a beautiful one year girl, Harper. We spent months (from the time I was 8 months pregnant until she was 3 months old) looking at daycares near our home, near both my work and my husbands and in surrounding communities. After touring over seven daycares I felt defeated and hopeless that I would not find a safe, nurturing environment for my soon to be 4 month old daughter. I cried on most of the trips home as my return to work date was fast approaching and I feared I would have to leave my child somewhere I did not feel comfortable with. Then we toured St. Mary's in Rancho and immediately fell in love. Although we toured in August and the next opening in the infant community was not until 2018 at the Fontana Facility I finally felt like l was doing my duties as a mother and that I would be able to provide my child with the care she deserved. St. Mary's offers our children something no other daycare/primary school does, an environment for Harper to develop into the a productive member of society_ Most other daycares will watch my child for a nominal fee but will they teach her how to accomplish life skills in a purposeful way? Will they teach her the four areas in which practical life revolves around (Caring for Self, Caring for the Environment, Grace & Courtesy and Movement of Objects). No. My family is truly grateful for the work St. Mary's does and will continue to do and we have one request for the community of Rancho Cucamonga. Please allow us to expand our school so that the impact of St. Mary's is greater and reaches further. Abigail Nawrocki I Operations Manager Radial, a bpost company anawrockrad.a cam M- 847.346.9763 E Radial a bpost company The information contained in this electronic mail transmission is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named in this transmission, l f you are not the intended recipient of this transmission, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this transmission is strictly prohibited and that you should delete the contents of this transmission from your system immediately. Any comments or statements contained in this transmission do not necessarily reflect the views or position of Radial or its subsidiaries and/or affiliates. E4—E5 Pg88 Tran, Dat From, Fanny Caste <f.coste@me.com> Sent: Monday, September 17, 2018 9:12 AM To: Tran, Dat Subject: Support for the expansion of Saint Mary's Montessori School Rancho Cucamonga Dear Mr Tran : I am writing to offer my personal support to the project of expansion of Saint Mary's Montessori School in Rancho Cucamonga. [ am a parent of one child who has attended Saint Mary's and two who are currently enrolled at Saint Mary's. I can not praise enough the dedication, support and knowledge of the teachers and staff. I have seen the positive impact of their work on my children. Moreover, Saint Mary's is a Montessori school. It is wonderful to also have this type of education in addition to our mainstream schools. Expanding the Rancho Cucamonga campus up to Elementary age is the natural evolution of the school. I strongly believe that every parent whose child has attended Saint Mary's would wish him or her to attend the longest possible. I believe this project will provide an exceptional facility to our children and will have a good impact on our community. Therefore, I provide my unconditional support for this project. Sincerely, Fanny Coste E4 -E5 Pg89 Tran, Dat From: Kristen Caloca < kristen.caloca@gmai l.com > Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2018 10:29 PM To: Tran, pat Subject: Support for St Mary's Montessori School Expansion Hello Mr. Tran, I am a resident of Rancho Cucamonga where my son attends St Mary's Montessori School. We love this school and have been so pleased with how loving and committed they are to teaching the children in their care. It is for this reason that I fully support the expansion of the school with a new building. The school is in my neighborhood (just .5 miles away from my home) and our neighborhood will benefit greatly from having access to another school option, Montessori, which is one of the best learning environments for children of young ages. I urge you and other decision makers at the City to allow this project to move forward. Thank you, Kristen Caloca E4 -E5 Pg90 Tran Dat From: Chariya Heang <chariyaheang@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2018 9:05 PM To: Tran, Dat Cc: emily.t@stmarysmontessorischool.com Subject: St. Mary's Montessori Elementary School expansion Hello Mr. Tran, I'm a Rancho Cucamonga resident and parent to a child currently attending St. Mary's Montessori school at the Rancho Cucamonga location. I am emailing you to express both my husband and my strong support in favor of the elementary school expansion for St. Mary's Montessori. With the current changes to the public school system that seems to be more motivated by public funding and politics rather than the care of our children, we believe it will be a great asset to the community to have an alternative academic facility such as St. Mary's that is truly invested in the well being, educational, and future needs of our children. Kindest Regards, Chariya Heang Tienanh Pham E4 -E5 Pg91 Tran, Dat From: Vanessa Bastiani <vanessa.bastiani@hotmail.com> Sent: Sunday, September 16r 2018 4-33 PM To: Tran, Dat Subject: St. Mary Montessori school expansion Hello Dat, My name is Vanessa Bastiani. As a Rancho Cucamonga citizen and mother of an enrolled student in 5t. Mary Montessori school I was reaching confirming our approval for the Rancho Cucamonga campus expansion. This school and the programs they offer add true value to the community allowing for children's development. Thank you, VanessaB E4—E5Pg92 Tran, Dat From: Maria Lin <oarbliss@hotmail.com> Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2016 12:23 PM To: Tran, Dat Cc: emily.t@stmarysmontessorischool.com Subject: Support for Expansion Project for St Mary's Montessori School Dear Mr. Tran, I would like to express my support for the expansion of St. Mary's Montessori School - Rancho Cucamonga Campus. St. Mary's Montessori School is an amazing school that has truly provided exceptional care and education for the children of many families in the Rancho Cucamonga community. My two children (5 -year-old Oliver and almost 3 -year-old Owen) both started attending the school beginning with the Infant Program. My family is so grateful for everything that the school has done for our kids. The school's expansion will truly be a great asset to the Rancho Cucamonga community. Thank you so much for your consideration. Have a wonderful day. Maria L (714-510-4761) E4—E5 Pg93 Tran, Dat From: cheyane caldwell <cheyane.caldwell@outlook.com> Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2018 5:46 PM To: Tran, Dat Cc: nohemi66@hotmail.com Subject: Montessori School in Rancho Cucamonga Hello Mr. Tran, I am writing to you in full support of the Montessori Project up for construction approval in Rancho Cucamonga. This school would be a social and economic benefit to the area. The expansion project would afford a well defined, solid foundation of education for the youth. I am a civil servant my self and understand the benefits of an education that matters. The Montessori Project will impact the area in a positive way and provide this type of education. We understand there are a few naysayers, but we must move forward for the benefit of the youth and their future. Thank you, Cheyane Caldwell, Fire Captain 909-241-4154 Sent from my iPad E4-E5Pg94 Tran, Dat From: Gabriel Martinez <gabrielm1954@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2018 7:45 AM To: Tran, Dat Subject: St Marys Montessori Rancho Cucomanga Expansion Project Mr Tran I am in agreement with the expansion project it would be very beneficial for the community to expand the school ,I don't see any reason to oppose building it my name is Gabriel Martinez we live at 12169 canyon meadows rancho cucomanga E4 -E5 Pg95 Tran, Dat From: Christina Larson <christinamary.larson@gmail com> Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2018 1:26 AM To: Tran, Dat Subject: St Mary's Montessori Expansion Mr. Tran, I am writing to you to express my support for the expansion project for St. Mary's Montessori school in Rancho Cucamonga. My oldest child recently graduated from kindergarten at St_ Mary's and is currently excelling at Perdew Elementary, in large part due to the high-quality, hands-on, education she received during her two years at St. Mary's Montessori school. My son is currently attending St. Mary's Montessori and there is no other place I would entrust with his care and growth. The Montessori program helps nurture and shape young children so that they can grow to be independent, productive, kind, considerate individuals. It is hard for me to imagine that the request to bring more of this approach to even more children during critical developmental years would be questioned — to that, I can only reason that it stems from a lack of knowledge and experience with Montessori education. The Montessori emphasis on development of sense of self as well as connection to others, nature, and the world has lasting impact on not only the individual but our community and future. I am confident that St. Mary's Montessori school would continue to enrich students and their families, as well as the surrounding community if aflowed to proceed with their expansion. Best, Christina Christina M. Larson, PhD Staff Psychologist, Jerry L. Pettis Memorial VA Healthcare Center E4 -E5 Pg96 Tran, Dat From: Ailie Salgado <alliesalgado@yahoo.com> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2018 3:26 PM To: Tran, Dat Subject: Expansion Project - St. Mary's Montessori School Dear Dat Tran, I am inquiring about the expansion project in association to St. Mary's Montessori School in Rancho Cucamonga, attended the neighborhood meeting that was held in June and was informed that in July the project was approved. However, a posting has been displayed at the location stating there will now be a public hearing held in regard to the expansion. Can you please inform me as to what is the reason there has been a delay in the expansion and what other steps are needed in order to finalize the project? I am a resident of the city and fully support the project as l believe it will benefit the city of Rancho Cucamonga. St. Mary's Montessori School is an excellent school that offers the best quality of education. Thank you, Allie Salgado E4—E5 Pg97 AI It'll I inn: 1}III Tran Ass kturtt 13ln11nc#- Cily OrRnttcl►n Clicalnonga Plannit►g I]clttlrin1c111 100500 Civic Cell Ier Dr. 111111eho C1leattlnmgn, CA 91730 `i'n 1CTltunl it a:ct}• cunrern nnc! 11It•.'f'ran, 1 live ncnr St. 31nry'n illuulessuri St buil located tit 6080 y `victoria Witulrows Loup, fia11eho Cucamonga and have sect tIII! xig11s 1poslccl that Lilcy are building as (lemenrnr), schaol. I '18 "T "T exc-ilcd 10 srt+ 111111 m private. clemertlury hrngratn would Itc eu111it1g to our neighhorhuud as i know this is suniclltiag 1'anlilies are luuking rur. 11va1 cllecl SI. Alary's 1f011tessOli School growfront w•!►en they slarl.eci mud see Ilse good reviews o►►lille. A school does 1101 si11►PI�• expand iClherc is flu ueccl For it and 1 dobclin�'c this will rill t1 nerd ill Ilse. neighlPnrhnnd. I nn, very touch itt immmrt orimm it(mwou and do lint Cee 111!' daily routine will lie nfre.clecl in the slightest. 1 IDOL rur►yard to sccing couslrucl ioa stars ttncl the next please beoim very suutr A i ega rds, Carlos llnjns tV10% Zlntta Cl. Rancho C+tcl1111m11gn, CA 91739 E4—E5 Pg98 City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department 100500 Civic Center Dr. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Attention: Dat Tran/ Assistant Planner Rancho Cucamonga City Planning Department, My family and I live in the neighborhood and have walked by St. Mary's Montessori School (6880 N. Victoria Windrows Loop, Rancho Cucamonga) or played with our children at Windrows Park many times. When I saw that they were adding additional parking and expanding to add elementary school I was not surprised. The school is successful and their name, St. Mary's Montessori School, is very reputable throughout the community. The expansion of this school can only bring good to the neighborhood and provide more choices for the families that live here. There is no scenario where this would cause a negative impact on the community. I am in full support of this addition being made to the school and I look forward to seeing the end product, hopefully, very soon. Thank you for your time, Henry Artiga 6554 Mimosa PI Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 E4—E5 Pg99 Dat Tan Assistant City Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga City Planning Department 100500 Civic Center Dr. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Dear Mr. Tan, I am writing as a neighbor of St. Mary's Montessori School located at 6880 N Victoria Windrows Loop, Rancho Cucamonga. My family and I live within walking distance from the school. With two children who are elementary age and one who is preschool age. I was very happy to sec that the school was expanding with an elementary program. As a mother of three having all of my children in one place is a huge convenience; .and part of the reason we moved to Rancho was to be a part of not just a school but a community. There has never been any congestion or noise associated with St. Mary's Montessori School and 1 do not believe by expanding this will cause a disruption to the neighborhood. In fact, I believe the opposite. It will bring more opportunities to the families with children within the community. We look forward to this project being approved without further delay. Sincerely, Rita Walia 12751 George Ct Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 E4—E5 Pg100 Dat Tran Assistant Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Dear Mr. Tran, I am writing to express my support for the expansion project for St. Mary's Montessori School located at 6880 N. Victoria Windrows Loop in Rancho Cucamonga. I live near the school at 6606 Sevilla Place. I pass the school daily on my way to work or to other dcstinations. Having heard such great reviews of the school from friends, I was excited to hear that they were planning, to expand their services. I am an avid believer that strong and successful schools are a gift to a surrounding neighborhood and bring up home values. I do not foresee any harmful traffic impact based on the expansion. It is my hope that the St. Mary's Montessori School expansion project will be approved to move forward. Sincerely, Michael P. Donaldson 6606 Sevilla Place Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 (909) 534-9482 E4—E5 Pg101 Dat Tran -Assistant Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department 100500 Civic Center Dr. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Mr. Tran and associates; I am a proud member of the Windrows community and I have watched the land that St, Mary's Montessori School, 6880 N. Victoria Windrows Loop, Rancho Cucamonga, go through various businesses. However, St. Mary's has been by far the one that has made the biggest impact on the neighborhood, in a positive way. Their school has continued to grow and 1 only see happy children playing or coming and going with their families. I believe that this additional will add an additional layer or support to the families in the area. I am in full support of this expansion and hope to see the school develop further without delay. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, 0 IA -A Cristina Muttukumaru 12418 Columbine Wy Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 E4—E5Pg102 Tran, bat From: TINA FULKERSON <fulkfam4@msn.com> Sent: Thursday, September 6, 2018 2:14 PM To: Tran, Dat Subject: Windrows expansion To Whom it May Concern, am a resident of the Victoria/Windrows community and have been a homeowner here since the homes were built in 1984. When I purchased my newly built home in 1985, 1 paid extra to have a full park view from my back yard. I must emphasize that I paid extra for this view, and I was promised the park view by the builder, William Lyon, upon purchase of my new home. My home is most affected by the expansion of the Windrows daycare project. The proposed new building will back up to my south fence, removing my park view, which I paid for when I bought my house new in 1984. Additionally, the area is already saturated with traffic. The North Victoria Windrows Loop, the school, the park, and the day care center, and the addition of 300 more kids that will be picked up and dropped off means each car will go in and out of the parking lot 4 times per day-- that's 1, 200 times total. They are building another day care center just down the street, south of the tunnels, so why does our neighborhood have to take the brunt of the traffic and the noise? This is an accident waiting to happen. Please take into consideration my concerns for my home and my neighborhood. Thank you, Ernest Valencia 6834 Plum Way Rancho Cucamonga 909-201-3336 EXHIBIT L E4—E5 Pg 103 Tran, Dat From: MICHAEL BROWN <michaelbrown95@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, September 6, 2018 2:01 PM To: Tran, Dat Subject: St. Mary's Montessori School Hello Mr. Tran, Hello my name is Michael Brown. II live at 6840 Plum Way, Rancho Cucamonga. I'm writing to you about Permit DRC2018-00092 and Minor Design Review DRC2018-00095. I have lived here for 16 years with a wonderful view of the park trees and nature and one of the many reasons I bought this home. The proposal extends the preschool to 71 parking spots. Which in its current format of 42 spots is more than enough parking. 900 of the day the parking at the Preschool is over half empty. Take into account the Elementary school that is close by has only 42 spots. The Elementary school also is 10 times bigger with 3 to 4 times more staff and 600 kids. I have concerns about how much more heat will be generated from more parking. The proposal doesn't show any grass, trees would take 15 to 20 years to give shade and zero parking cover. Having parking right behind my home leads for more potential crime to my property. As cars will now have more access to drive up to the back of my property at night. I'm also trouble about the assessment of the value of my property. When buying the home it was like buying a view lot. Living here for 16 years I have enjoyed looking at trees,birds and could see my son at the park by looking over the fence. The proposal would take many of those views away and leave me a building and a hot parking lot. The traffic congestion of the potential of 303 more cars coming into a small neighborhood that has no stop sign at the major turn off along with the weird angle of the Preschool has major concerns. Also the junior high school kids as pedestrians that come out right near the Preschool has nothing but red flags for me. Also considerations of the project that will be a potential impact that I loved to know has been considered. Noise and smell and loss of privacy and overlooking with parking in my backyard. Road safety, road capacity,means of access lighting. Also they currently don't turn on the lights in their small parking lot at night now but am I to believe with 71 parking spots that would change. Destiny and over development we will probably get 60 to 100 more homes on Victoria Windrows Loop. Which will cause more traffic going down a street with a weird turn at proposal. I do believe the proposed extension, by reason of their size sitting and design would represent an unneighbourly form of development, detrimental to the amenities of occupiers of adjoining residential property, particularly by reason of overbearing effect. In closing of my comments I hope they are listen to and consider before project if move forward. I understand that you are probably more close to the owner of project and his dream but please consider the lives that live here will be impacted by projected. Thank You Mr. Tran for your time if you have any questions please get back to me. Sincerely, Michael Brown Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone E4—E5 Pg 104 Tran, Dat From: Muhammud Noormohamed <mgmice@aol.com 1 Sent: Thursday, September 6, 2018 1:11 PM To: Tran, Dat Subject: Montessori school expansion am Not in favor of the expansion of Montessori school on windrows in the Windrows community for many reasons. Many of the neighbors collaborated together and came to me with the same decision. if you need any explanation on the derision made please contact me. 909-3191355 , 12655 Trillium ct. R.C. 91739 Thank you. M. G. Muhammad Muhammud Noormohamed mgmice@aol.com 1 E4—E5 Pg105 Tran, Dat From: Eleonore Volheim <evolheim@yahoo.com> Sent: Wednesday, September 5, 2018 9:11 PM To: Tran, Dat Subject: Project DRC2018 -00092 Dear Mr.Tran, My name is Eleonore Volheim and I am writing because of some concerns I have regarding this project. When I bought the house at 6828 Plum Way, the view of the park and having an open field behind my backyard fence was appealing. The daycare was a reasonable distance from my home as was the elementary school. My concern is the proposed distance from my backyard as well as the additional noise and traffic. I consider this to be a major concern and I have discussed this with my neighbors who will also be impacted in the same manner. I sincerely hope the city will take my feelings into consideration as well as the impact it will have on my neighborhood. Last but not least, I would like to know how this proposal will directly effect my property value?Especially with the increase in traffic, noise and lack of privacy. Sincerely, Eleonore Volheim 6828 Plum Way Rancho Cucamonga, CA. 91739 909-234-8189 E4 --E5 P9106 Tran, Dat From: Dean Shimek <dtsierra@msn.com> Sent: Wednesday, September 5, 2018 8:42 PM To: Tran, Dat Subject: Re: Comments on the Saint Mary's Montessori School Proposed Expansion, Conditional Use Permit DRC2018-00092, Minor Design Review DRC2018-00095 Dear Mr. Tran: After talking with fellow property owners Ernest Valencia, Michael Brown, and Eieonore Volheim about this project I am opposed to it. It would impact Ernest the most because the new building would spoil his view. When Ernest and I purchased our homes we paid premiums for view lots. Michael purchased his home from the previous owners, the Fairfields. Eleonore purchased her home with the understanding that there would be nothing in the easement behind her home. The project would mean too much activity including traffic and noise in our neighborhood. Thanks for your consideration. Sincerely, Dean Shimek From: Tran, Dat <Dat.Tran@cityofrc.us> Sent: Tuesday, September 4, 2018 4:34 PM To: Dean Shimek Subject: RE: Comments on the Saint Mary's Montessori School Proposed Expansion, Conditional Use Permit DRC2018- 00092, Minor Design Review DRC2018-00095 Hi Dean, I sent a message regarding the trees last week on Thursday. Not sure if you saw it. So I've gone ahead and pasted it below: Basically, the sheet that is sent out just doesn't have all the landscaping shown on it, but it's there per the Planting Pian that is part of the set. Please feel free to call me to discuss after reading this. Phone number is 909-774-4326. From: Tran, Dat Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2018 5:53 PM To: 'dtsierra@msn.com'<dtsierra@msn.com> Subject: St. Mary's Montessori's Trees Hi Dean, E4—E5 Pg107 I received your voicemail. I tried calling you back, but your phone cuts out before it gets to the voicemail and I wasn't able to leave one. Feel free to give me a call again on Tuesday when the city reopens. To answer your question preliminarily, the site plan we sent out just shows the site itself and the location of the building and new parking lot. It doesn't show the location of all the trees onsite, that is usually the Planting Plan (We tend to split certain features of the plans onto different sheets, just because it would be too much information to be shown on one.). You can be assured that we require trees for parking lot and along the boundary of the site. The Planting Plan, which I have at the office and you're more than welcome to come and view again, is essentially the same as before. There's 12 trees along Windrows park property boundary and 19 trees along the entire property line shared with the houses to the north. There's also trees in landscaped areas next to parking areas and diamond planters sticking into the parking lot to provide shade. In total, the site will have 67 trees onsite. + Dat Dat Tran Assistant Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga 909-477-2750x4326 dat.tran@citvofrc.us From: Dean Shimek <dtsierra@msn.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 4, 2018 1:55 PM To: Tran, Dat <Dat.Tran@cityofrc.us> Subject: Comments on the Saint Mary's Montessori School Proposed Expansion, Conditional Use Permit DRC2018-00092, Minor Design Review DRC2018-00095 Dean Shimek 6846 Plum Way Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739-1528 4 September 2018 Dat Tran Assistant Planner City Planning Department City of Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Drive P.O. Sox 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729-0807 Dear Mr. Tran -- 1 am concerned about the site plan for the proposed Saint Mary's Proposed Expansion. E4—E5 Pg108 As a property owner and attendee at the hearing for the proposal, I've noticed that the trees for the proposal which were presented at the hearing do not appear in the site plan I clearly remember seeing in the site plan presented at the hearing trees to be planted along the setback (Minimum) of 20 feet and behind the new expansion building. The site plan sent to property owners within of 660 feet of the project site does not show the aforementioned trees. I also clearly remember that one of President/Administrator H Chris Jayawardana's assistants said they would water the new trees. Since my property line and backyard wall is adjacent to the school property the proposal is especially sensitive too me and other next door neighbors who also share the property line with Saint Mary's Montessori School. Another concern is that shade trees are needed around and on the proposed new parking lot so that current and new staff will not park in the street. According to President/Administrator H Chris Jayawardana, or one of his assistants, at the hearing the proposed parking lot expansion would keep the staff from parking in the street. Respectfully submitted, Dean Shimek 6846 Plum Way Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739-1528 E4—E5 Pg 109 Tran, Dat From: Henry Araujo <haraujo@rmfood.com> Sent: Wednesday, September 5, 2018 6:07 PM To: Tran, Dat Subject: Pre School construction I'm a home owner in this area and I wanted to voice my concerns about the new preschool that is that is scheduled to be constructed into windrows Park area. This preschool will create more congestion in the area also increase noise levels and affect total the ambience in the area , totally reject this idea. Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone E4—E5 Pg110 Tran, Dat From: Tran, Dat Sent: Monday, July 30, 2018 11:50 AM To: 'Gary Takata' Subject: RE: St. Mary's Montessori School & Parking Facility Hi Gary, Yes, please feel free to document what you see and send it to me as soon as you can. We are in the process of conducting our final review of the project. We really do need evidence of your assertions, as it would not be fair on our part to assume that they are doing something wrong. Also, as 1 mentioned, there will be a Condition of Approval requiring all their staff to only park on their site (The exception is that if the staff member is not on duty, they become members of the public again and can park in the park just like you or me. So I don't know if that's when you've seen them.) If you catch them parking in the park in the future, we can always take action against them through our code enforcement teams. If they do not abide by the condition and we discover that to be true, the entire permit may be revoked in the future. Does that work for you? Dat From: Gary Takata [mailto:gtakata@verizon.net] Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2018 5:39 PM To: Tran, Dat <Dat.Tran@cityofrc.us> Subject: Re: St. Mary's Montessori School & Parking Facility Thank you for your response. In regards to their employees using Windrows Park's parking facility, I don't agree with their contention that their staff does not park there. I have seen individuals exiting their vehicles and walk to St_ Mary's facility. When I take my walks through the park I do see several cars parked at the park but very few people utilizing the park to account for the number of cars. I will photograph the vehicles when I actually see the individual going to St. Mary's School. Also, I do agree with you that the public does not have the right to use St Mary's parking lot but I did acknowledge that in my original email. Again thank you for your response. Gary Takata atakata(cDverizon.net ----Original Message ----- From: Tran, Dat <Dat.Tran@cityofrc.us> To: Gary Takata <gtakataC7a-.verizon_net> Sent: Mon, Jul 16, 2018 3:14 pm Subject: RE: St. Mary's Montessori School & Parking Facility Hi Gary, I just wanted to follow up with you on this. The applicant has assured me that their staff is not allowed to park in the parks (unless their staff is off-duty, in which case they are a resident just like you or me). I will also be placing a condition (requirement) on the approval requiring them to park on their own site. If you see that their staff has parked in the park, you can take a picture of it and let our Community Improvement departments know. We will take appropriate action. As I mentioned, however, they are legally allowed to prevent anyone from parking in their own property. E4—E5Pg111 9 Dat From: Tran, Dat Sent: Thursday, July 5, 2018 8:27 AM To: 'Gary Takata' <gtakata@verizon.net> Subject: RE: St. Mary's Montessori School & Parking Facility Hello Gary, Thanks for sending me your opinion on this matter. I will be investigating the issue with the parking lot and see what the signage issue was out there. The Montessori's site is private property and they have full rights to prevent anyone from parking there_ They also cannot use the park's parking for their staff or clients. If you have any evidence of this problem (pictures, correspondence, etc.), please send it to me so I can verify the issue. Currently, 71 parking spaces is enough to meet their parking requirements per the City's standards. They only need 64 spaces for their use per the City's codes. We cannot require them to have more. All schools and daycares are required to meet these requirements. Totals Parking Req. Required Parking 147 Daycare Kids 1 per 5 children 30 16 Daycare Staff 1 per employee 16 156 Pre-school/Elementary Kids 2 per Classroom 10 6 Pre-school/Elementary Staff 5 Other Admin Staff 1 Per Staff 5 Required 64 Provided 71 • Dat From: Gary Takata (mailto:etakata@verizon.net] Sent: Sunday, July 1, 2018 4.41 PM To: Tran, Dat <Dat.Tran@citvofrc.us> Subject: St. Mary's Montessori School & Parking Facility The former school (La Petite) that occupied the current St. Mary's Montessori School became the overflow parking lot for Windrows Park during baseball season when the park's parking lot and the on -street parking became full. This was occurring before St. Mary's occupied the facility. When St. Mary's occupied the facility they placed signs indicating that their parking lot was private and for their students parents and staff which was within their rights. However, for a couple of days they were directing park users to Windrows Elementary School's parking lot. Apparently Etiwanda School District must have said something to them and they quickly took down the sign. I now notice that their staff is parking on the street as well as in the park instead of in their own parking lot. I find this hypocritical considering they did not want park users in their parking lot but have their staff using Windrows Park parking lot and on -street parking taking spaces away from park users, especially during baseball season_ It does not matter that there are open spaces in the park's parking lot but it should not be used by St. Mary's as an auxiliary parking lot to their business. l see in their proposal that they have indicated spaces for 71 -stalls. City staff will need to investigate if this will be adequate .or their staff as well as the parents of their students. Thank you for considering my concerns. E4—E5 P91 12 Tran, Dat From: chris j <chris j@stmarysmontessorischool.com> Sent: Monday, September 17, 2018 1:13 AM To: Tran, Dat; nel j Cc: Smith, Michael; Burnett, Candyce; , Harry Heady Subject: RE: DRC 2018-00095 Attachments: St Marys Color Earthwork Exhibit (4).pdf Good Morning Dat, Thank you for sending the responses you received from the neighbors I got several complaints from my neighbors about Mr. Ernest Valencia going around the neighborhood asking people to write letters and emails to you opposing the project. In fact, Mr. Dean Shimek told me in front of one of my school parents, that Mr. Valencia was "so obnoxious that he wrote you an email". We found out that most of the fences and block walls located on the north side of our property are 61 to 71 inches in height. Considering our color earthworks plan attached, the homes located on the north side will be sitting 5 feet to 6 feet above the grading levels of the new building. With a 5 to a 6 - foot fence or block wall coving these properties backyards they never had a clear view of the windrows park. Also, as the new school building will sit approximately 5 to 6 feet below from the grading levels of the most northside properties. Due to this reason, the new school building will sit approximately 11 or 12 feet below the top of the fence or block walls of this neighbors. None of the neighbors will be able to see any parked cars close to their home property line due to their fences or the block walls that are currently in place. Due to the Hight of their block walls or wood fences and the windrows park sits 4 to 7 feet below from the grading levels of these homes if these northern neighbors were to come to their backyard, all they see is the treetops from the park. All these homes were built from 1985 to 1989. when Mr. Valencia made his comments about taking the school building underground and the cars that will park in our parking lot at night, we introduced a locked gate to both entrance and exit to our plans. Due to this gate, the parking lot will be completely secure. This will give our northern neighbors a peace of mind. We can also keep the parking lot lights on from dusk to dawn to give the neighbors some security just like we have done since 2016. We have around 100 children so far in the school at given time and we have only one program that starts in the morning and ends in the afternoon 45 min after the elementary school traffic ends, Therefore we will not be generating 1200 trips even after we are full with 303 children. We will also not be full as soon as we open. Please see the growth projections given below. As per our past experience, we expect the growth to be in the following stages in all programs. Within the first 12 months of opening the new building, we may reach 165 children. (projections as of 6/28/2018) Within the next 24 months, we may reach 185 children Within the next 48 months, we may reach 200 children Within the next 60 months, we may reach 250 children Within the next 72 months, we may reach 280 children EXHIBIT M E4-E5Pg113 1. The owner of the property marked as 125 on the earthworks plan will have no change to the current view unless they come to the edge of their property line with the school and then look over their 5.5 -foot fence towards the windrows elementary. Then they will see the new building sitting around 4 feet below their grading. This house was last sold on 9128/2015, therefore, the original builder could not have promised a view lot for this current owner. This owner was shown our current plans and they express their support. 2. The owner of the property marked as 126 on the earthworks plan will have no change to the view unless they come to the edge of their property line with the school and then look over their 5 -foot block wall fence towards the windrows elementary. Then they will see the new building sitting around 6 feet below their grading. This neighbor was shown the current plans and he was in support of our plans. Other than the part that Mr. Valencia was "so obnoxious that he wrote you an email". If the original builder promised a view lot that should have been properly documented in their title. 3. The owner of the property marked as 127 on the earthworks plan will have no change to the view unless they come to the edge of their property line with the school and then look over their 6 foot block wall fence towards the windrows elementary, they will have no obstruction of their current view even after construction other than to see partial roof towards the right of their property. If the original builder promised a view lot that should have been properly documented in their title. Thfs homeowner purchased this property only in 2002. therefore, they could not have promised a view by the original developer of this property. 4. The owner of the property marked as 128 on the earthworks plan is Mr. Valencia who has rented this house out for the last 20 years. This house will have no change to the view unless they come to the edge of their property line with the school and then look over their 6 foot block wall fence towards the windrows Park they will have some obstruction of their current view after construction by way of the roof of the building as the building will sit 12 feet below the top of their block wall fence. They will see a partial roof towards the center -right of their property. If the original builder promised a view lot that should have been properly documented in their title. 5. The owner of the property marked as 129 on the earthworks plan will hardly have any obstructions to their current view of the park as the building is right-angled. This property has a (71 -inch fence) almost 6 -foot fence covering their entire backyard. This house will have no change to their view unless they come to the edge of their property line with the school and then look over their 6 -foot fence towards their left. Then they will see the new building that will sit 12 feet below the top of their wood fence. From their yard, they will see a partial roof towards the extreme left of their property. If the original builder promised a view lot that should have been properly documented in their title. 6. The owner of the property marked as 130 on the earthworks plan will have no obstruction of any view over their 6 -foot fence of the park. This house will have no change to their view unless they come to the edge of their property line with the school and then look over their 6 - foot fence towards their left. Then they will see the new building that will sit 11 feet below the top of their fence. This property was purchased by its current owner in 1998 and therefore this property owner did not buy this house from its builder. If the original builder promised a view lot that should have been properly documented in their title. 2 L4 -E5 Pg 114 Thank you. Zirri.r ayascard-ffna President/ Administrator St. Mary's Montessori School 909-200-1111 Ext 906 From: Tran, Dat <Dat.Tran@cityofrc.us> Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2018 5:39 PM To: chris.j <chris.j@stmarysmontessorischool.com>; nel.j<nel.j@stmarysmontessorischool.com> Cc: Smith, Michael <Michael.Smith@cityofrc.us>; Burnett, Candyce <Candyce.Burnett@cityofrc.us>; , Harry Heady <hheady@headydesign.com> Subject: RE: DRC 2018-00095 Hello Chris, Here's 6 of the letters that were sent to us. Their personal information has been redacted to protect their privacy. There's one more letter from earlier that 1 can send you next week. I will be replying to each of them and answer any questions they may have. If you would like, I can also let them know to contact you directly to talk to you. - Dat From: chris.j<chris.j@stmarysmontessorischool.com> Sent: Monday, September 10, 2018 3:58 PM To: Tran, Dat <Dat.Tran@cityofrc.us>; nel.j <nel,j@stmi rysmontessorischool.com> Cc: Smith, Michael <Michael.Smith@ci,tyofrc.us>; Burnett, Candyce <Candyce.Burnett@cityofrc.us>; , Harry Heady <hhead head desi n.com> Subject: RE: DRC 2018-00095 Good afternoon Dat We had neighbors who gave us letters in support of the project when the neighborhood meeting letter was mailed out, come by and inquire if they need to send the city a new letter when they received the notice that was sent out by the city of RC on Aug 17th, 2018. We informed them that they need not contact the city again as we have sent all their letters to the city already. As mentioned at our meeting that was held on Aug 22nd, 2018, there were over 75 letters in favor of the project that we have provided to the city of RC and there are 6 letters and one walk up to the counter opposing the project ( as per your email today). As agreed at our meeting, the city of RC will share all the comments they receive from the public with us please share the comments and the sources with us. Thank you for your understanding. -iiri.rfayass rrrdawa President/ Administrator St. Mary's Montessori School 909-200=1111 Ext 906 From: Tran, Dat <Dat.Tran@cityofrc.us> Sent: Monday, September 10, 2018 12:02 PM E4—E5 Pg115 To: chris.j <chris.i@strna�r smontessorischool.com>; nel.j<r3el_i2stmarysmontessorischool.com> Cc: Smith, Michael <MJchael.Smith@cityofrc.us>; Burnett, Candyce <Cand ce.Burnett cit ofrc.us> Subject: RE: DRC 2018-00095 Hello Chris, The public notice period ended on September 6, 2018. We received a total of 6 written comments in total. One resident came to the City and provided us with his comments verbally. in total, there were 7 comments. All comments were in opposition to the project. After discussing the comments received with the Planning Director, she determined that the application will need to be reviewed and acted upon by the Planning Commission. This public hearing is scheduled for September 261h, 2018. Dat From: chris.j <chris�astma smont_essorischoolcom> Sent. Thursday, September 6, 2018 7:32 PM To: nel.j<nel.i@st_m_arysmontessorischool.com>; Tran, Dat <Dat.Tranpcitvofrc.us> Cc: Smith, Michael <MichaeI,Smith Pcityofrc.us>; Burnett, Candyce <Candyice.Burnett@cityofrc.us> Subject: Re: DRC 2018-00095 Dat, Thank you so much. Looking forward to hearing from you. Get Outlook for Android From: Tran, Dat <Dat.Tran cityofrc.us> Sent: Thursday, September 6, 2018 6:24:21 PM To: chris.j; nel.j Cc: Smith, Michael; Burnett, Candyce Subject: RE: DRC 2018-00095 Hello Chris, The comment period ends at the day today, September fi'n. We have gotten 7 comments so far. We will review next steps with Candyce next week and will get back to you. • Dat From: chris.j <chris.i stmarysmontessorischoo_I.com> Sent: Thursday, September 6, 2018 5:45 PM To: Tran, Dat <Dat.Tran(@citvofrc.us>; nef-j<nel.i@stmarysmontessorischool.com> Cc: Smith, Michael <M_ichael.Smith cityofrc.us>; Burnett, Candyce <Candyice.Burnett@c_ityofrc.us> Subject: DRC 2018-00095 Michael E4—E5 Pg 116 Hope you had a wonderful vacation. I am emailing to find out if you or Dat have received any letters or emails regarding public notice you mailed out on Aug 27 as it has now passed the 10 calendar days. Thank you for your understanding. f�y.svaTd;zna President/ Administrator St. Mary's Montessori School 909-200-11.11 Ext 906 E4—E5Pg117 I r RANCHO November 5, 2012 Himal Chas Jayawardana 6818 Wild Lupine Road Eastvale, CA 92880 :. t IlE' lit 11rtil!. - ..,. 0; C.tH'CK Ell Q-_ if, E)JAI;1 t1 Il E!'ti 1'1 THE C11 -Y Or RANCHO CLICAN- IONG-A SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2012-01004 - HIMAL CHRIS JARAWARDANA for SAINT MARY'S MONTESSORI SCHOOL - A request to operate a preschool in an existing 6,600 square foot building located on the north side of North Victoria Windrow hoop between Plum Way and Victoria Park Lane in the Low Medium (LM) Development District of the Victoria Planned Community at 6880 North Victoria Windrows Loop; APN: 1089-471-25. Dear Mr. Jayawardana: The Development Review process for the above-described project has been successfully completed and approval has been granted based upon the following landings and conditions- Thank you for your participation and cooperation during this review process. Site Characteristics: The partially developed 1.85 acre project site includes a 6,600 square foot building, outdoor play areas, and 41 parking spaces. The remainder of the site consists of trees, shrubs and native grasses. Entitlement Request: The Victoria Community Plan permits private schools within residential areas subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit and Planning Director approval. The purpose of a Conditional Use Permit is to the create flexibiFity necessary to achieve the objectives of the Development Code and General Plan, 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. Use Description: Saint Mary's Montessori School proposes operating a preschool within an existing 6,600 square foot building. The school will have a maximum 100 students and employ 12 to 15 staff members when fully operational. The largest shift during the school day will not exceed 13 employees. The site was previously used as a preschool and the applicant will be making minimal changes to the interior and exterior of the building. Hours of operation: Student instruction will take place from 8:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, with the majority of students arriving between 8:00 a.m. and 8:30 a.m. School hours will be from 6:00 a.m, to 7:30 p.m., which includes before and after school care, office hours, and site maintenance. Parking: Staff has determined that there is adequate parking for the proposed use. Parking for preschools is calculated at 1 parking space per employee and 1 parking space per 5 children. This translates into a parking requirement of 41 parking spaces, which is the exact number of parking spaces available on-site. The applicant has provided a parking plan which outlines the procedure that caretakers will follow when dropping-off/picking-up students to avoid traffic backing up onto or parking on the public street. EXHIBIT N 10500 C.. Ccwcr Di- • 11.0. Box 807 • Rancho l l'canuilil±a CA'E4-EAP91f1s9p9) 477-2700 - rax (909) :77-2$/9 • �1�n,:Cit}'oETif ,is �] APPROVAL LETTER DRC2012-01004 — SAINT MARY'S MONTESSORI SCHOOL November 1, 2012 Page 2 Land Use Compatibility: The premise of all Conditional Use Permits is to ensure the compatibility of adjacent uses and the separation of potential nuisance activities. The site is located within the Low Medium Residential Development District and abuts a public park. The outdoor play areas are separated from the surrounding residences by a public street and the large undeveloped portion of the site. Staff does not foresee any potential conflicts as long as the applicant observes the submitted traffic management plan. Findings The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and is in accordance with the objectives of the Victoria Community Plan and the Development Code in that preschools are permitted within the Low Medium Residential Development District with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. 2. The proposed project is in accordance with the objectives of the Victoria Community Plan and the Development Code and the purpose of the district in which the site is located in that preschools are a conditionally permitted use and no changes beyond normal maintenance are proposed to the site. 3. The proposed project, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 4. The proposed project will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. 5. The Planning Department Staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines. The project qualifies as a Class 1 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 which covers the permitting of existing structures that involve negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of the lead agency's original determination. The project entails permitting a preschool in an existing building with no expansion of the existing building. Staff finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Director has reviewed the Planning Department's determination of exemption, and based on his own independent judgment, concurs in the staff's determination of exemption. Conditions This project is approved subject to the following conditions and the attached Standard Conditions: Planning Department: 1. Approval is granted for the operation of a preschool at 6880 North Victoria Windrows Loop - APNF 1089471-25. 2. Any increase in the hours of operation and/or number of students or employees beyond that specifically approved by this Conditional Use Permit shall require review and approval by the Planning Director. 3. The applicant shall control on-site parking in conformance with the traffic plan on file. All parking and the dropping off/picking up of students shall occur on site. 4. Changes to the exterior of the building beyond normal maintenance will require separate approval. E4 --E5 Pg 119 APPROVAL LETTER DRC2012-01004 — SAINT MARY'S MONTESSORI SCHOOL November 1, 2012 Page 3 5. Al identification signs for the business shall comply with the Sign Ordinance of the City of Rancho Cucamonga_ Signs require the submittal of a separate Sign Permit application for review and approval prior to installation. 6. The use of on-site or off-site signs, banners, streamers, balloons, inflatable figures, etc., for advertising the business shall be prohibited except as allowed by the Rancho Cucamonga Development Code. 7_ The business shall operate in conformance with the performance standards as defined in the Development Code and adhere to all conditions of this Conditional Use Permit. If the operation of the approved use causes adverse effects upon adjacent businesses or operations, the Conditional Use Permit shall be brought before the Planning Director for consideration and possible termination of the use. 8. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with any sections of the Development Code, State Fire Marshal's regulations, Health Department Regulations, Uniform Building Code, or any other City Ordinances. This decision shall be final following a 10 -day appeal period beginning with the date of this letter. Appeals must be filed in writing with the Planning Commission Secretary, state the reason for the appeal, and be accompanied by a $2,095 appeal fee. If you should have any questions, please feel free to contact Tabe van der Zwaag at (909) 477-2750, extension 4316, Monday through Thursday 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m_ Sincerely, PLANNING DEPARTMENT Donald Granger DGITV:dl Attachment: Standard Conditions E4—E5 Pg 120 EXHIBIT O portation Planning I Parking I Noise/%ribration I Expert Witness I Global Climate Change ( Health Risk Assessment M—ES Pg121 ST. MARY'S MONTESSORI SCHOOL NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS June 20, 2018 Prepared by: Roma Stromberg, INCE/M.S. GA o Carl Ballard, LEED GA ■ William Kunzman, P.E. KUNZMAN ASSOCIATES, INC. 1111 Town & Country Road, Suite 34 ■ Orange, California 92868 5005 La Mart Drive, Suite 201 ■ Riverside, California 92507 17I4) 973-8383 a_www.traffrc-engineer.com JN 7398a E4 -E5 Pg 122 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTtON AND SEnING ........................................................................................ I A. Purpose and Objectives.............. ................................................................. I B. Project tc ca t ion . . ................................................................... - ....... .............................. C. Project Oescription ................................................................. ........ ................. ........ 11. NOISE AND V1 BRATION FU NOAMENTALS .......................................................................... 9 A. Ncise! Fundamenta[S . ......... ............... ........... -- ........ ....................... ............ 9 B_ Vibration F u ri d a rnemls ............................................... ............... ...... .... -- .......... ..... . 10 III. EXISTING NOISE ENWRONMENT ..................................................................................... 14 A. Exi,5tinlg Land Uses and Sensitive Reri?ptors----- .... .......... - ....... --- ............... -- 14 B. Ambient Noise Ke05urernents..................................................................................... 14 IV. REGULATORY SETTING .................. ............................................................... 17 A. Federal Regulations ....... ........... ...... ......................... .............................. ............ 17 8. State RegUI2flDn5----,,,- ....................................................................... -- ....... ..... 17 C- Locai Regulations . .. ...................................... . ..................... ........... ..................... -- 18 V. ANALYTICAL METHU 0 OLOGY AND MODEL PARAMETE R 5 ............................................... 24 A- Noise Modeling and Input ................................................................................ -- ......... 24 VI, IMPACT ANALYSIS -.. .................. I .............. I I ........... 1-1, ............... I ............ ...................... 25 A- Nui5u Impar.15,........................................................ .... ................ .. .......... 25 B. V i b ra tj a n lmpadLs ..... ............... ........... --- ........ ........ ...................... 26 VII. MEASURES TO REDUCE IMPACTS ................ ................................................................... 32 A. Construction M i t i ga t iort Measures . ........ ... .......... ...................................... --- ....... 32 VIII. ............................................................... 33 APPENDICES Appendix A - List of Acronyms Appendix B - Definitions of Acoustical Terms Appendix C - Noise Monitoring Field Worksheets Appendix D - SoundPLAN Input and Output Appendix E - FHWA Future Traffic Noise Worksheet E4—E 5 Pg 123 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equiprnert--..-_—.__'~------11 Table 2. Typical Human Reaction and Effect onBuildings Due UoGround6orneVibration ....... 1I Table 3. Short -Term Noise Measurement Summary (dBA)......................... .... ....................... 15 I'able4. Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Exposure ............................. ................ 2Z Table S. Residential Noise Limits (Base Noise Levmb)—_.-..'—... .................................... .... 23 E4—E5 Pg 124 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Project location Map ........... .......... . .. . ....................... ..... .................................... 7 figure 2. Site Plan ............. ......................................................................... 8 Figure 3. ComrnDn Noise Sources and N65e Levels ..................... ............................................ 13 Figure 4. Noise Measurement Location Map — .......... .............................................................. 16 Figure 5, Construction N104e Levels............................................................................ 29 Figure S. Construction Noise Contours(Leq) .......................................... .............. ........ ............ 30 Figure 7, Pea k H c u r Operational No ise Levels (Leq) ....................................................... ........ —, 31 E4—E5 Pg 125 I. INTRODUCTION AND SETTING A. Purpose and Objectives The purpose of this noise impact analysis is to provide an assessment of the noise impacts resulting from development of the proposed St. Mary's Montessori School project and to identify mitigation measures that may be necessary to reduce those impacts. The noise issues related to the proposed land use and development have been evaluated in the context of the California Environmental Quality Act. Although this is a technical report, every effort has been made to write the report clearly and concisely. To assist the reader with those terms unique to noise analysis, a list of acronyms is provided in Appendix A and definitions of acoustical terms are provided in Appendix 6 of this report, B. Project Location The project site is located north of North Victoria Windrows loop between Victoria Park Lane and Plum Way in the City of Rancho Cucamonga (see Figure 1). C. Proiect Description The following information has been provided by the Montessori school; History of this Location The property was previously operated as the La Petite Academy, a corporate pre-school program at this location since 1988 with a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) obtained by the City of Rancho Cucamonga to have 145 pre-school children and an occupancy certificate for 153 people. Since 1990 till 2005, the Academy operated at full capacity. Since 2007, the Academy declined in its enrollment and was completely shut down in May 2012. From May 2012 until August 2012, the property was broken into several times and the playground structures and many others were stolen and the building was in a very bad shape. Under the City ordinance that allows a same type of business to step into an existing CUP that is less than 6 months old, a business could have been established with minimum upgrades to the property and continue the similar operation. However, it was decided to upgrade the building with a brand new fire sprinkler system, fire alarm system, play structures, new cabinets and toilets, build a breakroom for staff, new HVAC system with new ductwork, new ceiling and new flooring, ADA upgrades including a ramp from the street and upgrades to electrical and plumbing to name a few. When a new CUP was applied for, it included 100 children and 15 staff as the Mon#essori school was not aware that the existing parking supply could accommodate up to 145 children and 12 staff. In addition, the Montessori school wanted to build a new building in about 4 years when it reached the full capacity. Therefore, only 200 students and 15 staff members were included in the new November 2012 CUP. E4—E5�g126 Hours of Operation Currently, the CUP allows the property to have hours of operation from 6:00 AM to 7:30 PM. The Montessori school hours of operation are from 6:30 AM to 6:30 PM, Monday to Friday. Opening staff and closing staff will be on-site from approximately 15 minutes before opening and 15 minutes after closing. This includes before and after school care for children. The Montessori school has several student arrivals and departure times to make sure not all the children arrive and leave at the same time. The Montessori school program runs Monday through Friday from 8:30 AM to 12:45 PM with the extended Montessori program running until 3:30 PM. The majority of children will arrive between the hours of 6:30 AM to 8:30 AM and approximately 35% of the children will leave the school between the hours of 12:45 PM and 2:00 PM, approximately 42% of the children will leave the school between 3:30 PM and 5:00 PM, the remainder of the children will leave the school between 5:00 PM and 6:30 PM. Daily cleaning staff (approximately 4 to 5 staff) will arrive around 6:30 PM and will leave around 7:30 PM to 8:00 PM, Monday through Thursday, and on Saturday will arrive around 10:00 AM and leave around 5:00 PM after a detailed clean-up. Once a year, the Montessori school will host open houses split into 4 to 6 separate days between 2 weeks from 5:00 PM to 6:30 PM for parents from different classrooms (one classroom per day) to attend this event on a designated day and time and discuss their children's work and observe the Montessori school environment. For example, classroom 1 will hold its open house on Monday, classroom 2 will hold their open house on Tuesday, etc. The Montessori school will hold several vacant spots for advancing children who are moving up, such as when a child reached 12 months they will have to be moved from the infant program to the toddler program. This means a child with a birthday falling on February 1st will have a spot in the toddler program since January of that year to be accommodated. After Construction of the New Building For the proposed new CUP, the Montessori school is hoping to keep the hours of operation from 6:00 AM to 7:30 PM consistent with the current CUP hours of operation. No change in school program hours of operation are proposed from the current 6:30 AM to 6:30 PM hours of operation. Number of Children and Staff The current building functions under a certificate of occupancy issued by the City of Rancho Cucamonga (dated March 7, 2013), for a total classroom occupancy of 148 students and 3 office staff. The CUP issued on November 5, 2012 included 100 students and 15 teachers/administrative staff. The building includes six classrooms, a break room for staff, six restrooms, a kitchen, school office, reception entry area, janitorial room, and two storage rooms. E4—Eg Pg i 27 Currently, the school has an infant program (for children from 6 weeks through 12 months), a Montessori toddler program (for children from 12 months to 24 months), and a Montessori early learner program (for children from 24 months through 36 months). All three of these classroom programs are offered for 2 days a week, 3 days a week, and 5 days a week slots. The 2 days per week children come to school on Tuesday and Thursday. The 3 days per week students come to school on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. The 5 days per week students come to school Monday through Friday. Currently, this program has 3 classrooms and a total of 52 children registered in this program out of which due to the 2 days, 3 days, and 5 days program, the school has 40 children attend school on a daily basis. The Montessori program (ages 3 years to 5 years) has children who attend Monday through Friday, 5 days a week. Currently, this program has 36 children registered and they attend school on a daily basis except for approximately 5 students who are on vacation or sick for the day. The Montessori pre -kindergarten and kindergarten program (ages 5 years through kindergarten) children attend Monday through Friday, 5 days a week. Currently, this program has 24 children registered and they attend school orp a daily basis except for approximately 3 students who are on vacation or sick For the day_ Teachers and Administrative Staff Currently, the Montessori school has 15 teachers, 3 administrative staff, a cooky and a receptionist. The administrative staff operates from the Educational Systems, Inc. corporate office located at 9640 Center Avenue, Suite 120, Rancho Cucamonga CA 91730. Opening — 3 staff members from 6=15 AM to 8;00 AM Daily —13 teachers/teacher aides/receptionist/cook from 8:00 AM to 4:00 PM Closing — 5 to 8 staff members from 4:00 PM to 6=30 PM Proposed New Building After completion of the new building construction, the Montessori school will move all the children from the current building to the new building. The new building will consist of 8 classrooms (2 more classrooms than the current building). The Montessori school will transfer all the children and tate staff members from the current building to the new building as well as enroll new children for the additional classrooms (classroom #7 and #8). This means that the new building will have total of 183 to 190 children (including the children and staff from the current building), as well as 17 to 22 pre-school and administrative staff, plus 2 to 5 elementary staff members at any given time to reach the full capacity in about 10 years. New Building and the Existing Building A. Infant Program (for children from 6 weeks through 12 months) Daycare/Preschool This classroom program will be offered for 2 days, 3 days, and 5 days a week slots. The 2 days per week children will attend school on Tuesday and Thursday. The 3 days per week students will attend school on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. The 5 days per E4—E5IOg128 week students will attend school Monday through Friday. This classroom program will occupy classroom #8 in the new building and will be occupied by a maximum of 9 students with 3 teachers. B. Montessori Toddler Program (for children 12 months to 24 month) Daycare/Preschool This classroom program will be offered for 2 days, 3 days, and 5 days a week slots. The 2 days per week children will attend school on Tuesday and Thursday. The 3 days per week students will attend school on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. The 5 days per week students will attend school Monday through Friday. This classroom program will occupy the classroom #7 in the new building and will be occupied by a maximum of 16 students with 4 teachers. C. Montessori Early Learner Program (24 months through 36 months) Daycare/Preschool This classroom program will be offered for 2 days, 3 days, and 5 days a week slots. The 2 days per week children will attend school on Tuesday and Thursday. The 3 days per week students will attend school on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. The 5 days per week students will attend school Monday through Friday. This classroom program will occupy the classroom #6 in the new building and will be occupied by a maximum of 26 students with 3 teachers. D. Our Montessori (ages 3 years to 5 or 5 and half years) Daycare/Preschool This classroom program has children who only attend school on Monday through Friday, 5 days per week. This classroom program will occupy classrooms #'s 1, 2, 3, and 4 in the new building and will have a maximum of 24 children in each classroom with 1 teacher per classroom, for a total of 96 children and 4 teachers and 2 floating assistants in this classroom program. Our Montessori Pre -kindergarten through Grade 3 Elementary Program (ages 5 or 5 1/2 years pre -kindergarten through elementary grades 1, 2, and 3) This classroom program has children who attend school on Monday through Friday, 5 days per week. This classroom program will occupy classroom #5 in the new building that will have a maximum of 36 children with 2 teachers. F. Classrooms 9, 10, 11, 12 in the existing building after the remodel is completed will also occupy by Montessori pre -kindergarten through grade 3 Elementary program (ages 5 or 5 1/2 years pre -kindergarten through elementary grades 1, 2, and 3) The school accrediting body will determine the total capacity of these classrooms. The Montessori school is expecting it to be licensed to hold 24 to 30 children for each of the classrooms and 4 teachers for the 4 classrooms. These students and teachers are counted in the elementary parking ratio. E4—OPg129 Staff Arrival and Departure Plan after the New Construction Opening , 7 to 9 staff members from 6:15 AM to 8:00 AM Daily — 22 teachers/teacher aides/receptionist/cook from 8.00 AM to 4:00 PM Closing —12 to 16 staff members from 4:00 PM to 6:30 PM Growth Pian The proposed total capacities mentioned below may never come to materialize. The Montessori school took 4 and 1/2 years to reach 100 children and it may require over 10 years or more to completely fill up this school if it ever happens. From past experience, the school growth projections for the next ten years are listed below: Within the first 12 months of opening the new building, reach 125 children Within the next 36 months, reach 155 children Within the next 24 months, reach 170 children Within the next 24 months, reach 200 children Within the next 24 months, reach 230 children The Montessori elementary school program growth with be at a very slow pace as most of the students leave after 5 to 6 years to attend pre -kindergarten in public schools which are free of charge to the parents- However, it is important to have a private elementary school program as an option for families. For the Montessori pre-school programs, economic conditions play a big part in its growth (i.e., if the economic conditions are down and one parent loses their job first thing they do is pull children out of the pre-school to cut the families expense). Construction Plan During the future construction, the current building will function as a Montessori school. After the new building is constructed and the CUP and Certificate of Occupancy are issued, the children will be moved from the current building to the new building subject to obtaining a pre-school license from the Department of Social Service. After we moved all the children and staff to the new building we will remodel the existing building to house 4 more classrooms and a conference room/training and orientation center for our own staff. Traditional Pre -Kindergarten and Elementary Vs. Montessori Pre -Kindergarten and Elementary In traditional public elementary schools, children who turn 5 years old from September 2nd through December 2nd of any given year are considered pre -kindergarten or transitional kindergarten. It is the first phase of a two-year kindergarten program that uses an age- appropriate curriculum aligned to the Common Core State Standards. Also, children who are turning 5 years during the September 2nd through December 2nd period of the same year can attend the summer school program before they turn 5 years old. Transitional kindergarten (pre -kindergarten) in a public school are taught by one or two teachers in a classroom of up to 30 students. In the same program, the students learn to recognize E4—E5 Pg 130 numbers from 1 through 10, learn to recognize the alphabet and learn to hold a pencil and draw pictures and color them, etc. In the Montessori School program, students are considered to be pre -kindergarten when they turn 5 years old in any given year, they can recognize and write numbers up to 10 and the entire alphabet. It is the first phase of a two-year kindergarten program that exceeds the age-appropriate curriculum set by the State Standards. The Montessori pre -kindergarten student, by the time they turn 5 years old will learn numbers up to 100, the Montessori components, and the approach in this age group excels with each year in the areas of math, language, sensorial, exercises of practical life, geography, botany, and cultural activities. The two years of pre -kindergarten and kindergarten in the Montessori elementary program will prepare a child for elementary grades 1, 2 and 3. In the public elementary school, children who turn 6 years old from September 2nd through December 2nd of any given year or children who have spent one year in transitional kindergarten are considered as kindergarten. Once they complete kindergarten in the elementary school system, the student will move to grade one within the elementary school program. This program is run in a class of 30 students with one or two teachers. The students learn who to count to 100, write the entire alphabet, draw pictures, and paint within the lines of a drawing. In the Montessori kindergarten program, students who reach the age of 6 years old any time during a calendar year, and the students who are 5 years old that have completed our pre- kindergarten program can be advanced to the kindergarten program. In kindergarten, the student will work with numbers up to 1,000, simple multiplication, simple addition, and simple subtraction. Parking Requirements A total of 72 parking spaces are required per the traffic study exemption letter prepared for the proposed project (Kunzman Associates, Inc., 2018). The Montessori School is proposing to add 30 additional parking spaces to the existing 42 parking spaces for a total of 72 parking spaces. Student drop-off: The Montessori school will provide a biometric scan child drop-off to all the parents of children who are over 3 years of age using an "ipad like" device that a staff member will hold just outside the drop-off point in front of the main door as parents drive to that location, and drop-off their child that takes approximately one minute per vehicle. The parents will not have to park, and they will enter the parking lot at the easterly driveway on North Victoria Windrows Loop and exit out through the westerly driveway close to the current building while circulating in a counter -clockwise direction (see figure 2). Once S children are dropped -off, one staff member will escort the children into the Montessori building. The Montessori school will increase the number of staff parking spaces by 2 to accommodate these two staff members. E4—E§ Pg 131 1-.555V v;th 1N 7398a 7 E4 -E5 Pg132 Figure 2 Site Plan z Mrtigr n j z L ;I •� , i ..... Im 1`LI\ZIMAN ASSOCIATES, INC. 0 IFIL 40 WAkk�: or E,,4 IF4 k EkT SER% lir E4 -E§ Pg 133 !N 7398a II. NOISE AND VIBRATION FUNDAMENTALS A. Noise Fundamentals Sound is a pressure wave created by a moving or vibrating source that travels through an elastic medium such as air. Noise is defined as unwanted or objectionable sound. The effects of noise on people can include general annoyance, interference with speech communication, sleep disturbance, and in extreme circumstances, hearing impairment, Commonly used noise terms are presented in Appendix B_ The unit of measurement used to describe a noise level is the decibel (dB). The human ear is not equally sensitive to all frequencies within the sound spectrum, Therefore, the "A -weighted" noise scale, which weights the frequencies to which humans are sensitive, is used for measurements. Noise levels using A -weighted measurements are written dB(A) or dBA. From the noise source to the receiver, noise changes both in level and frequency spectrum. The most obvious is the decrease in noise as the distance from the source increases. The manner in which noise reduces with distance depends on whether the source is a point or line source as well as ground absorption, atmospheric effects and refract;on, and shielding by natural and manmade features. Sound from point sources, such as air conditioning condensers, radiates uniformly outward as it travels away from the source in a spherical pattern. The noise drop-off rate associated with this geometric spreading is 6 dBA per each doubling of the distance (dBA/DD). Transportation noise sources such as roadways are typically analyzed as line sources, since at any given moment the receiver may be impacted by noise from multiple vehicles at various locations along the roadway. Because of the geometryof a line source, the noise drop-off rate associated with the geometric spreading of a line source is 3 dBA/DD. Decibels are measured on a logarithmic scale, which quantifies sound intensity in a manner similar to the Richter scale used for earthquake magnitudes. Thus, a doubling of the energy of a noise source, such as a doubled traffic volume, would increase the noise levels by 3 dBA; halving of the energy would result in a 3 dBA decrease. Figure 3 shows the relationship of various noise levels to commonly experienced noise events. Average noise levels over a period of minutes or hours are usually expressed as dBAL1q, or the equivalent noise level for that period of time. For example, Legi3r would represent a 3 -hour average. When no period is specified, a one-hour average is assumed. Noise standards for land use compatibility are stated in terms of the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) and the Day -Night Average Noise Level (Ldl)• CNEL is a 24-hour weighted average measure of community noise. CNEL is obtained by adding five decibels to sound levels in the evening (7:00 PM to 10:00 PM), and by adding ten decibels to sound levels at night (10:00 PM to 7:00 AM). This weighting accounts for the increased human sensitivity to noise during the evening and nighttime hours. Ld„ is a very similar 24-hour average measure that weights only the nighttime hours. E4—ES Pg134 It is widely accepted that the average healthy ear can barely perceive changes of 3 dBA; that a change of 5 dBA is readily perceptible, and that an increase (decrease) of 10 dBA sounds twice (half) as loud. This definition is recommended by the California Department of Transportation's Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol (2013). The difference in sound (noise) levels from the exterior to the interior of a structure indicates the sound transmitted loss through the window, door, or wall. A Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating specifies the noise level reduction that windows, doors, wall construction materials, and insulation provide. For example, if the exterior of a structure is exposed to 75 dBA and 45 dBA is measured on the interior of the structure, then a reduction of 30 dBA is achieved. Typically, higher STC ratings indicate greater interior noise reductions. B. Vibration Fundamentals The way in which vibration is transmitted through the earth is called propagation. Propagation of earthborn vibrations is complicated and difficult to predict because of the endless variations in the soil through which waves travel. There are three main types of vibration propagation: surface, compression and shear waves. Surface waves, or Raleigh waves, travel along the ground's surface. These waves carry most of their energy along an expanding circular wave front, similar to ripples produced by throwing a rock into a pool of water. Compression waves, or P-waves, are body waves that carry their energy along an expanding spherical wave front. The particle motion in these waves is longitudinal (i.e., in a "push-pull" fashion). P-waves are analogous to airborne sound waves. Shear waves, or S - waves, are also body waves that carry energy along an expanding spherical wave front. However, unlike P-waves, the particle motion is transverse or "side-to-side and perpendicular to the direction of propagation". As vibration waves propagate from a source, the energy is spread over an ever-increasing area such that the energy level striking a given point is reduced with the distance from the energy source. This geometric spreading loss is inversely proportional to the square of the distance. Wave energy is also reduced with distance as a result of material damping in the form of internal friction, soil layering, and void spaces. The amount of attenuation provided by material damping varies with soil type and condition as well as the frequency of the wave. Construction operations generally include a wide range of activities that can generate groundborne vibration. Vibratory compactors or rollers, pile drivers, and pavement breakers can generate perceptible amounts of vibration at up to 200 feet. Heavy trucks can also generate groundborne vibrations, which can vary depending on vehicle type, weight, and pavement conditions. Potholes, pavement joints, discontinuities, or the differential settlement of pavement all increase the vibration levels from vehicles passing over a road surface. Construction vibration is normally of greater concern than vibration from normal traffic flows on streets and freeways with smooth pavement conditions. Typically, particle velocity or acceleration (measured in gravities) is used to describe vibration. Table 1 shows the peak particle velocities (PPV) of some common construction equipment and Table 2 shows typical human reactions to various levels of PPV as well as the effect of PPV on buildings. E4—E5CPgl35 Table 1 Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment' Equ'pment Peak Particle Velocity (inches/second) at 25 feet Approximate Vibration Level LV (dVB) at 25 feet Pile driver (impact) 1.518 (upper range) 112 0.644 (typical) 104 Pile driver (sonic) 0.734 upper range 105 0.170 typical 93 Clam shovel drop (slurry wall) 0.202 94 Hydromill 0.008 in soil 66 (Slurry wall) 0.017 in rock 75 Vibratory Roller 0.21 94 Moe Ram 0.089 87 Large bulldozer 0.089 87 Caisson drill 0.089 87 Loaded trucks 0.076 86 Jackhammer 0.035 79 Small bulldozer 0.003 58 I Source: Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, Federal Transit Administration, May 2006. M—E50j136 Table 2 Typical Human Reaction and Effect on Buildings Due to Groundborne Vibration' Vibration Level Peak Particle Velocity (PPV) Human Reaction Effect on Buildings 0.006-0.019 in/sec Threshold of perception, possibility of Vibrations unlikely to cause damage of intrusion any type Recommended upper level of vibration 0.08 in/sec Vibrations readily perceptible to which ruins and ancient monuments should be subjected Level at which continuous vibration Virtually no risk of "architectural" (i.e., 0.10 in/sec begins to annoy people not structural) damage to normal buildings Threshold at which there is a risk to 0.20 in/sec Vibrations annoying to people in "architectural" damage to normal buildings dwelling — houses with plastered walls and ceilings Vibrations considered unpleasant by Vibrations at a greater level than 0.4-0.6 in/sec people subjected to continuous normally expected from traffic, but vibrations and unacceptable to some would cause "architectural" damage people walking on bridges and possibly minor structural damage 1 source: California Department of Transportation, 2002. E4—E52Pg137 ri. • F.K 1..L .1d W 'A A yLJ4��}tiff i3 A'. Av t— Sd—1 I Figure 3 Common Noise Sources and Noise Levels It Very Rut II 0 1132 00001 rv�I: v G,•.ti,� Mkihll 1. 4P i'F 0 1/64 000001 )URCE Of MUND 1\l1\ZMA\ ASSOCIATES, INC. VFR -W )TOLi Oi t\x fLLf\S SI RN ICF dVIA) FOUDMSs ErBGY E4-E5Vgl38 I'A.. F.'. AN rn..Sl SOURCE or SOUNLI IN 7ry98-1 III. EXISTING NOISE ENVIRONMENT A. Existing Land Uses and Sensitive Receptors The State of California defines sensitive receptors as those land uses that require serenity or are otherwise adversely affected by noise events or conditions. Schools, libraries, churches, hospitals, single and multiple -family residential, including transient lodging, motels, and hotel uses make up the majority of these areas. The project site is bordered by North Victoria Windrows Loop to the southeast. Single-family detached residential dwelling units are located just south and east of North Victoria Windrows Loop. The northern portion of the project site is bordered by single-family detached residential dwelling units and a public park borders the project site to the west. Noise sensitive land uses adjacent to the proposed project include the adjacent and nearby existing single-family detached residential dwelling units. B. Ambient Noise Measurements An American National Standards Institute (ANSI Section SI4 1979, Type 1) Larson Davis model LxT sound level meter was used to document existing ambient noise levels. In order to document existing ambient noise levels in the project area, three (3)10 -minute daytime noise measurements were taken between 10:22 AM and 11:30 AM on March 23, 2018. Field worksheets and noise measurement output data are included in Appendix C. As shown on Figure 4, the short-term noise measurements were taken at adjacent single- family detached residential dwelling units located northeast of the project site, single-family detached residential dwelling units located east of the project site, and at the park located west of the project site. Table 3 provides a summary of the short-term ambient noise data. Ambient noise levels ranged between 48.3 and 63.1 dBA Leq. Dominant noise sources were residential in nature and included, slow vehicle movements, barking dogs, children playing, and chatty pedestrians. R—E�'Pg139 Table 3 Short -Term Noise Measurement Summary (dBA)" 2 1 See Figure 4 for noise measurement rocat°ons. Each noise measurement was performed over a 10 -minute duration. 7 Noise measurements performed on March 23, 2018_ E4—E5 i§g 140 Daytime Site Location Time Started Leq Lmax L(2) L(8) x(25) L(50) NM1 10.22 AM 483 65.5 56.7 52.1 45.9 42.8 NM2 10:43 AM 578 71.1 67.0 63.2 55.2 51.3 NM3 11:20 AM 631 68.8 67.5 66.2 64.4 62.0 1 See Figure 4 for noise measurement rocat°ons. Each noise measurement was performed over a 10 -minute duration. 7 Noise measurements performed on March 23, 2018_ E4—E5 i§g 140 0%, . -0D I, t"N Fw'teas-A Sik;t. A 739Ea 16 E4-ESPgl41 IV. REGULATORY SETTING A. Federal Regulations 1. Federal Noise Control Act of 1972 The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Noise Abatement and Control was originally established to coordinate federal noise control activities. After its inception, EPA's Office of Noise Abatement and Control issued the Federal Noise Control Act of 1972, establishing programs and guidelines to identify and address the effects of noise on public health, welfare, and the environment. In response, the EPA published Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety (Levels of Environmental Noise). The Levels of Environmental Noise recommended that the Ldn should not exceed S5 dBA outdoors or 45 dBA indoors to prevent significant activity interference and annoyance in noise -sensitive areas. In addition, the Levels of Environmental Noise identified five (5) dBA as an "adequate margin of safety" for a noise level increase relative to a baseline noise exposure level of 55 dBA Ldn (i.e., there would not be a noticeable increase in adverse community reaction with an increase of five dBA or less from this baseline level). The EPA did not promote these findings as universal standards or regulatory goals with mandatory applicability to all communities, but rather as advisory exposure levels below which there would be no risk to a community from any health or welfare effect of noise, In 1981, EPA administrators determined that s+jbjective issues such as noise would be better addressed at lower levels of government. Consequently, in 1982 responsibilities for regulating noise control policies were transferred to State and local governments. However, noise control guidelines and regulations contained in EPA rulings in prior years remain in place by designated Federal agencies, allowing more individualized coAtrol for specific issues by designated Federal, State, and local government agencies. B. State Regulations 1. State of California Building Standards Code The State of California has adopted noise standards in areas of regulation not preempted by the Federal government, State standards regulate noise levels of motor vehicles, sound transmission through buildings, occupational noise control, and noise insulation. Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, also known as the California Building Standards Code, establishes building standards applicable to all occupancies throughout the state. The code provides acoustical regulations for both exterior -to - interior sound insulation, as well as sound and impact isolation between adjacent spaces of various occupied units. Title 24 regulations state that interior noise levels generated by exterior noise sources shall not exceed 45 dBA Ldn/CNEL, with windows closed, in any habitable room for general residential uses. E4—E5 Vg 142 2. State of California General Plan Guidelines 2003 Though not adopted by law, the State of California General Plan Guidelines 2003, published by the California Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) (OPR Guidelines), provide guidance for the compatibility of projects within areas of specific noise exposure. The OPR Guidelines identify the suitability of various types of construction relative to a range of outdoor noise levels and provide each local community some flexibility in setting local noise standards that allow for the variability in community preferences. Findings presented in the Levels of Environmental Noise Document (EPA 1974) influenced the recommendations of the OPR Guidelines, most importantly in the choice of noise exposure metrics (i.e., Ldn or CNEL) and in the upper limits for the Normally Acceptable outdoor exposure of noise -sensitive uses. The OPR Guidelines include a Noise and Land Use Compatibility Matrix identifies acceptable and unacceptable community noise exposure limits for various land use categories (see Table 4). The City of Rancho Cucamonga utilizes the County of Riverside's version of the compatibility matrix. 3. California Environmental Quality Act The California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines (Appendix G) establishes thresholds for noise impact analysis. Two of these standards apply to what is referred to as a "substantial increase" in ambient noise levels. Neither the California Environmental Quality Act nor the City of Jurupa Valley General Plan Noise Element recognizes an official numerical increase as a "substantial increase." Industry -accepted standards for what is considered to be a "substantial increase" range from 3 dB to 12 dB. It should be noted that a change of 3 dB is considered to be "barely perceptible" to a trained ear and that a change of 5 dB is considered to be a readily perceptible change. 4. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Rancho Cucamonga Development Code, exempts construction activity from the vibration standard. Therefore, there are no applicable City standards for structural damage from vibration. The California Department of Transportation and Vibration Guidance Manual recommends a maximum vibration level standard of 0.2 in/sec PPV for the prevention of structural damage to typical residential buildings. C. Local Regulations 1. City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan The Public Health and Safety Element of the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan includes the noise compatibility guidelines shown in Table 4. These guidelines and applicable sections of the State building code are used to evaluate the proposed project's compatibility with future ambient noise levels. E4-0Pg 143 2. City of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Ordinance Exterior Noise Standards Basic Noise Levels are presented in Table S. City of Rancho Cucamonga Ordinance 17.66.050 C (1) states that it shall be unlawful for any person at any location within the city to create any noise or allow the creation of any noise on the property owned, leased, occupied, or otherwise controlled by such person, which causes the noise level when measured on the property line of any other property to exceed the basic noise level as adjusted below: a_ Basic Noise Level for a cumulative period of not more than IS minutes in any one hour; or b. Basic Noise Level plus 5 dBA for a cumulative period of not more than 10 minutes in any one hour; or C, Basic Noise Level plus 14 dBA for a cumulative period of not more than 5 minutes in any one hour; or d. Basic Noise level plus 1S dBA at any time. If the measurement location is a boundary between two different noise zones, the lower noise level standard shall apply. If the intruding noise source is continuous and cannot reasonably be discontinued or stopped for a time period whereby the ambient noise level can be determined, the measured noise level obtained while the noise is in operation shall be compared directly to the allowable noise level standards as specified respective to the measurement's location, designated land use, and for the time of day the noise level is measured. The reasonableness of temporarily discontinuing the noise generation by an intruding noise source shall be determined by the planning director for the purpose of establishing the existing ambient noise level at the measurement location. Special Exclusions The following activities shall be exempted from the provisions of this section: 1. City or school -approved activities conducted on public parks, public playgrounds, and public or private school grounds including, but not limited to, athletic and school entertainment events between the hours of 7:00 AM and 10:00 PM. 2. Occasional outdoor gatherings, dances, shows, and sporting and entertainment events, provided said events are conducted pursuant to the approval of a temporary use permit issued by the City. 3. Any mechanical device, apparatus, or equipment used, related to, or connected with emergency machinery, vehicle, work, or warning alarm or bell, provided the sounding of any bell or alarm on any building or motor vehicle shall terminate its operation within 30 minutes in any hour of its being activated. 4. Noise sources associated with, or vibration created by, construction, repair, remodeling, or grading of any real property or during authorized seismic surveys, provided said activities: E4—E5 Pg 144 a. When adjacent to a residential land use, school, church or similar type of use, the noise generating activity does not take place between the hours of 8:00 PM and 7:00 AM on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday, and provided noise levels created do not exceed the noise standard of 65 dBA when measured at the adjacent property line. b. When adjacent to a commercial or industrial use, the noise generating activity does not take place between the hours of 10:00 PM and 6:00 AM on weekdays, including Saturday and Sunday, and provided noise levels created do not exceed the noise standards of 70 dBA at the when measured at the adjacent property line. All devices, apparatus, or equipment associated with agricultural operations, provided: a. Operations do not take place between 8:00 PM and 7:00 AM on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. b. Such operations and equipment are utilized for protection or salvage of agricultural crops during periods of potential or actual frost damage or other adverse weather conditions. C. Such operations and equipment are associated with agricultural pest control through pesticide application, provided the application is made in accordance with permits issued by, or regulations enforced by, the state department of agriculture. Noise sources associated with the maintenance of real property, provided said activities take place between the hours of 7:00 AM and 8:00 PM on any day. Any activity to the extent regulation thereof has been preempted by state or federal law. Schools, churches, librories, health care institutions. It shall be unlawful for any person to create any noise which causes the noise level at any school, hospital or similar health care institution, church, or library while the same is in use, to exceed the noise standards specified in this section and prescribed for the assigned noise zone in which the school, hospital, church, or library is located. Construction Noise Standards Noise sources associated with, or vibration created by, construction, repair, remodeling, or grading of any real property or during authorized seismic surveys, provided that when adjacent to a residential land use, school, church or similar type of use, the noise generating activity does not take place between the hours of 8:00 PM and 7:00 AM on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday, and provided noise levels created do not exceed the noise standard of 65 dBA when measured at the adjacent property line. Property Maintenance Noise Standards Ordinance 17.66.050 also sets forth standards intended to minimize noise associated with commercial land uses and property maintenance. ■ All commercial and office activities shall not create any noise that would exceed an exterior noise level of 65 dBA during the hours of 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM and E4--E;'OPgl45 70 dBA during the hours of 7:00 AM to 10:00 PM when measured at the adjacent property line. ■ No person shall cause the loading, unloading, opening, closing, or other handling of boxes, crates, containers, building materials, garbage cans, or similar objects between the hours of 10:00 PM and 7:00 AM, in a manner which would cause a noise disturbance to a residential area. E4—E5 Pg 146 Table 4 City of Rancho Cucamonga Noise Compatibility Matri)J (c1BA CNEL or Ldd Land Use 55 60 6s 70 75 Bo Residential -Low Density Single Unit, Duplex, Mobile Homes Normally Unacceptable: Residential Multi -Unit, Mixed Use Lodging -Hotels New construction or development Schools, Libraries, Community Centers, Religious Institutions, Hospitals, Nursing Hames New construction or Auditoriums, Concert Halls, Amphitheaters should be undertaken only after a development should generally Sports Arenas, Outdoor Spectator Sports assumption that any detailed analysis of the noise Playgrounds, Neighborhood Parks generally not be Outdoor Recreation (Commercial and Public) Office, Retail and Commercial construction or development undertaken Construction Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities, Agriculture Normally Acceplable: Conditionally Acceptable: Normally Unacceptable: Clearly Unacceptable: Specified land uses is New construction or development New construction and New construction or satisfactory based upon the should be undertaken only after a development should generally development should assumption that any detailed analysis of the noise be discouraged K new generally not be buildings involved are of reduction requirements Is made and construction or development undertaken Construction normal conventional needed noise Insulation features does proceed, a detailed costs to make the indoor construction without any included in the design Conventional analysis of the noise environment acceptable special noise Insulation or construction, but with dosed reduction requirements must would be prohibitive and requirements windows and fresh air supply be made with needed noise the outdoor environment systems or air conditioning wil insulation features included in would not be usable normally suffice Outdoor the design Outdoor areas environment will seem noisy must be shielded. i Saurra City of Rancho Cuomonga 2010 General Plan, May 19, 2010 E4-ffPg 147 Table 5 Residential Noise Limits (Base Noise Levels) 1 1 Source City of Rancho Cucamonga Munidpal Ord nance Tab'e 17.66.050.1 E4—E5%148 Maximum Allowable Location of Measurement 10:00 PM to 7.00 AM 7;00 AM to 10.00 PM Exterior 60 dBA 65 dBA Interior 45 dBA 50 dBA (A) It shall be unlawful for any person at any location within the city to create any noise or to allow the creation of any noise which causes the noise level when measured within any other fully enclosed (windows and doors shut) residential dwelling unit to exceed the interior nose standard in the manner described herein. (B) If the intruding noise source is continuous and cannot reasonably be discontinued or stopped for a time period whereby the ambient noise level can be determined, each of the noise limits above shall be reduced five dBA For noise consisting of impulse or simple tone noise 1 Source City of Rancho Cucamonga Munidpal Ord nance Tab'e 17.66.050.1 E4—E5%148 V. ANALYTICAL METHODOLOGY AND MODEL PARAMETERS A. Noise Modeling and Input 1. SoundPLAN The SoundPLAN software utilizes algorithms (based on the inverse square law) to calculate noise level projections. The software allows the user to input specific noise sources, spectral content, sound barriers, building placement, topography, and sensitive receptor locations. The SouncIPLAN model was utilized to calculate construction noise and future operational noise levels associated with the proposed project using reference sound level data for the various pieces of construction equipment and stationary on-site sources. Construction equipment noise reference levels found in the FHWA RCNM Handbook were utilized for modeling purposes. The SouncIPLAN model was utilized to model peak hour school operational noise. It is a three-dimensional noise modeling software that takes into account the shielding and reflective effects associated with intervening topography and nearby buildings. Noise sources included parking lot movements and full use of the playground areas. Parking lot noise is based on the proposed projects peak hour trip generation as well as parking lot size. Representative noise levels from the SouncIPLAN noise library were utilized to model playground noise. SoundPLAN modeling data is provided in Appendix D. 2. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Traffic Noise Prediction Model Future noise levels along North Victoria Windrows Loop were modeled utilizing the FHWA Traffic Noise Prediction Model FHWA-RD-77-108 in order to project future noise levels at the project site. The FHWA Traffic Noise Prediction Model arrives at a predicted noise level through a series of adjustments to the Reference Energy Mean Emission Level (REMEL). Adjustments are then made to the REMELto account for: total average daily trips (ADT), roadway classification, width, speed and truck mix, roadway grade and site conditions (hard or soft ground surface). Surfaces adjacent to all modeled roadways were assumed to have a "hard site" to predict worst-case, conservative noise levels. A hard site, such as pavement, is highly reflective and does not attenuate noise as quickly as grass or other soft sites. Possible reductions in noise levels due to intervening topography and buildings were not accounted for in this analysis. E4—E�% 149 V1. IMPACT ANALYSIS A. Noise Impacts This impact discussion analyzes the potential for project construction noise and operational noise to cause an exposure of person to or generation of noise levels in excess of established City of Rancho Cucamonga noise standards related to construction noise and operational related noise impacts caused by the proposed project. 1. Construction Noise Construction noise is considered a short-term impact and would be considered significant if construction activities are undertaken outside the allowable times as described by the City's Municipal Ordinance Section 17.66.050. Existing single-family detached residential dwelling units near the project site may be affected by short-term noise impacts associated with the transport of workers, the movement of construction materials to and from the project site, ground clearing, excavation, grading, and building activities. As described by the City's Municipal Ordinance Section 17.66, construction noise is considered a short-term impact and would be considered significant if construction activities are undertaken outside the allowable times or if they exceed 65 dBA at adjacent residential, school, church or similar types of land uses; or if they exceed 70 dBA at any adjacent commercial or industrial land uses. Project generated construction noise will vary depending on the construction process, type of equipment involved, location of the construction site with respect to sensitive receptors, the schedule proposed to carry out each task (e.g,, hours and days of the week) and the duration of the construction work. Site grading is expected to produce the highest sustained construction noise levels. Typical noise sources and noise levels associated with the site grading phase of construction are shown in Table 6. The Sounc[PLAN noise model was utilized to predict a likely worst-case grading noise scenario and a likely worst-case demotion scenario. Equipment expected to be utilized during grading assumes the use of a dozer, an excavator, and a water truck. Typical noise sources and noise levels associated with construction are shown in Table 7. Equipment was placed on the site in the 5oundPLAN mbdei in a realistic fashion and not assumed to all be operating on the property line. Typical operating cycles for these types of construction equipment may involve one or two minutes of full power operation followed by three to four minutes at lower power settings. It is assumed that all equipment has been equipped with properly operating mufflers. SoundPLAN construction noise input and output is included in Appendix Q. As shown on Figures 5 and 6, demolition activities may reach up to 59.7 dBA Leq at the single-family detached residential dwelling units east of the project site and is not likely to exceed the City's standard of 65 dBA Leg. All other phases are expected to be less noisy than the demolition phase and therefore, are also unlikely to exceed the City's 25 E4—E5 Pg 150 standard. Project construction shall also comply with the City's allowed hours for construction activities and implement the mitigation measures listed in Section VII of this report to minimize construction noise. Noise reduction measures are a provided in Section VII to minimize construction noise impacts. The impact is considered less than significant. 3. Traffic Noise_ Impacts to the Proposed Project The proposed project is adjacent to North Victoria Windrows Loop which has a General Plan classification of Modified Collector. Neither the City of Rancho Cucamonga nor the County of San Bernardino provide buildout traffic volume data for this roadway. The County of Riverside General Plan Circulation Element (2003) assigns 10,400 average daily traffic volumes at Level of Service C for a Collector. Utilizing County of Riverside Department of Hygiene Guidelines for Determining Traffic Noise Impacts (2004), and the FHWA noise model it was determined that the future 65 CNEL noise contour associated with North Victoria Windrows Loop does not reach any existing or proposed school buildings or existing or proposed outdoor use areas (playgrounds). School uses are considered to be acceptable in areas where the noise level reaches 70 CNEL. The FHWA calculation worksheet is included in this report as Appendix E. Future traffic noise impacts to the proposed project would be less than significant. S. Operational Noise Impacts to Sensitive Receptors As shown on Figure 5, peak hour operational noise levels are expected to range between 45.5 to 57.4 dBA Leq at nearby sensitive receptors and will not exceed the City's daytime base noise level of 65 dBA. Basic Noise Levels are shown in Table S. Project operations are also unlikely to exceed any of the Ln standards listed in 17.66.050 C (1) of the Municipal Code. Further, when compared to existing measured ambient noise levels, the proposed project is not expected to result in a temporary or permanent substantial increase in noise levels due to project operation. Existing measured noise levels in the project vicinity range between 48.3 dBA Leq and 63.1 dBA Leq and proposed project peak hour operations are expected to range between 45.5 and 57.4 dBA Leq Project operational noise would be less than significant. B. Vibration Impacts This impact discussion analyzes the potential for the proposed project to cause an exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. Vibration levels in the project area may be influenced by construction. A vibration impact would generally be considered significant if it involves any construction -related or operations -related impacts in excess of 0.2+ inches per second (in/sec) PPV. 1. Construction Vibration E4-EfPg 151 There are several types of construction equipment that can cause vibration levels high enough to annoy persons in the vicinity and/or result in architectural or structural damage to nearby structures and improvements. For example, a vibratory roller could generate up to 0.21 PPV at a distance of 25 feet; and operation of a large bulldozer (0.089 PPV) at a distance of 25 feet (two of the most vibratory pieces of construction equipment). Groundborne vibration at sensitive receptors associated with this equipment would drop off as the equipment moves away. For example, as the vibratory roller moves further than 100 feet from the sensitive receptors, the vibration associated with it would drop below 0.0026 PPV. It should be noted that these vibration levels are reference levels and may vary slightly depending upon soil type and specific usage of each piece of equipment. Annoyance to Persons The primary effect of perceptible vibration is often a concern. However, secondary effects, such as the rattling of a china cabinet, can also occur, even when vibration levels are well below perception. Any effect (primary perceptible vibration, secondary effects, or a combination of the two) can lead to annoyance. The degree to which a person is annoyed depends on the activity in which they are participating at the time of the disturbance. For example, someone sleeping or reading will be more sensitive than someone who is running on a treadmill. Reoccurring primary and secondary vibration effects often lead people to believe that the vibration is damaging their home, although vibration levels are well below minimum thresholds for damage potential. As shown in Table 2, vibration can be annoying to people in buildings at a peak particle velocity (PPV) of 0.20. Project construction activities within 100 feet of nearby sensitive receptors may result in groundborne vibration that is annoying. Annoyance is expected to be short-term, occurring only during site preparation. Mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts related to annoyance are presented in Section VII of this report. Architectural Damage Vibration generated by construction activity has the potential to damage structures. This damage could be structural damage, such as cracking of floor slabs, foundations, columns, beams, or wells, or cosmetic architectural damage, such as cracked plaster, stucco, or tile. Table 2 identifies a PPV level of 0.2 as the threshold at which there is a "risk" for architectural damage and levels between 0.4 and 0.6 as the threshold where architectural damage is likely. A mitigation measure requiring that the use of heavy equipment or vibratory rollers and soil compressors within 25 feet of existing structures be limited to the greatest degree possible is included in Section VII of this report. Project generated vibration impacts would be less than significant with mitigation measures implemented. E4—E5Vg15Z Table 6 Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels' Type of Equipment Range of Maximum Sound Levels Measured (dBA at 50 feet) Suggested Maximum Sound Levels for Analysis (dBA at 50 feet) Rock Drills 83-99 96 Jack Hammers 75-85 82 Pneumatic Tools 78-88 85 Pumps 74-84 80 Dozers 77-90 85 Scrappers 83-91 87 Haul Trucks 83-94 88 Cranes 79-86 82 Portable Generators 71-87 80 Rollers 75-82 80 Tractors 77-82 80 Front -End Loaders 77-90 86 Hydraulic Excavators 81-90 86 Graders 79-89 86 Air Compressors 76-89 86 Trucks 81-87 86 2 Source: Bolt, Beranek & Newman; Noise Control for Buildings and Manufacturing Plants, 1987. M—OPg 153 20 E4 -E5 Pg 154 30 M -ES Pg 155 31 E4 -E5 Pg 156 VII. MEASURES TO REDUCE IMPACTS A. Construction Mitigation Measures In addition to adherence to the County of Riverside and City of Rancho Cucamonga's policies found in the Municipal Code limiting the construction hours of operation, the following measures are recommended to reduce construction noise and vibrations, emanating from the proposed project: 1. During all project site excavation and grading on-site, construction contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers, consistent with manufacturer standards. 2. The contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from the noise sensitive receptors nearest the project site. 3. Equipment shall be shut off and not left to idle when not in use. 4. The contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction -related noise/vibration sources and sensitive receptors nearest the project site during all project construction. 5. Jackhammers, pneumatic equipment and all other portable stationary noise sources shall be shielded and noise shall be directed away from sensitive receptors. 6. The contractor shall limit the use of heavy equipment or vibratory rollers and soil compressors within 25 feet of existing structures to the greatest degree possible. E4—EVPg 157 Vlil. REFERENCES Bolt, Beranek & Newman 1987 Noise Control for Buildings and Manufacturing Plants. California Department of Transportation 2002 Transportation Related Earthborne Vibrations (Caltrans Experiences), Technical Advisory, Vibration TAV-0201-119601. February 20. 2013 Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol Environmental Protection Agency 1974 "Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health And Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety," EPA/ONAC 550/9-74-004, March, 1974. Harris, Cyril M. 1991 Handbook of Acoustical Measurement and Noise Controt. Acoustical Society of America. Woodbury, N.Y. Kunzman Associates, Inc. 2018 Traffic Exemption Letter for St. Mary's Montessori School. March Office of Planning and Research 2003 State of California General Plan Guidelines Rancho Cucamonga, City of 2018 Municipal Code. 2010 General Plan. Riverside, County of 2003 General Plan. Riverside, County Department of Public Health 2004 Requirements for Determining and Mitigating Traffic Noise Impacts to Residential Structures, Steven Hinde, REBS, CIH, Senior Industrial Hygienist, January 15. U.S. Department of Transportation. 2006 FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model User's Guide. January. E4—E5 Vg 158 APPENDICES Appendix A — List of Acronyms Appendix B — Definitions of Acoustical Terms Appendix C — Noise Monitoring Field Worksheets Appendix D — SoundPiAN Input and Output Appendix E — FHWA Future Traffic Noise Worksheet E4—E5 Pg 159 APPENDIX A List of Acronyms E4—E§Rycjl 60 Term Definition ADT Average Daily Traffic ANSI American National Standard Institute CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level D/E/N Day / Evening / Night dB Decibel dBA or dB(A) Decibel "A -Weighted" dBA/DD Decibel per Double Distance dBA Leq Average Noise Level over a Period of Time EPA Environmental Protection Agency FHWA Federal Highway Administration LczrLos,L5o,L90 A -weighted Noise Levels at 2 percent, 8 percent, 50 percent, and 90 percent, respectively, of the time period Ldn Day -Night Average Noise Level LegtYl Equivalent Noise Level for "'x" period of time Leq Equivalent Noise Level Lmac Maximum Level of Noise (measured using a sound level meter) Lmin Minimum Level of Noise (measured using a sound level meter) LOS C Level of Service C OPR California Governor's Office of Planning and Research PPV Peak Particle Velocities RCNM Road Construction Noise Model REMEL Reference Energy Mean Emission Level RMS Root Mean Square E4—tT6161 APPENDIX B Definitions of Acoustical Terms E4-E990gh U Term Definition Decibel, dB A logarithmic unit of noise level measurement that relates the energy of a noise source to that of a constant reference level; the number of decibels is 10 times the logarithm (to the base 10) of this ratio. Frequency, In a function periodic in time, the number of times that the quantity repeats Hertz itself in one second (i.e., the number of cycles per second). A -Weighted The sound level obtained by use of A -weighting. The A -weighting filter de - Sound Level, emphasizes the very low and very high frequency components of the sound dBA in a manner similar to the frequency response of the human ear. Root Mean A measure of the magnitude of a varying noise source quantity. The name Square (RMS) derives from the calculation of the square root of the mean of the squares of the values. It can be calculated from either a series of Ione values or a continuous varying function. Fast/Slow The fast and slow meter responses are different settings on a sound level Meter meter. The fast response setting takes a measurement every 100 Response milliseconds, while a slow setting takes one every second. Loz, Los, Lso, L90 The A -weighted noise levels that are equaled or exceeded by a fluctuating sound level, 2 percent, 8 percent, 50 percent, and 90 percent of a stated time period, respectively. Equivalent A level of steady state sound that in a stated time period, and a stated Continuous location, has the same A -weighted sound energy as the time -varying sound. Noise Level, Leq Lmaa, Lmin L,,, is the RMS (root mean squared) maximum level of a noise source or environment measured on a sound level meter, during a designated time interval, using fast meter response. Lm.n is the minimum level. Ambient Noise The all-encompassing noise environment associated with a given Level environment, at a specified time, usually a composite of sound from many sources, at many directions, near and far, in which usually no particular sound is dominant. Offensive/ The noise that intrudes over and above the existing ambient noise at a given Offending/ location. The relative intrusiveness of sound depends on its amplitude, Intrusive Noise duration, frequency, and time of occurrence, and tonal information content as well as the prevailing ambient noise level. E4-15'6163 APPENDIX C Noise Monitoring Field Worksheets E4-E��a154 EXHIBITP Fortation Planning I Parking I Noise/Vibration I Expert Witness I Global Climate Change I Health Risk Assessment M—ES Pg165 ST. MARY'S MONTESSORI SCHOOL FOCUSED TRAFFIC ANALYSIS (REVISED) July S, 2018 Prepared by. Carf Ballard, LEED GA o William Kunzman, P.E. 6��,of ESSio �S A. KU 9! Q 7 M— Ton KUNZMAN ASSOC f ATES, INC. 1111 Town & Country Road, Suite 34 ■ Orange, California 92868 5005 La Mart Driver Suite 201 ■ Riverside, Cal'ifornia 92507 (714) 973-8383 n www.kainc,us JN 7398b E4—E5 Pg166 TABLE OF CONTENTS :414 214011 KFA 41 U Airk'Al F.11 UU A. Project Description _-----...... ............ ................................................................. | 1. Lmxmt�onand Access —........................................................................................... i Z. Project DeveVupment.... ...... —_.~~~.~—~~.~..~.~~~................... .... | 3. PrciectTrip Generation .... --..—................................................................... ...... | 4. Phasing and ._.—.~..~~~.~.~..------'_'--'_-| B. r�xbdn8Traffic Condfthons----....................................... ........ __—.......... ...... U C. Trff ic|m pact --_---~........... ............................................................................. U [. Nl|doallonMeasumes—................ ...................... .----.............................. ........... U 1. INTRODUCTWAII ........................... ............ ............................................................. ~~~~..I A. PuvpomeandObjectives ................................... ...................... --'...... __—_........... 2 8- Project Qes(;TiptWn................ .................. .......... ......................................................... l I. Hi3tpryofthis Location ......... ............. —...... .......... `~~~`~^~~~~^'~^~'1 %. Hpu/5 of Operation .......................... —__—........... .... ........................... ............ % 3. Af tcrConstmct|000f the New Build ing.................................................. '....... .._3 *. Number qfChildren and Staff .......... .................................................................... 3 S. 74�Lachecsand Administrative Staff ...................................................................... 6. Proposed New Building— __~_~~~—~~~~~~,~~_................. ____4 7. New bw|ld1ngand <hsExisting Building ......................................... 4 8, StaffArdvaIand DepartunwPkmnafter the NevvConst ruction ............... ............... S 9. Growth Plan —............................................. ..... ............................................... 5 10, ConstractioonPlan .......... ........................................................... ---........... —..... 6 13' Tr d|tiorm[ and Elementary vs. MontmsmorLPre-Kindergarten and ��e�n�n�ary,,.,..-'.'-...................................... ......... —............ .............. � [ 5tmdyAirwm.............................................. .................................. .... --..... ....... —'_7 ||. METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................... 20 A- idnntif icatiomofStodVArea ............ ...................... —~—~~~.~....~.~~~~~~.-1O 5. 1ntersca[on Analys|sMet4odo|o@y--_—.......................................................... ........ 10 C. Perform ante Standards .............. ----......................................................... ............ t1 D. Threaholds ofS|gn|f icance----............................................................................... 11 A` Exis ting Mu*dw amSWem......... ___ -~~~... ........... ........ ............. _.................... 12 B. Existing Volumes ............................................................................ _......................... JL2 C. Existing |nter�,ecfionDmIaVmndi Level mfService ................................... _................... %2 0' City o{Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Circulation Element ............. -~................ _13 E. Truck Routes -~..~~.~~~~~—'—........ ................. .... ....... ___ ............. ......... %3 F� Tf a nsitService ................... ... ............ .......... ................... ................ ...................... —13 A- Trip Gcreotiom-.......... ....................... .... ..... ............................................................ 25 B. Trip Qistdbuirpgn.................................... --~~~~~~~~.~—....-~.~~~~--'~.25 E4—E5 Pg 167 [ Trip Assignment .................. .................. .............. ............ 25 C\ ?rip Contribution Test .~................. ............ 25 V. FUTURE CONDITIONS ........................................................................................................ 34 A. Method ofProjection .................................................. -........ -'- .......................... 34 1. Background Growth ...................................... ____ ...... 34 3. Other Development -.......................... --.--.-'-.................................. 34 3. Build -out Development ......... ...................... -.......... -'-------..--.-34 8. Future Volumes ... ~................................................. ..... .... ......... -_-.--..~-'3S 1 Existing Plus Project ............................................................ ___ ................. _.35 I Opening Year (DJ19)Without Project ............ --................ --_- .............. 35 I Opening Year (ZO19)With Project ............ ......... .... -....... .............. -_...... 3S 4. Horizon Year (2D4O)Without Project ....................... ...... ................... ...... ......... 3S 5. Horizon Year (2U4U)With Project ..~......~..~..'-~_ C. Future Levels of Service ..................................................................... ........ ................. 3G I. Existing Plus Project ............................................................................................. 36 2. Opening Year (2O19) Without Project.. -._.---.~.-..~-__-.--3G 3 Opening Year (IU19) With Project ............ ...................................... .......... ....... 36 4 Horizon Year QO40)Without Project -----....................... S Horizon Year (2O40)Without Project ......... ..... ____ .... ................................... 37 D, Parking Requirements ........... ..................... ... ...................................... ................. 37 A. Site Accmsu--.'-.....~.~........................... ....... ------.... .............. ........ .... G@ B. Off -Site Mitigation Measures ............ .......................... --__'-................................. G@ APPENDICES Appendix A Glossary of Transportation Terms Appendix B Scoping Agreement Appendix C-inteo*ctbmTum|ng Movement Count Worksheets AppmndixD-FutumwGrovvthIncnementCaku|etionVVmrkshcet AppmndixE- intersection Delay and Level mfService Worksheets Appendix F - City of Rancho Cucamonga Parking Code Requirement� E4—E 5 Pg 168 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Existing Intersection Delay and Level of Service............................................................14 Table 2. Project Trip Generation................................................................................................. 27 Table 3. Other Development Trip Generation............................................................................. 38 Table 4. Existing Plus Project Intersection Delay and Levels of Service......................................39 Table 5. Opening Year (2019) Without Project Intersection Delay and Levels of Service ........... 40 Table 6. Opening Year (2019) With Project Intersection Delay and Levels of Service ................41 Table 7. Horizon Year (2040) Without Project Intersection Delay and Levels of Service ............ 42 Table 8. Horizon Year (2040) With Project Intersection Delay and Levels of Service.................43 Table 9. Parking Space Requirements......................................................................................... 44 Table 10. Summary of Intersection Delay and Levels of Service...................................................64 E4 --E5 Pg 169 LIST OF F1 GURES Figure1. Project Location Map ...... ................................. .................... -..... ........................... -.8 Figure2. Site Plan .......................................................... -................................ ^^-___ ^^~-.'��'9 Figure 3. Existing Through Travel Lanes and Intersection Controls .............................................. l5 Figure 4. Existing Average Daily Traffic Volumes ............... ...... ......................... -.^--......... %6 Figure 5. Existing Morning Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes ...... ......... ...... 17 Figure 6. Existing Evening Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes ....................... %O Figure 7. City ofRancho Cucamonga General Plan Circulation Plan .................................. ...... -lS Figure 8. City ofRancho Cucamonga General Plan Roadway Cross -Sections ............................... 2U Figure 9. City of Rancho Cucamonga Truck Routes ... ........................... ................ .................... 21 Figure 10. Existing Transit Routes ...................................... ................... ...................... ................. 22 Figure11. Existing Pedestrian Fad|0Ucs--................... ............................................................... 23 Figure12. City of Rancho Cucamonga Bicycle Plan ....................... ................................... ............ 24 Figure 13. Project Outbound Trip Distribution ......................... .... -............................................... 28 Figure 14. Project Inbound Trip Distribution .......... ......................... ..................... ............... 29 Figure 15. Project Average Daily Traffic Volumes ...................... -_-................. .................... 3O Figure 16. Project Morning Peak Hour 1:ntersection Turning Movement Volumes........ ......... ...... 31 Figure 17. Project Evening Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes ...... ............ 32 Figure 18. Project Trip Contribution Vo?unmes............................... ........... .................................... 33 Figure 19. Other Development Trip Distribution -TrafficAnalysis Zone 1.-..^-...................... 45 Figure 20. Other Development Trip Distribution - Traffic Analysis Zone ]....... ..-.^_................ 4G Figure21. Existing Plus Project Average Daily Traffic Volumes ........................ ... .... ._-..-._,47 Figure 22. Existing Plus Project Morning Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes -48 Figure 23. Existing Plus Project Evening Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes ....49 Figure 24. Opening Year (2U19)Without Project Average Daily Traffic Volumes ............ -..^.,5O Figure 25. Opening Year (2O19) Without Project Morning Peak Hour Intersection Turning Figure 26. Opening Year (2019) Without Project Evening Peak Hour Intersection Tummin8 MovementVolumes ................................... ................................................................... SJ Figure 27, Opening Year (2Ol9)With Project Average Daily Traffic Volumes ........ ...... ....... ......... S3 Figure 28. Opening Year (2019) With Project Morning Peak Hour Intersection Turning MovementVolumes ........ ...-.................................................................... ---�-..S4 Figure 29. Opening Year (2019) With Project Evening Peak Hour Intersection Turning MovementVolumes ................................................................ ......................... --..-5S Figure 30. Horizon Year (2040) Without Project Average Daily Traffic Volumes ............. � ....... 56 Figure 31. Horizon Year (2040) Without Project Morning Peak Hour Intersection Turning MovementVolumes .......................................... ..................................................... -... S7 Figure 32. Horizon Year (l04O)Without Project Evening Peak Hour Intersection Turning MovementVolumes ............ ......................................................................................... 58 Figu,e33. Horizon Year (2O40)With Project Average Daily Traffic Volumes ................................. S9 Figure 34, Horizon Year (2040)With Project Morning Peak Hour Intersection Turning Figure35. Horizon Year (2040) With Project Evening Peak Hour Intersection Turning MovementVolumes .................................................................. .................................. G1 Figunc36. On -Site Circulation Patterns ..................... ___ .............................................................. G2 E4 -E5 Pg170 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to provide an assessment of the traffic impacts resulting from the development of the proposed St. Mary's Montessori School project and to identify the traffic mitigation measures necessary to maintain the established Level of Service standard for the elements of the impacted roadway system. The traffic issues related to the proposed land use and development have been evaluated in the context of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The City of Rancho Cucamonga is the lead agency responsible for preparation of the focused traffic analysis, in accordance with California Environmental Quality Act authorizing legislation. This report analyzes traffic impacts for the anticipated opening date with occupancy of the development in Opening Year (2019), at which time it will be generating trips at its full potential. This report also analyzes potential project traffic impacts for Horizon Year (2040) traffic conditions. Although this is a technical report, every effort has been made to write the report clearly and concisely. To assist the reader with those terms unique to transportation engineering, a glossary of terms is provided in Appendix A. A. Project Description 1. Location and Access The project site (5880 North Victoria Windrows Loop) is located north of North Victoria Windrows Loop between Victoria Park Lane and Plum Way in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The project site is proposed to provide direct access to North Victoria Windrows Loop. 2. Proiect Development The project site is currently occupied by a 100 student day care center. The project site is proposed to be developed with a 310 student Montessori school (increase of 210 students from the existing school). 3. Project Trip Generation The proposed project is forecast to generate approximately 1,268 daily trips, 242 trips of which will occur during the morning peak hour and 245 trips of which will occur during the evening peak hour. 4. Phasing and Timing The project is proposed to be constructed in one phase. For the purposes of this analysis, the project will be generating trips at its full potential in Opening Year (2019). Existing Plus Project will exemplify the existing traffic conditions with the entire site built -out. E4—E5 Pg171 B. Existing Traffic Conditions For Existing traffic conditions, the study intersections are curr8Qly operating within acceptable Levels of Service during the peak hours. C. Traffic Impacts For Existing Plus Project traffic conditions, the study intersections are projected to operate within acceptable Levels of Service during the peak hours For Opening Year (2019) Without Project traffic conditions, the study intersections are projected to operate within acceptable Levels of Service during the peak hours. For Openinp, Year (2019) With Project traffic conditions, the study intersections are projected to operate within acceptable Levels of Service during the peak hours, For Horizon Year (2040) Without Project traffic conditions, the study intersections are projected to operate within acceptable Levels of Service during the peak hours. For Horizon Year (20401 With Proiect traffic conditions, the study intersections are projected to operate within acceptable Levels of Service during the peak hours. D. Mitigation Measures No off-site roadway improvements were identified to eliminate any anticipated roadway operational deficiencies for which the project contributes a significant impact throughout the study area. As mitigation for any potential traffic impacts, the proposed project shall contribute through the City of Rancho Cucamonga Development Impact Fee (DIF) program as well as the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority Development Mitigation Nexus Study (2016). E_ On- Site/Access Recommendations Site-specific circulation and access recommendations are depicted on Figure 35. On-site traffic signing and striping should be implemented in conjunction with detailed construction plans for the project. On-site traffic control plans shall comply with the California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (2014). The proposed project is projected to provide sufficient off-street parking based upon the City of Rancho Cucamonga Parking code requirements. Sight distance at project access driveways should comply with applicable City of Rancho Cucamonga/California Department of Transportation sight distance standards. The final E4 --E5 Pg172 grading, landscaping, and street improvement plans should demonstrate that sight distance standards are met. As is the case for any roadway design, the City of Rancho Cucamonga should periodically review traffic operations in the vicinity of the project once the project is constructed to assure that the traffic operations are satisfactory. E4—E5Pg173 I. INTRODUCTION This section discusses the project location and proposed development and study area- Figure 1 shows the project location map and Figure 2 illustrates the project site plan. A. Purpose and Objectives The purpose of this focused traffic analysis is to provide an assessment of the traffic impacts resulting from the development of the proposed St. Mary's Montessori School project and to identify the traffic mitigation measures necessary to maintain the established Level of Service standard for the elements of the impacted roadway system. The traffic issues related to the proposed land use and development have been evaluated in the context of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The City of Rancho Cucamonga is the lead agency responsible for preparation of the focused traffic analysis, in accordance with California Environmental Quality Act authorizing legislation. This report analyzes traffic impacts for the anticipated opening date with occupancy of the development in Opening Year (2019), at which time it will be generating trips at its full potential. This report also analyzes potential project traffic impacts for Horizon Year (2040) traffic conditions. The following analysis years are considered in this report: M Existing (2018) Traffic Conditions ■ Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions' 111 Opening Year (2019) Without and With Project Traffic Conditions ■ Horizon Year (2040) Without and With Project Traffic Conditions B. Proiect_ Description The following information has been provided by St. Mary's Montessori School; History of this Location The property was previously operated as the La Petite Academy, a corporate pre- school program at this location since 1988 with a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) obtained by the City of Rancho Cucamonga to have 145 pre-school children and an occupancy certificate for 153 people. Since 1990 till 2005, the Academy operated at full capacity. Since 2007, the Academy declined in its enrollment and was completely shut down in May 2012. From May 2012 until August 2012, the property was broken into several times and the playground structures and many others were stolen and the building was in a very bad shape. Under the City ordinance that allows a same type of business to step into an existing CUP that is less than 6 months old, a business could have been established with minimum upgrades to the property and continue 1 The existing plus project conditions has been analyzed to comply with the Sunnyvale West Nc-ighborhood Association Y. City of Sunnyvale CEQA court case. This scenario assumes the full development of the proposed project and full absorption of the proposed project trips on the circulation system at the present tame. E4—E5 Pg174 the similar operation. However, it was decided to upgrade the building with a brand new fire sprinkler system, fire alarm system, play structures, new cabinets and toilets, build a breakroom for staff, new HVAC system with new ductwork, new ceiling and new flooring, ADA upgrades including a ramp from the street and upgrades to electrical and plumbing to name a few. When a new CUP was applied for, it included 100 children and 15 staff as the Montessori school was not aware that the existing parking supply could accommodate up to 145 children and 12 staff. In addition, the Montessorl school wanted to build a new building in about 4 years when it reached the full capacity. Therefore, only 100 students and 15 staff members were included in the new November 2012 CUP. 2. Hours of Operation Currently, the CUP allows the property to have hours of operation from 6:00 AM to 7:30 PM. The Montessori school hours of operation are from 6:30 AM to 6:30 PM, Monday to Friday. Opening staff and closing staff will be on-site from approximately 15 minutes before opening and 15 minutes after closing. This includes before and after school care for children. The Montessori school has several student arrivals and departure times to make sure not all the children arrive and leave at the same time. The Montessorl school program runs Monday through Friday from 8:30 AM to 12:45 PM with the extended Montessori program running until 3:30 PM. The majority of children will arrive between the hours of 6:30 AM to 8:30 AM and approximately 35% of the children will leave the school between the hours of 12:45 PM and 2:00 PM, approximately 42% of the children will leave the school between 3:30 PM and 5:00 PM, the remainder of the children will leave the school between 5:00 PM and 6:30 PM. Daily cleaning staff (approximately 4 to 5 staff) will arrive around 6:30 PM and will leave around 7:30 PM to 8:00 PM, Monday through Thursday, and on Saturday will arrive around 10:00 AM and leave around 5:00 PM after a detailed clean-up. Once a year, the Montessori school will host open houses split into 4 to 6 separate days between 2 weeks from 5:00 PM to 6:30 PM for parents from different classrooms (one classroom per day) to attend this event on a designated day and time and discuss their children's work and observe the Montessori school environment. For example, classroom 1 will hold its open house on Monday, classroom 2 will hold their open house on Tuesday, etc. The Montessori school will hold several vacant spots for advancing children who are moving up, such as when a child reached 12 months they will have to be moved from the infant program to the toddler program. This means a child with a birthday falling on February 1st will have a spot in the toddler program since January of that year to be accommodated. 