Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-04-26 - Agenda Packet - PC-HPCAPRIL 26, 2017 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 Roll Call: Chairman Oaxaca Vice Chairman Macias Commissioner Fletcher Commissioner Munoz 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 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 individuals embers 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 approve the regular meeting minutes of April 12, 2017 C2. Consideration to approve the workshop minutes of April 12, 2017 Page 1 of 4 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA D. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS 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. D1. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19497 — GEORGE BOTROS - A request to subdivide one (1) 42,630 square foot parcel of land into three (3) parcels of land in the Low (L) District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) located at the northeast corner of Base Line Road and Beryl Street; APN: 0202-241-24. The Planning Department Staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt as a Class 15 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15315 which covers minor land divisions. D2. MINOR DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00798 — GEORGE BOTROS — A request for site plan and architectural review of three (3) single-family residences that will be constructed in conjunction with a proposed subdivision (SUBTPM19497) of a 42,630 square foot parcel of land in the Low (L) District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) located at the northeast corner of Base Line Road and Beryl Street; APN: 0202-241-24. The Planning Department Staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt as a Class 3 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15303 which covers the construction of up to 3 single-family residences. D3. TIME EXTENSION DRC2017-00249 - PACIFIC SUMMIT -FOOTHILL, LLC - A request to allow for a one (1) year time extension of a previously approved 8-lot Tentative Tract Map (SUBTT16605) residential subdivision for condominium purposes on 21 acres of land in the Mixed Use (MU) District, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and Pacific Electric Trail, APNs: 0207-101-13, 31, 34 & 41. Related Files: Time Extension DRC2015-01110. On April 12, 2006, a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was adopted by the Planning Commission for Tentative Tract 16605. Per CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no further environmental review or Negative Declaration is required for subsequent projects or minor revisions to projects within the scope of the previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration. Page 2 of 4 OT APRIL 26, 2017 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA F. COMMISSION BUSINESS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION INTER -AGENCY UPDATES COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS G. ADJOURNMENT 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 April 20, 2017 seventy two (72) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive. 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 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 Page 3 of 4 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA your name, address and the agenda item letter your comments refer to. Comments are generally limited to 5 minutes per Individual. If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under "Public Comments." There is opportunity to speak under this section prior to the end of the agenda. Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the Planning Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of $2,662 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 4 of 4 Vicinity Map Historic Preservation and Planning Commission Meeting Sase Line oothll >rrow 8th m a 0 C9 D3 Church 6th 1 4th APRIL 26, 2017 i Item D1 & D2: Tentative Parcel Map 19497 and MDR DRC2013-00798. Item D3: Time Extension DRC2017-00249 Base Line Church � Foothill 1 a Arrow V 6th w * Meeting Location: City Hall/Council Chamber: 10600 Civic Center Drive APRIL 12, 2017 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 Roll Call: Chairman Oaxaca X The meeting was called to order at 7.13 PM Vice Chairman Macias X Commissioner Fletcher X Commissioner Munoz _X_ Commissioner Wimberly _X_ Other Staff Present: Mike Smith, Senior Planner; Albert Espinoza, Asst. City Engineer, Maricela Marroquin, Attorney, Donald Granger, Senior Planner, Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary. Dat Tran, 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 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 individuals embers 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. Luana Hernandez, residing at 6797 Hellman Avenue said she is the VP of the Route 66 ICEA historic group. She announced their museum hours, 10:00 a.m.-3:00 p.m. Saturdays and Sundays 10:00 a.m. to -3:00 pm. She announced a wine tasting on April 22ntl at the Sycamore Inn as well as their annual car show on June 241" at the Sycamore Inn She said the car show includes 150 cars and a nice lunch. C. CONSENT CALENDAR/HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION Page 1 of 6 Item C1-1 APRIL 12, 2017 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. Cl. Consideration to approve regular meeting minutes dated March 22, 2017 Moved by Wimberly, seconded by Munoz, carried 4-0-1 (Fletcher abstain) to approve the minutes of March 22 201T D. 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. D1. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00695 — RANCHO CUCAMONGA PROPERTIES, LLC - A request for site plan and architectural review of two industrial buildings totaling 150,003 square feet on two separate parcels totaling 7.52 acres of land, located north of 8th Street and west of Industrial Lane in the General Industrial (GI) District; APNs: 0209-032-28 & 0209- 032-29. Staff has a prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Dat Tran, Assistant Planner gave a brief staff report. It was noted that several letters had been received: 1) Department of Toxic Substances Control indicated more testing for toxic waste, pesticides, contaminate free imported soil and excavated soil should be done and/or mitigations added; 2) Native American Heritage Commission, indicated some technical sections of our environmental study Part II form was incomplete and 3) Moore Electric, Inc. sent a letter objecting to the proposal because of truck traffic (copies of all are on file). Because of the comments submitted by the Department of Toxic Substances Control, and upon consultation with our City Attorney, the environmental study is considered incomplete. Staff requested the item be continued to an unspecified date and will have to be re - advertised after the environmental documents are completed and recirculated. Mr. Tran confirmed that the applicant agreed to the continuance. Page 2 of 6 Item C1-2 APRIL 12, 2017 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Moved by Fletcher, seconded by Wimberly, carried 5-0 to continue the item to an unspecified date. D2. DESIGN REVIEW MODIFICATION DRC2017-00071 - NASSEF ESKANDER FOR ALTA LOMA ANIMAL HOSPITAL - A request to modify Design Review DRC2008-00909 by deleting a Condition of Approval in Planning Commission Resolution No. 14-05, that required an access easement on the subject property as part of the approval for the construction and operation of an animal hospital in the General Commercial (GC) located at 7289 Amethyst Avenue -APNs: 0202-161-10, -11, and -20. Related file: Design Review DRC2008-00909. The project qualifies as a Class 2 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15302 - Replacement or Reconstruction. Mike Smith, Senior Planner, gave the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file) Councilwoman Diane Williams stated she resides at 7251 Amethyst Avenue and noted the little house on the property has been vacant since January and is in poor condition with code enforcement issues. She asked the applicant to be a better neighbor as the condition of the house has become a concern to the neighbors. She offered support of the request to delete the condition requiring the access easement. She had no issue with the construction proposal. She suggested that before they move further they should ask the applicant to clean it up. Se provided photos of the house exterior littered with discarded furnishings and trash. Nassef Eskander, project architect, apologized about the condition of the house and said he would ask the tenant to clean it up. He said they intend to use the house as a construction office. Commissioner Fletcher asked for a commitment to clean it up within a week and agreed that if he was the neighbor, he too would be concerned. Mr. Eskander said he will contact the owner immediately and take care of it. A general discussion followed about the possibility of withholding a grading permit or begin code enforcement action until the area is cleaned up. Maricela Marroquin, Attorney, noted the only issue before the Commission is the proposal to delete the easement condition. She suggested the applicant simply work with staff to resolve the issue and Mr. Smith could report back to the Commission at the next meeting. Mike Smith, Senior Planner stated he would follow up on that commitment Page 3 of 6 Item C1-3 APRIL 12, 2017 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Commissioner Wimberly said he worked with the applicant on multiple occasions and he is glad to see this is finally moving forward. Commissioner Fletcher said he had no objection to the proposal as it was discussed before. He said the other property owner now may be limited with what he can do with the property with the lack of the easement condition but the access is sufficient. Moved by Munoz, seconded by Wimberly, carried 5-0 to adopt the Resolution of approval for Design Review Modification DRC2017-00071. F. COMMISSION BUSINESS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION INTER -AGENCY UPDATES: Commissioner Munoz reported on the ambitious plan pushed through last week by Governor Brown that will fund the repair of California's crumbling roads, highways and bridges. The main points are: • Raises the gas tax by 12 cents per gallon • Boosts diesel taxes by 20 cents per gallon • Creates a new annual fee on vehicle registration based on the value of the vehicle. He noted that it came at a high prices as fence -sitting lawmakers were promised $1 billion towards pet projects in exchange for their vote on the bill. Funding "arrangements" helped the governor and legislators break a 2-year Sacramento stalemate on transportation funding. COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS: Chairman Oaxaca welcomed back Commissioner Fletcher. Commissioner Fletcher said he attended the groundbreaking of the new Stater Bros. store and said a nice memorial tribute was given to their prior CEO, Jack Brown. He said at Design Review we asked them to incorporate winemaking history into the exterior and project area and the market will include a tribute to Jack Brown inside the building. He said he liked the new staff report format particularly the new sections about fiscal impacts and Council goals. Commissioner Munoz agreed. Page 4 of 6 Item C1-4 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA G. ADJOURNMENT The Commission adjourned at 7:50 PM to a workshop held in the Rains Room to discuss Pre -Application Review DRC2017-00052. Those minutes appear separately. 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 April 6, seventy two (72) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive. /S/ Lois J. Schrader Planning Commission Secretary City of Rancho Cucamonga 1111191 ky, 9L. ZWOUSMAIIJU-4m TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and speak into the microphone. After speaking, please sign in on the clipboard located next to the speaker's podium. It is important to list your name, address and the agenda item letter your comments refer to. Comments are generally limited to 5 minutes per individual. If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under "Public Comments." There is opportunity to speak under this section prior to the end of the agenda. Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling Page 5 of 6 Item Cl-5 APRIL 12, 2017 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 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 $2,662 for all decisions of the Commission. (Fees are established and governed by the City Council). Please turn off all cellular phones and pagers while the meeting is in session. Copies of the Planning Commission agendas, staff reports and minutes can be found at www.CityofRC.us. Page 6 of 6 Item C1-6 12, 2017 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 Vice Chairman Macias X Commissioner Fletcher X Commissioner Munoz _X_ Commissioner Wimberly _X_ The meeting was called to order at 7:55PM Other Staff Present: Mike Smith, Senior Planner; Rob Ball, Fire Marshall; Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Planning Commission on any item 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 individuals embers 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. None C. DISCUSSION ITEMS PLANNING COMMISSION Mike Smith, Senior Planner, noted that the applicant was not in attendance and therefore no presentation could be made. Staff requested the item be continued and rescheduled for an unspecified date. Moved by Munoz, seconded by Fletcher, carried 5-0 Page 1 of 3 Item C2-t APRIL 12, 2017 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES RAINS ROOM RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA C1. PRE -APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2017-00052 MVE+PARTNERS FOR HARRIS GROUP LP - A request for a Pre -Application Review of a proposed development consisting of a hotel of 6 floors and 150 rooms, an events center, offices, and restaurants with a combined floor area of about 145,500 square feet in the Mixed Use (MU) District, Haven Avenue Overlay District, located at the northwest corner of Haven Avenue and Civic Center Drive, APNs: 0208-331-40 and -47. D. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission adjourned at 8:00 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 April 6, 2017 seventy two (72) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive. 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. 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 Page 2 of 3 Item C2-2 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES RAINS ROOM RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and speak into the microphone. After speaking, please sign in on the clipboard located next to the speaker's podium. It is important to list your name, address and the agenda item letter your comments refer to. Comments are generally limited to 5 minutes per individual. If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under "Public Comments." There is opportunity to speak under this section prior to the end of the agenda. Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the Planning Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of $2.662 for all decisions of the Commission. (Fees are established and governed by the City Council). Please turn off all cellular phones and pagers while the meeting is in session. Copies of the Planning Commission agendas, staff reports and minutes can be found at www.CityofRC.us. Page 3 of 3 Item C2-3 REPORT DATE: April 26, 2017 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Candyce Burnett, City Planner qW INITIATED BY: Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner SUBJECT: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19497 - GEORGE BOTROS - A request to subdivide one (1) 42,630 square foot parcel of land into three (3) parcels of land in the Low (L) District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) located at the northeast corner of Base Line Road and Beryl Street; APN: 0202-241-24. The Planning Department Staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt as a Class 15 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15315, which covers minor land divisions. MINOR DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00798 - GEORGE BOTROS -A request for site plan and architectural review of three (3) single-family residences that will be constructed in conjunction with a proposed subdivision (SUBTPM19497) of a 42,630 square foot parcel of land in the Low (L) District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) located at the northeast corner of Base Line Road and Beryl Street; APN: 0202-241-24. The Planning Department Staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt as a Class 3 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15303, which covers the construction of up to 3 single-family residences. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission take the following action: • Approve Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19497 and Minor Design Review DRC2013-00798 through the adoption of the attached Resolutions of Approval with Conditions. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Project Density: 3.07 dwelling units per acre. B. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Single -Family Residences; Low (L) District South - Single -Family Residences; Low (L) District East - Single -Family Residences; Low (L) District West - Single -Family Residences; Low (L) District C. General Plan Designations: Project Site - Low (L) Residential North Low (L) Residential South Low L) Residential East Low (L) Residential West Low (L) Residential D1-D2 Pg1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTPM19497 & MINOR DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00798 - GEORGEBOTROS April 26, 2017 Page 2 D. Site Characteristics: The 0.98 acre (42,630 square feet) project site is located at the northeast corner of Base Line Road and Beryl Street. The vacant project site is covered with non-native grasses and generally drains from north to south. The Base Line Road street frontage is approximately 250 feet long and the Beryl Street frontage is approximately 110 feet long. ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant is requesting to subdivide (SUBTPM19497) a 42,630 square foot parcel of land into three (3) parcels of land. Parcels #1 and #2 will take access from a shared driveway from Base Line Road and Parcel #3 will take access from Beryl Street. The project site is within the Low (L) District, which has a required minimum parcel size of 7,200 square feet and a required average parcel size of 8,000 square feet. Parcel #1 is 18,991 square feet, Parcel #2 is 12,214 square feet and Parcel #3 is 11,425 square feet. The proposed three (3) parcel subdivision results in an average parcel size of 14,210 square feet. The project adheres to all development criteria for the Low (L) District. The Development Code requires that interior lots be 65 feet wide and corner lots be 70 feet wide and that each parcel be 100 feet deep. Parcel #1 (interior parcel) is 127 feet wide and 133 feet deep. Parcel #2 (interior parcel) is 105 feet wide and 115 feet deep. Parcel #3 (corner parcel) is 105 feet wide and 120 feet deep. Parcel #1 is a flag lot that is 20 feet wide at the Base Line Road street frontage, which is the minimum required street frontage for a flag lot. The project includes the Design Review (DRC2013-00798) of the 3 residences on the 3 new parcels of land. Plan #1 is single -story and has a living area of 2,255 square feet and a 2 car garage of 474 square feet. Plan #2 is two-story and has a living area of 2,642 square feet and a 2 car garage of 436 square feet. Plan #1 will be plotted on Parcel #1; Plan #2 will be plotted on Parcels #2 and #3. Both plans have a Spanish architectural design theme, which includes the use of "S" the roofs, exposed rafter tails, decorative clay pipe vents and window shutters. Each design element, along with roof and wall plane articulation, is carried around to all elevations. Each parcel conforms to or exceeds the minimum required building setbacks of 37 feet (plus or minus 5 feet) for the front setback, 20 feet for the rear setback and 5 feet and 10 feet for the side setbacks. There is also a minimum street streetscape setback of 45 feet from the curb face on Base Line Road. Parcel #1 has a 32-foot, front yard setback, 20-foot and 45-foot side yard setbacks and a 36-foot rear yard setback. Parcel #2 has a 45-foot front yard setback, 41-foot and 37-foot side yard setbacks and a 21-foot rear yard setback. Parcel #3 has a 37-foot front yard setback, a 15-foot and 53-foot side yard setbacks and 42 foot rear yard setback. The maximum permitted lot coverage in.the Low (L) District is 40 percent. The lot coverage of.Parcel #1 is 15 percent, the lot coverage of Parcel #2 is 17 percent and the lot coverage of Parcel #3 is 18 percent. The project will be required to replace the existing property line walls to the north and west of the project site, except for a small portion of wall that was recently constructed along the north property line by the adjacent resident. The applicant will also be required to work with the property owner to the east (9128 Base Line Road), who wishes to preserve an existing eucalyptus tree located near the property line. This may require constructing a portion of wrought iron fence with view obscuring metal backing on either side of the tree to preserve the existing root system. Additionally, the applicant will be required to reconstruct the street frontage adjacent to the existing D1—D2 Pg2 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTPM19497 & MINOR DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00798 - GEORGE BOTROS April 26, 2017 Page 3 driveway at 7271 Beryl Street to rectify the existing drainage issue along Beryl Street, which causes the southeast corner of the neighboring property to flood in heavy rains. The construction of a new property line walls will restrict these existing flows, which currently drain onto the project site. B. Design Review Committee: The project was reviewed and approved as presented by the Design Review Committee (DRC) on February 28, 2017. C. Technical Review Committee: The project was reviewed and approved as presented by the Technical Review Committee (TRC) on February 28, 2017. D. Neighborhood Meeting: On February 7, 2017, a neighborhood meeting was conducted by the applicant at Lyon Center West (9161 Base Line Road). The intent of the meeting was to invite property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project boundaries for input related to the project. The applicant provided an overview of the proposed project to the six residents in attendance and addressed their questions. The residents raised concerns about the proposed location of the property line walls, a tree located on the property line and drainage flows. The applicant stated that the location of the proposed property line walls were based on surveys they did of the property. They also stated that they would work with the neighbor to the east to preserve the existing tree on the property line and with the neighbor to the west to address any drainage concerns during storm events. E. Environmental Assessment: Planning Department staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines. The project qualifies as a Class 15 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15315, which covers minor land divisions of residential land into four or fewer parcels when the division is in conformance with the General Plan and zoning, no variances or exceptions are required, all services and access are to local standards and the existing slope is less than 20 percent. The project also qualifies as a Class 3 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15303, which covers the construction of up to 3 single-family residences. The project scope is for the subdivision of a 0.98 acre project site into 3 residential parcels of land and for the site plan and design review of the single-family residences on the 3 new parcels. The project is in conformance with the General plan and zoning, no variances or exceptions are being requested, all services and access are available and the on -site grades are less than 20 percent. Staff finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The City Planner has reviewed staff's determination of exemption, and based on her own independent judgment, concurs with staff's determination of exemption. 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. FISCAL IMPACT: The vacant project site currently is assessed $3,507.86 annually in property tax, with a City share of $179.25 yearly. The proposed development will increase the value of the project site and the annual City share of the property tax will increase to approximately $491.54 annually. D1—D2 Pg3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTPM19497 & MINOR DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00798 - GEORGE BOTROS April 26, 2017 Page 4 The project will also generate one-time impact fees, which are intended to offset services from the increased development. The following one-time impact fees will be assessed by Engineering Services and are subject to change. 1. Library - $1,791 2. Transportation - $28,146 3. Drainage - $19,660 4. Animal Center - $387 5. Police - $534 6. Park Land Acquisition - $5,404 7. Park Improvement - $7,899 8. Community and Recreation Centers - $5,388 CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site. No correspondence has been received in response to these notices. EXHIBITS: Exhibit A - Site Utilization Plan Exhibit B - Tentative Parcel Map (SUBTPM19497) Exhibit C - Conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan Exhibit D - Site Plan and Architectural Plans Exhibit E - Landscape Plan Exhibit F - Design Review Committee Action Agenda & Comments Draft Resolution of Approval for Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM9497 Draft Resolution of Approval for Minor Design Review DRC2013-00798 CB:TV/Is D1—D2Pg4 • J'• yf� ffw FQ .8, ii�t- " jam" • • s w �• { 3 NUNIBERED PARCELS DR°39 47,026.93 SD.FT. TENTATIVE ACRES) ACRES) NET AREA: NET A SD.FT. (0.98 (0.9B ACRECRES) PARCEL MAP APN: 0202-241-24 BEING A SUBDIVISION OF A PORTION OF LOT 6, BLOCK 12, OF THE CUCAMONGA HOMESTEAD ASSOCIATION, RECORDED IN MAP BOOK 6, PAGE 46, IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA PLUMP ENGINEERING, INC. FEBRUARY 2017 CONTACT INFORMATION: UTILITY PURVEYORS: PLUMP ENGINEERING. INC., wAMR A. SCMER: 911 E. MAMLA A WYME AN MEN,,. CA 92805 ELCANa'G VIIfY wi IFR OLSImf./ 90R-911-6000 t. G 11-Je5-1835 EIELMIrnr tv OWNER: SWMERN CALPGPN�A MSON RANAL NA. 600-655-1555 RANCH° CVGNW6A UUMCPA( OWN 3F 3 91I Cul'IL MBAR, NE SAN O'NAS CA 9177J 9°9-9I9 ¢61] (9J) 90e-ere? GAS PpsFiN $WMERN CAVORMA CAS SUBDIVIDER: Ba-42 9 ELLAO PRCULRA CWRr 8715 HE ' CABLE N AUE LIRE AA A.iSE LINF PA FAM CUCAMavc0. cA 9rror MAR ER caNNuxrcanays SITE (950 (Bsp nl-7JDA L�Eazays-e090 LOCATION CIVILENGINEER: ew-eJT1966 cmuN ENGNEER.ML INCC &°e-d9Z-Z339 MY P.( 65859 IA[YNp[p $I 911 C KAMMWYOS 911 E NAOA A ANAMIN L1 95B05 . BURTRAOR BURRR7-JN7 [ JeEYOS-1835 �9-�PRO VICINITY MAP SURVEYOR: SURVEYOR: FIRE PROTECTION AGENCY xor ro snLE PLVYP ExLRLMR;NU Mc RANaD aCANLWLA naE v9orELn6w asMxr EMAN R&N YON ROB 9120 66E1ANEM151AHNUE 9A E RAMELA AK ANAHflN CA 93805 pL/A (WA, CA 91737 (771) 25-18I 90-477-77M LEGAL DESCRIPTION REAL PROPERNIN ME ON fF RANDIO CIRCA C, LMAYY W SAN WNARPM'°, SIA2 OF CAL60.9WA,. OESCNIBEU AS YBObon ME SWM 155 2EI BY IRE eSr 2I7 (LET OF LOr 6, BLOCX IZ CUGNCNBA HCNESTAO AAOLIAIILW, IN MC tlNW RAN/JIO CUCNOWA. COIMN W SIN BERNARDW. STAE M CAIFMMI.. AS MR NAP RECMM IN BC(N' 6 CF NAPy PAC{ I6. IN.MF P`FlCC 6- ME [WNN REECHOED, LI` SAd) CpINIY. EXCEPT ME BEST 120 FELT 0, ME NORM IJJ YEEf 0.' MEROOM 255 FEET ER SAW LOT Q CXPEPr MEROMON ALL PL CAS MINERALS AND OMER NYCROL'ARBM WESTANWS IKNC BELOW A OEPMW SM MET,, WMOUr ME RIGHT OF WA rf CNMY. Aft 0701-211-11 GENERAL INFORMATION: L TMOMAMY SURIEI£O BY FLINCH ORRAEER/NL INL z WA (RWOZs WREWNM0 BY MC CONNORS M NE UAYXARL ST AS BOOM ON SMELT Z. S NU BTSRN6 5M ONNS M BMELLM(.S ON YIE A T."N HIC FEATURES $ W OR ME CIXY(PNAL MAOIN6 PLAN i ALL BMSS W. 4TE AW NRMAM' 6. I MRLBY STAT NA ME PR0.£Cr A'OW HEREON VES YARNZ NC X, AREAS allMW N HAW A IF ANNUAL OANCE ROOD HAZARD, PER FENN a. NAP NA 007I0863V CYNNOMN Ra MON (LIFT K RANCHO CMOWNOAf PAIR NO 1630, RMX 1 MORE BATE FEBRUARY 16. IOIS EASEMENT AND DEDICATION NOTES: ONGHWAYANO ROM GSSANUT A SAC EAANENr r0 BE OEA'CA20 r0 ME =Or RANCHO ocAwMx RWORNNC CA N04EMBERS 196A RE CN6 N0: BIXW 6766, PALE 911, OTMAL RECORDS OPRWOSEO 0.'MGRLW N WE tlN w RANCHO LUG. £M HXNWAY ANO ROAD PUMOS£S C PACPo4D 3I.30BY IMM' SMP GYNENI O Rq RORM E6RE5$ A. UWCY ELFESS PURPOOOS N PaMrBON PARM I AND PARM 2, ZONING INFORMATION 'AANES TO 5W MT PARCEL AND ALL ABOCMC 50MUMM,' AU OF RESVENRAL Uff ZONE L ROW lfWfAIIA 1 µMIn. I01 AWL ;Xb 50 A. NMN/N (OI MOM 65 Fr. mMMAI OORNCR L01 MOM l0 FC NLMMLN LOT W. 10 A. NM/ENA ER -TAM 10 Fr. NAAWUN BVIONL MBwr.' J5 fI FRONT YARD, J) FT. N/NINUN CCRNER 50E YARD: Zl FT 'ONIM'N WENCH SCE YARD: 5,70 Fr. NWINUN REAR YARD: ZO FF. NININW .11"LO/ARG: IACR£ I.MA'LOF MR "M IANINIW LOT CEPM: 175 FT, NAANIW RRWARY BNNML HE71W, 10 F) 125 FT MIMM IW F/ W RESWIRAL ANANAACCM4RYWk&NGNMCH! 11 Fr. zwlN% STREET YARB (MA"ISM" 6Lb}'. AS r/ (301.. PARNML) STREET YARD (CCYL£CNR/IocQ J5 FT., (25 R. PARKING) REAR YARD (ABNOW' TORES'D Nl): 20 FT (10 Er. PARRM'O) REAR. 1A (AOJA(LNr N 69MULKIL. ONWOOLMAL): 0?. INEAIM vD£ (ADACENF TO MSOXILRAI} re rz (IO FE PA.G) 'MWW SW (ADAQNI M CCNNEROAL OR INOUSMI&I 5 FT.. -wmmAMW WAmmmw Mf tlNLY AANON [UG40.NW YUNIOPAL C - WABRAL C£V[ICPN£N/SIANOAFOS EXHIBIT B D1-D2Pg6 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP APN: 0202-241-24 BEING A SUBDIVISION OF A PORTION OF LOT 6, BLOCK 12, OF THE CUCAMONGA HOMESTEAD ASSOCIATION, RECORDED IN MAP BOOK 6, PAGE 46, IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA PLUMP ENGINEERING, INC. FEBRUARY 2017 to 'I — -- EMMAnn51TT.1]I11CC00 I I ! ! E9 "IID6f4. 1ii r1 991 ]d $O F]. (O!]BAL) I I I I1 l i I I It I Ipp I � I I nl I i SYflPELEO�E�Y / b I IZONELI;. p 1 I l ( SCKR�INEI I ' J � EAST 1 23I.00 I � / O.68' —77 I I i116.32 I y 1 I 93z1 PARCEL Z 2 Ii L. (� Cz 5 e I / / 1z,2!+m so lo2da c) I I I /FVPC'EEU RfiLiCffN<CELY, I + / OR 5`p I i / of // PROP O5E0 5 I.ER 1 ZONE'L / '/ �� BP. 13 / =I " 14 E Lv L E, / / / . EST _ P I 1 AFEA-If�d2RIP FT'102fi2AG.l / ✓ I C . fy II .. M' 20.00 MB9��50 �y J�'q 5 VNOCRCRp , I (I l I m J Y fl 2O 00 L 45 — % 6 l] ERs1 22Lw' EINER BXSE LINE ROAD —[t (BASISPOR BEARINGS) _ ZONE OP I ZONE L D1—D2 Pg7 m c� 0 I 0 N 000 �J CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN APN: 0202-241-24 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA �r. u I' 11 I I � . I I u I .ffi Ili I I I I oer=J` ® UN III III =ftm®.,n.em A m ¢Mr-mr YXINITY RAP V �� dpordaadon.w.r.n to duuuw �� � `� 8 wr�ur..n,na.w Q rinvomw'enxwvvono aN�xv9 >DINtp[O NM Nvld smavus lvnidgm J s;,° ...... ..... .. i Nil 5 t 1: 3 19LOS4 arv3iu � ao —t— t�sNs All cya J .i- r } a' finA a` _ L_. • � s _a 'l°- \ a D1—D2 Pg9 CUT & FILL EXHIBIT APN: 0202-241-24 RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA F =-I 7ILI 77771 � 11 �I ❑ f � r h ill SECTIONS PLAN APN: 0202-241-24 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA aa it f b . ub f E f f f, k ' ono R b u I € I € I 4Cm, e-e 4YG 1'-�G FlumN �I ,.d I i i n armm a n..,. r•�n Z PRELIMINARY WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN APN: 0202-241-24 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA I I I I I I ' I I I ❑ _emu I I I I I .1Immill, 4,11 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ — 'PAINS �� s.cex mn:x ssrry rn ui exroosm ici� ansmv (xrsl w; E rat xa.n. .a era kv n rim 4 erm[ m0xF�a wnxhlro �I iR Y xo'e. �r row un mhac�xaw aumwwf�-Ir,o,u. v �.,u mwnw a.�us. Cll L dl 1! J 1 o:x-4 1-- -4..a w,iul.,'a`� i�i wu.rx` oi' oinm mi n s'a�, �nu� .uurxa o,uwu ssuiw wmnn m nE aww: wm.o en nru n rw�wnw:w, u,x u,uP:,oua � �vw �� m s.rw.,u rma xh,ss mouv �owxx.. roauuxnw.w rw mw,m�wmsme nuwnw wn' rim. _i,,wenwa,r ov'_i enurr'mzw� r. ��e�,. x.:o, a >°nmX i. w u row w un. •e� u m,rt nnme om m.wu, w.a>om w i.me m ur..a n x.mr. . oo.i au vreu n mr e ,x nwaw uuxuao��r�w. umm maa m, �, Ortil„LLSPE[rtKnnOH LEGEND 6�'®��emEO:m•v�o win_ ® ®mmm�mm cu��®mm®®mm0 E� �mmm®mm mmOE" me m_0_®mm ®xm®mmm�'imo ® ®mo p I �i 7gi a €a 33E; �g I i E6� S a k uII. a4z Y s, o oLL � ° I li U1Y rrc1}t 7 '_ i D1-D2Pg13 .21 m x 00 -�,.. NORTH ® NEW T \ 5!5 5F. v nsw.u, mm� LOI I ➢+ma�xc cove meoFu.xwx PL NING eNPGFMA ON _ VO➢�mfe v ME ZLS2O mauc•�n _ 2842 SF' L.LJ - ,2642 5P ., co MODEL02A MODEL 42 ryo LOT 3 LO ��. --- - --- ----- -- -- _ev., ws_w 2110i zv..6... 8119 BASE LINE RD --------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------- SITE PLAN 1/16"=1'-0" NEW THREE HOMES 9118 BASE LINE RD VICINITY MAP m DRC 2013-0000798 MAPS 19497 ,GB S�� P� GB ARCHITECTS ..ommu.e OWNER: N1vN5W1 • sa eK me-.nm. A-01 ROOF PLAN o.,...�.s T''—r �1 e rt Iq;._. A-1. -�mmmi Illm-7i. nlnmri Iltloinong uo m .i! MEINNE nn IIIm.IME=IIIIIlllnunlll .... diIMzn.. llllIIIIMEMEYmME.B .... 0 m memo Boom,1M -MODEL n;mlin m4mA M. NOON fan IS an Oil Illno, " n9/i//nl .IIIiiME�111 llllii1'i11l, m N 111 MEln MEu Majimsm 8 o°o MEI■MEMEI■MEMO/ 1////1 CMEMO/ MEME MEMEME ME/ MEMO/ EYairy YG� r: Eg ft00F PLAN D.%2013-OOOP/98 AI PP 119497 ©:rrwmra.rcmrn �rw- rmw �� mrev� nmw nr awwmrrmeene Q om rr�.w Praw nunnnnulnnnmuunnnnnnn■� i■nmmmmmmm■mn■nni■mmm•n SIDE ELEVATION(MODEL to mnnn•Innnannlnnn■m•I■m•Inn•I■n4%s••••" ^ mnl�mmmmmmmmmmmmgr -; namnmmlmmmummlmnmmlmn. a�mmnlmmmmmmmnlmnmr.-••.••.,, •• Cho EEEEE9 lEeEe Elom (MODELREAR ELEVATION L.,OCCo 0 00 - .. �nnmmimlmnm� •mni'.� mrin _....._..: ^nnmlmnmmlmiiimriimm'iinlinnlmmimm�mnmmmn FRONT ELEVATION LOT 11 N imc venn�nav: .���._ nniiiilmYiniiiiminim nnmmmmmmlmm ::: NOR UMI mnmm�mmmmmm OE EEESEA "I'm AMR EEE NOR CEE (MODELSIDE ELEVATION OZ6dZ4—la 3 1181HX3 Ni!r++ ,uf tau! t {..:,,1 ,:•f +i "i I }(t if,R li,j(, j flf ( j II 11 t 1 fill I+I! :fjijitlalfl Ili Ili fll if }Iljl I •' f � jtf r Ip! Ilu l� fd11�{ a s t.a'13' IE It , .. sg liil }� 7 I{i jlj 1 € I11 1 i li I ! i jf!s i€ I jjjf j'I , 4 l jl± a }ff I fff IIiI I a f + 1 tj} f w I "'If I,aef lase 4f 01t q 1111 al e:a +{ii.f {r 54 :A{i III! :jli[Ili :;j 11-Ill {+ s "li-' (jl+i., P`' ijl d•hilj�;j i(t }I ill S•iE �il. i f a � .:f .e €::i� ff}ii .. }� t Ill I;ti� i I i I il.l t�ai !(if ft I j ?� e 0 00 k sn at FE f{ 3a Io c b _ e . 6a1 f9 f _I 3 3 . �•. a •h5 3Front Garda 019 BasLBni Hard Road j i 3 BCry1910BaadC,.RmC a S o Rancho Cucamonga, CaMoMa 91701 tantlscapa Improvement Plana 1�1 = FEBRUARY 28, 2017 - 7:00 P.M. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA RAINS ROOM CITY HALL 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE A. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call: Ray Wimberly X 7 00 P M Rich Macias X Candyce Burnett Donald Granger X Alternates: Lou Munoz Rich Fletcher Francisco Oaxaca Additional Staff Present: Mike Smith, Senior Planner; babe van der Zwaag. Associate Planner B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS None 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 embers 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. SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2016-00732 — NATIONAL SIGN & MARKETING CORPORATION FOR CARL'S JR. - A request to update the architecture, consisting of Page 1 of 3 EXHIBIT F D1—D2Pg21 1 �V5 LV I - / .VV r M. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA RAINS ROOM CITY HALL 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE revisions to the roof and exterior wall material and color, of an existing restaurant building currently occupied by Carl's Jr. in the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) District located at 8736 Base Line Road; APN: 0202-381-26. Background and description of the project was presented to the Committee. Included in the presentation was an explanation of the project's deficiencies and solutions that were offered to address the deficiencies. The applicant was not present at the meeting. The Committee discussed the project with Staff. After consideration of the architectural revisions as proposed, they accepted Staffs recommendation and denied the application. C2. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19497 — GEORGE BOTROS -A request to subdivide one (1) 42,630 square foot parcel of land into three (3) parcels of land in the Low (L) District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) located at the northeast corner of Base Line Road and Beryl Street; APN: 0202-241-24. The Planning Department Staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt as a Class 15 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15315 which covers minor land divisions. MINOR DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00798 — GEORGE BOTROS - Site plan and architectural review of three (3) single-family residences that will be constructed in conjunction with a proposed subdivision (SUBTPM19497) of a 42,630 square foot parcel of land in the Low (L) District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) located at the northeast corner of Base Line Road and Beryl Street; APN: 0202-241-24, The Planning Department Staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt as a Class 3 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15303 which covers the construction of up to 3 homes. Project was approved as presented and forwarded to Planning Commission. D. ADJOURNMENT 7:25 P.M. The Design Review Committee has adopted Administrative Regulations that set an 11:00 p.m. adjournment time. If items go beyond that time, they shall be heard only with the consent of the Committee. I, Jennifer Palacios, Office Specialist II with the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on day, Page 2 of 3 D1—D2 Pg22 FEBRUARY 28, 2017 - 7:00 P.m. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA RAINS Room CITY HALL 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE Thursday, February 16, 2017, seventy two (72) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA. Jennifer Palacios Office Specialist 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. Page 3 of 3 D1—D2 Pg23 RESOLUTION NO. 17-26 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19497, A REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE ONE (1) 42,630 SQUARE FOOT PARCEL OF LAND INTO THREE (3) PARCELS OF LAND IN THE LOW (L) DISTRICT (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF BASE LINE ROAD AND BERYL STREET; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF — APN: 0202-241-24. A. Recitals. 1. Mr. George Botros filed an application for the approval of Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19497, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Tentative Parcel Map request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 26th day of April 2017, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above -referenced public hearing on April 26, 2017, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to a 0.98-acre project site located on the northeast corner of Base Line Road and Beryl Street in the Low (L) District; and b. The vacant project site is covered with non-native grasses and generally drains from north to south; and C. The Base Line Road street frontage is approximately 250 feet long and the Beryl Street street frontage is approximately 110 feet long; and d. To the north, south, east and west is single-family residential development within the Low (L) District; and e. The applicant is requesting to subdivide (SUBTPM19497) the 0.98-acre project site into 3 parcels of land for the purpose of developing 3 single-family residences; and The project adheres to all development criteria for the Low (L) District; and D1—D2 Pg24 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-26 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19497 GEORGEBOTROS April 26, 2017 Page 2 g. The project site is within the Low (L) District, which has a required minimum parcel size of 7,200 square feet and a required average parcel size of 8,000 square feet. Parcel #1 is 18,991 square feet, Parcel #2 is 12,214 square feet and Parcel #3 is 11,425 square feet. The proposed three (3) parcel subdivision results in an average parcel size of 14,210 square feet. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above -referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The tentative parcel map is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and any applicable specific plans. The project conforms to all development criteria of the General Plan and Development Code for the Low (L) Land Use and Zoning Districts. b. The design or improvements of the tentative parcel map will be consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and any applicable specific. The project site is being subdivided for residential purposes and will be of similar size and density to the single-family residential development in the surrounding area. C. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed. The project is designed to conform to all of the related development criteria of the Low (L) District. The project site is surrounded by similar residential development to the north, south, east and west and is accessed by an adjacent public streets and will connect to existing utility services. d. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat. The 0.98 acre project site is surrounded by residential development to the north, south, east and west and has been regularly cleared of brush. e. The tentative parcel map is not likely to cause serious public health problems. The project site is being subdivided for residential purposes and will not include the use of hazardous materials that would cause public health issues; f. The design of the tentative parcel map will not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. The subject property does not contain any easements that would limit access to or use of the project site. 4. Planning Department staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines. The project qualifies as a Class 15 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15315, which covers minor land divisions of residential land into four or fewer parcels when the division is in conformance with the General Plan and zoning, no variances or exceptions are required, all services and access are to local standards and the existing slope is less than 20 percent. The project also qualifies as a Class 3 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15303, which covers the construction of up to 3 single-family residences. The project scope is for the subdivision of a 0.98 acre project site into 3 residential parcels of land and for the site plan and design review of the single-family residences on the 3 new parcels. The project is in conformance with the General plan and zoning, no variances or exceptions are being requested, all services and access are available and the on -site grades are less than 20 percent. Staff finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The City D1—D2 Pg25 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-26 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19497 GEORGE BOTROS April 26, 2017 Page 3 Planner has reviewed staff's determination of exemption, and based on her own independent judgment, concurs with staffs determination of exemption. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the attached standard conditions incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Department 1) Approval is for Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19497 for the subdivision of a 0.98-acre parcel of land into 3 parcels for the development of 3 single- family residences for a site located northeast corner of Base Line Road and Beryl Street; APN: 0202-241-24. 2) Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with any sections of the Development Code, State Fire Marshal's regulations, Uniform Building Code, or any other City Ordinances. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF APRIL 2017. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA .33 ATTEST: Francisco Oaxaca. Chairman Candyce Burnett, Secretary I, Candyce Burnett, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certifythat 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 April 2017, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: D1—D2 Pg26 Conditions of Approval Community Development Department Project#: DRC2013-00798 SUBTPM19497 Project Name: Base Line Road and Beryl Street 3 Lot Subdivision and Design Review Location: 9118 BASE LINE RD - 020224124-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review Tentative Parcel Map ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 1. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 2. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval 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. 3. 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. 4. 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. 5. 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. 6. All clearing, grading, earth -moving, or excavation activities shall cease when winds exceed 25 mph per SCAQMD guidelines in order to limit fugitive dust emissions. 7. The contractor shall ensure that all disturbed unpaved roads and disturbed areas within the Project are watered at least three (3) times daily during dry weather. Watering, with complete coverage of disturbed areas, shall occur at least three times a day, preferably in the midmorning, afternoon, and after work is done for the day. 8. The contractor shall ensure that traffic speeds on unpaved roads and Project site areas are reduced to 15 miles per hour or less. 9. 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. Panted 4/3/2017 www.CityofRC.us D1—D2 Pg27 Project#: DRC2013-00798 Project Name: Base Line Road and Beryl Street 3 Lot Subdivision and Design Review Location: 9118 BASE LINE RD - 020224124-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. - Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 10. 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. 11. The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel powered equipment where feasible. 12. The construction contractor shall ensure that construction -grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. 13. All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. 14. 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. 15. All construction equipment shall comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403. Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions: • Reestablish ground cover on the construction site through seeding and watering. Pave or apply gravel to any on -site haul roads. Phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large areas to erosion over extended periods of time. Schedule activities to minimize the amounts of exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. Dispose of surplus excavated material in accordance with local ordinances and use sound engineering practices. Sweep streets according to a schedule established by the City if silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. Suspend grading operations during high winds (i.e., wind speeds exceeding 25 mph) in accordance with Rule 403 requirements. Maintain a minimum 24 inch freeboard ratio on soils haul trucks or cover payloads using tarps or other suitable means. 16. The site shall be treated with water or other soil -stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB)) daily to reduce PM10 emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. 17. 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. 18. Provide adequate ingress and egress at all entrances to public facilities to minimize vehicle idling at curbsides. 19. Landscape with native and/or drought -resistant species to reduce water consumption and to provide passive solar benefits. Printed: 4/3/2017 www.CityofRC.us Page 2 of 12 D1—D2 Pg28 Project #: DRC2013-00798 Project Name: Base Line Road and Beryl Street 3 Lot Subdivision and Design Review Location: 9118 BASE LINE RD - 020224124-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 20. Provide lighter color roofing and road materials and tree planting programs to comply with the AQMP Miscellaneous Sources MSC-01 measure. 21.24)All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate high-efficiency/low-polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water heaters. 22. All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. 23. 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. 24. 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. 25. 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. 26. Grading operations shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed 25 mph to minimize PM10 emissions from the site during such episodes. 27. 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. 28. 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. 29. 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. 30. Trucks shall not idle continuously for more than 5 minutes. 31. Alternative fuel powered equipment shall be utilized in lieu of gasoline- or diesel -powered engines where feasible. 32. Construction should be timed so as not to interfere with peak -hour traffic. 33. Ridesharing and transit incentives shall be supported and encouraged for the construction crew. 34. 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. Printed: 4/3/2017 wwv.CilyofRC.us Page 3 of 12 D1—D2 Pg29 Project #: DRC2013-00798 Project Name: Base Line Road and Beryl Street 3 Lot Subdivision and Design Review Location: 9118 BASE LINE RD - 020224124-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 35. 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. 36. 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 and/or install the infrastructure to deliver and use reclaimed water. 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. 37. 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. 38. The project shall comply with Chapter 7A of the California Building Code (CBC), which includes building standards for the Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Area. The standards call for the use of ignition -resistant materials and design to inhibit the intrusion of flame or burning embers projected by a vegetation fire and help reduce losses resulting from repeated cycles of interface fire disasters. 39. 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. 40. 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. Printed: 4/3/2017 N .CityofRC.l15 Page 4 of 12 D1—D2 Pg30 Project #: DRC2013-00798 Project Name: Base Line Road and Beryl Street 3 Lot Subdivision and Design Review Location: 9118 BASE LINE RD - 020224124-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 41. 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. 42. 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. 43. 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. 44. 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. 45. Landscaping plans shall include provisions for controlling and minimizing the use of fertilizers/pesticides/herbicides. Landscaped areas shall be monitored and maintained for at least two years to ensure adequate coverage and stable growth. Plans for these areas, including monitoring provisions for a minimum of two years, shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. 46. The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (Madole & Associates, February 2016) to reduce construction pollutants from entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 47. 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. 48. 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. 49. Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards specified in Development Code Section 17.66.050, as measured at the property line. Developers 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. 