Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-06-14 - Agenda Packet - PC-HPC- - I - - - - ) - - - - HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA A. 7:00 P.M. - CALL TO ORDER Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call: Chairman 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 or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to 5 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 adopt Regular Meeting Minutes of May 24, 2017 C2. Consideration to adopt Adjourned (Workshop) Meeting Minutes of May 24, 2017 Page 1 of 8 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA D. DIRECTOR'S STAFF REPORTS The following items do not legally require any public testimony, although the Chairman may open the meeting for public input. D1. PROPOSED REVIEW PROCEDURES AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT APPLICABLE TO HAUNTED HOUSES IN RESIDENCES/RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS E. PUBLIC HEARINGS/PLANNING COMMISSION The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required by law. The Chairman will open the public hearing to receive testimony. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual or less as determined by the Chairman. Please sign in after speaking. E1. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2015-00991 —WECARE DIALYSIS CENTER —The development of a 10,912 square foot medical office building on 1.13 acres in the General Commercial (GC) District, on the east side of Grove Avenue, approximately 500 feet south of Arrow Route, located at 8591 Grove Avenue - APN: 0207-222-27. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA guidelines as a Class 32 Exemption (CEQA Section 15332) for In -fill Development Projects. CONTINUED FROM MAY 24, 2017. E2. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20073 — LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP. — A review of a proposed subdivision of a property of about 84 acres into twenty-seven (27) parcels and one (1) lettered lot located within the Empire Lakes Specific Plan, Planning Area 1, located north of 4th Street, south of 6th Street, west of Milliken Avenue, and east of Utica/Cleveland Avenues - APNs: 0210-082-41, -49, and -52. Related fites: General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115, and Pre -Application Review DRC2017-00170. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on May 18, 2016 in connection with the City's approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project. CONTINUED FROM MAY 24, 2017. Page 2 of 8 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA E3. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20105 — LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP. — A review of a proposed subdivision of a property of about 82 acres into five (5) parcels located within the Empire Lakes Specific Plan, Planning Area 1, located north of 6th Street, south of the Metrolink/BNSF rail line, west of Milliken Avenue, and east of Utica/Cleveland Avenues -APN: 0209-272-20. Related files: General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115, and Pre - Application Review DRC2017-00170. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on May 18, 2016 in connection with the City's approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project. E4. TIME EXTENSION DRC2017-00430 - GOLDEN MEADOWLAND, LLC. AND RANCH HAVEN, LLC. - A request for a fourth one-year time extension for a previously approved tentative tract map (Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072) to subdivide 150.79 acres into 358 lots in the Low (2-4 dwelling units per acre) Residential District, with an average density of 2.3 dwelling units per acre for the entire project, in the Upper Etiwanda Neighborhood of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, located at northeast corner of Wilson Avenue and Etiwanda Avenue - APN: 0225-083-01, 12, 13, 15, 16 and 20. Staff has found the project to be within the scope of the project covered by a prior Environmental Impact Report certified by City Council in June 16, 2004 by Resolution 04-204 and does not raise or create new environmental impacts not already considered in the Environmental Impact Report. E5. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20042 — NH WEAVER LANE, LLC - A request to subdivide 18.2 acres of land into 26 lots for the purposes of developing 26 single-family residences for a site located on the east side of Carnelian Street and north of Hillside Road in the Very Low (VL) District (.1 — 2 Dwelling Units per Acre), the Hillside Overlay District and the Equestrian Overlay District - APN: 1061-261-01. Related records: Hillside Design Review DRC2016-00377, Variance DRC2016-00748, Variance DRC2017-00014 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2016-00376. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. E6. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND HILLSIDE DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00377 — NH WEAVER LANE, LLC - A request for site plan and architectural review of 26 single-family residences on 18.2 acres of land related to Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042, located on the east side of Carnelian Street and north of Hillside Road in the Very Low (VL) District (.1 — 2 Dwelling Units per Acre) the Hillside Overlay District and the Equestrian Overlay District -APN: Page 3 of 8 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 1061-261-01. Related records: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042, Variance DRC2016- 00748, Variance DRC2017-00014 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2016-00376. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ET ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VARIANCE DRC2016-00748 - NH WEAVER LANE, LLC - A request to reduce the required lot depth of Lots 11 - 15 by approximately 13 feet related to Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 located on the east side of Carnelian Street and north of Hillside Road in the Very Low (VL) District (.1 — 2 Dwelling Units per Acre the Hillside Overlay District and the Equestrian Overlay District - APN: 1061-261-01. Related records: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042, Hillside Design Review DRC2016-00377, Variance DRC2017-00014 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2016-00376. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. E8. ENVIRONMENT ASSESSMENT AND VARIANCE DRC2017-00014 - NH WEAVER LANE, LLC — A request to reduce the rear yard setback on Lot 16 by approximately 23 feet related Hillside Design Review DRC2016-00377, located on the east side of Carnelian Street and north of Hillside Road in the Very Low (VL) District (.1 — 2 Dwelling Units per Acre), the Hillside Overlay District and the Equestrian Overlay District - APN: 1061-261-01, Related records: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042, Hillside Design Review DRC2016-00377, Variance DRC2016-00748 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2016-00376. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. E9. ENVIRONMENT ASSESSMENT AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2016-00376 - NH WEAVER LANE, LLC —A request to remove 7 heritage trees related to Hillside Design Review DRC2016-00377, located on the east side of Carnelian and north of Hillside Road in the Very Low (VL) Development District (.1 — 2 Dwelling Units per Acre), the Hillside Overlay District and the Equestrian Overlay District -APN: 1061-261-01. Related records: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042. Hillside Design Review DRC2016-00377, Variance DRC2016-00748 and Variance DRC2017-00014. E10. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2016-00452 — DR HORTON — A request to change the Victoria Community Plan Zoning Designation for 28.4 acres of land at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road from Regionally Related Office/Commercial (RROC) to Mixed Use (MU) in the Victoria Community Plan (VCP) related to the construction of a mixed use project consisting of 380 residential units, a 71 room hotel and two restaurant buildings totaling 12,000 square feet, located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road — APN: 1090-331-05. Related Files: Preliminary Review DRC2015-01102, Pre -Application Review DRC2016-00142, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19762, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20032, Page 4 of 8 - - - -- - -7 -- - - HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449, Design Review DRC2016-00450, Uniform Sign Program DRC2016-00451 and Minor Exception DRC2016-00508. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final review and action. E11. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19762 — DR HORTON — A request to subdivide 28.4 acres of land into 4 parcels in the Victoria Community Plan (VCP) within the Mixed Use District related to the construction of a mixed use project consisting of 380 residential units, a 71 room hotel and two restaurant buildings totaling 12,000 square feet, located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road — APN: 1090-331-05, Related Files: Preliminary Review DRC2015-01102, Pre -Application Review DRC2016-00142, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20032, Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449, Design Review DRC2016-00450, Uniform Sign Program DRC2016-00451, Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2016-00452 and Minor Exception DRC2016- 00508. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. E12. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20032 — DR HORTON — A request for a residential condominium subdivision for 380 residential units on 28.4 acres of land in the Victoria Community Plan (VCP) within the Mixed Use District related to the construction of a mixed use project consisting of 380 residential units, a 71 room hotel and two restaurant buildings totaling 12,000 square feet, located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road —APN: 1090-331-05. Related Files: Preliminary Review DRC2015-01102, Pre -Application Review DRC2016-00142, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19762, Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449, Design Review DRC2016-00450, Uniform Sign Program DRC2016-00451, Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2016- 00452 and Minor Exception DRC2016-00508. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. E13. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00450 — DR HORTON — A request for site plan and architectural review in the Victoria Community Plan (VCP) within the Mixed Use District related to the construction of a mixed use project consisting of 380 residential units, a 71 room hotel and two restaurant buildings totaling 12,000 square feet, located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road — APN: 1090- 331-05. Related Files: Preliminary Review DRC2015-01102, Pre -Application Review DRC2016-00142, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19762, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20032, Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449, Uniform Sign Program DRC2016-00451, Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2016-00452 and Minor Exception DRC2016-00508. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Page 5 of 8 149 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA E14. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2016-00449 — DR HORTON — A request to operate a bar (Type 70 On Sale General — Restrictive Service) within a hotel in the Victoria Community Plan (VCP) within the Mixed Use District related to the construction of a mixed use project consisting of 380 residential units, a 71 room hotel and two restaurant buildings totaling 12,000 square feet, located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road — APN: 1090-331-05. Related Files: Preliminary Review DRC2015-01102, Pre -Application Review DRC2016-00142, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19762, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20032, Design Review DRC2016-00450 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2016-00451, Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2016- 00452 and Minor Exception DRC2016-00508. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. E15. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2016-00508 — DR HORTON — A request to allow 8 foot combination retaining/freestanding wall heights for a mixed use project in the Victoria Community Plan (VCP) within the Mixed Use District related to the construction of a mixed use project consisting of 380 residential units, a 71 room hotel and two restaurant buildings totaling 12,000 square feet, located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road —APN: 1090-331-05. Related Files: Preliminary Review DRC2015-01102, Pre -Application Review DRC2016-00142, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19762, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20032, Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449, Design Review DRC2016-00450, Uniform Sign Program DRC2016-00451 and Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2016-00452. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. E16. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2016-00451 —DR HORTON —A request for a Uniform Sign Program in the Victoria Community Plan (VCP) within the Mixed Use District related to the construction of a mixed use project consisting of 380 residential units, a 71 room hotel and two restaurant buildings totaling 12,000 square feet, located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road — APN: 1090- 331-05. Related Files: Preliminary Review DRC2015-01102, Pre -Application Review DRC2016-00142, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19762, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20032, Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449, Design Review DRC2016-00450, Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2016-00452 and Minor Exception DRC2016-00508. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. F. COMMISSION BUSINESS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION Page 6 of 8 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 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 June 8, 2017 seventy two (72) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive. /LS/ 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 Page 7 of 8 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and speak into the microphone. After speaking, please sign in on the clipboard located next to the speaker's podium. It is important to list your name, address and the agenda item letter your comments refer to. Comments are generally limited to 5 minutes per individual. If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under "Public Comments." There is opportunity to speak under this section prior to the end of the agenda. Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the Planning Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of $2,662 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 8 of 8 Vicinity Map Historic Preservation and Planning Commission Meeting June 14, 2017 3ase Line 4rrow L5 f Meeting Location: City HalliCouncil Chamber: 10500 Civic Center Drive D1— Haunted Houses (applies to all residential districts citywide) El —DR DRC2015-00991—WeCare Dialysis E2—SUBTT20073—Lewis Management Corp E3—SUBTPM20105—Lewis Management Corp E4—Time Extension DRC2017-00430—Golden Meadowland, LLC/Ranch Haven LLC E5-E9—TT, HDR, VAR, VAR, TRP—NH Weaver Lane E10-E16—VCPA, TPM, TTM, DR, CUP, ME, USP—DR Horton MAY 245 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 Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call: Chairman Oaxaca A Vice Chairman Macias X Commissioner Fletcher X Commissioner Munoz _X_ Commissioner Wimberly _X_ Additional Staff Present. Candyce Burnett. City Planner, Jim Markman. City Attorney, Tom Grahn, Associate Planner, Brian Sandona, Associate Engineer, Jennifer Nakamura, Associate Planner; Dominick Perez, Associate Planner, Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary, Mike Smith, Senior Planner; Tahe van der Zweag, Associate Planner, Nikki Cavazos. Assistant Planner, Oat 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 or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of 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 Page 1 of 14 C1—Pgl MAY 245 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. C1. Consideration to approve the Regular Meeting Minutes of May 10, 2017 C2. Consideration to approve the Adjourned Meeting (Workshop) Minutes of May 10, 2017 C3. Consideration of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Capital Improvement Program for Fiscal Year 2017/18 The Commission found the Capital Improvement Program in conformance with the General Plan. Moved by Fletcher, seconded by Munoz, carried 4-0-1 (Oaxaca absent) to adopt the Consent Calendar. D. PUBLIC HEARINGS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION The following items do not legally require any public testimony, although the Chairman may open the meeting for public input. D1. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS - DRC2016-00966 - NATIONAL COMMUNITY RENAISSANCE OF CALIFORNIA - A request to remove an on -site tree that has been determined to be a Designated Local Landmark related to the site plan and architectural review of a 140-unit affordable senior housing development on 4 acres of land within the Low -Medium (LM) District (4 — 8 dwelling units per acre) of the Victoria Planned Community, located at the terminus of Firehouse Court and west of Day Creek Boulevard. APN: 1089-031-36. Related records: General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00964, Design Review DRC2016-00814, Density Bonus Agreement DRC2017- 00156, Variance DRC2017-00032 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2016-00965. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. CONTINUED FROM MAY 10, 2017 Vice Chairman Macias noted the public hearing was still open for this item from the meeting of May 10, 2017 and that the meetings of the Historic Preservation Commission and Planning Commission had been opened concurrently. He then asked for the staff report. Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner gave a PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). He noted that there were concerns regarding the environmental study and staff has addressed those concerns. Page 2 of 14 C1—Pg2 MAY 245 2017 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Alexa Washburn of National Community Renaissance gave a PowerPoint presentation regarding the history of her organization and that they work as a public/private partnership and they are a non-profit. Commissioner Fletcher asked where the two bedroom units are placed in the development. Detlev Peiker, Architect of RM Design Group said the 2 bed units in are located in 3 different areas around the project perimeter. Vice Chairman Macias commented with respect to housing needs, these are important projects because any city should have accommodations for all economic groups. He said he thinks it's a good project. He invited public comment and hearing none, closed the public hearing. Item D1 was heard in conjunction with Items El-E5 Moved by Wimberly, seconded by Fletcher, carried4-0-1 (Oaxaca absent) to adopt the Resolution approving Certificate of Appropriateness DRC2016-00966, E. PUBLIC HEARINGS/PLANNING COMMISSION The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required by law. The Chairman will open the public hearing to receive testimony. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual or less as determined by the Chairman. Please sign in after speaking. El. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2016-00964 - NATIONAL COMMUNITY RENAISSANCE OF CALIFORNIA - A request to modify General Plan Figure LU-8 related to the removal of the Historic Resource Designation of an on -site tree related to the site plan and architectural review of a 140-unit affordable senior housing development on 4 acres of land within the Low -Medium (LM) District (4 - 8 dwelling units per acre) of the Victoria Planned Community, located at the terminus of Firehouse Court and west of Day Creek Boulevard. APN: 1089-031-36. Related records: Design Review DRC2016- 00814, Density Bonus Agreement DRC2017-00156, Certificate of Appropriateness DRC2016- 00966, Variance DRC2017-00032 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2016-00965. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. CONTINUED FROM MAY 10, 2017 Page 3 of 14 C1-Pg3 IWIM I L`Tl LV I / HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA E2. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DENSITY BONUS AGREEMENT DRC2017-00156 — NATIONAL COMMUNITY RENAISSANCE OF CALIFORNIA—A Density Bonus Agreement between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and National Community Renaissance of California, for the purpose of providing a senior housing project in accordance with the Victoria Community Plan and the Development Code, including deviating from certain development standards, for the development of a 140-unit affordable senior housing development on 4 acres of land within the Low -Medium (LM) District (4 — 8 dwelling units per acre) of the Victoria Planned Community, located at the terminus of Firehouse Court and west of Day Creek Boulevard. APN: 1089-031-36. Related records: General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00964, Certificate of Appropriateness DRC2016-00966, Design Review DRC2016-00814, Variance DRC2017-00032 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2016-00965. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. CONTINUED FROM MAY 10, 2017 E3. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00814 — NATIONAL COMMUNITY RENAISSANCE OF CALIFORNIA - A request for site plan and architectural review of a 140-unit affordable senior housing development on 4 acres of land within the Low - Medium (LM) District (4 — 8 dwelling units per acre) of the Victoria Planned Community, located at the terminus of Firehouse Court and west of Day Creek Boulevard. APN: 1089-031- 36. Related records: General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00964, Certificate of Appropriateness DRC2016-00966, Density Bonus Agreement DRC2017-00156, Variance DRC2017-00032 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2016-00965. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. CONTINUED FROM MAY 10, 2017 E4. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VARIANCE - DRC2017-00032 - NATIONAL COMMUNITY RENAISSANCE OF CALIFORNIA - A request to permit walls over 8 feet in height due to on -site grades related to the site plan and architectural review of a 140-unit affordable senior housing development on 4 acres of land within the Low -Medium (LM) District (4 — 8 dwelling units per acre) of the Victoria Planned Community, located at the terminus of Firehouse Court and west of Day Creek Boulevard. APN: 1089-031-36. Related records: General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00964, Certificate of Appropriateness DRC2016-00966, Design Review DRC2016-00814, Density Bonus Agreement DRC2017-00156 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2016-00965. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. CONTINUED FROM MAY 10, 2017 Page 4 of 14 C1—Pg4 MAY 249 2017 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA E5. ENVIRONMENT ASSESSMENT AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT - DRC2016-00965 - NATIONAL COMMUNITY RENAISSANCE OF CALIFORNIA - A request to remove 1 on -site tree related to the site plan and architectural review of a 140-unit affordable senior housing development on 4 acres of land within the Low -Medium (LM) District (4 — 8 dwelling units per acre) of the Victoria Planned Community, located at the terminus of Firehouse Court and west of Day Creek Boulevard. APN: 1089-031-36. Related records: General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00964, Certificate of Appropriateness DRC2016-00966, Design Review DRC2016- 00814, Density Bonus Agreement DRC2017-00156 and Variance DRC2017-00032. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. CONTINUED FROM MAY 10, 2017 For Items El and E2 (See item D1 for minutes) Moved by Wimberly, seconded by Fletcher, carried 4-0-1 (Oaxaca absent) to adopt the Resolutions recommending approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00964 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2017-00156 to be forwarded to the City Council for final action with the recommendation to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts. For Items E3-E5 Moved by Wimberly, seconded by Fletcher, carried 4-0-1 (Oaxaca absent) to adopt the Resolutions of Approval for Design Review DRC2016-00814, Variance DRC2017-00032, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2016-00965. E6. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2015-00991 — WECARE DIALYSIS CENTER —The development of a 10,912 square foot medical office building on 1.13 acres in the General Commercial (GC) District, on the east side of Grove Avenue, approximately 500 feet south of Arrow Route, located at 8591 Grove Avenue - APN: 0207-222-27. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA guidelines as a Class 32 Exemption (CEQA Section 15332) for In -fill Development Projects. CONTINUANCE REQUESTED Tom Grahn, Associate Planner, noted that because the property was not properly posted, the item has been re -advertised for the June 14th meeting date and staff requests a continuance. Vice Chairman Macias asked if there was any public comment and seeing and hearing none asked for a motion. Page 5 of 14 C1—Pg5 IWIP%I L`r, LV I I HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA For Item E6 Moved by Fletcher, seconded by Munoz, carried 4-0-1 (Oaxaca) to continue Design Review DRC2015-00991 to the June 14, 2017 meeting date. ET DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00417 - ROGER WONG -A review of a proposal to construct a 4,250 square foot office building on one developed parcel with an area of 15,726 square feet (0.37 acres) in the Commercial Office (CO) District, Foothill Boulevard Overlay District, (FBOD), located at the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Malachite Avenue at 9533 Foothill Boulevard - APN - 0208-261-14. 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 as a Class 32 (CEQA Guidelines Section 15332) exemption, which covers in -fill development on no more than 5 acres substantially surrounded by urban uses. Related files: Pre -Application Review DRC2015-00444 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2016-01036. E8. UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2016-01036 - ROGER WONG - A review of a uniform sign program for a 4,250 square foot office building on one developed parcel with an area of 15,726 square feet (0,37 acres) in the Commercial Office (CO) District, Foothill Boulevard Overlay District, (FBOD), located at the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Malachite Avenue at 9533 Foothill Boulevard -APN: 0208-261-14. 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 as a Class 32 (CEQA Guidelines Section 15332) exemption, which covers in -fill development on no more than 5 acres substantially surrounded by urban uses. Related files: Pre -Application Review DRC2015-00444 and Design Review DRC2016-00417. Nikki Cavazos, Assistant Planner gave a PowerPoint presentation (copy on file) and noted the standard conditions are before the Commissioners as they were inadvertently left out of the agenda. She indicated the applicant previously reviewed and agreed to all the conditions. Commissioner Fletcher asked if the DRC reviewed the Uniform Sign Program. Ms. Cavazos stated they did. Commissioner Wimberly did not recall the Route 66 sign being reviewed. He said it looks like it takes over the architecture of the building. He asked if there is a requirement for it to be located in that place. Page 6 of 14 Cl-Pg6 ITIM 1 LTA LLV I I HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Ms. Cavazos stated it is the applicant's request -similar to their "stamp" on the project. Commissioner Fletcher stated the "In God We Trust" and "Route 66" signs are not building identification signs and they do not look appropriate for the design. He said they appear tacked on and not consistent. He asked if the Route 66 sign could go somewhere else such as near the sidewalk. Ms. Cavazos pointed out that the portion reviewed by the DRC was for tenant signs. She said they must submit a final sign program as part of their conditions of approval. She said staff could contact the applicant regarding their removal. She said part of their USP is to show where the signs go. Commissioner Fletcher said he likes the building design, but not the signs. He said he would like to see the USP go back for discussion. Vice Chairman Macias said the placement of the signs could be altered and noted their sign approval process is still not complete. Ryan McGowan of Civic Design Group stated the property owner is present. He said they could put the signs on a future review. Vice Chairman Macias asked the applicant if they understand that where the sign is placed now is under question. Jim Markman, City Attorney, said the Commission can approve the building and delay the decision on the sign program. Commissioner Fletcher said those 2 signs are not compatible with other signs for the other tenants. Mr. McGowan explained that the owner's offices will be at this building and it was his choice as he will occupy the upper floor and a portion of the lower floor. Commissioner Munoz clarified and asked if the applicant is only agreeing to discuss it or agrees to remove them from the building. Mr. Markman said we need to be clear the signs are not acceptable Page 7 of 14 C1-Pg7 MAY 24, 2017 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Ms Cavazos restated that the USP was only for tenant signage Commissioner Munoz reiterated that this has to do with the actual design of the building and that he needs to ask the applicant to agree to remove sign. Roger Wong, project owner/applicant said the signs are part of creating a Route 66 theme — they are not so much part of signage program. Vice Chairman Macias noted the consensus of the Commission and said they can approve the design without the signs. Mr. Wong said ok, he is comfortable with that decision. Vice Chairman Macias asked if there was any public comment. Seeing and hearing no comment, Ile closed the public hearing. Commissioner Fletcher said staff did good job on the contemporary design. He said with the 2 signs removed it will be an improvement as they distracted from the architecture. He asked the applicant to work with staff to find a way to acknowledge Route 65. Commissioner Wimberly concurred that the USP approved tenant sign placement alone —he agreed the signs take away from the architecture. Commissioner Munoz concurred and supported the project. Vice Chairman Macias said he had assumed that the signage was part of the USP. For Items E7 and E8 Moved by Fletcher, seconded by Wimberly, carried 4-0-1 (Oaxaca absent) to adopt the Resolutions of Approval for Design Review DRC2016-00417 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2016-01036 but eliminating the two objectionable signs (Route 66 and In God We Trust) from the building design. The applicant will work with staff to find an alternative solution. E9. TIME EXTENSION DRC2017-00238 — WESTERN STATES DEVELOPMENT, INC. - A request to allow for a one (1) year time extension of a previously approved 11 lot Tentative Tract Map (SUBTT17769) on 2.98 acres of land in the Low Residential (L) District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located at the southwest corner of Beryl Street and 19th Street — APN: 0202- 461-62,-63, and -65. On June 11, 2008, a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental Page 8 of 14 C1—Pg8 IWIP11 L-TJ LV 1 I HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA impacts was adopted by the Planning Commission for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17769 under Resolution 08-29. Staff finds the project to be within the scope of the prior Mitigated Negative Declaration. The California Environmental Quality Act provides that no further environmental review or Negative Declaration is required for subsequent projects or minor revisions to the projects within the scope of the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration, CONTINUANCE REQUESTED Dat Tran, Assistant Planner stated that because the time extension request is still under review, and there are additional issues to address, staff requests a continuance to an unspecified date. For Item E9 Moved by Munoz, seconded by Wimberly, carried 4-0-1 (Oaxaca absent) to continue Time Extension DRC2017-00238 to an unspecified date E10. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2016-00931 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR IDS REAL ESTATE GROUP - A request to amend the Empire Lakes Specific Plan to increase the allowable Floor Area Ratio (FAR) from 0.35 to 0.50 for buildings within Planning Area 5 of the specific plan to allow for the construction of a logistics building of 232,058 square feet on a partially developed property comprised of five (5) parcels with a combined area 515.690 square feet (11.84 acres) located at the northeast corner of 4th Street and Utica Avenue - APNs: 0210-082-78, -79, -84, -89 and -90. Related files: Design Review DRC2016-00670 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2016-00671. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. El1. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00670 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR IDS REAL ESTATE GROUP - A review of a proposal to construct a logistics building of 232,058 square feet on a partially developed property comprised of five (5) parcels with a combined area 515,690 square feet (11.84 acres) in Planning Area 5, of the Empire Lakes Specific Plan, located at the northeast corner of 4th Street and Utica Avenue - APNs: 0210-082-78, -79, -84, -89 and -90. Related Files: Specific Plan Amendment DRC2016-00931 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2016-00671. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. E12. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2016-00671 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR IDS REAL ESTATE GROUP - A review of a proposal to remove existing trees on a partially developed property to allow for the construction Page 9 of 14 C1-Pg9 MAY 24) 2017 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA of a logistics building of 232,058 square feet on a property comprised of five (5) parcels with a combined area 515,690 square feet (11.84 acres) in Planning Area 5, of the Empire Lakes Specific Plan, located at the northeast corner of 4th Street and Utica Avenue - APNs: 0210- 082-78, -79, -84, -89 and -90. Related Files: Specific Plan Amendment DRC2016-00931 and Design Review DRC2016-00670. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Dominick Perez, Associate Planner, stated 2 letters were received regarding the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and because the concerns stated in the letter may take time to resolve, staff is requesting a continuance to an unspecified date. For Items E10-E12 Moved by Fletcher, seconded by Wimberly, carried 4-0-1 (Oaxaca absent) to continue Specific Plan Amendment DRC2016-00931, Design Review DRC2016-00670 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2016-00671 to an unspecified date. E13. MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT DRC2017-00177 — CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA — A request to amend Titles 2, 3 and 17 of the Municipal Code to enact requirements and standards for art in public places. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA guidelines under CEQA section 15601(b)(3). This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. Jennifer Nakamura, Associate Planner gave a Powerpoint Presentation (copy on file). Commissioner Fletcher noted that flexibility has been added. He asked if any comments were received from stakeholders, BIA, or the Chamber. He said he can see where the developer could build in a valuable enhancement to his project. Ms. Nakamura said they had a variety of concerns such as the fees. She said they were too high and prohibitive. She said most of their concerns have been addressed. She said they wanted flexibility about the artists that could be used -she said the City has no preference but we do want recognized artists or experts in their field. She said they wanted phasing for larger longer projects so they could install when it works for their phasing. She said overall, the groups thought the concept of adding art adds value but they want it to work for everyone. She said the Lewis group was the main voice of the BIA and gave us ideas and we believe we reached some middle ground. Creating spaces/places falls in line with what they want to do in development. Page 10 of 14 C1—Pg10 MAY 2412017 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Commissioner Fletcher asked if for example Empire Lakeshnixed use development what would be considered to determine the fee and if it would also go to the DRC for review along with the development application. He asked if they would always go to DRC. Ms Nakamura reported that the number of residential units as well as the amount of commercial space would be calculated. Vice Chairman Macias clarified that the developer has a choice; they can build on site, donate or pay an in lieu fee. Ms. Nakamura said that is true but we prefer they install the art. Commissioner Fletcher asked if for smaller developments if their fees go into a fund. Ms. Nakamura said they can and the Art Committee will advise the City Council as to how those funds are spent, the selection process of pieces and the design of the art. Commissioner Fletcher asked if the funds can be banked. Ms, Nakamura said we are allowed to bank the money for 10 years or the developer can request it be returned to the developer if they are still un-used at that point the unless City Council determines the funds will be saved fora specific, larger art project in the future (beyond the 10 years). Vice Chairman Macias noted the Art Committee would be responsible for creating the priorities of how those banked funds would be used. He then opened the public hearing and seeing and hearing no comment, closed the public hearing. For Item E13 Moved by Munoz, seconded by Wimberly, carried4-0-1 (Oaxaca absent) to adopt the Resolution Recommending Approval of Municipal Code Amendment DRC2017-00177 to be forwarded to the City Council for final action. E14. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20073 - LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP. - A review of a proposed subdivision of a property of about 84 acres into twenty-six (26) parcels and one (1) lettered lot located within the Empire Lakes Specific Plan, Planning Area 1, located north of 4th Street, south of 6th Street, west of Milliken Avenue, and east of Utica/Cleveland Avenues - APNs: 0210-082-41. -49, and -52 Related files: General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Page 11 of 14 C1-Pg11 MAY 249 2017 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, Development Code Amendment DRC2015- 00115. and Pre -Application Review DRC2017-00170 Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). the City certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on May 18. 2016 in connection with the City's approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040. and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project CONTINUANCE REQUESTED Mike Smith, Senior Planner, noted that because of a posting error, staff is requesting a continuance to the June 14th meeting date. For Item E14 Moved by Munoz, seconded by Wimberly, carried 4-0-1 to continue Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20073 to the June 14, 2017 meeting date. F. COMMISSION BUSINESS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION INTER -AGENCY UPDATES COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS G. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission adjourned to a workshop to discuss Pre -Application Review DRC2017-00170 - Lewis Management Corp. to be held in the DeAnza Room. 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 May 18. 2017 seventy two (72) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive. Page 12 of 14 C1-Pgl2 l� •.'' yl yya i MAY 2412017 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA /Is/ Lois J. Schrader Planning Commission Secretary City of Rancho Cucamonga INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and speak into the microphone. After speaking, please sign in on the clipboard located next to the speaker's podium. It is important to list your name, address and the agenda item letter your comments refer to. Comments are generally limited to 5 minutes per individual. If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under "Public Comments." There is opportunity to speak under this section prior to the end of the agenda. Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. Page 13 of 14 C1-Pg13 IVIH 1 91-`T7 LV 1 / HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the Planning Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of $2,662 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 14 of 14 C1-Pg14 MAY 243 2017 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES DEANZA ROOM RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA A. 7:00 P.M.* - CALL TO ORDER Roll Call: Chairman Oaxaca A 8:35 PM Vice Chairman Macias X Commissioner Fletcher _X_ Commissioner Munoz _X_ Commissioner Wimberly _X_ Additional Staff PresentCandyce Burnett, City Planner, Brian Sandona, Associate Engineer, Rob Ball, Fire Marshall: Dominick Perez, Associate Planner, Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary, Mike Smith, Senior Planner B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of 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. DISCUSSION ITEMS PLANNING COMMISSION C1 PRE -APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2017-00170 — LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP — A request for a Pre -Application Review of a proposed mixed use development consisting of 648 multi -family residential units and about 11,200 square feet of live/work and commercial floor area on a property consisting of three (3) parcels with a combined area of about 84 acres within the Empire Lakes Specific Plan, Planning Area 1, located north of 4th Street, south of Page 1 of 5 C2—Pgl PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES DEANZA ROOM RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA May 18, 2017, seventy two (72) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive. II sl Lois J. Schrader Planning Commission Secretary City of Rancho Cucamonga INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION 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. The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and speak into the microphone. After speaking, please sign in on the clipboard located next to the speaker's podium. It is important to list your name, address and the agenda item letter your comments refer to. Comments are generally limited to 5 minutes per individual. Page 4 of 5 C2—Pg4 i PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES DEANZA ROOM RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 6th Street, west of Milliken Avenue, and east of Utica/Cleveland Avenues, APNs: 0210-082- 41. -49, and -52. Related files: General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20073. Mike Smith Sr. Planner gave a presentation and noted this is located to the west of the future Vine' and the amenities located within the Vine are not included in the project proposal. He briefly noted the three themes and architectural styles being proposed. He said we are looking for variety in the architecture and we encourage the applicant to take full advantage of what the specific plan allows. He said the proposed buildings do not offer enough height variation nor building typology and suggested adding an additional floor to vertical suites. He said there is room for additional commercial space. Spencer Bogner VP Multi -Family Development (Project Manager) of Lewis Development gave a Powerpoint Presentation and introduced Paul Anderson (Architect) and Rick Polhamus, Randall Lewis, Bryan Goodman, Bill Kennedy and Courtney Power from TCA. Commissioner Fletcher asked if there are restrictions on the liveAvork uses, could they have a sandwich shop, for example. Candyce Burnett, City Planner, said not a sandwich shop, but there are some food uses that would be allowed under the cottage food industry ordinance. Commissioner Fletcher asked if the liveAvork units are all rentals Paul Anderson, Architect, said all liveAvork and retail units are rental spaces, the roof decks are private and there are no common barbeque areas on the roof, Commissioner Macias said he would like to see the architecture on the street (street view). Commissioner Fletcher said he would like to see a virtual presentation and he agrees with the staff comments in the report. He said he liked the small lot duplexes the best because the offer more variation that the other product renderings shown. He said he would like more variation of the wall and roof planes and that he was hoping to see more of a village atmosphere. He asked if all the buildings are 2 and 3 story. Mr. Bogner said those that have a roof deck could be considered 4 story Page 2 of 5 C2-Pg2 ---- ----J - - - - PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES DEANZA ROOM RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Commissioner Munoz said he likes much of it, particularly the amenities and the round -about as well as the movement and contemporary elevations. He said he likes the vine but it is hard to visualize how transportation will be utilized. He said he would like to see more movement as it appears they are using a lot of boxes stacked upon/or next to boxes (massing). He said there is a need for movement in the roofs and popouts or greater variation in the wall planes are needed. He said the plotting looks straight on to one another and suggested they change the plotting to make it more interesting. He said they are on right road. Mr. Smith asked the Commission if they would have any objection to adding other styles of architecture. He said staff is looking for more themes than what is provided. The Commission generally responded in favor and said there was no objection. Mr. Bogner referred to page 11 duplexes and asked about offering different alternatives within the styles offered. Commissioner Fletcher said they should try to avoid the apartment community look and said the view of flat top buildings goes far down the street. He commented that Victoria Gardens looks "built over time" and they should try to achieve that idea. Mr. Smith noted that staff recognizes the fact that a contemporary building next to a Tuscan architectural style does not make sense, other architectural styles should be incorporated carefully. Commissioner Wimberly also noted there is no real variation of the wall planes, offsets and rooflines. He said he likes the concept but it needs variation and they should work on it so it does not look boring or monolithic. Commissioner Macias concurred with the other Commissioners and with the staff report. He said it is a lot to absorb at once. He said the concept is exciting and cleverly plotted out. G. ADJOURNMENT 9:45 PM I, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on Page 3 of 5 C2-Pg3 MAY 24, 2017 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES DEANZA ROOM RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under "Public Comments." There is opportunity to speak under this section prior to the end of the agenda. Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the Planning Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m except for legal City holidays. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of $2,662 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 5 of 5 C2—Pg5 E REPORT DATE: June 14, 2017 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission r FROM: Candyce Burnett, City Planner<i1tQJJ INITIATED BY: Dat Tran, Assistant Planner ���� SUBJECT: PROPOSED REVIEW PROCEDURES AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT APPLICABLE TO HAUNTED HOUSES IN RESIDENCES/RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: 1. Receive staff's report and presentation; and 2. Provide guidance to staff on the extent in which the Planning Commission would like to modify the Development Code to regulate commercial haunted houses in residences and residential districts. BACKGROUND: Prior to 2012, the Development Code had no provisions for the establishment or operation of haunted houses. The 2012 Development Code Update established for the first time that haunted houses are required to obtain a Temporary Use Permit prior to commencement of the activity. The Temporary Use Permit gives Planning staff broad authority to review haunted houses to ensure that they do not adversely impact neighboring properties. Historically, staff has generally defined residential haunted houses as lightly -decorated homes serving the local residential neighborhoods where they are located. In contrast, commercial haunted houses are more elaborately decorated homes or non-residential facilities that have a regional following, charge a fee and/or collect a donation prior to entry. Between 2012-2015, haunted houses operating in the City have largely been residential in nature and attendance has been from the immediate area. Staff has been working in collaboration with the City's Fire Department and the Community Improvement Department to ensure the safety of residential haunted houses in the community. In the past couple of years, residential haunted houses in the City have become more business - oriented and commercial in nature. Owners have begun charging fees and operating for longer lengths of time. Property owners hosting haunted houses have also used social media to gain a regional presence, drawing larger crowds to their residential neighborhoods. The result has been an increase in noise, traffic and other public nuisances in these neighborhoods. Staff has received complaints regarding a number of these haunted houses. Based on the feedback, staff believes that a Temporary Use Permit is necessary for these commercial haunted houses. However, the Temporary Use Permit process in the Development Code does not specify how haunted houses should be regulated nor the extent of which regulation should occur. Staff believes that additional codified regulations in the Development Code may be warranted to ensure that commercial haunted houses are uniformly regulated and impacts are mitigated. Staff has prepared a presentation outlining the ways in which the Development Code can be maintained or modified to D1—Pgl PLANNING COMMISSION DIRECTOR'S REPORT PROPOSED REVIEW OF HAUNTED HOUSE REGULATIONS June 14, 2017 Page 2 enhance the regulations over haunted houses. Staff respectfully requests that the Planning Commission review staffs presentation and provide staff with direction and feedback regarding the regulation of haunted houses. NEXT STEPS: Based on the Planning Commission's direction, and if the Commission believes the regulations should be changed with respect to the permitting and regulation of haunted houses, staff may prepare a draft Development Code Amendment for review. A Staff Report, draft Development Code Amendment and presentation would be brought to a future Planning Commission meeting detailing the necessary changes to regulate haunted houses. The Planning Commission will have an opportunity at that time to review the draft Development Code Amendment and recommend any changes as necessary. The Planning Commission may also direct staff to make no changes to the current process but affirm the current requirement for a Temporary Use Permit for commercial haunted houses instead of changing the Code. Exhibits: Exhibit A -Social Media Screenshots CB: DT/Is D1—Pg2 EXHIBIT A 'u '111� YlwilrlM is WNW" Of m o a u = U N Y C a y o N Y a r 2 n C _ O N N lL a n C O 90 tL O C C N ti E o s i (� O E N o en � N rn N T ti n v p >A c o a E O u u o D = U O - o o ai t E r U O � C ri n C K - n. c a c 0 E 'L N Q1 O in L y 3 y p C s V C Q � O 0 • iJ X O c a o M y o = A v G m w O N U E E = N L Y V U 3 o a n E u rl : r ; o E U o o 0 E U c c O QI , cr !n D O O O E U Uwca� C E �TcrU D1-Pg3 v a, a U 0 S m E c a o C Q� f0 N m c LL d C d } S N c O O "K!l Y7_ 0 O q C N Y N 4 O N O B u > N O Q (1 � ❑ > w a A Exhibit A - Waterman Bros Haunted House Social Media Screenshot Waterman Bros Haunted House in Rancho Cucamonga I Home Posts Reviews ;, Like Fulloa Q Recommend Waterman Bros Haunted House in Rancho Cucamonga 0 One more day!!! The haunted house will still be FREE to enter However every year we have had guests that have asked if they could give a donation So this year we will be having a donation box out front where it anyone wants to voluntarily donate some money. we will forward 100% of everything given to the St Jude Children's Research Hospital We would also like to thank Costco of Rancho Cucamonga for donating some candy. Hasco Wholesale of Ontario for donating some light fixtures and Curtis Pitts from C&W Feed for donating pallets for our pallet maze every year! Thank you for your generosity t` Like In Comment A Share �1611 Chronological' address^ Photos Like Reply About ■ Waterman Bros Haunted House in Rancho Cucamonga 10185 Palo Alto St Likes Rancho Cucamonga.91730 Like Repl) Landmark & Historical Place in Rancho Cucamonga California 5 0 ***** community l,k Invite your friends to like this Page i* 40 people like this 40 people follor, this C 4 people have visited About See All + 10185 Palo Alto St Rancho Cucamonga. California. CA 91730 Q Send Message p Landmark 3 Historical Place Haunted House Espanol Portuguee (Brasil. + Francais iFrance Deutsch mfbmx, ST REQUESTED Doom%Bf S2 $1 CHILDREN UNDER 12 p� Tube The Garden Of Evil 2014 O �► ABOUT I GALLERY I LOCATION �..., /1 0.76/130 ri —, STAFF REPORT DATE: June 14, 2017 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Candyce Burnett, City Plann (w INITIATED BY: Tom Grahn, Associate Planner SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW DRC2015-00991 — WECARE DIALYSIS CENTER — The development of a 10,912 square foot medical office building on 1.13 acres in the General Commercial (GC) District, on the east side of Grove Avenue, approximately 500 feet south of Arrow Route, located at 8591 Grove Avenue; APN: 0207-222-27. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA guidelines as a Class 32 Exemption (CEQA Section 15332) for In -fill Development Projects. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve Design Review DRC2015-00991 through adoption of the attached Resolution. PROJECT REVIEW BACKGROUND: The proposed Design Review was originally scheduled for a Planning Commission public hearing to be held on May 24, 2017. Due to an error in the public noticing process, the Planning Commission continued the review of the application to June 14, 2017 (Exhibit G). PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: The project site is generally of a rectangular shape of about 322 feet (east -west) by 180 feet (north -south) with a lot area of 1.13 acres (Exhibit A). There is a house on an unrelated adjacent parcel (8581 Grove Avenue) at the northwest corner of the project site; as a result, the site has a street frontage along Grove Avenue of about 94 feet. The site is vacant and vegetation consists of short grass and weeds; there are no trees on -site. The subject property is generally level with an elevation at the north and south sides of about 1,210 feet and 1,208 feet, respectively. The existing land uses on, and General Plan land use and zoning designations for, the project site and the surrounding properties are as follows: El—Pg1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DESIGN REVIEW DRC2015-00991 — WECARE DIALYSIS CENTER June 14, 2017 Page 2 Land Use General Plan Zoning Site Vacant General Commercial General Commercial (GC) District North Single-family residence and General Commercial General Commercial (GC) vacant District South Vacant and Single-family General Commercial and Low General Commercial (GC) residences Residential District and Low (L) Residential District (2-4 du/ac East Single-family residences Low Residential Low (L) Residential District (2-4 du/ac) West Single-family residences City of Upland, Single Family City of Upland, Single -Family Residential -Medium Residential (RS-4) ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant proposes to construct a medical office building of 10,912 square feet, consisting of an 8,505 square foot dialysis facility and a 2,407 square foot sub -tenant (Exhibit B). The floor area is designed with office floor area in the westerly half of the building and the dialysis floor area, with 24 treatment stations, in the northeastern portion of the building (Exhibit E). No tenant has been specified for the sub -tenant area, however, office and reception areas are identified. A total of 57 parking spaces are provided for employees and customers, which is parked at 1 space above the minimum for a medical office development (Exhibit B). There will be one point of access — at the southwest corner of the site off of Grove Avenue. Landscape coverage is provided at 16.56 percent of the project site (Exhibit D). The proposed building will be of a contemporary design with wood framed construction, and elevations will consist of a primary red brick element with white brick accent stripes, stucco, aluminum metal roof, and aluminum store front windows (Exhibit E). The building is situated in the northeastern corner of the project site, with parking areas to the south and east. Pedestrian access to the building will be through entrances located on the south side of the building. As the project does not contemplate three (3) or more tenants a Uniform Sign Program is not required. B. Parking Calculations: Per Section 17.64 of the Development Code, the parking requirements for the project are as follows of Use Square Footage Parking Ratio Number of Number of SpacesType .. Provided, Required Medical Office (Dialysis 8,505 1/200 43 44 Center) Medical (Sub Tenant) 2 407 1/200 13 13 10,912 56 57 C. Floor Area Ratio (FAR): The proposed building will have a floor area of 10,912 square feet. The project site has an area of approximately 49,223 square feet. The FAR for the project site is 22 percerit. Per Chapter 2, Figure LU-2 Land Use Plan of the General Plan, the maximum FAR in the General Commercial land use category is 35 percent. E1—Pg2 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DESIGN REVIEW DRC2015-00991 — WECARE DIALYSIS CENTER June 14, 2017 Page 3 D. Technical Review Committee: The project was reviewed and approved by the Technical Review Committee on April 4, 2017. The Committee accepted the proposal as submitted and recommend approval to the Planning Commission. Their conditions of approval are included in the Resolution and attached Standard Conditions. E. Design Review Committee: The project was reviewed by the Design Review Committee (Wimberly, Macias, and Smith) on April 4, 2017 (Exhibit F). The Committee recommended approval of the project subject to the following design modifications: redesign the wood trellis to include a more durable material consistent with the project architecture; increase the size of the trellis support posts from a 44 to a larger size; increase the size of the trellis base and incorporate the buildings brick finish into the design; and shift the trellis post location away from the adjacent parking space. The conditions of approval are included in the Resolution and attached Standard Conditions. F. Neighborhood Meeting: On April 5, 2017, a neighborhood meeting was conducted by the applicant at the Lion's Park Community Center, located at 9161 Base Line Road. Three residents representing 2 adjacent properties attended; all attendees were in support of the project. One property owner asked questions regarding hours of operation, driveway access, and parking lot lighting. The applicant addressed these questions indicating that hours of operation will initially be 8 am to 5 pm, but hours may expand depending upon need, driveway access will be through the project driveway at the southwest corner of the site, and parking lot lighting will be shielded to prevent impact to adjacent properties. G. Environmental Assessment: The Planning Department staff has determined that the project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines. The project qualifies as a Class 32 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332— In -Fill Development Projects, as the project is a proposed development occurring within city limits on a project site less than 5 acres in size and substantially surrounded by urban uses. The project is a 10,912 square foot medical office building on 1.13 acres of land within the General Commercial (GC) District. The medical office use is consistent with the intent of the General Commercial designation in the General Plan and the project meets all applicable development standards and zoning regulations of the Development Code. A number of environmental studies were prepared to assess any potential impacts that the project might have on the environment. An Air Quality and GHG Impact Analysis (Giroux & Associates, October 2015) found that the project would not exceed the applicable Southern California Air Quality Management District's threshold for air quality and greenhouse gas emissions during construction or operational activity. A Noise Impact Analysis (Giroux & Associates, March 2016) found that construction and operational noise impacts would not impact adjacent properties. A Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan was submitted and reviewed by the City's grading engineer. The City's grading engineer approved the conceptual design and will review the final design when grading plans are submitted. Therefore, staff finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment and recommends that the Planning Commission find that the project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332. El—Pg3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DESIGN REVIEW DRC2015-00991 — WECARE DIALYSIS CENTER June 14, 2017 Page 4 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 project site currently is assessed an annual property tax, a percentage of this annual tax is shared with the City. When completed, the overall project will increase the value of the project site and the City's annual share of the property tax will increase accordingly. The developers also will be responsible for paying one-time impact fees applicable to the projects. These fees are intended to address the increased demand for City services due to the overall project. The following types of services that these impact fees would support include the following: library services, transportation infrastructure, drainage infrastructure, animal services, police, parks, and community and recreation services. The overall project, during construction may increase construction -related employment and, following its completion, will increase employment due to new non-residential (e.g. medical office) uses, and may increase employment at surrounding existing and future businesses that will provide services to the employees and customers of the project. Also, a positive fiscal impact for the City will occur through increased sales tax revenue generated by these employees' and customers' patronage of local businesses. 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 — Vicinity Map Exhibit B — Site Plan Exhibit C — Grading Plan Exhibit D — Landscape Plan Exhibit E —Architectural Plans (floorplan, elevation, building materials) Exhibit F — Design Review Committee Action Agenda for April 4, 2017 Exhibit G — Planning Commission Staff Report May 24, 2017 (Continuance) Draft Resolution of Approval for Design Review DRC2015-00991 CB:TG/Is El—Pg4 Vicinity Map E Arrow Hwy Orange Tice Ln Cottonwood S+ Orange Grove St DRC2015-00991 Project Site . "' t I' I I I I I I tl 9th _•� EXHIBIT A E1-Pg5 esoe ELZ On) 94LW tlJ 13'HM . . A 3 'M OU >xyvmswx\lrvl;Nuf,`eulujZ 'Ga Ipl I I I I I S31\9JOSSV 3' Olf(J YJRLLYJ m rye II G O�a � o��• ��� 3\� 4 g 3 �� 6 tl �q9� A a774k3 Sie M"ICI 31I5 OSLL6 tlJ VONO'NVOf1O OHONV23 3ON3AV 3AO60 I658 a 3 !i � � E •I Q' 'I i' EXHIBIT B E1-Pg6 4 e � iai¢F$Y.�;g � r@YyS66Ce9a i ?i},i dr eeei Pi�l4gpp��a9 C 11 ?ik;y��rieA•.if 3i EXHIBIT C E1—Pg7 vavavnnrobo MIS a P d anSSMWC3o W qqe Q )y � ownxnirim`iu a3o`oo uaur�siv,'moauvoan� EXHIBIT D E1_Pg8 m asoc ze.z (szsl 9LL16 YJ 131tlBM �MS .M NInd Boold R n1 AFL d am uma ozc 0£L 16 VO VONOWVCnO OHONV2J flL]N0IilUNFHtlf1S1131V1U: Cf5ll3ll11]W M"Dossv 9 MID YJIalva 3l1N3AV 3AOi10 l69B W N N lD r V I� N W I � N N N I I X N m X � Ifl � N V Q N \ V W < N Q � r Q Q N N z .9-,LB a z z o u o0 -- I� - 11 i II II II II a rZy rZj w -.al y I= .0 11,11 T� I, ib5- o Z < s U Q L c ji, w IF r 1�' I I I L HI J3 I - - i l all- ] I' C g a e 1 _ I _J U } z 0 ohs o 3 0 5 .6-,e O o c _ EXHIBIT E El—Pg9 m I v t0 0 RCVISIONS By 4 3 3 3 3 4 10 RED BRICK 2❑ WHITE BRICK 3❑ SMOOTH STUCCO 2 ® METAL r uy _ ❑O WOODED DOOR -- - - a' _m - 35� SOUTH ELEVATION O5��N 3 3� 4 top of roof sheathing 1 b b. m 2 69'-6 O NORTH ELEVATION rn 3❑ 3 � 4 w 4 Z U zZ 2812 4 j l 402 a wU 00O lm--- WEST ELEVATION , EAST ELEVATION 2 2 MI—i m v La WEST ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATION NORTH ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION 0 MATERIAL LEGEND ❑1 RED BRICK ❑2 WHITE BRICK 3B PACIFIC SAND STUCCO © SILVER GREY STUCCO ® BRUSH STAINLESS STEEL 05 WOODEN DOOR © STOREFRONT F'%r-rtIL-Tr A. I r - r .VV V.m. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA RAINS ROOM CITY HALL 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE A. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call: Ray Wimberly X i Ord P r:4 Rich Macias X Candyce Burnett Donald Granger Alternates: Lou Munoz Rich Fletcher Francisco Oaxaca Additional Staff Present Mike Smith. Senior Planner, Tom Gratin, 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. Page 1 of 2 EXHIBIT F E1-Pg13 - -. . -.._ 1 _ - . . DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA RAINS ROOM CITY HALL 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE C1. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2015-00991 — WECARE DIALYSIS CENTER — The development of a 10,912 square foot medical office building on 1.13 acres in the General Commercial (GC) District, on the east side of Grove Avenue, approximately 500 feet south of Arrow Route, located at 8591 Grove Avenue; APN: 0207-222-27. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA guidelines as a Class 32 Exemption (CEQA Section 15332) for In -fill Development Projects. The Committee recommended approval subject to the following; Redesign the wood trellis to include a more durable material consistent with the project architecture; Increase the size of the trellis support post from a 44 post to a larger size; Increase the size of the trellis post base and incorporate the buildings brick finish into its design; Shift the trellis post location away from the adjacent parking spaces. D. ADJOURNMENT 7,20 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, Thursday, March 23, 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 2 of 2 E1—Pg14 t: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA REPORTSTAFF DATE: May 24, 2017 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Candyce Burnett, City Planner'�� INITIATED BY: Tom Grahn, Associate Planner SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW DRC2015-00991 — WECARE DIALYSIS CENTER — The development of a 10,912 square foot medical office building on 1.13 acres in the General Commercial (GC) District, on the east side of Grove Avenue, approximately 500 feet south of Arrow Route, located at 8591 Grove Avenue: APN: 0207-222-27, This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA guidelines as a Class 32 Exemption (CEQA Section 15332) for In -fill Development Projects. RECOMMENDATION: Due to an error in the public noticing process, staff recommends the Planning Commission continue the public hearing for Tentative Tract SUBTT20073 to the June 14, 2017 meeting date. CB:TG/Is EXHIBIT G E1—Pg15 RESOLUTION NO. 17-63 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW DRC2015-00991, FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 10,912 SQUARE FOOT MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING ON 1.13 ACRES OF LAND IN THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL (GC) DISTRICT, ON THE EAST SIDE OF GROVE AVENUE, APPROXIMATELY 500 FEET SOUTH OF ARROW ROUTE, LOCATED AT 8591 GROVE AVENUE; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF — APN: 1089-031-36. A. Recitals. 1. Wecare Dialysis Center filed an application for the approval of Design Review DRC2015- 00991, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Design Review request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 24th day of May 2017, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga opened the public hearing on the application, but continued the public hearing until June 14, 2017, due to insufficient noticing of the public meeting. 3. On the 14th day of June 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. 4. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above -referenced public hearing on June 14, 2017, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to a property located on the east side of Grove Avenue, approximately 500 feet south of Arrow Route, located at 8591 Grove Avenue in the General Commercial (GC) District; and b. The project site is generally of a rectangular shape of about 322 feet (east -west) by 180 feet (north -south). The site is vacant and vegetation consists of short grass and weeds; there are no trees on -site. The subject property is generally level with an elevation at the north and south sides of about 1,210 feet and 1,208 feet, respectively; arid C. The project is for the development of a 10,912 square foot medical office, including an 8,505 square foot dialysis center and a 2,407 square foot sub -tenant on 1.13 acres of land. E1—Pg16 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-63 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2015-00991 WECARE DIALYSIS CENTER June 14,2017 Page 2 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced meeting and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and b. The proposed use is in accord with the objectives of the Development Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and C. The proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code; and 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. 4. The Planning Department Staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines. The project qualifies under the Class 32 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 — In -Fill Development Projects, because the project is a proposed development occurring within city limits on a project site less than 5 acres in size and substantially surrounded by urban uses. The project is a 10,912 square foot medical office building on 1.13 acres of land within the General Commercial (GC) District. The medical office use is consistent with the intent of the General Commercial designation in the General Plan and the project meets all applicable development standards and zoning regulations of the Development Code. In addition, there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Planning Department's determination of exemption, and based on its own independent judgment, concurs in the staff's determination of exemption. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the Design Review application subject to each and every condition set forth in the attached standard conditions incorporated herein by this reference. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2017. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA go ATTEST: Francisco Oaxaca, Chairman Candyce Burnett, Secretary E1—Pg17 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-63 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2015-00991 WECARE DIALYSIS CENTER June 14, 2017 Page 3 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 14th day of June 2017, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: E1—Pg18 Conditions of Approval Ij�nrno (�ra1�¢tvc� Community Development Department Project #: DRC2015-00991 Project Name: DR /// Wecare Dialysis Center Location: - 020722227-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions Approval is for Design Review DRC2015-00991, for the development of a 10,912 square foot medical office building on 1.13 acres in the General Commercial (GC) District, on the east side of Grove Avenue, approximately 500 feet south of Arrow Route, located at 8591 Grove Avenue; APN: 0207-222-27. 2. Revise the design of the trellis on the south elevation to include the following: a. Redesign the wood trellis to include a more durable material consistent with the project architecture. b. Increase the size of the trellis support posts from a 4x4 to a larger size. c. Increase the size of the trellis base and incorporate the buildings brick finish into its design. d. Shift the trellis post location away from the adjacent parking space Standard Conditions of Approval 3. 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. 4. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution and Conditions of Approval shall be included on the plans (full size). The sheet(s) are for information only to all parties involved in the construction/grading activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect. 5. 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. 6. For commercial and industrial projects, paint roll -up doors and service doors to match main building colors. Printed: 6/7/2017 w .CityolRC.us E1-Pg19 Project #: DRC2015-00991 Project Name: DR /// Wecare Dialysis Center Location: - 020722227-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planninq Department Standard Conditions of Approval 7. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners and other roof mounted equipment and/or projections shall be screened from all sides and the sound shall be buffered from adjacent properties and streets as required by the Planning' Department. Such screening shall be architecturally integrated with the building design and constructed to the satisfaction of the Planning Department. Any roof -mounted mechanical equipment and/or ductwork, that projects vertically more than 18 inches above the roof or roof parapet, shall be screened by an architecturally designed enclosure which exhibits a permanent nature with the building design and is detailed consistent with the building. Any roof -mounted mechanical equipment and/or ductwork, that projects vertically less than 18 inches above the roof or roof parapet shall be painted consistent with the color scheme of the building. Details shall be included in building plans. 8. 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. 9. For non-residential development, property owners are responsible for the continual maintenance of all landscaped areas on -site, as well as contiguous planted areas within the public right-of-way. All landscaped areas shall be kept free from weeds and debris and maintained in healthy and thriving condition, and shall receive regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing, and trimming. Any damaged, dead, diseased, or decaying plant material shall be replaced within 30 days from the date of damage. 10. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping in the case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for Planning Department review and approval prior to the issuance of Building Permits for the development. 11. Landscaping and irrigation systems required to be installed within the public right-of-way on the perimeter of this project area shall be continuously maintained by the developer. 12. A minimum of 30 percent of trees planted within commercial and office projects shall be specimen size trees - 24-inch box or larger. 13. Within parking lots, trees shall be planted at a rate of one 15-gallon tree for every three parking stalls. 14. Trees shall be planted in areas of public view adjacent to and along structures at a rate of one tree per 30 linear feet of building. 15. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Services Department. 16. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of water efficient landscaping per Development Code Chapter 17.82. 17. All parking lot landscape islands shall have a minimum outside dimension of 6 feet. 18. All parking spaces shall be 9 feet wide by 17 feet long with a required 1-foot overhang (e.g., over a curb stop). 19. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances, and exits shall be striped per City standards. Punted; 6f7/2017 w .CityofRC.us Page 2 of 11 E1—Pg20 Project #: Project Name: Location: Project Type: DRC2015-00991 DR /// Wecare Dialysis Center - 020722227-0000 Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. - Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 20. Textured pedestrian pathways and textured pavement across circulation aisles shall be provided throughout the development to connect buildings with open spaces/plazas/parking areas/and recreational uses. 21. Any signs indicated on the submitted plans are conceptual only and not a part of this approval. All signs proposed for this development shall comply with the Sign Ordinance and shall require separate application and approval by the Planning Department prior to installation of any signs. 22. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community, Specific Plans and/or Master Plans in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance. 23. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include Site Plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and grading on file in the Planning Department, the conditions contained herein, and Development Code regulations. 24. All ground -mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall be located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the Planning Department. 25.Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all California Building Code and State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Services Department to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance and final acceptance granted prior to occupancy. 26. Six-foot decorative block walls shall be constructed along the project perimeter. If a double wall condition would result, the developer shall make a good faith effort to work with the adjoining property owners to provide a single wall. Developer shall notify, by mail, all contiguous property owners at least 30 days prior to the removal of any existing walls/fences along the project perimeter. 27. Revised Site Plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted for Planning Department review and approval prior to the issuance of Building Permits. 28. Trash receptacle(s) are required and shall meet City standards. The final design, locations, and the number of trash receptacles shall be subject to Planning Department review and approval prior to the issuance of Building Permits. Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions Printed: GM2017 w .CityofRC.us E1—Pg21 Page 3 of 11 Project #: Project Name: Location: Project Type: DRC2015-00991 DR /// Wecare Dialysis Center - 020722227-0000 Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Enpineerina Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. Grove Avenue frontage improvements shall be in accordance with City "Secondary Arterial" standards as required and including: a. Remove existing a.c. berm and provide curb and gutter, a.c. pavement, property line adjacent sidewalk, drive approach and street trees per City standards. b. Provide one (1) 5300 Lumen LED street light on the south property line. The street light shall be owned by the City. Developer shall be responsible to coordinate and pay all costs to provide SCE power on City owned street lights. Coordinate with City staff for design and installation requirements. c. Provide signing and striping as required. d. The drive approach shall have a minimum width of 35 feet, per City Std. 101, Type C. e. Widen Grove Avenue measuring 32 feet from the centerline of Grove Avenue to curb face and a 12-foot parkway with a 4-foot wide property line adjacent sidewalk. f. Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. g. 