2 E4—E5 Pg175 After Construction of the New Building For the proposed new CUP, the Montessori school is hoping to keep the hours of operation from 6:00 AM to 7:30 PM consistent with the current CUP hours of operation. No change in school program hours of operation are proposed from the current 6:30 AM to 6:30 PM hours of operation. 4. Number of Children and Staff The current building functions under a certificate of occupancy issued by the City of Rancho Cucamonga (dated March 7, 2013), for a total classroom occupancy 4f 148 students and 3 office staff. The CUP issued on November 5, 2012 included 100 students and 15 teachers/administrative staff. The building includes six classrooms, a break room for staff, six restrooms, a kitchen, school office, reception entry area, janitorial room, and two storage rooms. Currently, the school has an infant program (for children from 6 weeks through 12 months), a Montessori toddler program (for children from 12 months to 24 months), and a Montessori early learner program (for children from 24 months through 36 months). All three of these classroom programs are offered for 2 days a week, 3 days a week, and 5 days a week slots. The 2 days per week children come to school on Tuesday and Thursday. The 3 days per week students come to school on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, The 5 days per week students come to school Monday through Friday. Currently, this program has 3 classrooms and a total of 52 children registered in this program out of which due to the 2 days, 3 days, and 5 days program, the school has 40 children attend school on a daily basis. The Montessori program (ages 3 years to 5 years) has children who attend Monday through Friday, 5 days a week. Currently, this program has 36 children registered and they attend school on a daily basis except for approximately 5 students who are on vacation or sick for the day. The Montessori pre -kindergarten and kindergarten Program (ages 5 years through kindergarten) children attend Monday through Friday, 5 days a week. Currently, this program has 24 children registered and they attend school on a daily basis except fat approximately 3 students who are on vacation or sick for the day. 5. Teachers and Administrative Staff Currently, the Montessori school has 15 teachers, 3 administrative staff, a cook, and a receptionist. The administrative staff operates from the Educational Systems, Inc. corporate office located at 9640 Center Avenue, Suite 120, Rancho Cucamonga CA 91730. Opening —3 staff members from 6:15 AM to 8:00 AM Daily —13 teachers/teacher aides/receptionist/cook from 8:00 AM to 4:40 PM Closing — 5 to 8 staff members from 4:00 PM to 6:30 PM E4—E5 Pg 176 6. Proposed New Building After completion of the new building construction, the Montessori school will move all the children from the current building to the new building. The new building will consist of 8 classrooms (2 more classrooms than the current building). The Montessori school will transfer all the children and the staff members from the current building to the new building as well as enroll new children for the additional classrooms (classroom #7 and #8). This means that the new building will have total of 183 to 190 children (including the children and staff from the current building), as well as 17 to 22 pre-school and administrative staff, plus 2 to 5 elementary staff members at any given time to reach the full capacity in about 10 years. 7. New Building and the Existing Building a. Infant Program (for children from 6 weeks through 12 months) Daycare/ Preschool This classroom program will be offered for 2 days, 3 days, and 5 days a week slots. The 2 days per week children will attend school on Tuesday and Thursday. The 3 days per week students will attend school on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. The 5 days per week students will attend school Monday through Friday. This classroom program will occupy classroom #8 in the new building and will be occupied by a maximum of 9 students with 3 teachers. b. Montessori Toddler Program (for children 12 months to 24 month) Daycare/Preschool This classroom program will be offered for 2 days, 3 days, and 5 days a week slots. The 2 days per week children will attend school on Tuesday and Thursday. The 3 days per week students will attend school on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. The 5 days per week students will attend school Monday through Friday. This classroom program will occupy the classroom #7 in the new building and will be occupied by a maximum of 16 students with 4 teachers. C. Montessori Early Learner Program (24 months through 36 months) Daycare/ Preschool This classroom program will be offered for 2 days, 3 days, and 5 days a week slots. The 2 days per week children will attend school on Tuesday and Thursday. The 3 days per week students will attend school on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. The 5 days per week students will attend school Monday through Friday. This classroom program will occupy the classroom #6 in the new building and will be occupied by a maximum of 26 students with 3 teachers. 4 E4—E5 Pg177 d. Our Montessori (ages 3 years to 5 or 5 and half years) Daycare/Preschool This classroom program has children who only attend school on Monday through Friday, 5 days per week. This classroom program will occupy classrooms #'s 1, 2, 3, and 4 in the new building and will have a maximum of 24 children in each classroom with 1 teacher per classroom, for a total of 96 children and 4 teachers and 2 floating assistants in this classroom program. Our Montessori Pre -kindergarten through Grade 3 Elementary Program (ages 5 or 5 1/2 years pre1indergarten through elementary grades 1, 2, and 3) This classroom program has children who attend school on Monday through Friday, 5 days per week. This classroom program will occupy classroom #5 in the new building that will have a maximum of 36 children with 2 teachers. Classrooms 9, 10, 11, 12 in the existing building after the remodel is completed will also occupy by Montessori pre -kindergarten through grade 3 Elementary program (ages 5 or 5 1/2 years prekindergarten through elementary grades 1, 2, and 3) The school accrediting body will determine the total capacity of these classrooms. The Montessori school is expecting it to be licensed to hold 24 to 30 children for each of the classrooms and 4 teachers for the 4 classrooms. These students and teachers are counted in the elementary parking ratio. 8. Staff Arrival and Departure Plan after the New Construction Opening . 7 to 9 staff members from 6.15 AM to 8:00 AM Daily — 22 teachers/teacher aides/receptionist/cook from 8:00 AM to 4:00 PM Closing —12 to 16 staff members from 4.00 PM to 6:30 PM 9. Growth Plan The proposed total capacities mentioned below may never come to materialize. The Montessori school took 4 and 1/2 years to reach 100 children and it may require over 10 years or more to completely fill up this school if it ever happens. From past experience, the school growth projections for the next ten years are listed below: Within the first 12 months of opening the new building, reach 125 children Within the next 36 months, reach 155 children Within the next 24 months, reach 170 children Within the next 24 months, reach 200 children Within the next 24 months, reach 230 children The Montessori elementary school program growth with be at a very slow pace as most of the students leave after 5 to 6 years to attend pre -kindergarten in public schools which are free of charge to the parents. However, it is important to have a private elementary school program as an option for families. For the Montessori pre - 5 E4 --E5 Pg 178 school programs, economic conditions play a big part in its growth (i.e., if the economic conditions are down and one parent loses their job first thing they do is pull children out of the pre-school to cut the families expense). 10. Construction Plan During the future construction, the current building will function as a Montessori school. After the new building is constructed and the CUP and Certificate of Occupancy are issued, the children will be moved from the current building to the new building subject to obtaining a pre-school license from the Department of Social Service. After we moved all the children and staff to the new building we will remodel the existing building to house 4 more classrooms and a conference room/training and orientation center for our own staff. 11. Traditional Pre -Kindergarten and Elementary, vs. Montessori Pre -Kindergarten and Elementary In traditional public elementary schools, children who turn 5 years old from September 2nd through December 2nd of any given year are considered pre- kindergarten or transitional kindergarten. It is the first phase of a two-year kindergarten program that uses an age-appropriate curriculum aligned to the Common Core State Standards. Also, children who are turning 5 years during the September 2nd through December 2nd period of the same year can attend the summer school program before they turn 5 years old. Transitional kindergarten (pre- kindergarten) in a public school are taught by one or two teachers in a classroom of up to 30 students. In the same program, the students learn to recognize numbers from 1 through 10, learn to recognize the alphabet and learn to hold a pencil and draw pictures and color them, etc. In the Montessori School program, students are considered to be pre -kindergarten when they turn 5 years old in any given year, they can recognize and write numbers up to 10 and the entire alphabet. It is the first phase of a two-year kindergarten program that exceeds the age-appropriate curriculum set by the State Standards. The Montessori pre -kindergarten student, by the time they turn 5 years old will learn numbers up to 100, the Montessori components, and the approach in this age group excels with each year in the areas of math, language, sensorial, exercises of practical life, geography, botany, and cultural activities. The two years of pre -kindergarten and kindergarten in the Montessori elementary program will prepare a child for elementary grades 1, 2 and 3. In the public elementary school, children who turn 6 years old from September 2nd through December 2nd of any given year or children who have spent one year in transitional kindergarten are considered as kindergarten. Once they complete kindergarten in the elementary school system, the student will move to grade one within the elementary school program. This program is run in a class of 30 students with one or two teachers. The students learn who to count to 100, write the entire alphabet, draw pictures, and paint within the lines of a drawing. 6 E4—E5 Pg179 in the Montessori kindergarten program, students who reach the age of 6 years old any time during a calendar year, and the students who are 5 years old that have completed our pre -kindergarten program can be advanced to the kindergarten program. In kindergarten, the student will work with numbers up to 1,000, simple multiplication, simple addition, simple subtraction, and including details of the areas below. C. Study, Area Local street access is provided by Victoria Park Lane, North Victoria Windrose Loop, Base Line Road, and Day Creek Boulevard. Regional access to the project site is provided by the I- 15 Freeway, which is located approximately 1.0 miles to the east, and the 1-210 Freeway, which is located approximately 0.5 miles to the north. Based on the City -approved scoping agreement, the study area consists of the following intersections (see Appendix B): # Study Intersection Jurisdiction 1 Day Creek Boulevard (NS) at Victoria Park Lane (EW) Rancho Cucamonga 2 Victoria Park Lane (NS) at North Victoria Windrose Loop (EW) Rancho Cucamonga 3 Victoria Park Lane (NS) at Atwood Street (EW) Rancho Cucamonga 4 Victoria Park Lane (NS) at Base Line Road (EW) Rancho Cucamonga 5 Tipu Place (NS) at North Victoria Windrose Loop (EW) Rancho Cucamonga 6 7 North Victoria Windrose Loop (NS) at Project East Driveway (EW) North Victoria Windrose Loop (NS) at Plum Way (EW) Rancho Cucamonga Rancho Cucamonga 7 E4—E5 Pg1$0 • fir'' �Fti- �� r� �- � Y}�*Aid .OLyPI-l••I��{`�"'!#tf .� Vil• _ i�v� ''�F^ a �, tv it Pr Ir ` � t�{ .. 5 `x : C R SA �AA..4„G��,. a�. SIF Ig or 4 LT �x r dig: 4AL e, « *w 7774loktk y x x H t- Agj as •. •...... IF 1+ "r _4j ' 1 Figure 2 Site Plan N0',1 W.k F, Ll�LINTMA\ ASSOCIATE=S, INC. TR -Iii 1 FARS of E\, FL.lf\ F SEIt\ kf JN 7398b 9 E4—E5 Pg182 4 • 1 x } F• - i � 5t f : 1 a�0 ti s E �•�O o'` FT Ll�LINTMA\ ASSOCIATE=S, INC. TR -Iii 1 FARS of E\, FL.lf\ F SEIt\ kf JN 7398b 9 E4—E5 Pg182 II. METHODOLOGY This study has been prepared in accordance with the guidelines contained in the San Bernardino County Congestion Management Program (2016 Update), including input parameters for Highway Capacity Manual calculations, saturation flow rates, and study intersections. A. Identification of Study Area Identification of the study area was based on the forecast contribution of peak hour project generated trips on the roadway segments near the project site. Based on the guidelines for preparation of a Traffic Impact Analysis, arterial facilities are required to be included in the analysis when the anticipated project trip contribution equals or exceeds 50 two-way trips during the peak hours; freeway segments are required to be included when the anticipated project trip contribution equals or exceeds 100 two-way peak hour trips. No analysis is typically required further than 5 miles from the project site. B. Intersection Analysis Methodology The technique used to assess the performance of an intersection is known as the intersection delay methodology based on the procedures contained in the Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board). The methodology compares the traffic volumes using the intersection to the capacity of the intersection to calculate the delay associated with associated with the traffic control at the intersection. The intersection delay is then correlated to a performance measure known as Level of Service based on the following thresholds: Level of Service Intersection Control Delay (Seconds/Vehicle) Signalized Intersection Unsignalized Intersection A :_ 10.0 510.0 B > 10.0 to :5 20.0 >10.0to515.0 C >20.0to535.0 >15.0to525.0 D > 35.0 to 5 55.0 > 25.0 to 5 35.0 E > 55,0 to <_ 80.0 > 35.0 to _< 50.0 F > 80.0 > 50.0 Source: Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board). Level of Service is used to qualitatively describe the performance of a roadway facility, ranging from Level of Service A (free-flow conditions) to Level of Service F (extreme congestion and system failure). Input parameters such as saturation flow rates and default values for Highway Capacity Manual calculations were used in accordance with the guidelines contained in the San Bernardino County Congestion Management Program (2016 Update) and City of Rancho Cucamonga: 10 E4—E5 Pg183 City of Rancho Cucamonga Level of Service Parameters Saturation Flow Rates Movement Existing/Opening Year Year 2040 Exclusive Through 1800 vphgpl 1900 vphgpl Exclusive Left 1700 vphgpl 1800 vphgpl Exclusive Right 1800 vphgpl 1900 vphgpl Exclusive Double Left 1600 vphgpl 1700 vphgpl Pedestrian clear times calculated using distance of crosswalk and 3.5 feet/sec walk speed for signalized intersections. Total lost time per phase is 4 seconds per the Highway Capacity Manual. C. Performance Standards The City of Rancho Cucamonga General Pian Circulation Element has established Level of Service D as the minimum acceptable Level of Service for the City's transportation system. Roadway facilities operating at Level of Service E or F are considered deficient_ D. Thresholds of Significance Based on the City -established performance standards, a project traffic impact is considered significant if the proposed project causes or worsens Level of Service E or F. To reduce a potential impact to a less than significant level, feasible mitigation measures should be identified that will maintain the acceptable Level of Service. If a project is forecast to worsen a facility already operating at Level of Service E or F under pre -project conditions, proposed mitigation measures should maintain operation of the impacted facility at pre -project conditions. Mitigation measures can be in many forms, including addition of lanes, traffic control modification, or demand management measures. If no feasible mitigation measures can be identified for a significantly impacted facility, the impact will remain significant and unavoidable. 11 E4—E5 Pg184 III. EXISTING CONDITIONS Traffic conditions as they exist today are discussed below for study roadways and intersections. A. Existing Roadway System Figure 3 identifies the Existing roadway conditions based on a field survey of the study area; the Existing number of through lanes for roadways and the intersection geometry and controls are identified. Local street access is provided by Victoria Park Lane, North Victoria Windrose Loop, Base Line Road, and Day Creek Boulevard. Regional access to the project site is provided by the l- 15 Freeway, which is located approximately 1.0 miles to the east, and the 1-210 Freeway, which is located approximately 0.5 miles to the north. B. Existing Volumes Figure 4 depicts the Existing average daily traffic volumes. The Existing average daily traffic volumes have been factored from peak hour intersection turning movement volumes using the following formula for each intersection leg: PM Peak Hour (Approach Volume + Exit Volume) x 11.5 = Leg Volume. Figure 5 and Figure 6 and show the existing morning and evening peak hour intersection turning movement volumes, respectively. Existing peak hour intersection turning movement volumes are based upon morning and evening peak period intersection turning movement counts conducted in May 2018 during typical weekday conditions. The morning peak period was counted between 7:00 AM and 9:00 AM; the evening peak period was counted between 4:00 PM and 6:00 PM. The actual peak hour within the peak period is the four consecutive 15 -minute periods with the highest total volume when all movements are added together. Thus, the weekday evening peak hour at one intersection may be 4:45 PM to 5:45 PM if those four consecutive 15 -minute periods have the highest combined volume_ Intersection turning movement count worksheets are provided in Appendix C. The peak hour intersection turning movement counts were converted into Passenger Car Equivalent (PCE) trips in accordance with the San Bernardino County Congestion Management Program recommendations (1.5 PCEs for large 2 -axle vehicles, 2.0 PCEs for 3 - axle trucks, and 3.0 PCEs for trucks with 4 or more axles). The peak hour factors used for intersection delay calculations are based the measured peak hour factors obtained from existing intersection turning movement counts. C. Existing Intersection Delay and Level of Service The morning and evening peak hour Levels of Service for Existing traffic conditions have been calculated and are shown in Table 1. The study intersections currently operate within acceptable Levels of Service during the peak hours for Existing traffic conditions (see Table 1). Existing Level of Service worksheets are provided in Appendix E. 12 E4—E5Pg185 D. City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Circulation Element Figure 7 shows the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Circulation Plan. This figure shows the nature and extent of arterial highways that are needed to adequately serve the ultimate development depicted by the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan roadway cross-sections are illustrated on Figure 8. E. Truck Routes The City of Rancho Cucamonga designated truck route map is illustrated on Figure 9, F. Transit Service Omnitrans provides transit service in the study area (see Figure 10). Omnitrans Route 67 travels along Base Line Road_ G. Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities The City of Rancho Cucamonga bicycle plan is illustrated on Figure 11 and the existing Pedestrian facilities adjacent to the project site are shown on Figure 12. 13 E4—l:5 Pg 186 Table 1 Existing Intersection Delay and Level of Service When a right turn 4neis designated, the lane tan elther be striped or unstriped To function as a right turn lane, there must he sufficient width for right turning veh_cles to travel outside the through lanes L -- left, T = Through; R u Right, d = De Facto Right Tum Lane, cla - Shared Left/Through/Right Lane. I TS =Traffic Signa`, CSS z Cross Street Stnp. AWSa All Way Stop Delay and Level of Servi;e have been calculated us. ng the follow;ng ana ysis software Synchro. Per the Highway Capacity Manual, overaL average Intersection delay and Level of Service are shown for Intersections with traffic signal or all way stop control For iniersecDons with cross street stop control, the delay and Level of Service for the worst tnd=wduaf movement for movements sharing a single lanel are shown. a LOS . Level of Servce 14 E4 -E5 Pg187 Intersection Approach Lanes' Peak Hour Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Morning Evening Traffic L T R L T R L T R L T R Delay' LOS° Delay' LOS' Intersection Control' Day Creek Boulevard INS) at: 1 Victoria Park Lane (EW) - #1 TS 1 3 d 1 3 d 1 1 d 1 1 d 10.1 B 107 B Victoria Park Lane (NS) at: North Victoria Windrose Loop (EW) - #2 CSS 0 1 d 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.5 0 0.5 10.1 B 103 B Atwood Street (EW) - #3 AWS 1 1 d 1 1 d 0 <1> 0 0 <1> 0 8.6 A 9.4 A Base Line Road (EW) - #4 TS 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 2.5 0.5 2 2.5 0.5 29.3 C 21.3 C Tipu Place (NS) at: North Victoria Windrose Loo (EW) #S CSS 0 <1> 0 0 <1> 0 0 <1> 0 0 <1> 0 9.7 A 9.5 A North Victoria Windrose Loop (NS) at. Project North Driveway (EW) - #fi C55 0 <1> 0 0 <1> 105 0 0 <1> 0 1 0 <h 1 0 1 7.5 A 7.3 A Plum Way (EW) - #7 C55 0.5 0 5 0 0 0.5 05 0 05 0 0 0 8.8 A 8.8 A When a right turn 4neis designated, the lane tan elther be striped or unstriped To function as a right turn lane, there must he sufficient width for right turning veh_cles to travel outside the through lanes L -- left, T = Through; R u Right, d = De Facto Right Tum Lane, cla - Shared Left/Through/Right Lane. I TS =Traffic Signa`, CSS z Cross Street Stnp. AWSa All Way Stop Delay and Level of Servi;e have been calculated us. ng the follow;ng ana ysis software Synchro. Per the Highway Capacity Manual, overaL average Intersection delay and Level of Service are shown for Intersections with traffic signal or all way stop control For iniersecDons with cross street stop control, the delay and Level of Service for the worst tnd=wduaf movement for movements sharing a single lanel are shown. a LOS . Level of Servce 14 E4 -E5 Pg187 -LA 0 L- 4 -J C 0 U C: 0 4-J u M cm (IJ Ln LL to :3 0 x LU L L f 4p 10 114 L LU t t J Z: U 4MUN < ;41 T E4—E5 Pg188 Ln 'I cu CL. OWL. cu I 4 ;2 1—i 7— 'A LU -0 en en 11 if w r-4 E4 -E5 Pg 189 N+ L- — =3 ro L LL a) tto CO < to LU -- - fflff cu CL. OWL. cu I 4 ;2 1—i 7— 'A LU -0 en en 11 if w r-4 E4 -E5 Pg 189 v1 N 1 O C N E 0] O to C .E L C LP's O ej-W L V :3 ai (2Qai L _ tZ5"-6E a ,`0 mpU3 t-bs .i n n T Q �-Z5 r 000 —9EL 5r ra 'w 65-. oaa a 5E-+ vrvQ i s LE— LE 000 hIawk. ZI� 9 Z 0 x # r�or�nnOSi '--ZSZ ..-,oro •-9ZT la orrno 0 000 —5Z rl1. rVE 3zr1 rTT rl1. rb oE�' `qtr s -O' -,tr _ sT�' TA W qtr of qtr 3 > SSS fn Loom 4 61 aaoc. F 0-� '''�� a 09— rnom �� E5- 0� E4—E5 Pg190 f � L 2 LO r . A "k ! '0 �. r. }ter N Z NJ z C V lar, � *' Jq�- soy .*� �r - •" ! - \f * e kms' . *' fit - ilk kI it £.. 40 MVI a✓ �' f �� '•� 11 fs•�, . ��, E. �� �:�� � � ��►#s �� a �.�; ,, _aTkawr" t ��+v ii.:� `. r.'K:.. �r Ea4. s f Ka:3 +",7 .7 }►uil3 jyir dedfi41�AX: N ���.� IO�Ri — fr! =IF- m ! A —cfi— - e -M I € 9 � Figure 7 City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Circulation Element r, -� AOTI Ii -j l�U\zntiA\ Assoc iATES, INC. =QQi� Q 6■w3alnn Plan 4.0 ••�•••• fbtLhnl Calrtur w^r AS-i?.i i Camnrary $� Myd�Ccd Sdwndary *yr Wydw, htsprArlenar D7419*411 Majcr 04v4W Anwal hU,c r Or" -d lMhxay �■ FeOBM'Jy �� InlerseCtdrA Wd nxxd "and Standards �C RJltroad GrWo Sepalalcn 0 Fmeway lrxm iur6ge © Pmpowd Free ay lroidurgd in i R-lr M Curammrga Gtr Bow" SpWQ d InOwnce - r r tWerxaye Source: City of Rancho Cucamonga T, -it) W \R5 Of E\CMLF\T SFI:\ VF JN 7398b 19 E4—E5Pg19Z i F 11 E4—E5 Pg 193 d J E le a Q � O i. Q z X �a O _ � � a a 1 E • /W R± s LU i- a c < O 7_ n t c L 9 N z L c ~ 1 w Ca O 00 3 - LJ � tLo C is W r- 0 0 E m u V w Fj Z s !� O � U U i F 11 E4—E5 Pg 193 d J E le I mill mi rMill m —1 1 ''1 a Q � c b i. Q z � E � O _ � � a in b LU I mill mi rMill m —1 1 ''1 �L in LU a < O 7_ N z �L Figure 9 City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Truck Routes KLI\' N1f\1 ASSOCIr\TES, INC. Source: City of Rancho Cucamonga i vIst 40 WALR4 pF E%CFLLF\T SrR1 KF !N 7398b 21 E4-E5Pg194 Figure 10 Existing Transit Routes JL -� Site m =Victoria St p Rancho m d a p �� Cucamonga ? LM L Baseline R Central Park w w Victoria � Gardens ,othill Blvd Foothill Blvd Civic Center Dr Rano w hvvvy ucamonga ac O Epicenter Stadium l�i�flll�fYletronan enar ino�inrCU� C camonga-Guasti Regional Park 4th St 2 San Bernardino Ave Conc rs Ontario _Inland Mills Mall itario Donal rport F, pr rt Dr Citizens Bank An Q C l`UNZhIA\, AssocIATE-17,, INC. Source Omnitrans 0VFR -10 YFtir, LIF f\cttLr\T:rl;\1,'F JN 73983 E4-E5Pg195 Route Roufa Hama GjD PXr:M.WId32•CSJSB-YFHJ$PtI IM AMUC -,%r Nnxtr� Ni Pp,e � Cy 51-i5t-Cfra.rdt ness CD £,SeYn _H¢hard _ Sar S&v &XMWx W ,-DOR:$a-cvV.0 It SM ftM sera W" - Srn Rdro Q Sal: tld:i`-11.[-0r4-Cf Hhca" � Fvtara-fi.»dna - td1 �',..nc $ Sm ¢antCl* - U./ - Cel six. farGne-f0[dj-Sw8wX m farIX i- &n E-=-dinHi9k and - Fcd `15 f., fortes- DOM -Rew:b.Y�ri a 3hadoi ;QMT-I- V*%Wvk -V.3 Harw - Kuw 1 Q� fiGMFap-Rr.r"A,V-a,+c Park FaalMa-Ce�rfo Wia-F[7PMa ® Forsra- FocCsi 31ri-1NorataG (j) Cra!byeoa.q.-8ea.ir.fa.cra CJ.IIMwdAt � '[5 Q RartoC=TraVa-frrara--malar-, Q Mm - EL44 Ave - V,ixJ (D OM-Mwrtia A..-Vjfsd { f j Cam kbrgl�W...C.tAIC-"Nr C) 5 Oft= -CKTM AA SMr &ra MM;U C3 Cain H.6.aarvla am . Wrar Metro�. ,., _ owr. ye -we �2a Or.wio Crrd F.rraa Qnr & Mcn'Cfr o k[s Source Omnitrans 0VFR -10 YFtir, LIF f\cttLr\T:rl;\1,'F JN 73983 E4-E5Pg195 E4—E5 Pg196 Figure 12 City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Bicycle Plan Bicycle Plan M� Class I (Bike Path or Trail) Class 11(Bike Lana) Class III .Bike Sheet) Ske Routes Outside Rancho Cuca-mnga Parks and Schools Schools Parks ----- Rancho Cucamorga City Boundary -- --• Sphere of Influence waaunway, 1` U\ZMAN AtiSol:IATES, INC. 5ource� City of Rancho Cucamonga L. L41% -Ili N `~\CF 1.1F\T SFR', 1-.-F 7N 73`J8b 24 E4 -E5 Pg197 IV. PROPOSED PROJECT The project site is proposed to be developed with a 310 student Montessori school (increase of 210 students from the existing school). The project site is proposed to provide direct access to North Victoria Windrows Loop. The project opening year is planned for Year 2019, A. Trip Generation The trips generated by the project are determined by multiplying an appropriate trip generation rate by the quantity of land use. Trip generation rates are predicated on the assumption that energy costs, the availability of roadway capacity, the availability of vehicles to drive, and life styles remain similar to what are known today_ A major change in these variables may affect trip generation rates. Trip generation rates were determined for daily trips, morning peak hour inbound and outbound trips, and evening peak hour inbound and outbound trips for the proposed land use. By multiplying the trip generation rates by the land use quantity, the traffic volumes are determined. Table 2 shows the project trip generation based upon rates obtained from the Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation Manual 10th Edition, 2017. As shown in Table 2, the proposed project is forecast to generate approximately 1,268 daily trips, 242 trips of which will occur during the morning peak hour and 245 trips of which will occur during the evening peak hour. In order to provide a conservative analysis, the 310 student Montessori school students have been assigned to the study area roadway system. B. Trip Distribution Figure 13 and Figure 14 show the forecast outbound and inbound directional distributions of the project generated trips, respectively. The project trip distributions are based on review of existing traffic volume data, surrounding land uses, and the local and regional roadway facilities in the project vicinity. C. Trip Assignment Based on the identified trip generation and distributions, project average daily traffic volumes have been calculated and shown on Figure 15. Morning and evening peak hour intersection turning movement volumes expected from the project are shown on Figure 15 and Figure 17, respectively. D. Trip Contribution Test No analysis is required further than 5 miles from the project site. The roadway elements that must be analyzed are dependent on both the analysis year (Opening Year) and project generated traffic volumes. The identification of the study area, and the intersections and highway segments requiring analysis, was based on an estimate of the two-way traffic 25 E4—E5 Pg198 volumes on the roadway segments near the project site. All arterial segments are required to be included in the analysis when the anticipated project volume equals or exceeds 50 two-way trips in the peak hours. The requirement is 100 two-way peak hour trips for freeways. As shown on Figure 182, the project does not contribute greater than the freeway threshold volume of 100 two-way peak hour trips. The project does not contribute trips greater than the arterial link threshold volume of 50 two-way trips during the morning and evening peak hours in adjacent jurisdictions. This means that the City of Rancho Cucamonga is not required to notify the adjacent jurisdictions and provide a copy of the focused traffic analysis, once the document is accepted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The purpose of this notification is to allow the adjacent jurisdictions to identify opportunities to make improvements to intersections concurrent with adjacent development, at considerably less cost and disruption than would occur if it were done after -the -fact. 7 Figure 18 is based upon the increase of 210 students from the existing school. ri: E4—E5 Pg199 Table 2 Project Trip Generation Descriptor Land Use Quantity Units Weekday Morning Peak our Evening Peak Hour Daily Inbound 10utboundl Total I Inbound JOutboundl Total Trip Generation Rates1 Day Care Center STU 0.41 0.37 0.78 0 37 0 420.79 4 09 +rips Generated Montessori School 310 STU 127 115 242 115 130 245 1,268 : 5TU =Students 2 Source Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition, Z0 t7, Land Use Code 565 27 E4—E5 Pg200 R IN Uav Creek Boulevard` E4 -E5 Pg201 65" 4r IE3 rr 116. E4 -E5 Pg201 Tri % J'.1k4 z �)r L w- A 13 � it .1 wm- 4 -1 - T- 4 CD FOO Ulf K, "13U 4-J Lm L- g. 4-J LA CL 1A. bjD C 0 -0 c 4-J u r 'A ugmtl—!� 5 v AM 41 �l E4—E5 Pg202 2 LU V, % J'.1k4 z �)r L 13 "13U 4-J Lm L- g. 4-J LA CL 1A. bjD C 0 -0 c 4-J u r 'A ugmtl—!� 5 v AM 41 �l E4—E5 Pg202 2 LU V, .0 co cn rn rl 9 Cry u J'.1k4 z .0 co cn rn rl 9 Cry A�r 0*., or m O E4 -E5 Pg203 Ln OJ E 7 O C N E N O bA O L l� .O OJ U L CU =3 N to L- iz LL � C L 0 Y f0 OJ d bD C L cO G U OJ �O L CL °i Lm —0 � � moo »-9 r � oao •--9 V 0-0 F.� 1 4 rTZT y TV9� z£t rs o0-• 9-+0-« 000, r, 97 '-0_ LO m�� �0 000 •-L5 coo •-0 ro �z'��L rD y1 �� r0 r ,a 0-► oWo a o5-; 000 0-► allo g.. c 60T7, E4—E5 Pg204 r. 9 r# M 00 on m n 1-4 m N M 00 on m n 1-4 m RESOLUTION NO.18-58 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2018-00092, A REQUEST TO ESTABLISH A COMBINATION CHILD CARE AND PRESCHOOLIELEMENTARY SCHOOL_ USE IN AN EXISTING 6,600 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING AND IN A PROPOSED 9,974 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION ON 1.85 ACRES OF LAND, LOCATED IN THE LOW -MEDIUM (LM) RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, VICTORIA PLANNED COMMUNITY, NORTH OF NORTH VICTORIA WINDROWS LOOP AND SOUTH OF PLUM WAY, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 1089-471-25, A. Recitals. 1. St. Mary's Montessori filed an application for the approval of Conditional Use Permit DRC2018-00092 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditional Use Permit is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 26th day of September 2018, 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 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 September 26, 2018 including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The project site is a triangular parcel of 1.85 acres within the Low -Medium (LM) Residential District of the Victoria Planned Community. The site is located east of, and adjacent to, Windrows Park, north of North Victoria Windrows Loop and south of Plum Way. The west property line is shared with Windrows Park and the north property line is adjacent to the rear yards of existing single-family residential homes. The front property line curves around the south and east side of the site facing North Victoria Windrows Loop; and b. The northern one-third of the project site consists of undeveloped vacant land. The southern two-thirds of the site, along the front property line, is improved with a 6,600 square foot building that is occupied by St. Mary's Montessori; and C. The site is located within land designated as Parks in the General Pian. The zoning designation for the property is Low -Medium Residential in the Victoria Planned Community; and d. Per the General Plan, the Parks designation is characterized by multi-purpose recreation land near residential developments. The General Plan does not specify whether other E4—E5 Pg205 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-58 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2018-00092 — ST. MARY'S MONTESSORI September 26, 2018 Page 2 complementary land uses that provide community support, such as the existing day care facility and proposed private elementary school, are allowed under a Parks designation. However, the General Pian recognizes the Victoria Community Plan as the guiding document for development for the Victoria Planned Community. Per the Victoria Planned Community, the day care facility and proposed private elementary school use is considered a community facility and is permitted in the Low -Medium (LM) Residential District subject to the review and approval of a Conditional Use Permit; and e. The applicant is proposing to construct a 9,974 square foot building and outdoor play areas to the existing day care facility. The proposal for the new building and outdoor areas is submitted under a related Minor Design Review (DRC2018-00095). The proposed building and play areas will replace the lawn area at the rear (north side) of the site. Following completion, the combined floor area of the two buildings will be 16,574 square feet; and f. The applicant is proposing an expansion of the existing use on-site. The number of day care staff will increase to 18 and the number of day care students to 147. The proposed use will also expand to include five new elementary classrooms, with a total of 156 students, nine teaching staff, and four administrative staff to provide support to the teaching staff and to maintain facility operations. In total, there will be a maximum of 303 students and 31 staff on-site; and g. The hours of operations for the school are between 6:30 am and 6;30 pm, Monday through Friday. Drop-off hours for all students will occur between 6:30 am and 9:00 am. Day care students may be picked -up between 12:30 pm and 6:30 pm, and elementary school students between 3:30 pm and 6:30 pm, and h. The range and flexibility of drop-off and pickup times for St. Mary's Montessori reduces the number of vehicles potentially on-site at any given time. Parents and guardians have the option to drop-off/pickup their child at any time during the designated time periods and will likely have staggered arrival times. Furthermore, the end times are staggered with the start and end times of the Windrows Elementary school. The earliest start time for St. Mary's Montessori (6,30 am) is 1 hour and 45 minutes before the start time for Windrows Elementary (8:15 am). The earliest end time for St. Mary's Montessori day care (12:30 pm) is 45 minutes before the earliest end time for Windrows Elementary (1:15 pm). The earliest end time for the proposed St. Mary's Montessori Elementary School (3:30pm) is 45 minutes after the latest end time for Windrows Elementary (2:45 pm). Given the range of hours that students can be dropped -off and picked up, and the staggered startlend times with the Windrows Elementary School, significant traffic congestion is unlikely to occur. 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 allowed within the applicable zoning district and complies with all other applicable provisions of this Development Code, Municipal Code, General Plan, and any applicable specific plans or City regulations/standards. The site is located within land designated as Parks in the General Pian. The General Plan does not specify in detail the range of land uses allowed within the Parks designation. For land use matters, the General Plan recognizes the Victoria Community Plan as the guiding land use document for the area the project site is located. Per the Victoria Community Plan, the existing day care facility and proposed private elementary school is considered a community facility. Community facilities are permitted in the Low -Medium (LM) Residential District where the project is located with approval of a Conditional Use Permit. E4—E5 Pg206 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO, 18-58 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2018-00092 — ST. MARY'S MONTESSORI September 26, 2018 Page 3 Community facilities are conditionally permitted in a Low -Medium (LM) Residential District because they complement and provide support to existing residential land uses. The existing day care facility and proposed private elementary school is within proximity to existing single-family homes and will provide day care services to residents in the nearby communities. All site improvements, including parking and landscaped areas, are designed to be consistent with all applicable Development Code provisions, the General Plan and the Victoria Community Plan and will not impact neighboring residential properties. b. The site is physically suited for the type, density, and intensity of the proposed use including access, utilities, and the absence of physical constraints and can be conditioned to meet all related performance criteria and development standards. The Development Code designates the project site as a Low -Medium (LM) Residential District within the Victoria Planned Community. The existing day care facility and proposed private elementary school is consistent with the land use intent of the Low -Medium (LM) Residential District and complements the existing single-family residential homes in the neighborhood. The existing site has adequate space to accommodate a second building on-site for the expanded day care and the private elementary school use. There is sufficient outdoor recreation and playground space for the proposed number of students. Access onto the property is provided via existing driveways leading directly to the parking lot on-site. The site can be fully serviced by utilities and there are no physical constraints which would prevent the development of the site as proposed. C. Granting the permit would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare, or materially injurious to persons, property, or improvements in the vicinity in which the project is located. The site is an established day care facility consistent with the land use intent of the Low -Medium (LM) Residential District it is located in. The operations on the site are expected to meet all Development Code standards. A Focused Traffic Analysis (Exhibit P - Kunzman Associates, Inc., July 2018) assessed the Level of Service (LOS) at various intersections in proximity to the project site. The City's Engineering Department reviewed the analysis and concluded the project would not significantly impact nearby intersections and roadways. On-site traffic will be improved with the expansion of the existing parking lot, and the addition of a new stacking lane and raised drop-off/pickup curbs that allows parents to drop off their children without having to park. A Stacking Analysis (Exhibit 1) conducted for the site showed up to 11 vehicles can be stacked in the driveway lane leading into the site before the line of vehicles begins extending into the public right-of-way. A Noise Impact Analysis (Exhibit O --Kunzman Associates, Inc., June 2018) analyzed potential construction and operational noise impacts associated with the proposed project on neighboring project sites. The analysis concluded that with a temporary, 6 -foot tall noise barrier erected along the north property line during construction, the exterior noise levels for all adjacent properties will fall below the maximum residential noise limits of 65 dBA per the Development Code. Noise associated with daily operations is expected to range between 45.5 and 57.4 dBA as measured from adjacent property lines and is not expected to exceed the 65 dBA limit. Therefore, the proposed use is not expected to be detrimental to public health, safety, welfare, and/or materially injurious to properties or improvements. 4. The project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines. The project qualifies as a Class 1 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 — Existing Facilities and a Class 3 exemption under State CEQA Section 15303 — New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures. The project is an expansion of an existing day care use on the site. Portions of the day care operations will continue to occur within the existing 6,600 square foot building on-site. The project also includes the development of a new 9,974 square foot building and new outdoor play areas to accommodate additional day care students and new elementary school students. The development occurs within City limits on a E4—E5 Pg207 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-58 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2018-00092 — ST. MARY'S MONTESSORI September 26, 2018 Page 4 project site of less than 5 acres in size, substantially surrounded by urban uses. The project site is located within the Low -Medium (LM) Residential District of the Victoria Planned Community. Development of a facility for day care and school use is permitted within the Low -Medium (LM) Residential District of the Victoria Planned Community with a Conditional Use Permit. The facility meets all applicable development standards and zoning regulations of the Development Code and the Victoria Planned Community_ The site can also be adequately served with all required utilities and police and fire services_ Two environmental studies were also prepared to assess any potential impacts that the project might have relating to traffic and noise_ A Focused Traffic Analysis (Exhibit P - Kunzman Associates, Inc., July 2018) assessed the Level of Service (LOS) at various intersections in proximity to the project site. The City's Engineering Department reviewed the analysis and concluded that the project would not significantly impact nearby intersections and roadways. A Noise Impact Analysis (Exhibit O - Kunzman Associates, Inc., June 2018) analyzed potential construction and operational noise impacts associated with the proposed project on neighboring project sites. The analysis concluded that with a temporary, 6 -foot tall noise barrier erected along the north property line during construction, the exterior noise levels for all adjacent properties will fall below the maximum residential noise limits of 65 dBA per the Development Code. Noise associated with daily operations is expected to range between 45.5 and 57.4 dBA as measured from adjacent property lines and is not expected to exceed the 65 dBA limit. 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 in the attached Standard Conditions incorporated herein by this reference. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THUS 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2018. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA L` -"V ATTEST: Rich Macias, Chatrrnan Candyce Burnett, Secretary I, Candyce Burnett: 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 26th day of September 2018, by the following vote -to -wit: £4—E5 Pg208 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-58 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2018-00092 — ST. MARY'S MONTESSORI September 26, 2018 Page 5 AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: E4—E5 Pg209 Conditions of Approval RANCHO rA Community Development Department Project #: DRC2018-00095 DRC2018-00092 Project Name: EDR - St. Mary's Montessori School Location: 6880 NORTH VICTORIA WINDROWS LOOP -108947125-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review Conditional Use Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Planning Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. A report shall be prepared by the applicant (or his representatives) and submitted to the Planning Department that discusses the effectiveness of the traffic circulation and parking management program that he has implemented. The report shall be submitted 6 months from the date that a Certificate of Occupancy is issued for the new building. In the event that there are significant traffic impacts observed by residents or representatives from the City, the Planning Director may require an evaluation of the Conditional Use Permit and refer it to the Planning Commission for consideration. Additional mitigation measures to address traffic issues may be applied to the Conditional Use Permit. 2. The use of Windrows Park for any purpose shall require an approved lease agreement between St. Mary's Montessori and the City prior to commencement of the activity. Lease agreements may require fees and/or include specific terms and conditions, and are subject to review and approval by the City Council. 3. The operation of the day care facility and the private school shall be limited to between 6:00am and 7:30pm, Monday through Friday. The day care facility and the private school shall be open to the general public only between 6:30am and 6.30pm. 4. The day care facility and private school shall be limited to a combined maximum of 303 students and 31 staff during all hours of operation. 5. All staff for the day care facility and private school shall park in the parking lot located onsite. Parking in the public right-of-way and in the parking lot of Windrows Park is not permitted. 6. The use of the drop-off/pickup areas is permitted at any time during the operating hours of the day care facility and private school. The use of the drop-offlpickup areas is required when the line of vehicles encroaches into the public right-of-way. Staff shall be present in the parking lot area to facilitate passenger unloadinglloading and until all such activity has been completed. Staff is responsible for ensuring that all incoming vehicles are safely onsite and do extend into the public right-of-way. 7. Staff shall inform all clients and visitors to park onsite or to use the drop-offlpickup lane during the time when children/students are being dropped off and picked up. A notice form shall be provided to existing and future clients stating this requirement. A copy of this notification form shall be provided to the Planning Department for the record prior to issuance of building permits. B. All day care facility and private school -related outdoor learning and recreational activities shall be conducted onsite. The use of the nearby Windrows Park or any other offsite location for these activities is not permitted. 9. Graffiti shall be removed within 72 hours. www.Cdy0 RC.us Punted W20/201B E4—E5Pg210 Project #: DRC2018-00095 DRC2018-00092 Project Name: EDR - St. Mary's Montessori School Location: 6880 NORTH VICTORIA WINDROWS LOOP - 108947125-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review Conditional Use Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 10. Any modification or intensification of the approved use, including revisions in the operations of the business including changes to the operating days/hours; change in the location on-site or within the building of the use/activity that is approved by this Conditional Use Permit; improvements including new building construction; and/or other modificationslintensifiication beyond what is specifically approved by this Conditional Use Permit, shall require the review and approval by the Planning Director prior to submittal of documents for plan check/occupancy, construction, commencement of the activity, and/or issuance of a business license. The Planning Director may determine that modifications or intensifications of use require the submittal of an application to modify this Conditional Use Permit for review by the City. 11. 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. 12. Copies of the signed Approval Letter and Conditions of Approval 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. 13. The applicant shall be required to pay California Department of Fish and Wildlife Notice of Exemption fee in the amount of $50.00. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary prior to public hearing or within 5 days of the date of project approval. 14. 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. 15. 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. 16. 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. Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 1. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. Printed 8120/2018 www.CityofRC.us Page 2 of 10 E4—E5 Pg211 Project #: DRC2018-00095 DRC2018-00092 Project Name. EDR - St. Mary's Montessori School Location: 6880 NORTH VICTORIA WINDROWS LOOP -108947125-0000 Protect Type: Minor Design Review Conditional Use Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 2. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CVWD is required prior to issuance of permits. 3. "" CD Information Required Prior to Sign -Off for Building Permit Prior to the issuance of building permits, if valuation is greater or equal to $100,000, a Diversion Deposit and a related administrative fee shall be paid for the Construction and Demolition Diversion Program. The deposit is fully refundable if at least 65% of all wastes generated during construction and demolition are diverted from landfills, and appropriate documentation is provided to the City. Applicant must identify if they are self -hauling or utilizing Burrtec prior to issuance of a building permit. Proof of diversion must be submitted to the Environmental Engineering Division within 60 days following the completion of the construction and 1 or demolition project. Contact Susan Shaker, Environmental Engineering, at (909) 774-4062 for more information. Instructions and forms are available at the City's website, www.cityofrc.us, under City Hall 1 Engineering 1 Environmental Programs 1 Construction & Demolition Diversion Program, 4. Add the following note to any private landscape plans that show street trees: "All improvements within the public right-of-way, including street trees, shall be installed per the public improvement plans." If there is a discrepancy between the public and private plans, the street improvement plans will govern. 5. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 16.37.010, no person shall make connections from a source of energy, fuel or power to any building or structure which is regulated by technical codes and for which a permit is required unless, in addition to any and all other codes, regulations and ordinances, all improvements required by these conditions of development approval have been completed and accepted by the City Council, except: that in developments containing more than one building, structure or unit, the development may have energy connections made in equal proportion to the percentage of completion of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval, as determined by the City Engineer, provided that reasonable, safe and maintainable access to the property exists. In no case shall more than 95 percent of the buildings, structures or units be connected to energy sources prior to completion and acceptance of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval. 6. Replace any damaged sidewalks, curb, or gutter along Victoria Windrows Loop along the project frontage, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Building and Safety Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions www.CityofRC.us Panted 8/2012018 Page 3 of 10 E4—E5 Pg212 Project #: DRC2018-00095 DRC2018-00092 Project Name: EDR - St. Mary's Montessori School Location: 6880 NORTH VICTORIA WINDROWS LOOP - 108947125-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review Conditional Use Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Building and Safety Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. When the Entitlement Review is approved submit complete construction drawings including structural calculations, energy calculations and soils report to Building and Safety for plan review in accordance with the current edition of the CA Building and Eire Codes including all local ordinances and standards. The new structures are required to be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers and a fire alarm per the CBC and Current RCFPD Ordinance. Disabled access for the site and building must be in accordance to the State of CA and ADA regulations. 2. Enter your special condition here Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 1. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall implement City Standards for on-site construction where possible, and shall provide details for all work not covered by City Standard Drawings. 2. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the grading plan shall show that all manufactured slopes shall be a minimum 2 -foot offset from the public right of way, permitted line, or the adjacent private property. All slope offsets shall meet the requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. 3. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the grading and drainage plan shall show the maximum parking stall gradient at 5 percent. Accessibility parking stall grades shall be constructed per the, current adopted California Building Code. 4. The final grading and drainage plan shall show existing topography a minimum of 100 -feet beyond project boundary. 5. This project shall comply with the accessibility requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. 6. Grading Inspections: a) Prior to the start of grading operations the owner and grading contractor shall request a pre -grading meeting. The meeting shall be attended by the project owner/representative, the grading contractor and the Building Inspector to discuss about grading requirements and preventive measures, etc. If a pre -grading meeting is not held within 24 hours from the start of grading operations, the grading permit may be subject to suspension by the Building Inspector; b) The grading contractor shall call into the City of Rancho Cucamonga Building and Safety Department at least 1 working day in advance to request the following grading inspections prior to continuing grading operations: i) The bottom of the over -excavation; ii) Completion of Rough Grading, prior to issuance of the building permit; iii) At the completion of Rough Grading, the grading contractor or owner shall submit to the Permit Technicians (Building and Safety Front Counter) an original and a copy of the Pad Certifications to be prepared by and properly wet signed and sealed by the Civil Engineer and Soils Engineer of Record; iv) The rough grading certificates and the compaction reports will be reviewed by the Associate Engineer or a designated person and approved prior to the issuance of a building permit. www.CityofRC.us Printed 920,20+=_ Page 4 of to E4—E5Pg213 Project #: DRC2018-00095 ORC2018-00092 Project Name: EDR - St. Mary's Montessori School Location: 6880 NORTH VICTORIA WINDROWS LOOP -108947125-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review Conditional Use Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 7. All roof drainage flowing to the public right of way must drain under the sidewalk through a parkway culvert approved by the Engineering Department. This shall be shown on both the grading and drainage pian and Engineering Services Department required plans. B. Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the permitted grading plan (or architectural site plan) set shall show in each of the typical sections and the plan view show how the separations between the building exterior and exterior ground surface meet the requirements of Sections CBC1804.31CRC R401.3, CBC2304.11.2.2/CRC R317.1(2) and CBC2512.1.21CRC R703.6.2.1 of the current adopted California Building Code/Residential Code. 9. Prior to approval of the project -specific storm water quality management plan, the applicant shall submit to the Building Official, or his designee, a precise grading plan showing the location and elevations of existing topographical features, and showing the location and proposed elevations of proposed structures and drainage of the site. Printed. 912012018 www.cityof^c.us Page 5 of 10 E4—E5Pg214 Project # Project Name: Location: Project Type: DRC2018-00095 DRC2018-00092 EDR - St. Mary's Montessori School 6880 NORTH VICTORIA WINDROWS LOOP - 108947125-0000 Minor Design Review Conditional Use Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 10. GROUND WATER PROTECTION: Prior to approval of the final project specific water quality management plan (WQMP), the WQMP document shall meet the requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board Order No. R8-2010-0036 (NPDES No. CAS 618036), the San Bernardino County Municipal Separate Storm Sewers Separation (MS4) Permit reads: Section XI.D(Water Quality Management Plan Requirements).8(Groundwater Protection): Treatment Control BMPs utilizing infiltration [exclusive of incidental infiltration and BMPs not designed to primarily function as infiltration devices (such as grassy swales, detention basins, vegetated buffer strips, constructed wetlands, etc.)] must comply with the following minimum requirements to protect groundwater: a. Use of structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause or contribute to an exceedance of ground water quality objectives. b. Source control and pollution prevention control BMPs shall be implemented to protect groundwater quality. The need for pre-treatment BMPs such as sedimentation or filtration should be evaluated prior to infiltration. c. Adequate pretreatment of runoff prior to infiltration shall be required in gas stations and large commercial parking lots. (NOTE: The State Water Quality Control Board defines a large commercial parking lot as '100,000 sq. ft. or more of commercial development to include parking lot (with 100 or more vehicle traffics), OR, by means of 5,000sgft or more of allowable space designated for parking purposes'). d. Unless adequate pre-treatment of runoff is provided prior to infiltration structural infiltration treatment BMPs must not be used for areas of industrial or light industrial activity{77), areas subject to high vehicular traffic (25,000 or more daily traffic); car washes; fleet storage areas; nurseries; or any other high threat to water quality land uses or activities. e. Class V injection wells or dry wells must not be placed in areas subject to vehicular(78) repair or maintenance activities{79), such as an auto body repair shop, automotive repair shop, new and used car dealership, specialty repair shop (e.g., transmission and muffler repair shop) or any facility that does any vehicular repair work_ f. Structural infiltration BMP treatment shall not be used at sites that are known to have soil and groundwater contamination. g. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall be located at least 100 feet horizontally from any water supply wells. h. The vertical distance from the bottom of any infiltration structural treatment BMP to the historic high groundwater mark shall be at least 10 -feet. Where the groundwater basins do not support beneficial uses, this vertical distance criteria may be reduced, provided groundwater quality is maintained. i. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause a nuisance or pollution as defined in Water Code Section 13050. Printed 9:24;2018 www,CityofRC.us E4—E5 Pg215 Page 6 of 10 Project #: Project Name Location; Project Type: DRC2018-00095 ORC2018-00092 EDR - St. Mary's Montessori School 6880 NORTH VICTORIA WINDROWS LOOP - 108947125-0000 Minor Design Review Conditional Use Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 11. NONRESIDENTIAL MANDATORY MEASURES — CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE — Prior to the issuance of any building permit the applicant shall comply with Section 5,106.10 (Grading and paving) of tate current adopted California Green Building Standards Code - Construction plans shall indicate how site grading or a drainage system will manage all surface water flows to keep water from entering buildings. Examples of methods to manage surface water include, but are not limited to, the following: 1. Swales. 2. Water collection and disposal systems. 3. French drains. 4. Water retention gardens. 5. Other water measures which keep surface water away from buildings and aid in groundwater recharge. Exception: Additions and alterations not altering the drainage path. 12. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with current adopted California Building Code and/or the California Residential Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The Grading and Drainage Plan(s) shall be in substantial conformance with the approved conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan. 13. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified Engineer licensed by the State of California to perform such work. Two copies will be provided at grading and drainage plan submittal for review. Plans shall implement design recommendations per said report. 14. 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 th+e issuance of building permits, 15. A separate Grading and Drainage Plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and wet signed by a California licensed Civil Engineer prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit. 16. The applicant shall comply with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Dust Control Measures and place a dust control sign on the project site prior to the issuance of a grading permit. All dust control sign (s) shall be located outside of the public right of way. 17. If a Rough Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit are submitted to the Building and Safety Oficial for review, the rough grading plan shall be a separate plan submittal and permit from Precise Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit. 18. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit the City of Rancho Cucamonga's "Memorandum of Agreement of Storm Water Quality Management Plan" shall be submitted for review and approval by the Building Official and recorded with the County Recorder's Office. 19. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall obtain a Waste Discharge Identification Number (WDID). The WDID number shall also be shown on the WQMP Site and Drainage Plan document. Printed 9:20.'2018 www.CityctRC. us 1=4—E5 Pg216 Page 7 01 10 Project #. Project Name Location: Project Type: DRC2018-00095 DRC2018-00092 BDR - St. Mary's Montessori School 6880 NORTH VICTORIA WINDROWS LOOP -108947125-0000 Minor Design Review Conditional Use Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 20. The land owner shall provide an inspection report on a biennial basis for the structural storm water treatment devices, commonly referred to as BMPs, to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Pian prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 21. The land/property owner shall follow the inspection and maintenance requirements of the approved project specific Water Quality Management Plan and shall provide a copy of the inspection reports on a biennial basis to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. 22. A final project -specific Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) shall be approved by the Building and Safety Director, or his designee, and the City of Rancho Cucamonga's "Memorandum of Storm Water Quality Management Plan" shall be recorded prior to the issuance of a grading permit or any building permit. 23. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the Final Grading and Drainage Plan shall show the accessibility path from the public right of way and the accessibility parking stalls to the building doors in conformance with the current adopted California Building Code. All accessibility ramps shall show sufficient detail including gradients, elevations, and dimensions and comply with the current adopted California Building Code. 24. Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the latest adopted California Plumbing Code. Private storm drain improvements shall be shown on the grading and drainage plan. 25. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy or final sign off by the Building Inspector the engineer of record shall certify the functionality of the storm water quality management plan (WQMP) storm water treatment devices and best management practices (BMP). 26. Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WQMP shall include a copy of the project Conditions of Approval. 27. The Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (PWQMP) has been deemed "Acceptable". Prior to the issuance of a grading permit a final project -specific Water Quality Management Plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the Building Official. 28. Prior to the issuance of a building permit or Engineering Services Department issued right of way permit, the applicant shall submit to the Building Official, or his designee, a final project specific water quality management plan for review and approval, and shall have said document recorded with the San Bernardino County Recorder's Office. 29. Prior to the start of landscaping operations, the landscape architect and the landscape contractor shall provide a sample of the weed fabric barrier to the Project Planner, City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department. The weed barrier shall be permeable. Printed 412 012 4 1 8 vwnv_C11y0fRC.us E4—E5 Pg217 Pages of 10 Project #. DRC2018-00095 DRC2018-00092 Project Name; EDR - St. Mary's Montessori School Location: 6880 NORTH VICTORIA WINDROWS LOOP - 108947125-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review Conditional Use Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 30. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the Final Project -Specific Water Quality Management Plan shall include a completed copy of "Worksheet H: Factor of Safety and Design Infiltration Worksheet" located in Appendix D "Section VII — Infiltration Rate Evaluation Protocol and Factor of Safety Recommendations, ..." of the San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans. The infiltration study shall include the Soil Engineer's recommendations for Appendix D, Table VI1.3: Suitability Assessment Related Considerations for Infiltration Facility Safety Factors 31. Prior to approval of the final project -specific water quality management plan the applicant shall have a soils engineer prepare a project -specific infiltration study for the project for the purposes of storm water quality treatment. The infiltration study and recommendations shall follow the guidelines in the current adopted "San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans". 32. Roof water is not permitted to flow over the public parkway and shall be directed to an under parkway culvert per City of Rancho Cucamonga requirements prior to issuance of a grading permit. 33. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy by the Building Official, or his designee, the civil engineer of record shall file a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Post Construction Storm Water Treatment Devices As -Built Certificate with the Environmental Programs Coordinator, City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Services Department. 34. Section 1.5.1, Table 1-1 Priority Projects, Category No, 1, of the San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans reads "All significant re -development projects — defined as the addition or replacement of 5,000 or more square feet (sq. ft.) of impervious surface on an already developed site subject to discretionary approval of the permitting jurisdiction. In addition. Where re -development results in an increase of 50% or more of the impervious surfaces of a previously existing developed site, the numeric sizing criteria discussed in Section 4 applies to the entire development. The project is showing square feet of existing impervious area_ The project is showing square feet of proposed and/or removal and replacement of impervious area. The proposed/removal/replacement impervious area equals or exceeds 50% of the existing impervious area, the project is conditioned, prior to the Issuance of a grading permit, to prepare a final project -specific water quality management plan to treat the storm water runoff of the enlire development's impervious area. Standard Conditions of Approval 1- "No trespassing" signs listing California Penal code section 602, shall be installed at all construction site access points. Printed 9;2012018 www C-tyofRC.us Page 9 of 10 E4—E5 Pg218 Project #: DRC2018-00095 DRC2018-00092 Project Name: EDR - St. Mary's Montessori School Location: Project Type: 6880 NORTH VICTORIA WINDROWS LOOP -108947125-0000 Minor Design Review Conditional Use Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.- Standard ROJECT: Standard Conditions of Approval 2. A minimum of twelve (12) surveillance cameras shall be installed onsite, outside the buildings, with the intent to capture digital images of subjects entering, exiting, and vehicle and pedestrian traffic approaching the business. Cameras shall be maintained in working conditions at all time. Prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall contact the Rancho Cucamonga Police Department for an inspection of the security cameras. Video recordings of surveillance cameras shall be nothing less than NTSC (National Television System Committee, the NTSC is the analog video color format used to broadcast television signals) standards, with a minimum of 1080p resolution. A minimum of 14 days surveillance video shall be kept and relinquished upon request by the city of Rancho Cucamonga, The Sheriff's Department, or a designated agent. The applicant(s) or on-site manager(s) shall maintain the recording system and cameras in working condition. 3. The exterior dumpster enclosures shall be constructed per City of Rancho Cucamonga Standards. Any gates or doors providing access into the enclosure shall be secured by a locking device of substantial design to prohibit unwanted entry. If openings in the design of the enclosure are proposed, all openings shall be screened, gates, or some other method must be used to prevent unwanted person from entering the dumpster enclosure. The dumpster area shall be equipped with lighting of sufficient power to illuminate and make it easily discernible the appearance and conduct of persons on or about the dumpster area. 4. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy or final sign off by the Building Inspector, the applicant shall obtain final approval from the San Bernardino County Sheriffs Department. Printed 912012018 www.CityofRC.us E4 --E5 Pg219 Page 10 of 10 RESOLUTION NO. 18-59 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING MINOR DESIGN REVIEW DRC2018-00095, A REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OF A PROPOSED 9,974 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION AND OUTDOOR PLAY AREAS TO AN EXISTING 6,600 SQUARE FOOT CHILD CARE FACILITY AND PRESCHOOL ON 1.85 ACRES OF LAND, LOCATED IN THE LOW -MEDIUM (LM) RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, VICTORIA PLANNED COMMUNITY, NORTH OF NORTH VICTORIA WINDROWS LOOP AND SOUTH OF PLUM WAY, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 1089-471-25. A. Recitals. 1 _ St. Mary's Montessori filed an application for the approval of Minor Design Review DRC2018-00095 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Minor Design Review is referred to as "the application." 2 On the 26th day of September 2018, 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 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 September 26, 2018 including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The project site is a triangular parcel of 1.85 acres within the Low -Medium (LM) Residential District of the Victoria Planned Community. The site is located east of, and adjacent to, Windrows Park, north of North Victoria Windrows Loop and south of Plum Way. The west property line is shared with Windrows Park and the north property line is adjacent to the rear yards of existing single-family residential homes. The front property line curves around the south and east side of the site facing North Victoria Windrows Loop; and b. The northern one-third of the project site consists of undeveloped vacant land. The southern two-thirds of the site, along the front property line, is improved with a 6,600 square foot building that is occupied by St. Mary's Montessori; and C. The site is located within land designated as Parks in the General Plan. The zoning designation for the property is Low -Medium Residential in the Victoria Planned Community; and d. Per the General Plan, the Parks designation is characterized by multi-purpose recreation land near residential developments. The General Plan does not specify whether other E4—E5 Pg220 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-59 MINOR DESIGN REVIEW DRC201 B-00095 — ST. MARY'S MONTESSORI September 26, 2018 Page 2 complementary land uses that provide community support, such as the existing day care facility and proposed private elementary school, are allowed under a Parks designation. However, the General Plan recognizes the Victoria Community Plan as the guiding document for development for the Victoria Planned Community. Per the Victoria Planned Community, the existing day care facility and proposed private elementary school use is considered a community facility and is permitted in the Low -Medium (LM) Residential District subject to the review and approval of a Conditional Use Permit; and e. The applicant is proposing to construct a 9,974 square foot building and outdoor play areas to the existing day care facility. The proposed building and play areas will replace the lawn area at the rear (north side) of the site. Following completion, the combined floor area of the two buildings will be 16,574 square feet; and f. The area in proximity of the buildings will consist of a variety of play, landscaped and outdoor entertainment areas for the use with the building. This includes five rubberized playground areas with play structures, soft turf play areas, wood decks, and decorative pathways with drought resistant landscape which enhances the overall site design. The design of the playground areas and outdoor recreation spaces meets the Department of Social Services' requirement for outdoor activity space; and g. The site meets the City's Development Standards for parking, building heights, and all applicable setbacks. The minimum setbacks for side property lines are 5 feet on one side and 10 feet on the other side in the Low -Medium (LM) Residential District. The proposed building is a minimum of 20 feet away from the north and west property lines, which form the side property lines of the site. The building also exceeds the minimum 32 feet front yard setback. All play structures are setback a minimum of 5 feet from property lines. There is no landscaping minimum established for non-residential facilities in Low -Medium (LM) Residential District. However, the total amount of landscaped coverage on-site is roughly 25%, which exceeds the 10-15% landscaped areas required for most commercial establishments in the City. Additionally, the City's Development Standards establishes a minimum requirement for the number of trees on-site. The site will have 67 trees at buildout, exceeding the required 56 trees for the entire site. h. In total, the proposed project will require 62 parking spaces per the Development Code. The parking lot will be enlarged to provide an additional 29 spaces resulting in a total of 71 parking spaces. The site will maintain an excess of 9 parking spaces as before. Access into the parking lot will remain unchanged, with two entrances located along North Victoria Windrows Loop. A new raised drop-off/pickup curb will be installed inside the parking lot to allow for guardians to drop off students; and i. The exterior of the building has visually -interesting fagades viewable from all vantage points. The design incorporates the use of composite wood cladding panels and stucco as the primary building materials. The base of the building is imbued with a graphic pattern stucco wainscot. The extensive use of the two primary materials and the wainscot helps break up expansive blank facade that usually occurs with the use of stucco materials. The roof consists of concrete tiles and open roof wood frames that complement each other. The roofing materials are also consistent with the roof design of the existing building. The proposed structure incorporates the use of standing seam metal roofs, decorative windows and doors, and aluminum screed to add architectural interest to the building. The architectural style and scale of the building is compatible with the existing building. Overall, the design of the proposed building enhances the overall visual quality of the site and meets the City's "360 -degree" design standards. E4—E5 Pg221 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-59 MINOR DESIGN REVIEW DRC2018-00095 — ST. MARY'S MONTESSORI September 26, 2018 Page 3 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. The site is located within land designated as Parks in the General Plan. The General Plan does not specify in detail the range of land uses allowed within the Parks designation. For land use matters, the General Plan recognizes the Victoria Community Plan as the guiding land use document for the area the project site is located. Per the Victoria Community Plan, the existing day care facility and proposed private elementary school is considered a community facility. Community facilities are permitted in the Low - Medium (LM) Residential District where the project is located with approval of a Conditional Use Permit. A Conditional Use Permit (DRC2018-00092) has been filed along with the Minor Design Review application for consideration. Community facilities are conditionally permitted in a Low - Medium (LM) Residential District because they complement and provide support to existing residential land uses. The existing day care facility and proposed private elementary school is within proximity to existing single-family homes and will provide day care services to residents in the nearby communities. Therefore, the project is consistent with the intent of the General Plan. b. The proposed use is in accord with the objective of this Development Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. The subject property is located in the Low - Medium (LM) Residential District of the Victoria Planned Community. Per the Victoria Community Plan, the existing day care facility and proposed private elementary school is considered a community facility. Community facilities are permitted in the Low -Medium (LM) Residential District where the project is located with approval of a Conditional Use Permit. A Conditional Use Permit (DRC2018-00092) has been filed along with the Minor Design Review application for consideration. Community facilities are conditionally permitted in a Low -Medium (LM) Residential District because they complement and provide support to existing residential land uses. The existing day care facility and proposed private elementary school is within proximity to existing single-family homes and will provide day care services to residents in the nearby communities. Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with the objective of the Development Code and the Victoria Planned Community. C. The proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of this Development Code. The Development Code designates the project site as a Low -Medium (LM) Residential District within the Victoria Planned Community. The existing day care facility and proposed private elementary school is consistent with the land use intent of the Low -Medium (LM) Residential District and complements the existing single-family residential homes in the neighborhood. The height of the proposed building is roughly 23 feet, comparable in height to the existing building, which measures roughly 19 feet. The lot coverage of the entire site at buildout is 19.3% and is lower than the maximum lot coverage of 55% for the Low -Medium (LM) Residential District in the Victoria Planned Community. All other site improvements, including parking and landscaped areas, are designed to be consistent with all applicable Development Code provisions and the Victoria Community Plan and will not impact neighboring residential properties. The site is physically suited for the type, density, and intensity of the proposed use, including access, utilities and the absence of physical constraints and can be conditioned to meet all related performance criteria and development standards. d. The proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The site is an established day care facility consistent with the land use intent of the Low -Medium (LM) Residential District it is located in. The operations on the site are expected to meet all Development Code standards. A Focused Traffic Analysis (Exhibit P - E4—E5 Pg222 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-59 MINOR DESIGN REVIEW DRC2018-00095 — ST. MARY'S MONTESSORI September 26, 2018 Page 4 Kunzman Associates, Inc., July 2018) assessed the Level of Service (LOS) at various intersections in proximity to the project site. The City's Engineering Department reviewed the analysis and concluded that the project would not significantly impact nearby intersections and roadways. On-site traffic will be improved with the expansion of the existing parking lot, and the addition of a new stacking lane and raised drop-off/pickup curbs that allows for parents to drop off their children without having to park. A Stacking Analysis (Exhibit 1) conducted for the site showed that up to 11 vehicles can be stacked in the driveway lane leading into the site before the line of vehicles begins extending into the public right-of-way. A Noise Impact Analysis (Exhibit O - Kunzman Associates, Inc., June 2018) analyzed potential construction and operational noise impacts associated with the proposed project on neighboring project sites. The analysis concluded that with a temporary, 6 -foot tall noise barrier erected along the north property line during construction, the exterior noise levels for all adjacent properties will fall below the maximum residential noise limits of 65 dBA per the Development Code. Noise associated with daily operations is expected to range between 45.5 and 57.4 dBA as measured from adjacent property lines and is not expected to exceed the 65 dBA limit. Therefore, the proposed use is not expected to be detrimental to public health, safety, welfare, and/or materially injurious to properties or improvements. 4. The project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines. The project qualifies as a Class 3 exemption under State CEQA Section 15303 — New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures. The project includes the development of a new 9,974 square foot building and new outdoor play areas to accommodate additional day care students and new elementary school students. The development occurs within City limits on a project site of less than 5 acres in size, substantially surrounded by urban uses. The project site is located within the Low -Medium (LM) Residential District of the Victoria Planned Community. Development of a facility for day care and school use is permitted within the Low - Medium (LM) Residential District of the Victoria Planned Community with a Conditional Use Permit. The facility meets all applicable development standards and zoning regulations of the Development Code and the Victoria Planned Community. The site can also be adequately served with all required utilities and police and fire services. Two environmental studies were also prepared to assess any potential impacts that the project might have on the environment. A Focused Traffic Analysis (Exhibit P - Kunzman Associates, Inc., July 2018) assessed the Level of Service (LOS) at various intersections in proximity to the project site. The City's Engineering staff reviewed the Analysis and concluded that the project would not significantly impact nearby intersections and roadways. A Noise Impact Analysis (Exhibit O - Kunzman Associates, Inc., June 2018) analyzed potential construction and operational noise impacts associated with the proposed project on neighboring project sites. The analysis concluded that with a temporary, 6 -foot tall noise barrier along the north property line, the exterior noise levels for all adjacent properties will fall below the maximum residential noise limits of 65 dBA per the Development Code. Noise associated with daily operations is expected to range between 45.5 and 57.4 dBA as measured from adjacent property lines and is not expected to exceed the 65 dBA limit. 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 in the attached Standard Conditions incorporated herein by this reference. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2018. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA E4—E5 Pg223 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-59 MINOR DESIGN REVIEW DRC2018-00095 — ST. MARY'S MONTESSORI September 26, 2018 Page 5 Rich Macias, Chairman ATTEST: Candyce Burnett, Secretary I, Candyce Burnett, 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 26th day of September 2018, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES' COMMISSIONERS; ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS; ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS- E4—E5 Pg224 Conditions of Approval Community Development Department Project #: DRC2018-00095 DRC2018-00092 Project Name: EDR - St. Mary's Montessori School Location: 6880 NORTH VICTORIA WINDROWS LOOP - 108947125-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review Conditional Use Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Planning Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. A report shall be prepared by the applicant (or his representatives) and submitted to the Planning Department that discusses the effectiveness of the traffic circulation and parking management program that he has implemented. The report shall be submitted 6 months from the date that a Certificate of Occupancy is issued for the new building. In the event that there are significant traffic impacts observed by residents or representatives from the City, the Planning Director may require an evaluation of the Conditional Use Permit and refer it to the Planning Commission for consideration. Additional mitigation measures to address traffic issues may be applied to the Conditional Use Permit. 2. The use of Windrows Park for any purpose shall require an approved lease agreement between St. Mary's Montessori and the City prior to commencement of the activity. Lease agreements may require fees and/or include specific terms and conditions, and are subject to review and approval by the City Council. 3. The operation of the day care facility and the private school shall be limited to between 6:00am and 7:30pm, Monday through Friday. The day care facility and the private school shall be open to the general public only between 6:30am and 6:30pm. 4. The day care facility and private school shall be limited to a combined maximum of 303 students and 31 staff during all hours of operation. 5. All staff for the day care facility and private school shall park in the parking lot located onsite. Parking in the public right-of-way and in the parking lot of Windrows Park is not permitted. 6. The use of the drop-off/pickup areas is permitted at any time during the operating hours of the day care facility and private school. The use of the drop-off/pickup areas is required when the line of vehicles encroaches into the public right-of-way. Staff shall be present in the parking lot area to facilitate passenger unloading/loading and until all such activity has been completed. Staff is responsible for ensuring that all incoming vehicles are safely onsite and do extend into the public right-of-way. 7. Staff shall inform all clients and visitors to park onsite or to use the drop-off/pickup lane during the time when children/students are being dropped off and picked up. A notice form shall be provided to existing and future clients stating this requirement. A copy of this notification form shall be provided to the Planning Department for the record prior to issuance of building permits. 8. All day care facility and private school -related outdoor learning and recreational activities shall be conducted onsite. The use of the nearby Windrows Park or any other offsite location for these activities is not permitted. 9. Graffiti shall be removed within 72 hours. Pnnled 9,120.7018 www.Cdyof .us E4 --E5 Pg225 Project #: Project Name Location: Project Type: DRC2018-00095 DRC2018-00092 EDR - St. Mary's Montessori School 6880 FORTH VICTORIA WINDROWS LOOP -108947125-0000 Minor Design Review Conditional Use Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.' Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 10. Any modification or intensification of the approved use, including revisions in the operations of the business including changes to the operating days/hours; change in the location on-site or within the building of the use/activity that is approved by this Conditional Use Permit; improvements including new building construction; and/or other modifications/intensification beyond what is specifically approved by this Conditional Use Permit, shag require the review and approval by the Planning Director prior to submittal of documents for plan check/occupancy, construction, commencement of the activity, and/or issuance of a business license. The Planning Director may determine that modifications or intensifications of use require the submittal of an application to modify this Conditional Use Permit for review by the City. 11. 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. 12. Copies of the signed Approval Letter and Conditions of Approval 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. 13. The applicant shall be required to pay California Department of Fish and Wildlife Notice of Exemption fee in the amount of $50.00. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary prior to public hearing or within 5 days of the date of project approval. 14. Any approval shah 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. 15. 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. 16. 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. Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 1 _ The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. Printed, 9120/2016 www.Cityo1RC s,s E4—E5 Pg226 Page 2 of 10 Project #: DRC2018-00095 DRC2018-00092 Project Name: EDR - St. Mary's Montessori School Location: 6880 NORTH VICTORIA WINDROWS LOOP - 108947125-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review Conditional Use Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 2. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CVWD is required prior to issuance of permits. 3. ** CD Information Required Prior to Sign -Off for Building Permit Prior to the issuance of building permits, if valuation is greater or equal to $100,000, a Diversion Deposit and a related administrative fee shall be paid for the Construction and Demolition Diversion Program. The deposit is fully refundable if at least 65% of all wastes generated during construction and demolition are diverted from landfills, and appropriate documentation is provided to the City. Applicant must identify if they are self -hauling or utilizing Burrtec prior to issuance of a building permit. Proof of diversion must be submitted to the Environmental Engineering Division within 60 days following the completion of the construction and 1 or demolition project. Contact Susan Shaker, Environmental Engineering, at (909) 7744062 for more information. Instructions and forms are available at the City's website, www.cityofrc.us, under City Hall 1 Engineering 1 Environmental Programs / Construction & Demolition Diversion Program. 4. Add the following note to any private landscape plans that show street trees: "All improvements within the public right-of-way, including street trees, shall be installed per the public improvement plans." If there is a discrepancy between the public and private plans, the street improvement plans will govern. 5. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 16.37.010, no person shall make connections from a source of energy, fuel or power to any building or structure which is regulated by technical codes and for which a permit is required unless, in addition to any and all other codes, regulations and ordinances, all improvements required by these conditions of development approval have been completed and accepted by the City Council, except; that in developments containing more than one building, structure or unit, the development may have energy connections made in equal proportion to the percentage of completion of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval, as determined by the City Engineer, provided that reasonable, safe and maintainable access to the property exists. In no case shall more than 95 percent of the buildings, structures or units be connected to energy sources prior to completion and acceptance of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval. 6. Replace any damaged sidewalks, curb, or gutter along Victoria Windrows Loop along the project frontage, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Building and Safety Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions www.CilyofRC.us Printed 9l2012018 Page 3 of 14 E4—E5 Pg227 Project #: DRC2018-00095 DRC2018-00092 Project Name: EDR - St. Mary's Montessori School Location: 6880 NORTH VICTORIA WINDROWS LOOP - 108947125-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review Conditional Use Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Building and Safety Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. When the Entitlement Review is approved submit complete construction drawings including structural calculations, energy calculations and soils report to Building and Safety for plan review in accordance with the current edition of the CA Building and Fire Codes including all local ordinances and standards. The new structures are required to be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers and a fire alarm per the CBC and Current RCFPD Ordinance. Disabled access for the site and building must be in accordance to the State of CA and ADA regulations. 2. Enter your special condition here Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 1. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall implement City Standards for on-site construction where possible, and shall provide details for all work not covered by City Standard Drawings. 2. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the grading plan shall show that all manufactured slopes shall be a minimum 2 -foot offset from the public right of way, permitted line, or the adjacent private property. All slope offsets shall meet the requirements of the current adopted California Building Code, 3. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the grading and drainage plan shall show the maximum parking stall gradient at 5 percent. Accessibility parking stall grades shall be constructed per the, current adopted California Building Code. 4, The final grading and drainage pian shall show existing topography a minimum of 100 -feet beyond project boundary. 5, This project shall comply with the accessibility requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. 8. Grading Inspections: a) Prior to the start of grading operations the owner and grading contractor shall request a pre -grading meeting. The meeting shall be attended by the project owner/representative, the grading contractor and the Building Inspector to discuss about grading requirements and preventive measures, etc. If a pre -grading meeting is not held within 24 hours from the start of grading operations, the grading permit may be subject to suspension by the Building Inspector; b) The grading contractor shall call into the City of Rancho Cucamonga Building and Safety Department at least 1 working day in advance to request the following grading inspections prior to continuing grading operations: i) The bottom of the over -excavation; ii) Completion of Rough Grading, prior to issuance of the building permit; iii) At the completion of Rough Grading, the grading contractor or owner shall submit to the Permit Technicians (Building and Safety Front Counter) an original and a copy of the Pad Certifications to be prepared by and properly wet signed and sealed by the Civil Engineer and Soils Engineer of Record; iv) The rough grading certificates and the compaction reports will be reviewed by the Associate Engineer or a designated person and approved prior to the issuance of a building permit. www.CityofRC.us Printrd 9-20.2018+'agc4ot ip E4—E5Pg228 Project #: Project Name: Location: Project Type: DRC2018-00095 DRC2018-00092 EDR - St. Mary's Montessori School 6880 NORTH VICTORIA WINDROWS LOOP - 108947125-0000 Minor Design Review Conditional Use Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 7. All roof drainage flowing to the public right of way must drain under the sidewalk through a parkway culvert approved by the Engineering Department. This shall be shown on both the grading and drainage plan and Engineering Services Department required plans. 8. Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the permitted grading plan (or architectural site plan) set shall show in each of the typical sections and the plan view show how the separations between the building exterior and exterior ground surface meet the requirements of Sections CBC1804.31CRC R401.3, CBC2304.11.2.21CRC R317.1(2) and CBC2512.1.21CRC R703.6.2.1 of the current adopted California Building Code/Residential Code. 9. Prior to approval of the project -specific storm water quality management plan, the submit to the Building Official, or his designee, a precise grading plan showing the elevations of existing topographical features, and showing the location and proposed proposed structures and drainage of the site. Printed 912012018 WWW.C11y0RC.US E4—E5 Pg229 applicant shall location and elevations of Page 5 of 10 Project # DRC2018-00095 DRC2018-00092 Project Name EDR - St. Mary's Montessori School Location: 6880 NORTH VICTORIA WINDROWS LOOP - 108947125-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review Conditional Use Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 10, GROUND WATER PROTECTION: Prior to approval of the final project specific water quality management plan (WQMP), the WQMP document shall meet the requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board Order No. R8-2010-0036 (NPDES No- CAS 618036), the San Bernardino County Municipal Separate Storm Sewers Separation (MS4) Permit reads: Section XLD(Water Quality Management Plan Requirements).8(Groundwater Protection): Treatment Control BMPs utilizing infiltration (exclusive of incidental infiltration and BMPs not designed to primarily function as infiltration devices (such as grassy swales, detention basins, vegetated buffer strips, constructed wetlands, etc.)] must comply with the following minimum requirements to protect groundwater. a. Use of structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause or contribute to an exceedance of ground water quality objectives. b. Source control and pollution prevention control BMPs shall be implemented to protect groundwater quality. The need for pre-treatment BMPs such as sedimentation or filtration should be evaluated prior to infiltration. c. Adequate pretreatment of runoff prior to infiltration shall be required in gas stations and large commercial parking lots. (NOTE: The State Water Quality Control Board defines a large commercial parking lot as '100,000 sq. ft. or more of commercial development to include parking lot (with 100 or more vehicle traffics), OR, by means of 5,000sgft or more of allowable space designated for parking purposes'). d. Unless adequate pre-treatment of runoff is provided prior to infiltration structural infiltration treatment BMPs must not be used for areas of industrial or light industrial activity(77}, areas subject to high vehicular traffic (25,000 or more daily traffic); car washes; fleet storage areas; nurseries; or any other high threat to water quality land uses or activities. e, Class V injection wells or dry wells must not be placed in areas subject to vehicular(78) repair or maintenance activities(79), such as an auto body repair shop, automotive repair shop, new and used car dealership, specialty repair shop (e.g., transmission and muffler repair shop) or any facility that does any vehicular repair work. f. Structural infiltration BMP treatment shall not be used at sites that are known to have soil and groundwater contamination_ g. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall be located at least 100 feet horizontally from any water supply wells. h_ The vertical distance from the bottom of any infiltration structural treatment BMP to the historic high groundwater mark shall be at least 10 -feet. Where the groundwater basins do not support beneficial uses, this vertical distance criteria may be reduced, provided groundwater quality is maintained. i. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause a nuisance or pollution as defined in Water Code Section 13050. www CityorRC.us Printed 812022018 Page 6 of 10 E4—E5 Pg230 Project #- Project Name Location: Project Type: DRC2018-00095 DRC2018-00092 EDR - St. Mary's Montessori School 6880 NORTH VICTORIA WINDROWS LOOP -108947125-0000 Minor Design Review Conditional Use Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 11. NONRESIDENTIAL MANDATORY MEASURES — CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE — Prior to the issuance of any building permit the applicant shall comply with Section 5.106.10 (Grading and paving) of the current adopted California Green Building Standards Code: Construction plans shall indicate how site grading or a drainage system will manage all surface water flows to keep water from entering buildings. Examples of methods to manage surface water include, but are not limited to, the following: 1. Swales. 2. Water collection and disposal systems. 3. French drains. 4. Water retention gardens. 5. Other water measures which keep surface water away from buildings and aid in groundwater recharge. Exception: Additions and alterations not altering the drainage path. 12. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with current adopted California Building Code and/or the California Residential Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The Grading and Drainage Plan(s) shall be in substantial conformance with the approved conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan. 13. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified Engineer licensed by the State of California to perform such work. Two copies will be provided at grading and drainage plan submittal for review. Plans shall implement design recommendations per said report. 14. 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. 15. A separate Grading and Drainage Plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and wet signed by a California licensed Civil Engineer prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit. 16. The applicant shall comply with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Dust Control Measures and place a dust control sign on the project site prior to the issuance of a grading permit. All dust control sign (s) shall be located outside of the public right of way. 17. If a Rough Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit are submitted to the Building and Safety Official for review, the rough grading pian shall be a separate plan submittal and permit from Precise Grading and Drainage Pian/Permit. 18. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit the City of Rancho Cucamonga's "Memorandum of Agreement of Storm Water Quality Management Plan" shall be submitted for review and approval by the Building Official and recorded with the County Recorder's Office. 19. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall obtain a Waste Discharge Identification Number (WDID). The WDID number shall also be shown on the WQMP Site and Drainage Plan document. Printed 9/2012018 www,CityofRC us E4—E5 Pg231 Page 7 of 10 Project #: Project Name'. Location: Project Type: DRC2018-00095 DRC2018-00092 EDR - St. Mary's Montessori School 6880 NORTH VICTORIA WINDROWS LOOP -108947125-0000 Minor Design Review Conditional Use Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 20. The land owner shall provide an inspection report on a biennial basis for the structural storm water treatment devices, commonly referred to as BMPs, to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager_ The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 21. The landiproperty owner shall follow the inspection and maintenance requirements of the approved project specific Water Quality Management Plan and shall provide a copy of the inspection reports on a biennial basis to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. 22. A final project -specific Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) shall be approved by the Building and Safety Director, or his designee, and the City of Rancho Cucamonga"s "Memorandum of Storm Water Quality Management Plan" shall be recorded prior to the issuance of a grading permit or any building permit. 23. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the Final Grading and Drainage Plan shall show the accessibility path from the public right of way and the accessibility parking stalls to the building doors in conformance with the current adopted California Building Code. All accessibility ramps shall show sufficient detail including gradients, elevations, and dimensions and comply with the current adopted California Building Code. 24. Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the latest adopted California Plumbing Code. Private storm drain improvements shall be shown on the grading and drainage plan. 25. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy or final sign off by the Building inspector the engineer of record shall certify the functionality of the storm water quality management plan (WQMP) storm water treatment devices and best management practices (BMP)_ 26. Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WQMP shall include a copy of the project Conditions of Approval. 27. The Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (PWQMP) has been deemed "Acceptable". Prior to the issuance of a grading permit a final project -specific Water Quality Management Plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the Building Official. 28_ Prior to the issuance of a building permit or Englneering Services Department issued right of way permit, the applicant shall submit to the Building Oficial, or his designee, a final project specific water quality management plan for review and approval, and shall have said document recorded with the San Bernardino County Recorder's Office. 29. Prior to the start of landscaping operations, the landscape architect and the landscape contractor shall provide a sample of the weed fabric barrier to the Project Planner, City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department. The weed barrier shall be permeable. Printed 9j20I2018 www.Ci,.ycfRC.us E4—E5 Pg232 Page 8 of 10 Project #: DRC2018-00095 DRC2018-00092 Project Name: EDR - St. Mary's Montessori School Location: 6880 NORTH VICTORIA WINDROWS LOOP - 108947125-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review Conditional Use Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 30. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the Final Project -Specific Water Quality Management Plan shall include a completed copy of "Worksheet H: Factor of Safety and Design Infiltration Worksheet" located in Appendix D "Section VII — Infiltration Rate Evaluation Protocol and Factor of Safety Recommendations, ..." of the San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans. The infiltration study shall include the Soil Engineer's recommendations for Appendix D, Table VI1.3: Suitability Assessment Related Considerations for Infiltration Facility Safety Factors". 31. Prior to approval of the final project -specific water quality management plan the applicant shall have a soils engineer prepare a project -specific infiltration study for the project for the purposes of storm water quality treatment. The infiltration study and recommendations shall follow the guidelines in the current adopted "San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans". 32. Roof water is not permitted to flow over the public parkway and shall be directed to an under parkway culvert per City of Rancho Cucamonga requirements prior to issuance of a grading permit. 33. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy by the Building Official, or his designee, the civil engineer of record shall file a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Post Construction Storm Water Treatment Devices As -Built Certificate with the Environmental Programs Coordinator, City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Services Department. 34. Section 1.5.1, Table 1-1 Priority Projects, Category No. 1, of the San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans reads "All significant re -development projects — defined as the addition or replacement of 5,000 or more square feet (sq. ft.) of impervious surface on an already developed site subject to discretionary approval of the permitting jurisdiction. In addition: Where re -development results in an increase of 50°, or more of the impervious surfaces of a previously existing developed site, the numeric sizing criteria discussed in Section 4 applies to the entire development. The project is showing square feet of existing impervious area. The project is showing square feet of proposed and/or removal and replacement of impervious area. The proposed/removaltreplacement impervious area equals or exceeds 50% of the existing impervious area, the project is conditioned, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, to prepare a final project -specific water quality management plan to treat the storm water runoff of the entire development's impervious area. Standard Conditions of Approval 1. "No trespassing" signs listing California Penal code section 602, shall be installed at all construction site access points. www.CityofRC.us Punted 9l2a12018 Page 9 of 10 E4 --E5 Pg233 Project #: DRC2018-00095 DRC2018-00092 Project Name: EDR - St. Mary's Montessori School Location: 6880 NORTH VICTORIA WINDROWS LOOP - 108947125-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review Conditional Use Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Standard Conditions of Approval 2. A minimum of twelve (12) surveillance cameras shall be installed onsite, outside the buildings, with the intent to capture digital images of subjects entering, exiting, and vehicle and pedestrian traffic approaching the business. Cameras shall be maintained in working conditions at all time. Prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall contact the Rancho Cucamonga Police Department for an inspection of the security cameras. Video recordings of surveillance cameras shall be nothing less than NTSC (National Television System Committee, the NTSC is the analog video color format used to broadcast television signals) standards, with a minimum of 1080p resolution. A minimum of 14 days surveillance video shall be kept and relinquished upon request by the city of Rancho Cucamonga, The Sheriff's Department, or a designated agent. The applicant(s) or on-site manager(s) shall maintain the recording system and cameras in working condition. 3_ The exterior dumpster enclosures shall be constructed per City of Rancho Cucamonga Standards. Any gates or doors providing access into the enclosure shall be secured by a locking device of substantial design to prohibit unwanted entry. If openings in the design of the enclosure are proposed, all openings shall be screened, gates, or some other method must be used to prevent unwanted person from entering the dumpster enclosure. The dumpster area shall be equipped with lighting of sufficient power to illuminate and make it easily discernible the appearance and conduct of persons on or about the dumpster area, 4. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy or final sign off by the Building Inspector, the applicant shall obtain final approval from the San Bernardino County Sheriffs Department. Printed 912U12018 1NWW-cl1yofRC.uS Page 14 of 70 E4—E5Pg234 DATE: September 26, 2018 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Candyce Burnett, City Planne CN INITIATED BY: Dominick Perez, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL_ ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2017-00658 — CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS - A proposal to amend the General Plan land use designation from Industrial Park to Mixed Use in conjunction with a proposed mixed-use development comprised of 2 buildings consisting of 207 multi -family units, including 14 live/work units and 14,300 square feet of commercial/office area on a 5.21 acre site located within the Industrial Park (IP) District and Haven Avenue Overlay (HADD) District at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and 26th Street at 10451 26th Street — APN: 0209-131-01. Related Files: Pre -App Review DRC2016-00428, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017-00657, Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656, Design Review DRC2017- 00654, Minor Exception DRC2017-00872, and Uniform Sign Program DRC2017-00659. A Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was prepared for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENT DRC2017-00657 — CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS - A proposal to amend the Zoning Map to change the zoning designation from Industrial Park (1P) District to Mixed Use (MU) District in conjunction with a proposed mixed-use development comprised of 2 buildings consisting of 207 multi -family units, including 14 live/work units and 14,300 square feet of commercial/office area on a 5.21 acre site located within the Industrial Park (IP) District and Haven Avenue Overlay (HAOD) District at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and 26th Street at 10451 26th Street — APN: 0209-131-01. Related Files: Pre -App Review DRC2016-00428, General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658, Development Code Amendment DRC2017- 00656, Design Review DRC2017-00654, Minor Exception DRC2017-00872, and Uniform Sign Program DRC2017-00659. A Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was prepared for consideration, ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DRC2017-00656 -- CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS - A proposal to amend the Development Code to allow for residential uses within the Haven Avenue Overlay (HAOD) District when part of a mixed-use project. This amendment is being proposed in conjunction with a mixed-use development comprised of 2 buildings consisting of 207 multi- family units, including 14 live/work units and 14,300 square feet of commercial/office area on a 5.21 -acre site located within the Industrial Park (IP) E6—E11 P1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA DRC2017-00658, ZMA DRC2017-00657, DCA DRC2017-00656, DR DRC2017-00654, USP DRC2017-00872, ME DRC2017-00872 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS September 26, 2018 Page 2 District and Haven Avenue Overlay (HAOD) District at the southwest comer of Haven Avenue and 26th Street at 10451 26th Street — APN: 0209-131-01. Related Files: Pre -App Review DRC2016-00428, General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017-00657, Design Review DRC2017-00654, Minor Exception DRC2017-00872, and Uniform Sign Program DRC2017-00659. A Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was prepared for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2017-00654 -- CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS - A proposal to construct a mixed-use development comprised of 2 buildings consisting of 207 multi -family units, including 14 live/work units and 14,300 square feet of commercial/office area on a 5.21 acre site located within the Industrial Park (IP) District and Haven Avenue Overlay (HADD) District at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and 26th Street at 10451 26th Street — APN: 0209-131-01. Related Files: Pre -App Review DRC2016-00428, General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017-00657, Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656, Minor Exception DRC2017-00872 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2017-00659. A Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was prepared for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2017-00872 — CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS - A proposal establish a uniform sign program to set sign guidelines and standards for a proposed mixed-use development comprised of 2 buildings consisting of 207 multi -family units, including 14 live/work units and 14,300 square feet of commercial/office area on a 5.21 acre site located within the Industrial Park (IP) District and Haven Avenue Overlay (HADD) District at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and 26th Street at 10451 26th Street — APN: 0209-131-01. Related Files: Pre -App Review DRC2016-00428, General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017-00657, Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656, Design Review DRC2017- 00654 and Minor Exception DRC2017-00872. A Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was prepared for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2017- 00872 — CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS - A proposal to reduce the amount of required off-street parking by approximately twenty-one (21 %) percent for a mixed-use development comprised of 2 buildings consisting of 207 multi -family units, including 14 live/work units and 14,300 square feet of commercial/office area on a 5.21 acre site located within the Industrial Park (IP) District and Haven Avenue Overlay (HAOD) District at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and 26th Street at 10451 26th Street — APN: 0209-131-01. Related Files: Pre -App Review DRC2016-00428, General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017-00657, Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656, Design Review DRC2017- E6—E11 P2 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA DRC2017-00658, ZMA DRC2017-00657, DCA DRC2017-00656, DR DRC2017-00654, USP DRC2017-00872, ME DRC2017-00872 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS September 26, 2018 Page 3 00654 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2017-00659. A Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was prepared for consideration. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission take the following actions: 1) Recommend the City Council approve General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017-00657, and Development Code Amendment DRC2017- 00656 through adoption of the attached Resolutions with conditions and adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for the project; and 2) Approve Design Review DRC2017-00654, Minor Exception DRC2017-00872, and Uniform Sign Program DRC2017-00659 through adoption of the attached Resolutions with conditions. PROJECT REVIEW BACKGROUND: A Pre -Application Review (DRC2016-00428) workshop was held on July 13, 2016, to discuss the project with the Planning Commission (Exhibit R). At that time, staff explained the City's vision of Haven Avenue Overlay District and that the purpose of the district is to establish a high-end office corridor with special commercial and service related retail to serve office users. Staff also mentioned that, according to the Development Code, the "Haven Avenue Overlay Zoning District is intended to result in a progressive, sophisticated, and urban style of development." It was also noted that the site is located 1) within walking distance (approximately 114 mile) from multiple active Omnitrans bus stops, which serves Route 81 (north and southbound) along Haven Avenue, and Route 85 (east and westbound) along Arrow Route, 2) along the future Omnitrans West Valley Connector Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Route, which is anticipated to provide services operating as early as mid -2019, 3) about 1.5 miles driving/walking distance to the west of the Rancho Cucamonga Metrolink Station at Milliken Avenue and, 4) within 0.6 miles of the Civic Center/City Hall (approximately a 14 minute walk distance) and approximately 1 mile from major shopping and restaurants (approximately a 22 minute walking distance). The Commission generally gave positive feedback with regard to the design and concept of the mixed-use project. The Planning Commission also noted the importance of providing sufficient parking. As the Development Code needed to be amended to enable this type of project, they indicated that any amendments still needed to be compatible with the existing development in the area."" It should be noted that this project is being processed concurrently with applications to amend the Development Code (DRC2017-00656), General Plan (DRC2017-00658) and Zoning Map (DRC2017-00657). The Development Code Amendment proposes to allow residential uses within the Haven Avenue Overlay District (HAOD) as part of a mixed-use development in the overlay district. The General Plan Amendment proposes a change to the General Plan land use designation for the project site from Industrial Park to Mixed Use. The Zoning Map Amendment proposes to a change the zoning designation of the site from Industrial Park (IP) District to Mixed Use. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: The project site is located at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and 26th Street on a 5.21 - acre parcel. The project site is partially developed with a 20,000 -square foot industrial building E6—E 11 P3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA DRC2017-00658, ZMA DRC2017-00657, DCA DRC2017-00656, DR DRC2017-00654, USP DRC2017-00872, ME DRC2017-00872 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS September 26, 2018 Page 4 and outdoor storage area. The site has frontage along three streets: Haven Avenue to the east, 26th Street to the north, and Marine Avenue to the west. The frontages along all these streets are partially improved with street improvements such as sidewalks, curbs, etc. The existing land use, General Plan and zoning designations for the project site and adjacent properties are as follows: ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant proposes to demolish the existing industrial building onsite and construct one 5 -story building (Building A), one 4 -story building (Building B), associated improvements including a parking lot, landscaping, and amenities. The development, when completed, will contain a total of 207 multi -family units (for rent), including 14 livetwork units, and 14,300 square feet of commercial area for office/retail uses. Building A, located along Haven Avenue, contains all of the project's live/work and commercial uses on the first floor and part of the second floor, and 93 multi -family residential units. Building B, generally located along 26th Street west of Building A, contains 114 residential units and a majority of the residential amenities. Both buildings are elevator served. The project proposes a total density of 39.8 dwelling units per acre, which is complies with Table 17.36.020-2 (Development Standards for Mixed Use Zoning Districts) of the Development Code that allows for a maximum of 50 dwelling units per acre. The proposed buildings have a contemporary architectural style and will incorporate building material consisting of stucco, decorative masonry, fiber cement boarding, corrugated metal, storefront glazing and metal balcony railing and storefront awnings. The building's facade provides a sufficient amount of articulation, with recessed windows and wall planes. The amount of glass added to the first floor of the commercial and amenity areas as well as modern awning design also enhances the design of the building. Overall, the project achieves the City's required "360 -degree" architecture and vision for Haven Avenue, which is to create a unique, high-end, progressive, urban -style corridor that provides a mix of uses such as office, retail and services uses specific to the Haven Avenue Overlay. The project has a maximum overall building height of 60 feet. The project has a building streetscape setback of 33.1 feet along Haven Avenue, 14.8 feet along 26th Street, and 104.8 feet along E6—E11 P4 Land Use General Ilan iY Zoning Warehouse and industrial Park/ Haven Avenue Industrial Park (IP) District/ Site Outdoor Storage Office Overlay Industrial Avenue Haven Avenue Haven Avenue Overlay District Industrial Park (IP) District/ North Multitenant Office Buildings Office Overlay Haven Avenue Overlay District South 9.65 -acre Vacant Industrial Park/ Haven Avenue Industrial Park (IP) District/ Parcel Office Overlay Haven Avenue Overlay District Gas Station and Industrial Park/ Industrial Park (IP) District/ East Multitenant Office Haven Avenue Buildings Office Overlay Haven Avenue Overlay District West Single -Family Residences Low Residential Low (L) Residential District ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant proposes to demolish the existing industrial building onsite and construct one 5 -story building (Building A), one 4 -story building (Building B), associated improvements including a parking lot, landscaping, and amenities. The development, when completed, will contain a total of 207 multi -family units (for rent), including 14 livetwork units, and 14,300 square feet of commercial area for office/retail uses. Building A, located along Haven Avenue, contains all of the project's live/work and commercial uses on the first floor and part of the second floor, and 93 multi -family residential units. Building B, generally located along 26th Street west of Building A, contains 114 residential units and a majority of the residential amenities. Both buildings are elevator served. The project proposes a total density of 39.8 dwelling units per acre, which is complies with Table 17.36.020-2 (Development Standards for Mixed Use Zoning Districts) of the Development Code that allows for a maximum of 50 dwelling units per acre. The proposed buildings have a contemporary architectural style and will incorporate building material consisting of stucco, decorative masonry, fiber cement boarding, corrugated metal, storefront glazing and metal balcony railing and storefront awnings. The building's facade provides a sufficient amount of articulation, with recessed windows and wall planes. The amount of glass added to the first floor of the commercial and amenity areas as well as modern awning design also enhances the design of the building. Overall, the project achieves the City's required "360 -degree" architecture and vision for Haven Avenue, which is to create a unique, high-end, progressive, urban -style corridor that provides a mix of uses such as office, retail and services uses specific to the Haven Avenue Overlay. The project has a maximum overall building height of 60 feet. The project has a building streetscape setback of 33.1 feet along Haven Avenue, 14.8 feet along 26th Street, and 104.8 feet along E6—E11 P4 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA DRC2017-00658, ZMA DRC2017-00657, DCA DRC2017-00656, DR DRC2017-00654, USP DRC2017-00872, ME DRC2017-00872 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS September 26, 2018 Page 5 Marine Avenue. The interior side setback at the south property line will be 5 feet. The building height complies with City standards, which according to Table 17.36.020-2 allows for a maximum building height of 75 feet. Additionally, the building height is consistent with that of other buildings within the Haven Avenue Overly, including the Barton Plaza buildings located at the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and Foothill Boulevard. These buildings have an approximate maximum building height of 60 feet. Lastly, the setbacks for the proposed buildings comply with the City's mixed-use standard for building setbacks. The standards allow for up to a 75 percent reduction along Haven Avenue and up to a 100 percent reduction along 26th Street and Marine Avenue. The project contains a total landscape coverage of 22,561 square feet (10 percent site coverage) and a minimum of 86 trees placed throughout the parking lot and along the perimeter and building frontage. Enhanced landscaping within the perimeter planter along Marine Avenue consisting of groundcover, shrubs, hedges, 24 -inch box Magnolia trees, and 5 -foot tall decorative wrought iron fence provides a buffer between the adjacent single-family neighborhood to the west of the project and gated parking area for the project (Exhibit N). Residential amenities for the project include an outdoor pool, spa, barbeque area, fireplace with group seating, fitness room, club room, 1,450 square foot roof top deck, and bicycle storage room. The project also includes 2,230 square feet of co -working office for residential use only, which will be located on the third floor above the office and retail area. A retail plaza area, located at the corner of Haven Avenue and 26th Street adjacent to the office and retail area, provides additional common open space area for future tenants and customers. Enhanced paving is proposed throughout the project site, including at the drive entrances, within the public plaza area and throughout other common open space areas. The project is in compliance with the landscape standards for Mixed Use (MU) District, which requires a minimum landscape coverage of 10 percent. The project also contains a sufficient number of amenities for the residents, which requires a minimum of six recreational amenities. B. Parking: Based on Section 17.64 of the Development Code, a total of 480 parking spaces are required as follows: E6—E11 P5 Number of Units/ Square Footage Parking Ratio Required Parking Spaces Studio 32 1.3/unit 42 LiveAAlork 1 Bedroom 14 1.5/unit 21 1 Bedroom 63 1.5/unit 95 2 Bedroom 98 2/unit 196 Guests 207 1/3 units 69 Office/Retail 14,300 1/250 57 Total Required 480 Total Off -Street Provided 380 Total On -Street Provided 30 E6—E11 P5 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA DRC2017-00658, ZMA DRC2017-00657, DCA DRC2017-00656, DR DRC2017-00654, USP DRC2017-00872, ME DRC2017-00872 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS September 26, 2018 Page 6 The project includes a total of 380 off-street (on-site) parking spaces and an additional 30 on -street parking spaces along 26th Street and Marine Avenue. This consists of 300 resident parking spaces (286 gated spaces and 14 ungated spaces), 80 public parking spaces, 16 on -street parking spaces along 26th Street and 14 on -street parking spaces along Marine Avenue. A total of 207 spaces are covered (38 "tuck under" garage spaces and 174 carport spaces). The applicant is proposing to develop the project with reduced parking. Per Section 17.64.060.D, (Reduction in Parking Requirements) of the Development Code, mixed use projects may be proposed with reduced parking_ However, reductions in parking must be justified by a parking study and subject to a peer review by an independent traffic/parking consultant. According to a Parking Demand Analysis that was prepared by Linscott Law and Greenspan Engineers on January 11, 2018, the 380 off-street parking spaces provided by the project will be sufficient for the number of units and commercial square footage. The Analysis states that actual parking demand ratios, according to ITE Parking Generation (4th Edition), the Urban Land Institute's (ULI's) Shared Parking (2nd Edition publication), the Parking Reform Made Easy publication and application of parking ratios developed from field studies conducted at similar sites, are significantly less than the parking ratios that the City requires. Table 2 and 3 in the Analysis provide a theoretical breakdown of the parking demand for the project and indicate, based on ULI - Urban Land Institute "Shared Parking," Second Edition, 2005, that the project will be mostly impacted at 7:00 pm on weekdays. However, the project will still maintain a surplus of 5 parking spaces at this time and therefore should not create negative impacts to the on-site tenants and businesses or adjacent residents or businesses. Gated spaces are separated from the public parking spaces by decorative wrought iron fencing that is generally placed along the entire south and west property lines. Vehicular access to the off-street parking areas of the project is provided along Haven Avenue and at two points along 26th Street. The westerly access along 26th Street will serve for emergency vehicle access only. Finally, it should be noted that the applicant does not currently have a property interest in a small portion of the southeast corner of the project site. A condition has been added to require the applicant to obtain the requisite property interest. By way of background, the property at issue is owned by the City in fee_ The City acquired the property as part of the Haven Avenue Grade Separation Project over ten years ago as a potential drive aisle from Haven for the adjacent property to the south. In 2007, however, the City entered into an agreement with the property owner to provide the adjacent property with an alternative means of access from Haven. Accordingly. the City and property owner agreed that the City need not construct the drive aisle. C. General Pian Amendment DRC2017-00658: The project involves a proposal to amend the General Plan land use designation for the site from Industrial Park to Mixed Use. Currently, the site is occupied by an industrial warehouse with outdoor storage of trucks and construction materials. To the west of the site, across Marine Avenue, is a residential neighborhood. The amendment and project will cause in the removal of the industrial use, which will eliminate the negative impacts created by the on-site business, including noise, odor, large truck traffic, and the site's overall aesthetics. Furthermore, the amendment will E6—E11 P6 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA DRC2017-00658, ZMA DRC2017-00657, DCA DRC2017-00656, DR DRC2017-00654, USP DRC2017-00872, ME DRC2017-00872 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS September 26, 2018 Page 7 allow the project to be developed consistent with the City's Mixed -Use standards, which include reduced setbacks, parking reductions, and density. The project is in compliance with General Plan Policy LU -1.2, which encourages the designation of appropriate land uses to serve local needs and be able to respond to regional market needs, as appropriate. The project will be providing new housing options for the community. The project also incorporates 14 live/work units and commercial space that should serve the immediate community. The project is consistent with General Plan Policy LU -2.1 that encourages planning for vibrant, pedestrian friendly mixed use and high density residential areas at strategic infill locations along transit routes. Because of the project's proximity to multiple active bus stops, future Omnitrans West Valley Connector Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Route, the Rancho Cucamonga Metrolink Station at Milliken Avenue and the Civic Center/City Hall and major shopping and restaurants along Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue, staff believes that the project will help encourage public transportation usage, promote walkability within the vicinity of the development and will therefore reduce vehicle trips to and from the site. The project is also in compliance with General Plan Policy LU -2.4, which promotes complementary infill development, rehabilitation, and re -use that contributes positively to the surrounding residential neighborhood areas. The project involves the re -development of an underserving industrial site with a housing and commercial use that is expected to positively contribute to the City by providing additional office, retail and services uses to nearby residences and businesses within the immediate vicinity. The project is also consistent with General Plan Policy LU3.4 that promotes development that is sustainable in its use of land and limits impacts to natural resources, energy and air and water quality. The proposed project involves the re -development of a site that contains an existing industrial use that will be demolished and replaced with a mixed-use development. The site does not contain natural resources that are anticipated to be disturbed and is not anticipated to create any impacts to air or water quality based on an environmental assessment that was prepared for this project. The project will also provide several residential amenities including a shared office space that is intended to encourage onsite residents to use the space for work and reduce trips to and from the site. Lastly, the project complies with the General Plan Policy PS -12.3, which encourages development of transit -oriented and infill development and encourage a mix of uses that foster walking and alternative transportation. The project is in close proximity to existing bus and transit lines which will encourage future tenants to use alternate methods of transportation. D. Zoning Mao Amendment DRC2017-00657: The project also involves a proposal to amend the Zoning Map to re -zone the subject property from Industrial Park (IP) District to Mixed Use (MU) District. This amendment is necessary for the zoning of the site to maintain consistency with the General Plan. Also, as with the General Plan Amendment, the amendment to the zoning designation for the site is necessary to allow for the proposed multi -family residential use, which is currently not an allowed use within the City's industrial E6 --E 11 P7 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA DRC2017-00658, ZMA DRC2017-00657, DCA DRC2017-00656, DR DRC2017-00654, USP DRC2017-00872, ME DRC2017-00872 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS September 26, 2018 Page 8 district area. It should be noted that the Zoning Map Amendment will not impact the Haven Avenue Overlay District_ E_ Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656: The applicant proposes to amend the Development Code in order to allow for residential uses within the Haven Avenue Overlay District, when part of a mixed-use project. As mentioned in the Project and Site Description section above, the site is currently located within the Industrial Park (IP) District and Haven Avenue Overlay District. At this time, the Haven Avenue Overlay District does not allow for residential uses. The specific change to the Development Code would occur to Table 17.38.040-1 (Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements for Haven Avenue Overlay Zoning District) and would specifically allow for multi -family residential uses within the Haven Avenue Overly District when constructed as part of a mixed-use project (Exhibit S). F. Uniform Sign Program DRC2017-00659: The applicant also proposes to establish a Uniform Sign Program for the development. The program contains the location and conceptual design of all signs for the residential and commercial components of the project. The sign types include proposed project identification signs, directional and code -related signs (ie. ADA parking, fire lane and stop signs) and amenity, retail and office tenant 1D signs. The project ID and commercial sign types are generally proposed to be located along the frontage of Building A, adjacent to Haven Avenue and 26th Street. The design, placement and colors of the project signage compliment the design of the architecture on-site and are consistent with the City's signage standards. G. Minor Exception DRC2017-00872: As mentioned in the Design Review Section above, the project contains a total of 380 off-street (on-site) parking spaces and an additional 30 on - street parking spaces along 26th Street and Marine Avenue. Per Section 17.64 of the Development Code (Parking and Loading Standards), a total of 480 parking spaces are required to be provided, based on the square footage of the non-residential building area and the number and bedroom type of the residential units. Therefore, the project has a parking deficiency of 19 percent (100 parking stalls). The applicant submitted an application for a Minor Exception with a Parking Demand Analysis, prepared by Linscott Law and Greenspan Engineers, dated January 11, 2018, and is requesting a reduction of the required parking to allow for the 19 percent parking deficiency. The parking study was peer reviewed by a third -party consultant, Nelson Nygaard Consulting Associates, which concluded on May 24, 2018. Nelson Nygaard Consulting Associates concurred with results of the Parking Demand Analysis that states the project has a theoretical surplus of 5 off-street parking spaces at its peak weekly hour of 7:00 pm and therefore contains a sufficient amount of parking for the residential and commercial development. 