50. The perimeter block wall shall be constructed as early as possible in the first phase. w .CltyofRC.us Printed: 4/32017 Page 5 of 12 D1—D2 Pg31 Project #: DRC2013-00798 Project Name: Base Line Road and Beryl Street 3 Lot Subdivision and Design Review Location: 9118 BASE LINE RD - 020224124-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 51. 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. 52. During construction, the contractor shall ensure all construction equipment is equipped with appropriate noise attenuating devices. 53. Idling equipment shall be turned off when not in use. 54. The project contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive receptors nearest the project site. 55. The construction contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction -related noise sources and noise -sensitive receptors nearest the project site during all project construction. 56. The construction contractor shall change the timing and/or sequence of the noisiest construction operations to avoid sensitive times of the day. 57. During all project site excavation and grading, the project contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers consistent with the manufacturers' standards. 58. Equipment shall be maintained so that vehicles and their loads are secured from rattling and banging. Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. Base Line Road frontage improvements: a. Protect or replace existing curb and gutter and sidewalk. b. Install street trees per City Standards. c. A shared drive driveway will be allowed on the most easterly parcel on Base Line Road. d. Provide two (2) 9500 Lumens HPSV-equivalent LED street lights on Base Line Road including one (1) street light that will replace a street light on a wooden pole. The street light shall be owned by the City. Developer shall be responsible to coordinate and pay all costs to provide SCE power and City owned street light. Coordinate with City staff for design and installation requirements. e. Protect or replace existing signing and striping, as required. Printed: 4/3/2017 w .CilyofRC.us Page 6 of 12 D1—D2 Pg32 Project #: DRC2013-00798 Project Name: Base Line Road and Beryl Street 3 Lot Subdivision and Design Review Location: 9118 BASE LINE RD - 020224124-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 2. Beryl Street frontage improvements: a. Protect or replace existing curb and gutter and install property line adjacent sidewalk, and street trees per City Standards, as required. b. Provide "Hammerhead" driveway approach to Beryl Street. c. Protect or replace existing signing and striping, as required. d. Provide one (1) 5800 Lumen HPSV-equivalent LED street light. The street light shall be owned by the City. Developer shall be responsible to coordinate and ,pay all costs to provide SCE power and City owned street light. Coordinate with City staff for design and installation requirements. 3. Any existing power poles on Base Line Road and Beryl Street to be relocated, shall be paid for and coordinated by the Developer with Southern California Edison Company. 4. Reconstruct access ramp at the northeast corner of Base Line Road and Beryl Street to comply with current ADA requirements. The City's Standard Drawing 102 access ramp, does not comply with current ADA requirements. The City is in the process of updating our standards however no time frame yet exactly when this will be done. Therefore a detail will have to be added to the street improvement plan showing the design details, elevations, and grades of the access ramp to substantiate they comply with ADA requirements. 5. Install private landscaping and irrigation systems in the parkways adjacent to side yards along Base Line Road and Beryl Street. 6. Corner property line cutoff shall be dedicated to the City per City Standards. Standard Conditions of Approval 7. 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. 8. 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. 9. Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval Printed: 4/3/2017 www.CltyofRC.us Page 7 a112 D1—D2 Pg33 Project #: DRC2013-00798 Project Name: Base Line Road and Beryl Street 3 Lot Subdivision and Design Review Location: 9118 BASE LINE RD - 020224124-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 1. 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. 2. 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. 3. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall obtain a Waste Discharge Identification Number (WDID). 4. 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. 5. 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. 6. 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. 7. 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. 8. 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.. 9. 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. 10.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. 4/3/2017 www.CityofRC.us Page 8 of 12 D1—D2 Pg34 Project #: DRC2013-00798 Project Name: Base Line Road and Beryl Street 3 Lot Subdivision and Design Review Location: 9118 BASE LINE RD - 020224124-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Gradinn Section Standard Conditions of Approval 11. 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. 12.It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off -site drainage easements prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 13. 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. 14. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall implement City Standards for on -site construction where possible, and provide details for all work not covered by City Standard Drawings. 15. Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the, latest adopted California Plumbing Code. 16. The final grading and drainage plan shall show existing topography a minimum of 100-feet beyond project boundary. 17. The applicant shall provide a grading agreement and grading bond for all cut and fill combined exceeding 5,000 cubic yards prior to issuance of a grading permit. The grading agreement and bond shall be approved by the Building and Safety Official. 18. This project shall comply with the accessibility requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. 19. 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". 20. 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. vnvw.CityofRC.us Printed: 4/3/2017 _ Page 9 of 12 D1—D2 Pg35 Project #: DRC2013-00798 Project Name: Base Line Road and Beryl Street 3 Lot Subdivision and Design Review Location: 9118 BASE LINE RD - 020224124-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 21. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy the engineer of record shall certify the functionality of the storm water quality management plan (WQMP) best management practices (BMP) devices. 22. Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WQMP shall include a copy of the project Conditions of Approval. 23. The land 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. 24. 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. 25. Reciprocal access easements for all parcels and maintenance agreements ensuring joint maintenance of all storm water quality structural/treatment best management practices (BMP) devices, 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 issuance a grading permit. 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. 26. Prior to issuance of a wall permit, on engineered combination garden/retaining walls along the property boundary the structural calculations for the wall shall assume a level toe/heel at the adjacent off -site property (i.e. a manufactured slope is not present). This shall be shown in the typical sections of the grading and drainage plan. 27. 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. 28. 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. 29. 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: 4/3/2017 www.cityofRC.Us Page 10 of 12 D1—D2Pg36 Project #: DRC2013-00798 Project Name: Base Line Road and Beryl Street 3 Lot Subdivision and Design Review Location: 9118 BASE LINE RD - 020224124-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 30. The land/property owner shall provide an inspection report on a biennial basis for the underground infiltration chambers 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. 31. 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". 32. 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". 33. 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. 34. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall obtain a signed and notarized letter from the adjacent property owner(s) for ALL work proposed on the adjacent property. The letter shall be scanned and pasted onto the permitted grading plan set. The letter shall show on either the title sheet or a detail sheet of the grading and drainage plan set. 35. 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. 36. As structural storm water treatment devices (commonly referred to as BMP's) are proposed in the rear yards of the residential lots, the developer/applicant is conditioned to provide access easement(s) in favor of the City of Rancho Cucamonga to allow City staff access for inspections of the structural storm water treatment devices prior to approval of the Final Map. Said easements may be shown on the Final Map, the Parcel Map or by a separate easement document. As an alternative, the applicant may set up a homeowner's association (HOA) for the inspection and maintenance of the structural storm water treatment devices. If an HOA is set up, a copy of the HOA CCBR's shall be recorded and included in the Water Quality Management Plan prior to recordation of the Memorandum of Agreement of Storm Water Quality Management Plan. Printed: 4/3/2017 W W W.CltyofRC.uS Page 11 of 12 D1—D2 Pg37 Project #: DRC2013-00798 Project Name: Base Line Road and Beryl Street 3 Lot Subdivision and Design Review Location: 9118 BASE LINE RD - 020224124-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 37. 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. 38. 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. 39. 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. 40. 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. Pdntetl: 4/3/2017 wwev.CityofRC.us Page 12 of 12 D1—D2 Pg38 RESOLUTION NO. 17-27 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING MINOR DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00798, A REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OF THREE (3) SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES THAT WILL BE CONSTRUCTED IN CONJUNCTION WITH A PROPOSED SUBDIVISION (SUBTPM19497) OF A 42,630 SQUARE FOOT PARCEL OF LAND IN THE LOW (L) DISTRICT (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF BASE LINE ROAD AND BERYL STREET; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF — APN: 0202-241-24. A. Recitals. 1. Mr. George Botros filed an application for the approval of Minor Design Review DRC2013-00798, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Minor Design Review request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 26th day of April 2017, 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 this Commission during the above -referenced public hearing on April 26, 2017, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to a 0.98-acre project site located on the northeast corner of Base Line Road and Beryl Street in the Low (L) District; and b. The vacant project site is covered with non-native grasses and generally drains from north to south; and C. The Base Line Road street frontage is approximately 250 feet long and the Beryl Street frontage is approximately 110 feet long; and d. To the north, south, east and west is single-family residential development within the Low (L) District; and e. The project is for the Minor Design Review (DRC2013-00798) of 3 single-family residences related to the subdivision (SUBTPM19497) of a 0.98-acre project into 3 parcels of land; and D1—D2 Pg39 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-27 MINOR DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00798 GEORGEBOTROS April 26, 2017 Page 2 The project adheres to all development criteria for the Low (L) District; and g. Each parcel conforms to or exceeds the minimum required building setbacks of 37 feet (plus or minus 5 feet) for the front setback, 20 feet for the rear setback and 5 feet and 10 feet for the side setbacks. There is also a minimum street streetscape setback of 45 feet from the curb face on Base Line Road. Parcel #1 has a 32-foot front yard setback, 20-foot and 45-foot side yard setbacks and a 36-foot rear yard setback. Parcel #2 has a 45-foot front yard setback, 41-foot and 37-foot side yard setbacks and a 21-foot rear yard setback. Parcel #3 has a 37-foot front yard setback, a 15-foot and 53-foot side yard setbacks and 42 foot rear yard setback. 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 General Plan states that the Low (L) Residential District is characterized by detached low density single residential units on individual lots with a density of 2 to 4 dwelling units per acre. The project is consistent with the intent of the Low (L) District as the project is for the development of 3 single-family residences on 3 individual lots, with a density of 3.07 dwelling units per acre. b. The proposed use is in accord with the objective of the Development Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. The Development Code states that the Low (L) District is for the development of single-family residences with a minimum lot size of 7,200 square feet and a maximum density of 4 units per gross acre. The project conforms to all the development criteria of the Low (L) District and has a density of 3.07 dwelling units per acre. C. The proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. The project conforms to all of the development criteria for single-family development in the Low (L) district. 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 project is of similar size and density to the single-family residential development in the surrounding area and the normal use of the residences will not be detrimental to the residences in the vicinity. 4. Planning Department staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines. The project qualifies as a Class 15 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15315, which covers minor land divisions of residential land into four or fewer parcels when the division is in conformance with the General Plan and zoning, no variances or exceptions are required, all services and access are to local standards and the existing slope is less than 20 percent. The project also qualifies as a Class 3 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15303, which covers the construction of up to 3 single-family residences. The project scope is for the subdivision of a 0.98 acre project site into 3 residential parcels of land and for the site plan and design review of the single-family residences on the 3 new parcels. The project is in conformance with the General plan and zoning, no variances or exceptions are being requested, all services and access are available and the on -site grades are less than 20 percent. Staff finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The City D1—D2 Pg40 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-27 MINOR DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00798 GEORGE BOTROS April 26, 2017 Page 3 Planner has reviewed staff's determination of exemption, and based on her own independent judgment, concurs with staff's determination of exemption. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the attached standard conditions incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Department 1) Approval is for Minor Design Review DRC2013-00798 for the site plan and design review of 3 single-family residences for a site located on the northeast corner of Base Line Road and Beryl Street; APN: 0202-241-24. 2) Approval is contingent on the approval of Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19497. 3) The final exterior finishes, colors and door and window design shall be to satisfaction of the City Planner. 4) Replace the existing the existing walls along the north and west property lines for Parcel #1 and along the north property line for Parcel #3 with new 6-foot high walls. A small portion of wall along the north property line (behind 9137 Roberds Street) may be preserved. All walls shall have a uniform finish. 5) The applicant shall make a good faith effort to eliminate any double wall conditions with the construction of the new property line walls. 6) All walls facing the public view shall be decorative (stucco, slump stone or split face block). 7) A good faith effort shall be made to work with the property owner at 9128 Base Line Road to preserve an existing eucalyptus tree along the west property line. This may include replacing a portion of the approved 6-foot high block wall with a wrought iron fence with a view obscuring metal backing. 8) Prior to approval of the final grading permit, the applicant shall reconstruct the street frontage and related onsite improvements adjacent to the existing driveway at 7271 Beryl Street to rectify the existing drainage issue along Beryl Street, which causes the southeast corner of this property to flood in heavy rains. Improvements may include removing or reconstructing two low walls adjacent to the driveway which are causing the existing storm water flows along Beryl Street to eddy and flow over the existing drive approach of 7271 Beryl Street. The precise grading plan submitted for plan check shall indicate the improvements at 7271 Beryl Street necessary to rectify the drainage issue. 9) Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with any sections of the Development Code, State Fire Marshal's regulations, Uniform Building Code, or any other City Ordinances. D1—D2 Pg41 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-27 MINOR DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00798 GEORGEBOTROS April 26, 2017 Page 4 The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF APRIL 2017. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Wi ATTEST: Francisco Oaxaca, 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 April 2017, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: D1—D2 Pg42 Conditions of Approval COCAMOAMO jNC., ro Community Development Department Project#: DRC2013-00798 SUBTPM19497 Project Name: Base Line Road and Beryl Street 3 Lot Subdivision and Design Review Location: 9118 BASE LINE RD - 020224124-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review Tentative Parcel Map ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 1. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 2. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval 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. 3. 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. 4. 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. 5. 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. 6. All clearing, grading, earth -moving, or excavation activitiesshall cease when winds exceed 25 mph per SCAQMD guidelines in order to limit fugitive dust emissions. 7. The contractor shall ensure that all disturbed unpaved roads and disturbed areas within the Project are watered at least three (3) times daily during dry weather. Watering, with complete coverage of disturbed areas, shall occur at least three times a day, preferably in the midmorning, afternoon, and after work is done for the day. 8. The contractor shall ensure that traffic speeds on unpaved roads and Project site areas are reduced to 15 miles per hour or less. 9. 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. www.CityofRC.us Printed. 4/3/2017 D1—D2 Pg43 Project #: DRC2013-00798 Project Name: Base Line Road and Beryl Street 3 Lot Subdivision and Design Review Location: 9118 BASE LINE RD - 020224124-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 10. 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. 11. The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel powered equipment where feasible. 12. The construction contractor shall ensure that construction -grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. 13. All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. 14. 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. 15. All construction equipment shall comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403. Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions: Reestablish ground cover on the construction site through seeding and watering. Pave or apply gravel to any on -site haul roads. Phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large areas to erosion over extended periods of time. • Schedule activities to minimize the amounts of exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. • Dispose of surplus excavated material in accordance with local ordinances and use sound engineering practices. • Sweep streets according to a schedule established by the City if silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. Suspend grading operations during high winds (i.e., wind speeds exceeding 25 mph) in accordance with Rule 403 requirements. • Maintain a minimum 24 inch freeboard ratio on soils haul trucks or cover payloads using tarps or other suitable means. 16. The site shall be treated with water or other soil -stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB)) daily to reduce PM10 emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. 17. 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. 18. Provide adequate ingress and egress at all entrances to public facilities to minimize vehicle idling at curbsides. 19. Landscape with native and/or drought -resistant species to reduce water consumption and to provide passive solar benefits. Printed: 4/3/2017 w .CityofRC.uS - Page 2 of 12 D1—D2 Pg44 Project #: DRC2013-00798 Project Name: Base Line Road and Beryl Street 3 Lot Subdivision and Design Review Location: Project Type: 9118 BASE LINE RD - 020224124-0000 Minor Desian Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. - Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 20. Provide lighter color roofing and road materials and tree planting programs to comply with the AQMP Miscellaneous Sources MSC-01 measure. 21.24)All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate high-efficiency/low-polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water heaters. 22. All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. 23. 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. 24. 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. 25. 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. 26. Grading operations shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed 25 mph to minimize PM10 emissions from the site during such episodes. 27. 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. 28. 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. 29. 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. 30. Trucks shall not idle continuously for more than 5 minutes. 31. Alternative fuel powered equipment shall be utilized in lieu of gasoline- or diesel -powered engines where feasible. 32. Construction should be timed so as not to interfere with peak -hour traffic. 33. Ridesharing and transit incentives shall be supported and encouraged for the construction crew. 34. 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. Printed: 4/3/2017 w .CityofRC.us D1—D2 Pg45 Page 3 of 12 Project #: DRC2013-00798 Project Name: Base Line Road and Beryl Street 3 Lot Subdivision and Design Review Location: 9118 BASE LINE RD - 020224124-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. - Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 35. 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. 36. 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 and/or install the infrastructure to deliver and use reclaimed water. • 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. 37. 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. 38. The project shall comply with Chapter 7A of the California Building Code (CBC), which includes building standards for the Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Area. The standards call for the use of ignition -resistant materials and design to inhibit the intrusion of flame or burning embers projected by a vegetation fire and help reduce losses resulting from repeated cycles of interface fire disasters. 39. 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. 40. 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. Printed: 4/3/2017 wmt.CltyofRC.uS Page 4 0(12 D1—D2 Pg46 Project #: DRC2013-00798 Project Name: Base Line Road and Beryl Street 3 Lot Subdivision and Design Review Location: 9118 BASE LINE RD - 020224124-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 41. 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. 42. 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. 43. 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. 44. 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. 45. Landscaping plans shall include provisions for controlling and minimizing the use of fertilizers/pesticides/herbicides. Landscaped areas shall be monitored and maintained for at least two years to ensure adequate coverage and stable growth. Plans for these areas, including monitoring provisions for a minimum of two years, shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. 46. The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (Madole & Associates, February 2016) to reduce construction pollutants from entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 47. 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. 48. 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. 49. Construction or grading noise levels shall not .exceed the standards specified in Development Code Section 17.66.050, as measured at the property line. Developers 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. 50. The perimeter block wall shall be constructed as early as possible in the first phase. Printed: 4/3/2017 www•CltyofRC.uS Page 5 of 12 D1—D2 Pg47 Project #: DRC2013-00798 Project Name: Base Line Road and Beryl Street 3 Lot Subdivision and Location: 9118 BASE LINE RD - 020224124-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 51. 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. 52. During construction, the contractor shall ensure all construction equipment is equipped with appropriate noise attenuating devices. 53. Idling equipment shall be turned off when not in use. 54. The project contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive receptors nearest the project site. 55. The construction contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction -related noise sources and noise -sensitive receptors nearest the project site during all project construction. 56. The construction contractor shall change the timing and/or sequence of the noisiest construction operations to avoid sensitive times of the day. 57. During all project site excavation and grading, the project contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers consistent with the manufacturers' standards. 58. Equipment shall be maintained so that vehicles and their loads are secured from rattling and banging. Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. Base Line Road frontage improvements: a. Protector replace existing curb and gutter and sidewalk. b. Install street trees per City Standards. c. A shared drive driveway will be allowed on the most easterly parcel on Base Line Road. d. Provide two (2) 9500 Lumens HPSV-equivalent LED street lights on Base Line Road including one (1) street light that will replace a street light on a wooden pole. The street light shall be owned by the City. Developer shall be responsible to coordinate and pay all costs to provide SCE power and City owned street light. Coordinate with City staff for design and installation requirements. e. Protect or replace existing signing and striping, as required. Printed: 4/3/2017 www.CityofRC.us D1—D2 Pg48 Page 6 of 12 Project #: DRC2013-00798 Project Name: Base Line Road and Beryl Street 3 Lot Subdivision and Design Review Location: 9118 BASE LINE RD - 020224124-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 2. Beryl Street frontage improvements: a. Protect or replace existing curb and gutter and install property line adjacent sidewalk, and street trees per City Standards, as required. b. Provide "Hammerhead" driveway approach to Beryl Street. c. Protect or replace existing signing and striping, as required. d. Provide one (1) 5800 Lumen HPSV-equivalent LED street light. The street light shall be owned by the City. Developer shall be responsible to coordinate and pay all costs to provide SCE power and City owned street light. Coordinate with City staff for design and installation requirements. 3. Any existing power poles on Base Line Road and Beryl Street to be relocated, shall be paid for and coordinated by the Developer with Southern California Edison Company. 4. Reconstruct access ramp at the northeast corner of Base Line Road and Beryl Street to comply with current ADA requirements. The City's Standard Drawing 102 access ramp, does not comply with current ADA requirements. The City is in the process of updating our standards however no time frame yet exactly when this will be done. Therefore a detail will have to be added to the street improvement plan showing the design details, elevations, and grades of the access ramp to substantiate they comply with ADA requirements. 5. Install private landscaping and irrigation systems in the parkways adjacent to side yards along Base Line Road and Beryl Street. 6. Corner property line cutoff shall be dedicated to the City per City Standards. Standard Conditions of Approval 7. 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. 8. 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. 9. Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval Printed: 413/2017 vnvw.CilyofRC.us Page 7 of 12 D1—D2 Pg49 Project #: DRC2013-00798 Project Name: Base Line Road and Beryl Street 3 Lot Subdivision and Design Review Location: 9118 BASE LINE RD - 020224124-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 1. 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. 2. 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. 3. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall obtain a Waste Discharge Identification Number (WDID). 4. 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. 5. 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. 6. 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. 7. 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. 8. 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.. 9. 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. 10.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: 4/3/2017 wwva.CityofRC.us Page 8 of 12 D1—D2 Pg50 Project #: DRC2013-00798 Project Name: Base Line Road and Beryl Street 3 Lot Subdivision and Design Review Location: 9118 BASE LINE RD - 020224124-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 11. 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. 12.It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off -site drainage easements prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 13. 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. 14. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall implement City Standards for on -site construction where possible, and provide details for all work not covered by City Standard Drawings. 15. Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the, latest adopted California Plumbing Code. 16. The final grading and drainage plan shall show existing topography a minimum of 100-feet beyond project boundary. 17. The applicant shall provide a grading agreement and grading bond for all cut and fill combined exceeding 5,000 cubic yards prior to issuance of a grading permit. The grading agreement and bond shall be approved by the Building and Safety Official. 18. This project shall comply with the accessibility requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. 19. 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". 20. 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; Ill) 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. Printed:-0/3/2g17 www.CityofRC.us Page 9 of 12 DI—D2 Pg51 Project #: DRC2013-00798 Project Name: Base Line Road and Beryl Street 3 Lot Subdivision and Design Review Location: 9118 BASE LINE RD - 020224124-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 21. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy the engineer of record shall certify the functionality of the storm water quality management plan (WQMP) best management practices (BMP) devices. 22. Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WQMP shall include a copy of the project Conditions of Approval. 23. The land 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. 24. 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. 25. Reciprocal access easements for all parcels and maintenance agreements ensuring joint maintenance of all storm water quality structural/treatment best management practices (BMP) devices, 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 issuance a grading permit. 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. 26. Prior to issuance of a wall permit, on engineered combination garden/retaining walls along the property boundary the structural calculations for the wall shall assume a level toe/heel at the adjacent off -site property (i.e. a manufactured slope is not present). This shall be shown in the typical sections of the grading and drainage plan. 27. 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. 28. 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. 29. 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: 4/3/2oi7 w .CityofRC.us Page 70 of 2 D1—D2 Pg52 Project #: DRC2013-00798 Project Name: Base Line Road and Beryl Street 3 Lot Subdivision and Design Review Location: 9118 BASE LINE RD - 020224124-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 30. The land/property owner shall provide an inspection report on a biennial basis for the underground infiltration chambers 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. 31. 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". 32. 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". 33. 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. 34. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall obtain a signed and notarized letter from the adjacent property owner(s) for ALL work proposed on the adjacent property. The letter shall be scanned and pasted onto the permitted grading plan set. The letter shall show on either the title sheet or a detail sheet of the grading and drainage plan set. 35. 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. 36. As structural storm water treatment devices (commonly referred to as BMP's) are proposed in the rear yards of the residential lots, the developer/applicant is conditioned to provide access easement(s) in favor of the City of Rancho Cucamonga to allow City staff access for inspections of the structural storm water treatment devices prior to approval of the Final Map. Said easements may be shown on the Final Map, the Parcel Map or by a separate easement document. As an alternative, the applicant may set up a homeowner's association (HOA) for the inspection and maintenance of the structural storm water treatment devices. If an HOA is set up, a copy of the HOA CC&R's shall be recorded and included in the Water Quality Management Plan prior to recordation of the Memorandum of Agreement of Storm Water Quality Management Plan. Printed: 4/3/2017 www.CityofRC.us Page 11 of 12 D1—D2 Pg53 Project #: DRC2013-00798 Project Name: Base Line Road and Beryl Street 3 Lot Subdivision and Design Review Location: 9118 BASE LINE RD - 020224124-0000 Project Type: Minor Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. - Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 37. 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. 38. 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. 39. 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. 40. 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: 4l3l2017 www.CityofRC.us Page 12 0(12 D1—D2 Pg54 STAFF REPORT DATE: April 26, 2017 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Candyce Burnett, City Planner INITIATED BY: Tom Grahn, Associate Planner SUBJECT: TIME EXTENSION DRC2017-00249 - PACIFIC SUMMIT -FOOTHILL, LLC - A request to allow for a one (1) year time extension of a previously approved 8-lot Tentative Tract Map (SUBTT16605) residential subdivision for condominium purposes on 21 acres of land in the Mixed Use (MU) District, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and Pacific Electric Trail —APN: 0207-101-13, -31, -34, and -41. On April 12, 2006, a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was adopted by the Planning Commission for Tentative Tract 16605. Per CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no further environmental review or Negative Declaration is required for subsequent projects or minor revisions to projects within the scope of the previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Time Extension DRC2017-00249 through adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval with conditions. BACKGROUND: On April 12, 2006 the Planning Commission took the following actions: Recommended to the City Council approval of the following applications related to the project site: General Plan Amendment DRC2004-00339 — A request to amend the General Plan to allow the development of land that contains a 30 percent slope. Development Code Amendment DRC2004-00352 — A request to amend the Development Code to allow the development of the land that contains a 30 percent slope. Approved the following applications contingent upon City Council approval of the above applications: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605 — A residential subdivision of 8 lots for condominium purposes (206 units) on 21 acres of land. Design Review DRC2003-00637 — The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for 206 condominiums on 21 acres of land. D3—Pg1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TIME EXTENSION DRC2017-00249 — PACIFIC SUMMIT -FOOTHILL, LLC April 26, 2017 Page 2 o Variance DRC2005-01061 — A request to reduce the parking lot setback from 45 feet minimum to 10 feet to allow improvements to an existing parking lot for the Sycamore Inn Restaurant. o Minor Development Review DRC2004-00826 — Parking lot, loading area modifications and covered patio area at the Historic Sycamore Inn Restaurant. On June 21, 2006, the City Council subsequently approved the General Plan and Development Code Amendment applications. Development Code Amendment DRC2004-00352 was incorporated into Development Code Section 17.52.020(E) thereby providing an exception to the prohibition of development on slopes of 30 percent and over provided certain conditions are satisfied. General Plan Amendment DRC2004-00339 was not incorporated into the 2010 General Plan update. The entitlement applications related to the Tentative Tract Map (Design Review DRC2003-00637, Variance DRC2005-01061, and Minor Development Review DRC2004-00826) expired on April 6, 2011. No time extensions for these applications were requested nor could they be granted as the option to extend the approval period for these types of applications was not available prior to 2012. On March 23, 2016, the Planning Commission approved a one (1) year time extension for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605 that extended the approval period of the map to April 12, 2017. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Surroundinq Land Use and Zoning: North - Condominiums and single-family homes; Medium (M) Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre) and Low (L) Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) South - Office, commercial, and condominiums; Mixed Use (MU) District and Medium (M) Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre) East - Route 66 Trailhead and condominiums; Medium (M) Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre) West - Sycamore Inn Restaurant and commercial; Mixed Use (MU) District General Plan Designations: Project Site - Mixed Use North - Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) and Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) South - Mixed Use and Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) East - Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) West - Mixed Use C. Site Characteristics: The project site contains approximately 21.0 acres of a generally irregular configuration situated to the north and east of the Sycamore Inn Restaurant. Slopes of varying gradients cover a large portion of the project area, with 32 percent of the site having slopes of 30 percent and greater. The majority of the site has been disturbed and replanted with non-native species; numerous mature trees are located in the northwestern portion of the site. Significant visual features that frame the site are the historic Sycamore Inn on the west, the Red Hill Bluff to the north, and Foothill Boulevard and the Pacific Electric Trail to the south and east. D3—Pg2 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TIME EXTENSION DRC2017-00249 — PACIFIC SUMMIT -FOOTHILL, LLC April 26, 2017 Page 3 ANALYSIS: General: This application involves a request to extend the approval period of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605 for one (1) additional year. Upon the initial approval of SUBTT16605 on April 12, 2006, the approval period was for a duration of 3 years and was set to expire on April 12, 2009. Subsequently, this map was subject to one (1) discretionary time extension and several automatic time extensions, granted through Senate and Assembly Bills, as shown in the table below. The most recent time extension occurred on March 23, 2016 when the Planning Commission approved Time Extension DRC2015-01110 extending the approval period for 1-year to April 12, 2017. 'Approving Authorityr APProval/Extehslom ilApproval" dd,f 4 l a Approval Date„ :Expiration, , ate;; Initial Approval Planning Commission PC Resolution 06-38 3-Years Aril 12, 2006 April 12, 2009 Senate Bill 1185 Automatic Extension 1-Year Aril 12, 2009 Aril 12, 2010 Assembly Bill 333 Automatic Extension 2-Years Aril 12, 2010 Aril 12, 2012 Assembly Bill 208 Automatic Extension 2-Years Aril 12, 2012 April 12, 2014 Assembly Bill 116 Automatic Extension 2 Years Aril 12, 2014 Aril 12, 2016 Time Extension DRC2015-01110 Planning Commission PC Resolution 16-16 1-Year March 23, 2016 April 12, 2017 Time Extension Planning Commission DRC2017-00249 1-Year Aril 26, 2017 April 12, 2018 Per the Subdivision Map Act, Section 66463.5(c), "prior to the expiration of an approved or conditionally approved tentative map, upon the application by the subdivider to extend the map, the map shall automatically be extended for 60 days or until the application for the extension is approved, conditionally approved, or denied, whichever comes first." Thus, although the expiration date for SUBTT16605 was on April 12, 2017, the approval of the map is still valid as the time extension request was submitted in a timely manner prior to the expiration date. Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605 is a valid subdivision, and no changes have occurred to the project site since the map was previously approved and there are no changed circumstances related to its subdivision. Therefore, a time extension of the duration of the approval for the map can be approved. Per the City's Subdivision Ordinance, the Planning Commission can grant time extensions in 12-month increments for up to an additional 5 years (beyond the original 3-year approval period) for a maximum of 8 years from the original time approval. This application is for a second 1-year time extension request, which would set the expiration date to April 12, 2018. Including the previously mentioned time extensions, the maximum approval period of this project would be up to 15 years from the date of approval (final expiration on April 12, 2021). As noted previously, the approvals for the related entitlement applications have expired and are no longer viable. Although SUBTT16605 conforms to all minimum development standards for the Mixed Use (MU) District, it only allows for the subdivision of the project site and not its development. All future development of the site will require the approval of entitlement applications (i.e., General Plan Amendment, Design Review, Variance, Tree Removal Permit, etc.) that will be subject to Planning Commission and/or City Council review and approval. The applicant has submitted applications to modify the map (revising parcel size, number of parcels, etc.) and Design Review DRC2012-00672 to allow for the subdivision and future development of D3—Pg3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TIME EXTENSION DRC2017-00249 — PACIFIC SUMMIT -FOOTHILL, LLC April 26, 2017 Page 4 the project site. These applications will be considered at a future advertised public hearing before the Planning Commission. Environmental Assessment: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration on April 16, 2006 in connection with the City's approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project unless: (i) substantial changes are proposed to the project that indicate new or more severe impacts on the environment; (ii) substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under which the project was previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts; or (iii) new important information shows the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered; or (iv) additional mitigation measures are now feasible to reduce impacts or different mitigation measures can be imposed to substantially reduce impacts. The previous project contemplated the subdivision of the project site into 8 lots for the development of a 206-unit condominium project and the Time Extension for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605 is consistent with that approval. Staff further finds that the project will not have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration, will not have more severe effects than previously analyzed, and that additional or different mitigation measures are not required to reduce the impacts of the project to a level of less than significant. There are no new effects from the subdivision of the property that were not discussed or analyzed or evaluated in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration. FISCAL IMPACT: The four (4) vacant parcels making up the project site are currently assessed $14,016.99 annually in property tax, with a City share of $716.24. As the previously approved entitlement applications have all expired, this amount is not expected to change absent the approval of new entitlement applications for the project site. COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: Although a specific current City Council goal does not apply to the application, the time extension request 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 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. CB:TG/Is EXHIBITS: Exhibit A - Aerial Photo Exhibit B - Site Utilization Map Exhibit C - Time Extension DRC2015-01110 Planning Commission Staff Report dated March 23, 2016 D3—Pg4 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TIME EXTENSION DRC2017-00249 — PACIFIC SUMMIT -FOOTHILL, LLC April 26, 2017 Page 5 Exhibit D - Planning Commission Resolution of Approval No. 16-16 for DRC2015- 01110 Exhibit E - Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605 Planning Commission Staff Report dated April 12, 2006 Exhibit F - Planning Commission Resolution of Approval No. 06-38 for SUBTT16605 Resolution of Approval for Time Extension DRC2017-00249 D3—Pg5 m x MEET 2 —T — —E�—----------------- 7----------------------------- HSHEET 3 ------------ 101 aP SUBJECT SITE LSt!tLT 4 ------------------ I 1 = 1,, I— =l —� 4 IIIf J- \. Iac,[2mvnv<as m"� A SHEET 5 ------------------------- COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO RADIUS MAP TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 16605 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA I w 5 BOOK 0207 PAGE 01 i 11 i. BOOK 0207 PAGE 11 BOOK 0207 PAGE 10 PAGE 01 1 BOOK 0207 PAGE 10 SUBJECT SITE SEE SHEET 4 BOOK 0207 PAGE 05 �oo l-02 Oq 9O �S BOOK 0207 PAGE 51 BOOK 0207 PAGE 10 COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO RADIUS MAP TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 16605 Z rs 5 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA ~N W Lu iN BOOK 0207 PAGE 63 i P 'BOOK0207PAGEN ae QPG� �Q + 0 000 0 PG0 Q 6T cp BOOK 0207 PAGE 0 r 6A 1 P� GE B008O0,- 7 oryOQO .. BOOK 0207 PAGE 10 gm, BOOK 0207 PAGE 72 BOOK 0207 PAGE 64 SUBJECT SITE BOOK 0207 PAGE 10 SEE SHEET 5 COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO RADIUS MAP TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 16605 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 3 w 5 i BOOK 0207 PAGE 11 BOOK 0207 PAGE 12 BOOK 0207PAGE 12 O�O,�pP 0 SEE SHEET 2 SUBJECT SITE e AGF 10 BOOK0207PArE 11 - BOOK 0207 PAGES uj X ..- 0) �S1 . BOO 0207 AGE 12, PPG,:_ W �Ot OOK n W'^ 9 ¢ v! mQJ a 0 COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO RADIUS MAP TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 16605 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 4 w 5 1 SUBJECT 0GOK020�PPGE65 1,1 t. V uj a - t Iv1 .i BOOK 0207 PAGE 65 BOOK 0207 PAGE 20 SEE SHEET 3 20 )7 PAGE B6 BOOK 0207 PAGE 67 BOOK U07 PAGE 21 BOOK M07 PAGE 21 COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO I_"n RADIUS MAP 'a'd TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 16605 5 6 5 RANCHO CUCAMONGA,CA STAFF REPORT PLANNING DEPARTMENT ri DATE: March 23, 2016 RANCHO TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission CUCAMONGA FROM: Candyce Burnett, Planning Director BY: Tom Grahn, Associate Planner SUBJECT: TIME EXTENSION DRC2015-01110 - PACIFIC SUMMIT -FOOTHILL, LLC - A request to allow for a one (1) year time extension of a previously approved 8-lot Tentative Tract Map (SUBTT16605) residential subdivision for condominium purposes on 21 acres of land in the Mixed Use (MU) District, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trail — APN: 0207-101-13. On April 12, 2006, a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was adopted by the Planning Commission for Tentative Tract 16605. Per CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no further environmental review or Negative Declaration is required for subsequent projects or minor revisions to projects within the scope of the previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Time Extension DRC2015-01110 through adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval with conditions. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Condominiums and single-family homes; Medium (M) Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre) and Low (L) Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) --South---Office,—eommerc4at,—and-condomini u m"laced-Use-(MU)-Districtand-Medium-(M) Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre) East - Route 66 Trailhead and condominiums; Medium (M) Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre) West - Sycamore Inn Restaurant and commercial; Mixed Use (MU) District B. General Plan Designations: Project Site - Mixed Use North - Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) and Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) South - Mixed Use and Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) East - Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) West - Mixed Use C. Site Characteristics: The project site is approximately 21.0 acres in size and is generally irregular in configuration situated to the north and east of the Sycamore Inn Restaurant. Slopes of varying gradients cover a large portion of the project area, with 32 percent of the site having slopes of 30 percent and greater. The majority of the site has been disturbed and replanted with non-native species; numerous mature trees are located in the northwestern portion of the site. Significant visual features that frame the site are the historic Sycamore Inn on the west, the Red Hill Bluff to the north, and Foothill Boulevard and the Pacific Electric Trail to the south and east. EXHIBIT C D3—Pg12 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TIME EXTENSION DRC2015-011 10 — PACIFIC SUMMIT -FOOTHILL, LLC March 23, 2016 Page 2 ANALYSIS: A. Background: On April 12, 2006 the Planning Commission took the following actions: Recommended to the City Council approval of the following applications related to the project site: o General Plan Amendment DRC2004-00339 — A request to amend the General Plan to allow the development of land that contains a 30 percent slope. o Development Code Amendment DRC2004-00352 — A request to amend the Development Code to allow the development of land that has slope conditions of 30 percent or greater when located south of Banyan Street and satisfies additional conditions. Approved the following applications contingent upon City Council approval of the above applications: o Tentative Tract 16605 — A residential subdivision of 8 lots for condominium purposes (206 units) on 21 acres of land. o Design Review DRC2003-00637 — The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for 206 condominiums on 21 acres of land. o Variance DRC2005-01061 —A request to reduce the parking lot setback from 45 feet minimum to 10 feet to allow improvements to an existing parking lot for the Sycamore Inn Restaurant. o Minor Development Review DRC2004-00826 — Parking lot, loading area modifications and covered patio area at the Historic Sycamore Inn Restaurant. On June 21, 2006, the City Council subsequently approved the General Plan and Development Code Amendment applications. Development Code Amendment DRC2004- 00352 was incorporated into Development Code Section 17.52.020(E) thereby providing an exception to the prohibition of development on slopes 30 percent and over, provided.the property is located south of Banyan Street and certain conditions are satisfied. In 2010 the General Plan was updated and at that time the General Plan Amendment (DRC2004-00339) was not incorporated into the update. Future development of the site will require a new General Plan Amendment to be submitted and approved prior to approval of development of the site. The entitlement applications related to the Tentative Tract (i.e., Design Review DRC2003- 00637, Variance DRC2005-01061, and Minor Development Review DRC2004-00826) expired on April 6, 2011. No time extensions for these applications were requested or granted. B. General: This application involves a request to extend the approval period of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605 for one (1) additional year. Upon the initial approval of SUBTT16605 on April 12, 2006, the approval period was for a duration of 3 years and was D3—Pg13 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TIME EXTENSION DRC2015-01110 — PACIFIC SUMMIT -FOOTHILL, LLC March 23, 2016 Page 3 C. set to expire on April 12, 2009. However, since the tract was approved, the State Legislature passed a series of Assembly/Senate Bills automatically extending the approval period of various active tentative maps throughout the State. Based on these legislative actions, SIB 1185 extended the approval period 1-year to April 12, 2010, AB 333 extended the approval period 2-years to April 12, 2012, AB 208 extended the approval period 2-years to April 12, 2014, and AB 116 extended the approval period 2-years to April 12, 2016. Based upon these automatic extensions, the current expiration date of SUBTT16605 is April 12, 2016. Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605 is a valid subdivision map approval and no changes have occurred to the project site from what was previously approved and there are no changed circumstances related to its subdivision, so a Time Extension of the subdivision map can be approved. The related entitlement applications (i.e., GPA, DR, VAR, MDR, etc.) have expired and are no longer viable development opportunities. Although SUBTT16605 conforms to all minimum development standards for the Mixed Use (MU) District, it only allows for the subdivision of the project site. All future development of the site will require the review and approval of a General Plan Amendment to allow the development of land that contains a 30 percent slope, and any related entitlement application (i.e., Design Review, Conditional Use Permit, etc.) will be subject to Planning Commission and/or City Council review and approval. The applicant has acquired 3 additional acres west of the Sycamore Inn and submitted Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605 Modification and Design Review DRC2012-00672 applications to allow for the subdivision and future development of the project site. These applications will be considered at a future advertised public hearing before the Planning Commission. Approving the Time Extension request will allow the applicant to record the original subdivision map should the Planning Commission and City Council not approve the revised applications. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQK) April 16, 2006 in connection with the City's approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project unless: (i) substantial changes are proposed to the project that indicate new or more severe impacts on the environment; (ii) substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under which the project was previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts; or (iii) new important information shows the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered; or (iv) additional mitigation measures are now feasible to reduce impacts or different mitigation measures can be imposed to substantially reduce impacts. The previous project contemplated the subdivision of the project site into 8 lots for the development of a 206-unit condominium project and the Time Extension for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605 is consistent with that approval. Staff further finds that the project will not have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration, will not have more severe effects than previously analyzed, and that additional or different mitigation measures are not required to reduce the impacts of the project to a level of less than significant. There are no new effects from the subdivision of the property that were not discussed or analyzed or evaluated in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration. D3—Pg14 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TIME EXTENSION DRC2015-01110 — PACIFIC SUMMIT -FOOTHILL, LLC March 23, 2016 Page 4 CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site. No comments have been received in response to these notifications. Respectfully submitted, 1 � L� Candyce B r ett Planning Director CB:TG/Is Attachments: Exhibit A - Aerial Photo Exhibit B - Site Utilization Map Exhibit C - Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605 Planning Commission Staff Report (April 12, 2006) Exhibit D - Planning Commission Resolution of Approval No. 06-38 for SUBTT16605 (April 12, 2006) Resolution of Approval for Time Extension DRC2015-01110 D3—Pg15 RESOLUTION NO. 16-16 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TIME EXTENSION DRC2015-01110 — A REQUEST TO ALLOW FOR A ONE (1) YEAR TIME EXTENSION OF A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED 8-LOT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (SUBTT16605) RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES (206 UNITS) ON 21 ACRES OF LAND IN THE MIXED USE (MU) DISTRICT, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, BETWEEN RED HILL COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE AND PACIFIC ELECTRIC TRAIL AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 020710113. A. Recitals 1. Pacific Summit -Foothill, LLC, filed an application for the extension of the approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 16605, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Tentative Tract Map Time Extension request is referred to as "the application." 2. On April 12, 2006, this Commission adopted Resolution No. 06-38, thereby approving the application subject to specific conditions and time limits. 3. A State allowed extension (per SB 1185) extended the approval period 1-year to April 12. 2010. 4. A State allowed extension (per AB 333) extended the approval period 2-years to April 12, 2012. 5. A State allowed extension (per AB 208) extended the approval period 2-years to April 12, 2014. 6. A State allowed extension (per AB 116) extended the approval period 2-years to April 12, 2016; 7. On March 23, 2016, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 8. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing on March 23, 2016, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: EXHIBIT D D3—Pg16 PLANNING COMMISSION r\ESOLUTION NO. 16-16 TIME EXTENSION DRC2015-01110 - PACIFIC SUMMIT -FOOTHILL, LLC March 23, 2016 Page 2 a. The project site contains approximately 21.0 acres of a generally irregular configuration having a topography with a 30 percent or greater slope, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trail, and is presently vacant; andThe project site is located in the Mixed Use (MU) District; and b. The property to the north contains Condominiums and single-family homes in the Medium (M) Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre) and Low (L) Residential District (2- 4 dwelling units per acre), the property to the south contains office, commercial, and condominiums uses in the Mixed Use (MU) District and Medium (M) Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), the property to the east contains Route 66 Trailhead and condominiums in the Medium (M) Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), and the property to the west contains the Sycamore Inn Restaurant and other commercial land uses in the Mixed Use (MU) District; and C. The application contemplates the subdivision of the subject parcel into eight (8) lots for condominium purposes (206 units). The applicant does not intend to construct the homes at this time; and d. The subdivision of the project site conforms to all applicable development standards applicable to property in the Mixed Use (MU) District. The Development Code does not identify minimum lot area, minimum lot width, or minimum lot depth requirements; and e. The subdivision of the project site for residential condominium purposes (and its eventual development) does not conflict with the Land Use policies of the General Plan, and will provide for development within the Mixed Use (MU) District in a manner consistent with the General Plan. All future development of the site will require the review and approval of various entitlement applications (i.e., Design Review, Conditional Use Permit, etc.), and will be subject to P_tanningCommission_and/nr_City-Cnunc review_and-approvaL—Further,_Hillside_Devefopmmnt-- criteria of the General Plan and Development Code were not intended to apply as uniformly as with a residential designated parcel from a slope density calculation stand point. The intent of the Hillside Development density restrictions was to address natural slopes, particularly those located north of Banyan Street. The project site contains a 21.0 acre fractured site surrounded by developed land, which is located approximately 2.5 miles south of Banyan Street. The project site has been significantly altered over time through the development of surrounding properties (Foothill Boulevard, Pacific Electric Trail, water reservoir, and water tank with graded access roads) that the site is no longer in a natural condition; and f. The General Plan Amendment associated with this original approval (DRC2004- 00339) to allow the development of land that contains a 30 percent slope was not incorporated into the 2010 General Plan Update; and g. The Development Code Amendment associated with this original approval (DRC2004-00352) to Section 17.52.020(E) of the Development Code to allow the development of the land that contains a 30 percent slope provided certain conditions are met; and h. The applications related to the approval of Tentative Tract (i.e., Design Review DRC2003-00637, Variance DRC2005-01061, and Minor Development Review DRC2004-00826) expired on April 6, 2011, and no time extensions for these applications were requested or granted; and D3-Pg17 PLANNING COMMISSIONti.cSOLUTION NO. 16-16 1 TIME EXTENSION DRC2015-01110 — PACIFIC SUMMIT -FOOTHILL, LLC March 23, 2016 Page 3 I. This application is a request to extend the approval period of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605 for one (1) additional year. Upon the initial approval of SUBTT16605 on April 12, 2006, the approval period was for a duration of 3 years and was set to expire on April 12, 2009. Since SUBTT16605 was approved, the State Legislature passed a series of Assembly/Senate Bills automatically extending the approval period of various active tentative maps throughout the State. Based on these legislative actions, SB 1185 extended the approval period 1-year to April 12, 2010, AB 333 extended the approval period 2-years to April 12, 2012, AB 208 extended the approval period 2-years to April 12, 2014, and AB 116 extended the approval period 2-years to April 12, 2016; and j. The applicant has submitted a revised Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605 Modification, Design Review DRC2012-00672 to allow for the subdivision and future development of the project site; these applications will be considered at a future advertised public hearing before the Planning Commission; and k. All lots will have access to a public right-of-way. Access to the project site will be via Foothill Boulevard and will include all public right-of-way improvements including pavement, sidewalk, curb, and gutter on the north side of Foothill Boulevard as well as all rights - of -way improvements on interior streets. 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 previously approved Tentative Tract Map for residential condominium purposes and the associated Time Extension for the Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the City's current General Plan, specific plans, ordinances, plans, codes, and policies since all future ——dev-elopmenLoLthe—site-v ULaquire t _r[iew—ancLapprovaLof_vari2us—entit[ement-applications (i.e., Design Review, Conditional Use Permit, etc.), and will be subject to Planning Commission and/or City Council review and approval. The proposed Time Extension for the Tentative Tract Map to subdivide the property into eight (8) parcels and is consistent with the development district of the project site; and b. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of the proposed subdivision. The surrounding property to the north is developed with condominiums and single- family homes, the property to the south contains office, commercial, and condominiums uses, the property to the east contains Route 66 Trailhead and condominiums, and the property to the west contains the Sycamore Inn Restaurant and other commercial land uses; and c. The proposed subdivision, 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 proposed project is to subdivide the property into eight (8) parcels — no development of the site is proposed; and d. The proposed subdivision complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. The proposed subdivision meets all standards outlined in the Development Code and the design and development standards and policies of the Planning Commission and the City; and D3—Pg18 PLANNING COMMISSION r ESOLUTION NO. 16-16 TIME EXTENSION DRC2015-01110 — PACIFIC SUMMIT -FOOTHILL, LLC March 23, 2016 Page 4 e. The extension is within the time limits established by State law and local ordinance. State law allows for one (1) year time extensions. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the application, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that no subsequent or supplemental environmental document is required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in connection with the review and approval of this application based upon the following findings and determinations: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration in April 12, 2006 in connection with the City's approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project unless: (i) substantial changes are proposed to the project that indicate new or more severe impacts on the environment; (ii) substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under which the project was previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts; or (iii) new important information shows the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered; or (iv) additional mitigation measures are now feasible to reduce impacts or different mitigation measures can be imposed to substantially reduce impacts; and b. The Planning Commission finds, in connection with the DRC2015-01110, that substantial changes to the project or the circumstances surrounding the project have not occurred which would create new or more severe impacts than those evaluated in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration. The previous project contemplated the subdivision of the project site for the development of a 206-unit condominium project and the Time Extension for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605 is consistent with that approval. Staff further finds that the project will not have on.e_or more signiftcant-effefts_not discussed_in-the-praviousMtigated-legativa_Dee4aration not — have more severe effects than previously analyzed, and that additional or different mitigation measures are not required to reduce the impacts of the project to a level of less than significant. There are no new effects from the subdivision of the property that were not discussed or analyzed or evaluated in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration; and C. Based on these findings and all evidence in the record, the Planning Commission concurs with the staff determination that no additional environmental review is required pursuant to CEQA in connection with the City's consideration of Time Extension DRC2015-01110. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3 and 4 above, this Commission hereby grants a time extension for: Tentative Mao Applicant Expiration SUBTT16605 Pacific Summit -Foothill April 12, 2017 6. All applicable Conditions of Approval in Resolution No. 06-38 for SUBTT16605 shall apply to Time Extension DRC2015-01110. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. D3—Pg19 PLANNING COMMISSION ncSOLUTION NO. 16-16 TIME EXTENSION DRC2015-01110 — PACIFIC SUMMIT -FOOTHILL, LLC March 23, 2016 Page 5 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 23RD DAY OF MARCH 2O16. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: -Ni) Ravenel Wimberly, Chairman ATTEST: aP, Candy urnett, 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 23rd day of March 2016, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: FLETCHER,MACIAS, MUNOZ, OAXACA, WIMBERLY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE, ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: NONE D3—Pg20 AnCHO CUCAMONGA Staff Report DATE April 12, 2006 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Dan Coleman, Acting City Planner BY: Larry Henderson AICP, Principal Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2004-00$39 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - An application to amend the General Plan to allow the development of land that contains a 30 percent slope within a mixed use area within Subarea 1 of the Foothill Districts, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and Southern Pacific Road Right -of -Way - APN: 0207-101-13, 01 and 34.' Related Files: Development Code Amendment DRC2004-00352, Tentative Tract SUBTT16605, Development Review DRC2003-00637, Variance DRC2005-01061, Minor Development Review DRC2004-00826, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2004-00082. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. This action will be forwarded to the City Council for final action and the date of the Public Hearing before City Council will be separately noticed. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DRC2004-00352 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - An application to amend the Development Code to allow the development of the. land that contains a 30 percent slope within a mixed -use area within Subarea 1 of the Foothill Districts, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Southern Pacific Rail Road Right -of -Way - APN: 0207-101-13, 01 and 34. Related Files: General Plan Amendment DRC2004-00339, Tentative Tract SUBTT16605, Development Review DRC2003-00637, Variance bRC2005-01061, Minor Development Review DRC2004-00826, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2004-00082. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. This action will be forwarded to the City Council for final action and the date of the Public Hearing before City Council will be separately noticed ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT SUBTT16605 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES- A residential subdivision of 8 lots for condominium purposes on 21 acres of land in the western Foothill Corridor Mixed Use area within Subarea 1 of the Foothill Districts, located on the north side of EXHIBIT E D3—Pg21 PLANNING COMMISSIONS FF REPORT DRC2004-00339/DRC2004-00352/SUBTT16605/DRC2003-00637/DRC2005-01061 /DRC2004-00826 April 12, 2006 Page 2 Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Southern Pacific Rail Road Right -of -Way - APN: 0207-101-13, 01 'and 34. Related Files: Development Code Amendment DRC2004-00352, General Plan Amendment DRC2004-00339, Development Review DRC2003.00637, Variance DRC2005-01061, Minor Development Review DRC2004-00826, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2004-00082. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00637 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for 206 condominiums on 21 acres of land in the western Foothill Boulevard Mixed Use Corridor area within Sub area 1 of the Foothill Districts, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red . Hill Country Club Drive and Southern Pacific Rail Road Right -of -Way — APN: 0207-101-13, 31 and 34. Related Files: General Plan Amendment DRC2004-00339, Development Code Amendment DRC2004-00352, Tentative Tract SUBTT16605, Variance DRC2005-01061, and Minor Development Review DRC2004-00826. VARIANCE DRC2005-01061 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - A request to reduce the parking lot setback from 45 feet minimum to 10 feet to allow improvements to an existing parking lot for the Sycamore Inn Restaurant on property located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard at the intersection of San Bernardino Road - APN: 0207-101-24. Related Files: Development Review DRC2003-00637, Tentative Tract SUBTT16605 and Minor Development Review DRC2004-00826. MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2004-00826 - CHARLES JOSEPH AS­S0­CIATES­ --Parking lot, loading area modifications and covere patio arena the Historic Sycamore Inn Restaurant, located at 8318 Foothill Boulevard - APN: 0207-101-24. Related Files: Development Review DRC2003-00637, Variance DRC2005-01061, and Tentative Tract SUBTT16605. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Proiect Density: 9.8 Dwelling Units per acre. B. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Condominiums and single-family homes designated Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) and Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units.per acre), respectively South - .Across Foothill Boulevard is developed with office and. commercial uses designated Mixed Used East - Abandoned Southern Pacific Rail Road (future Regional Trail and possible future rail) and is designated Mixed Use West - Sycamore Inn Restaurant and is designated Mixed Use. Other properties to the west are Mixed Use land use and Office/Commercial to the southwest. The Red Hill Golf course is located northwest of the project site adjacent to the Medium Density residential development D3—Pg22 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2004-00339/D RC2004-00352/SUBTT16605/DRC2003-00637/DRC2005-01061 /DRC2004-00826 April 12, 2006 Page 3 C. General Plan Designations: Project Site - Mixed Use North - Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) and Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) South - Mixed Use East - Open Space West - Mixed Use, Medium Density Residential, and Open Space D. Site Characteristics:. Slopes are a major feature of the site with over 34 percent of the site having slopes of 30 percent or gieater. A majority of the site is disturbed, and replanted with non-native species; however, there are numerous mature trees. Site features include a large, concrete drainage facility (abandoned reservoir) that has the remains of spray cans, graffiti, and dumping and the pad area for a demolished water tank. Evidence of squatters' campsites, and trash dumping is present in canyon areas. Significant visual features that frame the site are the historic Sycamore Inn on the west, the Red Hill Bluff to the north, and the abandoned Southern Pacific Railroad embankment to the east: Mature heritage trees are existing on- and off -site and are discussed in a revised Arborist Study dated February 2005, by David Evans and Associates. E. Parking Calculations: Number of Number of Square Parking Spaces Spaces Type of Use Footage Ratio Required Provided 2 bedroom condo 1,104 to 1,256 1.8/unit 206 covered 214 covered 165 open 157 open 52 guests 52 guests tandems Existing Restaurant 11,000 1/100 sq. ft. 110 167 TOTAL 533 672 Pre -Application Review: Staff referred the project to the Planning Commission on August 13, 2003, because of the scope of the project, historic sensitivity of the Sycamore Inn restaurant, and potential public controversy (Exhibit K). ANALYSIS: A. General: The project site land use designation is Mixed Use. The proposed project is the request to.construct 206 condominiums on 21 acres. The developer is proposing to construct the development on land with up to 30 percent slopes, which requires a Development Code and a General Plan Amendment. The development is anticipated to generate a ratio of 2.6 persons per unit or approximately 585 additional residents. However, growth was anticipated and is designed in accordance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Development Code, Chapter 17.32, Foothill Boulevard Districts guidelines for development of Subarea 1. D3—Pg23 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2004-00339/DRC2004-00352/SUBTT16605/DRC2003-00637/DRC2005-01061 /DRC2004-00826 April 12, 2006 Page 4 The project site has not been identified as an "Historic Resource" per the standards of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 2.24 (Historic Preservation). An Historical Assessment of the project site was conducted by Stephen R. Van Wormer fin May 1990, and revealed the following: four historic resources were identified as a result of research and field survey and include: 1) the Cucamonga Stage station site, 2) the Sycamore Inn, 3) the Red Chief Motel (now demolished), and 4) the San Bernardino Museum. Archaeological Information has noted the presence of two previously recorded historic bridges (CHS-1786-1 and CHS-1786-6) as well as the old Los Angeles to San Bernardino Road route (PS-BR-3-H) adjacent to the project boundaries. These resources are outside the project area and will not be impacted. It is noted that the Sycamore Inn site is affected from a site -specific impact, since the main access to the residential project is through the parking lot. Careful attention to the current restaurant needs of the Inn was considered with the residential design so that the economic viability of this unique historical resource is' not adversely affected. The most significant change was a shifting of the main driveway entrance on Foothill Boulevard further west in order to better align the intersection with San Bernardino Road and eliminate most of the pedestrian vehicular traffic conflict with a• majority of the Sycamore Inn parking spaces. Linocut Law & Greenspan Engineers conducted a Traffic Impact Study in July 2003. The study focused on seven intersections to determine the potential traffic impacts during the morning and evening commute peak hours (between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. on a typical weekday). The study concluded that the project would generate on a typical weekday approximately 1,283 daily two-way trips, with 96 trips (15 inbound, 81 outbound) produced in the AM peak hour and 118 trips (79 inbound, 39 outbound) produced in the PM peak hour. The results of the traffic analysis indicated that the proposed project will not adversely impact any of the seven key study intersections when compared to City of Rancho Cucamonga, City of Upland, and San Bernardino county_Congestion-Manager0enfPJarL(CME)Level of__ ervice standards and s;cinificance traffic impact criteria. The seven key study intersections currently operate, and are projected to operate with the inclusion of project traffic, at an acceptable service level during AM and PM peak commuter hours. B. General Plan and Development Code Amendment: The Mixed Use Designation in the General Plan is neither a residential nor commercial category of.the General Plan Land Use' Map. In recognition of its unique classification, it is a separate category. This is obvious since the density is not assigned per parcel but on an area wide basis subject to design and land use review. Therefore, the Hillside Development criteria of the General Plan and Development Code, such as prohibiting development where slope is, greater than 30 percent, were never intended to apply as uniformly as with a residentially designated parcel from a slope density calculation stand point. The intent of the Hillside density restrictions was to address natural slopes; in this case we have a 20 acre fractured site surrounded by developed land. In fact, the case can be made the site has been so altered (Foothill Boulevard., R.R. Line, a water reservoir, and a water tank) with graded access roads that the site is not natural as to not even being within the intent of the Hillside density requirement of the Development Code. Also, the natural drainage courses have been subject to urban runoff for years from the developed Red Hill neighborhood to the north. and therefore do not qualify as intended by the General Plan or the zoning requirements. To clarify the intent of the Hillside Requirements, text amendments to the General Plan and Development Code are contained in the attached Resolutions. D3—Pg24 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2004-00339/DRC2004-00352/SUBTT16605/DRC2003-00637/DRC2005-01061 /DRC2004-00826 April 12, 2006 Page 5 C. Tract Map and Development Review: Based on Design Review Committee input,'the project was re -designed to reduce the height of the buildings adjacent to Foothill Boulevard by changing from three-story to two-story, and re -oriented those structures 90 degrees. The design changes have resulted in a lower visual profile when viewed from Foothill Boulevard. This profile, combined with approximately 900 trees being planted throughout the project will substantially soften the visual impact along the Foothill Boulevard corridor. In addition, the remaining structures and pads were lowered several feet into the site topography to further reduce visual profile from the properties to the north. Photo exhibits have been provided that demonstrate the results of these design features. The project uses a craftsman architecture theme with gable style roofs, and cornices, consistent with the historic nature (Sycamore Inn) of the area. The retaining walls for the shared access and Sycamore Inn parking areas utilize river'rock, which are materials that will carry this theme and visual connection with the historic Sycamore Inn. The shared entryway for the Sycamore Inn and condominium project branches off in a smooth natural transition of the area to the grand entry for the clubhouse. The secondary point of access to the west of the project will be for emergency vehicles only, but provides for a nice connection to the on -site pocket park. The site has many amenities including pool and overhead shade trellis with seating located in the recreation area, recreation center with teaching kitchen, billiard and exercise area, recreational trails with benches, spa, and built-in gas barbecues throughout the site. A shade structure gazebo is also located on the west end of the.site. There is a tot lot park' near the center of the proposed condominiums. The site contains trails and pedestrian connections throughout and the buildings are literally tucked into the hillside providing for a blending of the existing contours of the site. D. Variance and Minor Development Review: Parking lot, loading area modifications, and -------covered patio area -at the Historic Sycamore -Inn Restaurant, and -the Varianbe-request.to_— reduce the parking lot setback from 45 feet minimum to 10 feet to allow improvements to the existing parking lot, are necessary to develop a shared access connection for the condominiums and the restaurant. Although the revised parking layout setback is less than the Code allows, there will be far more landscape setback area provided than currently exists on the site. In addition, the improvements will result in a complete upgrade of the landscaping and hardscape surfaces for the historic restaurant' while protecting the historical resources (building and mature sycamore trees). E. Tree Removal Permit: The site contains 71 heritage trees, including Oak, Sycamore, Pepper, Elm, and a few Eucalyptus, according to the arborist report. Although the applicant proposes to remove many of the trees, hundreds of new trees will be planted as mitigation. Out of 71 heritage trees, 44 of them are located in the northwest corner of the site, and the Site Plan has been revised to minimize disturbance in this area. Design Review Committee: The Committee reviewed the project on August 17, 2004, and requested• extensive design changes. The Committee reviewed revised plans on January 31, 2006, and unanimously recommended approval of the design plans. G. Technical Review Committee: The Committee reviewed and unanimously recommended approval of the design plans on January 31, 2006. Recommended conditions are contained in the appropriate attached resolutions. D3—Pg25 PLANNING COMMISSION'S AFF REPORT DRC2004-00339/DRC2004-00352/SUBTT1660-r,/DRC2003-00637/DRC2005-01061/DRC2004-00826 . April 12, 2006 Page 6 H. Environmental Assessment: 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 was prepared and is recommended for certification. FACTS FOR FINDING: General Plan Amendment and Development Code Amendment: The application applies to approximately 21 acres of land, basically an irregular configuration, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and Southern Pacific Road Right -of -Way, and is presently vacant. Said property is currently designated as Mixed Use; and Properties to the north are developed with condominiums and single-family homes designated Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) and Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre), respectively. South of Foothill Boulevard is designated Mixed Used and is developed with office and commercial uses. East of the site is the abandoned Southern Pacific Rail Road (future Regional Trail and possible future rail) and is designated Open Space. To the west is the Sycamore Inn Restaurant and is designated Mixed Use. Other properties to the west are Mixed Use land use and Office/Commercial to the southwest. The Red Hill Golf course is located northwest of the project site adjacent to the Medium Density residential development. Hillside Development criteria of the General Plan and Development Code were never intended to apply as uniformly as with a residential designated parcel from a slope density calculation stand point. The intent of the Hillside density restrictions was to address natural -slopes; .inlhis_case_we-have_a20-acre iraclured_site_surrounded_by-developed___ land. In fact, the site has been so altered (Foothill Boulevard, R.R. Line, a water reservoir, and a water tank) with graded access roads that the site is not natural as to not even being within the intent of the Hillside density requirement of the Development Code. Therefore, 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 This amendment promotes the goals and objectives of the Land Use Element by allowing for the implementation of the Mixed Use designation in this area; and In as much as an Office Commercial use allowed under the Mixed Use Designation would not be subject to the Hillside Density provisions of the General Plan and Development Code, but would allow a non-residential project of the same or more intense building mass, 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. D3—Pg26 PLANNING COMMISSIOWSTAFF REPORT DRC2004-00339/DRC2004-00352/SUBTT16605/DRC2003-00637/DRC200,,-01061/DRC20o4-00826 April 12, 2006 Page 7 Tentative Tract Map: The tentative tract map is designed in conformance with the Mixed Use Designation, and Hillside Development Regulations, as recommended for amendment; therefore, the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and any applicable specific plans; and The tentative tract map design and conditions of approval for improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and any applicable specific plans; and The tentative tract map and special studies included within the Initial Study demonstrate that the site is physically suitable for the type'of development proposed; and The tentative tract map and special studies included within the Initial Study support that the design of the subdivision and demonstrate it is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; and The tentative tract map is not likely to cause serious public health problems as demonstrated by the information contained within the Initial Study; and The design of the tentative tract 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. Development Review: —Subject-to-the.amendment.of ihe-Hillside_P_rovisions_gfsheSeneral-P-Ian,-the_Mixed-Use—___ designated project has demonstrated through the plans, Initial Study, and Conditions of Approval that the proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and Subject to the amendment of the Hillside Provisions of the Development Code Mixed Use designated 'Project has. demonstrated through the plans, Initial Study, and conditions of Approval that the proposed design is in accord with the objectives of the Development Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and That the proposed design is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Mixed Use designation and Hillside Regulations as recommended for amendment in the Development Code; and The Mixed Use designed project has demonstrated through the plans, Initial Study, and conditions of approval that the proposed design, 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. D3—Pg27 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2004-00339/DRC2004-00352/SUBTT16605/DRC2003-00637/DRC2005-01061 /DRC2004-00826 April 12, 2006 Page 8 Variance: Although the revised parking layout setback is less than the Code allows, there will be far more landscape setback area provided than currently exists on the site. In addition, the 'deficient setback is a common characteristic of the existing development in this section of Foothill Boulevard, therefore, the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulations would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of the Development Code. ' There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same district since the deficient setback is a common characteristic of the existing development in this section of Foothill Boulevard. That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would not deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district since the deficient setback is a common characteristic of the existing development in this section of Foothill Boulevard. That the granting of the Variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district since the deficient setback is a common characteristic of the existing development in this section of Foothill Boulevard. . That the granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity since there will be far more landscape setback area provided than currently exists on the site. In addition ----- --the -improvements -will -result-im-a-complete-upgrade-of-the- landscaping -and-hadscape___ surfaces for the Historic Restaurant while protecting the historical resources (Building and ' mature sycamore trees). NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING: A neighborhood meeting was conducted by the applicant on January 18, 2006 (Exhibit 0), and previously on February 24, 2005 (no minutes available), and on August 10, 2004 (no minutes available). CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property. owners within a 500-foot radius of the project site. Staff has received 12 letters from neighbors opposed to the project (Exhibit N), dating from January 30, 2004, through April 4, 200.6. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council for General Plan Amendment DRC2004-00339 and Development Code Amendment DRC2004-00352; and approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605, Development Review DRC2003-00637, Variance DRC2005-01061, and Minor Development Review DRC2004-00826 by. the adoption of the attached Resolutions of Approval with Conditions. D3-Pg28 PLANNING COMMISSIOIV�AFF REPORT DRC2004-00339/DRC2004-00352/SUBTT16605/DRC2003-00637/DRC2005-01061 /DRC2004-00826 April 12, 2006 Page 9 Acting City Planner DC:LJH1ma Attachments: Exhibit A - Site Utilization Map Exhibit B _ - Conceptual Landscape Plans Exhibit C - Fire Access Plan Exhibit D - Parking Lot Demolition (Minor Development Review) Exhibit E - Precise Grading Plan (Minor Development Review) Exhibit F - Parking Lot Entrance Plan (Minor Development Review) Exhibit G - Tentative Tract Map 16605 Exhibit H - Cross Sections (SUBTT16605 and DRC2004-00826 Exhibit I - Conceptual Grading/Drainage (SUBTT16605 & DRC2004-00826) Exhibit J - Building Elevations and Floor Plans Exhibit K - Pre -Application Review Comments dated August 13, 2003 . Exhibit L - Design Review.Comments dated August 17, 2004. Exhibit M - Design Review Comments dated January 31, 2005 Exhibit N - Residents Letters dated January 30, 2004, through April 4, 2006 Exhibit 0 - Neighborhood Meeting Information and Meeting Minutes Exhibit P - Applicant's Response to Letters dated April5, 2006 Exhibit Q - Initial Study Parts I and II Draft Resolution Recommending Approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2004-00339 Draft Resolution Recommending Approval of Development Code Amendment DRC2004-00352 Draft Ordinance Approving Development Code Amendment DRC2004-00352 Draft Resolution Approving Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605 Draft Resolution Approving Development Review DRC2003-00637 Draft Resolution Approving Variance DRC2005-01061 Draft Resolution Approving Minor Development Review DRC2004-00826 D3—Pg29 d W-t N ms. PPyiE�.v�mi°{ p=x sa. E At`caunsis LANDSCAPEPLAN =--= SYCAMORE VILLAS CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA a .. r ' a . seoei.re�_ 0 D3—Pg31 I SYCAMORE VILLAS _•�� e •�e en CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA �u2eeocurze.. �.'I D3-Pg32 h 'e'eTm�:yY:�`tS :1 ly a • I I � -¢-- � : sees'•. - mm Fu�: `"� EMMA alai a ti��o - �'"� WMA Um MNS ®� aj R D3—Pg33 �gt�a apR Ryaq eaa . aqa aRi g9s 1 5 a� EL i 5 MATCHLINE SEE SHEET C6.1 rr. '��t Ej•. —. i I Y + t yJ t� a tt . F � ri i� I t: 4 D3—Pg34 ' Ioo1A�I Ct IE / 1 9eRR I A •I � I /➢ �'. �. 53T-; Ip�s v •, i %TREE II lf� � r �-� � \ \ __ i���♦ ♦ M1 r. -a- .Irk PR ES 9 1 15 V&. CE - �- r f i -.e ' � 1 ! � .yam-• Pl R 1 ' {EGENU JC11M HORe. rry me ee¢ss RonPutvC Lor smmaxe ;TMi OIt+B Er GUEOIR�®. r—� NllErnroF Pg4MV ✓.SE55 unC I1KE STIIFWo CPOlSN41[ SIRWwG'- � �+ � CW>-uRln'E S,R6WG u u D3-Pg35 D3-Pg36 I THILi -04 PLEMAR D3-Pg37 t vPrassa SAN BERNAR �\ \A. .l.,.z i�et m 09 02 FOOTHI« BOU( EVARD� (.y�y{LrsrtR -- oxmo'ame,e D3-Pg38 o . (BOOR COO G9DOO tiMt �GJOM��i PMppOO ��Q ®APR..-f 1 W API - >-101-111'.�e ♦ � x01�101—]1 1 xw-total LOTO ^ c I mw-L n LOT n�acrew a , D3—Pg39 D3-Pg40 T— sScz vJ slcnon x-r' s19mv 4' FIRE ACCESS PATH RATIO PI�A34�FCq C:V20 MG® .�—`tries H@�iID 4( Mir Ha► & 'ibl�2II13I1�InC. m , D3—Pg41 n 1 i D3-Pg43 •.4V1 I SEE 5,� b _ / _,_SAN BERNARDINO RO.:_• YAR0=Ey _ -''�. x-1 . :. SEECSaF7IEy4Y,. i ,•'1 T r� SEE SHEET �c SEE SHEE ES� • a�I , a v7 Cd.T i NEF Hall&Fbreman,Inc. m`".^�M°' v"'•.. ,m LEGEND , N � w �y N � ` O •PAD ELEVATIONS 8' EELOw c E, D3—Pg44 N Jry�_ Pi�n3®Ftft CAAQ:O 1101Q:9 PAEPPI�BY� -••�•` NEW Hall & �breman, Inc. LEGEND —.d PAO ELE`/ATOaG 6" 6ElW� F.L D3—Pg45 m x L1 a vXT2RrOA MATARIAL4; � NORTH ELEVATION xore: raw mexirecrime. onexsm aerxeex mmaxr rnamxos. arexe r. wr mcrosao w rxc nonrx nar.nox EAST ELEVATION BLDG "rl" EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS SYCAMORE VILLAS SVBTn6606 DRCR 200340637 rw wnww Rancho Cufamongs, GIIlaml. 01 D3-Pg46 9 ®NW HOYO 4 Palm � o e m® WEST ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATION MEW FROM FOOTHILL) BLDG "A" EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS SYCXMORE•VILLAS SUMT16603 DRCN 200M0607 Rancho Cucamonga, California Nl9'( Ott1P� rove O D3-Pg47 IST FLOOR 0 _O . BLDG "A" COM4PO—SITE PLANS SYCAMORE VILLAS SUBM6605 "ar«ar,F rci a^�� Reveho Cunmov¢q Cepfomla DRCY Z003-00637 X { ]ND FLOOR ROOF ME���Immm �6AAr'�l11 ��1�� 1ST FLOOR - - - '•. 3RD FLOOR BLDG "B" COMPOSITE PLANS SYCAMORE VILLAS Sv9YT16603- ru wnmw Raovhv Cuumov6e, C�11[vnla DRC# 2D03.006n D3-Pg49 n F. EAST ELEVATION o »�_n SOUTH ELEVATION (VIEW FROM FOOTHILL) 13LDG "B" EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS SYCAMORE VILLAS s�arri66os DRC# 2002.00637 rw w° me. Reecho Cucvmavgv, Cvlllorvly O narma, 67 KTaymv.r„� r— 'cd_ _ O D3—Pg50 �o GYIA q0Y® YiM1 Wu�� O wvavm 9 WEST ELEVATION NORTH ELEVATION �iNvrte4 n^• ' un BLDG "B" EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS SYCAMORE. VILLAS SUMT16605 Ravcho Cuumongv, C.Ilforvla DRCR 2000.00607 a a D3-Pg51 F-c pgparoA MATp$IA1.9: EAST ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATION (VIEW FROM POOTHILLI BLDG "C" EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS SYCAMORE VILLAS suBm66o6 °"Ywu nw DRCM 2003-00637 ru.>nww R°Reh° CV°°m°R91 Call(omle D3—Pg52 WEST ELEVATION (a ENTRY ADJACENT TO REC ELDO) WEST ELEVATION' NORTH ELEVATION BLDG "C" EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS SYCAMORE VILLAS svarnssos DRC# 20000007 r¢ an mm Rancbo Cucamooss, Callfomla D-I D3-Pg53 IST FLOOR o �tii- ❑ BLDG "D" COMPOSITE PLANS SYCAMORE VILLAS sverr 66os K ; ua" DRC#2003006P Rnncno cuwmosa..'uvro.nl. ®r• _co a D3—Pg54 3RO FLOOR / ROOF PLAN IST FLOOR BLDG "C" COMPOSITE PLANS SYCAMORE VILLAS SUM16605 URCY 100Y006n Rancho Cuumoo ga, GII[omia L_ Q —I D3-Pg55 3 L EAST ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATION MEW FROM FOOTHILL) BLDG "D" EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS SYCAMORE VILLAS SUTM6605 DRC# 2005.00637 Revch. C4umovg0. C litoml4 �1 IlT FO1IXP�� ' �..1!IIC:V'Ni n D3-Pg56 x z 1 (-I z L EMgalox MwTgn�wi §; EAST ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATION MM FROM FOOTHILL) BI DG "D" EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS SYCAMORE. VILLAS suern66as DRCI 2003 W637 •.m wn u..n. Revchv Cuwmovg4 CdlTomie R D3—Pg57 ►I W WEST ELEVATION ❑ -=vim o �in�:.'= rl�� rir. 1:..�iu,� 'luir•� uiu .�uiu= � �l�i���l 1'3 '•I[ry�pP��H�■ _ma., 87:IN'C= n n ■ n IYI L•i _ yr■ _ n=■ - nl!3 1YIIIY u n �■n ■ I• Nj n gill ■ NORTH ELEVATION VIEW PROM FOOTHILL) BLDG "D" EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS cwm xavu SYCAMORE VILLAS SUBT'I76605 rw an ouv Rancho Cvicemxnxe. Cd1r..I. DRCY MOJ 0063]— ❑ min von ❑ D3-Pg58 t X � 71: n G :c— n i� ': r I !�I i. /� i71;IPS a �_1lip1,E''T�" ]RD FLOOR / ROOF PLAN 2ND FLOOR BLDG "E" COMPOSITE PLANS SYCAMORE VILLAS'' ma e«n..e.,.. SVBTI'1660s ¢rarp,ar,.- DRCY 200J.006 F --- ru o-n+me Reocho Cuumon[4 Cnllfomie D3—Pg59 Re I-rk F, a F%TEAIOR MATERIALSmoo' i? • .m om R p a e B WEST ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION T °� e- t PRC T 1. c;-lg�il� "` I3c 611Qa auulm�.- xnucic ,nsulxl SOUTH ELEVATION (VIEW FROM FOOTHILL) BLDG "E" EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS SYCAMORE VILLAS sulrm6605 "uannmm� Reecho C....'.. DAC1 300JA06Tl D3-Pg60 I I PLAN 1 . 2 BR / 2BA PLAN 1 • 2 BR / 2BA PLAN l • 2 DR/2BA 1129 S.F. (m 1ST FLOOR) 1104 S.F. (m 2ND FLOOR) 1104 S.F. (m 2RD FLOOR) PRIVATE F -PRIVATE OPSN SPArLr 128 SF OR fVATR OPPN CP�{`$:�S'�f GNEO HaMu ru o-n mm.� am UNIT PLANS SYCAMORE VILLAS Rancho Cucamonga, Call[ocala SUBTr16605 KT4Y.. �.1 DRCR 20g5-006n UM _AR D3-Pg61 l 2968 S.F. REC HLDG PLAN can SYCAMORE VILLAS ' suarnsew u a + Rancho cuumouQa. Cnl)romin DRCP 100I.00M D3—Pg62 PLAN 2�,2 DR / 23A 11 3 U. PRIVATE OMEN SPACE: 245 SF. 1ST FLOOR 2ND FLOOR 3RD FLOOR PLAN 3 - 2 DR / 2BA TOWN 1256 S.F. PRIVATE OPEN SPACE: 235 S.F. UNIT PLANS SYCAMORE VILLAS Rancho Cummomgk Calif..]. DRC# D3-Pg63 F. EAST ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATION REC BLDG EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS mum eowm SYCAMORE VILLAS SUBTt16603DACI 000M.007 an.mu� Aencho Cucamonga. Call temle � ' 0URN- .. ® n D3-Pg64 x r� L� N WEST ELEVATION MEE - - z NORTH ELEVATION REC BLDG EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS SYCAMORE VILLAS SUBTT16605 DRCM 200300637 irr" Rancho Cucamonpn, California D3-Pg65 i� r-- I c Ll N MAILBOX rya E�zr ' Ioi REMOTE GARAGES / TRASH ENCLOSURES AUXILIARY. STRUCTURES SYCAMORE VILLAS �a'w R°ncEo CucemoaBa Ceilfomle SUB7T6605 �oT��- DRC9 2000.00437 ® c-P _uc-'H—'j D3-Pg66 housing portion along San Bernardino Road. With either plan, she felt the architecture needs to be superior. Commissioner Stewart said that she did not care for either design as presented be they both look over built. While she commented that she did not care for auto -courts added that she could support an auto -court plan that has an appropriate amount of open . She believed that a tot lot is needed: She proposed that some bungalows along Foot" ulevard might enhance a "Route 66" streetscape. She felt high quality landscaping is n d along the Foothill Boulevard frontage. Chairman Macias agreed with Commissioner Ste at he was not fond of the auto court concept; however, he preferred the auto -court plan b den the two designs submitted. He added that Commissioner Stewart's suggestion reg g bungalows along Foothill Boulevard had merit within the "Route 66" context. He also bell' d that both plans'appear too dense and that a reduction in units might be warranted. He ded by saying that any plan needs to be pedestrian friendly and I tot lot is a must for the ex Brad Buller, City PI er, summarized the comments of the Commission. He stated that the plans conform to the 's multiple family density range..Further he added that single story bungalow type elements d be appropriate along Foothill Boulevard and that such features might provide a less dense earance from the major street frontage. He advised the applicants that they could move fn d with submittal of a Design Review application for either type of project. NEW BUSINESS B. PRE -APPLICATION REVIEW TENTATIVE TRACT MAP aUBJJIBEQy AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2o03-00637 - SYCAMORE TOWN HOMES - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - A pre -Application Review to consider a conceptual design concept for the 'proposed development of 86 town homes and 133 flats on 20.00 acres of land in the Western Foothill Boulevard Mixed Use Corridor area within Subarea 1 of the Foothill Districts, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between San Bernardino Road and Baker Avenue - -' LPN-0207=10"1 -and 34. -- -- Brad Buller, City Planner, introduced the item and gave an overview of the Pre -Application Review process. He emphasized that the purpose of the workshop was to look at the proposed project design overall and its relationship to the surrounding area. Chuck Buquet, Charles Joseph Associates, introduced the development team and gave an overview of the project. He indicated that the. project is currently going through the development process with the City, and added that there have been some revisions to the project layout thatwere not reflected on the plans the Commissioners received for the workshop. However, he thought the Commissioners and staff would like the new changes. He indicated that someone has done a lot of grading on the property and flattened out an area; however, they have not been able to discoverwho did it. Victor Mahony, Chief Financial Officer for Cameo Homes, discussed the proposed project in detail. Using photo simulations of the site for reference, he explained the project layout. He also noted that the adjacent property owner, Sycamore Inn, is in support of the project. Chris Giannini, Associate Landscape Architect, added that the applicant's intention is to save as many trees on -site as possible. raloumed Minutes -2- August 13, 2003 D3—Pg67 Commissioner Fletcher asked the developer if the project was a gated community. The developer indicted it would be. Warren Morelion, Assistant Planner, pointed out the following four key items for the Planning Commissioners to consider. 