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. h. Transitions to existing a.c. berms on the north and south project boundaries shall be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 2. A total of 44 feet on Grove Avenue, measured from the street centerline, shall be dedicated to the City. Standard Conditions of Approval 3. 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 issuance of Building Permits. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. 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 Building Permit issuance. Printed: 6/7/2017 w .CilyofRC.us El—Pg22 Page 4 of 11 Project #: DRC2015-00991 Project Name: DR /// Wecare Dialysis Center Location: - 020722227-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Enqineerinq Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 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. Permits issued on or after June 2, 2014, must complete the reimbursement process through the City's Accelerate online portal within 60 days following the completion of the construction and/or demolition project or the deposit will be forfeited. Permits issued before June 2, 2014, require the following when applying for a deposit reimbursement: a completed CD-2 form, a copy of the cashier's receipt showing the deposit amount, and all weight tickets. Instructions and forms are available at the City's web site, www.CityofRC.us, under City Hall; Engineering; Environmental Programs. 6. Add the following note to any private landscape plans that show street trees: "All improvements within the public right-of-way, including street trees, shall be installed per the public improvement plans." If there is a discrepancy between the public and private plans, the street improvement plans will govern. 7. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 16.37.010, no person shall make connections from a source of energy, fuel or power to any building or structure which is regulated by technical codes and for which a permit is required unless, in addition to any and all other codes, regulations and ordinances, all improvements required by these conditions of development approval have been completed and accepted by the City Council, except: that in developments containing more than one building, structure or unit, the development may have energy connections made in equal proportion to the percentage of completion of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval, as determined by the City Engineer, provided that reasonable, safe and maintainable access to the property exists. In no case shall more than 95 percent of the buildings, structures or units be connected to energy sources prior to completion and acceptance of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval. Pnnted: 6/7/2017 www.cityO RC.us Page 5 of 11 E1—Pg23 Project #: DRC2015-00991 Project Name: DR /// Wecare Dialysis Center Location: - 020722227-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 8. Install street trees per City street tree design guidelines and standards as follows. The completed legend (box below) and construction notes shall appear on the title page of the street improvement plans. Street improvement plans shall include a line item within the construction legend stating: "Street trees shall be installed per the notes and legend on Sheet _ (typically Sheet 1)." Where public landscape plans are required, tree installation in those areas shall be per the public landscape improvement plans. Street Name Grove Avenue Botanical Name Chionanthus Retusus Common Name Chinese Fringe Tree - Spacing 30' OC Size 24" box Construction Notes for Street Trees: 1) All street trees are to be planted in accordance with City standard plans. 2) Prior to the commencement of any planting, an agronomic soils report shall be furnished to the City inspector. Any unusual toxicities or nutrient deficiencies may require backfill soil amendments, as determined by the City inspector. 3) All street trees are subject to inspection and acceptance by the Engineering Services Department. Street trees are to be planted per public improvement plans only. 9. Provide utility services including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 10. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CVWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. Fire Prevention / New Construction Unit Standard Conditions of Approval 1. If the State considers this facility to be an OSHPD Occupancy, it must general requirements of the current CFC & CBC, local ordinances and NFPA.RCFPD and B&S may required the review to be performed by the State. Building and Safety Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions comply to all the OSHPD & reference standards such as Printed: e/712017 w .CityofRC.us Page 6 of 11 E1—Pg24 Project #: DRC2015-00991 Project Name: DR N Wecare Dialysis Center Location: - 020722227-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. - Building and Safety Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. When Design Review is approved submit complete construction drawings including structural and building energy calculations to building and safety for plan review in accordance with the current edition of the CA Building and Fire Codes. The applicant must clarify in the plan check application and the in the plans that the project is regulated by OSHPD. The north elevation is limited on the amount of openings permitted due to the proximity to the property line; reducing or protecting the openings may be required. the building is required to be fully sprinklered and equipped with a fire alarm system 2. When the Entitlement Review is approved submit complete construction drawings including structural calculations, energy calculations and soils report to Building and Safety for plan review in accordance with the current edition of the CA Building and Fire Codes including all local ordinances and standards. The new structures are required to be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers as required by the CBC and Current RCFPD Ordinance. Disabled access for the site and building must be in accordance to the State of CA and ADA regulations. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 1. The preliminary water quality management plan shows a flow directional manhole prior to the storm water entering the Chambermaxx system prior to infiltration into the soil. The project is conditioned to install an appropriate pre-treatment system upstream of the Chambermaxx system. 2. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with current adopted California Building Code and/or the California Residential Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The Grading and Drainage Plan(s) shall be in substantial conformance with the approved conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan. 3. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified Engineer licensed by the State of California to perform such work. Two copies will be provided at grading and drainage plan submittal for review. Plans shall implement design recommendations per said report. 4. 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. 5. The final Grading and Drainage Plan, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be completed, submitted, and approved by the Building and Safety Official prior to the issuance of building permits. 6. A separate Grading and Drainage Plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and wet signed by a California licensed Civil Engineer prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit. 7. 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. Printed: 6/7/2017 yr w.CilyofRC.uS Page 7 of 11 E1—Pg25 Project M DRC2015-00991 Project Name: DR /// Wecare Dialysis Center Location: - 020722227-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 8. 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. 9. 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. 10. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the Final Grading and Drainage Plan shall show the accessibility path from the public right of way and the accessibility parking stalls to the building doors in conformance with the current adopted California Building Code. All accessibility ramps shall show sufficient detail including gradients, elevations, and dimensions and comply with the current adopted California Building Code. 11. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall implement City Standards for on -site construction where possible, and shall provide details for all work not covered by City Standard Drawings. 12. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the grading plan shall show that all manufactured slopes shall be a minimum 2-foot offset from the public right of way, permitted line, or the adjacent private property. All slope offsets shall meet the requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. 13. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the grading and drainage plan shall show the maximum parking stall gradient at 5 percent. Accessibility parking stall grades shall be constructed per the, current adopted California Building Code. 14. The final grading and drainage plan shall show existing topography a minimum of 100-feet beyond project boundary. 15. This project shall comply with the accessibility requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. 16. 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". 17. 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. Printed: 6/7/2017 w .CityofRC.us Page 8 of 11 E1—Pg26 Project #: DRC2015-00991 Project Name: DR /// Wecare Dialysis Center Location: - 020722227-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 18. All roof drainage flowing to the public right of way (Grove Avenue) must drain under the sidewalk through a parkway culvert approved by the Engineering Department. This shall be shown on both the grading and drainage plan and Engineering Services Department required plans. 19. 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. 20. 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. 21. 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. 22. Prior to approval of the project -specific storm water quality management plan, the applicant shall submit to the Building Official, or his designee, a precise grading plan showing the location and elevations of existing topographical features, and showing the location and proposed elevations of proposed structures and drainage of the site. 23. Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the latest adopted California Plumbing Code. Private storm drain improvements shall be shown on the grading and drainage plan. 24. The conceptual grading and drainage plan shows an area within the parking lot and fire lane where storm water will be ponding. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit the civil engineer of record shall submit a set of grading plans to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Building and Safety Department Fire Construction Services to review the plans and provide a maximum ponding depth of the storm water retention. 25. 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. Note: of specific concern is the proper sizing of the sump catch basin and storm drain pipe discharging the storm water flows to the underground infiltration chambers. 26. Roof water is not permitted to flow over the public parkway and shall be directed to an under parkway culvert per City of Rancho Cucamonga requirements prior to issuance of a grading permit. Printed: B712017 w .CilyofRC.us E1—Pg27 Page 9 of 11 Project #: DRC2015-00991 Project Name: DR /// Wecare Dialysis Center Location: - 020722227-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 27. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy or final sign off by the Building Inspector the engineer of record shall certify the functionality of the storm water quality management plan (WQMP) storm water treatment devices and best management practices (BMP). 28. 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. 29. Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WQMP shall include a copy of the project Conditions of Approval. 30. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall obtain a Waste Discharge Identification Number (WDID). The WDID number shall also be shown on the WQMP Site and Drainage Plan document. 31. 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. 32. The land owner shall provide an inspection report by a qualified person/company on a biennial basis for the Class V Injection Wells/underground infiltration chambers to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis all best management practices (BMP"s) as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 33. The land owner shall provide an inspection report on a biennial basis for the structural storm water treatment devices, commonly referred to as BMPs, to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 34. The land/property owner shall follow the inspection and maintenance requirements of the approved project specific Water Quality Management Plan and shall provide a copy of the inspection reports on a biennial basis to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. 35. A final project -specific Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) shall be approved by the Building and Safety Director, or his designee, and the City of Rancho Cucamonga's "Memorandum of Storm Water Quality Management Plan" shall be recorded prior to the issuance of a grading permit or any building permit. 36. 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. Pdnted: 6/7/2017 www.CilyofRC.us Page 10 of 11 E1—Pg28 Project#: DRC2015-00991 Project Name: DR /// Wecare Dialysis Center Location: - 020722227-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 37. 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. 38. 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. 39. 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". 40. 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". 41. 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. 42. As the use of drywells are proposed for the structural storm water treatment device, to meet the infiltration requirements of the current Municipal Separate Storm Sewers Systems (MS4) Permit, adequate source control and pollution prevention control BMPs shall be implemented to protect groundwater quality. The need for pre-treatment BMPs such as sedimentation or filtration shall be evaluated prior to infiltration and discussed in the final project -specific Water Quality Management Plan document. Printed: 6/7/2017 w .CityofRC.us Page 11 or 11 E1—Pg29 i� STAFF REPORT DATE: June 14, 2017 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Candyce Burnett, City PlannerOAA� INITIATED BY: Mike Smith, Senior Planner SUBJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20073 — LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP. — A review of a proposed subdivision of a property of about 84 acres into twenty- seven (27) parcels and one (1) lettered lot located within the Empire Lakes Specific Plan, Planning Area 1, located north of 4th Street, south of 6th Street, west of Milliken Avenue, and east of Utica/Cleveland Avenues - APNs: 0210- 082-41, -49, and -52. Related files: General Plan Amendment DRC2015- 00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115, and Pre -Application Review DRC2017-00170. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on May 18, 2016 in connection with the City's approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project. CONTINUED FROM MAY 24, 2017 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached Resolution of Approval No 17-62 for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20073. PROJECT REVIEW BACKGROUND: The proposed Tentative Tract Map was originally scheduled for a Planning Commission public hearing to be held on May 24, 2017. Due to an error in the public noticing process, the Planning Commission continued the review of the application to June 14, 2017 (Exhibit C). PROJECT SITE DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND: The project site is part of a property of 160 acres that was formerly developed with the privately owned and operated Empire Lakes Golf Course located in the Empire Lakes Specific Plan (the "Specific Plan"). The Specific Plan has an overall area of 347 acres and is generally bound by 4th Street to the south, Milliken Avenue to the east, Cleveland Avenue and Utica Avenue to the west, and 8th Street and the BNSF/Metrolink rail line to the north. The subject property is generally located at the center of the Specific Plan. Both are bisected into south and north halves by 6th Street. The specific location of the project site is the southern half of the overall subject property. It consists of three (3) parcels with a combined area of about 84 acres. The project site E2—Pg1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20073 — LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP. JUNE 14, 2017 Page 2 has street frontage of about 1,740 feet and 422 feet along 6th Street and 4th Street, respectively. The north -south dimension of the site is about 2,500 feet. The existing land uses on, and General Plan land use and zoning designations for, the project site and the surrounding properties are as follows: Land Use General Plan Zoning Site Vacant (south half of Mixed Use former rivate golf course) Planninq Area 1' Vacant (north half of North former private golf course) Mixed Use Planning Areas 1 and 11' and Industrial Building South Vacant' Mixed Use —Ontario Commercial Center Millsz,a East Apartment Complexes Mixed Use Planning Areas 6 and 81 West Office Complex Mixed Use Planninq Areas 3, 4, and 5' 1 - Empire Lakes Specific Plan; 2 - Properties in the City of Ontario; 3 - Ontario General Plan; 4 — Ontario Center Specific Plan 2254-SP) The golf course was closed in mid-2016 following the approval by the City Council of amendments to the General Plan, Specific Plan, and Development Code (related files: General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115). These amendments were for the purpose of enabling the applicant to develop a new mixed use and transit -oriented project ("Empire Lakes/The Resort") hereafter referred to as "the overall project'. Preparation of the plans for the features described in the Specific Plan is in progress. These plans include the technical design of the "The Vine" (the future, north -south primary street within the project) and the associated utility infrastructure and street improvements. The applicant has removed all the trees from the property (related file: Tree Removal Permit DRC2016-00553), and completed the demolition/removal of the improvements and infrastructure related to the golf course. In the meantime, in preparation for future development the applicant has submitted grading plans for a permit to "mass grade" the site (related file: Grading Permit PMT2016-05024) to allow construction of the first of the three phases of the overall project. This permit is currently under review by the City. The applicant is also proposing to subdivide the north half of the overall subject property (related file: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20105). This separate application was submitted concurrently with the subject application and is also scheduled for review and action by the Planning Commission on June 14, 2017. ANALYSIS: General: The applicant proposes to subdivide the project site into twenty-seven (27) parcels and one (1) "letter" lot (Exhibit B). No building construction is proposed in conjunction with this tentative tract map. The parcels will be sold to various developers who will construct the overall project. The area of the parcels/lots will range between 0.08-acre and 34.11 acres. The smallest of the parcels will be for open, landscaped recreational areas such as paseos and "pocket' parks. The letter lot is a generally non -buildable area of 0.08-acre that will be located near the E2—Pg2 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20073 — LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP. JUNE 14, 2017 Page 3 intersection of The Vine and 4th Street. Improvements within this lot will be generally limited to landscaping. Per the Specific Plan, development of the overall project will be in three (3) phases and is expected to occur over a period of 8-10 years. The subject tentative tract map, and part of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20105, is within the first phase. The entitlement applications for the various components of the overall project will be submitted by each developer separately for review and action by the City at a later date. Development within all parcels will be governed by the technical and design standards/guidelines described in the Specific Plan. Technical and Design Review Committees: The proposed project is the subdivision of the property only. The outcome of this project is the creation of separate parcels and there are no technical nor design issues that require review by the Committees. Development within the overall project is governed by standards and guidelines described in the Specific Plan. When the entitlement applications for the various components of the overall project are submitted at a later date, Staff will analyze them to verify compliance with the Specific Plan. These applications will be presented to the Committees for their consideration and recommendation to the Planning Commission. Neighborhood Meeting: The proposed project is the subdivision of the property only. Development within the overall project is governed by the Specific Plan. The Specific Plan was subject to public review during a series of workshop/presentations conducted by the applicant. The outcome of this project is the creation of separate parcels and there is no additional information of significance to convey that warrants a neighborhood meeting. As part of Staff's evaluation of each entitlement application for the various components of the overall project that will be submitted at a later date, a neighborhood meeting for each will be conducted to inform the public and obtain comments, if any, for consideration by the Planning Commission. Environmental Assessment: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on May 18, 2016 (SCH No. 2015041083) in connection with the City's approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project as there have been a) no substantial changes proposed to the project that indicate new or more severe impacts on the environment; b) no substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under which the project was previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts; c) no new important information shows the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered; and d) no additional mitigation measures are now feasible to reduce impacts or different mitigation measures can be imposed to substantially reduce impacts. FISCAL IMPACT: The proposed subdivision of the property will facilitate the applicant's sale of parcels to developers to enable the development of the overall project. The project site currently is assessed an annual property tax. A percentage of this annual tax is shared with the City. When completed, the overall project will increase the value of the project site and the City's annual share of the property tax will increase accordingly. The developers also will be responsible for paying one-time impact fees applicable to their separate, individual projects. These fees are intended to address the increased demand for City services due to the overall project. The following types of services that these impact fees would support include the following: library services, transportation infrastructure, drainage infrastructure, animal services, police, parks, and community and recreation services. E2—Pg3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20073 — LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP. JUNE 14, 2017 Page 4 The overall project, during construction may increase construction -related employment and, following its completion, will increase employment due to new non-residential (e.g. commercial and office) uses, and may increase employment at surrounding existing and future businesses that will provide services to the residents of the overall project. Also, a positive fiscal impact for the City will occur through increased sales tax revenue generated by residents' patronage of local businesses. COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: The proposed subdivision of the property is the first step in the process of submitting entitlement applications for the development of the overall project that, when completed, will contribute to the realization of several City Council goals. The General Plan discusses several land use policies including 1) planning for vibrant, pedestrian - friendly mixed use and high density residential areas at strategic infill locations along transit routes; 2) implementing land use patterns and policies that incorporate smart growth practices, including placement of higher densities near transit centers and along transit corridors; and 3) supporting housing opportunities for workers of all income ranges. The City Council has two goals, Goals A24 and A25 that are relevant to the overall project. The objective of Goal A24 is "to address 1) mixed use, high density, transit oriented development (TOD), and 2) underperforming or underutilized areas." The objective of Goal A25 is "review the City's zoning districts and evaluate/investigate creating overlay districts or specific plan areas" that will create districts in order to revitalize underperforming or underutilized areas. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing 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 and/or correspondence have been received in response to these notices. EXHIBITS: Exhibit A — Vicinity Map Exhibit B — Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20073 Exhibit C — Planning Commission 05/24/2017 Staff Report (Continuance) Draft Resolution of Approval for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20073 CB:MS/Is E2—Pg4 L!LF ml i` If.YJIAW Ry.Xu YII e 1 1 X.'T �uAaww m Aw'.raaGl LA rI IPFID_Fx' __ _ Omo __ ' YxK__ w _._ 4'I.iMly . I,FP11 M1'^ MiM Y Mm r�R�q YIIP -rim, aM �}6, e t;I m .1Eta, ,ne,� w.um avaR _ kta,a m�• �i [oo 4.�Sasao .T533 -4110 Sf I a ryowmst PNOALTd Si S o m M �S � I aura Sf i Ij� �I �i �g rAvsAP i, wdN� 'w,As {�P - F Ni khl� i' '�iLlw A . 41'nurax :�n � ��'���, 4l n,ms �:, �f�s f'rx..ius _. 9p� EWE N. R F'vnn• FmLII.@� s I o � NVx y - � n.aR I ➢�; IwAA. �r �. awaa.*,p+'G Amwn� i LWaa n P 9 r PmmlaPPm �rt6n FFIFENSL im~S'ii'.°' le OwaTn ¢FRx51 Qy ,* .. r f !I I{ s' nroI or Of wa, p Po Ii i J „e g'snmwn glmwn r TERRA VISTA TOWN CENTERI I,�ue - IFOQJ2sL.B �ILlPEST --�-r— I *'""sG� w !vmsr I ompuA --r— �� r.1rV �ALL10A1 i' N�.1 UESsoue Mna3 i V� tNA _ i 'sai'.n amp s 3° m xl '1j1? �iMttx rvLx a g 4'8 OR \ \•� rmwTs '. ,warm - 1 wX G ww n nuE 'I fil f`.i w.Xexekn A I mw AB90W R91JT`:H__ �I ysus..:,.,.:d ceraraN XI t uJ l 'rwmcr . -- - — — 19m DR �i ,6 MIST > G 9 I msam �.m NANCHO CUCAMONliA 4f#i r�ya j� �. ddsA'w •` E `�O `�'Pqy Iliaa, ,a�fAP/aAILI b.M.XVBCi 3'' JFASEYBLYD Irmo n ® I METROLINK TRAIN STH S li 3. III � s. ,p �D t�41 usws �AiMw � R+Amw.n roaeL I =� gi i \ � F 7fN kl-_ I limwew, i T. �. ICI_ _ _ -I �I �7mtw' �' iIsm sr� S RXs I _ _ _- _ '� G aewwn Ii w I SEgI LL.ASt y 11 i Q, _BMST �, m halms awLlw In— a ¢¢G ry I 21 I a'.Inam'sw �I n \ ' s+ ;�.,c-• � Rr.�' � S Twwra nm I e ,ems s is I!,AnxwwsR s' 4 EXHIBIT A U-Pg5 6MrW .1 POl/R5 I I _ I I ,w awaoX , I waauwwl m 4I �wmxvmuw � G 1 ONTARIO MILLS cun.DIAlr m X TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20073 IN THE 11Y W W M COCM!ONGA COUNTY OF MN BEPNARgNO, STATE OF MFOPM4 ww •u soxmvu¢ifu.e<a.wxroxov vu�ras.wN+o::v.rza.wv:in:.urorvxa.:n.vvFsnx rzswum.rn N+aNanums IIinI.laoxxIms ruvuwxn :or o�© 'um-IMI .�IMEwis a7or■ I a �.�Y.V y,rc *�`••t°`n.,, s { X_*E"n `"' !' �° z��,� •., �� ��,y�`v.,$��._!y " g o � , �.i I,N� �,� p p -. • -q'w1`�� ,F' ..r, h 7k2 �'X°*- < �r:?f �C ,..��� ' � v � r ! �' I Kd r �tt,. � `4^�., y�l � � .. r Ln �+'✓ �i � v :. � I a u 4 r x �~ �.;�,,��,' • <7G, MPIREF g F .a.� "F�*: �,� , �o �� K � 1. �+. ytr�'t -" 4"`= c'c`.� C�"+` L f i�°,S] pis • 'r • ./ � • e ��� < 1 'Y y P 4.�'` +'arh .k�] �' }Ri4`�_'.`�j r''i +�� r; nb{•Lry,F It'�,'d Y.r t%2x �`Ir �'sa 4++t», 't L.SN '°gt-, t ,. � �iY�� a., ''}} '+,; •rG yS. � .1.^v '� ,s, � �„I ��� I.1,}�'itly it L�(+��• �.xi'h� - f � '?"y r `3'ro ,f - ��%R t °v t�. �'� �l 9T��'J _ f hC' ^`q"�i C � "�..,F � t,4yaTy �r i f ��.i j��.S •ice �� s ,`, y�a��1 !:' t�,``>fa-ja4 t], .14�P�g{ .. B . 1� a.i.. • ��i Z 'ti� ti � ??T "d "' ! pt.."'ti.< ` d � f t� ft �'•f . t ]rf - f rx� ti ' ��� vN� � n r'4 3 ✓ � � r *�� /� a rt���t �w v+ �.�o:r ✓'.r- ., t �� i e ✓ -tL s .tRy � �•� �. y/ Cal } ,N- >t i ,,�y'. G9tlpp,, Nd tT]19 P PJ,MS ' L�pbl'UB Ls�9Y1�9.tfYf Y>f.l � 'R •,'�': ._ y ,'r' . '� � gyp[°= ,1��•)r -, sy .._ � iP-1}' ,L.: � 4. '.. '.a°r ;:t- a'u� `�m�.�'°,m.•��;p`� -e .+r.< : CITY OFR G, 0 C AMO�N_`^ s r'-„" � =--.,, - �_ .ir ,,�-,� � �� t�«T. i-'--:•rF0�1R�'&T,e�EEE�T:�'-fi?�-�.�.-4..-�e� r., r• ,c'°"' z�,. YC`i.�s,fln:ircx..� i� ?" `��'P 11;50• T tINO 11550 `4 PAI NO i15501 M� 7?SB POtttEL'Sr �#Jl � �at � h 'spy � _ r . Se r �"fR,Lii - iAa-'i E%ISTBIG2OMNG ,t�---',��'-5,� G ^v".-ii'`"' •�� ,' I 'i'i r`^'�; k"� r,'.i �",� ��.t�rj��'�`� �Ar�''„ ''�F �{��,,CC a r ,, ¢ ^�h`' s y i�+suf ' n it fa7]Y�iyy„1 I,tJ,.rye^a"'.�' T�vr f ;yg"=k'°,*j.4 '• �^EE'4+{��'pd �"t. Z'^``✓,,,Fmr_... I m 0 Y TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 20073 [NTHEaWWONOMM'. ONGA. COUNTYOF SM1N BEHNMGINO, STATE OF G FMA *5, 'ALt MZ , � P-�it�iwlt - WE �,Z.L t F5 0,11 W s j FWWI, "Ok , 10501 z -�A -UKMtK!(P, VATO lSTJNG-ZPP[NGiiE�P ��fSP jk',F, g •,•'^}°.r,i 3xrt'i--•..a..^ 'Sly/ v !`(•Y'^r ej}�S' rPj �,.-N Gt 1 L? T al suenxoors TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20073 IN/ HE ow MNCHO CUCRMONG& CWNf! OF UN SERKM ND. STAM OF CPI1Po emc ♦vmL.vwavxcEEL.¢uo.vmmxavvxm.9wawmwvwmLw.n uwroEvue. m,v.ussrx fENIWn,fi19 N19 HAF]GP499 MxN&-PNL019 i6r9HAF5HE1 IIEIIFAGLOi k� SHEET 3 i o 1 STMST. L I�� I � 5m ST.. SHEET 4 SHEET 2 ' I I -- - OT9 CP0.W]PaIG9RM. -- rnror:anuo— --1- 4TH ST rillp ' =r�mw- 0 �7omm TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20073 IN THECITY RANCHO CUMIONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNAROINq STATE OF MFORNIA tlFIN6 AYIP➢VIS'W CiPKCEL1.lI,401%PIWIOE PIALFLf195XWMMP4ICEE W➢N0.IFWFOi P.Y&I11.P1t£s#M iFAPUPI.NP 1t19MF9GW HNMFPEtll0I9 ru9FPldxn xErrzPwwl PARCEL2 OFFICE 1' PAL Na 11310 E%ISTBIGZONINGEAIPIRE `. P AL 21GR38E LACES SPEdFlCPIFN PAPCEL4 I — •..1 ..� vim P..M N0.1<fi91 - 'CLEVELANO AVENUE / P.N.1nA0.9fi � R1N U u.0 ..- .-.............. u._•____ _ _ _•-n .0 -..n f 3C- nvn •-u u.v ee •.v RELFCIFFl i RI lnlEA I - RLLEa. I 1 R� IXW90. L � IXPJ.IOPf1WV I ' R3P4MP I ¢PrsP PC` ' RSruiMlrxW I _ � RTYYIFA I ,. Ecfxmuuw I 23 i. ,I IrvmEveLcvrwlr �I I.Al s.lauln nr l wENEMreRMsr.Na I ' n.l #IeevsPR 23 !. Imo' anFaEs un26 I¢LFWAIEPE O :r/ �IXsr.Lr.rP �. U IF Wl2Gr6�__ FUFudsp. 1Of z RPa.roPE F Fvlu�tEwFA ��— _—_— '•��\- a'�,._ i. � II IuimlEo R�THE VINE aPIX , `\ • I U 0 v I I------- , ____ mums-_~___ II RI OPENVN `'��[/ `� \ ``` fU1WEEL9NC9 i {,. IR9 L1.i0PEWd.' :{, `�`"- - t� \ `�EASEMNrI�OtlF£ rECEPGlE01U PIN I � I � l \ �[➢ghPNRM IRwsfm utsl \� \. RIPMBf fPAN@�� IFur.1PILT 40P ` \ GSEYEYrifANft.lal\ \ \ iCAI\e.>msl PoamlP>✓waF. \\```` a 23 \ \ PPOP. Mw Tl APREMGHREBIOe E%ISTNGIQVMG:; eP �Px \\\ / t EMPQiE1NQSSPECIFICPIAN \ \. / / 21 \ ,``\�` LGYMS a. <TNSTSEET 21 •,• • `• \\ /� i \� m mmsrnu - \ a 19 u SCALE IN .1p�p l \ \ \ • ` ` \ \ ` 17 hIEYWE MMM—\ SEEMEETA TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 20073 IN THE OW MNCH0 CUCMONG CCUNW OF M BMNAROINO, STATE OF W FORNM PARCELS OFFICE 'P.M NO, 14W M��M�E -. - PARCEL,PH Ins - LASS sc PIMI PA NO Pp. IT CLEVELANDAVENUE I 26 34.11 ACRES SCNE IN FEET bvs- _m �w TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20073 W ME M MCNO CGCA GI. COUM OF SM GEHNAPgNO, STFIE OF=FOMU 6EgG �54�19W CF iNLT81, V.YO /.FPIBLx GEV�GIb]tl98Wmp IN4t LLNF6 uEnRVye. m.Y.YESU% iE1AW9�,M8 4.191tPE3GPla9 iM.NBEPNtO19 1�.�E:�] iGnEPEolm TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20073 INTHEOry RN1LH0 WCPNQYC.O LWNIY OFSRN BEPNARgNL, STATE LFCPLFgWN IEWL�EMC�PoPII ONv rtwmnroru.mmrte TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20073 IN THE C IT RANCHO CUCM1ONG0. COUMT OF SM BERNAROINO, STATE OF MFOSM azixc.vrew�vaiaourcz� v a..wo.wmmxorvnuuusxa�xox Rmceiwsxn uurmruam,resso7.x rewvx..mz xn.�Fsosuv mNsnvxnzon 1lyappxfl �IEIIaLIM lmmmomwmwAm W. MEMO 0 U W TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20073 IN TN E CRY PANCHO CUMONGA: COUNTY OF SAN BMNPAMNO, STATE OF MFONNIA 4We PSIRYNLMCiaA9W 1.13,Y9PVMIXYIOFPYtt4]I96NgvxplPwfF1 W➢Np Y41tF Py8111. PIfiSNN M1FiWIP.IDiI 419PAFSf�4 3gPEfu11OR IfELLR9,El IIflIp®Ipi PP I ". OOMN P."".,. E%ESTINGRO+BNS:E11 P.N. RIIR36< LNfEE SPECIFlC PLAN u1zNT ac CLEVEIAND AVENUE k rtlTxPim 5 - IXbSo 'FX,P OWUAE PI , � I' ``` ~ `� ItlkLERM. E fYILP£ INFE1 L ` *e4oso rm uuuExrvmm \ � saw¢ m FEEi '•yI . RR \ `�� �' . u `:•�:.� 1\ �� `NB:333w6-09 �\ \\ PflNPR FASEPPM \ \\ Pa MEP ONMHIGHHESIim MTMG�NG- �\ \\ " N'4_____L __-I ExWiNEtnNES SPECIFlC FUN: I ST ETw / THEME SEMONA-A , ION" per"' SEMM SEESNEETA PANCEL< P.N.NO.14W PMfn1 % Bf. SsSyya V w S s �3 Ir ng TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20073 IN THECITY RANCHO CUC ONCOUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF G FORNIA Ill.ASLHUX4M.1 F.Ul 1, 11. AlA A Pox11Ox IIF 1A 11 I All .1 XP I1N1 O11 Nell/, 1A.l. R�IWY.AP N.13 MAF3IFRHYdPEa1. 16HI�FSA1 l�Ei1�lN PARCH OFFICE ' PIY NO. I4647 EXISTINGZOWNG EMPIRE PARCEE< P,Al lnsn%. I SSPECIFIC" — P.EI.NO R611 : _ PA. lnnm CLEVEIANFIAVENOE Fx Fn oXew. ..... ... N:.: UsO •� A:'. III: — SECRPR C{ SEESHFETS 01 4REL Sa� $GIE IN fEE! le=p I TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20073 INTHECITYPANCHOCUO ONO COUNTY OF SAN BEWiMDINO, STATE OF CAUFONNIA SEIN] �SM➢V�4d1O: aAK¢I.0 Ya]�KwTIMOf P/AC¢].SSSxWMpI POPRLNV X4 ML�6PYB,111, P.YE59]!b ReNMCMi 4ID MPFSWYS AxyEPfp1O9 nsamin nernmio. -flg�f— N£ IN RET tea TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20073 WTHE OW RR MCU=ONGA. CWIM OF SFE1 BENLNgNO, STATE OF i=FOPNU a Puw.I.a.roum�war.mxsAvsw.wwBAeai...xn wuraoua m,r.¢svoss iFW4M9Y, At1 4.f9MME941p55 IDxy4PEn LNE ru.msrer IunumLa 5, II t � - rBaseem Eu mEErroBE li _ vPa IELw,nEn— .,. aEu oromEm. a 'I' \ THE VINE \j E -J; �' S �Cnfli iNEt�yl { I EZ Ii WArEN ✓ FA41EIYfMP \ prlb2y _ _ EW/pll£E.4L4J.T _ T. /-ITPP6[�A.f�T O0. _ I I '' / IrOBE0.(fO/J1,21 I El II1dL w.IFA EA ELE ,I \ 0.41 Imo__ _ " IXELEL IR1nGlF➢ROB `'L . ` y S \\/ T 12 I J �r __ ___ _ B _ naWaErEwsaol � � i i' 5✓ EmT mpgrt I 1 jFAMGZOMNG:EM1PIREof r A. I SPECIFlOflANr, J , � IN Ear BA9[I OF ffA�fRB.,....iw.unwu w. PRELIMINARY WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN SITE AND DRAINAGE PLAN TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20073 IN THE CITY F ANCHO CUCAMON GA. COUNTY OF SAN BFRNAHOI NO. STATE OF MIFOHNIA YdM .6LPL120NCFPMSLI VIMAFVpilIM6P�M1(EL].999F'YMPN¢IIW➢M�414F W.�,I, PILE991f FE9PNMV.ID�] p9,19 KP£9fA099 XAWPEPE�LOT9 )IEOLFESNE] IIkTEXF➢1➢i 9 i SHEET 3 SHEET 5 SHEET 2 k X I MA/_- Illimm 10M.2a ®��Ewm 7omm b PRELIMINARY WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN SITE AND DRAINAGE PLAN TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20073 M1XE Ott PMCNO MCAMONCA CWNNOF S4N BMHNO, STATE OFCtllfORN4 F➢W116LBlWA9W yVMCELtt149 /.Vd11RIRVIALEt]1951WYH VIPMLFLLW M1p 1141KLL&fiLPI4E99Y1 EEPAWM1E.]TI %19 /.O�SfAMS }6APLPESISi AWPFROLOf9 I Lf1E129 LOi •--_• �`—. 'CLEVEIANDAWNDE COI[CfmDlft �ILOM Y lyJJ I ou �m n '11i�^ Ihrrh 24 � 25 }ob %I'KR9 I' li♦IZ IT ;,� (4 1111pT5 • fi �IC] µ ��T� •LLr � I `�I� _ msaaro Ev36WE THE NNE __ � o Sara'- .a, lt, `\ F \a iLLT WWOE `\WMm 5W4E 23 .`'Y�i J Ix Iff 31 NOTES' �a\ mslWwEs �\ `� Unnuwiw.aWUELow Ecmaiwmvnew%smW rzWonrouunswuE,nulmWTuwPunam.al \ b� \ iR1�EH�ML1 RiWf pIFAMTEPOCSIYPWLWN \\V11 !\�` 19 sCNE M fFET \ � \ p__ a W1- )SEE9XEFf1 11 tIIb�Ea PRELIMINARY WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN SITE AND DRAINAGE PLAN TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20073 w THEQry PMOHO MC ONOA COUNT' OF SAN SERNAAgNO, STATE OF L FORM awo �s�waswmw.em�.num�wmwrcvmmsuan:mwvu,mwsia iwrrcus.nr.vussroe fF .AI] wf9l�6afJ1W9 XIW.BFRilt 4O3 ]l]9.VAf5,h'i IIEiIEPEDIOi CLEVEIANUAVENUE - ... T �� �:.]ll]L. _ iYs�^,�-'a✓L•µ rvf$•ilffiilN. #RML 1 i f 34.11 ACRES I IS I NOTES: armiMs]wruRwv�aemurxwnsa„¢ma / \� � is4vuxrwunwucncxroAs[ww�uarn / / /r a/ �. I I n s '.\ �uiwnmvviesvaa uirtFwvawcmwuwrw / .�I SEESXF£TS PRELIMINARY WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN SITE AND DRAINAGE PLAN TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20073 INTHECITY RANCHO CU PMONGA, COUNTY OF 6FN 9ERNMI)NO, STATE OF C FORMA BFyq PSIBIlN9RIKf/.iml,QYpANTYN6GKfFt IIS S'VAx p1 V/AfFLLW NS IW1nf LLB.III. iIIESL% sRwawr.xn uIs/vasmass >sNwesrnloss s xn ILmLNm Lal SFESNEET2 19 17 \ 20 .... \\\ \� \ N IS 15 \\l� 16 /• \v\ 1n /IEWJvvmE •. L � � �\�SS\ 1EwWl s \ x NOTES: SIpY W.11FA Mll i4WI14A0S51 RIM W 9 9Ni/LE IU 1 IEV pWlrgLVlA5WNE11ENInA1FYfq VRIEFEIdf Is RMgX%SNYfg1E FHRN.Wi ThF %IdILBIPinItlW11 $ LE IN FEET PRELIMINARY WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN SITE AND DRAINAGE PLAN TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20073 SEE SNEF]] IN]NE CW NPNCNO COCAMONC0. COUN1Y OF SAN NERNANOINO. STAE OF ONIFOIUM \] ' 1 PNq A. iHY�faW ReM611.11IMAKQ,1Y16 PIPLELfI59Ptt1 O1 PN<tt WJW fW,'RLLe.III. PIIASp% I( 11 "mmnm,nr nn Pusslsr '.. . i THE VINE ------ ------ --------- AC. 1_J 14 S_____—__—_ __—__—__ IN" B , r m aP,ums E.Plnsa � mums s� � ` 13 \` SXI069 kva �� •C All N0. , i. 3 s2 �.; j. ------------ 1,'. nmlums ]LIKES i � Ii SRICOF9 n I 2 I! Its 'rt -nm1 .. .__ ------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------- NOTFS' 1 a�Wapfli.CN YAL63PPFPlV65,PYI!£laA 'I �I ' IIEIEP V.9XYESW4E RENr0A1flRVRNVS[9W.ENf. Poaix,sNxonEPmesrmwmuw `- y srsm ^ j �'ry q�scuEUj IN i� I t£Om DE]C'R=.V110�� �ucvnermms �_ II immo®W- immmtill --- mmr�m �i 1 Iw ]melee 1 I? I 1 O O N Li m O co W � O m U Q r` LL �JM� Qo c n Z TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20073 N THE CITY NANONO W0R61CNGA OOONIY OF SRN SETUUAOINO, STATE OF GL M% BhW ,]I6RN9RRPaV61l Y.MO.MFIWNRPACFI] V dWm MPNR,WA1q �W,IOIY6111, P]6.Stl(i fStN%.9i1 Y9WF]f! RM,FEPF0102 sans PARCEL 12 219.768 S.F. / 5.04 AC, PARCEL1 2,480,816 S.F. 156.95 AC. FIFTH ST ) I I P. I u ------------------- ❑ ❑ o U w o w MERE STAFF REPORT DATE: May 24, 2017 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Candyce Burnett. City Planne a"1 INITIATED BY: Mike Smith. Senior Planner SUBJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20073 — LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP. — A review of a proposed subdivision of a property of about 84 acres into twenty- six (26) parcels and one (1) lettered lot located within the Empire Lakes Specific Plan, Planning Area 1, located north of 4th Street, south of 6th Street, west of Milliken Avenue, and east of Utica/Cleveland Avenues - APNs: 0210-082-41, - 49. and -52 Related files General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115, and Pre -Application Review DRC2017-00170 Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on May 18, 2016 in connection with the City's approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015- 00115. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project. CONTINUANCE REQUESTED RECOMMENDATION: Due to an error in the public noticing process, staff recommends the Planning Commission continue the public hearing for Tentative Tract SUBTT20073 to the June 14, 2017 meeting date, CB TG/ls EXHIBIT C RESOLUTION NO. 17-62 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20073, A SUBDIVISION OF A PROPERTY OF ABOUT 84 ACRES INTO TWENTY-SEVEN (27) PARCELS AND ONE (1) LETTERED LOT LOCATED WITHIN THE EMPIRE LAKES SPECIFIC PLAN, PLANNING AREA 1, LOCATED NORTH OF 4TH STREET, SOUTH OF 6TH STREET, WEST OF MILLIKEN AVENUE, AND EAST OF UTICAICLEVELAND AVENUES; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF -APNS: 0210-082-41, -49, and -52. A. Recitals. 1. Lewis Management Corp. filed an application for the approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 20073, 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 24th day of May and continued to the 14th day of June, 2017, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing on May 24, 2017 and continued to June 14, 2017, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to a property of 160 acres that was formerly developed with the privately owned and operated Empire Lakes Golf Course located in the Empire Lakes Specific Plan; and b. The City Council approved amendments to the General Plan, Specific Plan, and Development Code (related files: General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115) for the purpose of enabling the applicant to develop a new mixed use and transit -oriented project ("Empire Lakes/The Resort"); and C. The Specific Plan has an overall area of 347 acres and is generally bound by 4th Street to the south, Milliken Avenue to the east, Cleveland Avenue and Utica Avenue to the west, E2—Pg25 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO, 17-62 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20073 — LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP. JUNE 14, 2017 Page 2 and 8th Street and the BNSF/Metrolink rail line to the north. The subject property is generally located at the center of the Specific Plan. Both are bisected into south and north halves by 6th Street; and d. The specific location of the project site is the southern half of the overall subject property; and e. The project site consists of three (3) parcels with a combined area of about 84 acres. It has street frontage of about 1,740 feet and 422 feet along 6th Street and 4th Street, respectively. The north -south dimension of the site is about 2,500 feet; and f. To the north of the project site is the north half of the former private golf course and an industrial building. To the south is vacant property in the City of Ontario. To the east are apartment complexes while to the west is an office complex; and g. The subject property and all properties to the north, east, and west are within the Empire Lakes Specific Plan which is divided into "Planning Areas". The property and the property to the north is in Planning Area 1. The properties to the east and west are in Planning Areas 6 and 8, and Planning Areas 3, 4, and 5, respectively. To the south is property in the City of Ontario that is zoned Commercial Center (within the Ontario Center Specific Plan); and h. The applicant proposes to subdivide the project site into twenty-seven (27) parcels and one (1) "letter" lot. No building construction is proposed in conjunction with this tentative tract map; and i. The parcels will be sold to various developers who will construct the single- and multi -family residential units and non-residential buildings within Empire Lakes/The Resort; j. The entitlement applications for the various components of the overall project will be submitted by each developer separately for review and action by the City at a later date. Development within all parcels will be governed by the technical and design standards/guidelines described in the Empire Lakes Specific Plan. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That the tentative tract map is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and the Empire Lakes Specific Plan. The proposed project is to subdivide the project site into multiple parcels which will be sold to allow the construction of single- and multi -family residential units and non-residential buildings consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and intent of the Empire Lakes Specific Plan; and b. The design or improvements of the tentative tract map is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and the Empire Lakes Specific Plan. The proposed project is only to subdivide the project site into twenty-seven (27) parcels and one (1) "letter' lot. No building construction is proposed in conjunction with this tentative tract map; and E2—Pg26 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-62 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20073 — LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP. JUNE 14, 2017 Page 3 C. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed. The individual entitlement applications for the various components of the overall project will be submitted by developers separately for review and action by the City at a later date. Development within all parcels will be governed by the technical and design standards/guidelines described in the Empire Lakes Specific Plan; and d. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat. The proposed project is only for the subdivision of the project site into multiple parcels. No building construction is proposed in conjunction with this tentative tract map. Mitigation measures described in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for Empire Lakes/The Resort will be implemented during the construction and operation of the project; and e. The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems. The proposed project is only for the subdivision of the project site into multiple parcels. No building construction is proposed in conjunction with this tentative tract map. Mitigation measures described in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for Empire Lakes/The Resort will be implemented during the construction and operation of the project; and f. 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. Easements for access through or use of the property within the project will be governed by local and State regulations and applicable technical and design standards/guidelines described in the Empire Lakes Specific Plan. 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), the City certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on May 18, 2016 (SCH No. 2015041083) in connection with the City's approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project as there have been a) no substantial changes proposed to the project that indicate new or more severe impacts on the environment; b) no substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under which the project was previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts; c) no new important information shows the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered; and d) no additional mitigation measures are now feasible to reduce impacts or different mitigation measures can be imposed to substantially reduce impacts. b. The Planning Commission finds, in connection with Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20073, 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 previously certified EIR. The application is the subdivision of the project site into twenty- E2—Pg27 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-62 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20073 — LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP. JUNE 14, 2017 Page 4 seven (27) parcels and one (1) "letter" lot. The parcels will be sold to enable the future construction of the overall project. Staff further finds that the project will not have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previously certified EIR, 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. No building construction is proposed in conjunction with this tentative tract map. Development of the project will be governed by the technical and design standards/guidelines described in the Empire Lakes Specific Plan C. Based on these findings and all evidence in the record, the Planning Commission concurs with the staff determination that no additional environmental review is required pursuant to CEQA in connection with the City's consideration of the Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20073. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3 and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Department 1) All future entitlement applications for the various components of the overall project that will be submitted separately for review and action by the City shall be governed by the Empire Lakes Specific Plan. 2) Prior to the recordation of the final map, a) a community facilities district (CFD) shall be created for the financing of construction, operation, and maintenance of public improvements and facilities, and public services within the overall project, and/or b) the project shall annex into any existing special districts including, but not limited to, the applicable park, landscape maintenance, and street light maintenance districts, and/or c) funded through the Home Owners or Property Owners Association to the satisfaction of the Deputy City Manager/Administrative Services or their designee. 3) Prior to the recordation of a final map that includes a subdivision involving more than 500 dwelling units, the property owner/developer shall demonstrate compliance with applicable requirements of SB 221 (Government Code Section 66473.7(b)(2)) in order to demonstrate the availability of an adequate and reliable water supply. 4) Prior to the recordation of the final map, the property owner/developer shall dedicate land, pay in -lieu fees, or a combination of both for the provision of neighborhood and community parks for recreational purposes. Land to satisfy dedication requirements shall be conveyed to the City at the time of recordation of the final map. In lieu fees shall be paid to the City prior to the issuance of building permits. The provision of on -site private open space and recreational facilities may be credited E2—Pg28 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-62 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20073 — LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP. JUNE 14, 2017 Page 5 against the parkland dedication and/or fee requirement at the discretion of the Planning Commission provided that the standards outlined in the Municipal Code are met.. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2017. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA go 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 14th day of June, 2017, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: E2—Pg29 Conditions of Approval RANCHO cMON GA Community Development Department Project #: SUBTT20073 CEQA2017-00003 Project Name: TT 27 PARCELS, 1 LOT /// EMPIRE LAKES/THE RESORT Location: Empire Lakes SP, Planning Area 1 - 021008241-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. Approval is for the subdivision of a property of about 84 acres into twenty-seven (27) parcels and one (1) lettered lot located within the Empire Lakes Specific Plan, Planning Area 1, located north of 4th Street, south of 6th Street, west of Milliken Avenue, and east of Utica/Cleveland Avenues - APNs: 0210-082-41, -49, and -52. Standard Conditions of Approval 2. 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. 3. 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. 4. This tentative tract map or tentative parcel map shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, unless a complete final map is filed with the Engineering Services Department within 3 years from the date of the approval. Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. All frontage improvements along The Vine (including the temporary access dedication 300 feet north of 6th Street), 4th Street, and 6th Street will be conditioned on the first development within the Empire Lakes (The Resort) specific plan area. 2. Execute a CFD agreement prior to any building permits. The City will not take ownership of any improvements without a funded CFD. Standard Conditions of Approval 3. Private drainage easements for cross -lot drainage shall be provided and shall be delineated or noted on the final map. 4. Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards and as determined by the CFD agreement. www.C1ty0 Rc.us Panted; 6/6/2017 E2—Pg30 Project#: SUBTT20073 CEQA2017-00003 Project Name: TT 27 PARCELS, 1 LOT N EMPIRE LAKES/THE RESORT Location: Empire Lakes SP, Planning Area 1 - 021008241-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 5. All existing easements lying within future rights -of -way shall be quit -claimed or delineated on the final map. And subject to approval by the City Engineer. 6. Easements for public sidewalks placed outside the public right-of-way shall be dedicated to the City. 7. 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. 8. 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. 9. Rights -of -way and easements shall be dedicated to the City for all interior public streets, community trails, public paseos, public landscape areas, street trees, traffic signal encroachment and maintenance, and public drainage facilities as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. Private easements for non-public facilities (cross -lot drainage, local feeder trails, etc.) shall be reserved as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. 10. Dedication shall be made of the following rights -of -way on the perimeter streets (measured from street centerline): 60' on 6th Street 60' on 4th Street 11. 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. 12. Public storm drain easements shall be graded to convey overflows in the event of a blockage in a sump catch basin on the public street, and provisions made to pass through walls. 13. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 1. 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. 2. 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. 3. 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. www.CityofRC.us Printed: 0/6/2017 Page 2 of 4 E2—Pg31 Project #: SUBTT20073 CEQA2017-00003 Project Name: TT 27 PARCELS, 1 LOT /// EMPIRE LAKES/THE RESORT Location: Project Type: Empire Lakes SP, Planning Area 1 - 021008241-0000 Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 4. The final Grading and Drainage Plan, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be completed, submitted, and approved by the Building and Safety Official prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. A separate Grading and Drainage Plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and wet signed by a California licensed Civil Engineer prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit. 6. The applicant shall comply with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Dust Control Measures and place a dust control sign on the project site prior to the issuance of a grading permit. All dust control sign (s) shall be located outside of the public right of way. 7. If a Rough Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit are submitted to the Building and Safety Official for review, the rough grading plan shall be a separate plan submittal and permit from Precise Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit. 8. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall obtain written permission from the adjacent property owner(s) to construct wall(s) on property line(s) or provide a detail(s) showing the perimeter wall(s) to be constructed offset from the property line. 9. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall implement City Standards for on -site construction where possible, and shall provide details for all work not covered by City Standard Drawings. 10. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the grading plan shall show that all manufactured slopes shall be a minimum 2-foot offset from the public right of way, permitted line, or the adjacent private property. All slope offsets shall meet the requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. 11. 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. 12. The final grading and drainage plan shall show existing topography a minimum of 100-feet beyond project boundary. 13. This project shall comply with the accessibility requirements of the current adopted Building Code. 14. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the precise grading and drainage plan shall follow provided in the City of Rancho Cucamonga handout "Information for Grading Plans and Permit". California the format Printed: 6/6/2017 v .CityofRC.us E2—Pg32 Page 3 of 4 Project#: SUBTT20073CEQA2017-00003 Project Name: TT 27 PARCELS, 1 LOT N EMPIRE LAKES(rHE RESORT Location: Empire Lakes SP, Planning Area 1 - 021008241-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. - Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 15. 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. 16. 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. 17. A review of the conceptual grading and drainage plan and the preliminary water quality management plan shows that it is the intent of the engineer of record to drain the surface storm water flows to a retention basin. The basin shall be designed to accept multiple storm events (100-year storm event and Antecedent Moisture Condition 3) using the methodology outlined in the current adopted San Bernardino County Hydrology Manual. 18. Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the latest adopted California Plumbing Code. Private storm drain improvements shall be shown on the grading and drainage plan. 19. Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WQMP shall include a copy of the project Conditions of Approval. 20. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall obtain a Waste Discharge Identification Number (WDID). The WDID number shall also be shown on the WQMP Site and Drainage Plan document. 21. 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. �.Cityo(RC.us Printed: 6/6/2017 Page 4 of 4 E2—Pg33 STAFF REPORT DATE: June 14, 2017 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Candyce Burnett, City Planner t01 __� INITIATED BY: Mike Smith, Senior Planner CI��� SUBJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20105 — LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP. — A review of a proposed subdivision of a property of about 82 acres into five (5) parcels located within the Empire Lakes Specific Plan, Planning Area 1, located north of 6th Street, south of the Metrolink/BNSF rail line, west of Milliken Avenue, and east of Utica/Cleveland Avenues - APN: 0209-272-20. Related files: General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115, and Pre - Application Review DRC2017-00170. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on May 18, 2016 in connection with the City's approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached Resolution of Approval No. 17-61 for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20105. PROJECT SITE DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND: The project site is part of a property of 160 acres that was formerly developed with the privately owned and maintained Empire Lakes Golf Course located in the Empire Lakes Specific Plan (the "Specific Plan"). The Specific Plan has an overall area of 347 acres and is generally bound by 4th Street to the south, Milliken Avenue to the east, Cleveland Avenue and Utica Avenue to the west, and 8th Street and the BNSF/Metrolink rail line to the north. The subject property is generally located at the center of the Specific Plan. Both are bisected into south and north halves by 6th Street. The specific location of the project site is the northern half of the overall subject property. It consists of one (1) parcel with an area of about 82 acres. The project site has street frontage of about 895 feet along Vh Street. The site also has street frontage of about 165 feet at the intersection of 7th Street and Cleveland Avenue, and 35 feet at the intersection of 7tt' Street and Anaheim Street. Frontage along the BNSF/Metrolink rail line is about 1,330 feet in length. The north -south dimension of the site is about 2,500 feet. The existing land uses on, and General Plan land use and zoning designations for, the project site and the surrounding properties are as follows: E3—Pgt PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20105 — LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP. JUNE 14, 2017 Page 2 Land Use General Plan Zoning Site Vacant (north half of Mixed Use Planning Area 1' former iDrivate golf course North Industrial Buildings Heavy Minimum Impact/Heavy Industrial Industrial MI/HI District South Vacant (south half of Mixed Use Planning Area 1' former privategolf course Apartments, Offices, and East Metrolink Station Parking Mixed Use Planning Areas 9 and 10' Lot West Industrial Buildings and Mixed Use General Industrial GI District Planning Area 11' Utility' Facilities F 1 - Em ire Lakes Specific Plan; 2 — Southern California Edison SCE and Cucamonga Valley Water District CVWD The golf course was closed in mid-2016 following the approval by the City Council of amendments to the General Plan, Specific Plan, and Development Code (related files: General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115). These amendments were for the purpose of enabling the applicant to develop a new mixed use and transit -oriented project ("Empire Lakes/The Resort") hereafter referred to as "the overall project'. Preparation of the plans for the features described in the Specific Plan is in progress. These plans include the technical design of the `The Vine" (the future, north -south primary street within the project) and the associated utility infrastructure and street improvements. The applicant has removed all the trees from the property (related file: Tree Removal Permit DRC2016-00553), and completed the demolition/removal of the infrastructure and improvements related to the golf course. In the meantime, in preparation for future development the applicant has submitted grading plans for a permit to "mass grade" the site (related file: Grading Permit PMT2016-05024) to allow development of the first of the three (3) phases of the overall project. This permit is currently under review by the City. The applicant is also proposing to subdivide the south half of the overall subject property (related file: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20073). This separate application was submitted concurrently with the subject application and is also scheduled for review and action by the Planning Commission on June 14, 2017. ANALYSIS: General: The applicant proposes to subdivide the project site into five (5) parcels (Exhibit B). No building construction is proposed in conjunction with this tentative tract map. The parcels will be sold to various developers who will construct the overall project. The area of the parcels/lots will range between 0.2-acre and 71.8 acres. Per the Specific Plan, development of the overall project will be in three (3) phases and is expected to occur over a period of 8-10 years. Parcels 1 and 2 of the subject tentative tract map are within the first phase while the remainder of the parcels are within the second and third phases. The entitlement applications for the various components of the overall project will be submitted by each developer separately for review and action by the City at a later date. Development within all parcels will be governed by the technical and design standards/guidelines described in the Specific Plan. Technical and Design Review Committees: The proposed project is the subdivision of the property only. The outcome of this project is the creation of separate parcels and there are no E3—Pg2 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20105 — LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP. JUNE 14, 2017 Page 3 technical nor design issues that require review by the Committees. Development within the overall project is governed by standards and guidelines described in the Specific Plan. When the entitlement applications for the various components of the overall project are submitted at a later date, Staff will analyze them to verify compliance with the Specific Plan. These applications will be presented to the Committees for their consideration and recommendation to the Planning Commission. Neighborhood Meeting: The proposed project is the subdivision of the property only. Development within the overall project is governed by the Specific Plan. The Specific Plan was subject to public review during a series of workshop/presentations conducted by the applicant. The outcome of this project is the creation of separate parcels and there is no additional information of significance to convey that warrants a neighborhood meeting. As part of Staffs evaluation of each entitlement application for the various components of the overall project that will be submitted at a later date, a neighborhood meeting for each will be conducted to inform the public and obtain comments, if any, for consideration by the Planning Commission. Environmental Assessment: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on May 18, 2016 in connection with the City's approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015- 00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project as there have been a) no substantial changes proposed to the project that indicate new or more severe impacts on the environment; b) no substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under which the project was previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts; c) no new important information shows the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered; and (iv) additional mitigation measures are now feasible to reduce impacts or different mitigation measures can be imposed to substantially reduce impacts. FISCAL IMPACT: The proposed subdivision of the property will facilitate the applicant's sale of parcels to developers to enable the development of the overall project. The project site currently is assessed an annual property tax. A percentage of this annual tax is shared with the City. When completed, the overall project will increase the value of the project site and the City's annual share of the property tax will increase accordingly. The developers also'will be responsible for paying one-time impact fees applicable to their separate, individual projects. These fees are intended to address the increased demand for City services due to the overall project. The following types of services that these impact fees would support include the following: library services, transportation infrastructure, drainage infrastructure, animal services, police, parks, and community and recreation services. The overall project, during construction may increase construction -related employment and, following its completion, will increase employment due to new non-residential (e.g. commercial and office) uses, and may increase employment at surrounding existing and future businesses that will provide services to the residents of the overall project. Also, a positive fiscal impact for the City will occur through increased sales tax revenue generated by residents' patronage of local businesses. E3—Pg3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20105 — LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP. JUNE 14, 2017 Page 4 COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: The proposed subdivision of the property is the first step in the process of submitting entitlement applications for the development of the overall project that, when completed, will contribute to the realization of several City Council goals. The General Plan discusses several land use policies including 1) planning for vibrant, pedestrian - friendly mixed use and high density residential areas at strategic infill locations along transit routes; 2) implementing land use patterns and policies that incorporate smart growth practices, including placement of higher densities near transit centers and along transit corridors; and 3) supporting housing. opportunities for workers of all income ranges. The City Council has two goals, Goals A24 and A25 that are relevant to the overall project. The objective of Goal A24 is "to address 1) mixed use, high density, transit oriented development (TOD), and 2) underperforming or underutilized areas." The objective of Goal A25 is "review the City's zoning districts and evaluate/investigate creating overlay districts or specific plan areas" that will create districts in order to revitalize underperforming or underutilized areas. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing 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 and/or correspondence have been received in response to these notices. EXHIBITS: Exhibit A — Vicinity Map Exhibit B — Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20105 Draft Resolution of Approval for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20105 CB:MS/Is E3—Pg4 04rSE5i A @Am i m.^yiSTq .s4 cc g wnR IALCVA 33 v AY4P �' Wxntla _E�.xma WmmEm , ;muY Kooawa-- IEVRBi w�WUW I K.I AnPI o- •.A VISTA i Si �rm+M1 EIurasr �''UG'MVESi AL7A ��+ LCA/A •''1W11Atl1 II N1RwPA �OAI 1•I a 5 I pg _ x wrmn + Wyw.vs+� A�Q l I 2 L'' � r pp Ly2 :iWtmr �:P Ili4' P I rK�w^vy'in/y., — fH T S'- AVE -1 r� yr ,wyol-g �r GAIA li k AVE °' w IBB�i-I�x+mr at,',I I�tary 'sal lRtt 7"ra9 � S 'I n rMAMw Y. j k I � ra nbl CNI�WfWdV/f WTE VI$TAST '� e � W wrrtrisr�yr Y�+ e uv2Wisi P AINW}II a 'IiC uevipl maz � mwPi �. Owm r'13P!P 110e'➢ i I �€ nmA a g.nwwa �pwgp psy.,w'�'�wml I WrrwWw mWl 3�'u, `, AwA000M c P .Ilk. la m Ar'VYAS F Ito l /F kM'+a ypw �j1N0 AL1<i Si ll 9 ti!• "YMn 6K k���'{ e iM+Wxmm xwrxdmsi � a E W s' `I �yikr I NER�pp� ° +•u�'r f„"�'`�.'� fniAnA S € ! u kN�� 'tit A RU M � �3"v1 � I r� 9 F MUBBF.R �Iwd JkTP C Ewiasir 4, TW 1 (1 E �.. A N I v .c WR5 a 9 aN a ll 1� WN GEM urWrn%`ib,er*!•t $$¢$ETRx site § I I._fRQA - vwmv c TERRA VISTA i, TOWN CENTER fSrRY! HISTORIC Il ' RmfsmIRE ST Ci Isl ! .. /� T xxrueaW li 8' jT +' g S I PEVON ST _ tj S E S p[kpI ST 1'(AITR it CENd'(U hNNPN k"- - LIKifl Sr P P.IMILfl 51 L� y g'.RACiF Q t tli AT sNfoFp 'M9RxNA �tt �tia+nWY + M, i1 9tN Si �ww 11 TB 8 w ,Wlr l PA YAIw I`: LIV�piREFw ✓Cr Y y. 9 IRLW Y ' RANCHO CUCANONOA hV 4W. s.� v i P1 krlRmr 'IM1G6R9W AYPo iSil a. E7mW 1 e ��wr Q4�y� .ALC.A. 4.0 h• avgy lop rEM C IO RANCHO :Ywt wiaa �w' OMW m CENTER COURT .OUSE sIIAUAEI$r I ,�O4AlYPgISrry �r qAweOLl` NERIEAGE 'i•R rYC,I'.1 wttUN!451Gr .C�bnTATIOH �I NOBpRAL :I11,0 %n w .11 on - I I II � �E ]LVW.W tt FINSONR ii jAWsw PR armtwrt o efuer I,.m 3 0 2 n JERSEY BLV➢ _ j I • %fMion;/� '� METROLINK TRAIN ALNrollnk d i 1 AhEwfl - _ • 1We�iuiwn I li rIAFMII w RXF' Iwuw,Wr 1 M rWLL4X w C. -. _- ' S' cl ,, mnwm.a st I. l� EMPIRF. s [AM COAR corrR.x I Y 1 1 W. .maweYS; � W. A lW � sxn _ EXHIBIT A y�' s } iCAMOKGA- cu AIL 8 TMR4MA KAT�.A J EA1PPkxfRg 4TH ST E3-Pg5 WAY 'fin I(e'k"rartw wrlwa Wp � II _I `I II I l f I ;AWWA��N 11 a oa WRSNXV151 M i� ONTARIO MILLS cunnnrafn ti x4 r ^[ar 1 A�d►r Yb i t � i� a+�, "F , l,� � e � � � �: �' 51 � Ell NN cl— ru tU"]d501 Gn r5 M 92 ��: �' �,� � "Q,`� � "+ �®d��'� )�1119iiICi���� r •�fpy, ,nJ w^ x ♦i Ifi'� '�+aS' ar :1 + y r� ", Et.{W",��•5:,i �j2�!' � I .9z ,,., g x��i t � '- i � ex Y v l'ha`� aSIR faHa`';, ". ar, OR +lie c�. c Oilgm 80 MKI } "`��,,f• srit #ks rka �tF �iZ�7 7xtTt bares 3 �i'"' atfr �j e � A I R7 r[T '�'"'>•. tk w e�sF� (4 , xr q z . c:) cn CD ife 7`" N 4 � � � £ 5 � R . � 7 c ab � �• P i,�`., Yfr 1>*. �'�V+a. d, Y z � N ;,...,�..�,,� ,�..�"{� �,r..���,�,:t2l•�+`,,°K�-yam s `';>+e.,o ♦�;#�r*gr*grit, x �r '� � L�. $�i EXHIBIT B � nary TSn ENTATIVE iPACT WN,MIM THE RESORT ..rr�rru ..se w w 1e"®� LENS MANAGEMENT CORP. ��wx mo�nuwnve is—rgb TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20105 IN THE CITY NPACHO CO ONGA. COUNTY OF SAN 6ENNANOINO, STATE OF MIFOHNIA �QK 196WSttI fiPWIlOK9VN1 W PMiLYNM IYII6PYB III, PI(E9W'L MILflI) VID.VFFS INYHPkO tO15 IRYYQ➢IOI K V 2 I m zSU-02 ! TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20105 IN THE CRY MNCHO CUCANONGA COUNTY OF MN 3MAROINO, STAi OF CALIFORNIA 8P4 �9AMWN W P4Yd1]/59ONi1 W PIALft4+➢IL 1W)6PYB IR, PPGE59)n YYVA. @ID/6.ES ;NY4Ap Y115 r M= �• _ _L. MEMOLPJK / BNSF RAB_ LP1E I I 14c. ! . SHEET 3 ! SHEET 5 AZUSA CT. ! :-�y� SHEET 6 ! ! SHEET 2- 1 i ! SHEET 4 IPPYBK� • �✓ j! 6TH ST. MEMO I� IIIIIIII��.�.. LEA e�ea�s TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20105 IN THE CRY MOW OW C"MONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNPAOINO, STATE OF CAL FOM lA HPG A,RIUFPRCFl1]A59aVMRI PNSF1YW101W)6PYR IR.PKASp12 MLCC, M] OIDROR9 IMLH RE T I MYY4RlOi FAI]EMR _� CLEYFIPNDAVE � '• '� SCALE MHEI bh W� DB I Mil Ii TTM-02 /I� .•• 0.EYEWIOAYE _ TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20105 IN THE CRY RANCHO CUCAMONOA COUNTY OF SAN BEPNAMINO, STATE OF CAUFORNIA &fM•Sl0aSa6PA�1sAt 94YMavN6F1LLVM udr6Pue ITT mm x¢nn amass .xdwum iuEMVRFUR .. .� -. - _ �IXUtR PIIm� .. .. - rflolEtlbFINVn ilOIIF9 - i - FM1YEFNf/SN1 3RN60. IXW4LRPEYWY I � F FASEME 7MMGPESs. EE �SsdNW5 A4W ' E%P➢. t �� � ,'� - '�`iM\ �"�� /4tElENfia NYAESj EGPE55 WIPL£Glf/,N // iflUN5M1Y s]Ii6iOA �—?.�i IFA 06MCi Lf J QK ___ ____ 1� 51tlL19E1M5 � E•IDIOl1.6[1111 y � _ __ _ ____ PcmaA. Exv➢. rc PEIMINOEP ,I I I�d14Es �i TA..— Sc IN FEET III �v � - � sEsslvers ' IBB IAMIT I'•. TTM-03 a l l 1 'I i, r if PI �l Ili E v II EnaVK w.rtA G E%16 WPiEA .]EI]Y'S IXmYYR11Y IXS}.IlilShl R O 4 0]KAES iLNPE W.1hP ///�/�'SyME55➢�W ' _ - ///rNMEPECWAIFA FA SI.,Iirt101rtLLW 1 u,v�¢ IXSTAu TmREMN Ecrx]oauw ------ uxas CWBtVi EAiF1FM TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20105 IN THE CITY WWCHO CUCAMONGA. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA arc AaeP.+vrnoEvualiswsswW,avvuuwuo laravue m.vxxsnn AVWmP Rm.mEs vuPwEm4 l SEESHEETI ,auuoSxEm THE NNE �I PSCES9 E�SFYFM l I I I r I .. �vPoeveoTxawr PARCELS _ PM. NO. 14647 PM I"%S6 TRACT NO. M'EHIIRd HIGHRUMENIIPL MUINGEONWG: EMPIRE -AKESSPECIFICPLAN TIE ME lA MAh 51REla5T11 �� \� vam.aucPa \\ � M➢FFMMfCN VE1WlE SIWNA[CEn `I H�,WPEH�Y� 6 EYIYLMSIPoFR6 REMINDER \ I.. 1 1 1 1 SF.LE M FEET I I ' I I I I SEESHEU2 I I �4a o U z W � 8' w TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20105 IN THE CITY HO CUCAMONGA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNMHUM, STATE0F=FORNA L4.9ftnlVelwPlY(LI]e39OIlIwPY[pYIP IL I VIl6PYB }A PMFSZS] VFLFIi @N I6p RIOR IM �Reu.eceR{al SEESNEET3 'I ,11�swsrlvrtrwewsc�ss {IR1wpM949OA EA VA "I 6 I T A.. jf� 'T [X9RePNFAiENFHi, tlL6q RlYOf OEFM1[ !I RF)MWOER I ii mwRscwwu 11.IPLP6 i� li Jl I I \ IER6OIfFY w.RR 'I iwcrwso. LH.PesmEs E.��wcmcnnrom onsacrzuwmYA m �� rc Ewmwrwexauss Ru¢a {RW[6.SM.lIRiOA L—u � II 4 I I �Rorcisoia v+ 1 I ."M waRnev:nrxr R- sC4L w ME I EES SHEETS �T bmR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP _., _�, EBS�OE `Imp In 41a W+DIDL..__. LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP. LEMALDESCMPTION Mq TB�- TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20105 IN THE CHVRANCHOCUCAMONGA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OFOPLIFOPNIA 9.@pA°Ox6P6�Li]/SSOxl p1 PFV8 Wpip 11lA�6PYB T,PKE wW aWLM� OID IRti �Y�HHxNw4 I IRwWFA IOf METHCLM BNSF HAIL LM AZUSA CT.' 7M ST. I I ST. I ma.xc-�i I SHEET 3 i Y, I SHEET r� FHJ 1 — — �— e-n-i_BT.--- Fi I Nnr<s sae e�ee� Htffie�* TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20105 IN THE CON WOW ClICA"UNGA, COUNTY OF SAN a I avumnrs ru lwrwue Pmius�so� FlWAMINO. STATE`-' RQMW'IQi, it r ... ; !•r . - 11 GS9 wPaml nmAwF] __ _ � usarnrm [rani ' 41 / i I - wmes[mxwwv J [ Mmm.rl . N 4 l]�025 ., • 1.1 l+i � PFIFIlII�MM I ryO+znr/aN Y �I i. `C PflCP.lfle. � �� • . L� THE NNE - • r ¢cmonon laver € \ �� .�' •II- , {.; [) f , ! [ nmri �Fclars if u FAV.IDaN•AL 1 LL p F `� / u[vas ua rtn¢mv4 i � i� e _ 1r 'r .vwssvwos[ I � � J I �\\ h� •\ . �I•avvEu I,.I 1 f / _REikPOFA NC 6FRi 1 ii 1 • ..I 1 _____ _ - _ •. is �\. \ � Of �I.• I' [ EI, ' [ I J _•_______ } i [ IiY LbS1 ally T. tY� 1 i art a v•mrzn s�s�rz i 0a LLI a � 3 J U Z 0 , O C7 w APR& All i CG-02 m.zai.a i TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20105 W THE CITY PAWCH0 CUCAWNG4 COUMYOF SAN BERWVmINO. STATE OF ORtM B[LY 19BYSAiW V VA�RLI]KNMI W YMCfLY.V lBI l W16VYS IP, G/QS 996 N.11%1 W1NA6B i43WFeOtOR SEE SNEER aYva°Im ffiWGfP / fl3tmnx¢BI ------------- T FER36EM.66l49 Y�SamPY�.,r�•: WLMYiE 63Ub _ _ _�O�=OfOSWC1EO1 -42bll� Y4E M FEET SECTION" IS.YIQfl I�PN^�I PARCELS. PANO,1 37 PAL lnR TRACTNOi LIFO MGZC RES WPUlE F%ISIINGZONW FtAHE lA1tES SPECUICRAN ' I. j I.. I �:,B.WVA.44W,im,9dE ,I RRB,MJMI[R69TSOOR6LNR 11F WERILLl. L43R4tBQ Il ,, RENW.wER iiI I' SEBMM/➢X.xL ' /a SCW[Ct1O4 SlbW dylgS RG10,4W� /' IYmmRn IK FSm.3aTn] a �uo3m •.� ' I 6..s3 u.l M �__Y �..m SEOTION" '.e'.� TEew.owvx wLErTwmt a SECTION" u` SEC11ON i p U iI J z O s�9 6 I? C I! UUM019 i i a.'" w nrRu � All I CG-03 RESOLUTION NO. 17-61 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20105, A SUBDIVISION OF A PROPERTY OF ABOUT 82 ACRES INTO FIVE (5) PARCELS LOCATED WITHIN THE EMPIRE LAKES SPECIFIC PLAN, PLANNING AREA 1, NORTH OF 6TH STREET, SOUTH OF THE METROLINK/BNSF RAIL LINE, WEST OF MILLIKEN AVENUE, AND EAST OF UTICA/CLEVELAND AVENUES; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF -APN: 0209-272-20. A. Recitals. 1. Lewis Management Corp. filed an application for the approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 20105, 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 14th day of June, 2017 the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing on June 14, 2017, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to a property of 160 acres that was formerly developed with the privately owned and operated Empire Lakes Golf Course located in the Empire Lakes Specific Plan; and b. The City Council approved amendments to the General Plan, Specific Plan, and Development Code (related files: General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115) for the purpose of enabling the applicant to develop a new mixed use and transit -oriented project ("Empire Lakes/The Resort"); and C. The Specific Plan has an overall area of 347 acres and is generally bound by 4th Street to the south, Milliken Avenue to the east, Cleveland Avenue and Utica Avenue to the west, and 8th Street and the BNSF/Metrolink rail line to the north. The subject property is generally located at the center of the Specific Plan. Both are bisected into south and north halves by 6th Street; and E3—Pg17 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-61 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20105 — LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP. JUNE 14, 2017 Page 2 d. The specific location of the project site is the northern half of the overall subject property; and e. The project site consists of one (1) parcel with a combined area of about 82 acres. It has street frontage of about 895 feet along 6th Street. The site also has street frontage of about 165 feet at the intersection of 7th Street and Cleveland Avenue, and 35 feet at the intersection of 7th Street and Anaheim Street. Frontage along the BNSF/Metrolink rail line is about 1,330 feet in length. The north -south dimension of the site is about 2,500 feet; and f. To the south of the project site is the south half of the former private golf course and an industrial building. To the north are industrial buildings. To the east are apartment complexes, offices, and a Metrolink Station parking lot. To the west are industrial buildings and utility facilities operated by Southern California Edison (SCE) and Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD); and g. The subject property and all properties to the north, east, and west are within the Empire Lakes Specific Plan which is divided into "Planning Areas". The property and the property to the south is in Planning Area 1. The properties to the east are in Planning Areas 9 and 10 while the properties to the west are in General Industrial (GI) District and Planning Area 11. To the properties to the north are in Minimum Impact/Heavy Industrial (MI/HI) District; and h. The applicant proposes to subdivide the project site into five (5) parcels. No building construction is proposed in conjunction with this tentative tract map; and i. The parcels will be sold to various developers who will construct the single- and multi -family residential units and non-residential buildings within Empire Lakes/The Resort; j. The entitlement applications for the various components of the overall project will be submitted by each developer separately for review and action by the City at a later date. Development within all parcels will be governed by the technical and design standards/guidelines described in the Empire Lakes Specific Plan. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That the tentative tract map is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and the Empire Lakes Specific Plan. The proposed project is to subdivide the project site into multiple parcels which will be sold to allow the construction of single- and multi -family residential units and non-residential buildings consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and intent of the Empire Lakes Specific Plan; and b. The design or improvements of the tentative tract map is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and the Empire Lakes Specific Plan. The proposed project is only to subdivide the project site into five (5) parcels. No building construction is proposed in conjunction with this tentative tract map; and C. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed. The individual entitlement applications for the various components of the overall project will be E3—Pg18 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-61 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20105 — LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP. JUNE 14, 2017 Page 3 submitted by developers separately for review and action by the City at a later date. Development within all parcels will be governed by the technical and design standards/guidelines described in the Empire Lakes Specific Plan; and d. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat. The proposed project is only for the subdivision of the project site into multiple parcels. No building construction is proposed in conjunction with this tentative tract map. Mitigation measures described in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for Empire Lakes/The Resort will be implemented during the construction and operation of the project; and e. The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems. The proposed project is only for the subdivision of the project site into multiple parcels. No building construction is proposed in conjunction with this tentative tract map. Mitigation measures described in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for Empire Lakes/The Resort will be implemented during the construction and operation of the project; and f. 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. Easements for access through or use of the property within the project will be governed by local and State regulations and applicable technical and design standards/guidelines described in the Empire Lakes Specific Plan. 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), the City certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on May 18, 2016 (SCH No. 2015041083) in connection with the City's approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project as there have been a) no substantial changes proposed to the project that indicate new or more severe impacts on the environment; b) no substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under which the project was previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts; c) no new important information shows the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered; and d) no additional mitigation measures are now feasible to reduce impacts or different mitigation measures can be imposed to substantially reduce impacts. b. The Planning Commission finds, in connection with Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20073, 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 previously certified EIR. The application is the subdivision of the project site into five (5) parcels. The parcels will be sold to enable the future construction of the overall project. Staff further finds that the project will not have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previously certified EIR, not have more severe effects than previously analyzed, and that E3—Pg19 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-61 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20105 — LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP. JUNE 14, 2017 Page 4 additional or different mitigation measures are not required to reduce the impacts of the project to a level of less than significant. No building construction is proposed in conjunction with this tentative tract map. Development of the project will be governed by the technical and design standards/guidelines described in the Empire Lakes Specific Plan C. Based on these findings and all evidence in the record, the Planning Commission concurs with the staff determination that no additional environmental review is required pursuant to CEQA in connection with the City's consideration of the Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20105. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3 and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Department 1) All future entitlement applications for the various components of the overall project that will be submitted separately for review and action by the City shall be governed by the Empire Lakes Specific Plan. 2) Prior to the recordation of the final map, a) a community facilities district (CFD) shall be created for the financing of construction, operation, and maintenance of public improvements and facilities, and public services within the overall project, and/or b) the project shall annex into any existing special districts including, but not limited to, the applicable park, landscape maintenance, and street light maintenance districts, and/or c) funded through the Home Owners or Property Owners Association to the satisfaction of the Deputy City Manager/Administrative Services or their designee. 3) Prior to the recordation of a final map that includes a subdivision involving more than 500 dwelling units, the property owner/developer shall demonstrate compliance with applicable requirements of SB 221 (Government Code Section 66473.7(b)(2)) in order to demonstrate the availability of an adequate and reliable water supply. 4) Prior to the recordation of the final map, the property owner/developer shall dedicate land, pay in -lieu fees, or a combination of both for the provision of neighborhood and community parks for recreational purposes. Land to satisfy dedication requirements shall be conveyed to the City at the time of recordation of the final map. In lieu fees shall be paid to the City prior to the issuance of building permits. The provision of on -site private open space and recreational facilities may be credited against the parkland dedication and/or fee requirement at the discretion of the Planning Commission provided that the standards outlined in the Municipal Code are met. E3—Pg20 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-61 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20105 — LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP. JUNE 14, 2017 Page 5 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2017. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA M. 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 14th day of June, 2017, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: E3—Pg21 Conditions of Approval Community Development Department Project#: SUBTT20105 Project Name: TT 5 PARCEL /// EMPIRE LAKES/THE RESORT Location: -- - 020927220-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT; Planning Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. Approval is for the subdivision of a property of about Empire Lakes Specific Plan, Planning Area 1, Metrolink/BNSF rail line, west of Milliken Avenue, 0209-272-20. 82 acres into five (5) parcels located within the located north of 6th Street, south of the and east of Utica/Cleveland Avenues - APN: Standard Conditions of Approval 2. 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. 3. 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 nol required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect. 4. This tentative tract map or tentative parcel map shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, unless a complete final map is filed with the Engineering Services Department within 3 years from the date of the approval. Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. All frontage improvements along The Vine (including the temporary access dedication 300 feet north of 6th Street), 4th Street, and 6th Street will be conditioned on the first development within the Empire Lakes (The Resort) specific plan area. 2. Execute a CFD agreement prior to any building permits. The City will not take ownership of any improvements without a funded CFD. Standard Conditions of Approval 3. 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. Printed: 6/6/2017 v .CityofRC.us E3—Pg22 Project#: SUBTT20105 Project Name: TT 5 PARCEL N EMPIRE LAKES/THE RESORT Location: -- - 020927220-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 4. Rights -of -way and easements shall be dedicated to the City for all interior public streets, community trails, public paseos, public landscape areas, street trees, traffic signal encroachment and maintenance, and public drainage facilities as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. Private easements for non-public facilities (cross -lot drainage, local feeder trails, etc.) shall be reserved as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. 5. 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: 6. Private drainage easements for cross -lot drainage shall be provided and shall be delineated or noted on the final map. 7. Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per the Empire Lakes Specific Plan, City Standards and the CFD agreement. 8. Dedication shall be made of the following rights -of -way on the perimeter streets (measured from street centerline): 60 feet on 6th Street 41 feet on The Vine 9. All existing easements lying within future rights -of -way shall be quit -claimed or delineated on the final map. And subject to approval by the City Engineer. 10. An irrevocable offer of dedication for roadway purposes shall be made for the private streets. 11. Easements for public sidewalks placed outside the public right-of-way shall be dedicated to the City. 12. Reciprocal access easements shall be provided ensuring access to all parcels by CC&Rs or by deeds and shall be recorded concurrently with the map or prior to the issuance of Building Permits, where no map is involved. 13. 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. 14. Public storm drain easements shall be graded to convey overflows in the event of a blockage in a sump catch basin on the public street, and provisions made to pass through walls. 15. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. Pdnled: 6/6/2017 www.CilyofRC.us Page 2 of 5 E3—Pg23 Project #: SUBTT20105 Project Name: TT 5 PARCEL /// EMPIRE LAKES/THE RESORT Location: — - 020927220-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. - Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 16. 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. 17. Permits shall be obtained from the following agencies for work within their right of way: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 1. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the precise grading and drainage plan shall follow the format provided in the City of Rancho Cucamonga handout "Information for Grading Plans and Permit". 2. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with current adopted California Building Code and/or the California Residential Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The Grading and Drainage Plan(s) shall be in substantial conformance with the approved conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan. 3. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified Engineer licensed by the State of California to perform such work. Two copies will be provided at grading and drainage plan submittal for review. Plans shall implement design recommendations per said report. 4. The final Grading and Drainage Plan, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be completed, submitted, and approved by the Building and Safety Official prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. A separate Grading and Drainage Plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and wet signed by a California licensed Civil Engineer prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit. 6. The applicant shall comply with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Dust Control Measures and place a dust control sign on the project site prior to the issuance of a grading permit. All dust control sign (s) shall be located outside of the public right of way. 7. If a Rough Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit are submitted to the Building and Safety Official for review, the rough grading plan shall be a separate plan submittal and permit from Precise Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit. 6. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall obtain written permission from the adjacent property owner(s) to construct wall(s) on property line(s) or provide a detail(s) showing the perimeter wall(s) to be constructed offset from the property line. 9. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the grading plan shall show that all manufactured slopes shall be a minimum 2-foot offset from the public right of way, permitted line, or the adjacent private property. All slope offsets shall meet the requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. 10. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the grading and drainage plan shall show the maximum parking stall gradient at 5 percent. Accessibility parking stall grades shall be constructed per the, current adopted California Building Code. Printed: 6/6/2017 www•CltyofRC.us Page 3 of 6 E3—Pg24 Project #: SUBTT20105 Project Name: TT 5 PARCEL /// EMPIRE LAKES/THE RESORT Location: -- - 020927220-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 11. 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. 12. The final grading and drainage plan shall show existing topography a minimum of 100-feet beyond project boundary. 13. This project shall comply with the accessibility requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. 14. 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. 15. 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. 16.It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off -site drainage easements prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 17.It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off -site drainage acceptance easements(s) from adjacent downstream property owner(s) or discharge flows in a natural condition (concentrated flows are not accepted) and shall provide the Building and Safety Official a drainage study showing the proposed flows do not exceed the existing flows prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit. 18. Flow lines steeper than 6 percent could be erosive. The applicant shall provide hard lined gutters and swales where concentrated flows exceed 3fps, and anywhere that flow lines exceed 10 percent. This shall be shown on the grading and drainage plan prior to issuance of a grading permit. Pdnted: 616/2017 www.CityofRC.US Page 4 of 5 E3—Pg25 Project#: SUBTT20105 Project Name: TT 5 PARCEL N EMPIRE LAKES/THE RESORT Location: -- - 020927220-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 19. Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the latest adopted California Plumbing Code. Private storm drain improvements shall be shown on the grading and drainage plan. 20. Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WQMP shall include a copy of the project Conditions of Approval. 21. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall obtain a Waste Discharge Identification Number (WDID). The WDID number shall also be shown on the WQMP Site and Drainage Plan document. 22. 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. 23. 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). Al 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. www.CityofRC.us PrinteU: 816/2017 Page 5 of 5 E3—Pg26 STAFF REPORT DATE: June 14, 2017 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Candyce Burnett, City Plann r i INITIATED BY: Dominick Perez, Associate Planner SUBJECT: TIME EXTENSION DRC2017-00430 - GOLDEN MEADOWLAND, LLC. AND RANCH HAVEN, LLC. -A request for a fourth 1-year time extension fora previously approved tentative tract map (Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072) to subdivide 150.79 acres into 358 lots in the Low (2-4 dwelling units per acre) Residential District, with an average density of 2.3 dwelling units per acre for the entire project, in the Upper Etiwanda Neighborhood of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, located at northeast corner of Wilson Avenue and Etiwanda Avenue. APN: 1087-081-12, and 19 through 24. Staff has found the project to be within the scope of the project covered by a prior Environmental Impact Report certified by City Council in June 16, 2004 by Resolution 04-204 and does not raise or create new environmental impacts not already considered in the Environmental Impact Report. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Time Extension DRC2017-00430 by adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval with conditions. BACKGROUND: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072, with the recommendation of approval by the Planning Commission, was initially approved by the City Council on June 16, 2004. Subsequently, this map went through a series of discretionary time extension requests and automatic time extensions granted through Senate and Assembly Bills, as shown in the table below. The most recent Time Extension (DRC2016-00356), which was granted by the Planning Commission for an extension of 1 year to the approval period of this map, changed the expiration date to June 16, 2017. Approving Authority Approval/Extension Type Approval Period Approval Date Expiration Date City Council Tentative Tract Map Approval 3 Years June 16, 2004 June 16, 2007 Planning Commission Time Extension 1 Year June 13, 2007 June 16, 2008 Planning Commission Time Extension 1 Year May 28, 2008 June 16, 2009 Senate Bill 1185 Automatic Extension 1 Year June 16, 2009 June 16, 2010 Assembly Bill 333 Automatic Extension 2 Years June 16, 2010 June 16, 2012 Assembly Bill 208 Automatic Extension 2 Years June 16, 2012 June 16, 2014 Assembly Bill 116 Automatic Extension 2 Years June 16, 2014 June 16, 2016 Planning Commission Time Extension 1 Year June 22, 2016 June 16, 2017 Planning Commission Time Extension 1 Year 'June 14, 2017 "June 16. 2018 "Projected dates to be determined. E4—Pgl PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2017-00430 - GOLDEN MEADOWLAND, LLC. AND RANCH HAVEN, LLC. June 14, 2017 Page 2 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: The site generally slopes from north to south at approximately 6 percent gradient and currently contains the remains of a foundation from a residential structure, remnants of low stonewalls, and irrigation flumes. The site is otherwise undeveloped and dominated by a variety of native vegetation including California Buckwheat White Sage, White Sage, Scalebroom Scrub, and Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub, and a variety of non-native vegetation. There are single-family residential homes located to the west and south of the site. A portion of the property to the south contains a Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD) Water Treatment facility. There is an approved Tentative Tract Map (SUBTT14749) for 269 single-family lots for the undeveloped property to the north. The undeveloped property to the east is currently in review for (i) a General Plan Amendment (DRC2016-00167) to change the land use designation from Very Low Residential to Low Residential, (ii) a Specific Plan Amendment (DRC2016-00168) to change the zoning district from Very Low Residential (VL) District to Low Residential (L) District, and (iii) a Tentative Tract Map (SUBTT19992) for a proposed subdivision to create 113 single-family residential lots. The site is divided generally from southwest to northeast by the Etiwanda Avenue Fault Scarp. Land Use General Plan Zoning Site Vacant Low Residential and Very Low (VL) and Low (L) Very Low Residentia13 Residential Districts2,3 Power line corridor and Utility Corridor and Utility Corridor (UC) District and North vacant land Very Low Residential Very Low (VL) Residential District Cucamonga Valley Very Low (VL) Residential South Water District (CVWD) Very Low Residential District' facility and vacant land East Vacant Low Residential Very Low (VL) Residential District2 West Single-family residences Low Residential Low L Residential District2 1 - Etiwanda Specific Plan; 2 — Etiwanda North Specific Plan; 3 — the land use designations and zoning are divided by the Etiwanda Avenue Scarp of the Red Hill Fault Zone ANALYSIS: A. Subdivision Mao: On January 6, 1999, the City Council amended the City's Subdivision Ordinance to establish a 3-year initial approval period for tract and parcel maps (increased from 2 years previously). The amendment also allows the Planning Commission to grant time extensions in 12-month increments for up to an additional 5 years (a maximum of 8 years from the original time approval), which is the maximum allowed under the State Subdivision Map Act Section 66452.69 (e). This application involves a fourth, 1-year time extension request, which would set the expiration date to June 16, 2018. Including the previously mentioned Senate and Assembly Bills that accounted for 7 years of automatic extensions, the maximum approval period of this project would be up to 15 years from the date of approval (final expiration on June 16, 2019). B. Environmental Assessment: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQK) and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City certified an Environmental Impact Report on June 16, 2004 in connection with the City's approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072. 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 E4—Pg2 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2017-00430 - GOLDEN MEADOWLAND, LLC. AND RANCH HAVEN, LLC. June 14, 2017 Page 3 the circumstances under which the project was previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts; or (iii) new important information shows the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered; or (iv) additional mitigation measures are now feasible to reduce impacts or different mitigation measures can be imposed to substantially reduce impacts. Staff has evaluated the Time Extension DRC2017-00430 and concludes that substantial changes to the project or the circumstances surrounding the project have not occurred which would create new or more severe impacts than those evaluated in the previously certified EIR. The proposal only involves a request to extend the approval period of a previously approved Tentative Tract Map. The proposal does not involve any changes or modifications to the design of the previously approved subdivision. Staff further finds that the project will not have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previously certified EIR, not have more severe effects than previously analyzed, and that additional or different mitigation measures are not required to reduce the impacts of the project to a level of less than significant. The Southern California Biological Resources Director for ESA, Steve Nelson, submitted a memorandum on June 5, 2017, stating the site conditions remain consistent with previous site assessments (Exhibit F). The site was surveyed prior to October 2003 for biological resources in preparation of the EIR. The site was found to contain California Buckwheat - White Sage (44.1 acres), White Sage (82.5 acres) Scalebroom Scrub (11.2-acres), and other non-native and disturbed areas that total 12.2-acres. Overall, the site was found to contain 147.7-acres of various forms of Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage scrub for which the project will be required to obtain off -site mitigation lands. Although focused surveys were performed for Sensitive Wildlife Species, including the San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat and the Coastal California Gnatcatcher, the results of all such surveys were negative. Mr. Nelson confirmed via a memorandum, received on June 5, 2017, that the site conditions remained consistent with those previously assessed. The letter also concludes, based on observations made in our recent site visit, no substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under which the project was previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts and no new important information shows the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered, and that, no additional mitigation measures are now feasible to reduce impacts or different mitigation measures can be imposed to substantially reduce impacts. Therefore, pursuant to CEQA, staff recommends that the Planning Commission concur with the staff determination that no additional environmental review is required in connection with the City's consideration of the Time Extension DRC2017-00430. FISCAL IMPACT: The project site currently is assessed an annual property tax. A percentage of this annual tax is shared with the City. The proposed development will increase the value of the project site and the City's annual share of the property tax will increase accordingly. The project proponent also will be responsible for paying one-time impact fees. These fees are intended to address the increased demand for City services due to the proposed project. The following types of services that these impact fees would support include the following: library services, transportation infrastructure, drainage infrastructure, animal services, police, parks, and community and recreation services. E4—Pg3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2017-00430 - GOLDEN MEADOWLAND, LLC. AND RANCH HAVEN, LLC. June 14, 2017 Page 4 CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing with a regular size legal advertisement in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site. To date, no written comments or phone calls have been received regarding the project notifications. EXHIBITS: Exhibit A - Aerial Photo Exhibit B - Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072 Exhibit C - Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072 Staff Report (June 16, 2004) Exhibit D - Resolution of Approval with Conditions for SUBTT16072 (June 16, 2004) Exhibit E - Resolution of Approval for Time Extension DRC2016-00356 (June 22, 2016) Exhibit F - June 5, 2017, Memorandum from ESA Draft Resolution of Approval for Time Extension DRC2017-00430 CB:DP/jy E4—Pg4 Aerial Photo Time Extension DRC2017-00430 EXHIBIT A E4-PgS — ^ a 1 a a o D ` N N ii ji •�� �Il O obP man OOmF ov $y 11111 II., NOS CC V'.Tt� O TIDM P f+P� O N^P hP.. yy{ N N N S O NNN O NNN D NNN NNN h 3 iDo �rc 3 %10 �z f X %W 2X ZXW r rl QI- Q�`71 oA ; m N Qo 0 O:> � —Iozzi U LL - awOw Q Q 0 Q 2� W F— ¢ Q O ~ Z O m U— ZQ OLL ap o 0� Q� O4 Q O� U �O �z LL � o OU O H CO EXHIBIT B E4—Pg6 T H E C I T Y O F - r RANC110 CUCANONGA Staff Report DATE: June 16, 2004 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Larry Henderson AICP, Principal Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND ANNEXATION DRC2002-00865 - RICHLAND PINEHURST INC. - A proposed Annexation of 160.0 acres of land into the City of Rancho Cucamonga, located within the Etiwanda North Specific Plan on the north side of Wilson Avenue between Etiwanda Avenue and East Avenue - APN: 0225-083-01, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 and 20. Related Files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072, Tree Removal Permit DRC2003-00461, and Development Agreement DRC2002-00156. CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16072 - RICHLAND PINEHURST INC. - The proposed residential subdivision of approximately 150.8 acres into 359 lots in the Low (2-4 dwelling units per acre) and Very -Low (.1-2 dwelling units per acre) Residential Districts, with an average density of 2.3 dwelling units per acre for the entire project, in the Upper Etiwanda Neighborhood of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, located on the north side of Wilson Avenue between Etiwanda Avenue and East Avenue - APN: 0225-083-01,12,13,15,16 and 20. Related Files: Development Agreement DRC2001-00156; Annexation DRC2002-00865, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2003-00461. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DRC2002-00156 - RICHLAND PINEHURST INC. - A proposed Development Agreement to address specific conditions of development and annexation for 150.8 acres of land located on the north side of Wilson Avenue between Etiwanda Avenue and East Avenue - APN: 0225-083-01, 12, 13, 15, 16 and 20. Related Files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072, Annexation DRC2002-00865, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2002-00461. EXHIBIT C E4—Pg7 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT RICHLAND-PINEHURST ANNEXATION DRC2002-00865, SUBTT16072 AND DRC2002-00156 June 16, 2004 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council take the following actions in the order presented: A. Approve the Resolution certifying the Final EIR for SUBTT16072, Development Agreement DRC2002-00156, and Annexation DRC2003-00865; B. Approve the Resolution to initiate proceedings for the annexation of 160 acres of land generally located on the north side of Wilson Avenue between Etiwanda Avenue and East Avenue. C. Deny the Appeal to the Planning Commission's decision to approve Tentative Tract Map No. 16072, as submitted by Craig A. Sherman, attorney for the Spirit of the Sage Council and the Habitat Trust for Wildlife, Inc., dated May 19, 2004, and approve Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072. D. Adopt the Ordinance to enter into Development Agreement DRC2002-00156, a Development Agreement between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and Richland Pinehurst for the purpose of developing an approximate 150.8-acre site with up to 359 residential lots. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: A. Project Summary The proposed project is located within the Upper Etiwanda Neighborhood of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan (Exhibit "A" - Regional Map). The Etiwanda Avenue Scarp of the Red Hill Fault divides the 150.8 acre site, with the area north of fault designated Very Low Residential and the area south of the fault designated Low Residential. The combined net density of the project is 2.93 dwelling units per acre, and the overall gross density of the project is 2.38 dwelling units per acre. The minimum lot area within the project is 8,400 square feet with an average lot size of approximately 11,400 square feet (Exhibit "B" - Site Plan). The Specific Plan identifies a Community Trail along the Fault Zone, connecting the Etiwanda Avenue Community Trail and the Regional Trail within the Southern California Edison (SCE) corridor north of the site. The internal street pattern has been designed following the naturally trending terrain, which slopes at approximately 6 percent northwest to southeast. Access to the site is provided by two street intersections on Etiwanda Avenue, and one each on East Avenue and Wilson Avenue. All perimeter streets will require some level of improvement with development of the project, including the south side of Wilson Avenue, which includes a Community Trail within the Metropolitan (MWD) strict right-of-way. The project will require flood protection improvements, including the 25th Street Diversion Channel along the north boundary of the project, as well as two on -site interim Detention Basins. The proposed storm drain improvements are individual components of the Etiwanda/San Sevaine Area 3 Master Plan of Storm Drain facilities. The proposed improvements would protect the site from upstream flows and would result in a modification of the current Federal Emergency Managements Agency (FEMA) and Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) designation of Zone D ("area of undetermined flood hazard") to "no significant flood hazard." E4—Pg8 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT RICHLAND-PINEHURST ANNEXATION DRC2002-00865, SUBTT16072 AND DRC2002-00156 June 16, 2004 Page 3 B. Summary of Planning Commission Meeting on May 12, 2004 Larry Henderson, Principal Planner, presented the staff report and suggested revisions to the resolution and the Development Agreement to include a statement that private landscape maintenance be the responsibility of a Homeowners Association or the formation of a new Landscape Maintenance District and to delete the requirement for a gated community. He stated staff would like to add Engineering Conditions to require the applicant to provide written approval from Metropolitan Water District for any activity within Metropolitan's fee property prior to any improvements to Wilson Avenue and clarified the Mitigation Measures to indicate that the property owner could transfer mitigation land to any qualified conservation entity approved by the City or to the County of San Bernardino Special Districts. Commissioner Fletcher observed the Site Plan shows cul-de-sac streets and not through streets. Mr. Henderson replied they were trying to limit access to Etiwanda Avenue and no lots are to front onto Etiwanda Avenue. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated that typically better neighborhoods are not along long streets, and that larger lots at the end of cul-de-sacs often become prime lots. Craig Sherman, Attorney representing Spirit of the Sage Council, presented two alternate site plans that he felt were environmentally superior and were more sensitive to the earthquake fault that runs through the property. Mr. Sherman indicated that generally Development Agreements included a provision allowing amendment to the Agreement by the City Planning Department. He believed such a provision is an attempt to rewrite the legislation under the Government Code that allows the City to enact Development Agreements. He also indicated concern about a number of projects coming forward piecemeal with respect to the General Plan Amendments and Specific Plan Amendments. With respect to alternatives submitted by Mr. Sherman, Kevin Ennis, Assistant City Attorney, said that the EIR discussed three alternatives to the project: 1) a no project alternative; 2) a less intensive development alternative; and 3) an alternative that would preserve more of the Riversidian Sage Scrub. Mr. Ennis indicated that the EIR and the Findings in the Resolution state why those particular alternatives do not satisfy the objectives of the project or are not feasible. With respect to the Development Agreement and the assertion that it provides an opportunity for staff to amend the Agreement in contravention to State law, he stated the Development Agreement provides for the opportunity for staff and the developer to enter into implementing agreements, but those agreements must be found consistent with the Development Agreement. He said the staff is not authorized to enter into agreements that are inconsistent with or modify or undercut the basic provisions of the Development Agreement. With regards to piecemeal projects, Mr. Ennis stated that in the EIR for this project and for another project on the agenda (Henderson Creek Properties), there is a discussion about the other projects occurring in the vicinity so as to consider the cumulative impacts of this project as well as the other projects so there is an acknowledgement and an interrelationship between all of the projects in terms of environmental impacts. The tentative tract map, associated development agreement, and annexation for the project were reviewed and approved at the May 12, 2004, Planning Commission meeting. E4—Pg9 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT RICHLAND-PINEHURST ANNEXATION DRC2002-00865, SUBTT16072 AND DRC2002-00156 June 16, 2004 Page 4 C. Project Analysis Tentative Tract Map 16072 - The proposed project is located within the Upper Etiwanda Neighborhood of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. The Etiwanda Avenue Scarp of the Red Hill Fault divides the 150.8 acre site, with the area north of the fault designated Very Low Residential and the area south of the fault designated Low Residential. The combined net density of the project is 2.93 dwelling units per acre, and the overall gross density of the project is 2.38 dwelling units per acre. The minimum lot area within the project is 8,400 square feet with an average lot size of approximately 11,400 square feet. The Specific Plan identifies a Community Trail along the Fault Zone, connecting the Etiwanda Avenue Community Trail and the Regional Trail within the Southern California Edison (SCE) corridor north of the site. An Appeal to the Planning Commission approval of the Tentative Tract Map was submitted by Craig A. Sherman, attorney for Spirit of the Sage Council and the Habitat Trust for Wildlife, Inc., dated May 19, 2004. The appeal letter was based on the adequacy of the Environmental Impact Report. A response to this matter is included in Exhibit "E" — Responses to Correspondence. The Development Agreement - The Development Agreement has been prepared in order to address project -specific improvements, fees, and other development standards and expectations for the benefit of the Property Owner and the City. The Development Agreement allows the applicant to identify all improvements and fees that will be required by the City upon Annexation. The Development Agreement has been reviewed by the City Attorney for form and content. The basic points of the Development Agreement are summarized below: 1. Term of the Agreement: 10 years 2. Minor deviations from the Engineering Division standards: a) cul-de-sac design and b) a reduction in the standard centerline radius for a specific internal local street segment. 3. Minor deviations to the Etiwanda North Specific Plan Phasing and Implementation Program: The property owner will construct East Avenue southerly between Wilson Avenue and Banyan Street, in lieu of extending Wilson Avenue easterly to connect to Wardman-Bullock Road. 4. Minor deviations from the Etiwanda/San Sevaine Drainage Policy: With the construction of an interim detention basin to attenuate the developed storm flows from the project. 5. Fees: a) The property owner shall pay a sum totaling $358,000 (based upon $1,000 per unit) for equestrian mitigation purposes; b) The property owner shall pay a sum totaling $2,362,800 ($6,600 per unit) for park purposes (the applicant may request park credit for improvements to the Community Trail that traverses the site within the Fault Zone, in accordance with General Policy); and c) In exchange for the construction of the landscaping improvements on the south side of Wilson Avenue within the MWD right-of- E4—Pg10 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT RICHLAND-PINEHURST ANNEXATION DRC2002-00865, SUBTT16072 AND DRC2002-00156 June 16, 2004 Page 5 way, the property owners shall not be required to pay City Beautification Fee of $0.20 per square foot for residential construction. 6. The project shall be designed in accordance with the. Etiwanda North Specific Plan Development standards. Clarification of the actual boundaries of the Red Hill Fault Zone as determined by the Geotechnical Analysis: The Red Hill Fault Zone is depicted as a Land Use District in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. The fault location and boundary has been refined through further trenching and on -site investigation that was conducted through the preparation of the Geotechnical Evaluation. The Fault Setback Zone, which precludes the development of habitable structures, does allow a portion of the lot area to intersect with the Setback Zone. In each case, a substantial buildable area remains available within the lot. 8. Open Space Transfer Plan: The Property Owners shall transfer to the County of San Bernardino Special Districts OS-1, other qualified conservation entity approved by the City in fee, a minimum of 150-acres of off -site land for permanent open space and habitat preservation; along with funding in an amount to be determined by County of San Bernardino Special Districts (or other conservation entity), to provide for long-term maintenance of said land. The preferred location of the off -site land is in the environment surrounding the North Etiwanda Preserve in the CITY Sphere of Influence, other properties may be considered based the review of appropriate Biological Habitat Assessments and concurrence of the City Planner. The transfer and funding shall occur prior to recording of the first final map of the Project. 9. The Development Agreement establishes timeframes for completion of key infrastructure and community amenities, including the following: a) the perimeter landscaping and the Upper Etiwanda Neighborhood Monumentation, as well as the Community Trail Improvements within the Fault Zone, will be completed prior to release of occupancy of the 150th dwelling (a small segment of the Etiwanda Avenue frontage north of the Fault Zone must be complete prior to release of occupancy of the 250th dwelling); b) all perimeter street improvements shall be completed prior to release of occupancy of the first dwelling within the project, including Wilson Avenue, Etiwanda Avenue, and East Avenue; and, c) all master plan storm drain improvements will also be completed prior to the release of occupancy for the first dwelling in the project. The Annexation - The proposed Annexation will include the entire 160 acres, which constitutes the southwest quadrant of Section 21, located north of Wilson Avenue between Etiwanda Avenue and East Avenue. The 10 acres at the corner of Wilson Avenue and East Avenue will require the review and approval of a separate Tentative Tract Map at a future time after the annexation process has been completed. City staff will forward the annexation application and all associated documentation to the Local Agency Formation Commission following City Council Certification of the EIR and approval of the project. E4—Pg11 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT RICHLAND-PINEHURST ANNEXATION DRC2002-00865, SUBTT16072 AND DRC2002-00156 June 16, 2004 Page 6 CORRESPONDENCE: Additional comments were sent via e-mail to the Planning Department, after the Planning Commission meeting of May 12, 2004 was called to order (after 7PM). Therefore the information is not part of the public record for the purposes of the Planning Commission hearing. Although the documents indicate they were either faxed or hand delivered, they were not, and because of its large size, 66 pages, it was conveyed under separate cover. A letter from the United States Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service was received on May 18, 2004. Responses to these comments are contained in Exhibit "E." CONCLUSION: Staff recommends that City Council 1) Approve the Resolution certifying the Final EIR for SUBTT16072, Development Agreement DRC2002-00156, and Annexation DRC2003- 00865; 2) Approve the Resolution permitting the City to initiate proceedings for the annexation of 160 acres of land generally located on the north side of Wilson Avenue between Etiwanda Avenue and East Avenue; 3) Deny the Appeal as submitted by Craig A. Sherman, attorney for the Spirit of the Sage Council and the Habitat Trust for Wildlife, Inc., dated May 19, 2004, and approve Tentative Tract Map 16072; and 4) Adopt the Ordinance approving Development Agreement DRC2002-00156 between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and Richland Pinehurst for the purpose of developing an approximate 150.8 acre site with up to 359 residential lots. Respectfully submitted, BB:LH/Is Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Regional Map Exhibit "B" - Site Plan Exhibit "C" - Planning Commission Staff Report Dated May 12, 2004 Exhibit "D" - Planning Commission Minutes dated May 12, 2004 Exhibit "E" - Responses to Correspondence Exhibit "F" - Findings of Fact in Support of Findings For Significant Environmental Effects of the Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map Number 16072 Project and Statement of Overriding Considerations (dated May 6, 2004) Exhibit "G" - Final Conditions of Approval Exhibit "H" - Mitigation Monitoring Checklist Resolution Certifying the Final EIR Resolution Initiating Proceedings For Annexation Resolution Denying Appeal to Approve SUBTT16072 Ordinance Approving Development Agreement E4—Pg12 RESOLUTION NO.04-206 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CAL1FORN1A, DENYINGANAPPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUB7718072 FOR A RESIDENTIAL. SUBDIVISION OF 358 LOTS ON APPROXIMATELY 150.8 ACRES OF LAND IN THE LOW (2-4 DWELLING UNITS- PER ACRE) AND VERY LOW 02 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS OF THE ETIWANDA NORTH SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED ONTHE NORTH SIDE OF WILSON AVENUE BETWEEN ETIWANDA AVENUE AND EAST AVENUE; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF — APN: 0225-083.01,12,13,15,16 AND2% AND APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SU8TT16072 FOR A RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION OF358 LOTS ON APPROXIMATELY 1$0.6 ACRES OF LAND IN THE LOW (2^4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) AND VERY LOW (,12 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS OF THE ETIWANDA NORTH SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF WILSON AVENUE BETWEEN ETIWANDA AVENUE AND EAST AVENUE; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORTTHEREOF_APN: 0225483-01, 12,13,15.16 AND 20, A. RECITALS, 1. Richland Pinehurst, Inc. (the "Appiicanth seeks approval of a series of actions related to the annexation of land from unincorporated San Bemardino County Into the City of Rancho Cucamonga, the approval of Tentative Traci Map 81.1871*16072, and associated Development Agreement. The actions also Include the development Of 358 single-family housing units on approximately 150.8 acres. The total area to be annexed Is approximately 160 acres. The average density of the development is approzlmately 2.38 dwelling units per gross acre for the entire site, These series of actions and approvals are hereinafter defined in this Resolution as the "Project.' 2. The -Applicant has submitted the following applications rotating to the Project: Annexation DRC2002-00865, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072, and Devetopment Agreement DRC2002-0015o (muecuvwy the ^Project Applications-). These Project Applications. as well as the appeal of ttte Planning Commission's approval of Tentative Tract Map SU13TT16072, constitute the matters involving the Project which are submitted to the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga for decision and action. 3. On May 12. 2004. the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on 6te. Project, and afterthe receipt of public testimony, dosed the hearing on that date. On May 12. 2004, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 04-66. certifying the Final EIR for Purposes of approval of Tentative Tract Map SUSTT10072 and approving Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072. EXHIBIT D E4—Pg13 ,, Resolution No. 04-206 Page 2 of 31 4. On May 19, 2004, Craig A. Sherman, attomeyfor the Spirit of the Sage Council and the Habitat Trust for Wildlife, Inc., filed an appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of Tentative Tract Map 5UBTT16072. S. On June 2, 2004. the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duty noticed public hearing on the Final EIR and the Project, at which fine all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and to present evidence regarding the Final EIR and the Project After the receipt of publictestimony, the City Council continued the public hearing on the Final EIR and the Project to its regularly scheduled meeting of June 16. 2004, 6. On June 16, 2004. the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a continued public hearing on the Final EIR and the Project, at which fire all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and to present evidence regarding the Final EIR and the Project, and after the receipt of public testimony, closed the hearing. 7. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. NOW, THEREFORE, It is hereby four4 delemttrred, and resolved by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga aS fellows: QN ]I This Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A. of this Resolution are true and correct. Eg CTION 2: Based upon the facts and information contained in the record of this Project, the City Council makes the following findings and statements, and takes the following actions, pursuant to the California Environmentaf Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et. WO: a. The City of Rancho Cucamonga, acting as the bad agency. prepared the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Project, induding certain technical appendices (the 'Appendices") to the draft EIR (State Clearinghouse No.2002091053). The Draft EIR was circulated for a45- day public review and comment period from December 2, 2003 through January 21, 2004, Comments were received during that period and written responses were prepared and sent to all persons and entities submitting comments. Those comments and the responses thereto have been Included in the'Final EIR, as have the Appendices to the Draft EIR. Those documents together comprise the Final EIR. b. The City Council finds that tht Final EIR was completed pursuant to CECA, and the State Guidelines for Implementation of CECIA, 14 California Code of Regulations. Section 1500o, et. seq. ("the Guidelines"). By Resolution No. 04.204. the City Council has certified the Final EIR as being in compliance with the requirements of CEOA. E4—Pgl4 Resolution No, 04-206 Page 3 of 31 C. The City Council funds that the Final FIR was presorted to the City Council and that the City Council reviewed and considered the Information In the Final ER and has reached its own conclusions with respect to the Project and as to WI'M& r and how to approve the various components of the Project approvals. d. The City Council finds that the Final EIR represents the independent judgment of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and adequately addresses the impacts of the Project and Imposes appropriate mitigation measures for the Project. o. Public Resources Code Section 21081 provides that no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an environmental impact report has been completed which identifies one or more significant environmental effects unless the public agency makes one or more of the following findings with respect to each significant effect: I. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project, which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental effects thereof as Identified in the Competed environmental impact report. il. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and such changes have been adopted by such agency or can and should be adopted bysuch other agency. III. Specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives Identified in the environmental impact report. f. The City Council finds, based upon the Initial Study, the Final EIR, public comments, publicagency comments, and the entire record before It that the PrOject may create significant Impacts in the areas of Geology and Solis, Blological Resources, TraneporiagorgTraffic, Air Quality, Noise,. Aesthetics, Cultural Resources, and Public Services and utilities. However, changes or alterations have been required In, or incorporated Into the Project which will mitigate. and In some cases, avoid the significant Impacts. The specific changes and albrations required, and a brief explanatim of the rationale far the nndkW with regard to each impact, arc contained in the'CEQA Findings" for the Project (Exhlbii OF to the June 16, 2004 City Council Staff Report) and are incorporated herein by referenCe. In addition to the rationale and explanation contained in the "CEQA FUWings; the City Council makes the following additional findings regarding the Impacts to the resources and services listed in this paragraph: E4—Pgl5 Resolution No. 04-200 Page 4 of 31 GeoloayandSoils, The Final EIR Identifies that development of the Project wIH expose people and structures to risks associated with seismic hazards, slope Instabiity, and foundation instability. With respect to seismic hazards, this risk arises because of the existence of regional faults located in the area and the existence of the Rwanda Avenue scarp fault that runs northeasterly across the Project site. The risks presented by these faults Include, fault - induced ground rupture, seismically induced $lope Instability, ground lurching, seismically induced settlement, and seismic ground shaking. Mitigation measures are Imposed which require the Applicant to set back structures north of the Etiwanda Avenue Scarp thrust fault by at least 100 feet and to set back all structures south of that fault zone by 50 feet (Mitigation Measure GS-1). All structures within Seismic Zone 4 of the site shall be designed In accordance with the Uniform Building Code and general engineering standards for seismic safety (Mlitigation Measure Gs-2). In addition, graded slopes will be designed to resist seismically induced failures, loose, ccheslonless soils located on the surface of the site shall be removed and property recompacted, and low density native surficial and artificial fills shall be removed and recompacted or exported offsite. (Mitigation Measures GS-3 -- 03-5). Based on these mitigation measures, the City Council finds that the potential for fault4nduoed ground rupture, seismically Induced slope InstabtTdy, ground lurching, and selsrnicalty Induced settlement WO be mitigated to a level of less than significant The City Council finds that even after these mitigation measures, the risks of seismic ground shaking will not be reduced to less than significant levels. With respect to slope Iru tabiilty, graded slopes are proposed on the Project site, with gradients for the slopes to be variable to provide a natural visual appearance, and cut and fill slopes of approximatety40 feet high are proposed to be constructed. Mitigation Measure G" is imposed Much requires additional stabilization measures for potentially unstable graded slopes exceeding 15 feet In halght Based on this mitigation measure, the City Council finds that the potential for slope instability will be mitigated to a level of less than significant With respect to foundation instability, the upper few feet of native soil onsite and uncontrolled fills existing on the sic are pOtentlaUY compressible. Because of variation in grain Giza within alluvial tan deposits on the site, potential collapse Of sell material may result in localized areas. The presence of oversized rocks on the site and the removal of such rocks can result in deficiencies of fill material. Mitigations measures are imposed which require the Applicant to remove and recompaet potentially compressible soils (Mitigation Measure GS-i7, to identify methods for elirninadng the potential for collapsible soils and after construction, to minimize the Infi tration of E4—Pgl6 Resolution No. 04-206 Page S of 31 water into subsurface soils by proper surface drainage (Mitigation Measure GS-8), and to relocate oversize rocks on the Project site during grading operations to reduce the potential deficiency of fill materials (Mitigation Measure GS-9). Based on these mitigation measures, the City Council finds that the potential for foundation instability will be mitigated to a level Of less than significant II. Io Mal Rfrsources, The Final EIR Indicates that prior to the Grand Prix firs of October 2003, that area was previously covered with California Buckwheat -White Sage Scrub (44.1 acres), White Sage Scrub (82.5 acres), Scalebroom Scrub (11.2 acres), non-native grassland (2.1 acres), disturbed and cleared areas (6.0 acres) and ornamental landscaping (4.1 acres). in categorizing the vagetaSon in accordance with the 'Holland System,* the Final EIR identifies Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub (RAFSS) divided into two subgroups: the Edwanda Alluvial Fan Group (171.3 acres), the Prickly Group/Alluvial Chapparal Group (39.6 acres). in addition, the final EIR identifies an area of Omamental Woodland and Disturbed plants (13.8 acres). The proposed Project would result in the loss of approximately 147.7 acres of Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub (RAFS4). In addition, the Final EIR identifies 213 trees that satisfy the Clty's criteria for "heritage trees; 15 sensitive plant specifiers as occurring within the general vicinity of the Project site, and the existence of Plummer s mariposa bly plants (a sensitive spades) on the site. To mitigate impacts for the loss of approximately 147.7 acres of RAFSS, a mitigation measure Is Imposed to require the Applicant to acquire 147.7 acres of land within or now the North Etlwanda Open Space and Habitat Preservation Program (NEOSHPP) area that supports similar RAFSS habitat (Mitigation Measure B-1). In addition, measures are imposed to ensure limits are kept on grading activities, that new landscaping is consistentwilh native landscaping, that lighting is controlled into areas of sensitive wildlife habitat, and that future residents of the project are informed about sensitive wildlife areas and encouraged not to plant invasive plants (Mitigation Measures B-2 — "). To mitigate impacts to common plant species, all 213 heritage trees shall be removed and replaced with native trees at a replacement ratio of one to one (Mitigation Measure B-6). With respect to sensitive plant species, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, focused surveys for Mummer's Mariposa lily shall be conducted by a qualified btdogistfor possible collection and relocation (Mitigation Measure B-7). Based on these mitigation measures, the City Council finds that the impacts to natural plant communities. common plant species and sensitive plant species will be mitigated to a level of leas than significant, E4—Pgl7 Resolution No. 04-Z06 Page 6 of 31 The Final EIR indicates that the site is within the critical habitat of the federally listed endangered San Bernardino kangaroo rat However, protocol surveys were conducted In 2001 and 2002 and revealed no presence of this species on the sm. The site is also within the known range and within designated critical habitat for the federally fisted threatened coastal California gnatcatcher. In addition, species of concern were found on the site which include the Northwestem San Diego pocket mouse, the San Diego desert woodrat, and the Los Angeles little pocket mouse. The site does support nesting habitat for raptor species and suitable habitat for the San Diego homed lizard and orange -throated whiptail (state species of special concern). In addition, 1.13 acres of waters would be affected and drainage courses would be Impacted by the Project. To address these Impacts, a rnitlgation measure is imposed to provide follow-up focus surveys for the San Bernardino kangaroo rat and the coastal California gnatcatcher prlorto issuance of grading pemnits (Mitigation Measures 13-8 and "). A qualified biological monitor will be ors -site during grading to reduce mortality to sensitive species, including rodent species and incidental species (Mitigation Measure B-10). If grading activities occur during active nesting season, a field survey will be conducted to preserve any active nests and the areas around them until the nesting Cycle is complete (Mitigation Measure B-11). With respect to impacts on waters and streambeds, the Applicant shall obtain required pemtlis from the ll.s. Army Corps of Engineers and the California Department of Fish and Game and comply with those permit requirementS (Mitigation Measure B-12). Based on these mitigation measures, the City Council finds that the impacts to sensitive wildlife species, and Jurisdictional areas (waters and streambeds) will be mitigated to a level of less than significance. Ili. jr_anssagrtatlonf'raffic. The Final EIR indicates that the proposed Project will Inmese vehicle trips and impact the Level of Service (LOS) along arterial streets and intersections. LOS levels of "D" or better do not represent a significant traffic Impact, whereas LOS levels of "E" or worse do represent a significant traftic impact. Specifically, the Fined EiR found that Project traffic. together with other anticipated traffic, will likely cause traffic flow to be deficient by experiencing a LOS of "F" during the AM peak hour at the intersections of Ellwanda Avenue at Banyan Street Etiwanda Avenue at Highland Avenue, and East Avenue at Banyan Street. During the PM peak hour, the intersection of Ellwanda Avenue at Banyan Street which will operate at an LOS of OF. At build -out certain intersections in the Immediate area will have LOS levels of "F". Mitigation Measures are imposed to require the Applicant to construct various roadway improvements at certain phases of the Project. For example, during the opening year of the Project the Applicantwill be required to construct Wilson Avenue from Ellwanda Avenue to East Avenue and to make various improvements to East E4—Pgl8 Resolution No, 04-206 Page 7 of 31 Avenue (Mitigation Measurea TT-3—1T-$), The Applicant will also be required to construct ENwanda Avenue from the north project boundary to Golden Prairie Drive at its ultimate hslf section width (Mitigation Measure TT�6). In addition, traffic signals, turn lanes and Other Improvements are required at various intersections In the vicinity of the Project (Mitigation Measures TT•7 and TT-8). Finally, the Applicant will be required to contribute its fair share toward the cost of off -site roadwayirttprovements (TT-1 and TT-2). Based on these mitigation measures, the City Council finds that the impacts of the Project on traffic and circulation will be mitigated to a level of less than significant. iv. Air Qual . The City Council finds, based upon the Initial Study, the Final EIR, public comments, public agency comments, and the entire record before It, that the Project may create significant and unavoidable impacts to air quality. Spedfically, the Final EIR identifies that short-term emissions from construction related activities are likely to exceed the thresholds of significance specified by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). Short-term emissions are caused. by fugitive dust and other particulate matter, exhaust emissions generated by earthmoving activities and operation of grading equipment, emissions generated during building construction as a result of equipment and vehicle operation. electrical consumption, and coating and paint applications, During the building phase of the Project, levels of nitrogen oxide WOO, reactive organic compounds (ROC) and atrrmphadc daily threshorticulateslds, and willlikely end ROC emi etons wnexceed the m�kkeey exceed the recommended SCAQMD quarterly thresholds, thereby resulting In significant ahort4arm air qualNyimpacts. Long-term emissions am caused by motor vehicle emissions and emissions from the consumption of natural gas and electricity, the use of landscape equipment, and the storage and use of consumer products. These emissions exceed the recommended SCAQMD thresholds for No, Carbon Monoxide (CO) and ROC. Mitigation measures for short- term Impacts upon air quality are Bnposed on the Project (Mitigation Measure AQ-1 — AQ-10) which will require various dust control measures, emission control measures and OURS actions. Included in those measures are requirements to limit the treat the site with water or other soil-stablllty, agents, sweep haul roads, suspend grading operations when wind speeds exceed 25 miles per hour, apply chemical soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas, select equipment based on low emission factors, use only low volatility paints and architectural coatings, and implement temporary traffic control during soil transport activities. Mitigation measures for long_ term impacts upon air quality are Imposed on the Project (Mitigation Measure AQ-11—AQ-13) which require the Applicant to participate In E4—Pgl9 Resolution No. 04-206 Page 8 of 31 the cost of off -site traffic signal installation and synchronization through payment of a mitigation fee, equip the residential structures with energy efficient appliances, and coordinate bus routing with transit agencies to determine locations and feasibility of providing bus stop shelters at Applicant's expense. The City Council finds that with Implementation of the recommended measures, shod and long-term emissions will be reduced, and that the Projeot's contribution to regional emission of c 4teria pollutants wiN be minimized. However, the City Council finds that despite the imposition of all these comprehensive mitigation measures, short-term construction emissions (building phase) will exceed SCAOMD's thresholds for ROC and NOx. and that long-term stationary and mobile emissions will exceed applicable thresholds for NOx, CO and ROC, and therefore, would remain significant after mitigation. v. YgM. The Final EIR Identifies the likelihood of short-term impacts on ambient noise levels during construction of the Project. The primary source of construction noise is heavy equipment associated with construction activities, such as trucks, graders, bulldozers, concrete mixers, cranes and portable generators with high levels of sound generation. In addition, the Final EIR identifies the likelihood of long -tern signHlcent noise Impacts on residences proposed on the perimeter of the Project site and adjacent to Eliwanda Avenue, Wilson Avenue, and Fast Avenue. For short-term noise Impacts, mitigation measures are imposed that will require the construction contractors to equip all construction equipment with properly operating and maintained mufflers, implement specific noise reduction measures when construction takes place now existing residences, locate equipment staging areas away from sensitive receptors, and complywith the citys Development Code forhours of construction activity - 6:30 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, with no construction to take place on Sundays or holidays (Mitigation Measures N-1— N-4). To address long -berm impacts to certain residential structures within the Project. sound barters shall he placed at specified locations near Project road Intersections and perimeter street intersections, and residential structures fronting on Etiwands Avenue, Wilson Avenue and East Avenue will have mechanical ventilation so that windows can remain closed, and upgraded windows and other improvements will be installed on said residential structures so that Interior noise levels are reduced to 45 dS CNEL or less (Mitigation Measures Pis — N-6). Based on these mitigation measures, the City Council finds that the short tens and long-term noise Impacts from the Projectwill be mitigated to less than significant levels. E4—Pg20 Resolution No. 04-206 Page 8 of 31 vl, , 71he Final EIR Indloates that implementation of the Proposed residential community may substantially alter the exiating character of the Project aite as web as views of titre San Gabriel Mountains. In addition, the proposed Project and the cumulative etfeotof development in the Projeciviclnitymay parma,xrrtlyafter the visual landscape of the San Gabriel Mountains. To address these Impacts, landscaping and perimeter walls shall be installed, landscaped transitions will be made between developed and the natural un-built environment, a strong landscaped edge will be required along roadways adjacent to the Project, utilities wig be undergrounded where feasible, and trees and structures shall be used to frame and orient views at key locations (Mitigation Measures AES-1 -- AES-5). Based on these mitigation measures, the City Council finds that although the implementation of the above mitigation measures will mitigate visual impacts assoGated with the proposed Project to a level that is less that signifignt, the cumulatva Impact of the ProJect upon aesthetics as well as future development In the Project vicinity will remain eignlfioam and unavoidable. Al. Cultural Ra$R roes. The Final EIR indicates that three archeologfcat sites are within the Project area, It is also likely that prehistoric remains may still be buried at these allies. To mitigate for the potential ions In Native American aroheological resources, the Applicant is required to retain a City -approved archeologist to develop an archaeological mitigation plan and a discovery/treatment plan. These plans will require the monll oring of 50 percent of the excavation activities, the treatment of found material and its recordation, mapping and disposition (Mitigation Measures CR-1— CRd3). The Final EIR also identifies the possible presence of buried fossilized remains. To mitigate these impacts, the Applicant shall retain a City -approved paleontologist to monitor excavation activities and to prepare, Identify and curate all recovered fossils for documentation and transfer to an appropriate depository, (Mitigation Measures CR-7—CR-11). Based an these mitigation measures, fhe City Council finds that the Impacts of the Project on archeological and Paleontological resources will be mitigated to less than significant levels. vIIL PWit SsryjgM end ll U The Final EIR Identifies that fhe Proposed Project will create a demand for fire services, water services, wastewater services, and schools, and will contribute to cumulative impacts to the need for water suppries, wastewater treatment, and schools. Mitigation Measures have been imposed to require the Applicant to obtain approval of ttespeciflcdesigns forfire flow and proposed fire resistant materials (Mitigation Measure F-1), pay a water service development fee (Mitigation Measure W-1), utilize a xedscape landscape and Irrigation design to conservewaty on Project common areas (Mitigation Measure W-2), provide funds to E4—Pg21 Resolution No. 04-206 Page 10 of 31 the Cucamonga County Water district for sewer service prior to occupancy (Mitigation Measure W W-1), and pay the required school impact fee as required by Govemment Code Section 65995, which is deemed to constitute fun and complete mitigation of the Projects Impacts to schools (Mitigation Measure S-1). Based on these mitigation measures and requirements, the City Council finds that the impacts of the Project on public services and utilities will be mitigated to less than significant levels. g. The Project Is also anticipated to have the potential to create contaminated runoff containing compounds such as landscaped chemicals and automotive fluids. To reduce this Impact, tte Applicant will be required to prepare a Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan (SWPPP) and file a Notice of Intent with the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). As part of standard construction practices, best management practices (BMPs) are required to ensure that potentially harmful chemicals or pollutants are not discharged from the site. These measures include sandbags, temporary diversion and temporary containment areas. Based on these requirements, the City Council finds that the Impacts of the Project on hydrology and water quality will be reduced to less than signiflcent levels. h. The City Council finds, based on the Final EIR, that after Implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, am foHowing impacts associated with the proposed project would remain significant: geology and soils (seismic ground shaking), air quality (short-term and long-term emissions), and aestheticsMsual (cumulative views). The City Council finds, based on the Final EIR, that the Project will not create significant growth inducing impacts because the Project will be an extension of existing residential development to the west and the Project is consistent with development contemplated in the 2001 General Plan update as wen as the Etlwanda North Specific Plan approved In 1991. The City Council also finds that the project would result in an irretrievable commitment of natural resources (energy demands) and land. j. The Final EIR describes a range of altemativas to the Pro)ectthat might fuiflfl basic objectives of the Project. These alternatives Include the required "No Projecl/No Development" aitemathve, the "Retention of Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub Altemative," and the "Less Intense Development" Aitemative. As set forth below, the alternatives Identified in the EIR are not feasible because they would rat achieve the basic objectives of the Project or would do so only to a much smaller degree and, therefore, leave unaddressed the significant economic, infrastructure. and General Plan goals that the Project is intended to accomplish, and are thus infeasible due to social and economic considerations, and/or they are infeasible because they would not eliminate the adverse environmental Impacts of the proposed Project Accordingly, each of the altematives is infeasible. In making this finding, the City Council determines as follows: E4—Pg22 Resolution No. 04-206 Page 11 of 31 1) The objectives of the Project are: a) To provide singIo-fan* housing units consistent with the intent of the City's General Plan and the Etiwands North Specific Plan. b) To annex the proposed tentative tract Into the City of Rancho Cucamonga. c) To create a project that Is generally consistent and compatible with other existing and proposed uses in the vicinity of the pmjec t and the community of Etiwands in general. d) To provide project infrastructure including streets, water and sewer mains, and flood control consistent with City and regional plans related to these services. e) To phase the development of the proposed protect to ensure adequate utllitlas are provided. f) To design and landscape the proposed protect to create an aesthetically pleasing living environment. IQ The "No Project/No Development' Alternative assumes that no new land uses would be constructed on the ProJeot site and that the site would remain vacant and undeveloped. Although this alternative Is environmentally superior to the proposed Project, it would not meet any of the Project objectives, Az the subject property Isunderprivate ownership, the elimination of future development within a previously approved Specific Plan la not legally or finandallyfaasibie. Therefore this alternative is rejected. III) The'Retenfion of Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub" Alternative assumes that all vegetation classified as RAFFS are not affected by development. As the Project site contains approximately 10.6 to 13.8 acres of disturbed or ornamental woodland, this alternative would only involve the development of those 10.6 to 13.8 acres. Based on the same residential density as the proposed Project 0.0. 2.4 units per acre), 25 to 33 single-family housing units would be constructed. Although this level of development could eliminate the potential significant unavoidable effects associated with the loss of RAFFS, this alternative would not meet the objectives of the Project, Including, but.not limited to, providing single-family housing units consistent with the Intent of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. In addition, the City Council finds, based on substantial evidence, that it is not economically feasible forthe Applicant to construct the required Infrastructure as contemplated by the Mwanda North Specific plan while constructing only 25 to 33 housing units on the entire property, The City Council specifically finds the required Improvements to roadways, pipelines, water supplies, and other infrastructure would not be economically feasible with a return on invesbnentof only 25to 33 housing units. E4—Pg23. Resolution No. 04-206 Page 12 of 31 Iv) The "Less Intense Uevek,pmant" Alternative is an alternative that attempts to avoid all significant, unavoidable, adverse long-term air emission impacts. To accomplish this result, -approximately 104 housing units would need to be eliminated. This would result In approximately 265 residential units on the site with an average dwelling unit per acre density of approximately 11 units per acre compared with the proposed 2.4 units per acre. This project density Is not consistent with the Etiwanda North Specific Plan and would not meet many of the objectives of the proposed Pra)ect. k. Mitigation measures described in the Mitigation Monitoring Program will avoid or substantially lessen the potentially significant environmental' effects of the Project Further, the environmental, physical, social, economic and other benefits of the Project, as set forth in this section and in the'CEQA Findings• for the Project (Exhibit OF to the June 16, 2004 City Council Staff Report), which Is incorporated herein by this reference, outweigh any unavoidable, significant, adverse Impacts that may occur as a result of the Project. Therefore, due to overriding benefits of the Project and because the alternatives identified in the FM EIR are not feasible, as discussed in paragraph j above, the CltyCouncil hereby finds, based on substantial evidence presented during the June 2, 2004 and June 16, 2004 public hearing, including written and oral staff reports and public testimony, that any unavoidable impacts of the Project. including the mitigated but unavoidable impacts from seismic ground shaking, the short-term and long-term Inwacts to air quality, end the cumulative Impacts to aesthetics .from the permanent alteration of the visual landscape of title region, are acceptable based on the findings contained herein and In the 'CEQA Findings' for the Pt*ct. This determination shall constitute a statement of overriding considerations within the meaning of CEQA and is based on any one of the following environmental and other benefits of the Project identified in the Final EIR and the record of the City Councirs proceedings: (n Provision for the use of land consistent with the established policies and goats of the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan, Etiwanda North Specific Plan, City Development Code, and all other City Development guidelines; (IQ Annexation of the 150-acre Project site and adjacent 10.0-aae area into the City of Rancho Cucamonga; (Ifi) Implementation and consistency with the policies and goals of the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Phan, Etiwands North Specific Plan. City Development Code and all other City development guidelines; (tv) Creation of a Project that to generally consistent and compatible with other existing and proposed uses in the vicinity of the Project and community of Etiwanda in general; E4—Pg24 Resolution No, 04-206 Page 13 of 31 (v) Provision of Project infrastructure Including streets, waterand sewer mains, and flood control consistent with City and regional plans related to these services. (VI) Phasing of the development of the proposed Project to ensure adequate utilities are provided; (vII) Integration of the Project with the character of the surrounding neighborhoods and establishment of a development that results in logical, coordinated growth; (vill) Provision of a system of public/community facilities, including traits, open space areas, and landscaping to support the residents of the Protect and surrounding area in an efficient and timely manner: (Ix) Design and landscaping of the proposed project to create an aesthetically pleasing lift environment. The mitigation measures In the Final EIR that correspond to the environmental Impacts which may result from the Project are hereby adopted and made a condition of approval of, Or Incorporated into, the Project. The City Council also hereby adopts the "Mitigation Monitoring Plan" attached as Exhibit "H" to the Juno 16, 2004 City Council Staff Report for this Project, The Mitigation Monitoring Plan w01 be used to monitor compliance with the mitigation measures and conditions that have been adopted or made a condition of Project approval as set forth in this Section of this Resolution and Exhibit"H' M. Pursuant to provisions of Califomia Public Resources Code Section 21069 (b), the findings contained in this Resolution shall not be operative, vested or final until all required filing fees assessed pursuant to California Fish and Game Code Section 711.4, together with any required handling charges, are pail to the County Clerk of the County of San Bernardino. SECrTION 3: Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above -referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth In Sections 1 and 2 above, this Council hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The Tentative Tract Map Is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and any applicable specific plans. The density, design and development standards of the Tentative Tract Map are consistent with the City's General Plan and with the Effwanda North Specific Plan. The Tentative Tract Map is also consistent with the General Plan's intention of extending the low density Image of Old EtWanda Into the area as provided in General Plan Policy 2AA,5, E4—Pg25 Resolution No. 04-206 Page 14 of 31 b. The design or improvements of the Tentative Tract Map Is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and any applicable specific plans. The proposed development is designed to comply with the design theme Imposed for North Etiwanda as specified In the North Edwanda Specific Plan. Specifically, the lots are relatively large, the tract contains a local trail system with connections to the regional trall system, and the design standards for landscaping, walls, fencing, lighting and community entries comply with the overall thematic design for the North Etiwanda area of the city. c. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed. The site Is located in proximity to existing roadways and infrastructure. The tract Is designed to address existing topographical and geological conditions and to achieve compilar" with existing legal, biological and geological limitations of the she. Based on the whole record, the City Council finds that the site is physically suitable for the proposed residential housing development d. The Site Is physically suitable for the proposed density of development The project will have an average density of 2.3 dwelling units per acre for the entire project and will complywith the density resbictions imposed by the existing General Plan and Etvranda North Specific Plan. The minimum lot size will be 9,400 square feet and the average lotsiza will be approximately 11,400 square feet. These sizes are compatible with the surrounding developed areas and with the physical conditions and limitations on the arts. e. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage aril avoidable Injury to humans and wlidlife or thelrhabitat Based on extensive mitigation measures relating to native plants, sensitive species and wildlife, the impact of the project on biological resources Is determined to be mitigated to a level of less than significant Further, the mitigation measures related to seismic shaking, fires, wind and other conditions are deemed to be sufficient to avoid substantial injury to humans. f. The Tentative Tract Map Is not likely to cause serious public health problems. As specified in prior sections of this resolution, conditions and Mitigation Measures have been Imposed that will reduce risks from seismic activities, fires, winds and other hazards and, based an these conditions and restrictions, the city Council finds that the project %iffll not cause serious public health problems. g. 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. Based an the evidence In the record of this matter, the project has been designed to recognize and protect existing conservation areas and open space resources maintained by public entitles as well as utility easements and other existing private and public easements and restrictions imposed on the Project site. E4—Pg26 Resolution No. 04-206 Page 15 of 31 SEgUON 4. Based upon the findings and canduslons set forth in Sections 1, 2, and 3 above, this Council hereby denies the appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of Tentative Tract Map 16072 and hereby approves the application (Tentative Tract Map 16072) subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by thig reference. Planolm Wvist 1) All future applications for Development Review shall be reviewed for consistency with the approved Tentative Tract Map and provisions of the associated Development Agreement, along with the design gukfalines of the Efiwanda North Specific Plan, including standards for parkways and streetscape design, slope planting, and neighborhood monumentation and wall designs. 2) The terrace drain splash walls and the edges of all down drains within the landsoaped slopes shall be lined with river rock cobble to maintain a native appearance. 3) The applicant shag provide landscaping and Irrigation along the detention basin on the south side of `P Street, 4) A minimum 3 feet of landscaping is required between the back of sidewalk and any retaining wall; and a minimum of 5 feet of landscape setback Is required between the back of the sidewalk and any waliffence. 5) The applicant shell establish a financial mechanism that would provide money for the future constrtrctlon of the Upper Etiwanda Neighborhood monumentaticn at both the northeast and northwest comers of Wilson Avenue and East Avenue, In arxordance with fhe Neighborhood design theme of the Edwanda North Specific Plan. 8) Any lot that is designed with a retaining wall at the toe of the roar yard Slope shall be provided with steps so that the Ihomecwaher tras appropriate access to the slope area for landscaping and maintenance. 7) Tree Removal Pennit DRC2003-00461 is approved in conjunction with Tentative Tract Map SUBTT1607Z including all environmental mitigation pertaining to biological resources as identified herein, 8) The effective date of the approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072 shall be the last to occur of both of the Mowing events: (1) the data that Development Agreement DRC2002-00156 has taken effect, and (11) the data that the annexation of the property into the City has occurred. E4—Pg27 Resolution No. 04-206 Page 16 of 31 Engineertna RMSfgn 1) A Homeowners Association (HOA) shall be created for the maintenance of the proposed landscape/slope areas on eitharside of the CommunityTrail within the Fault Zone and any lettered lots in the Interior and exterior to the tract, except for the Community Trait fencing and surfaces. Development shall also join Landscape Maintenance District (LIVID) No. 7, prior to final map recordation. a) Alternatively, the Cityv#JHconsidercreafinganewLMoforthe above -mentioned areas if the developer can provide a design that can be cost-effectively maintained do the satisfaction of the City Engineer. bj If entrances are gated, they shall conform to City design standards. 2) The Etiwanda Avenue frontage shall be improved as a Secondary Arterial including curb and gutter, 9500L HPSV streetilghM, a parkway Community Trall with HOA or LMD landscaping, and traffic striping and signage, including R26(s) as required. 3) East Avenue shall be improved as follows: a) Install Collector Street improvements in the west half of the project, from wilsort avenue to the north tract boundary. plus 1s feet of pavement east of the cer"ne, for a total of 40 feet along with a 2-foot wide graded shoulder. This would include curb and gutter, sidewalk or parkwayCommunilyTrall with HOA or LIVID landscaping, 5800L HPSV streetlights, and traffic striping and signage, including R26(s) as required. Additionally, construct 44 feet of pavement width for the first 200 feet north of Wilson Avenue, transitioning back to 40 fleet. Install an AC bens along the entire east side length of East Avenue. The developer may request a reimbursement agreement to recover the cost for Improvements east of the centerline and south of the south tract boundary, trorn future development as it occurs on adjacent properties within the City limits. b) South of Wilson Avenue, East Avenue should be constructed 36 feet wide to Banyan streat The developer shall receive credit against, and reimbursement of costs In excess of, the Transportation Development Fee for these backbone Improvements, In conformance with City policy. c) If the developer facts to submit for said reimbursement agreements within six months of tiro public improvements befog accepted by the City. all rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. E4—Pg28 Resolution No. 04-206 Page 17 of 21 4) Wilson Avenue shall be Improved as follows; a) Install full width Divided Secondary Arterial improvements, from Etiwanda Avenue to East Avenue. This would include curb and gutter, asphalt pavement, a landscaped median, HOA or LIVID landscaping, curvilinear sidewalk, ML HPSV streetlights, and traffic striping and signage, Including R26(s) as required. b) The developer shall receive credit against, and reimbursement of coats in excess of, the Transportation Development Fee for the median curbs and 14 feet of Pavement on both sides, in conformance with City policy, The developer may also requesta relmbursemantagreernent to recover the cost for improvements other than the "backbone," including median landscaping, south of the centerline and along the Not A -Part parcel from future development on adjacent properties. If the developer fails to submit for said reimbursement agreements within sic months of the public improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate, c) The right-of-way will need to be obtained from Metropolitan Wafer District (MWD), as well as a permit for improvements to the south side of Wilson Avenue. 5) Construct parkway community Traffs, per Standard Drawing 1002-A, on the east side of Etiwanda Avenue north of Street -Lr and on the west side of East Avenue north of Street "N - Provide a drainage facility along the toe of any landscaped 3:1 (if HOA, 2:1 allowable) slopes adjacent to the trail surface, so that no surface flows drain over Me trail. 8) Construct an interior Community Trail, per Standard Drawing 1004, within Lots J and 1 over the Fault Zone. The trail shall cross Street "A" at an intersection and be publicly maintained. 7) All publicly maintained landscapelslope areas should Incorporate allroetiva, low maintenance designs to City public works landscape standards, including 40 percent hardscape. Slope widths should be minimized through the use of 30-Inch maximum height freestanding retaining walls and retaining beneath perimeter walls subject to City Planner approval. a) LIVID landscaping within the Fault Zone (Lots i and J) and the 65-foot parkway on the south side of Wilson Avenue shad be designed for minimal maintenance (Xertcape). E4—Pg29 Resolution No. 04-206 Page 18 of 31 8) Private homeowners (or a HOA) shag maintain inferior comer side yards. If new a LMD is formed, eliminate Lots C. D, E, F, and N, and the 5-toot strips that wrap around the comers from Lots L and K. Side yard slope areas can be reduced through the use of retaining wails, 2:1 slopes, and allowing comer lots to drain toward the side street, with curbside drain outlets if necessary. Side yard slopes and fencing shall not infringe 'on the lines -of -sight for local street Intersections. 0) Lot G along the Not -A -Part parcel Is not acceptable for public (LMD) maintenance. The owner of said parcel should be approached regarding off -site grading permission, se that the property line can be located at the top of slope. 10) Construct Etiwandaroan Sevalne Area 3 Master Plan Storm Drain facilities along the north property line from Etiwanda Avenue to the Edwanda Spreading Grounds, including culverts for both Etiwanda and East Avenues to cross the facility. Standard drainage fees for the site stall be credited to the cost of permanent master plan facilides,'In accordance with City policy. The developer may request a reimbursement agreement to recoveroversairtg costs, in excess of fees, tram future development 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 retmbursernent shah temlinate, a) if required by the San Bemardino County Flood Control District to provide an Interim detention basin for this facility, Condition No.15 shag also Opply to this facility. b) Flood protection faaftess shall be computed prior to occupancy release. 11) Obtain off site easements, for grading in 0v3 SCE easement north of the proposed channel, prior to grading permit issuance. 12) Install local storm drains to convey development drainage to the existing Master Plan Storm Drain in Wilson Avenue. Extend the local storm drain system as for on -site as needed to contain 025 within tops of curbs and Q,00 within rights of -way and provide a 10400t dry lane in Qro• The cost of local storm drains shall be home by this development with no fee cxedtL 13) Where sump catch basins are used, provide two and Intercept Ow In boon sump catch basins and their laterals. 14) Interim basins shall have secondary Overflow routes to streets without Impeding adjacent lots. E4—Pg30 Resolution No. 04-208 Page 19 Of 31 15) Construct Interim detention basin(s) for the Wilson Avenue storm drain, as follows, justified by a final drainage report approved by the City Engineer. a) Provide a temporary easement to the City for the lots containing the basin. b) An assessment district shall be formed for maintenance of the detention basin or a maintenance agreement shall be executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attomeyguaranteeing private maintenance of the facility, but providing the City with the right of access to maintain the facility If private maintenance is insufficient and allowing the City to assess those costs to the developer. The said agreement shall include a cash deposit as security for any maln(enance Costs the City may incur. The said agreement shall be recorded to run with the property, c) Prior to final map recordation, pagan in lieu fee for removal of interim basin improvements within LMp areas and their replacement with landscaping. d) Basin shall be designed to mitigate developed flows for the entire area bounded by Wilson, Past, and Etiwanda Avenues and the 5CE easement to the north. Q) The developer may request a reimbursement agreement to. recover the proportionate cost of the land and ultimate basin, related facilities (outlet; etc.) from future development using the basin. If the developer, fails to submit said reimbursement agreement within six months of the public Improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. 16) Provide vehicular access to all manholes. 17) if any of the above -mentioned facilities (street, storm drain, etc.) are constructed by others, the developer will be responsible for reimbursing their fair share. 18) Provide a Water Quality Management Plan (WOMP) to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Identify applicable Best Management Practices (BMPs) on the Grading Plan. 19) Maintenance of BMPs Identified in the W QMP shall be addressed in the project CC&Rs. E4—Pg31 Resolution No. 04-206 Page 20 of 31 20) The project applicant shall demonstrate they have received written approval from Metropolitan water District for any proposed activities within Metropolitan's fee property prior to proceeding with the proposed improvements to Wilson Avenue or proceeding with any other activity that may infringe upon or impact rights -of -way. Coordination with Metropolitan and submittal of design plans should be in accordance with the "Guidelinesfor Developments in the Area of Facilities, Fee Properties, and/or easements of the Metropolitan Water District of Southem California' ii.,u•: u,•,= , Aesthetics AES•1: The applicant shall Install landscaping and perimeter walls prior to occupancy for the following phases and locations as shown on the Project Phasing Plan (Exhibit M): • Phase 1-Along Wilson and Etiwanda Avenues • Phase 2-Along Wilson Avenue • phase 3-" Etiwanda Avenue • Phase 4 AlOrV East Avenue AES-2: Prior to approval of a landscape plan, the project applicant shall provide transitions between the developed and natural (unbuilt) environment through landscaping techniques. AES-3: Prior to approval of a landscape plan, the projed applicant shall ensure that sb"tscape design along the roadways adjacent to the project site create 8 strong landscaped edge, provides a route,, and enhances the image of adjacent dftvlopment AES-4: The project applicant shall provide for the undergrounding of utility lines and facilities, wherever feasible, to rntnimize the unsightly appearance of overhead uglily fines and utility enclosures. AES-6: Prior to approval of a landscape plan, trees and structures shall be used to frame and orient such views at key locations, and obstruction or views should be kept to a minimum along EManda Avenue and East Avenue. Air Quality AQ-1: The site shall be treated with water or other soil -stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and Regional Water Quality control Board [RWQCBj) daily to reduce PM,o emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403, E4—Pg32 Resolution No. 04-206 Page 21 of 31 AQ-2: During conslrnictbn, all haul mutes shall be swept according to a schedule established by the City to reduce PM,o emissions associated with vehicle tracking of soil off -site. Timing may very depending upon time of year of construction. AQ-3: Suspend grading operations when wind speeds exceeding 25 mph to minimize PM10 emisslons from the side during such episodes, ACI-4: Chemical soil stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RVVQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for96 hours or more to reduce PMro emissions. AQ-5: The Consitucticn contractor shall select the construction equipment used on -site based on low emission factors and high-energy efficiency, The construction contractor shall ensure the construction grading plans include a statement that all construction equipment will be turned to and maintained In accordance with the manufacturers specifications. A04: The construction contractor shall utilize electric or dean alternative fuel powered equipment where feasible. AQ-7: The construction contractor shall ensure that construction - grading plans Include a statement that work crows will shut off equipment when not in use. AQ-8: The consImclion'contractor shall use low VOC architectural coating during the construction phase of the project, A": During construction of the proposed Improvements, temporary traffic control (e.g., Hag person) will be provided during soil transport activities. Contractorwiilbeadvised not toidle tucks on site for more than ten minutes AQ-10: During construction of the proposed Improvements, only low volatility paints and coatings as defamd In SCAaMD Rule 1113 shall be used. All paints shag be applied using either high volume low pressure (HVLP) spray equipment or by hand application, AQ-11: The proposed project Wit participate in the cost of oft -site tMffic signal installation and synchronization through payment of the traffic signal fair -share mitigation fee. This fee will be collected and utilized by the City to Install and synchroribm traffic lights as needed to prevent congestion of traffic flow on East Avenue between Banyan Street and ftte project boundary, and Etiwanda Avenue between Highland Avenue and the north terminus of EtMande Avenue. E4—Pg33 Resolution No. 04-206 Page 22 of 31 AQ-12: All appliances within the residential units of the project shall be energy -efficient as defined by SCAQMD. AQ43: The project proponent shall contact local transit agencies to determine bus routing in the project area that can accommodate bus stops at the project access points and determine locations and Feasibility of bus stop shakers provided at project proponents expense. Biological R63MMe8 8.1: Prior to recording of the first final map of the project, the property owner shag transfer to the County of San Bernardino Spacial Districts OS-1 or other qualified conservation entity approved by the City. In fee, at a ratio of 1:1(or 147.7 acres) of of -site land for permanent open space and habitat preservation; along with funding in an amount to be mutually agreed upon by the property owner and the conservation entity, to provide for long-term maintenance of said land. The prof n e:d location of the oft -site land is in the a whnment surrounding the North Ettwanda Preserve in the City Sphere of Influence, other properties may be considered based the review of appropriate Biological Habitat Assessments and concurrence of the City Planner. If the proponent is unable to acquire all or portion of the ofsite mitigation land, the proponent will deposit the equivalent mitigation cost of W,000 per developable acre with City - approved agency, which acquires and maintains open space. These funds will be used to purchase and manage mitigation lands. B 2: To reduce Impacts on adjacent offsite habitat during site preparation, grading and clearing limits shag be staked prior to issuance of the grading permits. The limits of grading and clearing shag be staked at 50-foot Intervals with suitable indicators such as white PVC (poWnylchloride) pipe with steel bases. Construction equipment shag not be operated beyond the grading and ctsaring limits, and a restoration program shall be Incorporated to restore any disturbed offsits areas. 8-3. Landscaping adjacent to natural areas ofake shall use native and drought -tolerant plant species. Such species shall be reflected on Project landscape plans. The use of species known to be weedy invasives, such as German ivy (Senecio mllkaniodes), periwinkle (Vince major), or iceplant (Carpobrotus spp.), shag be prohibited. E4—Pg34 Resolution No. 04-206 Page 23 of 31 B-4: In areas where night lighting may have adverse impacts on sensitive wildlife habitat, one or more of the following altenlatives shall be utilized, recognizing the constraints of roadway lighting requirements: (1) low-intensitystreet lamps, (2) lo"evation light poles, or (3) shielding of Internal silvering of the globes or external opaque reflectors, Ba: Provide residents of the future, development literature pertaining to sensitive wildlife In the area and provide ways the residents can reduce effects on the wildlife, including effects pets have on native wildlife. A list of invasive plants that are commonly planted in landscaping colD be included In this literature and It wifi be recommended -that certain plants be avoided, such as giant reed (Arundo donax) castor bean (Ridnus comrurriis) and Pampas grass (Cortaderia selfoana). This literature shall be approved by the City of Rancho Cucamonga and Included within the conditions,. covenants, and restrictions (CC&Rs), 8-6: AN 213 "heritage trees` shall be removed and replaced with native trees within the proposed development. Replacements have been proposed at a 1:1 ratio. 8 7: Prior to Issuance of a graft pemut, focused surveys for Plummets mariposa Illy shall be conducted by a qualified biologist Surveys shall be conducted during flowering, period (May to July) in all portions of the project $he containing suitable habitat. If present, the number and location(s) win be documented and the resource agencies will be notified for consultation and possible collection and relocation. 134: A follow-up focus survey for the San Bernardino kangaroo rat 5W be conducted prior to the Issuance of grading permits. If this species is determined to be present onsits, Consultation with Unftsd States Forestry Wildlife Service (USFWS) under the Endangered Species Act shall occur and USFWS-approved mitigation measures shall be implemented. B-B: A follow-up focused survey shall be conducted to confirm the absence of the coastatCalffomda gnatcatcher. Special focus will be placed In the northwest comer of the project site, which was not previously surveyed. If this species is determined to be presentonshe, consultation with USFWS under the Endangered Species Act shall occur and USFWS-approved mftigation measures shall be implemented. 840, The project proponent win have a qualified biological monitor present during Initial brush clearing to reduce mortality to sensitive species, Specifically sensitive rodentspeaes, as wail as incidental species, E4—Pg35 Resolution No. 04-206 Page 24 of 31 8-11: If grading activities are to occur during active nesting season (generally February 15 -August 31), a field survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to determine if active nests covered by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and/or the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) Code are present. 11 active nests are present, the area will be flagged, along with a 100-foot buffer (300-feet for raptors) and will be avoided until the nesting cycle is complete. B-12: The project proponent shall obtain a Section 404 of the Clean water Act permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and a 1603 Streambed Alteration Permit from Califomia Departmerdof Fish and Game prior to grading or any other groundbreaking activities. and shall comply with the penrWs mitigation requirements. Cultural Resources CR-1: Prior to the Issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall retain a City -approved archaeologist to develop an archaeological mitigation plan and a discovery clausettreatm ent plan. Both of these plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City. The archaeological mitigation plan shall Include monitoring 50 percent of the excavation activities on the project site by a City approved archaeologist and/or their representative. The discovery clauses reatmerd plan shall Include recovery and subsequent treatment of any archaeological or historical remains and associated data uncovered by brushing, grubbing, or excavation. The treatment plan shall provide procedures for the curation of any detected cultural specimens. Any recovered cultural resources shall be identified, sites recorded, mapped and artifacts catalogued as required by standard professional archaeological practices. Exandnatiort by an archaeological specialist shall be included where necessary, dependent upon the artifacts, features. or sites that are encountered. Specialists will identify, date and/or determine significance potential. CR-2: If the archaeological monitor discovers cultural deposits, earlhrnoving shall be diverted temporarily around the deposits until the deposits have been evaluated. recorded, excavated, and/or recovered, as necessary, and in accordance with a City - approved recovery plan. Earthmoving shall be allowed to proceed through the area after the archaeotogistdetermines the artifacts are recovered and/or site mitigated to the extent necessary. E4—Pg36 Resolution No. 04-206 Page 25 of 31 CR-3: if a previously unknown cultural site Is encountered during monitoring and it is determined by the archaeologist that a significance determination is required, the site shall be evaluated and recorded in accordance with requirements of the State Office of Historic Preservation (i.e., DPR 523 form). In this case, if the site is not determined to be significant, no measures subsequent to recording the site on appropriate forms are required. If airy of the sites are determined to be significant, an adequate amountof artifacts at the specific archaeological site shall be collected by the City -approved archaeologist The archaeologist shall determine the amount of artifacts needed to be collected. CR.4: N human remains are encountered during excavations associated With this project, all work shall halt and the County Coroner shall be notified (Section 5097.98 of the Public Resourm Code). The Coroner will determine whether the remains are of forensic interest If the coroner, with the aid of the City -approved archaeologist, determines that the remains are prehistoric, he/she YAR contact the Native American Heritage Comndssion (NAHC). The NAHC will be responsible for designating the most likely descendant (MLD), who will be responsible for the uttlmate disposition of the remains, as required by Section 7050.5 of the Califomla Health and Safety Code, The MLO will make his/her recommendations within 24 hours of their notification by the NAHC. This recommendallon may lndude scienfificremoval and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials (Section 705D.5 of the Health and Safety Code). CR-5: Any recovered archaeological resources shall be identified, sites recorded; mapped and artifacts catalogued as required by standard archaeological practices. Examination by an archaeological specialist should be Included whore necessary, dependent upon the artifacts, features or sites that are encountered. SPacialfsts will Identify, data and/or determine .significance potential. CR-G: A final report of findings will be prepared by the C►ty-approvad archaeologist for submission to the City, project applicant, and . the Archaeological Information Center of the San Bernardino County Museum. The report will desaibe the history of the project area, summarize field and laboratory mettiods used, if applicable, and include anytealing orspecial analysis information conducted to support the resultant findings. E4—Pg37 Resolution No. 04-206 Page 26 of 31 CR-T: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall retain a City -approved paleonloioglst. The City -approved paleontologist shall monitor all excavation activities in areas of the project underlain by previously undisturbed sediments. Earthmoving in areas of the site where previously undisturbed sediments will be buried but not disturbed will not be monitored. Monitoring shall bem once earthmoving reaches five (5) feet below the original ground surface. CR-8: Monitoring shall be conducted on a fuiHime basis in areas of the project underlain by sensitive rock units associated with older alluvium being encountered try earthmoving. CR-9: 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 dhrert construction and notify the monitor of the find. N too few fossil remains are found after 50 percent of earthmoving has been completed, monitofirig can be reduced or disooritinued In those areas at the project paleontologists direction. CR-10: If paleontological resources are detected. Prepare, Identify, and curate all recovered fossils for documentation in the summary report and transfer to an appropriate depository (Le., San Bernardino County Museum). CR-11, A final report of findings wAl be prepared by the City-appivved pthaelefSen Berrnardino Cou Museum, ryAll collect dpspecimens and the final report shall be provided to the San Bernardino County Museum. Geology And Soils t38-1: Friar llwandarA nue Sca tltpfaultlt anntthe prsojs*sitite. all structures north of this fault shall be set back 100 feet from the (suited zone and all structures south of this fault shall be set back 50 feel from the fault zone. t3S-2: Prior to the issuance of a building penTdt, structures will be designed and constructed in accordance with the Uniform Building Code and general engineering standards for seismic safety for development within Selsmlc Zone 4. GS 3: Prior to the issuance of a grading permii, engineered slopes of the project site shall be designed in accordance with the Uniform Building Code to resist seismically induced failures. Slope design shati be based on pseudo -stack stability analyses using soa- engineering parameters established for the site. E4—Pg38 Resolution No. 04406 Page 27 of 31 G64: Prior to the issuance of a grading pernK the grading plans shag state that the loose, cohesionless Solis located on the surface of the site shall be removed and recompacted during grading operations, GS-5: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the grading plans shag state that the native surficial and artificial fills on the project site that are of low density, shall be removed and recompacted or exported offsite. GS-G: Prior to the issuance of a final grading approval, potentially unstable graded slopes that exceed approximately 15 feet in height will require additional stabilization measures such as buttressing cut slopes with compacted fig, adding geogrid reinforcement to fill slopes, using a higher conVaotion standard, and/or using retaining wags. 03 7: Prior to the Issuance of a grading permit, the grading plans shall state that potentially compressible soils that are located on the project site shalt be removed and recompacted in accordance with standard grading procedures. GS-8: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project's soil engineer shall identify the method(s) of eliminating the potential for collapsible soils on the grading plan. Potential methods include excavation and recompaction and presaturation and pre. loading of the susceptible sops in -place to induce conapse prior to construction. After construction, Infittration of water into the subsurface soils shall be minimized by proper surface drainage which directs excess runoff from the proposed slopes and structures. G": Prior to the Issuance of a grading permit, the grading plans shall state that during grading operations, the soil engineer shall be consulted to relocate oversize racks on the project site to reduce the potential deficiency of fill materials that could result from the removal of oversize rocks on the project site. Noise N-1: During all project site excavation and grading, the project contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufners consistent with manufacturers standards. N-2: When construction operations occur in dose proximity to occupied realdentlel areas, appropriate additional revise reduction measures shag be Implemented, including: changing the location E4—Pg39 Resolution No. 04-206 Page 28 of 31 of stationary construction equipment to ma:dmize the distance between stationary equipment and occupied residential areas, installing muffling devices on equlpment, shutting off idling equipment, notifying adjacent residences in advance of construction, and Instating temporary acoustic barriers around stationary construction noise sources. W1 The construction contractor shall locate equipment staigtng in areas fhatwill create the greatest distance between construction related noise and the noise -sensitive receptors nearest the project site during all project construction. Nd: During all project site construction, the construction contract shell limit all construction related activities that would result in high noise levels to between the hours of 8:30 a m. and 8:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday. No construction shall be allowed on Sundays and public holidays. N-5: The project applicant shall construct sound barriers adjacent to the project lots as shown in Exhibit 5.5-2. The heights of the sound barriers shall be between 3 and 6.6 feet and placed at the top of tine proposed slope and at the edge of gads on it* residential lots that border E9wanda Avenue, Wilson Avenue, and East Avenue. 171e sound barriers may bq constructed of earthen beans, masonry, wood, or other similar materials, or combination of these materials to attain the total height required. These sound barriers shall be solid, with no openings from the ground to the indicated height. N-6: Prior to the issuance of a building permit, residential structures proposed on all lots adjacent to Rwanda Avenue, Wilson Avenue, and East Avenue will require mechanical Ventilation so that windows can remain dosed. Furthermore, these residential lots will require upgraded windows such as double -pane windows, if these lots have second story structures. To ensure the specific We of mechanical ventilation and paned windows are Included in the building plans, a final acoustical study shall be prepared for City approval prior to approVal Of Development Review applications for product development. The final acoustical studyshell identify the specific requirements to reduce future interior noise levels to 45 dB CNEL or less, Public Services And Utf sties F-1: Prior to the issuance building permits, the project applicant shall obtain approval from Rancho Cucamonga Fire Department (RCFD) of the designs for the fire flow and proposed fire resistant structural materials. E4—Pg40 Resolution No. 04-200 Page No. 29 of 31 W-1: Priorto the issuance of building permits, the project applicant will be required to submit a water services development fee to ensure that adequate water supplies and facilities are available to meet the project demand. W-2: Prior to titre issuance of a building permit for each phase, the project applicant shall submita landscaping and irrigation plan for common areas to the City for approval. Landscaping and irrigation within Common areas Shalt be designed to conserve water through the principles of Xedscape as defined in Chapter 19.16 of the Random Cucamonga Municipal Code. WW4: Prior to the issuance of occupancy pern ts, the applicant shall provide funding to the Cucamonga County Water Agency for sewer service. S-1: Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall pay developer impact fees to the Etiwands School District and Cha((eyJoint Union High School Diatrict M accordance with Section 65995 of the Government Code for the proposed residences. Transporta0fon/TrafRc TT-1: The project applicant shall contribute Its fair share toward local off site traffic Improvements, on -site improvefnents will be required in conjunction with the phasing of the proposed development to ensure adequate circulation within the projed Itself. The fair share contribution of all off -site improvements and timing of all onsite traffic improvements shall be subject to an agreementwiththe City ofRancho Cucamonga. Thisagreement shall, be in place prior to tract map approval. TT-2: The project applicant shall update construction cost estimates and prepare a current cost of the projed's fair share contribution toward traffic improvements. TT3: The project applicant shall construct Wilson Avenue from Etiwanda Avenue to East Avenue as a Special Divided Secondary Arterial (165 ft. Right-of-way) in conjunction with development of the proposed project or as determined by the Development Agreement with the City. TT-4: The project applicant shall construct the extension of East Avenue from the south project boundary with a minimum 36-foot two-way paved access to the project in oonjunCtiori with development of the proposed project or as determined by the Development Agreement with the City. E4—Pg41 Resolution No. 04-206 Page 30 of31 TT-B: The project applicant shall construct East Avenue from the north project boundary to Wilson Avenue to provide 44-foot two-way paved access and the full shoulder (curb, gutter, street lights, and side walks) on west side of the street in oonjunctfon with development of the proposed project or as determined by the Development Agreement with the City. TT-G: The project applicant shall construct Etiwanda Avenue from the north project Wurrdaryto Goiden Prairie Drive at Its ultimate half - section width as a Secondary Arterial (96 M Might-ofJway) In conjunction With development of the proposed project or as determined by the Development Agreement wdhthe City. TT 7: Prlor to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide funds in accordance with the CWa Transportation Development Fee. Collection of these flees shell represent the projeat's "Wr- share" toward the Wowing transportation Improvamw is required for opening year (Ye*r2004): Installation of a traffic signal at Ettvanda Avenue at Banyan Street. Installation of a traffic signal at East Avenue at Banyan Street. Construction of a southbound right turn lane at the intersection of Etiwanda Avenue at Highland Avenue. TT-iT: Prior to the issuance of building Permits, the applicant shell provide funds in accordance with the City's Transportation Development Fee. Collection of these fees shall represent the projects "fair share toward the following transportation Improvements required for Buildout Year 2020. • Construction of one additional northbound lane to provide a shared left and through lane, and a shared right and through northbound lane, and one additional southbound lane to provide a shared left and through and a shared right and through southbound lane on East Avenue at Banyan Street • Construction of a Westbound through lane on Highland Avenue at Etiwanda Avenue. • Installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Etlwanda Avenue (North) at Wilson Avenue. • Installation of a traffic signal at the Intersection of Uwanda Avenue (South) at Wilson Avenue. • Installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of East Avenue at Wilson Avenue. SECTWNThe City Clerk shag Certify to the adoption of this Resolution. E4—Pg42 Resolution No. 04-206 Page 31 of 31 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 16°i day of June 2004. AYES: Alexander, Gutierrez,'Howdyshell, Kurth, Williams NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAINED: None ATTEST: ;V!"l son I!'Q#7F-P1F-T#P7j M I, DEBRA J. ADAMS, CITY CLERK of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Califomia, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved and adopted by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, at a Regular Meeting of said City Council hold on the 16" day of June 2004. Executed this Ir day of June 2004, at Rancho Cucamonga, California, :�, E4—Pg43 RESOLUTION NO. 16-42 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A REQUEST FORA TIME EXTENSION (DRC2016-00356) FOR A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (SUBTT16072) TO SUBDIVIDE 150.79 ACRES INTO 359 LOTS IN THE LOW (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, WITH AN AVERAGE DENSITY OF 2.3 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE FOR THE ENTIRE PROJECT, IN THE UPPER ETIWANDA NEIGHBORHOOD OF THE ETIWANDA NORTH SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED AT NORTHEAST CORNER OF WILSON AVENUE AND ETIWANDA AVENUE; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APNs: 1087-081-12, 19 through 24. A. Recitals. 1. Golden Meadowland, LLC. and Ranch Haven, LLC. filed an application forthe extension of the approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT15072, 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 June 16, 2004, the City Council adopted its Resolution No. 04-204, thereby, approving Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072 subject to specific conditions and time limits. 3. On June 13, 2007, the Planning Commission adopted its Resolution No. 07-26, thereby, approving the application for a 1-year time extension subject to specific conditions and time limits. 4. On May 28, 2008, the Planning Commission adopted its Resolution No. 08-25, thereby, approving the application for a 1-year time extension subject to specific conditions and time limits 5. From July 2008 to July 2013, Senate Bill 1165, Assembly Bill 333, Assembly Bill 208 and Assembly Bill 116 were approved by the Governor allowing for a total of 7 years of automatic extensions for this Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072. 6. On June 22, 2016, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application for a third 1-year time extension to SUBTT16072 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 substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing on June 22, 2016, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to 7 parcels of approximately 150.79 acres located at the northeast corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Wilson Avenue; and EXHIBIT E E4—Pg44 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 16-42 TIME EXTENSION DRC2016-00356 - GOLDEN MEADOWLAND, LLC. AND RANCH HAVEN, LLC. June 22, 2016 Page 2 b. The project is adjacent to the south and west by single-family residences and is adjacent to the north and east by vacant undeveloped land; and C. The zoning of the subject property and properties to the north, south and west are within the Low Residential District. The Zoning of the property to the east is within the Very -Low Residential District. The subject property and properties to the north, east and west are within the North Etiwanda Specific Plan. The properties to the south arewithin the Etiwanda Specific Plan; and d. The previously approved Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072 is in substantial compliance with the City's current General Plan, specific plans, ordinances, plans, codes, and policies; and e. The extension of the Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072 approval will not cause significant inconsistencies with the current General Plan, specific plans, ordinances, plans, codes, and policies; and f. The extension of the Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072 approval is not likely to cause public health and safety problems; and g. The extension is within the time limits established by State law and local ordinance. 3. Based upon the facts and information contained in the application, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that no subsequent or supplemental environmental document is required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in connection with the review and approval of this application based upon the following findings and determinations: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on June 16, 2004 in connection with the City's approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project unless: (i) substantial changes are proposed to the project that indicate new or more severe impacts on the environment; (ii) substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under which the project was previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts; or (iii) new important information shows the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered; or (iv) additional mitigation measures are now feasible to reduce impacts or different mitigation measures can be Imposed to substantially reduce impacts. b. The Planning Commission finds, in connection with the time extension request, 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 previously certified EIR. The proposal only involves a request to extend the approval period of a previously approved Tentative Tract Map. The proposal does not involve any changes or modifications to the design of the previously approved subdivision. Staff further finds that the project will not have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previously certified EIR, 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. A memorandum was submitted by the E4—Pg45 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 16-42 TIME EXTENSION DRC2016-00356 - GOLDEN MEADOWLAND, LLC. AND RANCH HAVEN, LLC. June 22, 2016 Page 3 applicant's biologist, on May 20, 2016, stating the site conditions remain consistent with previous site assessments. The letter also concludes, based on observations made in our recent site visit, no substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under which the project was previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts and no new important information shows the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered, and that, no additional mitigation measures are now feasible to reduce impacts or different mitigation measures can be imposed to substantially reduce impacts. C. Based on these findings and all evidence in the record, the Planning Commission concurs with the staff determination that no additional environmental review is required pursuant to CEQA in connection with the City's consideration of the time extension. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 above, this Commission hereby grants a time extension for: Tentative Tract Applicant Expiration SUBTT16072 GOLDEN MEADOWLAND, LLC. June 16, 2017 AND RANCH HAVEN, LLC. 5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22ND DAY OF JUNE 2016. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA B: Ravenel Wimberly, Chairman ATTEST: Candycd 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 regularmeeting of the Planning Commission held on the 22nd day of June 2016, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: FLETCHER, MACIAS, MUNOZ, OAXACA, WIMBERLY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: NONE E4—Pg46 1"Sik Memorandum date June 5, 2017 to Mr. John Schafer/Golden Meadowland, LLC 2121 Alton Parkway Suite 100 Irvine, CA 92606 949.753,7001 r. 949.753.7002 i �. from Steve Nelson, Southern California Biological Resources Director subject Tract 16072— Biological Resources Update This memorandum addresses the status of the current biological conditions for the above referenced project site, the approximately 150-acre Tentative Tract 16072 in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The project site was assessed by PCR biologists in 2002, 2007 and 2011. The 2011 biological assessment was conducted as part of a Streambed Alteration Agreement application processed with California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Specifically, the 2011 project site conditions were assessed to determine the status and extent of vegetation communities, jurisdictional areas, and special -status plant and wildlife species existing at that time. No substantial changes were noted in the 2011 assessment and no additional mitigation measures beyond those noted in the original 2002 assessment were recommended or required. An ESA PCR biologist last conducted a site visit on May 20, 2016, who confirmed that the project site conditions in 2016 remained consistent with those assessed in 2011, based on the May 2016 observations. A recent site visit was conducted by ESA (as the former PCR has become) biologist Tommy Molioo on June 2, 2017 to assess if biological conditions on the site remain the same since 2016, particularly due to the recent storm events the region experienced in the winter of 2016/2017. Based on the observations made during the 2017 site visit, when compared to the biological conditions mapped in 2011, and documented as consistent in 2016, the existing biological conditions continue to remain the same as previously assessed. Particular attention was directed towards assessing the existing conditions of the three jurisdictional drainage features mapped on the project site, which are found to be in a similar condition as what was previously documented. As such, the discussion of impacts to special -status plant and wildlife species and recommended mitigation measures as detailed in the 2002 Biological Resource Assessment is consistent with the 2017 site conditions, as it was in 2016 and 2011. In conclusion, ESA found no substantial changes that have occurred in the circumstances under which the project was previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts and no new substantial information indicates the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously analyzed. In addition, we concur with the 2016 conclusion that no new mitigation measures would now be feasible to reduce impacts or different mitigation measures would be imposed to significantly reduce impacts. We hope the following information addresses any concerns or questions. Please feel free to contact me. Tommy Molioo or Daryl Koutnik at (949) 753-7001, or snelson@esassoc.com if you should require further assistance. EXHIBIT F E4—Pg47 RESOLUTION NO. 17-64 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A REQUEST FORA TIME EXTENSION (DRC2017-00430) FOR A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (SUBTT16072) TO SUBDIVIDE 150.79 ACRES INTO 358 LOTS IN THE LOW (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, WITH AN AVERAGE DENSITY OF 2.3 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE FOR THE ENTIRE PROJECT, IN THE UPPER ETIWANDA NEIGHBORHOOD OF THE ETIWANDA NORTH SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED AT NORTHEAST CORNER OF WILSON AVENUE AND ETIWANDA AVENUE; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APNs: 1087-081-12, 19 THROUGH 24. A. Recitals. 1. Golden Meadowland, LLC. and Ranch Haven, LLC. filed an application for the extension of the approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072, 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 June 16, 2004, the City Council adopted its Resolution No. 04-206, thereby, approving Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072 subject to specific conditions and time limits. 3. On June 13, 2007, the Planning Commission adopted its Resolution No. 07-26, thereby, approving the application for a 1-year time extension subject to specific conditions and time limits. 4. On May 28, 2008, the Planning Commission adopted its Resolution No. 08-25, thereby, approving the application for a 1-year time extension subject to specific conditions and time limits. 5. From July 2008 to July 2013, Senate Bill 1185, Assembly Bill 333, Assembly Bill 208 and Assembly Bill 116 were approved by the Governor allowing for a total of 7 years of automatic extensions for this Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072. 6. On June 22, 2016, the Planning Commission adopted its Resolution No. 16-42, thereby, approving the application for a 1-year time extension subject to specific conditions and time limits - 7. On June 14, 2017, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application for a fourth 1-year time extension to SUBTT16072 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. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-64 TIME EXTENSION DRC2017-00430 - GOLDEN MEADOWLAND, LLC. AND RANCH HAVEN, LLC. June 14, 2017 Page 2 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing on June 14, 2017, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to 7 parcels of approximately 150.79 acres located at the northeast corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Wilson Avenue; and b. The project is adjacent to the south and west by single-family residences and is adjacent to the north and east by vacant undeveloped land; and C. The zoning of the subject property and properties to the north, south and west are within the Low Residential District. The Zoning of the property to the east is within the Very -Low Residential District. The subject property and properties to the north, east and west are within the North Etiwanda Specific Plan. The properties to the south are within the Etiwanda Specific Plan; and d. The previously approved Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072 is in substantial compliance with the City's current General Plan, specific plans, ordinances, plans, codes, and policies; and e. The extension of the Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072 approval will not cause significant inconsistencies with the current General Plan, specific plans, ordinances, plans, codes, and policies; and f. The extension of the Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072 approval is not likely to cause public health and safety problems; and g. The extension is within the time limits established by State law and local ordinance. 3. Based upon the facts and information contained in the application, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that no subsequent or supplemental environmental document is required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in connection with the review and approval of this application based upon the following findings and determinations: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on June 16, 2004 in connection with the City's approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project unless: (i) substantial changes are proposed to the project that indicate new or more severe impacts on the environment; (ii) substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under which the project was previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts; or (iii) new important information shows the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered; or (iv) additional mitigation measures are now feasible to reduce impacts or different mitigation measures can be imposed to substantially reduce impacts. b. The Planning Commission finds, in connection with the time extension request, 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 previously certified EIR. E4—Pg49 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-64 TIME EXTENSION DRC2017-00430 - GOLDEN MEADOWLAND, LLC. AND RANCH HAVEN, LLC. June 14, 2017 Page 3 The proposal only involves a request to extend the approval period of a previously approved Tentative Tract Map. The proposal does not involve any changes or modifications to the design of the previously approved subdivision. Staff further finds that the project will not have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previously certified EIR, 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. A memorandum was submitted by the applicant's biologist, on June 5, 2017, stating the site conditions remain consistent with previous site assessments. The letter also concludes, based on observations made in our recent site visit, no substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under which the project was previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts and no new important information shows the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered, and that, no additional mitigation measures are now feasible to reduce impacts or different mitigation measures can be imposed to substantially reduce impacts. C. Based on these findings and all evidence in the record, the Planning Commission concurs with the staff determination that no additional environmental review is required pursuant to CEQA in connection with the City's consideration of the time extension. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 above, this Commission hereby grants a time extension for: Tentative Tract Applicant Expiration SUBTT16072 GOLDEN MEADOWLAND, LLC. June 16, 2018 AND RANCH HAVEN, LLC. 5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2017. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ms 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 14th day of June 2017, by the following vote -to -wit: E4—Pg50 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-64 TIME EXTENSION DRC2017-00430 - GOLDEN MEADOWLAND, LLC. AND RANCH HAVEN, LLC. June 14, 2017 Page 4 AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: E4—Pg51 E STAFF REPORT DATE: June 14, 2017 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Candyce Burnett, City Planner INITIATED BY: Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20042 — NH WEAVER LANE, LLC - A request to subdivide 18.2-acres of land into 26 lots for the purposes of developing 26 single-family residences for a site located on the east side of Carnelian Street and north of Hillside Road in the Very Low (VL) District (.1 — 2 Dwelling Units per Acre), the Hillside Overlay District and the Equestrian Overlay District. APN: 1061-261-01. Related records: Hillside Design Review DRC2016- 00377, Variance DRC2016-00748, Variance DRC2017-00014 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2016-00376. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND HILLSIDE DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016- 00377 — NH WEAVER LANE, LLC - A request for site plan and architectural review of 26 single-family residences on 18.2-acres of land related to Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042, located on the east side of Carnelian Street and north of Hillside Road in the Very Low (VL) District (.1-2 Dwelling Units per Acre) the Hillside Overlay District and the Equestrian Overlay District. APN: 1061-261-01. Related records: Tentative Tract Map SUBT720042, Variance DRC2016-00748, Variance DRC2017-00014 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2016-00376. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VARIANCE DRC2016-00748 - NH WEAVER LANE, LLC - A request to reduce the required lot depth of Lots #11 - #15 by approximately 13 feet related to Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 located on the east side of Carnelian Street and north of Hillside Road in the Very Low (VL) District (.1 — 2 Dwelling Units per Acre the Hillside Overlay District and the Equestrian Overlay District. APN: 1061-261-01, Related records: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042, Hillside Design Review DRC2016-00377, Variance DRC2017-00014 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2016-00376. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENT ASSESSMENT AND VARIANCE DRC2017-00014 - NH WEAVER LANE, LLC - A request to reduce the rear yard setback on Lot #16 by approximately 23 feet related Hillside Design Review DRC2016-00377, located on the east side of Carnelian Street and north of Hillside Road in the Very Low (VL) District (.1 — 2 Dwelling Units per Acre), the Hillside Overlay District and the Equestrian Overlay District. APN: 1061-261-01. Related records: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042, E5—E9 Pg1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT SUBTT20042, HDR DRC2016-00377, VARIANCE DRC2016-00748. VARIANCE DRC2017-00014 AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2016-00376 NH WEAVER LANE, LLC JUNE 14, 2017 Page 2 Hillside Design Review DRC2016-00377, Variance DRC2016-00748 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2016-00376. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2016-00376 - NH WEAVER LANE, LLC —A request to remove 7 heritage trees related to Hillside Design Review DRC2016-00377, located on the east side of Carnelian and north of Hillside Roald in the Very Low (VL) Development District (.1 — 2 Dwelling Units per Acre), the Hillside Overlay District and the Equestrian Overlay District. APN: 1061-261-01. Related records: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042. Hillside Design Review DRC2016-00377, Variance DRC2016- 00748 and Variance DRC2017-00014. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission take the following actions: • Adopt the attached Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts; and Approve Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042, Hillside Design Review DRC2016-00377, Variance DRC2016-00748, Variance DRC2017-00014 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2016-00376. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Project Density: 1.43 dwelling units per acre. Surrounding Land Uses, General Plan Designations and Zoning: Land Use General Plan Zoning Site Single -Family Residence Very Low Residential (.1-2 Very Low (VL) Residential du/ac) District North Single -Family Very Low Residential (.1-2 Very Low (VL) Residential Residences du/ac) District South Single -Family Very Low Residential (.1-2 Very Low (VL) Residential Residences du/ac District East Single -Family Very Low Residential (.1-2 Very Low (VL) Residential Residences du/ac) District West Single -Family Very Low Residential (.1-2 Very Low (VL) Residential Residences du/ac) District C. Site Characteristics: The project site is a mostly vacant property of 18.2-acres located at the northeast corner of Carnelian Street and Cherry Lane, about 665 feet north of Hillside Road. The project site is generally rectangular in shape with dimensions of about 663 feet (north -south) by 1,324 feet (east -west). The site has street frontage along Carnelian Street of about 334 feet. The project site and all surrounding properties are within the Very Low (VL) District, the Hillside Overlay E5—E9 Pg2 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT SUBTT20042, HDR DRC2016-00377, VARIANCE DRC2016-00748. VARIANCE DRC2017-00014 AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2016-00376 NH WEAVER LANE, LLC JUNE 14, 2017 Page 3 District and the Equestrian Overlay District. It is crossed by three ephemeral drainage features and is covered by non-native grasses, ornamental vegetation and disturbed habitat and along with seven heritage trees. The site includes a single-family residence that was constructed in the 1980s and a number of outbuildings used for storage. The Archaeological Study (Brian F. Smith and Associates Inc; February 2017) prepared for the project site determined that the on -site structures proposed for demolition do not meet the criteria to be determined as a historic resource. ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant is requesting to subdivide (Tentative Tract SUBTT20042) the 18.2-acres of land located at the northeast corner of Carnelian Street and Cherry Lane into 26 residential lots. The project will have private streets and will take access from Carnelian Street from a gated entrance. The proposed tentative tract map includes 26 numbered lots and 11 lettered lots. Lettered Lots A — K will be maintained by a Home Owner's Association (including the equestrian trails), and lettered Lot L is for street dedications (along Carnelian Street). The difficult existing onsite conditions were created by the presence of onsite streams discussed in the following paragraphs. These site conditions necessitated multiple environmental reports and entitlements. The result is oddly shaped lots and two Variance requests and a necessity for a bridge to be constructed to cross a stream that is to be preserved in place. The three ephemeral streams that cross the project site necessitated the submission of a jurisdictional delineation to determine whether the water drainages constitute being classified as Waters of the United States (WUS) under the Clean Water Act (CWA). If determined to be Waters of the United States, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has the authority to permit the discharge of dredged or fill material into Water of the United States under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The General Biological Assessment and Jurisdictional Delineation prepared for the project (Hernandez Environmental Services) determined that two of the onsite ephemeral streams meet the criteria to be classified as Waters of the United States (WUS) and should be protected in place. The third stream has been determined to not meet the criteria to be classified as a WUS and the seasonal rains carried by this ephemeral stream will be carried in an underground drainage facility to an existing spillway located on the property to the south. The presence of the two ephemeral streams results in 6 oddly -shaped lots (Lots #5, #6, #16, #24, #25 and #26). Additionally, the width of the project site, which dictates the proposed street alignment, creates 5 lots (Lots #11 — #15) at the center of the project site that do not adhere to the 200-foot minimum lot depth requirement. These five lots have a lot depth of approximately 187 feet. As the streets are private, i.e., not publicly accessible nor publicly maintained, lot depth. is measured from the front property line (behind the curb face of the street) to the rear property line. A 20-foot wide vehicle access easement located on Lot #10 will be provided to allow access for the City's Public Works Department to maintain the aforementioned spillway along the south property line, behind Lot #9. This easement will also allow vehicle access to the property located to the south of the project site, at 8900 Hillside Road. The owner of that property stores his E5—E9 Pg3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT SUBTT20042, HDR DRC2016-00377, VARIANCE DRC2016-00748. VARIANCE DRC2017-00014 AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2016-00376 NH WEAVER LANE, LLC JUNE 14, 2017 Page 4 recreational vehicles on the northern portion of his property. To access that part of his property, he currently drives through the project site. Although his property has street frontage along Hillside Road, it is difficult for him to access the northern portion of his lot from Hillside Road due to the terrain and presence of mature trees. The easement will allow him to continue to access his property as he currently does. The applicant has worked to try to conform to all of the related development requirements for the project site. However, due to the existing site constraints, the applicant has requested a Variance (DRC2016-00748) for lot depth for 5 lots and a Variance (DRC2017-00014) for a rear yard setback reduction for one lot. The existing onsite steams, the width of the project site and the fact that the site is surrounded by existing development together create a set of unusual circumstances that make it difficult to adhere to all of the related development criteria. Additionally, the single point of vehicle access from Carnelian Street dictates that the proposed street layout either be designed as proposed by the applicant, with a looping street, or alternatively as a cul-de-sac. The proposed looping street design creates five lots at the center of the project site that are through lots that are approximately 13 feet deficient from meeting the required 200-foot lot depth, necessitating the consideration of a Variance for lot depth. Without the Variance, the project street would be designed as a cul-de-sac, reducing the number of lots and creating lots up to 300 feet in depth, much deeper (and subsequently larger in size) than the existing lots in the surrounding area. B. Hillside Development: The Development Code (Section 17.52.020) requires that when subdividing land within the Hillside Development area with slope conditions of 8% or greater, land use density is limited by slope zones through a Land Capacity Schedule. A Slope Density Analysis is to be performed to verify the maximum density permitted on the project site based on the slope conditions. The project includes a Slope Density Analysis which demonstrates that 17.23-acres of the 18.2-acre project site is made up of land with natural grades of less than 10 percent, which has a capacity ratio of 1.0 or 100 percent of the maximum permitted density for the zoning district. The remainder of the project site is made up of 0.72-acres of stream bed and 0.24-acres of slopes over 30 percent directly adjacent to the stream beds. The Slope Density Calculation provided on the plans exclude both the stream beds and the adjacent slopes from the density calculation. Based on the remaining 17.23-acres of land with slopes less than 10 percent, a maximum 34 lots could theoretically be developed on the project site (based on 2 lots per acre - 17.23-acres x 2 dwelling units per acre). The applicant proposes developing 26 lots on the project site. All of the 26 proposed lots are outside of the 100-year flood plain. C. Subdivision (SUBTT20042): The required minimum lot size in the Very Low (VL) District is 20,000 square feet and the required average lot size is 22,500 square feet. The proposed lots range in size from 20,000 to 33,473 square feet, with an average lot size of 23,773. The minimum required lot width is 90 feet for interior lots and 100 feet for corner lots and the minimum required lot depth is 200 feet. Each lot conforms to the required minimum lot width, and all but five lots (Lots #11 - #15), meet the required lot depth. These five lots conform to the minimum lot size requirement and a Variance (DRC2016-00748) has been submitted requesting a 13-foot reduction in the lot depth requirement. Lots #11 - #15 are double frontage lots with the equestrian trails directly adjacent to the private street to the south. The project site includes a gated single point of access from Carnelian Street. Building and Safety Fire Construction Services Fire Services has reviewed the project and has determined that a E5—E9 Pg4 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT SUBTT20042, HDR DRC2016-00377, VARIANCE DRC2016-00748. VARIANCE DRC2017-00014 AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2016-00376 NH WEAVER LANE, LLC JUNE14,2017 Page 5 single point of access is acceptable as the project site is surrounded by single-family residential development, is not adjacent to a wildland-urban interface area and is less than 1 mile from the nearest fire station (Fire Station 177, 927 Rancho Street). Additionally, all the residences will include fire sprinklers and the final landscape plans will be reviewed for compliance with requirements of the Very High Fire Severity Zone. It should be noted that the only potential 2nd point of access would be through Whirlaway Court to the east, which was never intended to be extended to the west and would necessitate that the applicant purchase land from the single- family homeowners to the east, reducing their lot sizes and increasing vehicle traffic in front of their residences. D. Hillside Design Review (DRC2016-00377): The project includes the Design Review of the residences on the 26 new lots. Three separate floor plans are proposed, along with three different elevations for each floor plan, Spanish Colonial, Country Cottage and Italian Farmhouse. Plan #1 is single -story and includes 3,689 square feet of living area, a 643 square foot 3-car garage, a 493 square foot casita and a 360 square foot veranda. Plan #2 is two-story and includes 4,413 square feet of living area, a 710 square foot 3-car garage, a 521 square foot Casita and a 585 square foot veranda. Plan #3 is two-story and includes 4,977 square feet of living area, a 676 square foot garage, a 453 square foot casita and a 273 square foot veranda. The Development Code requires that projects with 21 — 40 units provide five different floor plans and three elevations per floor plan. Reverse footprints are counted as a separate floor plan. The project includes reverse floor plans for each plan type for a total of six different floor plans and three elevations per floor plan, exceeding the minimum requirement. The Development Code also requires that projects consisting of four or more units include a minimum of 25 percent single - story plans. The project includes nine single -story plans, two single -story plans in excess of the minimum requirement. Each floor plan and architectural variation includes wall and roof plane articulation and carries the architectural design theme to each elevation (360 degree architecture). Each plan includes design elements that emphasize the chosen architectural style including the use of stone veneer, wood/shake siding, exposed rafter tails, architecturally correct window and door surrounds, window shutters, wrought iron accents and tile roofs. The plans also includes the use of decorative garage and front entry doors that emphasize the architectural style. The maximum permitted lot coverage in the Very Low (VL) District is 25 percent. The proposed lot coverage ranges from 12.4 percent to 24.9 percent. Each lot conforms to or exceeds the minimum required building setbacks of 42 feet (plus or minus 5 feet) for the front setback, 60 feet for the rear setback and 10 feet and 15 feet for the side setbacks, except for the rear yard setback on Lot #16, which has a proposed rear setback of 37 feet. This corner lot is oddly shaped due to being adjacent an ephemeral stream, which causes the lot to narrow from approximately 128 feet along the north property line to 70 feet along the south property line. The Development Code dictates that the front property line is the narrowest lot line facing the public street, which in this case is the south property line. The narrowing of Lot #16 and the on - site slopes limit moving the house southward to comply with the 60-foot rear yard setback. The proposed house configuration provides for an 89-foot front yard setback, 39-foot and 28-foot side E5—E9 Pg5 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT SUBTT20042, HDR DRC2016-00377, VARIANCE DRC2016-00748. VARIANCE DRC2017-00014 AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2016-00376 NH WEAVER LANE, LLC JUNE14,2017 Page 6 yard setbacks and a 37-foot rear yard setback. The applicant has submitted a Variance (DRC2017-00014) requesting a reduction in the required rear yard setback. The developed portion of the project site has natural grades of less than 10 percent. The proposed grading is similar to the lots to the north, south, east and west, which were flat -padded for the foundation of the residences. The applicant has worked with the surrounding homeowners to protect the existing view corridors and plot single -story residences on specific lots to address concerns over loss of existing views raised by the adjacent residents. The grading for the entire site was designed to balance the cut and fill earthwork, to reduce the necessity for retaining walls and to provide a usable rear yard area that includes a flat corral pad on each lot. The proposed residences are less than 30 feet in height and conform to the 30-foot building envelope requirement. The project site is within the Very High Fire Zone and the final landscape plan will be reviewed for compliance with the fuel modification, plant species and plant spacing requirements for projects within the Very High Fire Zone. The landscape plan submitted for the project includes a draught tolerant plant palette. E. Equestrian Trails: The project includes the required internal network of 15-foot wide private local equestrian trails that will serve each of the 26 residential lots and that will be maintained by the home owner's association for the development. A 20-foot wide Community Trail will be constructed along Carnelian Street as identified in the General Plan. The Community Trail is incomplete in this area of the City, and as a result, the new segment will currently not directly connect with the rest of the Community Trail system. The nearest completed segments of the Community Trail along Carnelian Street is 0.5-mile to the south, at the intersection of Carnelian Street and Wilson Avenue, and 0.25-mile to the north, adjacent to the Maloof residence (5131 Carnelian Street). The internal network of local trails will provide direct access to an existing equestrian trail located at the northeast corner of the project site (east of Lot #17) and along the south property line (south of Lot #4). Due to the unusual layout of the private equestrian trail network, the alignments of the trails vary and are summarized as follows: Lots #1 -#5: The trail will be located along the south property line and access will be provided at the rear of these lots. This segment of the trail will provide direct connection to the Community Trail along Carnelian Street and will terminate at Lot #5. A hammerhead vehicle turnaround will be provided between Lots #4 and #5. The trail cannot continue beyond Lot #5, due to the on -site stream and a retention basin. 2. Lots #6 - #10: The trail will be located along the south property line and on the east side of Lot #9. This trail does not continue to the east project boundary due to the drainage spillway located south of Lot #9. This segment of trail terminates at Lot #6 with a hammerhead vehicle turnaround, which will partially be on an easement provided by the property owner to the south. Trail access for Lot #10 will be provided by the north -south trail on Lot #9. Lots #11 - #15: The trail will be located along the south property line of these lots, adjacent to the private street. This segment of trail will include a split rail equestrian fence between the trail and the private street. This trail will connect to the Community Trail along Carnelian Street ES—E9 Pg6 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT SUBTT20042, HDR DRC2016-00377, VARIANCE DRC2016-00748. VARIANCE DRC2017-00014 AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2016-00376 NH WEAVER LANE, LLC JUNE14,2017 Page 7 via a proposed trail on the south side of Lots #16, #25 and #26. The bridge over the stream will include an equestrian trail. This trail will also connect to a proposed segment of trail adjacent to the eastern project boundary, which will connect to a proposed trail along the side and rear property lines of Lots #16 —#24. 4. Lots #16 - #24: The trail will be located along the side property line of Lots #16, #17 and #24 and the rear property line of Lots #17 - #24. This portion of trail will also be used by Rancho Cucamonga Public Works to maintain the drainage inlet at the rear of Lot #19. This portion of trail is wider than 15 feet and includes radius corner cutoffs to allow larger maintenance vehicles to maneuver the trail. 