1. Finding: The Minor Exception is consistent with the General Pian or any applicable specific plan or development agreement. Fact: The reduction of parking requirements is consistent with the proposed amendment to the General Plan, which contemplates a designation of the land use of the project site to Mixed Use. Per Section 17.64.060.D. of the Development Code, mixed use projects are eligible for parking reductions, subject to the review and approval of a parking study that is peer reviewed by an independent third -party consultant. E6—E11p8 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA DRC2017-00658, ZMA DRC2017-00657, DCA DRC2017-00656, DR DRC2017-00654, USP DRC2017-00872, ME DRC2017-00872 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS September 26, 2018 Page 9 2. Finding: The proposed development is compatible with the existing and proposed land uses in the surrounding area. Facts: The proposed high density mixed use project is located on a major commercial thoroughfare that provides bus service. Furthermore, the project is in proximity to similar multi -family projects and nearby commercial and office land uses. The project will be within walking distance of these uses. 3. Finding: The proposed exception to the specific development standard(s) is necessary to allow creative design solutions compatible with the desires of the community and/or to accommodate unique site conditions. Fact: The proposed reduction in the parking standards is necessary to allow increased residential density on the project site. The General Plan has a stated policy (Policy LU - 3.8) to higher densities near transit centers and along transit corridors, allowing Mixed Use development, and encouraging and accommodating pedestrian movement. The proposed project is located adjacent to a major arterial and provides the opportunity for a mixed-use development with convenient access to alternative transportation modes. Additionally, the applicant will provide 30 on -street parking spaces that will offset the 100 parking space reduction. 4. Finding: The granting of the Minor Exception will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district and will not be detrimental to public health safety or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvement in the vicinity. Fact: The proposed reduction in the required number of parking spaces is not a grant of special privilege in that the Development Code allows flexibility to reduce the required number of parking spaces where the applicant has demonstrated that the project will provide adequate parking for all on-site uses. This is particularly true with mixed-use projects, such as this, where services are available on-site and therefore reduce vehicle demand. The applicant has submitted a parking study (Linscott, Law, & Greenspan, Engineers; October 9, 2017) verifying the adequacy of the proposed number of on-site parking spaces. H. Neighborhood Meeting: On March 5, 2018, the applicant held a neighborhood meeting at the Best Western Plus Heritage Inn located at 8179 Spruce Avenue. All property owners within 660 feet of the subject property were notified. Attendees included the applicant, architect, project planner and a total of eight (8) nearby property owners/residents. The project applicant and architect presented the project to the attendees, which followed with questions and answers. The questions generally related to parking, access and site design, including: 1. Question: Are there access points along Marine Avenue? Answer: No. Access is only provided along Haven Avenue and 26th Street. 2. Question: Will onsite parking be assigned to residents? Answer: Yes. Residents will be assigned specific parking spaces. E6—E 11 P9 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA DRC2017-00658, ZMA DRC2017-00657, DCA DRC2017-00656, DR DRC2017-00654, USP DRC2017-00872, ME DRC2017-00872 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS September 26, 2018 Page 10 3. Is there on street parking? Answer: Yes. There is a total of 30 parking spaces along the project side of Marine Avenue and 26th Street. 4. Does the project go down to the rail? Answer: No. The property to the south is not a part of the project. No objections were presented or stated at the meeting. One homeowner that was present at the meeting indicated support for the removal of the existing industrial use that currently occupies the project site and construction of the proposed project. Design Review Committee: The project was reviewed by the Design Review Committee (Oaxaca, Macias, and Granger) on July 3, 2018. Staff presented the item and the applicant followed by expanding on the project's design. The Committee discussed the project as well as the secondary issues regarding signage and connectivity, that were indicated in the Design Review Comments (Exhibit R). The first secondary comment regarding the uniform sign program indicated that the program was at a conceptual level and did not include signage details such as the proposed dimensions. The applicant indicated that an updated version of the Uniform Sign Program would be submitted shortly with the additional details that are required. The applicant has since submitted a revised Uniform Sign Program that includes the necessary details. The second item discussed in the secondary issues sections was in relation to the project's connectivity to the adjacent property located south of the project site. The comment was added by staff to obtain feedback from the Design Review Committee as to whether they felt the project site should plan for one or more future vehicular or pedestrian access points to the property located to the south. The Committee discussed this with staff and the applicant and ultimately determined that future access, whether it be vehicular or pedestrian, could be provided upon both property owners reaching an agreement to provide such connection(s). One property owner from the adjacent neighborhood to the west attended the meeting and provided comments regarding the design of the site. The property owner stated that the design should match more with the neighborhood to the west, should not be set so close to the street and should be shorter in height. The applicant indicated that the project was designed to meet the proposed standards allowed in the Development Code for Mixed Use projects. The applicant provided their contact information to the concerns resident and indicated they could reach out to further discuss their concerns. To staff's knowledge, this has not been done as of the preparation of this report. The Committee complimented the architectural design of the project and felt that it was an appropriate use for the project site. The Committee recommended that the project move forward to the Planning Commission for their review. Technical Review Committee: The project was reviewed by the Technical Review Committee on July 3, 2018. No issues were raised. The Committee recommended that the project move forward to the Planning Commission. Their conditions of approval are included in the attached Resolution. E6—E11 P10 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA DRC2017-00658, ZMA DRC2017-00657, DCA DRC2017-00656, DR DRC2017-00654, USP DRC2017-00872, ME DRC2017-00872 - CHARLES ,JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS September 26, 2018 Page 11 K. SB18 and AB52 Tribal Consultation: In accordance with SB18 and AB52, the City contacted Pauma Band of Luiseno Indians- Pauma & Yuima Reservation, San Fernando Band of Mission Indians, Serrano Nation of Mission Indians, Gabrielino-Tongva Tribe, Gabrielino ITongva Nation, Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council, GabrielenolTongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians, Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians, Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians — Kizh Nation, and Morongo were contacted between November 21, 2017 and February 15, 2018, to determine interest in engaging in consultation related to the potential impact to cultural resources as a result of the project. Following this, the City received a response from 2 of the tribes, San Manuel Band of Mission Indians and Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians — Kizh Nation. The San Manuel Band of Mission Indians indicated no concerns with the project, but recommended the inclusion of 3 conditions of approval, which were incorporated as mitigation measures (MM TCR -2 through MM TCR -4). The Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians — Kizh Nation, through consultation, requested to have a Tribal Monitor onsite during ground disturbing activities, which was also included as a mitigation measure (MM TCR -1). These measures will help reduce potential impacts to Tribal Cultural Resources that may be uncovered throughout the construction process. L. Public Art: This project is required to provide public art as outlined in Chapter 17.124 of the Development Code. Based on the number of residential units and the square footage of the commercial and office components of the project the total art value required per Section 17.124.020.C. is $169,578. The applicant is working to incorporate public art as part of the project. A condition has been included pursuant to the Development Code that requires the public art requirement to be met prior to occupancy. M. Environmental Assessment: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (" CEQK) and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project was prepared by LSA Associates, Inc. dated August 14, 2018, and was peer reviewed by MIG, Inc, a consultant contracted by the City to review this document. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures related to Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Hazardous and Waste Materials, Noise, Transportation and Traffic and Tribal Cultural Resources, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. The mitigation measures that the applicant will be required to comply with will reduce potential impacts to migratory birds, cultural and Tribal cultural resources and reduce noise impacts during the project's construction, as well as potential impacts that may be created upon operation of the development, such as traffic related impacts. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. A Mitigation Monitoring Program has also been prepared to ensure implementation of, and compliance with, the mitigation measures for the project. FISCAL IMPACT: The project site currently is assessed an annual property tax. Per the Fiscal Impact Analysis that was prepared for this project by Stanley R. Hoffman Associates on December 4, 2017, a percentage of this annual tax estimated at $16,000 will be shared with the City. The proposed E6—E11 P11 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA DRC2017-00658, ZMA DRC2017-00657, DCA DRC2017-00656, DR DRC2017-00654, USP DRC2017-00872, ME DRC2017-00872 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS September 26, 2018 Page 12 development will increase the value of the project site and the City's annual share of the property tax will increase accordingly. The project proponent also will be responsible for paying one-time impact fees estimated at $2.6 million. These fees are intended to address the increased demand for City services due to the proposed project. The following types of services that these impact fees would support include the following: Residential Development Impact Fees - Transportation Impact Fees ($1.1 million), Library Impact Fees ($86,319), Animal Center Impact Fees ($18,319), Police Impact Fees ($42,849), Park/Recreation Fees ($1.28 million), and Non -Residential Development Impact Fees —Transportation Impact Fees and Police Impact Fees ($95,352) . It should also be noted that the City's Development Impact Fees periodically increase. The project will also create temporary jobs during the construction of the site and permanent jobs during the operation of the site. The number of permanent jobs that the project will generate in unknown at this time as the tenant(s) has/have not yet been determined. COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: MID AND LONG-RANGE PLANNING Review areas with industrial zoning along arterials for possible rezoning to permit more commercial/office uses. Example of one such area is Rochester/Jack Benny by Quakes Stadium. Although the project does not propose a use that consists entirely of commercial building area, the proposed mixed-use project does involve the rezoning of a site currently designated Industrial Park (IP) District to Mixed Use (MU) District and the construction of 207 residential units and over 14,000 square feet of commercial space (retail/office). Staff believes this will be a benefit to the adjacent residential community and surrounding businesses as it provides additional shopping and office opportunities that will be within walking distance. Additionally, the project is consistent with General Plan Goal LU -2, that states the City should facilitate sustainable and attractive infill development that compliments surrounding neighborhoods and is accessible to pedestrians, bicycles, transit and automobiles. Because the project site is located within close proximity to multiple active Omnitrans bus stops, future Omnitrans West Valley Connector Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Route, is about 1.5 miles driving/walking distance to the west of the Rancho Cucamonga Metrolink Station at Milliken Avenue and is within 0.6 miles of the Civic Center/City Hall and approximately 1 mile from major shopping and restaurants, this project meets the above mentioned General Plan goal. Lastly, the project is consistent with General Plan Goal LU -3, which encourages sustainable development patterns that link transportation improvements and planned growth, create a healthy balance of jobs and housing, and protect the natural environment. The proposed project involves the redevelopment of a site that contains an existing industrial use that will be demolished and replaced with a mixed use development will provide a combination of 207 multifamily residential units as well as 14,300 square feet of commercial building area. The project will also provide several residential amenities including a shared office space that is intended to encourage onsite residents to use the space for work and reduce trips to and from the site. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing with a large 118th page legal advertisement 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. To date, staff has been contacted by E6—El1P12 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA DRC2017-00658, ZMA DRC2017-00657, DCA DRC2017-00656, DR DRC2017-00654, USP DRC2017-00872, ME DRC2017-00872 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS September 26, 2018 Page 13 four separate individuals, either to discuss the design of the project, or request copies of the Mitigated Negative Declaration that was circulated for this project. Staff visited the site to discuss the proposal with one of the neighboring property owners. Comments expressed by the property owner at the site visit included concerns regarding (1) the traffic created by the project, (2) the height of the proposed building and (3) the setback of the buildings from the property line. In regard to the concerns relating to height and setbacks, staff indicated that the project is consistent with City's requirements for mixed-use projects which allow reduced setbacks. Staff also noted that the current zoning of the subject property, Industrial Park (IP) District and Haven Avenue Overlay District allows for buildings by right with a maximum height of up to 75 feet, per Table 17.36.020-2 of the Development Code. Regarding the traffic -related concern, staff pointed out that the project was reviewed by the City's Traffic Division and it was determined the project, subject to the traffic related mitigation measures, would not create a significant traffic impact. Lastly, written comments have been received as of the preparation of this staff report. EXHIBITS: Exhibit A - Aerial Photo Exhibit B - Site Plan Exhibit C - Fire Access Plan Exhibit D - Architectural Elevations Exhibit E - Building Plans Exhibit F - Roof Plan Exhibit G - Building Sections Exhibit H - Unit Plans (Floor Plans) Exhibit I - Carport Details Exhibit J - Trash Exhibit Exhibit K - Preliminary Grading Plan and Section Details Exhibit L - Preliminary Utility Plan Exhibit M - Preliminary WQMP Exhibit N - Conceptual Landscape Plan/Concept Design of Open Space Amenities Exhibit 0 - Uniform Sign Program Exhibit P - Planning Commission Workshop Staff Report (Pre -App Review DRC2016-00428), July 13, 2016 Exhibit Q - Table 17.38.040-1 Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements for Haven Avenue Overlay Zoning District Exhibit R - Design Review Committee Action, July 3, 2018 Exhibit S - Existing and Proposed General Plan Land Use Maps Exhibit T - Existing and Proposed Zoning Maps Exhibit U - Proposed Negative Declaration with a location map Exhibit V - Initial Study Parts I, ii and III Exhibit W - Mitigation Monitoring Program Draft Resolution of Approval for General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658 Draft Resolution of Approval for Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017-657 Draft Resolution of Approval for Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656 Draft Resolution of Approval for Design Review DRC2017-00654 Draft Resolution of Approval for Uniform Sign Program DRC2017-659 Draft Resolution of Approval for Minor Exception DRC2017-00872 E6—El1P13 =f s c FalW-Jire'Carpordtior k"jr—VAL 2:aI tow Ii o �, r t a c Sih.'In Ear T_ I� .- ; CarAQrid Co leg _ r M-"' GTRLI -rr3x. rrp 1f}trii5t _ - ; 26tI11.St BNSF Railway., r"hL Trailer M Speedway_MtTffle.' } 'F"CI�ieLLv�roni ( It wI P, r-440 eoufevard . WIA 1 MI r 3 ti Grave Adv Imaging A - } I i f a 1. i � '��+•'�'� -' s -A* I i . 9 AF h60 l� V- 7 E6—Ell P15 I w w 0 Z w w 0 as we Ug Ol ■0701 NOM MMA M1 MUOI E6—Ell P16 r. T d m E m p — N N a d C ❑ m 0 co c0 Z rn m m m t° of 2 m e a y 'm m v c N O� M y w UN1 N N N N N O d N_ a _N M m �N d 1 L J w t N% N N N N IO N y .or y C a C. a LO W N i(LC L N N N N N N cc c cc a Y a m ccca = ❑ ymv p'p n32H� dm y§ o000o A rnoimrnoi— C c c c C a�� o tummy m rLL� y a > �nnnn Q N IO N N Da99 m C OL .0 U W N W N W N L" �'�'2'Z'� C o o o O �iI ww w w uw mmmmm� m 7»W U L) d C C C C C A JUUUU �UV1 N O O r O N f 7 0 O N l7 Q l o O O � N N O O 7 EEEEE ON C J V' N N `I E!O O O g O Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q v a a a a a J J J J J M1 MUOI E6—Ell P16 r. z` Q e g a eb Pj Ey R� RRRR ARF A .y A ®MA saa 39� Eli uI as R:��� 8AA t •� 3 � � W g H P� & t � s 1 5 ssg lQ�i9 ➢ 1 121 sill a �a ��• ■ � I�1 1�1 y EXHIBIT B E6—E11 P17 0 Y 1 ®— I �� • � I, • CIG � L. I = it i•w�....wi-� ��' � �j ,' r ■11111"1 i IIIIIIIIII A\\ t' � � C ��• ■ � I�1 1�1 y EXHIBIT B E6—E11 P17 is OFw q w � ulY$LS W �eaT° � m 2 i •Q IY�O� O`G pO '9_'FS Fin nr�n W Z S W J r {{���u ' • • N � ' U _ � ' w LL 1 .L Ps EXHIBIT C E6—Ell P18 l Aflde90@09e a� 0= ole 1 0 EXHIBIT D E6-E11P19 0 N Q • HAVEN AT 26TH CONCEPT DESIGN s:. �_. �.. +aa. wrwuicu�oxv. cusps«n •mnaa seauu.n me o Material Legend 1. Melfi Panels 2. Coma w Metal 3. Fle Gement BaaN 4. Masonry 5. Sturm 6. Smre6mn C , 7. Vinyl w a_ Railing BLDG A ELEVATIONS A2.1 • ms"."s"""'""" m.,,..® HAVEN AT 26TH CONCEPT DESIGN un mW W/npYyGM� RNILW NGYCeq.RyMMN RA�:dI.I I£MYMYO. A�6 m rIm @0ff fag- l!'=-� i0m, ■ ®mOmCii�l: - ■ .m .m :v Material Legend I . Metal Panels 2. Con v w Mel.l 3. F Cem6nt Boas a Masonry 5. SWcw 6. Storemmt Glazing 1 Vinyl YtAnEow6 a Baling BLDG B ELEVATIONS A2.2 6m Material Legend MeW Peds 2 Mn ga Mesal 3. FE Cement Boats A. Masonry 5 Stucco 6 Storm Glazing e R.hng �, w HAVEN AT�j2TH�— .� CONCEPT DESIGN __ BLDG B ELEVATIONS A2.3 © v 0 v v �■ . - et - It • HAVEN AT 26TH ro a CONCEPT DESIGN ..waa... en arosa nmceawcwow�uurwmu ssssuuwa„Via Material Leciend 1, MeW Parols 2. Conegoted McUI 3. Fifer Cement BoaM 4. Masonry 5. Swan a. Ston ftnnt Glazing 7. Vinyl Wndows 3. Rating ” BLDG B COURTYARD ELEVATIONS A2.4 EXHIBIT E E6—E11 P24 X05 M 3�9 S S HE 5q9 60� mT ■C 01 mm WMA m rn m_ v N Ln HAVEN AT 26TH CONCEPT DESIGN YM� •Mq.In.G66e 0.WCMONGwOXW VLfOXNI� RdIVMYY6]Ote 7+ BUILDINGPLANI A3.1 I �".7� me«evi "`""" °e:wwo 'wern.weso HAVEN AT 26TH CONCEPT DESIGN O o m 111, u�mm �.aq.n.uerme reexon wrsuoxu.uumnuu emivaem rtenw.ry m.xie BUILDING PLAN A3.2 mre Building B ma:�au.: °OnNn° .eow.wax=.:v xw I HAVEN AT 26TH ,J' psr�em �� Meio.usaw n>xcuocucunoucq uuvanxw CONCEPT DESIGN O x . m a BUILDING PLAN FOUm L A3.3 �911AA � nlum` 1 Building B HAVEN AT 26TH 1J�,as:l°�c`emsi. A"sso xnAVENCHO uAT 6TH u CONCEPTDESIGN O exona�w vsenwxrw,xou �" n e BUILDING PLAN A3.4 EXHIBIT F E6 -E11 P29 LO cri Q �8 EXHIBIT G E6—El1P30 F1 M6701 om NWW ma Deo r Great Room rrmicm — L [Qcnen 4uWy J Ban �pI EKry II Plan 0.1 SWGO, 1 Ban 542 SF Flan B-ia SWdn,1 Ban 583 SF .•aud.a.n.w,p ���� me.snseas I iiXmaw eXm+sauam HAVEN AT 26TH mmm Ytl�mn In.MPb G(¢V MACX�CYVtl�IRi.�CiV801WM 24-M Oerk_ Plan 1-1 1 Bed. 1 Ban 729 SF CONCEPT DESIGN GR m. Plan 1-1a 1 Bed. 1 Ban 738 SF • Master11.Bed v/we Bat UNIT PLANS A5.0 m rn I m v w N Plan 1-2 1 Bed. 1 Bath 814 SF Plan LWA 1 Bed. 1 Bath 453 SF Work 89B SF L ve �,.":`�^_•"'"'"' ���'q,",�®„e„� HAVEN AT 26TH CONCEPT DESIGN uw� �...,v.e.um. u.wowcuowwawe.0 .mnaia raeaurnva.zm. Second Floor UNIT PLANS A5.1 Bear 4 eeo, z eam 1107 SF IBM G .SBSBn hmM 1J WY�. M. Bath Plan 2-1a 2 Bed. 2 Bath 11155F HAVEN AT 26TH b.Nri b.GOW& R0.VCXOCYGVOX6XGLGOBXN BAt)ut9 �I �T o 0 w lllllllllllllm CONCEPT DESIGN w.xvm.)ate Plan 2-2 2 Bad, 2 Bath 1141 SF UNIT PLANS A5.2 u BedRom 2 1'P pp' Great Room rz++zrP �I �T o 0 w lllllllllllllm CONCEPT DESIGN w.xvm.)ate Plan 2-2 2 Bad, 2 Bath 1141 SF UNIT PLANS A5.2 HIM 762 Leasing and Amenity/Club Room Spaces HHAVENAT26TH W/rq.6..4BmN NvvOxEA41IION14 /IDIIDIL Geupir.FYq ti: t ti; t v Fitness and Pool Restroom Spaces CONCEPT DESIGN I ENLARGED PLANS A5.3 BWIEtrq A - Hawn Avenue Elevation m0miZI 5) Metal Panel t 8) Metal Panel 4 • � �nv+xn ...mry m�oM�mt� swan 2) Body 2 6) Metal Panel 9)At fl 3) BOEy 3 HAVEN AT 26TH 4) Boay Texture 7) Metal Panel 3 CONCEPT DESIGN EMUM�u.Aa 1) Body 1 2) Body 2 3) Body 3 4) Bogy Texture 5) Mat& Parcel t 6) Metal Panel 7) Met& Panty 3 8) Metal Parcel 4 9) Accent 1 10)A t2 COLOR AND MATERIALS BOARD I A7.0 m rn W Q1 Carport Elevation- Side Carport Elevation- Front Perspective View A • n n.....voh. a` .HAAVVENc AT 26TH .m�raa Perspective View B CONCEPT DESIGN Material Legend i. Sleet CO mn 2. Slee) Canelewr Beam I S" Benin /. Melm D.Jv CARPORT DETAILS I AH.O M rn w w V Trash Collection Room Building A (Ground Level) Trash Chute Room Building A (Typical Upper Level) ���� ®e.eaws nmry biro""wa*a=a...meso un.w. Me.i...uwow Trash Collection Room Building B (Ground Level) Trash Chute Room Building B (Typical Upper Level) HAVEN AT 26TH CONCEPT DESIGN RMCHOCUoxuuUruNM •xon rtenwwrm.owa Key Map (NTS) Legend 1. Trash Chute 2. Trash Bin 3. Resident Access 4. Trash Company Access (via Rolf -Up Garage Door) Trash Room Section Trash Plan • Residents deposit trash into trash chutes on each floor • Trash is collected into trash bins on ground level • Bins are retrieved on trash pickup day from the collection rooms on ground level and either loaded adjacent to collection room or brought to a designed trash staging area on site • Trash rooms and chutes areconveniengy located near elevator lobbies and main building entries, where all residents will be using access from the parking field T . . . m TRASH EXHIBIT I A8.1 m x 2 m m I -V W 00 viuq •®-�.-uro eswo.� mem. my vi��wi cvuovvarvm®mm i--o---mv-- u.uit�opom�V�rn. o.mr.uvmmtw nmru URBAN OFFERINGS "HAVEN AT 26TH" PRELIMINARY GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNJA Eno;®'N,,=m0L NOTE6: um vVo®®.m ®i000am®.u[-®vum �®o®fimenlwn®N® .gym.. °mn l`oe'�`•� ®'.0 ® moo, v.�sv-m R� MC.viu�.vi.am �ryv®® ® vusvm s• iepm® vw.a ®ovmsrm A6EA: "puC . OEVE pm: OWNER tlllLff V COMACT: ss eea mss ®® vwvm Mo 4Wmm am SHEET INDEX Sheet D ... rlpti. 9met Number fcssmunrmE sc�MN�n9so Riu. pmw.wu�unpwv � 601ui ENOIN�EEA �ATEAI^E�NT: .�4mr��♦.�e HAVEN AT 26TH TITLE SHEET (Sheet f of 6) cuiv QF A0m41p URBAN OFFERINGS RAIVCHO CUCAMONOA, CALIFORNIA ::� _– - X - —_ - "a —A. ...a x a JIM A �. axanex .. - f fi_ - tE ` Fri �� t I "J �aa�a�'_r 'T''�II� �l��l��i• i i I �\ `' � � F� �' "� iaGau��i°W4Ijl t1 x `„ � .P ( _ KA jj�} LJ I Q A: _� F��:�.Ix � II I {pl{I H — Jr- �I- �� , I �m@ x y ..�t1. - i I° I I i t.M1.a L - 9m..0 `®.'.pwx rnrTinr d J x- _ I '17 _ ------- Taw :e IINI °�I .:.e GENET NOTEB:� BENCHMARK BRE INFORMATION: GRADING GUANTRT EBTIMAM' 1m ®��i �i�'mm"® vnm-���✓u msom '� wiem,rm��i.'ora - rvmer. � w�u e�T�. v:u®v. w'v�i ruct'.,v'W2ymrye FEv-.� j HAVEN AT 26TH PREL/M/NARY GRAD/NG PLAN (Sheet 2 of 6) URBAN OFFER/NGS RANCHO CUCAMONOA, CAL/FORNM wro�xom un xrs mxoim y� �__ 1�A R �P I �p ppp I � HIS' aa e 3 2 w q �. Am WYMm I 11 PJ I I. �� t pe�a i W o i � I tl l I J 1 p7 1 l l ha � tle3e�y ITL 91 gQ a y ld 1 = m a 51e i s�'p- m f�� /9f a I. a.n�un bu�uu ou G Z- I ' Zi 11; Z of o o 2 o 1 U IRS w dllp d a g I d1 v 9gg I �2 — I ! 1p-'---"-- W x —-_ R in 1 a Milli a� 51 3 11 j �iY� li a y E°x �1e Tw-,ro3 For. TxMA,91l gf f '11 s 1i: 11 a Q[ tli 7 i NJ lei �) y oil iss. W 9 i!;p85a Q op um'n3i 3iaP'LFa �a6olxF = , E6—E11P40 I m --app! � 'I 26TH STREET F�—� a _� doll rm �� e � �-t�e � 11 aj IIII I�I id �F'1I{4�R Ir lI 14cn bl�+y j. I IIII) -J d S m 1 la L - - - - I. rs, IIII pY �P Iyyyy,,I' � � r I � u, •� �� I ; ewcxeuwK� HAVEN AT 26TH PRELIMINARYUTILITYPLAN (Sheet 4 of 6) C w.aasamn u URBAN OFFERINGS RANCHO CUC"ONOAr CAUFORN/A m x x ai mq Z LEOENO assess om HAVEN AT26TH PREL IMIAM R Y WA TER QUALITY MAN4 GEMENr PLAN SITE & DRAINAGE PLAN (Sheet 5 of 6) URBAN OFFERINGS RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA BRE INFORMArON; 'r �N- ........................... k4 41, HCl — - – ------------ .................. ........ LEOENO assess om HAVEN AT26TH PREL IMIAM R Y WA TER QUALITY MAN4 GEMENr PLAN SITE & DRAINAGE PLAN (Sheet 5 of 6) URBAN OFFERINGS RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA BRE INFORMArON; m Cl 1 A w ES 1pppppp�1I���77II 11 IIII1�111111 III~Ilii �. I!IMIn m • �tawo®eoa�nva_m_®miva rm �ne.o..a vrnr� 0...naa ® n n•®m+...®nnrao••irn /m cr a RI8INIF� oR,� nR� ID.D� a m CONTECN CDS2015. PRECASTCONCRETEWATEROWLLOYSYSTEM DEML HAVEN AT 26TH PRELIM/NARY WATER QUALITYMANAOEMENT PLAN BMP DETAILS (Sheet 6 o/ 6) URBAN OFFERINGS RANCHO CUCAMONCA, CALIFORNIA RE RMNDTME SPFE A ^&A6�L / B gH9mE ED916 I®1 a:a® py�i® psi® 1pppppp�1I���77II 11 IIII1�111111 III~Ilii �. I!IMIn m • �tawo®eoa�nva_m_®miva rm �ne.o..a vrnr� 0...naa ® n n•®m+...®nnrao••irn /m cr a RI8INIF� oR,� nR� ID.D� a m CONTECN CDS2015. PRECASTCONCRETEWATEROWLLOYSYSTEM DEML HAVEN AT 26TH PRELIM/NARY WATER QUALITYMANAOEMENT PLAN BMP DETAILS (Sheet 6 o/ 6) URBAN OFFERINGS RANCHO CUCAMONCA, CALIFORNIA m X !� of 00 Z HAVEN AVENUE AT 26TH STREET CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE DESIGN is _ � � _ _ — .�_. � -� �•� _� � r r. . CUCAMOPJGN, CALIFORfJIk ' UENT H urbanofferings Z O U J a z 0 Lv w .A Conceptual Design 01 Cwer5heet 02 Conceptual landscapeplan s\xf Wme 51zi a*., 03 Conceptual Elevatwns/Sections ry, Conceptual Tmelmagery OS Conceptual Shrubs and GmueMcwers Imagery * FEBRUARY 07, 2018 u i oipnjSpue� sSuf3aMouegan8loz'LOA8vn8E]33 I N91S30ivnid37NOJ N H19Z IV N3AVH O z g �Fi w p Yl a B 8898888 BBBBl3 ABB 'EL; 2a2 a D ByH 6 a yg g �k i b 9 x i U Z BUD 9D 0 BBD _r 1 D9E3D _H A"[N AV£N o,c UMFl._ z B D 0 D 6 D ° B 9 9 B B B ��Nn 11:� ` EE s �I `DDBB =a I pq � t I 9DBBB QD 3n N3AV 3N 18 VW I GQ II `DDBB =a I R �W s'd ra. tW= 9bd 113-93 *M4 , Ab W1m IWI4%6 �_ I T 5'-0'MIN_ m- - _� 3 I -O - m c �A 000 60 000 e a! ' w g `O HOAVEN ADT DESIGN I FEBRUARY 07,201B \� urbanofferings LandStudho960 f7o kH39VW1 S33d1IVnld3DNO) n O z n m D mm cl z m C m Z a N 01 2 V ...aa+w aiaumK.mvvaya.mavm aan+P� awuPa V +nape taml 4�.�.w-:a.- ua4.o4wa.94Pt.pua Y.aoaytw 4P.u[n Ysl'.v.1PAI w M:ua�wra[wa y� [ .vtlrs�Cnowo+u�m.Mnq'u� V P]TYOUYT.YM+Int..i M.uY.V aPn Ra.�vmwP A.fi..a4le.Wa�lvv�vwx..a�..lPwwv�a T:vr.u. r�>..'rw'na �oa`°aaP'aw..•+sw+ a.e '.a�..':K,.: epmtp.a aptavlfw+lo[w: vawa6yrcosaaat daaoanan Pmul�luacuam++�W+�V4 Yaruum��oO�.n i P Y']+�V �PaV Yaar[agppa PY� [�i[ww�jal�4+mp uua.[aa�Mavaa[Yaoaa6YyaP>aYv<tl _ fM®Mu ar.PPP.�a,MOaPaaayla W n.vu.s.apu a�apaapu4MpaaoY.ea� .rwmavvmuopPWs.alParm Ma.Pm^suf [ .uq.Yuyaeaa[�nP4M9aPY.art [ sea.0 a+aesp�as �P p+u vfc.vmmp sFuau va.+x»M wcara�ma. [.�aa 6nvn[ Y .�aiM+p wcv arae.a zi [ a. ., uP F tiaP 4t t .a.aY..Smp aPV P4.m+wa W u�l[Pauarau Luaatai n � W[aaa.yW;vactiva�rmu..nap'r[aayvw+auu '+Yiav®PYYP.seYaW rPuaveaYsaaYSY ooau. W W4 ]ep-.Raa.iu au,qu.P.{ WaaCei[[a.aV aye my fWM1Y W MwtiP.biRau+Fima.n'Y'aPvwq f-eemavrT '+fin p'P�K�a.awCv�[�vauato•6 �[a°Ym6 VeN M We4.0uv1 aPYPYJuaay FyP+u.y W Rad Rlwwewp weiR� wexRA eue.4alR>51WA P>d RIWw¢up fAllJllUey] �PneeuJ, euati yp vvAd a Ismasaw 3 aged alep epou6eW uwylnoSfawwo5 RnweS iawwo5lanwe5. efoll�nue:fi egru6eW nlcufieW u[a[Ilnn$RyMaa >USa�¢W n, nesq on�.a'ew e... i.inun6 eiwu6wa 31.1NM1'VI�f9 • vaW'11p,1Y0 PMaY011.[ �f.r,lw rvgmpw.0 wmma.+u Salallaae 3We�lMeldl Rad Rlwwewp weiR� wexRA eue.4alR>51WA P>d RIWw¢up fAllJllUey] �PneeuJ, euati yp vvAd a Ismasaw 3 aged alep epou6eW uwylnoSfawwo5 RnweS iawwo5lanwe5. efoll�nue:fi egru6eW nlcufieW u[a[Ilnn$RyMaa >USa�¢W n, nesq on�.a'ew e... i.inun6 eiwu6wa o", a...nxe iw naMun J a a arr em. ay.,a< a M ,.xpwa�e Glal do.aV, .qre nasMn�a.-. ` rv,,.,:,.r,--. --mar. »^�nescu r_rtnwry r��i 3lue ciT'a¢w esus �. smoe:n yaw weea.. n_:e nrme C � �errna nm.o -tit- aim tit- I •�•awuavanar sa rauanoaa.mw C iJT- NaealmM .sepaa cwassarru'iM 3U1MGe5 BavSiaiipWY.la OUJBIrye'9Fa Qtip LeinpNLLsgvlb�lL YaMee Poirtt' a}are+'a nd.:a Ja!i'y&uf ,.rye msawa..+.r. �AY Abe flM MlkarteD fuyole EUN UvarlSvnme.'.,:ac vaNse Wnt CeamM�n L1an'Y Blue �!aaLry m/yarM�..a � .n�osomvraw.ar ONE fl'I ���rsxwnwwa maw • 1' f vim, ; eaww�a� w. ueusmav II€E _ a K r a• m 0 ����.a.,_l.;�y =a,d_,:.,.. �ITa.=— .WVnnG�enMubA' BY...• a m w kk a a ' � ti• Allto z N +n a a� _ W a i u Rmyanm,ma,bh— voaxamaabn9aW.,MIM fleaeaminsafl. tadavaYb/pm' saNi.wV. uaran rnroaa aw , � �- a 2 MnW frytlugvun Icee Blue reww.me nma@mm�h' Srl >�-,-ec- ,,-.--.. �._,., ?Q T O CONCEPTUAL SHRUBS AND GROUNDCOVERS IMAGERY 05 e� lob IEC{ M X v_o -i 0 M m "t7 O HAVEN AT 26TH Uniform Sign Program Developer: Urban Offerings 11400 W. Olympic Blvd.. Ste 650 Los Angeles, CA 90064 Telephone: (310)427-7432 Email: jlutz@urban-oflerings.cOm CONTENTS: Sign Criteria SHEET SC1 Architect: Sign Criteria Summary Sl NTGY Architecture i Planning Sign Location Plan LP 12555 W. Jefferson Blvd.. Suite 100 Los Angeles, CA 90066 Project Data PD Telephone: (310) 394.2623 Email: info@ktgy.com Graphic Elements GE Signage Consultant: Sign Type A - Public Art Street Name Sculpture A.1 The Design Factor Sign Type B - Project ID S B.1 26,432 Las Allures Avenue Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Sign Type C- Parking IDSlgn C.1 Telephone: 949 360-5750 thedeslgnfactoribcox.net Sign Type D - Wayfinding Sign D.1 City of Rancho Cucamonga: Sign Type E - Amenity ID Sign E.1 City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Sign Type F - Retail Tenant ID Sign 61 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Telephone: (909) 477.2750 Sign Type G - Office Tenant ID Sign DO Email: City.Planning@citycilmus • • • % 6 • • TheDesignFactor 07-21-18 Purpose & Intent These a terla have been established for the purpose of maintaining signage antnuity, of quality and aesthetics for the mutual benefit of owner or tenants, and to compl"Rin the regulations of the City of Rancho Cucamonga ('City'). The sign specifications will offer optimum Mar/tenant identity when designated in conformance with the design standards. Conformance will be strictly enforced. and any Installed nom conforming or unapproved Signs will he removed at owner's expense. No sign shall he Instated without the ownar5iitmant's association's(heminafter referred to as "Architectural Review Committee-) written approval and the required city permits All sign permit applications shall be Submitted to the City with written Consent tram the Property Owner or Property Manager. The Architectural Review Committee reserves the right to change or modity thls sign arteria at any time. Sign Design & Style - Standards All signage must to, architecturally consistent with the overall building theme. All sign colon proposed b/ owners/tenants must be approved by the Architectural Review. Canada es prior to fabrication antl adhere to the fo0heing guidelines Sign colors small be selected to Provide sufficient contrast against building background colors Sign colors shall be compatible with and compliment building background colors. Tenant may choose corporate logo colors, subject to Archtectural Review Committee's approval. Co.. • , aaa32 Las Abu. Aveme. Lapuw XIII, CA 92653 • TheDesignFactor Ph19A*364s)so ri.049)W320e3 General Sign Regulations All ownedtenant signage is subject to the Architectural Review Committee's written approval. The Architectural Review Committee, at their sale discretion, acid at the owner'sflervi expense, has the authority to correct, replace, or remove any sign that is installed without written approval and/or airy sign that is not in compliants, want this Uniform Sign Program. Prior to permit Submittal or sign fabrication, owner/tenant shall submit to the Architectural Review Committee three (3) Copies of detailed shop drawings in full color. Submittals shall include the lonswhg: STOREFRONT ELEVATION Scaled elevation of owner's/tenants storefront depicting the proposed sign design and all the dimensions as they relate to the MK'Sltenant's Storefront, SROPDRAWINGS Fully dimensioned and scaled shop drawings Specifying exact dimensions, copy layout type styles materials, colors, means of attachment and all other details of Constructor. It shop drawings are denied, owner/tenant must resubmit revised plans unW Architectural Review CammittoeY Samoval is obtained. At shim must be approved by the My of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department with proof of approval submitted to the Architectural Review Committee prior to fabrication and Installation a Ship, All signs and their installation snail comply with all local pWlding Codes, and must Co form to this Sign Criteria FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY Each ownertterant shall be, responsible for all expenses related to the shortage for their space, Including but not limited to Design consultant fees (t applicable) 10056 of City/County of San Bernardino (If applicable) permit processing costs and capitation fees 10096 of costs for sign fabrication and installation Including review of shop draw" and patterns. Maintenance of all shins In "like new, CaMitpn. At costs meted to sign removal, including repair of any damage to the causing. At sign contractors shall be fully licensed with the City and State of California and stat provide NII Workman's Compensation and General Liability Insurance certificates to the Architectural Review Commitee prior to installation. Owner/tenant and their sign contractor win hot be permitted to commence installation of the exterior sign unless all of the following conditions haw been met. SUbmisam, of a stamped or Signed Set of final drawings mflecting the Architectural Review Committee and Gays approval to be kept on file in to Arctlltectuar Review Committees office. Submission of the sign contractor's Certificate of Insurance naming the management company as an additional Insured prior W the commencement of any work. All necessary permits licenses and approvals have been Issued by the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Including, but not limited ca, sago permit, building permit and contractor's business license The Archllecturai Review Committee must oe notified 48 hours in advance of the proposea sign installation. If the Avner/tenant choasas to change their exteriorsign at anytime, the owhar/tenard must comply with the requirements set forth herein and any future ma thfialgM, revisions, or changes which have been made to this Sion program for this center. Owner/tenant must resubmit charges for Associations approval. The Arch@xtual Review Committee reserves the right to reject any Sign they feel do not comply with the intent and Solid of that Untorm Sign Program. PaebR Sxwort nit Ibaa n s6.w tube , Naves At nor Sign Criteria SCI Rancho Cucamonga. CA 4b a]-21 to Sign Construction REQUIREMENTS The Architectural Revkw Committee shall apVwe all sign design, Color and construction per the following, PROHIBITED SIGNAGE General All syn Wks, fastenings alb mounting devices shall consist of hoPdlpped galvanind Iran, stainkss steel, aluminum, brass, bronze, nickel or cadmium plated material. Angle clips attached to letter sides wit Col be permitted. Surfaces with color hues prone to %ding leg, pastes, fluorescent Intense redo shall he coated with ultraviolet inhibiting clear cwt In a mase, glass, or smirgbss finish. No bkck iron materials of any type wild be permitted. The lace of the fusion letters and logos stall be Acrylk (3/16" MiCk m mmum). All signs and their installation most Comply with all local building codes All syn fabrication work snail W of excellent quality. All logo Images and type styles shall be accurately reproduces. Lettering that approximates type styles will not W acceptable. The Architectural Review Committee reserves the right to reject any tabricause work deemed to be below standard. Color coatings shall exactly match the Colors speclfled on the approved plans. Jolnhg of materials shall be finished In an kmnspkww manner. Rivets, screws, and better fnteners that extend N visible surfaces shall Im (loon, filled. Anb finished so As to be unnoticeable. All sign finishes shall be free from dust, drips, and runs and shall have a uniform surface conforming to the highest standards of the Industry, In no case shall any manufacturer4 label be visible from normal street viewirg angles. Color of exterior letter returns shall be subject to Architectural Review Committee approval. No sign cabinets will be allowed. No adverHflng placarpostructures, Inflatable signs, roof signs, pmleulng signs. reader Was signs, freestanding signs, decorative lighting, Rags, balkons pennants names, Insignia, [nomnaree or other descr'rytive material shall be affixed or maintained upon either the interior or exhumer glass Cones supports of the show windows Or 000rs or upon the exterior walls of the building. No lapels will W permitted w the exposed surface of signs except those required by IoW eminence, which shall be applied in an inconspicuous location. Sign boxes or cans are not permitted unless otW rwlse Swifled. No raceways are permitted. Paine f sharing R not Smirched. No animated, flashing, rotating or audible signs we permitted. No bumpers shall W allowed unless approved by the Architectural Review Committee and permitted by the Cly. ewRxt "Alset slwrt The, HeNWn e w • {- 2632 Lar Alnums Avenue. t na Hilly CA 92653 f Con Al 26th • • • eDesignFactor M(.9)30PS0Fl. 1 %6A3-2663 sArrhOqummenOnCA Sign Criteria Ne0c10nbctOrPma.mel www.IMtlexbnlMlOrgi Summary of Sign Criteria Description location Width Height Area D A.1- Pubic An Street Name Salpture G nd 469" 11"r 5YSF 1 A2 -Punk An Street Name Sculpture Gmmd M'i n' -r 442 SF I 8 Project ID Sign Wag 34110" 6'-21/2" 216 SF 1 C -Palling ID Sign Wall a'.T 12" 6'-0" 52 SF 4 0- Way6lging Sign Ground 1'-8" 5190" IO SF 5 E-Ammity lD Sign we 4'-0"Mn 25'-O"Ma] INV 3 F Retail Tenant ED Sign Wal 4'q"Mac 2T -O. Nae 100 SF T G Office TenantlDSign Wag 4'-0" Mo T -6 -Mar 46SF 12 Cxaa3 F.Np 9Nx TIW py1.Nn 36.30[x.1, u 15 Aw. MLl..aM C<9203 IYn..CU In Sign Criteria Summary eDesignFactor Vn IMfl ]Ap a2ap ft. 19K16. ]'M63 Rin[noCu[xnonW.CA meewamxrwan..nn «««mwnlonlxn..a: SnM NumO[I Si MS 072,18 Project Summary Site Area: 5.2 ACLocation: HAVEN AT 26TH - Rancho Cucamonga, I .Aq Use* 4 & 5 Story Residential Apartments for Retail and Office K it We-, ' 1 }' - - t i �..�,•"r `iii r }' r ( r _ � r r � '� 1 �Miw �fi�.R .~..`moi � � Y� � -�- rg!•J., �Sy� 10, z _ i ', rr � •r "''7777 �.,g �. t' j . C Signage Summary -Group I !n S'PTIP, _ _Mr.. A Public Art Street Name Sculpture 2 e Pm1m,t ID Sign 1 r C ParFIn91D Sign 4 A2 CA - - v 0 Wfivflntllnq Sign s 26th STREET c.3 A.1 Legend - --•-'S D TSign Type 1. Location Z _ C Sip Location - -44 1 u ~ }• _ m tJ LEASING' ,; ` _ CA M DA B.1 ��..2 D2 PRIMARY PROJECT ENTRY - D.5 — _1 4�. I 1 - —-j C2 �NNOOWHH 1 Conceptual Sign Location Plan �✓ Scale nts Unko Rt.l..t gu.enn. Daw.bn sb«t NYmar 26432Ln Attutaz Awnue,tawna X114CA 42653 qwn At36m • • TheDesignFRctor Pntaa906 5350 n.1949l643-2e63 Ranmccuammnanu Sign Location Plan LP1 tneawonlact....mt „.wm.aenamxtm.a: Group -1 Date mane t: j- . -. 1 conceptual Sign Location Plan Scale. nts • • a 4b • • TheDesignFactor 1 caro.a F.ww 26632La5Anum Av*LLLaaune HIa%CR 92653 Hvaa Al MI M.(%19Y360-575O Fifl491643-2863 R.. C. -ca. CA t6eae.19�aaRwow..net w..m<aesl9�r.<m,.m: Signage Stemmary- Gmup 2 Nn 9„Tyce _ _ _ Oty. E AmenitylOSign 3 F Retail Tenant tOSign T G Office Tenant lO Sign 12 s 2 Legend D F< Sign Type ,AI.i. Location z - C Sign Location ' c M NORTH sMtrai. Re,ft" s11M nuTMt Sign Location Plan LP2 Group 2 nm mn-ie u . { FlFl �1 1 conceptual Sign Location Plan Scale. nts • • a 4b • • TheDesignFactor 1 caro.a F.ww 26632La5Anum Av*LLLaaune HIa%CR 92653 Hvaa Al MI M.(%19Y360-575O Fifl491643-2863 R.. C. -ca. CA t6eae.19�aaRwow..net w..m<aesl9�r.<m,.m: Signage Stemmary- Gmup 2 Nn 9„Tyce _ _ _ Oty. E AmenitylOSign 3 F Retail Tenant tOSign T G Office Tenant lO Sign 12 s 2 Legend D F< Sign Type ,AI.i. Location z - C Sign Location ' c M NORTH sMtrai. Re,ft" s11M nuTMt Sign Location Plan LP2 Group 2 nm mn-ie m m M LA LAV protect cobrs ■ Prolect color l -..dark grey. ■ Protect color 2 -"medium grey, protect color 3 —white NProlectcolor4—cyan" ■ Prolectcoior5- .range" protect color 6- "yellow" regular sUpport font: ParalUcent Extra Light ABCDEFGHJKLMNOPORSTUV WXYZ abcdefghijklmnopgrstuvwxyz 123456789010#$670- &*0-=+ e ' 26632 Ln ARUM xwu LaWna N111t CA 9203 aTheDesignfactor s6.19a»36o-srso ra.rva916.3-ze53 medes.mxlawrm.ner .,w.ue6ampmxlo�.r projectlago HAVEN AT 26TH 6oidsuppprtfant: ParalUcent Medium ABCDEFGHJKLMNOPO RSTUV W XYZ abcdefghijk Imnopgrstuvwxyz 1234567890!0#$Q7o-&*O-=+ Rare! 91WtpM bWbn I...12mn Rmmo Nrammgv,Ca Graphic Elements sl,nehua GE mzwe M IT I M v CO CO z Elevation View from safe. NTS 1 Detail Views sok: 31W=T F— 3 a.l puG9C Art Street Name SCWptum Sale: NTS Gmde! 2661Ngtawrue.Lpwd XllliG $65] eDesipnFactor pn r99g2Lnn6o-s on.rs iFP01]Ienl![IYIW.trM 1nrYlnMlWrrt![Iv.N. 1tl Xdren M 2611 PN[no CV--. C! Sign Type 1 - Public Art Address Sculpture C. lnndM nM WMM WMwm aml."Ytu, I.WW hWiyYIWMryW.0 NH1plfD 11ry..W KryK 0[!1 R@WTlM IlCR56f W WinKUng6nlm ¢ry, 1' Mk\ INgy Myly ]rymrelur WPes�en LmeWe W III}IlI 1. W WY.1 ertl l.16w1[nM CelvbinlreM MP W[np1.1y— In. [ y— L[0[ . Ileal. 11, br Pyera.Srgn 6K�LIUT la naYelelmwnrY[mrdr lyddrhP alP <arcrerolemhea%. i erMPP[P Syr hlvkNwifVu[Iurdl enelnPMrrerLL-IJdflpp, bMmTlll! MWyn Sign Type A 2 Elevation View from 26th Street Scale: NTS 3 Renderir Scale: NTS A.2 Public AN Strott Name Sculpture 1 Detail Views Scale 31W=110" cbd.m 26932 Lm ARUM Aeem6 Lapwa.111, CA ..I • TheDcsignFactor PM11949136P5250 rtry49I663-m3 tbO*Agnlmty Ox.W v. wWIWOS19Mxmr.bla Prm. Myr At 26th Ran.. C..n,. CA side wkly i Sign Type A - Public Art Address Sculpture cmlmn Imr1[mwaann c.mw,umm[mmme,sbnadlm. lumsmcemwapr llumrew wren wmm LEb w.wNm avM[ Mn Remms onetta: n ba pamlea mMnm glry. P mkx Integral cdMeE ]r[(m re9n paneiswtln Lm e�Pup IIyMIrtq, to Ee besennunlM awia�gM(rcw bMween Ironl antl be[M OI IeI@r lo'mi Iat "[afe6 mtla WssI.n 10 WtftlarmI twe aW it bwu lE0 EEge I IpM zwrte for lamb Slqn 6frstun to rcroe IMemal sIN[iuM heminq ant [m[Rt! IOdlly ENow gra]epa zynlibrkalpalhutwal enginee�nq(akVla(im¢ a ntl, I Wlblm abed Num. Sign Type A A2 Wb 02218 2 Elevation View from Haven Avenue Scale: NTS z3�1In' —rirTVP� f — B.1 Riled 10 Sign 1 Detail Views SWI.: 3116--I' O-- . . • • ! Q TheDesiBnFactor WLI T I 3.,g. T -71/2- 1 J 12' � 1 6-23? r s 2'-P siEevlew 0, a ftg 26432L'MmsAvmc Lapwa XNiG 42453 Wve Al 260 .n-(.%3.0-5]SO Fl. M4 n.".M3 WOO Cuambnga,G the&M9n X1"Wx ut wWAhcde gnfXWr.bl] Sign Type B - Protect ID Sign 1 cuslmn MnWPb Sam Wnba N ntnYm aNe mww, ' lama laM mlemaxv nlulNllabewgn wNte Lrotmp«Nee Xry[ Ixe:INmmsbllen.5bbewiNm m.mum pex LPtlM bbpbi5e mWnkaryr Cpl nOr'ttebR Sttu[tYfel en6Meea�p[a[YLallge. I' NkY W pgml[tlaM 3fpm!¢SlnpmlNiwkh LtD atlpe up IigNlnp, 1pae Wan nwwilMb eip�Y[WYrt Maatt f aM[ehE metal heaEe! to mY<n buBGnq ar[hHx bre aw tb hwu lE0 eba Ognt spw[e!w panek s0 qan tNu latlenm} L¢kas b be1R'poua Wih IhRugM1[bpenyli[ 1 wah lra WMt Wd YINI Wl dro lxL SW Shames 1, mnaw Nlemal mu[bral lrwnlp. W n,.W to EUWY�gpn tlml leo-wlorsArv[tYal mglreennq GlMallpni 9MA1 Rn W Sign Type B 2 Typical Elevation View Scale: NTS I • • • ! ! TheDesignFiutor C2 G3 C.1 C.4 Parking l0 Sign [opposite? 1 Detail Views Scale: 3/8"=1'-0" teelam hgaa I p mx 26"R Ln apo.aa wawa. Lag.na Nlnl cp 9203 wy et tam Sign Type 9n. t9p91MORSO r.. rva91.p.-2as3 .an[ne C... 9a, c. snaersgntxm.®manes www.maeeal9neaaorina Sign Type C - Parking ID Sign WNImaMMaatlnptiMea dOfRalPtl aWnalwl tllamPl Ntln aMSymdYStOM MhmNyllunlMleE wilnwnpP lE0 tlmiPkaracrylk fxes whn VaugreN vnryl oYMay flalutn of INIPf uW rymWlP to Ee plTNmMWm 9reY LafM mW sympdslocertgwltapto0ultllnp wall cefilpn lepl[alws Strv[W21 wg1neenN ralinHaHOni V side "m .1.nar CA oea. 07-319. e • • ! • i 0 i 6 � O rypUal Waylinding Sign [messages TBDI 1 Detail Views S.I. NTS TheDesignFaetor Sign Type D - Wayfinding Sign G.d mw dsatin pawed leM[uted aWM.A,, e@.. wnnmteteal wedt[LED OF I.W"thn, R:Slpn StN[W[e bMw InW.,tW .1 InuW,.nd comate I.rine mlw d[.de rec sqn Irncztrs umcty. en0lnaxrl�lO cakVbtipla. r CeNM n.p[! I BMet Tia. iwbin 26432l.a.am.as a.eme. UWna wll.. CA W03 Its—at zald Sign TyPBD Ift.m.3 .50 h. N491663 ]6a3 Ren[ae Cuwmrnga, CF I IMMSI0n1u1nrO[w.nx xwvlMdeslOntecnr..lz Snevt1w r D.1 01`21 Irrzl re 25-u IM `RMPMHTrM C Tvplul ArneNty In Sly. I Detail Views Scale V16"=110" S. Sign Type E - Amenity ID Sign 4WWIfW INk9ap viK WbhtlaWMrum YnBM IeXm nbb ewiYpl'min irNrlYl LCDIIWnimtbn Mu wnne x+YK Y[x lHlen aMb• Bymptlrelvm 1p ne Vnhp medvn 0rR' an0 b b! bae mwNep [o YCM ImYAI [ygev pM 4pn laMkdpn lVu[IwN bYlkeNb<akpYllmi sloe view 2 Typical Elevation View Scale: NTS TheDesignFactor curo.n .1. sn.x mY pellslm 264 11313 x.vewa91.3n 3 9zS53 wrm.cu Amenity Sigange Gn.IW913EOP500.9.91 .3 M3 RantneCwamwga,U measl9Mxvwawr.oN »...Xnebnl9muY..Yz ' 25'-a'A O Troi3al Fetail tenant ID Sign Typical Elevation View Scale: NTS Sign Type F - Retail Tenant ID Sign IMINhW IWrKglpalN piN@C aYMymlMenl llVws MLb fYn< I[nIF IMNMIIFDIa�M�ylbn lMu'NMe aOy![ 1Keh lYyn aMNr SymAtl r¢Ivm [o R rynRE metlmn9rp WbbeCmemwnbE loercMlMurN[atopy i 9N Sb11hm`rFdl9n mun�rN.golwbo ueuNnms 2"323 heie[d aR«I rRa M1rhbn sR.w xuMa $N]$lallRurN /MRud.lapmd MMh C49$65] WM/.1361d ' • • • • � 6 eDesignFactor iR.IW9,]Eo-4:o 3..19.9,a.]aea] aMVR9crrm�M9.<a Retail Tenant Singage F.7 IRanmlgnbNp6ro..nN wvia'.IRMe51yMRIM.Mz qh Ol21 IB m m m m ar 1/ d' MPX —y •............. O , 4'-0 WX a a Oro O imp , vpi<al Offke Tenant !0 Slgn 1 Typical Elevation View scale NT5 • ® • • a TbeDesignFactor I Sign Type G -Office Tenant IG Sign !n,rwiw IMYdM aln nnla, ,w,:am,m Imml Irn.a e�ab swew wnn menu! L[o nammeron w u MNIe evy& 4fay Cellars aMbr SYmnq retNN to G ptln@tl memun •mr am ro ne ene,wMea to rmunva omor Oe: Ypn wbsalaa sbu[Iwai an pineninp [Nv blimy GMae, ltd i SMHTXN iFH,Nn gna,IMmty p:.9:,,, At 260 mm,cpramw„a.c. 9 9 Office TenantSin a e G.1 en.ls,el zso-nso re. �samwzaeaz a lluaawmxlaem..nM ....Inavnwmxlvn: o,r m xna STAFF REPORT PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: July 13, 2016 RANCHO TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission CUCAMONGA FROM: Candyce Burnett, Planning Director BY: Dominick Perez, Associate Planner SUBJECT: PRE -APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2016-00428 — CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES — A request for a Planning Commission Workshop to review a proposed mixed-use development of 207 residential units, including 18 live/work units, 17,800 square feet of commercial (5,300 retail and 12,500 live/work), and 11,800 square feet of office, on 5.7 acres of land in the Industrial Park (IP) District and Haven Avenue Overlay District (HAOD), located at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and 26th Street — APN: 0209-131-01. PROCESS: The Pre -Application Review process provides a project proponent with the opportunity to present conceptual designs to the Planning Commission prior to formal application submittal in order to receive broad, general comments and direction. The focus of the meeting is a discussion by the Planning Commissioners regarding the technical and design issues related to the project. The meeting is not a forum for debate and no formal decision or vote is made. After the meeting, staff prepares written comments summarizing the direction of the Commission and staff, which are sent to the applicant. BACKGROUND: The property is located at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and 26th Street and is currently partially improved with a 20,800 square foot metal warehouse building. The property is zoned Industrial Park (IP) and is within the Haven Avenue Overlay District (HAOD). The purpose of the district is to establish a high-end office corridor with special commercial and service related retail to serve office users. Additionally, per the Development Code, the "Haven Avenue Overlay Zoning District is intended to result in a progressive, sophisticated, and urban style of development." The site is located within walking distance (approximately 1/4 mile) from multiple active Omnitrans bus stops, which serves Route 81 (north and southbound) along Haven Avenue, and Route 85 (east and westbound) along Arrow Route (Exhibit E). The site is also along the future Omnitrans West Valley Connector Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Route, which is anticipated to provide services operating as early as mid -2019 (Exhibit F). The site is about 1.5 miles driving/walking distance to the west of the Rancho Cucamonga Metrolink Station at Milliken Avenue. Additionally, the site is within approximately .6 miles of the Civic Center/City Hall (approximately 14 min. walk) and approximately 1 mile from major shopping and restaurants (approximately 22 min. walk). The proposed project is requesting an amendment to the allowed uses within the Haven Avenue Overlay District (HADD) to allow for a mixed-use development to include residential uses when associated with other permitted uses in the overlay district. SITE CHARACTERISTICS: Surrounding Conditions: To the north, across 261 Street, there are two three-story multi -tenant office buildings. To the east, across Haven Avenue, is an existing gas station and multi -tenant office building. To the south is vacant undeveloped property. To the west, across Marine Avenue, is an existing single-family residential neighborhood. To the northwest is a gated single-family neighborhood. The zoning of the subject property and the properties to the north, south and east EXHIBIT P E6—E11 P66 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP STAFF REPORT PRE -APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2016-00428 — CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES July 13, 2016 Page 2 are Industrial Park (IP) District and Haven Avenue Overlay District (HADD). The zoning of the properties to the west is Low Residential (L) District. General Pian and Zoning: The existing land use designation in the General Plan is Industrial Park with the Haven Avenue Overlay over the easterly half of the site. The existing zoning designation is Industrial Park (IP) District and Haven Avenue Overlay District (HAOD). The proposed mixed-use development would require a General Plan Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment to change the General Plan land use and zoning designations to Mixed Use (MU). Development Code: The Development Code regulates the permitted uses for all zoning districts throughout the City. Specifically, Tables 17.30.030-1 and 17.38.040-1 show the permitted land uses within the Industrial Park District and the Haven Avenue Overlay District. At this time, the Industrial Park District and Haven Avenue Overlay District allows for office and restaurant uses by right, allows for retail uses with a Conditional Use Permit, and does not allow for residential uses. The subject mixed-use development would necessitate a Development Code Amendment to allow for multifamily residential uses within the HADD. PROJECT OVERVIEW Proiect Design and Layout: The project involves the development of a 5 -story mixed use building that contains 207 residential units (18 one -bedroom live/work, 107 one -bedroom, and 82 two- bedroom) that occupy portions of the first, second and third floors and the entire fourth and fifth floors. The commercial retail (5,300 square feet) and live/work (12,500 square feet) components are entirely located within the easterly half of the site, generally along Haven Avenue and 26th Street, and are provided on the ground floor. A portion of the third floor adjacent to Haven Avenue and 261h Street contains 11,800 square feet of office area, of which 2,800 square feet is dedicated to a co - working office area for on-site residents. The dimensions of the property are approximately 375 feet from north to south and 600_ feet from east to west. The building is generally located on the easterly three-quarters of the site. There are two vehicular access points to the project site, one along Haven Avenue and the second along 2611, Street. The development also includes a total of 345 parking spaces (247 open stalls, 53 tandem spaces, and 45 one -car "tuck under" garages that are located at ground level below the residential units), with a majority of parking located in the westerly quarter of the property. A community pool, fitness room, leasing/club room and fifth floor roof top deck are provided and will be centrally located on-site. Landscaping is provided around the perimeter of the site, throughout the parking lot and within the common open space area. The project site is 5.7 acres in size and contains 207 multifamily residential units, which equates to a density of 36.3 units/acre (a maximum of 50 du/acre is permitted in Mixed Use zoning districts). Since the project is conceptual in design, precise square footages are not provided for the residential units and compliance with the maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) cannot be confirmed. However, according to the minimum square footage requirements for one -bedroom (650 square feet) and two-bedroom units (800 square feet), the project would be in compliance with the maximum FAR of 1.0. STAFF COMMENTS: Staff believes that this site has high potential to be a successful mixed-use development, due to its adjacency to Haven Avenue, existing and planned bus transit lines, and neighboring office corridor. it is also anticipated that the proposed development will help in revitalizing the adjacent offices that are currently underutilized. For those reasons, Staff is in E6—E11P67 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP STAFF REPORT PRE -APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2016-00428— CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES July 13, 2016 Page 3 - support of the necessary General Plan, Zoning Map, and Development Code Amendments that are required to re -designate the subject property from Industrial Park (IP) to Mixed Use (MU) and allow the proposed multi -family residential component within the Haven Avenue Overlay District (HADD). Although staff is generally in support of the proposed amendments to permit residential uses within the Haven Avenue Overlay District (HADD), specific development standards will need to be drafted to be sensitive to the original intent of the Haven Avenue office corridor while allowing for strategic Mixed Use when appropriately located near transit stops. Conceptually, the layout of the site is well designed. The applicant has chosen to utilize the allowed reduction in streetscape setbacks permitted under the Mixed Use Development Standards for the building along Haven Avenue and 2611 Street. By doing this, the building is placed furthest away from the existing single-family residential neighborhood to the west. The building has also been divided into two sections, with the five -story section along the easterly portion of the site and the four-story section near the center of the site, which also helps reduce impacts to the adjacent residential use. A majority of parking spaces were placed at the west end of the site, which acts as a buffer between the single-family homes adjacent to the west end of the site. The project will provide .a visually appealing street scene that includes a variety of land uses that are compatible with the surrounding area. Staff has concerns with the requested reduction in the required number of parking spaces. The proposed design is thirty-five percent (35%) deficient in parking, per the Development Code standards. Bringing the project into compliance with the parking requirement will require a reduction of the total number of units. DISCUSSION OUTLINE: The following comments are meant to frame and facilitate input by the Commission. Staff recommends that the Commission provide comment and input on the following issues, and contribute additional comments as the Commission sees fit: 1. Land Use: Staff is generally in support of the necessary amendments to the General Plan, Zoning Map and Development Code for this mixed use project. The project is designed in a manner to be sensitive to the residential neighborhood to the west while providing a high density residential concept in the center and easterly portions of the site, with commercial and office uses at the corner of Haven Avenue and 261 Street. It is important to note that the proposed project will introduce multifamily residential units within the Haven Avenue Overlay District (HADD). 2. Layout: Staff is in support of the overall conceptual site plan, with the exception of parking, which is discussed below. Since the site plan before the Commission does not include details and dimensions, staff will be reviewing the future submittals for this project to be in compliance with the development standards and design guidelines, including but not limited to setbacks, building height, landscape and open space requirements. 3. Parking: Per the existing Development Code standards, the project is required to provide 528 parking spaces, 289 of which must be provided in the form of a garage or carport. This includes tenant and guest parking for the residential portion as well as parking for the retail and office portion, and excludes parking for the co -working office square footage, as this area is dedicated for the use of on-site residents. The project provides 345 parking spaces, 45 of which are garage parking spaces, and has a 183 parking space (35%) deficiency, as shown in the table below. E6—E11 P68 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP STAFF REPORT PRE -APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2016-00428 — CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES July 13, 2016 Page 4 Parking Analysis Residential Number of Units Square Footage Parking Ratio Required Parkin Multifamily units, one bedroom: 125 N/A 1.5 per unit, 1 in garage or carport (*125) 187,5 Multifamily units, two bedrooms: 82 N/A 2 per unit, 2 in garage or carport ('164) 164 Visitor parking (muiti-family): 207 N/A 1 per 3 units 69 Commercial Retail: N/A 17,800 1 per 250 s uare feet 71.2 Office: excludes coworking office area N/A 9,000 1 Per 250 s uare feet 36 Restaurants: N/A 0 1 per 100 square feet 0 Total Required: 528 Total Provided: 345 Percent Deficient: 35% * = minimum required garage or carport parking spaces Because there is a potential for the neighborhood to the west to be impacted by on -street parking from the proposed development, staff is suggesting potential solutions that may reduce the projects parking impacts that include: Considering on -street parking on 2611 Street and Marine Avenue, and pursuing a shared parking agreement with the office complex to the north and other parking management strategies, verifying adequate parking through a parking study and potentially reducing the number of overall dwelling units. By using one or more of these solutions, this could yield a significant amount of parking stalls. For example, by allowing parking on 2611 Street and Marine Avenue, this will gain approximately 40 on -street parking spaces and will minimize the utilization of the neighborhood for parking purposes. It is not anticipated that on -street parking for the project will impact the residential neighborhood to the northwest of the site, as this is within the gated community and is not accessible by neighboring residents. It should also be noted that staff is currently working on parking standards for mixed use and transit oriented development, which most likely will reduce the number of on-site parking spaces that are required for these types of projects. A request for approval of a project that includes a parking deficiency that is no greater than 25% may be reviewed through the submittal of a minor exception with a parking study. Whereas, projects with deficiencies to parking that are greater than 25% may be reviewed through a variance with a parking study. Parking studies for mixed-use projects are subject to review by an independent peer review consultant. 4. Architecture: Architectural renderings were not provided with the application. The applicant has chosen to present architectural concepts at the time of the meeting. 5. Open Space and Amenities: The open space and amenities have not been calculated, as this is a Pre -Application Review. That being said, the Development Code requirements are as follows: E6—E11 P69 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP STAFF REPORT PRE -APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2016-00428 — CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES July 13, 2016 Page 5 a. A minimum of 150 square feet of open space area, per unit, shall be provided. Based on the unit count (207 units), a minimum of 31,050 square feet of open space shall be provided, of which, no more than thirty percent (30%) can be used towards the private open space area. The details of these standards are specified in Section'17.36.020(D). b. A total of six recreational amenities are required for a 207 -unit residential project. This can include amenities such as pools, spas, fitness rooms, club rooms, rooftop decks, barbeque facility with seating area, and other amenity types specified in Section 17.36.010 (E). REQUIRED ENTITLEMENTS: The development of a mixed-use building on the project site will require the following entitlements: 1. General Pian Amendment—$12,752 2. Zoning Map Amendment — $9,509 3. Development Code Amendment — $6,712 4. Design Review -$11,187 5. Initial Environmental Study - $2,853 6. Conditional Use Permit -$3,188 7. Uniform Sign Program - $2,186 8. Minor ExceptionNariance (Parking) - $536/$2,479 NOTE: Fees are subject to change by Council Resolution. SPECIAL STUDIES: The following special studies will be required at the time of formal submittal: 1. Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study. 2. Biological Resources (birds, mammals, reptiles, plants, flora and fauna habitat). 3. Traffic Impact Analysis. 4. Cultural Resources Report (with Tribal Consultation per SB18 and AB52). 5. Noise Impact Analysis. 6. Photometric Analysis. 7. Parking Study (with third party review). 8. Water Quality Management Plan. NOTE: Additional special studies may be required following the formal submittal of the required applications. Respectfully submitted, Candy Burnett Planning Director CB:DP/jp Attachments: Exhibit A - Applicant Letter Exhibit B - 11" x 17 Site Plan Exhibit C - Preliminary Conditions of Approval/Comments Exhibit D - Aerial Photo Exhibit E - Omnitrans Bus Route Map Exhibit F - Omnitrans West Valley Connector Route Map E6—E11P70 Haven at 26th Justification Statement The proposed Haven at 26th Project is located at the Southwest corner of Haven and 26th Street. Considering the existing lack of diverse uses within the Haven Corridor and its prime location within the City proper, we believe the time is right for an innovative and contemporary mixed use project at this location. Haven Avenue is significantly underutilized -due to it primarily being a commuter transportation route during peak traffic demand during morning and evening periods and is utilized during normal business hours for local and regional circulation to some degree of benefit to existing Haven Corridor office and business uses. Due to the current mix of developed Haven Corridor uses, Haven Avenue synergy and current Corridor energy and activity Is dramatically subdued during evenings, hours of darkness and weekends. Haven Avenue was originally contemplated by early City Visionaries to be developed similar to MacArthur Blvd in Irvine as to building design, massing, profile and mix of uses as our City continued to mature and develop. The City established the Haven Avenue Overlay specifically for the purpose of defining the unique design and uses envisioned and sought by the City for this major corridor that is located in the very heart of Rancho Cucamonga. A project having this level of sophistication and diversity in mixed use, contemporary design and profile as contemplated by our team will serve to establish a cornerstone that will become the example to refer to with future Haven Corridor project design and profile and will be unmatched in the region, let alone Rancho Cucamonga, Haven at 26th will add a vitality and energy that is currently lacking on Haven Avenue and an after business hours vibe that will be essential in order to ultimately provide for a strong retail/commercial environment' and increase desirability and market demand for office and commercial properties within the Haven Overlay. With known pending redevelopment concepts under consideration by other Haven Avenue properties in proximity of our site, we will help create an anchor Transit Oriented Development hybrid concept and layout that will create a "walkable" interface for Haven at 26th residents and businesses, as well as for existing and future Haven Corridor properties and specialty regional and local transportation and transit system passengers and visitors to and from our project. Haven at 26th will be a lifestyle center that will be very desirable to a diverse demographic, that would include young professionals seeking a more urban residential setting, empty nesters and active seniors looking to downsize and eliminate labor and overhead associated with home ownership. This would appeal to those wanting to live in a more modern.community offering a varied range of business, commercial and retail uses within walking distance; immediately within the community, nearby or by simply riding on a shuttle or trolley to the Foothill Blvd shopping districts, Victoria Gardens and even destinations outside Rancho Cucamonga. A 5 -story mass fronts Haven Avenue and wraps around on to 26h Street. The architecture will be contemporary, defined by clean geometric lines, careful composition of solids and articulation, varying yet restrained roof and wall planes and use of accent colors and material changes executed in an interesting yet elegant manner. A vertical layer cake use programming approach is contemplated along the Haven frontage while also providing unique use adjacency opportunities and interface for the varied uses incorporated throughout this trendsetting design concept. E6—El1P71 A series of 10 ground floor work /live units interface with both Haven Avenue and 26th Street. Offices and co working offices ( approx.11,800 SF) for resident use is placed on the third floor and two levels of multi -family residential units sit on the 4th and 5'" floors. The total square footage of retail spaces proposed within the Retail mixed use component is approximately 17,800 SF, and this is in addition to the almost 12,000 SF in the Office mixed uses component. This true Mixed Use project also includes 207 units (36.3 du/a) within its Residential mixed use component. Additionally, proposed amenities include a two story fitness area, resort type pool and spa, open flex space, bike maintenance shop, pet spa salon and a roof deck. The two story entry Porte cochere opening located at the signalized intersection of Haven Avenue at Jersey Blvd gives the project a defining entry gateway and also offers a sneak peek to the interior of the development . As one passes through the Porte cochere from Jersey Blvd, the second layer of building mass presents itself as a 4 and 5 story structure. A second entry on 26`h is also defined by a two story entry Porte cochere having 3 floors of residential units spanning above to make this one contiguous building having various integrated uses. The development team for this sophisticated project concept and design is comprised of a developer, consultants and designers having extensive experience with development of all the range of uses contemplated for this project and having worked together on a number of successful Mixed Use projects over the past 20+ years. Working together, we have an opportunity to raise the collective quality of life bar for Rancho Cucamonga businesses and residents with our proposed lifestyle and business center. Thank you for your consideration. 2 E6—E11 P72 a CONOWUAL SITE SECTION R14 r:d9116cdrr{ssEv4 • rtnp}f 1M: x ptP R®VC➢x(9MNvxE Kps[y.Fxl xV cV v. x9VM1Yt f f:(rF ViRD 45ED M-i:vyiwrn rya 4Vr(s.:fpf�. } y9.1 ry WSC rK[ Pr6AK YV6R'xa rIWrS x }M MIt.Ri f}f i lCrr V VIf} .A IIIIWO MIIs[D:f EP N'W'ltrfe,!ry Af4 Pf i. VrW rfrTf rypprp' Cy (yy1}nsts 4Vf.'s a ml mpmen pEx }/4as 'a r4Orx a.ncu} r.. w.ru r:WPFsc'unrr.e .�aaf.DEDn.•c.�r• M.V IlW Oi FlV V CGMM1C Ml« t74WL slpwFO f v�YY2F.^^. ma•.1nY Y ..y}Kt.N...1. S4M 5y(S:YOWO� . wo.as Drcx }..r. x.rr w• x}x,..::.nry. ICA6 1til x 711 HAVEN & JERSEY APARTMENTS RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN -ground floor URBAN OFFERINGS, INC. EXHIBIT B ARCHITECTS ORANGE arsxx rorwema*aY aan r/n➢Y4c➢rHOIISMM.Ixx ,rnfFl aaV]a(y SM f 9.IDn n l//Il IIn nu. vurrr w JmSCnGEa na±¢py ;J ' 1.>OY 110 Y [AYV I,G M4 f/4ta[P V11 v,4(MYan.±WfY Y " M/Rw4.p1lY!]4I SIM9W NRo( s..usurxn J 4Vf /Or.BUG:S `41uxEpAf T.N[cWE . arvsa�r•rnr(s.aa./oer.. v.cr w.x.o.rn:..r,um:. n raxrwrr+orvo.xa+vJ(axx _ T sGIE' isb'-0' Jrsr+rH HAVEN & JERSEY APARTMENTS RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN -ground floor _Y� URBAN OFFERINGS, INC. QrYCK IDI/s lnuQl9 u a1, lmr-My ARCHITECTS ORANGE raw w+..rnmc cr (unrra. r. aM. rnrrnwa o e Y.x/ J+vrva or: ry aaeces arwrm:s r.Juv rare in n nwx m�e/ona JmSCnGEa na±¢py ;J ' 1.>OY 110 Y [AYV I,G M4 f/4ta[P V11 v,4(MYan.±WfY Y " M/Rw4.p1lY!]4I SIM9W NRo( s..usurxn J 4Vf /Or.BUG:S `41uxEpAf T.N[cWE . arvsa�r•rnr(s.aa./oer.. v.cr w.x.o.rn:..r,um:. n raxrwrr+orvo.xa+vJ(axx _ T sGIE' isb'-0' Jrsr+rH HAVEN & JERSEY APARTMENTS RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN -ground floor _Y� URBAN OFFERINGS, INC. QrYCK IDI/s lnuQl9 u a1, lmr-My ARCHITECTS ORANGE , Y� .,.. I ll . �A,.EPI.d,�EJ /JlW1dY 1 ]�A' iliPi'Ni1pW •J[Rtpr]PI,p91np!sn31A'1 MASQL bE CMGSMOt] O/JI S:Y]S ]TY Y] II!]tp9 pltllMYt ri Y091,Vdpn413F1t,. 1111pIY N/YC rr6V MdMD Bs ]'rOyY 7 ew+rt v ass n e lr ca�elan o,Ice Fm, ao- Yacw I®VMd'n inulwY Y 1 .o 110.4 Y ' IIFYOIFNMWp.TIUIESYt STUONO� ds422dII� rp J 4IIF Mti1M5YiF ]3 eNf Y1. FEVWC.Y PM.�rL.] • ^t KyUEMIppi{.Y 3LCM p9OFN.sA6 NYE W,pRv u:: _M,i.. ].i4]YRxoi sriMn O/3/,IMN sca'F f'sJ0'-0- HAVEN & JERSEY APARTMENTS RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN- second floor URBAN OFFERINGS, INC. ARCHITECTS ORANGE w 2ros�a a>aww'm-nawow Y.e � s n m s cww++w ..sem vu, nxa+/ vs ox. w ay.xosuu.ee rm rw:.arF awrsawm. v.oF. rFo.Rex a/r u+cu.ss ure+. nwu +crY ,mw eorevaw au�cw •: m s .unro:/... aner.r es /u. s enuovor o..rE .m wrw r¢au�n •mosanaavlrass n au,rnnwvar.nvu...v m sous n,vuEmavF.rm/oFue.w.n/rr,y .w., n - surto r.Fcs�emY uen,./uwc /w�Ya rwer.+raa-.v n•a.waeae oeoe.rm r>aNrW Num :w;r.. sa MtEY rK FUNM/FYr�m//(9W StA[IMDRNwv: arwunvr n' 9I WDMSAIS li /ME W IwQAE M /wI:AIFS . KNtMFw.OVRw15W�FS pFF }MU wrf W/BF.X:.. /.FC � ��rpv,5 M.9pwP Y/I qA HAVEN & JERSEYAPARTMENTS RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN -third floor URBAN OFFERINGS, INC. ARCHITECTS ORANGE m rn v J J _I m�u nan ay.rc.c wxwrec... r..m...: rn„ �• Yernvea r wfwa.�a ,uur mrr b•�r.w mmornu corr�rnr •• r v.rra.o.fn. Ram •rrvwwon.w.., - w.af rsrarf rco.uw ar.�re 1m.een xawo ,eavoav�n...czr : u.mw®.bwu cxa+,..nu •.a.uru or,a vn aiw. r �aoew,w asf.ra r.raaY�� ,,, ar.,� ur cvnr�r,o w vw..w i...xe vre •,. •a.... bfff K.p•{'ytprG.a4iaW rcriyp.M�r. uprYH e.mr•eurn ww.�uueTn.w wr -.anrsr,anw 1w.uw. r.ro ..., K,. arw� sGUEt+md- ,garW 1„ HAVEN & JERSEYAPARTMENTS RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN- fourth floor =�F URBAN OFFERINGS, INC. ARCHITECTS ORANGE I !STREET < PESgENvi. S �S(➢M: BEt Uw Sen mfY[MMM VLgIPOTPELRu.UY fYa.-. .s�YP14t .IQDNEO xslr�f w.w 114 tI/Y-L d5.Y.5':v� M POR NYPIt R vru¢m r0£SIML 6lJIN.,M P.. M,N OaO %P1I. 1,9Y .tYP .vw i.s ,r Envvl camera¢ L>yPIP ]y .. q/ y 1GPO1M I FKI l RPInPI KEII/INO • 4090vG2aI.\ala•/ `. a,rv.� o na v a.as< a..v eznloEw PraPsa eranvmP..+,.zn .. al..�a Plf uo.a {Poop.. fi.Swlt TMi.1l6 Yf54IY1FOtpM M.M'tv'iPF uy yull eF wlPEv.nm PESgF.Inu urtrwmc 1mxwlPlevPvePaoP..1 n.v...s PPFrenc..Ea PE.LE'n.14..nue seP.st.-. an.. .1c P.aemm�c.awsu s..•am•wm.�r. ..u.s.rrP n nFPemsP�»ru.... xaua:e Pue wrs uwar.e.nwirw sw.n ortPS..¢ P.w.urwe.c.��.v..Fa r.e-Pn PoranP. avarFla.P sc.LE HAVEN & JERSEY APARTMENTS RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CA CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN - r7 th floor URBAN OFFERINGS, INC. ARCHITECTS ORANGE PRELIMINARY CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL/COMMENTS Engineering: 1. Developer shall coordinate with the property owner's to the south of this project by preparing a master plan indicating future/ultimate access to Public Street from the property to the south. 2. Plot all right of way and easement on the site plan. 3. Submit a traffic impact analysis. 4. Provide a title report to the subject property. 5. The street lights shall be owned by the City. Developer shall be responsible to coordinate and pay all costs of street lights and to provide power to City owned street lights. 6. Haven Avenue frontage improvements to be in accordance with City "Major Divided Arterial" standards as required and including: a. Provide, protect, or repair existing curb and gutter, and sidewalk as required. b. Protect existing traffic signing and striping along Haven Avenue, or repair as required. c. Provide one 16,000 Lumen HPSV-equivalent LED Street Light. d. Driveway to be in accordance with the City Driveway Policy. e. Modify Traffic Signal at Haven Avenue and Jersey Avenue. Modify traffic striping and replace existing traffic signing as applicable. 7. Marine Avenue street frontage improvements to be in accordance with City "Local" standards as required and including: a. Provide, protect, or repair curb, gutter and sidewalks, as required. b. Provide two 5,800 Lumen HPSV-equivalent LED Street Lights, as required. c. Provide traffic signing and striping, as required. 8. 26th Street frontage improvements to be in accordance with City "Local" standards as required and Including: a. Provide, protect, or repair curb and gutter and sidewalk, as required. b. Provide traffic signing and striping as required. c. Driveway to be in accordance with the City Driveway Policy. 9. Amount of parking spaces to be in accordance with Development Code Section 17.64. 10. The proposed development is slated to be included in the City's Fiber Optic/ Broadband Service Business Plan that would provide a City owned Fiber -to -the -Home (FfTH) infrastructure. Proposed fiber optics on-site (conduits and fiber) will be placed underground within a duct and structure system to be installed by the Master Developer. The fiber and conduits along the backbone streets shall be installed in a joint trench by the developer as the last lane improvements are completed. In -tract fiber and conduit shall be installed by the Page 11 E6—E11P79 developers in -joint trench where possible. Maintenance of the installed system will be the responsibility of the City. Development of the Project requires the installation by the developers of all fiber optic infrastructure necessary to service the. Project as a stand-alone development. 11. Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated -per City Standards 12. Reciprocal access easements shall be provided ensuring access to all parcels by CC&Rs or by deeds and shall be recorded concurrently with the map or prior to the issuance of Building Permits, where no map isinvolved'. 13. Right-of-ways and easements shall be dedicated to the City for all 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. 14. 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. Permits issued on or after June 2, 2014, must complete the reimbursement process through the City's Accelerate online portal within 60 days following the completion of the construction and/or demolition project or the deposit will be forfeited. Permits issued before June 2, 2014„ require the following when applying for a deposit reimbursement: A completed CD -2 form, a copy of the Cashier's receipt showing the deposit amount, and all weight tickets. Instructions and forms are available at the City's web site, www.CityofRC.us, under City Hall; Engineering; Environmental Programs. 15. A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the estimated operating costs for all newstreetlights for the first six months of operation, prior to final map approval or prior to Building Permit issuance if no map is involved. 16. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting Districts shall be filed with the Engineering Services Department,prior to final map approval or issuance of Building Permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. 17. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 16.37.010, no person shall, make connections from a source of energy, fuel or power to any building or structure which is regulated by technical codes and for which a permit is required unless, in addition to any and all other codes, regulations and ordinances, all improvements required by these conditions of development approval have been completed and accepted by the City Council, except: That in developments containing more than one building, structure or unit, the development may have energy connections made in equal proportion to the percentage of completion of all improvementsrequired by these conditions of development approval, as determined by the City Engineer, provided that reasonable; safe and maintainable access to the property' exists. In no case shall more than 95% of the buildings, structures or units be connected to energy sources prior to completion and acceptance.of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval. Page 12 E6—E11 P80 18. Improvement Plans and Construction: a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of Building Permits, whichever occurs first. b. Prior to any work being, performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Services Department in addition to any other permits required. c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction project along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals and interconnect wiring. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR, or any other locations approved by the City Engineer. Notes: 1. Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets, a maximum of 200 feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer. 2. Conduit shall be 3 -inch galvanized steel with pull rope or as specified. e. Access ramps for the disabled shall be installed on all comers of intersections per City Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards, except for single-family residential lots. h. Street names shall be approved by the Planning Director prior to 'submittal for first plan check. 19. 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. Street Name Botanical Name Page 13 E6—Ell P81 Common Name Min. Grow Space Spacing Size Qty. / Construction Notes for Street Trees: 1. All street trees are to be planted in accordance with City standard plans. 2. Priorto the commencement of any planting, an agronomic soils report shall be furnished to the City Inspector. Any unusual toxicities or nutrient deficiencies may require backfill soil amendments, as determined by the City inspector. 3. All street trees are. subject to inspection and acceptance by the Engineering Services Department. 4. Street trees are to be planted per public improvement plans, only. 20. Intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with adopted policy. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight shall be plotted for all project intersections, including driveways. Local residential street intersections and commercial or industrial driveways may have lines of sight plotted as required. 21. 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. 22. The Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility (RCMU) shall be the electrical service provider for all project related development. Developer shall execute a Line Extension Agreement for electric service and shall construct electrical distribution facilities in accordance with such agreement and Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility requirements and dedicate such facilities to the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility (RCMU). 23. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. 24. 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. 25. Water and sewer ,plans shall bedesigned and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (RCFPD), and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CVWD is required prior to final map approval or -issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. . Building and Safety/Fire: The plans submitted for design review will have to clearly indicate if the building construction will be considered a high rise structure per the 2013 CBC Chapter 2. Illustrate the elevation of the highest floor used for human occupancy, including roof decks that are occupied. Page 14 E6—E 11P82 Z. The building will be required to protect with a NFPA 13 system. 3. Emergency vehicle access (EVA) willbe required on Marine Ave. 4. Both site access -drive aisles appear to be under the building, clearly indicate that the clearance below the building shall be 14'6". 5. Provide a site fire access plan in accordance with RCFPD Standard 5-1; reproduce the standard on the plans also illustrating the location of the designated FD lanes on the drive aisles next to all exterior walls ofthe building(s) to 26th Street, Haven Avenue and to the Marine Avenue required EVA. 6. In the building with a courtyard indicate direct access from the FD lanes to the courtyard; access to the courtyard shall be thru the pool area and from two sides of the building via a corridor. 7. Provide a code analysis for the proposed construction based on the 2013 CBC: Clearly indicate the type of construction, the number of stories,, the square footage of each floor and the total for the building, the occupancies of the building and provide the allowable area calculation. S. Aerial Fire Apparatus access roads in accordance with RCFPD Ordinance FD 54 section 503.7 is required for this project in addition to compliance with RCFPD Standard 5-1 requirements for fire lane, pleaser reference the standard rand illustrate compliance locations the proposed construction will also require roof access per RCFPD 5-6. 9. If you have any questions, please contact Moises Eskenazi, Senior Plans Examiner at (909) 477-2710 Extension 4209 or at moises.eskenazi@cityofrc.us the fire standards are available on the City's web site www.cityofrc.us follow the ,path from the home page to city hall/fire district/prevention/fire code standards. Fire construction documents are also available on-line, follow the path from.. the home page to city hall/building & safety/forms applications & handouts. All CA Building and Fire codes are posted on the State of California web site at www.bsc.ca.gov. Buildirg and Safety Department (Grading): 1. A site plan was submitted for a pre -application review. At this pre -application review neither a conceptual grading and drainage plan, nor a preliminary water quality management site and drainage plan were available for review. When these documents are submitted, the Building and Safety Department, Grading Services, will provide comments. Please note that all proposed areas of construction and impervious surfaces outside of the property boundaries shall be shown on both the conceptual grading and drainage plan and the preliminary water quality management site and drainage plan. Page 15 E6—E11P83 i oute I U M, WWI M 1 - N11 _., jersMr N 11,ey Boul� 34 7 �q; J Omnitrans Bus Route Map UPI -AND 210 N C � v ;J Red v Hill Park Antonio pital Foothill 0 6th St 4`': John 5alvin Park Holt Blvd Civic Center Dr Rancho Cmamung; Central Parl ml I v" 0 Q �O SITE ru C • Y Y Cucamonga-Guasti —_ n Regional Park 4th St RE \ Concours j C1tIZE Bank Ontario ¢ C:International > Airport = ncciis�Stfl�ejt�rxt:ro,,,. 1 gR 1 E6—E11P85 LN Victoria Gardens ■ Rancho ucamonga Epicenter %ldium 11111111101111%rro 15 ills Mall m M C I 00 jj' -.� arrow u.rv� :�..ffi..... •�.. _ Mw pglMlaa lrt.•sV M, wumr ' v. rw ar W C m 1.srw •- ,m I ]wasser polnYtamr ����9 Y T•.1 Iw I _ _-. --_- l�Irrrr ^� _ • �I For complete route and schedule information call: .t_V_� ffll € I a 'I 800 -9 -OMNIBUS (1-800-966-6428) I 3 ` � I w� ommt ons org Boarding the aRX d'O M9I �t 4. ^Y •d^] h'� ]:.X. Stj h' Ou] vf4 qy bA� - - ame ecsex sane ¢aemsmo, aa)bwnw a�o°ara ve mn �Iea4e t Chan, QH'•Se fiY YQN T13 Iae Ra°'/ON=bd 14 MveR 1] Omn/Trans GettinwPas abe m°`"� °"�"� Detling lift the bus ('e.. r ,,,et)ur Wnatunr, ':a,.v aw mat] d P•em m,tme oosome nenmar br nn] tre nma som me oz.s wm000, •Please ea M as trr g me rear aan Fmrax sas+r aegis+x ]!M RM °le rey 9/rvyJ'y+J Te [y]!13] SICMEI �We_N laa.rsr rrrlr Foga rl4 4 --xr� b Pm wn w seev✓x. -.. '.- rMF vr.. nn nm )•.m eesm 6v iy l•L 4. 4T )I)Y -.-zraaei. wmf � _isasW aEv �n reo Wane (1 l'M LYwOnP 8 6 -.ay ® to etun� YPw :•- Vu..- ® V a!'-SwPBgVytd-ie.�- 'J 'x�a Ws• -✓✓nix •� -1�nY Po„m ® ids. w3wn. w.o. wcdv P,,,... ✓... 40 ep O .�,. a. 6 West Valley Connector Bus Rapid Transit Map u tN i ALTFRNAM AIXiNMFJfl S E6 -Ell P87 West Valley Connector �16.�.���1..� e ' aM',LES IrMIMf ,O n 3 Definmm AllgnlTPllt 40 flFi Aalxm. - OpnenlA:lgnmenl ia:dlgHxm Avec MOr Mn R4 Lm BRf Trarytar '-' OpO. L AAqet labrv.�allr SlMaven AVP $talgrl•. •���. OpM1on3Allg.ent:abrg kYsev tllvdMaven Ave Amok OmniTrans TABLE 17.38.040-1 ALLOWED LAND USES AND PERMIT REQUIREMENTS FOR HAVEN AVENUE OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICT Land Use/Zoning District HA Residential Uses Dwelling, Multi -Family ' p Recreation, Resource Preservation, Open Space, Education, and Public Assembly Uses Assembly Use C Community Center/Civic Use p Indoor Fitness and Sports Facility—Large C Indoor Fitness and Sports Facility—Small C Park and Public Plaza C Public Safety Facility C School, Academic (Private) C School, Academic (Public) C School, College/ University (Private) C School, College/ University (Public) C Schools, Specialized Education and Training/Studio C Utility, Transportation, Public Facility, and Communication Uses Broadcasting and Recording Studios P Park and Ride Facility p Parking Facility C Transit Facility C Utility Facility and Infrastructure—Pipelines (I) P Retail, Service, and Office Uses Alcoholic Beverage Sales C Banks and Financial Services p Business Support Services p Call Centers C Child Day Care Facility/Center C Convenience Store C Furniture, Furnishing, and Appliance Store C Hotel and Motel p Massage Establishment p Medical Services, General p Office, Business and Professional p Office, Accessory p Restaurant, No Liquor Service p Restaurant, Beer and Wine p Restaurant, Full Liquor Service C Retail, Accessory p Automobile and Vehicle Uses Car Washing and Detailing 0), (4). i5) Service Stations (3),(4) C C FYWIRIT 0 E6–E11 P89 Table Notes: 10 Multi -family residential uses are permitted when part of a mixed-use project. (l) Utility facilities and infrastructure involving hazardous or volatile gas and/or liquid pipeline development require approval of a Conditional Use Permit. ()) Service stations and car washing and detailing establishments are prohibited within one-half ('/2) mile of the Foothill Boulevard/Haven Avenue and the 4th Street/Haven Avenue intersections. No service station or car washing and detailing establishment shall be closer than one-half ('/z) mile of another service station or car washing and detailing establishment as measured from the nearest property line. (4) Service stations shall be designed to reflect the architectural standards and guidelines within the Haven Avenue Overlay District. No corporate "prototype" architecture design will be permitted. Service stations are only permitted when designed as part of, and designed consistent with, profession office complexes. (S) Full service attended car washing and detailing establishments are permitted to operate a quick lube oil changes facility. Quick lube facilities that are part of an attended car wash shall be fully screened from the Haven Avenue right-of-way. E6—El1P90 - - -- -7---- DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ACTION RAINS ROOM CITY HALL 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE A. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 PM Roll Call: Ray Wimberly Rich Macias X Candyce Burnett Donald Granger X Alternates: Lou Munoz Tony Guglielmo Francisco Oaxaca X B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Committee on any item listed on the agenda. 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 to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Staff Coordinator, depending upon the number of individuals members of the audience. This is a professional businessmeeting 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. C. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS 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. C1. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20147- VAN DAELE HOMES, INC.- A review of a proposed subdivision of three parcels with a combined Page 1 of 4 EXHIBIT R E6—E 11 P91 JULY 33 2018 - 7:00 P.M. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ACTION RAINS ROOM CITY HALL 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE area of 17.23 acres into three (3) parcels and four (4) letter lots located within the Empire Lakes Specific Plan, Planning Area 1, located north of 4th Street, south of 6th Street, west of Milliken Avenue, and east of Utica/Cleveland Avenues. The specific location of the project site is south of 6th Street and east of the future alignment of The Resort Parkway (formerly referred to as The Vine); APN:0210-082-41, -49, and -52. Related files: Design Review DRC2017-00925 and Pre -Application DRC2017-00697. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 2015041083) on May 18, 2016 in connection with the City's approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2015- 00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project. C2. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2017-00925- VAN DAELE HOMES, INC.- A request for site plan and architectural review of 296 units consisting of bungalows, townhomes, and flats on multiple parcels with a combined area of 17.23 acres within the Empire Lakes Specific Plan, Planning Area 1, located north of 4th Street, south of 6th Street, west of Milliken Avenue, and east of Utica/Cleveland Avenues. The specific location of the project site is south of 6th Street and east of the future alignment of The Resort Parkway (formerly referred to as The Vine); APN:0210-082-41, -49, and -52. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20147 and Pre -Application DRC2017-00697. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 2015041083) on May 18, 2016 in connection with the City's approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project. C3. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2017-00654 — CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES — A proposal to construct a mixed-use development comprised of 2 buildings consisting of 207 multi -family units and 14,300 square feet of commercial area on a 5.21 -acre site located within the Industrial Park (IP) District and Haven Avenue Overlay (HADD) District at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and 26th Street—APN: 0209-131-01. Related Records: General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017- 00657, Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656, Uniform Sign Program DRC2017- 00659 and Minor Exception DRC2017-00872. The environmental document is in the process of being prepared. Page 2 of 4 E6—E11P92 1y - JULY 3, 2018 - 7:00 P.M. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ACTION RAINS ROOM CITY HALL 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE The Design Review Committee recommended approval of the project to the Planning Commission. C4. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2017-00659 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - A proposal to establish a Uniform Sign Program for a new mixed-use development comprised of 2 buildings consisting of 207 multi -family units and 14,300 square feet of commercial area on a 5.21 -acre site located within the Industrial Park (IP) District and Haven Avenue Overlay (HAOD) District at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and 26th Street - APN: 0209-131-01. Related Records: General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017-00657, Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656, Design Review DRC2017-00654 and Minor Exception DRC2017-00872. The environmental document is in the process of being prepared. The Design Review Committee recommended approval of the project to the Planning Commission. D. ADJOURNMENT 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. 8:01 PM 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 day, Thursday, June 28, 2018, at least seventy two (72) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA. Page 3 of 4 E6-El1P93 JULY 3, 2018 - 7:00 P.M. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ACTION RAINS ROOM CITY HALL 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE The Design Review Committee recommended approval of the project to the Planning Commission. C4. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2017-00659 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - A proposal to establish a Uniform Sign Program for a new mixed-use development comprised of 2 buildings consisting of 207 multi -family units and 14,300 square feet of commercial area on a 5.21 -acre site located within the Industrial Park (IP) District and Haven Avenue Overlay (HAOD) District at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and 26th Street - APN: 0209-131-01. Related Records: General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017-00657, Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656, Design Review DRC2017-00654 and Minor Exception DRC2017-00872. The environmental document is in the process of being prepared. The Design Review Committee recommended approval of the project to the Planning Commission. D. ADJOURNMENT 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. 8:01 PM 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 day, Thursday, June 28, 2018, at least seventy two (72) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA. Page 3 of 4 E6-El1P93 V V L- I V� LV I V - P . V V 1 .IYI DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ACTION RAINS ROOM CITY HALL 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE ,ctl5 Lois J. Schrader Planning Commission Secretary City of 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. Page 4 of 4 E6—El1P94 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Dominick Perez July 3, 2018 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2017-00654 — CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES — A proposal to construct a mixed-use development comprised of 2 buildings consisting of 207 multi -family units, 14 live/work units and 14,300 square feet of commercial area on a 5.21 -acre site located within the Industrial Park (IP) District and Haven Avenue Overlay (HADD) District at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and 26th Street — APN: 0209-131-01. Related Records: Pre -Application Review DRC2016-00428, General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017-00657, Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656, Uniform Sign Program DRC2017-00659 and Minor Exception DRC2017-00872, The environmental document is in the process of being prepared. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2017-00659 — CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES — A proposal to establish a Uniform Sign Program for a new mixed-use development comprised of 2 buildings consisting of 207 multi -family units, 14 live/work units and 14,300 square feet of commercial area on a 5.21 -acre site located within the Industrial Park (IP) District and Haven Avenue Overlay (HAOD) District at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and 26th Street — APN: 0209-131-01. Related Records: Pre -Application Review DRC2016-00428, General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017-00657, Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656; Design Review DRC2017- 00654 and Minor Exception DRC2017-00872. The environmental document is in the process of being prepared. Background: A Pre -Application Review (DRC2016-00428) workshop was held on July 13, 2016, to discuss the project with the Planning Commission (Attachments 1 & 2). At that time, prior to introducing the details of the project at the meeting, staff explained the City's vision of Haven Avenue Overlay District and that the purpose of the district is to establish a high-end office corridor with special commercial and service related retail to serve office users. Staff also mentioned that, according to the Development Code, the "Haven Avenue Overlay Zoning District is intended to result in a progressive, sophisticated, and urban style of development." It was also noted that the site is located (1) within walking distance (approximately 1/4 mile) from multiple active Omnitrans bus stops, which serves Route 81 (north and southbound) along Haven Avenue, and Route 85 (east and westbound) along Arrow Route, (2) along the future Omnitrans West Valley Connector Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Route, which is anticipated to provide services operating as. early as mid -2019, (3) about 1.5 miles driving/walking distance to the west of the Rancho Cucamonga Metrolink Station at Milliken Avenue and (4) within .6 miles of the Civic Center/City Hall (approximately 14 minute walk) and approximately 1 mile from major shopping and restaurants (approximately 22 min. walk). The Commission generally gave positive feedback with regard to the design and concept of the mixed use project, but also noted the importance of providing adequate parking and correctly amending the Development Code to allow for this type of development. It should be noted that this project is being processed concurrently with applications to amend the Development Code (DRC2017-00656), General Plan (DRC2017-00658) and Zoning Map E6—El1P95 DRC COMMENTS DRC2017-00654 & DRC2017-00659 — CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES July 3, 2018 Page 3 (DRC2017-00657). The Development Code Amendment proposes to allow residential uses within the Haven Avenue Overlay District (HAOD) as part of a mixed-use development in the overlay district. The General Plan Amendment proposes a change to the General Plan land use designation for the project site and the 10 -acre property to the south from Industrial Park to Mixed Use. The Zoning Map Amendment proposes to a change the zoning designation of the site from Industrial Park (IP) District to Mixed Use. Site and Surrounding Land Uses: The project site is located at the southwest comer of Haven Avenue and 26th Street on a 5.21 -acre parcel. The project site is partially developed with a 20,000 -square foot industrial building and outdoor storage area. The site fronts three streets, including Haven Avenue to the east, 26th Street to the north and Marine Avenue to the west, all of which contain partial improvements. The existing land use, general plan and zoning designations for the project site and adjacent properties are as follows: Land Use__ G_eneral Plan Zoning Site Warehouse and lndustrtal Park _ Industrial Park (IP) District/ Outdoor Storage Haven Avenue Overlay District North Multitenant Office Industrial Park Industrial Park (IP) District/ Buildings Haven Avenue Overlay District South 9.65 -acre Vacant Parcel Industrial Park Industrial Park (IP) District/ Haven Avenue Overlay District East Gas Station and Mullitenant Office Buildings West Single -Family Residences Industrial Park Industrial Park (IP) District/ Haven Avenue Overlay District Low Low (L) Residential District Residential Project Overview: The applicant proposes to demolish the existing industrial building onsite and construct one 5 -story building (Building A) and one 4 -story building (Building B) with parking, landscaping and amenities. The development, when completed, will contain a total of 207 multi- family units (for rent), including 14 live/work units and 14,300 square feet of commercial area for office/retail uses. The project proposes a total density of 39.8 dwelling units per acre. Building A, located along Haven Avenue, contains all of the project's live/work and commercial uses along the first and part of the second floor as well as 93 multifamily residential units. Building B, generally located along 26th Street west of Building A, contains 114 residential units as well as a majority of the residential amenities. Both buildings are elevator served. The proposed buildings have a contemporary architectural style and will incorporate building material consisting of stucco, decorative masonry, fiber cement boarding, corrugated metal, storefront glazing and metal balcony railing and storefront awnings. The project has a maximum overall building height of 60 feet. The project has a building streetscape setback of 33.1 feet along E6—E11 P96 DRC COMMENTS DRC2017-00654 & ORG2017-00659 — CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES July 3, 2018 Page 3 Haven Avenue, 14.8 feet along 26th Street and 104.8 feet along Marine Avenue and an interior side setback at the southern property line of 5 feet. Building A - East Elevation along Haven Avenue The project includes a total of 380 off-street (on-site) parking spaces and an additional 30 on - street parking spaces along 261h Street and Marine Avenue. This consists of 300 resident parking spaces (286 gated spaces and 14 ungaled spaces), 80 public parking spaces, 16 on -street parking spaces along 26th Street and 14 on-slreet parking spaces along Marine Avenue. A total of 207 spaces are covered (38 "tuck under" garage spaces and 174 carport spaces). Gated spaces are separated from the public parking spaces by decorative wrought iron fencing that is generally places along the entire south and west property lines. The project contains a parking deficiency of 19%. The applicant submitted a Minor Exception (DRC2017-00872) with a parking study and is requesting a reduction of the required parking. The parking study was peer reviewed by a third party, which determined the project contains a theoretical surplus of 5 parking off-street parking spaces and therefore contains a sufficient amount of parking. Vehicular access to the off- street parking areas of the project is provided along Haven Avenue and at two points along 26th Street. The westerly access along 26th Street will serve for emergency vehicle access only. The project contains a total landscape coverage of 22,561 square feet (10% site coverage) and a minimum of 86 trees placed throughout the parking lot and along the perimeter and building frontage. Enhanced landscaping within the perimeter planter along Marine Avenue consisting of groundcover, shrubs, hedges, 24 -inch box Magnolia trees and 5 -foot tall decorative wrought iron fence provides a buffer between the adjacent single-family neighborhood to the west of the project and gated parking area for the project (See Cross Section Below). Residential amenities for the project include an outdoor pool, spa, barbeque area, fireplace with group seating, fitness room, club room, 1,450 square foot roof top deck and bicycle storage room. The project also includes 2,230 square feet of coworking office foi* residential use only, which will be located on the third floor above the office and retail area. A retail plaza area, located at the corner of Haven Avenue and 26th Street adjacent to the office and retail area, provides additional common open space area for future tenants and customers. Enhanced paving is proposed throughout the project site, including at the drive entrances, within the public plaza area and throughout other common open space areas. Cross Section of Marine Avenue with Project Landscaping E15—Ell P97 DRC COMMENTS ORC2017-00654 & ORC2017-00659 — CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES July 3, 2018 Page 3 Tit " k roe tpp II �� I" I I i I I wfw_'Vr. MC M The applicant also proposes to establish a Uniform Sign Program for the development. At this time, the program contains the location and conceptual design of all signs for the residential and commercial components of the project, but does not include the dimensions or other details such as the materials or illumination methods. The sign types include proposed public art signage, project identification signs, directional and code -related signs (ie. ADA parking, fire lane and stop signs) and amenity, retail and office tenant ID signs. The project ID and commercial sign types are generally proposed to be located along the frontage of Building A, adjacent to Haven Avenue and 261' Street. Staff Comments: The project is well-designed and incorporates architecture and site design that is compliant with City development standards and design guidelines, including building height, setbacks, landscape coverage, amenities, and density, with the exception of parking requirements. A peer review of the parking study was completed by an independent third parry consultant that determined the project to have a sufficient amount of parking for the proposed uses. The site was designed to be sensitive to the adjacent residences, which can be seen by the placement of the buildings, parking and landscape improvements. This is consistent with the General Plan goals and policies that ensure established neighborhoods are protected from incompatible activities or land uses. Conversely, one notable improvement that staff thinks should be made to the project is with regard to connectivity. The project by itself provides adequate circulation, but does indicate any areas for future vehicular or pedestrian access to the property at the south. The red dashed line below shows a potential future access point through the site that could provide connectivity which could help the proposed project and future mixed use development to the south be successful. E6—E11P98 DRC COMMENTS DRC2017-00654 & DRC2017-00659 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES July 3, 2018 Page 3 El c o o O OO DOJ Dona O a m. r 0 0 0 0 0 0 e 0 Additionally, the Uniform Sign Program that was submitted appears to be a draft. Although the conceptual design and placement of the sign types appear to be complimentary to the proposed architecture, the program will need to be revised to include additional information, including the dimensions and other details such as the materials and illumination methods. This should be completed and resubmitted to the Planning Department prior to scheduling this project for a Planning Commission hearing. Major Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: 1. None. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. Connectivity - Staff believes that the project should incorporate a dedicated connection point between the project site and the property to the south as this may contribute to the success of this mixed use area. The Committee should discuss whether this importance mixed use principle should be incorporated into the project prior to the Planning Commission hearing. E6-E11P99 DRC COMMENTS DRC2017-00654 & DRC2017-00659 — CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES July 3, 2018 Page 3 2. Uniform Sign Program — Staff recommends the applicant revise the Uniform Sign Program (USP) to provide more information on the live/work and commercial signage. The revised USP should include sign details such as sign materials, illumination types and dimensions (maximum width and letter height for all sign types). Per the Development Code, the max letter height for commercial signage for buildings plotted at the street setback line should be no greater than 12 inches in height. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. None. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the Design Review Committee recommend approval of the project to the Planning Commission. Attachments: 1. Pre -Application Review DRC2016-00428 PC Workshop Staff Report — July 13, 2016 2. Pre -Application Review DRC2016-00428 PC Workshop Minutes —July 13, 2016 Staff Report: Dominick Perez, Associate Planner, presented the item and the applicant followed by expanding on the project's design. The Committee discussed the project as well as the secondary issues regarding signage and connectivity. The applicant confirmed they will be providing the additional information regarding the proposed uniform sign program prior to any upcoming meetings. The Committee discussed the matter of connectivity and did not ask that any changes be made to the design of the project. Design Review Committee Action: The Design Review Committee recommended approval of the project to the Planning Commission. Staff Planner: Dominick Perez, Associate Planner Members Present: Commissioner Macias, Commissioner Oaxaca attended Staff Coordinator: Donald Granger, Senior Planner E6—E11 P100 m X 2 V+ FFc Lc or Existing General Plan Land Use Plan Y —A General Plan Land Use Map U. D»ywlwes PeSgIMW O 0 vwY L0u0`-:Oauv( O I➢➢IIO-�ONux, O cows. 0 � wm➢m�SaYoauxl —WP.n Ngnllt O.NON,K` tili(Ntl �ayn.:.OSo00v➢[: ( I!\(o\t.1 Cam N Lv1.w X0.0 � 0 F V1� hN W avroN C." 10 05 0 31 F SA I Cmlmu:RY CmlmetaY N 25 � 0 U F4Nt Caney.C. .10:5iM 1 Yu 0 Y — WMux 109 0 FW, mGa•MY MSeFW Va110b-a Ol F.W I hMal MUYIUI FANS w3➢FY YNwWI 10.0M-. 030 FFM! ov ns➢ 20.11 g cM»:.Yma � LpM Sww m. a 1 Nvc1 FYN CmMVJI• CantlO' a et Fx»v :0I0 o:o FAR) � sm. 5Mtm*(0m ro Q W.M V[e Awa i Tew .'M IF �NA•n..e�u, FeY3ap[➢ IIYIa��ea C.NYNe� 3 faS� Wa ,Irtivy`lawl IMSMI e FmN>.0 „Ys 4w NNYnTeve SA "'W. ////// MNM 4vMw OIP(e �••••••� F�e3e'xMVN trza ®� uauN>n De. LrvN. ���� CM 9YM➢'v --WCS M IM.Mta NNIM➢.5 YavvE l.a 1 M/e+ae e..waw�w.sm.[cw rsu..w Ye, e ww Nw➢u.. c.w;ad.,. �0. rIN�M�eve 6 CNC 3� S:e W:eee IbN.^Mm ei F01b 0.YCasrvga:eane: u [3 `fNne ab lma �IS`SY. 1[0 ➢MONKS Scnod O 0 --IV x911. mN O wpn atom O cows. 0 °`CWwa PaM1. I1� iwCyY ►n...t NY.YMS D m < R a Proposed General Plan Land Use Plan General Plan Land Use Map D i.]ne us.Ospnxam FW61a 6i6 WNm ye XnAenrM 0..vWtlar®Jae.fe9Y rew.aJaare..�a..r :mrrm O nlve aA ]JWnr. o.eoarx� NW[wMJCveJ S.5lh i werlm m o »o aYxt r: yymnly®y �Jsev.w Pavr,.o-1. oawxr J.uso _»W R.CmCdYxr (.Rauosc.. cJw»«r Bue try.r< ar.Y ra.a.raF+n� � n.IOrPPrrrP<9 Lamwar Wpm, � cP..rr.r.r <e:..Yval mss o ss FUIr SpbedOWsu � GnxY cannwao mis.9ss Pur 0.pai< wa 9u» � 0.Ybxf � uuJ sae OB Fust mY,w ss wJlaax P.J m.o 9wFanr JLC Cwnwtl NNWO.0.o .. FFAP'. � ream lmnvw x PUir 19. oo» sox. rwn. NeEn.a 19:.19 Nixi Fjj{' ,_ Cmsnatm � Gb..� 5Pa[. tO-C t CWst FbW ConalWMVCahn Pu4R Fx1My CMUMpmY N a9-10 FUII Sugtlf 1010 -C m F.1RI Q J.,.P vsY uw ♦`.4Y.fuwas FW61a 6i6 WNm ye Y»r C.rt 0..vWtlar®Jae.fe9Y rew.aJaare..�a..r :mrrm O nlve a fmNw. NW[wMJCveJ S.5lh lMrMare<tMM- r: yymnly®y ]FW�Sc IM CNm Mss .ugNfa.et Ynrn M'. r2Fo%V @gCxmvye i�vmei 4.e RrpM.O Pan iL Bue try.r< U'x $ sl a...M PM< %///// O ewmmor[xnm `««..±Eauauvnra+ea O aYw Ygrlsuwa B� um ar p nuns<mo- RrpM.O Pan iL Bue try.r< SpbedOWsu 0.pai< .YYMYa< � 0.Ybxf iM X X �T I W Mal Ji L W Low Medium (LM) tesidential District Low (L) Residential District Existing Zoning Map • • Zoning Map • OIe RIY.uml�l � �ur...lu e.e:, IV 'Ifni •dust•I Park Specific Plan Industrial Park• Have• ® eine lau NrM VY�ME% (IP) District/ Avenue Avenue • • • 0 I .(IP)District/• Haven Avenue = Overlay r=q sneB, Districtt Overlay District District Haven Avenue (� .wnun nralww roue. Wwli Overlay Industrial vfMit{I� Park (IP) District General Industrial (GI) i •I • •I m District F �Ijersey ® Fwe...�..BR,FC R., w.al OIe RIY.uml�l � �ur...lu e.e:, IV 'Ifni •dust•I Park Specific Plan Haven Industrial ® eine lau NrM VY�ME% Overlay District a® B�.w•Y Evo1.0.nImE� Avenue Park (I Heat .(IP)District/• Industrial r=q sneB, Districtt a Indust Haven Avenue (� .wnun nralww roue. Wwli Overlay IP vfMit{I� �verlais[ t I District District r] ] IP Residential Open Space CommerciaVOtfice ® Fwe...�..BR,FC R., w.al OIe RIY.uml�l � �ur...lu e.e:, � �. sF.:.•osl _ `a...Csnn�aN FC' O Meo Camnvlp PCl ®.swn.Bwf m:..wllno a>w Ww.•a wnm � Neercmlmml.scl G Specific Plan 8 K.>VW..meC famm,n.. Q Scc4VW.ls° ® eine lau NrM VY�ME% Overlay District a® B�.w•Y Evo1.0.nImE� CommerciaVOtfice ® Fwe...�..BR,FC R., w.al OIe RIY.uml�l ® Weems IBo Planned Canmunities _ `a...Csnn�aN FC' O Meo Camnvlp PCl ®.swn.Bwf m:..wllno a>w Ww.•a wnm � Neercmlmml.scl G C�eadlaKQ 8 K.>VW..meC famm,n.. Mixed Use Overlay District 4Tai n1EOBl n..�= rte.. IE.�o n«ao� Industrial r=q sneB, Q iNW�a VII. i:V �-1 iWIM1FBM.i 1FBCOl � W.iwwru..IOI: w¢.rC ea1C®� (� .wnun nralww roue. Wwli rn_ O A Proposed Zoning Map L ing Map Avenue I = Overlay District < • T Industrial Park (IP) District n m • Residential Open Space O ..P is�a ma. � .mecam uc • ave• Industrial Avenue Park (IP) l . District Overlay IP O m.w,•n..��.,ye..ac � aco....wi,so Specific Plan :istric0 fm.n,nl 8 • Residential Open Space O ..P is�a ma. � .mecam uc r LS YIunIN Yr. 4� �A3� Q Y.p,n ry,.av�l IN,iH.n NCi �'.i+nm..[wPgP. KC. B Gf^IarW Gmune.i P:C O m.w,•n..��.,ye..ac � aco....wi,so Specific Plan fem�a. O.�KR fm.n,nl 8 CRIED 4rnu MPlPct wn i5P.6 �. ® Commercial101fice Planned Communities �:wv.CT„�YG: Qw.uNCa.,,,n.Y RCS �'.i+nm..[wPgP. KC. B Gf^IarW Gmune.i P:C O m.w,•n..��.,ye..ac � aco....wi,so rtiro w«w.YPw O raPY.s,zEY, fem�a. O.�KR fm.n,nl 8 FLT,r.Yni Mixed Use Overlay District um7 4,.....,cw. .::Y YPVYasq�swi Industrial Ey^.•-a O ww. •...is. L+ rm..Ye.a.e�wao- City of Rancho Cucamonga Y 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.: General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658, Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017-00657, Design Review DRC2017-00654, Uniform Sign Program DRC2017-00659 and Minor Exception DRC2017-00872 Public Review Period Closes: September 26, 2018 Project Name: Haven and 26th Project Applicant: Urban Offerings Inc. 11400 W. Olympic Blvd., Suite 850 Los Angeles, CA 90064 Project Location (also see attached map): Located within the Industrial Park (IP) District and Haven Avenue Overlay (HADD) District at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and 26th Street at 10451 26th Street — APN: 0209-131-01. Project Description: The project involves a proposal to construct a mixed-use development comprised of 2 buildings consisting of 207 multi -family units, including 14 live/work units and 14,300 square feet of commercial/office area on a 5.21 acre site located within the Industrial Park (IP) District and Haven Avenue Overlay (HADD) District at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and 26th Street at 10451 26th Street — APN: 0209-131-01. The project also involves a proposal to amend the General Plan land use for the site from Industrial Park to Mixed Use, amend the Zoning Map designation for the site from Industrial Park (IP) District to Mixed Use (MU) District and amend the Development Code to allow for residential uses within the Haven Avenue Overlay when park of a mixed use project. The project also involves the establishment of a Uniform Sign Program to set standards and guidelines for signage throughout the project site. Lastly, the project involves a Minor Exception for a proposed reduction of required off-street parking spaces. The project would require an existing industrial building on-site to be demolished and removed and would require the installation of street improvements along Haven Avenue, 26th Street and Marine Avenue. 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. EXHIBIT U E6—E11 P105 If adopted, the Mitigated Negative Declaration means that an Environmental Impact Report will not be required. The factual and analytical basis for this finding Is included in the attached Initial Study. The project file and all related documents are available for review at the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department at, 10500 Civic Center Drive- (909) 477-2750 or Fax (909) 477-2847. NOTICE The public is invited to comment on the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration during the review period. September 26, 2018 Date of Determination E6—Ell P106 Adopted By Project Site Aerial Photo E6—E11P107 U o ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM` (Part I - Initial Study) RANCHO (Please type or print clearly using Ink Use the tab key to move from one Ilne to the next Ilne.) CUCAMONGA Planning Department (909)477-2750 The purpose of this form is to inform the City of the basic components of the proposed projectso thatthe City may review the project pursuant to City Policies, Ordinances, and Guidelines; the California Environmental Quality Act; and the City's Rules and Procedures to Implement CEQA. It is important that the Information requested in this application be provided in full. Upon review of the completed Initial Study Part I and the development application, additional information such as, but not limited to, traffic, noise, biological, drainage, and geological reports may be required. The project application will not be deemed complete unless the identified special studies/reports are submitted for review and accepted as complete and adequate. The project application will not be scheduled for Committees' review unless all required reports are submitted and deemed complete for staff to prepare the Initial Study Part II as required by CEQA. In addition to the filing fee, the applicant will be responsible to pay or reimburse the City, its agents, officers, and/or consultants for all costs for the preparation, review, analysis, recommendations, mitigations, etc., of any special studies or reports. INCOMPLETEAPPLICATIONSWILL NOTBEPROCESSEO- Please note that itis the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that the application is complete at the time of submittal; City staff will not be available to perform work required to provide missing information. Application Number for the project to which this form pertains: Haven at Pmject Tdle Name & Address of project owner(s): Ross A. Allaire 10411 261h Street, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Name& Address of developerorprojectsponsor. Urban Offerings -Dean Nucich/Joe Lutz 11400 W. Olympic Blvd. Suite 850, Los Angeles, CA 90064 Updated 4/1112013 Page 1 of 10 EXHIBIT V E6 -E11 P108 Contact Person & Address: Chuck Buquet Charles Joseph Assciates, 9581 Business Center Drive, Suite D, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Name & Address ofperson preparing this form (if different from above): Same as above Telephone Number. 909481-1822 Information indicated by an asterisk (') is not required of non -construction CUP's unless otherwise requested by staff. '1) Provide a full scale (8-12 x 11) copy of the USGS Quadrant Sheet(s) which includes the project site, and indicate the site boundaries. 2) Provide a set of color photographs that show representative views into the site from the north, south, east, and west; views into and from the site from the primary access points that serve the site; and representative views of significant features from the site. include a map showing location of each photograph. 3) Project Location (describe): Haven at 26th 4) Assessor's Parcel Numbers (attach additional sheet if necessary): 0209-131-01-0-000 '5) Gross Site Area (acfsq. R.): 8.21 acres '6) Net Site Area (total site size minus area ofpublic streets & proposed dedications): 5.21 acres 7) Describe any proposed general plan amendment or zone change which would affect the project site (attach additional sheet if necessary): General Plan Amendment, Development District Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment. Updated 4111/2013 E6—E11 P109 Page 2 of 10 8) Include a description of all permits which will be necessary from the City of Rancho Cucamonga and othergovemmental agencies in order to fully implement the project: 9) Describe the physical setting of the site as it exists before the project including information on topography, soil stability, plants and animals, mature trees, tralls and roads, drainage courses, and scenic aspects. Describe any existing structures on site (including age and condition) and the use ofthe structures. Attach photographs of significant features described in addition, cite all sources of information (i.e., geological andforhydrologic studies, biotic and archeological surveys, traffic studies): The project site is relatively flat and is has an older warehouse building in average condition. This existing building will be demolished. Updated 4/11/2013 E6—Ell P110 Page 3 of 10 10) Describe the known cultural and/orhistorical aspects of the site. Cite all sources ofinformation (books, published reports and oral history): There are no known Cultural or Historical aspects to this site location. 11) Describe anynoise sources and theirlevels that now affect the site (aircraft, roadway noise, etc.) and how they will affect proposed uses: Existing roadway noise and short term construction noise. 12) Describe the proposed projectin detail. This should provide an adequate description of the site in terms of ultimate use that will result from the proposed project. Indicate if there aro proposed phases for development, the extent of development to occurwith each phase, and the anticipated completion of each increment. Attach additional sheet(s) if necessary. This multi -family luxury apartment community is comprised of,2 buildings totaling 207 Units on a 5.2 acre site. Building A is a 5 story type 111 on grade mixed-use building at the corner of Haven and 26th with apartments for rent above retail and office uses, Building B is a 4 story type V residential building fronting 26th with apartments for rent adjacent to indoor and outdoor amenity spaces. Both building feature tuck -under carports. A series of 14 ground floor work /live units interface with both Haven Avenue and 26th and Clubhouse facilities (approximately 8,090 SF) on the interior ground floor and Co - working space (approximately 2,230 SF) for resident use is placed on the third floor and two levels of multi -family residential units sit on the 4th and 5th floors. The total square footage of retail/office spaces proposed within the Retail/Office mixed use component is within its Residential mixed use spa, bike maintenance shop and a roof deck for resident access and use. 13) Describe the surrounding properties, including information on plants and animals and any cultural, historical, or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land use (residential, commercial, etc.), intensity ofland use (one -family, apartmenthouses, shops, department stores, etc.) and scale of development (height, frontage, setback, rear yard, etc.): btnrth-Cnmmorria1 Office Building South -vacant land East -Haven Avenue West Single Family Residential Updated 4/11/2013 Paae 4 of 10 E6 -E11 P111 14) Will the proposed project change the pattern, scale, orcharacter of the surrounding general area of the project? 15) Indicate the type of short-term and long-term noise to be generated, including source and amount. How will these noise levels affect adjacent properties and on-site uses? What methods of soundpmofing are proposed? Short term construction noise which will be mitigated as much as possible and will comply with all applicable noise control requirements. '16) Indicate proposed removals and/or replacements of mature or scenic trees: 17) Indicate any bodies of water (including domestic water supplies) into which the site drains: 18) Indicate expected amount of water usage. (See Attachment A for usage estimates). For further clarification, please contact the Cucamonga Valley Water District at (909) 987-2591. a. Residential (gaYday) _ Peak use (gaUDay) 52.992 b, Commeroiallind. (gal/day/ac) 1900 _ Peak use (gaUmirvac) 9.899 19) Indicate proposed method of sewage disposal. ❑ Septic Tank Sewer JD( if septic tanks are proposed, attach percolation tests. If discharge to a sanitary sewage system is proposed indicate expected daily sewage generation: (See Attachment forusage estimates). Forfurthercladfrcation, please contact the Cucamonga Valley Water District at (909) 987-2591. a. Residential (gat1day) b. Commemial/industrial (gaYday/ac) Updated 4/1112013 E6—E11P112 Page 5 & 10 RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS:) 20) Number of residentialunits: 207 Detached (indicate range of parcel sizes, minimum lot size and maximum lot size: n1a Attached (indicate whether units are rental or for sale units): All multi -family units will be rental and owned and managed by Urban Offerings. 21) Anticipated range of sale prices and/or rents: Sale Price(s) $ nla to 5 Rent (per month) $ lobe determined to $ 22) Specify number of bedrooms by unit type: This project will have a total of 207 rental units with 32 studio units 63 one bedroom, 98 two bedroom and 14 LivelMlork units. 23) Indicate anticipated household size by unit type: 1 per Studio, 1.25 per one bedroom, 1.75 per two bedroom, 24) Indicate the expected number of school children who will be residing within the project.' Contact the appropriate School Districts as shown in Attachment 8: a. Elementary: 2.36 b. JuniorHighi 3.64 c. Senior High 2_73 COMMERCIAL. INDUSTRIAL. AND INSTITUTIONAL PROJECTS 25) Describe type of use(s) and majorfunction(s) of commercial, industrial orinstiluhonal uses: A series of 14 ground floor work /live units interface with both Haven Avenue and 26th Street, adding 7,000 SF of commercial space to activate the pedestrian experience. Co - working space ( approx. 2.230 SF) fob resident use is placed on the third floor and two levels of multi -family residential units sit on the 4�h and 5th floors. The total square footage of re approximately 7,300 SF. This true Mixed Use project also includes 207 units (39.8 du/a) within its Residential mixed use eempenent. Updated 4/11/2013 Page 6 of 10 E6—El1P113 26) Total floor area of commercial, industrial, or institutional uses by type: 16,530 sf Retail/Office/Live Work/Co-working Use and 8,090 Fitness and Clubhouse Facilities. 27) Indicate hoursof operation: I. Normal Business. Hours subject to City Business License Criteria Clubhouse Facilities open 7 days a week 28) Number of employees: Total. Unknown at this time. Maximum Shift: Time of Maximum Shift., 29) Provide breakdown of anticipated job classifications, including wage and salary ranges, as well as an indication of the rate of hire for each classification (attach additional sheet if necessary): 30) Estimation of the number of workers to be hired that currently reside in the City: unknown at this time. '31) For commercial and industrial uses only, indicate the source, type, and amount of air pollution emissions. (Data should be verifieddhrough the South Coast Air Quality Management District, at (818) 572-6283): None. ALL PROJECTS 32) Have the water, sewer, Fre, and tloodcontrol agencies serving the projectbeen contacted to determine theirability to provide adequate service to the proposed project? If so, please indicate their response. All agencies contacted have indicated their ability to provide services. Updated 4111/2013 E6 -Ell P114 Page 7 of 10 s' 33) In the known history of this property, has there been any use, storage, or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic materials? Examples of hazardous and/or toxic materials include, but are not limited to PCB's; radioactive substances; pesticides and herbicides; fuels, oils, solvents, and otherllammable liquids and gases. Also note underground storage of any of the above. Please list the materials and describe their use, storage, and/or discharge on the property, as well as the dates of use, if known. None to our knowledge. 34) Will the proposed project involve the temporary orlong-term use, storage, ordischarge of hazardous andlortoxic materials, including but not limited to those examples listed above? If yes, provide an inventory of all such materials to be used and proposed method of disposal. The location of such uses, along with the storage and shipment areas, shall be shown and labeled on the application plans. No 35) The applicant shall be required to pay any applicable Fish and Game fee. 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 CommissionlPlanning Director hearing: 1 hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for adequate evaluation ofthis project to the best ofmy ability, that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct tot he best ofmy knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information maybe required to be submitted before an adequate evaluation can be made by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Date: 8-10-2017 Title: President Updated 4/11/2013 E6—Ell P115 Page 8 of 10 ATTACHMENT"A" CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ESTIMATED WATER USE AND SEWER FLOWS FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT (Data Provided by Cucamonga Valley Water District February 2003) Water Usage Single -Family Multi -Family Neighborhood Commercial General Commercial Office Professional Institutional/Government Industrial Park Large General Industrial Heavy Industrial (distribution) Sewer Flows Single -Family Multi -Family General Commercial Office Professional Industrial Park Large General Industrial Heavy Industrial (distribution) 705 gallons per EDU per day 256 gallons per EDU per day 1000 gal/day/unit (tenant) 4082 gal/day/unit (tenant) 973 gal/day/unit (tenant) 6412 gal/day/unit (tenant) 1750 gal/day/unit (tenant) 2020 gal/day/unit (tenant) 1863 gal/day/unit (tenant) 270 gallons per EDU per'day 190 gallons per EDU per day 1900 gal/day/acre 1900 gal/day/acre Institutional/Government 3000: gal/day/acre 2020 gal/day/acre 1863 gal/day/acre Source: Cucamonga Valley Water District Engineering & Water Resources Departments, Urban Water Management Plan 2000 Updated 4/1 112 01 3 Page 9 of 10 E6—El1P116 ATTACHMENT B Contact the school district for your area for amount and payment of school fees: Elementary School Districts Alta Loma 9350 Base Line Road, Suite F Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909) 987-0766 Central 10601 Church Street, Suite 112 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909) 989-8541 Cucamonga 8776 Archibald Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909)987-8942 Etiwanda 6061 East Avenue P.O. Box 248 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 (909) 899-2451 High School Chaffey High School 211 West 5th Street Ontario, CA 91762 (909) 988-8511 Updated 4/11/2013 E6—E11P117 Page 10 of 10 1JGL129 INITIAL STUDY HAVEN AT 26'" MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Cy_10t Il1I:ZVe1:1I]IP[/ZIIi1NJ1AiRO/e111101i►1/e1 LSA August 14, 2018 E6—E 11P118 DRAFT INITIAL STUDY HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Prepared for: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 (909)477-2750 Prepared by: LSA Associates, Inc. 1500 Iowa Avenue, Suite 200 Riverside, California 92507 (951)781-9310 Project No. URB1801 LSA August 14, 2018 E6—E 11 P1 19 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26T" MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS............................................................................................................... IV 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE................................................................................................I............. 1 1.1 INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 PURPOSE....................................................................................................................................1 1.3 INTENDED USE OF THIS INITIAL STUDY..................................................................................... 2 1.4 PUBLIC REVIEW OF THE INITIAL STUDY..................................................................................... 2 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION...........................................................................................................................3 2.1 PROJECT LOCATION................................................................................................................... 3 2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING.......................................................................................................3 2.3 PROJECT ELEMENTS................................................................................................................... 6 2.4 REQUIRED PERMITS AND APPROVALS.................................................................................... 18 3.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST..................................................................................................................... 19 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED......................................................................... 21 DETERMINATION (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE LEAD AGENCY)............................................................ 21 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS...................................................................................... 22 3.1 AESTHETICS..............................................................................................................................24 3.