1) Development on hillside slopes 30 percent or greater, 2) Building heights exceeding 30 feet in the Hillside Overlay; 3) Architecture of the buildings; and 4) Layout of private open space and entrances. Mr. Buller, stated his concern with the proposed project as it relates to the Hillside Ordinance.. He indicated that the project, as proposed, does not meet the Hillside Ordinance.' He also stated his concern with the photo simulations the applicant presented to the Commissioners because they did not appear to accurately depict the proposed development on the hillside. He noted that the existing Sycamore Inn parking lot on the east side of the restaurant would.be separated from the restaurant by the development of the Foothill Boulevard entrance to the project, but felt comfortable that pedestrian access from the parking lot to the restaurant crossing over the project entrance can be worked out. He questioned whether it was possible to save trees with the proposed grading scheme that will mass grade the site and fill in the natural ravines. He indicated that in his conversations with the owner of the Sycamore Inn, their support for project was very conditional. He stated that cross sections and sight line analysis from the Red Hill town homes is important. Mr. Buquet said that they will submit a section through every unit on Red Hill.. Mr. Giannini clarified that the only trees that the developer could.possibly save were on the perimeter of the project because of the project's mass grading concept. Commissioner Stewart stated she likes the project location next to the Sycamore Inn restaurant and wants it to move forward. She also indicated that she would like the site to be designed with a village feel that included wood motif street signs and other elements. Commissioner Fletcher stated he liked the overall concept of the project; however, was concerned the misleading depiction of the project on the photo simulations. He asked the applicant to.revise the simulations to be more reflective of the actual project proposed. for the protect. He indicated that.the project was unique. He stated, that although there coma De Issues wicn Ulu project, he thought they could be worked out. He also thought it was important for the applicant to submit realistic photo simulations of the project so the Commissioners could get a true picture of the proposed project. He then directed the applicant to work future issues out with staff and the Sycamore Inn. Mr. Bullersummarized the comments of the Commission and directed the applicantto move forward with the development process. C. PR (CATION REVIEW DRC2003-00733 - HOGLE IRELAND, INC. — A review of conceptua . n concept for the proposed development of 10 duplexes consisting of 20 units and 5 single -fame es on 4.20 acres of land in the Low -Medium Residential District (4-6 dwelling units per acre) Foothill Districts (Subarea 3), located south of Foothill Boulevard, at the terminus of Hampshire evon Streets - APN: 0208-331-18. . This item was continued to August 27, of the applicant. PC Adjourned Minutes -3- August 13, 2003 D3—Pg68 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:20 p.m. Larry Henderson . August 17, 2004 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT SUBTT16605 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - A residential subdivision of 7 lots for condominium purposes on 21 acres of land in the Western Foothill Corridor Mixed Use area of the Foothill Districts (Subarea 1), located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between San Bernardino Road and Baker Avenue - APN: 0207-101-13, 31, and 34. Related files: Development Review DRC2003-00637, Minor Exception DRC2003-01082, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2004-00082. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003.00637 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for 225 condominiums on 21 acres of land in the Western Foothill Boulevard Mixed Use Corridor area of the Foothill Districts (Subarea 1), located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between San Bernardino Road and Baker Avenue - APN: 0207-101-13, 31, and 34. Related files: Tentative Tract SUBTT16605, Minor Exception DRC2003-01082, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2004-00082. Design Parameters: The site is located in a hillside area on the southerly flank of Red Hill surrounding the historic Sycamore Inn Restaurant. The site contains 71 heritage trees. To the north are the Red Hill Condominiums (Medium Residential 8-14 dwelling unit peracre). To the west is the Sycamore Inn, vacant land, and single-family homes. To the east is the elevated and abandoned Pacific Electric Railway corridor. To the south is Foothill Boulevard, and further south, Knocker's bar, and an automotive repair shop. The properties to the west are Mixed -Use (MU) land use, and Office/Commercial to the southwest. The Red Hill Golf course is located northwest of the project site adjacent to the medium density residential development. The most significant design challenge is the steep topography, in which 34 percent of the site is greater than 30 percent slope. Development on land with over 30 percent slopes requires both --DeveTpme-ni-Co-de-and-General—Plan-Amendments. The proposed project must-alsobe designed-- ---- in accordance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Development Code, Chapter 17.32, Foothill Boulevard Districts, Guidelines for Development of Subarea 1. The project site has not been identified as a "Historic Resource" per the standards of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Cade Section 2.24 (Historic Preservation). An Historical Assessment of the project site was conducted by Stephen R. Van wormer in May.1990, and revealed the following: four historic resources were identified as a result of research and field survey and include: 1) the Cucamonga Stage station site, 2) the Sycamore Inn, 3) the Red Chief Motel (recently demolished), and 4) the San Bernardino Museum Archaeological Information has noted the presence of two previously recorded historic bridges (CHS-1786-1 and CHS-1786-6) as well as the old Los Angeles to San Bernardino road route (PS-BR-3-H) adjacent to the project boundaries. These resources are outside the project area and will not be impacted. It is noted that the Sycamore Inn site is affected from a site -specific impact, since the main access to the residential project is through the parking lot. Careful attention to the current restaurant needs of the Inn must be considered with the residential design so that the economic viability of this unique historical resource is not adversely affected. Pre -Application Review: The Planning Commission conducted a workshop on August 13, 2003 (see attached minutes). Staff identified' four major issues: 1) development on hillside slopes 30 percent or greater contrary to the Hillside Development Ordinance, 2) building heights exceeding 30 feet maximum allowed in Hillside areas, 3) architecture, and 4) private open spaces and entrances. The Commissioners (Macias, Fletcher, Stewart) liked the overall concept and provided direction to applicant. D3—Pg69 DRC ACTION COMMENTS SUBTT16605 AND DRC2004-00637 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES August 17, 2004 Page 2 staff comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: 1. View Protection - As an infill, hillside site, consideration and sensitivity to protection of neighbors' views is critical. The applicant has' provided sight -line sections through each adjoining Red Hill Condominium unit. The developer was asked to conduct a neighborhood meeting to obtain community input prior to this meeting. 2. Architecture - The Community Recreation Building is well articulated with a high degree of materials and definite 360-degree architecture policy compliance. However, the multi -family buildings are not on the same level of architectural development and lack sufficient articulation of the building planes for the ends and rear. Because of .the relative large massing of the residential structures, additional movement of the building planes is recommended. In addition, the stacked stone should be an element that is utilized on all sides of the proposed residential architecture. 3. Building Height - On the downhill side, the, buildings are 3-story, which exceeds the 30-foot hillside building envelope. The Ordinance encourages stepping building. The applicant is requesting a Development Code Amendment to resolve this issue; however, the Committee should still discuss whether the upper floors should be stepped back more than the 2 to 3 feet proposed to soften the height impact. 4. Tree Preservation - The site contains 71 heritage trees on -site, including Oak, Sycamore, Pepper, Elm, and a few Eucalyptus trees. The City tree ordinance, which states, "The Eucalyptus, Palm, Oak, Sycamore, Pine, and other trees growing within the City of Rancho _ Cucamonga are a natural aesthetic resource which helps define the character of the city. Such trees are-wor by of protectionn-trrarder-to-preserve-the scenie-beauty,- prevent- soil erosion, provide shade, wind protection, screening and counteract air pollution:' An Arborist Report (David Evans and Associates, September 2003) identified the existing conditions of the trees and reported on their type and general health (predominately focusing on Sycamores, Oaks, and Ornamentals). Pertaining to sycamore trees, if drainage is altered, it may affect the amount of water that the sycamores receive. The trees could be adversely effected if they were to receive significantly less water than they have received historically. Should this be, the developer should be required to replace the lost water with an irrigation system. In addition, it is recommended that grading be prohibited with the drip line of trees, which are to be protected in place. Also, it is recommended that the drainage source or proposed irrigation be designed in such a manner that additional moisture is not encouraged at the base of atree trunk or allowed to collect immediately adjacent to the tree truck, as this can cause rot. There are 44 heritage trees are located in the northwest corner of the site. This is an area that has been revised by the applicant, since the Pre -Application Review, to reduce the number of buildings from three to two and shifted the on -site driveway to the west. The arborist recommended preservation of 35 on -site trees. The developer is proposing to save 25 on -site trees; however, 10 of these are not those recommended by arborist. Preservation of all 35 trees recommended by arborist would require major site plan revisions. Further, based upon the Arborist Report, staff believes that the proposed improvements would cause the demise of four trees the developer has proposed to save: Tree #s 39, 43, 45, and 59. The Tree Preservation Ordinance establishes the following priorities: 1) preserve -in -place healthy trees, 2) if trees cannot be preserved -in -place, then transplant elsewhere on -site, and as a last resort, 3) remove and replace with largest nursery grown stock available. The developer is proposing to plant hundreds of new trees, ranging from 15-gallon up to 36-inch box. D3-Pg70 DRC ACTION COMMENTS SUBTT16605 AND DRC2004-00637 — CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES August 17, 2004 Page 3 Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. Recreation Amenities —The project requires a minimum of five amenities; however, onlythree qualifying amenities have been provided. Most of the items proposed do not qualify under Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 17.08.040.H: gazebos, trellis, and individual rooms within the Recreation Building (kitchen, billiards, exercise). Only one BBQ facility at the pool is shown; hence, does not meet the requirement for more than one. Also, staff recommends that a tot lot be provided for children (to qualify, multiple tot lots are required). 2. Architecture - The remote garages and trash enclosures are plain in comparison to all the other buildings, with stucco being the sole wall surface material. The incorporation of the stacked stone would create an integrated appearance to the overall project. 3. Architecture — Vary garage door designs. 4. Grading — In at least three locations near on -site driveways or parking lot, 5-foot retaining walls are proposed which exceeds the 3.5 feet (downslope) and 4 feet (upslope) allowed under Hillside Development Ordinance. The applicant is requesting a Development Code Amendment to resolve this issue. 5. Grading -"Brow ditches," "bench drains," and cross and down drains are a prominent feature of this project. The Hillside Development Ordinance requires special "naturalized appearance" with river rock as a liner or within a closed drainage pipe. 6. A mailbox center should be incorporated into the recreation building or designed as a stand alone structure designed in keeping with the architectural style and materials of the complex. on staff and Committee comments as appropriate. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: . Fletcher, Fong, Stewart Staff Planner: Larry Henderson The Committee directed the applicant to work with staff to resolve the following critical design areas and return to the Committee for further review of the revised plans: 1. The height and mass of the buildings needs to be reduced. Increasing the height of retaining walls and greater variation in building and roof planes is required. 2. The amenities package is not adequate and a tot lot needs to be added as well as spreading out the amenities to a greater level and making the main recreation area more centralized to all the units. 3. The Sycamore Inn entry area is not acceptable and must be safe as well as workable for the operation of the Inn. 4. Greater definition and planning for Heritage Tree preservation needs to be addressed. D3—Pg71. a DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 8:10 p.m. Larry Henderson January 31, 2006 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT SUBTT16605 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - A residential subdivision of 8 lots for condominium purposes on 21 acres of land in the western Foothill Corridor Mixed Use area within the Foothill districts (Subarea 1), located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and Southern Pacific Road Right Way - APN: 0207-101-13, 01 and 34. Related files: Development Review. DRC2003-00637, Development Code Amendment DRC2004-00352, General Plan Amendment DRC2004-00339, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2004-00082. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00637 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for 206 condominiums on 21 acres of land in the western Foothill Boulevard Mixed Use Corridor area within the Foothill Districts (Subarea 1), located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red.Hill Country Club Drive and Southern Pacific Road Right Way - APN: 0207-101-13, 31 and 34. Related files: Tentative Tract SUBTT16605, Development Code Amendment DRC2004-00352, General Plan Amendment DRC2004-00339, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2004-00082. MINOR DEVELOPMENT. REVIEW DRC2004-00826 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - Parking lot, loading area modifications, and covered patio area at the Historic Sycamore Inn Restaurant, located at 8318 Foothill Boulevard - APN: 0207-101-24. Related files: Variance DRC2005-01061, Tentative Tract SUBTT16605, and Development Review DRC2003-00637. Variance •DRC2005-01061 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - Variance request to reduce ---- -the parking-lot-setback-from-45-feet-minimum_to-ID_feetlo-allow improvements to an existing parking lot for the Sycamore Inn Restaurant on property located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard at the intersection of San Bernardino Road - APN: 0207-101-24. Related files: Minor Development Review DRC2004-00826. Design Parameters: The site is located in a hillside area on the.southerly flank of Red Hill surrounding the historic Sycamore Inn Restaurant. The site contains 71 heritage trees. To the north is Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) and is developed with the Red Hill Condominiums; to the west is the Sycamore Inn, vacant land, and single-family homes; to the east is the elevated and abandoned Pacific Electric Railway corridor; and to the south is Foothill Boulevard, and further south, Knocker's bar and an automotive repair shop. • The properties to the west are Mixed -Use (MU) land use, with Office/Commercial to the southwest. Red Hill Country Club Drive, and beyond the Red Hill Golf course, is located northwest of the project site, adjacent to the medium density residential development. The most significant design challenge is the steep topography, of which 34 percent of the site is greater than 30 percent slope. Development on land with over 30 percent slopes requires both Development Code and General Plan Amendments. The proposed project must also be designed in accordance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Development Code, Chapter 17.32, Foothill Boulevard Districts, Guidelines for Development of Subarea 1. D3-Pg72 DRC ACTION AGENDA SUBTT16605/DRC2003-00637,-00826, AND -01061 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES January 31, 2006 Page 2 The project site has not been identified as a "Historic Resource" per the standards of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 2.24 (Historic Preservation). An Historical Assessment of the project site was conducted by Stephen R. Van Wormer in May 1990, and revealed that four historic resources were identified as a result of research and field survey and include: 1) the Cucamonga Stage station site, 2) the Sycamore Inn, 3) the Red Chief Motel (recently demolished), and 4) the presence of two previously recorded historic bridges (CHS-1786-1 and CHS-1786-6), as noted by the San Bernardino Museum Archaeological Information, as well as the old Los Angeles to San Bernardino Road route (PS-BR-3-H) adjacent to the project boundaries. These resources are outside the project area and will not be impacted. It is noted that the Sycamore Inn site is affected from a site -specific impact, since the main access to the residential project is through the parking lot. Careful attention to the current restaurant needs of the Inn must be considered with the residential design so that the economic viability of this unique historical resource is not adversely affected. Pre -Application Review: The Planning Commission conducted a workshop on August 13, 2003 (see attached minutes). Staff identified four major issues: 1) development on hillside slopes 30 percent or greater is contrary to the Hillside Development Ordinance, 2) building heights exceeding 30 feet maximum allowed in Hillside areas, 3) architecture, and 4) private open spaces and entrances. The Commissioners (Macias, Fletcher, Stewart) liked the overall concept and provided direction to the applicant. Design Review Committee: The Committee reviewed the project on August 17, 2004, (Fletcher, Stewart, Fong). See attached minutes. Staff Comments: Staff has met with the applicant on many occasions since the previous meeting and the following changes have been made: 1. The project was re -designed to reduce the height of thi buildings as jaoent-t6 Foothill--'--"- Boulevard by changing from three-story to two-story, and reoriented those structures 90 degrees. In addition, the remaining structures and pads were lowered several feet into the site topography to further reduce visual impacts. The changes also resulted in reducing the number of units from to 225 to 206. 2. The project has added a tot lot and barbeque area to the center and east end of the project, respectively, in order. to address the amenities package the Committee recommendation. The applicant respectfully declined to move the main recreation area to a more central location. 3. The Sycamore Inn entry area concerns have been addressed through revisions to the related Minor Development Review DRC2004-00826. The historic Sycamore Inn parking lot has been included as part of the project application package and a Variance Application has also been filed as required as part of the MDR for less than the required street setback. 4. The applicant has submitted a revised Tree Study from David Evans and Associates, Inc., dated February 2005 (included with plans). As indicated by the submitted Landscape Plan (see Sheets L-1 and L-2) the changes to the Condominium and Restaurant Site Plans have further reduced the number of heritage trees that are affected (to be removed). D3-Pg73 DRC ACTION AGENDA SUBTT16605/DRC2003-00637,-00826, AND-01061. — CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES January 31, 2006 Page 3 Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval subject .to Committee comments as appropriate. Attachments Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Fletcher, Stewart, Coleman Staff Planner: Larry Henderson The applicant presented colored plans and a written statement responding to all staff comments. The Committee recommended approval of the project. D3—Pg74 1Y OF RANCHO COCNAON. ""'' _"`' %. January 3Q 2004 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ' FEB 0 4 2004 FEB 0 2 2004 Rancho Cucamonga City Council RECEIVED - PLANNING 7.8 1 0' i I.1 `' `.2,3,4, t;_;,t 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Dear City Council: There are signs posted on Red Hill Country Drive across from the golf course and I believe on Foothill around the Sycamore Inn regarding Notice of Filing. We are very much against the condos and homes. The City has already taken Foothill and made it a very unfriendly highway by making it a divided highway. When driving eastbound,, it is almost impossible to turn into a business on the north side without traveling a long distance to a signal and then waiting forever to make a U-tum and, of course, the same is true when traveling westbound and wanting to shop at business on the south side. The area in question is the north side of Foothill, west of the Cucamonga Channel. There are already signals at Grove, San Bernardino Road at Sycamore Inn, Baker, for the new residential area on the south side of Foothill, and at Vineyard. More housing on the north side will create more traffic problems because there will be vehicles coming from both the north and south sides of Foothill. Because of the congestion on Foothill between Grove and Vineyard, people are already traveling over Red Hill to avoid the traffic. Citizens have called the police to have them monitor the traffic on Red Hill, but nothing has been done. City is allowing anew multi -dwelling on the west side of Vineyard, south of Foothill and a shopping center. The Albertson shopping center has already created traffic problems in the area _ and now you want to create more traffic problems around the corner. The City has also allowed more housing on the west side of Camelian, north of Red Hill Country Club Drive. This is already a very dangerous area and has caused yet another signal to be installed —creating three signals between Foothill and Baseline. Because of the opening of the 210 Freeway, we have a lot more industrial trucks traveling up and down Carnelian which the street does not seem to be built to handle the excessive weight of these trucks. We hope the Council will not allow the development. This is such a historic area it should be left alone. Sincerely, Charles and Lynda Teenor 8731 Red Hill Country Club Drive Cucamonga, CA 91730 D3—Pg75 Dale & Barbara Price 8066 Calle Carabe Place Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91730 August 27, 2004 The City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91730 Attn: Mr. Brad Buller Ref: Cameo Homes Proposed Sycamore Villas The above proposed development has made a lot of people extremely unhappy. The residents of Red Hill On -The -Green as well as the residents of Red Hill proper have chosen to live in that area precisely because of the location: the serenity of the area, the abundance of critters and the ambiance of a generation long -forgotten. The proposed project will negatively impact both Red Hill and the adjacent Rancho Cucamonga areas in numerous ways: 4 Create traffic problems - on Red Hill Country Club Dr as well as on Foothill Blvd. 4 Land movement - potential storm drainage problems, land slide and fire hazards Development has inadequate parking/garage - vehicles most likely left on the street Pool/Rec Room (for 20N units and families) is located directly below Red -Hill -On -The - Green which translates into an unbearable noise traveling "upwind". The sheriff's department might as well rent a unit on site. 4 Project will negatively impact the value of the surrounding area. 'Overcrowd existing schools Purchasing a home is probably the single largest financial decision that many of us will make. Most of us, at least partly, base this decision on the rural character of the area. We have been residents in Rancho Cucamonga for over twenty-five years. While it would be naive to think that the area would never be developed, we certainly hoped the city would preserve the existing character and not compromise the integrity of the history of our city. In 2001 the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department posted their General Plan. This Plan was based on a long-term vision of the community, identifying values and qualities that Will guide the evolution over the next 20 years. These values and qualities included the following: A belief in our families and the need to promote their well-being; An abiding respect for the heritage we share. An unusually strong dedication to community planning. It is in the spirit of the City's intent that we strongly oppose the proposed Sycamore Villa Development. Sincerely, Dale 8 Barbara Price bep D3—Pg76 City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA., 91730 Attu: Planning Dept Re: Sycamore Villas Gentlemen, CITY OF hkKCl IG CUC(,i,VAGr. ''i;;R (1 1 200F, . ^t f r r• "-NN;ING I can't believe this ill conceived project has surfaced once again. I can't think of a single advantage of having such a project in Rancho Cucamonga. I'd like to list a few key objections: 1) Extremely high density as compared to any nearby projects. This can only reduce property values. 2) Insufficient parking. Our condominium homes (Red Hill) have two and three car garages. This project will create widespread parking problems and blocked access roads. 3) Twohundredsix (206) units with one swimming pool! This is going to create a health hazard of untold proportions. 4) "Young Professionals?" This project looks like entry level housing to me and will lead to slum or ghetto conditions in a short time. 5) Just recently we experienced severe mud -slide situations all over Southern California. Any heavy dirt movement is sure to cause some real problems to the existing homes as well as any new buildings. TjThe developers call thi a h gh-end pioJe`cf; yef most of the units are under 1,000 sGu—are Tezr -- of living space. This isn't even apartment sized. 7) The increased traffic dumped onto Foothill Blvd will cause even more gridlock 8) The emergency entry/exit on Red Hill Country Club right in the middle of a curve is extremely dangerous. 9) Overall this project degrades what our city is all about. I sincerely hope that our city planners come to their senses and remove this project for the books. Sincerely, Burt 4, Nancy'gourt 8485 Red Hill Country Club Dr. Rancho Cucamonga D3—Pg77 8082 Calle Carabe Place Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 February 28, 2005 City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department Attention: Mr. Larry Henderson 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 RE:,Proposed Sycamore Villas Project CITY OF Il(\1 4 r'I CAVI l t, ; ,,.��, ImCdNC:R ri AR C; 126E-1 Dear Mr. Henderson and Members of the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department: We attended the recent meeting regarding The Sycamore Villas and have some very serious issues which need to be resolved. Therefore, we were very disappointed to discover, by Mr. Buquet losing his temper, that the property is theirs already and they can do as they want as long as codes are followed. Frankly, they must be very confident that this project will be approved by Rancho Cucamonga's Planning Department. That's a red Flag in our book! The Police have been called out numerous times in our area due to the noise and music at the "Strawberry Patch." It is located quite a bit farther away than the proposed Recreation Room and Pool Area. The high density will produce a lot of noise at all hours which will travel up the Gulch and hill and affect nearly everyone in our Red Hill Green Association. It definitely will be considered a nuisance call which will keep our Police from more important duties. We felt we were not told all the truth about the so-called emergency entrance/exit on Red Hill Dr. People exiting or entering from this road will create even more hazardous conditions on Red Hill Dr. and the other roads on this hill. At lust we were told that only emergency vehicles would use this road but at this meeting _—_—Mr.Buquetsaid.that-maybejust-for.thefirstyear.that.would be the case -Another -red flag -is up! As far as we can tell, the builder and people associated with this group are in for the money and then they will move on and we are left with the noise, view changes in some instances, and traffic affecting our so -far wonderful qualityof life. The city of Rancho Cucamonga must be diligent in order to insure quality of life to all of its citizens and voters. We urge you to address these issues before approving any of this project. Sincerely, q 1 %� Ken and Helen Brown cc: Brad Buller, City Planner cc: Rancho Cucamonga Sheriff Station cc: Charles Joseph Associates D3—Pg78 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MAR 01 2005 RFCFIII'^ - PLANNING Dear Sirs, The peace, safety, and value of our homes will be significantly threatened by the proposed Cameo Homes "Sycamore Villas" project— a 206 unit project located on 20 acres at the NWC of baker and Foothill Blvd. In Rancho Cucamonga. These very high -density apartment -like structures will degrade the value of our homes on the hill above the proposed site. The grading required to develop this site may create serious instability of our hillside. The many rodents that now inhabit the proposed site when they are forced to migrate up the hill will infest our homes. The construction will produce a high - decibel noise from 6:30 AM to 8:00 PM, six days a week for a period of one to two years. The possibility of egress on to Red Hill C.C. Drive will create _—unreasonable_traffic-congestion.-__ Respectful y, Robert Fromer D3—Pg79 Dale & Barbara Price 8066 Cafle Carabe Place CITY OF Ftkiii i-i0 UlG!;GIO JGA Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91730 February 28, 2005 The City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, Ca: 91730 Attention: Mr. Brad Muller Reference: Proposed Sycamore Villa Project / Cameo Homes Gentlemen: MAR 41 200- i (?^ „' "i r; - � ",N'Rgi��G Attached is a copy of our original letter to you dated 8/27/04 in which we vehemently objected and opposed the above proposed project, Progress, growth and prosperity seeming to be the city's main priorities — it appears this.development is "moving forward". We were told there would be an "emergency exit" directly onto Red Hill Country Club Drive — now we understand this has now been designated as one of the complex's main entrance and exits. This is not only impossible - for a rural two-lane road to accommodate what will be approximately 400 vehicles intersecting with an already busy, noisy road — it is dangerous!! (And what other surprises do the builder and the city have in store for us?) ---- You -have received -letters -of -opposition -from -numerous existing -homeowners -in -the -Red —-- Hill area opposing, complaining and imploring the city to reconsider this project. Does the community have a voice? Is anyone listening??? The City of Rancho Cucamonga is renowned for their stringent building codes and the high standards that must be met before permits are issued. How is it possible that something like this is even being considered? How can the city compromise everything that has made Rancho Cucamonga so unique? This project will lower existing property values, agitate existing homeowners (and current tax -payers) and destroy the beauty of an historical area. It will be like living in Fontana or San Bernardino — which should make anyone wince. PLEASE— do something to stop this development!! mcerely, Dale and Barbara Price CITY OF RA.. , iC, CUCAP:IONGA I AR 01 2005 Melvin H. Dieterich ANNING 8525 Calle Carabe Rancho Cucamonga, CA 71730 February 28, 2005 The City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive P. 0. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Red Hill area residents recently attended a second Community Meeting held by the promoters of the "Sycamore Villas" Condominium Project. We wish to have our concerns voiced at the Design Review Committee meeting to be held on March 1, 2005. Although the builders have modified plans to somewhat address our concerns, it has done nothing to alleviate the major problems the residents and the city will face if this project is allowed to proceed as currently designed. The Planning. Commission has received dozens of letters protesting this project with legitimate concerns and yet we feel our voices have fallen on deaf ears. It hardly seems unreasonable to expect our city officials to have a dialogue with affected residents. The "Sycamore Villas" project calls for 206 units of two and three story buildings on approximately 20 or so acres. Although the density may well be within the requirements for such a project, that doesn't make it right or good for this area. I am on the Board of Directors at the Red Hill Green Condominiums and am well acquainted with problems facing complexes such as this. The promoters stated that studies and their "demographics" have indicated that this project would be geared to attract "young professionals." That may be well and good, but the fact remains that anyone that comes in with money will not be turned away, and that means investors will look at this as an attractive buy for income property. I have been an investor in real estate for over twenty years.and I speak from experience. We at Red Hill Green are also faced with this problem within our own complex and it is of great concern to us. The Board cannot dictate to an owner to whom he may sell his property. The proposed price range of the "Sycamore Villas" puts it pretty much at the entry level housing market and that's exactly what the buildings resemble. This will definitely not benefit the property values in the Red Hill area. The promoters have insisted that this is a "high -end" complex and we take serious issue with that. Units start at less than 1000 square feet. The largest unit at the "Sycamore Villas" comes in less than that of the SMALLEST unit at Red Hill Green. These are not condominiums - they are apartments. D3-Pg81 One swimming pool is proposed for "Sycamore Villas" with 206 units which is, frankly, a joke. Red )-Till Green has two swimming pools for only 74 units and I can assure you that two pools is not sufficient. And our residents are made up mostly of retirees - not "youhg professionals." How could one pool possibly serve 206 units? The number of units proposed with its single point of entry would further add to the congestion on Foothill Boulevard. With 206 units, we believe that an additional 400 vehicles will be added to that' congestion. The promoters dispute that. It's a fact that two and three car families are the norm - not the exception. If your project supposedly caters to "young professionals," then young professional couples have a car each. You cannot have the argument both ways. Additional projects currently under way all along Foothill Boulevard add to the traffic problem. Has any impact study been performed to assess this? The proposed emergency ingress/egress. planned for Red Hill Country Club -Drive is nothing but a disaster waiting to happen. The street is already an extremely dangerous area. Why would we want to make this situation worse? This "high -end" project shows units with one car garages and remote garages with insufficient additional parking. (EVERYONE at Red Hill Green has a THREE car garage and most have driveways.) The units at the complex at the southeast corner of Foothill and Baker, "Vintage Townhomes," have one car garages. Talking to residents there, I learned that garages are used mostly for storage and cars are left outside. Parking is grossly inadequate and visitors often have to park outside on public streets. Is not the same problem going to occur at the "Sycamore Villas?" ---- -What-these-issues-boi3-down-to-i-s-qual-ity-of-life issues: —We -don't need additional congestion, noise, declining property values or our safety compromised. The promoters have pretty much managed to gloss over these problems. ' We feel that the Planning Commission should be more concerned with the quality of life of everyone concerned, not just those of us who live here now, but those who might wish to make Rancho Cucamonga their home. Red Hill has long been a desirable and unique area. We would be much more inclined to accept a project of really high end single family homes. The attendant problems and strain on city services would be considerably reduced with such a project as opposed to the "Sycamore Villas." We urge the Planning Commission to reject the "Sycamore Villas" project outright, or, for now, at least, postpone approval until consideration of this alternative be addressed along with an in depth study of the concerns herein put forth. Thank you. Melvin H. Dieterich D3-Pg82 FROM : DRVIDSON PHONE NO. Mar. 02 2005 12:03RI'-P1 C!„ OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA !'!AR 01 2005 To Whom it may concerts; These are our concerns about the proposed 206 unit Condominium Cameo hou,es "Sycamore Villas" at the NWC of Baker and Foothill Blvd. in Rancho C:ucamc nga. 1. Traffic pMm and safety- Access is only across one end of the project. If fae:•e were a fire on that on the one and only road, which connects from Foothill to R.:ed 101 Country Club Road —the residents would be trapped! 2. Public services for police, fire department, mail services, and hash services won!d be increased 3. There will be a need for new schools/class room pace --children i.M allow.d- it they have the right to a decent public school system. 4. Dust during construction (some local people have asthma). 5, Noise d. Increase in consumption of scarce and/or costly resources such as N;;tl.e, el g:trii. u and gas 7. Strain on sewer system and probable need for more treatment plant All of the above items affect the quality of life and health! We strongly obje;:':o 6.1c size and plan of the condominium project Annette Davidson A Davidson y w( &-;v � 8077 Calle Cambe Place Rancho Cucamonga D3—Pg83 March 7, 2005 City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department P.O. Box 807 Ranchd Cucamonga, CA 91729 Attn: Mr. Brad Buller Dear Mr. Buller, CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MAR 17 2005 RECEIVED - PLANNING As a Red Hill resident, I am most concerned about the Cameo Homes Development. I attended the February 25' meeting at the Sycamore Inn, but the discussion there did not satisfactorily address these considerations: ' Safe : The 200+ homes will add traffic that will severely impact our area. The elementary school children in these homes are within walking distance of Valle Vista School, but there is no safe walking route. The only access road from Foothill Boulevard, Red Hill Country Club Drive, is a two lane road, no sidewalks and has two blind curves. In fact,' all of the roads in our community are two lane, narrow and the only ones with sidewalks are in the Red Hill Greens project and the area just below Valle Vista School. Traffic: Red Hill is a golf -oriented area and golf carts are legal on many roads. The addition of extra cars, narrow roads, and alternate driving patterns would create additional hazards. Also, the traffic impact on Foothill Boulevard is.a concern. Camelian/Vineyard Avenue is a direct route linking the 210 and 10 freeways and San Antonio Community Hospital is two miles away. We live above the exact area of the development, Vineyard to Baker to Grove, and nightly we — - observe accidents requiring police cards,,, fire trucks and ambulances. Flood Control: Cameo Homes proposes to move existing flood drainage servicing the Red Hill Greens area and remove existing watershed. In the wake of recent flood damage in surrounding areas, it seems an imprudent plan that - would open the city to lawsuits, should problems occur. To allow a development of this magnitude to continue could be a blueprint for disaster, not just creating safety hazards for the residents of the surrounding area, but also causing a multitude of problems for the new, and often unaware, homebuyers. We urge the Planning Commission to seriously consider our concerns before granting permission for this project as it is currently designed. ely, Donn and Shirley O'Morrow March 18, 2005 OIY��RA�tiiC"irt: City of Rancho Cucamonga MAR 22 Planning Commission Subject: Cameo Homes Project - Sycamore Villas�� NWC of Baker & Foothill As owner and occupant of a townhouse at the southeast corner of Baker and Foothill, I wish to express my opposition to subject project. My principle objection is the high density of this project, which I understand will accommodate 200 one and two bedroom units in an area of rough terrain. I also understand that the buildings housing these units will be two and three stories and that many of the units will have remote uncovered parking accommodations. The parking situation in my complex, Vintage Townhomes, is bad enough. With insufficient attached covered parking we have the continued problem of space availability for visitors. I feel that the proposed project only increases the problems of insufficient attached parking garages, including the increase in the density of the units. I appreciate the right of a property owner to develop his property but this right must be balanced by the rights of others to enjoy the use of their properties without the traffic and other problems created by high density developments. you for your consieration of these comments. Sincerely, Donald M Stevenson 8284 Chappellet Place Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 D3-Pg85 City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA., 91730 Attn: Planning Commission Re: Charles Joseph Associates Project Gentlemen, CITY OR RANCHO CUCAMONGA ?BAR 2 0 2006 RECEIVED - PLANNING As residents of Red Hill Country Club Green for 31 years, we are concerned about the proposed project below our property. Over the years there have been serious problems with flooding waters running off our property to the slopes below and onto Foothill Boulevard. The cutting and removal of any earth in this location will cause irreparable damage to the slopes and will surely undermine the foundations of the condo's above, which could cause severe damage not only to the units but risk injury or death to the homeowners. We strongly hope the City Planning Commission will reject this poorly conceived project. Sincerely, �— Burt Court Nancy Court r% 8485 Red Hill Country Club Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA., 91730 PLR1Jtj(o(3- pi0i'siofJ C i [ Y OF RA Q0-HO COCRMOMG-R PROPOSEp 6MIMORE Vil_i-PS ( IFOTLE M r=-1 IJ ; F3SCi CRkLE CARhPF- RAQbHG CLCAMokt,-AiCA 9i730 C9o9J 93I- a8,t:SV R F R 14. q i 2006 OGP�\ONGP OF GPNc e�PN A6' A HOMEoWfJEP, VV'Hci.SL PROPERTY r380rs -7(HE PR6fnsGD pCUFlOPMFkI T) f HOUE SEVFP6t. MRJOR COMCFRtJs OSOU T THiS PROJECT WHICH RRE . HtGHWCGHTEb ]tJ THE roLLOV\iIM(1 - pARtlGRRPHS, @CPt.RtJ AMEtJ0M1=tJ' DRC- zooy- 00339 pEUL'-LOPMi�tJi CODE RMEtJDMEIJ T QR� 20by— 0035'Z. Hod,/ cnfJ 'THE CITY OF ROJL'-HU C'OUMMG-R 1:-Ua� SCPiOLkSLy CONS1pEI\ 13 1, LO W i IJ Or- A HI&R-pf=1JS(TY Czo6 001Ts Gti zi ACRC-S), M0l- tPiE-STORY OEU�-i.OPIIIEIJT Gli r,A1JD Ygf-IIcH cou-rwIJs I; 3o PERCCIkJT 'vVF HRUE HN) SEUGRAL m),5T-htJcE'S of Si-OPf=S GliIWG- WRy W OUR oWN THIS PROJECT H14S -THE POTE1JI-117L FDR DE-,STARIl-17-W& THE WHOLE HiLi..SiDE, I Arvl NOT RT I LL. COMFON T EQ Qy Ti�C 1955URAtJCES WE HAUE RECEWED THAT THIS I-hAj)p CAfJ PC DEUGLotNE() SA(-Ei�Y', I HM CERT8W THRT PEDF;i.E iN PLACI`S i`lkG 1^AG-000 NiLiS •A!J!) "OREL. 0-0�,YNJ W14FRE I-iiL-LS(DE piSRSTj7-RS HgUr ccCURRED i HFSI; SRfAE (SSC)hfIJJC✓`S WHFL% PROJC-C'KS WIRE ROW( citJ SLoPEs wtgiCH 13HGULI) I4RUE tJEUER OEEK) gEVEGUPEp F1160f RUR;OI (= f=RoNI 'THE TOP OF THE: HiL.L FLOWS T HRUUGH THIS Mpl: R-a Y IN SEUERRiI- Pti/)CE5- /AND THERE ORF CRC -AT OWONULATIWS aF WATE'R Rr THE-PUTTOM ()F `rHfF SLOPE nr-i"ER EUGRY .STORM, THE pi.pMS i !-IRVE SE"EA; 06 No i SEEtlA TO RDECu UATi`Ly nj3bRESS DRRItJAG1~ 15s U E.! , D3-Pg87 MITIGATED IJEC'A�, L-ARATiOti) oFt E_tj0igb\?ryF�DTdL i fly P NEC-A-rIUI= 'IMP►iC-T Hc�W. Cliff- OF St- 1Or- �- H000r['Eb RDPiTlOfJAI t/kNlciFs poRiNa otJr—o f=vorlliLL l3vueevl�Rp r I}Ct I A l�`f Pam I sr�Y �� MIT G"/}TED ? " T N E Fer Tr1 ILL CoRR I PGtZ i5 (26MC:G5TEDj RIJD THE PoR'riWJ 139TWEEIW U ItJG1!AR D A R1 p GRo"JC IS DICE CF ,THE WCV� ST S'rR13-7TC1-4SE, THE Rnll ReW oUFRP()ss is 019RCly Lt��i�s WIDE C WITH nc sHbUi-()I RS) 81jo THE Utje'nNTr2ol�ED 1N'TFR,5ECi i0Q1 HT FOOTHILL i9k)0 RFI) HIi.L CCLIJTRV CLUB pRiUE (_5'CC-QE C'F .-MONY RCC f al N7S) IS GXi RLMERY HVROO JS, iHls VFuELoPIMEN-r Will_ o�3;�Y /b9DKE MHTI f\S vlOf�st_. iT ,3N0ui_.p 14,,5E 8E tiOTCI) -TNRT , NfiRRoWj WitJN0C- RF�0 Iiil-I CODO—rRY CL-OC3 VRiUE vdilri-. l}irso BE NEI)p fLY IMPF�c'T�P, THF;-s'PI=CtFic PRCBI-Fft.5 - I HOOF ME►JTi&K)ED l)i36VEJ CouP�_ED WITH THE ptR tj!✓p NOISE POLLOTIOfj CREfiTFD ey iia1S i-iicH— PP3SITY pEUEi-OPMF_1J"1-, WILL CIRF T tAl DEGRA,DE THE QUA1_ITY OF LWE FzR THa5E OF US i<iUiIJG IN THE -90RRcutjI)1K)G (AREA. t)RGE T1�E Pi AIJNiiJC GoivlMiss IUtis TG .DENY THE I�rv1Fiji) mcars - fi5 WrLL n.5 THE NEC-P7It),^ 1)FCLtiPATIOiQ5'j AlECr=SSnRY 1 -ro hLt-aw THIS PROPCP l3EUFL,0PMi`M7 'To MOVE- FORWRRD, i HaQ YOU FGR YOUK RMF 00b 8 T T tLi"I 10{�1 s r�tU/cEREt^Y � I-IKURY VI- „H/11MI `roy CC' MAYDR $iLl- AI.EXANPER fvIPVoR 'PRO TEM OIUE' WIC-Illms. CouticiLmFNBGR REX GUTi G-RREZ C.OUIJCjL( f4 Mf9R OEtiOtS M iCNAEL, C1000cil;ry,6Mt3i=R Snit1 S'i'nCtool-.o Charles Joseph Associates PUBLICIPRIVATE SECTOR MANAGEMENT SERVICES Cameo Homes Neighborhood Meeting Minutes Meeting Date: August 10"', 2004 6pm to 8pm Presentation included the project elevations, color landscape plan with proposed upgrade to parking lot entrance in front of Sycamore Inn that will provide access to the property. 2. Presentation of hillside ordinance and request for variance as to hillside cuts. Concerns raised that this would not hold and should not be allowed. Client explained that this portion of property had been adversely eroded by the years of neglect and poor drainage from the Red Hill Condos. It was discussed that the property owners have the right to develop the land and fix the erosion from the properties to the north. 3. Concerns about traffic created along Red Hill Country Club; client response was to create this secondary point of access as emergency purposes only. 4. Questions were raised about the mass of buildings along foothill and the property and blocking of views, concerns about trees blocking the views. Presentation of cross sections were provided and discussed that showed buildings were not being blocked. Client offered to prepare photo exhibits for another neighborhood meeting and to look at adjusting the screening of the buildings along Foothill. 5. Questions regarding interaction between homeowners on the north property line as it relates to types of trees blocking view. Landscape architect informed the neighbors that smaller trees that do not grow that high would be installed and view preservation was primary component with tree selection. Conversations regarding view preservations and a house sales and anticipated sales. Response was that cannot anticipate selling price but informed that new product is comparable sales at a per square foot basis. Concerns about existing traffic on the Red Hill country club road realignment. Neighbors were informed that this would be a City Project that is not part of the Cameo project scope. Concerns about homeless people on site. Client response was that they would follow up with police action to remove the trespassers. Office 909.481.1822 800*240.1822 Fax 909.481*1824 City Center • 10681 Foothill Blvd., Suite 395 • Rancho Cucamonga, CA • 91730 A CALIFORNIA CORPORA'11ON 8. Concerns about the existing trees, vegetation and integrity of the hill. Client response was that they would be looking at removing some of the buildings at the North west end of the project and preserving more trees. D3—Pg90 (a [;;k�_;arles Joseph Associates PUBLIC/POATE SECTOR MANAGEMENT SERVICES August 2. 21.)C4 Rh: r1Lgisi 91h, 2004 Community Meeting I:ameo Homes Project located a: the NWC of Baker and Foothill Blvd., in Rancho Cucamonga Dear Proper: f Cwner. This letter is tc invice you to a Community Meeting concerning the Cameo Homes '8yu.rnore Villas' 211 Unit Condominium project located at the NWC of Baker and Foothill Blvd-, in RenCho Cucamonga. This rreeGng ,n411 give us the opportunity to share with you our plans for this high quality 'ondor-.iniuni Development project that we believe will be a positive addition to your neighborhood, and +`.ie opportunity to discuss the specifics of this project and to answer any qucbtion:; I'hat you may have with regard to this project. All proposed condominium buildings hav;: been designed to preserve existing Red Hill views. 1'Ve app: eclat r you taking time out of your busy schedule to join us on Tuesday, August ' Oth, 2304 at fi:00 P.M. The meeting will be held at The Sycamore Inn, located at 8318 Foothill 31vd., ;'ancno Cucamonga. The meeting will be held downstairs, in the Grove Room and the project team will be available to answer any questions or concerns that you rn ay have at this meeting. Light refreshments will be served. -- -------UVe an; klokin forty iFdto meeting withyou.