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES................................:...........................................28 3.3 AIR QUALITY............................................................................................................................ 30 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES......................................................................................................... 38 3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES............................................................................................................ 43 3.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS...............................................................................................................49 3.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS................................................................................................54 3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS................................................................................ 60 3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY.................................................................._.................... 68 3.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING...................................................................................................... 77 3.11 MINERAL RESOURCES.............................................................................................................. 82 3.12 NOISE.......................................................................................................................................84 3.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING................................................................................................... 93 3.14 PUBLIC SERVICES .....................................................................................................................97 3.15 RECREATION..........................................................................................................................103 E6 -Ell P120 6.0 REFERENCES.......................................................................................................................................140 FIGURES Figure 1: INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Table 2.3.B: Project Landscape Summary..`............................................................................................... Figure 2: HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 5 3.16 TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC..................................................................................................106 7 3.17 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES......................................:.:......................I.............................. 115 3.18 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS..........................................................................................119 13 3.19 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE...........................................................................126 15 4.0 SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES AND STANDARD CONDITIONS............................................130 Existing and Proposed Zoning Designation.................................................................................. 4.1 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES....................................................................................................... 130 4.2 CULTURAL RESOURCES.......................................................................................................... 130 4.3 GEOLOGY AND SOILS.............................................................................................................132 4.4 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS.............................................................................................. 132 4.5 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS....................................................................................................... 133 4.6 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY...................................................................................... 134 4.7 NOISE.....................................................................................................................................135 4.8 TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC..................................................................................................136 4.9 TRIBAL RESOURCES............................................................................................................... 137 5.0 CERTIFICATION...................................................................................................................................139 6.0 REFERENCES.......................................................................................................................................140 FIGURES Figure 1: Regional and Project Location.......................................................................................................4 Table 2.3.B: Project Landscape Summary..`............................................................................................... Figure 2: Project Site and Surrounding Land Uses........................................................................................ 5 Figure3: Project Site Plan............................................................................................................................. 7 Figure4: Project Elevations.......................................................................................................................... 8 Figure5: Landscape Plan .................................... :................................................. ...................................... 13 Figure 6: Existing and Proposed General Plan Land Use Designation........................................................ 15 Figure 7: Existing and Proposed Zoning Designation.................................................................................. 16 TABLES Table 2.3.A: Project Building Summary ......................................................................................................... 6 Table 2.3.B: Project Landscape Summary..`............................................................................................... 14 Table 2.3.C: Project Parking Summary ........................................................................................................ 17 Table 3.3.A: Summary of Health Effects of the Major Criteria Air Pollutants ............................................ 33 Table 3.3.B: Regional Emissions.................................................................................................................. 34 Table3.3.C: Localized Emissions................................................................................................................. 34 Table 3.7.A: Construction Greenhouse Gas Emissions............................................................................... 56 Table 3.7.B: Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions During Operation............................................................ 56 Table 3.7.C: Project Consistency with CARB Scoping Plan Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction .............. 58 Table 3.10.A: Proposed Project's Consistency with the City's General Plan .............................................. 78 Table 3.10.8: SCAG Demographic Forecasts l.............................................................................................. 80 Table 3.12.A: Construction -Related Noise Calculations(dBA).................................................................... 86 E6-E11P121 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN. AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Table 3.12.6: Traffic Noisetevels (dBA CNEL)................................................ :............................................ 89 Table 3.12.C: Residential Noise Limits .......... ......................................... ........................................................ 90 Table 3.12.D: Adjusted Stationary Noise level Measurements.................................................................. 90 Table 3.12.E: Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment........................................................... 91 Table 3.13.A: Existing and Future Jobs/Housing Ratios.............................................................................. 94 Table 3.14.A: Student Generation..............................................................................:.............................100 Table 3.14.13:Proposed, Project's Consistency with the City's General Plan ............................................102 Table 3.16.A: Existing Levels of Service.................................................................................................... 108 Table 3:16.6: Existing with Project With Improvements Levels of Service...............................................108 Table 3.16.C: Opening Year (2019) Levels of Service..................:.............................................................109 Table 3.16.D: Opening Year (2019) with Project With Improvements Levels of:Service ..........................110 Table 3.16.E: Year 2040 Levels of Service................................................................................................. 110 Table 3.16.F: Year 2040 with Project With Improvements Levels of Service...........................................111 APPENDICES A: AIR QUALITY/GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ANALYSIS B: HABITAT.. ASSESSMENT C: CULTURAL AND PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT D: GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION E: PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT F: LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT PRELIMINARY CALCULATIONS G: ACOUSTICALSTUDY H: FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS I: TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY J:` TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON MEMORANDUM K: PARKING DEMAND ANALYSIS E6 -E11 P122 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS AB Assembly Bill ACM Asbestos -Containing Material ADA Americans with Disabilities Act AF acre-feet amsl Above Mean Sea Level AQMP Air Quality Management Plan Basin South Coast Air Basin BMP Best Management Practice California Register California Register of Historical Resources CalOSHA California Division of Occupational Health and Safety GARB California Air Resources Board CBC California Building Code CCR California Code of Regulations CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife CEQA California Environmental Quality Act City City of Rancho Cucamonga CJUHSD Chaffey Joint Union High School District CMP Congestion Management Program CNDDB California Natural Diversity Data Base CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level CNPS California Native Plant Society CO2 Carbon Dioxide CO2e Carbon Dioxide Equivalent COG Council of Governments CSD Cucamonga School District CSST California Site Surveillance Technician CVWD Cucamonga Valley Water District cy Cubic Yards dB Decibel dBA A -Weighted Decibel DOC Department of Conservation DTSC Department of Toxic Substance Control EIR Environmental Impact Report EPA Environmental Protection Agency ESA Environmental Site Assessment FAA Federal Aviation Administration FAR Federal Air Regulations E6—E 11 P1 23 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT FCS FirstCarbon Solutions FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency GHG Greenhouse Gas HRA Health Risk Assessment HUD United States Department of Housing and Urban Development Hz Hertz IEUA Inland Empire Utilities Agency IP Industrial Park IS Initial Study Leq Equivalent Sound Level LID Low Impact Development LOS Level of Service LST Localized Significance Threshold MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act mgd million gallons per day MLD Most Likely Descendant MM Mitigation Measure MND Mitigated Negative Declaration MRF Materials Recovery Facility MS4 Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System MT Metric Tan NAHC Native American Heritage Commission NO Negative Declaration NOI Notice of Intent NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service OEHHA Office of Environmental Health Hazards Assessment PPV Peak Particle Velocity PRC Public Resources Code PRIMP Paleontological Resources Impact Mitigation Program RCFPD Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District RCNM Roadway Construction Noise Model RHNA Regional Housing Needs Assessment RP Regional Plant RTP Regional Transportation Plan SB Senate Bill SC Standard Condition SLAG Southern California Association of Governments SCAP Sustainable Community Action Plan v E6—E11P124 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District SCCIC South Central Coastal Information Center SCS Sustainable Communities Strategy sf square feet SLF Sacred Lands File SMARA Surface Mining and Reclamation Act SMBMI San Manuel Band of Mission Indians SRA Source Receptor Area SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan TAC Toxic Air Contaminant TCR Tribal Cultural Resource USDOT United States Department of Transportation USGS United States Geological Survey UWMP Urban Water Management Plan WQMP Water Quality Management Plan vi E6-El1P125 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE 1.1 INTRODUCTION Section 1.0 of this Initial Study (IS) describes the purpose, environmental authorization, the intended uses of the IS, documents incorporated by reference, and the processes and procedures governing the preparation of the environmental document. Pursuant to Section 15367 of the State of California Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA Guidelines), the City of Rancho Cucamonga (City) is the Lead Agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The City has primary responsibility for compliance with CEQA and consideration of the Haven at 26`h Mixed - Use Development Project (project or proposed project). The Initial Study is organized as follows: Section 1.0 Introduction and Purpose provides a discussion of the Initial Study's purpose, focus, legal requirements. Section 2.0 Project Description provides a detailed description of the proposed project. Section 3.0 Environmental Checklist includes a checklist and accompanying analyses of the project's effect on the environment. For each environmental issue, the analysis identifies the level of project's environmental impact. Section 4.0 References details the references cited throughout the document. Appendices Include the technical material prepared to support the analyses contained in the IS. 1.2 PURPOSE CEQA requires that the proposed project be reviewed to determine the environmental effects that would result if the project is approved and implemented. The City is the Lead Agency and has the responsibility for preparing and adopting the associated environmental document prior to consideration of the approval of the proposed project. The City has the authority to make decisions regarding discretionary actions relating to implementation of the proposed project. This IS has been prepared in accordance with the relevant provisions of CEQA (California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.); the CEQA Guidelines,' and the rules, regulations, and procedures for implementing CEQA as adopted by the City. The objective of the Initial Study is to inform City decision -makers, representatives of other affected/agencies, the public and interested parties of the potential environmental consequences of the project. As established in CEQA Guidelines Section 15063(c), the purposes of an IS are to: • Provide the Lead Agency (City of Rancho Cucamonga) with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative Declaration (ND), or Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND); • Enable an applicant or Lead Agency to modify a project, mitigating adverse impacts before an EIR is prepared, thereby enabling the project to qualify for an ND or MND; ' California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, Sections 15000 through 15387. 1 E6—E 11 P1 26 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 2e' MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Assist in the preparation of an EIR, if one is required; • Facilitate environmental assessment early in the design of a project; • Provide a factual basis for finding in an ND or MND that a project will not have a significant effect on the environment; • Eliminate unnecessary EIRs; and • Determine whether a previous prepared EIR could be used with the project. 1.3 INTENDED USE OF THIS INITIAL STUDY The City formally initiated the environmental process for the proposed project with the preparation of this Initial Study. The IS screens out those impacts that would be less than significant and do not warrant mitigation, while identifying those issues that require further mitigation to reduce impacts to a less than significant level. As identified in the following analyses, project impacts related to various environmental issues either do not occur, are less than significant (when measured against established significance thresholds), or have been rendered less than significant through implementation of mitigation measures. Based on these analytical conclusions, this IS supports adoption of an MND for the proposed project. CEQAZ permits the incorporation by reference of all or portions of other documents that are generally available to the public. The IS has been prepared utilizing information from City planning and environmental documents, technical studies specifically prepared for the project, and other publicly available data. The documents utilized in the 15 are identified in Section 3.0 and are hereby incorporated by reference. These documents are available for review at the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Division. 1.4 PUBLIC REVIEW OF THE INITIAL STUDY The IS and a Notice of Intent (NOI) to adopt an MND will be distributed to responsible and trustee agencies, other affected agencies, and other parties for a 30 -day public review period. Written comments regarding this IS should be addressed to: Dominick Perez, Associate Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 (909) 477-2750, Ext. 4315 Dom i nick. Perez@citvofrc.us After the 30 -day public review period, consideration of comments raised during the public review period will be taken into account and addressed prior to adoption of the MND by the City. ' CEQA Guidelines Section 15150. E6 -E 11 P1 27 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26T" MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1 PROJECT LOCATION Totaling approximately 5.2 acres, the proposed project area consists of partially improved land located at 10411 26th Street. The project site is located at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and 26" Street, bounded by 26th Street to the north, Haven Avenue to the east, vacant/undeveloped land to the south, and Marine Avenue to the west (refer to Figure 1). 2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The 5.2 -acre project site is a relatively flat site located approximately 1,140 feet above sea level. The site is characterized as an active industrial site (Industrial Supplies, Inc.) along with tractor trailer and pipe storage. The site is bounded by green screen -wrap attached to cyclone -fencing and partially improved with a 22,640 -square foot metal warehouse building in the northwest corner currently occupied by Industrial Supplies, Inc., which is in the business of battery repair for forklifts and related equipment (refer to Figure 2). The remainder of the site is currently utilized as short-term employee parking and long-term parking of tractor -trailers and additional industrial heavy equipment storage. The project site surface consists of gravel and concrete. Existing development is present to the north, west, and east. Adjacent to the south of the project site is a vacant, undeveloped property. Specifically, the site is bound: • On the north by 26th Street, across which is a professional office building with various tenants; • On the east by Haven Avenue beyond which are professional office buildings with various tenants and a gasoline service station with car wash; • On the south by an undeveloped lot; and • On the west by Marine Avenue and further west of Marine Avenue are residential land uses. The office building across 26th Street to the north is occupied by Arrowhead Credit Union, administrative offices for Seasons Hospice & Palliative Care, and a doctors' office for outpatient services. The office buildings across Haven Avenue to the east are occupied by medical imaging, physical therapy, and various doctors' offices for primarily outpatient services. One medical office located at 8710 Monroe Court, across the street to the east of Haven Avenue, conducts primarily outpatient plastic and reconstructive surgery with an occasional inpatient (i.e., overnight stay) procedure; this facility is located approximately 150 feet east of the project site, across the street from Haven Avenue. The medical facilities described above are located as close as ISO feet from the project site and are considered sensitive receptors. The vacant property adjacent to the south is surrounded on three sides with barbed wire and is covered in native and non-native grasses. This property has been mechanically modified, engineered, and subject to redeposited soils as a result of a previous grade separation project for Haven Avenue and the nearby Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fe railroad. The residential uses across Marine Avenue to the west are single-family homes located as close as 82 feet to the project site boundary. Due to this proximity, the single-family homes across Marine Avenue to the west are the closest sensitive receptors in relation to the project site. E6—E11 P128 v 25th St A w4' !—J b r. 4 -77,1W W ---A.:7 -I- IF Kk- vriti pr 7-X- Office/ Conftprcialll off ic 0ommercl NIT" r I 1R�p 4rcl, Proied X041 nu* , r *Silodentia —4 m i :1 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Introduced (non-native) plant species recorded on site included just a few scattered peripheral areas supporting foxtail chess (Bromus madritensis ssp. rubens), Mediterranean grass (Schismus barbatus), Russian thistle (Salsola tragus), Jimsonweed (Datura stramonium), and Lamb's quarters (Chenopodium album). A single native species was recorded, blue elderberry (Sambucus nigra ssp. caerulea). In addition, a single fan palm (Washingtonia filifera) was also recorded. 2.3 PROJECT ELEMENTS The project proposes to demolish the on-site 22,640 -square foot industrial building and construct a mixed-use development comprised of 207 apartments with a mix of 32 studios, 63 one -bedroom, 98 two-bedroom, and 14 live -work units; approximately 7,300 square feet of corner retail and/or office space uses; and 7,000 square feet of work space incorporated into the live -work units. The project will include general amenities such as a fitness center and pool for residents. In addition, to facilitate sustainability and reduce commuter traffic, the project provides 2,230 square feet of separate co - working space on the third floor above the corner retail and/or office space for use by all on-site residents, which will provide residents an environment to work remotely.' Building heights will range from 60 feet (Building A) to 50 feet (Building B) above grade (Figures 4a through 4e). Table 2.3.A: Project Building Summary Source: Architectural Site Plan, A1.0. February8, 2018. Proposed landscaping would cover approximately 22,391 square feet on site, 6,753 square feet off site along public sidewalks, and 1,396 square feet off-street along the street parking stalls (Figure 5). Landscaping would be installed in all areas not devoted to buildings, parking, traffic, and specific user requirements, in accordance with the City's Municipal Code Section 17.36.020, Section 15.56.060, and Section 17.82.050, which specify landscape design guidelines. The City's Municipal Code requires a minimum of 10 percent landscape coverage of the overall net area for mixed-use sites. Additionally, the City's Municipal Code Section 17.56.060 has tree requirements for buildings and parking. The building/ tree requirement is calculated at a rate of one tree per 30 linear feet of building dimensions; tree clusters may be used to satisfy specific design objectives. The parking/tree requirement is calculated at a rate of one tree for every three parking stalls. The total landscaping and number of trees for the proposed project as well as the City's landscape and tree requirements are provided in Table 2.3.6, which shows that the proposed project's landscaping would be in compliance with the required landscape percentages. Additionally, the proposed project would exceed the City's tree requirement. ' The 2,230 square feet of co -working space is intended for on-site residents and therefore will not generate any additional traffic beyond that which is analyzed with the proposed 207 residential units, 7,300 square feet of corner retail and/or office space uses, and 7,000 square feet of work space incorporated into the live -work units. E E6—E11 P131 Retail/ Total Open Site Amenities 1n Residential Residential Residential Residential Building Space Building (acres( Floor (sf) 2ntl Floor (sf) 3r° Floor (sf) 41b Floor (sf) 5'h Floor (sf) (sf) (sf) Building — 18,987 16,309 30,435 30,435 30,435 126,601 — A Building B — 37,683 32,545 32,545 32,545 — 135,318 — Total 1 5.2 1 56,670 1 48,854 1 62,980 1 62,2980 1 30,435 261,919 46,289 Source: Architectural Site Plan, A1.0. February8, 2018. Proposed landscaping would cover approximately 22,391 square feet on site, 6,753 square feet off site along public sidewalks, and 1,396 square feet off-street along the street parking stalls (Figure 5). Landscaping would be installed in all areas not devoted to buildings, parking, traffic, and specific user requirements, in accordance with the City's Municipal Code Section 17.36.020, Section 15.56.060, and Section 17.82.050, which specify landscape design guidelines. The City's Municipal Code requires a minimum of 10 percent landscape coverage of the overall net area for mixed-use sites. Additionally, the City's Municipal Code Section 17.56.060 has tree requirements for buildings and parking. The building/ tree requirement is calculated at a rate of one tree per 30 linear feet of building dimensions; tree clusters may be used to satisfy specific design objectives. The parking/tree requirement is calculated at a rate of one tree for every three parking stalls. The total landscaping and number of trees for the proposed project as well as the City's landscape and tree requirements are provided in Table 2.3.6, which shows that the proposed project's landscaping would be in compliance with the required landscape percentages. Additionally, the proposed project would exceed the City's tree requirement. ' The 2,230 square feet of co -working space is intended for on-site residents and therefore will not generate any additional traffic beyond that which is analyzed with the proposed 207 residential units, 7,300 square feet of corner retail and/or office space uses, and 7,000 square feet of work space incorporated into the live -work units. E E6—E11 P131 M rn v w N LSA o sz to FEET SOURCE: ktp LEGEND Q Apartment Homes Q Community Amenities Q Live/Work Units Q Corner Retail FIGURE 3 Haven at 26th Mixed -Use Development Site Plan ©o 0 o v o©a po � dClsmlvl'�I m i � n•,::.,,n lei �0 Elevation 2- Building A North Elevation T FE jt I I -Iii I T Material Legend 1 Mmw Panels z J. a F«fC eCamenrsew Fen l BoeN Ma:ony i HAVEN AT --- S. sw«o Ra oma, s ®■ e■ �■ i i i s il' ■� Elevation t - Building A East Elevation L- LS fIGUeE U Hauen of 26th Mhed-Use Development nor sowm nry Building A Elevations IT! rn I w A Egli Is- a `J Elevation 4 Building A South Elevation .Y—._. __. _ —. _ _ _ - Malenal Legend MP a -+ems+ — _ 7t - - a Fcamem mam NEI6. ]. Y -e Gwz a. Pally Elevation 3 - Building A West Elevation LSA FIGURE Ob w sooner �� mw.wiwuwa.e.o...e....e. wwuul Noven of 16H, Mired Use Development Building A Elevations rr�r r r Elevation 2. Building B North Elevation Elevation 1 -Building B East Elevation LSA am souna:ury wann�w.rawe�.m lamrmu Material Legend l- mew vends 2 Comgelai Mewl ]. FO Cemem Bono C. Mazmry 5. Swan 6. 6 ir. Au', i. ", Willows 6. Railing FIGURE4c Haven of 26th Mixed -Use Development Building 0 Elevations I urJ_etis�_ _ bf- I Elevation 4 Building B South Elevation m Material Legend w 3Y _ _. —r _..��_�__■__ 1. MCUI PinIIS Im 1 a Eeer Lllmenl BoaN Masonry 4 i Stu¢o ..�3.f R •_ $ _ -- - e eWVin m Glann9 ]. VInyI WiMovs a=l3.lkUa-- a _� � B. Rallnq Elevation 3 - Building B West Elevation LSA FIGURE 4d ® Hoven at 26th Mired -Use Development souse: ns! Building B Elevations �roef eiwvutim....s Ivnsmn m rn I _m J W V FIE Elevation 3- Building B South Courtyard Elevation Elevadon ]. Bullding B EE, East Courtyard Elevation — --- t �I Material Legend_ DLE® T ❑ L Men, 1. .4 Int t L COrruNlN MCGI {[(�y��r!Iyy{�`` p 3. i0er [ement aoar0 I . SlwelrmlGat n( ]. Nirv,WnEwn T T D ❑ T © -il ❑ O a aa,pnt Elevation 1 � Building B North Courtyard Elevation FI61JREae Hoven at 16th Miaed-Use Development sotuncestw Building B Courtyard Elevations ueld adexpuel luawda�anap asp-paxJW W9Z m --H i 3vn9A aswwswn:l�vnas ss s¢ m cc a J all mm 13 om in m o m • <I 1 40 ' m ,m_ m ,., SwF ■ ■ � m 13 ® m F r ,y, INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Table 2.3.B: Project Landscape Summary Source: Conceptual Landscape Plan, February 7, 2018. • 10 percent landscape requirement applies to the overall net area pursuant to Table 17.36.020-2, Development Standards for Mixed Use Zoning Districts, of the City Municipal Code. Access to the project will be provided via two driveways. One driveway will form the fourth leg of the intersection of Jersey Boulevard and Haven Avenue, while the other will be on 26" Street, approximately 260 feet west of Haven Avenue (previously referenced Figure 3). In accordance with Section 17.64.060(D) of the City Municipal Code, a site-specific parking study was prepared for the proposed project .4 A total of 380 on-site parking stalls (173 uncovered and 207 covered parking stalls) would be provided, including 12 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) stalls. Table 2.3.0 provides parking by project component and parking requirements. The parking calculation for the proposed project is based on the City's Municipal Code Section 17.64.050. The results of the Updated Parking Demand Analysis for the Proposed Haven at 26th Mixed -Use Project (January 2018) found that the proposed project's parking is adequate based on supporting reference and empirical material/data,' and a third -party peer -review of the parking demand analysis confirmed its conclusions that adequate parking exists on site to accommodate the proposed mixed-use project.6 Additionally, 30 off-site parking spaces would be provided along Marine Avenue and 26"Street.' The project will require a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Development Code Amendment. The existing General Plan land use designation for the site is Industrial Park and the proposed land use designation is Mixed Use (Figure 6). The existing zoning is Industrial Park lip) and the proposed zoning is Mixed Use (Figure 7). Additionally, the project site is located within the Haven Overlay Zoning District, which is established along Haven Avenue between Foothill Boulevard and 4th Street to allow unique use provisions for high-end office development designed to enhance the City's image by providing an intensive, high-quality, and prestigious gateway into the community. The proposed Development Code x Updated Parking Demand Analysis for the Proposed Haven at 26th Mixed -Use Project, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Linscott Law & Greenspan Engineers. January 11, 2018. 5 Ibid. Page 2. Haven at 26'" Mixed -Use Project Parking Review. Page 1. Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates. May 24, 2018. ' Off-site parking spaces are not used to satisfy the City's parking requirements. 14 E15—Ell P139 Landscape Landscape Requirement (Percentage of Tree Location Total Area Landscape (Percentage of Site) Site) Trees Requirement On -Site 226,770 22,391 10%• 10% — — square feet square feet Off -Site 30,030 square 6,753 square • 22% — — feet feet Off -Street 7.625 square 1,395 square , 18% — — feet feet 173 Parking uncovered — 33% (1 tree per 3 — 59 58 uncovered stalls) spaces Building 3.3% (1 tree per 30 Street 778 linear feet — _ 27 26 Frontage linear feet) Total — — — — 86 84 Source: Conceptual Landscape Plan, February 7, 2018. • 10 percent landscape requirement applies to the overall net area pursuant to Table 17.36.020-2, Development Standards for Mixed Use Zoning Districts, of the City Municipal Code. Access to the project will be provided via two driveways. One driveway will form the fourth leg of the intersection of Jersey Boulevard and Haven Avenue, while the other will be on 26" Street, approximately 260 feet west of Haven Avenue (previously referenced Figure 3). In accordance with Section 17.64.060(D) of the City Municipal Code, a site-specific parking study was prepared for the proposed project .4 A total of 380 on-site parking stalls (173 uncovered and 207 covered parking stalls) would be provided, including 12 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) stalls. Table 2.3.0 provides parking by project component and parking requirements. The parking calculation for the proposed project is based on the City's Municipal Code Section 17.64.050. The results of the Updated Parking Demand Analysis for the Proposed Haven at 26th Mixed -Use Project (January 2018) found that the proposed project's parking is adequate based on supporting reference and empirical material/data,' and a third -party peer -review of the parking demand analysis confirmed its conclusions that adequate parking exists on site to accommodate the proposed mixed-use project.6 Additionally, 30 off-site parking spaces would be provided along Marine Avenue and 26"Street.' The project will require a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Development Code Amendment. The existing General Plan land use designation for the site is Industrial Park and the proposed land use designation is Mixed Use (Figure 6). The existing zoning is Industrial Park lip) and the proposed zoning is Mixed Use (Figure 7). Additionally, the project site is located within the Haven Overlay Zoning District, which is established along Haven Avenue between Foothill Boulevard and 4th Street to allow unique use provisions for high-end office development designed to enhance the City's image by providing an intensive, high-quality, and prestigious gateway into the community. The proposed Development Code x Updated Parking Demand Analysis for the Proposed Haven at 26th Mixed -Use Project, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Linscott Law & Greenspan Engineers. January 11, 2018. 5 Ibid. Page 2. Haven at 26'" Mixed -Use Project Parking Review. Page 1. Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates. May 24, 2018. ' Off-site parking spaces are not used to satisfy the City's parking requirements. 14 E15—Ell P139 Existing General Plan Land Use rX�ft t I I Existing General Plan Land Use Mixed Use I Industrial Park n r Multi -Family Residential Single Family Residential o M 250 Transportation, Communications, and Utilities FEET ® Haven Avenue Office SOURCE: Google Maps (2017), City of Rancho Cucamonga (2012) I,\URa1801\GIS\MxD\ExistGPLU ProGPLUProjArea.mxd(6/22/2018) E6—E11P140 Haven at 26th Mixed -Use Development General Plan Amendment Map L \ A�` LEGEND ♦/ Q Project Location Proposed Zoning Existing Zoning ZM Mixed Use N Industrial Park Residential pns 250 ® 0 FEET Haven Avenue Overlay District SOURCE: Google Maps (2017), City of Rancho Cucamonga (2012) 1:\URB1B01\GIS\MXD\EdnZoning PropZoning_ProjArea.mid(6/25/2018) E6-E11P141 FIGURE 7 Haven at 26th Mixed -Use Development Zoning Plan Amendment Map Proposed Zoning Existing Zoning Plan ::.j�.::: ..........: ..............: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . •I . . . . . . . . . . . • I 4:: •: • • • • • • • • . • f .�gl .ate. _ • • . ±�. ' 10 00 • • • • • • • -.. -H• .1:. •'114Y .� . . . . • . . . • . . . . • . . . . . . •i� . . . . _ . . . • . . . • • . • . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . �. . L \ A�` LEGEND ♦/ Q Project Location Proposed Zoning Existing Zoning ZM Mixed Use N Industrial Park Residential pns 250 ® 0 FEET Haven Avenue Overlay District SOURCE: Google Maps (2017), City of Rancho Cucamonga (2012) 1:\URB1B01\GIS\MXD\EdnZoning PropZoning_ProjArea.mid(6/25/2018) E6-E11P141 FIGURE 7 Haven at 26th Mixed -Use Development Zoning Plan Amendment Map Proposed Zoning ::.j�.::: ..............: • • . • • • . • . • . • • • • R .. •�) • •, • • I 4:: •: • • • • • • • • . • f .�gl .ate. _ • • . ±�. ' 10 00 • • • • • • • -.. -H• .1:. •'114Y .� . . . . • . . . • . . . . • . . . . . . •i� . . . . _ . . . • . . . • • . • . • L \ A�` LEGEND ♦/ Q Project Location Proposed Zoning Existing Zoning ZM Mixed Use N Industrial Park Residential pns 250 ® 0 FEET Haven Avenue Overlay District SOURCE: Google Maps (2017), City of Rancho Cucamonga (2012) 1:\URB1B01\GIS\MXD\EdnZoning PropZoning_ProjArea.mid(6/25/2018) E6-E11P141 FIGURE 7 Haven at 26th Mixed -Use Development Zoning Plan Amendment Map INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Table 2.3.C: Project Parking Summary Project Component Size City of Rancho Cucamonga Code Parking Ratios Spaces Required Residential Apartments, Studio Units 32 Units 1.3 spaces per unit 42 Live/Work Units 14 Units 1.5 spaces per unit 21 Apartments, One Bedroom 63 Units 1.5 spaces per unit 95 Apartments, Two Bedrooms 98 Units 2.0 spaces per unit 196 Guests 207 Units= 0.333 spaces per unit 69 Reserved Residential Subtotal 354 Residential Guest Subtotal 69 Residential City Code Parking Requirement 423 Non -Residential Corner Retail' 7,300 square feet 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet 29 Live/Work (Work Space) 7,000 square feet 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet 28 Non -Residential City Code Parking Requirement 57 Total Project City Code Parking Requirement 480 Total Parking Supply 380 Parking Surplus/Deficiency(+/-) (-100)• Source: Table 1, Updated Parking Demand Analysis for the Proposed Hoven at 261° Mixed -Use Project, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Unscott Law g Greenspan Engineers. January 11, 2018. ' Pursuant to Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Chapter 17.64 (Parking and Loading Standards); Section 17-64.050, (Number of Parking Spaces Required — Table 17.64.050-1). 2 Guest parking is based on the total number of residential units. 3 Corner Retail comprises 4,800 square feet of office space and 2,528 square feet of retail space rounded to the nearest hundred. The parking calculation for the proposed project is based on the City's Municipal Code Section 17.64.050. However, the results of the Updated Parking Demand Analysis for the Proposed Haven at 260 Mixed -Use Project (January 2018) found that the proposed project's parking is adequate based an supporting reference and empirical material/data, and a third -party peer -review of the parking demand analysis confirmed its conclusions that adequate parking exists on site to accommodate the proposed mixed-use project. Amendment would amend Table 17.38.040-1, Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements for Haven Overlay Zoning District, to allow Mixed Use (i.e., residential, retail, and office) development within the Haven Overlay Zoning District. Mixed Use development in the City is designed to be inherently flexible with regard to combinations of uses at varying intensities. Pursuant to Table 17.36.020-2, Development Standards for Mixed Use Zoning Districts, of the City Municipal Code, mixed-use densities may reach up to 5o dwelling units per acre at heights up to 75 feet. The proposed project entails 207 dwelling units on 5.2 acres (39.8 dwelling units per acre) within two buildings ranging in height between 50 and 60 feet above grade. As detailed in response to Checklist Question 3.10a, the project proposes mixed-use development on an underutilized infill site within the South Haven Avenue Focus Area, which the City envisions as its major office corridor providing high-end professional employment opportunities through the creation of "pleasant, well -landscaped, office park settings, with restaurants and other amenities that are within walking distance for employees and visitors." The project is proposed on a property used for battery repair for forklifts and related equipment, short-term employee parking, and the long-term parking of tractor -trailers and additional industrial heavy equipment storage. The prevailing Industrial Park uses surrounding the project site are professional (e.g., medical and financial) in nature, and the proposed mixed-use development of the project site would be more compatible with surrounding (professional office) land uses and provide a seamless transition between the Industrial Park uses along Haven Avenue and the residential uses adjacent to the west. Furthermore, the project by its very nature as a proposed mixed-use development fosters a lifestyle 17 E6—E11 P142 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26?" MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT whereby residents would live in close proximity to professional employment opportunities along Haven Avenue and have commercial amenities within walking distance of their homes. Construction activities within the project area will consist of demolition, site preparation, on-site grading, building, paving, and architectural coating. Approximately 16,000 cubic yards (cy) of soil import is anticipated. The source of the imported soil is yet to be determined and would be coordinated by the grading contactor during execution of the project. 2.4 REQUIRED PERMITS AND APPROVALS The City is expected to use this IS/MND in consideration of the proposed project and associated actions. These actions may include, but are not limited to, the following: • General Plan Amendment from Industrial Park to Mixed use. • Zone Change from Industrial Park (IP) to Mixed -Use (MU) District. Development Code Amendment to allow for Residential Use within the Haven Overlay District when part of a Mixed Use development; • Design Review; • Minor Exception for reduction in parking as per Linscott Law & Greenspan Engineers Parking Study that was also subject to a Peer Review by Nelson\Nygaard; Uniform Sign Program; • Demolition Permit for removal of existing approximately 22,800 square foot industrial building; • Grading/Building Permits. Approvals from other regulatory agencies may also be required and are listed as follows: • State Water Resources Control Board: Applicant must submit a Notice of Intent to comply with the General Construction Activity NPDES Permit. • Utility Providers: Connection permits. E6—E11 P143 18 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26" MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 3.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST 1. Project Title: Haven at 26`" Mixed -Use Development Project 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Dominick Perez Associate Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga (909) 477-2750 Ext. 4315 Dom i nick. PerezPcitvofrc. us 4. Project Location: 5.2 acres, located at 1041126" Street, Rancho Cucamonga 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Joe Lutz, Vice President Urban Offerings, Inc. 11400 W. Olympic Boulevard, Suite 850 Los Angeles, California 90064 (310)427-7432 j lu tz @urban-offe ri nes. co m 6. General Plan Designation: Existing: Industrial Park Proposed: Mixed use 7. Zoning: Existing: Industrial Park (IP) Proposed: Mixed Use 8. Description of Property: The project site is subject located in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County, California. More specifically, the site is located west of Haven Avenue, south of 26`" Street, and east of Marine Avenue; Township 1 South, Range 7 West, Section 11 on the Guasti, California U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5 -minute quadrangle map. The site is characterized as an active industrial site (Industrial Tools and Supplies) along with tractor trailer and pipe storage. On-site surface material consists of gravel and concrete. Existing development is present to the north, west, and east. An undeveloped, albeit disturbed parcel is located to the south. 19 E6—E11 P144 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The site is characterized as an active industrial site (Industrial Tools and Supplies) along with tractor trailer and pipe storage. The project site is bounded on the north and east by office and commercial development. South of the project site is an undeveloped, albeit disturbed parcel, while to the west is residential development. 10. Other Public Agencies whose Approval is Required: The City is expected to use this IS/MND in consideration of the proposed mixed uses and associated actions. These actions may include, but are not limited to, the following: • General Plan Amendment from Industrial Park to Mixed use. • Zone Change from Industrial Park (IP) to Mixed -Use (MU) District. • Development Code Amendment to allow for Residential Use within the Haven Overlay District when part of a Mixed Use development; • Design Review; • Minor Exception for reduction in parking as per Linscott Law & Greenspan Engineers Parking Study that was also subject to a Peer Review by Nelson\Nygaard; • Uniform Sign Program; • Demolition Permit for removal of existing approximately 22,800 square foot industrial building; • Grading/Building Permits. Approvals from other regulatory agencies may also be required and are listed as follows: • State Water Resources Control Board: Applicant must submit a Notice of Intent to comply with the General Construction Activity NPDES Permit • Utility Providers: Connection permits. 11. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1? If so, has consultation begun? Yes. Please refer to Checklist Section 3.17. Note: Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process allows tribal governments, lead agencies, and project proponents to discuss the level of environmental review, identify and address potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources, and reduce the potential for delay and conflict in the environmental review process (See Public Resources Code Section 21083.3.2.). Information may also be available from the California Native American Heritage Commission's Sacred Lands File per Public Resources Code Section 5097.96 and the California Historical Resources Information System administered by the California Office of Historic Preservation. Please also note that Public Resources Code Section 21082.3(c) contains provisions specific to confidentiality. F7 E6 -E11 P145 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a potentially significant impact as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agricultural Resources ❑ Air Quality ❑ Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Geology/Soils ❑ Greenhouse Gas Emissions ❑ Hazards & Hazardous Materials ❑ Hydrology/Water Quality ❑ Land Use/Planning ❑ Population/Housing ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Public Services ❑ Transportation/Traffic ❑ Tribal Cultural Resources ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE LEAD AGENCY) On the basis of the initial evaluation: ❑ Noise ❑ Recreation ❑ Utilities/Service Systems CI 1 find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. © 1 find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑ 1 find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact' or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ❑ 1 find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are impose on the proposed project, nothing further is required. Signature: Date: Name and Title: ,bavZ a%c-y_ PSL , A sSvc-iA? E PLA,atae — 21 E6—E11 P146 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26T" MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g,, the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis). 2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required. 4. "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact" The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from "Earlier Analyses," as described in (5) below, may be cross-referenced). 5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a. Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b. Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c. Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8. This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 22 E6—E11 P147 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 9. The explanation of each issue should identify: a. The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b. The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance. 10. Mitigation Measures are provided to reduce impacts to less than significance. As the Lead Agency, the City is responsible for ensuring full compliance with the Mitigation Measures adopted for the proposed project. The City will monitor and report on all mitigation activities. Mitigation Measures will be implemented at different stages of development throughout the project site. 11. Standard Conditions are presented in instances where the proposed project would not create a significant impact but would be required to adhere to City regulatory requirements in order to ensure impacts do not become significant. Standard Conditions outline compliance with various federal, State, and/or local acts, laws, rules, regulations, municipal codes, etc. 23 E6—E11 P148 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 3.1 AESTHETICS Would the project: Less than Significant Potentially with Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a ❑ ElEl scenic vista? b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to trees, rock ❑ ❑ ❑ outcroppings and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ surroundings? d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect daytime or ❑ ❑ x❑ ❑ nighttime views in the area? a. Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: Development of the 5.2 -acre project site would result in the demolition of a 22,640 -square foot metal warehouse building and convert a dirt parking lot to a mixed-use development. There are existing office uses to the north along 26'h Street, commercial and office uses to the east of the project site along Haven Avenue, and residential uses located west of the site, across Marine Avenue. A vacant lot is adjacent to and south of the project site. The applicant proposes the construction of two mixed-use development buildings that would be a maximum of 60 feet in height (Figure 4). The project site is located at an elevation of 1,140 feet above mean sea level (amsl) and is relatively flat. The San Gabriel Mountains, approximately 5 miles to the north of the project site, are visible from the project site. The Managing Land Use, Community Design, and Historic Resources Element of the City's General Plan provides that scenic resources in and near the City include views of the San Gabriel and San Bernardino Mountains to the north and northeast of the proposed project.8 The project site is across the street from existing office uses to the north, which are constructed approximately 50 feet high and partially obstruct views of the mountains with a multi -story building and street tree landscaping. With implementation of a 93 -foot setback along Marine Avenue, views of the San Gabriel and Bernardino Mountains to the north and northeast from the single-family homes to the west of the project site would not be significantly further obstructed than they are already by the existing office uses to the north and street trees along Marine Avenue. Additionally, the surrounding mountains are frequently masked by atmospheric conditions (e.g., haze). Therefore, due to the topography of the site, the proximity to existing office uses, and atmospheric conditions, views of the San Gabriel Mountains from the site are already limited. The mountains rise to heights over 6,000 feet amsl and would remain a Chapter 2: Managing Land Use, Community Design, and Historic Resources. Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. Page LU -90. May 19, 2010. 24 E6—E11 P149 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT partially visible upon buildout of the project site. Through compliance with the City's Development Code including building separation and setback requirements, which would ensure that buildout of the project site would maintain distant mountain views, potential impacts to scenic vistas would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. b. Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to trees, rock outcroppings and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? No Impact Discussion of Effects: There are no State or County designated scenic highways in proximity to the project site.9 The nearest scenic highway is State Route 138 along the Cajon Pass approximately 16 miles to the north of the project site. Additionally, there are no protected trees, rock outcroppings, or historically significant buildings on or adjacent to the project site. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact to scenic resources within a state scenic highway. No mitigation is required. c. Would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? Cess than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: The construction phase of the project would introduce the use of machinery such as excavators and bulldozers, and construction staging areas, including earth stockpiling, storage of equipment and supplies. Construction -related activities would contribute to a disturbed site, which could be perceived by some viewers as a potential visual impact. However, it should be noted that the project site currently contains green screen -wrapped, cyclone -fencing along the east and northeast side of the parcel. In addition, the site contains a 22,640 -square foot building with associated short-term employee parking and the long-term parking of tractor -trailers and industrial heavy equipment storage. Therefore, the introduction of construction equipment would not be a substantial change from existing conditions, where large vehicles and pieces of equipment similar in size are already stored. Additionally, construction activities would be temporary and they would not create a significant permanent impact to the visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. According to the City's General Plan EIR," a number of goals and policies in the 2010 General Plan (i.e., Goal LU -2, Policy LU -2.1, Policy LU -2.4, Goal LU -9, Policy LU -9.3, and Policy LU -9.4) would address the protection of the aesthetic and visual resources in the City, including those related to supporting infill development, like the proposed project. Goal LU -2 intends to provide for sustainable and attractive infill development that complements surrounding neighborhoods and is accessible to alternative modes of transportation. Goal LU -9 fosters a cohesive, healthy community through appropriate patterns and scales of development, including complementary transitions between districts, neighborhoods, and land uses. The project site and the surrounding area are predominantly developed with buildings, except for the south adjacent lot. Currently, the project site comprises a metal warehouse building in the northwest corner occupied by Industrial Supplies, Inc., which is in the business of battery repair for forklifts and related equipment (Figure 2). The remainder of the site is currently utilized as short-term employee California Department of Transportation. 2018. Official Designated Scenic Highways. July 18, 2017. http://www.dot.ca.gov///_livability/_highways/.htm. Accessed February 15, 2018. 10 Rancho Cucamonga 2010 General Plan Update Draft Program Environmental Impact Report. Page 4.1-9 and 4.1-12. City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County, California. 25 E6—E11P150 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT parking and long-term parking of tractor -trailers and additional industrial heavy equipment storage. None of the existing uses on the project site is compatible with or seamlessly transitions between the residential uses to the west and the professional office uses to the north and east. Although the proposed project would place a five -story building in the vicinity of existing single-family residential uses to the west across Marine Avenue, the proposed parking and Marine Avenue on the western side of the project site would provide separation between existing residential uses.and proposed Building B, which would begin 93 feet east of the western property line. Additionally, the proposed project would add groundcover, shrub hedges, and street trees along Marine Avenue in a blighted area currently barren of vegetation where industrial heavy equipment is being staged. The proposed project as a modern, high-quality mixed-use site would provide a transition between the residential developments to the west, and commercial and office uses to the north and east. The proposed project would reduce the scale and massing of the buildings through the use of varied massing, projecting elements, recessed windows, trim, material and color massing, and other architectural features. Furthermore, the project by its very nature as a mixed-use development surrounded by Industrial Park land uses fosters a lifestyle whereby residents live in close proximity to professional employment opportunities and have commercial amenities within walking distance of their homes. In addition, the project will build residential units within 1.6 miles of the Metrolink Rancho Cucamonga Station located at 11208 Azusa Court to further support use of alternative transportation. The Managing Land Use, Community Design, and Historic Resources Element of the City's General Plan designates Haven Avenue as a Special Boulevard, which entails landscape prominence as a focus in the design process along this roadway." Treatment of Haven Avenue as a Special Boulevard within the City entails implementation of the Have Avenue Beautification Master Plan.'Z Beautification Master Plans include high-quality streetscape designs with strong landscape edges and consistent design elements. Under the Haven Avenue Beautification Master Plan, the entire center median of Haven Avenue within the planning area must be landscaped and street trees must be incorporated along the roadway in a consistent manner to reflect overall design cohesion. Design elements of the proposed project include landscaped setbacks and street trees along Haven Avenue, an entry monument at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and 26`" Street, and an overall improved, updated streetscape through the development of modern buildings of varied massing to compliment other community developments along Haven Avenue. These design elements would result in a net benefit to the visual character of the project site and its surroundings by converting a warehouse and parking lot, underutilized property to a modern, high-quality mixed-use development in the community and in accordance with the City's General Plan and the Haven Avenue Beautification Master Plan. Therefore, impacts to the visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. d. Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect daytime or nighttime views in the area? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: Currently, nighttime lighting is produced by surrounding office and commercial properties, street lighting, and vehicles on adjacent roadways. The proposed project would add " Chapter 2: Managing Land Use, Community Design, and Historic Resources. Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. Figure LU -6, Community Design Framework, May 19, 2010. 1 2 Rancho Cucamonga 2010 General Plan Update Draft Program Environmental Impact Report. Page 4.1-2 and 4.1-3. City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County, California. 26 E6—E11 P151 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT residential, office, and commercial uses and vehicle trips that would incrementally increase ambient nighttime illumination in the area for both ambience and security. The .proposed project would incorporate lighting at entrances, exits, and parking areas that would be commensurate with surrounding commercial ambient day and nighttime illumination in the area. The proposed project would comply with Section 17.58 of the Development Code which contains regulations for lighting to balance the security needs for lighting with the City's desire to preserve dark skies and to ensure that light trespass and glare have negligible impact on surrounding properties (especially residential) and roadways. The project site lighting would be shielded such that it would minimize light spillage onto adjacent residential properties. Approximately 0.0 to 0.1 foot-candle would reach the curb of the residential developments to the west.13 Therefore, lighting would not substantially affect daytime or nighttime views in the project vicinity. Glare also can be produced during the daytime and is usually associated with reflective building materials, such as glass, stainless steel, aluminum, and photovoltaic panels. Building materials for the proposed mixed-use development would consist of metal panels, corrugated metal, fiber cement board, masonry, stucco, storefront glazing, vinyl windows, and railing. Although some of these materials may have some reflective properties, high -gloss materials would be avoided, and reflective materials would be designed and constructed to minimize glare or reflection .14 Pursuant to the City's Standard Condition of Approval SC 4.1-5, which requires all development in the City to comply with the City's Light and Glare regulations, the project perimeter along neighboring properties and roadways will be constructed with street trees, decorative landscaping, architectural features, welcome signs, decorative lighting, and other streetscape design techniques in accordance with Title 17 of the City's Development Code in order to reduce light and glare spillover. Additionally, on-site driveways are designed to minimize vehicle headlight spillover to neighboring residences to the west, which would be shielded from light and glare spillover through the incorporation of perimeter trees, decorative landscaping, and architectural features along the project site's western boundary. These design techniques would minimize light spillage and glare onto neighboring areas in accordance with Section 17.58 of the City's Development Code. Through the City's plan check process, the proposed project must be designed and constructed in accordance with Standard Condition of Approval SC 4.1-5 and Title 17 of the Development Code in order to reduce light and glare spillover. Incorporation of on-site lighting designed and implemented in accordance with Section 17.58 of the Development Code, in conjunction with perimeter trees, decorative landscaping, and architectural features along the project perimeter, will ensure impacts from new sources of substantial light or glare would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. '" Site Lighting Exhibit, Concept Design, December 1, 2017. 19 Concept Design. Exhibit A7.0, Calor and Materials Board. KTGY Architecture and Planning. February 8, 2018. 27 E6—Ell P152 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION a. Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? No Impact Discussion of Effects: The site is not designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. The site is located on land designated as Urban and Built -Up Land by the Department of Conservation (DOC) Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program.15 No impact would occur and no mitigation is required. is California farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. California Department of Conservation_ https:Hwww.arcgis.com/ home/webmap/viewer.html?useExisting=l&layers=6586b7d276d84581adf921de7452f765. Accessed February 8, 2018. F E6—E11P153 HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 3.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES Would the project: Less than Significant Potentially with Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared ❑ 11 1-1 C pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural ❑ Ll i r] use, or a Williamson Act contract? c. Conflict with existing zoning for or cause rezoning of forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X 4526) or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(8))? d. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 of forest land to non -forest use? e. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of ❑ ❑ ❑ O Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non -forest use? a. Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? No Impact Discussion of Effects: The site is not designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. The site is located on land designated as Urban and Built -Up Land by the Department of Conservation (DOC) Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program.15 No impact would occur and no mitigation is required. is California farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. California Department of Conservation_ https:Hwww.arcgis.com/ home/webmap/viewer.html?useExisting=l&layers=6586b7d276d84581adf921de7452f765. Accessed February 8, 2018. F E6—E11P153 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT b. Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or'a Williamson Act contract? No Impact Discussion of Effects: There is no agriculturally zoned land on-site or in the vicinity of the project site. According to the DOC's Williamson Act Map, there are no Williamson Act contracts on the project site .16 No impact would occur and no mitigation is required. c. Conflict with existing zoning for or cause rezoning of forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526) or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(8))? No Impact Discussion of Effects: There are no lands within the City zoned as forest land, timberland, or Timberland Production. No impact would occur and no mitigation is required. d. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non -forest use? No Impact Discussion of Effects: There are no lands within the City that qualify as forest land or timberland. No impact would occur and no mitigation is required. e. Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non -forest use? No Impact Discussion of Effects: The project site is designated "Urban and Built -Up Land" by the DOC Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. Since the site is currently zoned Industrial Park, contains a warehouse and is used for staging of trailers and other automotive equipment, and is not located on any designated Farmland, no conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use would occur on the site. Additionally, no forest land is on site and no lands within the City qualify as forest land or timberland; therefore, no impact related to conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non -forest use would occur. No mitigation is required. Son Bernardino County Williamson Act FY 2015/2016 Sheet 2 of 2. California Department of Conservation. ftp:HftP.consw.ca.gov/pub/dlrp/wa/SanBernardino_so_15_16_WA.pdf. Accessed February 8, 2018. 29 E6—E11P154 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 2e' MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 3.3 AIR QUALITY Would the project: Less than Significant Potentially with Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ the applicable air quality plan? b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or ❑ ❑ 9 ❑ projected air quality violation? C. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable Federal or State ambient air ❑ ❑ O ❑ quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial ❑ ❑ o ❑ pollutant concentrations? e. Create objectionable odors affecting a ❑ ❑ ❑ substantial number of people? a. Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? The following discussion is based on the Haven Avenue at 26Th Street Mixed Use Development Air Quality and GHG Study, City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, lune 26, 2018 (Appendix A). Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: The project site is located in the South Coast Air Basin (Basin), which is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The Basin includes all of Orange County and the non -desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties. The SCAQMD and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) are responsible for formulating and. implementing the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), which has a 20 -year horizon for the Basin. The SCAQMD and SCAG must update the AQMP every three years. The current regional air quality plan is the Final 2016 AQMP adopted by -the SCAQMD on March 10, 2017." The Final 2016 AQMP proposes policies and measures currently contemplated by responsible agencies to achieve federal standards for healthful air quality in the Basin and those portions of the Salton Sea Air Basin that are under SCAQMD jurisdiction. This Final Plan also addresses several federal planning requirements and incorporates significant new scientific data, primarily in the form of updated emissions inventories, ambient measurements, new meteorological episodes, and new air quality modeling tools. This Final Plan builds upon the approaches taken in the 2012 AQMP for the Basin for the attainment of the federal ozone air quality standard 18 The Basin is currently a federal and State rr Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan. South Coast Air Quality Management District, March 2016. 10 Final 2012 Air Quality Management Plan, South Coast Air Quality Management District, February 2013. 30 E6 -E11 P155 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT nonattainment area for particulate matter less than 10 microns in size (PMlo), particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size (PM2.5), and ozone (03). The Final 2016 AQMP proposes attainment demonstration of the federal PM=,s standards through a more focused control of sulfur oxides (SOx), directly -emitted PM,.s, nitrogen oxides (NOx), and volatile organic compounds (VOC). Consistency with the AQMP for the Basin means that a project would be consistent with the goals, objectives, and assumptions in the respective plan to achieve the federal and State air quality standards. For a project to be consistent with the AQMP adopted by the SCAQMD, the pollutants emitted from the project should not exceed the SCAQMD daily threshold or cause a significant impact on air quality, or the project must already have been included in the AQMP projections. However, if feasible mitigation measures are implemented and shown to reduce the impact level from significant to less than significant, a project may be deemed consistent with the AQMP. The AQMP uses the assumptions and projections of local planning agencies to determine control strategies for regional compliance status. Since the AQMP is based on the local General Plan, projects that are deemed consistent with the General Plan are found to be consistent with the AQMP. The City's General Plan is consistent with the SCAG Regional Comprehensive Plan Guidelines and the SCAQMD AQMP. However, the proposed project would include a change in land use from Industrial Park to Multi-Family/Mixed-Use development. The City's General Plan and the AQMP assumed the current industrial designation in its air quality emission estimates. The emissions associated with the proposed mixed-use development were not included in the City's land use projections; therefore, the AQMP also does not anticipate emissions from the proposed project's land uses. Pursuant to the methodology provided in Chapter 12 of the 1993 SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, consistency for project development proposals that differ from the land use designation assumed within the Basin's 2016 AQMP is affirmed when a project: (1) does not increase the frequency or severity of an air quality standards violation or cause a new violation; and (2) is consistent with the growth assumptions in the AQMP. Consistency review is presented below: 1. The project would result in, short-term construction and long-term pollutant emissions that are less than the CEQA significance emissions thresholds established by SCAQMD, as demonstrated above; therefore, the project would not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of any air quality standards violation and will not cause a new air quality standard violation. 2. The CEQA Air Quality Handbook indicates that consistency with AQMP growth assumptions must be analyzed for new or amended General Plan elements, Specific Plans, and significant projects. Significant projects include airports, electrical generating facilities, petroleum and gas refineries, designation of oil drilling districts, water ports, solid waste disposal sites, and offshore drilling facilities; therefore, the proposed project is not defined as significant. As detailed in response to Checklist Question 3.13a, the proposed project would not generate a substantial increase in population in the City or region beyond that which has been projected in local and regional plans. Additionally, the nature of mixed-use projects generally fulfill several key issues and policies of the AQMP in order to reduce vehicle emissions, such as developing commercial uses in proximity to residential uses, building residential units near mass transit stations, and supporting alternative modes of transportation. As detailed in response to Checklist Question 3.3b, the proposed [mixed-use] project would not exceed any SCAQMD daily threshold or cause a significant impact on air quality. Therefore through adherence to standard SCAQMD regional rules required for all development activity with the Basin that assist in 31 E6—E11P156 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT reducing air pollutant emissions, the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the AQMP. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. b. Would the project violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: Construction. Air quality impacts could occur during construction of the proposed project from site preparation (demolition of on-site structures), soil disturbance, on-site grading, building, paving, architectural coating, and emissions from equipment exhaust. Major sources of emissions during grading and site preparation include (1) exhaust emissions from construction vehicles, (2) equipment and fugitive dust generated by construction vehicles and equipment traveling over exposed surfaces, and (3) soil disturbances from grading and soil import. Exhaust emissions from construction activities on site would vary daily as construction activity levels change. The use of construction equipment on site would result in localized exhaust emissions. Operation. Long-term air pollutant emission impacts are those associated with stationary sources and mobile sources involving any project -related changes. The stationary source emissions would come from additional natural gas consumption for on-site buildings and electricity for the lighting in the buildings and at the parking area. Area sources include architectural coatings, consumer products, and landscaping. Energy sources include natural gas consumption for heating. Mobile -source emissions usually result from vehicle trips associated with a project. Project Emissions. The California Emissions Estimator Model Version 2016.3.2 (CalEEMod) was used to calculate construction -source and operational -source criteria pollutants identified in Table 3.3.A. Modeling to estimate project emissions incorporated SCAQMD Rules 1113 (use of low VOC paint) and 403 (Fugitive dust control). The following dust control measures are included in the modeling and will be incorporated into the project: • Exposed area(s) watered a minimum of twice per day; Use of a moveable sprinkler system or water truck to maintain a minimum soil moisture content of 12 percent or greater; • Limit on-site vehicle speeds to 15 miles per hour; • Installation of a 25 -foot long gravel apron at project entrance; • Tarping trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil or other loose materials and maintenance of 12 inches of freeboard; • Application of soil stabilizers in inactive construction areas; and • Installation/replacement of groundcover in disturbed areas as soon as possible. The project -specific short-term (construction) and long-term (operation) for regional and localized emissions are detailed in in Tables 3.3.13 and 3.3.C, respectively. KPA E6—El1P157 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Table 3.3.A: Summary of Health Effects of the Major Criteria Air Pollutants Pollutant Health Effects Examples of Sources • Hospitalizations for worsened , Cars and trucks (especially diesels) Particulate Matter (PM=,, heart diseases PMia: less than or equal to 2.5 • Emergency room visits for Fireplaces, wood stoves or 10 microns, respectively) asthma . Windblown dust from roadways, agriculture, and • Premature death construction e Inflammation of the airways • Decreased lung function , Any source that burns fuel such as cars, trucks, Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) • Increased risk of respiratory construction and farming equipment, and residential conditions heaters and stoves. • Increase in responses to allergens • Inflammation of the airways • Headaches, loss of Volatile Organic Compounds coordination, and nausea • Paints, varnishes, and waxes (VOC) • Damage to liver, kidney, and • Building materials and furnishings central nervous system • Cleaning solvents, disinfectants, cosmetics • Cancer • Aerosolsprays • Inflammation of the airways • Burning of fossil fuels by power plants and other Sulfur Oxide (SOx) • Decreased lung function Industrial facilities • Increased risk of respiratory • Locomotives, ships, and other vehicles and heavy conditions equipment that burn fuel with a high sulfur content • Chest pain in heart patients' • Headaches, nausea' a Any source that burns fuel such as cars, trucks, Carbon Monoxide (CO) a Reduced mental alertness' construction and farming equipment, and residential • Death at very high exposure heaters and stoves. levels' Sources: CARR Fact Sheet: Air Pollution and Health. httP:H/ .arb.ca.gov/research//fs/fsl/fsl.htm. (Accessed March 29, 2018). United States Environmental Protection Agency. Volatile Organic Compounds' Impact on Indoor Air Quality. https://www.epa.gov/indoor-air-quality-iaq/volatile-organic-compounds-Impact-indoor-air-quality (Accessed March 29, 2018), United States Environmental Protection Agency. Sulfur Dioxide Basics. https://www,epa.gov/so2-pollution/sulfur-dioxide-basics (Accessed March 29, 20181. ' Health effects from CO exposures occur at levels considerably higher than ambient. CARB = California Air Resources Board 33 E6—El1P158 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Table 3.3.B: Regional Emissions Source: Tables 12 and 14, Haven Avenue at 26' Street Mixed Use Development Air Quality and GHG Study, City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, June 26, 2018. (Appendix A) ' Based on SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds(March 2015). CO = carbon monoxide lbs./day = pounds per day NOx = nitrogen oxides PM's = particulate matter less than 2.5 microns In size VOC = volatile organic compounds SCAQMD =South Coast Air Quality Management District SOx = sulfur oxides PM,o = particulate matter less than 10 microns in size Table 3.3.C: Localized Emissions Maximum Daily Emissions, lbs./day NOx PMso PM', NOx VOC PM. PM's SOX CO Construction Emissions 54.99 9.99 Emissions, Summer 54.82 72.64 9.50 6.05 0.11 29.01 Emissions, Winter 54.99 72.64 9.50 6.05 0.11 27.28 SCAQMD Regional Threshold' 100 75 150 55 150 550 Significant Emissions? No No No No No No Operation Significant Emissions? No No No No Emissions, Summer 24.28 9.01 8.06 2.54 0.14 51.87 Emissions, Winter 24.23 8.57 8.06 2.54 0.13 48.59 SCAQMD Regional Threshold' 55 55 150 55 150 550 Significant Emissions? No No No No No No Source: Tables 12 and 14, Haven Avenue at 26' Street Mixed Use Development Air Quality and GHG Study, City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, June 26, 2018. (Appendix A) ' Based on SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds(March 2015). CO = carbon monoxide lbs./day = pounds per day NOx = nitrogen oxides PM's = particulate matter less than 2.5 microns In size VOC = volatile organic compounds SCAQMD =South Coast Air Quality Management District SOx = sulfur oxides PM,o = particulate matter less than 10 microns in size Table 3.3.C: Localized Emissions Source: Tables 13 and 15, Haven Avenue at 26' Street Mixed Use Development Air Quality and GHG Study, City of Rancho Cucamonga, Cal/farnio, June 26, 2018. (Appendix A) ' Reference LST thresholds are from 2006-2008 SCAQMD Mass rate Localized Significant Thresholds for construction and operation Tables C-1 through C-6 for a disturbance area of 5 acres and at a receptor distance of 25 meters. •• The LST analysis only includes on-site sources; however, the CaIEEMcd software outputs do not separate on-site and off-site emissions for mobile sources. For a worst-case scenario assessment, the emissions shown include all on-site project -related stationary sources and 5% of the project -related new mobile sources. This percentage is an estimate of the amount of project -related new vehicle traffic that will occur on site. CO= carbon monoxide PM,o = particulate matter less than 10 microns in size NO,= nitrogen oxides PMis= particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size SCAQMD =South Coast Air Quality Management District The emissions estimates presented in Tables 3.3.B and 3.3.0 are based on construction and operation of a mixed-use development with 207 apartments, approximately 7,300 square feet of corner retail/office space uses, which would generate approximately 1,486 average daily vehicle trips during operation of the project (refer to Appendix I and J). Of the 207 apartments, 14 will be live -work units, each of which would include approximately 500 square feet of work space (total of 7,000 square feet of work space). 34 E6 -E11 P159 Maximum Daily Emissions, lbs./day NOx PMso PM', CO Construction Emissions 54.99 9.99 6.50 29.01-- SCAQMD Localized Significance Threshold' 270 16 9 2,193 Significant Emissions? No No No No Operation Emissions 5.40 0.80 0.54 20.61 SCAQMD Localized Significance Threshold' 270 4 2 2,193 Significant Emissions? No No No No Source: Tables 13 and 15, Haven Avenue at 26' Street Mixed Use Development Air Quality and GHG Study, City of Rancho Cucamonga, Cal/farnio, June 26, 2018. (Appendix A) ' Reference LST thresholds are from 2006-2008 SCAQMD Mass rate Localized Significant Thresholds for construction and operation Tables C-1 through C-6 for a disturbance area of 5 acres and at a receptor distance of 25 meters. •• The LST analysis only includes on-site sources; however, the CaIEEMcd software outputs do not separate on-site and off-site emissions for mobile sources. For a worst-case scenario assessment, the emissions shown include all on-site project -related stationary sources and 5% of the project -related new mobile sources. This percentage is an estimate of the amount of project -related new vehicle traffic that will occur on site. CO= carbon monoxide PM,o = particulate matter less than 10 microns in size NO,= nitrogen oxides PMis= particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size SCAQMD =South Coast Air Quality Management District The emissions estimates presented in Tables 3.3.B and 3.3.0 are based on construction and operation of a mixed-use development with 207 apartments, approximately 7,300 square feet of corner retail/office space uses, which would generate approximately 1,486 average daily vehicle trips during operation of the project (refer to Appendix I and J). Of the 207 apartments, 14 will be live -work units, each of which would include approximately 500 square feet of work space (total of 7,000 square feet of work space). 34 E6 -E11 P159 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26T" MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Operation emissions estimates for the 14 live -work units are based on their use as residential units rather than commercial units'. However,, if the 14 live -work units were analyzed as commercial units, the average daily trips of the overall project would increase by 75 trips to a total of 1,561, an increase of approximately five (5) percent (Appendix J). This increase in average daily trips is negligible when taking into account the overall operation of the proposed project. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that operational emissions of the proposed project would remain below SCAQMD thresholds when taking into accountthe 14 live -work units as commercial rather than residential uses. The project is required to comply with standard SCAQMD regional rules that assist in reducing short- term air pollutant emissions. Adherence to. the standard control measures is required for all development activity with the Basim As detailed in Tables 3.3.8 and 3.3.C, the regional or localized air quality emissions do not exceed established SCAQMD thresholds. In the absence of any exceedance, the project would not violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected, air quality violation. No significant air quality impact would result from the construction or operation of the proposed uses. No mitigation is required. c. Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable Federal or State ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Less than significant Impact Discussion of Effects: No single project is sufficient in size to, by itself, to result in nonattainment of ambient air quality standards. Instead, a project's individual emissions contribute to existing cumulatively significant adverse air quality impacts. The SCAQMD developed, the operational thresholds of significance based on the level above which a project's individual emissions would result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to the Basin's existing air quality conditions. Therefore, a.project that exceeds the SCAQMD operational thresholds would also have a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact. As described in this section, the proposed project's operational emissions would not exceed air quality emissions thresholds. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to significant cumulative air quality impacts. Long-term cumulative air quality impacts would be less than. significant. No mitigation is required. d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs) represent the maximum emissions from a project that would not exceed, air quality standards. LSTs are evaluated on the ambient concentrations of each pollutant within the project source receptor area (SRA) and the distance to the nearest sensitive receptor. The SCAQMD recommends the evaluation of localized NOx, CO, PMlo, and PMzs concentration -related impacts to sensitive receptors in the immediate vicinity of the project site. Sensitive receptors include but are.not limited to residential land uses, schools, open space and parks, recreational facilities, hospitals, resident care facilities, daycare facilities, or other facilities that may house individuals with health conditions that would be affected by poor air quality. Sensitive population groups include children, the elderly, the acutely ill, and the chronically ill. 35 E6—E11 P160 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT The nearest sensitive receptors to the project site are the residential uses to the west of Marine Street 82 feet west of the project site boundary.19 Residential areas are considered to be sensitive receptors to air pollution because residents (including children and elderly) tend to be at home for extended periods of time, resulting in sustained exposure to any pollutants present. Per the SCAQMD LST guidance, for receptors less than 82 feet (25 meters) away, LST screening thresholds at 82 feet (25 meters) are used as the SCAQMD-recommended LST thresholds.20 The construction and operational emissions were compared to the SCAQMD's threshold tables with a disturbance area of 5 acres. Project -generated traffic congestion may result in the formation of locally high concentrations of CO, known as CO "hot spots." The SCAQMD recommends that a local CO hot spot analysis be conducted if the,intersection meets one of the following criteria: 1) the intersection is at level of service (LOS) D or worse and where the project increases the volume to capacity ratio by 2 percent, or 2) the project decreases LOS at an intersection from C to D or worse. Micro -scale air quality emissions have traditionally been analyzed in environmental documents where the air basin, was a non -attainment area for CO. However, the SCAQMD has demonstrated in the.CO attainment redesignation request to EPA that there are no "hot spots" anywhere in the air basin, even at intersections with much higher volumes, much worse congestion, and much higher background CO levels than anywhere in San Bernardino County. If the worst-case intersections in the air basin have no "hot spot" potential, it is reasonable to conclude assumed that local impacts will be below thresholds. Localized project -specific short-term (construction) and long-term (operation) emissions for NOx, CO, PM10, and: PMzs are detailed in Table 3.3.C. As detailed above, project -related construction and operation emissions of NOx, CO, PM10, PM2.5 would not exceed LST thresholds established by the SCAQM D. Toxic air emissions from the construction and operation of the proposed project are expected to be limited to those produced by fuel combustion, which is primarily vehicle exhaust. The most significant toxic air contaminant (TAC) emission related to construction and operation activities would be diesel exhaust particulate, which would have the greatest potential adverse effects on health. Diesel exhaust particulate has a potential for long-term (chronic) cancer risks and chronic non -cancer health effects. Diesel exhaust particulate does not have a potential for acute (short-term) cancer risks and chronic non -cancer health effects. The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) has issued the Air Toxic Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines and Guidance Manual for the Preparation of Health Risk Assessments, February 2015, to provide a description of the algorithms, recommended exposure variates, cancer and npncancer health values, and the air modeling protocols needed to perform a health risk assessment (HRA) under the Air Toxics Hot Spots Information and Assessment Act of 1987, which identifies all substances that are evaluated for cancer risk and/or noncancer acute, 8 -hour, and chronic health impacts. In addition, multipathway substances that present a cancer risk or chronic noncancer:hazard via noninhalation routes of exposure are also identified. The project's construction schedule follows the CaIEEMod's default for demolition, site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and coating phases. The assessment assumes that construction " Various medical offices are located across 26`h Street to the north and Haven Avenue to the east of the project site and are sensitive receptors due to their generally heightened sensitivity to pollutants. However, the nearest medical offices are located ISO feet to the north (northern portion of the building located at 9227 Haven Avenue) and 150 feet to the east (across Haven Avenue at 8710 Monroe Court). Therefore, the nearest sensitive receptors are residences located approximately 82 feet to the west. Z0 Guidance for Localized Significance Thresholds. South Coast Air Quality Management District. July 2008, Updated October 2009. 36 E6—E11P161 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 20 MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT phases will not overlap. The CaIEEMod default construction equipment and'worker and vendor trips and trip lengths are utilized. The SCAQMD has established limits for maximum individual cancer risk from exposure to emissions of TACs over the period of 30 years for adults and 9 years for children; however, construction is expected to be completed within one and one-half years after its commencement. Given the relatively limited amount of heavy-duty construction equipment and the short-term construction schedule, the proposed project would not result in a long-term substantial source of toxic air contaminant emissions and corresponding individual cancer risk. For the TAC analysis, the emissions of diesel exhaust particulates are included in the exhaust PM,o emissions presented in Table 3.3.0 in response to Checklist Question 3.3b. Table 3.3.0 identifies the on- site operation emissions of PM10 and demonstrates that operation of the proposed project would not exceed LST related to PM,o emissions. Therefore, as with construction emissions, ongoing operations are not anticipated to generate significant TACs. The tables above in Checklist Question 3.3b demonstrate that construction and operational emission rates would not exceed the localized significance thresholds. In addition, local "hot spot' potential is below thresholds and construction and operations activities are not expected to generate significant TACs. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: Project construction will generate limited odors over the short term, mainly fumes from gasoline- and diesel -powered construction equipment, the application of architectural coatings, and the installation of asphalt surfaces. Construction activity would cease to occur after individual construction is completed, so these odors would be temporary, and not likely to be noticeable beyond the project limits. The painting of buildings or the installation of concrete paving may also create temporary odors. SCAQMD Rule 1113 outlines standards for paint applications, while Rule 1108 identifies standards regarding the application of asphalt. Adherence to the standards identified in these SCAQMD Rules, required as a matter of policy, would ensure temporary odors are less than significant and no mitigation is required. Land uses generally associated with long-term objectionable odors include agricultural uses, wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting operations, refineries, landfills, dairies, and/or various industrial uses. The proposed project is a mix of office, commercial and residential uses and does not propose any uses or activities that would result in a potentially significant operational -source odor impacts. Standard building shell design, air duct filters and exhaust systems that will be required as part of the building code requirements would reasonably suppress any potentially objectionable odors. The project would be required to adhere to City waste storage requirements (i.e., covered outdoor storage containers that are regularly emptied). Additionally, the proposed project would be required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 402, which regulates nuisance odors. Because the project would not involve any substantial short-term or long-term sources of odors, impacts are considered less than significant. No mitigation is required. 37 E6—E11 P162 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 38 E6—Ell P163 HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Would the project: Less than Significant Potentially with Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a cand(date, sensitive, or special status species in local or ❑ O I 1 11 regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional ❑ ❑ 11 ❑ plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal ❑ ❑ ❑ O pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native ❑ ❑ ❑ resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a ❑ ❑ ❑ O tree preservation policy or ordinance? f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan? 38 E6—Ell P163 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Discussion of Effects: The project site was subject to a project -specific habitat assessment, which included a literature review of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), the California Native Plant Species (CNPS) Rare Plant Inventory, the City General Plan Resource Conservation Element, and the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) custom soils report for the project site, as well as an on-site pedestrian survey conducted on October 29, 2016. The Habitat Assessment is included as Appendix B, and the results are summarized herein. The project site is disturbed with industrial uses, including a tilt -up concrete and metal structure and staging of trailers and other automotive materials. Surrounding land uses are developed, urban environs comprising professional office uses to the east and north, with residential uses to the west. Undeveloped land occurs adjacent to the south of the project site; however, this property is subject to routine disking for weed abatement and is currently used to stage piles of fill soil of unknown origin. A single native plant species, the blue elderberry (Sambucus nigra ssp. caerulea), was identified on site; however, the blue elderberry is a common native species and not considered a candidate, sensitive, or special status species. The remaining on-site flora is comprised of non-native foxtail chess (Bromus modritensis ssp. rubens), Mediterranean grass (Schismus barbatus), Russian thistle (Salsola tragus), Jimsonweed (Datura stramonium), and Iamb's quarters (Chenopodium album), as well as a single fan palm (Washingtonia filifera). The flora were generally scattered along the peripheral areas of the site as a result of on-site disturbances. Wildlife species observed on site include northern mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos), mourning dove (Zenaido macroura), black phoebe (Sayornis nigricans), western kingbird (Tyrannus verticalis), European starling (Sturnus vulgaris), and house sparrow (Passer domesticus). One reptile species was identified, side -blotched lizard (Uta stansburiona). No mammals were observed. The occurrence potential of special -status plant and wildlife species is primarily based on habitat types present, occurrence records of sensitive species from the site vicinity, and results of the on-site reconnaissance survey. No special -status plant species were detected on-site during the reconnaissance survey and none is expected due to lack of suitable habitat. Likewise, no special -status wildlife species were directly observed on site and none is expected due to absence of suitable habitat. For a complete list of special -status plant and wildlife species known from the vicinity of the project site, please refer to Appendix B. Site development would not eliminate significant amounts of habitat for potentially occurring special - status plant or wildlife species, nor would it reduce population size of sensitive plant and/or wildlife species below self-sustaining levels on a local or regional basis. However, fences, structures, and the fan palm on site could provide potential nesting sites for common native bird species protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) or the California Fish and Game Code (Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3515), so removal of these on-site features could result in a significant impact to habitat of species protected by regulation. Mitigation Measure (MM) BIO -1 requires that a pre -construction nesting bird survey be conducted prior to any demolition or ground -disturbing activities. 39 E6—El1P164 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT MM BI0-1: Pre -construction Nesting Bird Survey. Pre -construction nesting bird survey shall be conducted within three to seven days prior to demolition and ground -disturbing activities if such activities are proposed during the nesting season (generally February 1 through August 31). The survey shall encompass the entire area of project -related demolition and ground disturbance. If no active avian nests are found during survey, no additional mitigation will be required. If an active avian nest is discovered during survey, construction activities shall be redirected around the nest(s). A qualified biologist shall delineate the boundaries of any such buffer area. The buffer shall be sufficient to ensure that nesting behavior is not adversely affected by the construction activity. If demolition and/or ground -disturbing activities are delayed or suspended for more than seven days after the survey, the site shall be resurveyed. Should eggs or fledglings be discovered in any native nest, these resources cannot be disturbed until the young have hatched and fledged (matured to a stage that they can leave the nest on their own). Once the qualified biologist has determined that young birds have successfully fledged or the nest has otherwise become inactive, a monitoring report shall be prepared and submitted to the City. The monitoring report shall summarize the results of the nest monitoring, describe construction restrictions currently in place, and confirm that construction activities can proceed within the buffer area without jeopardizing the survival of the young birds. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department. With implementation of Mitigation Measure 13I0-1, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact with respect to nesting birds. b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? No Impact Discussion of Effects: According to the project -specific habitat assessment (Appendix B), no riparian habitat exists on site. Additionally, the project site is disturbed with industrial uses and therefore contains no natural communities. No impact to riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community would occur and no mitigation is required. c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? No Impact Discussion of Effects: According to the project -specific habitat assessment (Appendix B), no federally protected wetlands occur on site. No impact to federally protected wetlands would occur and no mitigation is required. 40 E6-E11P165 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT.PROJECT d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or Wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Discussion of Effects: Habitat fragmentation occurs when a single, contiguous habitat area is divided into two or more areas, or where an action isolates the two or more new areas from each, other. Isolation of habitat occurs when wildlife cannot move freely from one portion of the habitat to another or to/from one habitat type to another. Habitat fragmentation may occur when a portion of one or more habitats is converted into another habitat; as when scrub habitats are converted into annual grassland habitat because of frequent burning. Wildlife movement includes seasonal migration along corridors, as well as daily movements for foraging. ,Examples of migration corridors may include areas of unobstructed movement for deer, riparian corridors providing cover for migrating birds, routes between breeding waters and upland habitat for amphibians, and between roosting and feeding areas for birds. The project site is bounded on the north and east by professional office and commercial development. Residential uses occur to the west, and routinely disked vacant land is located adjacent to the south. Natural vegetation communities that previously occurred on the project site and on the vacant site to the south were cleared in the early 1900s for agricultural use, which ceased during the early 1970s when the project site was developed for light industrial uses. The vacant site adjacent to the south contained Cucamonga Pioneer Winery District structures that were demolished in 2007 and that property has been vacant since. The project site is not identified as a regionally important dispersal or seasonal migration corridor. As stated in response to Checklist Questions 3.4b and 3.4c, no riparian habitat or wetland exists on site. The project would not restrict or eliminate wildlife movement because habitat is already limited by surrounding development and adjacent roadways to the west, north and east, as well as by Humboldt Avenue and the Atchison; Topeka, and Santa Fe railroad between 750 and 850 feet to the south. Additionally, the project site contains no critical habitat, has minimal vegetation, and is heavily disturbed. Due to the surrounding professional office and residential •development, any ;potential surrounding habitat is already fragmented. The project site is not directly or indirectly connected to natural habitats and does not provide resources necessary to support local or regional wildlife movement and migration. As detailed in response to Checklist Questions 3.4a and 3.4b, above, the. project site does not contribute habitat for the long-term conservation of wildlife. However, although no riparian habitat or other natural vegetation communities occur on site, fences, structures, and the fan palm on site may provide nesting habitat for migratory birds. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO -1 for the protection of birds pursuant to the MBIA, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact with implementation of mitigation on the movement of native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species, native or migratory wildlife corridors, or native wildlife nursery sites. e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? No Impact Discussion of Effects: The project site does not contain any biological resources protected under local policies or ordinances. A single fan palm (Washingtonia filifera) is located at the northwest corner of the project site, but this species of tree is flowering and fruit -bearing and therefore is exempt frorri the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance (Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Chapter 17.16.080(E)(1)). The 41 E6—E11 P166 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26T" MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT proposed project is not in conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. No impact would occur and no mitigation is required. f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? No Impact Discussion of Effects: Neither the City nor its sphere of influence is within an adopted HCP, NCCP, or other approved State Habitat Conservation Plan area. The project site is not located within a local conservation area according to Figure RC -1, Open Space and Conservation Plan, of the General Plan Resource Conservation Element.' No impact related to conflict with habitat conservation plans would occur and no mitigation is required. 21 Chapter 6: Resource Conservation. Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. Figure RC -1: Open Space and Conservation Plan. May 19, 2010. 42 E6—E11 P167 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the project Less than Significant Potentially with Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as ❑ O ❑ ❑ defined in §15064.5? b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource ❑ O ❑ ❑ pursuant to §15064.5? c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique ❑ Ox ❑ ❑ geologic feature? d. Disturb any human remains, including those ❑ ❑ R ❑ Inter -red outside of formal cemeteries? A Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment and Paleontological Review, Haven and 161" Street Project Rancho Cucamonga, California, FirstCarbon Solutions, March 1, 2017 (Appendix C) was prepared for the proposed project. The Cultural Resources Assessment and Paleontological Review study area encompassed not only the 5.2 -acre subject project site, but also the approximately 9.7 -acre undeveloped property adjacent to the south of the project site, which will not be developed or disturbed under the proposed project. These investigations included records searches at the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) located at the California State University, Fullerton for cultural resources and at the Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History for paleontological resources. Additionally, the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) was engaged to determine whether any sacred sites are listed on its Sacred Lands File for the project site and vicinity and to obtain a list of regional Native American Tribes who may have additional knowledge of the project site and vicinity. Finally, an on-site pedestrian survey was conducted on December 17, 2016, to investigate the existing surface conditions of the project site. a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Discussion of Effects: When a project will affect an archaeological site, a lead agency shall first determine whether the site is an historical resource. CEQA defines a "historical resource" as a resource that meets one or more of the following criteria: (1) is listed in, or determined eligible for listing in, the California Register of Historical Resources (California Register); (2) is listed in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 5020.1(k); (3) is identified as significant in a historical resource survey meeting the requirements of PRC Section 5024.1(g); or (4) is determined to be a historical resource by a project's Lead Agency (PRC Section 21084.1 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5[a)). A "substantial adverse change" to a historical resource, according to PRC §5020.1(q), "means demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration such that the significance of a historical resource would be impaired." 43 E6—Ell P168 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CEQA Guidelines do not preclude identification of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Sections 5020.10) or 5024.1. Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5[c][4], if an archaeological resource is neither a unique archaeological nor a historical resource, the effects of the project on those resources shall not be considered a significant effect on the environment. It shall be sufficient that both the resource and the effect on it are noted in the Initial Study, but they need not be considered further in the CEQA process. The results of the SCCIC records search indicate that it survey reports and other findings are on file for properties within a 1 -mile search radius of the project site, but that the project site has never been fully surveyed. In addition, 12 previously recorded cultural resources have been identified within a 1 -mile search radius of the project site; two of these, both historic resources, are located within the 9.7 -acre southern property, which is not part of the proposed project. The SCCIC records search did not identify previously recorded cultural resources, either historic or archaeological, on the 5.2 -acre project site. The two previously recorded historic resources located within the 9.7 -acre southern property, which is not part of the proposed project, were located again during the course of the pedestrian survey. These resources are (1) the structural foundations of the Cucamonga Pioneer Winery District (P-36-011281) demolished in 2007, and (2) the historic refuse scatter (P-36-011276) associated with the Cucamonga Pioneer Winery District. As detailed in Figure LU -8, Historic Resources, of the City's General Plan Managing Land Use, Community Design, and Historic Resources Element, the Cucamonga Pioneer Winery District is identified both as a California Point of Historical Interest as well as a Rancho Cucamonga Point of Historical Interest. 12 These resources are not located within the proposed 5.2 -acre project site and no impacts to these resources are expected, as all grading and ground -disturbing construction activities will be limited to the 5.2 -acre project site. Review of historic orthophotography reveals the project site was utilized as a vineyard associated with the Cucamonga Pioneer Winery District until the early 1970s, at which time the project site was cleared, and the existing on-site concrete and metal tilt -up warehouse building was constructed. However, due to the proximity of the previously -recorded cultural resources listed as a California Point of Historical Interest as well as a Rancho Cucamonga Point of Historical Interest, the project site retains some sensitivity for undocumented subsurface resources. The on-site pedestrian survey did not identify any cultural resources, either historic or archaeological, on the project site, which comprises a 5.2 -acre partially -developed property improved with a 22,640 -square foot concrete and metal tilt -up warehouse building in the northwest corner. As previously stated, the existing on-site structure was constructed in the early 1970s and therefore does not meet the age requirement (minimum of 50 years) to be potentially considered a [historic] cultural resource. The remainder of the project site is currently utilized as short-term employee parking and the long-term staging of tractor -trailers and additional industrial heavy equipment. Additionally, in 2009, Haven Avenue was temporarily rerouted onto the project site as part of the grade separation beneath the nearby Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fe railroad. Due to the existing on-site disturbances, the potential for cultural resources to be encountered on the project site is low to moderate. Although the potential for the proposed project to affect subsurface historical resources is low to moderate, implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL -1 would help ensure that impacts to any historic or prehistoric resources from project grading would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. 22 Chapter 2: Managing Land Use, Community Design; and Historic Resources. Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. Figure LU -8, Historic Resources. May 19, 2010. 44 E6 -E11 P169 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26T" MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Mitigation Measure MM CUL -1 Unanticipated Cultural Resources: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor all clearing, grubbing, and grading activities at the project site. The archaeologist shall be equipped to record and salvage cultural resources that may be unearthed during such activities. This measure shall not apply to importation of non-native soil onto the project site prior to actual grading of native on-site soil. The archaeologist shall be empowered to temporarily halt or divert grading equipment to allow recording and removal of unearthed resources. The archaeologist shall assess the significance of any cultural finds in consultation with affected Native American tribal representatives and select an appropriate disposition for the resource based on the significance of the find and tribal input. If cultural resources are discovered on the project site, ground -disturbing activities shall be suspended within 50 feet of the resource(s) and an exclusionary buffer shall be established. The archaeologist and representatives of the appropriate Native American Tribe(s), the project applicant, and the City Planning Department shall confer regarding mitigation of the discovered resource(s). The archaeological monitor shall continue monitoring areas of the project site not included in the exclusionary buffer, and a treatment plan and/or preservation plan shall be prepared by the project archaeologist and reviewed by representatives of the appropriate Native American Tribe(s), the project applicant, and the City Planning Department for implementation to protect the identified cultural resource(s) from damage and destruction. A final report containing the significance and treatment of findings shall be prepared by the archaeologist and submitted to the City Planning Department and the appropriate Native American Tribe(s). All cultural material, excluding sacred, ceremonial, grave goods and human remains, collected during the grading monitoring program and from any previous archaeological studies or excavations on the project site shall be curated, as determined by the treatment plan, according to the current professional repository standards. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department. With implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL -1, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact with implementation of mitigation on historical resources and archaeological resources. b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Discussion of Effects: See response to Checklist Question 3.5a above. c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Discussion of Effects: The Cultural Resources Assessment and Paleontological Review'3 indicates that the project site is underlain by younger Quaternary Alluvium derived as fan deposits. These sediments have low potential to contain significant, nonrenewable paleontological resources subject to adverse impact Z' A Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment and Paleontological Review, Haven and 26i4 Street Project, Rancho Cucamonga, California, FirstCarbon Solutions, March 1, 2017. 45 E6-E11P170 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT by development -related excavation. Therefore, these deposits are assigned low paleontological sensitivity. However, these sediments may overlie older sedimentary deposits or Quaternary older alluvium present in the subsurface. Quaternary older alluvium is comprised of potentially fossiliferous sediments deposited between approximately 2.6 million years ago and 11,000 years ago. Older Quaternary sediments elsewhere in the Inland Empire are highly fossiliferous. It is noted, however, that Pleistocene outcrops in the vicinity of the project site are mapped as alluvial fan deposits of coarse- grained sand to boulder alluvium, which does not suggest deposition in a manner conducive to the preservation of fossil resources. Accordingly, excavation in surficial and subsurface exposures of recent alluvium with a low paleontological sensitivity within the boundaries of the project site has low potential to adversely affect significant nonrenewable paleontological resources. Likewise, Pleistocene alluvium present in the study area, given the lithology and the depositional context; also has low paleontological sensitivity, so excavation in these Pleistocene deposits has low potential to adversely affect significant nonrenewable paleontological resources. Despite the low likelihood any significant nonrenewable paleontological resources are present beneath the project site, the project site is underlain by Quaternary alluvium;Z" therefore, there remains some potential for the proposed project to unearth previously undocumented paleontological resources during construction, and Mitigation Measure CUL -2 and Mitigation Measure CUL -3 shall be implemented. Mitigation Measures MM CUL -2 Discovery of Paleontological Resources: Prior to issuance of grading permits, the City shall verify that the following notes are included on the grading plans: "If any suspected fossil -bearing sediments or paleontological resources are discovered during ground -disturbing activities, the construction supervisor is obligated to halt work within a 50 -foot radius around the find and establish an exclusionary buffer. Construction personnel shall not collect or move any paleontological materials or further disturb any soils within the exclusionary buffer; but construction activity may continue unimpeded on other portions of the project site. The project applicant shall retain a qualified (project) paleontologist to inspect the find in accordance with federal, State, and local guidelines to determine if the find is fossiliferous. If the project paleontologist determines the find is not fossiliferous, no further evaluation shall be required within the exclusionary buffer, and construction activity shall be allowed to resume therein. However, if the project paleontologist determines the find is fossiliferous, construction activity shall not resume within the exclusionary buffer, and Mitigation Measure CUL -3 shall apply." This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department. MM CUL -3 Treatment of Paleontological Resources: If the project paleontologist determines fossil - bearing sediments or paleontological resources are discovered on the project site, the project paleontologist shall develop and implement a Paleontological Resource Impact Mitigation Program (PRIMP) for this project. The PRIMP shall include the methods that will be used to protect paleontological resources that may exist within the project site, as well as 14 Preliminary Geologic Map of the Son Bernardino 30'x 60' Quadrangle, California. Open -File Report 03-293 (Sheet 1 of 5, Version 1.0). U.S. Geological Survey, Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Forest Service (San Bernardino National Forest) and the California Geological Survey. Douglas M. Morton and Fred K. Miller, 2003. E6—E11 P171 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT procedures for monitoring, fossil preparation and identification, curation into a repository, and preparation of a report at the conclusion of grading. • Excavation and grading activities in deposits with high paleontological sensitivity, as determined by the project paleontologist, shall be monitored by a paleontological monitor in accordance with the PRIMP. No monitoring is required for excavations in soil with no paleontological sensitivity (Artificial Fill). • If paleontological resources are encountered during the course of ground disturbance, the paleontological monitor shall have the authority to temporarily redirect construction away from the area of the find in order to assess its significance. • In the event that paleontological resources are encountered when a paleontological monitor is not present, work in the immediate area of the find shall be redirected and a paleontologist shall be contacted to assess the find for significance in accordance with the PRIMP. Collected resources shall be prepared to the point of identification, identified to the lowest taxonomic level possible, cataloged, and curated into the permanent collections of a scientific institution. • At the conclusion of the monitoring program, a report of findings shall be prepared to document the results of the monitoring program. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department. d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: The project is proposed on a site that has already been disturbed by development. Previous disturbances on the project site include agriculture associated, with the Cucamonga Pioneer Winery District, development of a 22,640 -square foot concrete and metal tilt -up warehouse building, and short-term employee parking and long-term staging of tractor -trailers and additional industrial heavy equipment. Additionally, in 2009, Haven Avenue was temporarily rerouted onto the project site as part of the grade separation beneath the nearby Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fe railroad. Based on the SCCIC records search of the project site and vicinity, no known religious or sacred Native American sites exist within a one -mile radius of the project site. No evidence is known to suggest the project site has been used for human burials. Therefore, it is unlikely human remains would be discovered during construction of the proposed project. If human remains are discovered, California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to California PRC Section 5097.98. The Coroner must be notified of the find immediately. If the remains are determined to be prehistoric, the Coroner would notify the NAHC within 24 hours, and the NAHC would determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD). The MLD may make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in PRC § 5097.98. Where the NAHC is unable to identify a most likely descendant, the most likely descendant is identified by the NAHC but fails to make a recommendation within 48 hours of being granted access to the site, or the landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendant and 47 E6—El1P172 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 2C' MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT mediation by the NAHC fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner, the human remains and associated grave goods shall be reinterred with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject to further and future subsurface disturbance pursuant to PRC § 5097.98(e). Compliance with existing regulations would ensure impacts to human remains are less than significant. No mitigation is required. 48 E6—E11P173 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION A project -specific Geotechnical Investigation was prepared by Geotechnical Professionals, Inc. and is included as Appendix D. The Geotechnical Investigation included limited subsurface exploration, engineering evaluations, and preparation of a feasibility -level geotechnical letter report. A subsequent design -level, detailed geotechnical investigation will be needed prior to execution/construction of the project in accordance with the California Building Code (CBC). 49 E6—E11 P174 HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 3.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS Would the project: Less than Significant Potentially with Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on ❑ ❑ ❑ other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ 4 ❑ iii. Seismic -related ground failure, ❑ ❑ ED ❑ including liquefaction? iv. Landslides? ❑ ❑ O ❑ b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss ❑ ❑ to ❑ of topsoil? c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result ❑ ❑ ❑O ❑ in on -or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code ❑ ❑ ❑ (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems ❑ ❑ ❑ 10 where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? A project -specific Geotechnical Investigation was prepared by Geotechnical Professionals, Inc. and is included as Appendix D. The Geotechnical Investigation included limited subsurface exploration, engineering evaluations, and preparation of a feasibility -level geotechnical letter report. A subsequent design -level, detailed geotechnical investigation will be needed prior to execution/construction of the project in accordance with the California Building Code (CBC). 49 E6—E11 P174 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26" MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? iii. Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv. Landslides? No Impact/Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: i. The project site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo zone and does not overlie any known fault; therefore, potential for on-site fault rupture is very 10w.25 No impact would occur and no mitigation is required. ii. The project site is within a seismically active area, where earthquakes have the potential to cause ground shaking of significant magnitude. The project site is located within Seismic Zone 4 as defined by the Uniform Building Code. Ground shaking during a seismic event is considered to be high for the project site due to the site's proximity to existing regionally active faults. According to Figure PS -2, Fault Hazards, of the General Plan Public Health and Safety Element," the nearest known fault in proximity to the project site is the Red Hill Fault approximately 1.8 miles to the north. The next -nearest fault is the Cucamonga Fault along the foothills of the San Gabriel Mountains approximately 4.7 miles to the north. The extent of ground shaking associated with an earthquake is dependent upon the size of the earthquake and the geologic material of the underlying area. The project site could be subjected to peak horizontal ground acceleration (g) of 0:51 g. This acceleration has a 2 percent chance of being exceeded in 50 years. Accordingly, all future construction and development within the project site would be required to`comply with applicable provisions of the 2016 CBC and the City's building regulations as a routine action conditioned by the City. Proper engineering design. and construction in conformance with the 2016 CBC standards and project -specific geotechnical recommendations, as required by City Standard Condition [SC] GEO-1, would ensure that potential impacts from seismic ground shaking would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. SC GEC -1 Compliance with applicable California Building Code and Project -specific Geotechnical Recommendations. Prior to the approval of grading and/or building permits, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City for review and approval that on-site structures, features, and facilities have been designed and will be constructed in conformance with applicable provisions of the 2016 California Building Code and the recommendations cited in the project -specific geotechnical investigation. Geotechnical recommendations include development of the project 25 Geotechnical Feasibility Investigation Proposed Mixed Use Development, Geotechnical Professionals, Inc., November 30, 2016. zs Chapter8: Public Health and Safety. Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. Figure PS -2, Fault Hazards. May 19, 2010. co E6—E11 P175 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT site in 'accordance with applicable seismic' code' values and design methods determined by the Project Structural Engineer, as well as remedial earthwork and/or ground improvement to provide a sufficient layer of engineered fill or densified soil beneath the structural footings/foundations. A qualified geotechnical engineer shall be present during demolition of the on-site structure to confirm the depth of foundation elements. Additionally, verification testing must be performed upon completion of ground improvements to confirm that the compressible soils have been sufficiently densified. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City's Building & Safety Services Department. Adherence to the measures identified in the geotechnical investigation, as well as the 2016 CBC and other requirements identified and required by the City, would ensure ground shaking hazards remain less than significant. No mitigation is required. iii. Liquefaction is a phenomenon that occurs when strong seismic.ground shaking causes soils to collapse from a sudden loss of cohesion and undergo a transformation from a solid to a liquefied state. There are three basic factors that must exist concurrently in order for liquefaction to occur: • A source of ground shaking, such as an earthquake, capable of generating soil mass distortions; • A relatively loose silty and/or sandy soil; and • A relatively shallow, groundwater table (within approximately 50 feet below ground surface) or completely saturated soil conditions that would allow positive pore pressure generation. The project site is not located in an area considered susceptible to liquefaction. The geotechnical investigation on site did not encounter groundwater to a' maximum depth of 41 feet below grade. Groundwater is not expected to be within 100 feet of the site surface. Therefore, the potential for liquefaction to occur is considered low. Accordingly, the potential for liquefaction induced lateral spreading and settlement is also considered to be low. The project site is partially developed with a 22,640 -square foot concrete and metal tilt -up warehouse building in the northwest corner and undocumented fill soils associated with the building may exist onsite. Any undocumented fills or debris buried from the current commercial structure that is present and encountered during demolition will, need to ber removed in accordance with the recommendations outlined in the project -specific geotechnical investigation. Based on ,peak horizontal ground acceleration (g) of 0.51 g expected for the project site, seismically -induced dry settlement of the on-site soils, is anticipated to be within tolerable limits. Remedial earthwork and/or ground improvement to provide a sufficient layer of engineered fill or densified soil beneath the proposed structural footings/foundations is required to ensure settlement of the ground surface will be less than % inch, should the project site be subjected to a design earthquake. Through incorporation of Standard Condition GEO-1, impacts from seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction and/or ground settlement, would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. iv. The project site is relatively flat and not located on or adjacent to,a hillside. The approach slope for the existing grade separation between Haven Avenue and the Atchison, Topeka, & Santa Fe railroad begins along the Haven Avenue frontage approximately 150 feet south of the project site boundary, and it has been structurally engineered in accordance with City, State, and 51 E6—E11 P176 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT American Railway Engineering and Maintenance -of -Way Association regulations to prevent the potential for slope instability and landslides. Evidence of landslides and/or slope instabilities was not observed on the project site. Additionally, the City does not recognize the project site as a location susceptible to landslides. Due to the property's flat topography, the absence of slopes or hills susceptible to landslides, and the planned site grading in accordance with Standard Condition GEO-1, potential impacts from landslides or slope instabilities at the project site are less than significant. No mitigation is required. b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: The project site is partially developed with a 22,640 -square foot concrete and metal tilt -up warehouse building with the majority of the site is utilized as short-term employee parking and the long-term staging of tractor -trailers and additional industrial heavy equipment. Total vegetation cover on the project site is minimal and concentrated along the periphery of the site, and the majority of the site is unvegetated, consisting of highly disturbed bare ground. Mapped soils on the site are Tujunga loamy sand (TuB), 0 a 5 percent slopes. Construction at the proposed project site would disturb surface soils and make them susceptible to erosion from wind and water. The City is a co -permittee under Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board Order number R8- 2010-0036, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No. CA5618036, also known as the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System or MS4 permit. The San Bernardino County Water Quality Management Plan was developed to implement compliance with the MS4 permit. In order to address the potential for erosion pursuant to the MS4 Permit, the project is required to implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) during the construction phase that would reduce erosion in accordance with NPDES regulations. These BMPs would be selected as part of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that is required to address erosion and discharge impacts associated with the proposed on-site grading. The project must also comply with the City's grading permit requirements, which would ensure that construction practices include BMPs to protect exposed soils such as covering stockpiled soils, and use of straw bales and silt fences to minimize off-site sedimentation. In addition, the site would be covered with asphalt, concrete, and landscaping materials during operations; therefore, soil erosion would be none to minimal. Compliance with State and federal requirements, as well as with City grading permit requirements, would ensure that the proposed project would have a less than significant impact related to soil erosion or loss of topsoil. No mitigation is required. c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: Evidence of landslides and/or slope instabilities was not observed on the project site. Additionally, the City does not recognize the project site as a location susceptible to landslides. Due to the property s flat topography, the absence of significant nearby slopes or hills, and the planned site grading in accordance with Standard Condition GEO-1, potential impacts from landslides or slope instabilities at the project site are less than significant. No mitigation is required. 52 E6—E11 P177 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26T" MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT As indicated in Response to Checklist Question 3.6.a (iii), the potential for liquefaction induced lateral spreading and settlement is also considered to be low. Based on peak horizontal ground acceleration of 0.51 g expected for the project site, seismically -induced dry settlement of the on-site soils is anticipated to be within tolerable limits. Settlement of the ground surface will be less than ''% inch, should the project site be subjected to a design earthquake. Through incorporation of Standard Condition GEO-1, impacts from landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction and/or soil collapse would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: The majority of Rancho Cucamonga, including the project site, is located on alluvial soil deposits. Mapped soils on the site are Tujunga loamy sand (Tu B), 0 to 5 percent slopes. Expansive soils are soils with a significant amount of clay particles that have the ability to shrink or swell through water retention .2' The on-site soils are excessively drained, have a relatively high sand content, and feature a very low run-off class with a high capacity to transmit water .2' Therefore, the on-site soils are not considered to be expansive. Through incorporation of Standard Condition GEO-1, impacts from expansive soils would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? No Impact Discussion of Effects: The project will connect to, and be served by, the existing municipal sewer system for wastewater disposal. No septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal is proposed. Because the proposed project would not include the installation of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems, no impact would occur. No mitigation is required. Z' Rancho Cucamonga 2010 General Plan Update Draft Program Environmental Impact Report. Page 4.7-13. City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County, California. 