-Should you have -any-questions-orneedf any-- additior al information in advance of this meeting, please feel free to give me a call at y)ui eartiest cplxrtL pity. Sincemlg. Cnartes J_ Elucwst 0.1WIL-3 du3L]Ih Associates .:nC+osury rx:: tarty i-fend-rson, City Planning 05ce 909.481•1822 888024061822 Fa 909•481.1824 1 13 =otter -. 10681 Foothill Blvd, Suite 395 • Rancho Cu onga, CA • 91730 A CAUJ-*ORN1A CORPORA nON D3-Pg91 a -d ••E:EIT Tat,a 4anbnE >jongo dGv;eo 4o cc gnu 0 Erysr ELEV T.ON u LDG "Al" EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS µN en NaYO QV/-'A➢/ll T1T lITT T �n�oa�4 fan .+y vi-�y�a Vl\Lr TILLAJ F�'T L":y�:j_'�;;j 9 m D3-Pg92 Charles Joseph Associates PUBLICIPRIVATE SECTOR MANAGEMENT SERVICES Cameo Homes Neighborhood Meeting Minutes Meeting Date: February 24, 2005 530 pm to 7pm Presentation of the revised project elevations, color landscape plan with proposed upgrade to parking lot entrance in front of Sycamore Inn that will provide access to the property. Client informed neighbors that the Foothill Elevations were reduced to 2 story elements from feedback by City staff and turned sideways. Concerns were raised about the lack of amenities; and neighbors were informed since our last meeting additional amenities; including a tot lot per City requirements. Concerns raised about tot lot and not wanting residents to have children. Client explained this was not legal to exclude children and a tot lot is required for multifamily development with the only exception being senior housing. 3. Presentation of hillside ordinance and request for general plan amendment as to hillside cuts. Client explained that this portion of property had been adversely eroded by the years of neglect and poor drainage from the Red Hill Condos and the previous variance determination. The proposed development will improve the poor drainage at the sites. Il Concerns about traffic created along Red Hill Country Club for student trip generation_ client response was to this secondary point of access as emergency purposes only and a stu y was prepare -to- demonstrate student traffic along Red Hill. 5. Presentation of cross sections and preservation of existing views being preserved. 6. Questions regarding interaction between homeowners on the north property line as it relates to types of trees blocking view. Landscape architect informed the neighbors that smaller trees that do not grow that high would be installed and view preservation was primary component with tree selection. 7. Conversations regarding home sales and anticipated sales. Response was that cannot anticipate selling price but informed that new product is comparable sales at a per square foot basis. Office 909.481.1822 800.240.1822 Fax909.481.1824 City Center 0 10681 Foothill Blvd., Suite 393 • Rancho Cucamonga, CA • 91730 A CALIFORNIA CORPOIL111ON D3—Pg93 Concerns about existing traffic on the Red Hill country club road realignment. Neighbors were informed that this would be a City Project that is not part of the Cameo project scope. Concerns about homeless people on site. Client response was that they have been arresting and prosecuting these offenders, and that if the development is approved this would not be an issue. D3—Pg94 _ ^t-- I- nt,- d CarnE;o Hore!;s 2/24/0b t;OMmunlry twee;u!iy,,�Qy19 I„ Phone # Name! Address ot I— joaj cdlE calb' e cc, + - t.,4L �?c. CA $t(Sq Caijy-Ca�eab� 2 —/�✓ _ ^Nvlkeod- WMD 99,4747a K- �' T J r,l 94456 (-(L 2, -a ��J,'- 85 �tf hoer M3 Pg95 as/7.a ?add Hd3Sor S376VHD PM11806 91:00 500Z/83/Z0 11 2/24/05 Community Meeting Sign In Sheet CP/.Ll -Poll D3-Pg96 Hd3SOP S376GHO bZBLLBb6 91:00 4OBZ/BZ/ZO 02/28/2035 04:16 94811824 CHARLES JOSEPH L66d-£d PPG_ b4/bb -'"d , -y.�" yo a'rybb9+fir --=_'-r—� i46 10kb- ssajppy aiur # WOU see uoH }aaug ul u6is 6uilaaw f4iunwwoo go/VZ/Z ,-- ' 1 i L 4 Charles Joseph Associates PUBLICIPRIVATE SECTOR MANAGEMENT SERVICES Sycamore Inn MDR Neighborhood Meeting Minutes Meeting Date: January 19th, 2006, 5pm to 7pm Presentation included the revised parking lot layout and traffic signal relocation. This was the primary goal of this meeting. We provided confirmation that the Red Hill Country Club rear access will be for emergency purposes only and that the Sycamore Inn access and business operations will not be adversely effected by the shared driveway approach. 2. Questions were raised regarding the types of trees to be removed and installed on the site; there will be over 300 trees for the MDR application and nearly 900 (actual.1100) trees for the condo project. Several questions as to the types of trees and size of trees and landscape architect addressed landscape issues. 3. Questions regarding interaction between homeowners on the north property line as it relates to types of trees blocking view. Landscape architect informed the neighbors that smaller trees that do not grow that high would be installed and view preservation was primary component with tree selection. Ell Conversations regarding view preservations and a house sales and anticipated sales. The subject of this meeting was to discuss the Sycamore Inn parking lot, but we cannot anticipate selling price but informed that new product is comparable sales at a per square toot basis. 5. Concerns about existing traffic on the Red Hill country club road realignment. Neighbors were reminded that this would be a City Project that is not part of the cameo project scope. Concerns about homeless people on site and peeping toms. Informed neighbors that the police have been actively arresting the homeless people and that when development occurs this will no longer be an issue. Comments from homeowners wanting to know when the project was going to be approved and construction timelines. Timelines regarding plan check and construction discussed and offer extended to homeowners to participate in communication with the City for support for the project. Office 909.481.1822 800*24001822 Fax 909#481.1824 City Center • 10681 Foothill Blvd., Suite 395 • Rancho Cucamonga, CA • 91730 A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION EM Charles Joseph Associates PUBLIC/PRIVATE SECTOR MANAGEMENT SERVICES Cameo Homes NeighbArhpppd Meeting Minutes Meeting Date: January T t#,i, 2006, 5pm to 7pm Presentation included the revised parking lot layout and traffic signal relocation. Confirmation that the Red Hill Country Club rear access will be for emergency purposes only. Questions were raised regarding the types of trees to be removed and installed on the site; there will be over 300 trees for the MDR application and nearly 900 (actual 1100) trees for the condo project. Several questions as to the types of trees and size of trees and landscape architect addressed landscape issues. Questions regarding interaction between homeowners on the north property line as it relates to types of trees blocking view. Landscape architect informed the neighbors that smaller trees that do not grow that high would be installed and view preservation was primary component with tree selection: 4. Conversations regarding view preservations and a house sales and anticipated sales. We cannot anticipate selling price but informed that new product is comparable sales at a per square foot basis. 5. Concerns about existing traffic on the Red Hill country club road realignment. Neighbors were reminded that this would be a City T Project that is not part of the cameo project scope. oncerns a ouf homeless people on site and peeping toms. Informed neighbors that the police have been actively arresting the homeless people and that when development occurs this will no longer be an issue. Comments from homeowners wanting to know when the project was going to be approved and construction timelines. Timelines regarding plan check and construction discussed and offer extended to homeowners to participate in communication with the City for support for the project. Office 909.481.1822 800*240*1822 Fax 909.481.1824 City Center • 10681 Foothill Blvd., Suite 395 • Rancho Cucamonga, CA • 91730 A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION D3—Pg99 01/31/2006 00:51 9094E CHARLES JOSEPH l -IC PAGE 02/04 Cameo Homes 1/19/2006 Community Meeting Name Address Phone # J 3 . � v� 1 1n�na S3S Red 1� I! CGt; Dl 4 li !� It It 1/ Eti U< <14 5 c -- 9 _ _ 10 1 11 y�7-7750 O.T. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ' D3-Pg100 01/31/2006 00:51 90948� CHARLES JOSEPH A,"-9C PAGE -03/04 Cameo Homes 1/19/2OD6 Community Meeting Name Address Phone # l 7 2f ,. .11 3 p /� t• gPil. h�i�+ �wv' '. 'r �*'-iilc..�/ rs ..iF• � 9l 7_30 • G.clLl __�:lh � . 6 �m_s3"C'A�4c� �4k��Cf 11 t7 tiiR +' 3 C�k & l 9 10 11 12 13 14 16 17 18 19 zo 21 22 23 24 D3—Pg101 01/31/2006 00:51 90W 1 CHARLES JOSEPH +'-'OC PAGE 04/04 Cameo Homes 1/19/2006 Community Meeting Name Address Phone # 1 �o u ' er a0 9BI-y6zz 1 d 6 I c zo -0 9 4 5 8 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 18 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 D3-Pg102 Charles Joseph A.ssoc�ates PUBLIC/PRIVATE SECTOR MANAGEMENT SERVICES Cj ly OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA January 6th, 2006 +AN 0 9 2006 F Re: Community Meeting 'FCFiV'r1- PLANNING Cameo Homes Project located at the NWC, of Baker and Foothill Blvd., in Rancho Cucamonga Dear Property Owner: This letter is to invite you to a Community Meeting concerning the Cameo Homes "Sycamore Villas" a 206 Unit Condominium project located at the NWC of Baker and Foothill Blvd., in Rancho Cucamonga. This meeting will give us the opportunity to share with you our plan revisions for this high quality Condominium Development project that we believe will be a positive addition to your neighborhood, and the opportunity to discuss the specifics of this project and to answer any questions that you may have with regard to this project. All proposed condominium buildings have been designed to preserve existing Red Hill views. We appreciate you taking time out of your busy schedule to join us at 5:00 PM on January 19th, 2006. The meeting will be held at The Sycamore Inn, located at 8318 Foothill Blvd., Rancho Cucamonga. The meeting will be held downstairs, in the Grove Room and the project team will be available to answer any questions or concerns that you may have at this meeting. Light refreshments will be served. We are looking forward to meeting with you. Should YOU have any questions or need any _—additionaLinformatiQn_i>Ladva[Lce_of_this eeti�please__feel free to give me_a call at ____ your earliest opportunity. Sincerely, Charles J. Buquet Charles Joseph Associates Enclosure cc: Larry Henderson, City Planning cc: Dan Coleman, City Planner OfFice 901)-4,q I•IS'_'_ 88S-240-1822 Fax 909•481•1824 rain' (:enter • 10681 Foorhill Blvd_ SUIre 395 • Rancho Cucamonga. CA • 91730 A C 11.111 rK\IA a a rRP< IR.CI-II . D3—Pg103 o / � � i •emu n492.Y/ f � I . i��, CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN SYCAMORE C:TY GF RANCI IO CUCA?IONGA VILLAS owm e.s . ssoe^Ns..... a D3-PgQ04 CharlesJUBLICIPRIVATEose*ph Associates �/�yoFAgNcy0 cG SECTORMANAGEME14TSERVICES ' 4Pp p� C�IL/pNG Neighborhood Letter Summary We have complied responses to the issues raised by the neighbors during the Neighborhood meeting and letters received by the City of Rancho Cucamonga, which was then in turn provided to us. Below is a summary of each letter and discussion of items addressed. Copies of these letters are in the staff report. Ken and Helen Brown Mr. and Mrs. Brown are concerned about the following issues regarding the proposed Sycamore Villas Project: noise levels, view changes, and traffic. Response: View impacts been mitigated by lowering the prorrle of the building, a photo survey was conducted to demonstrate the ultimate Roof Condition south of the property. The traffic issues•raised in this letter have been addressed by the traffic study that will not create adverse impacts for traveling to the elementary school as 'there will be a low student trip generation. Noise.— already present from Farm, more from Recreation/Pool-Complaints about what was verbally described during the neighborhood meeting as "migrant music' coming from the strawberry patch farm workers. Response; We can not control the noise levels generated from the workers at the strawberry patch as it is not subject to the application. We can not control the type of music desired by the residents of a project. The complaints are coming from a property that is approximately a % mile, or 1200 linear feet from the subject property. Emergency entrance/exit hazardous. The northerly exit is for Fire Ingress/Egress only and has been designed as such. There's a perception of developers greed. The developer will be responsible for paying over 4 million dollars in associated "impact fee" costs to the community. This fee was something that was not required for the existing condo project to the north. Annette and Richard Davidson Project's one access would be hazardous in case of emergency, i.e. fire. The no exit is for Fire Ingress/Egress only and has been designed as such. Public services would be increased. The developer will be responsible for paying over 4 million dollars in associated "impact fee" costs to the Office 909.481.l822 800.240•1822 Fa 909*481.1824 r:-y Center • 10681 Foothll Blvd., Suite 395 • Rancho Cucamonga, CA • 91730 A CALIFORNIA CORPORA FION D3-Pg105 community. This fee was something that was not required for the existing condo project to the north. The project will be paying to mitigate future services with an estimate of approximately $ 753, 548 for Traffic, $721i000 for park fees, $1,772,218 for school fees, $361,000 for storm drain fees and construction of master planned storm drain improvements that will benefit the existing condo project, $1,669,218 for water fees. All fees totaling an estimate of 3 681984 dollars in impact fees as well as over a million dollars in street improvements as currently conditioned. New schools and classroom needed. See relative to school fees. Construction dust will affect local people with asthma. Project will comply with necessary, air quality management during construction for dust control... Noise Project will comply with noise standards and have an HOA in place• for control of noise standards on site; same as the condo to the north. Increase in consumption of scarce and/or costly resources, ie. Water, electricity and gas. Project will be paying almost 2 million dollars in water fees, which is something that was not paid for by the Condo's to the north. Strain on sewer system. See above response, project will be paying millions of dollars in infrastructure fees, something the condo project to the north was not required to do. In fact, Red hill condos existing drainage creates more of a safety hazard on the area than the proposed project because of the lack of storm drain improvements and drainage that was allowed to sheet flow from the existing condo project, which as part of this development will be fixed beyond the property line. Dale and Barbara Price Traffic problems on Red Hill and Foothill, The northerly exit is for Fire Ingress/Egressonly-andhas_beenslesignest�s uc raffc Increases have been anticipated as part of the General Plan and appropriate street widening plans have been approved and are moving forward to accommodate all growth of Rancho Cucamonga along this corridor. Potential storm drainage problems, land slides and fire hazards Insufficient parking/garages The project site will be over parked and includes 82 extra tandem spaces as part of the overall approval and are in addition to City required parking. The parking will not affect the property to the north. Unbearable upward traveling noise from Pool/Rec Room. As part of the CC&R's noise levels will need to be controlled by the property management which have more control than say a single family development. Devaluation of surrounding area and rural quality of area. Brand new development tends to increase the price per square foot, the price per square foot for the proposed development is higher than the existing condos. D3-Pg106 Overcrowding of existing schools This 2 bedroom type product does not generate high numbers of students and nationally have been negligible, however the developer will be contributing $1,772,218 for school fees. Charles and Lynda Teenor Entry point into site will create traffic problems. The traffic signal entrance has been designed to meet all applicable City Traffic Engineering requirements. This particular resident lives approximately 1 mile from the project development, near the Vineyard traffic signal. Melvin Dieterich Please note that Mr. & Mrs. Dieterich have sold their condo and moved. Devaluation of surrounding area due to the fact that project buildings resemble an entry level housing market and not a high end complex. Brand new development tends to increase the price per square foot; the price per square foot for the proposed development is higher than the existing condos. Traffic/congestion problems escalated by single entry into project site. Since Me/ reviewed the plans, the traffic signal entrance has been revised as outlined above,_and_prQjecl_w-fl! also be ayin Ci Transportation fees. Insufficient parking. The project site will be over parked and includes 82 extra tandem spaces as part of the overall approval. The parking will not effect the property to the north. One pool insufficient The project will have other amenities provided such as a clubhouse, pocket park and tot /of and not just 2 pools similar to what was provided for the condo project. Dale and Barbara Price Emergency exit, designated as a main entrance and exit, is impossible, noisy, and dangerous. The northerly exit is for Fin: Ingress/Egress only and has been designed as such and will not be dangerous since residents will not use that ingress/egress. D3-Pg107 Devaluation of property values, agitation of homeowners and destruction of historical area. Brand new development tends to increase the price per square foot, the price per square foot for the proposed development is higher than the existing condos. Rancho Cucamonga will become into Fontana. We are not sure how to respond to this comment Burt and Nancy Court Our firm spoke at Great length with Mrs. Court regarding the development Friday March 315t. The same issues 'raised were conveyed regarding the responses with an additional response to the drainage issues. The decay of the soil for the existing condos can not be mitigated by our. development, we will provide for an appropriate drainage acceptance of the condo project. The existing drainage problems of the condos is not for our client to solve. The condos could decide to generate funds to address the storm drain issues, and we are happy to providecopies of the drainage study to an engineer to evaluate the existing drainage flows. High density will reduce property values. Insufficient parking/garages Health hazard as result of insufficient swimming pools Entry-level housing units will become ghetto. Dirt movement will cause damage to existing homes. Increased traffic along Foothill Emergency entry/exit dangerous Degrades city Earth removal will cause damage to slopes and undermine the foundation of the tondo's above. Sever damage will be caused to units and lead to injury or death of homeowners. Robert Fromer Our firm spoke at Great length with Mr. Fromer regarding the development Friday March 318 It appeared his primary concern was noise and he mentioned that he could not hear the construction noise for the Red Hill Country Club construction, and therefore would not likely hear the noise from the Cameo project during construction. Hillside stability will need to be addressed by the Civil Engineer of record, but we were told that the buildings and proposed development would actually serve to help hold the hillside intact and property accept and control drainage/run off from the existing condo project. Devaluation of surrounding property Hillside instability will be created by grading Rodents will migrate to surrounding homes. D3-Pg108 Noise issue Traffic congestion as result of exit onto Red Hill Thank you for the opportunity to provide responses to the letters on file at the City. Sincerely, Charles Buquet Charles Joseph Associates D3-Pg109 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM . (Fart I - Initial Study) City of Rancbo Cuwmonga (Please type orprint clearly using Ink Use the tab key to move from one fine to the next line.) Planning nrvrsian , (e09)477-2750 The purpose of this form is to inform the -City of the basic components of the proposed projectso that the City may review the project pursuant'to City Policies, 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. INCOMPLETEAPPLICATIONSWILL NOTBEPROCESSED . Please note that it is the responsibility ormeapplicant roensure mat the application is complete at the time of submittal; City staff will not be available to perform work required to provide missing information. Application Number for the project to which this form pertains: DRC 2003-00637 Project Title: Sycamore Villas Name,& Address of project owner(s): Nicholas Coussoulis IRA No. 61133912, McNay Group I, LLC Name & Address of developer or project sponsor: Kim Berry, Cameo Homes -1105 Quail Street Newport Beach, CA 92660-2705 Contact Person & Address: Chuck Buquet - Charles Joseph Associates, 16081 Foothill Blvd Suite 395 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Name & Address of person preparing this form (if different from above): Chuck Buquet - Charles Joseph Associates, 16081 Foothill Blvd Suite 395 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Telephone Number. 909-481-1822 Page 1 of 9 Created on 522/2003 12:03 PM D3—Pg110 Information indicated by an asterisk (') is not required of nonconstruclion CUP unless otherwise requested by staff. '1) Provide a hull scale (8-112 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): Project is located north of Foothill, north & east of Sycamore Inn, west of the Railroad overpass on Foothill. The northern boundary is just south of the Red Hill condominium project. 4) Assessor's Parcel Numbers (attach additional sheet if necessary): 0207-101-34-MOO,0207-101-31 •5) Gross Site Area (adsq. It.): . 21.00 '6) Net Site Area (total site size minus area of public streets 8 proposed dedications): 19.75 7) Describe any proposed general plan amendment or zone change which would affect thb project site (attach additional sheet if necessary): None. 8) Include a description of all permits which will be necessary from the City of Rancho Cucamonga and other governmental agencies in order to fully implement the project: Grading & Building permits 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): Site is sloped North from Foothill with various plants and trees. There is an abandoned water basin on the east portion of the site adjacent to the "rails on trails" proposed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. EnvironmentalCameo Page 2 of 9 Created on 5/2212003 12:03 PM D3—Pgl11 10) Describe the known cultural and/or historical aspects of the site. Cite all sources of information (books, published reports and oral history): Project site is north of Route 66 and nearby City Landmark Sycamore Inn dating back as a Stagecoach Trading Depot during agricultural development of Rancho Cucamonga. 11) Describe any noise sources and their levels that now affect the site (aircraft, roadway noise, etc.) and how they will affect proposed uses: FootFli B1vd7Route-66) traffic voice -that will be -addressed in -accordance -to city specifications.--- — 12) Describe the proposed project in detail. This should provide an adequate description of the site in terms of ultimate use that will result from the proposed project. Indicate if there are proposed phases for development, the extent of development to occur with each phase, and the anticipated completion of each increment. Attach additional sheet(s) if necessary. The project is 225 attached for -sale residential unit community designed for a hillside site. Because of its highly visible location, the project intends to be a °gateway" into Rancho Cucamonga. It utilizes split level buildings of townhomes and stacked flat product type in an effort to mitigate the hillside terrain. It will have a variety of 2 bedroom plans with the majority of the units having an individual garage in the same buidling. A few remote garage structures will be in close proximity to the units as well as uncovered spaces located among lush landscaping. Because of its close proximity to the Sycamore Inn, the project Environmenta[Cameo Page 3 of 9 Created on 51=003 12:03 PM D3—Pgl12 will share the same entry as well as similar craftsman style of architecture to compliment the existing structure Amenities such as a pool spa fltness'room among others will cater to the residents. A system of landscaped walking paths traverse through the site and will connect to the future City Rails to, 13) Describe the surrounding properties, including information on plants and animals and any cultural, historical, or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land use (residential, commercial, etc.), intensity of land use (one -family, apartment houses, shops, department stores, etc.) and scale of development (height, frontage, setback, mar yard, etc.): North of the site is the Red Hill Condo Community & County club East is a future site of community trail. East of the trail crossing is a vacant property zoned Multi Family. South of the site is Foothill Blvd. with resturants on the south side of Blvd West of the site is vacant property and the Sycamore Inn. 14) Will the proposed project change the pattern, scale or character of the surrounding general area of the project? The proposed project will not change the pattern scale or character of the area. The proposed project is generally consistent with the spirt and intent of the Sycamore Inn specific plan. 15) Indicate the type of short-term and long-term noise to be generated, including source and amount. How will these noise levels affect adjacent properties and on -site uses. What methods of soundproofing are proposed? - Short term Construction noise only-no-longterm-impacts.Residentialprojeet-will comply -with -applicable _ City noise standards *16) Indicate proposed removals and/or replacements of mature or scenic trees: Any tree removal determined as necessary during City review/approval process will be subject to City tree removal permit requirements. 17) ' Indicate any bodies of water (including domestic water supplies).into which the site drains: None. EnvironmentalCameo Page 4 of 9 Created on 5/22/2003 12:03 PM D3—Pgl13 t 18) Indicate expected amount of water usage. (See Attachment A for usage estimates). For further clarification, please contact the Cucamonga County WaterDishict at 987-2591. a. Residential (gal/day) 87,600.00 Peak use (gat/Day) 175 200.00 b. Commercial/Ind. (gal/day/ac) 0.00 Peak use (gal/min/ac) 0.00 19) Indicate proposed method of sewage disposal. ❑ Septic Tank ® Sewer. If septic tanks are proposed, attach percolation tests. If discharge to a sanitary sewage system is proposed indicate expected daily sewage generation: (See Attachment A for usage estimates). For further clarification, please contact the Cucamonga County Water District at 987-2591. a. Residential (gal/day) 43,800.00 b. CommercialAndustdaf (gal/day/ac) 0.00 RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS: 20) Number of residential units: 225 Detached (indicate range of parcel sizes, minimum lot size and maximum lot size: Attached (indicate whether units are rental or for sale units): sale units. see below. 21) Anticipated range of sale prices and/orrents: Sale Pdce(s) $230,000.00 to $275,000.00 Rent (permonth) $0.00 to $0.00 22) Specify number of bedrooms by unit type: Building Type 1. 1,116 sq. ft. total of 119 units Building Type 2; 1,143 sq. ft. total of 21 units Building Type 3; 1,231 sq.ft. total of 86 units 23) Indicate anticipated household size by unit type: All 2 bedroom units 2.6 per unit EnvironmentalCameo Page 5 of 9 Created on 522/2003 12:03 PM D3—Pgl14 24) Indicate the expected number of schoolchildren who will be residing within the project: Contact the appropriate School Districts as shown in Attachment B: ' a. Elementary., 37 b. Junior High: 15 c. Senior High 53 COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL PROJECTS 25) Describe type of use(s) and major function(s) of commercial, industrial or institutional uses: N/A 26) Total Floor area of commercial, industrial, or institutional uses by type: N/A 27) Indicate hours of operation: 28) Number of employees: Total., Maximum Shift. - Time of Maximum Shift: 29) Provide breakdown of anticipatediob classifications, including wage and salary ranges, as well as an indication of the rate of hire for each classification (attach additional sheet if necessary): NIA 30) Estimation of the number of workers to be hired that currently reside in the City: p *31) For commercial and industrial uses only, indicate the source, type and amount of air pollution emissions. (Data should be verified through the South Coast Air Quality Management District, at (818) 572-6283): NIA EnvironmentalCameo Page 6 of 9 Created on.52212003 12:03 PM D3-Pgl15 ALL PROJECTS 32) Have the water, sewer, fire, and flood control agencies serving the project been contacted to determine their ability to provide adequate service to the proposed project? If so, please indicate their response. All agencies have indicated their ability to provide adequate service to the project site. 33) In the known history of this property, has there been any use, storage, or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic materials? Examples of hazardous and/or toxic materials include, but an: not limited to PCB's; radioactive substances; pesticides and herbicides; fuels, oils, solvents, and other flammable liquids and gases. Also note underground storage of any of the above. Please list the materials and describe their use, storage, and/or discharge on the property, as well as the dates of use, if known. None. 34) Will the proposed project involve the temporary or long-term use, storage or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic materials, including but not limited to those examples listed above? If yes, provide an inventory of all such materials to be used and proposed method of disposal. The location of such uses, along with the storage and shipment areas, shall be shown and labeled on the application plans. No. I 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 of my ability, that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct tot he best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information maybe required to be submitted before an adequate evaluation can be made by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Date: 1/28104 Signature: Title: Chuck Buquet, President, Charles Joseph Associates EnvironmentalCameo Page 7 of 9 Created on 5rM003 12:03 PM D3-Pgl16 City of Rancho Cucamonga ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM INITIAL STUDY PART II BACKGROUND 1. Project File: General Plan Amendment DRC2004-00339, Development Code Amendment . DRC2004-00352, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605, Development Review DRC2003-00637, Variance DRC2005-01061, and Minor Development Review DRC2004-00826. 2. Related Files: Tree Removal Permit DRC2004-00082 3. Description of Project: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2004-00339 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - An application to amend the General Plan to allow the development of land that contains a 30 percent slope within a mixed use area within Subarea 1 of the Foothill Districts, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard; between Red Hill Country Club Drive and Southern Pacific Road Right -of -Way - APN: 0207-101-13, 31 and 34. Related Files: Development Code Amendment DRC2004-00352, Tentative Tract SUBTT16605, Development Review DRC2003-00637, Variance DRC2005-01061, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2004-00082. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DRC2004-00352 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - An application to amend the Development Code to allow the development of the land that contains a 30 percent slope within a mixed -use area within Subarea 1 of the Foothill Districts, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Southern Pacific Rail Road Right -of -Way - APN: 0207-101-13, 31 and 34. Related Files: General Plan Amendment DRC2004-00339, Tentative Tract SUBTT16605, Development Review DRC2003-00637, Variance DRC2005-01061, Minor Development Review DRC2004.00626, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2004-00082. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT SUBTT16605- CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES- A residential subdivision of 8 lots for condominium purposes on 21 acres of land in the western Foothill Corridor Mixed Use area within Subarea 1 of the Foothill Districts, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Southern Pacific Rail Road Right -of -Way - APN: 0207-101-13, 31 and 34. Related Files: Development Code Amendment DRC2004-00352, General Plan Amendment DRC2004-00339, Development Review DRC2003-00637, Variance DRC2003-00637, Minor Development Review DRC2004-00826, DRC2005-01061, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2004-00082. . ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00637 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for 206 condominiums on 21.acres of land in the western Foothill Boulevard Mixed Use Corridor area within Subarea 1 of the Foothill Districts, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and Southern Pacific Rail Road Right -of -Way - APN: 0207-101-13, 31 and 34. Related Files: General Plan Amendment DRC2004-00339, Development Code Amendment DRC2004-00352, Tentative Tract SUBTT16605, Minor Development Review, DRC2004.00826, Variance DRC2005-01061, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2004-00082. VARIANCE DRC2005-01061 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - A request to reduce the parking lot setback from 45 feet minimum to 10 feet to allow improvements to an existing parking lot for the Sycamore Inn Restaurant on property located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard at the intersection of San Bernardino Road - APN: 0207-101-24. Related File: Development Review DRC2003.00637, Tentative Tract SUBTT16605 and Minor Development Review DRC2004-00826 MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2004-00826 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - Parking lot, loading area modifications and covered patio area at the Historic Sycamore Inn Restaurant, located at 8318 Foothill Boulevard - APN: 0207-101-24. Related Files: Development Review DRC2003-00637. Variance DRC2005-01061. and Tentative Tract SUBTT16605. D3—Pgl18 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 2 DRC2004-00339,-00352\SUBTT16605\DRC2003-00637\DRC2005-01061\DRC2004-00826 4. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Charles Joseph Associates 16081 Foothill Boulevard, Suite 395 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 5. General Plan Designation: Mixed Use 6. Zoning: Foothill Boulevard District (Subarea 1) 7. Surrounding Land Use's and Setting: The site is located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Southern Pacific Rail Road right-of-way. Properties to the north are developed with condominiums and. single-family homes designated- Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) and Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre), respectively. South of Foothill Boulevard is designated Mixed Used and is developed with office and commercial uses. East of the site is the abandoned Southern Pacific Rail Road (future Regional Trail and possible future rail) and is designated Open Space. To the west is the Sycamore Inn Restaurant and is designated 'Mixed Use. Other properties to the west are Mixed -Use land use and Office/Commercial to the southwest. The Red Hill Golf course is located northwest of the project site adjacent to the Medium Density residential development. 8. 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: Larry Henderson, Principal Planner (909)477-2750 10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): None ---GLOSSARY= The followingabbreviationsareused irrthis-rep CVWD — Cucamonga Valley Water District EIR —Environmental Impact Report FEIR — Final Environmental Impact Report NPDES — National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NOx— Nitrogen Oxides ROG — Reactive Organic Gases PM,o — Fine Particulate Matter RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board SCAQMD — South Coast Air Quality Management District SWPPP — Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan URBEMIS7G — Urban Emissions Model 7G ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," or "Less -than -significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. D3—Pg119 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 3 DRC2004-00339,-00352\SUBTT16605\DR02003-00637\DRC2005-01061\DRC2004-00826 (✓) Aesthetics (✓) Biological Resources (✓) Agricultural Resources (✓) Cultural Resources (✓) Air Quality (✓) Geology & Soils () Hazards & Waste Materials (✓) Hydrology & Water Quality () Land Use & Planning () Mineral Resources (✓) Noise Recreation () Population & Housing (✓) Transportation(Traffic (✓) Public Services () Utilities & Service Systems ( ) (✓) Mandatory Findings of Significance 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. () 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 standard 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. () 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 _____—__T_NEGATLVE_t?ECIARA_TIQN-ursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Prepared 1 Reviewed Date: 2 Date: D3—Pg120 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 4 DRC2004-00339,-00352\SUBTT16605\DRC2003-00637\DRC2005-01061\DRC2004-00826 Less Than Slgn'V. , Less Potentla'ly Wnn Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Slgnifirant MGgation Signo ant No cl Incowated 1 act I d EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1, AESTHETICS. Would the project: () () () H a) Have a substantial affect a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not () () () V) limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State Scenic Highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or () () () H 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/b) There are significant vistas within or adjacent to the project site. However, the site is not within a view corridor according to General Plan Exhibit 111-15. It is the City's desire to have permanent locations within the City where scenic vistas of the foothills, in particular, can be leisurely enjoyed. Turnouts at the northern terminus of certain roadways (Haven, Archibald, Milliken, Etiwanda Avenues, as well as the Day Creek Channel) provide an unsurpassed opportunity to create these vista points. Views of existing condominium residents on Red Hill to the north have been reasonably preserved by the design of the proposed project. The proposed project is surrounded by development. Attached condominiums occupy the properties north of the project site, which are within the Red Hill area. Slopes are a major feature of the site, with a majority of the site disturbed, and replanted with non-native species. Site -features include a-iarge,—concrete-drainage-facility/-(abandoned_reservoir)lhat has -the remains of spray cans, graffiti, and dumping and the pad area for a demolished water tank. Evidence of squatters homes, camp sites, and trash dumping is present in canyon areas. Significant visual features that frame the site are the historic Sycamore Inn on the west, the Red Hill Bluff to the north, and the abandoned Southern Pacific Railroad embankment to the east. Mature heritage trees are existing on- and off -site and are discussed in a'revised Arborist Study dated February 2005, by David Evans and Associates. c) The site is located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and Southern Pacific Rail road -right-of-way and is zoned Foothill Boulevard District (Subarea 1), Mixed -Use. The visual quality of the area will not degrade as a result of this project. 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 fines and utility enclosures in accordance with Planning. Commission Resolution No. 87-96, unless exempted by said Resolution. d) The project will create new light and glare because the site is currently vacant. The design and placement of light fixtures will be shown on site plans which require review for consistency with City standards that requires shielding, diffusing, or indirect lighting to avoid glare. Lighting will be selected and located to confine the area of illumination to within the project site. The impact is not considered significant. D3—Pg121 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 5 nnr)nnd_nn3za-nn359\SUBTT16605\DRC2003-00637\DRC2005-01061\DRC2004-00826 Less Tian Si;nifiwnl Less Palentia'ly WIN Than 1n Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Significant m^1lga,lan slm Na .ifica .,.,.it,on nifu.ctInca 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) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, because of their location or nature, could result in . conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural uge? Comments: a) The site' is not designated as Prime Farmlands, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. The site is located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard between San Bernardino Road and Baker Avenue and is zoned Foothill Boulevard District (Subarea 1), Mixed -Use, and is characterized by developments to the north, south, east, and west. There are approximately,1,300 acres of Prime Farmlands, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance within the City of Rancho Cucamonga, of which about one-third 'is either developed or committed to development according to General Plan Table IV-2. The major concentrations of designated farmlands are located in the southern and eastern portions of our City that is characterized by existing and planned development. Further, two-thirds of the designated farmlands parcels are small, ranging from 3 acres to 30 acres, and their economic viability is doubtful; therefore, they are not intended to be retained as ----------farmlandan_the_GeneralPlanhand Use Plan. The General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) identified the conversion of farmlands to urban uses as a sigm icy unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan for which the FEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. b) There is no agriculturally zoned land within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. There are no Williamson Act contracts within the City. c) The site is located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard between San Bernardino Road and Baker Avenue and is zoned Foothill Boulevard District (Subarea 1), Mixed -Use and is characterized by existing developments to the north, south, east and west. The nearest agricultural use is more north of Arrow Route (marginal grape production) from the project site. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. 3. AIR QUALITY. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?. b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? D3—Pg122 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 6 DRC2004-00339,-00352\SUBTT16605\DRC2003-00637\DRC2005-01061\DRC2004-00826 Less Than sigNficant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: pp g Potentially 9tenfiiaN wih Mi WiKh Than Sipnlan No I. aq Inao,pwate0 I act Imoad 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 () (f) () ( ) concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number () () () V) of people? Comments: a) As noted in the General Plan FEIR (Section 5.6), continued development will contribute to the pollutant levels in the Rancho Cucamonga area, which already exceed Federal and State standards. The General Plan FOR identified the citywide increase in 'emissions as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan for which the FEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. b) During the construction phases 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 and operate at one development site until their tasks are complete. They then transfer to a different site where the process begins again. There o�tTie emissions associated with construction activities are not new to the Rancho Cucamonga area and they would not violate an air quality standard or worsen the existing air quality in the region. Nevertheless, fugitive dust and equipment emissions are required to be assessed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) on a project -specific basis. Therefore, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented to reduce impacts to less -than -significant levels: 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) 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. D3—Pg123 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 7 nRc9nn4-00339.-00352\SUBTT16605\DRC2003-00637\DRC2005-01061\DRC2004-00826 Less han S�gmficam Less PoleNially WAr Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: sIe^is�n. M Igatio^ �9^If and No 1 acl Incooaroled irwtl Inroad 4) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. 5) All construction equipment shall comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403. Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions: • Reestablish ground cover on the construction site through seeding and watering. • Pave or apply gravel to any on -site haul roads. • Phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large areas to erosion over extended periods of time. • Schedule activities to minimize the amounts of exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. • Dispose of surplus excavated material in accordance with local ordinances and use sound engineering practices. • Sweep streets according to a schedule established by the City If silt is carried over to adjacent public .thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. • Suspend grading operations during high winds (i.e., wind speeds exceeding 25 mph) in accordance with Rule 403 requirements. • Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils haul trucks or cover payloads using tarps or other suitable means. 6) The site shall be treated with water or other soil -stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and Regional Water Quality Control Board [RWQCB]) daily to reduce Fine Particulate Matter (PM,,) emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. 7) Chemical soil -stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PMio emissions. 8) The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel -powered equipment where feasible. 9) The construction contractor shall ensure that construction grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. The proposed project was screened using the Urban Emission Model 2002 (URBEMIS2002) prepared by Jones & Stokes under the guidance of the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, the Ventura County Air Pollution Control District, and the SCAQMD. The program generates emissions estimates for land use development projects. Though not required, construction emissions are screened and quantified to document the effectiveness of control measures. Tables 1 and 1A show construction emission results. D3—Pg124 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 8 DRC2004-00339,-003521SUBTT16605\DRC2003-00637\DRC2005-01061\DRC2004-00826 Lew Than Slane" nl Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potealially slynlfiaaal Wlp. A411igafian Than Slgnfi and ' Na Noct IR act Inca orated act t Table 1 URBEMIS2002 Site Grading Emissions Summary (Pounds per Day) Source ROG NOx CO PM�o Mit. Mit. Mit. Mit. Demolition ' Site Grading ROG NOx CO PM" Fugitive Dust - - 20.00 Off -Road Diesel 17.23 144.19 118.01 6.72 Worker Trips 0.19 0.37 3.93 0.02 Total 17.42 144.56 121.94 26.74 SCAQMD Thres. 75 100 550 150 Si nificance No Yes No No Table I URBEMIS2002 Construction Emissions Summary (Pounds per Day) Source ROG NOx CO PM10 Mit. Mit. Mit. Mit. Bldg Const 26.15 212.09 184.33 9.76 Worker Trips 2.60 5.64 57.13 0.27 Arch Coatino 1 434.22 - Asphalt 0.83 3.15 0.59 0.04 Total 463.80 220.88 242.05 10.07 SCAQMDTtrres 75-- 100---55�---450-- Si nificance Yes Yes No No As indicated in Table 1, grading emissions exceed the SCAQMD threshold for Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) and Table 1A the construction emissions exceed the SCAQMD thresholds for two of the four criteria air pollutants, Reactive Organic Gases (ROG) and NOX. The grading and construction of a development this size is anticipated to exceed thresholds levels. However, the construction emissions are short-term (approximately twelve months) and are not considered significant. Once construction is complete, the operational levels are well below SCAQMD thresholds as indicated in Table 2. Operational Emissions: The site is located within the Foothill Boulevard District (Subarea 1), Mixed -Use, and the project would remain consistent with the designated land use, with the approval of a Minor Exception. Residential developments currently surround the project site. The majority of the emissions impacts associated with the project would result from vehicles traveling to and from the site. Mobile source emissions were calculated using the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (6th edition) values programmed into the URBEMIS 2002 model. In order to reflect the nature of the proposed project, the default value of 5.76 per dwelling unit was used to reflect the vehicle trips that would most likely be associated with the proposed project. Emissions associated with these vehicle trips are listed in Table 2. D3-Pg125 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 9 nRc9004-00339.-00352\SU6TT16605\DRC2003-00637\DRC2005-01061\DRC2004-00826 • Less Than 5gnlit Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PetenAal:y Sli;W i V, MlUgehan Than sio r., No In act Incareafa:ed hrwcl Iroact Table 2 URBEMIS 2002 Operations Emissions Summary (Pounds per Day) Source ROG NOx CO PM10 Mit. Mit. I Mit Mit. Area Source 11.22 1.70 1.31 0.00 Mobile Source 15.87 15.43 172.15 13.17 Totals 27.10 17.13 173.46 13.18 SCAQMD Thres. 55 55 550 150 Si nificance No No No No After implementation of the preceding mitigation measures, short-term construction air quality emissions would remain significant as holed in the General Plan FEIR (Section 5.6). Based upon the Urban Emissions Model 7G URBEMIS7G model estimates in Table 5.6-4 of the General Plan FEIR, NO,, ROG, and Fine Particulate Matter (PM10) would exceed SCAQMD thresholds for significance; therefore, would all be cumulatively significant if they cannot be mitigated on a project basis to a level less -than -significant. The General Plan FOR identified the citywide increase in emissions as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. In the long-term, development consistent with the General Plan would result in significant operational vehicle emissions based upon the URBEMIS7G model estimates in Table 5.6-4 of the General Plan FEIR; therefore, would all be cumulatively significant if they cannot be mitigated on a project basis to a level less -than -significant. The following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 10) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate high-efficiency/low-polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water heaters. 11) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. After implementation of the preceding mitigation measures, the General Plan FEIR identified the citywide increase in operational emissions as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. c) As noted in the General Plan FEIR (Section 5.6) continued development would contribute to the pollutant levels in the Rancho Cucamonga area, which already exceed Federal and State standards. The General Plan FEIR identified the citywide increase in emissions as a significant and adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. The project proposed is consistent with the General Plan for which the FEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. 