3e Web Soil Survey. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. https://websoilsuNey.sc.egov.usda.gov//.aspx (Accessed March 30, 2018). 53 E6—E11P178 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 3.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Would the project: Less than Significant Potentially with Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ significant impact on the environment? b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of ❑ 17 O I1 reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: "Greenhouse gases" (GHGs) emitted by human activity are implicated in global climate change, commonly referred to as "global warming." GHGs contribute to an increase in the temperature of the Earth's atmosphere by transparency to short wavelength visible sunlight, but near opacity to outgoing terrestrial long wavelength heat radiation in some parts of the infrared spectrum. The principal GHGs are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH,), nitrous oxide (N20), 03, and water vapor. For purposes of planning and regulation, Section 15364.5 of the CCR defines GHGs to include, but are not limited to, CO2, CH,, N20, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). Fossil fuel consumption in the transportation sector (e.g., on -road motor vehicles, off-highway mobile sources, and aircraft) is the single largest source of GHG emissions, accounting for approximately half of GHG emissions globally. Industrial and commercial sources are the second largest contributors of GHG emissions with about one-fourth of total emissions. The City has not established local CEQA significance thresholds for GHG emissions. Section 15064.7 of the CEQA Amendments states that "[w]hen adopting thresholds of significance, a lead agency may consider thresholds of significance previously adopted or recommended by other public agencies or recommended by experts." To provide guidance to local lead agencies on determining significance for GHG emissions in their CEQA documents, SCAQMD convened a GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Working Group (Working Group). Based on the last Working Group meeting (Meeting No. 15) held in September 2010, SCAQMD is proposing to adopt a tiered approach for evaluating GHG emissions for development projects where the SCAQMD is not the lead agency. This concept is equivalent to the existing consistency determination requirements in CEQA Guidelines Sections 15064(h)(3), 15125(d), or 15152(a). The SCAQMD has continued to consider adoption of significance thresholds for residential and general development projects. The most recent proposal issued in September 2010 uses the following tiered approach to evaluate potential GHG impacts from various uses: Tier 1 Determine if CEQA categorical exemptions are applicable. Tier 2 Consider whether or not the proposed project is consistent with a locally adopted GHG reduction plan that has gone through public hearing and CEQA review, that has an approved inventory, includes monitoring, etc. If a project is consistent with a greenhouse gas reduction plan, it would not have a significant impact. 54 E6—E11 P179 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Tier 3 Consider whether the proposed project generates GHG emissions in excess of screening thresholds for individual land uses. A 10,000 MT COZe/yr threshold for industrial uses would be recommended for use by all lead agencies. Under Option 1, separate screening thresholds are proposed for residential projects (3,500 MT COZe/yr), commercial projects (1,400 MT COZe/yr), and mixed-use projects (3,000 MT COZe/yr). Under Option 2, a single numerical screening threshold of 3,000 MT COZe/yr would be used for all non -industrial projects. Tier 4 Establishes a decision tree approach that includes compliance options for projects that have incorporated design features into the project and/or implement GHG mitigation measures. • Efficiency Target (2020 Targets). 0 4.8 MT COZe per service population, (the number of jobs and the number of residents provided by a project), for project level threshold (land use emissions only) and total residual emissions not to exceed 35,000 million tons per yearCOZe. 0 6.6 MT COZe per service population for plan level thresholds (all sectors). • Efficiency Target (2035 Targets). 0 3.0 MT COZe per service population for project level threshold. 0 4.1 MT COze per service population for plan level threshold. Tier 5 Consider the implementation of CEQA mitigation (including the purchase of GHG offsets) to reduce the project efficiency target to Tier 4 levels. The proposed project is analyzed for impacts to the environment from generation of GHG emissions using the SCAQMD tiered approach, specifically Tier 3, which consists of screening values the lead agency may choose for consistent application. A project's construction emissions are averaged over 30 years and are added to a project's operational emissions. If a project's emissions are under one of the following screening thresholds, then the project is less than significant: • All land use types: 3,000 metric tons (MT) COZe per year; or • Based on land use types: residential is 3,500 MT COZe per year; commercial is 1,400 MT COze per year; and mixed-use is 3,000 MT COze per year. Construction emissions are estimated based on model Year 2018 and beyond. It was assumed that construction would begin in the Year 2019 and would last approximately 15 months. Approximately 16,000 cubic yards of material is assumed to be imported during the grading phase. The project's construction schedule follows the CalEEMod's default for demolition, site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and coating phases. The assessment assumes that construction phases will not overlap. The CalEEMod default construction equipment and worker and vendor trips and trip lengths are utilized. Table 3.7.A shows greenhouse gas emissions from project construction equipment and worker vehicle emissions. The emissions are from all phases of construction. The total construction emissions amortized over a period of 30 years are estimated at 22.26 MT COZe per year. 55 E6—E11P180 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Table 3.7.A: Construction Greenhouse Gas Emissions Activity Emissions (MT CO2e) with Regulations Emissions IMT CO,e)' 1,716.94 On-site Off-site Total Demolition 34.87 5.35 40.22 Site Preparation 17.22 0.87 18.09 Grading 26.85 77.06 103.91 Building Construction 215.25 302.45 517.70 Paving 20.19 1.41 21.60 Coating 2.564.04 6.60 Total 282.07 385.83 667.90 Averaged over 30 years 9.40 12.86 22.26 Source: Table 16, Haven Avenue at 26' Street Mixed Use Development Air Quality and GHG Study, City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, June 26, 2018. (Appendix A) ' MT COTe = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents (includes carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and/or hydrafluorocarbons). ' The emissions are averaged over 30 years because the average Is added to the operational emissions, pursuant to SCAQMD recommendations. Table 3.7.8: Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions During Operation Emission Source Emissions (MT CO2e) with Regulations Mobile Source 1,716.94 Energy Source 509.76 Area Source 53.59 Water 112.73 Waste 51.47 Subtotal Operation 2,444.49 Subtotal Construction (averaged over 30 years) 22.26 Total Annual Emissions 2,467 Source: Table 17, Haven Avenue at 26'"Street Mixed Use Development Air Quality and GHG Study, City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, June 26, 2018. (Appendix A) 1 MT CO,e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents (includes carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and/or hydroflurocarbons) Operational or long-term emissions occur over the life of the project. The operational emissions for the project are 2,467 metric tons of CO2e per year as shown in Table 3.7.0, above. The emissions refer to emissions with the incorporation of regulations that would further reduce emissions. The project's operational GHG emissions are below SCAQMD's Tier 3 threshold of 3,000 MT COZe per year for mixed- use development. The emissions estimates presented in Tables 3.7.A and 3.7.0 are based on demolition of the existing 22,640 square -foot industrial warehouse and construction and operation of a mixed-use development with 207 apartments, approximately 2,528 square feet of retail uses, and 4,800 square feet of office uses (total of approximately 7,328 square feet of commercial uses), which would generate approximately 1,486 average daily vehicle trips during operation of the project (refer to Appendix I and J). Of the 207 apartments, 14 will be live -work units, each of which would include approximately 500 square feet of work space (total of 7,000 square feet of work space). Operation emissions estimates for the 14 live -work units are based on their use as residential units rather than commercial units. However, if the 14 live -work units were analyzed as commercial units, the average daily trips of the overall project would increase by 75 trips to a total of 1,561, an increase of approximately five (5) percent (Appendix J). This increase in average daily trips is negligible when taking into account the overall operation of the 56 E6 -E11 P181 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT proposed project. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that operational emissions of the proposed project would remain below the SCAQMD Tier 3 threshold when taking into account the 14 live -work units as commercial ratherthan residential uses. Therefore, the project will not result in significant GHG emissions. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Less Than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: Assembly Bill 32 requires CARB to reduce statewide GHG emissions to 1990 level by 2020. As part of this legislation, CARB was required to prepare a "Scoping Plan" that demonstrates how the State will achieve this goal. The Scoping Plan was adopted in 2011, and in it, local governments were described as "essential partners" in meeting the statewide goal, recommending a GHG reduction level 15 percent below 2005-2008 levels, depending on when a full emissions inventory is available, by 2020. CARB released the 2017 Scoping Plan Update November of 2017. The 2017 Scoping Plan Update provides strategies for achieving the 2030 target established by Executive Order B-30-15 and codified in SB 32 (40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030). Applicable reduction strategies are presented in Table 3.7.C. The 2017 Scoping Plan Update recommends local plan level GHG emissions reduction goals. CARB recommends that local governments aim to achieve a communitywide goal to achieve emissions of no more than six metric tons COze per capita by 2030 and no more than two metric tons COZe per capita by 2050. CARB identified reduction measures to achieve this goal as set forth • in the CARB Scoping Plan. Therefore, projects that are consistent with the CARB Scoping Plan are also consistent with the communitywide goal for GHG emissions reduction. As summarized in Table 3.7.C, the proposed project is consistent with applicable CARB Scoping Plan GHG emissions reduction measures. The City adopted the Rancho Cucamonga Sustainable Community Action Plan (SCAP) in April 2017.9 The City SCAP established a GHG reduction target of 15 percent below 2008 levels by 2020 to be consistent with AB 32 goal of 1990 levels by 2020. By 2020, the City is expected to reduce GHG emissions by 16.9 percent with existing actions, State programs, and the goals, policies, and actions identified in the SCAP. To achieve long-term GHG reduction targets beyond 2020, the City will consider policies and actions as part of the updates and revisions to the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. The City of Rancho Cucamonga SCAP provides GHG reduction policies with which the project is required to comply as a routine action conditioned by the City. As part of a standard condition of approval, the project will incorporate several design features that are consistent with the SCAP, including: • Supporting development of land use patterns that promote clean, green, and healthy living. • Reducing energy demand by improved efficiency and building design. • Incorporating the use of green building practices. Supporting efforts to reduce potable water usage per capita in Rancho Cucamonga. Participating in residential recycling and organic diversion programs. " City of Rancho Cucamonga 2035 Sustainable Community Action Pion. City of Rancho Cucamonga. April 2017. https:H/ -cityofrc.us////.asp Accessed February 19, 2018. 57 E6—E11 P182 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Table 3.7.C: Project Consistency with CARB Scoping Plan Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Scoping Plan Measure Measure Number Consistency Analysis Pavley Motor Vehicle Standards (AB Consistent: Residents, employees, and customers would 1493) T-1 purchase and operate vehicles in compliance with Incumbent CARS vehicle standards, as required by law. Limit High Global -Warming -Potential Consistent: Residents, employees, and customers would Use in Consumer Products H-4 purchase and operate consumer products that would comply with incumbent regulations, as required by law. Motor Vehicle Air Conditioning Systems - Consistent: Residents, employees, and customers would Reduction from Non -Professional H-1 be prohibited from performing air conditioning repairs Servicing and required to use professional servicing. Consistent: Motor vehicles driven by residents, Tire Pressure Program employees, and customers would maintain proper tire T-4 pressure when vehicles are serviced, as required by law. Consistent: Motor vehicles driven by residents, Low Carbon Fuel Standard T-2 employees, and customers would use fuels that are compliant with incumbent standards, as required by law. Consistent: As required in accordance with Standard Water Use Efficiency W-1 Condition [SC] GHG-1, on-site residential and commercial uses would implement measures to minimize water use and maximize efficiency. Consistent: As required in accordance with SC GHG-1, on- Green Buildings GB -1 site residential and commercial uses would be constructed in compliance with Incumbent State or local green building standards. Air Conditioning Refrigerant Leak Test Consistent: Motor vehicles driven by residents, During Vehicle Smog Check H -S employees, and customers would comply with leak test requirements during smog checks, as required by law. Consistent: As required in accordance with SC GHG-1, the Energy Efficiency Measures (Electricity) E-1 project would comply with incumbent electrical energy efficiency standards through green building construction practices and utilization of energy-efficient appliances. Consistent: As required in accordance with SC GHG-1, the Energy Efficiency (Natural Gas) CR -1 project would comply with incumbent natural gas energy efficiency standards through green building construction practices and utilization of energy-efficient appliances. Consistent: As required in accordance with SC GHG-1, on - Greening New Residential and GB -1 site residential and commercial uses would be Commercial Construction constructed in compliance with incumbent State or local green building standards. Greening Existing Homes and GB -2 Consistent: On-site residential and commercial uses Commercial Buildings would meet retrofit standards as they become effective. Source: California's 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. California Air Resources Board (CARS). November 2017. Standard Condition [SC] GHG-1 would ensure that the proposed project is designed, constructed, and operated in accordance with SCAP GHG reduction policies. SC GHG-1 Compliance with applicable Rancho Cucamonga Sustainable Community Action Plan GHG reduction policies. Prior to the approval of building and/or occupancy permits, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City for review and approval that on-site structures, features, and facilities have been designed and will be constructed in conformance with the following enforceable actions: 6M E6—E11 P183 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 1. Construction and building materials shall be produced and/or manufactured locally. Use "Green Building Materials' such as materials, that are resource -efficient, recycled, and manufactured in an environmentally friendly way, including low - volatile organic compound (VOC) materials. 2. Design all buildings to exceed the California Building Code Title 24 energy standard including, but not limited to, any combination of: a. Increased insulation. b. Limit air leakage through the structure. c. Incorporate Energy Star or better rated windows, space heating and cooling equipment, light fixtures, and appliances. d. Landscape and develop site utilizing shade, prevailing winds, and landscaping. e. Install efficient lighting and lighting control systems. f. Install light colored "cool' roofs and cool pavements. g. Install solar or light emitting diodes (LEDs) for outdoor lighting. 3. Prepare a comprehensive water conservation strategy appropriate for the project and include the following: a. Install water efficient landscapes and irrigation systems and devices in compliance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. b. Use reclaimed waterfor landscaping within the project, if available. c. Design buildings to be water efficient by installing water efficient fixtures and appliances including low flow faucets, dual flush toilets, and waterless urinals/heaters. d. Design irrigation to control runoff and to remove water to non -vegetated surfaces. 4. Reuse and recycle construction and demolition waste. Provide interior and exterior storage areas for recyclables and green waste in public areas. Educate employees about reducing waste and about recycling. Tables 3.7.A and 3.7.B detail the project -specific GHG emissions with the incorporation of SC GHG-1. Through implementation of SC GHG-1, the proposed project would comply with the GHG reduction measures identified in the City's SCAP and therefore would not conflict with the SCAP for the purposes of reducing GHG emissions. The project by its very nature as a mixed-use development surrounded by Industrial Park land uses fosters a lifestyle whereby residents live in close proximity to professional employment opportunities and have commercial amenities within walking distance of their homes. Furthermore, the project will build residential units within 1.6 miles of the Metrolink Rancho Cucamonga Station located at 11208 Azusa Court to further support use of alternative transportation and reduce vehicle miles traveled. These project design features are consistent with the State (AB 32) and local (SCAP) goals for reducing GHG emissions. Therefore, the project will not conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. Impacts are less than significant. No mitigation is required. 59 E6—E11 P184 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION E115—Ell P185 HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Would the project: Less than Significant Potentially with Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine ❑ ❑ ❑ transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions ❑ O ❑ ❑ involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? C. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport ❑ 21 ❑ ❑ or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency ❑ ❑ ❑ response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are ❑ ❑ ❑ adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? E115—Ell P185 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT The analysis in this section is based on the project -specific Phase I Environmental Site Assessment prepared by Hazard Management Consulting, August 1, 2017 (Appendix E). a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Discussion of Effects: The project includes demolition of one on-site building. The building was constructed in 1973 and demolition would involve site clearing, demolition of structure walls and foundations, asphalt removal, and material haul -away. The project -specific Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was prepared for the purposes of identifying hazardous materials conditions or historical recognized environmental conditions on the subject property. "Recognized environmental condition" is interpreted as the presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at a property: (1) due to any release to the environment; (2) under conditions indicative of a release to the environment; or (3) under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment. The term is not intended to include de minimis conditions that generally do not present a threat to human health or the environment and that generally would not be the subject of an enforcement action if brought to the attention of appropriate governmental agencies. Conditions determined to be de minimis are not recognized environmental conditions. "Historical Recognized environmental condition" means an environmental condition which in the past would have been considered a recognized environmental condition, but which may or may not be considered a recognized environmental condition currently. If a past release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products has occurred in connection with the property, with such remediation accepted by the responsible regulatory agency (for example, as evidenced by the issuance of a no further action letter or equivalent), this condition shall be considered a historical recognized environmental condition. The ESA includes federal, State, and local records reviews (up to a one -mile radius) and an on-site inspection of the subject property comprising the project site. The project site contains a 22,640 -square foot concrete and metal tilt -up warehouse building in the northwest corner, which is in the business of battery repair for forklifts and related equipment. The records reviews revealed the on-site facility uses and records of disposal of hazardous waste off site. Chemicals on site include several barrels of battery acid, petroleum, and paint products. However, according to the Haznet and San Bernardino County Permit databases, no records or evidence of spills or releases were noted and no issues of concern were noted by the County during inspections of the on-site facility. The project site is located in an area that has had historical commercial, retail, and industrial activities. However, the project -specific ESA found no evidence of off-site facilities that have adversely affected the project site. For a complete listing of properties within the regulatory agency database search, refer to Appendix E. A physical inspection of the project site was conducted on July 13, 2017, in order to identify visible evidence of recognized environmental conditions of concern at the project site and to assess possible conditions off-site that may impact the project site. Chemicals in use at the facility included battery acid, hydrocarbons, and minor amounts of paint. Moderate etching of the concrete surface was noted in the receiving area. The batteries and acid were noted to be stored on containment racks. The chemical and waste storage practices were acceptable, and no evidence of significant stains or spills was present (Appendix Q. No underground storage tanks or aboveground storage tanks were observed. Additionally, no ponds, pits, or lagoons were observed at the site, and no significant staining of surface soils was rM E6—E11 P186 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT evident. Due to the presence of on=site hazardous materials, Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 is proposed to ensure these materials are managed in accordance with regulatory standards. Mitigation Measure MM HAZ-1 Removal of Hazardous Materials: Prior to issuance of demolition permits, the numerous chemicals stored on the project site shall be disposed of as hazardous waste by a California Division of Occupational Health and Safety (CalOSHA) licensed Hazardous Materials Substances Removal contractor in accordance with applicable State and federal laws. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City's Building & Safety Services Department. Implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 would ensure hazards to the public and the environment from on-site hazardous materials used during previous occupation of the project site would be reduced to less than significant levels. As stated previously, the project includes demolition of the on-site building constructed in 1973 and would involve site clearing, demolition, and material haul -away. Buildings constructed prior to 1978 may contain asbestos -containing materials (ACM) incorporated into various construction components including floor tiles and thermal insulation. Current federal and State regulations (SCAQMD Rule 1403) require all contractors be properly trained in the correct handling of ACM during any repair, removal, or demolition activities to buildings or structures containing ACM. Therefore Mitigation Measures HAZ-2 and HAZ-3 are proposed. Mitigation Measures MM HAZ-2 Asbestos Survey: Prior to issuance of demolition permits, the project applicant shall provide evidence to the City that inspection for Asbestos -Containing Building Materials (ACM) is conducted by a California Site Surveillance Technician (CSST) registered by the California Division of Occupational Health and Safety (CaloSHA) for ACM. The purpose of the ACM inspection is to locate and identify suspected ACM that will be affected during the demolition portion of the project. Once a visual inspection.is performed, representative asbestos samples (if present) shall be collected in accordance with the EPA established guidelines document, "Guidance for Controlling Asbestos -Containing Materials in Buildings (EPA 560/5-85-024, 1985)." If it is determined that no ACM is present, no further work is required, and demolition permits may be issued in accordance with all remaining applicable regulations. However, if it is determined that the project site contains ACM, Mitigation Measure HAZ-3 shall apply. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City's Building & Safety Services Department. MM HAZ-3 Asbestos Abatement: Prior to the demolition of any structure determined to contain Asbestos -Containing Building Materials (ACM), all ACM shall be abated from the project site. An Asbestos Notification and Procedure -5 Work Plan shall be prepared and submitted to the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) for approval before any asbestos abatement may commence. The work plan shall include containment measures to control asbestos dust and debris created during abatement. All asbestos abatement shall be conducted by a California State Registered Asbestos Abatement Contractor registered by the Division of Occupational Health and Safety in accordance with the California Administrative Code, Title 8, and article 2.5 and the SCAQMD Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act pursuant to Code of Federal Regulations Chapter40, Part 763, subpart E. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City's Building & Safety Services Department. 62 E6—E11 P187 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT With implementation of Mitigation Measures HAZ-2 and HAZ-3, hazards to the public and the environment from demolition of buildings containing ACM would be reduced to less than significant levels. The United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) regulates the transport of hazardous materials and waste in connection with construction of the project and would require carriers to register with the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). Additionally, the future uses of the site may include the storage and use of common hazardous materials such as paints, cleaners, batteries, and pesticides. For the purposes of this analysis, it is assumed any future on-site uses would not handle substances that may be acutely hazardous. However, the handling of hazardous materials or emission of hazardous substances, if present, would be in accordance with the California Health and Safety Code Section 25507. The project would develop a Hazardous Materials Business Emergency Plan administered by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (RCFPD), as applicable, in accordance with California Health and Safety Code Section 25507 and other local, State, and federal standards, ordinances, and regulations. The project would also be required to implement health and safety policies and procedures regarding hazardous materials used where employees would be expected to handle or work around hazardous materials. As required by Health and Safety Code Section 25507, a business shall establish and implement a Hazardous Materials Business Emergency Plan for emergency response to a release or threatened release of a hazardous material in accordance with the standards prescribed in the regulations adopted pursuant to Section 25503 if the business handles a hazardous material or a mixture containing a hazardous material that has a quantity at any one time above the thresholds described in Section 25507(a) (1) through (6). Implementation of Mitigation Measures HAZ-1 through HAZ-3 for the removal of on-site hazardous materials used during previous occupation of the project site and demolition of the on-site structure, as well as compliance with Health and Safety Code Section 25507, would ensure impacts to the public or environment from the routine transportation, use and disposal of hazardous materials would be reduced to less than significant levels. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Discussion of Effects: As required by Health and Safety Code Section 25507, a business shall establish and implement a Hazardous Materials Business Emergency Plan for emergency response to a release or threatened release of a hazardous material in accordance with the standards prescribed in the regulations adopted pursuant to Section 25503 if the business handles a hazardous material or a mixture containing a hazardous material that has a quantity at any one time above the thresholds described in Section 25507(a) (1) through (6). As a mixed-use project, operations of the proposed project are not expected to utilize large quantities of hazardous materials. The project -specific Phase I ESA (Appendix E) did not identify any recognized environmental conditions on the project site, but demolition and construction of the proposed project could release on-site hazardous materials into the environment. Through implementation of Mitigation Measures HAZ-1 through HAZ-3 for the removal of on-site hazardous materials used during previous occupation of the 63 E6-E11P188 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT project site and demolition of the on-site structure, as well as compliance with Health and Safety Code Section 25507 and other applicable federal, State, and local regulations concerning the storage and handling of hazardous materials or volatile fuels, impacts from reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment would be reduced to less than significant levels. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: There are no existing schools within a 0.25 -mile radius of the project site, and there is no evidence to suggest any schools are proposed within 0.25 mile of the project site.30 According to the School Boundary Map of the Cucamonga School District, the nearest school in proximity to the project site is the Rancho Cucamonga Middle School at 10022 Feron Boulevard, approximately 0.4 mile to the west of the project site.31 Furthermore, any transport of hazardous materials associated with construction of the proposed project would be in accordance with the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT), which regulates the transport of hazardous materials and waste and requires carriers to register with the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). Only CalOSHA licensed Hazardous Materials Substances Removal contractors, and/or California State Registered Asbestos Abatement Contractors registered by the Division of Occupational Health and Safety in accordance with the California Administrative Code, Title 8, and article 2.5 and the SCAQMD Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act pursuant to Code of Federal Regulations Chapter 40, Part 763, subpart E would transport hazardous materials off-site, as detailed in response to Checklist Question 3.8a. Since no schools are located or proposed within 0.25 mile of the project site, and any transport of hazardous materials associated with construction of the proposed project would be in accordance with the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT), impacts related to an accidental release of hazardous materials or emissions of hazardous substances within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? No Impact Discussion of Effects: According to the project -specific Phase I ESA (Appendix E), the project site is listed in the Haznet and San Bernardino County Permit databases under the name HCS Cutler, Inc. The Haznet listing indicates that the facility used hazardous materials on site and disposed of hazardous waste off site. Chemicals observed on site during the Phase 1 ESA include several barrels of battery acid, petroleum, and paint products. However, the project -specific Phase I ESA did not identify the project site on any list of hazardous material sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. 30 About the District. Cucamonga Schaal District. 2018. http://ww.cuca.kl2.ca.us///_page?d=&group_id=&vdid=elrqia29y (Accessed June 20, 2018). 33 School BoundaryMoP� Cucamonga School District. 2018. http://www.cuca.kl2.ca.us///page?d=&group—id= &vdid=d14en1rgia21e (Accessed lune 20, 2018). M E6—E11 P189 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Therefore, no impact related to hazardous materials sites pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 would occur. No mitigation is required. e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Discussion of Effects: The project site is located approximately 2.2 miles north of the Ontario International Airport (ONT) within the ONT Airport Influence Area of the Ontario International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ONTLUCP) 32 Although the project site is not within a ONTLUCP Safety Zone or Noise Impact Zone, the project site is located within the ONTLUCP Overflight Notification Zone for Real Estate Transaction Disclosures and within the ONT Airspace Protection Zone for structural heights ranging between 100 feet and 200 feet above grade3' Policy PS -9.4 of the City's General Plan Public Health and Safety Element provides options for informing prospective buyers and tenants within Overflight Notification Zones of the impacts of airport overflight .14 Since notification generally is the responsibility of real estate agents or brokers, the City proposes Mitigation Measure HAZ-4 to require the applicant as a condition of project entitlement to notify prospective occupants of the proposed project of the project site's proximity to the DINT and airport overflight in accordance with the ONTLUCP and Policy PS -9.4 of the City's General Plan. MM HAZ-4 Ontario International Airport Overflight Notification: Prior to issuance of occupancy permits, the project applicant shall provide evidence to the City that appropriate real estate disclosures identifying the impacts of airport overflight are -provided to all tenants upon lease, transfer, or sale of any residential or commercial unit on site. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City's Building & Safety Services Department. The ONTLUCP Map 2-4: Airspace' Protection Zones and the City's General Plan Public Health and Safety Element identify the project site to be located within Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Height Notification Area (1) of the ONT. Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR)'Part 77, Subpart B requires notification to the FAA of any proposed construction or alteration having a height greater than an imaginary surface extending 100 feet outward and 1 foot upward (slope of 100 to 1) for a distance of 20,000 feet from nearest point of any runway, and also requires FAA notification for construction of any object taller than 200 feet, within Height Notification area (1).as The project site is located approximately 13,600 feet north of the nearest runway of the ONT. Therefore, any development on the project site greater than 136 feet tall would require notification to the FAA. The proposed height of the on-site structures is approximately 60 feet above surface grade; therefore, notification to the FAA is not required. Through implementation of Mitigation Measure HA2 -4, requiring the applicant to notify prospective occupants of the proposed project of the project site's proximity to the ONT and airport overflight in accordance with ONTLUCP's Real Estate Transaction Disclosures, impacts related to airport hazards for people residing or working on the project site would be reduced to less than significant levels. 32 Chapter 7: Procedural and Compatibility Policies. Ontario International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Map 2-1: Airport Influence Area. April 19, 2011. 33 Ibid. Map 2-4: Airspace Protection Zones, and Map 2-5: Overflight Notification Zones. 34 Chapter& Public Health and Safety. Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. Page PS -61. May 19, 2010. 35 y 779(a)(1) Construction or Alteration Requiring Notice. 14 Code of Federal Regulations 77.9 - Construction or Alteration Requiring Notice. https://www.law.corneii.edu/cfr/text/14/77.9 (Accessed June 19, 2018). 65 E6—E11 P190 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact Discussion of Effects: There are no private airstrips within the City. The nearest private airstrip, Cable Airport, is located approximately 2.5 miles west of the City's westerly limits, and the project site is well outside any of the Cable Airport Land Use Compatibility Zones, as detailed in the Cable Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.36 Therefore, no impact would occur, and no mitigation is required. g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: The City has a developed roadway network that provides emergency access and evacuation routes to existing development. The proposed project would be located on a site that has access to existing roadways (i.e., Haven Avenue and 26th Street) and the project proposes at least two points of public street access along 26`h Street and another point of public street.access along Haven Avenue. The City's Emergency Operations Plan, which is updated every three years, includes policies and procedures to be administered by the City in the event of a disaster for all four phases of effective emergency management: mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery, incorporated in an all - hazards planning cycle. The City's Emergency Operations Plan details the City's responsibility before, during, and after emergencies and identifies the RCFPD as the first responder to natural and human - caused disasters and threats, which are addressed through the City's centralized EOC. Construction activities that may temporarily restrict vehicular traffic would be required to implement appropriate measures to facilitate the passage of persons and vehicles through/around any required road closures. Typical City requirements include prior notification of any lane or road closures with sufficient signage before and during any closures, flag crews with radio communication when necessary to coordinate traffic flow, etc. The project applicant will be required to comply with these requirements, which will maintain emergency access and allow for evacuation if needed during construction activities. Compliance with these requirements will ensure that short-term impacts related to this issue are less than significant and no mitigation is required. The proposed project would be subject to RCFPD and San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department (SBCSD) review and approval prior the issuance of building permits. The developer of the project is required to design, construct, and maintain structures, roadways, and facilities to maintain appropriate emergency/access in accordance with applicable standards that would provide for adequate emergency access and evacuation. The two major cross -streets adjacent to the project site, Haven Avenue and 26th Street, are through -streets providing connectivity for emergency access and efficient evacuation of the site if necessary. The project design includes a Fire Access Plan, subject to approval by the RCFPD, which will ensure compliance with the City's Emergency Operations Plan through consultation with the City Public Works Department and RCFPD as part of the City's plan check process. Additionally, the project - specific Fire Access Plan ensures all on-site roadways are designed in accordance with RCFPD standards so that any necessary fire department apparatuses have adequate emergency access and are provided sufficient distance to all areas of the project site to ensure sufficient fire hose reach, as necessary. 36 Cable Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Map 3A and Page 3-3. City of Upland, September 14, 2015. MI. E6—E11 P191 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Proper site design and compliance with standard and emergency City access requirements will allow for evacuation if necessary during ongoing mixed-use operations. Consultation with the City Public. Works Department and RCFPD as part of the City's plan check process prior to project entitlement would ensure a less than significant impact related to implementation of or physical interference with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. No mitigation is required. h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? No Impact Discussion of Effects: Rancho Cucamonga faces ongoing threat from wind -driven fires within the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone found in the northern part of the City; however, the proposed project site is not located within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone according to Figure PS -1, Fire Hazard Severity Zones, of the City's General Plan Public Health & Safety Element," The project site is surrounded by urban development. In the absence of wildlands adjacent to or in the vicinity of the project site areas, a less than significant impact would occur. No mitigation is required. 37 Chapter 8: Public Health and Safety. Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. Figure P5-1, Fire Hazard Severity Zones. May 19, 2010. 67 E6—El1P192 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 62 E6—E11 P193 HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Would the project: Less than Significant Potentially with Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Violate any water quality standards or El El❑ waste discharge requirements? b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the ❑ ❑ ❑O ❑ production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? C. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a ❑ ❑ & ❑ stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site? d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on or off site? e. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or ❑ ❑ ❑O ❑ provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f. Otherwise substantially degrade water ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ quality? g. Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Flood ❑ El 11 21 Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h. Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures that would impede or redirect ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x flood flows? 62 E6—E11 P193 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 2C' MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT i. Expose people or structures to significant risk of loss, injury or death involving . ❑x flooding, including flooding as a'result of the failure of a levee or dam? j. Expose people or structures to inundation ❑ 0 ❑ by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? The analysis in this section is based in part on project -specific technical memorandum, Haven at 26th — Low Impact Development Information and Preliminary Calculations, KHR Associates, February 13, 2018 (Appendix F). a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: The City is a co -permittee under Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board Order number R8-2010-0036, NPDES Permit No. CAS618036, also known as the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System or MS4 permit. The San Bernardino County Water Quality Management Plan was developed to implement compliance with the MS4 permit. The project site clearing and grading phases would disturb vegetation and surface soils, potentially resulting in erosion and sedimentation. If left exposed and with no vegetative cover, the project site's bare soil could be subject to additional wind and water erosion. Since the proposed project involves over one acre of ground disturbance, it is subject to NPDES requirements. Coverage under an NPDES permit includes the submittal of a Notice of Intent (N01) application to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), the receipt of a Waste Discharge Identification Number (WDIN) from SWRCB, and the preparation of an SWPPP for construction discharges. A SWPPP is a written document that describes the construction operator's activities to comply with the requirements in the NPDES permit. The SWPPP is intended to facilitate a,process whereby the operator' evaluates potential pollutant sources at the site and selects and implements BMPs designed to prevent or controfthe discharge of pollutants in storm waterrunoff. During the demolition phase and during any future construction phase, the project would use a series of BMPs to reduce *erosion and sedimentation. These measures may include the use of gravel bags, silt fences, hay bales, check dams, hydroseed, and soil binders. The demolition and construction contractor(s) would be required to operate and maintain these controls throughout the duration of on-site activities. In addition, the construction contractor(s) would be required to maintain an inspection log and have the log on site to be reviewed by the City and representatives of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The existing site has a small industrial structure located in the northwest corner that is surrounded by asphalt and the remaining area is exposed soil. Drainage currently sheet flows in a southwesterly direction. Two trench drains located near the east side of the structure collect a small amount of runoff and then discharge into the storm drain main within Marine Avenue. This storm drain flows to Santa Ana River Reach 3 (Prado Basin), and ultimately into the Pacific Ocean. The site is located within the Santa Ana River Watershed, which is 303(d) listed for copper, lead, and pathogens, which are the pollutants of concern of the proposed project. The site is underlain with sandy soils with a groundwater depth greater than 100 feet below the existing ground surface. To address potential water contaminants, the proposed project is required to comply with applicable federal, State, and local water quality regulations. All new development in the City is required to prepare a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) to reduce water pollution impacts from construction and M E6—E11 P194 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT operation of the developments. WQMP's include BMPs for source control, pollution prevention, site design, low impact development (LID) implementation, and structural treatment control. Various techniques have been implemented by the project to mitigate potential storm water impacts. A combination of structural and non-structural source controls is used to reduce the discharge of pollutants and the effects of changes to runoff patterns that can be caused by the proposed development. The project limits the introduction of pollutants to storm water by locating trash enclosures within covered building structures and covering a little over half of the parking stalls. Signs, educational materials for residents, employee training, activity restrictions, and other non-structural source controls are to be implemented in order to enlighten people about storm water pollution and potentially reduce activities that lead to polluted runoff. LID BMPs with appropriate pretreatment have been chosen to mitigate the project's polluted runoff. Operation of the proposed project would result in typical wastewater discharges and would not require new methods or equipment for treatment that are not currently permitted for the existing treatment plants (refer to responses to Checklist Questions 3.18a and 3.18b). The proposed mixed-use development comprises 207 apartments (193 dwelling units and 14 live/work units), approximately 7,300 square feet of corner retail uses, and 7,000 square feet of work space within the 14 live/work units would not result in direct wastewater discharge and would not affect the City's compliance with SWRCB treatment requirements. Proper engineering design and construction in conformance with the requirements of the City, the San Bernardino County Municipal Storm Water Management Program, the intent of the NPDES Permit for San Bernardino County and the incorporated cities of San Bernardino County within the Santa Ana Region (MS4 permit), SWRCB treatment requirements, and project -specific recommendations outlined in a WQMP are routine actions conditioned by the City. Accordingly, the following City Standard Conditions [SC] are required for the proposed project to ensure impacts remain less than significant. No mitigation is required. SC HYD -1 Coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit. Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit and subsequent grading permit, the project applicant shall file and obtain a Notice of Intent (NO[) with the Regional Water Quality Control Board in order to be in compliance with the State NPDES General Construction Storm Water Permit for discharge of surface runoff associated with construction activities. Evidence that this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Discharger's Identification Number) shall be submitted to the City for coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit. The N01 shall address the potential for an extended and discontinuous construction period based on funding availability. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utilities & Engineering Department and Development Services Department, as appropriate. SC HYD -2 Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit and subsequent grading permit, the project applicant shall submit to and receive approval from the City of Rancho Cucamonga of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP shall include a surface water control plan and erosion control plan citing specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion during the entire demolition, grading, and construction period. In addition, the SWPPP shall emphasize structural and nonstructural Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control sediment and non-visible discharges from the site. The SWPPP shall include inspection forms for routine monitoring of the site during both the demolition and construction phases to ensure NPDES compliance and that additional BMPs and erosion control measures will be documented in the SWPPP 70 E6—E11 P195 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT and utilized if necessary. The SWPPP shall address the potential for an extended and discontinuous demolition and construction period based on funding availability. The SWPPP shall be kept on site for the entire duration of project demolition and construction and shall be available to the local RWQCB for inspection at any time. BMPs to be implemented may include the following: o Sediment discharges from the site may be controlled by the following: sandbags, silt fences, straw wattles and temporary basins (if deemed necessary), and other discharge control devices. The construction and condition of the BMPs shall be periodically inspected during demolition and construction, and repairs shall be made when necessary as required by the SWPPP. • Materials that have the potential to contribute to non-visible pollutants to storm water must not be placed in drainage ways and must be contained, elevated, and placed in temporary storage containment areas. • All loose piles of soil, silt; clay, sand, debris, and other earthen material shall be protected in a reasonable manner to eliminate any discharge from the site. Stockpiles shall be surrounded by silt fences and covered with plastic tarps. a In addition, the construction contractor shall be responsible for performing and documenting the application of BMPs identified in the SWPPP. Weekly inspections shall be performed on sandbag barriers and other sediment control measures called for in the SWPPP. Monthly reports and inspection logs shall be maintained by the contractor and reviewed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the representatives of the State Water Resources Control Board. In the event that it is not feasible to implement specific BMPs, the City of Rancho Cucamonga can make a determination that other BMPs will provide equivalent or superior treatment either on or off site. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utilities & Engineering Department and Development Services Department, as appropriate. SC HYD -3 Water Quality Management Plan. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall submit a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) to the City of Rancho Cucamonga for review and approval. The project shall implement project design features identified in the WQMP. The WQMP shall demonstrate that any proposed on-site development plan includes BMPs for source control, pollution prevention, site design, low impact development (LID) implementation, and structural treatment control. BMPs shall be designed and implemented to retain the project site's minimum design capture volume and hydromodification volume of 30,355 cubic feet of runoff to ensure post -development storm water runoff volume or time of concentration does not exceed pre -development storm water runoff. Periodic maintenance of any required infiltration basin and landscaped areas during project occupancy and operation shall be in accordance with the schedule outlined in the WQMP. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utilities & Engineering Department and Development Services Department, as appropriate. The WQMP would be reviewed and approved as a routine action during the processing of the project by the City; therefore, it is reasonable that the required measures and features detailed in the WQMP to safeguard water quality would be incorporated into the proposed project. Adherence to Standard 71 E6—E11P196 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26 TI MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Conditions HYD -1 through HYD4 and requirements included in the NPDES permit, SWPPP, and WQMP would ensure potential water quality impacts remain less than significant. No mitigation is required. b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: Potable water service is provided to the City of Rancho Cucamonga from the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD), which receives approximately 3S percent of the City's water from the underlying Chino and Cucamonga Groundwater Basins. CWVD complies with its prescriptive water rights as managed by the Chino Basin Watermaster through the process of adjudication between various water purveyors and therefore will not deplete local groundwater resources in order to meet its entitlements. As discussed in the response to Checklist Question 3.18d, there would be sufficient water supplies to serve the project from existing entitlements. Except for non -paved areas, there are no BMPs or other mechanisms on-site designed to capture storm water runoff and facilitate infiltration prior to discharge into the municipal storm drains. Through implementation of Standard Condition HYD -3, a project -specific WQMP shall be developed to specify BMPs designed and implemented to retain the project site's minimum design capture volume and hydromodification volume. Through implementation of Standard Condition HYD -3, storm water shall be captured on-site and allowed to infiltrate into the ground such that post -development storm water runoff volume or time of concentration will not exceed pre -development storm water runoff. The proposed project would not interfere with groundwater recharge because the project site is not located within an area designated as a groundwater recharge basin or spreading ground 3' and the underground storm water detention system in the parking area would ensure post -development runoff does not exceed pre -development flow conditions. Therefore, the proposed project would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effect: Development of the proposed project (buildings and pavement) would alter the amount of existing impervious surface area and the amount of generated runoff. Approximately 30 percent of the project site is paved or comprised of buildings, and the non -paved areas are comprised of bare earthen soil. Except for non -paved areas, there are no BMPs or other mechanisms on-site designed to capture storm water runoff and facilitate infiltration prior to discharge into the municipal storm drains. Demolition and subsequent construction phases would disturb paved and/or vegetated surfaces and expose on-site soils to erosion and siltation potential. Pursuant to Standard Condition HYD -2, the project applicant shall submit a SWPPP to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of a demolition permit and subsequent grading permit. The SWPPP shall include a surface water control plan 39 Chapter 6: Resource Conservation. Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. Figure RC -3: Water Resources. May 19, 2010. ya E6—E11 P197 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT and erosion control plan citing specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion during the entire demolition, grading, and construction period. In addition, the SWPPP shall emphasize structural and nonstructural BMPs to control sediment and non-visible discharges from the site. The SWPPP shall include inspection forms for routine monitoring of the site during both the demolition and construction phases to ensure NPDES compliance and that additional BMPs and erosion control measures will be documented in the SWPPP and utilized if necessary. The SWPPP shall address the potential for an extended and discontinuous demolition and construction period based on funding availability. The proposed project would include an on-site private storm drain system that would discharge into the public storm drain main within Marine Avenue. Pursuant to Standard Condition HYD -3 the applicant shall prepare a project -specific WQMP to ensure conveyance of storm water runoff under post - development conditions do not exceed pre -development conditions. Through implementation of Standard Condition HYD -3, a project -specific WQMP shall be developed to specify BMPs designed and implemented to retain the project site's minimum design capture volume and hydromodification volume of 30,355 cubic feet of runoff. Storm water shall be captured on-site and allowed to infiltrate into the ground such that post -development storm water runoff volume or time of concentration will not exceed pre -development storm water runoff. Additional project design features, such as roof downspouts draining into pervious, landscaped areas, and maintenance of existing surface flows across the project site into the infiltration basin(s), would further maintain the site's existing drainage pattern and prevent erosion or siltation. Periodic maintenance of any required infiltration basin and landscaped areas during project occupancy and operation shall be in accordance with the schedule outlined in the WQMP. The project site does not contain any streams�or rivers; therefore, none would be altered by the proposed project. With implementation of the City's Standard Conditions HYD -2 and HYD -3, impacts related to substantial alteration of the existing drainage pattern of the site or area in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation would remain less than" significant. No mitigation is required. d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on or off site?„ Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effect: As detailed in response to Checklist Question 3.9c, the applicant shall prepare a project -specific WQMP pursuant to Standard Condition HYD -3 to ensure conveyance of storm water runoff under post -development conditions do not exceed pre -development conditions. The proposed project site is located within the Co -Permittees Hydromodification Sensitivity Map in an area exempt from hydromodification to a downstream channel since all downstream conveyance channels to an adequate sump (e.g., Santa Ana River or Prado Dam) is engineered and regularly maintained to ensure design flow capacity.39 Through implementation of Standard Condition HYD -3, BMPs shall be designed and implemented to retain the project site's minimum design capture volume and hydromodification volume of 30,355 cubic feet of runoff. Storm water shall be captured on-site and allowed to infiltrate into the ground such that post -development storm water runoff volume or time of concentration will not exceed pre -development storm water runoff. Additional project design features, such as roof downspouts draining into pervious, landscaped areas, and maintenance of existing surface flows across 39 Stormwater Facility Mapping Tool. San Bernardino County Watershed Action Plan. http://permitrack.sbcounty.gov/wap/ (Accessed April 2, 2018). 73 E6—E11 P198 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT the project site into the infiltration basin(s), would further maintain the site's existing drainage pattern and retain the project site's minimum design capture volume and hydromodification volume of 30,355 cubic feet of runoff. Periodic maintenance of any required infiltration basin and landscaped areas during project occupancy and operation shall be in accordance with the schedule outlined in the WQMP. With implementation of Standard Condition HYD -3, impacts related to substantial alteration of the existing drainage pattern of the site or area or substantial increase in the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site would remain less than significant. No mitigation is required. e. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effect: The Federal Clean Water Act delegates authority to the States to issue NPDES permits for discharges of storm water from construction, industrial, and municipal entities to Waters of the United States. The purpose of the Municipal Separate Storm Water Sewer System (MS4) permit is to meet the California State Water Resources Control Board's requirements to mitigate for the negative impact of increases in storm water runoff caused by new development and redevelopment. The project storm water discharge rates cannot exceed the pre -development runoff condition for 2 -year 24-hour storm total or the 85`h percentile 24-hour storm runoff event to be in compliance with the MS4 post - construction and site design requirements. The project is over one acre in size and is required to have coverage under the State's General Permit for Construction Activities (SWPPP). Pursuant to Standard Condition HYD -2, a project -specific SWPPP shall be prepared which would detail BMPs to be implemented during demolition and construction to reduce/adverse water quality impacts resulting from development. All impacts related to runoff during demolition, site preparation, and construction would be addressed by the SWPPP. Pursuant to Standard Condition HYD -3, the applicant shall prepare a project -specific WQMP to ensure conveyance of storm water runoff under post -development conditions do not exceed pre -development conditions. Through implementation of Standard Condition HYD -3, BMPs shall be designed and implemented to retain the project site's minimum design capture volume and hydro modification volume of 30,355 cubic feet of runoff. Storm water shall be captured on-site and allowed to infiltrate into the ground such that post -development storm water runoff volume or time of concentration will not exceed pre -development storm water runoff. Additional project design features, such as roof downspouts draining into pervious, landscaped areas, and maintenance of existing surface flows across the project site into the infiltration basin(s), would further maintain the site's existing drainage pattern and prevent additional sources of polluted runoff. Periodic maintenance of any required infiltration basin and landscaped areas during project occupancy and operation shall be in accordance with the schedule outlined in the WQMP. The project is located in an urbanized area for which storm drain features have been previously planned and installed. Except for non -paved areas, currently there are no BMPs or other mechanisms on-site designed to capture storm water runoff and facilitate infiltration prior to discharge into the municipal storm drains. Project -generated sources of storm water pollution and runoff would be addressed through adherence to NPDES permit requirements. Implementation of Standard Conditions HYD -2 and HYD -3 would ensure polluted runoff during demolition, site preparation, and construction would be addressed by the SWPPP, and post -development storm water runoff volume or time of concentration would not exceed pre -development conditions. Therefore, impacts related to the creation or 74 E6—E11P199 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT contribution of runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff would remain less than significant. No mitigation is required. f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effect: Refer to response to Checklist Question 3.9a. Implementation of Standard Conditions HYD -1 through HYD -3 would ensure compliance with the State NPDES General Construction Storm Water Permit for discharge of surface runoff associated with construction activities; polluted runoff during demolition, site preparation, and construction would be addressed by the SWPPP; and post -development storm water runoff volume or time of concentration would not exceed pre - development conditions. The SWPPP and WQMP would be reviewed and approved as a routine action during the processing of the project by the City; therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that the required measures and features detailed in the SWPPP and WQMP to safeguard the existing drainage pattern of the site and area from storm water runoff would be incorporated into the proposed project. The project would not have any substantial effects on a stream or river, as no such features exist on or adjacent to the project site, and site-specific structural BMPs shall be designed and implemented to retain the project site's minimum design capture volume and hydromodification volume of 30,355 cubic feet of runoff. Adherence to Standard Conditions HYD -1 through HYD -3 and requirements included in the NPDES permit, SWPPP, and WQMP would ensure potential water quality impacts remain less than significant. No mitigation is required. g. Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? No Impact Discussion of Effect: According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map No. 06071C8630J, the project site is located in Zone X, which is,identified to be outside the 100 -year (1 percent annual chance of flood) and 500 -year (0.2 percent annual chance of flood) flood hazard areas 40 Therefore, no impact would occur. No mitigation is required. . h. Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures that would impede or redirect flood flows? No Impact Discussion of Effect: According to FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map No. 06071C86301, the project site is not within a 100 -year flood zone. Therefore, the proposed uses would not impede or direct flood flows within a 100-yearflood zone. No impact would occur and no mitigation is required. 1. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? No Impact Discussion of Effects: As described in response to Checklist Question 3.9g, the project site is located in Zone X, which is identified to be outside the 100 -year (1 percent annual chance of flood) and 500 -year 4 0 Flood Insurance Rate Map No. 06071[86301.. February 18, .2015. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). https://msc.fema.gov//?AddressQuery=highland%2C%20californiaffsearchresultsanchor. Accessed February 21, 2018. 75 E6—E11P200 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (0.2 percent annual chance of flood) flood hazard areas. Furthermore, Figures PS -5, Flood Hazard Zones, and Figure PS -6, Dam Inundation Hazards, of the City's General Plan Public Health and Safety element, indicate the project site is not included in any flood or inundation hazard areas that affect the City.61 Additionally, implementation actions related to Goal PS -7.1, PS -7.2, and PS -7.4 of the City's General Plan Public Health and Safety element ensure that the City will continue to collect flood control fees as a part of the development permitting process .4' These fees would fund the City's efforts to upgrade and expand the flood control system and maintain structural and operational integrity of essential public facilities in the event of a flooding hazard, as well as locate new essential public facilities outside of flood hazard zones. Therefore, no impact would occur as a result of a failure of a levee or dam and no mitigation is required. j. Expose people or structures to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: A tsunami is a series of waves generated by a pulsating or abrupt disturbance that vertically displaces water. Inundation of the proposed project's site by a tsunami is highly unlikely, as the project site is approximately 40 miles east of the Pacific Ocean at an elevation approximately 1,130 feet amsl. Seiches are oscillations in enclosed bodies of water that are caused by a number of factors, most often wind or seismic activity. There are no large open water bodies in Rancho Cucamonga outside of the dams and reservoirs. Since the project site is not located within a 100 -year flood zone or dam inundation area, seiche-related flooding is not anticipated to occur on site. As detailed in response to Checklist Question 3.6a(iv), the project site is located on relatively flat topography and is surrounded by existing development. The approach slope for the existing grade separation between Haven Avenue and the Atchison, Topeka, & Santa Fe railroad begins along the Haven Avenue frontage approximately 150 feet south of the project site boundary, and it has been structurally engineered in accordance with City, State, and American Railway Engineering and Maintenance -of -Way Association regulations to prevent the potential for slope instability and landslides. Evidence of landslides and/or slope instabilities was not observed on the project site. Additionally, the City does not recognize the project site as a location susceptible to landslides. Due to the property's flat topography, existing development on three sides of the project site, the absence of slopes or hills susceptible to landslides; and the planned site grading in accordance with Standard Condition GEO-1, potential impacts from seiche, tsunami, or muciflow as a result of landslides or slope instabilities at the project site are less than significant. No mitigation is required. 41 Chapter 8: Public Health and Safety. Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. Figure PS -5: Flood Hazard Zones and Figure PS -6: Dam Inundation Hazards. May 19, 2010. 02 Ibid. Pages PS -57 and PS -58. E6—E11 P201 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 3.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING Would the project: Less than Significant Potentially with Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Physically divide an established community? ❑ ❑ O ❑ b. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? C. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x conservation plan? a. Physically divide an established community? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: The site is located in a predominantly urbanized area. There are existing office uses to the north along 26th Street, commercial and office uses to the east of the project site along Haven Avenue, and residential uses located west of the site, across Marine Avenue. A vacant lot is located adjacent to the south of the project site. The proposed project as a mixed-use site would provide a transition between the residential developments to the west and commercial and office uses to the north and east. Therefore, it is not anticipated that the proposed project would physically divide an established community. Impacts would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. b. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: The proposed project would require a General Plan Amendment, a Zone Change, and a Development Code Amendment. The existing land use designation for the site is Industrial Park and the proposed land use designation is Mixed Use. The existing zoning is Industrial Park (IP) and the proposed zoning is Mixed Use. Additionally, the project site is proposed within the Haven Overlay Zoning District, which is established along Haven Avenue between Foothill Boulevard and 4th Street to allow unique use provisions for high-end office development designed to enhance the City's image by providing an intensive, high-quality, and prestigious gateway into the community. The proposed Development Code Amendment would amend Table 17.38.040-1, Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements for Haven Overlay Zoning District, to allow Mixed Use (i.e., residential, retail, and office) development within the Haven Overlay Zoning District. Mixed Use development in the City is designed to be inherently flexible with regard to combinations of uses at varying intensities. Pursuant to Table 77 E6—E 11 P202 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 17.36.020-2, Development Standards for Mixed Use Zoning Districts, of the City Municipal Code, mixed- use densities may reach up to 50 dwelling units per acre at heights up to 75 feet. The project site is located along Haven Avenue, which the General Plan Community Mobility Element identifies as a Primary Transit Corridor .4' Additionally, the proposed project would replace an existing warehouse and parking lot with a mixed -used development, consisting of two buildings with a total of 207 apartments (193 dwelling units and 14 live/work units), approximately 7,300 square feet of corner retail uses, and 7,000 square feet of work space within the 14 live/work units. Table 3.10.A details the proposed project's consistency with the General Plan goals and policies pertaining to land use, which encourage strategic infill development along transit corridors as well as mixed-use developments. Table 3.10.A: Proposed Project's Consistency with the City's General Plan City's General Plan Policy or Goal Proposed Project's Consistency with General Plan Goal or Policy Land Use Element GOAL LU -2: Facilitate sustainable and Consistent. The proposed project would convert an underutilized light -industrial property attractive infill development that adjacent to residential and Industrial Park (e.g., professional office) uses to a mixed use complements surrounding neighborhoods development that would introduce residential dwelling units in proximity to employment and and is accessible to pedestrians, bicycles, transit centers. transit, and automobiles. Policy LU -2.1: Plan for vibrant, pedestrian- Consistent. The proposed project would include 207 dwelling units (du) on 5.2 acres (39.8 friendly Mixed Use and high density du/acre) approximately 3 blocks (0.55 mile) south of existing mixed use development, directly residential areas at strategic infill locations across the street (Hawn Avenue) from OmnTrans Route 82, and approximately 8 blocks (1.6 along transit routes. miles) west of the Rancho Cucamonga Metrolink Station. Surrounding land uses include residential and Industrial Park (e.g., professional office), thus incorporating employment opportunities In proximity to the proposed project, which would integrate with the surrounding residential uses. GOAL LU -3: Encourage sustainable Consistent. In accordance with SC GHG-1, the proposed project would be developed to exceed development patterns that link the California Building Code Title 24 energy standard and be located directly across the street transportation improvements and (Hawn Avenue) from OmniTrans Route 82, and approximately 8 blocks (1.6 miles) west of the planned growth, create a healthy balance Rancho Cucamonga Metrolink Station. Surrounding land uses Include residential and Industrial of jobs and housing, and protect the Park (e.g., professional office), thus incorporating employment opportunities in proximity to the natural environment. proposed project, which would integrate with the surrounding residential uses. The project is proposed on a blighted property determined unlikely to harbor significant natural resources. Policy LU -3.7: Encourage new Consistent. The proposed project would convert an underutilized light -industrial property development projects to build on vacant adjacent to residential and Industrial Park (e.g., professional office) uses to a mixed use infitl sites within a built -out area, and/or development that would introduce residential dwelling units in proximity to employment and redevelop previously developed transit centers. Surrounding land uses include residential and Industrial Park (e.g., professional properties that are underutilized. office), thus incorporating employment opportunities in proximity to the proposed project, which would integrate with the surrounding residential uses. The project is proposed on an industrialized property used for battery repair for forklifts and related equipment, short-term employee parking, and the long-term parking of tractor -trailers and additional industrial heavy equipment storage. The prevailing Industrial Park uses surrounding the project site are professional (e.g, medical, financial) in nature, and the proposed Mixed Use development of the project site would be more compatible with surrounding professional office and residential land uses. Policy LU -3.8: Implement land use Consistent. The proposed project would include 207 dwelling units (du) on 5.2 acres (39.8 patterns and policies that incorporate du/acre) approximately 3 blocks (0.55 mile) south of existing mixed use development, directly smart growth practices, including. across the street (Haven Avenue) from OmnTrans Route 82, and approximately 8 blocks (1.6 placement of higher densities near transit miles) west of the Rancho Cucamonga Metrolink Station. Haven Avenue includes a Class II bike centers and along transit corridors, lane along both sides of the roadway. Surrounding land uses include residential and Industrial allowing Mixed Use development, and Park (e.g., professional office), thus incorporating employment opportunities in proximity to the encouraging and accommodating proposed project, which would integrate with the surrounding residential uses. pedestrian movement. Source: Chapter 2: Managing Land Use, Community Design, and Historic Resources. Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. May 19, 2010. 13 Chapter 3: Community Mobffity. Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. Figure CM -4: Transit Plan. May 19, 2010. 78 E6—E11P203 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT As detailed in Table 3.10.A, the proposed project is consistent'with the above General Plan Land Use goals and policies, which are designed to enhance community services, reduce air pollution, GHG emissions, and traffic congestion by introducing residential uses to major employment centers comprising the Industrial Park land uses along the Haven Overlay Zoning District (refer to Figure 6) and reducing vehicle trips, promoting transit use, and encouraging energy efficient design. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) functions as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for six counties, including San Bernardino County, wherein the project area is located. As the designated MPO, SCAG is federally mandated to research and plan for transportation, growth management, hazardous waste management, and air quality. SCAG's main responsibilities under State and federal law are preparing the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) and the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). Although SCAG does not have formal regulatory authority and cannot directly implement land use decisions, SCAG guides land use planning for the southern California region through intergovernmental coordination and consensus building. The City's General Plan EIR bases the City's target growth forecast on regional growth forecasts detailed in SCAG's Adopted 2008 RTP Growth Forecast, by City.44,45 However, SCAG's Regional Council adopted the latest [2016-2040] Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) on April 7, 2016. Therefore, the analysis of the proposed project's impacts to the City's growth forecast is based on the latest data provided in SCAG's 2016-2040 RTP/SCS.41 Typically, growth -inducing potential of a project would be considered significant if it fosters growth or a concentration of population in excess of what is assumed in pertinent master plans and land use plans. Significant growth impacts could also occur if the project provides infrastructure or service capacity to accommodate growth beyond the levels currently permitted by local or regional plans and policies. As detailed in response to Checklist Question 3.13a, the City will need to accommodate a total of 848 units in various income categories, including 209 very low-income, 141 low-income, 158 moderate -income, and 340 above moderate -income housing units in order to meet the City's projected housing needs detailed in the RHNA. The latest figures provided by the California Department of Finance indicate the papulation of the City is approximately 176,671 persons 41 Development of the proposed project and other projects in the City of Rancho Cucamonga and in San Bernardino County would lead to increases in population, housing, and employment. The proposed project would involve development of 207 residential units (494 new residents) and approximately 45 net new jobs that would likely be filled by the local labor pool. However, as detailed in Table 3.10.8, SCAG estimates that there could be approximately 204,300 people, 73,100 households, and 104,600 jobs in the City by 2040. The proposed project's growth would represent a negligible amount of the future growth forecasts in the City (approximately 0.24 percent of the projected 2040 City population; 0.28 percent of the projected 2040 City households, and 0.000043 percent of the projected 2040 City jobs). The addition of 494 residents and 45 employees within the City 44 Regional Transportation Plan. Southern California Association of Governments. http://scagrtpscs.net/Pages/2008RTP.aspx (Accessed June 20, 2018). 45 Section 4.13 - Population, Housing, and Employment. Rancho Cucamonga 2010 General Plan Update Draft Program Environmental Impact Report. SCH No. 2000061027. Page 4.13-12 and Tables 4.13-7 and 4.13-9. February 16, 2010. 46 Final 2016/2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. Table 11 in Demographics & Growth Forecast Appendix. Adopted April, 2016. Southern California Association of Governments. 47 E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities; Counties, and the State, 2011-2018 with 2010 Census Benchmark. State of California Department of Finance. http://veww.dof.ca,gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/E-S/. (Accessed June 20, 2018). 79 EG—EIIP204 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT would result in population growth within the City; however, this additional population is consistent with the City, County, and regional (SCAG) growth projections depicted in Table 3.10.8. Table 3.10.B: SCAG Demographic Forecasts' Demographic Characteristic 2012 2040 Population City of Rancho Cucamonga 170,100 204,300 San Bernardino County 2,068,000 2,731,300 Southern California Association of Governments` 18,300,000 22,100,000 Households City of Rancho Cucamonga 55,400 73,100 San Bernardino County 615,300 854,300 Southern California Association of Governments 5,900,000 7,400,000 Employment City of Rancho Cucamonga 69,900 104,600 San Bernardino 659,500 998,100 Southern California Association of Governments 7,400,000 9,900,000 Source: Final 2016/1040 Regional Transportation Plon/Sustoinoble Communities Strategy. Table 11 In Demographics & Growth Forecast Appendix. Adopted April, 2016. Southern California Association of Governments. ' The City's General Plan EIR analyzes regional growth forecasts based on regional growth forecasts detailed in SCAG's Adopted 2008 RTP Growth Forecast, by City. ' Rounded to the nearest hundred -thousand. The City's General Plan has a year 2025 to 2030 buildout horizon; however, the General Plan does not specify or anticipate when complete buildout would occur,ae as long-range demographic and economic trends are difficult to predict. The designation within the General Plan of a site for a certain use does not necessarily mean that the site would be developed with that use during the planning period, as most development depends on property owner initiative. Although the project site's existing land use and zoning designation is Industrial Park, an increase in residential uses beyond that which was planned for by the City at General Plan buildout would contribute to the balance of the City's current and future jobs -to -housing ratio consistent with both the SCAG forecasts and the growth forecasts for the City, as detailed in Table 3.10.8. The project would accommodate overall planned growth in the City and the SCAG region, and it would contribute to the City's RHNA requirement. The 2016-2040 RTP/SCS analyzed the region's transportation system, future growth projections, and potential funding sources in order in order to develop a long-term framework for transportation improvements and maintenance .4' The RTP includes policies and regulations set forth to ensure development within the SCAG regional area is within planned and forecast socioeconomic projections. As part of the RTP, SCAG developed an SCS, which was required by Senate Bill 375, the Sustainable Communities Act of 2008. The SCS is intended to combine land use and transportation planning with the overall goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions generated by vehicle travel. The project proposes mixed use development on an underutilized infill site within the South Haven Avenue Focus Area, which the City envisions as its major office corridor providing high-end professional xe The City's target growth forecasts for the General Plan horizon year are based on regional growth forecasts detailed in SCAG's Adopted 2008 RTP Growth Forecast, by City. However, the analysis of the proposed project's impacts to the City's growth forecast is based on the latest data provided in SCAG's 2016-2040 RTP/SCS. 19 1016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan Sustainable Communities Strategy: A Plan g p / gy: for Mobility, Accessibility, Sustainability, and o High Quality of Life. Southern California Association of Governments. April 2016. LE E6—E11 P205 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT employment opportunities through the creation of "pleasant, well -landscaped, office park settings, with restaurants and other amenities that are within walking distance for employees and visitors :i50 The project is proposed on a blighted property used for battery repair for forklifts and related equipment, short-term employee parking, and the long-term parking of tractor -trailers and additional industrial heavy equipment storage. The prevailing Industrial Park uses surrounding the project site are professional (e.g., medical, financial) in nature, and the proposed mixed use development of the project site would be more compatible with surrounding [professional office] land uses and provides a seamless transition between the Industrial Park uses along Haven Avenue.and the residential uses adjacent to the west. Furthermore, the project by its very nature as a proposed mixed-use development fosters a lifestyle whereby residents would live in close proximity to professional employment opportunities along Haven Avenue and have commercial amenities within walking distance of their homes. The project will build residential units directly across the street (Haven Avenue) from CmniTrans bus Route 82 and approximately 8 blocks (within 1.6 miles) from the Metrolink Rancho Cucamonga Station located at 11208 Azusa Ct. to further support use of alternative transportation and reduce vehicle miles traveled and GHG emissions. Tables 3.7.A and 3.7.B detail the project -specific GHG emissions with the incorporation of SC GHG-1. The project design features outlined in SC GHG-1, in conjunction with the alternative transportation lifestyle the proposed mixed use development would support along the South Haven Avenue Focus Area, would ensure the proposed project would not conflict with the GHG and vehicle miles traveled reduction measures identified in State (AB 32), regional (SCAG RTP/SCS), and local (General Plan and SCAP) plans adopted for the purposes of avoiding or mitigating adverse environmental effects. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. c. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? No Impact Discussion of Effects: As detailed in response to Checklist Question 3.4f, the project site does not lie within a proposed or adopted habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. No impact or conflict would occur in regard to conservation plans, and no mitigation is required. 50 Chapter 2: Managing Land Use, Community Design, and Historic Resources. Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. Page LU -42 and Figure LU -4: Focus Areas. May 19, 2010. 81 E6—El1P206 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 3.11 MINERAL RESOURCES Would the project: Less than Significant Potentially with Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to ❑ ❑ Z ❑ the region and the residents of the state? b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? Less than Significant Impact The project site is within an area designated by the State of California Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) as containing aggregate resources (MRZ-2).s' MRZ-2 zones are areas where adequate information indicates that significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that a high likelihood for their presence exists. This zone is applied to known mineral deposits or where well- developed lines of reasoning, based upon economic -geologic principles and adequate data, demonstrate that the likelihood for occurrence of significant mineral deposits is high. The State Geologist is responsible for identifying and calculating the amount of aggregate resources contained in areas classified as MRZ-2. The State Geologist further limits the aggregate resource calculations to areas within "Sectors," areas classified as MRZ-2 that have current land uses deemed compatible with potential mining. Compatible land uses are defined as those that are non -urbanized or that have very low-density residential developments (one dwelling unit per ten acres or less), land without high-cost improvements, and land used for agriculture, grazing, or open space. Urbanization and/or incompatible land uses are defined as improvements of high cost, such as high-density residential developments, intensive industrial developments, commercial developments, and major public facilities. The identification of aggregate resources provides local governments information on areas that remain accessible for extraction. The criteria for identifying resource areas do not consider land use commitments that may restrict the accessibility to the resource; therefore, the amount of available resource may be overestimated. Through the development of local General Plans, it is expected that local jurisdictions will identify areas suitable for the extraction of aggregate and other materials. The City's General Plan Resource Conservation Element does not designate the project site, or any site in the vicinity of the proposed project, for mineral extraction. S2 The project site has long been used for light industrial uses, and the project proposes to redevelop the site into mixed use comprised of residential, 51 Mineral Land Use Classification Map, Claremont -Upland P -C Region, California Division and Mines and Geology, Quasti Quadrangle, Special Report 143, Plate 6.9. 1987. 52 Chapter 6: Resource Conservation. Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. Figure RC -2: Regionally Significant Aggregate Resources. May 19, 2010. 82 E6—E 11P207 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT office, and commercial uses. 'Because the project area surrounding the site contains residential, commercial, and office land uses, sand and gravel operation on the site would be incompatible with regards to noise, dust, truck traffic, and possibly vibration on the surrounding land uses. In 2009, several areas within the City with the potential for aggregate recovery were prioritized for urban uses and petitioned to have their mineral resource designations removed from SMARA maps due to anticipated adjacent land use incompatibility. As detailed in Exhibit 4.11-2 of the City's General Plan EIR, the project site is not located within an area determined regionally significant for aggregate resources 53 Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur from the loss of State designated mineral resources and no mitigation is required. b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effect: The City's General Plan Resource Conservation Element does not designate the site for mineral extraction.54 No impact will occur and no mitigation is required. 53 Section 4.11 - Mineral Resources. Rancho Cucamonga 2010 General Plan Update Draft Program Environmental Impact Report. SCH No. 2000061027. Exhibit 4.11-2, Regionally Significant Aggregate Resources. February 16, 2010. 54 Chapter 6: Resource Conservation. Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. Figure RC -2: Regionally Significant Aggregate Resources. May 19, 2010. 83 E6—E 11P208 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 3.12 NOISE Would the project: Less than Significant Potentially with Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Result in exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general ❑ ❑x ❑ ❑ plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b. Result in exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne ❑ ❑ O ❑ vibration or groundborne noise levels? C. Result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ above levels existing without the project? d. Result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the ❑ ❑ project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport ❑ ❑ or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? An Acoustical Study was prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc. (July 2017) for short-term and long- term noise impacts of the proposed project. This study is included as Appendix G to this Initial Study. Noise is generally defined as sound that is loud, unpleasant, unexpected, or unwanted that interferes with or disrupts normal activities. Ambient noise constitutes noise levels that are normal or the existing level of environmental noise at a given location. Because of the ways that different people perceive noise, in any given noise environment a variety of reactions can be expected, ranging from serious annoyance to no awareness. Sound is a disturbance created by a moving or vibrating source and is capable of being detected by the hearing organs. A continuous sound is described by its frequency (pitch) and its amplitude (loudness). Frequency relates to the number of pressure oscillations per second. These oscillations per second (cycles) are commonly referred to as Hertz (Hz). The amplitude of a sound determines it loudness and is measured in decibels (dB). The loudness of sound increases or decreases, as the amplitude increases or 84 E6—E 11P209 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT decreases. Decibels are measured using a logarithmic scale; thus, the average person perceives a change in sound level of about 10 d6 as a doubling (or halving) of the sound's loudness. In general, the healthy human ear is most sensitive to sounds between 1,000 Hz and 5,000 Hz, (A - weighted scale) and it perceives a sound within that range as being more intense than a sound with a higher or lower frequency with the same magnitude. For purposes of this report as well as with most environmental documents, the A -scale weighting is typically reported in terms of A -weighted decibel (dBA). Typically, the human ear can barely perceive the change in noise level of 3 de. A change in 5 dB is readily perceptible, and a change in 10 dB is perceived as being twice or half as loud. A doubling of sound energy results in a 3 dB increase in sound, which means that a doubling of sound energy (e.g. doubling the volume of traffic on a highway), would result in a barely perceptible change in sound level. Because community noise fluctuates over time, a single measure called the Equivalent Sound Level (Leq) is often used to describe the time -varying character of community noise. The Leq is the energy -averaged A -weighted sound level during a measured time interval, and is equal to the level of a continuous steady sound containing the same total acoustical energy over the averaging time period as the actual time - varying sound. Another sound measure known as the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) is an adjusted average A -weighted sound level for a 24-hour day. It is calculated by adding a 5 dB adjustment to sound levels during evening hours (7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.) and a 10 dB adjustment to sound levels during nighttime hours (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.). These adjustments compensate for the increased sensitivity to noise during the typically quieter evening and nighttime hours. The CNEL is used by the State of California and the City to evaluate land use compatibility with respect to transportation noise. The site is located in a predominantly urbanized area. There are existing office uses to the north along 26`h Street, commercial and office uses to the east of the project site along Haven Avenue, and residential uses located west of the site, across Marine Avenue. A vacant lot is located adjacent to south of the project site. The primary source of traffic noise will come from the adjacent Haven Avenue. Construction activities within the project area will consist of demolition, site preparation, on-site mass grading, building, paving, and coating. These noise impacts are discussed below. a. Result in exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Discussion of Effects: Short -Term (Construction) Noise Project -generated construction noise will vary depending on the construction process, type of equipment involved, location of the construction site with respect to sensitive receptors, the schedule proposed to carry out each task (e.g., hours and days of the week) and the duration of the construction work. Table 3.12.A lists construction noise for individual construction equipment. Site preparation (grading) is expected to produce the highest sustained construction noise levels. Typical operating cycles for these types of construction equipment may involve one or two minutes of full power operation followed by three to four minutes at lower power settings. A likely worst-case construction noise scenario assuming the use of this equipment was calculated using the Federal Highway Administration's Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM) assuming the use of a grader, a dozer, two excavators, two 85 E6—E11P210 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT tractors, and two scrapers at 150 feet from the nearest sensitive receptor." Assuming a use factor of 40 percent for each piece of equipment, unmitigated noise levels at 150 feet would reach 78 dBA Leq and 82 dBA Lma,. The average distance of the construction equipment would be at least 150 feet from any existing residence." Table 3.12.A: Construction -Related Noise Calculations (dBA) Construction Phase Type of Equipment Quantity Calculated Noise Level at 50 feet (dBA) L.. Combined Noise Level at 150 feet (dBA) I.M. Leq Grading Dozers 1 85 82 78 Scrapers 2 87 Tractor/Backhoe 2 80 Excavators 2 86 Graders 1 86 Building Construction Cranes 1 82 77 73 Forklift/Tractor 3 80 Generators 1 80 Tractor/Backhoe 3 80 Paving Pavers 2 86 79 75 Rollers 2 80 Paving Equipment 2 80 Other Equipment Summary Rock Drills — 96 — — Jack Hammers — 82 — — Pneumatic Tools — 85 — — Pumps — 80 — — Haul Trucks — 88 — — Front -End Loaders — 86 — — AirCompressors — 86 — — Trucks — 86 — — Source: Table 16, Haven Avenue Mixed use DevelopmentAcpustica/Study, RK Engineering, June 27, 2018 (Appendix G). dBA = A -weighted decibels Lm., = Maximum Instantaneous sound level Ly = Equivalent continuous sound level Construction noise is considered a short-term impact and would be considered significant if construction activities are undertaken outside the allowable times as described by the City's Municipal Code 17.66.050(D)(4). ss The estimated construction equipment usage is generally based on the default construction equipment assumptions from the Haven Avenue at 26r" Street Mixed Use Development Air Quality and GHG Study (Appendix A). However, two additional pieces of equipment have been added to the noise analysis model to estimate worst-case noise impacts. The noise analysis considers the potential noise impact of eight total pieces of equipment operating during the grading phase, Including two scrappers, as a worst-case scenario. S6 Although the nearest sensitive receptors are located approximately 82 feet from the project site's western property line, the project's combined construction noise level is measured at 150 feet from the nearest sensitive receptor since construction activities would occur throughout the project site, primarily at distances greater than 150 feet from the nearest sensitive receptors. Eli E6—El1P211 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT a) When adjacent to a residential land use, school, church or similar type of use, the noise generating activity does not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday, and provided noise levels created do not exceed the noise standard of 65 dBA when measured at the adjacent property line. b) When adjacent to a commercial or industrial use, the noise -generating activity does not take place between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday and Sunday, and provided noise levels created do not exceed the noise standards of 70 dBA when measured at the adjacent property line. The existing single-family detached residential dwellings located west of Marine Avenue west of the project site may be affected by short-term noise impacts associated with demolition, the transport of workers, the movement of construction materials to and from the project site, ground clearing, excavation, grading, and building activities. While project construction would adhere to the City's permitted construction hours, the construction noise impact would be above the City's noise limit and therefore additional mitigation measures are required to reduce the noise levels down to 65 dBA. Project construction would need to achieve a 13 dB reduction in order to be in compliance with the City's noise standard. Therefore, a temporary 14 -foot tall (or higher) barrier with a minimum STC -27 rating (or higher) shall be placed along the western property line to shield existing residences from construction noise. With the implementation of Mitigation Measure NOH, a temporary barrier would be utilized to reduce construction noise levels during the loudest phase (site preparation/grading) to 65 dBA (78 dBA —13 dBA = 65 dBA) when measured at the adjacent residential property line. Additionally, Mitigation Measure NOI-2 would ensure noise -attenuating practices and devices are implemented during project construction. Therefore, the proposed project short-term (construction) noise impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. Mitigation Measures MM NOI-1 Construction Noise Monitoring and Temporary Noise Barriers. Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards specified in City of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 17.66.050, as measured at the adjacent property line. During construction, the applicant shall perform weekly noise level monitoring. The findings of the noise monitoring shall be reported to the Building Official and City Planning Department on a monthly basis; however, the Building Official and City Planning Department must be notified immediately if noise levels exceed 65 dBA when measured at the adjacent residential property line or 70 dBA when measured at the adjacent commercial or industrial property line per the City of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 17.66.050. If noise levels exceed 65 dBA or 70 dBA at the adjacent residential or commercial/industrial property lines, respectively, construction activities shall be halted, reduced in intensity to a level of compliance, or temporary construction noise barriers shall be used. The project shall implement a temporary 14 -foot barrier with a minimum STC -27 (or higher) along the western property line during construction to shield existing residences from construction and achieve a 13 dBA reduction in noise levels to within the City's exterior noise limit of 65 dBA when measured at the adjacent residential property line. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Building Official and City Planning Department. MM NOI-2 Construction Noise -Attenuating Practices and Devices. The following noise -attenuating practices and devices would be implemented by the construction contractor during project construction: 87 E6—E11P212 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Construction staging areas would be located as far from 'noise -sensitive land uses as feasible. • During construction, the contractor shall ensure all construction equipment is equipped with appropriate noise -attenuating devices. Idling equipment shall be turned off when not in use. Equipment shall be maintained so that vehicles and their loads are secured from rattling and banging. Long -Term (Operational) Noise Interior Noise. Based on the data provided in the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Protective Noise Levels (EPA 550/9-79-100, November 1979), standard homes in Southern California provide at least 12 dBA of noise exterior to interior noise attenuation with windows open and 20 dBA with windows closed. The anticipated interior noise level at the project site would range between 46 and 55.7 dBA CNEL with the "windows closed." To meet the City's interior 45 dBA CNEL standard, a "windows closed" condition upgraded glazing is required. The project building assembly design must achieve a minimum noise reduction of 30.7 dBA (75.7 dBA — 45 dBA = 30.7 dBA). With the implementation Mitigation Measures NOI-3 through NOI-5, an interior noise study shall be conducted to ensure the proposed project's noise levels would be in compliance with City's and California Title 24 standards. Therefore, the proposed project long-term (operational) noise impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. Mitigation Measures MM NOI-3: Construction Techniques. Prior to issuance of occupancy permits, the project shall incorporate building construction techniques that achieve the City's interior 45 dBA CNEL standard. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Building Official and City Planning Department. MM NOI-4: Interior Sound Attenuation Study. Prior to issuance of building permits, the project proponent shall demonstrate to the City Building Department that the proposed building shell assembly and window assemblies will achieve exterior to interior noise reduction that will meet the State/City Building Code requirement of 45 dBA CNEL. Based on the building plans, an interior sound attenuation study shall be prepared and submitted to the City confirming findings. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Building Official and City Planning Department. MM NOI-5: Compliance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Noise Regulations and California Title 24. The project shall comply with California Title 24 insulation building requirements for multifamily dwelling units for common separating assemblies (e.g., floor/ceiling assemblies and demising walls). This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Building Official and City Planning Department. Roadway Noise. The Noise Study calculated the potential off-site noise impacts caused by the increase in vehicular traffic from the operation of the proposed project on the nearby roadways. Table 3.12.8 provides the noise level calculated at 100 feet from the centerline (representative of the nearest homes along the study area roadway) under the existing conditions compared to 2040 with project conditions, as well as 2040 without project conditions compared to 2040 with project conditions. As shown in Table 3.12.8, existing noise levels range from 57.1 dBA CNEL to 74.1 dBA CNEL. Therefore, many of the existing M E6—E11P213 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT traffic noise conditions along adjacent roadways exceed the City's residential noise standards of 60 dBA (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) and 65 dBA (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.). It takes an increase of 3 dBA increase or decrease in noise level to hear an audible difference. As shown in Table 3.12.B, the proposed project does not increase the noise level by 3 dBA. Therefore, the proposed project's impacts from roadway noise would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. Table 3.12.8: Traffic Noise Levels (BBA CNEL) Roadway Segment CNEL at 100 feet (dBA) Combined Effect Incremental Effect Cumulatively Significant Impact? Existing 2040 Without Project 2040 With Project Difference in dBA between Existing and 2040 With Project Difference in dBA between 2040 Without Project and 2040 With Project Haven Avenue North of E. Foothill Boulevard 73.0 74.0 74.0 1.0 0.0 No Foothill Boulevard to Civic Center Drive 73.2 74.1 74.1 0.9 0.1 No Civic Center Drive to Arrow Route 73.0 74.1 74.1 1.1 0,1 No Arrow Route to 26� Street 73.4 74.3 74.4 1 0.1 No 26' Street to Jersey Boulevard 73.5 74.4 74.4 0.9 0.1 No Jersey Boulevard to 7 Street 74 0 74 9 74.9 0.9 0.1 No 7e Street to 6th Street 73.9 74.8 74.9 1.0 0.0 No South of & Street 74.1 75.3 75.3 1.2 0.0 No East Foothill Boulevard East of Haven Avenue 72.2 73.3 73.3 1.1 0.0 No West of Haven Avenue 72.1 73.3 73.3 1.2 0.0 No Civic Center Drive East of Haven Avenue 62.0 62.3 62.3 0.3 o.0 No West of Haven Avenue 60.0 62.4 62.4 2.4 0.0 No Arrow Route East of Haven Avenue 71.6 72.2 72.2 0.6 0.0 No West of Haven Avenue 71.6 72.1 72.1 0.5 0.0 No 26r Street East of Haven Avenue 57.1 57.4 57.4 0.3 0.0 No West of Haven Avenue 57.1 57.1 58.0 0.9 0.9 No Jersey Boulevard East of Haven Avenue 67.7 68.1 68.2 0.5 0.1 No 7th Street East of Haven Avenue 59.3 61.8 61.8 2.5 0.0 No West of Haven Avenue 57.7 57.7 58.0 0.3 0.3 No 60 Street East of Haven Avenue 69.6 71.5 71.5 1.9 0.0 No West of Haven Avenue 69.6 70.6 70.6 1.0 0.0 No Source: Tables 4,11-23, Hoven Avenue Mixed Use Development Acoustical Study, RK Engineering, June 27, 2018 (Appendix G). dBA=A-welghted decibels CNEL = Community Noise Level Equivalent 8') E6 -E 11P214 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Noise from Stationary Sources. The Acoustical Study projected reference noise levels to the nearest sensitive receptor location property line (west of project site). The noise levels assume that the stationary sources are operating continuously when, in reality, all noise sources will operate intermittently throughout daily operation. Table 3.12.0 depicts allowable residential noise levels. Table 3.12.D shows the projected exterior noise levels along the western property line for a typical everyday condition and demonstrates that the change in noise level as a result of the parking lot is approximately 0.5 dBA L,q above the baseline condition. It is anticipated that the project site will generate approximately 43.8 dBA Leq of noise to the nearest residence to the west. The existing ambient noise level is 52.9 dBA Leq. The project site's noise level impact is anticipated to be approximately 9.1 dBA Leq below the ambient condition. Additionally, the proposed project's impact is below the City's daytime 65 and nighttime 60 dBA noise standard. Therefore, the proposed project noise impacts from stationary sources would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. Table 3.12.0: Residential Noise Limits Location of Measurement Maximum Allowable 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Exterior 60 dBA 65 dBA Interior 45 dBA 50 dBA Source: Haven Avenue Mixed Use Development Acoustical Study, RK Engineering, June 27, 2018 (Appendix G). dBA = A -weighted decibels Table 3.12.D: Adjusted Stationary Noise Level Measurements Source: Table 15, Haven Avenue Mixed use Developmen t Acoustical Study, RK Engineering, June 27, 2018 (Appendix G). With implementation of mitigation measures, the proposed project would not result in exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local General Plan or Noise Ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. Therefore, the proposed project impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. b. Result in exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: Once operational, the proposed project would not be a source of groundborne vibration. Increases in groundborne vibration levels attributable to the proposed project would be primarily associated with short-term construction -related activities. Construction on the project site would have the potential to result in varying degrees of temporary groundborne vibration, depending on the specific construction equipment used and the operations involved. E6-E11P215 Western Property Line - Residential Adjusted Noise Levels (dBA) Distance from Reference L.S. L2 (I LA is Lis(15 Lso(30 Source Source (feet) L,q (max) min) min) min) min) Parking Lot 350 43.8 59.5 48.5 45.5 44.5 43.0 Existing Ambient Measurement — 52.9 67.2 61.1 57.6 53.2 48.5 Total Combined Noise Impact — 53.4 67.9 613 57.9 53.7 49.6 City of Ranch Cucamonga not to exceed Noise Standards — — 80.0 — 79.0 65.0 — Change in Noise Level as a Result of Project — 0.5 0.7 0.2 0.3 0.5 1.1 Source: Table 15, Haven Avenue Mixed use Developmen t Acoustical Study, RK Engineering, June 27, 2018 (Appendix G). With implementation of mitigation measures, the proposed project would not result in exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local General Plan or Noise Ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. Therefore, the proposed project impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. b. Result in exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: Once operational, the proposed project would not be a source of groundborne vibration. Increases in groundborne vibration levels attributable to the proposed project would be primarily associated with short-term construction -related activities. Construction on the project site would have the potential to result in varying degrees of temporary groundborne vibration, depending on the specific construction equipment used and the operations involved. E6-E11P215 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT The Federal Transit Administration has compiled data regarding the vibration levels for various construction equipment and activities (Table 3.12.E). The Transportation and Construction Induced Vibration Guidance Manual for the California Department of Transportation has various recommended vibration thresholds for various types of projects and land uses. According to the Konan Vibration Criteria for Historic and Sensitive Buildings, the criteria for transient vibration sources should not exceed 0.3 peak particle velocity (PPV) (Section 6 — Structures, Table 11); 0.035 inches per second PPV is barely perceptible. Table 3.12.E: Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment Equipment Peak Particle Velocity (inches/second) at 25 feet Approximate Vibration Level (LV) at 25 feet Pile driver (impact) 1.518 (upper range) 112 0.644 (typical) 104 Pile driver (sonic) 0.734 upper range 105 0.170 typical 93 Clam shovel drop (slurry wall) 0.202 94 Hydromill 0.008 in soil 66 (slurry wall) 0.017 in rock 75 Vibratory Roller 0.210 94 Hoe Ram 0.089 87 Large bulldozer 0.089 87 Caisson drill 0.089 87 Loaded trucks 0.076 86 Jackhammer 0.035 79 Small bulldozer 0.003 58 Source: Source: Table 17, Haven Avenue Mixed use Development Acoustical Study, RK Engineering, June 27, 2018 (Appendix G). Construction activities can produce vibration that may be felt by adjacent land uses. The construction of the proposed project would not require the use of equipment such as pile drivers, which are known to generate substantial construction vibration levels. The primary source vibration during construction may be from a vibratory roller during paving. A vibratory roller has a vibration impact of 0.021 inch per second PPV at 25 feet. The distance of the construction equipment will be approximately 150 feet from any existing building. It is anticipated that level would be approximately 0.098 PPV (in/sec), which is within the distinctly perceptible range but below any architectural or structural damage criterion (0.5 PPV (in/sec). The vibration impact is considered temporary and does not exceed the vibratory limits for residential structures. Therefore, the proposed project impacts would not result in exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. Impacts would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. c. Result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effect: As detailed in response to Checklist Question 3.12a, the proposed project does not increase the noise level by 3 dBA, which is threshold for when a typical human ear can barely perceive a change in noise level. Additionally, the proposed project's stationary noise impacts are anticipated to be 9.1 dBA Leq below the ambient condition (52.9 dBA Leq). Operation of the proposed project would not E6—E 11P216 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. Impacts would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. d. Result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Discussion of Effect: As detailed in response to Checklist Question 3.12a, construction of the proposed project would result in a short-term increase in noise levels in the project vicinity. Short-term noise levels associated with project construction would be substantially higher than existing ambient noise levels in the project vicinity but would cease upon project completion. When combining multiple pieces of equipment operating simultaneously, the noise level would be 78 dBA Ley during grading at 150 feet from the equipment. With the implementation Mitigation Measure NOI-1, a temporary barrier would be utilized to reduce construction noise levels during the loudest phase (site preparation/grading) to 65 dBA (78 dBA — 13 dBA = 65 dBA). Additionally, Mitigation Measure NOI-2 would ensure noise attenuating practices and devices are implemented during project construction. With implementation of mitigation measures, the proposed project would not result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. Therefore, the proposed project impacts would, be less than significant with mitigation. e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effect: The nearest airport is the Ontario International Airport (ONT) located approximately three miles south of the project site. Occasional aircraft noise can be heard in southern areas of the City; however, noise contours over 60 dBA CNEL do not extend into the City.17 The proposed project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels from a public airport or public use airport. Impacts would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact Discussion of Effect: The project site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. The nearest private airstrip, Cable Airport, is located approximately 2.5 miles west of the City and the project site is well outside any of the Cable Airport Land Use Compatibility Zones, as detailed in the Cable Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.Se Therefore, no impact related to noise from private airstrips would occur and no mitigation is required. 57 LA/0ntario International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Map 2-3, Compatibility Policy Map: Noise Impact Zones. Mead & Hunt, Inc. April 19, 2011. se Cable Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Map 3A and Page 3-3. City of Upland, September 14, 2015. 92 E6—E11P217 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 3.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING Would the project: Less than Significant Potentially with Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or ❑ 17 O 11 indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b. Displace substantial amounts of existing housing, necessitating the construction of ❑ rl ❑ ❑x replacement housing elsewhere? c. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x replacement housing elsewhere? The following discussion is based on the findings of the project -specific Fiscal Impact Analysis prepared by Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. and included as Appendix H. a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: The latest figures provided by the California Department of Finance indicate the population of the City is approximately 176,671 persons.59 As indicated in previously referenced Table 3.10.8, the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) anticipates population to continue to grow for the City and the overall Southern California region. The SCAG projects the City's population will grow to 204,300 persons by the year 2040.60 It should be noted that a Council of Governments (COG) is a regional planning and review authority whose membership includes representation from all communities in the designated region. SCAG is the designated COG for Southern California. The extent to which the new jobs created by a project are filled by existing residents of the City is a factor that tends to reduce the growth -inducing effect of a project. The proposed project would create short-term construction jobs during the construction phase. It is anticipated these short-term positions would be filled by workers who, for the most part, would reside in the general project vicinity; therefore, construction of the proposed project would not generate a permanent increase in population within the project area. E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2011-2018 with 2010 Census Benchmark. State of California Department of Finance. hftp://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/E-5/ (accessed June 20, 2018). The City's General Plan EIR bases the City's target growth forecast on regional growth forecasts detailed in SCAG's Adopted 2008 RTP Growth Forecast, by City. However, SCAG's Regional Council adopted the latest 12016-20401 Regional Transportation Pian/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) on April 7, 2016. Therefore, the analysis of the proposed project's Impacts to the City's growth forecast is based on the latest data provided in SCAG's 2016-2040 RTP/SCS. 93 E6—E 11P218 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT The project is located in a predominantly developed area and would include the construction of 193 rental dwelling units, 14 live/work units, approximately 7,300 square feet of corner retail uses, and 7,000 square feet of work space incorporated into the live -work units. As detailed in Appendix H, the Fiscal Impact Analysis prepared for the project estimates 494 residents would occupy the proposed project, assuming an occupancy rate of 2.45 persons per rental dwelling unit and 1.5 persons per live/work unit." Additionally, the proposed project would generate a, maximum employment of 45 workers, assuming 1 employee per 500 square feet of retail, 1 employee per 350 square feet of restaurant, 1 employee per 250 square feet of office, and 1.5 employees per live/work unit. The ratio of jobs to housing units in the City is used by regional planning groups to balance regional traffic commutes to minimize freeway congestion, air pollutant emissions, and greenhouse gas emissions. The jobs -to -housing ratio measures the extent to which job opportunities in a given geographic area are sufficient to meet the employment needs of area residents. This ratio identifies the number of jobs available in a given region compared to the number of housing units in the same region. For example, a region with a jobs -to -housing ratio of 1.5 would indicate that 1.5 jobs exist for every housing unit within that region. The standard used for comparison is the jobs -to -housing ratio of the SLAG region, which is currently 1.25 jobs for every household (Table 3.13.A). This standard is used because most residents of the region are employed somewhere within the SCAG region. A City or sub- region with a jobs -to -housing ratio lower than the overall standard of 1.25 jobs for every household would be considered a "jobs poor' area, indicating that many of the residents must commute to places of employment outside the sub -region. Table 3.13.A details the current and potential jobs/housing ratios forthe City, County, and SCAG. — Table 3.13.A: Existing and Future Jobs/Housing Ratios Sources: Data from Table 3.10.8 (SCAG Demographic Forecasts). The City's 2012 jobs -to -housing ratio is well above the San Bernardino County job/housing ratio and slightly higher than the SCAG regional job/housing ratio; therefore, the City may be considered "jobs balanced" relative to the greater SCAG region. By 2040, however, the City's jobs -to -housing is expected to exceed both the County's and SCAG's jobs -to -housing ratios, meaning the City would be relatively "jobs rich" and "housing poor," and additional housing within the City would be required to balance the jobs -to -housing ratio at the local level. The Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) is mandated by State Housing Law as part of the periodic process of updating local housing elements of General Plans. The RHNA quantifies the need for housing within each jurisdiction during specified planning periods. The RHNA for San Bernardino County is developed by SCAG and allocates to cities and the unincorporated county their "fair share" of the region's projected housing needs. The 5t6 Cycle RHNA Allocation Plan, which covers the planning period from January 2014 to October 2021, was adopted by SCAG on October 4, 2012. si According to the U.S. Census Bureau's 2016 American Community Survey, 1 -Year Public Use Microdots Sample, the average size of rental units in Rancho Cucamonga is 2.45 persons per unit (see Table A-1 in Appendix H). The population for the live/work units is estimated at 1.5 persons per unit by the fiscal consultant based on a survey of similar units in Rancho Cucamonga. 94 E6—Ell P219 2012 Ratio 2040 Ratio City of Rancho Cucamonga 1.26 1.43 San Bernardino County 1.07 1.17 Southern California Association of Governments 1.25 1.34 Sources: Data from Table 3.10.8 (SCAG Demographic Forecasts). The City's 2012 jobs -to -housing ratio is well above the San Bernardino County job/housing ratio and slightly higher than the SCAG regional job/housing ratio; therefore, the City may be considered "jobs balanced" relative to the greater SCAG region. By 2040, however, the City's jobs -to -housing is expected to exceed both the County's and SCAG's jobs -to -housing ratios, meaning the City would be relatively "jobs rich" and "housing poor," and additional housing within the City would be required to balance the jobs -to -housing ratio at the local level. The Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) is mandated by State Housing Law as part of the periodic process of updating local housing elements of General Plans. The RHNA quantifies the need for housing within each jurisdiction during specified planning periods. The RHNA for San Bernardino County is developed by SCAG and allocates to cities and the unincorporated county their "fair share" of the region's projected housing needs. The 5t6 Cycle RHNA Allocation Plan, which covers the planning period from January 2014 to October 2021, was adopted by SCAG on October 4, 2012. si According to the U.S. Census Bureau's 2016 American Community Survey, 1 -Year Public Use Microdots Sample, the average size of rental units in Rancho Cucamonga is 2.45 persons per unit (see Table A-1 in Appendix H). The population for the live/work units is estimated at 1.5 persons per unit by the fiscal consultant based on a survey of similar units in Rancho Cucamonga. 94 E6—Ell P219 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT The projected housing needs in the RHNA are categorized by income levels (very low, low, moderate, and above moderate income) established by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). According to the Allocation Plan, the City will need to accommodate a total of 848 units in various income categories during this time, including 209 very low-income, 141 low-income, 158 moderate -income, and 340 above moderate -income housing units. Typically, growth -inducing potential of a project would be considered significant if it fosters growth or a concentration of population in excess of what is assumed in pertinent master plans and land use plans. Significant growth impacts could also occur if the project provides infrastructure or service capacity to accommodate growth beyond the levels currently permitted by local or regional plans and policies. Development of the proposed project and other projects in the City and in San Bernardino County would lead to increases in population, housing, and employment. The proposed project wouldinvolve development of 207 residential units (494 new residents) and approximately 45 net new jobs that would likely be filled by the local labor,pool.'However, as detailed in previously referenced Table 3.10.13, SCAG estimates that there could be approximately 204,300 people, 73,100 households, and 104,600 jobs in the City by 2040. The proposed project's growth would represent a negligible amount of the future growth forecast in the City (approximately 0.24 percent of the projected 2040 City population, 0.28 percent of the projected 2040 City householdsi and 0.000043 percent of the projected 2040 City jobs). The addition of 494 residents and 45 employees within the City would result in population growth within the City; however, this additional population is consistent with the City, County, and regional (SLAG) growth projections depicted in Table 3.10.8. The City's General Plan has a year 2025 to 2030 buildout horizon; however, the General Plan does not specify or anticipate when complete buildout would occur," as long-range demographic and economic trends are difficult to predict. The designation within the General Plan of a site for a certain use does not necessarily mean that ,the site would be developed with that use during the planning period, as most, development depends on property owner initiative. Although the project site's existing land use and zoning designation is Industrial Park, an increase in residential uses beyond that which was planned for by the City at General Plan buildout would contribute to the balance of the City's current and future jobs -to -housing ratio consistent with both the ISCAG forecasts and the growth forecasts for the City, as detailed in Table 3.13.A. The project would accommodate overall planned growth in the City and the SCAG region, and it would contribute to meeting the City's RHNA requirement. Additionally, the project site is located within an urbanized area and would be connected to existing municipal roadways and utility infrastructure. The project would not include the construction of new roadways or infrastructure beyond that which would serve only the project site. Therefore, the project would not induce substantial population growth,in an area, either directly or indirectly: Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. b. Displace substantial amounts of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact Discussion of Effects: The proposed project does not contain any existing housing. The site is currently occupied by an industrial warehouse and staging yard.. Since the proposed project would not displace 62. The City's target growth forecasts for the General Plan horizon year are basedon regional growth forecasts detailed in SCAG's.Adopted 2008 RTP Growth Forecast, by City. However, the analysis of the proposed project's impacts to the City's growth forecast is based on the latest data provided in SCAG's 2016-2040 RTP/SCS. - W E6—E11 P220 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT any existing housing, the construction of replacement housing elsewhere is not required. No impact would occur and no mitigation is required. c. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact Discussion of Effects: Please refer to response to Checklist Question 3.13b. M E6—E11P221 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 3.14 PUBLIC SERVICES Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause Less than significant environmental impacts, in order to Significant maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or Potentially with Less than other performance objectives for any of the public Significant Mitigation Significant No services: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Fire protection? ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ Police protection? ❑ ❑ % ❑ Schools? ❑ ❑ 21 ❑ Parks? ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: Fire Protection. The Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (RCFPD) provides fire protection services for the City. The RCFPD employs over 120 full-time and part-time employees that serve over 176,000 residents within a 50 -square mile area, which equates to one RCFPD employee per every 1,467 residents. Fire, rescue, emergency medical and hazardous materials incidents are coordinated by an on - duty Battalion Chief supervising cross -trained firefighter/paramedics and firefighter/emergency medical technicians responding from seven fire stations. The closest RCFPD station to the project site is Fire Station 174, located approximately 1.1 miles east of the project site at 11297 Jersey Boulevard. Average travel time between the fire station and the project site is approximately three minutes, and through compliance with California Vehicle Code 21806(A)(1), requiring all vehicles to yield to emergency vehicles, travel time between the nearest fire station and the project site is not expected to exceed three minutes. The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) maintains a four -minute response time standard for first responders 90 percent of the time, and the project site's proximity to Fire Station 174 would not preclude the RCFPD's ability to meet the NFPA standard. Additionally, the City maintains mutual aid agreements with surrounding cities (i.e., Fontana, Ontario, Upland), as well as with the County of San Bernardino and the United States Forest Service, which allow for the services of nearby fire departments to assist the City during major emergencies. Design features incorporated into the structural design and layout of the proposed project would keep service demand increases to a minimum. For example, the project will be constructed in accordance with the 2016 CBC which requires all on-site structures to incorporate construction techniques and materials such as roofs, eaves, exterior walls, vents, appendages, windows, and doors resistant to and/ or to perform at high levels against ignition during the exposure to fires. Fire sprinklers would be incorporated into the building design to further reduce fire risk and service demand. Additionally, the proposed project includes a Fire Access Plan, subject to review and approval by the RCFPD. The Fire Access Plan will further lessen the future demand for fire protection services by ensuring effective and efficient response through design of on-site roadways in accordance with RCFPD standards so that any necessary fire department apparatuses have adequate emergency access and are provided sufficient 97 E6—E 11P222 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT distance to all areas of the project site to ensure sufficient fire hose reach, as necessary. Incorporation of such project design features is a required standard condition (Rancho Cucamonga Standard Condition 4.14.1) for all development in the City." . The proposed project would replace an existing warehouse and parking lot with a mixed-use development consisting of two buildings with 207 apartments (193 dwelling units and 14 live/work units), approximately 7,300 square feet of corner retail uses, and 7,000 square feet of work space within the 14 live/work units. Approximately 494 new residents and 45 net new jobs could be introduced to the City, which may incrementally increase the demand for fire protection services. However, based on the proposed project's location in a relatively low fire hazard severity zone 14 in proximity to existing RCFPD facilities capable of responding to emergencies at the project site within the NFPA standard, and in conjunction with design features incorporated into the structural design and layout of the proposed project in order to keep service demand increases to a minimum (Rancho Cucamonga Standard Condition 4.14-1), development of the proposed project would not cause fire staffing, facilities, or equipment to operate at a deficient level of service necessitating construction of new or renovated facilities that could result in an environmental impact. As stated previously, the current service ratio maintained by the RCFPD is one RCFPD employee per every 1,467 residents. The addition of approximately 539 additional residents/employees to the City would require less than one additional RCFPD employee in order to maintain baseline conditions. The proposed project would be required to pay service and development fees to the RCFPD. Such fees would be used to fund capital costs associated with acquiring land for new fire stations, constructing new fire stations, purchasing fire equipment, and providing for additional staff as needed and as identified by the City. Any construction of future fire protection facilities in the City would require project -level environmental review and site-specific mitigation as appropriate in order to ensure significant environmental impacts are avoided or mitigated. It is reasonable to conclude that the addition of one RCFPD employee in order to maintain baseline conditions would occur within existing RCFPD facilities and would not generate demand for new or physically altered governmental facilities or need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts. Therefore, impacts associated with the need to expand fire protection services and facilities in order to maintain acceptable levels of service would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. Police Protection. The City contracts with the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department (SBCSD) to provide police protection services. The SBCSD employs over 187 sheriff's personnel that serve over 176,000 residents within the City, which equates to one RCCSD employee per every 944 residents .6' The closest sheriff's station is located at 10510 Civic Center Drive in the City, approximately 0.5 mile northeast of the project site. Average travel time between the sheriff's station and the project site is approximately two minutes, and through compliance with California Vehicle Code 21806(A)(1), requiring all vehicles to yield to emergency vehicles, travel time between the nearest sheriff's station and the 63 Section 4.14 - Public Services. Rancho Cucamonga 2010 General Plan Update Draft Program Environmental Impact Report. SCH No. 2000061027. Page 4.14-9. February 16, 2010. 64 Chapter 8: Public Health and Safety. Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. Figure PS -1: Fire Hazard Severity Zones. May 19, 2010. 65 Rancho Cucamonga Patrol Station. San Bernardino County Sheriffs Department. http://cros.sbcounty.gov///.aspx (accessed April 3, 2018). 98 E6—E11 P223 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT project site is not expected to exceed two minutes. As of December 2017, average police response time for emergency service calls is 4 minutes, 51 seconds." The project would incorporate crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED) features to keep service demand increases to a minimum. For example, demolition of the on-site structure would eliminate places of concealment for potential assailants. Future development of the project site would incorporate public zones and private zones via physical and symbolic barriers to define acceptable uses of the proposed on-site facilities and determine who has a right to occupy such zones. Additionally, future development would be equipped with formal surveillance through the use of closed-circuit television, electronic monitoring, and potential security patrols, as well as informal surveillance such as architecture, landscaping, and lighting designed to minimize visual obstacles and eliminate places of concealment for potential assailants. The proposed project would replace an existing warehouse and parking lot with a mixed -used development consisting of two buildings with 207 apartments (193 dwelling units and 14 live/work units), approximately 7,300 square feet of corner retail uses, and 7,000 square feet of work space within the 14 live/work units. Approximately 494 new residents and 45 net new jobs could be introduced to the City, which may incrementally increase the demand for police protection services. However, CPTED design features will be incorporated into the structural design and layout of the proposed project in order to keep service demand increases to a minimum. Based on the proposed project's location in proximity to existing SBCSD facilities capable of responding to emergencies at the project site within the City's average police response time of 4 minutes, 51 seconds, development of the proposed project would not cause police staffing, facilities, or equipment to operate at a deficient level of service necessitating construction of new or renovated facilities that could result in an environmental impact. As stated previously, the current service ratio maintained by the SBCSD is one SBCSD employee per every 944 residents. The addition of approximately 539 additional residents/employees to the City would require less than one additional SBCSD employee in order to maintain baseline conditions. The City does not base service standards on an industry standard; however, the City recognizes that future development and population growth would adversely affect the SBCSD response time, which would be mitigated through the hiring of additional staff, as needed, to be funded through existing funding mechanisms such as the general fund revenue and grant funding. 17 The proposed project would be required to pay service and development fees to the City. Such fees would be used to fund capital costs associated with acquiring land for new sheriff's stations, constructing new sheriff's stations, purchasing crime prevention equipment, and providing for additional staff as needed and as identified by the City. Any construction of future police protection facilities in the City would require project -level environmental review and site-specific mitigation as appropriate in order to ensure significant environmental impacts are avoided or mitigated. It is reasonable to conclude that the addition of one SBCSD employee in order to maintain baseline conditions would occur within existing SBCSD facilities and would not generate demand for new or physically altered governmental facilities or need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts. Therefore, impacts associated with the need to expand police protection services and facilities in order to maintain acceptable levels of service would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. 66 Measuring Average Police Response Times for Emergency Service Calls in 2017. City of Rancho Cucamonga. https://performance.cityofrc.us////i-wfck/r-gwng/fxm/(accessed April 3, 2018). 67 Section 4.14 - Public Services. Rancho Cucamonga 2010 General Plan Update Draft Program Environmental Impact Report. SCH No. 2000061027. Page 4.14-10. February 16, 2010. W E6—El1P224 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Schools. Impacts to school services are primarily driven by increases in permanent population; therefore, student generation is estimated based on the number of proposed residential units. Table 3.14.A provides an estimate of the number of K-12 grade level students that would be generated by buildout of the proposed project's residential uses. The estimates use student generation rates provided by each district. These student generation rates are used by school districts to estimate the number of students generated by new development in order to determine whether or not existing school facilities would be adequate forfuture students. Based on the Cucamonga School District School Boundary Map, the project site falls within the Cucamonga School District (CSD) boundaries. The CSD provides schooling for children in kindergarten through 8" grade, after which these students enter into the Chaffey Joint Union High School District (GUHSD). The project would be served by the Cucamonga Elementary School and the Rancho Cucamonga Middle School within the CSD, and Chaffey High School and Valley View High School within the GUHSD. For the 2016-2017 school year, enrollment for Cucamonga Elementary School was 560 students,68 enrollment for Rancho Cucamonga Middle School was 769 students,69 enrollment for Chaffey High School was 3,268 students,70 and enrollment for Valley View High School was 446 students." As shown in Table 3.14.A, construction of the proposed 207 dwelling units could generate up to approximately 45 new students. Both school districts are operating in excess of their total capacity. With implementation of the proposed project and subsequent generation of new students, anticipated student enrollment would continue to exceed the current design capacity for schools in the CSD and GUHSD. Table 3.14.A: Student Generation School District Grade Level Multifamily Dwelling Unit Student Generation Rate'"2 Estimated Students Existing Enrollment Total Capacity Cucamonga School District K-8 0.13 27 2,515 2,478 Chaffey Joint Union High School District 9-12 0.085 18 23,894 22,927 Sources: School Accountability Report Card. 2018. Cucamonga School District. http://cucamonga-ca.schoollwp.com/pf4/cros2/ view-paged=x&group_id=1516954841924&vdid=il44eh18grgialph. (Accessed June 21, 2018). School Accountability Report Cards. 2018. Chaffey Joint Union High School District. https://cjuhsd.ca.schoolloop.com/cros/ page view?d=x&pled=&vpid=1304410582453. (Accessed lune 21, 2018). 1 Cucamonga School District. lune 21, 2018. Personal Communication. Telephone call between Dionisios Glentis (ISA) and Rick Jensen (Cucamonga School District Assistant Superintendent of Business Services) with Information about Student Generation Factors. 2 Chaffey Joint Union High School District. June 21, 2018- Personal Communication. Email between Dionisios Glentis (LSA) and Philip Schuler (Chaffey Joint Union High School District Executive Director of Assessment and Research) with information about Student Generation Factors. In accordance with California Government Code 65995 and Education Code 17620, "The payment or satisfaction of a fee, charge, or other requirement levied or imposed ... are hereby deemed to be full and complete mitigation of the impacts ... on the provision of adequate school facilities." Therefore, through 66 Student Accountability Report Card. Reported using Data from the 2016-2017 School Year; published during 2017-2018. Cucamonga Elementary School. http://cucamonga-ca.schoolloop.com////.pdf (accessed June 21, 2018). 69 Student Accountability Report Card. Reported using Data from the 2016-2017 School Year; published during 2017-2018. Rancho Cucamonga Middle School. http://cucamonga-ca.schoolloop.com/file/1516954841972/1400653951698/ 2874676397045692766.pdf(accessed June 21, 2018). 70 Student Accountability Report Card, 2016-2017 School Activity; published in January 2018. Chaffey High School. http://cjuhsd-ca.schoolloop.com/file/1325749002465/1309101244690/3294332944304051021.pdf (accessed July 16, 2018). 71 Student Accountability Report Card. 2016-2017 School Activity; published in January 2018. Valley View High School. h"P:Hcjuhsd-ca.schoolloop.com/file/1325749002465/1309101244690/3323546855830417435.pdf (accessed June 21, 2018). 100 E6—E 11P225 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT payment of development fees pursuant to Section 65995 of the California Government Code to fund future school facilities and services, which would be subject to site-specific environmental review, impacts associated with the need to expand school services and facilities in order to maintain acceptable levels of service would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. Parks/Recreational Facilities. Please refer to the response to Checklist Question 3.15a. Other Public Facilities. The addition of 494 residents and 45 employees within the City would represent an incremental increase (0.3 percent) of the City's overall population of 176,671 persons and a corresponding incremental increase in the demand for public services, including libraries. According to the City's General Plan EIR, future development and population growth would adversely affect the service capacities of public facilities such as libraries, which would be mitigated through implementation of the goals and policies (PF 3.1 through PF 3.6) identified in the Public Facilities and Infrastructure element of the City's General Plan 12 and detailed in Table 3.14.13. The City requires that certain types of development pay impact fees to compensate for additional services provided by public facilities as a result of project implementation. The City requires development impact fees for libraries and animal centers based on the number of residential units proposed by the development. As of March 1, 2018, the City charges $417 per multi -family residential dwelling unit for library development (total of $86,319) and $90 per multi -family residential dwelling unit for animal center development (total of $18,630)." The proposed project would replace an existing industrial use with a mixed -used development. The proposed project may incrementally increase the demand for public facilities; however, as required for a development of this type, the proposed project is subject to development impact fees imposed by the City in order to offset increased demand for public facilities. Any construction of future public facilities in the City would require project -level environmental review and site-specific mitigation as appropriate in order to ensure significant environmental impacts are avoided or mitigated. Since payment of the City's development impact fees would finance and support the implementation of the goals and policies (PF 3.1 through PF 3.6) identified in the Public Facilities and Infrastructure element of the City's General Plan 74 and detailed in Table 3.14.8 for the purposes of mitigating adverse effects to service capacities of public facilities such as libraries, impacts related to this issue would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. ]i Section 4.14 -Public Services. Rancho Cucamonga 2010 General Plan Update Draft Program Environmental Impact Report. SCH No. 2000061027. Page 4.14-11. February 16, 2010. 73 Engineering Fees. City of Rancho Cucamonga. Updated March 1, 2018. 74 Section 4.14 - Public Services. Rancho Cucamonga 2010 General Plan Update Draft Program Environmental Impact Report. SCH No. 2000061027. Page 4.14-11. February 16, 2010. 101 E6—E11 P226 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Table 3.14.6: Proposed Project's Consistency with the City's General Pian City's General Plan Policy or Goal Proposed Project's Consistency with General Plan Goal or Policy Public Facilities and Infrastructure Element GOAL PF -3: Provide high-quality Consistent. The City requires development impact fees for public facilities such as libraries library resources to meet the based on the number of residential units proposed by the development. As of March 1, educational, cultural, civic, and 2018, the City charges $417 per multi -family residential dwelling unit's which would business needs of all residents. equate to $86,319 in order to support the City's goal of providing high quality library resources to the public. Policy PF -3.1: Continue to provide Consistent. The City intends to expand current levels of service by expanding document high-quality library services to the collections, improving storage capacity, providing expanded hours of operation, providing community, including supporting the continuous on-line access, and diversifying outlet (physical access) locations. Through Archibald Library and Paul A. Biane payment of the required development impact fees ($86,319), the proposed project would Library. help finance and support the City's intention of expanding current levels of service. Policy PF -3.2: Continue to improve the Consistent. The City strategy to Improve the high quality of library services involves a local Libraries system, complete with three -tiered approach, each of which seeks to continue the cost effectiveness of library community facilities that provide services under ever-changing circumstances. Short-term strategies focus on achieving knowledgeable, service- oriented staff maximum service with existing facilities and seeking a variety of non -conventional outlets and offer access to information, books, for library materials to supplement the libraries and the bookmobile now in use. and other materials in a variety of Intermediate strategies focus on possibly adding library facilities in the most underserved formats, including emerging areas of the City and continually expanding use of technology. Long-term strategies technologies. Consider future options encompass a new and expandable main library, expanding the eastern branch, and for providing library services that are continued use of technology to diversify access modes. Through payment of the required flexible, and will maximize library development impact fees ($86,319), the proposed project would help finance and support services white keeping costs affordable. the City's intention of improving the high quality of library services. Policy PF -3.3: Continue to foster Consistent. The strategy for sustaining quality services is focused on preserving pride in the Library as a place for the community pride, not only in terms of superior access to reading and research materials, entire community. but also in terms of creativity in providing those services. The proposed project would foster pride in the City's public library services by introducing residents expected to utilize the public library. Policy PF -3.4: Lead by example by Consistent. Considering the full life -cycle costs of new public library facilities and successfully considering the full Improvements can provide economic and environmental benefits to the City. Designing "lifecycle" cost for new public library new facilities to utilize natural processes such as lighting, heating, and cooling can help facilities and Improvements to reduce the use of energy needed to operate library facilities as well as reduce operating existing library facilities. costs. Actualizing a successful building model for developing facilities that reduces life- cycle costs can provide a template for other public facilities as well as private development to follow. Through payment of the required development impact fees ($86,319), the proposed project would help finance and support the City's intention of developing facilities that reduce life -cycle costs. Policy PF -3.5: Assist and support life- Consistent. Technical skills such as computer skills and access to comprehensive materials long learning for adults through are beneficial to adults for numerous reasons. Learning new computer skills can help computer training programs and improve job prospects for adults entering the work force or changing careers, and it can comprehensive library collections. help improve job skills of those adults currently employed. Life-long learning also helps exercise and expand the mind for those adults seeking to satisfy personal enrichment goals. Through payment of the required development impact fees ($86,319), the proposed project would help finance and support the City's policy of supporting life-long learning for adults. Policy PF -3.6: Encourage non- Consistent. Inclusivity is a strong theme in the City. Activities and resources provided in exclusive, cross -generational cultural the City need to appeal and be accessible to everyone. This means the City will encourage activities and resources that are a wide array of programs, activities, and resources that can be utilized by anyone of any accessible to people of all ages and age, race, sex, fitness and health level, and are accessible to everyone regardless of where backgrounds. they live in the community. Through payment of the required development Impact fees ($86,319), the proposed project would help finance and support the City's policy of inclusivity of public facilities for all residents. Source: Pages PF -30 and PF -31. Chapter 7: Public Focllltles and Infrostructure. Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. May 19, 2010. 75 Engineering Fees. City of Rancho Cucamonga. Updated March 1, 2018. 102 E6—E 11P227 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26T" MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 3.15 RECREATION Would the project: Less than Significant Potentially with Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b. Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational ❑ ❑ 9 ❑ facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? a. Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such I that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: The project site is in a developed area of the City, and the nearest park is Old Town Park located at 10033 Feron Boulevard, approximately 0.5 mile west of the project site. In compliance with Chapter 3.52, Community and Recreation Center Impact Fee, and Chapter 3.68, Park In-Lieu/Park Impacts Fees, of the City's Municipal Code, the project applicant is required to pay development impact fees collected to fund the expansion of park and recreation center assets and community and recreation center assets in the City to serve new residential development. The .City of Rancho Cucamonga 2014 Development Impact Fee Study -analyzes the impact of development on certain capital facilities and calculates impact fees based on that analysis.76 The methods used to calculate impact fees in the study are intended to satisfy relevant legal requirements, including the California Mitigation Fee Act and, where applicable, the Quimby Act. The Development Impact Fee Study calculates two broad types of development fees for parks: fees for park land acquisition, and fees for park improvements. Fees for park improvements are impact fees regardless of whether the project involves a subdivision and are intended to offset the costs associated with increased maintenance and the addition of park facilities resulting from new development. The City's park impact fees are generated based on the number of residential units in either subdivision or non -subdivision developments. As of March 1, 2018, the City charges $1,839 per multi -family residential dwelling unit for park improvements (total of $380,673) and $1,255 per multi -family residential dwelling unit for community and recreation center improvements (total of $259,785)." The City continues to routinely monitor its park facilities and fund and improve those facilities as identified in the City's Capital Improvement Plan. Through compliance with Chapter 3.52, Community and Recreation Center Impact Fee, and Chapter 3.68, Park In-Lieu/Park Impacts Fees, of the City's Municipal Code, payment of the City's development impact fees would ensure the incremental increase 76 City of Rancho Cucamonga Development Impact Fee Study Report. Colgan Consulting Corporation. April 22, 2014. )) Engineering Fees. City of Rancho Cucamonga. Updated March 1, 2018. 103 E6—E11 P228 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT in usage of the City's parks and commensurate increase in physical deterioration would be offset and therefore less than significant. No mitigation is required. b. Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: The proposed project itself would not include construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. California allows a city or county to pass an ordinance that requires, as a condition of approval of a subdivision, either the dedication of land, the payment of a fee in lieu of dedication, or a combination of both for park or recreational purposes (California Government Code, Section 66477). This legislation, commonly called the "Quimby Act", establishes a minimum parkland dedication standard of 3 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents for new subdivision development unless the amount of existing neighborhood and community parkland exceeds that limit. The City of Rancho Cucamonga 2014 Development Impact Fee Study includes provisions for collection of fees for park land acquisition. Fees for park land acquisition charged to residential development in subdivisions are governed by the Quimby Act. Based on the Development Impact Fee Study, the current ratio of City -owned park land to population is less than 3.0 acres per 1,000 residents, so the standard used to calculate park land acquisition in -lieu fees in the Development Impact Fee study is 3.0 acres per 1,000 residents." The provisions of the Quimby Act only apply to land acquisition and not park improvements. Fees for park land acquisition are subdivided into two types. Fees for park land acquisition charged to residential development in subdivisions are governed by the Quimby Act. However, the currently proposed approvals for the project do not include subdivisions maps, so fees for park land acquisition on account of the proposed project are impact fees (governed by the Mitigate Fee Act). Based on an anticipated generation of 494 new residents from the proposed project (commercial uses are not included in development impact fees for parks and recreation centers), the proposed project would require the development of approximately 1.5 acres of parkland in order to comply with the Mitigation Fee Act and the City's Municipal Code. The project would include construction of residential open space and recreational amenities such as a swimming pool and spa, outdoor natural gas fireplace with group seating, and a barbecue area with dining and seating. All of these recreational amenities are proposed on-site and therefore analyzed for environmental impacts within this Initial Study. The City of Rancho Cucamonga 2014 Development Impact Fee Study analyzes the impact of development on certain capital facilities and calculates impact fees based on that analysis." The methods used to calculate impact fees in the study are intended to satisfy_ relevant legal requirements, including the California Mitigation Fee Act and, where applicable, the Quimby Act. As of March 1, 2018, the City charges $3,125 per multi -family residential dwelling unit for park in-lieu/park impact (total of $646,875) for the proposed [non -subdivision) project.80 Through compliance with Chapter 3.52, Community and Recreation Center Impact Fee, and Chapter 3.68, Park In-Lieu/Park Impacts Fees, of the City's Municipal Code, payment of the City's development impact fees would ensure the City would receive the necessary funding to provide parks and recreation )a City of Rancho Cucamonga Development Impact Fee Study Report. Colgan Consulting Corporation. April 22, 2014. )9 Ibid. eo Engineering Fees. City of Rancho Cucamonga. Updated March 1, 2018. WE E6—E 11P229 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT facilities to meet their demands. The City continues to routinely monitor its recreation facilities and fund and improve those facilities as identified in the City's Capital Improvement Plan. As part of this process, any construction of future park facilities in the City would require project -level environmental review and site-specific mitigation as appropriate in order to ensure significant environmental impacts are avoided or mitigated. Therefore, payment of the City's development impact fee would ensure the proposed project impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. 105 E6—E11 P230 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 2C" MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 3.16 TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC Would the project: Less than Significant Potentially with Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and ❑ non -motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? b. Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards ❑ O ❑ ❑ established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or ❑ ❑ ❑ a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e. Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ ❑O ❑ f. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease ❑ ❑ ❑ the performance or safety of such facilities? According to the project -specific Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared based on the construction and operation of a mixed-use development with 207 apartments, approximately 2,528 square feet of retail uses, and 4,800 square feet of office uses (total of approximately 7,328 square feet of commercial uses), the project would generate approximately 1,486 average daily vehicle trips during operation of the project; this is referred to as the original scenario (refer to Appendix 1). Of the 207 apartments, 14 will be live -work units, each of which would include approximately 500 square feet of work space (total of 7,000 square feet of work space). If the 14 live -work units were analyzed as commercial (i.e., retail) units, the overall commercial uses would increase to approximately 14,328 square feet, and the average 106 E6—E 11P231 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT daily trips of the overall project would increase by 75 trips to a total of 1,561; an increase of approximately 5 percent; this is referred to as the updated scenario (refer to Appendix J). According to the Haven at 26`h - Trip Generation Comparison Memorandum (Appendix J), the increase in average daily trips under the updated scenario is negligible when taking into account the overall operation of the proposed project since the alternative trip generation under the updated scenario is forecast to generate one less peak hour trip than those disclosed in the TIA under the original scenario in the a.m. peak hour (114 a.m. peak hour trips under the updated scenario versus 115 a.m. peak hour trips under the original scenario) and only two more peak hour trips than those disclosed in the TIA under the original scenario in the p.m. peak hour (146 p.m. peak hour trips under the updated scenario versus 144 p.m. peak hour trips under the original scenario). Therefore, the Haven at 26`h - Trip Generation Comparison Memorandum concludes the project -specific and cumulative impacts expected under the updated scenario would not be new or more severe than those disclosed in the TIA under the original scenario (refertoAppendix I and Appendix J). a. Conflict with an applicable plan,, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non -motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including.but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Discussion of Effects: Roadway operations and the relationship between capacity and traffic volumes are generally expressed in terms of levels of service (which are defined using the letter grades A through F). These -levels recognize that, while an absolute limit exists as to the amount of traffic traveling through a given intersection (the absolute capacity), the conditions that motorists experience rapidly deteriorate as traffic approaches the absolute capacity. Under such conditions, congestion is experienced. All study intersections are under the jurisdiction of the -City of Rancho Cucamonga, which uses Level of Service (LOS), D as the minimum level of service standard for intersection operations. Therefore, study intersections in the City of Rancho Cucamonga operating at.LOS E or F are required to be mitigated to LOS D or better." The proposed project under the updated scenario is forecast to generate approximately 1,561 trip -ends per day including approximately 114 trips, during the a.m. peak hour and approximately 146 trips during the p.m. peak hour. The study intersections are currently operating at an acceptable LOS of'D or better during the peak hours for Existing Conditions and continue to do so for all of the future analysis conditions evaluated as part of this analysis, with the exception of the following study intersections: • Haven Avenue/61h Street'(p.m., peak hour under existing with project, a.m. and p.m. peak hour under opening year (2019) with and without project) and a.m. and p.m. peak hour under year 2040 with. and without project); and • Haven Avenue/Jersey Boulevard (p.m. peak hour under year 2040 with project). Pedestrian crossings are determined safe, as sufficient time has been provided at all signalized intersections to enable safe crossing. 81' LOS D delay in seconds is between >25 and s35 for unsignalized intersections and between >35 and s55 for signalized intersections. LOS E delay in secondsis between >35 and 550 for unsignalized intersections and between >55 and 580 for signalized intersections. LOS Fdelay in seconds is>50 for unsignalized intersections andl>80 for signalized intersections. 107 E6—Ell P232 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Existing Conditions. As detailed in Table 3.16.A, the study intersections are forecast to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS (D or better) under existing conditions, with the exception of Haven Avenue/th Street, which is forecast to operate at a deficient LOS for the p.m. peak hour with project. Based on the above analysis, the intersection of Haven Avenue/61h Street is forecast to operate at unsatisfactory LOS under existing plus project conditions. Addition of a northbound right turn lane will restore satisfactory operations. This improvement is currently under construction by another developer and will be ready by the proposed project's opening year (2019).Hz With the implementation of a northbound right turn lane currently under construction by another developer, expected to be ready by the proposed project's opening year (2019), all intersections will operate at satisfactory levels of service under existing plus project conditions, as detailed in Table 3.16.8. Table 3.16.A: Existing Levels of Service Intersection LOS Std. Control Without Project With Project AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Control Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delayl LOS 1. Haven Ave./E. Foothill Blvd. D Signal 36.8 D 46.2 D 43.9 D 46.5 1 D 2. Haven Ave./Civic Center Dr. D Signal 21.1 C 16.9 B 30.8 C 17 B 3. Haven Ave./Arrow Rte. D Signal 41.4 D 37 D 45.6 D 39 D 4. Haven Ave./26'h St. D TWSC 24.6 C 17.1 C 24.8 C 17.5 C S. Haven Ave./Jersey Blvd. D Signal 47.9 D 27.8 C 24 C 36.1 D 6. Haven Ave./7" St. D Signal 5.3 A 25.6 C 12.7 B 19.2 8 7. Haven Ave./6'h St. D Signal 31.8 C 50.1 D 32 C 57.9 E " 8. Project Driveway 1/26" St. D TWSC - A - A - A - A Source: Table D, Haven ot2e Trak Impact analysis, Translutfons, Inc., October 21, 2017. (Appendix[). . Exceeds LOS Standard LOS Std. = Levels of Service standard TWSC = Two-way stop control; for TWSC intersections, reported delay is for worst-case approach/improvement. Table 3.16.6: Existing with Project With Improvements Levels of Service Intersection LOS Std. Control Without Improvement With Improvement AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS 1. Haven Ave./E. Foothill Blvd. D Signal 43.9 D 46.5 D 43.9 D 46.5 D 2. Haven Ave./Civic Center Dr. D Signal 30.8 C 17 B 30.8 C 17 B 3. Haven Ave./Arrow Rte. D Signal 45.6 D 39 D 45.6 D 39 D 4. Haven Ave./26" St. D TWSC 24.8 C 17.5 C 24.8 C 17.5 C S. Haven Ave./Jersey Blvd. D Signal 24 C 36.1 DC 36.1 D 6. Haven Ave./7t" St. D Signal 12.7 6 19.2 B 19.2 B 7. Haven Ave./6t" St. D Signal 32 C 57.9 E • 47.8 D 8. Project Driveway 1/26'" St. D Signal - A - A -A - A Source: Table G, Haven at 16" Traffic Impact Anolysis, Translutfons, Inc., October 21, 2017. (Appendix 1(. . Exceeds LOS Standard LOS Std. = Levels of Service standard TWSC = Two-way stop control; for TWSC Intersections, reported delay is for worst-case approach/improvement. Bold: Intersections with Improvements at Haven at 26th Trak Impact Analysis. Page 24. Translutions, Inc. October 21, 2017. 108 E6-El1P233 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Opening Year (2019) Conditions. As detailed in Table 3.16.C, the study intersections are forecast to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS (D or better) under opening year (2019) conditions, with the exception of Haven Avenue/6th Street, which is forecast to operate at a deficient LOS for the a.m. and p.m. peak hour without as well as with project. Table 3.16.C: Opening Year (2019) Levels of Service Intersection LOSAM Std. Control Without Project With Project Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS 1. Haven Ave./E. Foothill Blvd. D Signal 41.7 D 50.4 D 41.9 D 50.8 D 2. Haven Ave./Civic Center Dr. D Signal 35.4 D 15.2 B 25.7 C 17.4 B 3. Haven Ave./Arrow Rte. D Signal 46.2 D 41 D 46.4 D 41.7 D 4. Haven Ave./261h St. D I TWSC 27.2 C 11.6 C 27.4 C 19.4 C 5. Haven Ave./Jersey Blvd. D Signal 11.1 8 30.9 C 1 20.1 C 1 41.6 D 6. Haven Ave./7`h St. D Signal 33.1 C 23.4 C 28.5 C 18.5 B 7. Haven Ave./61h St. D Signal 93.2 F " 75.8 E = 95.3 F' 77.4 E - 8. Project Driveway 1/26 1h St. D TWSC - A - A - A - A Source: Table E, Hoven at 2r Traffic Impact Analysis, Translutions, Inc., October 21, 2017- (Appendix 1). . Exceeds LOS Standard LOS Std. = Levels of Service standard TWSC = Two-way stop control; for TWSC intersections, reported delay is for worst-case approach/Improvement. Based on the above analysis, the intersection of Haven Avenue/6th Street is forecast to operate at unsatisfactory LOS for the a.m. and p.m. peak hour under opening year (2019) without as well as with project conditions. The project -specific recommended improvement at this location is to add a westbound left turn lane. This improvement is conditioned as part of the Empire Lakes/Industrial Area Specific Plan Sub Area 18 (Empire Lakes) Project.83 Mitigation Measure 13-1 of the EIR prepared for the Empire Lakes Project states, "Prior to the issuance of the first occupancy permit, and in coordination with the City of Rancho Cucamonga, the Property Owner/Developer shall implement the following intersection improvements: To achieve additional lanes on the northbound and westbound approach, modify the northbound approach from having two left -turn lanes, two through lanes, and one shared through/right-turn lane to having two left -turn lanes, three through lanes, and one right -turn lane. Modify the westbound approach from having one left -turn lane, two through lanes, and one right -turn lane to having two left -turn lanes, two through lanes, and one right -turn lane." However, there is no guarantee that the necessary improvements to the intersection of Haven Avenue and 61h Street will be installed and City -approved prior to the development of the proposed project. Therefore, Mitigation Measure TRA -1 is required. MM TRA -1 Opening Year (2019) Plus Project Improvements: Prior to issuance of the first occupancy permit, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City for review and approval that the following improvements have been installed: • Haven Avenue/6th Street: Modify the westbound approach from having one left -turn lane, two through lanes, and one right -turn lane to having two left -turn lanes, two through lanes, and one right -turn lane. 83 Environmental Impact Report for the Empire Lakes/Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan Sub -Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project. SCH No. 2015041083. City of Rancho Cucamonga. November 2015- 109 E6 -E 11P234 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT If these improvements are in place prior to application for occupancy, no further work is required, and the mitigation shall be deemed effected. However, if these improvements are not in place prior to application for occupancy, the project applicant shall be responsible for providing evidence to the City for review and sign -off of their implementation prior to issuance of occupancy permits. The resulting levels of service are included in Table 3.16.D. With the implementation of Mitigation Measure TRA -1, all intersections will operate at satisfactory levels of service under opening year (2019) with project conditions. Table 3.16.D: Opening Year (2019) with Project With Improvements Levels of Service Intersection LOS Std. control Without Improvement AM Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour Delay LOS FDelay LOS With Improvement AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay LOS Delay LOS 1. Haven Ave./E. Foothill Blvd. D Signal 41.9 D50.8 53 D 41.9 D 50.8 D 2. Haven Ave./Civic Center Dr. D Signal 25.7 1 CB 15.8 8 25.7 C 17.4 B 3. Haven Ave./Arrow Rte. D Signal 46.4 D 41.7 D 46.4 D 41.7 D 4. Haven Ave./26` St. D TWSC 27.4 C 19.4 C 27.4 D 19.4 C S. Haven Ave./Jersey Blvd. D Signal 20.1 C 41.6 D 20.1 C 41.6 D 6. Haven Ave./7'" St. D Signal 28.5 C 18.5 B 28.5 C 18.5 B 7. Haven Ave./6'" St. D Signal 95.3 F • 77.4 E' 45.9 D 47.1 D S. Project Driveway 1/26'" St. D Signal - Al - I A I - I A - A >ource: iaoie n, maven orzo Irog¢Impactanolysls, Transiutions,Inc., October 21, 2017.(Appendix I). Exceeds LOS Standard LOS Std. = Levels of Service standard TWSC = Two-way stop control; for TWSC intersections, reported delay is for worst-case approach/improvement. Said: Intersections with Improvements Year 2040 Conditions. As detailed in Table 3.16.E, the study intersections are forecast to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS (D or better) under year 2040 conditions, with the exception of Haven Avenue/`" Street, which is forecast to operate at a deficient LOS for the a.m. and p.m. peak hour without as well as with project and Haven Avenue/Jersey Boulevard, which is forecast to operate at a deficient LOS for the p.m. peak hour with project: Table 3.16.E: Year 2040 Levels of Service Intersection LOS Std. Control Without Project AM Peak Hour FFM Peak Hour Delay LOS Delay LOS With Project AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay LOS Delay LOS 1. Haven Ave./E. Foothill Blvd. D Signal 41.6 D 53 D 42.553-4 D 2. Haven Ave./Civic Center Dr. D Signal 28.2 C 15.8 8 30.7 C 18.7 8 3. Haven Ave./Arrow Rte. D Signal 46.2 D 46.6 D 46.6 D 37.8 D 4. Haven Ave./26` St. D iWSc 30.2 C 21.7 C 3S D 25.5 C S. Haven Ave./Jersey Blvd. D Signal10.3 8 31.3 C 27.4 C 67 E " 6. Haven Ave./7 St. D Signal 27.9 C 23.8 C 14.9 B 18.6 B 7. Haven Ave.le St. D Signal 76.5 E * 95 F' >100 F' >100 F' 8. Project Driveway 1/26' St. D TWSC - A - A I - A I - A >ource: i ame r, maven or [o napic Impactnnalysrs, Translutions, Inc., October 21, 2017. (Appendix 0. . Exceeds LOS Standard LOS Std. = Levels of Service standard TWSC = Two-way stop control; for TWSC intersections, reported delay is for worst-case approach/improvement. 110 E6-E11P235 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26T" MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Based on the above analysis, the intersections of Haven Avenue/Jersey Boulevard and Haven Avenue/6`h Street are forecast to operate at unsatisfactory levels of service under year 2040 without as well as with project conditions. The Mitigation Measure TRA -2 has been identified to address project impacts at these intersections to restore satisfactory operations. Mitigation Measures MM TRA -2 Year 2040 Plus Project Improvements: The applicant shall provide evidence to the City for review and approval that the following improvements have been installed: • Haven Avenue/Jersey Boulevard: Restripe the westbound approach to provide a shared left -turn lane and a left -turn lane with split phasing in the east -west direction. The City shall review and sign off on these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. As previously stated, the project -specific recommended improvement at the intersection of Haven Avenue and 6" Street is to add a westbound left -turn lane. This improvement is conditioned on the Empire Lakes Project as MM 13-1 of the EIR, which states, "Prior to the issuance of the first occupancy permit, and in coordination with the City of Rancho Cucamonga, the Property Owner/Developer shall implement the following intersection improvements: To achieve additional lanes on the northbound and westbound approach, modify the northbound approach from having two left -turn lanes, two through lanes, and one shared through/right-turn lane to having two left -turn lanes, three through lanes, and one right -turn lane. Modify the westbound approach from having one left -turn lane, two through lanes, and one right -turn lane to having two left -turn lanes, two through lanes, and one right -turn lane." However, there is no guarantee that the necessary improvements to the intersection of Haven Avenue and 6`h Street will be installed and City -approved prior to the development of the proposed project. Therefore, Mitigation Measure TRA -1 is required. With implementation of Mitigation Measure TRA -1, occupancy permits would not be issued for the proposed project until the necessary improvements to the intersection of Haven Avenue and 6th Street are made and approved by the City. The resulting levels of service are included in Table 3.16.F. With the implementation of recommended improvements, all intersections will operate at satisfactory levels of service under year 2040 with project conditions. Table 3.16.F: Year 2040 with Project With Improvements Levels of Service Intersection LOSAM Std. Without Improvement With Improvement Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Control Delay LOS Delay I LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS 1. Haven Ave./E. Foothill Blvd. D Signal 42.5 D 53.4 D 42.5 D 53.4 D 2. Haven Ave./Civic Center Dr. D Signal 30.7 C 18.7 B 30.7 c 18.7 B 3. Haven Ave./Arrow Rte. D Signal 46.6 D 37.8 D 46.6 D 37.8 D 4. Haven Ave./261h St. D TWSC 35 D 25.5 C 35 D 25.5 C S. Haven Ave./Jersey Blvd. D Signal 27A C 67 E * 26.4 C 36.6 D 6. Haven Ave./70 St. D Signal 14.9 8 18.6 B 14.9 B 18.6 B 7. Haven Ave./691 St. D Signal >1OD F * >100 F * 48.3 D39.3 D 8. Project Driveway 1/26" St. D Signal - A - A - A - A Source: Table I, Haven at 26-' Traffic Impact Analysis, Translations, Inc., October 21, 2017. (Appendix 1). * Exceeds LOS Standard LOS Std. = Levels of Service standard TWSC = Two-way stop control; for TwSC Intersections, reported delay is for worst -ase approach/Improvement. Bold: Intersections with Improvements 111 E6 -E11 P236 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT As detailed in Tables 3.16.13, 3.16.1), and 3.16.F, impacts at all study area intersections are reduced to less than significant levels with the implementation of the required mitigation. b. Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Discussion of Effects: The San Bernardino County Congestion Management Plan (CMP) requires that circulation improvements be recommended at any intersection which operates at unsatisfactory level of service. For intersections that meet a jurisdiction's minimum level of service standard under existing conditions, circulation improvements must maintain conformance with that standard. For intersections that fail to meet a jurisdiction's minimum level of service standard under existing conditions, circulation improvements must maintain the existing level of service. These include conversion of stop control, signalization, changes to signal phasing, and/or addition of lanes as appropriate. As detailed in response to Checklist Question 3.16a, with implementation of anticipated improvements and Mitigation Measure MM TRA -1 and TRA -2, all CMP intersections would operate at satisfactory conditions under all "with project scenarios," and impacts related to conflict with the CMP and/or the CMP's LOS standards would be reduced to less than significant levels. c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: The project site is located approximately 2.2 miles north of the Ontario International Airport (ONT) within the ONT Airport Influence Area of the Ontario International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ONTLUCP).84 Although the project site is not within a ONTLUCP Safety Zone or Noise Impact Zone, the project site is located within the ONTLUCP Overflight Notification Zone for Real Estate Transaction Disclosures and within the ONT Airspace Protection Zone for structural heights ranging between 100 feet and 200 feet above grade85 The proposed project's proximity to the ONTLUCP Overflight Notification Zone for Real Estate Transaction Disclosures is a matter of notification to project occupants of the ONT's proximity to the project site, and a change in air traffic patterns would not result. The ONTLUCP Map 2-4: Airspace Protection Zones and the City's General Plan Public Health and Safety Element identify the project site to be located within Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Height Notification Area (1) of the ONT. Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77, Subpart B requires notification to the FAA of any proposed construction or alteration having a height greater than an imaginary surface extending 100 feet outward and l.foot upward (slope of 100 to 1) for a distance of 20,000 feet from nearest point of any runway, and also requires FAA notification for construction of any object taller than 200 feet, within Height Notification area (1).86 84 Chapter 2: Procedural and Compatibility Policies. Ontario International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Map 2-1: Airport Influence Area. April 19, 2011. as Ibid. Map 2-4: Airspace Protection Zones, and Map 2-5: Overflight Notification Zones. 86 § 77.9(a)(1) Construction or Alteration Requiring Notice, 14 Code of Federal Regulations 77.9 - Construction or Alteration Requiring Notice. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/77.9 (accessed June. 19, 2018). 112 E6—E11P237 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT The project site is located approximately 13,600 feet north of the nearest runway of the ONT. Therefore, any development on the project site greater than 136 feet tall would require notification to the FAA. The proposed height of the on-site structures is approximately 60 feet above surface grade; therefore, notification to the FAA is not required, and a change in air traffic patterns would not result. The nearest private airstrip, Cable Airport, is located approximately 2.5 miles west of the City's westerly limits, and the project site is well outside any of the Cable Airport Land Use Compatibility Zones, as detailed in the Cable Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan8' Accordingly, a change in air traffic patterns would not result. Finally, as detailed in the project TIA, the expected increase in population and employment generated by the project (up to 539 persons) will not be substantial enough to impact air traffic volumes. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: The design of roadways must provide adequate sight distance and traffic control measures. This provision is normally realized through roadway design to facilitate roadway traffic flows. Roadway frontage improvements in and around the project site would be designed and constructed to satisfy all City requirements for street widths, corner radii, and intersection control, as well as incorporate design standards tailored specifically to site access requirements. As detailed in the project TIA, final design plans, including proposed improvements detailed in response to Checklist Question 3.16a, would be subject to review and approval by City staff prior to issuance of building permits, and adherence to applicable City and County requirements would ensure the proposed development would not include any sharp curves, dangerous driveway intersections, or visual obstructions for drivers negotiating roadway curves. Therefore, impacts related to a substantial increase in hazards due to a design feature or incompatible use would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. e. Result in inadequate emergency access? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: As described in the Traffic Impact Analysis (October 2017), the site plan indicates that emergency vehicles would be able to access the site through both driveways, as well as through an additional Emergency Vehicle Access on 26th Street. On-site roadways would be 26 feet wide with standard turning radii. Furthermore, all streets and fire access lanes to individual units and structures would be required to comply with applicable codes, ordinances, and standard conditions, and would meet the City's width and turnaround requirements to provide adequate emergency access. The proposed project would not result in inadequate emergency access. Impacts would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. 67 Cable Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Map 3A and Page 3-3. City of Upland, September 14, 2015. 113 E6—E11 P238 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT f. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: As described in the Traffic Impact Analysis (October 2017), the proposed project would not change roadway designations from those .in the City's General Plan Community Mobility Element or result in the removal of any of the facilities listed above. Pedestrians accessing the project may utilize pedestrian facilities (e.g., sidewalks and crosswalks) that are part of the surrounding street system. Additionally, new sidewalks and other street frontage improvements proposed along Haven Avenue in accordance with the Haven Avenue Beautification Master Plan would improve the connectivity of the project site and nearby communities. Haven Avenue is served by transit facilities (OmniTrans Bus Route 82). Transit service is reviewed and updated by OmniTrans periodically to address ridership, budget, and community demand needs. Changes in land use can affect these periodic adjustments, which may lead to either enhanced or reduced service where appropriate. Bus stops at the Haven Avenue/Jersey Boulevard intersection, directly across the street (Haven Avenue) from the project site, and at the Haven Avenue/Arrow Route intersection, approximately 1,400 feet north of the project site, are approximately 1,600 feet apart and are conveniently placed on either side of the project site to serve future residents of the project. The project by its very nature as a mixed-use development surrounded by Industrial Park land uses fosters a lifestyle whereby residents live in close proximity to professional employment opportunities and have commercial amenities within walking distance of their homes. Furthermore, the project will build residential units within 1.6 miles of the Metrolink Rancho Cucamonga Station located at 11208 Azusa Court to further support use of alternative transportation and reduce vehicle miles traveled. These project design features are consistent with the State (AB 32) and local (SCAP) goals for reducing GHG emissions. , The proposed project would improve connectivity for users of alternative transportation, is strategically located within several hundred feet of two existing bus stops, and would not remove or relocate any alternative transportation access points. Therefore, the project does not conflict with adopted plans, policies, or programs supporting alternative transportation. Impacts would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. 114 E6-E11P239 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 3.17 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: a. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k)? b. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe? Less than Significant Potentially with Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact ❑ ❑O ❑ ❑ a. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k)? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Discussion of Effect: Signed into law in September 2004, and effective March 1, 2005, SB 18 permits California Native American tribes recognized by the NAHC to hold conservation easements on terms mutually satisfactory to the tribe and the landowner. The term "California Native American tribe" is defined as "a federally recognized California Native American tribe or a non -federally recognized California Native American tribe that is on the contact list maintained by the NAHC." The bill requires a City or County to consult with California Native American tribes for the purpose of preserving specified places, features, and objects located prior to the adoption or amendment of a General Plan or Specific Plan. This bill requires the planning agency to refer to the California Native American tribes specified by the NAHC and to provide them with opportunities for involvement. Chapter 532, Statutes of 2014 (i.e., AB 52), requires Lead Agencies evaluate a project's potential to impact "tribal cultural resources." Such resources include "[s]ites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American Tribe that are eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources or included in a local register of historical resources." AB 52 also gives Lead Agencies the discretion to determine, supported by substantial evidence, whether a resource qualifies as a "tribal cultural resource." CEQA defines a "historical resource" as a resource that meets one or more of the following criteria: (1) is listed in, or determined eligible for listing in, the California Register of Historical Resources (California 115 E6—E11 P240 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26T" MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Register); (2) is listed in a local register of historical resources as defined in PRC §5020.1(k); (3) is identified as significant in a historical resource survey meeting the requirements of PRC §5024.1(8); or (4) is determined to be a historical resource by a project's Lead Agency (PRC §21084.1 and State CEQA Guidelines §15064.5[aj). "Local register of historical resources" means a list of properties officially designated or recognized as historically significant by a local government pursuant to a local ordinance or resolution. Per SB 18 and AB 52 (specifically PRC 21080.3.1), Native American consultation is required upon request by interested California Native American tribes that have previously requested that the City provide them with notice of such projects. The City disseminated notices of the proposed project to interested California Native American tribes on February 7, 2018. Two California Native American tribes contacted the City with comments or a request to consult. The Gabrielino Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation advised the City that the project site lies within its ancestral tribal territory and submitted a request to consult. Consultation with the Gabrielino Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation was conducted via a conference call with the City on March 22, 2018, during which the Tribe recommended a tribal monitor during all ground -disturbing activities, as detailed in Mitigation Measure TCR -1. MM TCR -1 Tribal Monitoring: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall retain a qualified representative from the Gabrielino Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation to monitor all clearing, grubbing, and grading activities at the project site and provide input to the on-site archaeologist, who shall be equipped to record and salvage cultural resources that may be unearthed during such activities. This measure shall not apply to importation of non-native soil onto the project site prior to actual grading of native on-site soil. The archaeologist shall assess the significance of any cultural finds in consultation with the qualified representative from the Gabrielino Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation and select an appropriate disposition for the resource based on the significance of the find and tribal input. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department. The San Manuel Band of Mission Indians advised the City that the project site exists within Serrano ancestral territory and, therefore, is of interest to the Tribe. In an email dated February 9, 2018, the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians provided standard language to be incorporated as conditions of project approval, as detailed in Mitigation Measures TCR -2 through TCR -4. MM TCR -2 Human Remains: If human remains or funerary objects are encountered during any activities associated with the project, work in the immediate vicinity (within a 100 -foot buffer of the find) shall cease and the County Coroner shall be contacted pursuant to State Health and Safety Code §7050.5 and that code enforced for the duration of the project. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department. MM TCR -3 Native American Cultural Resources: In the event that Native American cultural resources are discovered during project activities, all work in the immediate vicinity of the find (within a 60 -foot buffer) shall cease and a qualified archaeologist meeting Secretary of Interior standards shall be hired to assess the find. Work on the other portions of the project outside of the buffered area may continue during this assessment period. Additionally, San Manuel Band of Mission Indians will be contacted if any such find occurs and be provided information and permitted/invited to perform a site visit when the archaeologist makes his/her assessment, so as to provide Tribal input. 116 E6—E11P241 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT MM TCR -4 Cultural Resources Treatment Plan: If significant Native American historical resources, as defined by CEQA (as amended, 2015), are discovered and avoidance cannot be ensured, an Secretary of Interior -qualified archaeologist shall be retained to develop a cultural resources Treatment Plan, as well as a Discovery and Monitoring Plan, the drafts of which shall be provided to San Manuel Band of Mission Indians for review and comment. a. All in -field investigations, assessments, and/or data recovery enacted pursuant to the finalized Treatment Plan shall be monitored by a San Manuel Band of Mission Indians Tribal Participant(s). b. The Lead Agency and/or applicant shall, in good faith, consult with San Manuel Band of Mission Indians on the disposition and treatment of any artifacts or other cultural materials encountered during the project. As detailed in response to Checklist Question 3.5a, a project -specific cultural resources assessment was conducted for the project site and included archaeological and historical records search, extended research into the local history of the project site and vicinity, and an intensive pedestrian survey of the project site (Appendix C). Two historic resources previously recorded within the 9.7 -acre southern property, which is not part of the proposed project, were located again during the course of the project - specific pedestrian survey. These resources are (1) the structural foundations of the Cucamonga Pioneer Winery District (P-36-011281) demolished in 2007, and (2) the historic refuse scatter (P-36-011276) associated with the Cucamonga Pioneer Winery District. As detailed in Figure LU -8, Historic Resources, of the City's General Plan Managing Land Use, Community Design, and Historic Resources Element, the Cucamonga Pioneer Winery District is identified both as a California Point of Historical Interest as well as a Rancho Cucamonga Point of Historical Interest." These resources are not located within the proposed 5.2 -acre project site and no impacts to these resources are expected, as all grading and ground - disturbing construction activities will be limited to the 5.2 -acre project site. There are no known unique ethnic or cultural values associated with the project site, nor are there known religious or sacred uses associated with the project site. Additionally, the on-site pedestrian survey did not identify any cultural resources, either historic or archaeological, on the project site that could be listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k). With implementation of Mitigation Measures TCR -1 through TCR -4, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact with implementation of mitigation on tribal cultural resources, as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074. b. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Discussion of Effect: CEQA defines a "historical resource" as a resource that meets one or more of the following criteria: (1) is listed in, or determined eligible for listing in, the California Register of Historical Resources (California Register); (2) is listed in a local register of historical resources as defined in PRC 88 Chapter 2: Managing Land Use, Community Design, and Historic Resources. Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. Figure LU -8, Historic Resources. May 19, 2010. 117 E6-E11P242 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT §5020.1(k); (3) is identified as significant in a historical resource survey meeting the requirements of PRC §5024.1(g); or (4) is determined to be a historical resource by a project's Lead Agency (PRC §21084.1 and State CEQA Guidelines §15064.5[a]). A resource may be listed as a'historical resource in the California Register if it meets any of the following National Register of Historic Places criteria as defined in PRC §5024.1(C): A. Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California's history and cultural heritage. B. Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past. C. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values. D. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. A "substantial adverse change' to a historical resource, according to PRC §5020.1(q), "means demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration such that the significance of a historical resource would be impaired." CEQA Guidelines do not preclude identification of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Sections 5020.1(j) or 5024.1. Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5[c][4], if an archaeological resource is neither a unique archaeological nor a historical resource, the effects of the project on those resources shall not be considered a significant effect on the environment. It shall be sufficient that both the resource and the effect on it are noted in the Initial Study, but they need not be considered further in the CEQA process. As detailed in response to Checklist Question 3.5a, a project -specific cultural resources assessment was conducted for the project site and included archaeological and historical records search, extended research into the local history of the project site and vicinity, and an intensive pedestrian survey of the project site (Appendix C). There are no known unique ethnic or cultural values associated with the project site, nor are there known religious or sacred uses associated with the project site. Additionally, the on-site pedestrian survey did not identify any cultural resources, either historic or archaeological, on the project site that could be listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. With implementation of Mitigation Measures TCR -1 through TCR -4, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact with implementation of mitigation on tribal cultural resources, as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074. 118 E6 -E 11P243 a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: Local governments and water districts are responsible for complying with federal regulations, both for wastewater plant operation and the collection systems (e.g., sanitary sewers) that convey wastewater to the wastewater treatment facility. Proper operation and maintenance is critical for sewage collection and treatment, as impacts from these processes can degrade water resources and affect human health. For these reasons, publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) are subject to Waste 119 E6—E 11P244 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26T" MIXED-USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 3.18 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Would the project: Less than Significant Potentially with Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality ❑ ❑ 59 ❑ Control Board? b. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the ❑ ❑ O ❑ construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c. Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of ❑ ❑ 9 ❑ which could cause significant environmental effects? d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements ❑ ❑ Ix' ❑ and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project, that it has ❑ ❑ adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the ❑ ❑ ❑x project's solid waste disposal needs? g. Comply with Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid ❑ ❑ IZI waste. a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: Local governments and water districts are responsible for complying with federal regulations, both for wastewater plant operation and the collection systems (e.g., sanitary sewers) that convey wastewater to the wastewater treatment facility. Proper operation and maintenance is critical for sewage collection and treatment, as impacts from these processes can degrade water resources and affect human health. For these reasons, publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) are subject to Waste 119 E6—E 11P244 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED—USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Discharge Requirements (WDRs) to ensure that such wastewater facilities operate in compliance with water quality regulations set forth by the State. WDRs, issued by the State, establish effluent limits on the kinds and quantities of pollutants that POTWs can discharge. These permits also contain pollutant monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements. Each POTW that intends to discharge into the nation's waters must obtain a WDR priorto initiating its discharge. Wastewater conveyance is handled by the City of Rancho Cucamonga and Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD). Wastewater is processed by CVWD and the Inland Empire Utilities Agency (IEUA). CVWD is one of nine member agencies that operate under the IEUA. IEUA operates five interconnected regional water -recycling facilities that have a combined permitted capacity of 85 million gallons per day (mgd) (IEUA NPDES No. CA8000409). Two of four IEUA treatment plants serve development within the City of Rancho Cucamonga: Regional Plant No. 1 (RP -1) located within Ontario and Regional Plant No. 4 (RP -4) located within the City. RP -1 and RP -4 are designed to accommodate 44 mgd and 14 mgd, respectively, and the daily average flows at these facilities are 28 mgd and 10 mgd, respectively. All new development is required to comply with all provisions of the NPDES program and the City's Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Permit (MS4), as enforced by the RWQCB. The proposed project would result in typical wastewater discharges that would not require new methods or equipment for treatment that are not currently permitted for the IEUA treatment plants, which would serve the proposed project. At all IEUA treatment plants, wastewater is subject to tertiary -level water treatment, which produces effluent suitable for reuse (e.g., irrigation, wetlands/wildlife habitat, and groundwater recharge). The treatment plants have a combined excess capacity of 20 mgd, which is considered more than adequate to treat the wastewater generation for the proposed project (39,653 gallons per day) in addition to their existing entitlements8a The proposed project would connect to existing wastewater infrastructure, which is currently operating within capacity. Compliance with condition or permit requirements established by the City, WDRs outlined by the RWQCB, as well as requirements included in the NPDES permit, SWPPP, WQMP, and wastewater conveyance standards would ensure that wastewater discharges coming from the project site and treated by the wastewater treatment facility system would not exceed applicable RWQCB wastewater treatment requirements. Impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. b. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: Potable water service is provided to the City of Rancho Cucamonga from the CVWD. According to the CVWD 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), the CVWD service area covers approximately 47 square miles, which serves a population of over 200,466 customers with over 48,000 water connections. With a demand of 184 gallons per capita per day, CVWD's service population demand is 3,685,744 gallons per day. The CVWD's water sources includegroundwater, imported surface water delivered through the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, canyon water, and recycled water from Inland Empire Utilities Agency. CVWD receives approximately 35 percent of the City's water from the underlying Chino and Cucamonga Groundwater Basins. CWVD complies with its prescriptive water rights as managed by the Chino Basin Watermaster through the process of adjudication between various 89 Based on factors from City of Rancho Cucamonga, Initial Study Checklist, Attachment A. 120 E6—E 11P245 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT water purveyors and therefore will not deplete local groundwater resources in order to meet its entitlements. According to the UWMP, it is anticipated that the CVWD will be capable of meeting the water demands for the existing and future 20 -year projected planned growth within the CVWD's service area under normal, single -dry and multiple -dry year conditions. CVWD's projected supply is 60,500 acre-feet (AF) in the year 2020, 63,100 AF in the year 2025, and 65,700 AF in the years 2030 and 2035, respectively, which is more than the projected demand of 58,900 AF in the year 2020, 61,300 AF in the year 2025, and 63,700 AF in the years 2030 and 2035, respectively. With a per capita demand of 184 gallons per day, the proposed project would demand approximately 99,176 gallons per day or 36.2 million gallons per year (111 AF per year). Therefore, the proposed project would demand approximately 7 percent of CVWD's anticipated surplus water in the year 2020, 6.2 percent of CVWD's anticipated surplus water in the year 2025, and 5.5 percent of CVWD's anticipated surplus water in the years 2030 and 2035, respectively. As detailed in Standard Condition SC GHG-1, the project would prepare a comprehensive water conservation strategy appropriate for the project and include the following: Install water efficient landscapes and irrigation systems and devices in compliance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance; • Use reclaimed water for landscaping within the project, if available; • Design buildings to be water efficient by installing water efficient fixtures and appliances including low flow faucets, dual flush toilets, and waterless urinals/water heaters; and • Design irrigation to control runoff and to remove water to non -vegetated surfaces. Since the City has sufficient water supplies to meet current and future development consistent with its General Plan through the 2025 to 2030 buildout horizon, and the proposed project, including the amendment to the General Plan and zone change, would demand up to 7 percent of CVWD's anticipated surplus water in the year 2020 under a worst case scenario, additional water storage and treatment facilities are not anticipated to be required to serve the proposed project. Furthermore, as stated in response to Checklist Question 3.18a, the CVWD RP -4 and R -P 1 treatment plants that would serve the project site operate with a 20 mgd surplus, which is considered more than adequate to treat the wastewater generation for the proposed project (39,653 gallons per day) in addition to their existing entitlements. As detailed in the project -specific Utility Plan submitted to the City as part of the development application, sewer and water lines are already in place along Haven Avenue and 26th Street to serve the project site. Interconnection to the City's municipal water and wastewater systems would occur within the project's construction footprint and therefore already identified, disclosed, and subject to all applicable mitigation measures, as well as local, State, and federal regulations, as part of this Initial Study. The proposed project may incrementally increase the demand for water and wastewater treatment and storage; however, as required for a development of this type, the proposed project is subject to interconnection fees imposed by the City in order to offset increased demand for water and wastewater treatment and storage. Goals PF -5 and PF -6 and Policies PF -5.1, PF -5.2, PF -6.1, and PF -6.2 detailed in the City's General Plan require the City to ensure provision of water and wastewater supplies and infrastructure to support existing development and future growth through maintenance and expansion, when necessary, through consultation with CVWD and County agencies while minimizing environmental 121 E6—E11 P246 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT impacts. Any future construction or facility expansion would require project -level environmental.review and site-specific mitigation as appropriate in order to ensure significant environmental impacts are avoided or mitigated. Since the demand for water and wastewater treatment capacity generated by the proposed project would not result in the exceedance of projected water supply or wastewater treatment capacity or require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects, impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. c. Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: Development of the project site could alter hydrologic conditions by altering drainage patterns, increasing impervious areas, and, in turn, reducing infiltration and increasing runoff flow rates and volumes, which could require the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities. Pursuant to the NPDES permit, the proposed project is required to meet or exceed pre -project conditions for storm water discharge and would be required to retain any additional runoff on site and discharge it to the storm drain system at rates that do not exceed pre -development conditions. In accordance with the provisions in the NPDES permit, the project shall implement Standard Condition HYD -1 to file and obtain a Notice of Intent (N01) with the RWQCB in order to be in compliance with the State NPDES General Construction Storm Water Permit for discharge of surface runoff associated with construction activities. Additionally, the project shall implement an SWPPP in accordance with Standard Condition HYD -2 emphasizing structural and nonstructural BMPs to control sediment and non-visible discharges from the site. Finally, the project shall develop a WQMP in accordance with Standard Condition HYD -3 that would require BMPs designed and implemented to retain the project site's minimum design capture volume and hydromodification volume of 30,355 cubic feet of runoff to ensure post -development storm water runoff volume or time of concentration does not exceed pre - development storm water runoff. All BMPs are expected to be constructed on site; therefore, any potential environmental impacts resulting from construction of the proposed BMPs are addressed throughout this Initial Study and mitigated as applicable. The project is located in an urbanized area for which storm drain features have been previously planned and installed. Except for non -paved areas, there are no BMPs or other mechanisms on site designed to capture storm water runoff and facilitate infiltration prior to discharge into the municipal storm drains. Changes in storm water volume as a result of the proposed project would be addressed through adherence to NPDES permit requirements. The City continues to routinely monitor its storm drain system and fund and improve those systems as identified in its Capital Improvement Plan. The approval of drainage features/improvements occurs through the City's building plan check process. As part of this process, the proposed project would be engineered and constructed in conformance with the requirements of the City, the San Bernardino County Municipal Storm Water Management Program, the intent of the NPDES Permit for San Bernardino County, and the incorporated cities of San Bernardino County within the Santa Ana Region (MS4 permit), and pursuant to Standard Conditions HYD -1 through HYD -3. There would be no significant environmental effects specifically related to the installation of storm water facilities during the project's construction phase that are not encompassed within the project's construction footprint and therefore already identified, disclosed, and subject to all applicable mitigation measures, as well as 122 E6—E11P247 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT local, State, and federal regulations, as part of this Initial Study. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. No additional mitigation is required. d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: As stated in response to Checklist question 3.18b, the CVWD's water sources include groundwater, imported surface water delivered through the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, canyon water, and recycled water from Inland Empire Utilities Agency. CVWD receives approximately 35 percent of the City's water from the underlying Chino and Cucamonga Groundwater Basins. CWVD complies with its prescriptive water rights as managed by the Chino Basin Watermaster through the process of adjudication between various water purveyors and therefore will not deplete local groundwater resources in order to meet its entitlements. According to the UWMP, it is anticipated that the CVWD will be capable of meeting the water demands for the existing and future 20 -year projected planned growth within the CVWD's service area under normal, single -dry and multiple -dry year conditions. CVWD's projected supply is 60,500 acre-feet (AF) in the year 2020, 63,100 AF in the year 2025, and 65,700 AF in the years 2030 and 2035, respectively, which is more than the projected demand of 58,900 AF in the year 2020, 61,300 AF in the year 2025, and 63,700 AF in the years 2030 and 2035, respectively. With a per capita demand of 184 gallons per day, the proposed project would demand approximately 99,176 gallons per day or 36.2 million gallons per year (111 AF per year). Therefore, the proposed project would demand approximately 7 percent of CVWD's anticipated surplus water in the year 2020, 6.2 percent of CVWD's anticipated surplus water in the year 2025, and 5.5 percent of CVWD's anticipated surplus water in the years 2030 and 2035, respectively. As detailed in Standard Condition SC GHG-1, the project would prepare a comprehensive water conservation strategy appropriate for the project and include the following: • Install water efficient landscapes and irrigation systems and devices in compliance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance; • Use reclaimed water for landscaping within the project, if available; • Design buildings to be water efficient by installing water efficient fixtures and appliances including low flow faucets, dual flush toilets, and waterless urinals/water heaters; and • Design irrigation to control runoff and to remove water to non -vegetated surfaces. The UWMP is updated every five years and submitted to the California Department of Water Resources for review. General Plans are source documents for water suppliers as they update their respective UWMPs. These planning documents are linked, and their accuracy and usefulness are interdependent. Because the proposed project would require a General Plan Amendment to change the existing land use designation forthe site from Industrial Park to Mixed Use, water demand for the proposed project is not currently accounted for in the UWMP's projections. However, since the City has sufficient water supplies to meet current and future development consistent with its General Plan through the 2025 to 2030 buildout horizon, and the proposed project, including the amendment to the General Plan and zone change, would demand up to 7 percent of CVWD's anticipated surplus water in the year 2020 under a worst case scenario, the CVWD would have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements. Additionally, CVWD's UWMP is updated every five years based on the General 123 E6—E 11P248 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Plan. Therefore, the proposed project's updated land use designation would be accounted for in the next UWMP update. Impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project, that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: As stated in response to Checklist Question 3.18a, the proposed project is served by the CVWD sewer system, which has wastewater treated by RP -4 and RP -1 treatment plants, neither of which is at capacity. Combined, RP -4 and RP -1 operate with a 20 mgd surplus, which is considered more than adequate to treat the wastewater generation for the proposed project (39,653 gallons per day) in addition to their existing entitlements. Impacts would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: Solid waste is collected by the City, which contracts with private firms for solid waste collection and transport to haul collected materials to regional landfills and materials recycling facilities. Solid waste generated in the City is transferred to Burrtec's West Valley Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) in Fontana. Solid waste that is not diverted is primarily disposed at Mid -Valley Landfill, a County Class III (i.e., municipal waste) landfill located at 2390 North Alder -Avenue in Rialto. Mid -Valley Landfill has a daily permitted capacity of 7,500 tons per day (tons/day), a remaining capacity of 67,520,000 cubic yards (cy), and an anticipated close date of 2033.90 Landfill capacity is expected to decrease over time with future growth and development throughout San Bernardino County and surrounding Inland Empire areas. Waste reduction and recycling programs and regulations are expected to reduce the demand and extend the life of existing landfills. Buildout of the 2010 General Plan Update would result in an estimated net increase in solid waste disposal of 201.5 tons per day.91 Because the proposed project would require a General Plan Amendment to change the existing land use designation for the site from Industrial Park to Mixed Use, solid waste for the proposed project is not accounted for in this General Plan estimate. However, the proposed project was estimated to result in an increase of 1.5 tons per day.9' As detailed in Standard Condition SC GHG-1, the proposed project would reuse and recycle construction and demolition waste, provide interior and exterior storage areas for recyclables and green waste in public areas, and educate employees about reducing waste and about recycling to further reduce generation of solid waste during construction and operation. Even if the proposed project's incremental increase in solid waste disposal was added to the General Plan's buildout total, this increase would represent only approximately 2.7 percent of Mid -Valley Landfill's daily permitted capacity. Therefore, the proposed project's incremental increase, assuming 90 CaRecycle. 2018. Facility/Site Summary Details: Mid -Valley Sanitary Landfill (36 -AA -0055). 2018. http://vnvw.calrecycle.ca.gov/////. Accessed January 20, 2018. 91 Section 4.17 - Utilities and Service Systems. Rancho Cucamonga 2010 General Plan Update Draft Program Environmental Impact Report. SCH No. 2000061027. Page 4.17-22. February 16, 2010. 99 CalRecycle. http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/LGCentral/GoalMeasure/DisposalRate/Graphs/Disposal.htm. Accessed February 22, 2018. 124 E6—E 11P249 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT that all solid waste in the City would be disposed at Mid -Valley Landfill, would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. g. Comply with Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: Refer to response Checklist Question 3.18f, above. The Mid -Valley Landfill has been constructed to meet all required local, State, and federal statutes and regulations. The proposed project would not compromise the City's compliance with federal, State, or local statues and regulations related to solid waste including recycling of waste. Impacts would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. 125 E6—E11P250 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 3.19 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Does the project: Less than Significant Potentially with Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the ❑ ❑x ❑ ❑ number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable' means that the incremental effects of a project are ❑ when viewed in connection ❑ El with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) C. Have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ beings, either directly or indirectly? a. Have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Discussion of Effects: The proposed project's impacts to biological resources and cultural resources were analyzed in this Initial Study, and all direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts were determined to have no impact, a less than significant impact, or reduced to a less than significant impact with implementation of mitigation. No endangered or threatened species were identified on the project site. Development of the proposed project would not cause fish or wildlife populations to drop below self- sustaining levels or restrict the movement/distribution of a rare or endangered species. The proposed project would not affect any threatened or endangered species or associated habitat. Potential impacts to migratory and nesting birds would be mitigated to less than significant levels with implementation of Mitigation Measure 810-1. Development of the proposed project would not affect known historic, archaeological, or paleontological resources. There are no known unique ethnic or cultural values associated with the 126 E6—E11P251 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26" MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT project site, nor are there known religious or sacred uses associated with the project site. Mitigation Measures CUL -1 and CUL -2 have been identified to address potential impacts if subsurface cultural or paleontological resources would be encountered during construction operations. Additionally, the project applicant is required to comply with California Code of Regulations (CCR) Section 15064.5(e), California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, and Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 5097.98 as a matter of policy in the event human remains are encountered at any time. Adherence to Mitigation Measures CUL -1 and CUL -2 and regulations governing human remains would reduce potential impacts to cultural and paleontological resources to less than significant with implementation of mitigation. b. Have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Discussion of Effects: The 2010 General Plan was adopted along with the certification of a Program Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2000061027), Findings of Fact, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations for significant adverse environmental effects of build -out in the City and Sphere -of - Influence. The City made findings, that adoption of the General Plan would result in significant adverse effects to Aesthetics, Agriculture and Forest Resources, Air Quality, Climate Change, and Mineral Resources. Mitigation measures were adopted to the extent feasible for each of these resources, although the measures would not reduce impacts to less than significant levels. Accordingly, the City adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations balancing the benefits of development under the General Plan Update against the significant unavoidable adverse effects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15092 and 15096 (h). These benefits include less overall traffic volumes by developing mixed- use projects that will be pedestrian -friendly (similar to the proposed project), and conservation of valuable open space. The project site is located within an area has been designated by the City -for primarily Industrial Park uses, which are comprised of light industrial, research and development businesses, green technology, and general and medical office uses, and the proposed project includes a General Plan Amendment and zone change from Industrial Park to Mixed Use. As detailed in response to Checklist Question 3.10a, the project proposes mixed use development on an underutilized infill site within the South Haven Avenue Focus Area, which the City envisions as its major office corridor providing high-end professional employment opportunities through the creation of "pleasant, well -landscaped, office park settings, with restaurants and other amenities that are within walking distance for employees and visitors." The project is proposed on a blighted property used for battery repair for forklifts and related equipment, short-term employee parking, and the long-term parking of tractor -trailers and additional industrial heavy equipment storage. The prevailing Industrial Park uses surrounding the project site are professional (e.g., medical, financial) in nature, and the proposed mixed use development of the project site would be more compatible with surrounding [professional office] land uses and provide a seamless transition between the Industrial Park uses along Haven Avenue and the residential uses adjacent to the west. Furthermore, the project by its very nature as a proposed mixed-use development fosters a lifestyle whereby residents would live in close proximity to professional employment opportunities along Haven Avenue and have commercial amenities within walking distance of their homes. The project will build residential units directly across the street (Haven Avenue) from OmniTrans bus Route 82 and approximately 8 blocks (within 1.6 miles) from the Metrolink Rancho Cucamonga Station located at 11208 Azusa Ct. to further support use of alternative transportation and reduce vehicle miles traveled 127 E6—E11 P252 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT and GHG emissions: Since the proposed project would mitigate its incremental impacts on the environment to less than significant levels and therefore would not exacerbate any impacts determined to be significant and unavoidable in the Rancho Cucamonga 2010 General Plan Update Draft Program Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2000061027), the proposed project would not contribute to a significant cumulative impact. The proposed project has either no impact, a less than significant impact, or a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated with respect to all environmental issues pursuant to CEQA. Due to the limited scope of direct physical impacts to the environment associated with the proposed project, the project's impacts are primarily project -specific in nature. Since individual development projects, including the proposed project, would mitigate their incremental impacts on the environment to the extent feasible, and all of the proposed project's impacts would be mitigatable to levels less than significant, the proposed project would not contribute to a significant cumulative impact. Short-term construction -related noise impacts that would result from construction of the proposed mixed uses would be reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of Mitigation Measure N0I-1 and Mitigation Measure N0I-2 identified in this Initial Study. Mitigation Measure N0I-1 would require use of a temporary barrier to reduce construction noise levels during the loudest phase (site preparation/grading). Additionally, Mitigation Measure N0I-2 would ensure noise -attenuating practices and devices are implemented during project construction. Therefore, the proposed project short-term (construction) noise impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. The project building assembly design must achieve a minimum noise reduction of 30.7 dBA (75.7 dBA — 45 dBA = 30.7 dBA) in order to be in compliance with the City's noise standard. Implementation Mitigation Measures N0I-3 through N0I-5 would require an interior noise study to determine whether the proposed project's noise levels would be in compliance with City's and California Title 24 standards. Therefore, the proposed project long-term (operational) noise impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. There is no guarantee that the necessary improvements to the intersection of Haven Avenue and 6`" Street will be installed by the Empire Lakes Project and City -approved prior to the development of the proposed project. With implementation of Mitigation Measure TRA -1, occupancy permits would not be issued for the proposed project until the necessary improvements to the intersection of Haven Avenue and 6" Street are made and approved by the City. Additionally, the intersection of Haven Avenue and Jersey Boulevard was forecast to operate at unsatisfactory levels under year 2040 with proposed project. With implementation of Mitigation Measure TRA -2, the proposed project would contribute its fair -share costs for implementation of this improvement and would not conflict with San Bernardino County's CMP. Therefore, the proposed project impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. Since the City has sufficient water supplies to meet current and future development consistent with its General Plan through the 2025 to 2030 buildout horizon, and the proposed project, including the amendment to the General Plan and zone change, would demand up to 7 percent of CVWD's anticipated surplus water in the year 2020 under a worst-case scenario, additional water storage and treatment facilities are not anticipated to be required to serve the proposed project. Furthermore, as stated in response to Checklist Question 3.18a, the CVWD RP -4 and R -P 1 treatment plants that would serve the project site operate with a 20 mgd surplus, which is considered more than adequate to treat the wastewater generation for the proposed project (39,653 gallons per day) in addition to their existing entitlements. 128 E6-El1P253 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT As detailed in the project -specific Utility Plan submitted to the City as part of the development application, sewer and waterlines are already in place along Haven Avenue and 26" Street to serve the project site. Interconnection to the City's municipal water and wastewater systems would occur within the project's construction footprint and therefore already identified, disclosed, and subject to all applicable mitigation measures, as well as local, State, and federal regulations, as part of this Initial Study. The proposed project may incrementally increase the demand for water and wastewater treatment and storage; however, as required for a development of this type, the proposed project is subject to interconnection fees imposed by the City in order to offset increased demand for water and wastewater treatment and storage. Goals PF -5 and PF -6 and Policies PF -5.1, PF -5.2, PF -6.1, and PF -6.2 detailed in the City's General Plan require the City to ensure provision of water and wastewater supplies and infrastructure to support existing development and future growth through maintenance and expansion, when necessary, through consultation with CVWD and County agencies while minimizing environmental impacts. Any future construction or facility expansion would require project -level environmental review and site-specific mitigation as appropriate in order to ensure significant environmental impacts are avoided or mitigated. The City continues to routinely monitor its storm drain system and fund and improve those systems as identified in the City's Capital Improvement Plan. The approval of drainage features/improvements occurs through the City's building plan check process. As part of this process, the proposed project would be engineered and constructed in conformance with the requirements of the City, the San Bernardino County Municipal Storm Water Management Program, the intent of the NPDES Permit for San Bernardino County and the incorporated cities of San Bernardino County within the Santa Ana Region (MS4 permit), and pursuant to Standard Conditions HYD -1 through HYD -3. Mitigation: Previously identified Mitigation Measures 1\10I-1 through N0I-5, TRA -1, and TRA -2 c. Have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Less than Significant Impact Discussion of Effects: The South Coast Air Basin is currently designated as a non -attainment area for ozone, PM10, and PMZ,s. Development of the project would contribute to air pollutant emissions on a short-term basis. The proposed project is required to comply with applicable SCAQMD Rules, applicable California Code of Regulations, and CalRecycle Sustainable (Green) Building Program regulations, which include implementation of standard control measures for fugitive dust and construction equipment emissions. Like all of Southern California, the project site could be subject to strong ground shaking resulting from large earthquakes. Proper engineering design and construction in conformance with the 2016 CBC standards and project -specific geotechnical recommendations (Standard Condition GEO-1) would ensure that impacts from strong seismic ground shaking and unstable soils would be less than significant. 129 E6—El1P254 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 4.0 SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES AND STANDARD CONDITIONS 4.1 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MM BI0-1 Pre -construction Nesting Bird Survey. Pre -construction nesting bird survey shall be conducted within three to seven days prior to demolition and ground -disturbing activities if such activities are proposed during the nesting season (generally February 1 through August 31). The survey shall encompass the entire area of project -related demolition and ground disturbance. If no active avian nests are found during survey, no additional mitigation will be required. If an active avian nest is discovered during survey, construction activities shall be redirected around the nest(s). A qualified biologist shall delineate the boundaries of any such buffer area. The buffer shall be sufficient to ensure that nesting behavior is not adversely affected by the construction activity. If demolition and/or ground -disturbing activities are delayed or suspended for more than seven days after the survey, the site shall be resurveyed. Should eggs or fledglings be discovered in any native nest, these resources cannot be disturbed until the young have hatched and fledged (matured to a stage that they can leave the nest on their own). Once the qualified biologist has determined that young birds have successfully fledged or the nest has otherwise become inactive, a monitoring report shall be prepared and submitted to the City. The monitoring report shall summarize the results of the nest monitoring, describe construction restrictions currently in place, and confirm that construction activities can proceed within the buffer area without jeopardizing the survival of the young birds. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Citv Planning Department. 4.2 CULTURAL RESOURCES MM CUL -1 Unanticipated Cultural Resources: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor all clearing, grubbing, and grading activities at the project site. The archaeologist shall be equipped to record and salvage cultural resources that may be unearthed during such activities. This measure shall not apply to importation of non-native soil onto the project site prior to actual grading of native on-site soil. The archaeologist shall be empowered to temporarily halt or divert grading equipment to allow recording and removal of unearthed resources. The archaeologist shall assess the significance of any cultural finds in consultation with affected Native American tribal representatives and select an appropriate disposition for the resource based on the significance of the find and tribal input. If any suspected cultural resources are discovered during ground -disturbing activities and an archaeological monitor is not present, the construction supervisor shall halt work within a 50 -foot radius around the find and call the City planner immediately who will contact the project archaeologist and the tribal representatives to the site to assess the significance of the find. If cultural resources are discovered on the project site, ground -disturbing activities shall be suspended within 50 feet of the resource(s) and an exclusionary buffer shall be established. The archaeologist and representatives of the appropriate Native American Tribe(s), the project applicant, and the City Planning Department shall confer regarding mitigation of the discovered resource(s). The archaeological monitor shall continue monitoring areas of the 130 E6—E11 P255 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26T" MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT project site not included in the exclusionary buffer, and a treatment plan and/or preservation plan shall be prepared by the project archaeologist and reviewed by representatives of the appropriate Native American Tribe(s), the project applicant, and the City Planning Department for implementation to protect the identified cultural resource(s) from damage and destruction. A final report containing the significance and treatment of findings shall be prepared by the archaeologist and submitted to the City Planning Department and the appropriate Native American Tribe(s). All cultural material, excluding sacred, ceremonial, grave goods and human remains, collected during the grading monitoring program and from any previous archaeological studies or excavations on the project site shall be curated, as determined by the treatment plan, according to the current professional repository standards. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department. MM CUL -2 Discovery of Paleontological Resources: Prior to issuance of grading permits, the City shall verify that the following notes are included on the grading plans: "If any suspected fossil -bearing sediments or paleontological resources are discovered during ground -disturbing activities, the construction supervisor is obligated to halt work within a 50 -foot radius around the find and establish an exclusionary buffer. Construction personnel shall not collect or move any paleontological materials or further disturb any soils within the exclusionary buffer, but construction activity may continue unimpeded on other portions of the project site. The project applicant shall retain a qualified (project) paleontologist to inspect the find in accordance with federal, State, and local guidelines to determine if the find is fossiliferous. If the project paleontologist determines the find is not fossiliferous, no further evaluation shall be required within the exclusionary buffer, and construction activity shall be allowed to resume therein. However, if the project paleontologist determines the find is fossiliferous, construction activity shall not resume within the exclusionary buffer, and Mitigation Measure CUL -3 shall apply." This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department. MM CUL -3 Treatment of Paleontological Resources: If the project paleontologist determines fossil - bearing sediments or paleontological resources are discovered on the project site, the project paleontologist shall develop and implement a Paleontological Resource Impact Mitigation Program (PRIMP) for this project. The PRIMP shall include the methods that will be used to protect paleontological resources that may exist within the project site, as well as procedures for monitoring, fossil preparation and identification, curation into a repository, and preparation of a report at the conclusion of grading. • Excavation and grading activities in deposits with high paleontological sensitivity, as determined by the project paleontologist, shall be monitored by a paleontological monitor in accordance with the PRIMP. No monitoring is required for excavations in soil with no paleontological sensitivity (Artificial Fill). • If paleontological resources are encountered during the course of ground disturbance, the paleontological monitor shall have the authority to temporarily redirect construction away from the area of the find in order to assess its significance. • In the event that paleontological resources are encountered when a paleontological monitor is not present, work in the immediate area of the find shall be redirected and a 131 E6—E11P256 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT paleontologist shall be contacted to assess the find for significance in accordance with the PRIMP. • Collected resources shall be prepared to the point of identification, identified to the lowest taxonomic level possible, cataloged, and curated into the permanent collections of a scientific institution. • At the conclusion of the monitoring program, a report of findings shall be prepared to document the results of the monitoring program. 4.3 GEOLOGY AND SOILS SC GEO-1 Compliance with applicable California Building Code and Project -specific Geotechnical Recommendations. Prior to the approval of grading and/or building permits, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City for review and approval that on-site structures, features, and facilities have been designed and will be constructed in conformance with applicable provisions of the 2016 California Building Code and the recommendations cited in the project -specific geotechnical investigation. Geotechnical recommendations include development of the project site in accordance with applicable seismic code values and design methods determined by the Project Structural Engineer, as well as remedial earthwork and/or ground improvement to provide a sufficient layer of engineered fill or densified soil beneath the structural footings/foundations. A qualified geotechnical engineer shall be present during demolition of the on-site structure to confirm the depth of foundation elements. Additionally, verification testing must be performed upon completion of ground improvements to confirm that the compressible soils have been sufficiently densified. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City's Building & Safety Services Department. 4.4 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS SC GHG-1 Compliance with applicable Rancho Cucamonga Sustainable Community Action Plan GHG reduction policies. Prior to the approval of building and/or occupancy permits, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City for review and approval that on-site structures, features, and facilities have been designed and will be constructed in conformance with the following enforceable actions: 1. Construction and building materials shall be produced and/or manufactured locally. Use "Green Building Materials such as materials that are resource -efficient, recycled, and manufactured in an environmentally friendly way, including low-volitile organic compound (VOC) materials. 2. Design all buildings to exceed the California Building Code Title 24 energy standard including, but not limited to, any combination of: a. Increased insulation. b. Limit air leakage through the structure. c. Incorporate Energy Star or better rated windows, space heating and cooling equipment, light fixtures, and appliances. d. Landscape and develop site utilizing shade, prevailing winds, and landscaping. 132 E6—E 11P257 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT e. Install efficient lighting and lighting control systems. f. Install light colored "cool" roofs and cool pavements. g. Install solar or light emitting diodes (LEDs) for outdoor lighting. 3. Prepare a comprehensive water conservation strategy appropriate for the project and include the following: a. Install water efficient landscapes and irrigation systems and divices in compliance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. b. Use reclaimed water for landscaping within the project, if available. c. Design buildings to be water efficient by installing water efficient fixtures and appliances including low flow faucets, dual flush toilets, and waterless urinals/water heaters. d. Design irrigation to control runoff and to remove water to non -vegetated surfaces. 4. Reuse and recycle construction and demolition waste. Provide interior and exterior storage areas for recyclables and green waste in public areas. Educate employees about reducing waste and about recycling. 4.5 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MM HAZ-1 Removal of Hazardous Materials: Prior to issuance of demolition permits, the numerous chemicals stored on the project site shall be disposed of as hazardous waste by a California Division of Occupational Health and Safety (CalOSHA) licensed Hazardous Materials Substances Removal contractor in accordance with applicable State and federal laws. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City's Building & Safety Services Department. MM HAZ-2 Asbestos Survey: Prior to issuance of demolition permits, the project applicant shall provide evidence to the City that inspection for Asbestos -Containing Building Materials (ACM) is conducted by a California Site Surveillance Technician (CSST) registered by the California Division of Occupational Health and Safety (CalOSHA) for ACM. The purpose of the ACM inspection is to locate and identify suspected ACM that will be affected during the demolition portion of the project. Once a visual inspection is performed, representative asbestos samples (if present) shall be collected in accordance with the USEPA established guidelines document, "Guidance for Controlling Asbestos -Containing Materials in Buildings (USEPA 560/5-85-024, 1985)" If it is determined that no ACM is present, no further work is required, and demolition permits may be issued in accordance with all remaining applicable regulations. However, if it is determined that the project site contains ACM, Mitigation Measure HAZ-3 shall apply. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City's Building & Safety Services Department. MM HAZ-3 Asbestos Abatement: Prior to the demolition of any structure determined to contain Asbestos -Containing Building Materials (ACM), all ACM shall be abated from the project site. An Asbestos Notification and Procedure -5 Work Plan shall be prepared and submitted to the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) for approval before any asbestos abatement may commence. The work plan shall include containment measures to control asbestos dust and debris created during abatement. All asbestos abatement shall be conducted by a California State Registered Asbestos Abatement Contractor registered by 133 E6—Ell P258 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26T" MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT the Division of Occupational Health and Safety in accordance with the California Administrative Code, Title S, and article 2.5 and the SCAQMD Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act pursuant to Code of Federal Regulations Chapter 40, Part 763, Subpart E. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City's Building & Safety Services Department. MM HAZ-4 Ontario International Airport Overflight Notification: Prior to issuance of occupancy permits, the project applicant shall provide evidence to the City that appropriate real estate disclosures identifying the impacts of airport overflight are provided to all tenants upon lease, transfer, or sale of any residential or commercial unit on site. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City's Building & Safety Services Department. 4.6 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY SC HYD -1 Coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit. Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit and subsequent grading permit, the project applicant shall file and obtain a Notice of Intent (NOI) with the Regional Water Quality Control Board in order to be in compliance with the State NPDES General Construction Storm Water Permit for discharge of surface runoff associated with construction activities. Evidence that this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Discharger's Identification Number) shall be submitted to the City for coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit. The NO] shall address the potential for an extended and discontinuous construction period based on funding availability. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utilities & Engineering Department and Development Services Department, as appropriate. SC HYD -2 Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit and subsequent grading permit, the project applicant shall submit to and receive approval from the City of Rancho Cucamonga of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP shall include a surface water control plan and erosion control plan citing specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion during the entire demolition, grading, and construction period. In addition, the SWPPP shall emphasize structural and nonstructural Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control sediment and non-visible discharges from the site. The SWPPP shall include inspection forms for routine monitoring of the site during both the demolition and construction phases to ensure NPDES compliance and that additional BMPs and erosion control measures will be documented In the SWPPP and utilized if necessary. The SWPPP shall address the potential for an extended and discontinuous demolition and construction period based on funding availability. The SWPPP shall be kept on site for the entire duration of project demolition and construction and shall be available to the local RWQCB for inspection at any time. BMPs to be implemented may include the following: • Sediment discharges from the site may be controlled by the following: sandbags, silt fences, straw wattles and temporary basins (if deemed necessary), and other discharge control devices. The construction and condition of the BMPs shall be periodically inspected during demolition and construction, and repairs shall be made when necessary as required by the SWPPP. 134 E6—E11 P259 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26 TI MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT • Materials that have the potential to contribute to non-visible pollutants to storm water must not be placed in drainage ways and must be contained, elevated, and placed in temporary storage containment areas. • All loose piles of soil, silt, clay, sand, debris, and other earthen'material shall be protected in a reasonable manner to eliminate any discharge from the site. Stockpiles shall be surrounded by silt fences and covered with plastic tarps. • In addition, the construction contractor shall be responsible for ,performing and documenting the application of BMPs identified in the SWPPP. Weekly inspections shall be performed on sandbag barriers and other sediment controlmeasures called for in the SWPPP.,Monthly reports and inspection logs shall be maintained by the contractor and reviewed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the representatives of the State Water Resources Control Board. In the event that it is not feasible to implement specific BMPs, the City of Rancho Cucamonga can make a determination that other BMPs will provide equivalent or superior treatment either on or off site. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utilities & Engineering Department and Development Services Department, as appropriate. SC HYD -3 Water Quality Management Plan. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall submit a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) to the City of Rancho Cucamonga for review and approval. The project shall implement project design features identified in the WQMP. The. WQMP shall demonstrate that any proposed on-site development plan includes BMPs for source control, pollution prevention, site design, low impact development (LID) implementation, and structural treatment control. BMPs shall be designed and implemented to retain the project site's minimum design capture volume and hydromodification volume of 30,355 cubic feet of runoff to ensure post -development stormwater runoff volume or time of concentration does not.exceed pre -development stormwater runoff. Periodic maintenance of any required infiltration basin and landscaped areas during project occupancy and operation shall be in accordance with the schedule outlined in the WQMP. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utilities & Engineering Department and Development Services Department, as appropriate. 4.7 NOISE MM NO[ -1: Construction Noise Monitoring and Temporary Noise Barriers. Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards specified in City of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 17.66.050, as measured at the adjacent property line. During construction, the applicant shall- perform weekly noise level monitoring. The findings of the noise monitoring shall be reported to the, 'Building Official and City Planning Department on a monthly basis; however, the Building Official and City Planning Department must be notified immediately if noise levels exceed 65 dBA when measured at the adjacent residential property line or 70 dBA when measured at the adjacent commercial or industrial property line per the City of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 17.66.050. If noise levels exceed 65 dBA or 70 dBA at the adjacent residential or commercial/industrial property ,lines, respectively, construction activities shall be halted, reduced in 'intensity to a. level of compliance, or temporary construction noise barriers shall be used. The project shall implement a 135 E6—E11 P260 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT temporary 14 -foot barrier with a minimum STC -27 (or higher) along the western property line during construction to shield existing residences from construction and achieve a 13 dB reduction in noise levels to within the City's exterior noise limit of 65 dBA when measured at the adjacent residential property line. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Building Official and City Planning Department. MM NOI-2 Construction Noise -Attenuating Practices and Devices. The following noise -attenuating practices and devices would be implemented by the construction contractor during project construction: • Construction staging areas would be located as far from noise -sensitive land uses as feasible. • During construction, the contractor shall ensure all construction equipment is equipped with appropriate noise -attenuating devices. • Idling equipment shall be turned off when not in use. • Equipment shall be maintained so that vehicles and their loads are secured from rattling and banging. MM NOI-3: Construction Techniques. Prior to issuance of occupancy permits, the project shall incorporate building construction techniques that achieve the City's interior 45 dBA CNEL standard. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Building Official and City Planning Department. MM NOI-4: Interior Sound Attenuation Study. Prior to issuance of building permits, the project proponent shall demonstrate to the City Building Department that the proposed building shell assembly and window assemblies will achieve exterior to interior noise reduction that will meet the State/City Building Code requirement of 45 dBA CNEL. Based on the building plans, an interior sound attenuation study shall be prepared and submitted to the City confirming findings. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Building Official and City Planning Department. MM NOI-S: Compliance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Noise Regulations and California Title 24. The project shall comply with California Title 24 insulation building requirements for multifamily dwelling units for common separating assemblies (e.g., floor/ceiling assemblies and demising walls). This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Building Official and City Planning Department. 4.8 TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC MM TRA -1 Opening Year (2019) Plus Project Improvements: Prior to issuance of the first occupancy permit, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City for review and approval that the following improvements have been installed: • Haven Avenue/6`h Street: Modify the westbound approach from having one left -turn lane, two through lanes, and one right -turn lane to having two left -turn lanes, two through lanes, and one right -turn lane. If these improvements are in place prior to application for occupancy, no further work is required, and the mitigation shall be deemed effected. However, if these improvements are not in place prior to application for occupancy, the project applicant shall be responsible for 136 E6—E 11P261 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26T" MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT providing evidence to the City for review and sign -off of their implementation prior to issuance of occupancy permits. MM TRA -2 Year 2040 Plus Project Improvements: The applicant shall provide evidence to the City for review and approval that the following improvements have been installed: • Haven Avenue/Jersey Boulevard: Restripe the westbound approach to provide a shared left -turn lane and a left -turn lane with split phasing in the east -west direction. • The City shall review and sign -off on these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. 4.9 TRIBAL RESOURCES MM TCR -1 Tribal Monitoring: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall retain a qualified representative from the Gabrielino Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation to monitor all clearing, grubbing, and grading activities at the project site and provide input to the on-site archaeologist, who shall be equipped to record and salvage cultural resources that may be unearthed during such activities. This measure shall not apply to importation of non-native soil onto the project site prior to actual grading of native on-site soil. The archaeologist shall assess the significance of any cultural finds in consultation with the qualified representative from the Gabrielino Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation and select an appropriate disposition for the resource based on the significance of the find and tribal input. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department. MM TCR -2 Human Remains: If human remains or funerary objects are encountered during any activities associated with the project, work in the immediate vicinity (within a 100 -foot buffer of the find) shall cease and the County Coroner shall be contacted pursuant to State Health and Safety Code 47050.5 and that code enforced for the duration of the project. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department. MM TCR -3 Native American Cultural Resources: In the event that Native American cultural resources are discovered during project activities, all work in the immediate vicinity of the find (within a 60 -foot buffer) shall cease and a qualified archaeologist meeting Secretary of Interior standards shall be hired to assess the find. Work on the other portions of the project outside of the buffered area may continue during this assessment period. Additionally, San Manuel Band of Mission Indians will be contacted if any such find occurs and be provided information and permitted/invited to perform a site visit when the archaeologist makes his/her assessment, so as to provide Tribal input. MM TCR -4 Cultural Resources Treatment Plan: If significant Native American historical resources, as defined by CEQA (as amended, 2015), are discovered and avoidance cannot be ensured, an Secretary of Interior -qualified archaeologist shall be retained to develop a cultural resources Treatment Plan, as well as a Discovery and Monitoring Plan, the drafts of which shall be provided to San Manuel Band of Mission Indians for review and comment. a. All in -field investigations, assessments, and/or data recovery enacted pursuant to the finalized Treatment Plan shall be monitored by a San Manuel Band of Mission Indians Tribal Participant(s). 137 E6—E11 P262 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT b. The Lead Agency and/or applicant shall, in good faith, consult with San Manuel Band of Mission Indians on the disposition and treatment of any artifacts or other cultural materials encountered during the project. 138 E6—E 11P263 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26T" MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 5.0 CERTIFICATION I certify that I am the applicant for the project described in this Initial Study. I acknowledge that I have read this Initial Study and the proposed mitigation measures. Further, I have revised the project plans or proposals and/or hereby agree to the proposed mitigation measures to avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant environmental effects would occur. Applicant's Signature: Date: August 14, 2018 Print Name and Title: Chuck Buquet, President; Charles Joseph Associates 139 E6—E 11P264 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 6.0 REFERENCES Bean, Lowell John, and Charles R. Smith. 1978. Serrano. In California, edited by R.F. Heizer, pp. 570-574. Handbook of North American Indians, vol. 8, W.C. Sturtevant, general editor, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. California Air Resources Board (CARS). CARS Fact Sheet: Air Pollution and Health. http://www.arb.ca.gov/research//fs/fsl/fsl.htm (accessed March 29, 2018). California's 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. November 2017. California Department of Conservation. California Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. https://www. a rcgis.com///. html?useExisting=l&layers=d276d84581adf921de7452f765. Accessed February 8, 2018. Mineral Land Use Classification Map, Special Report 143, Plate 6.9. Claremont -Upland P -C Region. California Division and Mines and Geology. Guasti Quadrangle. 1987. San Bernardino County Williamson Act FY 2015/2016 Sheet 2 of 2. ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov///`/—so—IS_16—WA.pdf. Accessed February 8, 2018. . Special Report 143, Mineral Land Classification of The Greater Los Angeles Area Part Vi, Classification of Sand And Gravel Resource Areas, Claremont -Upland Production -Consumption Region. Division of Mines and Geology. 1984. California Department of Transportation. 2018. Official Designated Scenic Highways. July 18, 2017. httP://www.dot.ca-gov///_Iivability/highways/.htm. Accessed February 15, 2018. CalRecycle, http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/LGCentral/GoalMeasure/Disposa]Rate/Graphs/Disposal.htm, site accessed February 22, 2018. 2018. Facility/Site Summary Details: Mid -Valley Sanitary Landfill (36 -AA -0055). 2018. http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/////. Accessed January 20, 2018. Chaffey Joint Union High School District. School Accountability Report Cards. 2018. https://cjuhsd- ca.schoolloop.com/cros/page_view?d=x&piid=&vpid=1304410582453, accessed June 21, 2018. June 21, 2018. Personal Communication. Email between Dionisios Glentis (LSA) and Philip Schuler (Chaffey Joint Union High School District Executive Director of Assessment and Research) with information about Student Generation Factors. Concept Design. Site Lighting Exhibit. December 1, 2017 Colgan Consulting Corporation. City of Rancho Cucamonga Development Impact Fee Study Report. April 22, 2014. Cucamonga School District. School Accountability Report Card. 2018. http://cucamonga- ca.schoolloop.com/pf4/cros2/view—page?d=x&group id=1516954841924&vdid=il44ehl8grgial ph, accessed June 21, 2018. 140 E6—E 11P265 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT . June 21, 2018. Personal Communication. Telephone call between Dionisios Glentis (LSA) and Rick Jensen (Cucamonga School District Assistant Superintendent of Business Services) with information about Student Generation Factors. Cucamonga Valley Water District. 2016.2015 Urban Water Management Plan. June 2016. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Flood Insurance Rate Map No. 06071C8630J. February 18, 2015. https:Hmsc.fema.gov//?AddressQuery=highland%2C%20california#. Accessed February 21, 2018. FirstCarbon Solutions. A Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment and Paleontological Review, Haven and 26`6 Street Project, Rancho Cucamonga, California. March 1, 2017. Geotechnical Professionals, Inc. Geotechnical Feasibility Investigation Proposed Mixed Use Development. November 30, 2016. LA/Ontario International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Mead & Hunt, Inc. April 19, 2011. Linscott Law & Greenspan Engineers. Updated Parking Demand Analysis for the Proposed Haven at 26th Mixed -Use Project, Rancho Cucamonga, California. January 11, 2018. Rancho Cucamonga, City of. City of Rancho Cucamonga 2035 Sustainable Community Action Plan. April 2017. https://www.cityofrc.us////.asp. Accessed February 19, 2018. Engineering Fees. Updated March 1, 2018. Environmental Impact Report for the Empire Lakes/Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan Sub -Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project. SCH No. 2015041083. November 2015. . Rancho Cucamonga 2010 General Plan Update Draft Program Environmental Impact Report. SCH No. 2000061027. February 16, 2010. . Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. May 19, 2010. . Initial Study Checklist, Attachment A. Measuring Average Police Response Times for Emergency Service Calls in 2017. https://performance.cityofrc.us/en/stat/goals/h97i-wfck/2k4r-gwng/8dsh-fxwv/view (accessed April 3, 2018). San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department. Rancho Cucamonga Patrol Station. http://cros.sbcounty.gov/sheriff/PatrolStations/RanchoCucamonga.aspx (accessed April 3, 2018). San Bernardino County Watershed Action Plan. Stormwater Facility Mapping Tool. http://permitrack.sbcounty.gov/wap/ (accessed January 2, 2018). South Coast Air Quality Management District. Final 2016Air Quality Management Plan. March 2016. 141 E6 -E11 P266 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT . Final 2012 Air Quality Management Plan. February 2013. Guidance for Localized Significance Thresholds. July 2008, Updated October 2009. Southern California Association of Governments. 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy: A Plon for Mobility, Accessibility, Sustainability, and a High Quality of Life. April 2016. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. Web Soil Survey. https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx (accessed March 30, 2018). Upland, City of. Cable Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. September 14, 2015. 142 E6—E 11P267 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT APPENDIX A AIR QUALITY ASSESSMENT E6 -E 11P268 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT APPENDIX B HABITAT ASSESSMENT E6 -E 11P269 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT APPENDIX C CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT E6 -E 11P270 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT APPENDIX D GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION E6-El1P271 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT E6 -Ell P272 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26T" MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT APPENDIX F LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT PRELIMINARY CALCULATIONS E6 -Ell P273 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT APPENDIX G ACOUSTICAL IMPACT STUDY E6 -E11 P274 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT APPENDIX 1 HAVEN AT 26TH - TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON MEMORANDUM E6 -Ell P275 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAVEN AT 26TH MIXED -USED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT APPENDIX K PARKING DEMAND ANALYSIS E6 -Ell P276 MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST (INITIAL STUDY PART 111) Project File No.: General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658, Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656 Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017-00657, Design Review DRC2017-00654, Uniform Sign Program DRC2017-00659 and Minor Exception DRC2017-00872 Applicant: Urban Offerings, Inc. Initial Study Prepared by: Date: August 14, 2018 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance _Frequency Section',1 "-Aesthetics 1 None Sdction-2: --Agricultural; Resources 1 None Section 3 —Air Quality 1) None Section 4 - Biological Resources 1) Pre -construction Nesting Bird Survey. Pre- PD g Review of report D 2/4 construction nesting bird survey shall be and plans during conducted within three to seven days prior construction to demolition and ground -disturbing activities if such activities are proposed during the nesting season (generally February 1 through August 31). The survey shall encompass the entire area of project - related demolition and ground disturbance. If no active avian nests are found during survey, no additional mitigation will be required. If an active avian nest is discovered during survey, construction activities shall be redirected around the nest(s). A qualified biologist shall delineate the boundaries of any such buffer area. The buffer shall be sufficient to ensure that nesting behavior is Page 1 of 24 m i m to N V DD Mitigation Measures No. ! Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date /Initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance not adversely affected by the construction activity. If demolition and/or ground - disturbing activities are delayed or suspended for more than seven days after the survey, the site shall be resurveyed. Should eggs or fledglings be discovered in any native nest, these resources cannot be disturbed until the young have hatched and fledged (matured to a stage that they can leave the nest on their own). Once the qualified biologist has determined that young birds have successfully fledged or the nest has otherwise become inactive, a monitoring report shall be prepared and submitted to the City. The monitoring report shall summarize the results of the nest monitoring, describe construction restrictions currently in place, and confirm that construction activities can proceed within the buffer area without jeopardizing the survival of the young birds. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department. Section -:5- Cultural Resources Page 2 of 24 Mitigation Measures No. I Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date /Initials Sanctions for :Non -Compliance 1) Unanticipated Cultural Resources: Prior to PD B/C Review of report A/D 2/3/4 issuance of a grading permit, the project and plans during applicant shall retain a qualified construction archaeologist to monitor all clearing, grubbing, and grading activities at the project site. The archaeologist shall be equipped to record and salvage cultural resources that may be unearthed during such activities. This measure shall not apply to importation of non-native soil onto the project site prior to actual grading of native on-site soil. The archaeologist shall be empowered to temporarily halt or divert grading equipment to allow recording and removal of unearthed resources. The archaeologist shall assess the significance of any cultural finds in consultation with affected Native American tribal representatives and select an appropriate disposition for the resource based on the significance of the find and tribal input. If cultural resources are discovered on the project site, ground -disturbing activities shall be suspended within 50 feet of the resource(s) and an exclusionary buffer shall be established. The archaeologist and representatives of the appropriate Native American Tribe(s), the project applicant, and the City Planning Department shall confer regarding mitigation of the discovered resource(s). The archaeological monitor shall continue monitoring areas of the project site not included in the exclusionary buffer, and a treatment plan and/or preservation plan shall be prepared by the project Page 3 of 24 m m i m J J v N OD O Mitigation Measures No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring _FrequencyVerification Timing of Method of Verification Verified Date /Initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance archaeologist and reviewed by representatives of the appropriate Native American Tribe(s), the project applicant, and the City Planning Department for implementation to protect the identified cultural resource(s) from damage and destruction. A final report containing the significance and treatment of findings shall be prepared by the archaeologist and submitted to the City Planning Department and the appropriate Native American Tribe(s). All cultural material, excluding sacred, ceremonial, grave goods and human remains, collected during the grading monitoring program and from any previous archaeological studies or excavations on the project site shall be curated, as determined by the treatment plan, according to the current professional repository standards. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department. 2) Discovery of Paleontological Resources: PD B/C Review of report C 2 Prior to issuance of grading permits, the City and plans during shall verify that the following notes are construction included on the grading plans: "If any suspected fossil -bearing sediments or paleontological resources are discovered during ground -disturbing activities, the construction supervisor is obligated to halt work within a 50 -foot radius around the find and establish an exclusionary buffer. Construction personnel shall not collect or move any paleontological materials or further disturb any soils within the Page 4 of 24 m rn i M_ J v N 00 J Mitigation Measures No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date /Initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance exclusionary buffer, but construction activity may continue unimpeded on other portions of the project site. The project applicant shall retain a qualified (project) paleontologist to inspect the find in accordance with federal, State, and local guidelines to determine if the find is fossiliferous. If the project paleontologist determines the find is not fossiliferous, no further evaluation shall be required within the exclusionary buffer, and construction activity shall be allowed to resume therein. However, if the project paleontologist determines the find is fossiliferous, construction activity shall not resume within the exclusionary buffer, and Mitigation Measure CUL -3 shall apply." This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department. 3) Treatment of Paleontological Resources: If PD C/D Review of report AID 3/4 the project paleontologist determines fossil- and plans during bearing sediments or paleontological construction resources are discovered on the project site, the project paleontologist shall develop and implement a Paleontological Resource Impact Mitigation Program (PRIMP) for this project. The PRIMP shall include the methods that will be used to protect paleontological resources that may exist within the project site, as well as procedures for monitoring, fossil preparation and identification, curation into a repository, and preparation of a report at the conclusion of grading. This measure shall be implemented to the Page 5 of 24 M ON I -o N OD N Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance satisfaction of the City Planning Department. • Excavation and grading activities in PD C During Construction A 4 deposits with high paleontological sensitivity, as determined by the project paleontologist, shall be monitored by a paleontological monitor in accordance with the PRIMP. No monitoring is required for excavations in soil with no paleontological sensitivity (Artificial Fill). • If paleontological resources are PD C During Construction A 4 encountered during the course of ground disturbance, the paleontological monitor shall have the authority to temporarily redirect construction away from the area of the find in order to assess its significance. • In the event that paleontological resources PD C During Construction A 4 are encountered when a paleontological monitor is not present, work in the immediate area of the find shall be redirected and a paleontologist shall be contacted to assess the find for significance in accordance with the PRIMP. • Collected resources shall be prepared to PD C/D/E Review of Report D 3/7 the point of identification, identified to the lowest taxonomic level possible, cataloged, and curated into the permanent collections of a scientific institution. • At the conclusion of the monitoring PD D Review of Report D 3/7 program, a report of findings shall be prepared to document the results of the monitoring program. Page 6 of 24 M rn m v 00 N W w Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Verification Date/Initials Non -Compliance Section6 — Geology and Soils _FrequencyVerification 1) None Section 7 — Greenhouse,Gas Emissions 1) None Section 8 — Hazards and Waste.Materials 1) Removal of Hazardous Materials: Prior to B0 B Review of Report A/D 2 issuance of demolition permits, the numerous chemicals stored on the project site shall be disposed of as hazardous waste by a California Division of Occupational Health and Safety (CalOSHA) licensed Hazardous Materials Substances Removal contractor in accordance with applicable State and federal laws. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City's Building & Safety Services Department. 2) Asbestos Survey: Prior to issuance of B0 B Review of Report A/D 2 demolition permits, the project applicant shall provide evidence to the City that inspection for Asbestos -Containing Building Materials (ACM) is conducted by a California Site Surveillance Technician (CSST) registered by the California Division of Occupational Health and Safety (CalOSHA) for ACM. The purpose of the ACM inspection is to locate and identify suspected ACM that will be affected during the demolition portion of the project. Once a visual inspection is performed, representative asbestos samples (if present) shall be collected in accordance with the EPA established guidelines document, "Guidance for Controlling Asbestos -Containing Materials in Buildings (EPA 560/5-85-024, 1985)." If it is Page 7 of 24 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance determined that no ACM is present, no further work is required, and demolition permits may be issued in accordance with all remaining applicable regulations. However, if it is determined that the project site contains ACM, Mitigation Measure HAZ-3 shall apply. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City's Building & Safety Services Department. 3) Asbestos Abatement: Prior to the BO B Review of Report A/B 2 demolition of any structure determined to contain Asbestos -Containing Building Materials (ACM), all ACM shall be abated from the project site. An Asbestos Notification and Procedure -5 Work Plan shall be prepared and submitted to the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) for approval before any asbestos abatement may commence. The work plan shall include containment measures to control asbestos dust and debris created during abatement. All asbestos abatement shall be conducted by a California State Registered Asbestos Abatement Contractor registered by the Division of Occupational Health and Safety in accordance with the California Administrative Code, Title 8, and article 2.5 and the SCAQMD Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act pursuant to Code of Federal Regulations Chapter 40, Part 763, subpart E. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City's Building & Safety Services Department. 4) Ontario International Airport Overflight BO D I Review of D 3 Notification: Prior to issuance of occupancy I Disclosures Page 8 of 24 M rn 1 M_ J v N 00 Ul Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring _Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance permits, the project applicant shall provide evidence to the City that appropriate real estate disclosures identifying the impacts of airport overflight are provided to all tenants upon lease, transfer, or sale of any residential or commercial unit on site. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City's Building & Safety Services Department. Section 9'— Hydrology and Water Quality_ 1) None Section 10 — Land Use and -Planning 1) None Section 11 — Mineral Resources 1) None Section 12-- Noise 1) Construction Noise Monitoring and pD/BO C During Construction A/D 4 Temporary Noise Barriers. Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards specified in City of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 17.66.050, as measured at the adjacent property line. During construction, the applicant shall perform weekly noise level monitoring. The findings of the noise monitoring shall be reported to the Building Official and City Planning Department on a monthly basis; however, the Building Official and City Planning Department must be notified immediately if noise levels exceed 65 dBA when measured at the adjacent residential property line or 70 dBA when measured at the adjacent commercial or industrial property line per the City of Page 9 of 24 Mitigation Measures No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date /Initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 17.66.050. If noise levels exceed 65 dBA or 70 dBA at the adjacent residential or commercial/industrial property lines, respectively, construction activities shall be halted, reduced in intensity to a level of compliance, or temporary construction noise barriers shall be used. The project shall implement a temporary 14 -foot barrier with a minimum STC -27 (or higher) along the western property line during construction to shield existing residences from construction and achieve a 13 dBA reduction in noise levels to within the City's exterior noise limit of 65 dBA when measured at the adjacent residential property line. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Building Official and City Planning Department. 2) Construction Noise -Attenuating Practices PD/BO C During Construction A 4 and Devices. The following noise -attenuating practices and devices would be implemented by the construction contractor during project construction: • Construction staging areas would be located as far from noise -sensitive land uses as feasible. • During construction, the contractor shall ensure all construction equipment is equipped with appropriate noise - attenuating devices. • Idling equipment shall be turned off when not in use. Page 10 of 24 m m I M v N 0J V Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action forMonitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance • Equipment shall be maintained so that vehicles and their loads are secured from rattling and banging. 3) Construction Techniques. Prior to issuance PD/BO C During Construction A/C 3 of occupancy permits, the project shall incorporate building construction techniques that achieve the City's interior 45 dBA CNEL standard. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Building Official and City Planning Department. 4) Interior Sound Attenuation Study. Prior to PD/BO B Review of report C/D 2 issuance of building permits, the project and plans proponent shall demonstrate to the City Building Department that the proposed building shell assembly and window assemblies will achieve exterior to interior noise reduction that will meet the State/City Building Code requirement of 45 dBA CNEL. Based on the building plans, an interior sound attenuation study shall be prepared and submitted to the City confirming findings. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Building Official and City Planning Department. 5) Compliance with the City of Rancho PD/BO WE Review of report C/D 2/3/7 Cucamonga Noise Regulations and California and plans Title 24. The project shall comply with California Title 24 insulation building requirements for multifamily dwelling units for common separating assemblies (e.g., floor/ceiling assemblies and demising walls). This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Building Official and City Planning Department. Page 11 of 24 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance Section 13 -Population and Housing 1) None Section 14 - Public Services 1) None Section 15— Recreation ` 1) None Section 16—TransportationfTraffic 1) Opening Year (2019) Plus Project PD/CE D Review of plans A/C 3 Improvements: Prior to issuance of the first during construction occupancy permit, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City for review and approval that the following improvements have been installed: • Haven Avenue/61h Street: Modify the westbound approach from having one left -turn lane, two through lanes, and one right -turn lane to having two left -turn lanes, two through lanes, and one right -turn lane. If these improvements are in place prior to application for occupancy, no further work is required, and the mitigation shall be deemed effected. However, if these 'improvements are not in place prior to application for occupancy, the project applicant shall be responsible for providing evidence to the City for review and sign -off of their implementation prior to issuance of occupancy permits. 2) Year 2040 Plus Project Improvements: The PD/CE C Review of plans A/C 2 applicant shall provide evidence to the City during construction for review and approval that the following Page 12 of 24 m rn I M v N 00 tio Mitigation Measures No. I Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance improvements have been installed: • Haven Avenue/Jersey Boulevard: Restripe the westbound approach to provide a shared left -turn lane and a left - turn lane with split phasing in the east - west direction. The City shall review and sign off on these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. Section 17` -Tribal' Cultural Resources 1) Tribal Monitoring: Prior to issuance of a PD B/C Review of report A/D 2/3/4 grading permit, the project applicant shall and plans during retain a qualified representative from the construction Gabrielino Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation to monitor all clearing, grubbing, and grading activities at the project site and provide input to the on-site archaeologist, who shall be equipped to record and salvage cultural resources that may be unearthed during such activities. This measure shall not apply to importation of non-native soil onto the project site prior to actual grading of native on-site soil. The archaeologist shall assess the significance of any cultural finds in consultation with the qualified representative from the Gabrielino Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation and select an appropriate disposition for the resource based on the significance of the find and tribal input. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department 2) Human Remains: If human remains or PD C Review of report A/D 3/4 and plans during Page 13 of 24 m rn i m v N CD O Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance funerary objects are encountered during any construction activities associated with the project, work in the immediate vicinity (within a 100 -foot buffer of the find) shall cease and the County Coroner shall be contacted pursuant to State Health and Safety Code §7050.5 and that code enforced for the duration of the project. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department 3) Native American Cultural Resources: In the PD C Review of report A/B/D 3/4 event that Native American cultural and plans during resources are discovered during project construction activities, all work in the immediate vicinity of the find (within a 60 -foot buffer) shall cease and a qualified archaeologist meeting Secretary of Interior standards shall be hired to assess the find. Work on the other portions of the project outside of the buffered area may continue during this assessment period. Additionally, San Manuel Band of Mission Indians will be contacted if any such find occurs and be provided information and permitted/invited to perform' a site visit when the archaeologist makes his/her assessment, so as to provide Tribal input. 4) Cultural Resources Treatment Plan: If PD C Review of report A/B/D 3/4 significant Native American historical and plans during resources, as defined by CECIA (as amended, construction 2015), are discovered and avoidance cannot be ensured, an Secretary of Interior -qualified archaeologist shall be retained to develop a cultural resources Treatment Plan, as well as a Discovery and Monitoring Plan, the drafts Page 14 of 24 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance of which shall be provided to San Manuel Band of Mission Indians for review and comment. a. All in -field investigations, assessments, PD C During Construction A/B 3/4 and/or data recovery enacted pursuant to the finalized Treatment Plan shall be monitored by a San Manuel Band of Mission Indians Tribal Participant(s). b. The Lead Agency and/or applicant shall, PD C During Construction A/B 3/4 in good faith, consult with San Manuel Band of Mission Indians on the disposition and treatment of any artifacts or other cultural materials encountered during the project. Section 18 — Utility and Service'Systems 1) None Section 19 - Mandatory Findings of Significance 1) None Page 15 of 24 m C i _m J v N rQ N Standard Conditions Standard Conditions No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials I Non -Compliance Section 1- Aesthetics 1 None Section 2 - Agricultural Resources 1 None Section 3 - Air Quality 1 None Section 4 -' Biological -Resources 1) None Section 5 — Cultural Resources 1) None Section 6 - Geologyand,-Soils 1) Compliance with applicable California BO B/C/D Review of report A/C/D 2/3 Building Code and Project -specific and plans during Geotechnical Recommendations. Prior to construction the approval of grading and/or building permits, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City for review and approval that on- site structures, features, and facilities have been designed and will be constructed in conformance with applicable provisions of the 2016 California Building Code and the recommendations cited in the project - specific geotechnical investigation. Geotechnical recommendations include development of the project site in accordance with applicable seismic code values and design methods determined by the Project Structural Engineer, as well as remedial earthwork and/or ground improvement to provide a sufficient layer of engineered fill or densified soil beneath the structural footings/foundations. A qualified Page 16 of 24 Standard Conditions No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance geotechnical engineer shall be present during demolition of the on-site structure to confirm the depth of foundation elements. Additionally, verification testing must be performed upon completion of ground improvements to confirm that the compressible soils have been sufficiently densified. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City's Building & Safety Services Department. Section 7 — Greenhouse Gas:Emissions 1) Compliance with applicable Rancho PD/BO B/C/D Review of report A/C/D 2/3 Cucamonga Sustainable Community Action and plans during Plan GHG reduction policies. Prior to the construction approval of building and/or occupancy permits, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City for review and approval that on- site structures, features, and facilities have been designed and will be constructed in, conformance with the following enforceable actions: • Construction and building PD/BO B/C/D Review of report A/C/D 2/3 materials shall be produced and/or and plans during manufactured locally. Use "Green construction Building Materials such as materials that are resource -efficient, recycled, and manufactured in an environmentally friendly way, including low -volatile organic compound (VOC) materials. • Design all buildings to exceed the PD/BO B/C/D Review of report A/C/D 2/3 California Building Code Title 24 energy and plans during standard including, but not limited to, construction any combination of: Page 17 of 24 Standard Conditions No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Freque cy Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date /Initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance o Increased insulation. o Limit air leakage through the structure. o Incorporate Energy Star or better rated windows, space heating and cooling equipment, light fixtures, and appliances. o Landscape and develop site utilizing shade, prevailing winds, and landscaping. o Install efficient lighting and lighting control systems. o Install light colored "cool' roofs and cool pavements. o Install solar or light emitting diodes (LEDs) for outdoor lighting. o Prepare a comprehensive water PD/BO B/C/D Review of report A/C/D 2/3 conservation strategy appropriate for the and plans during project and include the following: construction o Install water efficient landscapes and irrigation systems and devices in compliance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. o Use reclaimed water for landscaping within the project, if available. o Design buildings to be water efficient by installing water efficient fixtures and appliances including low flow faucets, dual flush toilets, and Page 18 of 24 M m I m v N to Standard Conditions No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance waterless urinals/water heaters. o Design irrigation to control runoff and to remove water to non- vegetated surfaces. • Reuse and recycle construction and PD/BO B/C/D Review of report A/C/D 2/3 demolition waste. Provide interior and and plans during exterior storage areas for recyclables and construction green waste in public areas. Educate employees about reducing waste and about recycling. Section 8 —Hazards and Waste Materials 1) None Section 9 — Hydrology and Water Quality 1) Coverage under the NPDES General CDD/CE B Review of Plans B/C 2 Construction Permit. Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit and subsequent grading permit, the project applicant shall file and obtain a Notice of Intent (N01) with the Regional Water Quality Control Board in order to be in compliance with the State NPDES General Construction Storm Water Permit for discharge of surface runoff associated with construction activities. Evidence that this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Discharger's Identification Number) shall be submitted to the City for coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit. The N01 shall address the potential for an extended and discontinuous construction period based on funding availability. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 19 of 24 Standard Conditions No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date /initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance Municipal Utilities & Engineering Department and Development Services Department, as appropriate. 2) Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan CDD/CE BIC Review of plans A/B/C 2/4 (SWPPP). Prior to the issuance of a during construction demolition permit and subsequent grading permit, the project applicant shall submit to and receive approval from the City of Rancho Cucamonga of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP shall include a surface water control plan and erosion control plan citing specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion during the entire demolition, grading, and construction period. In addition, the SWPPP shall emphasize structural and nonstructural Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control sediment and non-visible discharges from the site. The SWPPP shall include inspection forms for routine monitoring of the site during both the demolition and construction phases to ensure NPDES compliance and that additional BMPs and erosion control measures will be documented in the SWPPP and utilized if necessary. The SWPPP shall address the potential for an extended and discontinuous demolition and construction period based on funding availability. The SWPPP shall be kept on site for the entire duration of project demolition and construction and shall be available to the local RWQCB for inspection at any time. BMPs to be implemented may include the following: • Sediment discharges from the site Page 20 of 24 M rn I m v N V Standard Conditions No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date /Initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance may be controlled by the following: sandbags, silt fences, straw wattles and temporary basins (if deemed necessary), and other discharge control devices. The construction and condition of the BMPs shall be periodically inspected during demolition and construction, and repairs shall be made when necessary as required by the SWPPP. • Materials that have the potential to contribute to non-visible pollutants to storm water must not be placed in drainage ways and must be contained, elevated, and placed in temporary storage containment areas. • All loose piles of soil, silt, clay, sand, debris, and other earthen material shall be protected in a reasonable manner to eliminate any discharge from the site. Stockpiles shall be surrounded by silt fences and covered with plastic tarps. • In addition, the construction contractor shall be responsible for performing and documenting the application of BMPs identified in the SWPPP. Weekly inspections shall be performed on sandbag barriers and other sediment control measures called for in the SWPPP. Monthly reports and inspection logs shall be maintained by the contractor and reviewed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the representatives of the State Water Page 21 of 24 Standard Conditions No. I Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date lInitials Sanctions for Non -Compliance Resources Control Board. In the event that it is not feasible to implement specific BMPs, the City of Rancho Cucamonga can make a determination that other BMPs will provide equivalent or superior treatment either on or off site. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utilities & Engineering Department and Development Services Department, as appropriate. 3) Water Quality Management Plan. Prior to CDD/CE B/C/D/E Review of plans A/C/D 2/3/4 the issuance of a grading permit, the project during construction applicant shall submit a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) to the City of Rancho Cucamonga for review and approval. The project shall implement project design features identified in the WQMP. The WQMP shall demonstrate that any proposed on-site development plan includes BMPs for source control, pollution prevention, site design, low impact development (LID) implementation, and structural treatment control. BMPs shall be designed and implemented to retain the project site's minimum design capture volume and hydromodification volume of 30,355 cubic feet of runoff to ensure post - development stormwater runoff volume or time of concentration does not exceed pre - development stormwater runoff. Periodic maintenance of any required infiltration basin and landscaped areas during project occupancy and operation shall be in accordance with the schedule outlined in the Page 22 of 24 Standard Conditions No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date lInitials. Sanctions for Non -Compliance WQMP. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utilities & Engineering Department and Development Services Department, as appropriate. 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 Section 10 — Land Use and Planning 3 - Withhold Certificate of Occupancy 1) None Section 1.1 —Mineral Resources 1) None 'Section 12 — Noise 1) None Section 13 -Population and Housing 1) None Section 14 — Public Services 1) None Section' 1'5 - Recreation 1) None Section 16--Transportation/Traffic = T= . 1) None Section 17 — Tribal Cultural' Resources 1) None Section 18_ —Utility and Service Systems 1) None Section 19 —Mandatory Findings of Significance 1) None Key to Checklist Abbreviations Responsible Person Monitoring Frequency Method of Verification. Sanctions CDD - Community Development Director or designee A - With Each New Development A - On-site Inspection 1 - Withhold Recordation of Final Map 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 Page 23 of 24 m rn v LA) 0 0 BO - Building Official or designee D - On Completion D - Separate Submittal (Reports/Studies/ Plans) 4 - Stop Work Order PO - Police Captain or designee E - Operating 5 - Retain Deposit or Bonds FC - Fire Chief or designee 6 - Revoke CUP 7 - Citation Page 24 of 24 City of Rancho Cucamonga MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM Project File No.: General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658, Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017-00657, Design Review DRC2017-00654, Uniform Sign Program DRC2017-00659 and Minor Exception DRC2017-00872 This Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) has been prepared for use in implementing the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the above -listed project. This program has been prepared in compliance with State law to ensure that adopted mitigation measures are implemented (Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code). Program Components - This MMP contains the following elements: 1. Conditions of approval that act as impact mitigation measures are recorded with the action and the procedure necessary to ensure compliance. The mitigation measure conditions of approval are contained in the adopted Resolution of Approval for the project. 2. A procedure of compliance and verification has been outlined for each action necessary. This procedure designates who will take action, what action will be taken and when, and to whom and when compliance will be reported. 3. The MMP has been designed to provide focused, yet flexible guidelines. As monitoring progresses, changes to compliance procedures may be necessary based upon recommendations by those responsible for the program. Program Management - The MMP will be in place through all phases of the project. The project planner, assigned by the Planning Director, shall coordinate enforcement of the MMP. The project planner oversees the MMP and reviews the Reporting Forms to ensure they are filled out correctly and proper action is taken on each mitigation. Each City department shall ensure compliance of the conditions (mitigation) that relate to that department. Procedures - The following steps will be followed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 1. A fee covering all costs and expenses, including any consultants' fees, incurred by the City in performing monitoring or reporting programs shall be charged to the applicant. 2. A MMP Reporting Form will be prepared for each potentially significant impact and its corresponding mitigation measure identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Checklist, attached hereto. This procedure designates who will take action, what action will 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 E6—Ell P301 RESOLUTION NO.18-60 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2017-00658 FOR A PROPOSAL TO AMEND THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM INDUSTRIAL PARK TO MIXED USE IN CONJUNCTION WITH A PROPOSED MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT COMPRISED OF 2 BUILDINGS CONSISTING OF 207 MULTI -FAMILY UNITS, INCLUDING 14 LIVEIWORK UNITS AND 14,300 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL/OFFICE AREA ON A 5.21 ACRE SITE LOCATED WITHIN THE INDUSTRIAL PARK (IP) DISTRICT AND HAVEN AVENUE OVERLAY (HADD) DISTRICT AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF HAVEN AVENUE AND 26TH STREET AT 10451 26TH STREET; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 0209-131-01. A. Recitals. 1. Charles Joseph Associates filed an application on behalf of Urban Offerings for the approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject General Plan Amendment request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 26th day of 2018, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application DRC2017-00658 and issued Resolution No. 18-60 recommending to the City Council that the associated General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658 be approved. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced meeting on September 26, 2018, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to a 5.21 -acre property located at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and 26th Street. The project site is partially developed with a 20,000 -square foot industrial building and outdoor storage area. The site fronts three streets, including Haven Avenue to the east, 26th Street to the north and Marine Avenue to the west, all of which contain partial improvements; and b. The existing land use, general plan and zoning designations for the project site and adjacent properties are as follows: E6—E 11P302 d. The proposal is for the development of a mixed-use project comprised of 2 buildings consisting of 207 multi -family units, including 14 live/work units and 14,300 square feet of commercial/office area on 5.21 -acres of land; and e. The project is being processed concurrently with the following applications: Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017-00657, Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656, Design Review DRC2017-00654, Uniform Sign Program DRC2017-00659 and Minor Exception DRC2017- 00872; and f. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development within the district in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development; and g. This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Land Use Element by allowing for the implementation of the Mixed Use designation in this area; and h. This amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties and would not have a significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding properties. 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. That the subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed district in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area. The project is consistent with existing development also located within the Haven Avenue Overlay District, including Barton Plaza located at the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and Foothill Boulevard, which has an approximate height of 60 feet and the Town Square Development, located at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and Foothill Boulevard, which contains a mix of residential and commercial uses; and b. That the proposed amendment would not have significant impacts on the environment nor the surrounding properties. An initial study that analyzed potential significant impacts was prepared for this project, which determined the proposed mixed-use development would not create significant impacts, subject to mitigation measures relating to Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Hazardous and Waste Materials, Noise, Transportation and Traffic and Tribal Cultural Resources; and E6—E 11P303 Land Use General Plan Zoning Site Warehouse and Industrial Park/ Industrial Park (IP) District/ Outdoor Storage Haven Avenue Haven Avenue Overlay District Office Overlay North Multitenant Office Industrial Park/ Industrial Park (IP) District/ Buildings Haven Avenue Haven Avenue Overlay District Office Overlay South 9.65 -acre Vacant Industrial Park/ Industrial Park (IP) District/ Parcel Haven Avenue Haven Avenue Overlay District Office Overlay East Gas Station and Industrial Park/ Industrial Park (IP) District/ Multitenant Office Haven Avenue Haven Avenue Overlay District Buildings Office Overlay West Single -Family Low Residential Low (L) Residential District Residences d. The proposal is for the development of a mixed-use project comprised of 2 buildings consisting of 207 multi -family units, including 14 live/work units and 14,300 square feet of commercial/office area on 5.21 -acres of land; and e. The project is being processed concurrently with the following applications: Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017-00657, Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656, Design Review DRC2017-00654, Uniform Sign Program DRC2017-00659 and Minor Exception DRC2017- 00872; and f. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development within the district in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development; and g. This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Land Use Element by allowing for the implementation of the Mixed Use designation in this area; and h. This amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties and would not have a significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding properties. 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. That the subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed district in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area. The project is consistent with existing development also located within the Haven Avenue Overlay District, including Barton Plaza located at the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and Foothill Boulevard, which has an approximate height of 60 feet and the Town Square Development, located at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and Foothill Boulevard, which contains a mix of residential and commercial uses; and b. That the proposed amendment would not have significant impacts on the environment nor the surrounding properties. An initial study that analyzed potential significant impacts was prepared for this project, which determined the proposed mixed-use development would not create significant impacts, subject to mitigation measures relating to Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Hazardous and Waste Materials, Noise, Transportation and Traffic and Tribal Cultural Resources; and E6—E 11P303 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-60 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2017-00658 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS September 26, 2018 Page 3 C. That the proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan. Policy LU - 2.1 in the General Plan encourages high density mixed use development along transit routes. The site is located within walking distance (approximately 1/4 mile) from multiple active Omnitrans bus stops, which serves Route 81 (north and southbound) along Haven Avenue, and Route 85 (east and westbound) along Arrow Route. The site is also located along the future.Omnitrans West Valley Connector Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Route, which is anticipated to provide services operating as early as mid -2019. Lastly, the site is about 1.5 miles driving/walking distance to the west of the Rancho Cucamonga Metrolink Station at Milliken Avenue and (4) within .6 miles of the Civic Center/City Hall (approximately 14 minute walk) and approximately 1 mile from major shopping and restaurants (approximately 22 min. walk). 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. 'Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and; based on the whole record before it, finds: (i) that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii) that,, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. C. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the Planning Manager 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, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopt General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658. E6—E 11P304 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-60 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2017-00858 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS September 26, 2018 Page 4 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2018. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA M Rich Macias, Chairman ATTEST: Candyce Burnett, Secretary I, Candyce Burnett, 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 26th day of September 2018, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: E6—E 11P305 RESOLUTION NO. 18-61 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT CODEAMENDMENT DRC2017-00656, A PROPOSALTO AMEND THE DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ALLOW FOR RESIDENTIAL USES WITHIN THE HAVEN AVENUE OVERLAY (HADD) DISTRICT WHEN PART OF A MIXED-USE PROJECT; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. A. Recitals. 1. Charles Joseph Associates filed an application on behalf of Urban Offerings for the approval of Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Code Amendment is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 26th day of September 2018, 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 and issued Resolution No. 18-61 recommending to the City Council that the associated General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658 be approved. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the, Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced meeting on September 26, 2018, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The applicant is proposing to amend the Development Code to allow multifamily residential uses when incorporated as part of a mixed use project; and b. Currently, Development Code does not permit for residential uses within the Haven Avenue Overlay District; and C. The specific change to the Development Code would occur to Table 17.38.040-1 (Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements for Haven Avenue Overlay Zoning District) and would specifically allow for multifamily residential uses within the Haven Avenue Overly District when constructed as part of a mixed-use project; and d. Allowing this change would still require mixed-use projects within the Haven Avenue Overlay District to comply with all required development standards and design guidelines specified in the Development Code, including building setbacks, lot coverage, etc. and are necessary in order to guide the City and applicants in developing residential projects that are consistent with the General Plan, in accordance with the objective of the applicable development E6—E 11P306 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-61 DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DRC2018 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS September 26, 2018 Page 2 district (zoning), and comply with other standards and guidelines described in the Development Code; and e. As Table 17.38,040-1 (Allowed Land ,Uses and Permit Requirements for Haven Avenue Overlay Zoning District) currently does not allow for residential uses, a revised table has been created for incorporation into the Development Code and is shown as Attachment A to this Resolution; and f. This request is being processed concurrently with a proposal to a develop a mixed- use project comprised of 2 buildings consisting of 207 multi -family units, including 14 live/work units and 14,300 square feet.of commercial/office area on 5.21 -acres of land that involves the following applications: General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017- 00657, Design Review DRC2017-00654, Uniform Sign Program DRC2017-00659 and Minor Exception DRC2017-00872; and g. In the absence of proposed change to Table 17.38.040-1, the applicant would not be able to develop the property as proposed; and h. Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656 conforms to and ,does not conflict with the General Plan, including without limitation; the Land Use Element thereof, and will provide for development in a manner consistent with the General Plan. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in, paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development, within the district, in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development; and b. This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Development Code; and c. The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and d. The subject application is consistent with the objectives the Development Code; and e. The proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the.application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence thatthe 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 E6—E11 P307 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-61 DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DRC2018 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS September 26, 2018 Page 3 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 significanteffect on the environment. The Planning Commission further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. C. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program; for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. ' d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration,, Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the Planning Manager 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, and'3 above, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopt Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2018. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Rich Macias, Chairman ATTEST: Candyce Burnett, Secretary E6—E11 P308 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-61 DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DRC2018 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS September 26, 2018, Page 4 l, Candyce Burnett, 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 26th day of September 2018, by the following vote -to -wit: I_\'/_��Kf]kkyihVi1619[9]kjI: 10IQ**�K6IPITI6X eykIX ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS` ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: E6—E11 P309 TABLE 17.38.040-1 ALLOWED LAND USES AND PERMIT REQUIREMENTS FOR HAVEN AVENUE OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICT Land Use/Zoning District HA Residential Uses Dwelling, Multi -Family u) P Recreation, Resource Preservation, Open Space, Education, and Public Assembly Uses Assembly Use C Community Center/Civic Use P Indoor Fitness and Sports Facility—Large C Indoor Fitness and Sports Facility—Small C Park and Public Plaza C Public Safety Facility C School, Academic (Private) C School, Academic (Public) C School, College/ University (Private) C School, College/ University (Public) C Schools, Specialized Education and Training/Studio C Utility, Transportation, Public Facility, and Communication Uses Broadcasting and Recording Studios P Park and Ride Facility P Parking Facility C Transit Facility C Utility Facility and Infrastructure— Pipelines czt P Retail, Service, and Office Uses Alcoholic Beverage Sales C Banks and Financial Services P Business Support Services P Call Centers C Cbild Day Care Facility/Center C Convenience Store C Furniture, Furnishing, and Appliance Store C Hotel and Motel P Massage Establishment P Medical Services, General P Office, Business and Professional P Office, Accessory P Restaurant, No Liquor Service P Restaurant, Beer and Wine P Restaurant, Full Liquor Service C Retail, Accessory P Automobile and Vehicle Uses Car Washing and Detailing (3)• (4). (S) C Service Stations 0), ta> C Attachment A E6—E11 P310 Table Notes: U7 Multi -family residential uses are permitted when pail of a mixed-use project. tit Utility facilities and infrastructure involving hazardous or volatile gas and/or liquid pipeline development require approval of a Conditional Use permit. M Service stations and car washing and detailing establishments are prohibited within one-half (%) mile of the Foothill Boulevard/Haven Avenue and the 4th Street(Haven Avenue intersections. No service station or car washing and detailing establishment shall be closer than one-half (%:) mile of another service station or car washing and detailing establishment as measured from the nearest property line. (a) Service stations shall be designed to reflect the architectural standards and guidelines within the Haven Avenue Overlay District. No corporate "prototype" architecture design will be permitted. Service stations are only permitted when designed as part of, and designed consistent with, profession office complexes. (e) Full service attended car washing and detailing establishments are permitted to operate a quick lube oil changes facility. Quick lube facilities that are part of an attended car wash shall be fully screened from the Haven Avenue right-of-way. E6—E 11 P31 1 RESOLUTION NO. 18-62 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ZONING MAP AMENDMENT DRC2017-00657 REQUESTING TO AMEND THE ZONING MAP TO CHANGE THE ZONING DESIGNATION FROM INDUSTRIAL PARK (IP) DISTRICT TO MIXED USE (MU) DISTRICT IN CONJUNCTION WITH- A PROPOSED MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT COMPRISED OF 2 BUILDINGS CONSISTING OF 207 MULTI -FAMILY UNITS, INCLUDING 14 LIVENVORK UNITS AND 14,300 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL/OFFICE AREA ON A 5.21 ACRE SITE LOCATED WITHIN THE INDUSTRIAL PARK (IP) DISTRICT AND HAVEN AVENUE OVERLAY (HAOD) DISTRICTATTHE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF HAVEN AVENUE AND 26TH STREET AT 10451 26TH STREET; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF —APN: 0209-131-01. A. Recitals. 1. Charles Joseph Associates filed an application for Urban Offerings the approval of Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017-00657, 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 26th day of 2018, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application DRC2017-00657 and issued Resolution No. 18-62 recommending to the City Council that the associated Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017-00657 be approved. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced meeting on September 26, 2018, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to a 5.21 -acre property located at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and 26th Street. The project site is partially developed with a 20,000 -square foot industrial building and outdoor storage area. The site fronts three streets, including Haven Avenue to the east, 26th Street to the north and Marine Avenue to the west, all of which contain partial improvements; and b. The existing land use, general plan and zoning designations for the project site and adjacent properties are as follows: E6—E11 P312 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. ZONING MAP AMENDMENT DRC2017-00657 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS September 26, 2018 Page 2 d. The project is for the development of a mixed-use project comprised of 2 buildings consisting of 207 multi -family units, including 14 live/work units and 14,300 square feet of commercial/office area on 5.21 -acres of land; and e. The project is being processed concurrently with the following applications: General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658, Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656, Design Review DRC2017-00654, Uniform Sign Program DRC2017-00659 and Minor Exception DRC2017- 00872; and f. The amendment is consistent with the General Plan and will implement the goals of the General Plan as this location is designated Mixed Use in the General Plan. The amendmentwill change the zoning from Industrial Park to Mixed Use and will which is consistent with the proposed General Plan Amendment and will facilitate the development of a mixed use project, thereby implementing General Plan Policy LU -2.1 which plans for vibrant, pedestrian -friendly mixed use and high density residential areas at strategic infill locations along transit routes. Accordingly, this amendment is consistent with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development, within the district, in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development; and g. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development, within the district, in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development; and h. This amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties and would not have a significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding properties. 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. That the subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed district in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area. The project E6—E 11P313 Land Use General PlanZonin Site Warehouse and Industrial Park/ Industrial Park (IP) District/ Outdoor Storage Haven Avenue. Haven Avenue Overlay District Office Overlay North Multitenant Office Industrial Park/ Industrial Park (IP) District/ Buildings Haven Avenue Haven Avenue Overlay District Office Overlay South 9.65 -acre Vacant Industrial Park/ Industrial Park (IP) District/ Parcel Haven Avenue Haven Avenue Overlay District Office Overlay East Gas Station and Industrial Park/ Industrial Park (IP) District/ Multitenant Office Haven Avenue Haven Avenue Overlay District Buildings Office Overlay West Single -Family Low Residential Low (L) Residential District Residences d. The project is for the development of a mixed-use project comprised of 2 buildings consisting of 207 multi -family units, including 14 live/work units and 14,300 square feet of commercial/office area on 5.21 -acres of land; and e. The project is being processed concurrently with the following applications: General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658, Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656, Design Review DRC2017-00654, Uniform Sign Program DRC2017-00659 and Minor Exception DRC2017- 00872; and f. The amendment is consistent with the General Plan and will implement the goals of the General Plan as this location is designated Mixed Use in the General Plan. The amendmentwill change the zoning from Industrial Park to Mixed Use and will which is consistent with the proposed General Plan Amendment and will facilitate the development of a mixed use project, thereby implementing General Plan Policy LU -2.1 which plans for vibrant, pedestrian -friendly mixed use and high density residential areas at strategic infill locations along transit routes. Accordingly, this amendment is consistent with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development, within the district, in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development; and g. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development, within the district, in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development; and h. This amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties and would not have a significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding properties. 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. That the subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed district in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area. The project E6—E 11P313 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. ZONING MAP AMENDMENT DRC2017-00657 OFFERINGS September 26, 2018 Page 3 CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN is consistent with existing development also located within the Haven Avenue Overlay District, including Barton Plaza located at the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and Foothill Boulevard, which has an approximate height of 60 feet and the Town Square Development, located at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and Foothill Boulevard, which contains a mix of residential and commercial uses; and b. That the proposed amendment would not have significant impacts on the environment nor the surrounding properties. An initial study that analyzed potential significant impacts was prepared for this project, which determined the proposed mixed-use development would not create significant impacts, subject to mitigation measures relating to Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Hazardous and Waste Materials, Noise, Transportation and Traffic and Tribal Cultural Resources; and C. That the proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan. Policy LU - 2.1 in the General Plan encourages high density mixed use development along transit routes. The site is located within walking distance (approximately 1/4 mile) from multiple active Omnitrans bus stops, which serves Route 61 (north and southbound) along Haven Avenue, and Route 85 (east and westbound) along Arrow Route. The site is also located along the future Omnitrans West Valley Connector Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Route, which is anticipated to provide services operating as early as mid -2019. Lastly, the site is about 1.5 miles driving/walking distance to the west of the Rancho Cucamonga Metrolink Station at Milliken Avenue and (4) within .6 miles of the Civic Center/City Hall (approximately 14 minute walk) and approximately 1 mile from major shopping and restaurants (approximately 22 min. walk). 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an l6itial 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 furtherfinds 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 E6—E11 P314 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. ZONING MAP AMENDMENT DRC2017-00657 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS September 26, 2018 Page 4 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 Manager 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 1,0500 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, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopt Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017-00657. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2018. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 30 Rich Macias, Chairman ATTEST: Candyce Burnett, Secretary I, Candyce Burnett, 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 26th day of September 2018, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: E6—E11 P315 RESOLUTION NO. 18-63 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW DRC2017-00654 TO CONSTRUCT A MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT COMPRISED OF 2 BUILDINGS CONSISTING OF 207 MULTI -FAMILY UNITS, INCLUDING 14 LIVE/WORK UNITS AND 14,300 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL/OFFICE AREA ON A 5.21 ACRE SITE LOCATED WITHIN THE INDUSTRIAL PARK (IP) DISTRICT AND HAVEN AVENUE OVERLAY (HADD) DISTRICTAT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF HAVEN AVENUE AND 26TH STREET AT 10451 26TH STREET; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 0209-131-01. A. Recitals. 1. Charles Joseph Associates filed an application for Urban Offerings the approval of Design Review DRC2017-00654, 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 26th day of 2018, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said meeting on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced meeting on September 26, 2018, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to a 5.21 -acre property located at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and 26th Street. The project site is partially developed with a 20,000 -square foot industrial building and outdoor storage area. The site fronts three streets, including Haven Avenue to the east, 26th Street to the north and Marine Avenue to the west, all of which contain partial improvements; and b. The existing land use, general plan and zoning designations for the project site and adjacent properties are as follows: E6—E11 P316 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-63 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2017-00654 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS September 26, 2018 Page 2 d. The project is forthe development of a mixed-use project comprised of 2 buildings consisting of 207 multi -family units, including 14 live/work units and 14,300 square feet of commercial/office area on 5.21 -acres of land; and e. The project is being processed concurrently with thefollowing applications: General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017-00657, Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656, Uniform Sign Program DRC2017-00659 and Minor Exception DRC2017-00872; and f. The project proposes the construction of one 5 -story building and one 4 -story building. The 5 -story building, which is located along Haven Avenue, contains all of the project's live/work and commercial uses along the first and part of the second floor as well as 93 multifamily residential units. The 4 -story building, generally located along 26th Street, contains 114 residential units as well as a majority of the residential amenities. The project's density is 39.8 units per acre and the maximum building height is 60 feet; and g. The project has a contemporary architectural style and incorporates 360 -degree architecture with building material consisting of stucco, decorative masonry, fiber cement boarding, corrugated metal, storefront glazing and metal balcony railing and storefront awnings; and h. The project contains a total of 380 parking spaces with three vehicle access points, one of which is designated for emergency vehicle access only. Per Section 17.64 of the Development Code, the project requires a total of 480 parking spaces and has a parking deficiency of 19 percent. The applicant has submitted a Minor Exception application (DRC2017-00872) for approval of the project with the 19 percent parking deficiency; and i. The project contains a total landscape coverage of 22,561 square feet (10 percent site coverage) and a minimum of 86 trees placed throughout the parking lot and along the perimeter and building frontage. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced meeting and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: E6—El1P317 Land Use General Plan Zoning Site Warehouse and Industrial Park/ Industrial Park (IP) District/ Outdoor Storage Haven Avenue Haven Avenue Overlay District Office Overlay North Multitenant Office Industrial Park/ Industrial Park (IP) District/ Buildings Haven Avenue Haven Avenue Overlay District Office Overlay South 9.65 -acre Vacant Industrial Park/ Industrial Park (IP) District/ Parcel Haven Avenue Haven Avenue Overlay District Office Overlay East Gas Station and Industrial Park/ Industrial Park (IP) District/ Multitenant Office Haven Avenue Haven Avenue Overlay District Buildings Office Overlay West Single -Family Low Residential Low (L) Residential District Residences d. The project is forthe development of a mixed-use project comprised of 2 buildings consisting of 207 multi -family units, including 14 live/work units and 14,300 square feet of commercial/office area on 5.21 -acres of land; and e. The project is being processed concurrently with thefollowing applications: General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017-00657, Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656, Uniform Sign Program DRC2017-00659 and Minor Exception DRC2017-00872; and f. The project proposes the construction of one 5 -story building and one 4 -story building. The 5 -story building, which is located along Haven Avenue, contains all of the project's live/work and commercial uses along the first and part of the second floor as well as 93 multifamily residential units. The 4 -story building, generally located along 26th Street, contains 114 residential units as well as a majority of the residential amenities. The project's density is 39.8 units per acre and the maximum building height is 60 feet; and g. The project has a contemporary architectural style and incorporates 360 -degree architecture with building material consisting of stucco, decorative masonry, fiber cement boarding, corrugated metal, storefront glazing and metal balcony railing and storefront awnings; and h. The project contains a total of 380 parking spaces with three vehicle access points, one of which is designated for emergency vehicle access only. Per Section 17.64 of the Development Code, the project requires a total of 480 parking spaces and has a parking deficiency of 19 percent. The applicant has submitted a Minor Exception application (DRC2017-00872) for approval of the project with the 19 percent parking deficiency; and i. The project contains a total landscape coverage of 22,561 square feet (10 percent site coverage) and a minimum of 86 trees placed throughout the parking lot and along the perimeter and building frontage. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced meeting and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: E6—El1P317 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-63 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2017-00654 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS September 26, 2018 Page 3 a. The land use designation of the site in the General Plan is Industrial Park as well as Haven Avenue Office Overlay. However, the project proposes a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation of the site to Mixed Use, as well as a Zoning Map Amendment to rezone the site from Industrial Park (IP) District to Mixed Use (MU) District. The proposed project is a mixed-use project that will include 207 residential units, including 14 live/work units and 14,300 square feet of commercial/office area. The residential units are of various sizes that will provide housing opportunities for various segments of the market. Accordingly, the proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and b. The proposed mixed-use project is designed with commercial and residential land uses. The applicant is proposing to amend the Development Code to allow for residential uses within the Haven Avenue Overlay District, when developed as part of a mixed-use project. The project has been designed consistent with other mixed use projects within the City and meets the intent of the Mixed Use (MU) District. Accordingly, the proposed project and land use will be in accord with the objectives of the Development Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and C. The proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code for a mixed-use project, including, but not limited to, setbacks, parking, building heights and amenity requirements. Therefore, the proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code; and d. An environmental review was completed for the project which concluded that with the proposed mitigation measures, the project would have a less than significant impact on the environment. Therefore, the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQK) 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 E6—E11 P318 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-63 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2017-00654 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS September 26, 2018 Page 4 Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. C. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the Planning Manager 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 in the Mitigation Monitoring Checklist and Conditions of Approval attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2018. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ATTEST: Rich Macias, Chairman Candyce Burnett, Secretary I, Candyce Burnett, 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 26th day of September 2018, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: E6—E11 P319 MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST (INITIAL STUDY PART III) Project File No.: General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658 Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656 Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017-00657 Design Review DRC2017-00654 Uniform Sign Program DRC2017-00659 and Minor Exception DRC2017 00872. Applicant: Urban Offerings, Inc. Initial Study Prepared by: LSA Date: August 14, 2018 Mitigation Measures No./ Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /initials Non -Compliance Section T - Aestfietics .- .. _ 1 None Section_2 _AgricuRural Resources - _ 1 None - -Section 3—AirQuality - 1) None Section,4 - Biological,Resources 1) Pre -construction Nesting Bird Survey. Pre- PD B Review of report D 2/4 construction nesting bird survey shall be and plans during conducted within three to seven days prior construction to demolition and ground -disturbing activities if such activities are proposed during the nesting season (generally February 1 through August 31). The survey shall encompass the entire area of project - related demolition and ground disturbance. If no active avian nests are found during survey, no additional mitigation will be required. If an active avian nest is discovered during survey, construction activities shall be redirected around the nest(s). A qualified biologist shall delineate the boundaries of any such buffer area. The buffer shall be sufficient to ensure that nesting behavior is Page 1 of 24 m rn I M v W N Mitigation Measures No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date /Initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance not adversely affected by the construction activity. If demolition and/or ground - disturbing activities are delayed or suspended for more than seven days after the survey, the site shall be resurveyed. Should eggs or fledglings be discovered in any native nest, these resources cannot be disturbed until the young have hatched and fledged (matured to a stage that they can leave the nest on their own). Once the qualified biologist has determined that young birds have successfully fledged or the nest has otherwise become inactive, a monitoring report shall be prepared and submitted to the City. The monitoring report shall summarize the results of the nest monitoring, describe construction restrictions currently in place, and confirm that construction activities can proceed within the buffer area without jeopardizing the survival of the young birds. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department. Section r5 — Cultural Resources Page 2 of 24 Mitigation Measures No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date/initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance 1) Unanticipated Cultural Resources: Prior to PD BIC Review of report A/D 2/3/4 issuance of a grading permit, the project and plans during applicant shall retain a qualified construction archaeologist to monitor all clearing, grubbing, and grading activities at the project site. The archaeologist shall be equipped to record and salvage cultural resources that may be unearthed during such activities. This measure shall not apply to importation of non-native soil onto the project site prior to actual grading of native on-site soil. The archaeologist shall be empowered to temporarily halt or divert grading equipment to allow recording and removal of unearthed resources. The archaeologist shall assess the significance of any cultural finds in consultation with affected Native American tribal representatives and select an appropriate disposition for the resource based on the significance of the find and tribal input. If cultural resources are discovered on the project site, ground -disturbing activities shall be suspended within 50 feet of the resource(s) and an exclusionary buffer shall be established. The archaeologist and representatives of the appropriate Native American Tribe(s), the project applicant, and the City Planning Department shall confer regarding mitigation of the discovered resource(s). The archaeological monitor shall continue monitoring areas of the project site not included in the exclusionary buffer, and a treatment plan and/or preservation plan shall be prepared by the project Page 3 of 24 Mitigation Measures No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date lInitials Sanctions for Non -Compliance archaeologist and reviewed by representatives of the appropriate Native American Tribe(s), the project applicant, and the City Planning Department for implementation to protect the identified cultural resource(s) from damage and destruction. A final report containing the significance and treatment of findings shall be prepared by the archaeologist and submitted to the City Planning Department and the appropriate Native American Tribe(s). All cultural material, excluding sacred, ceremonial, grave goods and human remains, collected during the grading monitoring program and from any previous archaeological studies or excavations on the project site shall be curated, as determined by the treatment plan, according to the current professional repository standards. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department. 2) Discovery of Paleontological Resources: PD B/C Review of report C 2 Prior to issuance of grading permits, the City and plans during shall verify that the following notes are construction included on the grading plans: "If any suspected fossil -bearing sediments or paleontological resources are discovered during ground -disturbing activities, the construction supervisor is obligated to halt work within a 50 -foot radius around the find and establish an exclusionary buffer. Construction personnel shall not collect or move any paleontological materials or further disturb any soils within the Page 4 of 24 M m I M v LQ N A Mitigation Measures No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date /Initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance exclusionary buffer, but construction activity may continue unimpeded on other portions of the project site. The project applicant shall retain a qualified (project) paleontologist to inspect the find in accordance with federal, State, and local guidelines to determine if the find is fossiliferous. If the project paleontologist determines the find is not fossiliferous, no further evaluation shall be required within the exclusionary buffer, and construction activity shall be allowed to resume therein. However, if the project paleontologist determines the find is fossiliferous, construction activity shall not resume within the exclusionary buffer, and Mitigation Measure CUL -3 shall apply." This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department. 3) Treatment of Paleontological Resources: If PD C/D Review of report A/D 3/4 the project paleontologist determines fossil- and plans during bearing sediments or paleontological construction resources are discovered on the project site, the project paleontologist shall develop and implement a Paleontological Resource Impact Mitigation Program (PRIMP) for this project. The PRIMP shall include the methods that will be used to protect paleontological resources that may exist within the project site, as well as procedures for monitoring, fossil preparation and identification, curation into a repository, and preparation of a report at the conclusion of grading. This measure shall be implemented to the Page 5 of 24 m rn I v w N Ln Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance satisfaction of the City Planning Department. • Excavation and grading activities in PD C During Construction A 4 deposits with high paleontological sensitivity, as determined by the project paleontologist, shall be monitored by a paleontological monitor in accordance with the PRIMP. No monitoring is required for excavations in soil with no paleontological sensitivity (Artificial Fill). • If paleontological resources are PD C During Construction A 4 encountered during the course of ground disturbance, the paleontological monitor shall have the authority to temporarily redirect construction away from the area of the find in order to assess its significance. • In the event that paleontological resources PD C During Construction A 4 are encountered when a paleontological monitor is not present, work in the immediate area of the find shall be redirected and a paleontologist shall be contacted to assess the find for significance in accordance with the PRIMP. . • Collected resources shall be prepared to PD C/D/E Review of Report D 3/7 the point of identification„ identified to the lowest taxonomic level possible, cataloged, and curated into the permanent collections of a scientific institution. • At the conclusion of the monitoring PD D Review of Report D 3/7 program, a report of findings shall be prepared to document the results of the monitoring program. Page 6 of 24 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Mon -Compliance Section 6—Geology'and:Soils' - 1) None _ . Section 7 —Greenhouse Gas,Em fissions - , 1) None Section —' Mazards'and Waste Materials 1) Removal of Hazardous Materials: Prior to BO B Review of Report A/D 2 issuance of demolition permits, the numerous chemicals stored on the project site shall be disposed of as hazardous waste by a California Division of Occupational Health and Safety (CalOSHA) licensed Hazardous Materials Substances Removal contractor in accordance with applicable State and federal laws. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City's Building & Safety Services Department. 2) Asbestos Survey: Prior to issuance of BO B Review of Report A/D 2 demolition permits, the project applicant shall provide evidence to the City that inspection for Asbestos -Containing Building Materials (ACM) is conducted by a California Site Surveillance Technician (CSST) registered by the California Division of Occupational Health and Safety (CalOSHA) for ACM. The purpose of the ACM inspection is to locate and identify suspected ACM that will be affected during the demolition portion of the project. Once a visual inspection is performed, representative asbestos samples (if present) shall be collected in accordance with the EPA established guidelines document, "Guidance for Controlling Asbestos -Containing Materials in Buildings (EPA 560/5-85-024, 1985)." If it is. Page 7 of 24 m rn I M v W N V Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance determined that no ACM is present, no further work is required, and demolition permits may be issued in accordance with all remaining applicable regulations. However, if it is determined that the project site contains ACM, Mitigation Measure HAZ-3 shall apply. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City's Building & Safety Services Department. 3) Asbestos Abatement: Prior to the BO B Review of Report A/B 2 demolition of any structure determined to contain Asbestos -Containing Building Materials (ACM), all ACM shall be abated from the project site. An Asbestos Notification and Procedure -5 Work Plan shall be prepared and submitted to the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) for approval before any asbestos abatement may commence. The work plan shall include containment measures to control asbestos dust and debris created during abatement. All asbestos abatement shall be conducted by a California State Registered Asbestos Abatement Contractor registered by the Division of Occupational Health and Safety in accordance with the California Administrative Code, Title 8, and article 2.5 and the SCAQMD Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act pursuant to Code of Federal Regulations Chapter 40, Part 763, subpart E. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City's Building & Safety Services Department. 4) Ontario International Airport Overflight BO D Review of D 3 Notification: Prior to issuance of occupancy Disclosures Page 8 of 24 M rn _M v W N 00 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for ImplementinA Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance permits, the project applicant shall provide evidence to the City that appropriate real estate disclosures identifying the impacts of airport overflight are provided to all tenants upon lease, transfer, or sale of any residential or commercial unit on site. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City's Building & Safety Services Department. Section 9 - Hydrology and Water`Quality_ 1) None Section 10-LandUse,and Planning 1) None Section ,11—Mineral Resources_ - - 1) None SectionAl—Noise: - - - - 1) Construction Noise Monitoring and pDBO C During Construction A/D 4 Temporary Noise Barriers. Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards specified in City of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 17.66.050, as measured at the adjacent property line. During construction, the applicant shall perform weekly noise level monitoring. The findings of the noise monitoring shall be reported to the Building Official and City Planning Department on a monthly basis; however, the Building Official and City Planning Department must be notified immediately if noise levels exceed 65 dBA when measured at the adjacent residential property line or 70 dBA when measured at the adjacent commercial or industrial property line per the City of Page 9 of 24 Mitigation Measures No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date /initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 17.66.050. If noise levels exceed 65 dBA or 70 dBA at the adjacent residential or commercial/industrial property lines, respectively, construction activities shall be halted, reduced in intensity to a level of compliance, or temporary construction noise barriers shall be used. The project shall implement a temporary 14 -foot barrier with a minimum STC -27 (or higher) along the western property line during construction to shield existing residences from construction and achieve a 13 dBA reduction in noise levels to within the City's exterior noise limit of 65 dBA when measured at the adjacent residential property line. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Building Official and City Planning Department. 2) Construction Noise -Attenuating Practices PD/BO C During Construction A 4 and Devices. The following noise -attenuating practices and devices would be implemented by the construction contractor during project construction: • Construction staging areas would be located as far from noise -sensitive land uses as feasible. • During construction, the contractor shall ensure all construction equipment is equipped with appropriate noise - attenuating devices. • Idling equipment shall be turned off when not in use. Page 10 of 24 M rn i M v LU W 0 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance • Equipment shall be maintained so that vehicles and their loads are secured from rattling and banging. 3) Construction Techniques. Prior to issuance PD/BO C During Construction A/C 3 of occupancy permits, the project shall incorporate building construction techniques that achieve the City's interior 45 dBA CNEL standard. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Building Official and City Planning Department. 4) Interior Sound Attenuation Study. Prior to PD/BO B Review of report CID 2 issuance of building permits, the project and plans proponent shall demonstrate to the City Building Department that the proposed building shell assembly and window assemblies will achieve exterior to interior noise reduction that will meet the State/City Building Code requirement of 45 dBA CNEL Based on the building plans, an interior sound attenuation study shall be prepared and submitted to the City confirming findings. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Building Official and City Planning Department. 5) Compliance with the City of Rancho PD/BO B/E Review of report C/D 2/3f7 Cucamonga Noise Regulations and California and plans Title 24. The project shall comply with California Title 24 insulation building requirements for multifamily dwelling units for common separating assemblies (e.g., floor/ceiling assemblies and demising walls). This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Building Official and City Planning Department. Page 11 of 24 m rn I M v LU LU Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/initials Non -Compliance Section' 13 - Population,and Housing. 1) None Section 14 =Public Services , •, • - .. ; , -°, „ _ - •_ : - ; . •• • .: - 1) None Section -15 -Recreation` _1)" None. Section 16 - Tfansportationf,rraffic, 1) Opening Year (2019) Plus Project PD/CE D Review of plans A/C 3 Improvements: Prior to issuance of the first during construction occupancy permit, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City for review and approval that the following improvements have been installed: • Haven Avenue/6t' Street: Modify the westbound approach from having one left -turn lane, two through lanes, and one right -turn lane to having two left -turn lanes, two through lanes, and one right -turn lane. If these improvements are in place prior to application for occupancy, no further work is required, and the mitigation shall be deemed effected. However, if these improvements are not in place prior to application for occupancy, the project applicant shall be responsible for providing evidence to the City for review and sign -off of their implementation prior to issuance of occupancy permits. 2) Year 2040 Plus Project Improvements: The PD/CE C Review of plans A/C 2 applicant shall provide evidence to the City during construction for review and approval that the following Page 12 of 24 M rn i m v W W N Mitigation Measures No./ Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance improvements have been installed: • Haven Avenue/Jersey Boulevard: Restripe the westbound approach to provide a shared left -turn lane and a left - turn lane with split phasing in the east - west direction. The City shall review and sign off on these improvements prior to the issuance of - building permits. Section 17—TribafCultural Resources _,. 1) Tribal Monitoring: Prior to issuance of a PD BIC Review of report A/D 2/3/4 grading permit, the project applicant shall and plans during retain a qualified representative from the construction Gabrielino Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation to monitor all clearing, grubbing, and grading activities at the project site and provide input to the on-site archaeologist, who shall be equipped to record and salvage cultural resources that may be unearthed during such activities. This measure shall not apply to importation of non-native soil onto the project site prior to actual grading of native on-site soil. The archaeologist shall assess the significance of any cultural finds in consultation with the qualified representative from the Gabrielino Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation and select an appropriate disposition for the resource based on the significance of the find and tribal input. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department 2) Human Remains: If human remains or PD C Review of report A/D 3/4 and plans during Page 13 of 24 M rn I v U) w W Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/Initials Non -Compliance funerary objects are encountered during any construction activities associated with the project, work in the immediate vicinity (within a 100 -foot buffer of the find) shall cease and the County Coroner shall be contacted pursuant to State Health and Safety Code §7050.5 and that code enforced for the duration of the project. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department 3) Native American Cultural Resources: In the PD C Review of report A/B/D 3/4 event that Native American cultural and plans during resources are discovered during project construction activities, all work in the immediate vicinity of the find (within a 60 -foot buffer) shall cease and a qualified archaeologist meeting Secretary of Interior standards shall be hired to assess the find. Work on the other portions of the project outside of the buffered area may continue during this assessment period. Additionally, San Manuel Band of Mission Indians will be contacted if any such find occurs and be provided information and permitted/invited to perform a site visit when the archaeologist . makes his/her assessment, so as to provide Tribal input. 4) Cultural Resources Treatment Plan: If PD C Review of report A/B/D 3/4 significant Native American historical and plans during resources, as defined by CECLA (as amended, construction 2015), are discovered and avoidance cannot be ensured, an Secretary of Interior -qualified archaeologist shall be retained to develop a cultural resources Treatment Plan, as well as a Discovery and Monitoring Plan, the drafts Page 14 of 24 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance of which shall be provided to San Manuel Band of Mission Indians for review and comment. a. All in -field investigations, assessments, PD C During Construction A/B 3/4 and/or data recovery enacted pursuant to the finalized Treatment Plan shall be monitored by a San Manuel Band of Mission Indians Tribal Participant(s). b. The Lead Agency and/or applicant shall, PD C During Construction A/B 3/4 in good faith, consult with San Manuel Band of Mission Indians on the disposition and treatment of any artifacts or other cultural materials encountered during the project. Section 18'-Utilityand;Servic6Systems; 1) None Section 19 —Mandatory Findings of Significance 1) None Page 15 of 24 Standard Conditions Standard Conditions No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance Section 1_ -Aesthetics' _ _ _ 1 None Section 2 - Agricultural Resources 1 None Section 3 -Air Quality` 1 None Section 4- Biological Resources 1) None Section.5 — Cultural ,Resources 1) None Section ,6 - Geology and Soils, 1) Compliance with applicable California BO B/C/D Review of report A/C/D 2/3 Building Code and Project -specific and plans during Geotechnical Recommendations. Prior to construction the approval of grading and/or building permits, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City for review and approval that on- site structures, features, and facilities have been designed and will be constructed in conformance with applicable provisions of the 2016 California Building Code and the recommendations cited in the project - specific geotechnical investigation. Geotechnical recommendations include development of the project site in accordance with applicable seismic code values and design methods determined by the Project Structural Engineer, as well as remedial earthwork and/or ground improvement to provide a sufficient layer of engineered fill or densified soil beneath the structural footings/foundations. A qualified Page 16 of 24 Standard Conditions No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance geotechnical engineer shall be present during demolition of the on-site structure to confirm the depth of foundation elements. Additionally, verification testing must be performed upon completion of ground improvements to confirm that the compressible soils have been sufficiently densified. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City's Building & Safety Services Department. 'Section 7— Greenfiduse Gas-Emissioris 1) Compliance with applicable Rancho PD/BO B/CJD Review of report A/C/D 2/3 Cucamonga Sustainable Community Action and plans during Plan GHG reduction policies. Prior to the construction approval of building and/or occupancy permits, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City for review and approval that on- site structures, features, and facilities have been designed and will be constructed in conformance with the following enforceable actions: • Construction and building PD/BO B/C/D Review of report A/C/D 2/3 materials shall be produced and/or and plans during manufactured locally. Use "Green construction Building Materials such as materials that are resource -efficient, recycled, and manufactured in an environmentally friendly way, including low -volatile organic compound (VOC) materials. • Design all buildings to exceed the PD/BO B/C/D Review of report ACID 2/3 California Building Code Title 24 energy and plans during standard including, but not limited to, construction any combination of: Page 17 of 24 Standard Conditions No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date /Initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance o Increased insulation. o Limit air leakage through the structure. o Incorporate Energy Star or better rated windows, space heating and cooling equipment, light fixtures, and appliances. o Landscape and develop site utilizing shade, prevailing winds, and landscaping. o Install efficient lighting and lighting control systems. o Install light colored "cool' roofs and cool pavements. o Install solar or light emitting diodes (LEDs) for outdoor lighting. • Prepare a comprehensive water PD/BO B/C/D Review of report A/C/D 2/3 conservation strategy appropriate for the and plans during project and include the following: construction o Install water efficient landscapes and irrigation systems and devices in compliance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. o Use reclaimed water for landscaping within the project, if available. o Design buildings to be water efficient by installing water efficient fixtures and appliances including low flow faucets, dual flush toilets, and Page 18 of 24 Standard Conditions No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance waterless urinals/water heaters. o Design irrigation to control runoff and to remove water to non- vegetated surfaces. • Reuse and recycle construction and PD/BO B/C/D Review of report AIC/D 2/3 demolition waste. Provide interior and and plans during exterior storage areas for recyclables and construction green waste in public areas. Educate employees about reducing waste and about recycling. Section'8 —Hazards, and Waste Materials' 1) None Section9—.Hydrology add Water Quality 1) Coverage under the NPDES General CDD/CE B Review. of Plans B/C 2 Construction Permit. Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit and subsequent grading permit, the project applicant shall file and obtain a Notice of Intent (N01) with the Regional Water Quality Control Board in order to be in compliance with the State NPDES General Construction Storm Water Permit for discharge of surface runoff associated with construction activities. Evidence that this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Discharger's Identification Number) shall be submitted to the City for coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit. The N01 shall address the potential for an extended and discontinuous construction period based on funding availability. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 19 of 24 Standard Conditions No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date/Initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance Municipal Utilities & Engineering Department and Development Services Department, as appropriate. 2) Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan CDD/CE B/C Review of plans A/B/C 2/4 (SWPPP). Prior to the issuance of a during construction demolition permit and subsequent grading permit, the project applicant shall submit to and receive approval from the City of Rancho Cucamonga of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP shall include a surface water control plan and erosion control plan citing specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion during the entire demolition, grading, and construction period. In addition, the SWPPP shall emphasize structural and nonstructural Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control sediment and non-visible discharges from the site. The SWPPP shall include inspection forms for routine monitoring of the site during both the demolition and construction phases to ensure NPDES compliance and that additional BMPs and erosion control measures will be documented in the SWPPP and utilized if necessary. The SWPPP shall address the potential for an extended and discontinuous demolition and construction period based on funding availability. The SWPPP shall be kept on site for the entire duration of project demolition and construction and shall be available to the local RWQCB for inspection at any time. BMPs to be implemented may include the following: • Sediment discharges from the site Page 20 of 24 m rn 1 M v W 0 Standard Conditions No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date /Initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance may be controlled by the following: sandbags, silt fences, straw wattles and temporary basins (if deemed necessary), and other discharge control devices. The construction and condition of the BMPs shall be periodically inspected during demolition and construction, and repairs shall be made when necessary as required by the SWPPP. • Materials that have the potential to contribute to non-visible pollutants to storm water must not be placed in drainage ways and must be contained, elevated, and placed in temporary storage containment areas. • All loose piles of soil, silt, clay, sand, debris, and other earthen material shall be protected in a reasonable manner to eliminate any discharge from the site. Stockpiles shall be surrounded by silt fences and covered with plastic tarps. • In addition, the construction contractor shall be responsible for performing and documenting the application of BMPs identified in the SWPPP. Weekly inspections shall be performed on sandbag barriers and other sediment control measures called for in the SWPPP. Monthly reports and inspection logs shall be maintained by the contractor and reviewed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the representatives of the State Water Page 21 of 24 M rn I m v W A Standard Conditions No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date /Initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance Resources Control Board. In the event that it is not feasible to implement specific BMPs, the City of Rancho Cucamonga can make a determination that other BMPs will provide equivalent or superior treatment either on or off site. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utilities & Engineering Department and Development Services Department, as appropriate. 3) Water Quality Management Plan. Prior to CDD/CE B/C/D/E Review of plans A/C/D 2/3/4 the issuance of a grading permit, the project during construction applicant shall submit a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) to the City of Rancho Cucamonga for review and approval. The project shall implement project design features identified in the WQMP. The WQMP shall demonstrate that any proposed on-site development plan includes BMPs for source control, pollution prevention, site design, low impact development (LID) implementation, and structural treatment control. BMPs shall be designed and implemented to retain the project site's minimum design capture volume and hydromodification volume of 30,355 cubic feet of runoff to ensure post - development stormwater runoff volume or time of concentration does not exceed pre - development stormwater runoff. Periodic maintenance of any required infiltration basin and landscaped areas during project occupancy and operation shall be in accordance with the schedule outlined in the Page 22 of 24 Standard Conditions No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date /Initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance WQMP. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utilities & Engineering Department and Development Services Department, as appropriate. 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 Section 1 Q-:- Land,Use and Planning 3 - Withhold Certificate of Occupancy 1) None Section 11—.Mineral;Resources, 1) None Section 12 -Noise _ - - 1) None Section 1,3—Population and:Housirig - 1) None Sectio_ m14 — Public'Services _ _- 1) None Section, l5 - Recreation 1) None Section 16,— t Transporation/Traffic. .. - 1) None Section 17 --Tribal, CulturalResources 1) None -- _ Sedion $B,—,_.:UtiliViand Service Systems - - - 1) None Section 19:- Mandatory Findings of Significance 1) None Key to Checklist Abbreviations =Responsible Person. Monitoring Frequency Method of Verification Sanctions CDD - Community Development Director or designee A - With Each New Development A- On-site Inspection 1 -Withhold Recordation of Final Map 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 Page 23 of 24 m rn I v w A w BO - Building Official or designee D - On Completion D - Separate Submittal (Reports/Studies/ Plans) 4 - Stop Work Order PO - Police Captain or designee E - Operating 5 - Retain Deposit or Bonds FC - Fire Chief or designee 6 -Revoke CUP 7 -Citation Page 24 of 24 Conditions of Approval Community Development Department Project #: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659. DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th Location: 10451 26TH ST - AP N: 0209-131-01 Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planninq Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. Prior to the approval of grading and/or building permits, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City for review and approval that on-site structures, features, and facilities have been designed and will be constructed in conformance with applicable provisions of the 2016 California Building Code and the recommendations cited in the project -specific geotechnical investigation. Geotechnical recommendations include development of the project site in accordance with applicable seismic code values and design methods determined by the Project Structural Engineer, as well as remedial earthwork and/or ground improvement to provide a sufficient layer of engineered fill or densified soil beneath the structural footings/foundations. A qualified geotechnical engineer shall be present during demolition of the on-site structure to confirm the depth of foundation elements. Additionally, verification testing must be performed upon completion of ground improvements to confirm that the compressible soils have been sufficiently densified. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City's Building & Safety Services Department. Printed: 9/19/2018 EOM54 7944 Project #: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th Location: 10451 26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planninq Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 2. Prior to the approval of building and/or occupancy permits, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City for review and approval that on-site structures, features, and facilities have been designed and will be constructed in conformance with the following enforceable actions: 1. Construction and building materials shall be produced and/or manufactured locally. Use "Green Building Materials such as materials that are resource -efficient, recycled, and manufactured in an environmentally friendly way, including low-volitile organic compound (VOC) materials. 2. Design all buildings to exceed the California Building Code Title 24 energy standard including, but not limited to, any combination of: a. Increased insulation. b. Limit air leakage through the structure. c. Incorporate Energy Star or better rated windows, space heating and cooling equipment, light fixtures, and appliances. d. Landscape and develop site utilizing shade, prevailing winds, and landscaping. e. Install efficient lighting and lighting control systems. f. Install light colored "cool" roofs and cool pavements. g. Install solar or light emitting diodes (LEDs) for outdoor lighting. 3. Prepare a comprehensive water conservation strategy appropriate for the project and include the following: a. Install water efficient landscapes and irrigation systems and divices in compliance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. b. Use reclaimed water for landscaping within the project if available or as required by the Cucamonga Valley Water District. c. Design buildings to be water efficient by installing water efficient fixtures and appliances including low flow faucets, dual flush toilets, and waterless urinals/water heaters. d. Design irrigation to control runoff and to remove water to non -vegetated surfaces. 4. Reuse and recycle construction and demolition waste. Provide interior and exterior storage areas for recyclables and green waste in public areas. Educate employees about reducing waste and about recycling - 3. Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit and subsequent grading permit, the project applicant shall file and obtain a Notice of Intent (NO[) with the Regional Water Quality Control Board in order to be in compliance with the State NPDES General Construction Storm Water Permit for discharge of surface runoff associated with construction activities. Evidence that this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Discharger's Identification Number) shall be submitted to the City for coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit. The NOI shall address the potential for an extended and discontinuous construction period based on funding availability. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utilities & Engineering Department and Development Services Department, as appropriate. Printed: 9/19/2018 'EWLEV0945 Page 2 of 19 Project #: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th Location: 10451 26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Planning Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 4. Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit and subsequent grading permit, the project applicant shall submit to and receive approval from the City of Rancho Cucamonga of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP shall include a surface water control plan and erosion control plan citing specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion during the entire demolition, grading, and construction period. In addition, the SWPPP shall emphasize structural and nonstructural Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control sediment and non-visible discharges from the site. The SWPPP shall include inspection forms for routine monitoring of the site during both the demolition and construction phases to ensure NPDES compliance and that additional BMPs and erosion control measures will be documented in the SWPPP and utilized if necessary. The SWPPP shall address the potential for an extended and discontinuous demolition and construction period based on funding availability. The SWPPP shall be kept on site for the entire duration of project demolition and construction and shall be available to the local RWQCB for inspection at any time. BMPs to be implemented may include the following: • Sediment discharges from the site may be controlled by the following: sandbags, silt fences, straw wattles and temporary basins (if deemed necessary), and other discharge control devices. The construction and condition of the BMPs shall be periodically inspected during demolition and construction, and repairs shall be made when necessary as required by the SWPPP. • Materials that have the potential to contribute to non-visible pollutants to storm water must not be placed in drainage ways and must be contained, elevated, and placed in temporary storage containment areas. • All loose piles of soil, silt, clay, sand, debris, and other earthen material shall- be protected in a reasonable manner to eliminate any discharge from the site. Stockpiles shall be surrounded by silt fences and covered with plastic tarps. • In addition, the construction contractor shall be responsible for performing and documenting the application of BMPs identified in the SWPPP. Weekly inspections shall be performed on sandbag barriers and other sediment control measures called for in the SWPPP. Monthly reports and inspection logs shall be maintained by the contractor and reviewed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the representatives of the State Water Resources Control Board. In the event that it is not feasible to implement specific BMPs, the City of Rancho Cucamonga can make a determination that other BMPs will provide equivalent or superior treatment either on or off site. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utilities & Engineering Department and Development Services Department, as appropriate. 5. The City currently owns the land described in Amended Final Order of Condemnation for Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Bernardino Case No. RCV 091735 filed on February 15, 2017. The City must follow the requirements of Section 1245.245 of the Code of Civil Procedure when disposing of property acquired by condemnation or changing the public use for the property. The applicant does not currently have the required interest in this land to allow for the contemplated development. Therefore, approval of the contemplated development is conditioned and effective upon the applicant obtaining the necessary property interest and rights to develop. Printed: 9/19/2018 E6W_ P11fP§46 Page 3 of 19 Project #: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th Location: 10451 26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.- Planning ROJECT. Planning Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 6. Approval is for the development of a 207 -unit multi -family residential development (including 14 live -work units) on 5.2 acres of land in the Mixed Use (MU) District, located at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and 26th Street; APN: 0209-131-01. 7. This project is subject to the Code. No final approval, development project subject requirements of this chapter completion schedule, the city project, provided they are in attorney. public art requirement outlined in such as a final inspection or a to this chapter shall be granted have been met. In consideration may accept bonds or other surety a form and manner acceptable Chapter 17.124 of the Development certificate of occupancy, for any or issued unless and until the of any phasing plan or project to assist in the completion of the to the planning director and city 8. The landscape architect of record shall provide a signed certification on company letterhead certifying that all project -related landscaping has been installed per the approved landscape plans. This is subject to Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the development. 9. A Parking Management Plan shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to occupancy. The Parking Management Plan shall include, at a minimum, requirements that the use of parking spaces and carports will be strictly monitored. The City Planner may periodically review and require additional parking mitigation measures if it is determined that the on-site parking is inadequate to meet the project's ongoing parking demand. 10. Approval of this Design Review application is contingent upon Planning Commission approval of Minor Exception DRC2017-00872 and City Council approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017-00657 and Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656. Standard Conditions of Approval 11. All parking space, when outdoors (e.g., parking lot), shall have a minimum size of nine feet by 17 feet with a required one -foot overhang (e.g., over a curb stop) and shall be free of obstructions such as columns or walls. All parking space, when indoors or under a shelter (e.g:, parking structure or carport/shade structure), shall be ten feet by 20 feet where columns or walls are located within the parking area. 12. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances, and exits shall be striped per City standards. 13. Textured pedestrian pathways and textured pavement shall be provided in all areas shown on the approved conceptual grading plan and conceptual landscape plan. Printed: 9/19/2018 V6&P1y'PfP947 Page 4 of 19 Project#: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th Location: 10451 26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 14. 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. 15. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval, Conditions of Approval, 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. 16. Crime Free Multi -Family Housing Program - The owner shall cause the manager and any resident manager to complete the training for and enroll the project in the San Bernardino County Crime Free Multi -Family Housing Program. 17. The applicant shall be required to pay California Department. of . Fish and Wildlife Notice of Exemption and Mitigated Negative Declaration fee in the amount of $2,330.75. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary prior to public hearing. 18. 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. 19. 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. 20. The developer shall submit a construction access plan and schedule for the development of all lots for Planning Director and Engineering Services Department approval; including, but not limited to, public notice requirements, special street posting, phone listing for community concerns, hours of construction activity, dust control measures, and security fencing. 21. 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. 22. For multiple -family development, provide exterior lockable storage space as required by the California Green Building Code. 23. 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. Printed: 9/19/2018 E'&LOYPT948 Page 5 of 19 Project#: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th Location: 10451 26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 24. 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. 25. 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 for the development or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. For development occurring in the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, the landscape plans will also be reviewed by Fire Construction Services. 26. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of water efficient landscaping per Development Code Chapter 17.82. 27. A uniform hardscape and street furniture design including seating benches, trash receptacles, free-standing potted plants, bike racks, light bollards, etc., shall be utilized and be compatible with the architectural style. Detailed designs shall be submitted for Planning Department review and approval prior to the issuance of Building Permits. 28. 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 Engineering Services Department review and approved prior to the issuance of Building Permits. 29. A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram, shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director and Police Department (909-477-2800) prior to the issuance of Building Permits. Such plan shall indicate style, illumination, location, height, and method of shielding so as not to adversely affect adjacent properties. 30. 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. 31. 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. 32. 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, any applicable Uniform Sign Program for the development and shall require separate application and approval by the Planning Department prior to installation of any signs. Printed: 9/19/2018 g'gUat.@RvTT949 Page 6 of 19 Project #: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th Location: 10451 26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 33. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners and other roof mounted equipment and/or projections shall be screened from all sides and the sound shall be buffered from adjacent properties and streets as required by the Planning Department. Such screening shall be architecturally integrated with the building design and constructed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. Any roof -mounted mechanical equipment and/or ductwork, that projects vertically more than 18 inches above the roof or roof parapet, shall be screened by an architecturally designed enclosure which exhibits a permanent nature with the building design and is detailed consistent with the building. Any roof -mounted mechanical equipment and/or ductwork, that projects vertically less than 18 inches above the roof or roof parapet shall be painted consistent with the color scheme of the building. Details shall be included in building plans. Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. Provide a limited access curb per City Standard 105-C in -lieu of a drive approach for the proposed 26 foot wide gated Fire Department access. 2. The street lights shall be owned by the City. Developer shall be all costs of street lights and to provide power to City owned street lights. 3. Haven Avenue frontage improvements to be in accordance standards as required and including: responsible to coordinate and pay with City "Major Divided Arterial' A. Provide, protect, or repair existing curb and gutter, and sidewalk as required. B. Protect existing traffic signing and striping along Haven Avenue, or repair as. required. C. Provide one LED street light. Street lights shall be owned by the City. Developer shall be responsible to coordinate and pay all costs to provide power on City owned street lights. Coordinate with City staff for design and installation requirements. D. Driveway to be in accordance with the City Driveway Policy E. Modify Traffic Signal at Haven Avenue and Jersey Avenue. West and east phases shall be split phased. Modify traffic striping and replace existing traffic signing as applicable. 4. Marine Avenue street frontage improvements to be in accordance with City "Local' standards as required and including: A. Provide, protect, or repair curb and gutter and sidewalk, as required. B. Provide two LED street lights. Street lights shall be owned by the City. Developer shall be responsible to coordinate and pay all costs to provide power on City owned street lights. Coordinate with City staff for design and installation requirements. C. Provide traffic signing and striping, as required. 5. 26th Street frontage improvements to be in accordance with City "Local' standards as required and including: A. Provide, protect, or repair curb and gutter and sidewalk, as required. B. Provide traffic signing and striping as required. C. Driveway to be in accordance with the City Driveway Policy. Printed: 911 912 01 8 Pn13§5B Page 7 of 19 Project #: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th Location: 10451 26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 6. Amount of parking spaces to be in accordance with Development Code Section 17.64 7. The proposed development is slated to be included in the City's Fiber Optic / Broadband service business plan that would provide a City owned Fiber -to -the -Home (FTTH) infrastructure. Proposed fiber optics on-site (conduits and fiber) will be placed underground within a duct and structure system to be installed by the Master Developer. The fiber and conduits along the backbone streets shall be installed in a joint trench by the developer. In -tract fiber and conduit shall be installed by the developers in joint trench where possible. Maintenance of the installed system will be the responsibility of the City. Development of the Project requires the installation by the developers of all fiber optic infrastructure necessary to service the Project as a stand-alone development. Dedicate easements to the City on-site for utility purposes. 8. All curb ramps shall be reconstructed to current ADA standards. 9. Process a vacation excess right of way west of Haven across from Jersey Boulevard. Provide right-of-way for the maintenance of existing and proposed public facilities. Dedicate a 10' utility easement to the City of Rancho Cucamonga along the Haven Avenue right-of-way north of Jersey Boulevard. Standard Conditions of Approval 10.A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting Districts shall be filed with the Engineering Services Department prior to final map approval or issuance of Building Permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. 11. Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards. 12. Easements for public sidewalks placed outside the public right-of-way shall be dedicated to the City, where necessary. 13. 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. Permits issued on or after June 2, 2014, must complete the reimbursement process through the City's Accelerate online portal within 60 days following the completion of the construction and/or demolition project or the deposit will be forfeited. Permits issued before June 2, 2014, require the following when applying for a deposit reimbursement: a completed CD -2 form, a copy of the cashier's receipt showing the deposit amount, and all weight tickets. Instructions and forms are available at the City's web site, www.CityofRC.us, under City Hall; Engineering; Environmental Programs. 14. 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. Printed: 9119/2018 Eff&P4y?tP3!9`l Page 8 of 19 Project #: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th Location: 10451 26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 15. Add the following note to any private landscape plans that show street trees: "All improvements within the public right-of-way, including street trees, shall be installed per the public improvement plans." If there is a discrepancy between the public and private plans, the street improvement plans will govern. 16. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 16.37.010, no person shall make connections from a source of energy, fuel or power to any building or structure which is regulated by technical codes and for which a permit is required unless, in addition to any and all other codes, regulations and ordinances, all improvements required by these conditions of development approval have been completed and accepted by the City Council, except: that in developments containing more than one building, structure or unit, the development may have energy connections made in equal proportion to the percentage of completion of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval, as determined by the City Engineer, provided that reasonable, safe and maintainable access to the property exists. In no case shall more than 95 percent of the buildings, structures or units be connected to energy sources prior to completion and acceptance of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval. 17. 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. 18. Trees are prohibited within 5 feet of the outside diameter of any public storm drain pipe measured from the outer edge of a mature tree trunk. Pnnled: 9/1 912 01 8 EfiMCWP992 Page 9 of 19 Project #: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Location: Haven at 26th 10451 -26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.- Engineering ROJECT. Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 19. Improvement Plans and Construction: a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of Building Permits, whichever occurs first. b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Services Department in addition to any other permits required. c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction project along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals and interconnect wiring. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR, or any other locations approved by the City Engineer. Notes: 1) Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets, a maximum of 200 feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer. 2) Conduit shall be 3 -inch pvc with pull rope or as specified. e. Access ramps for the disabled shall be installed on all corners of intersections per latest ADA standards or as directed by the City Engineer. f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards, except for single-family residential lots. h. Street names shall be approved by the Planning Manager prior to submittal for first plan check. Printed: 9119/2018 W R 1fp§58 Page 10 of 19 Project #: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th Location: 10451 26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.- Engineering ROJECT. Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 20. 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 1." Where public landscape plans are required, tree installation in those areas shall be per the public landscape improvement plans. Street Name Botanical Name Common Name Min. Grow Space Spacing Size Qty. Construction Notes for Street Trees: 1) All street trees are to be planted in accordance with City standard plans. 2) Prior to the commencement of any planting, an agronomic soils report shall be furnished to the City inspector. Any unusual toxicities or nutrient deficiencies may require backfill soil amendments, as determined by the City inspector. 3) All street trees are subject to inspection and acceptance by the Engineering Services Department. Street trees are to be planted per public improvement plans only. 21. Intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with adopted policy. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight shall be plotted for all project intersections, including driveways. Local residential street intersections and commercial or industrial driveways may have lines of sight plotted as required. 22. 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. 23. 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. 24. Developer shall execute a Line Extension Agreement for electric service and shall construct electrical distribution facilities in accordance with such agreement and shall construct electrical distribution facilities in accordance with such agreement and Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility requirements and dedicate such facilities to the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility. The Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility shall be the electrical service provider for all project related development. 25. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. Pante: 9119/2018 nwst T§54 Page 11 of 19 Project #: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th Location: 10451 26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 26. 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. 27. 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. 28. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CVWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. Building and Safety Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. Building and Fire Conditions of Approval When the Entitlement Review is approved submit complete- construction drawings including structural calculations, energy calculations and soils report to Building and Safety for plan review in accordance with the current edition of the CA Building and Fire, Codes, all local ordinances and standards ladder truck and roof access. The new structures are required to be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers per the CBC and Current RCFPD Ordinance. Disabled access for the site and building must be in accordance to the State of CA and ADA regulations. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 1. This project shall comply with the accessibility requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. Printed: 9/19/2018 Ebw-p"fP355 Page 12 of 19 Project #: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th Location: 10451 26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 2. Grading Inspections: a) Prior to the start of grading operations the owner and grading contractor shall request a pre -grading meeting. The meeting shall be attended by the project owner/representative, the grading contractor and the Building Inspector to discuss about grading requirements and preventive measures, etc. If a pre -grading meeting is not held within 24 hours from the start of grading operations, the grading permit may be subject to suspension by the Building Inspector; b) The grading contractor shall call into the City of Rancho Cucamonga Building and Safety Department at least 1 working day in advance to request the following grading inspections prior to continuing grading operations: i) The bottom of the over -excavation; ii) Completion of Rough Grading, prior to issuance of the building permit; iii) At the completion of Rough Grading, the grading contractor or owner shall submit to the Permit Technicians (Building and Safety Front Counter) an original and a copy of the Pad Certifications to be prepared by and properly wet signed and sealed by the Civil Engineer and Soils Engineer of Record; iv) The rough grading certificates and the compaction reports will be reviewed by the Associate Engineer or a designated person and approved prior to the issuance of a building permit. 3. All roof drainage flowing to the public right of way (Marine Avenue, 26th Street and Haven Avenue) must drain under the sidewalk through a parkway culvert approved by the Engineering Department. This shall be shown on both the grading and drainage plan and Engineering Services Department required plans. 4. Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the permitted grading plan (or architectural site plan) set shall show in each of the typical sections and the plan view show how the separations between the building exterior and exterior ground surface meet the requirements of Sections CBC1804.3/CRC R401.3, CBC2304.11.2.2/CRC R317.1(2) and CBC2512.1.2/CRC R703.6.2.1 of the current adopted California Building Code/Residential Code. 5. As the use of drywells are proposed for the structural storm water treatment device, to meet the infiltration requirements of the current Municipal Separate Storm Sewers Systems (MS4) Permit, adequate source control and pollution prevention control BMPs shall be implemented to protect groundwater quality. The need for pre-treatment BMPs such as sedimentation or filtration shall be evaluated prior to infiltration and discussed in the final project -specific Water Quality Management Plan document. 6. A drainage study showing a 100 -year, AMC 3 design storm event for on-site drainage shall be prepared and submitted to the Building and Safety Official for review and approval for on-site storm water drainage prior to issuance of a grading permit. The report shall contain water surface profile gradient calculations for all storm drain pipes 12 -inches and larger in diameter. All reports shall be wet signed and sealed by the Engineer of Record. In addition, the project specific drainage study shall provide inlet calculations showing the proper sizing of the water quality management plan storm water flows into the proposed structural storm water treatment devices. Printed: 9/19/2018 Cgw_fifyf r & Page 13 of 19 Project #: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th Location: 10451 26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 7. Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the latest adopted California Plumbing Code. Private storm drain improvements shall be shown on the grading and drainage plan. 8. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy or final sign off by the Building Inspector the engineer of record shall certify the functionality of the storm water quality management plan (WQMP) storm water treatment devices and best management practices (BMP). 9. Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WQMP shall include a copy of the project Conditions of Approval. 10. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the precise grading and drainage plan shall follow the format provided in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, handout "Information for Grading Plans and Permit". 11. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with current adopted California Building Code and/or the California Residential Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The Grading and Drainage Plan(s) shall be in substantial conformance with the approved conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan. 12. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified Engineer licensed by the State of California to perform such work. Two copies will be provided at grading and drainage plan submittal for review. Plans shall implement design recommendations per said report. 13. A geologic report shall be prepared by a qualified Engineer or Engineering Geologist and submitted at the time of application for Grading and Drainage Plan review. 14. 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. 15. A separate Grading and Drainage Plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and wet signed by a California licensed Civil Engineer prior to the issuance of a -grading or building permit. 16. The applicant shall comply with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Dust Control Measures and place a dust control sign on the project site prior to the issuance of a grading permit. All dust control sign (s) shall be located outside of the public right of way. 17. If a Rough Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit are submitted to the Building and Safety Official for review, the rough grading plan shall be a separate plan submittal and permit from Precise Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit. 18. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall obtain written permission from the adjacent property owner(s) to construct wall(s) on property line(s) or provide a detail(s) showing the perimeter wall(s) to be constructed offset from the property line. Printed: 911912018 tb E Wtt'30 Page 14 of 19 Project #: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th Location: 10451 26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 19. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the Final Grading and Drainage Plan shall show the accessibility path from the public right of way and the accessibility parking stalls to the building doors in conformance with the current adopted California Building Code. All accessibility ramps shall show sufficient detail including gradients, elevations, and dimensions and comply with the current adopted California Building Code. 20. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall implement City Standards for on-site construction where possible, and shall provide details for all work not covered by City Standard Drawings. 21. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the grading plan shall show that all manufactured slopes shall be a minimum 2 -foot offset from the public right of way, permitted line, or the adjacent private property. All slope offsets shall meet the requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. 22. Prior to approval of the project -specific storm water quality management plan, the applicant shall submit to the Building Official, or his designee, a precise grading plan showing the location and elevations of existing topographical features, and showing the location and proposed elevations of proposed structures and drainage of the site. 23. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the grading and drainage plan shall show the maximum parking stall gradient at 5 percent. Accessibility parking stall grades shall be constructed per the, current adopted California Building Code. 24. The applicant shall provide a grading agreement and grading bond for all cut and fill combined exceeding 5,000 cubic yards prior to issuance of a grading permit. The grading agreement and bond shall be approved by the Building and Safety Official. 25. The final grading and drainage plan shall show existing topography a minimum of 100 -feet beyond project boundary. 26. Reciprocal access easements for all parcels and maintenance agreements ensuring joint maintenance of all storm water quality structural/treatment devices and best management practices (BMP) as provided for in the project's Storm Water Quality Management Plan, shall be provided for by CC&R's or deeds and shall be recorded prior to the approval of the Water Quality Management Plan. Said CC&R's and/or deeds shall be included in the project site specific Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) document prior to approval of the WQMP document and recording of the Memorandum of Agreement of Storm Water Quality Management Plan. 27. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit the City of Rancho Cucamonga's "Memorandum of Agreement of Storm Water Quality Management Plan" shall be submitted for review and approval by the Building Official and recorded with the County Recorder's Office. 28. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall obtain a Waste Discharge Identification Number (WDID). The WDID number shall also be shown on the WQMP Site and Drainage Plan document. Printed; 9/19/2018 M_:EVffPSn Page 15 of 19 Project #: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th Location: 10451 26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 29. The applicant shall provide a copy of a completed EPA Form 7520-16 (Inventory of Injection Wells) for each underground infiltration device, with the Facility ID Number assigned, to the Building and Safety Services Department Official prior to issuance of the Grading Permit and/or approval of the project -specific Water Quality Management Plan. A copy of EPA Form 7520-16 shall be scanned and pasted onto the permitted grading plan set, and a copy of said form shall be included in the project -specific Water Quality Management Plan. 30. The land owner shall provide an inspection report by a qualified person/company on a biennial basis for the Class V Injection Wells/underground infiltration chambers to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis all best management practices (BMP"s) as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 31. The land owner shall provide an inspection report on a biennial basis for the structural storm water treatment devices, commonly referred to as BMPs, to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 32. The land/property owner shall follow the inspection and maintenance requirements of the approved project specific Water Quality Management Plan and shall provide a copy of the inspection reports on a biennial basis to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. 