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 D3—Pg126 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 10 DRC2004-00339,-00352\SUBTT16605\DRC2003-00637\DRC2005-01061\DRC2004-00826 - - Less TGan i significant Less and Supporting Information Sources: en:anv sipn5wnt With MlliptanSignra man nl NoIssues act Incor Date! Im act I act are located within 1/4mile of sensitive receptors and would emit toxic air contaminants identified in SCAQMD Rule 1401. The project site is adjoining the nearest sensitive receptor (existing residences). Therefore, adverse impacts are anticipated. Potential impacts to air quality are consistent with the Public Health and Safety Super -Element within the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. During construction, there is the possibility of fugitive dust to be generated from grading the site. The mitigation measures listed under b) above will reduce impact to less -than -significant levels. e) Typically, the uses proposed do not create objectionable odors. No adverse impacts are anticipated. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project., a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game -or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on riparian habitat or () () () V) 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, coas a , e c.)-tfiro(gh—(rrect -rermavatYlting,-hydrologicat — interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native () ( ) resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan? Comments: a/b) in July 2003, Ecological Sciences conducted a Habitat Suitability Evaluation on the project site. The level of constraint a sensitive biological resource would pose to potential developments typically depends on the following criteria: The relative value of that resource The amount or degree of impact to the resource D3-Pg127 0 City of Rancho Cucamonga IPage 11 DRC2004-00339,-00352\SUBTT16605\DR02003-00637\DRC2005-01061\DRC2004-00826 Less Tian ' Significant less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially sgrifianl W..m M1titiph Than Sigoifia t Hp Impact- Inca. eratei Im aM Impact Whether or not impacts to the resource would, be in violation of State and/or federal regulations or laws Whether or not impacts to the resource would require permitting by resources agencies The degree to which impacts on the resource would otherwise be considered "significant" under CEQA Based on an evaluation using these criteria, existing disturbed/disced areas were considered of a relatively low biological constraint and value given the context in which they occur. This designation is because of the high level 'of disturbance that has resulted in low biological diversity, absence of special -status species to utilize or reside within these areas. Because no threatened or endangered species are likely to occur in disturbed areas because of the highly disturbed conditions present in a predominantly degraded environment, construction activities in these areas would not likely jeopardize the continued existence of listed species, nor would construction adversely impact designated critical habitat. Impacts to disturbed areas would also not be expected to substantially affect special -status resources or cause a population of plant or wildlife species to, drop below self-sustaining levels, nor would impacts be expected to substantially alter diversity of wildlife in the area because of the current degraded habitat conditions. The project site is located in an area developed with mixed uses. The site has been previously disrupted during construction , of infrastructure and surrounding developments/annual discing for weed abatement. According to the General Plan Exhibit IV-3, and Section 5.3 of the General Plan FEIR, the project site is not within an area of sensitive biological resources; therefore, development will not adversely affect rare or endangered species of plants or animals because of the fact that the project is surrounded by T urbanize�laan uses and is costs-terTtwlth-theGerreral-Ptan-Land Use Piart-- -- c) No wetland habitat is present on -site. As a result, project implementation would have no impact on these resources. d) The majority of the surrounding area has been or is being developed, thereby, disrupting any wildlife corridors that may have existed. No adverse impacts are anticipated. . e) The City of Rancho Cucamonga has adopted a tree ordinance, which states, "The Eucalyptus, Palm, Oak, Sycamore, Pine, and other trees growing within the City of Rancho Cucamonga are a natural aesthetic resource which helps define the character of the City. Such trees are worthy of protection in order to preserve the scenic beauty, prevent soil erosion, provide shade, wind protection, screening, and counteract air pollution." David Evans and Associates Incorporated conducted an Arborist Report and Tree Inventory analysis in September 2003 and revised it in February 2005. They identified the existing conditions of the trees and reported on their type and general health (predominately focusing on Sycamores, Oaks, and Ornamentals). Pertaining to Sycamore trees, if drainage is altered, it may affect the amount of water that the Sycamores receive. The trees could be adversely effected if they were to receive significantly less water than they have received historically. Should this be, the developer would be advised to replace the lost water with another source, namely irrigation. D3—Pg128 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 12 DRC2004-00339,-00352\SUBTT16605\DRC2003-00637\DRC2005-01061\DRC2004-00826 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: pp g Fmefiwt SiImpact l wm rdiliga Than Signifi ant Impact a Inso� aced IripaC a Fact f) An area northwest of the project site is identified as a conservation area according to the General Plan, Open Space and Conservation Plan, Exhibit IV-4. The Red Hill Golf Course occupies the adjacent area. identified. No. conflicts with habitat conservation plans will occur. 1) In accordance with the Tree Preservation Ordinance, a tree preservation and replacement program based on the following priorities will be submitted and approved by the City Planner prior to the issuance of grading permits: 1) preserve -in -place healthy trees, 2) if trees cannot be preserved-tn-place„then transplant elsewhere on -site, and as a last resort, 3) remove and replace with largest nursery grown stock available. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project. a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance O O O V) of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance O V) O ( ) of an archeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological () V) () ( ) resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred () () () V) outside of formal cemeteries? Comments: a) The project site has not been identified as a "Historic Resource" per the standards of Rancho' Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 2.24 (Historic Preservation). An Historical Assessment of-th project -site was-conductedtylStephen"R-Van-wormerir-May 1990-and-revealed-the---=--- following: Four historic resources were identified as a result of research and field survey and include: 1) the Cucamonga Stage station site, 2) the Sycamore Inn, 3) the Red Chief Motel, and 4) the San Bernardino Museum Archaeological Information has noted the presence of two previously recorded historic bridges (CHS-1786-1 and CHS-1786-6) as well as the old Los Angeles to San Bernardino road route (PS-BR-3-H) adjacent to the project boundaries. These resources are outside the project area and will not be impacted. However, the Sycamore Inn site is being used as access to the project. The use of a portion of the Sycamore Inn site has required some realignment of the parking layout and drive aisles but the impact is not significant. b) An Archaeological Assessment was prepared in May 1990 by Kathleen C. Del Chario for the project site. The assessment concluded that all exposed ground surfaces within the project area were examined and neither artifacts nor any indication of a subsurface deposit, or midden, was encountered. Because of this, no further prehistoric archaeological investigations are recommended. However, since a prehistoric scatter was previously recorded in this location, and because of the intense prehistoric activities in the local area, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 1) 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 D3—Pg129 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 13 DRC2004-00339,-00352\SUBTT16605\DRG2003-00637\DRC2005-01061\DRC2004-00826 Less Than Sigoifianl less Issues and Su ortln Information Sources: pp g Potentially 3: am Prnh 6a ThanNo Broad t dm ac: 'Inca me orates Tcate Imaac: Im ct E c) 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: • 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 area's archaeological heritage. • Propose mitigation measures and recommend conditions of approval to eliminate adverse project effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric resources, following appropriate CEQA,guidelines. • Prepare a technical resources management report, documenting the inventory, evaluation, and proposed mitigation of resources within the project area. Submit one copy of the completed report, with original illustrations, to the San Bernardino County Archaeological Information Center for permanent archiving. The General Plan FEIR (Section 5.11) indicates that the Rancho Cucamonga area is on an alluvial fan. According to the San Bernardino County database, no paleontological sites or resources have been recorded within the City of Rancho Cucamonga or the sphere -of -influence, including the project site; however, the area has a high sensitivity rating for oaleontoloaical resources. The older alluvium, which would have been deposited during the wetter climate that prevailed 10,000-100,000 years ago during the Late Pleistocene epoch of the Quaternary period, when the last "Ice Age" and the appearance of modern man occurred, may contain significant vertebrate fossils. The project site is underlain by Quaternary alluvium per General Plan Exhibit V-2; therefore, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 2) If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal fossils) are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified paleontologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. The paleontologist shall submit a report of findings that will also provide specific recommendations regarding further mitigation measures (i.e., paleontological monitoring) that may be appropriate. Where mitigation monitoring is appropriate, the program must include, but not be limited to, the following measures: • Assign a paleontological monitor, trained and equipped to allow the rapid removal of fossils with minimal construction delay, to the site full-time during the interval of earth -disturbing activities. Should fossils be found within an area being cleared or graded, divert earth - disturbing activities elsewhere until the monitor has completed salvage. If construction 'personnel make the discovery, the grading contractor should immediately divert construction and notify the monitor of the find. D3—Pg130 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 14 DRC2004-00339,-00352\SUBTT16605\DRC2003-00637\DRC2005-01061\DRC2004-00826 Less Than sin-f- l Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: pp 9 Fptemially SiyNrram y,N hLtigaGm TIf sip ifpnl No Im a9 Npot^„p21M ImcaCl Impact • Prepare, identify, and 'curate all recovered fossils for documentation in the summary report and transfer to an appropriate depository (i.e., San Bernardino County Museum). d) The proposed project is in an area that has already been disturbed by development. The project site has already been disrupted by construction of infrastructure and surrounding developmentslannual 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) states that if human remains are discovered on -site, no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. As adherence to State regulations is required for all development, no mitigation is required in the unlikely event human remains are discovered on -site. No adverse impacts are anticipated. .6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated () () () V) 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. i)_ Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including () () () (V) liquefaction? iv) Landslides? ( ) ( ) ( ) V) b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ( ) V) ( ) ( ) 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 () V) () ( ) of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of (), () ( ) V) septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? Comments: a) Eberhart Consultants, Inc prepared a Geolechnical Investigation and Fault Study. The investigation concluded the following: No known active faults pass through the site and the subject property has experienced strong groundshaking from earthquakes that have occurred D3—Pg131 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 15 DRC2004-00339,-00352\SUBTT16605\DRC2003-00637\DRC2005-01061\DRC�004-00826 Less Tian Signficant Lm Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: pp g Felentaay Sgrifirant vnn WgaJ. Than SI-;Natant No ' I'aact Inc Ie0 I. -d Irt act In the southern California region and will likely experience strong ground shaking in the future. The largest estimated median and 84th percentile PHGA are 0.473g and 0.753g, respectively associated with a 7.OMw earthquake on the Cucamonga Fault. The potential for on -site liquefaction is considered low. No known landsliding exists on the subject property. However, approximately the eastern third of the site is within an Earthquake Fault Zone, along the Red Hill Fault, in the Rancho Cucamonga City Special Study Zone, according to the General Plan Exhibit V-1, and Section 5.1 of the General Plan FEIR. The Red Hill Fault, passes within 1/4 mile of the site, and the Cucamonga Fault Zone lies approximately 4.6 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 1.5 miles northeasterly of the site and the San Andreas Fault, capable of up to Mw 8.2 earthquakes, is 15 mile northeasterly of the site. Each of these faults can produce strong groundshaking. Adhering to the Uniform Building Code will ensure that geologic impacts are less -than -significant. b) 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 Fine Particulate Matter (PMto) emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403, or replanted with drought resistant landscaping as soon as possible. -- 2)— Frontage public sf�eets "shall be swept according-tb-a smeduft'estabtished by the City to reduce PMjo 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, 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 PMIa emissions. c) The General Plan FEIR (Section 5.1) indicates that subsidence is generally associated with large decreases or withdrawals of water from the aquifer. Widespread subsidence, on the order of 1 to 2 feet, because of groundwater withdrawal has been predicted for the southern part of the City. The project site is located in the southern portion of the City and it could be subject to subsidence. However, there are no known indications that this is occurring. The project would not withdraw water from the existing aquifer. The site is not within a geotechnical hazardous area or other unstable geologic unit or soil type according to General Plan FOR Figure 5.1-2. Soil types on -site consist of Soboba Gravelly Loamy (0-9 percent slopes), Saugus Sandy Loam (30-50 percent slopes), and Ramona Sandy Loam (9-15 percent slopes) Soil association according to General Plan FEIR Exhibit 5.1-3. No adverse impacts are anticipated. D3-Pg132 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 16 DRC2004-00339,-003521SUBTT16605\DRC2003-00637\DR02005-01061\DRC2004-00826 Less Than sgnigcant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: pp g Potennally Signif.,=t W h Mitigation Than Signl$anl No Im act Inca '-d Im act Impact 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 Saugus Soil, and Ramona Sandy Loam (9-15 percent slopes) associations, according to General Plan Exhibit V-3 and General Plan FEIR Exhibit 5.1-3: These soils are typically well -drained, steep soils. Slopes are 30 to 50 percent and elevation is approximately 1.200 to 2,500 feet. Several recommendations for the design and construction of manufactured slopes were. identified in the Geotechnical Investigation and Fault Study prepared by Eberhart Consultants. 5) Fill slopes 30 feet or less in height should have a keyway toe (a special backfilled excavation, which Is constructed beneath the toe area of a planned fill slope on sloping ground to improve the stability of the slope). Fill slopes greater than 30 feet in height should have a keyway width equal to one-half the slope height with a depth of 5 feet at the keyway toe. All keyways should be tilted a minimum of 2 percent towards the back of the keyway. 6) Backcuts for stabilized slopes 30 feet or less in height should be excavated at a 2:1 gradient. Backcuts for stabilized slopes greater than 30 feet in height can be excavated at gradients up to 1.5:1 provided the fill at the top of these slopes is at least 15 feet thick. All stabilized slopes should be constructed and drained in accordance with the specifications and details in Appendix H of the Geotechnical Investigation and Fault Study (specifications 5.50 thru 5.57). Adherence to these design specifications would ensure stable construction slopes. 7) For residences, setbacks from bottom outer edges of foundations, walls, etc. - ______-adjacent -a -top-of-slope-should-be-setback-from-the-slope-fare-a-horizontal----- distance of one-third the slope height under consideration in accordance with the 1997 Uniform Building Code. The horizontal distance should not be less than 5 feet. 8) Buildings adjacent the toe of a slope should be set back a horizontal distance equal to one-half the vertical height of the slope in accordance with the 1997 Uniform Building Code with minimum and maximum setbacks of 3 feet and 15 feet, respectively. In addition the following recommendations should be included in the CC&R's for the homeowners association. To ensure proper maintenance of the slopes: 9) All slopes should be landscaped with drought resistant vegetation. A landscape architect should be consulted for recommendations on appropriate plant types and planting configuration. 10) Interim measures should be considered to protect the slopes prior to the establishment of landscaping. These measures may include the utilization of geotechnical erosion fabrics or acceptable alternatives. 11) Drainage devices should be inspected and maintained at regular intervals and should not be obstructed. D3-Pg133 0 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 17 DRC2004-00339,-00352\SUBTT16605\DRC2003-00637\DRC2005-01061\DRC2004-00826 TtlinIssues and Su ortin Information Sources:i PP 9 slan&anl 6��n ation SlIm aci araled Im atl Im acl 12) The slopes should be periodically inspected for the presence of burrowing rodents. If an infestation of burrowing rodents is confirmed, they should be eliminated from the slopes. 13) Provisions should be made to interrupt automatic timing devices of irrigation systems during the rainy seasons. 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. 7. HAZARDS AND WASTE MATERIALS. Would the project: a) Create , a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public -or the O O O V) environment through reasonably foreseeable 'upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emithazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 114 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 i) () () V) the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working, in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an () () () V) adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, () () () V) injury or death involving wildiand fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? D3—Pg134 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 18 DRC2004-00339,-00352\SUBTT16605\DRC2003-00637\DRC2005.01061\DRC2004-00826 Less Than Siofimnl Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g Potemauy sfSW.W,t vrm fbuga Qn Then sf9d!. of Np Impact Inm;i aced ImAad Irtgad Comments: a) The project will not involve the transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. The City participates in a countywide interagency coalition that is considered a full service Hazardous Materials Division that is more comprehensive that any other in the state. The City has adopted a Standardized Emergency Management System Multi -Hazard Functional Plan to respond to chemical emergencies. In addition, PIC Environmental Services completed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment report in June 2003 and concluded that based upon the results of the Phase I assessment, and the research of available records, there was no evidence that environmental impairments exist at the subject property. Compliance with Federal, State, and local regulations concerning the storage and handling of hazardous materials and/or waste will reduce the potential for significant impacts to a level less -than -significant. No adverse impacts are expected. b) The proposed project does not include the use of hazardous materials or volatile fuels. The City participates in a countywide interagency coalition that is considered a full service Hazardous Materials Division that is more comprehensive than any other in the stale. The City has adopted a Standardized Emergency Management System Multi -Hazard Functional Plan to respond to chemical emergencies. Compliance with Federal, State, 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. No adverse impacts are anticipated. c) There are no schools located within 1/4 mile of the project site. The nearest existing schools are located .41 mile to the northeast (Valley. Vista Elementary), to the south (Los Amigos Elementary), and to the southeast (Bear Gulch Elementary). 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. The Phase I site inspection did not reveal the presence of discarded drums or illegal dumping of hazardous materials. No impact is anticipated. e) The site is not located within an Airport Land Use Plan and is,not within 2 miles of a public airport. The project site is located approximately 3 miles northerly of the Ontario Airport and is offset north of the flight path, No impact is anticipated. The nearest private airstrip, Cable Airport, is located approximately 2 1/2 miles to the west of the City's westerly limits. No impact is anticipated. g) The City's Multi -Hazard Disaster Plan, which is updated every two years, includes policies and procedures to be administered by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District in the event of a disaster. Because the project includes at least two points of public street access and is required to comply with all applicable City codes, including local fire ordinances, no adverse impacts are anticipated. h) Rancho Cucamonga faces the greatest ongoing threat from a wind -driven fire in the Urban Wildland Interface area found in the northern part of the City according to the Fire District Strategic Plan 2000-2005; however, the proposed project site is not located within a high fire hazard area according to General Plan Exhibit V-7. D3—Pg135 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 19 DRC2004-00339,-00352\SUBTT16605\DRC2003-00637\DRC2005-01061\DRC2004-00826 Less Tnxn SiGrZeanl Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP 9 sgrsfi ally Solenual vmn FL:iaM Tna" S;9,�F.nt No In' act Inccf waled Impact ercact S. 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 () () () V) 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-Flood-trazard-area-as O---if)--- (�--(-)--- 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 () (10 () ( ) would impede or redirect flood flows? 1) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, () V) () ( ) injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? Comments: a) Water and sewer.service is to be provided by the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD). The project is designed to connect to existing water and sewer systems. The State of California is authorized to administer various aspects of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit under Section 402 of the Clean Water Act. The General Construction Permit treats any construction activity over 1 acre as an industrial activity, requiring a permit under the State's General NPDES permit. The State Water Resource Control Board (SWRCB) through the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), Santa Ana Region, administers these permits. D3—Pg136 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 20 DRC2004-00339,-00352\SUBTT16605\DRC2003-006371DRC2005-01061\DRC2004-00826 Less Than Significan{ Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: pp g Potenlml:y SignifwM ro5tn Mitipation °a Sip fwnl No Iwact Inco crateE I act Impact 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 Construction Permit. The General Construction Permit requires all dischargers to comply with the following during construction activities, including site clearance and grading: Develop and implement a Storm, Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that would specify Best Management Practices (BMPs) that would prevent construction pollutants from contacting storm water and with the intent of keeping all products of erosion from moving off -site into receiving waters. Eliminate or reduce non -storm water discharges to storm sewer systems and other waters of the nation. Perform inspections of all BMPs. Waste discharges include discharges of storm water and construction project discharges. A construction project for new development or significant redevelopment requires an NPDES permit. Construction project proponents are required to prepare a SWPPP. To comply with the NPDES, the construction contractor of the project will be required to prepare a 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 Hall and Foreman, Inc. dated May 2004, that 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-sG ur1-c rof r eiho-dc-.—St�Cturat co-ntrots-used`to-mlanage-storm-water pottutarrt levels include detention basins, oil/grit separators, and porous pavement. Non-structural controls focus on controlling pollutants at the source, generally through implementing erosion and' sediment control plans, and various business plans that must be developed by any businesses that store and use hazardous materials. Practices, such as periodic parking lot sweeping, can substantially reduce the amount of pollutants entering the storm drain system. The following mitigation measures would be required to control additional storm water effluent: Construction Activities: 1) Prior to issuance of grading permits, the permit applicant shall submit to Building Official for approval 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 of 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 D3-Pg137 IN City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 21 DRC2004-00339,-00352\SUBTT16605\DRC2003-00637\DRC2005-01061\DRC2004-00826 Less Than Slgnifiwnt Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP 9 P°1e°I'allr sfanfru„t �nlh ruu�dN, of s:gmront rm In• as Inco na:etl Inoacl Irreacl 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) It shall be the hired contractor's responsibility to inspect and maintain all BMPs in good working order. Inspection and maintenance responsibility shall remain for the duration of the project. . Post -Construction Operational., 6) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared by Hall and Foreman, Inc, dated May 2004 to reduce pollutants after construction entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 7) Landscaping plans shall include provisions for controlling and minimizing the use of fertilizerstpesticidesiherbicides, 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-Gity-for-review-and -approval -prior-to-the— issuance of grading permits. b) According to CVWD, 43 percent of the City's water is currently provided from groundwater in the Cucamonga and Chino Basins.' CVWD has adopted a Master Plan that estimates demand needs until the year 2030. The proposed project will not deplete 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 Exhibit IV-2. The development of the site will require the grading of the site and excavation; however, would not affect the existing aquifer, estimated to be about 288 to 470 feet below the ground surface. As noted in the General Plan FEIR (Section 5.9), continued development citywide will increase water needs and is a significant impact; however, CVWD has plans to meet this increased need through the construction of future water facilities. c) 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. 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, an increase in runoff from the site will not result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site. The impact is not considered significant. D3-Pgl38 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 22 DRC2004-00339,-00352\SUBTT16605\DRC2003-00637\DRC2005-01061\DRC2004-00826 Less Than slgnifitanl Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g a^1e^eanr SigAfi an drag MlGgagon hag sgn0 No i n i lea i3 i n 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, an 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 rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and amount of surface water runoff because of the amount of new building and hardscape proposed on a site; however, all runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to handle the flows. The project will not result in substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. Therefore, an increase in runoff from the site will not result in flooding on- or off -site. No impacts are anticipated. Grading activities associated with the construction period could result in a temporary increase in the amount of suspended solids in surface flows during a concurrent storm event, thus resulting in surface water quality impacts. The site is for new development or significant redevelopment; therefore, is required to comply with the NPDES to minimize water pollution. The following mitigation measures shall be jrpplemented: 8) Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit to the City Engineer for approval a WQMP, including a project description and identifying 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. 9) Prior to issuance of grading or paving permits, the applicant shall obtain a Notice of Intent (NO1) to comply with obtaining coverage under the NPDES General Construction Storm Water Permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Evidence that this has. been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Discharger's Identification Number) shall be submitted to the City Building Official for coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit. g/h) The project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area according to General Plan Exhibit V-5. No adverse impacts are expected. The Rancho Cucamonga area is flood protected by an extensive storm drain system designed to convey a 100-year storm event. The system is substantially improved and provides an integrated approach for regional and local drainage flows. This existing system includes several debris dams and levees north of the City, spreading grounds, concrete -lined channels, and underground storm drains as shown in General Plan Exhibit V-6. The project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area according to General Plan Exhibit V-5. No adverse impacts are expected. j) There are no oceans, lakes, or reservoirs near the project site; therefore impacts from seiche and tsunami are not anticipated. The Rancho Cucamonga area sits at the base of the steep eastern San Gabriel Mountains whose deep canyons were cut by mountain streams. D3—Pg139 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 23 DRC2004-00339,-00352\SUBTT16605\DRC2003-00637\DRC2005-01061\DRC2004-00826 ' less Than spnl0eanl Leos Su Issues and ortin Information Sources: PP g IftiS potentiavy SipniMam wa, Mi Wlffi "" SlgNf Na Im aC Incono2led Impoe. 1 cl 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. 9. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, a general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or () i) H V) natural community conservation plan? ' Comments: a) The site is located within the Foothill Corridor Mixed Use area within Subarea 1 of the Foothill Districts and is characterized by mixed commercial and residential developments to the north, south, east, and west. The project includes the development of 21 acres into 206 condominiums. The project would not conflict with any environmental plans or policies upon approval of the proposed General Plan and Development District Code Amendments. The project will become a part of the larger community. No adverse impacts are anticipated. b) The project site land use designation is Mixed Use. The proposed project is the request to _construct 206 condominiums on 21 acres. The developer is proposing to construct the development on land with up to 30 percent slopes, which requires a Development Code and a General Plan Amendment. See Section 6 of the General Plan FEIR for a discussion of geolechnical requirements to ensure that the project can be developed under these conditions. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan with the proposed amendment and does not interfere with any policies for environmental protection. As such, no impacts are anticipated. c) The project site is not located within any habitat conservation or natural community plan area. According to the General Plan Exhibit IV-3, and Section 5.3 of the General Plan FEIR, the project site is not within an area of sensitive biological resources; therefore, development will not adversely affect rare or endangered species of plants or animals because of the fact that the project is surrounded by urbanized land uses and is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Plan. 10. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important () () () V) mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? D3—Pgl40 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 24 DRC2004-00339,-00352\SUBTT16605\DRC2003-00637\DRC2005-01061\DRC2004-00826 Less Than significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PA g Potenlla!Iy Significant Rom Maigaaon Than significant He I—- tncor cra!ed Im act Imes t Comments: a) The site is not designated as a State Aggregate Resources Area according to the City General Plan, Figure IV-1 and Table IVA: therefore, there is no impact. b) The site is not designated by the General Plan, Figure IV-1 and Table IV-1, as a valuable mineral resource recovery site; therefore, there is no impact. 11.'NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in () (✓) () ( ) excess of standards established in the local general plan or .noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive () () () (✓) ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels () () () (✓) in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient () w () (✓) noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, () () () (✓) where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to -—excessive-noise levels? -----— f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would () () () (✓) the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Comments a) The project site is within an area of noise levels exceeding City standards according to General Plan Exhibit V-13 at build -out. BridgeNet International conducted an Exterior Noise Analysis in September 2003. The total noise exposure level will consist of the sum of the traffic noise combined an an energy basis. The traffic noise exposure will be dominated by the noise generated from traffic on Foothill Boulevard at the southern portion of the project site. The total unmitigated noise exposure level at the condominiums closest to Foothill Boulevard will be as high as 68.3 dB CNEL. The General Plan FEIR (Section 5J) indicates that during a construction phase, on -site stationary sources, heavy-duty construction vehicles, and construction equipment, will generate noise exceeding City standards. The following measures are provided to mitigate the short-term noise impacts: 1) Construction or grading shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. 2) Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120-D, as measured at the property line. D3—Pg141 City of Rancho Cucamonga IPage 25 DRC2004-00339,-00352\SUBTT16605\DRC2003-00637\DRC2005-01061\DRC2004-00826 Less Than Sig.'rcanl Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g Folenllany Significant With Wiga!' Than Significant No Impact Monoclal.d Impacl Im act Developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly noise level monitoring as specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120. Monitoring at other times may be required by the Planning Department. Said consultant shall report their findings to the Planning Department within 24 hours; however, if noise levels exceed the above standards, then the consultant shall immediately notify the Planning Department. If noise levels exceed the above standards, then construction activities shall be reduced in intensity to a level of compliance with above noise standards or halted. 3) The perimeter block wall shall be constructed as early as possible in the first phase. b) The uses associated with this type of project normally do not induce ground borne vibrations. As such, no impacts are anticipated. c) The project site is located within the Foothill Corridor Mixed Use area within Subarea 1 of the Foothill Districts. The project includes the development of 21 acres into 206 condominiums. The primary source of ambient noise levels in Rancho Cucamonga is traffic. The proposed activities will not significantly increasetraffic; hence, are not anticipated to increase the ambient noise levels within the vicinity of the project. d) The General Plan FEIR (Section 5.7) indicates that during a construction phase, on -site stationary sources, heavy-duty construction vehicles, and construction equipment, will generate noise exceeding City standards. The following measures are provided to mitigate the short-term noise impacts: 4) Haul truck deliveries shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and _--.____ _.___-6:30.a.m_on-weekdaysrincluding_SaturdayTor_atany_time_-on_Sunday_or-a- national holiday. Additionally, if heavy trucks used for hauling would exceed 100 daily trips (counting both to and from the construction site), then the developer shall prepare a Noise Mitigation Plan denoting any construction traffic haul routes. To the extent feasible, the plan shall denote haul routes that do not pass sensitive land uses or residential dwellings. The preceding mitigation measures will reduce the disturbance created by on -site construction equipment; however, do not address the potential impacts because of the transport of construction materials and debris. The following mitigation measures shall then be required: 5) Once building plans are submitted for permits, an interior noise analysis shall be done for buildings in this project to determine the type of building materials to be used to ensure that buildings meet interior noise standards of 45dB CNEL. 6) Noise barriers should be constructed around the patios and balconies of the buildings along the southern portion of the project site, adjacent to Foothill Boulevard. The first Floor patio barriers shall be 5 112 feet in height and the second and third floor balcony barriers shall be 5.0 feet in height. e) The site is not located within an Airport Land Use Plan and is not within 2 miles of a public airport. The site is located approximately 3 miles northerly of the Ontario Airport and is offset north of the flight path. No impact is anticipated. D3-Pg142 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 26 DRC2004-00339,-00352\SUBTT16605\DRC2003-00637\DRC2005-01061\DRC2004-00826 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: POlentaJY sigOMM wit MW atia illdn Sg dfi an! No I ac: leco e21c0 Impact Im Oct The nearest private airstrip, Cable Airport, is located approximately 2 1l2 miles to the west of the City's westerly limits. No impact is anticipated. 12. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either {) () �) {✓) directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) of 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 not induce population growth. Construction activities at the site will be short-term and will not attract new employees to the area. The project includes the development of 21 acres into 206 condominiums. The development is anticipated to generate a ratio of 2.6 persons per unit or approximately 585 additional residents.., However, growth Is anticipated and is designed in accordance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Development Code, Chapter 17.32, Foothill Boulevard Districts guidelines for development of Subarea 1. No impacts are anticipated. b) The project site contains no existing housing units. No adverse impact expected -- c)—The proect site is vacant land. No Impac s are an Icipate-d.— 13. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire protection? () () (✓) ( ) b) Police protection? () () (✓) ( ) c) Schools? () () (✓) ( ) (✓) ( ) e) Other public facilities? () () (✓) ( ) Comments: a) Fire Protection - The Insurance Services Office, Inc. (ISO) collects information on a community's public fire protection and analyzes the data using their Fire Suppression Rating Schedule (FSRS). They then assign a Public Protection Classification (PPC) on a scale from one to ten. Class one represents the best public protection, and Class ten indicates less than D3-Pgl43 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 27 DRC2004-00339,-00352\SUBTT16605\DRC2003-00637\DRC2005-01061\DRC2004-00826 ' Less Than signMcanl Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP 9 FInroad Poler.ualy sigrifiwnl wtn Wigabon Thai signiCcanl No Irco ualed Impact Mead the minimum recognized protection. Each Fire District is evaluated every five years and is reported to insurance companies as a factor in setting the premiums they charge for property insurance; the better the community's PPC grade, the lower the premiums for property insurance. According to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Construction Services, the City is rated a Class Three. According to the ISO, a class three rating in California is in the upper 15 percent of the entire state. The site would be served by a fire station located approximately 2 miles from the project site. This site, designated Mixed -Use, is intended for the development of 206 condominiums. The proposed development would generate approximately 585 residents. The City. of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District indicates that for every 1,000 citizens, an average of 0.27 firefighter is on -duty (based on conversation with John Thomas, City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Construction Services/Plan Check Manager, January 2003). Under existing considerations, the Fire Protection District would be able to provide adequate fire' protection, for the proposed condominium development and the impact would be less -than -significant. The project will not require the construction of any new facilities or alteration of any existing facilities or cause a decline in the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new facilities. Standard conditions.of approval from the Uniform Building and Fire Codes will be placed on the project so no impacts to fire services will occur. No impacts are anticipated. b) Police protection — The City of Rancho Cucamonga contracts with the San Bernardino County Sheriffs Department (SBSD) and currently has 96 uniformed officers assigned to the City. With an estimated population of 154,780 people, the ratio of officers to citizens is approximately 0.62 per 1,000 residents (based on.conversation with Dan Waters, Crime Analyst assigned to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, January 2003). The average response time to an emergency call for service is approximately four minutes; response times are evaluated on a monthly basis. The Sheriffs Department reviews response times annually, and the ratio of officers to the City's population to determine if more officers are needed to ____keep _the response tjrn�belpw five minutes. The proposed project would generate approximately 585 people. This would result in a demand for less than a one percent increase in officers to maintain the City's current level of service. The impact is considered less -than -significant. Additional police protection is not required as the addition of the project will not change the pattern of uses within the surrounding area and will not have a substantial increase in property to be patrolled as the project site is within an area that is regularly patrolled. c) Schools - Rancho Cucamonga is divided into four different elementary and intermediate school districts: Alta Loma, Central, Cucamonga, and Etiwanda. A total of twenty-one elementary schools and seven middle schools currently exist within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. This site is served by the Central School District. The Central School District serves the western portion of Rancho Cucamonga and includes five elementary schools and two junior -high schools with a capacity of 5,885 students. Portable classrooms are used to alleviate overcrowding problems. Funding is the deterrent to facility expansion and the City and school districts are addressing the problem by requesting State and Federal funding. The,City also meets the needs for schools by collecting developer school impact fees. The fees currently are $1.93 per square foot for residential construction and $.31 per square foot for commercial and industrial developments. The elementary and the high school districts share revenues generated by the school impact fees. The proposed project is anticipated to generate approximately 105 students (37 Elementary students, 15 Middle School students and 53 High School students). The D3—Pg144 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 28 DRC2004-00339,-00352\SUBTT16605\DRC2003-00637\DRC2005-01061\DRC2004-00826 Less Tnan 31gnUant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentialty Wth MNgavan ThanStgnlfiaM Signi.iant No I n Ina ted n I d developer will be required to pay the appropriate schools fees prior to occupancy. Therefore, this impact is considered less -than -significant. In addition to the primary and in term ediale'schools, the City of Rancho Cucamonga includes four high schools within the Chaffey Joint Unified School District. The Central 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. With this standard mitigation, impacts to the school districts are not considered significant. No impacts are anticipated. d) The site is in a developed area, currently served by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The nearest parks are located .8 mile northeast (Red Hill Community Park) and southeast (Bear Gulch Neighborhood Park) 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. No impacts are anticipated. 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 FEIR (Section 5.9.9), the projected increase in library space under the General Plan will not meet the projected demand. The General Plan FEIR identified the cumulative impact on library services as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. The proposed_p oject is consistent with the General Plan for which impacts evaluated. Since the adoption of the General Plan, the City has planned a new library within the Victoria Gardens regional shopping center of approximately 22,000 square feet, which is in excess of the projected need of 15,500 square feet at build -out of the City. 14. RECREATION. Would the project: a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional () () () V.) 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 () () () V) 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 served by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The nearest park is located 3/4 mile from the project site. Various recreational facilities are available within the City. According to the General Plan EIR, the City has approximately 261 acres of developed parks (excluding trails). Neighborhood parks range in size from .5 to 10 acres, while community parks generally range from 12 to 44 acres in size. The regional and community trail system within the City includes an additional 248 acres of D3—Pgl45 a City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 29 DRC2004-00339,-00352\SUBTT16605\DRC2003-00637\DRC2005-01061\DRC2004-00826 Less Thar. _ Slprificanl Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 potentially Sipnifipnl wm MiUBaaon lha^ SipniSmnt Np I d I^< area Imoacl I a recreational lands. Approximately 150 acres of proposed recreational lands exist within the City that has not yet been developed. Residents within the City also have limited use of school facilities for various recreational activities and sports leagues through agreements between the certain school districts and surrounding communities The City's current goal regarding parks involves designating 5 acres of parkland for every 1,000 residents. Based on this goal, the City'is currently experiencing a deficiency of approximately 118.9 acres of developed parkland. The City currently collects 3 acres of parkland or in -lieu fees for every residential subdivision of 1,000 residences. Some additional sources of funding for parklands include general fund revenues, developer impact fees, State and Federal grants, user• group contributions, school district joint use contributions, concessions, and encouraging large residential projects to incorporate private recreational facilities beyond the City's requirements. The General Plan EIR indicates the City estimates development of approximately 232 acres of recreational facilities (parks, special use facilities) by 2020, in addition to the currently designated 150 acres of designated area intended for recreational purposes, but not yet developed. These areas, when combined with the existing recreational facilities within the City, would total 891 acres. Based on the General Plan population projections for 2020, the City would require a total of 781 acres of parkland to meet the City's parkland goal. The proposed project would generate approximately 585 people and a standard condition of approval will require the developer to pay park development fees and/or designate area for parklands. With the projection of the General Plan for the availability of parklands exceeding demand, the project would not significantly impact'recreational facilities within the City. b) See a)response above. _15--TRANSP.ORTATIONITRAFFIC... Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in () () () V) relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of () () () H 'service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either () () () V) an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards because of a 'design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? () () () V) f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? () () () V) g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs () () V) ( ) supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? D3—Pg146 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 30 DRC2004-00339,-00352\SUBTT16605\DRC2003-00637\DRC2005-01061\DRC2004-00826 Less Than Si6nr<ant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Pal=^call, Zni5fanl With Wjgation Aan Signi6pnl No Impact Info o21ed Impact hopact Comments: a) Linocut Law & Greenspan Engineers conducted a Traffic Impact Study in July 2003. The study focused on seven intersections to determine the potential traffic impacts during the morning and evening commute peak hours (between 7:00 and 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 and 6:00 p.m. on a typical weekday. The study concluded that the project would generate on a typical weekday approximately 1,283 daily two-way trips, with 96 trips (15 inbound, 81 outbound) produced in the AM peak hour and 118 trips (79 inbound, 39 outbound) produced in the PM peak hour. The results of the traffic analysis indicated that the proposed *project will not adversely impact any of the seven key study intersections when compared to City of Rancho Cucamonga, City of Upland, and San Bernardino County Congestion Management Plan (CMP) Level of Service standards and significance traffic impact criteria. The seven key study intersections currently operate, and are projected to operate with the inclusion of project traffic, at an acceptable service level during AM and PM peak commuter hours. As noted in the General Plan FEIR (Section 5.5), continued development will contribute to the traffic load, in the Rancho Cucamonga area. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan for which the FOR 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. _ __—_ _.__—h)—TheprojectwilL eaeiate 1,2831w.ozray_peakhourhips, whioliis less_than-250_iwo_way_pgak—.—__ hour trips for non -retail land use; therefore, is below the threshold of the San Bernardino CMP criteria for requiring a traffic impact analysis. 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 3 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. Access to the site is from Foothill Boulevard and Red Hill Country Club Drive. 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 and will, therefore, not create an inadequate emergency access. No impacts are anticipated. The project design has adequate parking in compliance with standards of the Rancho Cucamonga Development Code and will therefore not create an inadequate parking capacity. According to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Development Code, parking associated with the D3—Pg147 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 31 DRC2004-00339,-00352\SUBT716605\DRC2003-00637\DRC2005-01061\DRC2004-00826 Less Than Slgmficanl Less ssues and Su ortin Information Sources: pp g aol:,.i2nY Signifi.( V"h hti;iganon han Sgnlfiranl No Im W ncupaa:ed Imhad Imcac; project should be approximately 405 spaces; the project developer has provided a sufficient number of spaces. No impacts are anticipated. g) The project site is within the Foothill Corridor Mixed Use area within Subarea 1 of the Foothill Districts. According to the Rancho Cucamonga Draft General Plan Exhibit III-13 "Hiking and Riding Trails Master Plan," the southeast portion of the site adjoins the abandoned Southern Pacific Rail Road — Proposed Multi -Purpose Regional Trail. The regional Multi -Purpose Trail serves as the backbone of the public trails system; covering long distances and connecting to regional parks, open space preserves, national forests, and other regional trails leading beyond the community. This trail should provide for equestrian, pedestrian, and bicycle use. The right-of-way standard for regional trails is 30 feel minimum' width. The Planning Commission, based on physical constraints, may grant an exception to the standard. Additionally, according to Exhibit III-7 "General Bikeway Plan," the site also adjoins a Class I (southeast portion of the site abandoned Southern Pacific Rail Road — Proposed Multi -Purpose Regional Trail) and Class II (Foothill Boulevard) Bikeway Plan, Class I consists of bicycle trails that are essentially "off-street" and separated from motor vehicles. They are a minimum of 8 feet in width for two-way travel and include bike lane signage and designating street crossing where needed. A Class I bike path may parallel a roadway (within the parkway) or may be a completely separate right-of-way that meanders through a neighborhood or along a Flood control channel. Class II bikeways are located next to the curb or edge of paved roadway and are a minimum of 5 feet in width. They include bike lane signage, special lane lines, andother pavement markings. Adherence to the City of Rancho Cucamonga "Hiking and Riding Trails Master Plan," and "General Bikeway Plan," this impact is considered less -than -significant. The project design includes, or the project will be conditioned to provide, features supporting transportation and vehicle trip reduction (e.g., bus bays, bicycle racks, carpool, parking, etc.). 16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the () () () V) 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 0 drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project, that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? D3—Pg148 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 32 DRC2004-00339,-00352\SUBTT16605\DRC2003-00637\DRC2005-01061\DRC2004-00826 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Fotenually Significant cam NIREg too Than Spniricant No Inroad Incorporated Imoact Impact g) Comply with Federal, State, and 'local statutes and O O O V) 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-4 treatment plant located within Rancho Cucamonga and RP-1 located within the City of Ontario, neither of which are at capacity. The project is required to meet the requirements of the Santa Ana RWQCB regarding wastewater. No impacts are anticipated. b/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 are at capacity. The project is required to meet the requirements of the Santa Ana RWQCB regarding wastewater. CVWD is an independent special district that provides sewer collection, water treatment and distribution services to 152,000 customers in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, portions of the cities of Ontario, Fontana, and Upland, and a portion of the unincorporated area of the County. Annually, the CVWD adopts a five-year CIP for infrastructure improvements and new projects. Every five years, the CVWD completes a Water and Sewer Master Plan Study, which was most recently updated in 2000 (Cucamonga County Water District LAFCO Sphere/Service Review Report, September, 2002). The CVWD water sources include groundwater, surface ("Canyon") water, and imported water. There are currently a total of 23 groundwater wells (17 in the Cucamonga Basin and 6 in the Chino Basin). The CVWD total capacity of pumped groundwater production from both basins is 32,121 gallons per minute (gpm) (approximately 51,800 acre-feet/year). --------C-apilal-improvement -funds-are-budgeted-annually-to-fecondition -and -rehabilitate-wells-as -- needed. Three water treatment facilities treat local surface water and imported water. The total treatment capacity of all three plants is 57.5 million gallons per day (mgd) with an additional 18 mgd expected to be on-line in mid-2003. These plants currently provide treatment for an average of 32 mgd. The distribution system has approximately 230 miles of primary distribution lines. Pipelines include cement mortar lined and wrapped steel pipe and cement mortar coated steel pipe.(Cucamonga County Water District LAFCO Sphere/Service Review Report, September, 2002). The CVWD funds water and sewer system capital improvements, primarily through developer fees ("Development Capacity Charges") for the right to connect to CVWD systems. The amount of the charge is based on the size of a meter installed for a new customer (Cucamonga County Water District LAFCO Sphere/Service Review Report, September, 2002). The project developer will be required to pay fees for service to the CVWD. The impact to the District's water treatment and distribution system is determined to be less -than -significant. c) All runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to handle the flows. The project would increase demand upon storm drain systems because of the increased runoff from new hardscape and rooftops proposed. A Final Drainage Report would address projected storm 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 less -than -significant. D3-Pg149 9 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 33 DRC2004-00339,-003521SUBTT16605\DRC2003-006371DRC2005-01061\DRC2004-00826 Less Than signif..nt Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: pp g Ftlenralnt Significant with Malgh Than slgnian No tm acl :nco grated [ ad Inoad 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. f/g) 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. Solid waste collection and disposal services are currently supplied by the City contracted hauler and transported to the Mid -Valley Sanitary Landfill in the City of Rialto or other County landfills in the Valley. San Bernardino County of Public Works, Solid Waste Management Department (SWMD) operates the landfills. According to the General Plan EIR, the City generates approximately 270 tons of solid waste per day. The EIR indicates that the City would generate an increase of approximately 236 tons per day by 2020, which accounts for an 87 percent increase over the existing generated solid waste. The current permitted capacity of the Mid -Valley Landfill is estimated to the year 2035. SWMD does not foresee any significant impacts resulting from projected growth and solid waste generation since the countywide waste management system is planned for expansions to meet the growing demands within the County's'service area. .This ,project complies with Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations regarding solid waste. The City of Rancho Cucamonga continues to implement waste reduction procedures consistent with AB 939. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated. 17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or — resTrl`citthe range-of�a rare or endangered plantmt'-animat,,- or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually O O V) ( ) 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) The site is not located in an area of sensitive biological resources as identified on the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Exhibit IV-3. Additionally, the area surrounding the site is developed. Based on previous development and street improvements, it is unlikely that any endangered or rare species would inhabit the site. However, portions of the site support remnants of native scrub habitat of varying quality and composition. The occurrence potential for most special -status species associated with this habitat type would generally be considered low because of the fragmented, (e.g., from various D3—Pg150 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 34 DRC2004-00339,-00352\SUBTT16605\DRC2003-00637\DRC2005-01061\DRC2004-00826 less Than sig dr' and L255 Issues and SuPPortin9 Information Sources: Polentiatly slgnmoam Ougaon sTan lgmaanl No Iwoa.t Inw,E2. E Im as Impart anthropogenic disturbances) and often degraded conditions (e.g., from invasive vegetation) of scrub habitats present, relatively small habitat patch sizes, and surrounding land uses that have isolated the site from larger contiguous habitats. Nonetheless, the potential presence of several special -status species associated with scrub habitats (e.g., gnatcatcher, rufous -crowned sparrow, and sage sparrow) may impose some degree of constraint to development. Depending upon the particular species, as well as the nature, extent, and seasonal timing of proposed construction activities, special mitigation measures to avoid or reduce potential project -related impacts to these sensitive biological resources (if present) may be required pursuant to CEQA. The mitigation measures recommended under Section 4, Biological Resources, has addressed this concern. 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 proposed project is consistent with the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan as proposed to be amended. The 2001 General Plan was adopted along with the certification of a Program FEIR, Findings of Fact, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations for significant adverse environmental effects of build -out in the City and Sphere of Influence. The City made findings that adoption of the General Plan would result in significant adverse effects to aggregate resources, prime farmland, air quality, the acoustical environment, library services, and aesthetics and visual resources. Mitigation measures were adopted for each of these resources; however, they would not reduce impacts to less -than -significant levels. As such, the City adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations balancing the benefits of development under the General Plan Update against the significant unavoidable adverse impacts (CEQA Guidelines Section 15092 and 15096(h)). These benefits include less overall traffic volumes by developing mixed -use projects that will be pedestrian friendly and conservation of valuable natural open space. With these findings and the Statement of Overriding Considerations, no further discussion or evaluation of cumulative impacts is required. c) Development of the site under the proposed land use change would not cause su stb antial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Adding pollutants to an area where air quality is a problem will have an affect on achieving goals, however, all pollutant levels area at a point below thresholds set to avoid adverse health effects associated with the pollutants. The Initial Study identifies construction -related emissions of criteria pollutants as having a potentially significant impact. Proposed mitigation measures would further reduce emission levels. Additionally, impacts resulting from air quality would be short-term and would cease once construction activities were completed. The Initial Study identified potentially significant impacts associated with the exposure of people to increased noise levels. Mitigation measures contained in this Initial Study will ensure impacts are at less - than -significant levels. D3—Pg151 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 35 DRC2004-00339,-003521SUBTT16605\DRG2003-00637\DRC2005-01061\DRC2004-00826 EARLIER ANALYSES Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration per Section 15063(c)(3)(D). The effects identified above for this project were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in the following earlier document(s) pursuant to applicable legal standards, and such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. The following earlier analyses were utilized in completing this Initial Study and are available for review in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Division offices, 10500 Civic Center Drive (check all that apply): (✓) General Plan FEIR (SCH#2000061027, Certified October 17, 2001) (✓) Master Environmental Assessment for the 1989 General Plan Update (SCH 088020115, certified January 4, 1989) (✓) . Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan EIR (SCH #87021615, certified September 16, 19.87) (✓) Cameo Homes Arborist Report and Tree Inventory, prepared by David Evans and Associates Revised February 2005. (✓) Eberhart Consultants, Inc, Geotechnical Investigation and Fault Study (✓) Ecological Sciences, Habitat Suitability Evaluation, July 2003 (✓) BridgeNet International, Exterior Noise Analysis, September, 2003 (✓) Linocut Law & Greenspan Engineers, Traffic Impact Study, July 2003 EQTIFI.SATI4N 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. Signature:�\\V Date: Print Name and Title: C L"C' (-)LTD -,!;—o're I- H ,As-S 'PG: c�5 D3—Pg152 ryLH3�5 �"i City of Rancho Cucamonga h MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM Project File No.: General Plan Amendment DRC2004-00339, Development Code Amendment DRC2004-00352, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605, Development Review DRC2003-00637, Variance DRC2005-01061, and Minor Development Review DRC2004-00826. This Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) has been prepared for use in implementing the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration forthe above -listed project. This program has been prepared in compliance with State law to ensure that adopted mitigation measures are implemented (Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code). Program Components - This MMP contains the following elements: 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. 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. The MMP has been designed to provide focused, yet flexible guidelines. As monitoring progresses, changes to compliance procedures may be necessary based upon recommendations by those responsible for the program. Program Management - The MMP will be in place through all phases of the project. The project planner, assigned by the City Planner, shall coordinate enforcement of the MMP. The project planner oversees the MMP and reviews the Reporting Forms to ensure they are filled out correctly and proper action is taken on each mitigation. Each City department shall ensure compliance of the conditions (mitigation) that relate to that department. Procedures - The following steps will be followed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 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. A MMP Reporting Form will be prepared for each potentially significant impact and its corresponding mitigation measure identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Checklist, attached hereto. This procedure designates who will take action, what action will be taken and when, and to whom and when compliance will be reported. All monitoring and reporting documentation will be kept in the project file with the department having the original authority for processing the project. Reports will be available from the City upon request at the following address: D3—Pg153 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM DRC2004-00339,-00352\SUBTT16605\DRC2003-00637\DRC2005-01061\DRC2004-00826 April 12, 2006 Page 2 City of Rancho Cucamonga - Lead Agency Planning Department 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 2. Appropriate specialists will be retained if technical expertise beyond the City staffs is needed, as determined by the project planner or responsible City department, to monitor specific mitigation activities and ,provide appropriate written approvals to the project planner. 3. The project planner or responsible City department will approve, by signature and date, the completion of each action item that was identified on the MMP Reporting Form. After each measure is verified for compliance, no further action is required for the specific phase of development. 4. All MMP Reporting Forms for an impact issue requiring no further monitoring will be signed off as completed by the project planner or responsible City department at the bottom of the MMP Reporting Form. 5. Unanticipated circumstances may arise requiring the refinement or addition of mitigation measures. The project planner is responsible for approving any such refinements or additions. An MMP Reporting Form will be completed by the project planner or responsible City department and a copy provided to the appropriate design, construction, or operational personnel. 6. The project planner or responsible City department has the authority to stop the work of construction contractors if compliance with any aspects of the MMP is not occurring after written notification has been issued. The project planner or responsible City department also ---has-the-authority to -hold -certificates -of -occupancies if compfiance-with-a mitigation -measure----- — attached hereto is not occurring. The project planner or responsible City department has the authority to hold issuance of a business license until all mitigation measures are implemented. Any conditions (mitigation) that require monitoring after project completion shall be the responsibility of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division. The Division shall require the applicant to post any necessary funds (or other forms of guarantee) with the City. These funds shall be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measure for the required period of time. 8. In those instances requiring long-term project monitoring, the applicant shall provide the City with a plan for monitoring the mitigation activities at the project site and reporting the monitoring results to the City. Said plan shall identify the reporter as an individual qualified to know whether the particular mitigation measure has been implemented. The monitoring/reporting plan shall conform to the City's MMP and shall be approved by the Community Development Director or City Planner prior to the issuance of building permits. D3—Pg154 MITIGATION MON Project File No.: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMEP TENTATIVE TRACT SUBTT16605, DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2004-00826 Initial Study Prepared by: Larry Henderson CHECKLIST (INITIAL STUDY PART III) 9, DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT D VICVV UK1,ZUU3-UUb3/, VAKIANGt UKG2U05-U1U61 MINOR DEVELOPMENT plicant: CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES March Mitigation Measures No. of ... , Sanctions for Action for Monitoring Frequency' VerificationImplementing D. Air Quality All construction equipment shall be maintained in good CID C Review of plans A/C 2/4 operating condition so as to reduce operational emissions. The contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained as per manufacturers' specifications. Maintenance records shall be available at the construction site for City verification. Pjior to the issuance of any grading permits, the CPCP/BO C Review of plans C 2 Iveloper shall submit construction plans to the City Onoting the proposed schedule and projected uipment use. Construction contractors shall provide ¢�{idence 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. I All paints and coatings shall meet or -exceed CP C Review of plans A/C 2/4 performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1113. Paints and coatings shall be applied either by hand or high -volume, low-pressure spray. i All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards BO B Review of plans A/C 2 noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. All construction equipment shall comply with SCAQMD BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 Rules 402 and 403. Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions: i Reestablish ground cover on the construction site BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 through seeding and watering. 1 of 10 Mitigation Measures No. .. of Verified Sanctions for ActionImplementing Date /initials Non -Compliance Pave or apply gravel to any on -site haul roads. BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 Phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 areas to erosion over extended periods of time. Schedule activities to minimize the amounts of exposed BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. Dispose of surplus excavated material in accordance C Review of plans A 4 with local ordinances and use sound engineering L practices. Sweep streets according to a schedule established by BO C During A 4 the City if silt is carried over to adjacent public construction thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling. Timing I may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. Suspend grading operations during high winds (i.e., wind BO C During A 4 Us eeds exceeding 25 mph) in accordance with Rule 403 construction quirements. Haintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils BO C During A 4 Gaul trucks or cover payloads using tarps or other Construction �P%dtable means. The site shall be treated with water or other soil- BO C During A 4 stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and Regional construction Water Quality Control Board [RWQCBj) daily to reduce Fine. Particulate Matter (PM,o) emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. Chemical soil -stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and BO C During A 4 RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM,o emissions. The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean BO C Review of plans A/C 4 alternative fuel -powered equipment where feasible. The construction contractor shall ensure that BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 construction grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. 2of10 Measures No. I ResponsibleMitigation lementing • •residential .. All and commercial structures shall be BO C/D Review of plans C 2/4 required to incorporate high efficiency/low polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water heaters. All residential and commercial structures shall be BO C/D Review of plans C 2/4 required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. Biological Resources In accordance with the Tree Preservation Ordinance, a CID B/C A/C/D A/C 2/4 tree preservation and replacement program based on the following priorities will be submitted and approved by the City Planner prior to the issuance of grading permits: 1) preserve -in -place healthy trees, 2) if trees cannot be preserved -in -place, then transplant elsewhere on -site, and as a last resort, 3) remove and replace with largest nursery grown stock available. 0,uItural Resources It any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal t5ssils) are encountered before or during grading, the 4veloper will retain a qualified paleontologist to monitor c6nstruction 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: Enact interim measures to protect undesignated sites CP/BO C Review of report A/D 3/4 from demolition or significant modification without an opportunity for the City to establish its archaeological value. Consider establishing provisions to require incorporation CP/BO C Review of report A/D 3/4 of archaeological sites within new developments, using their special qualities as a theme or focal point. Pursue educating the public about the area's CP/BO C Review of report A/D 3/4 archaeological heritage. 3of10 Mitigation Measures No. I Respon sible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified I SanctionsJor Implementing Action for Mo itoring Fre uenc Verification Verification Date /Init.1als I Non -Compliance, Propose mitigation measures and recommend CP/BO C Review of report AM 3/4 conditions of approval to eliminate adverse project effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric resources, following appropriate CEQA guidelines. Prepare a technical resources management report, CP C Review of report ND 314 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. If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal CP B Review of report A/D 4 fossils) are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified paleontologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. The paleontologist Oiall submit a report of findings that will also provide �Pecific recommendations regarding further mitigation to easures (i.e., paleontological monitoring) that may be appropriate. Where mitigation monitoring is appropriate, We program must include, but not be limited to, the following measures: Assign a paleontological monitor, trained and equipped CP B Review of report A/D 4 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 BO B/C Review of report A/D 4 graded, divert earth -disturbing activities elsewhere until the monitor has completed salvage. If construction personnel make the discovery, the grading contractor should immediately divert construction and notify the monitor of the find. Prepare, identify, and curate all recovered fossils for CP D Review of report D 3 documentation in the summary report and transfer to an appropriate depository (i.e., San Bernardino County Museum). 4of10 Mitigation Measures No. I Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date,/Initials Non-compiiance Geology and Soils The site shall be treated with water or other soil- BO C During A 4 stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) construction daily to reduce Fine Particulate Matter (PM10) emissions, 74 in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403, or replanted with drought resistant landscaping as soon as possible. Frontage public streets shall be swept according to a BO C During A schedule established by the City to reduce PM10 construction emissions associated with vehicle tracking of soil off -site. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. Grading operations shall be suspended when Wind BO C During A 4 speeds exceed 25 mph to minimize PM10 emissions construction from the site during such episodes. Chemical soil -stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and BO C During A 4 BWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction construction teas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to duce PM10 emissions. II slopes 30 feet or less in height should have a BO C During A 4 'fPeyway toe (a special backfilled excavation, which is construction constructed beneath the toe area of a planned fill slope on sloping ground to improve the stability of the slope). Fill slopes greater than 30 feet in height should have a keyway width equal to one-half the slope height with a depth of 5 feet at the keyway toe. All keyways should be lilted a minimum of 2 percent towards the back of the keyway. Backcuts for stabilized slopes 30 feet or less in height BO C During A 4 should be excavated at a 2:1 gradient. Backcuts for construction stabilized slopes greater than 30 feet in height can be excavated at gradients up to 1.5:1 provided the fill at the top of these slopes is at least 15 feet thick. All stabilized slopes should be constructed and drained in accordance with the specifications and details in Appendix H of the Geotechnical Investigation and Fault Study (specifications 5.50 thru 5,57). Adherence to these i design specifications would ensure stable construction slopes. 5of10 Measures No. ResponsibleMitigation , Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification .. For residences, setbacks from bottom outer edges of BO C During A 4 foundations, walls, etc, adjacent a top -of -slope should construction be setback from the slope face a horizontal distance of one-third the slope height under consideration in accordance with the 1997 Uniform Building Code._ The horizontal distance should not be less than 5 feet. Buildings adjacent the toe of a slope should be set back BO C During A 4 a horizontal distance equal to one-half the vertical height construction of the slope in accordance with the 1997 Uniform Building Code with minimum and maximum setbacks of 3 feet and 15 feet, respectively. All slopes should be landscaped with drought resistant BO/CP B Plan Check and A/C 2/3 vegetation. A landscape architect should be consulted During for recommendations on appropriate plant types and construction planting configuration. Interim measures should be considered to protect the BO/CP B/C Plan Check and A/C 2/3 Sopes prior to the establishment of landscaping. These During 4easures may include the utilization of geotechnical construction ierosion fabrics or acceptable alternatives. -rainage devices should be inspected and maintained BO C On -going A 3/4 at regular intervals and should not be obstructed. --- The slopes should be periodically inspected fog the BO C On -going A 5 presence of burrowing rodents. If an infestation of burrowing rodents is confirmed, they should be eliminated from the slopes. Provisions should be made to interrupt automatic timing M0 C A 3 devices of irrigation systems during the rainy seasons. Hydrology and Water Quality Prior to issuance of grading permits, the permit applicant BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 shall submit to Building Official for approval 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. 6of10 An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, included in BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 the Grading Plan, and implemented for the proposed project that identifies specific measures to control on - site and off -site erosion from the time of ground disturbing activities are initiated through completion of grading. This Erosion Control Plan shall include the following measures at a minimum: a) Specify the timing of grading and construction to minimize soil exposure to rainy periods experienced in southern California, and b) An inspection and maintenance program shall be included to ensure that any erosion which does occur either on -site or off -site as a result of this project will be corrected through a remediation or restoration program within a specified time frame. During construction, temporary berms such as BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 sandbags or gravel dikes must be used to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site when there 59 rainfall or other runoff. �uring construction, to remove pollutants, street BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 cleaning will be performed prior to storm events and °�f'ter the use of water trucks to control dust in order to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site. It shall be the hired contractor's responsibility to inspect CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 and maintain all BMPs in good working order. Inspection and maintenance responsibility shall remain for the duration of the project. The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in CE B/CID Review of plans A/C 2/4 the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared by Hall and Foreman, Inc. dated May 2004 to reduce pollutants after construction entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 7of10 Measures No. ResponsibleMitigation of Verified I Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification.. Landscaping plans shall include provisions for BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 controlling and minimizing the use of fertilizers/pesticides/herbicides. Landscaped areas shall be monitored and maintained for at least two years to ensure adequate coverage and stable growth. Plans for these areas, including monitoring provisions for a minimum of two years, shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 submit to the City Engineer for approval a WQMP, including a project description and identifying 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 Sancho Cucamonga in June 2004. to issuance of grading or paving permits, the BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 ,grior applicant shall obtain a Notice of Intent (NO]) to comply 2ith obtaining coverage under the NPDES General Construction Storm Water Permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Evidence that this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Discharger's Identification Number) shall be submitted to the City Building Official for coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit. Noise Construction or grading shall not take place between the BO C During A 4 hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, construction including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. 8of10 Mitigation .. of Verified 'Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /initials , Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the BO C During A 4 standards specified in Development Code Section construction 17.02.120-D, as measured at the property line. Developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly noise level monitoring as specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120. Monitoring at other times may be required by the Planning Department. Said consultant shall report their findings to the Planning Department within 24 hours; however, if noise levels exceed the above standards, then the consultant shall immediately notify the Planning Department. If noise levels exceed the above standards, then construction activities shall be reduced in intensity to a level of compliance with above noise standards or halted. The perimeter block wall shall be constructed as early CP C During A A as possible in the first phase. construction tjaul truck deliveries shall not take place between the PO/130 C During A 4/7 'flours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, construction Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a ,Ncluding raetional holiday. Additionally, if heavy trucks used for &uling would exceed 100 daily trips (counting both to and from the construction site), then the developer shall prepare a Noise Mitigation Plan denoting any construction traffic haul routes. To the extent feasible, the plan shall denote haul routes that do not pass sensitive land uses or residential dwellings. Once building plans are submitted for permits, an CP B Plan check C 2 interior noise analysis shall be done for buildings in this project to determine the type of building materials to be used to ensure that buildings meet interior noise standards of 45dB CNEL. Noise barriers should be constructed around the patios CP B/D Plan check and A/C 2/3 and balconies of the buildings along the southern portion Final inspection of the project site, adjacent to Foothill Boulevard. The first floor patio barriers shall be 5 112 feet in height and the second and third floor balcony barriers shall be 5.0 feet in height. 9of10 Key to Checklist Abbreviations Responsible Person. . Monitoring Fre�uency Method of Verification Sanctions CDD - Community Development Director or designee A- With Each NewlDevelopment A - On -site Inspection 1 - Withhold Recordation of Final Map CP - City Planner or designee B - Prior To Constnjction B - Other Agency Permit Approval 2 - Withhold Grading or Building Permit CE - City Engineer or designee C - Throughout Co6struction C - Plan Check 3 - Withhold Certificate of Occupancy BO - Building Official or designee D - On Completion D - Separate Submittal (Reports/Studies/ Plans) 4 - Stop Work Order PO - Police Captain or designee E - Operating 5 - Retain Deposit or Bonds FC - Fire Chief or designee 6 - Revoke CUP 7 -Citation 10 of 10 RESOLUTION NO. 06-38 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16605, A RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION OF 8 LOTS FOR 206 CONDOMINIUM UNITS ON 21 ACRES OF LAND IN THE WESTERN FOOTHILL CORRIDOR MIXED USE AREA WITHIN SUBAREA 1 OF THE FOOTHILL DISTRICTS, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, BETWEEN RED HILL COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE AND THE SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAIL ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 0207-101-13, 01 AND 34. A. Recitals. 1. Charles Joseph Associates filed an application for the approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605, 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 12th day of April 2006, 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 t e su stantiaf evi enc7 ce presented to this Commission during the above -referenced public hearing on April 12, 2006, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to the property located on north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Southern Pacific Rail Road Right -of -Way, with a street frontage of 560 feet and lot depth of 620 feet, and is presently improved with an abandoned water reservoir: and. b. Properties to the north are developed with condominiums and single-family homes designated Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) and Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre), respectively. South of Foothill Boulevard is designated Mixed Used and is developed with office and commercial uses. East of the site is the abandoned Southern Pacific Rail Road (future Regional Trail and possible future rail) and is designated Open Space. To the west is the Sycamore Inn Restaurant and is designated Mixed Use. Other properties to the west are Mixed Use land use and Office/Commercial to the southwest. The Red Hill Golf course is located northwest of the project site adjacent to the Medium Density residential development. 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: EXHIBIT F D3—Pg165 PLANNING COMMISSION rr.�SOLUTION NO.06-38 SUBTT16605 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES April 12, 2006 Page 2 a. The tentative tract map is designed in conformance with the Mixed Use Designation and Hillside Development Regulations as recommended for amendment, therefore, the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and any applicable specific plans; and b. The tentative tract map design and conditions of approval for improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and any applicable specific plans; and C. The tentative tract map and special studies included within the Initial Study demonstrate, the site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; and d. The tentative tract map and special studies included within the Initial Studysupport the design of the subdivision and demonstrate it is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; and e. The tentative tract map is not likely to cause serious public health problems as demonstrated by the information contained within the Initial Study; and f. The design of the tentative tract map will not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, togetherwith all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. That the Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the �.aiuurnia cnvironmeniai uuanty Act or Im, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and, further, this Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Mitigated Negative Declaration with regard to the application. b. Although the Mitigated Negative Declaration identifies certain significant environmental effects that will result if the project is approved, all significant effects have been reduced to an acceptable level by imposition of mitigation measures on the project which are listed below as conditions of approval. C. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the Planning Commission finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon the substantial evidence contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the Planning Commission during the public hearing, the Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-1-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. D3—Pg166 PLANNING COMMISSION Ir,cSOLUTION NO. 06-38 SUBTT16605 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES April 12, 2006 Page 3 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Department 1) Approval of Tentative Tract SUBTT16605 is granted contingent upon approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2004-00339 and Development Code Amendment D,RC2004-00352. 2) Subject to the approval by the Planning Commission of Development Review DRC2003-00637 and all applicable conditions thereto. Engineering Department 1) Dedicate Lot B to the City. 2) Extend Master Plan Storm Drain Line III-1 from its current terminus south of Foothill Boulevard (south of the Pacific Electric RR trail) to Red Hill Country Club Drive, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Standard drainage fees for the site shall be credited to the cost of permanent master plan facilities, in accordance with City policy. The developer may request a reimbursement agreement to recover oversizing costs, in excess of fees, from future development within the same tributary area. If the developer fails to submit for said reimbursement agreement within six months of the public improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. Construct private, on -site storm drains to collect all project runoff and discharges from adjacent properties and convey to the Master Plan Storm Drain. "Adjacent properties" include the redeveloped Sycamore Inn parking lot and other properties. b) Final drainage study shall also determine the need for local storm drain facilities in Foothill Boulevard to maintain Qio 10-foot dry lanes, Q25 under top -of -curb, and Q100within right-of-way. c) The Master Plan Storm Drain shall allow for City access to manholes. Provide manholes at public -private junctions. 3) Proposed driveway entrance (street type) on Foothill Boulevard shall align with San Bernardino Road on the south side. 4) Provide a driveway aisle from Foothill Boulevard to the condo project with three lanes: one entry lane, 14 feet wide continuing to the condo project, and two outbound lanes, one 14-foot right -turn and one 11-foot for through/left-turn lane and to extend from the condo project to Foothill Boulevard. D3—Pg167 PLANNING COMMISSION IhaSOLUTION NO. 06-38 SUBTT16605 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES April 12, 2006 Page 4 5) Record an access easement across the Sycamore Inn property, from the signalized drive approach to the project entry, prior to final map approval. If not successful, re -design the project to take right -turn -only access to Foothill from its own frontage (no median break). 6) Driveway accent paving shall be located outside the ultimate rights -of -way. 7) Coordinate installation of Foothill Boulevard frontage improvements with the City project. 8) Modify the existing traffic signal at Foothill Boulevard and San Bernardino Road, as needed. 9) Foothill Boulevard Parkway improvements, including special streetlights, street trees, sidewalk, and median, shall conform to the Foothill Boulevard Districts guidelines outlined in the Development Code and the Route 66/Foothill Boulevard Visual Improvement Plan. 10) Make a contribution in -lieu of construction for the prorated share of the project for a future landscaped median on Foothill Boulevard. 11) On the Red Hill Country Club Drive frontage, install street improvements per the attached Standard Conditions, and per City standards, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Improvements shall extend from the project site north to join those south of Calle Carabe for pedestrian traffic. a) Vehicle access on Red Hill Country Club Drive shall be emergency_access only not an "Exit Only" access.) Drive approach shall be installed per Standard Drawing 105-C, with thicker concrete or reinforced sidewalk to meet Fire District standards. b) The curb -adjacent sidewalk shall have a minimum 6-foot width, per City standards. Install retaining walls as required. c) Provide 5,800 lumen streetlights along the frontage. 12) Parkways shall slope at 2 percent from 1 foot behind the sidewalk to the top of the curb, along all street frontages. 13) On -site terminus to drive aisle that ends at emergency access to Red Hill Country Club Drive shall be approved by the City Traffic Engineer, 14) Process a Lot Line Adjustment on the lot lines shared with the Sycamore Inn property so that they correspond with the proposed improvements and in particular, so that lot lines are at tops of slopes. D3—Pg168 PLANNING COMMISSION nESOLUTION NO. 06-38 SUBTT16605 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES April 12, 2006 Page 5 15) Draining onto the Pacific Electric RR trail and the public right-of-way fronting Foothill Boulevard is not approved. Provide private drainage facilities to direct flows to the Master Plan Storm Drain, including concrete ditch at the toe of the 2:1 slope along the property line. 16) The existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical) from the project site to the south side of Foothill Boulevard and the overhead utilities from the project site to the pole 120 feet north of the site shall be undergrounded, priorto public improvement acceptance or occupancy, whichever occurs first. The developer may request a reimbursement agreement to recover one-half the City adopted cost for undergrounding from future development (or redevelopment) as it occurs on the opposite side of the street. If the developer fails to submit for said reimbursement agreement within six months of the public improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. 17) The Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) dated June 17, 2005, has been conceptually reviewed and the following items need to be completed: a) Section 1.2 - Provide permit numbers (List Tract, PMT# and WDID#] b) Section 2.1 - Provide source for Mill Creek (Hydrologic Unit No. 801.24) c) Section 3.2 - Check Section numbers for Section 3.2, 3.3, and 3.4. d) Section 3.2 - The City of Rancho Cucamonga Catch Basin Labeling Standard is: "Keep Gutters Clean For Those Down Stream." e) Section 3.2 - Roof Runoff Controls (SD-11): Provide source for commentthat "Infiltration practices are not recommended in San Bernardino County due to potential impact to groundwater resources." Section 3.3 - Bacteria and Viruses should be a "yes" since they are expected/potential pollutants of concern. g) Section 4 - The City of Rancho Cucamonga Catch Basin Labeling Standard is: "Keep Gutters Clean For Those Down Stream." h) Section 6 - Notarize and record the City's "Memorandum of Agreement of Storm Water Quality Management Plan" (Copies are available at Engineering's front counter). D3-Pg169 t PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 06-38 SUBTT16605 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES April 12. 2006 Page 6 i) Plan Review - Locate proposed Best Management Practices (BMPs) on the Grading Plan. 18) Maintenance of BMPs identified in the WQMP shall be addressed in the project Covenants, Conditions, and Restriction (CC&Rs). 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 developershall 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 bythe South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), as well as City Planning staff. 3) All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1113. Paints and coatings shall be applied either by hand or high -volume, low-pressure spray. 4.) All q phalt shall_meet-or_exceed.-perfarmance-staAdaTds_4oted--ia — - SCAQMD Rule 1108. 5) All construction equipment shall comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403. Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions: • Reestablish ground cover on the construction site through seeding and watering. • Pave or apply gravel to any on -site haul roads. • Phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large areas to erosion over extended periods of time. • Schedule activities to minimize the amounts of exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. • Dispose of surplus excavated material in accordance with local ordinances and use sound engineering practices. D3-Pg170 PLANNING COMMISSION (InESOLUTION NO. 06-38 SUBTT16605 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES April 12, 2006 Page 7 Sweep streets according to a schedule established by the City if silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. Suspend grading operations during high winds (i.e., wind speeds exceeding 25 mph) in accordance with Rule 403 requirements. Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils haul trucks or cover payloads using tarps or other suitable means. 6) The site shall be treated with water or other soil -stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and Regional Water Quality Control Board [RWQCB]) daily to reduce Fine Particulate Matter (PM,o) emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. 7) Chemical soil -stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM10 emissions. 8) The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel -powered equipment where feasible. 9) The construction contractor shall ensure that construction grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. 10) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate high-efficiency/low-polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances and water heaters 11) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. Biological Resources 1) In accordance with the Tree Preservation Ordinance, a tree preservation and replacement program based on the following priorities will be submitted and approved by the City Planner prior to the issuance of grading permits: 1) preserve -in -place healthy trees, 2) if trees cannot be preserved -in -place, then transplant elsewhere on -site, and as a last resort, 3) remove and replace with largest nursery grown stock available. Cultural Resources 1) 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., D3—Pg171 PLANNING COMMISSION Fir -SOLUTION NO. 06-38 SUBTT16605 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES April 12, 2006 Page 8 paleontological monitoring) that may be appropriate. Where mitigation monitoring is appropriate, the program must include, but not be limited to, the following measures: • 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 area's archaeological heritage. • Propose mitigation measures and recommend conditions of approval to eliminate adverse project effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric resources, following appropriate CEQA guidelines. • Prepare a technical resources management report, documenting the inventory, evaluation, and proposed mitigation of resources within the project area. Submit one copy of the completed report, with original illustrations, to the San Bernardino County Archaeological Information Center for permanent archiving. 2) If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal fossils) are encountered 'before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified paleontologist to monitor construction activities, to take — appropriate -measures tu-pTaMct-serve tnem Tor s u y. e —" paleontologist shall submit a report of findings that will also provide specific recommendations regarding further mitigation measures (i.e., paleontological monitoring) that may be appropriate. Where mitigation monitoring is appropriate, the program must include, but not be limited to, the following measures: Assign a paleontological monitor, trained and equipped to allow the rapid removal of fossils with minimal construction delay, to the site full-time during the interval of earth -disturbing activities. Should fossils be found within an area being cleared or graded, divert earth -disturbing activities elsewhere until the monitor has completed salvage. If construction personnel make the discovery, the grading contractor should immediately divert construction and notify the monitor of the find. Prepare, identify, and curate all recovered fossils for documentation in the summary report and transfer to an appropriate depository (i.e., San Bernardino County Museum). D3-Pg172 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 06-38 SUBTT16605 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES April 12, 2006 Page 9 Geology and Soils 1) The site shall be treated with water or other soil -stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) daily to reduce (PM1o) emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403, or replanted with drought resistant landscaping as soon as possible. 2) Frontage public streets shall be swept according to a schedule established by the City to reduce PM10 emissions associated with vehicle tracking of soil off -site. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. 3) Grading operations shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed 25 mph to minimize PM10 emissions from the site during such episodes. 4) Chemical soil -stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM;o emissions. 5) Fill slopes 30 feet or less in height should have a keyway toe (a special backfilled excavation, which is constructed beneath the toe area of a planned fill slope on sloping ground to improve the stability of the slope). Fill slopes greater than 30 feet in height should have a keyway width equal to one-half the slope height with a depth of 5 feet at the keyway toe. All keyways should be tilted a minimum of 2 percent towards the back of the keyway. 6) BackCLlts for stabilized slopes 30 feet or less in height should be -exeavated--at-a --E�-1-gradient—Backcuts for stabilized -slopes -greater -- than 30 feet in height can be excavated at gradients up to 1.5:1 provided the fill at the top of these slopes is at least 15 feet thick. All stabilized slopes should be constructed and drained in accordance with the specifications and details in Appendix H of the Geotechnical Investigation and Fault Study (specifications 5.50 thru 5.57). Adherence to these design specifications would ensure stable construction slopes. 7) For residences, setbacks from bottom outer edges of foundations, walls, etc. adjacent a top -of -slope should be setback from the slope face a horizontal distance of one-third the slope height under consideration in accordance with the 1997 Uniform Building Code. The horizontal distance should not be less than 5 feet. 8) Buildings adjacent the toe of a slope should be set back a horizontal distance equal to one-half the vertical height of the slope in accordance with the 1997 Uniform Building Code with minimum and maximum setbacks of 3 feet and 15 feet, respectively. D3-Pgl73 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 06-38 SUBTT16605 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES April 12, 2006 Page 10 9) All slopes should be landscaped with drought resistant vegetation. A landscape architect should be consulted for recommendations on appropriate plant types and planting configuration. 10) Interim measures should be considered to protect the slopes prior to the establishment of landscaping. These measures may include the utilization of geotechnical erosion fabrics or acceptable alternatives. 11) Drainage devices should be inspected and maintained at regular intervals and should not be obstructed. 12) The slopes should be periodically inspected for the presence of burrowing rodents. If an infestation of burrowing rodents is confirmed, they should be eliminated from the slopes. 13) Provisions should be made to interrupt automatic timing devices of irrigation systems during the rainy seasons. Hydrology and Water Quality Construction Activities: 1) Prior to issuance of grading permits, the permit applicant shall submit to 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 Gradina . . .... -�' u,ori'Nwcu PIUJVct uiai iu(enunes Specuic measures to control on -site and off -site erosion from the time of 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. D3—Pgl74 PLANNING COMMISSION F ESOLUTION NO. 06-38 SUBTT16605 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES April 12, 2006 Page 11 5) It shall be the hired contractor's responsibility to inspect and maintain all BMPs in good working order. Inspection and maintenance responsibility shall remain for the duration of the project. Post -Construction Operational: 6) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared by Hall and Foreman, Inc. dated May 2004 to reduce pollutants after construction entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 7) Landscaping plans shall include provisions for controlling and minimizing the use of fertilizers/pesticides/herbicides. Landscaped areas shall be monitored and maintained for at least two years to ensure adequate coverage and stable growth. Plans for these areas. including monitoring provisions for a minimum of two years, shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. 8) Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit to the City Engineer for approval a WQMP, including a project description and identifying BMPs that will be used on -site to reduce pollutants into the storm drain system to the maximum extent practicable. The WQMP shall identify the structural and non-structural measures consistent with the Guidelines for New Development and Redevelopment adopted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in June 2004. Prior to issuance of grading or paving permits, the applicant shall umain a Nouce or intent (NUI) to complywith obtaining coverage under the NPDES General Construction Storm Water Permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Evidence that this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Discharger's Identification Number) shall be submitted to the City Building Official for coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit. Noise 1) Construction or grading shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. 2) Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120-D, as measured at the property line. Developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly noise level monitoring as specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120. Monitoring at other times may be required by the Planning Department. Said consultant shall report their findings to the Planning Department within 24 hours; however, if noise levels exceed the above standards, then the consultant shall immediately notify the Planning D3—Pgl75 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 06-38 SUBTT16605 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES April 12, 2006 Page 12 Department. If noise levels exceed the above standards, then construction activities shall be reduced in intensity to a level of compliance with above noise standards or halted. 3) The perimeter block wall shall be constructed as early as possible in the first phase. 4) Haul truck deliveries shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. Additionally, if heavy trucks used for hauling would exceed 100 daily trips (counting both to and from the construction site), then the developer shall prepare a Noise Mitigation Plan denoting any construction traffic haul routes. To the extent feasible, the plan shall denote haul routes that do not pass sensitive land uses or residential dwellings. 5) Once building plans are submitted for permits, an interior noise analysis shall be done for buildings in this project to determine the type of building materials to be used to ensure that buildings meet interior noise standards of 45dB CNEL. o"") Noise barriers should be constructed around the patios and balconies of the buildings along the southern portion of the project site, adjacent to Foothill Boulevard. The first floor patio barriers shall be 51/2 feet in height and the second and third floor balcony barriers shall be 5.0 feet in height. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12TH DAY OF APRIL 2006, M ATTEST: Dan N OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA I, Dan Coleman, Acting Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 12th day of April 2006, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: FLETCHER, MACIAS, MUNOZ, STEWART NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: McPHAIL D3-Pg176 r COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT #: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16605 SUBJECT: SYCAMORE VILLAS APPLICANT: CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES NORTHSIDE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD BETWEEN RED HILL COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE LOCATION: AND SAN BERNARDINO ROAD ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. General Requirements L C. Comoletion Date 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 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. Time Limits 1. 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 City Engineer within 3 years from the date of. the approval. Site Development 1. 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. 2. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 3. Street names shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval in accordance with the adopted Street Naming Policy prior to approval of the final map. --- D3—Pg177 Project NO.SUM16605 Completion Date 4. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) and Articles of Incorporation of the Homeowners' Association are subject to the approval of the Planning and Engineering Departments and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Map or prior to the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City Engineer. The Homeowners' Association shall submit to the Planning Department a list of the name and address of their officers on or before January 1 of each and every year and whenever said information changes. 5. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property owner, homeowners' association, or other means acceptable to the City. Proof of this landscape maintenance shall be submitted for City Planner and City Engineer review and approved prior to the issuance of building permits. 6. The developer shall submit a construction access plan and schedule for the development of all lots for City Planner and City Engineer approval; including, but not limited to, public notice requirements, special street posting, phone listing for community concerns, hours of construction activity, dust control measures, and security fencing. D. Parking and Vehicular Access (indicate details on building plans) The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions shall restrict the storage of recreational vehicles on this site unless they are the principal source of transportation for the owner and prohibit parking on interior circulation aisles other than in designated visitor parking areas. E. Environmental Mitigation measures are required for the project. The applicant is responsible for the cost of implementing said measures, including monitoring and reporting. Applicant shall be required to post cash, letter of credit, or other forms of guarantee acceptable to the City Planner in the amount of S475.00 prior to the issuance of building permits, guaranteeing satisfactory performance and completion of all mitigation measures. These funds maybe used bythe Cityto retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measures. Failure to compete all actions required by the approved environmental documents shall be considered grounds for forfeit. COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: F. Dedication and Vehicular Access 1. Rights -of -way and easements shall be dedicated to the City for all interior public streets, community trails, public paseos, public landscape areas, streettrees, traffic signal encroachment and maintenance, and public drainage facilities as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. Private easements for non-public facilities (cross -lot drainage, local feeder trails, etc.) shall be reserved as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. 2. Dedication shall be made of the following rights -of -way on the perimeter streets (measured from street centerline): 60 total feet on Foothill Boulevard project site and Sycamore Inn Frontage. 30 total feet on Red Hill Country Club Drive. 3. Vehicular access rights shall be dedicated to the City for the following streets, except for approved openings: Red Hill Country Club Drive. 4. Reciprocal access easements shall be provided ensuring access to all parcels by CC&Rs or by deeds and shall be recorded concurrently with the map or prior to the issuance of building permits, where no map is involved. /—/- -/—/- D3-Pg178 Project No,SUBTTt06os Completion Date G. 5. Reciprocal parking agreements for all parcels and maintenance agreements ensuring joint maintenance of all common roads, drives, or parking areas shall be provided by CC & R's or deeds and shall be recorded prior to, or concurrent with, the final parcel map. 6. All existing easements lying within future rights -of -way shall be quit -claimed or delineated on the final map. 7. Easements for public sidewalks trees placed outside the public right-of-way shall be dedicated to the City. 8. The developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off -site property interests necessary to construct the required public improvements, and if he/she should fail to do so, the developer shall, at least 120 days prior to submittal of the final map for approval, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to Government Code Sections 66462 and 66462.5 at such time as the City decides to acquire the property interests required for the improvements. Such agreement shall provide for payment by the developer of all costs incurred by the City if the City decides to acquire the off -site property interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security for a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the City, at developer's cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to commencement of the appraisal. This condition applies in particular, but not limited to: Master Plan Storm Drain south of Foothill Boulevard.. Street Improvements 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. Pursuant to City Council Resolution No. 88-557, no person shall make connections from a source of energy, fuel or pourer to any building service equipment which is regulated by technical codes and for which a permit is required unless, in addition to any and all other codes, regulations and ordinances, all improvements required by these conditions of development approval have been completed and accepted by the City Council, except: that in developments containing more than one building or unit, the development may have energy connections made to a percentage of those buildings, or units proportionate to the completion of improvements as required by conditions of approval of development. In no case shall more than 95 percent of the buildings or these conditions of approval of development. -...... 1. _ . _.... ._ 3. 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 Foothill Boulevard, project X X (c) (e) X X (d) (f) site and Sycamore Inn frontage (g) (h) (i) Red Hill Country Club X X X X X X (g) Drive Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. (c) If so marked, sidewalk shall be curvilinear per Standard 114. (d) If so marked, an in -lieu of construction fee shall be provided for this item. (e) Street type (f) ADA access ramps. (g) Necessary drainage facilities. (h) Depending on school district requirements, provide a bus bay Westbound Foothill Boulevard east of drive entrance; dedicated additional right-of-way as necessary. (i) Modify traffic signal at Foothill Boulevard and San Bernardino Road. 4. Improvement Plans and Construction: _/—/- -/_/. D3—Pg179 3 ` S Project No. SUBTT16605 Comoietion Dat- a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in addition to any other permits required. C. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction project along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals and interconnect wiring. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR, or any other locations approved by the City Engineer Notes: 1) Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets, a maximum of 200 feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer. 2) Conduit shall be 3-inch galvanized steel with pull rope or as specified. e. Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all corners of intersections per City Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 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-shal-beapprvved-by-the-Sity-P-ianner-prior-tesubrnittaHerr-fifst-pian-erteek- /— 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. D3—Pg180 Project No.SUB7T16605 Comol-tion Date 111 6. Install street trees per City street tree design guidelines and standards as follows. The completed legend (box below) and construction notes shall appear on the title page of the street improvement plans. Street improvement plans shall include a line item within the construction legend stating: "Street trees shall be installed per the notes and legend on sheet _(typically sheet 1)." Where public landscape plans are required, tree installation in those areas shall be per the public landscape improvement plans. The City Engineer reserves the right to adjust tree species based upon field conditions and other variables. For additional information, contact the Project Engineer. Min. Grow Street Name Botanical Name Common Name Space Spacing Size Oty. Foothill Boulevard in Prunus X N.C.N. 3 ft. 20' O.C. informal 15 gal. Fill in R.O.W. and Madian Blireiana groupings not more than 252,'. of total frontage trees. Foothill Boulevard on- Plalanus London Plane 8 Ft. Space per on -site plans- 15 gal, site aoerifolia Tree 30' O.C. suggested Foothill Country Club Platanus London Plane 8 ft. 30' O.C. 15 gal. Drive acerifotia Tre=_ I Construction Notes for Street Trees: 1) All street trees are to be planted in accordance with City standard plans. 2) Prior to the commencement of any planting, an agronomic soils report shall be furnished to the City inspector. Any unusual toxicities or nutrient deficiencies may require backfill soil amendments, as determined by the City inspector. 3) All street trees are subject to inspection and acceptance by the Engineering Department. 4) Street trees are to be planted per public improvement plans only. Intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with adopted policy. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight shall be plotted for all project intersections, including driveways. Local residential street intersections and commercial or industrial driveways may have lines of sight plotted as required. Public Maintenance Areas 1. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting ewleIgs ric s shall e y eer prior t5 Ina1 1:::p approval or issuance of building permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. 2. Parkway landscaping on the following street(s) shall conform to the results of the respective Beautification Master Plan: Foothill Boulevard Drainage and Flood Control 1. The project (or portions thereof) is located within a Flood Hazard Zone; therefore, flood protection measures shall be provided as certified by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer. 2. It shall be the developer's responsibility to have the current FIRM Zone A designation removed from the project area. The developer shall provide drainage and/or flood protection facilities sufficient to obtain an unshaded "X" designation. The developer's engineer shall prepare all necessary reports, plans, and hydrologic/hydraulic calculations. A Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) shall be obtained from FEMA prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. A Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) shall be issued by FEMA prior to occupancy or improvement acceptance, whichever occurs first. 3. A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer. —/—i— /—J- -/--J— . /—/. D3—Pg181 t (' Project No.SUB1716605 Completion Date 4. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. 5. 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. J. Utilities 1. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. 2. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVW D), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CVW D 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. 3. 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. K. General Requirements and Approvals 1. The separate parcels contained within the project boundaries shall be legally combined into one parcel prior to issuance of building permits. --- 2. An easement for a joint use driveway shall be provided prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first, for : 3. Permits shall be obtained from the following agencies for work within their right of -way: San Bernardino Area Government. 4. 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. 5. Prior to the issuance of building permits, a Diversion Deposit and related administrative fees shall be paid for the Construction and Demolition Diversion Program. The deposit is fully refundable if at least 50% of all wastes generated during construction and demolition are diverted from landfills, and appropriate documentation is provided to the City. Form CD-1 shall be submitted to the Engineering Department when the first building permit application is submitted to Building and Safety. Form CD-2 shall be submitted to the Engineering Department within 60 days following the completion of the construction and/or demolition project. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE SAFETY DEPARTMENT, FIRE PROTECTION PLANNING SERVICES AT, (909) 477-2770, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: SEE ATTACHED D3—Pg182 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE DISTRICT STANDARD CONDITIONS July 14, 2004 Charles Joseph & Associates Cameo/Sycamore Town Homes N/S foothill Blvd between San Bernardino & Baker DRC2003-00637 & SUBTT16605 MFR complex THE FOLLOWING STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLY TO THIS PROJECT. The public water supply must be tested by CVWD at the point of connection. The test must be conducted prior to the issuance of permits for the Commercial or Condominium buildings in the development. The water supply must meet or exceed the minimum fire flow requirement for the most demanding building. All Structures must be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers "thought-out" in accordance to NFPA 13. FSC-1 Public and Private Water Supply 1. Design guidelines for Fire Hydrants: The following provides design guidelines for the spacing and location of fire hydrants: a. The maximum distance between fire hydrants in commercial/industrial projects is 300-feet. No portion of the exterior wall shall be located more than 150-feet from an approved fire hydrant. For cul-de-sacs, the distance shall not exceed 100-feet. b. The maximum distance between fire hydrants in multi -family residential projects is 400-feet. No portion of the exterior wall shall be located more than 200-feet from an approved fire hydrant. For cul-de-sacs, the distance shall not exceed 150-feet. C. Fire hydrants are to be located. The preferred locations for fire hydrants are: i. At the entrance(s) to a commercial, industrial or residential project from the public roadways. ii. At intersections. iii. On the right side of the street, whenever practical and possible. iv. As required by the Fire Safety Division to meet operational needs of the Fire District. V. A minimum of forty -feet (40') from any building. D3—Pg183 If any portion of a facility or building is located more than 150-feet from a public fire hydrant measured on an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, additional private or public fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required fire flow shall be provided. e. Provide one fire hydrant for each 1000 gpm of required fire flow or fraction thereof. FSC-2 Fire Flow 1. The required minimum fire flow for this project, when automatic fire sprinklers are installed is 1500 gallons per minute at a minimum residual pressure of 20-pounds per square inch. This flow reflects a 50-percent reduction for the installation of an approved automatic fire sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13 with central station monitoring. This requirement is made in accordance with the California Fire Code Appendix III -A, as adopted by the Fire District Ordinances. 2. Public fire hydrants located within a 500-foot radius of the proposed project may be used to provide the required fire flow subject to Fire District review and approval. Private fire hydrants on adjacent property shall not be used to provide required fire flow. 3. Fire protection water plans are required for all projects that must extend the existing water supply to or onto the site. Building permits will not be issued until fire protection water plans are approved. 4. On all site plans to be submitted for review, show all fire hydrants located within 600-feet of the proposed project site. FSC-3 Prerequisite for submittal of Overhead Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems Prior to submitting plans for an overhead automatic fire sprinkler system, the applicant shall submit plans, specifications and calculations for the fire sprinkler system underground supply piping. Approval of the undergrounb—sLpply piping sys em must�e Ufa nnedpnor to su milting t e overhead —fire- sprinkler system plans. FSC-4 Requirement for an Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Ordinance 15, the 2001 California Fire Code and the approved RCFPD alternative method require that all structures in this development be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers in accordance to NFPA 13 "Fully Sprinklered". FSC-5 Fire Alarm System Per the approved alternative method all sprinkler systems in this development must be monitored by a listed central station fire alarm system. Refer to RCFPD Ordinances 15 and 39, the California Building Code, RCFPD Fire Alarm Standard #10-6 and/or the California Fire Code. 2. Prior to the installation of the fire alarm system, Fire Construction Services' approval and a building permit must be obtained. Plans and specifications shall be submitted to Fire Construction Services in accordance with RCFPD Fire Alarm Standard #10-6. D3—Pg184 FSC-6 Fire District Site Access Fire District access roadways include public roads, streets and highways, as well as private roads, streets drive aisles and/or designated fire lanes. Please reference the RCFPD Fire Department Access - Fire Lanes Standard 9-7. Location of Access: All portions of the structures 151 story exterior wall shall be located within 150-feet of Fire District vehicle access, measure on an approved route around the exterior of the building. Landscaped areas, unpaved changes in elevation, gates and fences are deemed obstructions. 2. Specifications for private Fire District access roadways per the RCFPD Standards are: a. The minimum unobstructed width is 26-feet. b. The maximum inside turn radius shall be 24-feet. C. The minimum outside turn radius shall be 50-feet. d. The minimum radius for cul-de-sacs is 45-feet. The minimum vertical clearance is 14-feet, 6-inches. At any private entry median, the minimum width of traffic lanes shall be 20-feet on each side. g. The angle of departure and approach shall not exceed 9-degrees or 20 percent. h. The maximum grade of the driving surface shall not exceed 12%. Support a minimum load of 70,000 pounds gross vehicle weight (GVW). j. Trees and shrubs planted adjacent to the fire lane shall be kept trimmed to a minimum of 14- et "-6fles from he grown up. ege a ion s a not a al ogre to obstruct Fire Department apparatus. Access Doorways: Approved doorways, accessible without the use of a ladder, shall be provided in accordance with the 2001 California Building Code, Fire and/or any other applicable standards. 4. Access Walkways: Hardscape access walkways shall be provided from the fire apparatus access road to all required building exterior openings. 5. Residential gates installed across Fire District access roads shall be installed in accordance with RCFPD Residential Gate Standard 99-1. The following design requirements apply: a. All automatic gates shall be provided with a Fire District approved, compatible traffic pre- emption device. The devices shall be digital. Analog devices are not acceptable. Devices shall be installed in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions and specifications. b. Vehicle access gates shall be provided with an approved Fire District Knox Key Switch. C. The key switch shall be located outside and immediately adjacent to the gate for use in the event that the traffic pre-emption device fails to operate. D3-Pg185 d. A traffic loop device must be installed to allow exiting from the complex e. The gate shall remain in the open position for not less than 20-minutes and shall automatically reset. Fire Lane Identification: Red curbing and/or signage shall identify the fire lanes. A site plan illustrating the proposed delineation that meets the minimum Fire District standards shall be included in the architectural plans submitted to B&S for approval. Approved Fire Department Access: The approved mitigation measures must be clearly noted on the site plan. A copy of the approved Alternative Method application must be reproduced on the architectural plans submitted to B&S for plan review. FSC-10 Occupancy and Hazard Control Permits Listed are those Fire Code permits commonly associated with the business operations and/or building construction. Plan check submittal is required with the permit application for approval of the permit; field inspection is required prior to permit issuance. General Use Permit shall be required for any activity or operation not specifically described below, which in the judgment of the Fire Chief is likely to produce conditions that may be hazardous to life or property. • Public Assembly, LPG or Gas Fuel Vehicles in Assembly Buildings • Tents, Canopies and/or Air Supported Structures, Liquefied Petroleum Gases FSC-13 Alternate Method Application Fire Construction Services staff and the Fire Marshal will review all requests for alternate method, when submitted. The request must be submitted on the Fire District "Application for Alternate Method" form along with supporting documents and payment of the S92 review fee. FCS-14 Map Recordation Reciprocal Access Agreement: The plan as submitted indicate that the required Fire Department access: a. Is located on property which is not under the control of the applicant; or b. Crosses a property line; or C. Is shared by multiple owners; or d. Is located on common space under the control of an owner's association Please provide a permanent access agreement granting irrevocable use of the property to the Fire District. The agreement shall include a statement that no obstruction, gate, fence, building or other structure shall be placed within the dedicated access without Fire District approval. The recorded agreement shall include a copy of the site plan. The agreement shall be presented to Fire Construction Services for review and approval, prior to recordation. The agreement shall be recorded with the Recorder's Office, County of San Bernardino. To assist Fire Construction Services in reviewing the agreement the following shall be included in the submittal: D3—Pg186 a. The current title reports to provide a legal description and proof of ownership for all properties included in the agreement. The assessor's parcel numbers of each parcel subject to the agreement. C. A scaled site plan showing the path of the Fire District access, the width, turn radii and slope of roadway surface shall be provided. The access roadway shall comply with the requirements of the RCFPD Fire Lane Standard #9-7. 2. Reciprocal Water Covenant and Agreement: The plans as submitted indicate that a required private fire mains or appurtenances a. Pass through or are located on property not under the control of the applicant; or b. Crosses a property line; or Provide service to adjacent properties; or Is located on common space under the control of an owner's association; or e. Is shared by multiple owners. Please provide a permanent maintenance and service agreement between the owner for the private water mains, fire hydrants and fire protection equipment essential to the water supply. The agreement shall meet the form and content approved by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District. The agreement shall be submitted to Fire Construction Services for review and approval, prior to recordation. The agreement shall be recorded within the Recorder's Office, County of San Bernardino. Chronological Summary of RCFPD Standard Conditions PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS — Please complete the following prior to the issuance of any building permits: Private Water Supply (Fire) Systems: The applicant shall submit construction plans, specifications, flow test data and calculations for the private water main system for review and approval by the Fire District. Plans and installation shall comply with Fire District Standards. Approval of the on -site (private) fire underground and water plans is required prior to any building permit issuance for any structure on the site. Private on -site combination domestic and fire supply system must be designed in accordance with RCFPD Standards # 9-4, #10-2 and #10-4. The Building & Safety Division and Fire Construction Services will perform plan checks and inspections. All private on -site fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed and operable prior to delivering any combustible framing materials to the site. Fire construction Services will inspect the installation, witness hydrant flushing and grant a clearance before lumber is dropped. 2. Public Water Supply (Domestic/Fire) Systems: The applicant shall submit a plan showing the locations of all new public fire hydrants for the review and approval by the Fire District and CCWD. On the plan, show all existing fire hydrants within a 600-foot radius of the project. All required public fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed and operable prior to delivering any combustible framing materials to the site. CCWD personnel shall inspect the installation and D3—Pg187 witness the hydrant flushing. Fire Construction Services shall inspect the site after acceptance of the public water system by CCWD. Fire Construction Services must grant a clearance before lumber is dropped. 3. Construction Access: The access roads must be paved in accordance with all the requirements of the RCFPD Fire Lane Standard #9-7. All temporary utilities over access roads must be installed at least 14' 6" above the finished surface of the road. Fire Flow: A current fire flow letter from CCWD must be received. The applicant is responsible for obtaining the fire flow information from CCWD and submitting the letter to Fire Construction Services. 5. Easements and Reciprocal Agreements: All easements and agreements must be recorded with the County of San Bernardino. PRIOR TO THE RELEASE OF TEMPORARY POWER The building construction must be substantially completed in accordance with Fire Construction Services' "Temporary Power Release Checklist and Procedures". PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY OR FINAL INSPECTION — Please complete the following: Hydrant Markers: All fire hydrants shall have a blue reflective pavement marker indicating the fire hydrant location on the street or driveway in accordance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Standard Plan 134, "Installation of Reflective Hydrant Markers". On private property, the markers shall be installed at the centerline of the fire access road, at each hydrant location. 2. Private Fire Hydrants: For the purpose of final acceptance, a licensed sprinkler contractor, in the presence of Fire Construction Services, shall conduct a test of the most hydraulically remote on - site fire hydrants. The underground fire line contractor, developer and/or owner are responsible for hiring the company to perform the test. A final test report shall be submitted to Fire Construction Services verifying the fire flow available. The fire flow available must meet or exceed the required --fire-flowr-in-aceordancewfth-the-C—alifomra Fire-Code-- 3. Fire Sprinkler System: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the fire sprinkler system(s) shall be tested and accepted by Fire Construction Services. 4. Fire Sprinkler Monitoring: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the fire sprinkler monitoring system must be tested and accepted by Fire Construction Services. The fire sprinkler monitoring system shall be installed, tested and operational immediately following the completion of the fire sprinkler system (subject to the release of power). 5. Fire Suppression Systems and/or other special hazard protection systems shall be inspected, tested and accepted by Fire Construction Services before occupancy is granted and/or equipment is placed in service. 6. Fire Alarm System: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the fire alarm system shall be installed, inspected, tested and accepted by Fire Construction Services. Access Control Gates: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, vehicular gates must be inspected, tested and accepted in accordance with RCFPD Standards #9-1 or 09-2 by Fire Construction Services. 8. Fire Access Roadways: Prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, the fire access roadways must be installed in accordance with the approved plans and acceptable to Fire Construction Services. The CC&R's, the reciprocal agreement and/or other approved documents shall be recorded and contain an approved fire access roadway map with provisions that prohibit parking, specify the method of enforcement and identifies who is responsible for the required annual inspections and the maintenance of all required fire access roadways. 9. Address: Prior to the granting of occupancy, single-family dwellings shall post the address with minimum 4-inch numbers on a contrasting background. The numbers shall be internally or externally illuminated during periods of darkness. The numbers shall be visible from the street. When building setback from the public roadway exceeds 100-feet, additional 4-inch numbers shall be displayed at the property entry. 10. Address: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, commercial/industrial and multi- family buildings shall post the address with minimum 8-inch numbers on contrasting background, visible from the street and electrically illuminated during periods of darkness. When the building setback exceeds 200 feet from the public street, an additional non -illuminated 6-inch minimum number address shall be provided at the property entrance. Larger address numbers will be required on buildings located on wide streets or built with large setbacks in multi -tenant commercial and industrial buildings. The suite designation numbers and/or letters shall be provided on the front and back of all suites. 11. Confidential Business Occupancy Information: The applicant shall complete the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District "Confidential Business Occupancy Information" form. This form provides contact information for Fire District use in the event of an emergency at the subject building or property. This form must be presented to the Fire Construction Services Inspector. 12. Mapping Site Plan: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, a 8 Yz" x 11" or 11" x 17" site plan of the site in accordance with RCFPD Standard #13-1 shall be revised by the applicant to reflect the actual location of all devices and building features as required in the standard. The site ---plan-must-be-reviewed-and-aecepted-by-the-Fireinspeet,ar. —----------- 7 D3-Pgl89 RESOLUTION NO. 17-28 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TIME EXTENSION DRC2017-00249 —A REQUEST TO ALLOW FOR A ONE (1) YEAR TIME EXTENSION OF A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED 8-LOT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (SUBTT16605) RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES (206 UNITS) ON 21 ACRES OF LAND IN THE MIXED USE (MU) DISTRICT, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, BETWEEN RED HILL COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE AND PACIFIC ELECTRIC TRAIL AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF -APN: 0207-101-13, 31, 34, AND 41. A. Recitals. 1. Pacific Summit -Foothill, LLC, filed an application for the extension of the approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 16605, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Tentative Tract Map Time Extension request is referred to as "the application." 2. On April 12, 2006, the Planning Commission adopted its Resolution No. 06-38, thereby approving Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605 subject to specific conditions and time limits. 3. On March 23, 2016, the Planning Commission adopted its Resolution No. 16-16, thereby approving Time Extension DRC2015-01110 subject to specific conditions and time limits. 4. On April 26, 2017, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 5. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing on April 26, 2017, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to 4 parcels with a combined area of approximately 21.0 acres located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trail, and is presently vacant; and b. The project site is located in the Mixed Use (MU) District; and C. The property to the north contains condominiums and single-family homes in the Medium (M) Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre) and Low (L) Residential District (2- 4 dwelling units per acre), the property to the south contains office, commercial, and D3—Pg190 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-28 TIME EXTENSION DRC2017-00249 — PACIFIC SUMMIT -FOOTHILL, LLC April 26, 2017 Page 2 condominiums uses in the Mixed Use (MU) District and Medium (M) Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), the property to the east contains Route 66 Trailhead and condominiums in the Medium (M) Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), and the property to the west contains the Sycamore Inn Restaurant and other commercial land uses in the Mixed Use (MU) District; and d. This application is a request to extend the approval period of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605 for one (1) additional year. Upon the initial approval of SUBTT16605 on April 12, 2006, the approval period was for a duration of 3 years and was set to expire on April 12, 2009. Subsequently, this map was subject to one (1) discretionary time extension granted by the Planning Commission and several automatic time extensions granted through Senate Bill 1185 and Assembly Bills 333, 208, and 116. The most recent time extension occurred on March 23, 2016 when the Planning Commission approved Time Extension DRC2015-01110 extending the approval period for 1-year to April 12, 2017; and e. Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605 contemplated the subdivision of the subject parcel into eight (8) lots for condominium purposes (206 units). The applicant does not intend to construct the homes at this time; and f. The subdivision of the project site conforms to all applicable development standards applicable to property in the Mixed Use (MU) District. The Development Code does not identify minimum lot area, minimum lot width, or minimum lot depth requirements; and g. The subdivision of the project site for residential condominium purposes (and its eventual development) does not conflict with the Land Use policies of the General Plan, and will provide for development within the Mixed Use (MU) District in a manner consistent with the General Plan. h. The entitlement applications related to the Tentative Tract Map (Design Review DRC2003-00637, Variance DRC2005-01061, and Minor Development Review DRC2004-00826) expired on April 6, 2011. No time extensions for these applications were requested nor could they be granted as the option to extend the approval period for these types of applications was not available prior to 2012; and L All future development of the site will require the review and approval of entitlement applications (i.e., Design Review, Conditional Use Permit, etc.), and will be subject to Planning Commission and/or City Council review and approval. 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 previously approved Tentative Tract Map for residential condominium purposes and the associated Time Extension for the Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the City's current General Plan, specific plans, ordinances, plans, codes, and policies since all future development of the site will require the review and approval of entitlement applications (i.e., Design Review, Conditional Use Permit, etc.), and will be subject to Planning Commission and/or City Council review and approval. The proposed Time Extension for the Tentative Tract Map to subdivide the property into eight (8) parcels and is consistent with the development district of the project site; and D3—Pg191 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-28 TIME EXTENSION DRC2017-00249 — PACIFIC SUMMIT -FOOTHILL, LLC April 26, 2017 Page 3 b. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of the proposed subdivision. The surrounding property to the north is developed with condominiums and single- family homes, the property to the south contains office, commercial, and condominiums uses, the property to the east contains Route 66 Trailhead and condominiums, and the property to the west contains the Sycamore Inn Restaurant and other commercial land uses; and c. The proposed subdivision, 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 proposed project is to subdivide the property into eight (8) parcels — no development of the site is proposed; and d. The proposed subdivision complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. The proposed subdivision meets all standards outlined in the Development Code and the design and development standards and policies of the Planning Commission and the City; and e. The extension is within the time limits established by State law and local ordinance. State law allows for one (1) year time extensions. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the application, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that no subsequent or supplemental environmental document is required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in connection with the review and approval of this application based upon the following findings and determinations: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration in April 12, 2006 in connection with the City's approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project unless: (i) substantial changes are proposed to the project that indicate new or more severe impacts on the environment; (ii) substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under which the project was previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts; or (iii) new important information shows the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered; or (iv) additional mitigation measures are now feasible to reduce impacts or different mitigation measures can be imposed to substantially reduce impacts; and b. The Planning Commission finds, in connection with the DRC2017-00249, that substantial changes to the project or the circumstances surrounding the project have not occurred which would create new or more severe impacts than those evaluated in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration. The previous project contemplated the subdivision of the project site for the development of a 206-unit condominium project and the Time Extension for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605 is consistent with that approval. Staff further finds that the project will not have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration, not have more severe effects than previously analyzed, and that additional or different mitigation measures are not required to reduce the impacts of the project to a level of less than significant. There are no new effects from the subdivision of the property that were not discussed or analyzed or evaluated in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration; and D3—Pg192 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-28 TIME EXTENSION DRC2017-00249 — PACIFIC SUMMIT -FOOTHILL, LLC April 26, 2017 Page 4 C. Based on these findings and all evidence in the record, the Planning Commission concurs with the staff determination that no additional environmental review is required pursuant to CEQA in connection with the City's consideration of Time Extension DRC2017-00249. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3 and 4 above, this Commission hereby grants a time extension for: Tentative Map Applicant Expiration SUBTT16605 Pacific Summit -Foothill April 12, 2018 6. All applicable Conditions of Approval in Resolution No. 06-38 for SUBTT16605 shall apply to Time Extension DRC2017-00249. 7. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF APRIL 2017. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Ll'� ATTEST: Francisco Oaxaca, 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 April 2017, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: D3—Pg193