33. The Site and Drainage Plan in the final project -specific Water Quality Management Plan shall show ,the locations of all roof downspout drains. if required for storm water quality purposes, the downspouts shall include filters. 34. Prior to the start of landscaping operations, the landscape architect and the landscape contractor shall provide a sample of the weed fabric barrier to the Project Planner, City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department. The weed barrier shall be permeable. 35. The final project -specific water quality management plan (WQMP) shall include executed maintenance agreements along with the maintenance guidelines for all proprietary structural storm water treatment devices (BMP's). In the event the applicant cannot get the proprietary device maintenance agreements executed prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant is required to submit a letter to be included within the WQMP document, and scanned and pasted onto the Site and Drainage Plan which states that prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy with applicant shall enter into a contract for the maintenance of the proprietary storm water treatment device. If the proprietary storm water treatment device is part of a residential subdivision, prior to the sale of the residential lot, the developer shall include maintenance agreement(s) as part of the sale of the residential lot to the buyer. A copy of the maintenance agreements to be included in the sale of the property shall be included within the WQMP document. Printed: 911 912 01 8 tb—? Mn Page 16 of 19 Project #: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th Location: 10451 26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 36. Prior to issuance of a grading permit and approval of the project specific water quality management plan all private storm water catch basin inlets shall include insert filters to capture those pollutants of concern as addressed in the in the final project -specific water quality management plan (WQMP). At a minimum catch basin insert filters to capture trash and other floating debris. All catch basin insert filters shall be maintained on a regular basis as described in the "Inspection and Maintenance Responsibility for Post Construction BMP" section of the final project -specific water quality management plan. 37. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the Final Project -Specific Water Quality Management Plan shall include a completed copy of "Worksheet H: Factor of Safety and Design Infiltration Worksheet" located in Appendix D "Section VII — Infiltration Rate Evaluation Protocol and Factor of Safety Recommendations, ..." of the San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans. The infiltration study shall include the Soil Engineer's recommendations for Appendix D, Table VI1.3: Suitability Assessment Related Considerations for Infiltration Facility Safety Factors'. 38. Prior to approval of the final project -specific water quality management plan the applicant shall have a soils engineer prepare a project -specific infiltration study for the project for the purposes of storm water quality treatment. The infiltration study and recommendations shall follow the guidelines in the current adopted "San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans". 39. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy by the Building Official, or his designee, the civil engineer of record shall file a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Post Construction Storm Water Treatment Devices As -Built Certificate with the Environmental Programs Coordinator, City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Services Department. Printed: 9/19/2018 tb—Ei I Pid Page 17 of 19 Project #: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th Location: 10451 26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 40. GROUND WATER PROTECTION: Prior to approval of the final project specific water quality management plan (WQMP), the WQMP document shall meet the requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board Order No. R8-2010-0036 (NPDES No. CAS 618036), the San Bernardino County Municipal Separate Storm Sewers Separation (MS4) Permit reads: Section XI.D(Water Quality Management Plan Requirements).8(Groundwater Protection): Treatment Control BMPs utilizing infiltration [exclusive of incidental infiltration and BMPs not designed to primarily function as infiltration devices (such as grassy swales, detention basins, vegetated buffer strips, constructed wetlands, etc.)] must comply with the following minimum requirements to protect groundwater: a. Use of structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause or contribute to an exceedance of ground water quality objectives. b. Source control and pollution prevention control BMPs shall be implemented to protect groundwater quality. The need for pre-treatment BMPs such as sedimentation or filtration should be evaluated prior to infiltration. c. Adequate pretreatment of runoff prior to infiltration shall be required in gas stations and large commercial parking lots. (NOTE: The State Water Quality Control Board defines a large commercial parking lot as '100,000 sq. ft. or more of commercial development to include parking lot (with 100 or more vehicle traffics), OR, by means of 5,000sgft or more of allowable space designated for parking purposes'). d. Unless adequate pre-treatment of runoff is provided prior to infiltration structural infiltration treatment BMPs must not be used for areas of industrial or light industrial activity{77), areas subject to high vehicular traffic (25,000 or more daily traffic); car washes; fleet storage areas; nurseries; or any other high threat to water quality land uses or activities. e. Class V injection wells or dry wells must not be placed in areas subject to vehicular{78) repair or maintenance activities{79), such as an auto body repair shop, automotive repair shop, new and used car dealership, specialty repair shop (e.g., transmission and muffler repair shop) or any facility that does any vehicular repair work. f. Structural infiltration BMP treatment shall not be used at sites that are known to have soil and groundwater contamination. g. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall be located at least 100 feet horizontally from any water supply wells. h. The vertical distance from the bottom of any infiltration structural treatment BMP to the historic high groundwater mark shall be at least 10 -feet. Where the groundwater basins do not support beneficial uses, this vertical distance criteria may be reduced, provided groundwater quality is maintained. i. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause a nuisance or pollution as defined in Water Code Section 13050. The final project -specific water quality management plan shall specifically address items a., b., and c. above. Printed: 9/19/2018 Ww—ilDflCy9 Page 18 of 19 Project #: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th Location:- 10451 26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 41. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for non-residential projects the applicant shall show on the electrical plans and the permitted grading plan set the location for a future installation of an Electric Vehicle (EV) charging station/parking area per the current adopted California Green Building Standards Code, section 5.106.5.3. 42. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall show on the site plan and the permitted grading plan set for non-residential projects the designated parking for clean air vehicles per the current adopted California Green Building Standards Code, section 5.106.5.2. 43. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for residential projects the applicant shall show on the electrical plans and the permitted grading plan set the location for a future installation of an Electric Vehicle (EV) charging station/parking area per the current adopted California Green Building Standards Code, section 4.106.4. Printed: 9/19/2018 MEW1pio Page 19 of 19 RESOLUTION NO. 18-64 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2017-00659, TO ESTABLISH A UNIFORM, SIGN PROGRAM TO SET SIGN GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS FOR A PROPOSED MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT COMPRISED OF 2 BUILDINGS CONSISTING OF 207 MULTI -FAMILY UNITS, INCLUDING 14 LIVE/WORK UNITS AND 14,300 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL/OFFICE AREA ON A 5.21 ACRE SITE LOCATED WITHIN THE INDUSTRIAL PARK (IP) DISTRICT AND HAVEN AVENUE OVERLAY (HADD) DISTRICT AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF HAVEN AVENUE AND 26TH STREET AT 10451 26TH STREET; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 0209-131-01. A. Recitals. 1. Charles Joseph Associates filed an application for Urban Offerings for the approval of Uniform Sign Program DRC2017-00659, as -described in the title of this Resolution.Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Uniform Sign Program request is'referred 'to as "the application." 2. On the 26th day of 2018, the Planning Commission of the. City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said meeting on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution., NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved. by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced meeting on September 26, 2018, including written and oral, staff reports, together with public testimony this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application' applies to a 5.21 -acre property located at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and 26th Street. The project site is partially developed with a 20,000 -square foot industrial building and outdoor storage area. The site fronts three streets, including Haven Avenue to the east; 26th Street to the north and Marine Avenue to the west, all of which contain partial improvements; and b. The existing land use, general plan and zoning, designations for the project site and adjacent properties are as follows: E6—El1P363 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-64 UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2017-00659 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS. September 26, 2018 Page 2 d. The proposed project meets or exceeds all Development Code standards, with the exception of the City's parking requirements, which the applicant submitted a Minor Exception to address. As conditioned, the proposed mixed use project will meet all applicable Development Code standards; and e. The applicant proposes to establish a Uniform Sign Program (USP) for a proposed development of a mixed use project consisting of 207 residential units, including 14 live/work units and 14,300 square feet of commercial/office,area; and f. . Development Code Section 17.74.030 requires that,a Uniform Sign Program be established for all new multi -tenant shopping centers, office parks, and other multi -tenant; mixed- use, or otherwise integrated developments of three (3) or more- separate tenants/uses that share buildings, public spaces, landscape, and/or parking facilities: The, proposed USP contains provisions that regulate permanent building signage as well as permanent monument signage for property identification for the mixed use project. The size and height of the letters, and the number of wall signs allowed per tenant comply with the technical standards descrbed'in the Development Code; and. g. These signs are typical for commercial and mixed use buildings; and h. The size, location, and placement of the signs will be integrated and compatible with the architecture of the buildings and the site; and 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced meeting. 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 Uniform Sign Program is consistent with the development standards for signs as provided in Chapter 17.74 (Sign Regulations for Private Property); and b. The design, location, and scale of proposed signs for the integrated development are in keeping with the architectural character of the development. E6—E11 P364 Land Use General Plan Zoning Site Warehouse and Industrial Park/ Industrial Park (IP) District/ Outdoor Storage Haven Avenue Haven Avenue Overlay District Office Overlay North Multitenant Office Industrial Park/ Industrial Park (IP) District/ Buildings Haven Avenue Haven Avenue Overlay District Office Overlay South 9.65 -acre Vacant Industrial, Park/ Industrial Park (IP) District/ Parcel Haven Avenue Haven Avenue Overlay District Office Overlay East Gas Station and Industrial Park/ Industrial Park (IP) District/ Multitenant Office Haven Avenue Haven Avenue Overlay District Buildings Office Overla West Single -Family Low Residential Low (L) Residential District Residences d. The proposed project meets or exceeds all Development Code standards, with the exception of the City's parking requirements, which the applicant submitted a Minor Exception to address. As conditioned, the proposed mixed use project will meet all applicable Development Code standards; and e. The applicant proposes to establish a Uniform Sign Program (USP) for a proposed development of a mixed use project consisting of 207 residential units, including 14 live/work units and 14,300 square feet of commercial/office,area; and f. . Development Code Section 17.74.030 requires that,a Uniform Sign Program be established for all new multi -tenant shopping centers, office parks, and other multi -tenant; mixed- use, or otherwise integrated developments of three (3) or more- separate tenants/uses that share buildings, public spaces, landscape, and/or parking facilities: The, proposed USP contains provisions that regulate permanent building signage as well as permanent monument signage for property identification for the mixed use project. The size and height of the letters, and the number of wall signs allowed per tenant comply with the technical standards descrbed'in the Development Code; and. g. These signs are typical for commercial and mixed use buildings; and h. The size, location, and placement of the signs will be integrated and compatible with the architecture of the buildings and the site; and 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced meeting. 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 Uniform Sign Program is consistent with the development standards for signs as provided in Chapter 17.74 (Sign Regulations for Private Property); and b. The design, location, and scale of proposed signs for the integrated development are in keeping with the architectural character of the development. E6—E11 P364 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-64 UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAMDRC2017-00659 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS September 26, 2018' Page 3 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQX) and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared' an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds: (i) that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared, in compliance with CEQA; and (ii) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. C. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has,been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources'Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the Planning Manager 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. 4. 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 in the Mitigation Monitoring Checklist and Conditions of Approval attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. 5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2018. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA E6—E 11P365 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-64 UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2017-00659 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS September 26, 2018 Page 4 ATTEST: Rich Macias, Chairman Candyce Burnett, Secretary I, Candyce Burnett, Secretary of the PlanningCommission 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 26th day of September 2018, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS•: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: E6—E11 P366 M rn I M v W rn V MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST (INITIAL STUDY PART III) Project File No.: General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658, Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656 Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017-00657, Design Review DRC2017-00654, Uniform Sign Program DRC2017-00659 and Minor Exception DRC2017-00872 Applicant: Urban Offerings, Inc. Initial Study Prepared by: Date: August 14, 2018 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /initials Non -Compliance 'Section,1 -.Aesthetics . 1 None •Section 2 -Agricultural Resources - _ — , 1 None Section •3•—Air Quality -_ s 1) None Section 4 - Biological Resources - 1) Pre -construction Nesting Bird Survey. Pre- PD g Review of report D 2/4 construction nesting bird survey shall be and plans during conducted within three to seven days prior construction to demolition and ground -disturbing activities if such activities are proposed during the nesting season (generally February 1 through August 31). The survey shall encompass the entire area of project - related demolition and ground disturbance. If no active avian nests are found during survey, no additional mitigation will be required. If an active avian nest is discovered during survey, construction activities shall be redirected around the nest(s). A qualified biologist shall delineate the boundaries of any such buffer area. The buffer shall be sufficient to ensure that nesting behavior is Page 1 of 24 M rn I M W W rn m Mitigation Measures No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date /Initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance not adversely affected by the construction activity. If demolition and/or ground - disturbing activities are delayed or suspended for more than seven days after the survey, the site shall be resurveyed. Should eggs or fledglings be discovered in any native nest, these resources cannot be disturbed until the young have hatched and fledged (matured to a stage that they can leave the nest on their own). Once the qualified biologist has determined that young birds have successfully fledged or the nest has otherwise become inactive, a monitoring report shall be prepared and submitted to the City. The monitoring report shall summarize the results of the nest monitoring, describe construction restrictions currently in place, and confirm that construction activities can proceed within the buffer area without jeopardizing the survival of the young birds. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department. Section 5 _=_Cultura[ Resources` Page 2 of 24 Mitigation Measures No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date /initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance 1) Unanticipated Cultural Resources: Prior to PD B/C Review of report A/D 2/3/4 issuance of a grading permit, the project and plans during applicant shall retain a qualified construction archaeologist to monitor all clearing, grubbing, and grading activities at the project site. The archaeologist shall be equipped to record and salvage cultural resources that may be unearthed during such activities. This measure shall not apply to importation of non-native soil onto the project site prior to actual grading of native on-site soil. The archaeologist shall be empowered to temporarily halt or divert grading equipment to allow recording and removal of unearthed resources. The archaeologist shall assess the significance of any cultural finds in consultation with affected Native American tribal representatives and select an appropriate disposition for the resource based on the significance of the find and tribal input. If cultural resources are discovered on the project site, ground -disturbing activities shall be suspended within 50 feet of the resource(s) and an exclusionary buffer shall be established. The archaeologist and representatives of the appropriate Native American Tribe(s), the project applicant, and the City Planning Department shall confer regarding mitigation of the discovered resource(s). The archaeological monitor shall continue monitoring areas of the project site not included in the exclusionary buffer, and a treatment plan and/or preservation plan shall be prepared by the project Page 3 of 24 M rn I m v LU V 0 Mitigation Measures No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date /Initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance archaeologist and reviewed by representatives of the appropriate Native American Tribe(s), the project applicant, and the City Planning Department for implementation to protect the identified cultural resource(s) from damage and destruction. A final report containing the significance and treatment of findings shall be prepared by the archaeologist and submitted to the City Planning Department and the appropriate Native American Tribe(s). All cultural material, excluding sacred, ceremonial, grave goods and human remains, collected during the grading monitoring program and from any previous archaeological studies or excavations on the project site shall be curated, as determined by the treatment plan, according to the current professional repository standards. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department. 2) Discovery of Paleontological Resources: PD B/C Review of report C 2 Prior to issuance of grading permits, the City and plans during shall verify that the following notes are construction included on the grading plans: "If any suspected fossil -bearing sediments or paleontological resources are discovered during ground -disturbing activities, the construction supervisor is obligated to halt work within a 50 -foot radius around the find and establish an exclusionary buffer. Construction personnel shall not collect or move any paleontological materials or further disturb any soils within the Page 4 of 24 M rn 1 M J J v LU Mitigation Measures No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date/Initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance exclusionary buffer, but construction activity may continue unimpeded on other portions of the project site. The project applicant shall retain a qualified (project) paleontologist to inspect the find in accordance with federal, State, and local guidelines to determine if the find is fossiliferous. If the project paleontologist determines the find is not fossiliferous, no further evaluation shall be required within the exclusionary buffer, and construction activity shall be allowed to resume therein. However, if the project paleontologist determines the find is fossiliferous, construction activity shall not resume within the exclusionary buffer, and Mitigation Measure CUL -3 shall apply." This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department. 3) Treatment of Paleontological Resources: If PD C/D Review of report A/D 3/4 the project paleontologist determines fossil- and plans during bearing sediments or paleontological construction resources are discovered on the project site, the project paleontologist shall develop and implement a Paleontological Resource Impact Mitigation Program (PRIMP) for this project. The PRIMP shall include the methods that will be used to protect paleontological resources that may exist within the project site, as well as procedures for monitoring, fossil preparation and identification, curation into a repository, and preparation of a report at the conclusion of grading. This measure shall be implemented to the Page 5 of 24 Mitigation Measures No. I Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/Initials Non -Compliance satisfaction of the City Planning Department. • Excavation and grading activities in PD C During Construction A 4 deposits with high paleontological sensitivity, as determined by the project paleontologist, shall be monitored by a paleontological monitor in accordance with the PRIMP. No monitoring is required for excavations in soil with no paleontological sensitivity (Artificial Fill). • If paleontological resources are PD C During Construction A 4 encountered during the course of ground disturbance, the paleontological monitor shall have the authority to temporarily redirect construction away from the area of the find in order to assess its significance. • In the event that paleontological resources PD C During Construction A 4 are encountered when a paleontological monitor is not present, work in the immediate area of the find shall be redirected and a paleontologist shall be contacted to assess the find for significance in accordance with the PRIMP. • Collected resources shall be prepared to PD C/D/E Review of Report D 3/7 the point of identification, identified to the lowest taxonomic level possible, cataloged, and curated into the permanent collections of a scientific institution. • Atf' the conclusion of the monitoring PD D Review of Report D 3/7 program, a report of findings shall be prepared to document the results of the monitoring program. Page 6 of 24 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance -ImplementingAction Section 6'= Geology and Soils ' 1) None Section 7 - Greenhouse Gas €missions 1) None Section 8 — Hazards and Waste Materials 1) Removal of Hazardous Materials: Prior to BO B Review of Report A/D 2 issuance of demolition permits, the numerous chemicals stored on the project site shall be disposed of as hazardous waste by a California Division of Occupational Health and Safety (CalOSHA) licensed Hazardous Materials Substances Removal contractor in accordance with applicable State and federal laws. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City's Building & Safety Services Department. 2) Asbestos Survey: Prior to issuance of BO B Review of Report A/D 2 demolition permits, the project applicant shall provide evidence to the City that inspection for Asbestos -Containing Building Materials (ACM) is conducted by a California Site Surveillance Technician (CSST) registered by the California Division of Occupational Health and Safety (CalOSHA) for ACM. The purpose of the ACM inspection is to locate and identify suspected ACM that will be affected during the demolition portion of the project. Once a visual inspection is performed, representative asbestos samples (if present) shall be collected in accordance with the EPA established guidelines document, "Guidance for Controlling Asbestos -Containing Materials in Buildings (EPA 560/5-85-024, 1985)." If it is Page 7 of 24 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance determined that no ACM is present, no further work is required, and demolition permits may be issued in accordance with all remaining applicable. regulations. However, if it is determined that the project site contains ACM, Mitigation Measure HAZ-3 shall apply. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City's Building & Safety Services Department. 3) Asbestos Abatement: Prior to the BO B Review of Report A/B 2 demolition of any structure determined to contain Asbestos -Containing Building Materials (ACM), all ACM shall be abated from the project site. An Asbestos Notification and Procedure -5 Work Plan shall be prepared and submitted to the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) for approval before any asbestos abatement may commence. The work plan shall include containment measures to control asbestos dust and debris created during abatement. All asbestos abatement shall be conducted by a California State Registered Asbestos Abatement Contractor registered by the Division of Occupational Health and Safety in accordance with the California Administrative Code, Title 8, and article 2.5 and the SCAQMD Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act, pursuant to Code of Federal Regulations Chapter 40, Part 763, subpart E. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City's Building & Safety Services Department. 4) Ontario International Airport Overflight BO D Review of D 3 Notification: Prior to issuance of occupancy Disclosures Page 8 of 24 Mitigation Measures No./ Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date lInitials Non -Compliance permits, the project applicant shall provide evidence to the City that appropriate real estate disclosures identifying the impacts of airport overflight are provided to all tenants upon lease, transfer, or sale of any residential or commercial unit on site. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City's Building & Safety Services Department. Secticin' 9 -,Hydrology and Water Quality 1) None Section 10- Land'Use and Planning - 1) None Section;// —Mineral Resources - 1) None 'Section 12 -'Noise 1) Construction Noise Monitoring and PD/BO C During Construction A/D 4 Temporary Noise Barriers. Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards specified in City of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 17.66.050, as measured at the adjacent property line. During construction, the applicant shall perform weekly noise level monitoring. The findings of the noise monitoring shall be reported to the Building Official and City Planning Department on a monthly basis; however, the Building Official and City Planning Department must be notified immediately if noise levels exceed 65 dBA when measured at the adjacent residential property line or 70 dBA when measured at the adjacent commercial or industrial property line per the City of Page 9 of 24 Mitigation Measures No./ Implementing Action Responsible for, Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date/Initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 17.66.050. If noise levels exceed 65 dBA or 70 dBA at the adjacent residential or commercial/industrial property lines, respectively, construction activities shall be halted, reduced in intensity to a level of compliance, or temporary construction noise barriers shall be used. The project shall implement a temporary 14 -foot barrier with a minimum STC -27 (or higher) along the western property line during construction to shield existing residences from construction and achieve a 13 dBA reduction in noise levels to within the City's exterior noise limit of 65 dBA when measured at the adjacent residential property line. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Building Official and City Planning Department. 2) Construction Noise -Attenuating Practices PD/BO C During Construction A 4 and Devices. The following noise -attenuating practices and devices would be implemented by the construction contractor during project construction: • Construction staging areas would be located as far from noise -sensitive land uses as feasible. • During construction, the contractor shall ensure all construction equipment is equipped with appropriate noise - attenuating devices. • Idling equipment shall be turned off when not in use. Page 10 of 24 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance • Equipment shall be maintained so that vehicles and their loads are secured from rattling and banging. 3) Construction Techniques. Prior to issuance PD/BO C During Construction A/C 3 of occupancy permits, the project shall incorporate building construction techniques that achieve the City's interior 45 dBA CNEL standard. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Building Official and City Planning Department. 4) Interior Sound Attenuation Study. Prior to PD/BO B Review of report CID 2 issuance of building permits, the project and plans proponent shall demonstrate to the City Building Department that the proposed building shell assembly and window assemblies will achieve exterior to interior noise reduction that will meet the State/City Building Code requirement of 45 dBA CNEL. Based on the building plans, an interior sound attenuation study shall be prepared and submitted to the City confirming findings. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Building Official and City Planning Department. 5) Compliance with the City of Rancho PD/BO B/E Review of report CID 2/377 Cucamonga Noise Regulations and California and plans Title 24. The project shall comply with California Title 24 insulation building requirements for multifamily dwelling units for common separating assemblies (e.g., floor/ceiling assemblies and demising walls). This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Building Official and City Planning Department. Page I I of 24 Mitigation Measures No./ Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance Section 13 — Population and 'Housing, 1) None Section 14 - Public Services . • •, . - .. - - _ 1) None Section 15 --Recreation - 1) None Section 16— Transportation/Traffic 1) Opening Year (2019) Plus Project PD/CE D Review of plans A/C 3 Improvements: Prior to issuance of the first during construction occupancy permit, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City for review and approval that the following improvements have been installed: • Haven Avenue/611' Street: Modify the westbound approach from having one left -turn lane, two through lanes, and one right -turn lane to having two left -turn lanes, two through lanes, and one right -turn lane. If these improvements are in place prior to application for occupancy, no further work is required, and the mitigation shall be deemed effected. However, if these improvements are not in place prior to application for occupancy, the project applicant shall be responsible for providing evidence to the City for review and sign -off of their implementation prior to issuance of occupancy permits. 2) Year 2040 Plus Project Improvements: The PD/CE C Review of plans A/C 2 applicant shall provide evidence to the City during construction for review and approval that the following Page 12 of 24 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/Initials Non -Compliance improvements have been installed: • Haven Avenue/Jersey Boulevard: Restripe the westbound approach to provide a shared left -turn lane and a left - turn lane with split phasing in the east - west direction. The City shall review and sign off on these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. Section 17 —Tribal Cultural Resources ` 1) Tribal Monitoring: Prior to issuance of a PD B/C Review of report A/D 2/3/4 grading permit, the project applicant shall and plans during retain a qualified representative from the construction Gabrielino Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation to monitor all clearing, grubbing, and grading activities at the project site and provide input to the on-site archaeologist, who shall be equipped to record and salvage cultural resources that may be unearthed during such activities. This measure shall not apply to importation of non-native soil onto the project site prior to actual grading of native on-site soil. The archaeologist shall assess the significance of any cultural finds in consultation with the qualified representative from the Gabrielino Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation and select an appropriate disposition for the resource based on the significance of the find and tribal input. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department 2) Human Remains: If human remains or PD C Review of report A/D 3/4 and plans during Page 13 of 24 M m I M v W 00 0 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/initials Non -Compliance funerary objects are encountered during any construction activities associated with the project, work in, the immediate vicinity (within a 100 -foot buffer of the find) shall cease and the County Coroner shall be contacted pursuant to State Health and Safety Code §7050.5 and that code enforced for the duration of the project. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department 3) Native American Cultural Resources: In the PD C Review of report A/B/D 3/4 event that Native American cultural and plans during resources are discovered during project construction activities, all work in the immediate vicinity of the find (within a 60 -foot buffer) shall cease and a qualified archaeologist meeting Secretary of Interior standards shall be hired to assess the find. Work on the other portions of the project outside of the buffered area may continue during this assessment period. Additionally, San Manuel Band of Mission Indians will be contacted if any such find occurs and be provided information and permitted/invited to perform a site visit when the archaeologist makes his/her assessment, so as to provide Tribal input. 4) Cultural Resources Treatment Plan: If PD C Review of report A/B/D 3/4 significant Native American historical and plans during resources, as defined by CEQA (as amended, construction 2015), are discovered and avoidance cannot be ensured, an Secretary of Interior -qualified archaeologist shall be retained to develop a cultural resources Treatment Plan, as well as a Discovery and Monitoring Plan, the drafts Page 14 of 24 Mitigation Measures No./ Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance of which shall be provided to San Manuel Band of Mission Indians for review and comment. a. All in -field investigations, assessments, PD C During Construction A/B 3/4 and/or data recovery enacted pursuant to the finalized Treatment Plan shall be monitored by a San Manuel Band of Mission Indians Tribal Participant(s). b. The Lead Agency and/or applicant shall, PD C During Construction A/B 3/4 in good faith, consult with San Manuel Band of Mission Indians on the disposition and treatment of any artifacts or other cultural materials encountered during the project. Section 18 — Utility and Service Systems 1) None Section 19 —Mandatory Findings of Significance 1) None Page 15 of 24 Standard Conditions Standard Conditions No. l Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /initials Non -Compliance Section 1 :-Aesthetics 1 None "Section 2 - Agricultural' Resources _ 1 None Section 3— Air `Q_'uality" - - — 1 None Section 4 -'Biological Resources 1) None Section 5—.Cu1turafRes6urces -• - -- - 1) None Section 6 — Geolog`y'and 'Soils 1) Compliance with applicable California BO B/C/D Review of report A/C/D 2/3 Building Code and Project -specific and plans during Geotechnical Recommendations. Prior to construction the approval of grading and/or building permits, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City for review and approval that on- site structures, features, and facilities have been designed and will be constructed in conformance with applicable, provisions of the 2016 California Building Code and the recommendations cited in the project - specific geotechnical investigation. Geotechnical recommendations include development of the project site in accordance with applicable seismic code values and design methods determined by the Project Structural Engineer, as well as remedial earthwork and/or ground improvement to provide a sufficient layer of engineered fill or densified soil beneath the structural footings/foundations. A qualified Page 16 of 24 Standard Conditions No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date linitials Non -Compliance geotechnical engineer shall be present during demolition of the on-site structure to confirm the depth of foundation elements. Additionally, verification testing must be performed upon completion of ground improvements to confirm that the compressible soils have been sufficiently densified. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City's Building & Safety Services Department. Section 7- Greenhouse Gas Emissions 1) Compliance with applicable Rancho PD/BO B/C/D Review of report A/C/D 2/3 Cucamonga Sustainable Community Action and plans during Plan GHG reduction policies. Prior to the construction approval of building and/or occupancy permits, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City for review and approval that on- site structures, features, and facilities have been designed and will be constructed in conformance with the following enforceable actions: • Construction and building PD/BO B/C/D Review of report A/C/D 2/3 materials shall be produced and/or and plans during manufactured locally. Use "Green construction Building Materials such as materials that are resource -efficient, recycled, and manufactured in an environmentally friendly way, including low -volatile organic compound (VOC) materials. • Design all buildings to exceed the PD/BO B/C/D Review of report A/C/D 2/3 California Building Code Title 24 energy and plans during standard including, but not limited to, construction any combination of: Page 17 of 24 Standard Conditions No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date linitials Sanctions for Non -Compliance o Increased insulation. o Limit air leakage through the structure. o Incorporate Energy Star or better rated windows, space heating and cooling equipment, light fixtures, and appliances. o Landscape and develop site utilizing shade, prevailing winds, and landscaping. o Install efficient lighting and lighting control systems. o Install light colored "cool' roofs and cool pavements. o Install solar or light emitting diodes (LEDs) for outdoor lighting. • Prepare a comprehensive water PD/BO B/CID Review of report A/C/D 2/3 conservation strategy appropriate for the and plans during project and include the following: construction o Install water efficient landscapes and irrigation systems and devices in compliance with the City of Rancho . Cucamonga Water Efficient' Landscape Ordinance. o Use reclaimed water for landscaping within the project, if available. o Design buildings to be water efficient by installing water efficient fixtures and appliances including low flow faucets, dual flush toilets, and Page 18 of 24 Standard Conditions No. Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/Initials Non -Compliance waterless urinals/water heaters. o Design irrigation to control runoff and to remove water to non- vegetated surfaces. • Reuse and recycle construction and PD/BO B/C/D Review of report A/C/D 2/3 demolition waste. Provide interior and and plans during exterior storage areas for recyclables and construction green waste in public areas. Educate employees about reducing waste and about recycling. Sectiori'8 — Hazards and Waste Materials 1) None Section!9—Hydrology 'and WaterQuality 1) Coverage under the NPDES General CDD/CE B Review of Plans BIC 2 Construction Permit. Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit and subsequent grading permit, the project applicant shall file and obtain a Notice of Intent (NOI) with the Regional Water Quality Control Board in order to be in compliance with the State NPDES General Construction Storm Water Permit for discharge of surface runoff associated with construction activities. Evidence that this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Discharger's Identification Number) shall be submitted to the City for coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit. The NOI shall address the potential for an extended and discontinuous construction period based on funding availability. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 19 of 24 M m I M v W 00 o) Standard Conditions No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date !Initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance Municipal Utilities & Engineering Department and Development Services Department, as appropriate. 2) Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan CDD/CE BIC Review of plans A/BIC 214 (SWPPP). Prior to the issuance of a during construction demolition permit and subsequent grading permit, the project applicant shall submit to and receive approval from the City of Rancho Cucamonga of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP shall include a surface water control plan and erosion control plan citing specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion during the entire demolition, grading, and construction period. In addition, the SWPPP shall emphasize structural and nonstructural Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control sediment and non-visible discharges from the site. The SWPPP shall include inspection forms for routine monitoring of the site during both the demolition and construction phases to ensure NPDES compliance and that additional BMPs and erosion control measures will be documented in the SWPPP and utilized if necessary. The SWPPP shall address the potential for an extended and discontinuous demolition and construction period based on funding availability. The SWPPP shall be kept on site for the entire duration of project demolition and construction and shall be available to the local RWQCB for inspection at any time. BMPs to be implemented may include the following: • Sediment discharges from the site Page 20 of 24 m m I M v W 00 V Standard Conditions No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified DatelInitials Sanctions for Non -Compliance may be controlled by the following: sandbags, silt fences, straw wattles and temporary basins (if deemed necessary), and other discharge control devices. The construction and condition of the BMPs shall be periodically inspected during demolition and construction, and repairs shall be made when necessary as required by the SWPPP. • Materials that have the potential to contribute to non-visible pollutants to storm water must not be placed in drainage ways and must be contained, elevated, and placed in temporary storage containment areas. • All loose piles of soil, silt, clay, sand, debris, and other earthen material shall be protected in a reasonable manner to eliminate any discharge from the site. Stockpiles shall be surrounded by silt fences and covered with plastic tarps. • In addition, the construction contractor shall be responsible for performing and documenting the application of BMPs identified in the SWPPP. Weekly inspections shall be performed on sandbag barriers and other sediment control measures called for in the SWPPP. Monthly reports and inspection logs shall be maintained by the contractor and reviewed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the representatives of the State Water Page 21 of 24 m m I m v W m m Standard Conditions No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date /Initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance Resources Control Board. In the event that it is not feasible to implement specific BMPs, the City of Rancho Cucamonga can make a determination that other BMPs will provide equivalent or superior treatment either on or off site. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utilities & Engineering Department and Development Services Department, as appropriate. 3) Water Quality Management Plan. Prior to CDD/CE B/C/D/E Review of plans A/C/D 2/3/4 the issuance of a grading permit, the project during construction applicant shall submit a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) to the City of Rancho Cucamonga for review and approval. The project shall implement project design features identified in the WQMP. The WQMP shall demonstrate that any proposed on-site development plan includes BMPs for source control, pollution prevention, site design, low impact development (LID) implementation, and structural treatment control. BMPs shall be designed and implemented to retain the project site's minimum design capture volume and hydromodification volume of 30,355 cubic feet of runoff to ensure post - development stormwater runoff volume or time of concentration does not exceed pre - development stormwater runoff. Periodic maintenance of any required infiltration basin and landscaped areas during project occupancy and operation shall be in accordance with the schedule outlined in the Page 22 of 24 Standard Conditions No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date iInitials Sanctions for Non -Compliance WQMP. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utilities & Engineering Department and Development Services Department, as appropriate. 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 Section 10'—'Land Use and Planning - 3 -Withhold Certificate of Occupancy 1) None Section 11 — Mineral Resources 1) None 'Section 12 — Noise 1) None 'Section 13 — Population and Housing' 1) None Section 14.—Public Services 1) None `Section 15.- Recreation 1) None SectionA6=Transpoitationrrraffic 1) None -;. Section,lZ—Tribal Cultural`Resources 1) None Section 18— Utility and Service -Systems 1) None Section 19 — Mandatory Findings of Significance 1) None Key to Checklist Abbreviations Responsible Person Monitoring Frequency Method of Verification Sanctions CDD - Community Development Director or designee A - With Each New Development A - On-site Inspection 1 - Withhold Recordation of Final Map 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 Page 23 of 24 m rn I _m v w UD 0 BO - Building Official or designee D - On Completion D - Separate Submittal (Reports/Studies/ Plans) 4 - Stop Work Order PO - Police Captain or designee E - Operating 5 - Retain Deposit or Bonds FC - Fire Chief or designee 6 - Revoke CUP 7 - Citation Page 24 of 24 RESOLUTION NO. 18-65 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2017-00872 FOR A PROPOSAL TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF REQUIRED OFF-STREET PARKING BY APPROXIMATELY TWENTY-ONE (21%) PERCENT FOR A MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT COMPRISED OF 2 BUILDINGS CONSISTING OF 207 MULTI -FAMILY UNITS, INCLUDING 14 LIVE/WORK UNITS AND 14,300 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL/OFFICE AREA ON A 5.21 ACRE SITE LOCATED WITHIN THE INDUSTRIAL PARK (IP) DISTRICTAND HAVEN AVENUE OVERLAY (HADD) DISTRICTAT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF HAVEN AVENUE AND 26TH STREETAT 1045126TH STREET; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF -APN: 0209-131-01. A. Recitals. 1. Charles Joseph Associates filed an application for Urban Offerings the approval of Minor Exception DRC2017-00872, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Minor Exception request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 26th day of 2018, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said meeting on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced meeting on September 26, 2018, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to a 5.21 -acre property located at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and 26th Street. The project site is partially developed with a 20,000 -square foot industrial building and outdoor storage area. The site fronts three streets, including Haven Avenue to the east, 26th Street to the north and Marine Avenue to the west, all of which contain partial improvements; and b. The existing land use, general plan and zoning designations for the project site and adjacent properties are as follows: E6—E11 P391 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-65 MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2017-00872 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS September 26, 2018 Page 2 d. The project is for the development of a mixed-use project comprised of 2 buildings consisting of 207 multi -family units, including 14 live/work units and 14,300 square feet of commercial/office area on 5.21 -acres of land; and e. The project is being processed concurrently with the following applications: General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017-00657, Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656, Uniform Sign Program DRC2017-00659 and Minor Exception DRC2017-00872; and f. The project contains a total of 380 off-street parking spaces as well as an additional 30 on -street parking spaces; and g. Per Section 17.64 of the Development Code (Parking and Loading Standards), a total of 480 parking spaces are required to be provided for this project, based on the square footage of the non-residential building area and the number and bedroom type of the residential units. Therefore, the project contains a parking deficiency of 19 percent. h. The applicant submitted a parking study, prepared by Linscott Law and Greenspan Engineers, and is requesting a reduction of the required parking to allow for the 19 percent parking deficiency. The parking study was peer reviewed by a third -party consultant, Nelson Nygaard Consulting Associates, which determined the project contains a theoreticalsurplus of 5 parking off- street parking spaces and therefore contains a sufficient amount of parking. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced meeting 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 Minor Exception is consistent with the General Plan or any applicable specific plan or development agreement. The reduction of parking requirements is consistent with the proposed amendment to the General Plan, which contemplates a designation of the land use of the project site to Mixed Use. E6—E 11P392 Land Use General Plan Zoning Site Warehouse and Industrial Park/ Industrial Park (IP) District/ Outdoor Storage Haven Avenue Haven Avenue Overlay District Office Overla North Multitenant Office Industrial Park/ Industrial Park (IP) District/ Buildings Haven Avenue Haven Avenue Overlay District Office Overlay South 9.65 -acre Vacant Industrial Park/ Industrial Park (IP) District/ Parcel Haven Avenue Haven Avenue Overlay District Office Overlay East Gas Station and Industrial Park/ Industrial Park (IP) District/ Multitenant Office Haven Avenue Haven Avenue Overlay District Buildings Office Overlay West Single -Family Low Residential Low (L) Residential District Residences d. The project is for the development of a mixed-use project comprised of 2 buildings consisting of 207 multi -family units, including 14 live/work units and 14,300 square feet of commercial/office area on 5.21 -acres of land; and e. The project is being processed concurrently with the following applications: General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017-00657, Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656, Uniform Sign Program DRC2017-00659 and Minor Exception DRC2017-00872; and f. The project contains a total of 380 off-street parking spaces as well as an additional 30 on -street parking spaces; and g. Per Section 17.64 of the Development Code (Parking and Loading Standards), a total of 480 parking spaces are required to be provided for this project, based on the square footage of the non-residential building area and the number and bedroom type of the residential units. Therefore, the project contains a parking deficiency of 19 percent. h. The applicant submitted a parking study, prepared by Linscott Law and Greenspan Engineers, and is requesting a reduction of the required parking to allow for the 19 percent parking deficiency. The parking study was peer reviewed by a third -party consultant, Nelson Nygaard Consulting Associates, which determined the project contains a theoreticalsurplus of 5 parking off- street parking spaces and therefore contains a sufficient amount of parking. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced meeting 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 Minor Exception is consistent with the General Plan or any applicable specific plan or development agreement. The reduction of parking requirements is consistent with the proposed amendment to the General Plan, which contemplates a designation of the land use of the project site to Mixed Use. E6—E 11P392 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-65 MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2017-00872 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS September 26, 2018 Page 3 b. The proposed development is compatible with the existing and proposed land uses in the surrounding area. The proposed high density mixed use project is located on a major commercial thoroughfare that provides bus service. Furthermore, the project is near in proximity to similar multi -family projects and nearby commercial land uses. C. The proposed exception to the specific development standard(s) is necessary to allow creative design solutions compatible with the desires of the community and/or to accommodate unique site conditions. The proposed reduction in the parking standards is necessary to allow increased residential density on the project site. The General Plan has a stated policy (Policy LU- 3.8) to higher densities near transit centers and along transit corridors, allowing Mixed Use development, and encouraging and accommodating pedestrian movement. The proposed project is located adjacent to a major arterial and provides the opportunity for a mixed-use development with convenient access to alternative transportation modes. Additionally, the applicant will provide 30 additional on -street parking spaces that will offset the 100 parking space reduction. d. The granting of the Minor Exception will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district and will not be detrimental to public health safety or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvement in the vicinity. The proposed reduction in the required number of parking spaces is not a grant of special privilege in that the Development Code allows flexibility to reduce the required number of parking spaces where the applicant has demonstrated that the projectwill provide adequate parking for all on-site uses. The applicant has submitted a parking study (Linscott, Law, & Greenspan, Engineers; January 11, 2018) verifying the adequacy of the proposed number of on-site parking spaces. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds: (i) that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. E6—E 11P393 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-65 MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2017-00872 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR URBAN OFFERINGS September 26, 2018 Page 4 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 Manager 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. 4. 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 setforth in the Mitigation Monitoring Checklist and Conditions of Approval attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. 5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2018. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ATTEST: Rich Macias, Chairman Candyce Burnett, Secretary I, Candyce Burnett, 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 26th day of September 2018, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: E6—E11 P394 m rn 1 m v W to to MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST (INITIAL STUDY PART III) Project File No.: General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658 Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656 Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017-00657, Design Review DRC2017-00654, Uniform Sign Program DRC2017-00659 and Minor Exception DRC2017-00872 Applicant: Urban Offerings, Inc. Initial Study Prepared by: LSA Date: August 14, 2018 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/Initials Non -Com Iiance Section 1 -Aesthetics 1 None Section 2 -Agricultural Resources 1 None Section' 3—AirQuality 1) None Section 4 - Biological. Resources 1) Pre -construction Nesting Bird Survey. Pre- PD B Review of report D 2/4 construction nesting bird survey shall be and plans during conducted within three to seven days prior construction to demolition and ground -disturbing activities if such activities are proposed during the nesting season (generally February 1 through August 31). The survey shall encompass the entire area of project - related demolition and ground disturbance. If no active avian nests are found during survey, no additional mitigation will be required. If an active avian nest is discovered during survey, construction activities shall be redirected around the nest(s). A qualified biologist shall delineate the boundaries of any such buffer area. The buffer shall be sufficient to ensure that nesting behavior is Page 1 of 24 Mitigation Measures No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date /Initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance not adversely affected by the construction activity. If demolition and/or ground - disturbing activities are delayed or suspended for more than seven days after the survey, the site shall be resurveyed. Should eggs or fledglings be discovered in any native nest, these resources cannot be disturbed until the young have hatched and fledged (matured to a stage that they can leave the nest on their own). Once the qualified biologist has determined that young birds have successfully fledged or the nest has otherwise become inactive, a monitoring report shall be prepared and submitted to the City. The monitoring report shall summarize the results of the nest monitoring, describe construction restrictions currently in place, and confirm that construction activities can proceed within the buffer area without jeopardizing the survival of the young birds. This measure shall be implemented to the ,satisfaction of the City Planning Department. Section -5 - Cultural Resources Page 2 of 24 M rn I m v W 14 V Mitigation Measures No./ Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date linitials Sanctions for Non -Compliance 1) Unanticipated Cultural Resources: Prior to PD B/C Review of report A/D 2/3/4 issuance of a grading permit, the project and plans during applicant shall retain a qualified construction archaeologist to monitor all clearing, grubbing, and grading activities at the project site. The archaeologist shall be equipped to record and salvage cultural resources that may be unearthed during such activities. This measure shall not apply to importation of non-native soil onto the project site prior to actual grading of native on-site soil. The archaeologist shall be empowered to temporarily halt or divert grading equipment to allow recording and removal of unearthed resources. The archaeologist shall assess the significance of any cultural finds in consultation with affected Native American tribal representatives and select an appropriate disposition for the resource based on the significance of the find and tribal input. If cultural resources are discovered on the project site, ground -disturbing activities shall be suspended within 50 feet of the resource(s) and an exclusionary buffer shall be established. The archaeologist and representatives of the appropriate Native American Tribe(s), the project applicant, and the City Planning Department shall confer regarding mitigation of the discovered resource(s). The archaeological monitor shall continue monitoring areas of the project site not included in the exclusionary buffer, and a treatment plan and/or preservation plan shall be prepared by the project Page 3 of 24 M rn I rn v LU 00 00 Mitigation Measures No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date /Initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance archaeologist and reviewed by representatives of the appropriate Native American Tribe(s), the project applicant, and the City Planning Department for implementation to protect the identified cultural resource(s) from damage and destruction. A final report containing the significance and treatment of findings shall be prepared by the archaeologist and submitted to the City Planning Department and the appropriate Native American Tribe(s). All cultural material, excluding sacred, ceremonial, grave goods and human remains, collected during the grading monitoring program and from any previous archaeological studies or excavations on the project site shall be curated, as determined by the treatment plan, according to the current professional repository standards. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department. 2) Discovery of Paleontological Resources: PD B/C Review of report C 2 Prior to issuance of grading permits, the City and plans during shall verify that the following notes are construction included on the grading plans: "If any suspected fossil -bearing sediments or paleontological resources are discovered during ground -disturbing activities, the construction supervisor is obligated to halt work within a 50 -foot radius around the find and establish an exclusionary buffer. Construction personnel shall not collect or move any paleontological materials or further disturb any soils within the Page 4 of 24 m m I M v w to to Mitigation Measures No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date /Initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance exclusionary buffer, but construction activity may continue unimpeded on other portions of the project site. The project applicant shall retain a qualified (project) paleontologist to inspect the find in accordance with federal, State, and local guidelines to determine if the find is fossiliferous. If the project paleontologist determines the find is not fossiliferous, no further evaluation shall be required within the exclusionary buffer, and construction activity shall be allowed to resume therein. However, if the project paleontologist determines the find is fossiliferous, construction activity shall not resume within the exclusionary buffer, and Mitigation Measure CUL -3 shall apply." This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department. 3) Treatment of Paleontological Resources: If PD C/D Review of report A/D 3/4 the project paleontologist determines fossil- and plans during bearing sediments or paleontological construction resources are discovered on the project site, the project paleontologist shall develop and implement a Paleontological Resource Impact Mitigation Program (PRIMP) for this project. The PRIMP shall include the methods that will be used to protect paleontological resources that may exist within the project site, as well as procedures for monitoring, fossil preparation and identification, curation into a repository, and preparation of a report at the conclusion of grading. This measure shall be implemented to the Page 5 of 24 M rn I A 0 0 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance satisfaction of the City Planning Department. • Excavation and grading activities in PD C During Construction A 4 deposits with high paleontological sensitivity, as determined by the project paleontologist, shall be monitored by a paleontological monitor in accordance with the PRIMP. No monitoring is required for excavations in soil with no paleontological sensitivity (Artificial Fill). • If paleontological resources are PD C During Construction A 4 encountered during the course of ground disturbance, the paleontological monitor shall have the authority to temporarily redirect construction away from the area of the find in order to assess its significance. • In the event that paleontological resources PD C During Construction A 4 are encountered when a paleontological monitor is not present, work in the immediate area of the find shall be redirected and a paleontologist shall be contacted to assess the find for significance in accordance with the PRIMP. • Collected resources shall be prepared to PD . C/D/E Review of Report D 317 the point of identification, identified to the lowest taxonomic level possible, cataloged, and curated into the permanent collections of a scientific institution. • At the conclusion of the monitoring PD D Review of Report D 3!7 program, a report of findings shall be prepared to document the results of the monitoring program. Page 6 of 24 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequencv Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance Section 16 =Geology and Soils - 1) None Section 7 - Greenhouse Gas Emissions 1) None Section 8 - Hazards and WaiW Materials "- 1) Removal of Hazardous Materials: Prior to BO B Review of Report A/D 2 issuance of demolition permits, the numerous chemicals stored on the project site shall be disposed of as hazardous waste by a California Division of Occupational Health and Safety (CalOSHA) licensed Hazardous Materials Substances Removal contractor in accordance with applicable State and federal laws. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City's Building & Safety Services Department. 2) Asbestos Survey: Prior to issuance of SO B Review of Report A/D 2 demolition permits, the project applicant shall provide evidence to the City that inspection for Asbestos -Containing Building Materials (ACM) is conducted by a California Site Surveillance Technician (CSST) registered by the California Division of Occupational Health and Safety (CalOSHA) for ACM. The purpose of the ACM inspection is to locate and identify suspected ACM that will be affected during the demolition portion of the project. Once a visual inspection is performed, representative asbestos samples (if present) shall be collected in accordance with the EPA established guidelines document, "Guidance for Controlling Asbestos -Containing Materials in Buildings (EPA 560/5-85-024, 1985)." If it is Page 7 of 24 m m I m v A 0 N Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance determined that no ACM is present, no further work is required, and demolition permits may be issued in accordance with all remaining applicable regulations. However, if it is determined that the project site contains ACM, Mitigation Measure HAZ-3 shall apply. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City's Building & Safety Services Department. 3) Asbestos Abatement: Prior to the .'BO B Review of Report A/B 2 demolition of any structure determined to contain Asbestos -Containing Building Materials (ACM), all ACM shall be abated from the project site. An Asbestos Notification and Procedure -5 Work Plan shall be prepared and submitted to the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) for approval before any asbestos abatement may commence. The work plan shall include containment measures to control asbestos dust and debris created during abatement. All asbestos abatement shall be conducted by a California State Registered Asbestos Abatement Contractor registered by the Division of Occupational Health and Safety in'. accordance with the California Administrative Code, Title S, and article 2.5 and the SCAQMD Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act pursuant to Code of Federal Regulations Chapter 40, Part 763, subpart E. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City s Building & Safety Services Department. 4) Ontario International Airport Overflight BO D Review of D 3 Notification: Prior to issuance of occupancy Disclosures Page 8 of 24 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance permits, the project applicant shall provide evidence to the City that appropriate real estate disclosures identifying the impacts of airport overflight are provided to all tenants upon lease, transfer, or sale of any residential or commercial unit on site. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City's Building & Safety Services Department. Section 9 - Hydrology and Water Quality, 1) None Section 10 — Land Use and'Planriing 1) None Section 11 -Mineral Resources 1) None Section 12 —Noise _ 1) Construction Noise Monitoring and POW C During Construction A/D 4 Temporary Noise Barriers. Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards specified in City of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 17.66.050, as measured at the adjacent property line. During construction, the applicant shall perform weekly noise level monitoring. The findings of the noise monitoring shall be reported to the Building Official and City Planning Department on a monthly basis; however, the Building Official and City Planning Department must be notified immediately if noise levels exceed 65 dBA when measured at the adjacent residential property line or 70 dBA when measured at the adjacent commercial or industrial property line per the City of Page 9 of 24 m rn I -v A O A Mitigation Measures No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date /Initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 17.66.050. If noise levels exceed 65 dBA or 70 dBA at the adjacent residential or commercial/industrial property lines, respectively, construction activities shall be halted, reduced in intensity to a level of compliance, or temporary construction noise barriers shall be used. The project shall implement a temporary 14 -foot barrier with, a minimum STC -27 (or higher) along the western property line during construction to shield existing residences from construction and achieve a 13 dBA reduction in noise levels to within the City's exterior noise limit of 65 dBA when measured at the adjacent residential property line. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Building Official and City Planning Department. 2) Construction Noise -Attenuating Practices PD/BO C During Construction A 4 and Devices. The following noise -attenuating practices and devices would be implemented by the construction contractor during project construction: • Construction staging areas would be located as far from noise -sensitive land uses as feasible. • During construction, the contractor shall ensure all construction equipment is equipped with appropriate noise - attenuating devices. • Idling equipment shall be turned off when not in use. Page 10 of 24 Mitigation Measures No./ Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance • Equipment shall be maintained so that vehicles and their loads are secured from rattling and banging. 3) Construction Techniques. Prior to issuance PD/BO C During Construction A/C 3 of occupancy permits, the project shall incorporate building construction techniques that achieve the City's interior 45 dBA CNEL standard. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Building Official and City Planning Department. 4) Interior Sound Attenuation Study. Prior to PD/BO B Review of report C/D 2 issuance of building permits, the project and plans proponent shall demonstrate to the City Building Department that the proposed building shell assembly and window assemblies will achieve exterior to interior noise reduction that will meet the State/City Building Code requirement of 45 dBA CNEL. Based on the building plans, an interior sound attenuation study shall be prepared and submitted to the City confirming findings. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Building Official and City Planning Department. 5) Compliance with the City of Rancho PD/BO WE Review of report C/D 2/3/7 Cucamonga Noise Regulations and California and plans Title 24. The project shall comply with California Title 24 insulation building requirements for multifamily dwelling units for common separating assemblies (e.g., floor/ceiling assemblies and demising walls). This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Building Official and City Planning Department. Page 11 of 24 m rn I m v A 0 (n Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance • Equipment shall be maintained so that vehicles and their loads are secured from rattling and banging. 3) Construction Techniques. Prior to issuance PD/BO C During Construction A/C 3 of occupancy permits, the project shall incorporate building construction techniques that achieve the City's interior 45 dBA CNEL standard. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Building Official and City Planning Department. 4) Interior Sound Attenuation Study. Prior to. PD/BO B Review of report C/D 2 issuance of building permits, the project and plans proponent shall demonstrate to the City Building Department that the proposed building shell assembly and window assemblies will achieve exterior to interior noise reduction that will meet the State/City Building Code requirement of 45 dBA CNEL. Based on the building plans, an interior sound attenuation study shall be prepared and submitted to the City confirming findings. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Building Official and City Planning Department. 5) Compliance with the City of Rancho PD/BO WE Review of report C/D 2/3/7 Cucamonga Noise Regulations and California and plans Title 24. The project shall comply with California Title 24 insulation building requirements for multifamily dwelling units for common separating assemblies (e.g., floor/ceiling assemblies and demising walls). This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Building Official and City Planning Department. Page 11 of 24 m rn I m v A 0 V Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance Section 13 — Population and Housing 1) None Section 14 — Public Services 1) None Section -15 - Recreation 1) None Section 16 — Transportation/Traffic 1) Opening Year (2019) Plus Project PD/CE D Review of plans A/C 3 Improvements: Prior to issuance of the first during construction occupancy permit, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City for review and approval that the following improvements have been installed: • Haven Avenue/6t° Street: Modify the westbound approach from having one left -turn lane, two through lanes, and one right -turn lane to having two left -turn lanes, two through lanes, and one right -turn lane. If these improvements are in place prior to application for occupancy, no further work is required, and the mitigation shall be deemed effected. However, if these improvements are not in place prior to application for occupancy, the project applicant shall be responsible for providing evidence to the City for review and sign -off of their implementation prior to issuance of occupancy permits. 2) Year 2040 Plus Project Improvements: The PD/CE C Review of plans A/C 2 applicant shall provide evidence to the City during construction for review and approval that the following Page 12 of 24 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date (Initials Non -Compliance improvements have been installed: • Haven Avenue/Jersey Boulevard: Restripe the westbound approach to provide a shared left -turn lane and a left - turn lane with split phasing in the east - west direction. The City shall review and sign off on these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. Section 17 —Tribal Cultural Resources 1) Tribal Monitoring: Prior to issuance of a PD B/C Review of report A/D 2/3/4 grading permit, the project applicant shall and plans during retain a qualified representative from the construction Gabrielino Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation to monitor all clearing, grubbing, and grading activities at the project site and provide input to the on-site archaeologist, who shall be equipped to record and salvage cultural resources that may be unearthed during such activities. This measure shall not apply to importation of non-native soil onto the project site prior to actual grading of native on-site soil. The archaeologist shall assess the significance of any cultural finds in consultation with the qualified representative from the Gabrielino Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation and select an appropriate disposition for the resource based on the significance of the find and tribal input. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department 2) Human Remains: If human remains or PD C Review of report A/D 3/4 and plans during Page 13 of 24 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/Initials Non -Compliance funerary objects are encountered during any construction activities associated with the project, work in the immediate vicinity (within a 100 -foot buffer of the find) shall cease and the County Coroner shall be contacted pursuant to State Health and Safety Code §7050.5 and that code enforced for the duration of the project. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department 3) Native American Cultural Resources: In the PD C Review of report AIB/D 3/4 event that Native American cultural and plans during resources are discovered during project construction activities, all work in the immediate vicinity of the find (within a 60 -foot buffer) shall cease and a qualified archaeologist meeting Secretary of Interior standards shall be hired to assess the find. Work on the other portions of the project outside of the buffered area may continue during this assessment period. Additionally, San Manuel Band of Mission Indians will be contacted if any such find occurs and be provided information and permitted/invited to perform a site visit when the archaeologist makes his/her assessment, so as to provide Tribal input. 4) Cultural Resources Treatment Plan: If PD C Review of report A/B/D 3/4 significant Native American historical and plans during resources, as defined by CECIA (as amended, construction 2015), are discovered and avoidance cannot be ensured, an Secretary of Interior -qualified archaeologist shall be retained to develop a cultural resources Treatment Plan, as well as a Discovery and Monitoring Plan, the drafts Page 14 of 24 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance of which shall be provided to San Manuel Band of Mission Indians for review and comment. a. All in -field investigations, assessments, PD C During Construction A/B 3/4 and/or data recovery enacted pursuant to the finalized Treatment Plan shall be monitored by a San Manuel Band of Mission Indians Tribal Participant(s). b. The Lead Agency and/or applicant shall, PD C During Construction A/B 3/4 in good faith, consult with San Manuel Band of Mission Indians on the disposition and treatment of any artifacts or other cultural materials encountered during the project. Section 18 — Utility and Service Systems - 1) None Section, 19 — Mandatory Findings of Significance _ 1) None Page 16 of 24 Standard Conditions Standard Conditions No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance Aesthetics:1 Section_1 -Aesthetics.- 1) None Section 2 - Agricultural Resources 1 None Section '3—Air Quality 1 None .Section 4 - Biological Resources- - 1) None Section 5: --,Cultural �Resources 1) None ;Section 6—Geology:and�Soils 1) Compliance with applicable California BO B/C/D Review of report A/C/D 2/3 Building Code and Project -specific and plans during Geotechnical Recommendations. Prior to construction the approval of grading and/or building permits, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City for review and approval that on- site structures, features, and facilities have been designed and will be constructed in conformance with applicable provisions of the 2016 California Building Code and the recommendations cited in the project_, specific geotechnical investigation. Geotechnical recommendations include development of the project site in accordance with applicable seismic code values and design methods determined by the Project Structural Engineer, as well as remedial earthwork and/or ground improvement to provide a sufficient layer of engineered fill or densified soil beneath the structural footings/foundations. A qualified Page 16 of 24 Standard Conditions No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/Initials Non -Compliance geotechnical engineer shall be present during demolition of the on-site structure to confirm the depth of foundation elements. Additionally, verification testing must be performed upon completion of ground improvements to confirm that the compressible soils have been sufficiently densified. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City's Building & Safety Services Department. Section 7 - Greenhouse Gas Emissions 1) Compliance with applicable Rancho PD/BO B/C/D Review of report A/C/D 2/3 Cucamonga Sustainable Community Action and plans during Plan GHG reduction policies. Prior to the construction approval of building and/or occupancy permits, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City for review and approval that on- site structures, features, and facilities have been designed and will be constructed in conformance with the following enforceable actions: • Construction and building PD/BO BIC/D Review of report A/C/D 2/3 materials shall be produced and/or and plans during manufactured locally. Use "Green construction Building Materials such as materials that are resource -efficient, recycled, and manufactured in an environmentally friendly way, including low -volatile organic compound (VOC) materials. • Design all buildings to exceed the PD/BO B/C/D Review of report A/C/D 2/3 California Building Code Title 24 energy and plans during standard including, but not limited to, construction any combination of: Page 17 of 24 Standard Conditions No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date/Initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance o Increased insulation. o Limit air leakage through the structure. o Incorporate Energy Star or better rated windows, space heating and cooling equipment, light fixtures, and appliances. o Landscape and develop site utilizing shade, prevailing winds, and landscaping. o Install efficient lighting and lighting control systems. o Install light colored "cool' roofs and cool pavements. o Install solar or light emitting diodes: (LEDs) for outdoor lighting. • Prepare a comprehensive water PD/BO B/C/D Review of report A/C/D 2/3 conservation strategy appropriate for the and plans during project and include the following: construction o Install water efficient landscapes and irrigation systems and devices in compliance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. o Use reclaimed water for landscaping within the project, if available. o Design buildings to be water efficient by installing water efficient fixtures and appliances including low flow faucets, dual flush toilets, and Page 18 of 24 Standard Conditions No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance waterless urinals/water heaters. o Design irrigation to control runoff and to remove water to non- vegetated surfaces. • Reuse and recycle construction and PD/BO B/C/D Review of report A/C/D 2/3 demolition waste. Provide interior and and plans during exterior storage areas for recyclables and construction green waste in public areas. Educate employees about reducing waste and about recycling. Section 8 •klazards and,Waste Material's 1) None Section 9 =Hydrology and:lNa'ter Qualify . 1) Coverage under the NPDES General CDD/CE B Review of Plans B/C 2 Construction Permit. Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit and subsequent grading permit, the project applicant shall file and obtain a Notice of Intent (N01) with the Regional Water Quality Control Board in order to be in compliance with the State NPDES General Construction Storm Water Permit for discharge of surface runoff associated with construction , activities. Evidence that this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Dischargers Identification ` Number) shall be submitted to the City for coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit. The NO] shall address the potential for an extended and discontinuous construction period based on funding availability. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 19 of 24 M Q1 I m_ J v A Ln Standard Conditions No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date /Initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance Municipal Utilities & Engineering Department and Development Services Department, as appropriate. 2) Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan CDD/CE BIC Review of plans AIB/C 2/4 (SWPPP). Prior to the issuance of a during construction demolition permit and subsequent grading permit, the project applicant shall submit to and receive approval from the City of Rancho Cucamonga of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP shall include a surface water control plan and erosion control plan citing specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion during the entire demolition, grading, and construction period. In addition, the SWPPP shall emphasize structural and nonstructural Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control sediment and non-visible discharges from the site. The SWPPP shall include inspection forms for routine monitoring of the site during both the demolition and construction phases to ensure NPDES compliance and that additional BMPs and erosion control measures will be documented in the SWPPP and utilized if necessary. The SWPPP shall address thew potential for an extended and discontinuous demolition and construction period based on funding availability. The SWPPP shall be kept on site for the entire duration of project demolition and construction and shall be available to the local RWQCB for inspection at any time. BMPs to be implemented may include the following: • Sediment discharges from the site Page 20 of 24 Standard Conditions No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date /Initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance may be controlled by the following: sandbags, silt fences, straw wattles and temporary basins (if deemed necessary), and other discharge control devices. The construction and condition of the BMPs shall be periodically inspected during demolition and construction, and repairs shall be made when necessary as required by the SWPPP. • Materials that have the potential to contribute to non-visible pollutants to storm water must not be placed in drainage ways and must be contained, elevated, and placed in temporary storage containment areas. • All loose piles of soil, silt, clay, sand, debris, and other earthen material shall be protected in a reasonable manner to eliminate any discharge from the site. Stockpiles shall be surrounded by silt fences and covered with plastic tarps. • In addition, the construction contractor shall be responsible for performing and documenting the application of BMPs identified in the SWPPP. Weekly inspections shall be performed on sandbag barriers and other sediment control measures called for in the SWPPP. Monthly reports and inspection logs shall be maintained by the contractor and reviewed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the representatives of the State Water Page 21 of 24 Standard Conditions No. I Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date /Initials . Sanctions for Non -Compliance Resources Control Board. In the event that it is not feasible to implement specific BMPs, the City of Rancho Cucamonga can make a determination that other BMPs will provide equivalent or superior treatment either on or off site. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utilities & Engineering Department and Development Services Department, as appropriate. 3) Water Quality Management Plan. Prior to CDD/CE B/C/D/E Review of plans A/C/D 2/3/4 the issuance of a grading permit, the project during construction applicant shall submit a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) to the City of Rancho Cucamonga for review and approval. The project shall implement project design features identified in the WQMP. The WQMP shall demonstrate that any proposed on-site development plan includes BMPs for source control, pollution prevention, site design, low impact development (LID) implementation, and structural treatment control. BMPs shall be designed and implemented to retain the project site's minimum design capture volume and hydromodification volume of 30,355 cubic feet of runoff to ensure post - development stormwater runoff volume or time of concentration does not exceed pre - development stormwater runoff. Periodic maintenance of any required infiltration basin and landscaped areas during project occupancy and operation shall be in accordance with the schedule outlined in the Page 22 of 24 Standard Conditions No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date /Initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance WQMP. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utilities & Engineering Department and Development Services Department, as appropriate. 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 Section 10. -Land Use and Planning--- lanning-1) 3 - Withhold Certificate of Occupancy 1)None _.._ Section' --"Mineral Resources-. _ 1) None Section 12- Noise - 1) None Section `13 = Poptilatlon and°Housing 1) None Section'14 = Public Sefyices 1) None Section 15 R .. _ 1) Noneecreation,. Section.16-Tran§portationlTraffic ; ,. - ,-,, _, ., - _ 1) None Section l;7 -Tribal CulturaliResources' _ 1) None Section `18.- Utility and! Service ,Systems ; 1) None Section '19--, MandatbryFindings•of Significance - - -" - 1) None Key to Checklist Abbreviations Responsible Person Monitoring Frequency Metho&of Verification ' " - ;Sanctions 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 Page 23 of 24 m on I _A UD BO - Building Official or designee D - On Completion D - Separate Submittal (Reports/Studies/ Plans) 4 - Stop Work Order PO -Police Captain or designee E - Operating5 - Retain Deposit or Bonds FC - Fire Chief or designee 6 - Revoke CUP 7 - Citation Page 24 of 24 Conditions of Approval j�ANceo Community P Development Department CoGAMGNGA Project #: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th Location: 10451 26TH ST - APN: 0209-131-01 Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. Prior to the approval of grading and/or building permits, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City for review and approval that on-site structures, features, and facilities have been designed and will be constructed in conformance with applicable provisions of the 2016 California Building Code and the recommendations cited in the project -specific geotechnical investigation. Geotechnical recommendations include development of the project site in accordance with applicable seismic code values and design methods determined by the Project Structural Engineer, as well as remedial earthwork and/or ground improvement to provide a sufficient layer of engineered fill or densified soil beneath the structural footings/foundations. A qualified geotechnical engineer shall be present during demolition of the on-site structure to confirm the depth of foundation elements. Additionally, verification testing must be performed upon completion of ground improvements to confirm that the compressible soils have been sufficiently densified. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City's Building & Safety Services Department. Printed: 9/19/2018 w .QtyofRC.us E6—E 11P420 Project #: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th Location: 10451 26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Planning Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 2. Prior to the approval of building and/or occupancy permits, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City for review and approval that on-site structures, features, and facilities have been designed and will be constructed in conformance with the following enforceable actions: 1. Construction and building materials shall be produced and/or manufactured locally. Use "Green Building Materials such as materials that are resource -efficient, recycled, and manufactured in an environmentally friendly way, including low-volitile organic compound (VOC) materials. 2. Design all buildings to exceed the California Building Code Title 24 energy standard including, but not limited to, any combination of: a. Increased insulation. b. Limit air leakage through the structure. c. Incorporate Energy Star or better rated windows, space heating and cooling equipment, light fixtures, and appliances. d. Landscape and develop site utilizing shade, prevailing winds, and landscaping. e. Install efficient lighting and lighting control systems. f. Install light colored "cool" roofs and cool pavements. g. Install solar or light emitting diodes (LEDs) for outdoor lighting. 3. Prepare a comprehensive water conservation strategy appropriate for the project and include the following: a. Install water efficient landscapes and irrigation systems and divices in compliance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. b. Use reclaimed water for landscaping within the project if available or as required by the Cucamonga Valley Water District. c. Design buildings to be water efficient by installing water efficient fixtures and appliances including low flow faucets, dual flush toilets, and waterless urinals/water heaters. d. Design irrigation to control runoff and to remove water to non -vegetated surfaces. 4. Reuse and recycle construction and demolition waste. Provide interior and exterior storage areas for recyclables and green waste in public areas. Educate employees about reducing waste and about recycling. 3. Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit and subsequent grading permit, the project applicant shall file and obtain a Notice of Intent (NOI) with the Regional Water Quality Control Board in order to be in compliance with the State NPDES General Construction Storm Water Permit for discharge of surface runoff associated with construction activities. Evidence that this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Discharger's Identification Number) shall be submitted to the City for coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit. The NOI shall address the potential for an extended and discontinuous construction period based on funding availability. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utilities & Engineering Department and Development Services Department, as appropriate. Printed: 9/192018 www.CityofRC.us Page 2 of 19 E6—E11P421 Project#: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th Location: 10451 26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Planning Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 4. Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit and subsequent grading permit, the project applicant shall submit to and receive approval from the City of Rancho Cucamonga of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP shall include a surface water control plan and erosion control plan citing specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion during the entire demolition, grading, and construction period. In addition, the SWPPP shall emphasize structural and nonstructural Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control sediment and non-visible discharges from the site. The SWPPP shall include inspection forms for routine monitoring of the site during both the demolition and construction phases to ensure NPDES compliance and that additional BMPs and erosion control measures will be documented in the SWPPP and utilized if necessary. The SWPPP shall address the potential for an extended and discontinuous demolition and construction period based on funding availability. The SWPPP shall be kept on site for the entire duration of project demolition and construction and shall be available to the local RWQCB for inspection at any time. BMPs to be implemented may include the following: • Sediment discharges from the site may be controlled by the following: sandbags, silt fences, straw wattles and temporary basins (if deemed necessary), and other discharge control devices. The construction and condition of the BMPs shall be periodically inspected during demolition and construction, and repairs shall be made when necessary as required by the SWPPP. • Materials that have the potential to contribute to non-visible pollutants to storm water must not be placed in drainage ways and must be contained, elevated, and placed in temporary storage containment areas. • All loose piles of soil, silt, clay, sand, debris, and other earthen material shall be protected in a reasonable manner to eliminate any discharge from the site. Stockpiles shall be surrounded by silt fences and covered with plastic tarps. • In addition, the construction contractor shall be responsible for performing and documenting the application of BMPs identified in the SWPPP. Weekly inspections shall be performed on sandbag barriers and other sediment control measures called for in the SWPPP. Monthly reports and inspection logs shall be maintained by the contractor and reviewed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the representatives of the State Water Resources 'Control Board. In the event that it is not feasible to implement specific BMPs, the City of Rancho Cucamonga can make a determination that other BMPs will provide equivalent or superior treatment either on or off site. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utilities & Engineering Department and Development Services Department, as appropriate. 5. The City currently owns the land described in Amended Final Order of Condemnation for Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Bernardino Case No. RCV 091735 filed on February 15, 2017. The City must follow the requirements of Section 1245.245 of the Code of Civil Procedure when disposing of property acquired by condemnation or changing the public use for the property. The applicant does not currently have the required interest in this land to allow for the contemplated development. Therefore, approval of the contemplated development is conditioned and effective upon the applicant obtaining the necessary property interest and rights to develop. Printed: 9/19/2018 www.CltyofRC.us Page 3 of 19 E6—E11 P422 Project #: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th Location: 10451 26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.- Planning ROJECT: Planning Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 6. Approval is for the development of a 207 -unit multi -family residential development (including 14 live -work units) on 5.2 acres of land in the Mixed Use (MU) District, located at the southwest comer of Haven Avenue and 26th Street; APN: 0209-131-01. 7. This project is subject to the public art requirement outlined in Chapter 17.124 of the Development Code. No final approval, such as a final inspection or a certificate of occupancy, for any development project subject to this chapter shall be granted or issued unless and until the requirements of this chapter have been met. In consideration of any phasing plan or project completion schedule, the city may accept bonds or other surety to assist in the completion of the project, provided they are in a form and manner acceptable to the planning director and city attorney. 8. The landscape architect of record shall provide a signed certification on company letterhead certifying that all project -related landscaping has been installed per the approved landscape plans. This is subject to Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the development. 9. A Parking Management Plan shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to occupancy. The Parking Management Plan shall' include, at a . minimum, requirements that the use of parking spaces and carports will be strictly monitored. The City Planner may periodically review and require additional parking mitigation measures if it is determined that the on-site parking is inadequate to meet the project's ongoing parking demand. 10. Approval of this Design Review application is contingent upon Planning Commission approval of Minor Exception DRC2017-00872 and City Council approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2017-00658, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2017-00657 and Development Code Amendment DRC2017-00656. Standard Conditions of Approval 11. All parking space, when outdoors (e.g., parking lot), shall have a minimum size of nine feet by 17 feet with a required one -foot overhang (e.g., over a curb stop) and shall be free of obstructions such as columns or walls. All parking space, when indoors or under a shelter (e.g., parking structure or carport/shade structure), shall be ten feet by 20 feet where columns or walls are located within the parking area. 12. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances, and exits shall be striped per City standards. 13. Textured pedestrian pathways and textured pavement shall be provided in all areas shown on the approved conceptual grading plan and conceptual landscape plan. Printed: 9/19/2018 www.CityofRC.us Page 4 of 19 E6—E 11P423 Project#: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th, Location: 10451 26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 14. 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. 15. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval, Conditions of Approval, 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. 16. Crime Free Multi -Family Housing Program - The owner shall cause the manager and any resident manager to complete the training for and enroll the project in the San Bernardino County Crime Free Multi -Family Housing Program. 17. The applicant shall be required to pay California Department of Fish and Wildlife Notice of Exemption and Mitigated Negative Declaration fee in the amount of $2,330.75. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary prior to public hearing. 18. 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. 19. 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. 20. The developer shall submit a construction access plan and schedule for the development of all lots for Planning Director and Engineering Services Department approval; including, but not limited to, public notice requirements, special street posting, phone listing for community concerns, hours of construction activity, dust control measures, and security fencing. 21. 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. 22. For multiple -family development, provide exterior lockable storage space as required by the California Green Building Code. 23. 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. Printed: 9119/218 0www.CityofRC.us Page 5 of 19 E6—E 11P424 Project#: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th Location: 10451 26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 24. 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. 25. 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 for the development or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. For development occurring in the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, the landscape plans will also be reviewed by Fire Construction Services. 26. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of water efficient landscaping per Development Code Chapter 17.82. 27. A uniform hardscape and street furniture design including seating benches, trash receptacles, free-standing potted plants, bike racks, light bollards, etc., shall be utilized and be compatible with the architectural style. Detailed designs shall be submitted for Planning Department review and approval prior to the issuance of Building Permits. 28. 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 Engineering Services Department review and approved prior to the issuance of Building Permits. 29. A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram, shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director and Police Department (909-477-2800) prior to the issuance of Building Permits. Such plan shall indicate style, illumination, location, height, and method of shielding so as not to adversely affect adjacent properties. 30. 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. 31. 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. 32. 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, any applicable Uniform Sign Program for the development and shall require separate application and approval by the Planning Department prior to installation of any signs. Printed: 9/19/2018 w' N'n'•CityofRC.us Page 6 of 19 E6—E11P425 Project#: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th Location: 10451 26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.- Planning ROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 33. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners and other roof mounted equipment and/or projections shall be screened from all sides and the sound shall be buffered from adjacent properties and streets as required by the Planning Department. Such screening shall be architecturally integrated with the building design and constructed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. Any roof -mounted mechanical equipment and/or ductwork, that projects vertically more than 18 inches above the roof or roof parapet, shall be screened by an architecturally designed enclosure which exhibits a permanent nature with the building design and is detailed consistent with the building. Any roof -mounted mechanical equipment and/or ductwork, that projects vertically less than 18 inches above the roof or roof parapet shall be painted consistent with the color scheme of the building. Details shall be included in building plans. Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. Provide a limited access curb per City Standard 105-C in -lieu of a drive approach for the proposed 26 foot wide gated Fire Department access. 2. The street lights shall be owned by the City. Developer shall be responsible to coordinate and pay all costs of street lights and to provide power to City owned street lights. 3. Haven Avenue frontage improvements to be in accordance with City "Major Divided Arterial" standards as required and including: A. Provide, protect, or repair existing curb and gutter, and sidewalk as required. B. Protect existing traffic signing and striping along Haven Avenue, or repair as required. C. Provide one LED street light. Street lights shall be owned by the City. Developer shall be responsible to coordinate and pay all costs to provide power on City owned street lights. Coordinate with City staff for design and installation requirements. D. Driveway to be in accordance with the City Driveway Policy E. Modify Traffic Signal at Haven Avenue and Jersey Avenue. West and east phases shall be split phased. Modify traffic striping and replace existing traffic signing as applicable. 4. Marine Avenue street frontage improvements to be in accordance with City "Local" standards as required and including: A. Provide, protect, or repair curb and gutter and sidewalk, as required. B. Provide two LED street lights. Street lights shall be owned by the City. Developer shall be responsible to coordinate and pay all costs to provide power on City owned street lights. Coordinate with City staff for design and installation requirements. C. Provide traffic signing and striping, as required. 5. 26th Street frontage improvements to be in accordance with City "Local' standards as required and including: A. Provide, protect, or repair curb and gutter and sidewalk, as required. B. Provide traffic signing and striping as required. C. Driveway to be in accordance with the City Driveway Policy. Printed: 9/19/2018 www.CityofRC.us Page 7 of 19 E6—E 11P426 Project#: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th Location: 10451 26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.- Engineering ROJECT: Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 6. Amount of parking spaces to be in accordance with Development Code Section 17.64 7. The proposed development is slated to be included in the City's Fiber Optic / Broadband service business plan that would provide a City owned Fiber -to -the -Home (FTTH) infrastructure. Proposed fiber optics on-site (conduits and fiber) will be placed underground within a duct and structure system to be installed by the Master Developer. The fiber and conduits along the backbone streets shall be installed in a joint trench by the developer. In -tract fiber and conduit shall be installed by the developers in joint trench where possible. Maintenance of the installed system will be the responsibility of the City. Development of the Project requires the installation by the developers of all fiber optic infrastructure necessary to service the Project as a stand-alone development. Dedicate easements to the City on-site for utility purposes. 8. All curb ramps shall be reconstructed to current ADA standards. 9. Process a vacation excess right of way west of Haven across from Jersey Boulevard. Provide right-of-way for the maintenance of existing and proposed public facilities. Dedicate a 10' utility easement to the City of Rancho Cucamonga along the Haven Avenue right-of-way north of Jersey Boulevard. Standard Conditions of Approval 10. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting Districts shall be filed with the Engineering Services Department prior to final map approval or issuance of Building Permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. 11. Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards. 12. Easements for public sidewalks placed outside the public right-of-way shall be dedicated to the City, where necessary. 13. 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. Permits issued on or after June 2, 2014, must complete the reimbursement process through the City's Accelerate online portal within 60 days following the completion of the construction and/or demolition project or the deposit will be forfeited. Permits issued before June 2, 2014, require the following when applying for a deposit reimbursement: a completed CD -2 form, a copy of the cashier's receipt showing the deposit amount, and all weight tickets. Instructions and forms are available at the City's web site, www.CityofRC.us, under City Hall; Engineering; Environmental Programs. 14. 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. Printed: 9/19/2018 w .CityofRC.us Page a of 19 E6—E11P427 Project #: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th Location: 10451 26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.- Engineering ROJECT: Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 15. Add the following note to any private landscape plans that show street trees: "All improvements within the public right-of-way, including street trees, shall be installed per the public improvement plans." If there is a discrepancy between the public and private plans, the street improvement plans will govern. 16. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 16.37.010, no person shall make connections from a source of energy, fuel or power to any building or structure which is regulated by technical codes and for which a permit is required unless, in addition to any and all other codes, regulations and ordinances, all improvements required by these conditions of development approval have been completed and accepted by the City Council, except: that in developments containing more than one building, structure or unit, the development may have energy connections made in equal proportion to the percentage of completion of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval, as determined by the City Engineer, provided that reasonable, safe and maintainable access to the property exists. In no case shall more than 95 percent of the buildings, structures or units be connected to energy sources prior to completion and acceptance of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval. 17. 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. 18. Trees are prohibited within 5 feet of the outside diameter of any public storm drain pipe measured from the outer edge of a mature tree trunk. Printed: 9/19/2018 www.CityofRC.us Page 9 of 19 E6—E11 P428 Project #: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th Location: 10451 26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 19. Improvement Plans and Construction: a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of Building Permits, whichever occurs first. b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Services Department in addition to any other permits required. c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction project along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals and interconnect wiring. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR, or any other locations approved by the City Engineer. Notes: 1) Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets, a maximum of 200 feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer. 2) Conduit shall be 3 -inch pvc with pull rope or as specified. e. Access ramps for the disabled shall be installed on all corners of intersections per latest ADA standards or as directed by the City Engineer. f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards, except for single-family residential lots. h. Street names shall be approved by the Planning Manager prior to submittal for first plan check. Printed: 9/19/2018 www.CityofRC.us Page 10 of 19 E6—E11 P429 Project#: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th Location: 10451 26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 20. 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 1." Where public landscape plans are required, tree installation in those areas shall be per the public landscape improvement plans. Street Name Botanical Name Common Name Min. Grow Space Spacing Size Qty. Construction Notes for Street Trees: 1) All street trees are to be planted in accordance with City standard plans. 2) Prior to the commencement of any planting, an agronomic soils report shall be furnished to the City inspector. Any unusual toxicities or nutrient deficiencies may require backfill soil amendments, as determined by the City inspector. 3) All street trees are subject to inspection and acceptance by the Engineering Services Department. Street trees are to be planted per public improvement plans only. 21. Intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with adopted policy. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight shall be plotted for all project intersections, including driveways. Local residential street intersections and commercial or industrial driveways may have lines of sight plotted as required. 22. 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. 23. 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. 24. Developer shall execute a Line Extension Agreement for electric service and shall construct electrical distribution facilities in accordance with such agreement and shall construct electrical distribution facilities in accordance with such agreement and Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility requirements and dedicate such facilities to the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility. The Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility shall be the electrical service provider for all project related development. 25. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. Printed: 9/1912018 www.CityofRC.us Page 11 of 19 E6—E11 P430 Project #: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th Location: 10451 26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment . ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT., Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 26. 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. 27. 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. 28. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CVWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. Building and Safety Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. Building and Fire Conditions of Approval When the Entitlement Review is approved submit complete construction drawings including structural calculations, energy calculations and soils report to Building and Safety for plan review in accordance with the current edition of the CA Building and Fire Codes, all local ordinances and standards ladder truck and roof access. The new structures are required to be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers per the CBC and Current RCFPD Ordinance. Disabled access for the site and building must be in accordance to the State of CA and ADA regulations. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 1. This project shall comply with the accessibility requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. Printed: 9/19/2018 w .CityofRC.us Page 12 of 19 E6—E11P431 Project #: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th Location: 10451 26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 2. Grading Inspections: a) Prior to the start of grading operations the owner and grading contractor shall request a pre -grading meeting. The meeting shall be attended by the project owner/representative, the grading contractor and the Building Inspector to discuss about grading requirements and preventive measures, etc. If a pre -grading meeting is not held within 24 hours from the start of grading operations, the grading permit may be subject to suspension by the Building Inspector; b) The grading contractor shall call into the City of Rancho Cucamonga Building and Safety Department at least 1 working day in advance to request the following grading inspections prior to continuing grading operations: i) The bottom of the over -excavation; ii) Completion of Rough Grading, prior to issuance of the building permit; iii) At the completion of Rough Grading, the grading contractor or owner shall submit to the Permit Technicians (Building and Safety Front Counter) an original and a copy of the Pad Certifications to be prepared by and properly wet signed and sealed by the Civil Engineer and Soils Engineer of Record; iv) The rough grading certificates and the compaction reports will be reviewed by the Associate Engineer or a designated person and approved prior to the issuance of a building permit. 3. All roof drainage flowing to the public right of way (Marine Avenue, 26th Street and Haven Avenue) must drain under the sidewalk through a parkway culvert approved by the Engineering Department. This shall be shown on both the grading and drainage plan and Engineering Services Department required plans. 4. Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the permitted grading plan (or architectural site plan) set shall show in each of the typical sections and the plan view show how the separations between the building exterior and exterior ground surface meet the requirements of Sections CBC1804.3/CRC R401.3, CBC2304.11.2.2/CRC R317.1(2) and CBC2512.1.2/CRC R703.6.2.1 of the current adopted California Building Code/Residential Code. 5. As the use of drywells are proposed for the structural storm water treatment device, to meet the infiltration requirements of the current Municipal Separate Storm Sewers Systems (MS4) Permit, adequate source control and pollution prevention control BMPs shall be implemented to protect groundwater quality. The need for pre-treatment BMPs such as sedimentation or filtration shall be evaluated prior to infiltration and discussed in the final project -specific Water Quality Management Plan document. 6. A drainage study showing a 100 -year, AMC 3 design storm event for on-site drainage shall be prepared and submitted to the Building and Safety Official for review and approval for on-site storm water drainage prior to issuance of a grading permit. The report shall contain water surface profile gradient calculations for all storm drain pipes 12 -inches and larger in diameter. All reports shall be wet signed and sealed by the Engineer of Record. In addition, the project specific drainage study shall provide inlet calculations showing the proper sizing of the water quality management plan storm water flows into the proposed structural storm water treatment devices. Printed: 9 /1 912 01 8 www.CityofRC.us Page 13 of 19 E6—E11P432 Project#: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th Location: 10451 26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 7. Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the latest adopted California Plumbing Code. Private storm drain improvements shall be shown on the grading and drainage plan. 8. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy or final sign off by the 'Building Inspector the engineer of record shall certify the functionality of the storm water quality management plan (WQMP) storm water treatment devices and best management practices (BMP). 9. Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WQMP shall include a copy of the project Conditions of Approval. 10. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the precise grading and drainage plan shall follow the format provided in the City of Rancho Cucamonga handout "Information for Grading Plans and Permit". 11. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with current adopted California Building Code and/or the California Residential Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The Grading and Drainage Plan(s) shall be in substantial conformance with the approved conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan. 12. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified Engineer licensed by the State of California to per -form such work. Two copies will be provided at grading and drainage plan submittal for review. Plans shall implement design recommendations per said report. 13. A geologic report shall be prepared by a qualified Engineer or Engineering Geologist and submitted at the time of application for Grading and Drainage Plan review. 14. 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. 15. A separate Grading and Drainage Plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and wet signed by a California licensed Civil Engineer prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit. 16. The applicant shall comply with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Dust Control Measures and place a dust control sign on the project site prior to the issuance of a grading permit. All dust control sign(s) shall be located outside of the public right of way. 17. If a Rough Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit are submitted to the Building and Safety Official for review, the rough grading plan shall be a separate plan submittal and permit from Precise Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit. 18. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall obtain written permission from the adjacent property owner(s) to construct wall(s) on property line(s) or provide a detail(s) showing the perimeter wall(s) to be constructed offset from the property line. Printed: 9/1912018 www.CityofRC.us Page 14 of 19 E6—E11P433 Project#: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th Location: 10451 26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.- Grading ROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 19. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the Final Grading and Drainage Plan shall show the accessibility path from the public right of way and the accessibility parking stalls to the building doors in conformance with the current adopted California Building Code. All accessibility ramps shall show sufficient detail including gradients, elevations, and dimensions and comply with the current adopted California Building Code, 20. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall implement City Standards for on-site construction where possible, and shall provide details for all work not covered by City Standard Drawings. 21. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the grading plan shall show that all manufactured slopes shall be a minimum 2 -foot offset from the public right of way, permitted line, or the adjacent private property. All slope offsets shall meet the requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. 22. Prior to approval of the project -specific storm water quality management plan, the applicant shall submit to the Building Official, or his designee, a precise grading plan showing the location and elevations of existing topographical features, and showing the location and proposed elevations of proposed structures and drainage of the site. 23. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the grading and drainage plan shall show the maximum parking stall gradient at 5 percent. Accessibility parking stall grades shall be constructed per the, current adopted California Building Code. 24. The applicant shall provide a grading agreement and grading bond for all cut and fill combined exceeding 5,000 cubic yards prior to issuance of a grading permit. The grading agreement and bond shall be approved by the Building and Safety Official. 25. The final grading and drainage plan shall show existing topography a minimum of 100 -feet beyond project boundary. 26. Reciprocal access easements for all parcels and maintenance agreements ensuring joint maintenance of all storm water quality structural/treatment devices and best management practices (BMP) as provided for in the project's Storm Water Quality Management Plan, shall be provided for by CC&R's or deeds and shall be recorded prior to the approval of the Water Quality Management Plan. Said CC&R's and/or deeds shall be included in the project site specific Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) document prior to approval of the WQMP document and recording of the Memorandum of Agreement of Storm Water Quality Management Plan. 27. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit the City of Rancho Cucamonga's "Memorandum of Agreement of Storm Water Quality Management Plan" shall be submitted for review and approval by the Building Official and recorded with the County Recorder's Office. 28. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall obtain a Waste Discharge Identification Number (WDID). The WDID number shall also be shown on the WQMP Site and Drainage Plan document. Printed: 9/19/2018 www.CityofRC.us Page 15 of 19 E6—E11P434 Project#: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th Location: 10451 26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.- Grading ROJECT: Grading Section Standard Condltlons of Approval 29. The applicant shall provide a copy of a completed EPA Form 7520-16 (Inventory of Injection Wells) for each underground infiltration device, with the Facility ID Number assigned, to the Building and Safety Services Department Official prior to issuance of the Grading Permit and/or approval of the project -specific Water Quality Management Plan. A copy of EPA Form 7520-16 shall be scanned and pasted onto the permitted grading plan set, and a copy of said form shall be included in the project -specific Water Quality Management Plan. 30. The land owner shall provide an inspection report by a qualified person/company on a biennial basis for the Class V Injection Wells/underground infiltration chambers to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis all best management practices (BMP"s) as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 31. The land owner shall provide an inspection report on a biennial basis for the structural storm water treatment devices, commonly referred to as BMPs, to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 32. The land/property owner shall follow the inspection and maintenance requirements of the approved project specific Water Quality Management Plan and shall provide a copy of the inspection reports on a biennial basis to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. 33. The Site and Drainage Plan in the final project -specific Water Quality Management Plan shall show the locations of all roof downspout drains. if required for storm water quality purposes, the downspouts shall include filters. 34. Prior to the start of landscaping operations, the landscape architect and the landscape contractor shall provide a sample of the weed fabric barrier to the Project Planner, City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department. The weed barrier shall be permeable. 35. The final project -specific water quality management plan (WQMP) shall include executed maintenance agreements along with the maintenance guidelines for all proprietary structural storm water treatment devices (BMP's). In the event the applicant cannot get the proprietary device maintenance agreements executed prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant is required to submit a letter to be included within the WQMP document, and scanned and pasted onto the Site and Drainage Plan which states that prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy with applicant shall enter into a contract for the maintenance of the proprietary storm water treatment device. If the proprietary storm water treatment device is part of a residential subdivision, prior to the sale of the residential lot, the developer shall include maintenance agreement(s) as part of the sale of the residential lot to the buyer. A copy of the maintenance agreements to be included in the sale of the property shall be included within the WQMP document. Printed: 9/19/2016 w .CltyofRC.us Page 16 of 19 E6—El1P435 Project #: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th Location: 10451 26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 36. Prior to issuance of a grading permit and approval of the project specific water quality management plan all private storm water catch basin inlets shall include insert filters to capture those pollutants of concern as addressed in the in the final project -specific water quality management plan (WQMP). At a minimum catch basin insert filters to capture trash and other floating debris. All catch basin insert filters shall be maintained on a regular basis as described in the "Inspection and Maintenance Responsibility for Post Construction BMP" section of the final project -specific water quality management plan. 37. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the Final Project -Specific Water Quality Management Plan shall include a completed copy of "Worksheet H: Factor of Safety and Design Infiltration Worksheet" located in Appendix D "Section VII — Infiltration Rate Evaluation Protocol and Factor of Safety Recommendations, ..." of the San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans. The infiltration study shall include the Soil Engineer's recommendations for Appendix D, Table VII.3: Suitability Assessment Related Considerations for Infiltration Facility Safety Factors". 38. Prior to approval of the final project -specific water quality management plan the applicant shall have a soils engineer prepare a project -specific infiltration study for the project for the purposes of storm water quality treatment. The infiltration study and recommendations shall follow the guidelines in the current adopted "San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans". 39. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy by the Building Official, or his designee, the civil engineer of record shall file a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Post Construction Storm Water Treatment Devices As -Built Certificate with the Environmental Programs Coordinator, City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Services Department. w .CityofRC.us Printed: 911 912 01 8 Page 17 of 19 E6—E 11P436 P�/Project #: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Haven at 26th Location: 10451 26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 40. GROUND WATER PROTECTION: Prior to approval of the final project specific water quality management plan (WQMP), the WQMP document shall meet the requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board Order No. R8-2010-0036 (NPDES No. CAS 618036), the San Bernardino County Municipal Separate Storm Sewers Separation (MS4) Permit reads: Section XI.D(Water Quality Management Plan Requirements).8(Groundwater Protection): Treatment Control BMPs utilizing infiltration [exclusive of incidental infiltration and BMPs not designed to primarily function as infiltration devices (such as grassy swales, detention basins, vegetated buffer strips, constructed wetlands, etc.)] must comply with the following minimum requirements to protect groundwater: a. Use of structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause or contribute to an exceedance of ground water quality objectives. b. Source control and pollution prevention control BMPs shall be implemented to protect groundwater quality. The need for pre-treatment BMPs such as sedimentation or filtration should be evaluated prior to infiltration. c. Adequate pretreatment of runoff prior to infiltration shall be required in gas stations and large commercial parking lots. (NOTE: The State Water Quality Control Board defines a large commercial parking lot as '100,000 sq. ft. or more of commercial development to include parking lot (with 100 or more vehicle traffics), OR, by means of 5,000sgft or more of allowable space designated for parking purposes'). d. Unless adequate pre-treatment of runoff is provided prior to infiltration structural infiltration treatment BMPs must not be used for areas of industrial or light industrial activity{77), areas subject to high vehicular traffic (25,000 or more daily traffic); car washes; 'fleet storage areas; nurseries; or any other high threat to water quality land uses or activities. e. Class V injection wells or dry wells must not be placed in areas subject to vehicular{78) repair or maintenance activities{79), such as an auto body repair shop, automotive repair shop, new and used car dealership, specialty repair shop (e.g., transmission and muffler repair shop) or any facility that does any vehicular repair work. f. Structural infiltration BMP treatment shall not be used at sites that are known to have soil and groundwater contamination. g. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall be located at least 100 feet horizontally from any water supply wells. h. The vertical distance from the bottom of any infiltration structural treatment BMP to the historic high groundwater mark shall be at least 10 -feet. Where the groundwater basins do not support beneficial uses, this vertical distance criteria may be reduced, provided groundwater quality is maintained. L Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause a nuisance or pollution as defined in Water Code Section 13050. The final project -specific water quality management plan shall specifically address items a., b., and c. above. Printed: 9/19/2018 W` n'W.CityofRC.us Page 18 of 19 E6—E11P437 Project#: DRC2017-00654 DRC2017-00656, DRC2017-00657, DRC2017-00658, DRC2017-00659, DRC2017-00872 Project Name: Location: Haven at 26th 10451 26TH ST - Project Type: Design Review Development Code Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Minor Exception, Uniform Sign Program, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval i 41. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for non-residential projects the applicant shall show on the electrical plans and the permitted grading plan set the location for a future installation of an Electric Vehicle (EV) charging station/parking area per the current adopted California Green Building Standards Code, section 5.106.5.3. 42. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall show on the site plan and the permitted grading plan set for non-residential projects the designated parking for clean air vehicles per the current adopted California Green Building Standards Code, section 5.106.5.2. 43. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for residential projects the applicant shall show on the electrical plans and the permitted grading plan set the location for a future installation of an Electric Vehicle (EV) charging station/parking area per the current adopted California Green Building Standards Code, section 4.106.4. Printed: 9119/2018 www.CityofRC.us E6—E11 P438 Page 19 of 19