5. Lots #25 and #26: The trail will be located along the eastern property line of Lot #26 and will terminate at Lot #26. Vehicles servicing the equestrian uses on Lot #25 will use the vehicle driveway on this lot and thus a vehicle turnaround is not necessary. As stated above, a trail also runs along the south property line of Lots #25 and #26 to provide trail access to the Community Trail along Carnelian Street. A portion of this trail connection will also cross Lots D and E, which are designated as open space and will be maintained by the homeowners association. Each lot will include a graded pad of 576 square feet (12 X 48-feet or 12 X 24-feet) for the purpose of future equestrian corrals. These pads are a minimum of 70 feet from the adjacent residences. With the exception of Lot #1, the corral pads are located adjacent to the trail. The corral pad on Lot #1 is located on the north side of a 2:1 slope —this location is necessary to provide the required 70-foot separation from residences on the adjacent lots. The corral pad on Lot #1 includes a 5:1 graded connection to the 15-foot wide equestrian trail easement along the south property line. Each lot also provides railroad tie steps to maneuver the 2:1 slope from the flat yard area to the corral pad and trail. All trails will include a decomposed granite surface with the required depth of 4 inches. The trails along the private streets will include a two -rail equestrian fence. The required gates and equestrian step-thru will be provided where the private equestrian trails intersect with the Community Trail along Carnelian Street. The applicant proposes a combination wall/fence, consisting of a 3-foot high block wall topped by a 3-foot high wrought iron fence along the equestrian trails. In most cases the trails are separated from the required 15-foot flat rear yards by either up or downhill 2:1 slopes. A similar combination wall/fence design was approved by the Trails Advisory Committee on December 8, 2009, for a residential subdivision (Tract 18122) that is currently under construction at the northeast corner of East Avenue and the 210 Freeway. Variances: The project includes a Variance (DRC2016-00748) for a 13-foot reduction in the lot depth requirement for Lots #11 - #15. The proposed street design creates five lots at the center of the project site that are deficient from meeting the required 200-foot lot depth. Each of these lots will comply with the minimum lot size requirement of 20,000 square feet. Without the Variance, the project street would be designed as a cul-de-sac, reducing the number of lots and creating lots up to 300 feet deep, much deeper than the existing lots in the surrounding area. The applicant is also requesting a Variance (DRC2017-00014) to reduce the required rear yard setback on Lot #16, which has a proposed rear setback of 37 feet. This corner lot is oddly shaped due to being adjacent to the ephemeral stream, which causes the lot to narrow from approximately 128 feet along the north property line to 70 feet along the south property line. The findings of facts below support the necessary findings, which are required by the City's Development Code: E5—E9 Pg7 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT SUBTT20042, HDR DRC2016-00377, VARIANCE DRC2016-00748. VARIANCE DRC2017-00014 AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2016-00376 NH WEAVER LANE, LLC JUNE 14, 2017 Page 8 Variance for Lot Deoth (DRC2016-00748 Finding: Strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would result in a difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this Code. Fact: The reduction in the required lot depth is necessary due to the existing shape and topography of the project site. Without the lot depth reduction, the project would be required to be redesigned reducing the number of lots and creating lots up to 300 feet in depth, much deeper, and in turn larger, than the existing lots in the surrounding area. Finding: 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 zone. Fact: The shape of the project site, surrounding development, onsite grades and two existing ephemeral streams place limitations on the design of the internal street network. These limitations do not generally apply to the surrounding lot or lots in the same zone. Finding: Strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same zone. Fact: The project site is within the Very Low (VL) District which requires that lots have a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet and an average lot size of 22,500 square feet. Without the lot depth reduction, the project would need to be redesigned, reducing the number of lots and subsequently increasing the size of the remaining lots to be much larger than the required minimum or average lot sizes in the zoning district and then the existing lots in the surrounding area. Not approving the Variance would deprive the applicant of development rights enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. Finding: The granting of the Variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same zone. Fact: It is not uncommon to grant a Variance to reduce a required lot dimension for a limited number of lots within a subdivision when the majority of the lots are in compliance and there are site conditions that preclude all of the lots from complying. The proposed Variance for a reduction in the required lot depth for five lots (Lots #11 - #15) within a 26-lot subdivision, will not constitute a grant of special privilege as existing site conditions, including the shape of the project site, surrounding development and the two onsite ephemeral streams limit alternative site designs without reducing the number of lots. Finding: 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. Fact: The reduction in the required lot depth for five lots within the proposed 26-lot subdivision will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity, as the reduction will not preclude the keeping of horses and will be E5—E9 Pg8 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT SUBTT20042, HDR DRC2016-00377, VARIANCE DRC2016-00748. VARIANCE DRC2017-00014 AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2016-00376 NH WEAVER LANE, LLC JUNE 14, 2017 Page 9 in keeping with other subdivisions in the surrounding area and with the intent of the Very Low (VL) District. Additionally, staff has prepared an environmental review for the proposed project and has determined that with the inclusion of mitigation measures the project will have a less than significant impact on the environment. Variance for Rear Yard Setback (DRC2017-00014): Finding: Strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would result in a difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this Code. Fact: The reduction in the required rear yard setback for Lot #16 from 60 to 37 feet is necessary due to the odd shape of the lot. The lot is adjacent to an ephemeral stream on the project site, which causes Lot #16 to narrow from approximately 128 feet along the north property line to 70 feet along the south property line. Lot #16 meets all other development criteria and provides for an extra deep front yard setback and adequate room for the required horse corral area. Without the rear yard setback reduction, Lot #16 would need to be eliminated, increasing the size of the adjacent lots to be significantly larger than the other lots in the subdivision and in the surrounding area. Finding: 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 zone. Fact: The lot is adjacent to an ephemeral stream on the project site, which causes Lot #16 to narrow from approximately 128 feet along the north property line to 70 feet along the south property line. These limitations do not generally apply to the surrounding lot or lots in the same zone. Finding: Strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same zone. Fact: The project site is within the Very Low (VL) District, which requires a 60-foot rear yard setback. Without the rear yard setback reduction, Lot #16 would not comply with the rear yard setback requirement and would need to be eliminated. Lot #16 complies with all other development criteria for the Very Low (VL) District and exceeds the minimum lot size for the district by 6,457 square feet. Elimination of the lot would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district as the project will be of similar size to other lot in the same district and in the surrounding area. Finding: The granting of the Variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same zone. Fact: It is not uncommon to grant a Variance to reduce a required lot dimension when there are unusual site and topographic conditions that preclude compliance. The proposed Variance for a reduction in the required rear yard setback for 'Lot #16, will not constitute a grant of special privilege as there are special circumstances which apply to the subject lot that do not apply to other lots in the surrounding area. The subject lot narrows from approximately 128 feet to 70 feet due to being'adjacent to an ephemeral stream. E5—E9 Pg9 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TTSUBTT20042, HDR DRC2016-00377, VARIANCE DRC2016-00748. VARIANCE DRC2017-00014 AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2016-00376 NH WEAVER LANE, LLC JUNE 14, 2017 Page 10 Finding: 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. Fact: The reduction in the required rear yard setback for Lot #16, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity, as the lot is 6,457 square feet larger than the minimum lot size requirement and will be in keeping with the other lots in the subdivision and in the surrounding area. G. Tree Removal Permit (DRC2016-00376): There are seven trees on the project site that qualify to be classified as heritage trees. An Arborist Report (March 18, 2016) was submitted to determine the condition of the on -site trees. The on -site trees include a Mimosa tree (40-50 foot grown spread), three Samuel Ash trees (20-30 foot crown spread) and three Date Palm trees (15-20 foot crown spread). The report concludes that the trees are generally in good condition (each tree is given a "C" rating), but will need to be removed as they are in conflict with the proposed site improvements. The applicant will be required to replace removed trees on a one -for -one basis as well as plant the required two trees in the front yard area of each residence. H. Neighborhood Meeting: On January 17, 2017, a neighborhood meeting was conducted by the applicant at the Goldy S. Lewis Community Center (11200 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. Approximately thirty (30) neighbors attended the meeting and expressed concerns about view preservation, proposed project walls and traffic. 1. Preservation of Views: Several neighbors raised concerns regarding loss of their existing views. The applicant informed the neighbors to the north of the project site (Strang Lane) that the building pads for the lots to the south of their lots were more than 20 feet below their rear yard areas, which will greatly minimize, if not eliminate, view impacts. Additionally 3 of the 8 lots along the north property line are single -story plans, further reducing any potential view loss. Several neighbors to the south of the project site were also concerned about loss of their existing views. The applicant worked with these neighbors after the meeting and additional single -story plans were plotted along the south property line to reduce any potential view impacts. 2. Walls around Development: Several neighbors along Strang Lane, to the north of the project site, expressed concerns about the types of walls that were proposed along the north property line of the project site. The applicant discussed the situation with these residents at the meeting and followed up with them after the meeting. From these discussions, the applicant proposed a solution whereby the neighbors to the west of the drainage inlet will receive a 6- foot high solid block wall, while the neighbors to the east of the inlet will receive a combination block wall (bottom 3 feet) and a wrought iron fence (top 3 feet). 3. Potential Increased Traffic: A neighbor expressed a concern regarding a potential for increased traffic. The applicant informed them that the level of traffic created by the project will be minor and will not negatively impact traffic along Carnelian Street. Design Review Committee: The project was reviewed and approved as presented by the Design Review Committee (DRC) on March 14, 2017. Staff provided a project overview to the Committee. E5—E9 Pg10 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT SUBTT20042, HDR DRC2016-00377, VARIANCE DRC2016-00748. VARIANCE DRC2017-00014 AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2016-00376 NH WEAVER LANE, LLC JUNE14,2017 Page 11 Commissioner Macias asked staff whether each lot provided an adequate area for a horse corral that met the required 70-foot buffer from the neighboring residences. He also stated that he wanted staff to provide the Commissioners with an update at the Planning Commission meeting outlining how the future homeowner would be informed about the maximum permitted lot coverage. Staff informed the Committee that each lot would provide the required horse corral area at the required separation distance from the neighboring residences. The applicant, Bryan Avilla, provided the Committee with a brief overview on the design of the project site and stated that they would provide the new property owners with a disclosure statement outlining the maximum permitted lot coverage. The meeting was then opened for public comment. Joseph Cowan, president of the Alta Loma Riding Club, asked whether project density was calculated from gross lot size and stated that the Alta Loma Riding Club was concerned the project only provided one (1) point of access, that the equestrian trail system did not loop and that the lots that were near maximum lot coverage would not be able to provide for the construction of a covered corral area considering the maximum lot coverage allowed. Staff stated that lot coverage was calculated from gross lot size, as required by the Development Code. The applicant stated that the stream bed running through the site limited the ability to provide a loop trail and that the property owners of the public street to the east were opposed to a street connection with the project. A second member of the public, Mrs. Judith Brennan, asked whether the project would provide an equestrian connection to Carnelian Street and asked whether a horse trail could be provided adjacent to the east property line, so that horses and walkers would not be required to walk in the street. Staff stated that the project would provide two equestrian connection points to Carnelian Street and that they would have the applicant investigate whether it was technically feasible to provide an equestrian trail along the east property line. The Committee then recommended that the project move forward to the Trail Advisory Committee for their review and to Planning Commission for final review. J. Technical Review Committee: The project was reviewed and approved as presented by the Technical Review Committee (TRC) on March 14, 2017. K. Trails Advisory Committee: The project was reviewed by the Trails Advisory Committee on April 12, 2017. Staff presented the project and the proposed trail network and equestrian related improvements associated with the project. Staff also provided a number of options on how a segment of the trail system along the eastern boundary of the project site could be designed to provide a loop trail system. The Committee and the public raised a number of concerns regarding access, equestrian gate locations, how density for the project was calculated, lot coverage, and stability of the proposed roadway "bridge" across one of the existing ephemeral streams within the project site. The major question was whether the project should construct an equestrian bridge over an existing drainage culvert, located along the east property line of the project site. This culvert creates an obstacle to accessing the existing private equestrian trail within the residential tract to the east. It was determined that as the culvert and the trail to the east were located on private property not controlled by the applicant, that the applicant could not be required to provide a bridge over the culvert. Commissioner Douglas raised concerns over the location of the trail gates being adjacent to the corral areas, the high lot coverage on four of the lots and the stability of the proposed bridge over the on -site stream, The applicant agreed to adjust the locations of the trail gates to not be directly E5—E9 Pg11 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT SUBTT20042, HDR DRC2016-00377, VARIANCE DRC2016-00748. VARIANCE DRC2017-00014 AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2016-00376 NH WEAVER LANE, LLC JUNE 14, 2017 Page 12 adjacent to the corral pad areas and informed the Commissioners that each lot would be able to provide a minimum 200 square foot covered area over the equestrian corrals. Additionally, they stated that the homes included a large amount of covered outdoor patio space, reducing the likelihood that the future homeowners would construct additional covered outdoor areas. In regards to construction materials proposed for the roadway bridge over the onsite stream, the applicant informed the Commissioners that the majority of the flows historically carried by the on - site stream have been diverted northerly of the project site and that they would ensure that the bridge was adequately engineered for flows carried by the stream. A member of the public asked how density for the project was calculated and was concerned that the lots would be smaller than the existing lots in the area. Staff stated that density was based on gross lot area as required by the Development Code and that the individual lots conformed to the minimum lot size requirement for the Very Low (VL) District of 20,000 square feet and the average lot size of 22,500 square feet. A second resident commended the applicants for adding a trail segment along the eastern boundary of the project site to create a loop trail system within the project site and that they would like to see the bridge over the existing culvert located on the tract of houses to the east. The meeting concluded at 7:30 p.m., with the Commissioners agreeing that the proposed design of the eastern leg of the trail system with a 4-foot sidewalk and an 8-foot equestrian trail was the preferred design and recommended that the project move forward to the Planning Commission for final review with the only recommended change being the relocation of the trail access gates. L. Communication from the Alta Loma Riding Club: The City received a letter dated April 12, 2017, (Exhibit J) from the Alta Loma Riding Club regarding the project. The letter raised a number of issues regarding the project including how the density of the project was calculated, compliance with the Equestrian and Hillside Overlay Districts and the lack of two points of emergency access. Staff responses to the concerns are summarized below: Calculation of Proiect Density: Project density was calculated from gross lot area (18.2- acres) as required by the Development Code. The proposed density is 1.43 dwelling units per acre, within the permitted density of .1 — 2 dwelling units per acre). 2. Slope Density Analysis: A slope density analysis was performed for the project which determined that 17.23-acres of the 18.2-acre project site are made up of land with natural grades of less than 10 percent. Based on the remaining 17.23 acres of land with slopes less than 10 percent, a maximum 34 lots could theoretically be developed on the project site. Equestrian Overlay: As proposed, each lot within the proposed subdivision is the minimum 20,000 square feet necessary to keep horses and provides for the required minimum 24 x 24 foot or 12 x 48 foot corral area. The corral areas conform to the required minimum 70-foot separation from the residences on the adjacent lots and each lot has direct access to a minimum 15-foot wide private equestrian trail. Physical constraints created by the on -site streambeds, however, restrict the project from providing a looping trail system throughout the entire development. The project does provide a shorter looping trail system serving 16 of the lots, which is accessible to all of the lots within the subdivision and to the larger community. The project also provides direct equestrian connections to the two existing private equestrian trails on adjacent lots that currently dead-end into the project site and to the future community E5—E9 Pg12 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT SUBTT20042, HDR DRC2016-00377, VARIANCE DRC2016-00748. VARIANCE DRC2017-00014 AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2016-00376 NH WEAVER LANE, LLC JUNE 14, 2017 Page 13 trail on Carnelian Street, for which the applicant will construct their potion of the trail. Additionally, the project will provide trail access to the seven lots north of the project site, which currently do not have trail access. 4. Hillside Overlay: The developed portion of the project site has natural grades of less than 10 percent. The proposed grading is similar to the lots to the north, south, east and west, which were flat padded for the foundation of the residences. The applicant has worked with the surrounding homeowners to protect the existing view corridors and plot single -story residences on specific lots to address adjacent resident view concerns. The grading for the entire site was designed to balance the cut and fill earthwork, to reduce the necessity for retaining walls and to provide a usable rear yard area that includes a flat corral pad on each lot. Each residence conforms to the 30-foot maximum height limit. 5. Access: Building and Safety Fire Construction Services has reviewed the project and has determined that a single point of access is acceptable as the project site is surrounded by single-family residential development and is not adjacent to a wildland-urban interface area, the site is less than 1 mile from the nearest fire station (Fire Station 177, 927 Rancho Street), all the residences will include fire sprinklers and the final landscape plans will be reviewed for compliance with requirements of the Very High Fire Severity Zone. It should be noted that the only potential 2nd access point would be through Whirlaway Court to the east, which was never intended to be extend to the west and would necessitate that the applicant purchase land from the single-family homeowners to the east, reducing their lot sizes and increasing vehicle traffic in front of the residences. M. AB52 Tribal Consultation: In conformance with California Assembly Bill AB 52, on February 6, 2017, staff sent notice of the proposed project to the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, the San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians and the Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians. The City has not been contacted to date in regards to the AB 52 notification letter. N. Environmental Assessment: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures related to air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and waste materials, hydrology and water quality, land use, planning and noise, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. A Mitigation Monitoring Program has also been prepared to ensure implementation of, and compliance with, the mitigation measures for the project. 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. E5—E9 Pg13 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT SUBTT20042, HDR DRC2016-00377, VARIANCE DRC2016-00748. VARIANCE DRC2017-00014 AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2016-00376 NH WEAVER LANE, LLC JUNE14,2017 Page 14 FISCAL IMPACT: The vacant project site currently is assessed $3,021.55 annually in property tax, with a City share of $154.40 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 $9,178.71 annually. The project proponent also will be responsible for paying one-time impact fees. These fees are intended to address the increased demand for City services due to the proposed project. The following types of services that these impact fees would support include the following: library services, transportation infrastructure, drainage infrastructure, animal services, police, parks, and community and recreation services. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the, Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site. No correspondence has been received in response to these notices. EXHIBITS: Exhibit A - Site Utilization Plan Exhibit B - Tentative Tract Map (SUBTT20042) Exhibit C - Site Plans Exhibit D - Conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan Exhibit E - Architectural Plans Exhibit F - Landscape Plan Exhibit G - Design Review Committee Action Agenda & Comments Exhibit H - Trails Advisory Committee Action Agenda & Comments Exhibit I - Initial Study Parts I, ll, and III Exhibit J - Correspondence from ALRC dated April 12, 2017 Draft Resolution of Approval for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 Draft Resolution of Approval for Hillside Design Review DRC2016-00377 Draft Resolution of Approval for Variance DRC2016-00748 Draft Resolution of Approval for Variance DRC2017-00014 Draft Resolution of Approval for Tree Removal Permit DRC2016-00376 CB:TV/Is E5—E9 Pg14 I b -;N(r, I E 5 - E 9 P g 15 aafpGipGiy@$yp%q� z' , I I e + Io e $ eoee�o 5 a i g ga 7c , I 19N15tt31 yy 8�.]� �$ I' i hl I F �g 9999 11E , 2 MIX °� tl � p t I g L]tl O I lr € a I. W3NY HM9NWJ -y 4�N A.Tn �. Will II II EXHIBIT B E5—E9Pg16 ree% ] - d W EXHIBIT C E5—E9 Pgl7 t I• g 9 § dot 3 fl a •, a�8as�u u ' I i I e�fF i r , HIM IIIM, I = it I I �Eesaa J I. I I _ _. ,��eJR(]A'A�4ISulR�� —N.l tte.ee1umKmrv�n— • ' i � lv, Jximrmm yp �\ E5—E9 Pg18 A'L E5-E9 Pg19 Ao P I� 7 it I r. I-{1��� �L�t ' :� � !', ! `'•`1 _� i ��-tom_ I ' 1` ,-- I'` r J N l jf PRELIM REO.. DRRCNUiU U1 PLANNING GSEA SUOTT:Jp1: i • IIW II LLIIJCVV ♦ - APN t%Ri.M t Ne�v�and GRADING AND FUTURE CORRALS TENTAnVE TRACT NO.iM1: _ CRY OF WW CFO CUCAMONGA 1 :q f I L I` EXHIBIT D ll!ill!l9flf49flif!}111lY1555555�5555E ��;ba9;d`aas;3aoo°o:eveei;5< e e B a5a;;a s?3368z e 9 5 3531: �u�?��k¢N�d��dF i a 9idxA:5rt9§"saa93:5° g a3k A �ppv r�r �i—-- E5-E9Pg21 m vt qD m v to N N nwr� SECTION A -A Kf 1�p .o p C L Ra. ,mn mr M #t SECTON D-D P ` I SECTION 9-D rv:✓ ce o 4,u ,oip l•xnfl �' ` iu� SECTON C—C rtxW�'a i TM'n 7 ...u'ini Pau a .-cnP, SECTION F-E xl alp SFCII(IN F-F u-io° sc. f mfn �T w¢ 14 w41 Eofr xry oM � Mtr �P'OS[o oW i e ,or F I�r mr r I _ YY um' m nr oa 3) SEC110NG-L SECT oN.f=HSELTCN J-J rE.p SECIIDN I -I tP,:i1 e e _ rc MNI H�[�Sl i„nr ------------ SECTION K-K e .urna I I RFUON O-O .(v fnP I uo I 7 I' ler rcl oyt YC 5ECn Hxl'.ra e e i TYPICAL STREET SECTION P-P rr^i,.� mviw[ SECTON N—N m rcxe ES—E9 Pg24 .vnw�.a=*. .tee •. .ema.fm.fe i u.rr. mm.ruru mn .��nr...—u.'n..r. n _ .,....do. ._..«..... ,...a...rr a «w, i ....,..... .r.m 4 y .✓Y Y .nu..n nu ..«.._ L e.y .Nay._..swvneu�+v..urwgr. aNnev �rmy.mr [n,xm.l yemL �nhvn � n�✓�mrerm�rmnuw r u Y � 9 O 49i 9z9 d a � w U q al.I3c;311 # 4ad::38iBi:!!�" A..[AaAB.^^.• aB8846tlB8888aaR ! _egir �a_88688888Bag888aR=386 a eE 3ZB98aaaa9agaaeRaesasae a a 89aa °�$88�8 aaaa E5-E9 Pg26 E5-E9 Pg27 E5—E9 Pg28 m I m ....! aM ,.. All - - n - EXHIBIT E E5-E9Pg30 m to I m UD v to w i i I PLAN 1 LIVING 3689 SF CASITA 493 SF VERANDA 360 SF GARAGE 613SF COURT 433 SF WEAVER LANE RANCID) CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA SCALE 340 - 1'4- I I I PLAN 1 - REAR SPANISH COLONIAL A 11 14 2 3 1 11 5 9 10 8 I'IAN I - IKONI Design Elements 13 4 6 Spanish Colonial 1 Pool Low Profit.'S' Tile 2 Stucco 16/205and Finish 3 Patter Tall, lids exposed * Wood/Painted 4 Deco Fascia Tileoverlap 5 Front Door Rustic Pattern j6 Garage Door Rustic Pattern ) Wirulo.nd.. Wnylwitrdeed Y g Window Trim und -AEle rtuao surround -All Elev. w/Smooth Trowelled Finish All Sides tl 9 Entry Door Accent Brick veneer surround - - 10 Stone Ascent at Front Elevation only (w/ Grout) 11 Stucco Accent wall recess with deco Wrought Iran over SPANISH COLONIAL 12 Shutter Accent Rustic Pattern A 13 E.umcur tight Traditional Style 14 Color Accent Light to Medium earth tone, PLAN 1 - WRAP ELEVATIONS WEAVER LANE RANCHO VAMUVGA, L'ALIFURNIA 8'ALE 31IV - IW LW()q CW AWf)`%h cuFaw •TukNtN.0 MLYh n,sn�s. BGA N. 160W m m v 0 w w PLAN 1 - RIGHT PLAN 1 - LEFT SPANISH COLONIAL A alu --1J SPANISH COLONIAL A PLAN l - WRAP ELEVATIONS WEAVER LANE RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFOMIA m In m v tD w A WEAVER LANE RANCHO CL'CANIONO . C LIFOMNIA sc FMe -M. m Ln m D W Ln PLAN 1 - REAR COUNTRY COTTAGE B A 3 5 9 1 11 7 8 6 12 2 13 PLAN 1 - FRONT COUNTRY COTTAGE B PLAN 1 — WRAP ELEVATIONS WEAVER LANE RY\CHO CPCA.NOV(Cy CALIFORNIA MALE 196' - 1'-u' Design Elements Country Cottage 1 goof Flat Tile 2 Stucco 16/20 Send Finish 3 Rafter Talls 2a6 ealiosed - Wood / Painted a Fascia tag gable ends S. Front Door Rustic Pattern 6 Garage Door Rustic Pattern T Window Vinyl with deco mullions 9 Window Trim Wood surround at shingles Smooth Stucco surround at stucco -All Elev. 9 Entry Door Accent Wood Tdm surround 10 Stone A m at Front Elevation only (w/ Grout( 11 Shutter Accent Rustic Pattem 12 Exterior light Traditional Style 13 Color Accent Light m Medium earth tones WEAVER LANE aAnCtO MMUnCA "NOR'" —i B� BGA Na lbON uv s aassm.,. cat,.ra, r PLAN 1 - LEFT -- b PLAN 1 - RIGHT 90 COUNTRY COTTAGE R COTTAGEELEVEN "li!mll I COUNTRY 1 PLAN 1 - WRAP ELEVATIONS WEAVER LANE RANCHO COCAAIONGA, CALIFORNIA __--_--SCALE MV WEAVER LANE RINCIIO CQCAQIONCA. CALIFORNIA PLAN 1 - REAR ITALIAN FARMHOUSE C 1 3 4 11 5 9 13 8 7 10 6 12 PLAN -I - FRONT ITALIAN FARMHOUSE C PLAN I - WRAP ELEVATIONS WEAVER LANE R.SNCNO('t CAMONGA,('ALIFO&\I.( v ,A E 3: W - V.' Design Elements Italian Farmhouse 1 Roat Low ProRle'S' Tile 2 Stucco 16/20 Sand Florio 3 Eave Accent 3x6 Corbels with 2x11 behind Wood/Pamted 4 Fnsna tag 5 rront Door Rustic Pattern 6 Garage Door Rusti[Pallem 7 Wmdow vinyl with deco mullions 8 Window Tom Smooth Stucco surround - Al Elev. 9 Entry Door Accent Pretest surround 30 Stone Accent at Front Elevation only (w/ Groot) 11 Shutter Accent Rustic Pattern 12 Exterior Light Traditional Style 13 Calor Accent Light to Medium earth tones m vl I m Lo -v to w ED PLAN 1 - RIGHT ITALIAN FARMHOUSE G PLAN 1 - LEFT ITALIAN FARMHOUSE C PLAN 1- WRAP ELEVATIONS WEAVER LANE 8ANC110 CUCAMONGA. CAUFORNIA SCA 3116' - ll-0" -- - l L--------------- /1 • r ' WEAVER LANE R NCIIO CUCAMONGA, C MFO"]A SGLLE 3116- - 1W PLAN 2 - SECOND FLOOR LINING 2413 SF (2ND FLOOR) DECK 132 SF ------ --------- - ----- -- — - r— - tlA..- _ __ _________________ www m` PLAN 2 - FIRST FLOOR LINING 7018 SF(IST FLOOR) CASITA 521 SF VERANDA 585 SF GARAGE 710 sF POOLIsPA 925 SF WEAVER LANE R\NCRO CGC.\6IONCA. CALIFORNIA sCALE 3110 = M-0 UCILLA ROUP RCIIITECTURE WEAVER ONE �.wwo NCMquG� W W0.nN nnn.Ho ilau¢ veyum_ BCA Na 16014 -uco..o eia DD-2.0 II. II I t M--`--Y Efl L7 PLAN 2 • REAR SPANISH COLONIAL A 11 1 H 7 3 10. 12 S 9 4 13 14; 6 PLAN 2 • FROM ` SPANISH COLONIAL A PLAN 2 - WRAP ELEVATIONS WEAVER LANE RANCHO CI'CA.NONGA, C:AUFOHV IA VALE VFW - 14P Design Elements Spanish Colonial 1 Root Low Protile'S' nle 2 stucco 16/20 Sand Finish 3 Raker Tails 2x6 exposed -Wood/Painted 4 Deco Fascia Tleoverlap 5 Front Door Rustic Pattern 6 Garage Door Rustic Pattern 2 Window Vinyl with deco mullions 8 Window Tnm stucco surround - All Else. w/ Smooth Trowelled Finish An Sides 9 Entry Door Accent Brick veneer surround 10 Slom Accent at Front Elevation any (w/Grout) 11 Stucco Accent wall recess with deco Wrought Iron over 12Shutter Accent Rustic Pattern 33' Exterior Light Traditional Style 34 Color Accent Light to Medium earth tones PLAN 2 • LEFT SPANISH COLONIAL A PLAN 2 • RIGHT SPANISH COLONIAL A PLAN 2 - WRAP ELEVATIONS WEAVER LANE RAXCIIO CCCA.\IOYGA. CALIFOWNIA SCALE 3W = 1W m Ln 1 m W v to PLAN2-ROOF WEAVER LANE INYCIIO CCCANIOSG•4 CALIFOMMA SCALE L16- . 1'L- M M tD v 0 A to FM PA --�bJ-. PLAN 2 • REAR COUNTRY COTTAGE B 1 B 4, 7 3 5: 9 6 12 13 PLAN 2 - FRONT Eva; COUNTRY COTTAGE B PLAN 2 - WRAP ELEVATIONS WEAVER LANE R44T710 (Y('A_NOSCA. ('ALIFORV IA UCILLA ROUP RCHITECTURE WEAVER LANE WIOO CLf.NgrvCA W(OPNI Design Elements e4vni. o Honas Country Cottage I Roof Flat Tile ' 2 Stucco 16/20 Sand finish 3 Rafter Tolls 2.6 exposed- Wood/Painted 4 fasda 2.8 gable ends 5 Front Door Rustic Pattern 6 Garage Door Rustic Pattern 2 Window Vinyl with deco mullions B Window TO. Wood surround at shingles _ Smooth Stucco surround at stucco - All Elev. 9 Entry OoorAscent Wood Trim surround - 20 Stone Ascent at Front Elevation only lw/Group J 31 Shutter Accent Runic Pattern 12 Exterior Light Traditional Style 33 Color Accent Light to Medium earth tones BGA No. 16014 t1 x: -4E\'Allna� DD-2-1B PLAN 2 • LEFT COUNTRY COTTAGE B III i�■� ?■� ■ COUNTRYPLAN 2 - RIGHT • PLAN 2 - WRAP ELEVATIONS WEAVER LANE RANCIIO CUCAMONGA, CALIFOWNIA SCALE Me 1'-0- UCILLA ROUP RCHITECTURE RM oN MW U MRNU neww.n Irows euv_ uuanoaa DD-2.2B '--- I - -- PLAN2-ROOF WEAVER LANE HdNCHO CLICANONGA. CALIFORNIA SCALE 3W = P-V DD-23B PLAN 2 . REAR ITALIAN FARMHOUSE C PLAN 2 - WRAP ELEVATIONS WEAVER LANE aA%*CAo(TC MON'"CAUMICVIA MALE Inn• Design Elements Italian Farmhouse 1 Roof low Profile 'S' Tile 2 Stucco 16/20 Sand Finish 3 Eave Accent 3.6 Corbels with 2a8 behind -Wood/Painted 4 Fascia 2.8 5 From Door Rustic Pattern 6 Garage Door Rustic Pattern 7 Window Vinyl with deco mullions 8 Window Trim Smooth Stucco surround All Elev. 9 Entry Door Accent Precast surround 10 Stone Accent at Front Elevation only (w/Green) 11 Shutter Accent Rustic Pattern 12 Exterior light Traditional Style 13 Color Accent light to Medium earthtones m m v ID Lo PLAN 2 • LEFT ITALIAN FARMHOUSE C i PLAN 2 - WRAP ELEVATIONS WEAVER LANE RANCHO CUC NION'"C.LLIMMIA SC, J 311V = 1W u . DD-2.2C PLAN 2 - ROOF WEAVER LANE RANCRO CU'AMONGA. CALIMRNIA SCALE 3116' = "I - UCILLA ROUP RCHITECTURE � WEAVER LANE LWNO NLvnONGN WWPNIA 4© RCA Na 16M4 -ROOT -IT.LL1\\i. DD-2.3C PLAN 3 - FIRST FLOOR LR'fNG 7437 SF CASITA a.)SF VTRANDA 373SF GARAGE 676 SF COURT 2K SF WEAVER LANE RANCHO CUCA.\IONGA. CALIFORNIA SCARF 3116• = IW" PLAN 3-SECOND FLOOR LIVING 34o SF WEAVER LANE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFOILNIA SCALE 311W = M. PLAN 3 • REAR SPANISH COLONIAL A 11 8:7 10 1.51913 14.2 13 4 _ _ t PIAN 3 • FRONT i SPANISH COLONIAL A PLAN 3 - WRAP ELEVATIONS WEAVER LANE Ib{V('UO ('FG4HOV(:A, ('.{LIFUR:Y[A Design Elements Spanish Colonial 1 Pool Low Proflle'S'Tlle 2 Stucco 16/20 Sand Finish 3 Rafter Tars 2,6 exInned- Wood/Painted 4 Deco Fascia The overlap 5 Front Door Reslic Pattern 6 Garage Door Rustic Pattern J Window Vinyl with deco mullions 8 Window Trim stucco surround - All Elev. w/Smooth Trowelled Finish All Sides 9 Entry Door Accent Bdck veneer surround 10 Stone Accent at Front Elevation only (w/Grout) 11 Stucco well recess with deco Wrought Iron over 12 Shutter Accent Rustic Pattern 13 Eaterlor Light Traditional Style 14 Color Accent Light to Medium earth tones pUCILLA ROUP RCIPTFULTE WEAVER LANE k.WLlp (11CMgNU �w ritx3wmibews rrwn ......s rta,w., �..iw. DD-3.1A m Ln I m to v to Lq A PLAN 3 • RIGHT SPANISH COLONIAL A PLAN 3 • LEFT SPANISH COLONIAL A PLAN 3 - WRAP ELEVATIONS WEAVER LANE 1UNCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA ,G E MW = I' -a• WEAVER LANE Y MCUL NCA G R6 U �'INM1MD IpM6 eu a ¢ocanm. DD-3.2A PLAN3-ROOF WEAVER LANE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA SCALE 3116- - M' UCILLA i ROUP i RCHITECTURE WEAVER LANE VN+ oWu ,w GIY00.�N wwuNo iwna BCA No.'16014 wit ILA)] .ypA.'uyc DD-3.3A 21. PLAN 3 • REAR COUNTRY COTTAGE B 13 4 3 10 5 9 1 11 7 8 6 12, 2' PLAN 3 - FRONTVca.w COUNTRY COI fAGE B PLAN 3 - WRAP ELEVATIONS WEAVER LANE RANCHO CUCANIONG.i. CA3-IFORINIA !CALL 311W - 1. ' Design Elements Country Cottage 1 Roof Flat Tile 2 Stucco 16/20 Sand Finish 3 RafterTails 2x6 exposed- Wood/Painted 4 Fascia 2xB gable ends 5 Front Door Rustic Pattern 6 Garage Door Rustic Pattern 2 Window Vinyl with detm mullions 8 Window Trim Wood surround at shingles Smooth Stucco surround at stucco -All Eley, 9 Entry Door Accent Wood Trim surround 10 Stone Accent at Front Elevation only (w/ Grout) 31 Shutter Accent Rustic Pattern 12 Exterior light Traditional Style 13 Color Accent light to Medium earth tows s.M PLAN 3 - LEFT COUNTRY COTTAGE B PLAN 3 - RIGHT COUNTRY COTTAGE B PLAN 3 - WRAP ELEVATIONS WEAVER LANE RANCIIO CCCA\IOYGA, CALIFORMA SCALE 3I16- - M- PLAN3-ROOF WEAVER LANE RANCHO COCAAIONW. CALIFOILNIA SCALE 3/16• - P-0• PLAN 3 - REAR ITAUAN FARMHOUSE C 13 1 4 3 10 5 9 8 7 11 12 2 6 Design Elements Italian Farmhouse 1 Roo( Low Profile 'S' Tile 2 Stucco 16/20 Send Finish 3 Eave Accent 3x6 Corbels with 2x8 behind - Wood/Painted 4 Fascia 2x8 5 Front Door Rustic Pattern 6 Garage Door Rustic Pattern 7 Window Vinyl with deco mullions 8 Window Trim Smooth Stucco surround All Elev. 9 Entry Door Accent Precast surround 10 Stone Accent at front Elevation only lw/Grout) 11 Shutter Accent Rustic Pattern 12 Exterior Light Traditional Style 13 Color Accent Light to Medwm earth nines PLAN 3 - WRAP ELEVATIONS WEAVER LANE ItAbY'HO IL I'CAMO\CA, CALIFOBNIA SCALE pl6' - IW WEAVER LANE ewon cucwsro� c4rOFw ntxswu lcw4s .ii— BGA No 16014 eu.r uas nm.. DD-3.1(' PLAN 3 - LEFT ITALIAN FARMHOUSE C PLAN 3 - RIGHT ITALIAN FARMHOUSE G PLAN 3 - WRAP ELEVATIONS WEAVER LANE Ri8CN0 CCCANIONGA. CALIFORNIA SCAU 31W = IW" l UCILLA E ROUP RCHITECTURE Ilenmixvu:w WYw......u.. Pqa WEAVER LANE au+oq acvlDNc4 CNPORI.0 NM D 110,W5 BCA N. 1601I PW') DD-3.2C PLAN3-ROOF WEAVER LANE R NCIIO CUCAMONGA, CALIFOMNIA SCALE 1116' = 1'-0" —I— A=n { �i -_...._ BAHAMA SINKER .r. 21 WASHER PAN .ox a 16 GARAQ DOOR HEAD +. 'M WWDOW IIEAD LA Am r� m 6 DOOR HEAD 27 VENEER Iu• • 0 22 EJEEERIOR SOEDT rue n V GA a DOOR LAMB rw. ... '12 WINDOW SILL 7 DOOR LAMB xti +u 7 28� WFTP SCREED AT VENEER eue nro 23 SRL HAT[ — 18 SIDINGSTARTERATGRAQ— +a 13 WINDcwmw i Il 11 11 lly ..._.... .a� ="rma.'e `• 8 DOOR THRESHOLD s 3 _ 29 0000. THRESHOLD w rue .rs 24 SHOWER DRAIN 19 TUB DE .,....+ '14 _ - _ + _ 9 DOOR THRESHOW PAN s 4 .` ' •.•.•-. _._, � m rem + 99 m.v�\ 7 � ww•.v u�� rtnury r.rrw i.r • � ru:u vre¢a wm — run ... `. srmu�mc—+a<- a.r unu.0 •um .:rt wu + .ruv.1— . '... ..nnnnn. u.rv. wrm.mm n>o ♦ ', a-- \ '• mmr � rue T30 M. LOW WA CAP vu .ra -25- SIDINGS OUESIDE CORNER Irue r..o 20 SIDINGS INSIDE CORNER w-w 1$ SXOwA To w.uL mnNEe'noR -z 10 DROP SIDING STARTER ,sue 5 EXHIBIT F 9 O $E+E e�iS UN! Who 3 a . d� p n f 3 E5—E9 Pg63 R., gg 10 Io LU 0�R b m C 0) c O w m 0 C f0 d`a Z`a WALLiFENCE LEGEND ® tNRYtMYpiIPMST9t ® x4Rl� STCK vFA?$6D flLASRR ■ 9RIfsAL[PIxK PIW1PR 6' H6X'Ai-PALE Wa'K WUL i011` &OFJ e 6'K6X 9fLIiiKEB10LK YWl. l9)T14OE9) 6•MSN gTLI51d WCLK I2' ZCEI -vw�. !ET/i NFH PRV'E GII TLPQLLTI 1INL POCG PBt ]iWL c11Y GGiK IMOA MORJ 1-I EQC91RW1 AGGC+S x v..ml lrn- WbF�1/fE-._ �'«oi�lo.mvazlaw. mm �a �•'c oTwm aw:w vc am oa sow o.e �'m anw. m ax awm. uuulnuw uuw nnu uuw ul 4�lli I 4{ nuuu 1 uuuu ui�l an1,�n,1ul 1 tt�61 Fx53fUI�1E - Yf�siF FFK IYVSiii. mn am mlm« rmm gnu. nm n1�:a I�µ. wlla5a M.W�Sffi err .a IIm wmn •IIPLv }I ..L3:II4-J �i4�-•t.l���a.t[.• �-:l w mo.m. � N v::l .1 �p '�.: •r w: ®.•'6 ®rtprr fua mt �� no�•mr� M4IVUII PROJECT ENTRY PILASTERS AND GATE a/e•.r-m• �uaxavu. EQUESTRIAN GATE 3/e•.i�-m• a ro Iro >m • Ffl• 51:1 vg0' NORTH Wall and Fence Plan Weaver Lane RJCLA 1 of 2 Newland Homes , Rancho CucamongaCalifornia"`" 6N/bmxsUgw NATv{rs 9)bn sllLli (9,9)bbl-9Yd. �abrybMLe! CA /aYi LA)136 rom �O: Hl�c. I 1K1GN2 Li�2 LY>QP 1 1 1-. o��� ,a aa.�o�lrow plwmxemwmWwxean �wealm.m.mwaxa. (Drmamzofmwveox �.�:ea�re Tram p I Qa .u•]t4aTaulmvwaam -all I' 7r Of ✓art m.armulmlMaam. I- Oral m.aTaunert./oma. ] L o O� Oa�vN�mws.w Oi`�!•v �rl�alB ®ew[sm� rssm�ie6ial]�ewemvaenme e .erelva• as mm�Y O Q vrpacwmm�aM O ¢ ea. mNne.aa MMHgtfGI.TOEA TMw. JIL, - 14, k. IF ly Gr7' : J.. aT _ L-lb f 1b I��w.m � oe rodxar I � mare[ lemma mtexe] C SPLR PdOE MOM I'M I lBolli BIDES) YAlll OdP B BLOIX YL1LL IOEE 01DE SRR FdcE) WRH C:M Q W I —I I xia / I 1 ] -. ewoxr dnxxvrtcerx 1 I. f— ••••••-�. I j: __,'.�...W.q.,. n a G fTVOfEDill-E ReILOG I 9 ma a a w:e.a o.4mro su I` ¢evdTwl Irao ] sn•m wna..n•ad. I - I �• y.I'b• H,y.,W,° ` mw � 1 1_�._ _l. .0— I—, a ew•m om..Hnm rz°"m.l"'"'eme° w uue n•.aa"e rmr _ v .• a•i SECTION ���v �'y a II ��[ V•�OW¢.�i.nar �••�•••�•a• xv..�sM.. rs 1SeIrNm n CITY OF R13C1111 CGCAIIO\'CA. L-AIJPOY.\L\ E �I ` xW. mT Hc�[ --�••+•+� CONVLRY YTY IIL ), .uerESTTd�HwnwwNo uua eµvW�NHdn PI_ I'LC 2-MIL CE \[F. IUIO-\ e' l�v...m.z...�.�.�....�. ____________ •'� voa. xvertrtWurauT! uLM YUY yin - �nrywv]n eW¢lulrn ♦n xs•f� ]IT�Mpa� �. ].HaeI.W nIUTW�n WKe]2 Ro.fWrnfO. C{1PVdTl01 l WCpI]KM.a 'Mal' HTv a Torrme�a rc•M. s�m�wt R/reY. li IVE L R S EEL ENCE cM Lau WN L F wO Fda F@ CE E axR KE eL«x P us Ex D &Ldf BTEE G4 E Wall and Fence Details Weaver Lane RJCLA SHEET Newland Homes Rancho Cucamonga, California °"�°"""�"� ""' 4 NIlnnveleglra A'gwl, Cd 916]! OF2 WIV17 1%V66F9uue-rJc6.sbnJMv+4M (d/E( LA 1I36 m m kD to rn rn Weaver Lane Newland Homes - Rancho Cucamonga, California 5 M17 9 Hlbware[egx �! G19MT1 I9e9166F3949 - kb9MgbWLx! Li ,H4 LA ]ei6 WALL/FENCE LEGEND ® EN1RY IYMREIR PIL.KIER ® CLLIMFR STONE VB,EFAEC Pi1w5TER ■ SRIT-FACE ELOGK PILPSTER e 6'Mbx 3R IT-F/GE &.OLK YVLL IdC SI�FJ -- 6'M6N vR1T-FPLE AP.K W4LEWTi 51oEy 6' HIbM PREGIBIGN BLOCK I�fN 51�51 MEIK VIEM PENCE (IY XC16MT) -.nnn. rc-iN, vIF1v FENCE oN 10P c£ LOW WHL ]-RNL EVINYL FENCE FER 3-RVL CITY OLLMAI(-L 101OIOA hYpTFJ -SEE GEiALL - E(]IE51RIgN TRAIL t is v N'� vn nary l+af. LOi 3, TTP. 'T u: m � sccem�t 01 V Trails Exhibit Newland Homes M41;7 ru uuulm ......... urn inn mFm+w pp w.>A A u I u nn unuul mBu. ..w p m r Turin un wuul..o �. um"" IN, O• * mxms xuF rrrr us rio.w Ir �� amom.i]�n°AE.°i oa. A (4 _ C ^¢evee s"�.nwu L J A EwEsmm"M 1y3Ire'.I'-p' C NEILLN2 STEEL FENCE ON LOW W4LL B S 17 FG E ELC .14" (EOTH SIDES) 1 I x w m izx ]m m sratxa'=60' NORTH Weaver Lane RJC,A Rancho Cucamonga, California WMbrcve svn Vgm4 U=r (91^Jbbl C4 kb�etrykbelmt FEG LA "24 b36 I�IMI\VI1 ITy LV 1 / - / .VV r..0.. 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; Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner; Dominick Perez, 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. EXHIBIT G Page 1of4 E5-E9 Pg68 I�If11\VI1 1-ry LLV 1 I - / .VV r.m. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA RAINS ROOM CITY HALL 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE C1. SIGN PERMIT DRC2017-00106 - KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. - A request to remove an existing illuminated wall sign and replace with two (2) new illuminated wall signs on an existing retail store (Target) located within the Community of the Terra Vista Community Plan at 10576 Foothill Boulevard - APN: 1077-423-15. The Committee briefly discussed the project and recommended approval with no issues. C2. 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. Staff presented background on the Design Review application that was approved by the City in January 2014. The applicant's reason for requesting the deletion of the subject condition of approval was explained. The presentation included a background on the applicant's efforts to comply with the condition of approval, and the difficulty he encountered while attempting to acquire the signature of the neighboring property owner that was needed for access easement. Staff also explained his attempts to assist the applicant. The Committee recognized that the applicant and Staff had exhausted the available means for obtaining the signature. The Committee recommends to the Planning Commission the approval of the deletion of the subject condition of approval. C3. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00814 - NATIONAL COMMUNITY RENAISSANCE OF CALIFORNIA - A request for site plan and architectural review of a 140-unit affordable senior housing development on 4 acres of land within the Low - Medium (LM) District (4 - 8 dwelling units per acre) of the Victoria Planned Community, located at the terminus of Firehouse Court and west of Day Creek Boulevard - APN: 1089-031-36. Related records: General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00964, Development Agreement DRC2017-00156, Certificate of Appropriateness DRC2016-00966, Variance DRC2017-00032 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2016-00965. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Staff provided a project overview to the Committee and raised 2 design issues regarding adding additional trellis structures of the select windows and additional board and batten siding on the south elevation. The applicant stated that they had no issue with addition of the requested architectural enhancements. The Commissioners recommended that the project move forward to the Planning Commission for final review with the agreed upon architectural enhancements. C4. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20042 - NH WEAVER LANE, LLC - A request to subdivide 18.2 acres of land into 26 lots for the purposes of developing 26 single-family residences for a site located on the east side of Carnelian Street Page 2 of 4 E5-E9 Pg69 MARCH 14, 2017 - 7:00 P.M. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA RAINS ROOM CITY HALL 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE and north of Hillside Road in the Very Low (VL) District (A — 2 Dwelling Units per Acre) and within the Hillside Overlay District -APN: 1061-261-01. Related records: Hillside Design Review DRC2016-00377, Variance DRC2016-00748, Variance DRC2017-00014 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2016-00376. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND HILLSIDE DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00377 — NH WEAVER LANE, LLC - A request for site plan and architectural review of 26 single-family residences on 18.2 acres of land related to Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042, located on the east side of Carnelian Street and north of Hillside Road in the Very Low (VL) District (.1 — 2 Dwelling Units per Acre) and within the Hillside Overlay District - APN: 1061-261-01. Related records: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042, Variance DRC2016-00748, Variance DRC2017- 00014 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2016-00376. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Staff provided a project overview to the Committee. Commissioner Macias asked staff whether each lot provided an adequate area for a horse corral that met the required 70-foot buffer from the neighboring residences. He also stated that he wanted staff to provide the Commissioners with an update at the Planning Commission outlining how the future homeowner would be informed about the maximum permitted lot coverage. Staff informed the Committee that each lot would provide the required horse corral area at the required separation distance from the neighboring residences. The applicant, Bryan Avilla, then provided the Committee with a brief overview on the design of the project site and stated that they would provide the new property owners with a disclosure statement outlining the maximum lot coverage. The meeting was then opened for public comment. Joseph Cowan, president of the Alta Loma Riding Club, asked whether project density was calculated from gross lot size and stated that the Alta Loma Riding Club was concerned the project only provided 1 point of access, that the equestrian trail system did not loop and that the lots that were near maximum lot coverage would not be able to construct a covered corral area. Staff stated that lot coverage was calculated from gross lot size, as required by the Development Code. The applicant stated that the stream bed running through the site limited providing a loop trail and that the property owners of the public street to the east were opposed to a street connection with the project. A second member of the public, Mrs. Judith Brennan, asked whether the project would provide an equestrian connection to Carnelian Street and asked whether a horse trail could be provided adjacent to the east property line, so horses and walkers would not be required to walk in the street. Staff stated that the project would provide 2 equestrian connection points to Carnelian Street and would have the applicant investigate whether it was technically possible to provide an equestrian trail along the east property line. The Committee then recommended that the project move forward to the Trail Advisory Committee for their review and to Planning Commission for final review. Page 3 of 4 E5—E9 Pg70 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA RAINS ROOM CITY HALL 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE C5. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00713 - LVD TERRA VISTA, LLC - A request for site plan and architectural review of a 214-unit multi -family development on 12.1 acres of land within the Medium High (MH) District (14-24 dwelling units per acre) of the Terra Vista Community Plan, located at the southwest corner of Church Street and Terra Vista Parkway - APN: 1077-422-97. Related records: Terra Vista Community Plan Amendment DRC2016-00715, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20054, Minor Exception DRC2016- 00716, Minor Exception DRC2017-00159 and Pre -Application DRC2016-00361. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Staff provided a project overview to the Committee and raised 2 design issues regarding adding additional pilasters around the pool areas and wood trellis structures to the front elevation of the carriage unit, which are currently a homebuyer's option. The applicant agreed to add the pilasters around the pool area and wants to leave it up to the homeowners as to whether they wanted to purchase the trellis structure to the front elevation of the carriage unit as an option. They went on to state that at a similar project that they recently constructed, no homeowners selected the trellis structure option. The Commissioners agreed with the applicant that the trellis structures would not be required. The Commissioners recommended that the project move forward to the Planning Commission for final review with the addition of pilasters around the pool area. D. ADJOURNMENT 8:56 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, Thursday, March 2, 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 4 of 4 E5-E9 Pg71 TRAILS ADVISORY COMMITTEE ACTIONS RAINS ROOM CITY HALL 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE A. 6:00 P.M. -CALL TO ORDER Roll Call: Francisco Oaxaca X Victoria Jones _X_ Rich Fletcher X Otis Greer X Ray Wimberly (Alt) Vacant (Alt) Carol Douglass (Equestrian) _X Tom Tisler (Bicycle) —X Mike Smith (Staff Coordinator)_X_ B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Trails Advisory Committee on any item listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Trails Advisory Committee from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Committee may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Staff Coordinator, depending upon the number of individual members of the audience. This is a professional 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. STAFF REPORTS The following items do not legally require any public testimony, although the Committee may open the meeting for public input. C1. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20042 — NH WEAVER LANE, LLC - A request to subdivide 18.2 acres of land into 26 lots for the purpose of developing 26 single-family residences for a site located on the east side of Carnelian Street and north of Hillside Road in the Very Low (VL) District (.1 — 2 Dwelling Units per Acre) and within the Hillside Overlay District. APN: 1061-261-01. Related records: Hillside Design Review DRC2016-00377, Variance DRC2016-00748, Variance DRC2017-00014 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2016-00376. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. C2. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND HILLSIDE DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00377 — NH WEAVER LANE, LLC - A request for site plan and architectural review of 26 single-family residences on 18.2 acres of land related to Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 located on the EXHIBIT H Page 1 of 2 E5—E9 Pg72 TRAILS ADVISORY COMMITTEE ACTIONS RAINS ROOM CITY HALL 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE east side of Carnelian Street and north of Hillside Road in the Very Low (VL) District (.1 - 2 Dwelling Units per Acre) and within the Hillside Overlay District. APN: 1061-261-01. Related records: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042, Variance DRC2016-00748, Variance DRC2017- 00014 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2016-00376. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. The Committee recommended items C1 and C2 be forwarded to the Planning Commission for final approval. C3. CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF THE TRAILS PRIORITY PLAN FOR FISCAL YEARS 2017/18 - 2021/22 Because of the late hour and because Planning Commissioners Fletcher and Oaxaca needed to be excused to attend the regular Planning Commission meeting, the Committee agreed to continue this item to the next meeting on May 10, 2017 D. IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR THE NEXT MEETING This is the time for the Trails Advisory Committee to identify the items they wish to discuss at the next meeting. These items will not be discussed at this meeting, only identified for the next meeting. E. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 7:30 PM. I, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on Wednesday, April 05, 2017, 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 inIf you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. Page 2 of 2 E5-E9 Pg73 Print Form ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM (Part I - Initial Study) RANCHO (Please type or print clearly using ink. Use the tab key to move from one line to the next line.) C,UCAMONGA Planning Department (909)477-2750 The purpose of this form is to inform the City of the basic components of the proposed project so 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. Upon review of the completed Initial Study Part I and the development application, additional information such as, but not limited to, traffic, noise, biological, drainage, and geological reports may be required. The project application will not be deemed complete unless the identified special studies/reports are submitted for review and accepted as complete and adequate. The project application will not be scheduled for Committees' review unless all required reports are submitted and deemed complete for staff to prepare the Initial Study Part II as required by CEQA. In addition to the filing fee, the applicant will be responsible to pay or reimburse the City, its agents, officers, and/or consultants for all costs for the preparation, review, analysis, recommendations, mitigations, etc., of any special studies or reports. INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE PROCESSED. Please note that itis the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that the application is complete at the time of submittal, City staff will not be available to perform work required to provide missing information. Application Number for the project to which this form pertains: Project Title: Weaver Lane Name & Address of project owner(s): Lester G. Weaver, Trustee Weaver Living Trust 40 Wood Pointe Drive, Apt 6, Greenville, SC 29615 Name & Address of developer or project sponsor Newland Homes / 10 �L W�v" L01 n c— LLC. 3121 Michelson Drive, Suite 110, Irvine CA 92612 / �T EXHIBIT I Pagel of 10 E5-E9 Pg74 Contact Person & Address: Bryan Avilla 3121 Michelson Drive, Suite 110, Irvine CA 92612 Name & Address of person preparing this form (if different from above): same as above Telephone Number (949) 344-2705 Information indicated by an asterisk (`) is not required of non -construction CUP's unless otherwise requested by staff. '1) Provide a full scale (8-1/2 x 11) copy of the USGS Quadrant Sheet(s) which includes the project site, and indicate the site boundaries. 2) Provide a set of color photographs that show representative views into the site from the north, south, east, and west; views into and from the site from the primary access points that serve the site; and representative views of significant features from the site. Include a map showing location of each photograph. 3) Project Location (describe): 5367 Carnelian Street North of Hillside Road, East of Carnelian Street 4) Assessor's Parcel Numbers (attach additional sheet if necessary): 1061-261-01 `5) Gross Site Area (ac/sq. ft.): 18.2 acres `6) Net Site Area (total site size minus area of public streets & proposed 18.2 acres dedications): 7) Describe any proposed general plan amendment or zone change which would affect the project site (attach additional sheet if necessary): No proposed general plan amendment or zone change proposed for the project site. Updated 4/11/2013 Page 2 of 10 E5—E9 Pg75 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., Tentative and Final Tract Map Tree Removal Permit California Department of Fish and Wildlife 1601 Army Corps 404 Permit Regional Water Quality Control Board 401 permit 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/orhydrologic studies, biotic and archeological surveys, traffic studies): The site is irregular shaped property that moderately slopes to the south, elevations range from 1,965ft in the southeast corner to 2,035ft at the northwest corner. Two natural drainages flow in a south to southeasterly direction through the property. The majority of the property is disturbed or has non-native grasses. Trees are located near the project entrance driveway and near the ranch house and support buildings. A concrete culvert is located at the driveway crossing the west drainage. The property was previously used for agriculture but the property is currently fallow and has not been farmed for many years. The property has 3 permanent structures, consisting of a residence and two storage/garage structures. In addition to the structures, old farm equipment is located near the accessory structures. The residence is currently utilizing an onsite sewage disposal system. The residence was built in approximately 1977 and the two structures were built in the late 70s and early 80s. The project site contains eight habitat types, including 13.41 acres of disturbed non-native grasses, 2.25 acres of ornamental vegetation habitat, 1.12 acres of disturbed habitat, .51 acres of disturbed residential habitat, .42 acres of mulefat dominant habitat, .33 acres of non-native vegetation habitat, .12 acres of willow ornamental The project site contains approx .78 acres of ephemeral drainage feature and associated riparian habitat and .32 acres of waters of the US. The project site is not within any federal critical habitat for endangered species. The project site has approximately 3.67 acres of nesting bird habitat. The project site is not considered a wildlife movement corridor. No endangered or threatened species were found on site. There are 7 mature trees that would qualify as heritage trees under Municipal code section 17.16.080. The property has a final geotechnical report, hydrologic study, biological assessment, jurisdictional delineation archeological survey, and tree survey that have been included with the application. Updated 4/1112013 E5—E9 Pg76 Page 3 of 10 10) Describe the known cultural and/orhistorical aspects of the site. Cite all sources of information (books, published reports and oral history): A class III Section 106 (NHPA) archaeological survey was completed for the site. Based upon the current survey, background research and record search results, no historic resources are anticipated to be found at the project site. 11) Describe any noise sources and theirlevels that now affect the site (aircraft, roadwaynoise, etc.) and how they will affect proposed uses: A noise study was not completed for the site, however the property is surrounded by existing residential uses and there is no other known source of noise nearby. The surrounding streets have very limited traffic and there are no nearby airports or other industrial or commercial uses. 12) Describe the proposed project in detail. This should provide an adequate description of the site in terms of ultimate use that wilt 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 proposed project is a 26 unit residential subdivision designed to follow the current zoning code and general plan land use designation. The property has been designed to include half -acre minimum lot sizes to comply with the hillside overlay district. The property has also been designed with horse trails to comply with the equestrian overlay district. The property includes a gated entry and internal loop street for traffic circulation The lots have been oriented north south to take advantage of the views and accomodate the site topography. The main westerly watercourse has been avoided where possible to avoid impacts to the jurisdictional area since this feature includes the majority of the riparian habitat found onsite. The proposed project will include a mix of one and two story homes. The project will likely be developed in a single phase for site development. 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, rear yard, etc.): The surrounding properties are all built -out residential neighborhoods with minimum half -acre lot sizes similar to the proposed project. The proposed project will also have homes that are similar in size and scale with the surrounding neighborhoods. Updated 4/11/2013 E5—E9 Pg77 Page 4 of 10 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 surrounding general area. 15) Indicate the type of short-term and long-term noise to be generated, including source and amount. How will these noise levels affect adjacent properties and on -site uses? What methods of soundproofing are proposed? Both short term and long term noise impacts are not anticipated to be significant. Best management practices will be used during the grading and construction phases to minimize noise impacts to the surrounding neighborhoods. •16) Indicate proposed removals and/or replacements of mature or scenic trees: There are 7 mature trees proposed to be removed. The removed trees will be replaced onsite at a level satisfactory to the city that will meet the guidlines of municipal code section 17.16.080. It was determined in the arborist study that the removal of the 7 heritage trees will not have a negative impact on the aesthetics or general welfare of the surrounding area. 17) Indicate any bodies of water (including domestic water supplies) into which the site drains: The three ephemeral drainages located on the project site are all hydrologically connected to the Cucamonga Creek. 18) Indicate expected amount of water usage. (See Attachment A for usage estimates). For bother clarification, please contact the Cucamonga Valley Water District at (909) 987-2591. a. Residential (gal/day) 18,330 b. CommerciaUlnd. (gal/day/ac) 19) Indicate proposed method of sewage disposal. Peak use (gal/Day) 18,330 Peak use (gal/min/ac) ❑ Septic Tank x❑ 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). Forfurlher clarification, please contact the Cucamonga Valley Water District at (909) 987-2591. a. Residential (gal/day) 7,020 b. Commercial/Industrial (gal/day/ac) Updated 4/11/20Q Page 5 of 10 E5—E9 Pg78 RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS: 20) Numberof residential units: 26 Detached (indicate range of parcel sizes, minimum lot size and maximum lot size: Minimum lot size: 20,000 SF Maximum lot size: 33,683 SF Average lot size: 23,611 SF Attached (indicate whetherunits are rental orforsale units): 21) Anticipated range of sale prices and/or rents: SalePdce(s) $1,000,000 to $1,300,000 Rent(permonth) $ to $ 22) Specify number of bedrooms by unit type: Anticipated 3 floorplans with 4-5 bedrooms each 23) Indicate anticipated household size by unit type: Anticipated average of 3-4 person household size 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:: b. Junior High: c. Senior High COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL, AND INSTITUTIONAL PROJECTS 25) Describe type of uses) and major function(s) of commercial, industrial or institutional uses: Updated 4/11/2013 E5—E9 Pg79 Page 6 of 10 26) Total floor area of commercial, industrial, or institutional uses by type: 27) Indicate hours of operation: 28) Number of employees: Total: Maximum Shift., Time of Maximum Shift, 29) Provide breakdown of anticipated job classifications, including wage and salary ranges, as well as an indication of the rate of hire for each classification (attach additional sheet if necessary): 30) Estimation of the number of workers to be hired that currently reside in the City: *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): ALL PROJECTS 32) Have the water, sewer, fire, and flood control agencies serving the project been contacted to determine theirabilityto provide adequate service to the proposed project? If so, please indicate their response. A will serve letter has been provided from Cucamonga Valley Water District for sewer and water service. Project was reviewed by City of Rancho Cucamonga fire during the pre-app process. Based on comments received and conversations with the fire department, the site was redesigned to address their concerns regarding circulation. The project will use onsite retention basins for flood control and water treatment . purposes and will not connect to any offsite drainage facilities. Updated 411112013 E5—E9 Pg80 Page 7 of 10 33) In the known history of this property, has there been any use, storage, or discharge of hazardous andlor toxic materials? Examples of hazardous andlor toxic materials include, but are not limited to PCBs; radioactive substances; pesticides and herbicides; fuels, oils, solvents, and other flammable liquids and gases. Also note underground storage of any ofthe above. Please list the materials and describe their use, storage, andlor discharge on the property, as well as the dates of use, it known. Per the phase 1 report, the property was historically an agricultural property and therefore, there is a potential for restricted agricultural chemicals (herbicides and pesticides, copper, lead, arsenic, thallium) as well as petroleum based products to have been utilized onsite. A limited phase II is recommended due to the above. An underground gas fuel tank was previously removed from the site in Jan 2015 and received a closure letter from San Bernardino County fire. 34) Will the proposed project involve the temporary or long-term use, storage, or discharge of hazardous andlor 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. im 35) The applicant shall be required to pay any applicable Fish and Game fee. The project planner will confirm which fees apply to this project. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning CommissionlPlanning Director hearing. I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for adequate evaluation of this 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 may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaluation can be made by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Date: May 5, 2016 Signature: Title: Manager Updated 4111/2013 ES—E9 Pg81 Page 9 of 10 ATTACHMENT"A" CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ESTIMATED WATER USE AND SEWER FLOWS FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT (Data Provided by Cucamonga Valley Water District February 2003) Water Usage Single -Family Multi -Family Neighborhood Commercial General Commercial Office Professional Institutional/Government Industrial Park Large General Industrial Heavy Industrial (distribution) Sewer Flows Single -Family Multi -Family General Commercial Office Professional Industrial Park Large General Industrial Heavy Industrial (distribution) 705 gallons per EDU per day 256 gallons per EDU per day 1000 gal/day/unit (tenant) 4082 gal/day/unit (tenant) 973 gal/day/unit (tenant) 6412 gal/day/unit (tenant) 1750 gal/day/unit (tenant) 2020 gal/day/unit (tenant) 1863 gal/day/unit (tenant) 270 gallons per EDU per day 190 gallons per EDU per day 1900 gal/day/acre 1900 gal/day/acre Institutional/Government 3000 gal/day/acre 2020 gal/day/acre 1863 gal/day/acre Source: Cucamonga Valley Water District Engineering & Water Resources Departments, Urban Water Management Plan 2000 Updated 411112013 Page 9 of 10 E5—E9 Pg82 ATTACHMENT B Contact the school district for your area for amount and payment of school fees: Elementary School Districts Alta Loma 9350 Base Line Road, Suite F Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909) 987-0766 Central 10601 Church Street, Suite 112 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909) 989-8541 Cucamonga 8776 Archibald Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909) 987-8942 Etiwanda 6061 East Avenue P.O. Box 248 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 (909) 899-2451 High School Chaffey High School 211 West 5th Street Ontario, CA 91762 (909) 988-8511 Updated 4/11/2013 Page 10 of ID E5—E9 Pg83 rat 9 J ,Ar, v i� n ROOM - Elk lit l,' m m ro co WEAVER LANE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA LOCATIONS OF PHOTOGRAPHS/AERIAL IMAGES N�e�land Hornes m m M WEAVER LANE es— View of Property Looking East from Primary Entrance at Carnelian St. V) 0 a z 0 8 PROPERTY PHOTO #2 _.- ! � �. ^u�'1-•'�� t� %�_L "Y W rjyrM-_ �� !'4 R� _ .. yri� . _ Tom, �t V) 0 s IL z 0 a 0 J PROPERTY PHOTO #3 o PROPERTY PHOTO #4 0 a o Am NEW y PROPERTY PHOTO #5 0 a z 0 aI u J P l ' � City of Rancho Cucamonga ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM INITIAL STUDY PART II BACKGROUND 1. Project File: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042, Hillside Design Review DRC2016-00377, Variance DRC2016-00748, Variance DRC2017-00014 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2016- 00376. 2. Related Files: N/A 3. Description of Project: A request to subdivide 18.2 acres of land (SUBTT20042) and for site plan and architectural review (DRC2016-00377) of 26 single-family residences for a site located on the east side of Carnelian Street and north of Hillside Road in the Very Low (VL) District and within the Hillside Overlay District. The project includes a Variance (DRC2016-00748) to reduce the lot depth of 5 lots, a Variance (DRC2017-00014) to reduce the rear yard setback on 1 lot and a Tree Removal Permit (DRC2016-00376) to remove 7 heritage trees on the project site. 4. Project Sponsor Name and Address: Newland Homes, LLC 3121 Michelson Drive, Suite 110 Irvine, CA 92612 5. General Plan Designation: Very Low (VL) District 6. Zoning: Very Low (VL) District 7. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The 18.2 acre project site is located on the east side of Carnelian Street approximately 750 feet north of Hillside Road. The site is developed with a single-family residence and a number of small storage buildings that will be removed as part of the project. The site includes 13.41 acres of disturbed non-native grasses, 2.25 acres of Ornamental vegetation habitat and 1.12 acres of disturbed habit. Three ephemeral drainages run through the site from north to south. The project site is surrounded by residential development to the north, south, east and west, within the Very Low Development (VL) District and the Hillside Overlay District. 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: Tabe van der Zwaag (909) 477-2750, extension 4316 10. Other agencies whose approval is required: N/A GLOSSARY — The following abbreviations are used in this report:. CALEEMOD — California Emissions Estimator Model CVWD — Cucamonga Valley Water District EIR — Environmental Impact Report FEIR — Final Environmental Impact Report E5—E9 Pg91 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & Hillside Design Review DRC2016-00377 Page 2 FPEIR - Final Program Environmental Impact Report NPDES — National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NOx — Nitrogen Oxides ROG — Reactive Organic Gases PMio — Fine Particulate Matter RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board SCAQMD — South Coast Air Quality Management District SWPPP — Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," or "Less Than -Sig nificant-Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. (✓) Aesthetics (✓) Biological Resources (✓) Greenhouse Gas Emissions (✓) Land Use & Planning (✓) Population & Housing (✓)Tribal Cultural Resources (✓) Agricultural Resources (✓) Cultural Resources () Hazards & Waste Materials () Mineral Resources () Public Services () Utilities & Service Systems () Transportation/Traffic (✓) Air Quality (✓) Geology & Soils (✓) Hydrology & Water Quality (✓) Noise () Recreation (✓) 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 NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant 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. Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg92 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & Prepared By: Reviewed By: City of Rancho Cucamonga Review DRC2016-00377 Page 3 Date: _ y/ i 6 / / A Date: 'i7L�� Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg93 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 4 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g Potentially Significant Witt, Mitigation man Signifcant No Im act Inconacrated Im d Im ad EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project. a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? () () () (✓) b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but () () () (✓) not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State Scenic Highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or () () (✓) ( ) quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, () () (✓) ( ) which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Comments: a) There are no significant vistas within or adjacent to the project site. The site is not within a view corridor according to General Plan Figure LU-6. b) The project site contains no scenic resources and no historic buildings within a State Scenic Highway. There are no State Scenic Highways within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. c) The site is located on the east side of Carnelian Street approximately 750 feet north of Hillside Road and is characterized by single-family residential development to the north, south, east and west. The proposed lots average 23,797 square feet in size, which exceeds to the required minimum 22,500 square foot average lot size and is similar in size to the surrounding residential lots. The project site includes 3 ephemeral streams, 2 of which meet the criteria to be classified by the Army Corps of Engineers as Waters of the United States (WUS) and will be projected in place. The third stream has been determined to not meet the Waters of the United States (WUS) criteria and will be directed to a new underground drainage facility to an existing spillway on the property to the south. The protection of 2 of the on -site streams will help to maintain the existing character of the project site. The project site is within the Hillside Overlay and was designed to be in conformance with the related design and technical criteria, including limiting grading, limiting the height of retaining walls to no more than 4 feet in height and limiting the height of the residences to be within the 30-foot building envelope. The project site is also within the Equestrian Overlay and includes a private equestrian trail system providing access to an equestrian corral on each lot and to the community trail on Carnelian Street, a portion of which will be constructed as part of the project. The trail system will integrate the project site into the larger trail system in the City. The project includes 9 single -story residences, in excess of the requirement that 25 percent of the residences be single -story. The applicant has worked with the surrounding property owners to plot the new residences with consideration given to protecting the existing views and to plot single -story residences on lots where there was a potential impact to views on adjacent lots. Rev 4-17 ES—E9 Pg94 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 5 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Petentiatly Significant With Mitigation man Significant No Im act Incur crated Im act Im act The Design Review Committee reviewed and approved the 26 single-family residences proposed as part of the project at their meeting on March 14, 2017, and the Trails Advisory Committee reviewed the design and layout of the trails system and the equestrian amenities at their meeting on April 12, 2017. City standards require the developer to underground existing and new utility lines and facilities to minimize unsightly appearance of overhead utility lines and utility enclosures in accordance with Planning Commission Resolution No. 87-96, unless exempted by said Resolution. The impact is not considered significant. d) The project would increase the number of streetlights and security lighting used in the immediate vicinity. The design and placement of light fixtures will be shown on site plans which require review for consistency with City standards that require shielding, diffusing, or indirect lighting to avoid glare. Lighting will be selected and located to confine the area of illumination to within the project site. The impact is not considered significant. 2. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or () () (✓) ( ) Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a () () () (✓) Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause re -zoning of, () () () (✓ ) forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220 (g), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104 (g))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest () () () (✓) land to non -forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment, () () () (✓) which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non -forest use? Comments: a) The site is not designated as Prime Farmlands, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. The site is located on the east side of Carnelian Street approximately 750 feet north of Hillside Road and is characterized by residential development to the north, south, east and west. There are approximately 209 acres of Farmland of Local Importance, Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance within the City of Rancho Cucamonga according to the General Plan and the California Department of Conservation Farmland Map 2014. Concentrations of Important Farmland are sparsely located in the southern and eastern parts of the City that is characterized by existing and planned development. Farmland in the southern portion of the City is characterized by industrial, residential, and commercial land uses and Farmland in the eastern portion of the City is within the Etiwanda area and planned for development. Further, a large number of the designated farmland parcels are small, Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg95 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 6 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g Potentially Signircant wen Mitigation Than Significant No Impact =raorated Impact Impact ranging from 3 acres to 30 acres, and their economic viability is doubtful; therefore, they are not intended to be retained as farmland in the General Plan Land Use Plan. The General Plan FPEIR identified the conversion of farmlands to urban uses as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan for which the FPEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. b) There is no agriculturally zoned land within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. There are no Williamson Act contracts within the City. c) There are no lands within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that are zoned as forest land or timberland. Therefore no impacts would occur related to the conversion of forest land to non -forest use. Further, there are no areas within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that are zoned as forest land, timberland, or Timberland Production. No mitigation is required. d) There are no lands within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that qualify as forest land or timberland. Therefore no impacts would occur related of the loss or conversion of forest land to non -forest use. Further, there are no areas within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that are zoned as forest land, timberland, or Timberland Production. e) The site is located on the east side of Carnelian Street approximately 750 feet north of Hillside Road and is characterized by residential development to the north, south, east and west. The nearest agricultural use, an orange grove, is located approximately 1,600 feet to the north from the project site. Furthermore, there are no lands within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that qualify as forest land. Therefore, there is no potential for conversion of forest land to a non -forest use. Therefore, no 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? 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 () (✓) () ( ) concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial () () () (✓) number of people? Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg96 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 7 Less Than Significant Ls Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially significant Wth Mitigation Thanes Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Im act Comments: a) As discussed in subsection b, the project would not exceed any air quality standards and would not interfere with the region's ability to comply with Federal and State air quality standards for Criterion 1 Increase in the Frequency or Severity of Violations (local air quality impacts) or Criterion 2 Exceed Assumptions in the AQMP (consistency with the 2003 AQMP). Therefore the project is consistent with the 2003 AQMP. b) Both the State of California and the Federal government have established health -based ambient air quality standards (AAQS) for seven air pollutants. These pollutants include ozone (03), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), coarse particulate matter with a diameter or 10 microns or less (PMto), fine particulate matter less than 2.5 (PM2.5) microns in diameter and lead. Among these pollutants, ozone and particulate matter (PM,o and PM2.5) are considered regional pollutants while the others have more localized effects. In addition, the State of California has set standards for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide (1-12S), vinyl chloride and visibility reducing particles. These standards are designed to protect the health and welfare of the populace with a reasonable margin of safety. The City of Rancho Cucamonga area is within the South Coast Air Basin, which is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The California Clean Air Act (CCAA) provides the SCAQMD with the authority to manage transportation activities at indirect sources. Indirect sources of pollution are generated when minor sources collectively emit a substantial amount of pollution. Examples of this include motor vehicles at an intersection, a mall and on highways. SCAQMD also regulates stationary sources of pollution within a jurisdictional area. Direct emissions from motor vehicles are regulated by the Air Resources Board (ARB). The combination of topography, low mixing height, abundant sunshine, and emissions from the second largest urban area in the United States gives the Basin the worst air pollution problem in the nation. The Basin experiences a persistent temperature inversion (increasing temperature with increasing altitude); this inversion (coupled with low wind speeds) limits the vertical dispersion of air contaminants, holding them relatively near the ground. Pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA) of 1970, the EPA established national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for six major pollutants, termed criteria pollutants: ozone (03), coarse particulate matter with a diameter or 10 microns or less (PMto), fine particulate matter less than 2.5 (PM2.5) microns in diameter, carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and lead. Criteria pollutants are defined as those pollutants for which the Federal and State governments have established AAQS, or criteria, for outdoor concentrations in order to protect public health. Data collected at permanent monitoring stations are used by the EPA to classify regions as "attainment" or "non -attainment" depending on whether the regions met the requirements stated in the primary NAAQS. Nonattainment areas have additional restrictions as required by the EPA. The EPA has designated the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) responsible for ensuring the Basin's compliance with the FCAA. The South Coast Air Basin is in Non -Attainment Status for Ozone, PMto and PM2.5. Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg97 initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 8 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Than No Impact Incorporated Impact Im act Specific criteria for determining whether the potential air quality impacts of a project are significant are set forth in the SCAQMD's CEQA Air Quality Handbook. The criteria include daily emissions thresholds, compliance with State and national air quality standards, and consistency with the current AQMP. As prescribed by SCAQMD, an Air Quality Impact Analysis (date) was prepared by Urban Crossroads (July 7, 2016) that utilizes CalEEMod (Version 2013.2.2) to evaluate short-term construction emissions and short-term construction emissions for localized significant thresholds, long-term operational emissions, operation emissions for localized significant thresholds, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Short Term (Construction): Proiect Emissions and Impacts The project proposes to subdivide 18.2 acres of land for the purposes of developing 26 single family -residences. The project site is currently developed with a single-family residence and a number of small storage buildings, which will be removed for development of the proposed project. The potential emissions associated with construction of the project are described in the following sections. Summary of Peak Construction Emissions (Emissions Summary of Overall Construction with Best Available Control Measures) TABLE 3-4: MAXIMUM DAILY CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS SUMMARY Year _ _ Emissions (pounds per,day) VOC NOx CO � �SOx PM30 _P{NLS 2017 4.90 51.84 4D.51 0.04 10.00 6.46 2018 16.69 25.35 19.49 0.03 1.72 1.54 Maximum Daily Emissions 16.69 51.84 40.51 0.04 10 6.46 SCAQMD Regional Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55 Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO NO No Construction activities associated with the project will result in emissions of CO, VOCs, NOx, SOx, PMlo and PM2.5 and are expected from the following construction activities: demolition, grading (including soil import), building construction, painting (architectural coatings) paving (curb, gutter, flatwork, and parking lot), and construction worker commuting. Localized Significance Summary (Construction Emissions with Best Available Control Measures) Rev 4-17 ES—E9 Pg98 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 9 Less Than Signifiwnl Less Issues and SupportingInformation Sources: Potentially significant With Mitigation Than Significant Ne Impact Incorporated Im act Im act TABLE 3-6: LOCALIZED SIGNIFICANCE SUMMARY CONSTRUCTION On -Site Site Preparation Emissions Emissions (pounds per day). NO. c0, PM10 _ PM2.5 Maximum Daily Emissions 51.75 39.40 9.80 6.41 SCAQMD Localized Threshold 270 2,193 16 9 Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO On -Site Grading Emissions Emissions (pounds per day) NO. CO PM2g PM2.5 Maximum Daily Emissions 41.61 26.80 5.15 3.53 SCAQMD Localized Threshold 270 2,193 16 9 Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO Equipment Exhausts and Related Construction Activities Construction activities produce combustion emissions from various sources such as site grading, utility engines, on -site heavy-duty construction vehicles, asphalt paving, and motor vehicles transporting the construction crew. Exhaust emissions from construction activities envisioned on site would vary daily as construction activity levels change. The use of construction equipment on site would result in localized exhaust emissions; however, as shown in the tables above, the amount will not exceed any threshold of significance. Fugitive Dust Fugitive dust emissions are generally emissions associated with land clearing and exposure of soils to the air and wind, and cut -and -fill grading operations. Dust generated during construction varies substantially on a project -by project basis, depending on the level of activity, the specific operation and weather conditions at the time of construction. Construction emissions can vary greatly depending on the level of activity, the specific operations taking place, the equipment being operated, local soils, weather conditions and other factors. The proposed project will be required to comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403 to control fugitive dust. Architectural Coatings Architectural coatings contain VOCs that are similar to ROCS and are part of the 03 precursors. Based on the proposed project, it is estimated that the proposed project will result in a maximum of approximately 6.80 Ibs of VOC per day (combined for all construction sources) during construction. Therefore, this VOC emission is the principal air emission and is less than the SCAQMD VOC threshold of 75 Ibslday. Odors Heavy-duty equipment in the project area during construction would emit odors. However, the construction activity would cease to occur after individual construction is completed. No other sources of objectionable odors have been identified for the proposed project, and no mitigation measures are required. In compliance with SCAQMD Rule 402 the Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg99 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 10 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information S pf 9 Sources: Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Im act proposed uses are not anticipated to emit any objectionable odors. Therefore, objectionable odors posing a health risk to potential on -site and existing off -site uses would not occur as a result of the proposed project. Naturally Occurring Asbestos The proposed project is located in San Bernardino County and it is not among the counties that are found to have serpentine and ultramafic rock in their soils. In addition, there has been no serpentine or ultramafic rock found in the project area. Therefore, the potential risk for naturally occurring asbestos (NOA) during project construction is small and less than significant. Based on the discussion above and with implementation of the following Best Available Control Measures (BACM) identified in the Air Quality Impact Analysis by Urban Crossroads (July 7, 2016) as mitigation measures, short-term, construction impacts will be less -than -significant: 1) All clearing, grading, earth -moving, or excavation activities shall cease when winds exceed 25mph per SCAQMD guidelines in order to limit fugitive dust emissions. 2) 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. 3) The contractor shall ensure that traffic speeds on unpaved roads and Project site areas are reduced to 15 miles per hour or less. Cumulative Impacts: Short -Term Construction Emissions Continued development will contribute to the pollutant levels in the Rancho Cucamonga area, which already exceed Federal and State standards. 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. Nevertheless, fugitive dust and equipment emissions are required to be assessed. The General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR) analyzed the impacts of Air Quality based on the future build out of the City. Based upon on the Urban Emissions Model (URBEMIS7G) estimates in Table 4.3-3 of the General Plan (FPEIR), Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2), Ozone (03), and Particulate Matter (PM2.5 and PM,o) would exceed SCAQMD thresholds for significance; therefore, they would all be cumulatively considerable if they cannot be mitigated on a project basis to a level less -than -significant. This city-wide increase in emissions was identified as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council as noted in the Section 4.3 of the General Plan FPEIR. Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg100 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 11 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Inccr orated Impact Im act With implementation of the following best practices and mitigation measures from the City's 2010 General Plan FPEIR that are designed to minimize short-term air quality impacts, the project's contribution to cumulative impacts will be less -than -significant: 4) 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. 5) 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. 6) The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel powered equipment where feasible. 7) The construction contractor shall ensure that construction -grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. 8) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. 9) 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. 10) 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 Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg101 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 12 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g Potentially Significant With Mitigation man Significant No Impact Incorporatedd Im act Im act hauling. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. Suspend grading operations during high winds (i.e., wind speeds exceeding 25mph) in accordance with Rule 403 requirements. Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils haul trucks or cover payloads using tarps or other suitable means. 11) The site shall be treated with water or other soil -stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB)) daily to reduce PM,o emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. 12) 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. Proiect Long Term (Operational) Emissions and Impacts Long-term air pollutant emissions are those associated with stationary sources and mobile sources involving any project -related changes. The proposed project would result in a net increase in the amount of development in the area; therefore, the proposed project would result in net increases in both stationary and mobile source emissions. The stationary source emissions would come from additional natural gas consumption for on -site buildings and electricity for the lighting in the buildings and at the parking area. As shown in the following tables, project implementation will not exceed any significance thresholds. No long-term, operational impacts will occur as a result of the project. Rev 4-17 ES—E9 Pg102 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 13 Less Than Signifwnt Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Pctenttagy S igniOwnt wth Mitigation pan Signifcant No Im act Incor prated Im act Im act Summary of Peak Operational Emissions TABLE 3-5: MAXIMUM DAILY OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS SUMMARY Operational Activities -Summer Scenario ' Emissions (pounds per day) VOc NO. CD to, 'PMia PMzs Area Source 1.26 0.03 2.15 1.10E-04 0.05 0.05 Energy5ource 0.02 0.21 0.09 1.34E-D3 0.02 0.02 Mobile 0.93 2.91 11.09 0.03 1.94 0.55 Total Maximum Daily Emissions 2.21 3.15 13.34 0.03 2.D1 0.62 SCAQMD Regional Threshold 55 55 550 ISO 150 55 Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO NO NO Operational Activities - Winter Scenario Emissions (pounds per day) "'- VOc NO. CO 50. PMia `PMze Area Source 1.26 0.03 2.16 1.10E.04 0.05 0.05 Energy Source 0.02 0.21 0.09 1.34E-03 0.02 0.02 Mobile 0.90 3.04 10.30 0.03 1.94 0.55 Total Maximum Daily Emissions 2.18 3.28 12.5S 0,03 2.01 0.62 SCAQMD Regional Threshold 55 55 1 550 150 150 1 55 Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO INO NO NO Localized Signifiance - Long Term Operational Activity: The proposed project involves the construction and operation of 26 single-family residenital dwelling units. According to SCAQMD LST methodology, LST's would apply to the operational phase of a proposed project, if the project includes stationary sources, or attracts moile sources that may spend long periods queuing and idling at the site (e.g., transfer facilities and warehouse buildings). The propsed project does not include such uses, and thus, due to the lack of significant stationary source emission, no long-term localized significance thershold analysisi is needed. Cumulative Impacts (Long Term/Operational Emissions) The General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR) analyzed the potential impacts to air quality based on the future build out of the City. In the long-term, continued development would result in significant operational vehicle emissions based upon on the URBEMIS7G model estimates in Table 4.3-3 of the General Plan FPEIR; therefore, all developments would be cumulatively significant if they cannot be mitigated on a project basis to a less -than -significant level. This City-wide increase in emissions was identified as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council as noted in the Section 4.3 of the General Plan FPEIR. Rev 4-17 E5-E9 Pg103 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 14 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g Ponificaly Significant can Mitigation Tnic Significant No Im act Incorporated Impact Impact With implementation of the following mitigation measures from the City's 2010 General Plan FPEIR that are designed to minimize long-term, operational air quality impacts, the project's contribution to cumulative impacts will be less -than -significant: 13) Provide adequate ingress and egress at all entrances to public facilities to minimize vehicle idling at curbsides. 14) Provide preferential parking to high occupancy vehicles and shuttle services. 15) Schedule truck deliveries and pickups during off-peak hours. 16) Improve thermal integrity of the buildings and reduce thermal load with automated time clocks or occupant sensors. 17) Landscape with native and/or drought -resistant species to reduce water consumption and to provide passive solar benefits. 18) Comply with the AQMP Miscellaneous Sources PRC-03, and Stationary Sources Operations Enhanced Inspection and Maintenance and ADV-MISC to reduce emissions of restaurant operations. 19) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate high-efficiency/low-polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water heaters. 20) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. c) As noted in the General Plan FEIR (Section 4.3), continued development would contribute to the pollutant levels in the Rancho Cucamonga area, which already exceed Federal and State standards. The General Plan FPEIR identified the citywide increase in emissions as a significant and adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. With implementation of mitigation measures listed in subsection b) above from the City's 2010 General Plan FPEIR, which are designed to minimize long-term, operational air quality impacts, cumulative impacts will be less -than -significant. d) Sensitive receptors are defined as populations that are more susceptible to the effects of pollution than the population at large. The SCAQMD identifies the following as sensitive receptors: long-term health care facilities, rehabilitation centers, convalescent centers, retirement homes, residences, schools, playgrounds, child care centers, and athletic facilities. According to the SCAQMD, projects have the potential to create significant impacts if they are located within 1/4 mile of sensitive receptors and would emit toxic air contaminants identified in SCAQMD Rule 1401. The project site is located within '% mile of single-family residences. Notwithstanding, the Methodology explicitly states that "it is possible that a project may have receptors closer than 25 meters. Projects with boundaries located closer than 25 meters to the nearest receptor should use the LSTs for receptors located at 25 meters." Therefore, LSTs for receptors located at 25 meters were utilized in the projects air quality study. Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg104 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 15 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Significant wth MiligaYon Than Significant No Impactt Inver crated Im act Im act During construction, there is the possibility of fugitive dust to be generated from grading the site. The mitigation measures listed under subsection b above and the following mitigation measure will reduce any potential impact to less -than -significant levels. 21) 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. e) Construction odors (Short-term) may include odors associated with equipment use including diesel exhaust or roofing, painting and paving. These odors are temporary and would dissipate rapidly. Operational odors (Long-term) are not typically associated with this type of use. Odors from the proposed single-family residential subdivision would most likely be from activities such as cooking and lawn care however, these odors would be minimal and not considered to be significant. 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 other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally () (✓) () ( ) protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native () (✓) () ( ) resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? 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? Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg105 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 16 Less Than Significant Less Issues and SupportingInformation Sources: Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Im act Comments: a) The project site is located in an area developed with single-family residential land uses and has been previously disrupted during annual discing for weed abatement. According to the General Plan Figure RC-4, and Section 4.4 of the General Plan FPEIR, the project site is not within an area of sensitive biological resources. A General Biological Assessment (April, 2016) and a Jurisdictional Delineation (March, 2016) were prepared by Hernandez Environmental Services to review the biological resources and the 3 ephemeral stream on the project site. The General Biological Assessment included a literature review, a review of aerial photographs and of topographic maps of the project location and surrounding areas. As part of the General Biological Assessment, a field survey was conducted on the 18.2 acre project site which determined that the project site contains 8 habitat types, including 13.41 acres of disturbed non-native grasses, 2.25 acres of ornamental vegetation habitat, 1.2 acres of disturbed habitat, 0.51 acre of disturbed residential habitat 0.42 of mulefat dominant habitat, 0,33 acre of non-native habitat 0.12 acres of will ornamental mix and .04 acre with a cottonwood tree. The project site also includes a single-family residence, 3 storage buildings and 3 ephemeral drainages that are under the jurisdiction of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), Regional Water Control Board (RWQCB) and the United Sates Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE). The General Biological Assessment determined that a total of 56 sensitive plants and 48 sensitive animals have the potential to be present on or near the project site. This includes those listed, or candidate for listing, by the USFWS, CDFW, and the CNPS. All potential habitats for these species were evaluated on the project site and a determination was made that no sensitive or endangered plant or animal species exist on the project site and that focused surveys were not required. Implementation of the project was determined to not have the potential to impact any state or federally listed sensitive species or their associated habitat. No wildlife movement corridors were found to be present on the project site. The project site does contain potentially suitable habitat for nesting birds and a mitigation measure has be included requiring nesting bird and burrowing owl surveys prior to earth moving activities. With the following mitigation measures the project will have a less than significant impact on biological resources: 1) Three days prior to the removal of vegetation or ground -disturbing activities, a breeding bird survey that is in conformance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act shall be required to determine whether nesting is occurring. Occupied nests shall not be disturbed unless a qualified biologist verifies through non-invasive methods that either (a) the adult birds have not begun egg -laying or incubation; or (b) the juveniles from the occupied nests are foraging independently and are capable of independent survival. If the biologist is unable to verify one of the above conditions, then no disturbance shall occur within 300 feet of non -raptor nests, and within 500 feet of raptor nests, during the breeding season to avoid abandonment of young. If nests are discovered, they shall be avoided through the establishment of an appropriate buffer setback, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. The temporary "no construction" area shall be maintained until the nest has completed its cycle, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. Once the Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg 106 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 17 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: seenoam Mit gal an SieThan t No Impact Incar orated Impact Im att nest cycle is complete and all nestlings have fledged and have left the nest, construction in the area may resume. 2) Prior to removal of vegetation or ground -disturbing activities, perform a Burrowing Owl Survey that is in conformance with the Department of Fish and Wildlife Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation and submit the written report outlining the findings to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the Planning Department within 30 days of groundbreaking activity. The survey shall include a habitat assessment, survey and impact analysis. The Burrowing Owl Survey shall follow the following protocol: Burrowing Owl Survey methodology shall be based on Appendix D (Breeding and Non -breeding Season Surveys and Reports) of the CDFW Staff Report. Results of the pre -construction survey shall be provided to CDFW and the City. If the pre -construction survey does not identify burrowing owls on the project site, then no further mitigation is required. If burrowing owls are found to be utilizing the project site during the pre - construction survey, measures shall be developed by the qualified biologist in coordination with CDFW to avoid Impacting occupied burrows during the nesting period. These measures shall be based on the most current CDFW protocols and will at minimum include establishment of buffer setbacks from occupied burrows and owl monitoring. If ground - disturbing activities are delayed or suspended for more than 30 days after the pre -construction survey, the site shall be resurveyed for owls. During the non -breeding season from September 1 through January 31, if burrows are occupied by migratory or non -migratory resident burrowing owls during a pre -construction survey, burrow exclusion and/or closure may be used to exclude owls from those burrows. Burrow exclusion and/or closure should only be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist in coordination with CDFW using the most current CDFW guidelines. During the avian nesting season from February 1 through August 31, if nests are discovered, they shall be avoided through establishment of an appropriate buffer setback, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. The temporary "no construction" area would have to be maintained until the nest has completed its cycle, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. Once the nest cycle is complete and all nestlings have fledged and have left the nest, construction in the area may resume. b) The project site is located in an urban area with no natural communities and contains 3 ephemeral drainages. The project site contains approximately 0.89 acre (approximately 1,719 feet in length) of ephemeral drainage feature and associated riparian habitat that would be regulated under Section 1602 of the Fish and Game code. In addition, the project site contains approximately 0.32 acres of waters of the United States. The project will impact approximately 0.30 acre (8,040 linear feet) of Drainages A and B and associated riparian habitat, which would be regulated under Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code. Further, the proposed project will impact approximately 0.12 acre (885 linear feet) of ephemeral Drainages A and B, which are considered water of the United States. The proposed impacts to CDFW, USACE and RWQCB jurisdictional waters would Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg107 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 18 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentntly Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Im aq Incorporated Impact Im act require a 1600 Streambed Alteration Agreement from CDFW, a Section 404 permit authorization from the USACE and a 401 State Water Quality Certification from the RWQCB. The applicant submitted a Notification of Lake and Streambed Alteration to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), which included an offer to mitigate the projects streambed impacts by providing sufficient funds to the Soquel Canyon Mitigation Bank for 0.60 acre of streambed restoration. The applicant received a letter from CDFW, dated September 15, 2016, stating that the CDFW had until September 13, 2016. to submit a Draft Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement to the applicant or inform them that an agreement is not required. The CDFW did not meet that date, and as a result, the applicant was informed that they may now move forward with the project without a Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement. The applicant also submitted a letter dated March 27, 2017, from the Department of the Army in compliance with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act for the discharge of dredged and/or material into waters of the United States. The letter states that the proposed project, if constructed as described in the application, would comply with Nationwide Permit NWP 29 (Residential Permits). The permit authorizes the applicant to permanently place fill material into approximately 0.12 acres of non -wetland water of the United States to construct 26 residential lots, associated utility and road infrastructure and three infiltration basins. With the following mitigation measures the project will have a less than significant impact on biological resources: 3) Prior to approval of any permits related to the project, documentation shall be submitted to the Planning Department verifying the purchase 0.60 acre of streambed restoration land from the Soquel Canyon Mitigation Bank, which is owned by Land Veritas. 4) Comply will all of the terms and conditions of Enclosure 1 as outlined in the Department of the Army Nationwide Permit Verification letter dated March 27, 2017. 5) The Department of the Army permit is contingent upon the issuance of a Section 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC) from the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The Permittee shall abide by the terms and conditions of the Clean Water Act Section 401 WQC. The permittee shall submit the Section 401 WQC to the Corps Regulatory Division within two weeks of receipt from the issuing State agency. The permittee shall not proceed with construction until receiving an email or other written notification from Corps Regulatory Division acknowledging the Clean Water Act 401 WQC has been received, reviewed and determined to be acceptable. If the RWQCB fails to act on a request for certification within 60 days after receipt of a complete application, please notify the Corps so we may consider whether a waiver of water quality certification is warranted pursuant to 33 CFR 325.2(b)(1)(ii). 6) Prior to initiating construction in waters of the U.S., and to mitigate for impacts to 0.12 acres of non -wetland water of the U.S., The Permittee shall provide documentation verifying purchase of 0.24 ephemeral stream enhancement credits from Soquel Canyon Mitigation Bank or another Corps -approved Rev 4-17 ES—E9 Pg108 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 19 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially signifewt wen Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Inca prated Im ad Im act mitigation bank within the same primary service area. The Permittee shall not initiate work in waters of the U.S. prior to receiving written confirmation from the Corps Regulatory Division as to compliance with the special condition. The permittee retains responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation until the number and resource type of credits described above have been secured from a sponsor and the district engineer has received documentation that confirms that the sponsor has accepted the responsibility for providing the required compensatory mitigation. This documentation may consist of a letter or form signed by the sponsor, with the permit number and a statement indicating the number and resource type of credits that have been secured from the sponsor. 7) No later than one month following completion of authorized work in waters of the U.S., the permittee shall ensure all sites within waters of the U.S. subject to authorized, temporary impacts are restored to pre -project alignments, elevation contours, and conditions to the maximum extent practicable to ensure expeditious resumption of aquatic resource functions. No later than 45 calendar days following completion of authorized work within water of the U.S., the permittee shall submit a memorandum documenting compliance with this special condition. 8) Within 45 calendar days of completion of authorized work in waters of the U.S., the Permittee shall submit to the Corps Regulatory Division a post -project implementation memorandum including the following information: Date(s) work within waters of the U.S. was initiated and completed. • Summary of compliance status with each special conations of this permit (including any noncompliance that previously occurred or is currently occurring and corrective action taken or proposed to achieve compliance). • Color photographs (including map of photopoints) taken at the project site before and after construction for those aspects directly associated with permanent impacts to waters of the U.S. such that the extent of authorized fills can be verified. • One copy of "as built' drawings of the entire project. Electronic submittal is preferred. All sheets must be signed, dated, and to -scale. If submitting paper copies, sheets must be no larger than 11 x 17 inches. • Signed Certification of Compliance (attached as part of his permit package). c) No wetland habitat is present on -site. The project does contain 3 ephemeral drainages. The project proposes protecting 2 of the 3 ephemeral drainages. The applicant has proposed purchasing 0.60 acre of streambed restoration land from the Soquel Canyon Mitigation Bank to mitigate the removal of 1 ephemeral drainage. See full discussion under b). Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg109 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 20 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g rmaourc Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Signircant No Impact Incorporated Impact impact d) The City is primarily located in an urban area that does not contain large, contiguous natural open space areas. Wildlife potentially may move through the north/south trending tributaries in the northern portion of the City and within the Sphere of Influence. The City is required to acquire and/or protect open space areas that provide strategic wildlife corridors to vital habitat areas. Based on the Biology study prepared for the project by Hernandez Biological Services (April 2016), the project site is not considered a wildlife movement corridor. The project does contain 3 ephemeral drainages. The project proposes protecting 2 of the 3 ephemeral drainages. The applicant has proposed purchasing 0.60 acre of streambed restoration land from the Soquel Canyon Mitigation Bank to mitigate the removal of 1 ephemeral drainage. The project will have a less than significant impact with the implementation of mitigation measures 1 - 6 in section a) above. e) There are 7 trees on the project site that qualify to be classified as heritage trees on the project site. An Arborist Report (Mike Parker; March 18, 2016) was submitted to determine the condition of the on -site trees. The on -site trees include a Mimosa tree (40-50 foot grown spread), 3 Samuel Ash trees (20-30 foot crown spread) and 3 Date Palm tree (15- 20 foot crown spread). The report concludes that the trees are generally in good condition (each tree is given a "C' rating) but will need to be removed as they are in conflict with the proposed site improvements. The applicant will be required to replace removed trees on a one -for -one basis as well as plant the required two trees in the front yard are of each residence. With implementation of the following mitigation measure, the impact is considered less than significant: 9) A minimum 7 trees (not counting trees required to be planted in the front yard areas and street trees) shall be planted on the project site to replace the 7 removed heritage trees which include a Mimosa tree, 3 Samuel Ash trees and 3 Date Palm trees. The replacement trees shall be shown on the landscape plan. f) Neither the City nor the SOI are within an adopted HCP, NCCP, or other approved State Habitat Conservation Plan area. The project site is not located within a local conservation area according to the General Plan, Open Space and Conservation Plan, Figure RC-1. No conflicts with habitat conservation plans will occur. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the () () () (✓) significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the () (✓) () ( ) significance of an archeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological () (✓) () ( ) resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred () () () (✓) outside of dedicated cemeteries? Comments: a) The project site has not been identified as a "Historic Resource" per the standards of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 2.24 (Historic Preservation). The applicant Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg110 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 21 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information S PP g rmaSources: Potentially Significant wth Mitigation Than Significant No Impact incorponsted Impact Im aU has submitted a CEQA and Section 106 (NHPA) Archaeological Study (Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc.; February 6, 2017). The Study included an archaeological records search by the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) at CSU Fullerton of all properties within a 1-mile radius of the project site, a records search by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) of Sacred Lands Files (SLF) and a field survey of the project site. The SCCIC records search did not identify any previously recorded resources within the project boundaries. Six archaeological sites were located within a 1-mile radius of the project site. This includes a prehistoric temporary camp, a historic electric transmission line and four historic residences. The records search and literature review suggest that there is a low potential for archaeological resources to be contained within the boundaries of the project site. Additionally, the NAHC SLF search did not indicate the presence of any sacred sites or locations of religious or ceremonial importance within the search radius. The field survey included a pedestrian survey of the project area. All exposed ground was inspected for cultural materials. The project site was found to be highly disturbed by previous agricultural use. The survey did not result in the identification of any archaeological resources and there is no indication of any historic or prehistoric use or occupation. Based on the information obtained through the records search and from the field survey, there is sufficient information to conclude that the prosed development will not impact any historic resources. Based on this information, no impact is anticipated. b) There are no known archaeological sites or resources recorded on the project site; however, the Rancho Cucamonga area is known to have been inhabited by Native Americans according to the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.6). Construction activity, particularly grading, soil excavation, and compaction, could adversely affect or eliminate existing and potential archaeological resources. The General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR) analyzed the impacts of Cultural Resources based on the future build out of the City. The following mitigation measures as identified in the FPEIR shall be implemented: 1) If any prehistoric archaeological resources are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. With the assistance of the archaeologist, the City of Rancho Cucamonga will: • Enact interim measures to protect undesignated sites from demolition or significant modification without an opportunity for the City to establish its archaeological value. • Consider establishing provisions to require incorporation of archaeological sites within new developments, using their special qualities as a theme or focal point. • Pursue educating the public about the archaeological heritage of the area. • Prepare a mitigation plan consistent with Section 21083.2 Archaeological resources of CEQA to eliminate adverse project effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric resources, including but not limited to, Rev 4-17 ES—E9 Pg111 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 22 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information S PP g Sources: Pctantialiy Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Im ap avoiding archaeological sites, capping or covering sites with soil, planning the site as a park or green space or paying an in -kind mitigation fee. Prepare a technical resources management report, documenting the inventory, evaluation, and proposed mitigation of resources within the project area. Submit one copy of the completed report with original illustrations, to the San Bernardino County Archaeological Information Center for permanent archiving. c) The General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.6) indicates that the Rancho Cucamonga area is on an alluvial fan. According to the research performed at the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County and the San Bernardino County database, no paleontological sites or resources have been recorded within the City of Rancho Cucamonga or the Sphere -of - Influence, including the project site; however, the area has a high sensitivity rating for paleontological resources. The older alluvium, which would have been deposited during the wetter climate that prevailed 10,000-100,000 years ago during the Late Pleistocene epoch of the Quaternary period, when the last "Ice Age" and the appearance of modern man occurred, may contain significant vertebrate fossils. The project site is underlain by Quaternary alluvium per the Public Safety Element of the General Plan; therefore, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 2) If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal fossils) are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified paleontologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. The paleontologist shall submit a report of findings that will also provide specific recommendations regarding further mitigation measures (i.e., paleontological monitoring) that may be appropriate. Where mitigation monitoring is appropriate, the program must include, but not be limited to, the following measures: • Assign a paleontological monitor, trained and equipped to allow the rapid removal of fossils with minimal construction delay, to the site full-time during the interval of earth -disturbing activities. • Should fossils be found within an area being cleared or graded, divert earth -disturbing activities elsewhere until the monitor has completed salvage. If construction personnel make the discovery, the grading contractor should immediately divert construction and notify the monitor of the find. • Prepare, identify, and curate all recovered fossils for documentation in the summary report and transfer to an appropriate depository (i.e., San Bernardino County Museum). • Submit summary report to City of Rancho Cucamonga. Transfer collected specimens with a copy of the report to San Bernardino County Museum. d) The proposed project is in an area that has already been disturbed by development. The project site was historically used for agricultural purposes. The site is currently developed with a single-family residence and the remainder of the parcel is regularly cleared of brush. 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 Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg112 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 23 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Inver crated Impact Im an 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 6097.98. As adherence to State regulations is required for all development, no mitigation is required in the unlikely event human remains are discovered on -site. 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as () () () (✓) delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? () () () (✓) iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including () () () (✓) liquefaction? iv) Landslides? () () () (✓) b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? () (✓) () ( ) c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, () () () (✓) or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table () () () (✓) 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use () () (✓) of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal I systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? Comments: a) No known faults pass through the site and it is not in an Earthquake Fault Zone, nor is it in the Rancho Cucamonga City Special Study Zone along the Red Hill Fault, according to the General Plan Figure PS-2, and Section 4.7 of the General Plan FPEIR. The Red Hill Fault, passes 3 miles southeast of the site, and the Cucamonga Fault Zone lies approximately 3 miles north of the site. 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 13 miles northeasterly of the site and the San Andreas, capable of up to Mw 8.2 earthquakes, is 23 miles northeasterly of the site. Each of these faults can produce strong ground shaking. Adhering to the Uniform Building Code and Standard Conditions will ensure that geologic impacts are less -than -significant. Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg113 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 24 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g rmaurc Potentially significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Im act Inca oraled Impact Im ad b) The City of Rancho Cucamonga is within a designated Soil Erosion Control Area according to Exhibit 4.7-4 of the General Plan FPEIR. The proposed project will require the excavation, stockpiling, and/or movement of on -site soils. The Rancho Cucamonga area is subject to strong Santa Ana wind conditions during September to April, which generates blowing sand and dust, and creates erosion problems. Construction activities may temporarily exacerbate the impacts of windblown sand, resulting in temporary problems of dust control; however, development of this project under the General Plan would help to reduce windblown sand impacts in the area as pavement, roads, buildings, and landscaping are established. Therefore, the following fugitive dust mitigation measures shall be implemented to reduce impacts to less -than -significant levels: 1) The site shall be treated with water or other soil -stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) daily to reduce PM10 emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 or re -planted with drought resistant landscaping as soon as possible. 2) Frontage public streets shall be swept according to a schedule established by the City to reduce PM10 emissions associated with vehicle tracking of soil off - site. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. 3) Grading operations shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed 25 mph to minimize PM,o emissions from the site during such episodes. 4) Chemical soil -stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM,o emissions. c) The General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.7) indicates that there is a potential for the hillside areas at the northern end of the City and in the SOI for slope failure, landslides, and/or erosion. Areas subject to slope instability contain slopes of 30 percent or greater. Landslides may be induced by seismic activity, rain, or construction. The City Hillside Development Regulations prohibits the development within slopes of 30 percent or greater and limit the number of units that could be constructed within the Hillside Residential and Very Low Density Residential designations in the Hillside areas. The site is not within an Earthquake hazard zone or other unstable geologic unit or soil type according to General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.7-2. Soil types on -site consist of Hanford coarse loam, Greenfield sandy loam and Ramona sandy loam soil association according to General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.7-3. No adverse impacts are anticipated. d) The majority of Rancho Cucamonga, including the project site, is located on alluvial soil deposits. These types of soils are not considered to be expansive. Soil types on -site consist of Hanford coarse loam, Greenfield sandy loam and Ramona sandy loam soil association according to General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.7-3. These soils are typically have slow to medium runoff. No adverse impacts are anticipated. e) The project proposes the installation of septic systems that will be required to be permitted by the City's Building and Safety Department and meet all related environmental regulations. Additionally, the project shall be required to comply with Chapter 5 of the Santa Ana Region Basin Plan. If the site is unsuitable for the installation of septic systems, the applicant shall be required to connect to the City's existing sewer system per section 4.7.6 Threshold 4.7e of the General Plan. Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg114 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 25 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 aetentlaily Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Im act Inver oraled Impact Im act 7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or () (✓) () ( ) indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation () () (✓) ( ) adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Comments: a) Regulations and Significance —The Federal government began studying the phenomenon of global warming as early as 1979 with the National Climate Protection Act (92 Stat. 601). In June of 2005, Governor Schwarzenegger established California's Green House Gas (GHG) emissions reduction target in Executive Order (EO) S-3-05. The EO created goals to reduce GHG emissions for the State of California to 2000 levels by 2010; GHG emissions reduced to 1990 levels by 2020; and GHG emissions reduced to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. Additionally, on December 7, 2009 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) issued findings regarding GHGs under rule 202(a) of the Clean Air Act: (1) that GHGs endanger human health; and (2) that this will be the first steps to regulating GHGs through the Federal Clean Air Act. The USEPA defines 6 key GHGs (carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hezafluoride (SF6)). The combined emissions of these well -mixed greenhouse gases from new motor vehicles and engines contribute to GHG pollution. The western states, including Arizona, California, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, and Washington, already experience hotter, drier climates. California is a substantial contributor of GHGs and is expected to see an increase of 3 to 4 degrees Fahrenheit (OF) over the next century. Assembly Bill (AB) 32 requires that the California Air Resources Board (ARB), the lead agency for implementing AB 32, determine what the statewide GHG emission level was in 1990 and approve a statewide GHG emissions limit (427 million metric tons of CO2 equivalent) to be achieved by 2020 and prepare a Scoping Plan to outline the main strategies for meeting the 2020 deadline. Significant progress can be made toward the 2020 goal through existing technologies and improving the efficiency of energy use. Other solutions would include improving the State's infrastructure, and transitioning to cleaner and more efficient sources of energy. The ARB estimates that 38 percent of the State's GHG emissions in 2004 was from transportation sources followed by electricity generation (both in -State and out -of -State) at 28 percent and industrial at 20 percent. Residential and commercial activities account for 9 percent, agricultural uses at 6 percent, high global warming potential gases at 3 percent, and recycling and waste at 1 percent. It is not anticipated that any single development project would have a substantial effect on global climate change but that GHG emissions from the project would combine with emissions across California, the United States, and the world to cumulatively contribute to global climate change. Therefore, consistent with the ARB's Climate Change Scoping Plan, the proposed project was evaluated for consistency with the Early Action Measures Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg115 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 26 Less Than significant Less Issues and Supporting Information So PP g mSources: Petanllally significant wen Mitigation Than significant No Impact incorporated Impact Impact (Scoping Plan is a recommendation until adopted through normal rulemaking). The proposed project is assessed by determining its consistency with the 37 Recommended Actions identified by ARB. In compliance with Senate Bill (SB) 97 and CEQA, the project has been analyzed based on a qualitative analysis (CEQA 15064.4). Additionally, the ARB was directed through SB 375 to develop regional GHG emission reduction targets to be achieved within the automobile and light truck sectors for 2020 and 2035. SCAQMD and ARB maintain ambient air quality monitoring stations in the Basin. The stations closest to the project site are the Upland station and the Fontana -Arrow Highway station. The Upland station monitors all criteria pollutants except PMio, PM2.5, and SO2 which are monitored at the Fontana -Arrow Highway station. The ambient air quality in the project area for CO, NO2, and SO2 are consistently below the relevant State and Federal standards (based on ARB and EPA from 2007, 2008, and 2009 readings). Ozone, PM1o, and PM2.5 levels all exceed State and Federal standards regularly. Proiect Related Sources of GHG's — Based on the Guidelines for the Implementation of California Environmental Quality Act, Appendix G, a project would normally be considered to have a significant effect on air quality if the project would violate any ambient air quality standards, contribute substantially to an existing air quality violation, expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, or conflict with adopted environmental plans and goals of the community. However, neither the CEQA statutes, Office of Planning and Research (OPR) guidelines, nor the draft proposed changes to the CEQA Guidelines prescribe thresholds of significance or a particular methodology for performing an impact analysis. Significance criteria are left to the judgment and discretion of the Lead Agency. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has not adopted a threshold of significance for GHG emissions. However, a screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year is based upon South Coast Air Quality Management District staff's proposed GHG screening threshold for stationary sources emissions for non -industrial projects, as described in the SCAQMD's Interim CEQA GHG Significance Threshold for Stationary Sources, Rules and Plans. Project related GHG's would include emissions from direct and indirect sources. Based on the Greenhouse Gas Analysis (Urban Crossroads; March 15, 2016), total project related emissions would be 484.82 MTCO2egIyear, as shown in the following table: Rev 4-17 E5—E9Pg116 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 27 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information S PP g Sources: Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incorporated Im act Im act TABLE 4-1: TOTAL PROJECT GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS (ANNUAL) Emission Source _ Emissions (metric tons per year) coz CH4 NzO Total CO=E Annual construction -related emissions amortized over 30 years 11.11 2.58E-03 — 11.16 Area 6.68 5.50E-04 1.10E-04 6.73 Energy 87.32 3.35E-03 1.33E-03 97.80 Mobile Sources 355.26 0.01 0 355.53 Waste 6.16 0.36 13.80 Water Usage 8.19 0.06 0.00 9.80 Total CO2E (All Sources) 484.82 SCAQMD Threshold 3,000 Significant? No As shown in Table 4-1, direct and indirect operational emissions associated with the project as compared to the SCAQMD's interim threshold of significance of 3,000 MTCO2e per year would result in a less than significant impact with respect to GHG emissions. Cumulative Short Term (Construction) GHG Emissions — The General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.5) indicates that GHG emissions result from construction activities associated with diesel -powered construction equipment and other combustion sources (i.e. Generators, workers vehicles, material delivery, etc.). The GHG emitted by construction equipment is primarily carbon dioxide (CO2). The highest levels of construction related GHG's occur during site preparation including demolition, grading and excavation. Construction related GHG's are also emitted from off -site haul trucks and construction workers traveling to the job site. Exhaust emissions from construction activities would vary each day with the changes in construction activity on site. The combustion of fossil - based fuels creates GHG's such as CO2, Cho, and N20. CH4 is emitted during the fueling of heavy equipment. Based on the Greenhouse Gas Analysis (Urban Crossroads; March 15, 2016), no significant impacts to GHGs from short-term construction impacts would occur as a result of the project as shown in the table above. Because the project would result in minimal emissions that do not exceed the SCAQMD's interim threshold of significance, the project's contribution to cumulative impacts is also considered minimal. The proposed project would have less than a significant short-term cumulative impact with implementation of the following enforceable actions, which are included as mitigation measures in accordance with Mitigation Measure 4.5-1 of the 2010 General Plan Update FPEIR: 1) The project must comply with all rules that assist in reducing short-term air pollutant emission in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403 regarding fugitive dust including treating the site with water or other soil -stabilizing agent twice daily or replanting disturbed areas as quickly as possible. Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg117 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 28 Less Than slgnfcant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g Potenllally Significant Wlh Mitigation Than S,pifranl No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 2) The construction contractor shall select construction equipment based on low -emission factors and high energy efficiency and submit a statement on the grading plan that ensures all construction equipment will be tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufactures' specification. 3) Trucks shall not idle continuously for more than 5 minutes. 4) Alternative fuel powered equipment shall be utilized in lieu of gasoline- or diesel -powered engines where feasible. 5) Construction should be timed so as not to interfere with peak -hour traffic. 6) Ridesharing and transit incentives shall be supported and encouraged for the construction crew. Cumulative Long Term (Operational) GHG's Emissions —The primary source of GHG emissions generated by the proposed project would be from motor vehicles, combustion of natural gas for space and water heating, as well as off -site GHG emissions from generation of electricity consumed by the proposed land use development over a long term. CEQA requires the Lead Agency to review the project for "adequacy, completeness, and a good faith effort at full disclosure," to determine potential impacts of GHG's. Therefore the project has been analyzed based on methodologies and information available to the City at the time this document was prepared. Estimates are based on past performance and represent a scenario that is a worst case with the understanding that technology changes may reduce GHG emissions in the future. To date, there is no established quantified GHG emission threshold. The project involves the construction of 26 single-family residences and the subdivision of the 18.2 acre project site and therefore would result in an increase in the net increases of both stationary and mobile source emissions. The majority of energy consumption typically occurs during project operation (more than 80 percent and less than 20 percent during construction activities). The proposed project will incorporate several design features that are consistent with the California Office of the Attorney General's recommended measures to reduce GHG emission including: water efficient landscaping, shade trees and walkways that provide accessibility to public sidewalks. The project is consistent with the California Environmental Protection Agency Climate Action Team proposed early action measures to mitigate climate change included in the CARB Scoping Plan mandated under AB 32. The proposed project will incorporate several design features including: water efficient landscaping, shade tree and walkways that provide accessibility to public sidewalks. Additionally, the City is participating in the development of a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) with SANBAG for the San Bernardino County area pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 375. Based on the (Urban Crossroads; March 15, 2016), no significant impacts to GHGs from long-term, operational impacts would occur as a result of the project as shown in the table above. Because the project would result in minimal emissions that do not exceed the SCAQMD's interim threshold of significance, the project's contribution to cumulative impacts is also considered minimal. The proposed project would have less than a significant long-term operational impact with implementation of the following enforceable Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg118 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 29 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information S PP g Sources: Potentially significant With Mitigation an Signifcant No Impact Incorporated Impact Im act actions, which are included as mitigation measures in accordance with Mitigation Measure 4.5-1 of the 2010 General Plan Update FPEIR: 7) Construction and Building materials shall be produced and/or manufactured locally. Use "Green Building Materials" such as materials that are resource efficient, recycled and manufactured in an environmentally friendly way including low -volatile -organic -compound (VOC) materials. 8) Design all buildings to exceed California Building Code Title 24 energy standard including but not limited to any combination of; • Increased insulation. • Limit air leakage through the structure. • Incorporate Energy Star or better rated windows, space heating and cooling equipment, light fixtures, and appliances. • Landscape and develop site utilizing shade, prevailing winds and landscaping. Install efficient lighting and lighting control systems. • Install solar or light emitting diodes (LED's) for outdoor lighting. 9) Prepare a comprehensive water conservation strategy appropriate for the project and include the following; • Install water efficient landscapes and irrigation systems and devices in compliance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. • Use reclaimed water for landscaping within the project if available or as required by the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD). • Design building to be water efficient by installing water efficient fixtures and appliances including low flow faucets, dual flush toilets and waterless urinals/water heaters. • Design irrigation to control runoff and to remove water to non -vegetated surfaces. 10) Reuse and recycle construction and demolition waste. Provide interior and exterior storage areas for recyclables and green waste in public areas. Educate employees about reducing waste and about recycling. b) The project involves the development of 26 single-family residences and the subdivision of the 18.2 acre project site, which is consistent with the General Plan. Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg119 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 30 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g Potentially Significant Wth Mitigation Than Significant No Im act Inca crated Im act hn act No other applicable plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emission apply to the project. The 2010 General Plan Update includes adopted policies and Standard Conditions that respond to the Attorney General and the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). The General Plan policies and Standard Conditions guide infill and sustainable development reliant on pedestrian connections, re -use and rehabilitation of existing structures, link transportation opportunities, promote development that is sensitive to natural resources and incentivizes denser mixed use projects that maximizes diverse opportunities. The proposed project includes water efficient landscaping, shade trees, and walkways that provide accessibility to public sidewalks and therefore is consistent with the sustainability and climate change policies of the General Plan. The General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR) analyzed the impacts of GHG's and determined that GHG emissions would be cumulatively considerable, which would be a significant, unavoidable adverse cumulative impact. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. Based on the Greenhouse Gas Analysis (Urban Crossroads; March 15, 2016), no significant impacts to GHGs from short-term, construction impacts or long-term, operational impacts would occur as a result of the project. Because the project would result in minimal emissions that do not exceed the SCAQMD's interim threshold of significance, the project's contribution to GHGs from short-term construction and long- term operational cumulative impacts is also considered minimal. With implementation of the mitigation measures listed in subsection a), less than significant impacts would occur as a result of the project. In addition, the proposed project would not hinder the State's GHG reduction goals established by AB 32 and therefore would be less than a significant impact. 8. HAZARDS AND WASTE MATERIALS. Would the project., a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the ( ) () () (✓) environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the ( ) () () (✓) environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous. or () () () (✓) acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 1/4 mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of () () () (✓) hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, () () () (✓) where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg120 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 31 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information S PP g ormaSources: Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No [Mood Incorporated Im act impact f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? () () () (✓) g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an () () () (✓) adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of () (✓) () ( ) loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Comments: a) Development within the City may utilize or generate hazardous materials or wastes. This is usually associated with individual households, small business operations, and maintenance activities like paints, cleaning solvents, fertilizers, and motor oil or through construction activities that would use paints, solvents, acids, curing compounds, grease, and oils. These materials would be stored and used at individual sites. The City participates in a countywide interagency coalition, which is considered a full service Hazardous Materials Division that is more comprehensive that any other in the State. The City has an Emergency Operations Plan that meets State and Federal requirements and is in the process of updating the approved 2005 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Compliance with Federal, 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, which is considered a full service Hazardous Materials Division that is more comprehensive than any other in the State. The City has an Emergency Operations Plan that meets State and Federal requirements and is in the process of updating the approved 2005 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Compliance with Federal, 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. c) There are no schools located within 1/4 mile of the project site. The project site is located within 1/2 miles of the nearest existing or proposed school, Floyd M. Stork Elementary School. No impacts are anticipated. d) The proposed project is not listed as a hazardous waste or substance materials site. Recent site inspections did not reveal the presence of discarded drums or illegal dumping of hazardous materials. No impact is anticipated. e) The site is not located within an airport land use plan according to the General Plan Figure PS-7 and General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.8-1 and is not within 2 miles of a public airport. The project site is located approximately 7 miles northerly of the Ontario Airport and is offset north of the flight path. No impact is anticipated. f) There are no private airstrips within the City. The nearest private airstrip, Cable Airport, is located approximately 2 and 1/2 miles to the west of the City's westerly limits. No impact is anticipated. Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg121 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 32 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Inco orated Impact Impact g) The City has a developed roadway network that provides emergency access and evacuation routes to existing development. New development will be located on a site that has access to existing roadways. The City's Emergency Operation Plan, which is updated every three years, includes policies and procedures to be administered by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in the event of a disaster. Because the project includes at least two points of public street access and is required to comply with all applicable City codes, including local fire ordinances, no adverse impacts are anticipated. h) Rancho Cucamonga faces the greatest ongoing threat from wind - driven fires in the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone found in the northern part of the City. The project is located with the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone according to General Plan Figure PS-1. The City recognizes the risk and has adopted policies and Standard Conditions that limit uses to Very Low density residential development and Hillside residential uses in these areas to limit property exposed to wildland fire hazards. The project shall prepare a Fire Protection Plan to outline appropriate measures to address fire hazards. Therefore, the following wildland fire mitigation measure shall be implemented to reduce impacts to less -than -significant levels: 1) 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. 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge ( ) (✓) () ( ) requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere ( ) () () (✓) substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the, production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the () () (✓) ( ) site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the () () () (✓) site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off -site? Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg122 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 33 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information S PP g Sources: Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact incorporated Impact Im act e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed () () () (✓) the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? () (✓) () ( ) g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as ( ) () () (✓) mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures ( ) () () (✓) that would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of ( ) () () (✓) loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? () () () (✓) Comments: a) The project proposes the installation of septic systems that will be required to be permitted by the City's Building and Safety Department and meet all related environmental regulations. Additionally, the project shall be required to comply with Chapter 5 of the Santa Ana Region Basin Plan. If the site is unsuitable for the installation of septic systems, the applicant shall be required to connect to the City's existing sewer system per section 4.7.6 Threshold 4.7e of the General Plan. 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. Construction activities covered under the State's General Construction permit include removal of vegetation, grading, excavating, or any other activity for new development or significant redevelopment. Prior to commencement of construction of a project, a discharger must submit a Notice of Intent (NOI) to obtain coverage under the General Permit. The General Permit requires all dischargers to comply with the following during construction activities, including site clearance and grading: Develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that would specify Best Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent construction pollutants from contacting storm water and with the intent of keeping all products of erosion from moving off -site into receiving waters. Eliminate or reduce non -storm water discharges to storm sewer systems and other waters of the nation. Perform inspections of all BMPs. Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg123 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 34 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Waste discharges include discharges of storm water and construction project discharges. A construction project for new development or significant redevelopment requires an NPDES permit. Construction project proponents are required to prepare an SWPPP. To comply with the NPDES, the project's construction contractor will be required to prepare an SWPPP during construction activities, and a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for post -construction operational management of storm water runoff. The applicant has submitted a WQMP exhibit, prepared by Huitt-Zollars (February 13, 2017), which identifies BMPs to minimize the amount of pollutants, such as eroded soils, entering the drainage system after construction. Runoff from driveways, roads and other impermeable surfaces must be controlled through an on -site drainage system. BMPs include both structural and non-structural control methods. Structural controls used to manage storm water pollutant levels include detention basins, oil/grit separators, and porous pavement. Non-structural controls focus on controlling pollutants at the source, generally through implementing erosion and sediment control plans, and various Business Plans that must be developed by any businesses that store and use hazardous materials. Practices such as periodic parking lot sweeping can substantially reduce the amount of pollutants entering the storm drain system. The following mitigation measures are required to control additional storm water effluent: Construction Activities: 1) Prior to issuance of grading permits, the permit applicant shall submit to the Building Official for approval, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) specifically identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that shall be used on -site to reduce pollutants during construction activities entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 2) An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, included in the Grading Plan, and implemented for the proposed project that identifies specific measures to control on -site and off -site erosion from the time ground disturbing activities are initiated through completion of grading. This Erosion Control Plan shall include the following measures at a minimum: a) Specify the timing of grading and construction to minimize soil exposure to rainy periods experienced in Southern California, and b) An inspection and maintenance program shall be included to ensure that any erosion which does occur either on -site or off -site as a result of this project will be corrected through a remediation or restoration program within a specified time frame. 3) During construction, temporary berms such as sandbags or gravel dikes must be used to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site when there is rainfall or other runoff. 4) During construction, to remove pollutants, street cleaning will be performed prior to storm events and after the use of water trucks to control dust in order to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site. 5) Prior to issuance of grading or paving permits, the applicant shall obtain a Notice of Intent (NOI) to comply with obtaining coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Storm Water Permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Evidence that this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Discharger's Identification Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg124 Initial Study for I City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 35 Than cant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potamlany Fll,�11 rnan Significant tion Significant No Im act rated Im act Im act Number) shall be submitted to the City Building Official for coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit. Post -Construction Operational: 6) Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit to the City Building Official for approval of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), including a project description and identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on -site to reduce pollutants into the storm drain system to the maximum extent practicable. The WQMP shall identify the structural and non-structural measures consistent with the Guidelines for New Development and Redevelopment adopted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in June 2004. 7) Landscaping plans shall include provisions for controlling and minimizing the use of fertilizers/pesticides/herbicides. Landscaped areas shall be monitored and maintained for at least two years to ensure adequate coverage and stable growth. Plans for these areas, including monitoring provisions for a minimum of two years, shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. b) According to CVWD, approximately 35 percent of the City's water is currently provided from water supplies coming from the underlying Chino and Cucamonga Groundwater Basins. CVWD complies with its prescriptive water rights as managed by the Chino Basin Watermaster and will not deplete the local groundwater resource. The proposed project will not deplete groundwater supplies, nor will it interfere with recharge because it is not within an area designated as a recharge basin or spreading ground according to General Plan Figure RC-3. Development of the site will require the grading and excavation, but would not affect the existing aquifer, estimated to be about 300 to 470 feet below the ground surface. As noted in the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.9), continued development citywide will increase water needs but will not be a significant impact. CVWD has plans to meet this increased need to the year 2030. No impacts are anticipated. c) The project will cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and amount of surface water runoff because of the amount of new building and hardscape proposed on the site; however, the project will not alter the course of any stream or river. The project site includes 3 ephemeral streams, 2 of which meet the criteria to be classified by the Army Corps of Engineers as Waters of the United States (WUS) and will be projected in place. The third stream has been determined to not meet the Waters of the United States (WUS) criteria and will be directed to a new underground drainage facility to an existing spillway on the property to the south. The project will include the construction of two storm water retention basins designed to collect all the storm water runoff on the project site for an up to 2 year storm event. The project design includes landscaping of non-hardscape areas and slopes to prevent erosion. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. Therefore, the project will not result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off - site. The impact is not considered significant. Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg125 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 36 Less Than significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g Potentially Significant wth Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Im act 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 the site; however, the project will not alter the course of any stream or river. The project site includes 3 ephemeral streams, 2 of which meet the criteria to be classified by the Army Corps of Engineers as Waters of the United States (WUS) and will be projected in place. The third stream has been determined to not meet the Waters of the United States (WUS) criteria and will be directed to a new underground drainage facility to an existing spillway on the property to the south. The project will include the construction of two storm water retention basins designed to collect all the storm water runoff on the project site for an up to 2 year storm event. The project design includes landscaping of non-hardscape areas and slopes to prevent erosion. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. Therefore, the project will not result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off - site. The impact is not considered significant. 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, 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 therefore, is required to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) to minimize water pollution. With implementation of the mitigation measures specified under subsection a), less than significant impacts are anticipated. 8) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality Management Plan prepared by Huitt-Zollars (February 13, 2017) to reduce construction pollutants from entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. g) The project site is located within a 100-year flood hazard area according to General Plan Figure PS-5. All new construction of residential units are required to comply with the City's Floodplain Management Regulation which require the implementation of various flood hazard reduction measures. Additionally, the project will be required to construct required storm drain facilities or payment of fees for storm drain system improvements. No adverse impacts are expected. h) The project site is located within a 100-year flood hazard area according to General Plan Figure PS-5. All new construction is required to comply with the City's Floodplain Management Regulation which requires the implementation of various flood hazard reduction measures. Additionally, the project will be required to construct required storm drain facilities or payment of fees for storm drain system improvements. No adverse impacts are expected. Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg126 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 37 Less Than Significant Lass Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Im act Inca cratatl Im act Im act The Rancho Cucamonga area is flood protected by an extensive storm drain system designed to adequately convey floodwaters from a 100-year storm event. The system is substantially improved and provides an integrated approach for regional and local drainage flows. This existing system includes several debris dams and levees north of the City, spreading grounds, concrete -lined channels, and underground storm drains as shown in General Plan Figure PS-6. The project site is located within a 100-year flood hazard area according to General Plan Figure PS-5. All new construction is required to comply with the City's Floodplain Management Regulation which would ensure that future development would not impede or redirect floodwaters and would be adequately anchored to prevent flotation, collapse, or lateral movement of structures within the floodplain. 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. 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. 10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? () () () (✓) b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or () () () (✓) regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, a general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan () () () (✓) or natural community conservation plan? Comments: a) The site is located on the east side of Carnelian Street approximately 750 feet north of Hillside Road and is characterized by residential development to the north, south, east and west. This project will be of similar design and size to surrounding residential development to the north, east, south and west. The project will become a part of the larger community. No adverse impacts are anticipated. b) The project site land use designation is Very Low (VL) District. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and does not interfere with any policies for environmental protection, or SCAG's Regional Comprehensive Plan. The General Plan states that the Very Low (VL) Land Use District is characterized by detached, very low density single residential units on 0.5 acre lots. The proposed lots average 23,797 square feet in size, which exceeds to the required minimum 22,500 square foot average lot size. The project site is within the Hillside Overlay and was designed to be in conformance with the related design and technical criteria, including limiting grading, limiting the height of retaining walls to no more than 4 feet in height and limiting the height of the residences to be within the 30 foot building envelope. The project site is also within the Equestrian Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg127 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 38 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Petantially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Im acl Inca crated impact Im act Overlay and includes a private equestrian trail system providing access to an equestrian corral on each lot and to the community trail on Carnelian Street, a portion of which will be constructed as part of the project. The project site includes 3 ephemeral streams, 2 of which meet the criteria to be classified by the Army Corps of Engineers as Waters of the United States (WUS) and will be projected in place. The third stream has been determined to not meet the Waters of the United States (WUS) criteria and will be directed to a new underground drainage facility to an existing spillway on the property to the south. As such, no impacts are anticipated. c) According to General Plan Figure RC-4 and Section 4.10 of the General Plan FPEIR, the project site is not within an area of sensitive biological resources A General Biological Assessment (April, 2016) and a Jurisdictional Delineation (March, 2016) were prepared by Hernandez Environmental Services to review the biological resources and the 3 ephemeral stream on the project site. The General Biological Assessment determined that a total of 56 sensitive plants and 48 sensitive animals have the potential to be present on or near the project site. This includes those listed, or candidate for listing, by the USFWS, CDFW, and the CNPS. All potential habitats for these species were evaluated on the project site and a determination was made that no sensitive or endangered plant or animal species exist on the project site and that focused surveys were not required. The applicant submitted a Notification of Lake and Streambed Alteration to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), which included an offer to mitigate the projects streambed impacts by providing sufficient funds to the Soquel Canyon Mitigation Bank for 0.60 acre of streambed restoration. The applicant received a letter from CDFW, dated September 15, 2016, stating that the CDFW had until September 13, 2016, to submit a Draft Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement to the applicant or inform them that an agreement is not required. The CDFW did not meet that date, and as a result, the applicant was informed that they may now move forward with the project without a Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement. The applicant also submitted a letter dated March 27, 2017, from the Department of the Army in compliance with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act for the discharge of dredged and/or material into waters of the United States. The letter states that the proposed project, if constructed as described in the application, would comply with Nationwide Permit NWP 29 (Residential Permits). The permit authorizes the applicant to permanently place fill material into approximately 0.12 acres of non -wetland water of the United States to construct 26 residential lots, associated utility and road infrastructure and three infiltration basins. Therefore, development will not adversely affect rare or endangered species of plants or animals or conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg128 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 39 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information S PP g Sources: Potentially Signifoant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Im act 11. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral () () () (✓) resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important () () () (✓) mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Comments: a) The site is not designated as a State Aggregate Resources Area according to the City General Plan, Figure RC-2 and Table RC-1; therefore, there is no impact. b) The site is not designated by the General Plan, Figure RC-2 and Table RC-1, as a valuable mineral resource recovery site; therefore, there is no impact. 12. NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in () (✓) () ( ) excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive () () () (✓) ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise () () () (✓) levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in () (✓) () ( ) ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 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 not within an area of noise levels exceeding City standards according to General Plan Figure PS-9 at build -out. The applicant has submitted a Noise Impact Analysis (Urban Crossroads; July 25, 2016) to review existing noise conditions and construction noise levels. The Analysis finds that Lot 1, which is adjacent to Carnelian Avenue, will require a noise reduction of up to 20.5 dBA and a windows closed condition requiring mechanical ventilation and a minimum 4 foot high wall along the west property line (the plans propose a 6 foot high wall along the west property line of Lot 1). The analysis also finds that the highest construction noise levels will occur when construction Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg 129 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 40 Less Than Signifaant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g Pclentially Signifcant h Miligawtticn Than Slgnifcant No Impact Inco waled Im act Im acl activities take place near the edge of the project site. The unmitigated construction noise levels are expected to range from 63.6 to 65 dBA, at the sensitive receiver locations and will not exceed City noise exterior noise levels. With the following standard mitigation measures and special mitigation measures for Lot 1, no adverse impacts expected. Exterior: 1) Prior to the issuance of any grading plans a construction -related noise mitigation plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval. The Plan shall depict the location of the construction equipment and how the noise from this equipment would be mitigated during construction. Interior: 2) Provide a letter for an acoustical engineer that the following noise mitigation measures have been met for the residence on Lot 1: • All windows and sliding glass doors shall be well fitted, well whether stripped assemblies. • All exterior door shall be well weather-stripped solid core assemblies at least one and three -fourths inch thick. • At any penetrations of exterior walls by pipes, ducts, or conduits, the space between the wall and pipes, ducts, or conduits shall be caulked or filled with mortar to form an airtight seal. • Roof sheathing of wood construction shall be well fitted or caulked plywood of a least one-half inch thick. Ceiling shall be well fitted, fully sealed gypsum board of at least one-half inch thick. Insulation with at least a rating of R-19 shall be used in the attic space. • Arrangements for any habitable room shall be such that any exterior door or window can be kept closed when the room is in use and still receive circulated air. A forced air circulation system or active ventilation system shall be provided which satisfies the requirements of the uniform building code. b) The normal operating uses associated with this type of project normally do not induce ground borne vibrations. Construction related vibration may create short term noise and vibration impacts. With the mitigation measure listed in under d) below, any impacts will be less than significant. c) The primary source of ambient noise levels in Rancho Cucamonga is traffic. Because the project will not significantly increase traffic as analyzed in Section 16 Transportation/Traffic; it will likely not increase ambient noise levels within the vicinity of the project. d) The General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.12) indicates that during a construction phase, on -site stationary sources, heavy-duty construction vehicles, and construction equipment, will Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg 130 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 41 Less Than Significant Less Issues and SupportingInformation Sources: Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact I icarporated Impact Im atl generate noise exceeding City standards. The following measures are provided to mitigate the short-term noise impacts: 3) Construction or grading shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. 4) Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards specified in Development Code Section 17.66.050, as measured at the property line. Developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly noise level monitoring as specified in Development Code Section 17.66.050. Monitoring at other times may be required by the Building Official. Said consultant shall report their findings to the Building Official within 24 hours; however, if noise levels exceed the above standards, then the consultant shall immediately notify the Building Official. If noise levels exceed the above standards, then construction activities shall be reduced in intensity to a level of compliance with above noise standards or halted. 5) The perimeter block wall shall be constructed as early as possible in first phase. The preceding mitigation measures will reduce the disturbance created by on -site construction equipment but do not address the potential impacts because of the transport of construction materials and debris. The following mitigation measures shall then be required: 6) Haul truck deliveries shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. Additionally, if heavy trucks used for hauling would exceed 100 daily trips (counting both to and from the construction site), then the developer shall prepare a noise mitigation plan denoting any construction traffic haul routes and include appropriate noise mitigation measures. To the extent feasible, the plan shall denote haul routes that do not pass sensitive land uses or residential dwellings. e) The site is not located within an airport land use plan and is not within 2 miles of a public airport. The Project is located approximately 7 miles northerly of the Ontario Airport and is offset north of the flight path. No impact is anticipated. f) The nearest private airstrip, Cable Airport, is located approximately 2 112 miles to the west of the City's westerly limits. No impact is anticipated. 13. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either () () (✓) ( ) directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, () () () (✓) necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg131 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 42 Less Than Significant Less Issues and SupportingInformation Sources: Potentially Significant with Mitigauan Than Significant Na Im act Incorponated Impact Im aG c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating () () () (✓) the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Comments: a) The project is located in a predominantly developed area and will include the construction of 26 single family homes. Although the project will increase population growth in the area there will be a less than significant impact as the project is consistent with the underlying Zoning and General Plan Designation. The density was analyzed as part of the build out in the General Plan FPEIR. Construction activities at the site will be short-term and will not attract new employees to the area. No significant impacts are anticipated. b) The project site is currently developed with 1 single-family residence that will be removed as part of the project scope. There will be a temporary displacement of 1 single-family residence during construction of the 26 new residential units. The displacement will be temporary and therefore, no adverse impact is expected. c) The project site is currently developed with 1 single-family residence that will be removed as part of the project scope. There will be a temporary displacement of 1 single-family residence during construction of the 26 new residential units. The displacement will be temporary and therefore, no adverse impact is expected. 14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire protection? () () () (✓) b) Police protection? () () () (✓) c) Schools? () () () (✓) d) Parks: () () () (✓) e) Other public facilities? () () () (✓) Comments: a) The site, located on the east side of Carnelian Avenue and north of Hillside Road, would be served by Rancho Cucamonga Fire Station 177, located approximately .75 miles from the project site. The project will not require the construction of any new facilities or alteration of any existing facilities or cause a decline in the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new facilities. Standard conditions of approval from the Uniform Building and Fire Codes will be placed on the project to lessen the future demand and impacts to fire services. No impacts are anticipated. b) The increase in residential units may lead to an increase in calls for service. Although there may be an increase in calls, additional police protection is not required as the addition of the project will not change the pattern of uses within the surrounding area and Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg132 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 43 Less Than Significant Lass Issues and Supporting Information Sources: sgnif`cant Wan Wgatbn an nhficanl Slg No Impact Inca crated Im col Im as will not have a substantial increase in property to be patrolled as the project site is within an area that is regularly patrolled. c) The Alta Loma 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 d) The site is in a developed area, currently served by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The nearest park, Heritage Park, is located one-fourth mile from the project site. The project will not require the construction of any new facilities or alteration of any existing facilities or cause a decline in the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new facilities. A standard condition of approval will require the developer to pay Park Development Fees. 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 FPEIR (Section 4.14), there will be a projected increase in library space demand but with the implementation of standard conditions the increase in Library Services would be mitigated to less than significant impact. Additionally, the closest public library, the Paul A. Biane Library, recently completed a second floor addition that added 13,500 square feet of specialized programming space. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan for which the FPEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. Therefore no adverse impact is expected. 15. RECREATION. Would the project: a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and () () () (✓) regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or () () () (✓) require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Comments: a) The site is in a developed area, currently served by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The nearest park, Heritage Park, is located .25 mile southeast from the project site. This project is proposing the subdivision of the project site for the construction of 26 single- family residences. The project is in conformance with the Very Low (VL) General Plan land use designation and will not increase the use of parks or other recreational facilities beyond that contemplated by the General Plan. A standard condition of approval will require the developer to pay Park Development Fees. No impacts are anticipated. b) See a) response above. Rev 4-17 ES—E9 Pg133 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 44 Lass Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than significant No Impact Inca orateE Impact ha act 16. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy () () () (✓) establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non -motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management () ( ) () (✓) program, including, but not limited to a level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including ( ) () () (✓) either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that result in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature ( ) () () (✓) (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? () () () (✓) f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs () () () (✓) regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities. Comments: a) Implementation of the proposed project will generate 247.52 vehicle trips daily. The proposed project includes the development of 26 single family residences. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) estimates that each single-family residence will generate 9.52 trips daily. As noted in the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.16), continued development will contribute to the traffic load in the Rancho Cucamonga area. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan for which the FPEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. The project is in an area that is mostly developed with street improvements existing or included in project design. The project will not create a substantial increase in the number of vehicle trips, traffic volume, or congestion at intersections. The project site will be required to provide street improvements (curb, gutter and sidewalk) along the street frontage of the site per City roadway standards. In addition, the City has established a Transportation Development fee that must be paid by the applicant prior to issuance of building permits. Fees are used to fund roadway improvements necessary to support adequate traffic circulation. No impacts are anticipated. b) The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) estimates that each single-family residences will generate 1 two-way peak hour trips daily. In November 2004, San Bernardino County voters passed the Measure I extension which requires local Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pig 134 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 45 Less Than Signifcant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Signifirant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact jurisdictions to impose appropriate fees on development for their fair share toward regional transportation improvement projects. On May 18, 2005, the City of Rancho Cucamonga adopted a Comprehensive Transportation Fee Schedule updating these development impact fees. As a result, the San Bernardino County Congestion Management Agency waived the Congestion Management Plan (CMP) Traffic Impact Analysis reporting requirement. This project will be required, as a condition of approval, to pay the adopted transportation development fee prior to issuance of building permit. The project is in an area that is mostly developed with all street improvements existing. The project will not negatively impact the level of service standards on adjacent arterials. The project will be required to provide street improvements (curb, gutter, and sidewalk) along the street frontage of the site. No impacts are anticipated. c) Located approximately 7 miles northerly of the Ontario Airport, the site is offset north of the flight path and will not change air traffic patterns. No impacts are anticipated. d) The project is in an area that is mostly developed. The project will be required to provide street improvements (curb, gutter, and sidewalk) along the street frontage of the site. The project design does not include any sharp curves or dangerous intersections or farming uses. The project will, therefore, not create a substantial increase in hazards because of a design feature. No impacts are anticipated. e) The project will be designed to provide access for all emergency vehicles during construction and upon completion of the project. The project provides a single point of access from Carnelian Street. Fire Services has reviewed the project and has determined that single point of access is acceptable as the project site is surrounded by single-family residential development and is not adjacent to a wildland-urban interface area, the site is less than 1 mile from the nearest fire station (Fire Station 177, 927 Rancho Street), all the residences will include fire sprinklers and the final landscape plans will be reviewed for compliance with requirements of the Very High Fire Severity Zone. No impacts are anticipated. f) The design of the project 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.). 17. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with the cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of () () () (✓) Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1 (K)? Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg135 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 46 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incorcorated Im ad Impact d) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 6024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. Comments: a) The applicant has submitted a CEQA and Section 106 (NHPA) Archaeological Study (Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc.; February 6, 2017) for the project site. The Study included an archaeological records search by the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) at CSU Fullerton of all properties within a 1-mile radius of the project site, a records search by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) of Sacred Lands Files (SLF) and a field survey of the project site. The SCCIC records search did not identify any previously recorded resources within the project boundaries. Additionally, it was determined that the on -site structure, a single-family residence constructed in the 1980s, is not a listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources. No impacts are anticipated. b) The applicant has submitted a CEQA and Section 106 (NHPA) Archaeological Study (Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc.; February 6, 2017) for the project site. The Study included an archaeological records search by the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) at CSU Fullerton of all properties within a 1-mile radius of the project site, a records search by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) of Sacred Lands Files (SLF) and a field survey of the project site. The SCCIC records search did not identify any previously recorded resources within the project boundaries. Six archaeological sites were located within a 1-mile radius of the project site. This includes a prehistoric temporary camp, a historic electric transmission line and four historic residences. The records search and literature review suggest that there is a low potential for archaeological resources to be contained within the boundaries of the project site. Additionally, the NAHC SLF search did not indicate the presence of any sacred sites or locations of religious or ceremonial importance within the search radius. The field survey included a pedestrian survey of the project area. All exposed ground was inspected for cultural materials. The project site was found to be highly disturbed by previous agricultural use. The survey did not result in the identification of any archaeological resources and there is no indication of any historic or prehistoric use or occupation. Based on the information obtained through the records search and from the field survey, there is sufficient information to conclude that the proposed development will not impact any historic resources. The analysis of nearby sites and artifacts did not indicate Native American religious, ritual, or other special activities at this location. In addition, Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. (BFSA) requested a review of the Sacred Lands Files (SLF) by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) to determine if any recorded Native American sacred sites or locations of religious or ceremonial importance are present within one mile of the Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg136 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 47 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Significant With Wigalion Than Significant No Im act Incor crated Im act Im act project site. The NAHC SLF search did not indicate the presence of any sacred sites or locations of religious or ceremonial importance within the search radius. The records search and literature review suggest that there is a low potential for archaeological resource to be contained within the boundaries of the project. Given the prehistoric and historic settlement of the region, in addition to the lack of sites surrounding the project site, there is a low potential for prehistoric archaeological discoveries based upon the project's geographic location and previous studies surrounding the project area. Most resources recorded in the vicinity of the APE are historic sites associated with the ranching and farming uses that flourished in the Rancho Cucamonga area starting in the late 1800s and early 1900s. In conformance with California Assembly Bill (AB) 52 on February 6, 2017, notice of the proposed project was sent to the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, the San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians and the Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians. The City has not been contacted to date in regards to the (AB) 52 notification letter. Should any undocumented archaeological or cultural resources be discovered during grading activities, adherence to the mitigation measures listed below will ensure that all impacts will be less than significant. 1) In the event that human remains or funerary objects are encountered during any activities associated with the project, work in the immediate vicinity (within a 100- foot buffer of the find) shall cease and the County Coroner shall be contacted pursuant to State Health and Safety Code §7050.5 and that code be enforced for the duration of the project. 2) In the event that Native American cultural resources are discovered during project activities, all work in the immediate vicinity of the find (within a 60-foot buffer) shall cease and a qualified archaeologist meeting Secretary of Interior standards shall be hired to assess the find. Work on the other portions of the project outside of the buffered area may continue during this assessment period. The archaeologist shall contact Tribal communities for input regarding the preservation, retention and final disposition of any discovered cultural resources. The archaeologist shall prepare a mitigation plan and technical resources management report, which shall document the inventory, evaluation, and proposed mitigation of resources within the project area. 3) In the event that significant Native American historical resources, as defined by CEQA (as amended, 2015), are discovered and avoidance cannot be ensured, an SOI-qualified archaeologist shall be retained to develop a cultural resources Treatment Plan, as well as a Discovery and Monitoring Plan. Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg137 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 48 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Signi(iwnt No Impact Incorporated Impact Im act 18. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the ( ) () () (✓) applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or ( ) () () (✓) wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm ( ) () () (✓) water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? 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 projects solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with Federal, State, and local statutes and () () () (✓) regulations related to solid waste? Comments: a) The project proposes the installation of septic systems that will be required to be permitted by the City's Building and Safety Department and meet all related environmental regulations. Additionally, the project shall be required to comply with Chapter 5 of the Santa Ana Region Basin Plan. If the site is unsuitable for the installation of septic systems, the applicant shall be required to connect to the City's existing sewer system per section 4.7.6 Threshold 4.7e of the General Plan. If it is determined that the project site cannot be served by an on -site septic system, the project will be served by the CVWD sewer system, which has waste treated by the Inland Empire Utilities Agency at the RP-1 and RP-4 treatment plants. The RP-1 capacity is sufficient to exceed the additional development within the western and southern areas of the City. The RP-4 treatment plant has a potential ultimate capacity of 28 mgd which is considered more than adequate to capacity to treat all increases in wastewater generation for buildout of the General Plan. The project is required to meet the requirements of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board regarding wastewater. No impacts are anticipated. b) The project proposes the installation of septic systems that will be required to be permitted by the City's Building and Safety Department and meet all related environmental regulations. If it is determined that the project site cannot be served by an on -site septic system, the project will be served by the CVWD sewer system, which has waste treated by the Inland Empire Utilities Agency at the RP-4 treatment plant located within Rancho Cucamonga and RP-1 located within City of Ontario, neither of which is at capacity. The Rev 4-17 E5—E9,Pig138 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 49 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact nwroorated Impact Im act project is required to meet the requirements of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board regarding wastewater. No impacts are anticipated. c) All runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to handle the flows. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. The impact is not considered significant. d) The project is served by the CVWD water system. There is currently a sufficient water supply available to the City of Rancho Cucamonga to serve this project. No impacts are anticipated. e) The proposed project is served by the CVWD sewer system, which has waste treated by the Inland Empire Utilities Agency at the RP-4 treatment plant located within Rancho Cucamonga and RP-1 located within City of Ontario, neither of which is at capacity. No impacts are anticipated. Solid waste disposal will be provided by the current City contracted hauler who disposes the refuse at a permitted landfill with sufficient capacity to handle the City's solid waste disposal needs. No impacts are anticipated. g) This project complies with Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations regarding solid waste. The City of Rancho Cucamonga continues to implement waste reduction procedures consistent with AB 939. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated. 19. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the () (✓) () ( ) quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually () () () (✓) limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects that will () () () (✓) cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Comments: a) The site is not located in an area of sensitive biological resources as identified on the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Figure RC-4. A General Biological Assessment Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg139 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-000377 Page 50 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incorporated Im act Im act (April, 2016) and a Jurisdictional Delineation (March, 2016) were prepared by Hernandez Environmental Services to review the biological resources and the 3 stream beds on the project site. Implementation of the project was determined to not have the potential to impact any State or Federally listed sensitive species or their associated habitat. No wildlife movement corridors were found to be present on the project site. The 2.27 acres of ornamental vegetation habitat, 0.51 acre of disturbed residential habitat, 0.39 acre of mulefat dominant habitat, 0.35 acre of non-native vegetation habitat, 0.11 acre of willow ornamental mix, and 0.04 acre with a cottonwood tree may be suitable habitat for nesting birds. As suitable habitat for nesting birds exists on the project site, a mitigation measure was included requiring nesting bird and burrowing owl surveys prior to earth moving activities. The project site contains approximately 0.89 acre (approximately 1,719 feet in length) of ephemeral drainage feature and associated riparian habitat that would be regulated under Section 1602 of the Fish and Game code. In addition, the project site contains approximately 0.32 acres of waters of the United States. The applicant submitted a Notification of Lake and Streambed Alteration to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), which included an offer to mitigate the projects streambed impacts by providing sufficient funds to the Soquel Canyon Mitigation Bank for 0.60 acre of streambed restoration. The applicant received a letter from CDFW, dated September 15, 2016, stating that the CDFW had until September 13, 2016, to submit a Draft Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement to the applicant or inform them that an agreement is not required. The CDFW did not meet that date, and as a result, the applicant was informed that they may now move forward with the project without a Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement. The applicant also submitted an applicant for a Department of the Army permit under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act for the discharge of dredged and/or material into waters of the United States. The applicant submitted a letter dated March 27, 2017 from the Department of the Army stating that the proposed project, if constructed as described in the application, would comply with Nationwide Permit NWP 29 (Residential Permits). The permit authorizes the applicant to permanently place fill material into approximately 0.12 acres of non -wetland water of the United States to construct 26 residential lots, associated utility and road infrastructure and three infiltration basins. With the mitigation measures outlined in Section 4 (Biological Resources) the project will have a less than significant impact on biological resources: b) If the proposed project were approved, then the applicant would be required to develop the site in accordance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. The 2010 General Plan was adopted along with the certification of a Program FEIR, Findings of Fact, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations for significant adverse environmental effects of build -out in the City and Sphere -of -Influence. The City made findings that adoption of the General Plan would result in significant adverse effects to Aesthetics, Agriculture and Forest Resources, Air Quality, Climate Change and Mineral Resources. Mitigation measures were adopted 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 Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg 140 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & Hillside Design Review DRC2016-00377 Page 51 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 substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. 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. EARLIER ANALYSES Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier PEIR or Negative Declaration per Section 15063(c)(3)(D). The effects identified above for this project were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in the following earlier document(s) pursuant to applicable legal standards, and such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. The following earlier analyses were utilized in completing this Initial Study and are available for review in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Division offices, 10500 Civic Center Drive (check all that apply): (T) General Plan FPEIR (SCH#2000061027, Certified May 19, 2010) (T) General Plan FEIR (SCH#2000061027, Certified October 17, 2001) (T) Master Environmental Assessment for the 1989 General Plan Update (SCH #88020115, certified January 4, 1989) (T) Air Quality Impact Analysis (Urban Crossroads, July 7, 2016) (T) Arborist Report (Mike Parker, March 18, 2016) (T) Archaeological Study (Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc., February 6, 2017) (T) California Department of Fish and Wildlife Notification of Streambed Alteration Letter (September 15, 2016) (T) Department of the Army Nationwide Permit Verification Letter (March 27, 2017) (T) General Biological Assessment (Hernandez Environmental Services, February 2016) (T) Greenhouse Gas Analysis (Urban Crossroads, March 15, 2016) (T) Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment (Petra, March 16, 2015) (T) Jurisdictional Delineation (Hernandez Environmental, March, 2016) (T) Noise Impact Analysis (Urban Crossroads, July 25, 2016) Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg141 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 & Hillside Design Review DRC2016-00377 Page 52 APPLICANT CERTIFICATION I certify that I am the applicant for the project described in this Initial Study. I acknowledge that I have read this Initial Study and the proposed mitigation measures Further, I have revised the project plans or proposals and/or hereby agree to the proposed mitigation measures to avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant environmental effects would occur. Applicant's Signature: �- Date: 6Vct1 2.6, �17 Print Name and Title: `boj.&. Qv-A\� M.n&%&r of Miwav e� N N 00-w 4-w (1 L Rev 4-17 E5—E9 Pg142 m Ln i m Lo v A w MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST (INITIAL STUDY PART III) Project File No.: SUBTT20042 & DRC2016-00377 Applicant: Newland Homes, LLC Initial Study Prepared by: Tabe van der Zwaaq, Associate Planner Date: Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance Section3 AirsQuahty .N - a T Short Term (Construction) Emissions 1) All clearing, grading, earth -moving, or PD C Review of Plans A/C 214 excavation activities shall cease when winds exceed 25mph per SCAQMD guidelines in order to limit fugitive dust emissions 2) The contractor shall ensure that all disturbed PD C Review of Plans A/C 2/4 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 3) The contractor shall ensure that traffic speeds PD C Review of Plans A/C 2/4 on unpaved roads and Project site areas are reduced to 15 miles per hour or less. 4) All construction equipment shall be maintained PD C Review of Plans A/C 2/4 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. 5) Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, PD/BO C Review of Plans C 2 the developer shall submit Construction Plans to the City denoting the proposed schedule and projected equipment use. Construction contractors shall provide evidence that low -emission mobile construction equipment will be utilized, or that their use was Page 1 of 20 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/initials Non -Compliance 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. 6) The construction contractor shall utilize BO C Review of Plans A/C 4 electric or clean alternative fuel powered equipment where feasible. 7) 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 8) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance BO B Review of Plans A/C 2 standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. 9) All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed PD C Review of Plans A/C 214 performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1113. Paints and coatings shall be applied either by hand or high -volume, low pressure spray 10) All construction equipment shall comply with BO C Review of Plans A/C 214 SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403. Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions: • Reestablish ground cover on the BO C Review of Plans A/C 2/4 construction site through seeding and watering. • Pave or apply gravel to any on -site haul BO C Review of Plans A/C 214 roads. • Phase grading to prevent the BO C Review of Plans A/C 2/4 susceptibility of large areas to erosion over extended periods of time. • Schedule activities to minimize the BO C Review of Plans A/C 2/4 amounts of exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. • Dispose of surplus excavated material in BO C Review of Plans A 4 accordance with local ordinances and use sound engineering practices. • Sweep streets according to a schedule BO C During Construction A 4 established by the City if silt is carried Page 2 of 20 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. • Suspend grading operations during high BO C During Construction A 4 winds (i.e., wind speeds exceeding 25 mph) in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 requirements. • Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard BO C During Construction A 4 ratio on soils haul trucks or cover payloads using tarps or other suitable means. 11) The site shall be treated with water or other BO C During Construction A 4 soil -stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and Regional Water Quality Control Board [RWQCB]) daily to reduce Particulate Matter (PMio) emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. 12) Chemical soil -stabilizers (approved by BO C During Construction A 4 SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PMio emissions. Long Term Emissions and Impacts 13) Provide adequate ingress and egress at all BO C During Construction A 4 entrances to public facilities to minimize vehicle idling at curbsides. 14) Provide preferential parking to high occupancy BO C During Construction A 4 vehicles and shuttle services. 15) Schedule truck deliveries and pickups during BO C During Construction A 4 off-peak hours. 16) Improve thermal integrity of the buildings and BO C During Construction A 4 reduce thermal load with automated time clocks or occupant sensors. 17) Landscape with native and/or drought- BO C During Construction A 4 resistant species to reduce water consumption and to provide passive solar benefits. Page 3 of 20 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance 18) Comply with the AQMP Miscellaneous BO C During Construction A 4 Sources PRC-03, and Stationary Sources Operations Enhanced Inspection and Maintenance and ADV-MISC to reduce emissions of restaurant operations. 19) All residential and commercial structures shall BO C/D Review of Plans C 2/4 be required to incorporate high-efficiency/low- polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water heaters. 20) All residential and commercial structures shall BO C/D Review of Plans C 2/4 be required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. 21) All new development in the City of Rancho BO C/D Review of Plans C 2/4 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. Section 4 Blofo' Ical°Resources 1) Three days prior to the removal of vegetation pD B Review of Plans D 2 or ground -disturbing activities, a breeding bird survey that is in conformance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act shall be required to determine whether nesting is occurring. Occupied nests shall not be disturbed unless a qualified biologist verifies through non- invasive methods that either (a) the adult birds have not begun egg -laying or incubation; or (b) the juveniles from the occupied nests are foraging independently and are capable of independent survival. If the biologist is unable to verify one of the above conditions, then no disturbance shall occur within 300 feet of non - raptor nests, and within 500 feet of raptor nests, during the breeding season to avoid Page 4 of 20 Mitigation Measures No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date/Initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance abandonment of young If nests are discovered, they shall be avoided through the establishment of an appropriate buffer setback, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. The temporary "no construction" area shall be maintained until the nest has completed its cycle, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. Once the nest cycle is complete and all nestlings have fledged and have left the nest, construction in the area may resume 2) Prior to removal of vegetation or ground- PD B Review of Plans D 2 disturbing activities, perform a Burrowing Owl Survey that is in conformance with the Department of Fish and Wildlife Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation and submit the written report outlining the findings to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the Planning Department within 30 days of groundbreaking activity. The survey shall include a habitat assessment, survey and impact analysis. The Burrowing Owl Survey shall follow the following protocol: • Burrowing Owl Survey methodology shall be based on Appendix D (Breeding and Non -breeding Season Surveys and Reports) of the CDFW Staff Report. Results of the pre -construction survey shall be provided to CDFW and the City. If the pre -construction survey does not identify burrowing owls on the project site, then no further mitigation is required. If burrowing owls are found to be utilizing the project site during the pre -construction survey, measures shall be developed by the qualified biologist in coordination with CDFW to avoid Impacting occupied burrows during the Page 5 of 20 Mitigation Measures No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date/initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance nesting period. These measures shall be based on the most current CDFW protocols and will at minimum include establishment of buffer setbacks from occupied burrows and owl monitoring. If ground -disturbing activities are delayed or suspended for more than .30 days after the pre -construction survey, the site shall be resurveyed for owls. • During the non -breeding season from September 1 through January 31, if burrows are occupied by migratory or non -migratory resident burrowing owls during a pre -construction survey, burrow exclusion and/or closure may be used to exclude owls from those burrows. Burrow exclusion and/or closure should only be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist in coordination with CDFW using the most current CDFW guidelines. • During the avian nesting season from February 1 through August 31, if nests are discovered, they shall be avoided through establishment of an appropriate buffer setback, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. The temporary "no construction" area would have to be maintained until the nest has completed its cycle, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. Once the nest cycle is complete and all nestlings have fledged and have left the nest, construction in the area may resume 3) Prior to approval of any permits related to the PD B Review of Plans D 2 project, documentation shall be submitted to the Planning Department verifying the purchase 0.60 acre of streambed restoration Page 6 of 20 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance land from the Soquel Canyon Mitigation Bank, which is owned by Land Veritas. 4) Comply will all of the terms and conditions of PD B Review of Plans D 2 Enclosure 1 as outlined in the Department of the Army Nationwide Permit Verification letter dated March 27, 2017. 5) The Department of the Army permit is PD B Review of Plans D 2 contingent upon the issuance of a Section 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC) from the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The Permittee shall abide by the terms and conditions of the Clean Water Act Section 401 WQC. The permittee shall submit the Section 401 WQC to the Corps Regulatory Division within two weeks of receipt from the issuing state agency. The permittee shall not proceed with construction until receiving an email or other written notification from Corps Regulatory Division acknowledging the Clean Water Act 401 WQC has been received, reviewed and determined to be acceptable. If the RWQCB fails to act on a request for certification within 60 days after receipt of a complete application, please notify the Corps so we may consider whether a waiver of water quality certification is warranted pursuant to 33 CFR 325.2(b)(1)(ii). 6) Prior to initiating construction in waters of the PD B Review of Plans D 2 U.S., and to mitigate for impacts to 0.12 acres of non -wetland water of the U.S., The Permittee shall provide documentation verifying purchase of 0.24 ephemeral stream enhancement credits from Soquel Canyon Mitigation Bank or another Corps -approved mitigation bank within the same primary service area. The Permittee shall not initiate work in waters of the U.S. prior to receiving written confirmation from the Corps Page 7 of 20 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/Initials Non -Compliance Regulatory Division as to compliance with the special condition. The permittee retains responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation until the number and resource type of credits described above have been secured from a sponsor and the district engineer has received documentation that confirms that the sponsor has accepted the responsibility for providing the required compensatory mitigation. This documentation may consist of a letter or form signed by the sponsor, with the permit number and a statement indicating the number and resource type of credits that have been secured from the sponsor. 7) No later than one month following completion pD 8 Review of Plans D 2 of authorized work in waters of the U.S., the permittee shall ensure all sites within waters of the U.S. subject to authorized, temporary impacts are restored to pre -project alignments, elevation contours, and conditions to the maximum extent practicable to ensure expeditious resumption of aquatic resource functions. No later than 45 calendar days following completion of authorized work within water of the U.S., the permittee shall submit a memorandum documenting compliance with this special condition. 8) Within 45 calendar days of completion of PD 8 Review of Plans D 2 authorized work in waters of the U.S., the Permittee shall submit to the Corps Regulatory Division a post -project implementation memorandum including the following information: • Date(s) work within waters of the U.S. was initiated and completed. • Summary of compliance status with each special conations of this permit(including Page 8 of 20 Mitigation Measures No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date /initials Sanctions for Non -Compliance any noncompliance that previously occurred or is currently occurring and corrective action taken or proposed to achieve compliance). • Color photographs (including map of photopoints) taken at the project site before and after construction for those aspects directly associated with permanent impacts to waters of the U.S. such that the extent of authorized fills can be verified. . One copy of "as built' drawings of the entire project. Electronic submittal is preferred. All sheets must be signed, dated, and to -scale. If submitting paper copies, sheets must be no larger than 11 x 17 inches. • Signed Certification of Compliance (attached as part of his permit package). 9) A minimum 7 trees (not counting trees PD g Review of Plans D Z required to be planted in the front yard areas and street trees) shall be planted on the project site to replace the 7 removed heritage trees which include a Mimosa tree, 3 Samuel Ash trees and 3 Date Palm trees. The replacement trees shall be shown on the landscape plan. Page 9 of 20 m Ln i m v �n NJ N Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance 1) If any prehistoric archaeological resources are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. With the assistance of the archaeologist, the City of Rancho Cucamonga will: • Enact interim measures to protect PD/BO C Review of Report AID 3/4 undesignated sites from demolition or significant modification without an opportunity for the City to establish its archaeological value. • Consider establishing provisions to PD/BO C Review of Report A/D 3/4 require incorporation of archaeological sites within new developments, using their special qualities as a theme or focal point. • Pursue educating the public about the PD/BO C Review of Report A/D 314 archaeological heritage of the area. • Prepare a mitigation plan consistent with PD B/C Review of report AID 2/4 Section 21083.2 Archeological and plans during resources of CEQA to eliminate adverse construction project effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric resources, including but not limited to, avoiding archeological sites, capping or covering site with soil, planning the site as a park or green space or paying an in -kind mitigation fee. • Prepare a technical resources PD C Review of Report AID 3/4 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 Page 10 of 20 m U1 i m v Ln w Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance archiving. 2) If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or PD B Review of Report A/D 4 animal fossils) are encountered before or during grading, the developer will. retain a qualified paleontologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. The paleontologist shall submit a report of findings that will also provide specific recommendations regarding further mitigation measures (i.e., paleontological monitoring) that may be appropriate. Where mitigation monitoring is appropriate, the program must include, but not be limited to, the following measures: • Assign a paleontological monitor, trained PD B Review of Report A/D 4 and equipped to allow the rapid removal of fossils with minimal construction delay, to the site full-time during the interval of earth -disturbing activities. • Should fossils be found within an area BO B/C Review of Report A/D 4 being cleared or graded, divert earth - disturbing activities elsewhere until the monitor has completed salvage. If construction personnel make the discovery, the grading contractor should immediately divert construction and notify the monitor of the find. • Prepare, identify, and curate all PD D Review of Report D 3 recovered fossils for documentation in the summary report and transfer to an appropriate depository (i.e., San Bernardino County Museum). • Submit summary report to City of PD D Review of Report D 3 Rancho Cucamonga. Transfer collected specimens with a copy to the report to San Bernardino County Museum. 1) The site shall be treated with water or other BO C During Construction A 4 soil -stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD Page 11 of 20 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance and RWQCB) daily to reduce PMio emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 or re- planted with drought resistant landscaping as soon as possible. 2) Frontage public streets shall be swept BO C During Construction A 4 according to a schedule established by the City to reduce PMio emissions associated with vehicle tracking of soil off -site. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. 3) Grading operations shall be suspended when BO C During Construction A 4 wind speeds exceed 25 mph to minimize Mo emissions from the site during such episodes. 4) Chemical soil -stabilizers (approved by BO C During Construction A 4 SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PMio emissions. `Section,? Greenhoi�sE Gas�Emissions '`° - -• - - ' - _ - ' Short Term (Construction) GHG Emissions 1) The project must comply with all rules that BO C During Construction A 4 assist in reducing short-term air pollutant emission in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403 regarding fugitive dust including treating the site with water or other soil -stabilizing agent twice daily or replanting disturbed areas as quickly as possible. 2) The construction contractor shall select BO C During Construction A 4 construction equipment based on low - emission factors and high energy efficiency and submit a statement on the grading plan that ensures all construction equipment will be tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufactures' specification. 3) Trucks shall not idle continuously for more BO C During Construction A 4 than 5 minutes. 4) Alternative fuel powered equipment shall be BO C During Construction I A 4 utilized in lieu ofgasoline- or diesel -powered Page 12 of 20 m Ln I m to -o V1 til Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance engines where feasible. 5) Construction should be timed so as not to BO C During Construction A 4 interfere with peak -hour traffic. 6) Ridesharing and transit incentives shall be BO C During Construction A 4 supported and encouraged for construction crew. Long Term (Operational) GHG Emissions 7) Construction and Building materials shall be BO A During Construction C 2 produced and/or manufactured locally. Use "Green Building Materials" such as materials that are resource efficient, recycled, and manufactured in an environmentally friendly way including low -volatile -organic -compound (VOC) materials. 8) Design all buildings to exceed California BO C During Construction A 4 Building Code Title 24 energy 'standard including but not limited to any combination of: • 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 solar or light emitting diodes (LED's) for outdoor lighting. 9) Prepare a comprehensive water conservation BO A During Construction C 2 strategy appropriate for the project and include the following: • Install water efficient landscapes and irrigation systems and devices in compliance with the City of Rancho Page 13 of 20 m m v Ln rn Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/Initials Non -Compliance Cucamonga Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. • Use reclaimed water for landscaping within the project if available or as required by the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD). • Design building to be water efficient by installing water efficient fixtures and appliances including low flow faucets, dual flush toilets and waterless urinals/water heaters. • Design irrigation to control runoff and to remove water to non -vegetated surfaces. 10) Reuse and recycle construction and CE A Review of Plans C 2 demolition waste. Provide interior and exterior storage areas for recyclables and green waste in public areas. Educate employees about reducing was to and about recycling. f Sechonf8�= Hazard"s.andUVaste:Mate�i�' _ ` 1) The project shall comply with Chapter 7A of BO B/D Review of Plans A/C 2/4 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. SecUotl 9 Hydrology and Water Quality - w Construction Activities 1) Prior to issuance of grading permits, the BO B/C/D Review of Plans A/C 2/4 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 Page 14 of 20 m to i m kD -v Un V Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitorin Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance pollutants during construction activities entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 2) An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, BO B/C/D/ Review of Plans A/C 2/4 included in the Grading Plan, and implemented for the proposed project that identifies specific measures to control on -site and off -site erosion from the time ground disturbing activities are initiated through completion of grading. This Erosion Control Plan shall include the following measures at a minimum: a) Specify the timing of grading and construction to minimize soil exposure to rainy periods experienced in Southern California, and b) An inspection and maintenance program shall be included to ensure that any erosion which does occur either on -site or off - site as a result of this project will be corrected through a remediation or restoration program within a specified time frame. 3) During construction, temporary berms such BO B/C/D Review of Plans A/C 214 as sandbags or gravel dikes must be used to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site when there is rainfall or other runoff. 4) During construction, to remove pollutants, BO B/C/D Review of Plans A/C 2/4 street cleaning will be performed prior to storm events and after the use of water trucks to control dust in order to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site. 5) Prior to issuance of grading or paving BO B/C/D Review of Plans A/C 2/4 permits, the applicant shall obtain a Notice of Intent (NOI) to comply with obtaining coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Storm Water Permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Evidence that this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Discharger's Identification Number) shall be submitted to the City Building Official for coverage under Page 15 of 20 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance the NPDES General Construction Permit. 6) Prior to issuance of building permits, the BO B/C/D Review of Plans A/C 2/4 applicant shall submit to the City Building Official for approval of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), including a project description and identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on -site to reduce pollutants into the storm drain system to the maximum extent practicable. The WQMP shall identify the structural and non-structural measures consistent with the Guidelines for New Development and Redevelopment adopted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in June 2004. 7) Landscaping plans shall include provisions for 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. Grading Activities 8) The developer shall implement the BMPs BO B/C/D Review of Plans A/C 214 identified in the Water Quality Management Plan prepared by Huitt-Zollars (February 13, 2017) to reduce construction pollutants from entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. Exterior 1) Prior to the issuance of any grading plans a PDIBO B Review of Plans C/A 4 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 Page 16 of 20 Mitigation Measures No. I Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date ]Initials Non -Compliance during construction. Interior 2) Provide a letter for an acoustical engineer that PD g Review of Plans D 2 the following noise mitigation measures have been met for the residence on Lot 1: • All windows and sliding glass doors shall be well fitted, well whether stripped assemblies. • All exterior door shall be well weather- stripped solid core assemblies at least one and three -fourths inch thick. • At any penetrations of exterior walls by pipes, ducts, or conduits, the space between the wall and pipes, ducts, or conduits shall be caulked or filled with mortar to form an airtight seal. • Roof sheathing of wood construction shall be well fitted or caulked plywood of a least one-half inch thick. Ceiling shall be well fitted, fully sealed gypsum board of at least one-half inch thick. Insulation with at least a rating of R-19 shall be used in the attic space. • Arrangements for any habitable room shall be such that any exterior door or window can be kept closed when the room is in use and still receive circulated air. A forced air circulation system or active ventilation system shall be provided which satisfies the requirements of the uniform building code. 3) Construction or grading shall not take place BO C During Construction A 4 between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at an Page 17 of 20 m i m v rn 0 Mitigation Measures No. I Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /initials Non -Compliance time on Sunday or a national holiday. 4) Construction or grading noise levels shall not BO C During Construction A 4 exceed the standards specified in Development Code Section 17.66.050, as measured at the property line. The developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly noise level monitoring as specified in Development Code Section 17.66.050. Monitoring at other times may be required by the Building Official. Said consultant shall report their findings to the Building Official within 24 hours; however, if noise levels exceed the above standards, then the consultant shall immediately notify the Building Official. If noise levels exceed the above standards, then construction activities shall be reduced in intensity to a level of compliance with above noise standards or halted. 5) The perimeter block wall shall be constructed PD C During Construction A as early as possible in the first phase. 6) Haul truck deliveries shall not take place PO/BO C During Construction A 417 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. Secti_ona1drrRTtllial�Cultu_r_ahResources--:' = � - - -- 1) In the event that human remains or funerary PD C During Construction D objects are encountered during any activities associated with the project, work in the immediate vicinity (within a 100-foot buffer of the find) shall cease and the County Coroner shall be contacted pursuant Page 18 of 20 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date /Initials Non -Compliance to State Health and Safety Code §7050.5 and that code be enforced for the duration of the project. 2) In the event that Native American cultural PD C During Construction D resources are discovered during project activities, all work in the immediate vicinity of the find (within a 60-foot buffer) shall cease and a qualified archaeologist meeting Secretary of Interior standards shall be hired to assess the find. Work on the other portions of the project outside of the buffered area may continue during this assessment period. The archaeologist shall contact Tribal communities for input regarding the preservation, retention and final disposition of any discovered cultural resources. The archaeologist shall prepare a mitigation plan and technical resources management report, which shall document the inventory, evaluation, and proposed mitigation of resources within the project area. 3) In the event that significant Native American PD C During Construction D historical resources, as defined by CEQA (as amended, 2015), are discovered and avoidance cannot be . ensured, an SO[ - qualified archaeologist shall be retained to develop a cultural resources Treatment Plan, as well as a Discovery and Monitoring Plan. Key to Checklist Abbreviations Responsible#Persont`;" ,5 _ Monrtorvrig Frequency, wMethod of Uenfication = =Sanctions _ tr" 'x CDD - Community Development Director or designee A - With Each New Development A - On -site Inspection 1 - Withhold Recordation of Final Map PD - Planning Director or designee B - Prior To Construction B - Other Agency Permit / Approval 2 -Withhold Grading or Building Permit CE - City Engineer or designee C - Throughout Construction C - Plan Check 3 - Withhold Certificate of Occupancy BO - Building Official or designee D - On Completion D - Separate Submittal (Reports/Studies/ Plans) 4 - Stop Work Order PO - Police Captain or designee E - Operating 5 - Retain Deposit or Bonds Page 19 of 20 FC - Fire Chief or designee 6 - Revoke CUP 7 - Citation Page 20 of 20 . A 7- City of Rancho Cucamonga MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION The following Mitigated Negative Declaration is being circulated for public review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act Section 21091 and 21092 of the Public Resources Code. Project File No.: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042, Hillside Design Review DRC2016-00377, Variance DRC2016-00748, Variance DRC2017-00014 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2016-00376. Public Review Period Closes: June 14, 2017 Project Name: Weaver Ranch Project Applicant: Newland Homes, LLC 3121 Michelson Drive, Suite 110 Irvine, CA 92612 Project Location (also see attached map): The project is located east side of Carnelian Street and north of Hillside Road in the Very Low (VL) District and within the Hillside Overlay District. — APN:1061-261-01 Project Description: A request to subdivide 18.2 acres of land (SUBTT20042) and for site plan and architectural review (DRC2016-00377) of 26 single-family residences for a site located on the east side of Carnelian Street and north of Hillside Road in the Very Low (VL) District and within the Hillside Overlay District. The project includes a Variance (DRC2016-00748) to reduce the lot depth of 5 lots, a Variance (DRC2017-00014) to reduce the rear yard setback on 1 lot and a Tree Removal Permit (DRC2016-00376) to remove 7 heritage trees on the project site. After reviewing the Initial Study and any applicable mitigating measures for the project, staff has determined that this project will not have a significant effect on the environment. Accordingly, a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared. FINDING This is to advise that the City of Rancho Cucamonga, acting as the lead agency, has conducted an Initial Study to determine if the project may have a significant effect on the environment and is proposing this Mitigated Negative Declaration based upon the following finding: The Initial Study identified potentially significant effects but: (1) Revisions in the project plans or proposals made or agreed to by the applicant before this proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration was released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur, and (2) There is no substantial evidence before the agency that the project, as revised, may have a significant effect on the environment. If adopted, the Mitigated Negative Declaration means that an Environmental Impact Reportwill not be required. The factual and analytical basis for this finding is included in the attached Initial Study. The project file and all related documents are available for review at the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department at 10500 Civic Center Drive (909) 477-2750 or Fax (909)477-2847. NOTICE The public is invited to comment on the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration during the review period. Date of Determination Adopted By E5—E9 Pg 163 RESOLUTION NO. 17-49 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20042 - A REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE 18.2-ACRES OF LAND INTO 26 LOTS FOR THE PURPOSES OF DEVELOPING 26 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES FOR A SITE LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF CARNELIAN STREET AND NORTH OF HILLSIDE ROAD IN THE VERY LOW (VL) DISTRICT (.1 —2 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), THE HILLSIDE OVERLAY DISTRICT AND THE EQUESTRIAN OVERLAY DISTRICT; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF—APN: 1061-261-01. A. Recitals. 1. NH Weaver Lane, LLC filed an application for the approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042, 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 14th day of June 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 June 14, 2017, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to a property mostly vacant property of 18.2-acres located at the northeast corner of Carnelian Street and Cherry Lane, about 665 feet north of Hillside Road in the Very Low (VL) District; and b. The project site and all surrounding properties are within the Very Low (VL) District, the Hillside Overlay District and the Equestrian Overlay District. The surrounding properties are all developed with single-family residences; and C. The applicant has requested to subdivide the 18.2-acres project site (SUBTT20042) to into 26 residential lots; and d. The project includes the site plan and architectural review of 26 single-family residences on the project site (DRC2016-00377); and e. The proposed tentative tract map includes 26 numbered lots and 11 lettered lots. Lettered Lots A — K will be maintained by a home owner's association (including the equestrian trails), and lettered Lot L is for street dedications (along Carnelian Street); and E5—E9 Pg164 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-49 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20042 NH WEAVER LANE, LLC JUNE 14, 2017 Page 2 f. The required minimum lot size in the Very Low (VL) District is 20,000 square feet and the required average lot size is 22,500 square feet. The proposed lots range in size from 20,000 to 33,473 square feet, with an average lot size of 23,773. The minimum required lot width is 90 feet for interior lots and 100 feet for corner lots and the minimum required lot depth is 200 feet. Each lot conforms to the required minimum lot width, and all but 5 lots (Lots #11 - #15), meet the required lot depth. g. The project includes a Variance (DRC2016-00748) for a 13-foot reduction in the lot depth requirement for Lots #11 - #15 and a Variance (DRC2017-00014) to reduce the required rear yard setback on Lot #16, which has a proposed rear setback of 37 feet; and h. The developed portion of the project site has natural grades of less than 10 percent. The proposed grading is similar to the lots to the north, south, east and west, which were flat padded for the foundation of the residences. The grading for the entire site was designed to balance the cut and fill earthwork, to reduce the necessity for retaining walls and to provide a usable rear yard area that includes a flat corral pad on each lot. The proposed residences are less than 30 feet in height and conform to the building envelope requirement; and I. The project includes the required internal network of 15-foot wide private local equestrian trails that will serve each of the 26 residential lots and that will be maintained by the home owner's association for the project. A 20-foot wide Community Trail will be constructed along Carnelian Street as identified in the General Plan. Each lot includes the required 576 square foot flat corral area that is a minimum 70 feet from an adjacent single-family residence; and j. The project includes a request for a tree removal permit (DRC2016-00376) to remove 7 heritage trees. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above -referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and any applicable specific plans. The Very Low residential designation is intended for the development of detached, very -low density residential units on 20,000 square foot lots or larger, with private yards and private parking. The project is for the development of a single-family residences on minimum 20,000 square foot lots with an overall density of 1.43 dwelling units per acre. The project includes a Variance (DRC2016-00748) for a 13-foot reduction in the lot depth requirement for Lots #11 - #15 and a Variance (DRC2017-00014) to reduce the required rear yard setback on Lot#16, which has a proposed rear setback of 37 feet. Both variances are consistent with the General Plan and Development Code as the project is in conformance with the related density requirements and the variances will not impact the single-family use of the lots. b. The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and any applicable specific plans. The lots are in conformance with the intent of the General Plan and comply with all requirements of the Development Code for the Very Low (VL), Equestrian Overlay and Hillside Overlay Districts except for a request for a 13-foot reduction in the lot depth requirement for Lots #11 - #15. The proposed lots have a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet, an average lot size of 23,773 and an overall density of 1.43 dwelling units per acre. With approval of Variance DRC2016-00748, the project will be compliant with the Development Code. E5—E9 Pg 165 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-49 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20042 NH WEAVER LANE, LLC JUNE 14, 2017 Page 3 C. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed. The 18.2-acre project site is well suited for the proposed 26-lot single-family subdivision as the site is surrounded by single-family residential lots that are of similar size and layout to the proposed lots. The site includes two ephemeral streams that will be protected in place. The project includes a Variance (DRC2016- 00748) for a 13-foot reduction in the lot depth requirement for Lots #11 - #15. d. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat. An environmental review was completed for the project which concluded that with the proposed mitigation measures, the project would have a less than significant impact on the environment. e. The tentative tract 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 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. The subject property does not contain any easements that would limit access to or use of the project site. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and recommends that the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQK) and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the projectwould have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds: (i) that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. C. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. E5—E9 Pg 166 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-49 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20042 NH WEAVER LANE, LLC JUNE 14, 2017 Page 4 d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the City Planner of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference Planning Department 1) Approval is for the subdivision of 18.2-acres of land for the purpose of developing 26 single-family residents for a site located on the east side of Carnelian Street and north of Hillside Road. APN: 1061-261-01. 2) Approval for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 is contingent upon Planning Commission approval of Variance DRC2016-00748 3) 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. 4) The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2017. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA W Francisco Oaxaca, Chairman ATTEST: Candyce Burnett, Secretary E5—E9 Pg167 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-49 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20042 NH WEAVER LANE, LLC JUNE 14, 2017 Page 5 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 14th day of June 2017, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: E5—E9 Pg168 Conditions of Approval Community Development Department Project #: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance 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. Approval of Tentative Tract No. SUBTT20042 is granted subject to the approval of Variance DRC2016-00748. 3. 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. 4. The applicant shall be required to pay California Department of Fish and Wildlife Notice of Exemption and Negative Declaration fee in the amount of $2,266.25. 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. 5. 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. 6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community, Specific Plans and/or Master Plans in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance. Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. Lettered lots A-J will be maintained by the HOA www.CityofRC.us Printed: 5:30/2017 E5-E9 Pg 169 Project#: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 2. "Per Resolution No. 87-96: All developments, except those contained in section 7 and others specifically waived by the Planning Commission, shall be responsible for undergrounding all existing overhead utility lines including the removal the related supporting poles adjacent to and within the limits of a development... The existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical) on the project side of Carnelian Avenue shall be undergrounded from the first pole off site to the north of the project boundary to the first pole off site south of the project boundary, prior to public improvement acceptance or occupancy, whichever occurs first. 3. Per the Traffic Engineer: Carnelian Street frontage improvements to be in accordance with City "Collector" standards as required and including: A. Provide, protect, or repair curb and gutter, sidewalk and four (4) 9500 Lumen HPSV-equivalent LED street lights, as required. Coordinate with City staff for design and installation requirements. B. Provide a traffic signing and striping plan, as required. C. Proposed local street off Carnelian Street shall be either aligned with the proposed street on the opposite side or separated by at least 150'. Private street "A" improvements to be in accordance with City "Modified Local" standards as required and including: A. Provide curb, gutter, and sidewalk as required. B. Proposed Gated Entrance to be in accordance with the City "Residential Project Gated Entrance" Design Guide. C. All driveways to be in accordance with the City Driveway standard. D. Provide traffic signing and striping as required. E. Install 5800 Lumen HPSV-equivalent LED street lights at 120' staggered spacing Street Lighting Standard. Coordinate with City staff for design and installation requirements. F. All street intersections and driveways to comply with the city 'Line of Sight' unobstructed clear view of approaching traffic and pedestrians in both directions and vertically). G. Minimum centerline radius to be 300' per City Street Design Policy. H. Provide parking restrictions at the 45' radius turns. 4. For pads below streets, the first 6 feet of the driveway shall slope away from the of sidewalk) elevation at no more than 6%. Standard Conditions of Approval Printed: 5/30/2017 www.CilyofRC.us and per the City standards (200' both horizontally right-of-way (back Page 2 of 12 E5—E9 Pg170 Project;*: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 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. Permits issued on or after June 2, 2014, must complete the reimbursement process through the City's Accelerate online portal within 60 days following the completion of the construction and/or demolition project or the deposit will be forfeited. Permits issued before June 2, 2014, require the following when applying for a deposit reimbursement: a completed CD-2 form, a copy of the cashier's receipt showing the deposit amount, and all weight tickets. Instructions and forms are available at the City's web site, www.CityofRC.us, under City Hall; Engineering; Environmental Programs. 6. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting Districts for street lights on Carnelian 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. 7. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 16.37.010, no person shall make connections from a source of energy, fuel or power to any building or structure which is regulated by technical codes and for which a permit is required unless, in addition to any and all other codes, regulations and ordinances, all improvements required by these conditions of development approval have been completed and accepted by the City Council, except: that in developments containing more than one building, structure or unit, the development may have energy connections made in equal proportion to the percentage of completion of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval, as determined by the City Engineer, provided that reasonable, safe and maintainable access to the property exists. In no case shall more than 95 percent of the buildings, structures or units be connected to energy sources prior to completion and acceptance of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval. Printed: 5/30/2017 ww .CityofRC.us Page 3 of 12 E5—E9 Pg171 Project #: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-OOD14 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. - Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 8. Improvement Plans and Construction: a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of Building Permits, whichever occurs first. b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Services Department in addition to any other permits required. c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction project along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals and interconnect wiring. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR, or any other locations approved by the City Engineer. Notes: 1) Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets, a maximum of 200 feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer. 2) Conduit shall be 3-inch pvc with pull rope or as specified. e. Access ramps for the disabled shall be installed on all corners of intersections per latest ADA requirements or as directed by the City Engineer. f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards, except for single-family residential lots. h. Street names shall be approved by the Planning Manager prior to submittal for first plan check. 9. 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. 10. 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. 11. 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. 12. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. Printed: 5/30/2017 www.CityofRC.us Page 4 of 12 E5—E9 Pg172 Project #: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 13. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 14. 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. 15. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CVWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. 16. Add the following note to any private landscape plans that show street trees: "All improvements within the public right-of-way, including street trees, shall be installed per the public improvement plans." If there is a discrepancy between the public and private plans, the street improvement plans will govern. 17. It shall be the developer's responsibility to have the current FIRM Zone designation removed from the project area. The developer shall provide drainage and/or flood protection facilities sufficient to obtain a Zone "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. 18. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. Provide capacity in public storm drains to carry Q 100 plus debris flows. Storm water exiting the site shall be reduced to less than the erosive velocity of 6 feet per second. Building and Safety Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions Building and Fire Standard Conditions: This site is located in the fire area designated VHFHSZ, all structures must be constructed with ignition resistant or noncombustible materials in accordance with the most current edition of the CA Building/Residential Code. When the Tract and Development Review are approved submit complete construction drawings including energy and structural calculations to Building and Safety for plan review in accordance with the current edition of the CA Building and Fire Codes. The new structures are required to be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers. A soils report is required for new structures. Vegetation must be design and installed in accordance to the guidelines from the RCFPD for sites located in the fire area. Printed: 5/302017 mvw.CllyofRC.us Page 5 of 12 ES—E9 Pg 173 Project#: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 1. 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. 2. 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. 3. 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. 4. The final Grading and Drainage Plan, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be completed, submitted, and approved by the Building and Safety Official prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. A separate Grading and Drainage Plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and wet signed by a California licensed Civil Engineer prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit. 6. The applicant shall comply with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Dust Control Measures and place a dust control sign on the project site prior to the issuance of a grading permit. All dust control sign (s) shall be located outside of the public right of way. 7. If a Rough Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit are submitted to the Building and Safety Official for review, the rough grading plan shall be a separate plan submittal and permit from Precise Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit. 8. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall obtain written permission from the adjacent property owner(s) to construct wall(s) on property line(s) or provide a detail(s) showing the perimeter wall(s) to be constructed offset from the property line. Copies of the letters of written permission shall be scanned and pasted onto the permitted grading and drainage plan. 9. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall implement City Standards for on -site construction where possible, and shall provide details for all work not covered by City Standard Drawings. 10. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the grading plan shall show that all manufactured slopes shall be a minimum 2-foot offset from the public right of way, permitted line, or the adjacent private property. All slope offsets shall meet the requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. 11. 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. 12. The final grading and drainage plan shall show existing topography a minimum of 100-feet beyond project boundary. 13. 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". Printed: 5/30/2017 www.CityofRC.us Page 6 of 12 E5—E9 Pg174 Project #: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 14. 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. 15. 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. 16. 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. 17. 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. 18. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall obtain a signed and notarized letter, or a recorded easement, 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. 19. 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. 20. The conceptual grading and drainage plan is showing driveway slopes exceeding 10%. Therefore, prior to issuance of a grading permit, the permitted grading plan set shall show driveway profiles for the driveways from the street curb line to the garage door(s). Printed: 5/30/2017 t+n".CityofRC.us Page 7 of 12 E5—E9 Pg175 Project#: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. - Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 21. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the grading and drainage plan shall show the following information in the equestrian trails: — Provide PVC fencing per city standards, provide a 4" thick decomposed granite (DG) surface, provide a drainage V ditch parallel to the trail, provide a bridge over the V ditch where necessary for access to corals, and gates to corrals. The equestrian bridges shall be capable of carrying vehicle loads where necessary. Where the longitudinal slope (s) is S< 5% the cross fall shall be 2%, if S>5% the cross fall may be 4% maximum. Where water bars required, the spacing for the water bars is: 50' maximum for longitudinal slopes of 4% to 6%, 40' maximum for longitudinal slopes of 6.1% to 9%, 30' maximum for longitudinal slopes of 9.1% to 12%, 20' maximum for longitudinal slopes greater than 12%. In the equestrian trails water bars shall also be placed at the top and bottom of the trail where the gradient of the trail changes, i.e. a steep downhill slope which will cause additional erosion to the trail. 22. 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. 23.It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off -site drainage easements prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 24.It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off -site drainage acceptance easements(s) from adjacent downstream property owner(s) or discharge flows in a natural condition (concentrated flows are not accepted) and shall provide the Building and Safety Official a drainage study showing the proposed flows do not exceed the existing flows prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit. 25. The site shall be rough graded to eliminate all cross -lot drainage, (except in approved facilities adjacent to private trails). All slopes and retaining walls necessary to accomplish this shall be installed prior to final map approval. 26. 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. 27. Prior to issuance of a grading permit and in accordance with Planning Commission Resolution 92-17, if a lot may not directly drain off -site directly to the street or other acceptable drainage device (such as a drainage ditch adjacent to an equestrian trail), then: a) drainage may flow from only one lot onto only one other lot; b) a drainage easement shall be provided over the lot accepting the drainage; c) the drainage shall be contained within either a concrete/rock lined swale/channel or a reinforced concrete pipe; and d) the drainage shall be designed with excess capacity to account for the probable lack of necessary maintenance, therefore, it shall be designed to convey two (2) times the runoff from a 100-year storm event with the minimum diameter of the pipe being 12-inches. Printed: 5.13012017 w .CityofRC.us Page 8 of 12 ES—E9 Pg176 Project #: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 28. Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the latest adopted California Plumbing Code. Private storm drain improvements shall be shown on the grading and drainage plan. 29. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy or final sign off by the Building Inspector the engineer of record shall certify the functionality of the storm water quality management plan (WQMP) storm water treatment devices and best management practices (BMP). 30. Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WQMP shall include a copy of the project Conditions of Approval. 31. Reciprocal access easements for all parcels and maintenance agreements ensuring joint maintenance of all storm water quality structural/treatment devices and best management practices (BMP) as provided for in the project's Storm Water Quality Management Plan, shall be provided for by CC&R's or deeds and shall be recorded prior to the approval of the Water Quality Management Plan. Said CC&R's and/or deeds shall be included in the project site specific Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) document prior to approval of the WQMP document and recording of the Memorandum of Agreement of Storm Water Quality Management Plan. 32. 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. 33. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall obtain a Waste Discharge Identification Number (WDID). The WDID number shall also be shown on the WQMP Site and Drainage Plan document. 34. 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. 35. The land owner shall provide an inspection report by a qualified person/company on a biennial basis for the Class V Injection Wells/underground infiltration chambers to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis all best management practices (BMP"s) as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 36. 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. Printed: 5/30/2017 w i.CityofRC.us Page 9 of 12 E5—E9 Pg 177 Project#: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. - Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 37. The land owner shall provide an inspection report on a biennial basis for the structural storm water treatment devices, commonly referred to as BMPs, to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 38. The land/property owner shall follow the inspection and maintenance requirements of the approved project specific Water Quality Management Plan and shall provide a copy of the inspection reports on a biennial basis to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. 39. 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. 40. 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. 41. 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 BMF section of the final project -specific water quality management plan. 42. 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". Printed: 5/30/2017 vnvw.CityofRC.us Page 10 or 12 E5—E9 log 178 Project #: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 43. 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". 44. 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. 45. 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. 46. GROUND WATER PROTECTION: Prior to approval of the final project specific water quality management plan (WQMP), the WQMP document shall meet the requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board Order No. R8-2010-0036 (NPDES No. CAS 618036), the San Bernardino County Municipal Separate Storm Sewers Separation (MS4) Permit reads: Section XI.D(Water Quality Management Plan Requirements).8(Groundwater Protection): Treatment Control BMPs utilizing infiltration [exclusive of incidental infiltration and BMPs not designed to primarily function as infiltration devices (such as grassy swales, detention basins, vegetated buffer strips, constructed wetlands, etc.)] must comply with the following minimum requirements to protect groundwater: a. Use of structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause or contribute to an exceedance of ground water quality objectives. b. Source control and pollution prevention control BMPs shall be implemented to protect groundwater quality. The need for pre-treatment BMPs such as sedimentation or filtration should be evaluated prior to infiltration. g. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall be located at least 100 feet horizontally from any water supply wells. h. The vertical distance from the bottom of any infiltration structural treatment BMP to the historic high groundwater mark shall be at least 10-feet. Where the groundwater basins do not support beneficial uses, this vertical distance criteria may be reduced, provided groundwater quality is maintained. i. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause a nuisance or pollution as defined in Water Code Section 13050. Printed: 5/30/2017 w W.CityofRcros Page 11 of 12 E5—E9 Pg179 Project #: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 47. The permittedgrading plan and the final project -specific water quality management plan are proposing stormwater detention basin (commonly referred to as BMPs) for the treatment of storm water runoff as required in the current adopted Municipal Separate Storm Sewers Systems (MS4) Permit. The depth of the proposed retained water equals or exceeds 18-inches. Therefore prior to the issuance of a grading permit and approval of the final project -specific water quality management plan the applicant shall show a barrier a minimum of 60-inches above the finished ground surface. 48. The conceptual utility plan is showing the nearest connection to a public sewer at the intersection of Hillside Road and Beryl Street approximately 3,678 feet from the boundary of the proposed subdivision with a note on the plan which reads "All lots to have a septic system". On October 13, 1989 the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board adopted Resolution 89-157 regarding Minimum Lot Size Requirements for New Developments Using On -Site Septic Tank -Subsurface Leaching Percolation Systems. Item H of the Resolution reads "No exemptions shall be granted for new developments on lots less than one-half acre which are 200 feet or less from a sewer which could serve that tract/parcel, barring ,legal impediments to such use. All other developments shall be considered on a sliding scale, e.g., for each additional unit (any development which is more than a single family dwelling), this requirement should be increased by 100-feet per dwelling unit. For example, a 10-lot subdivision shall be required to connect to a sewer if the sewer is within 1,100 feet (200 + 9x100 feet = 1,100 feet) of the proposed development barring legal impediments to connection to the sewer". Based on this criteria a connection to a public sewer is required if the sewer is 2,700 feet from the proposed subdivision. The nearest public sewer connection is in Thoroughbred Street near the intersection of Carnelian Avenue about 2,700 feet from the southerly boundary of the proposed subdivision. Therefore this project is conditioned, prior to issuance of a grading permit, to comply with the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board adopted Resolution 89-157 and connect to the public sewer system if the project is not deemed to be a minimum distance of 2,700 linear feet from the intersection of Thoroughbred Street and Carnelian Street to the southwest corner of the subject property, as done by a field survey. 49. Design Issue: The Conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan is showing a culvert inlet on the north side of the equestrian trail (Section O-O on Lot 19) with a grate which may be subject to clogging should there be a lack of maintenance during a storm event. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit, the applicant is conditioned to show an emergency overland escape route for the 100-year storm event or an alternative inlet design that will protect the proposed structures on affected lots during the 100-year storm event that is acceptable to the City. The emergency overland escape route shall be capable of withstanding possible storm water erosion control forces and protect the proposed structure(s) in the affected lots. Hydraulic calculations for the emergency overflow system shall be shown in the project drainage/hydrology/hydraulics report. Printed: 5/30/2017 mwv.CityofRC.us Page 12 of 12 E5—E9 Pg180 RESOLUTION NO. 17-50 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING HILLSIDE DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00377 - A REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OF 26 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES ON 18.2- ACRES OF LAND RELATED TO TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20042, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF CARNELIAN STREET AND NORTH OF HILLSIDE ROAD IN THE VERY LOW (VL) DISTRICT (.1 — 2 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), THE HILLSIDE OVERLAY DISTRICT AND THE EQUESTRIAN OVERLAY DISTRICT; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF — APN: 1061-261-01. A. Recitals. 1. NH Weaver Lane, LLC filed an application for the approval of Hillside Design Review DRC2016-00377, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Hillside Design Review request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 14th day of June 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 June 14, 2017, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to a mostly vacant property of 18.2-acres located at the northeast corner of Carnelian Street and Cherry Lane, about 665 feet north of Hillside Road in the Very Low (VL) District; and b. The project site and all surrounding properties are within the Very Low (VL) District, the Hillside Overlay District and the Equestrian Overlay District. The surrounding properties are all developed with single-family residences; and C. The applicant is requesting site plan and architectural review of 26 single-family residences; and d. The project includes a tentative tract map (SUBTT20042) to subdivide the 18.2-acre project site into 26 residential lots; and e. Three (3) separate floor plans are proposed, along with three different elevations for each floor plan, Spanish Colonial, Country Cottage and Italian Farmhouse. Plan #1 is single -story and E5—E9 Pg181 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-50 HILLSIDE DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00377 NH WEAVER LANE, LLC JUNE 14, 2017 Page 2 includes 3,689 square feet of living area, a 643 square foot 3-car garage, a 493 square foot casita and a 360 square foot veranda. Plan #2 is two-story and includes 4,413 square feet of living area, a 710 square foot 3-car garage, a 521 square foot Casita and a 585 square foot veranda. Plan #3 is two-story and includes 4,977 square feet of living area, a 676 square foot garage, a 453 square foot casita and a 273 square foot veranda; and f. The project includes a variance (DRC2016-00748) for a 13-foot reduction in the lot depth requirement for Lots #11 - #15 and a variance (DRC2017-00014) to reduce the required rear yard setback on Lot #16, which has a proposed rear setback of 37 feet; and g. The developed portion of the project site has natural grades of less than 10 percent. The proposed grading is similar to the lots to the north, south, east and west, which were flat padded for the foundation of the residences. The grading for the entire site was designed to balance the cut and fill earthwork, to reduce the necessity for retaining walls and to provide a usable rear yard area that includes a flat corral pad on each lot. The proposed residences are less than 30 feet in height and conform to the 30-foot building envelope requirement; and h. The project includes the required internal network of 15-foot wide private local equestrian trails that will serve each of the 26 residential lots and that will be maintained by the home owner's association for the project. A 20-foot wide Community Trail will be constructed along Carnelian Street as identified in the General Plan. Each lot includes the required 576 square foot flat corral area that is a minimum 70 feet from an adjacent single-family residence; and i. The project includes a request for a tree removal permit (DRC2016-00376) to remove 7 heritage trees. 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 Land Use designation of the project site is Very Low (VL) District. The Very Low residential designation is intended for the development of detached, very -low density residential units on 20,000 square foot lots or larger, with private yard and private parking. The project is for the development of single-family residences on minimum 20,000 square foot lots with an overall density of 1.43 dwelling units per acre. The project includes a Variance (DRC2016-00748) for a 13-foot reduction in the lot depth requirement for Lots #11 - #15 and a Variance (DRC2017-00014) to reduce the required rear yard setback on Lot #16, which has a proposed rear setback of 37 feet. Both variances are consistent with the General Plan as the project is in conformance with the density requirement and the variances will not impact the residential use of the lots. 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 Very Low (VL) District is for the development of very low density residential use, with a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet and a maximum residential density of up to 2-units per gross acre. The proposed lots have a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet with an overall density of 1.43 dwelling units per acre. C. The proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. The project includes two variances, one for a reduction in the 200-foot lot depth requirement (DRC2016-00748) for Lots #11 - #15, and one for a rear yard setback reduction ES—E9 Pg182 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-50 HILLSIDE DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00377 NH WEAVER LANE, LLC JUNE 14, 2017 Page 3 (DRC2017-00014) for Lot #16. With approval of the two variances, the project will be compliant with the Development Code. d. The proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, orwelfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. An environmental review was completed for the project which concluded that with the proposed mitigation measures, the project would have a less than significant impact on the environment. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included forthe environmental assessment forthe application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and recommends that the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds: (i) that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. C. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the City Planner of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference E5—E9 Pg183 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-50 HILLSIDE DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00377 NH WEAVER LANE, LLC JUNE 14, 2017 Page 4 Planning Department 1) Approval is for Hillside Design Review DRC2016-00377, for the site plan and architectural review of 26 single-family residents on 18.2-acres of land related to Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 located on the east side of Carnelian Street and north of Hillside Road. APN: 1061-261-01. 2) Approval for Hillside Design Review DRC2016-00377 is contingent upon Planning Commission approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042, Variance DRC2016-00748, Variance DRC22017-00014 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2016-00376. 3) 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. 4) The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2017. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA M 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 14th day of June 2017, by the following vote -to -wit: ES—E9 Pg184 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-50 HILLSIDE DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00377 NH WEAVER LANE, LLC JUNE 14, 2017 Page 5 AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: E5—E9 Pg185 Conditions of Approval Community Development Department Project #: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance 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. Approval of Tentative Tract No. SUBTT20042 is granted subject to the approval of Variance DRC2016-00748. 3. 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. 4. The applicant shall be required to pay California Department of Fish and Wildlife Notice of Exemption and Negative Declaration fee in the amount of $2,266.25. 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. 5. 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. 6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community, Specific Plans and/or Master Plans in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance. Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. Lettered lots A-J will be maintained by the HOA Printed. 5;30;2017 w .CityofRC.us E5—E9 Pg 186 Project#: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. - Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 2. "Per Resolution No. 87-96: All developments, except those contained in section 7 and others specifically waived by the Planning Commission, shall be responsible for undergrounding all existing overhead utility lines including the removal the related supporting poles adjacent to and within the limits of a development... The existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical) on the project side of Carnelian Avenue shall be undergrounded from the first pole off site to the north of the project boundary to the first pole off site south of the project boundary, prior to public improvement acceptance or occupancy, whichever occurs first. 3. Per the Traffic Engineer: 4. Carnelian Street frontage improvements to be in accordance with City "Collector" standards as required and including: A. Provide, protect, or repair curb and gutter, sidewalk and four (4) 9500 Lumen HPSV-equivalent LED street lights, as required. Coordinate with City staff for design and installation requirements. B. Provide a traffic signing and striping plan, as required. C. Proposed local street off Carnelian Street shall be either aligned with the proposed street on the opposite side or separated by at least 150'. Private street "A" improvements to be in accordance with City "Modified Local" standards as required and including: A. Provide curb, gutter, and sidewalk as required. B. Proposed Gated Entrance to be in accordance with the City "Residential Project Design Guide. C. All driveways to be in accordance with the City Driveway standard. D. Provide traffic signing and striping as required. E. Install 5800 Lumen HPSV-equivalent LED street lights at 120' staggered spacing Street Lighting Standard. Coordinate with City staff for design and installation requirements. F. All street intersections and driveways to comply with the city 'Line of Sight' unobstructed clear view of approaching traffic and pedestrians in both directions and vertically). G. Minimum centerline radius to be 300' per City Street Design Policy. H. Provide parking restrictions at the 45' radius turns. Gated Entrance" and per the City standards (200' both horizontally For pads below streets, the first 6 feet of the driveway shall slope away from the right-of-way (back of sidewalk) elevation at no more than 6%. Standard Conditions of Approval Puted: 5130/2017 www.CityofRC.us Page 2 of 12 E5—E9 Pg187 Project SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. - Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 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. Permits issued on or after June 2, 2014, must complete the reimbursement process through the City's Accelerate online portal within 60 days following the completion of the construction and/or demolition project or the deposit will be forfeited, Permits issued before June 2, 2014, require the following when applying for a deposit reimbursement: a completed CD-2 form, a copy of the cashier's receipt showing the deposit amount, and all weight tickets. Instructions and forms are available at the City's web site, www.CityofRC.us, under City Hall; Engineering; Environmental Programs. 6. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting Districts for street lights on Carnelian 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. 7. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 16.37.010, no person shall make connections from a source of energy, fuel or power to any building or structure which is regulated by technical codes and for which a permit is required unless, in addition to any and all other codes, regulations and ordinances, all improvements required by these conditions of development approval have been completed and accepted by the City Council, except: that in developments containing more than one building, structure or unit, the development may have energy connections made in equal proportion to the percentage of completion of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval, as determined by the City Engineer, provided that reasonable, safe and maintainable access to the property exists. In no case shall more than 95 percent of the buildings, structures or units be connected to energy sources prior to completion and acceptance of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval. Printed: 5/302vnm.CityofRC.us017 Page 3 of 12 E5—E9 Pg188 Project #: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 8. Improvement Plans and Construction: a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of Building Permits, whichever occurs first. b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Services Department in addition to any other permits required. c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction project along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals and interconnect wiring. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR, or any other locations approved by the City Engineer. Notes: 1) Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets, a maximum of 200 feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer. 2) Conduit shall be 3-inch pvc with pull rope or as specified. e. Access ramps for the disabled shall be installed on all corners of intersections per latest ADA requirements or as directed by the City Engineer. f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards, except for single-family residential lots. h. Street names shall be approved by the Planning Manager prior to submittal for first plan check. 9. 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. 10. 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. 11. 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. 12. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. Printed: 5/30/2017 www.Cityo(RC.us Page 4 of 12 E5—E9 Pg 189 Project#: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 13. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 14. 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. 15. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CVWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. 16. Add the following note to any private landscape plans that show street trees: "All improvements within the public right-of-way, including street trees, shall be installed per the public improvement plans." If there is a discrepancy between the public and private plans, the street improvement plans will govern. 17. It shall be the developer's responsibility to have the current FIRM Zone designation removed from the project area. The developer shall provide drainage and/or flood protection facilities sufficient to obtain a Zone 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. 18. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. Provide capacity in public storm drains to carry Q100 plus debris flows. Storm water exiting the site shall be reduced to less than the erosive velocity of 6 feet per second. Building and Safety Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. Building and Fire Standard Conditions: This site is located in the fire area designated VHFHSZ, all structures must be constructed with ignition resistant or noncombustible materials in accordance with the most current edition of the CA Building/Residential Code. When the Tract and Development Review are approved submit complete construction drawings including energy and structural calculations to Building and Safety for plan review in accordance with the current edition of the CA Building and Fire Codes. The new structures are required to be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers. A soils report is required for new structures. Vegetation must be design and installed in accordance to the guidelines from the RCFPD for sites located in the fire area. Printed: 5/30/2017 Vvww.CityofRC.us Page 5 of 12 E5—E9 Pg190 Project#: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 1. 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. 2. 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. 3. 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. 4. The final Grading and Drainage Plan, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be completed, submitted, and approved by the Building and Safety Official prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. A separate Grading and Drainage Plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and wet signed by a California licensed Civil Engineer prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit. 6. The applicant shall comply with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Dust Control Measures and place a dust control sign on the project site prior to the issuance of a grading permit. All dust control sign (s) shall be located outside of the public right of way. 7. If a Rough Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit are submitted to the Building and Safety Official for review, the rough grading plan shall be a separate plan submittal and permit from Precise Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit, 8. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall obtain written permission from the adjacent property owner(s) to construct wall(s) on property line(s) or provide a detail(s) showing the perimeter wall(s) to be constructed offset from the property line. Copies of the letters of written permission shall be scanned and pasted onto the permitted grading and drainage plan. 9. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall implement City Standards for on -site construction where possible, and shall provide details for all work not covered by City Standard Drawings. 10. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the grading plan shall show that all manufactured slopes shall be a minimum 2-foot offset from the public right of way, permitted line, or the adjacent private property. All slope offsets shall meet the requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. 11. 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. 12. The final grading and drainage plan shall show existing topography a minimum of 100-feet beyond project boundary. 13. 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". Printed: 5/30/2017 www.CilyofRC.us Page 6 0(12 ES—E9 Pg191 Project #: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 14. 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. 15. 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. 16. 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. 17. 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. 18. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall obtain a signed and notarized letter, or a recorded easement, 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. 19. 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. 20. The conceptual grading and drainage plan is showing driveway slopes exceeding 10%. Therefore, prior to issuance of a grading permit, the permitted grading plan set shall show driveway profiles for the driveways from the street curb line to the garage door(s). Printed: 5/30/2017 www.CityofRC.us Page 7 of 12 E5—E9 Pg192 Project#: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 21. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the grading and drainage plan shall show the following information in the equestrian trails: — Provide PVC fencing per city standards, provide a 4" thick decomposed granite (DG) surface, provide a drainage V ditch parallel to the trail, provide a bridge over the V ditch where necessary for access to corals, and gates to corrals. The equestrian bridges shall be capable of carrying vehicle loads where necessary. Where the longitudinal slope (s) is S< 5% the cross fall shall be 2%, if S>5% the cross fall may be 4% maximum. Where water bars required, the spacing for the water bars is: 50' maximum for longitudinal slopes of 4% to 6%, 40' maximum for longitudinal slopes of 6.1% to 9%, 30' maximum for longitudinal slopes of 9.1% to 12%, 20' maximum for longitudinal slopes greater than 12%. In the equestrian trails water bars shall also be placed at the top and bottom of the trail where the gradient of the trail changes, i.e. a steep downhill slope which will cause additional erosion to the trail. 22. 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. 23.It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off -site drainage easements prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 24. it shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off -site drainage acceptance easements(s) from adjacent downstream property owner(s) or discharge flows in a natural condition (concentrated flows are not accepted) and shall provide the Building and Safety Official a drainage study showing the proposed flows do not exceed the existing flows prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit. 25. The site shall be rough graded to eliminate all cross -lot drainage, (except in approved facilities adjacent to private trails). All slopes and retaining walls necessary to accomplish this shall be installed prior to final map approval. 26. 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. 27. Prior to issuance of a grading permit and in accordance with Planning Commission Resolution 92-17, if a lot may not directly drain off -site directly to the street or other acceptable drainage device (such as a drainage ditch adjacent to an equestrian trail), then: a) drainage may flow from only one lot onto only one other lot; b) a drainage easement shall be provided over the lot accepting the drainage; c) the drainage shall be contained within either a concrete/rock lined swale/channel or a reinforced concrete pipe; and d) the drainage shall be designed with excess capacity to account for the probable lack of necessary maintenance, therefore, it shall be designed to convey two (2) times the runoff from a 100-year storm event with the minimum diameter of the pipe being 12-inches. Printed: 5/3012017 w w.CityofRC.us Page 8 of 12 E5—E9 Pg193 Project #: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 28. Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the latest adopted California Plumbing Code. Private storm drain improvements shall be shown on the grading and drainage plan. 29. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy or final sign off by the Building Inspector the engineer of record shall certify the functionality of the storm water quality management plan (WQMP) storm water treatment devices and best management practices (BMP). 30. Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WQMP shall include a copy of the project Conditions of Approval. 31. Reciprocal access easements for all parcels and maintenance agreements ensuring joint maintenance of all storm water quality structural/treatment devices and best management practices (BMP) as provided for in the project's Storm Water Quality Management Plan, shall be provided for by CC&R's or deeds and shall be recorded prior to the approval of the Water Quality Management Plan. Said CC&R's and/or deeds shall be included in the project site specific Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) document prior to approval of the WQMP document and recording of the Memorandum of Agreement of Storm Water Quality Management Plan. 32. 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. 33, Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall obtain a Waste Discharge Identification Number (WDID). The WDID number shall also be shown on the WQMP Site and Drainage Plan document. 34. 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. 35. The land owner shall provide an inspection report by a qualified person/company on a biennial basis for the Class V Injection Wells/underground infiltration chambers to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis all best management practices (BMP"s) as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 36. 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. Printed: 5/30/2017 www.CilyofRC.us- Page 9 of 12 E5—E9 Pg194 Project#: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. - Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 37. The land owner shall provide an inspection report on a biennial basis for the structural storm water treatment devices, commonly referred to as BMPs, to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 38. The land/property owner shall follow the inspection and maintenance requirements of the approved project specific Water Quality Management Plan and shall provide a copy of the inspection reports on a biennial basis to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. 39. 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. 40. 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. 41. 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. 42. 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". Printed: 5/30/2017 www.CityofRC.us Page 10 of 12 E5—E9 Pg195 Project: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. - Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 43. 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". 44. 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. 45. 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. 46. GROUND WATER PROTECTION: Prior to approval of the final project specific water quality management plan (WQMP), the WQMP document shall meet the requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board Order No. R8-2010-0036 (NPDES No. CAS 618036), the San Bernardino County Municipal Separate Storm Sewers Separation (MS4) Permit reads: Section XI.D(Water Quality Management Plan Requirements).8(Groundwater Protection): Treatment Control BMPs utilizing infiltration [exclusive of incidental infiltration and BMPs not designed to primarily function as infiltration devices (such as grassy swales, detention basins, vegetated buffer strips, constructed wetlands, etc.)] must comply with the following minimum requirements to protect groundwater: a. Use of structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause or contribute to an exceedance of ground water quality objectives. b. Source control and pollution prevention control BMPs shall be implemented to protect groundwater quality. The need for pre-treatment BMPs such as sedimentation or filtration should be evaluated prior to infiltration. g. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall be located at least 100 feet horizontally from any water supply wells. h. The vertical distance from the bottom of any infiltration structural treatment BMP to the historic high groundwater mark shall be at least 10-feet. Where the groundwater basins do not support beneficial uses, this vertical distance criteria may be reduced, provided groundwater quality is maintained. I. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause a nuisance or pollution as defined in Water Code Section 13050. Printed: 5130/2017 www.CityofRC.us Page 11 of 12 ES—E9 Pg196 Project #: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. - Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 47. The permitted grading plan and the final project -specific water quality management plan are proposing stormwater detention basin (commonly referred to as BMPs) for the treatment of storm water runoff as required in the current adopted Municipal Separate Storm Sewers Systems (MS4) Permit. The depth of the proposed retained water equals or exceeds 18-inches. Therefore prior to the issuance of a grading permit and approval of the final project -specific water quality management plan the applicant shall show a barrier a minimum of 60-inches above the finished ground surface. 48. The conceptual utility plan is showing the nearest connection to a public sewer at the intersection of Hillside Road and Beryl Street approximately 3,678 feet from the boundary of the proposed subdivision with a note on the plan which reads "All lots to have a septic system". On October 13, 1989 the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board adopted Resolution 89-157 regarding Minimum Lot Size Requirements for New Developments Using On -Site Septic Tank -Subsurface Leaching Percolation Systems. Item H of the Resolution reads "No exemptions shall be granted for new developments on lots less than one-half acre which are 200 feet or less from a sewer which could serve that tract/parcel, barring legal impediments to such use. All other developments shall be considered on a sliding scale, e.g., for each additional unit (any development which is more than a single family dwelling), this requirement should be increased by 100-feet per dwelling unit. For example, a 10-lot subdivision shall be required to connect to a sewer if the sewer is within 1,100 feet (200 + 9x100 feet = 1,100 feet) of the proposed development barring legal impediments to connection to the sewer'. Based on this criteria a connection to a public sewer is required if the sewer is 2,700 feet from the proposed subdivision. The nearest public sewer connection is in Thoroughbred Street near the intersection of Carnelian Avenue about 2,700 feet from the southerly boundary of the proposed subdivision. Therefore this project is conditioned, prior to issuance of a grading permit, to comply with the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board adopted Resolution 89-157 and connect to the public sewer system if the project is not deemed to be a minimum distance of 2,7001inear feet from the intersection of Thoroughbred Street and Carnelian Street to the southwest corner of the subject property, as done by a field survey. 49. Design Issue: The Conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan is showing a culvert inlet on the north side of the equestrian trail (Section O-O on Lot 19) with a grate which may be subject to clogging should there be a lack of maintenance during a storm event. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit, the applicant is conditioned to show an emergency overland escape route for the 100-year storm event or an alternative inlet design that will protect the proposed structures on affected lots during the 100-year storm event that is acceptable to the City. The emergency overland escape route shall be capable of withstanding possible storm water erosion control forces and protect the proposed structure(s) in the affected lots. Hydraulic calculations for the emergency overflow system shall be shown in the project drainage/hydrology/hydraulics report. Printed: 5/3012017 w .CityofRC.us Page 12 of 12 E5—E9 Pg197 RESOLUTION NO. 17-51 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING VARIANCE DRC2017- 00014 -A REQUEST TO REDUCE THE REAR YARD SETBACK ON LOT#16 BY APPROXIMATELY 23 FEET RELATED HILLSIDE DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00377, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF CARNELIAN STREET AND NORTH OF HILLSIDE ROAD IN THE VERY LOW (VL) DISTRICT (.1 —2 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), THE HILLSIDE OVERLAY DISTRICT AND THE EQUESTRIAN OVERLAY DISTRICT; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF — APN: 1061-261-01. A. Recitals. 1. NH Weaver Lane, LLC filed an application for the approval of Variance DRC2017-00014, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Variance request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 14th day of June 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 June 14, 2017, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to a mostly vacant property of 18.2-acres located at the northeast corner of Carnelian Street and Cherry Lane, about 665 feet north of Hillside Road in the Very Low (VL) District; and b. The project site and all surrounding properties are within the Very Low (VL) District, the Hillside Overlay District and the Equestrian Overlay District. The surrounding properties are all developed with single-family residences; and C. The applicant is requesting site plan and architectural review of 26 single-family residences; and d. The project includes a tentative tract map (SUBTT20042) to subdivide the 18.2-acre project site into 26 residential lots; and e. The project includes a Variance (DRC2017-00014) to reduce the required rear yard setback on Lot #16, which has a proposed rear setback of 37 feet. This corner lot is oddly shaped due E5—E9 Pg198 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-51 VARIANCE DRC2017-00014 NH WEAVER LANE, LLC JUNE 14, 2017 Page 2 to being adjacent to the ephemeral stream, which causes the lot to narrow from approximately 128 feet along the north property line to 70 feet along the south property line. 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. Strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would result in a difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this Code. The reduction in the required rear yard setback for Lot #16 from 60 to 37 feet is necessary due to the odd shape of the lot. The lot is adjacent to an ephemeral stream on the project site, which causes Lot #16 to narrow from approximately 128 feet along the north property line to 70 feet along the south property line. Lot #16 meets all other development criteria and provides for and extra deep front yard setback and adequate room for the required horse corral area. Without the rear yard setback reduction, Lot#16 would need to be eliminated, increasing the size of the adjacent lots to be significantly larger than the other lots in the subdivision and in the surrounding area. b. 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 zone. The lot is adjacent to an ephemeral stream on the project site, which causes Lot#16 to narrow from approximately 128 feet along the north property line to 70 feet along the south property line. These limitations do not generally apply to the surrounding lot or lots in the same zone. C. Strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same zone. The project site is within the Very Low (VL) District, which requires a 60-foot rear yard setback. Without the rear yard setback reduction, Lot #16 would not comply with the rear yard setback requirement and would need to be eliminated. Lot #16 complies with all other development criteria for the Very Low (VL) District and exceeds the minimum lot size for the district by 6,457 square feet. Elimination of the lot would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district as the project will be of similar size to other lot in the same district and in the surrounding area. d. The granting of the Variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same zone. It is not uncommon to grant a Variance to reduce a required lot dimension when there are unusual site conditions that preclude compliance. The proposed Variance for a reduction in the required rear yard setback for Lot #16, will not constitute a grant of special privilege as there are special circumstances which apply to the subject lot that do not apply to other lots in the surrounding area. The subject lot narrows from approximately 128 feet to 70 feet due to being adjacent to an ephemeral stream. e. 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. The reduction in the required rear yard setback for Lot#16, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, orwelfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity, as the lot is 6,457 square feet larger than the minimum lot size requirement and will be in keeping with the other lots in the subdivision and in the surrounding area. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment forthe application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will E5—E9 Pg199 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-51 VARIANCE DRC2017-00014 NH WEAVER LANE, LLC JUNE 14, 2017 Page 3 have a significant effect upon the environment and recommends that the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQK) and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds: (i) that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission furtherfinds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. C. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the City Planner of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference Planning Department 1) Approval is for Variance DRC2017-0014 to reduce the required rear yard setback on Lot #16 from 60 feet to 37 feet related to Hillside Design Review DRC2016-00377 for a site located on the east side of Carnelian Street and north of Hillside Road. APN: 1061-261-01. 2) Approval for Variance DRC2017-00014 is contingent upon Planning Commission approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 and Hillside Development Review DRC2016-00377. E5—E9 Pg200 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-51 VARIANCE DRC2017-00014 NH WEAVER LANE, LLC JUNE 14, 2017 Page 4 3) 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. 4) The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2017. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 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 14th day of June 2017, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: E5—E9 Pg201 N Conditions of Approval Community Development Department Project #: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance 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. Approval of Tentative Tract No. SUBTT20042 is granted subject to the approval of Variance DRC2016-00748. 3. 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. 4. The applicant shall be required to pay California Department of Fish and Wildlife Notice of Exemption and Negative Declaration fee in the amount of $2,266.25. 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. 5. 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. 6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community, Specific Plans and/or Master Plans in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance. Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. Lettered lots A-J will be maintained by the HOA Printed513012017 www.CttyofRC.us E5—E9 Pg202 Project #: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 2. "Per Resolution No. 87-96: All developments, except those contained in section 7 and others specifically waived by the Planning Commission, shall be responsible for undergrounding all existing overhead utility lines including the removal the related supporting poles adjacent to and within the limits of a development... The existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical) on the project side of Carnelian Avenue shall be undergrounded from the first pole off site to the north of the project boundary to the first pole off site south of the project boundary, prior to public improvement acceptance or occupancy, whichever occurs first. 3. Per the Traffic Engineer: Carnelian Street frontage improvements to be in accordance with City "Collector" standards as required and including: A. Provide, protect, or repair curb and gutter, sidewalk and four (4) 9500 Lumen HPSV-equivalent LED street lights, as required. Coordinate with City staff for design and installation requirements. B. Provide a traffic signing and striping plan, as required. C. Proposed local street off Carnelian Street shall be either aligned with the proposed street on the opposite side or separated by at least 150'. Private street "A" improvements to be in accordance with City "Modified Local" standards as required and including: A. Provide curb, gutter, and sidewalk as required. B. Proposed Gated Entrance to be in accordance with the City "Residential Project Gated Entrance" Design Guide. C. All driveways to be in accordance with the City Driveway standard. D. Provide traffic signing and striping as required. E. Install 5800 Lumen HPSV-equivalent LED street lights at 120' staggered spacing and per the City Street Lighting Standard. Coordinate with City staff for design and installation requirements. F. All street intersections and driveways to comply with the city 'Line of Sight' standards (200' unobstructed clear view of approaching traffic and pedestrians in both directions both horizontally and vertically). G. Minimum centerline radius to be 300' per City Street Design Policy. H. Provide parking restrictions at the 45' radius turns. 4. For pads below streets, the first 6 feet of the driveway shall slope away from the right-of-way (back of sidewalk) elevation at no more than 6%. Standard Conditions of Approval Printed: 5/30/2017 www.CityofRC.us Page 2 of 12 E5—E9 Pg203 Project#: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 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. Permits issued on or after June 2, 2014, must complete the reimbursement process through the City's Accelerate online portal within 60 days following the completion of the construction and/or demolition project or the deposit will be forfeited. Permits issued before June 2, 2014, require the following when applying for a deposit reimbursement: a completed CD-2 form, a copy of the cashier's receipt showing the deposit amount, and all weight tickets. Instructions and forms are available at the City's web site, www.CityofRC.us, under City Hall; Engineering; Environmental Programs. 6. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting Districts for street lights on Carnelian 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. 7. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 16.37.010, no person shall make connections from a source of energy, fuel or power to any building or structure which is regulated by technical codes and for which a permit is required unless, in addition to any and all other codes, regulations and ordinances, all improvements required by these conditions of development approval have been completed and accepted by the City Council, except: that in developments containing more than one building, structure or unit, the development may have energy connections made in equal proportion to the percentage of completion of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval, as determined by the City Engineer, provided that reasonable, safe and maintainable access to the property exists. In no case shall more than 95 percent of the buildings, structures or units be connected to energy sources prior to completion and acceptance of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval. Printed: 5130/2017 vnvw.CityofRC.us Page 3 of 12 ES—E9 Pg204 Project#: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 8. Improvement Plans and Construction: a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of Building Permits, whichever occurs first. b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Services Department in addition to any other permits required. c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction project along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals and interconnect wiring. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR, or any other locations approved by the City Engineer. Notes: 1) Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets, a maximum of 200 feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer. 2) Conduit shall be 3-inch pvc with pull rope or as specified. e. Access ramps for the disabled shall be installed on all corners of intersections per latest ADA requirements or as directed by the City Engineer. f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards, except for single-family residential lots. h. Street names shall be approved by the Planning Manager prior to submittal for first plan check. 9. 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. 10. 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. 11. 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. 12. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. Printed: 5/3012017 "w.CityofRC.us Page 4 of 12 E5—E9 Pg205 Project: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 13. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 14. 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. 15. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CVWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. 16. Add the following note to any private landscape plans that show street trees: "All improvements within the public right-of-way, including street trees, shall be installed per the public improvement plans." If there is a discrepancy between the public and private plans, the street improvement plans will govern. 17. It shall be the developer's responsibility to have the current FIRM Zone designation removed from the project area. The developer shall provide drainage and/or flood protection facilities sufficient to obtain a Zone "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. 18. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. Provide capacity in public storm drains to carry Q100plus debris flows. Storm water exiting the site shall be reduced to less than the erosive velocity of 6 feet per second. Building and Safety Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. Building and Fire Standard Conditions: This site is located in the fire area designated VHFHSZ, all structures must be constructed with ignition resistant or noncombustible materials in accordance with the most current edition of the CA Building/Residential Code. When the Tract and Development Review are approved submit complete construction drawings including energy and structural calculations to Building and Safety for plan review in accordance with the current edition of the CA Building and Fire Codes. The new structures are required to be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers. A soils report is required for new structures. Vegetation must be design and installed in accordance to the guidelines from the RCFPD for sites located in the fire area. Printed: 5/30/2077 www.CityofRC.us Page 5 of 12 E5—E9 Pg206 Project#: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT, Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 1. 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. 2. 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. 3. 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. 4. The final Grading and Drainage Plan, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be completed, submitted, and approved by the Building and Safety Official prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. A separate Grading and Drainage Plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and wet signed by a California licensed Civil Engineer prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit. 6. The applicant shall comply with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Dust Control Measures and place a dust control sign on the project site prior to the issuance of a grading permit. All dust control sign (s) shall be located outside of the public right of way. 7. If a Rough Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit are submitted to the Building and Safety Official for review, the rough grading plan shall be a separate plan submittal and permit from Precise Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit. 8. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall obtain written permission from the adjacent property owner(s) to construct wall(s) on property line(s) or provide a details) showing the perimeter wall(s) to be constructed offset from the property line. Copies of the letters of written permission shall be scanned and pasted onto the permitted grading and drainage plan. 9. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall implement City Standards for on -site construction where possible, and shall provide details for all work not covered by City Standard Drawings. 10. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the grading plan shall show that all manufactured slopes shall be a minimum 2-foot offset from the public right of way, permitted line, or the adjacent private property. All slope offsets shall meet the requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. 11. 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. 12. The final grading and drainage plan shall show existing topography a minimum of 100-feet beyond project boundary. 13. 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". Printed: 5/30/2017 w .CilyofRC.us Page 6 of 12 ES—E9 Pg207 Project #: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 14. 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. 15. 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. 16. 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. 17. 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. 18. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall obtain a signed and notarized letter, or a recorded easement, 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. 19. 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. 20. The conceptual grading and drainage plan is showing driveway slopes exceeding 10%. Therefore, prior to issuance of a grading permit, the permitted grading plan set shall show driveway profiles for the driveways from the street curb line to the garage door(s). Printed: 5/30/2017 www.CityofRC.us Page 7 of 12 E5—E9 Pg208 Project #: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. - Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 21. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the grading and drainage plan shall show the following information in the equestrian trails: — Provide PVC fencing per city standards, provide a 4" thick decomposed granite (DG) surface, provide a drainage V ditch parallel to the trail, provide a bridge over the V ditch where necessary for access to corals, and gates to corrals. The equestrian bridges shall be capable of carrying vehicle loads where necessary. Where the longitudinal slope (s) is S< 5% the cross fall shall be 2%, if S>5% the cross fall may be 4% maximum. Where water bars required, the spacing for the water bars is: 50' maximum for longitudinal slopes of 4% to 6%, 40' maximum for longitudinal slopes of 6.1% to 9%, 30' maximum for longitudinal slopes of 9.1% to 12%, 20' maximum for longitudinal slopes greater than 12%. In the equestrian trails water bars shall also be placed at the top and bottom of the trail where the gradient of the trail changes, i.e. a steep downhill slope which will cause additional erosion to the trail. 22. 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. 23.It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off -site drainage easements prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 24.It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off -site drainage acceptance easements(s) from adjacent downstream property owner(s) or discharge flows in a natural condition (concentrated flows are not accepted) and shall provide the Building and Safety Official a drainage study showing the proposed flows do not exceed the existing flows prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit. 25. The site shall be rough graded to eliminate all cross -lot drainage, (except in approved facilities adjacent to private trails). All slopes and retaining walls necessary to accomplish this shall be installed prior to final map approval. 26. 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. 27. Prior to issuance of a grading permit and in accordance with Planning Commission Resolution 92-17, if a lot may not directly drain off -site directly to the street or other acceptable drainage device (such as a drainage ditch adjacent to an equestrian trail), then: a) drainage may flow from only one lot onto only one other lot; b) a drainage easement shall be provided over the lot accepting the drainage; c) the drainage shall be contained within either a concrete/rock lined swale/channel or a reinforced concrete pipe; and d) the drainage shall be designed with excess capacity to account for the probable lack of necessary maintenance, therefore, it shall be designed to convey two (2) times the runoff from a 100-year storm event with the minimum diameter of the pipe being 12-inches. Printed: 5/30/2017 www.CilyofRC.us Page 5 of 12 E5—E9 Pg209 Project #: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: Project Type: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 28. Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the latest adopted California Plumbing Code. Private storm drain improvements shall be shown on the grading and drainage plan. 29. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy or final sign off by the Building Inspector the engineer of record shall certify the functionality of the storm water quality management plan (WQMP) storm water treatment devices and best management practices (BMP). 30. Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WQMP shall include a copy of the project Conditions of Approval. 31. Reciprocal access easements for all parcels and maintenance agreements ensuring joint maintenance of all storm water quality structural/treatment devices and best management practices (BMP) as provided for in the project's Storm Water Quality Management Plan, shall be provided for by CC&R's or deeds and shall be recorded prior to the approval of the Water Quality Management Plan. Said CC&R's and/or deeds shall be included in the project site specific Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) document prior to approval of the WQMP document and recording of the Memorandum of Agreement of Storm Water Quality Management Plan. 32. 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. 33. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall obtain a Waste Discharge Identification Number (WDID). The WDID number shall also be shown on the WQMP Site and Drainage Plan document. 34. 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. 35. The land owner shall provide an inspection report by a qualified person/company on a biennial basis for the Class V Injection Wells/underground infiltration chambers to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis all best management practices (BMP"s) as describedin the Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 36. 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. Printed: 5130/2017 vnp/w.CityofRC.us Page 9 of 12 E5—E9 Pg210 Project #: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 37. The land owner shall provide an inspection report on a biennial basis for the structural storm water treatment devices, commonly referred to as BMPs, to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 38. The land/property owner shall follow the inspection and maintenance requirements of the approved project specific Water Quality Management Plan and shall provide a copy of the inspection reports on a biennial basis to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. 39. 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. 40. 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. 41. 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. 42. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the Final Project -Specific Water Quality Management Plan shall include a completed copy of "Worksheet H: Factor of Safety and Design Infiltration Worksheet" located in Appendix D "Section VII — Infiltration Rate Evaluation Protocol and Factor of Safety Recommendations, ..." of the San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans. The infiltration study shall include the Soil Engineer's recommendations for Appendix D, Table VII.3: Suitability Assessment Related Considerations for Infiltration Facility Safety Factors". Printed: 5/30/2017 vn` .CilyofRC.us Page 10 of 12 E5—E9 Pg211 Project #: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 43. 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". 44. 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. 45. 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. 46. GROUND WATER PROTECTION: Prior to approval of the final project specific water quality management plan (WQMP), the WQMP document shall meet the requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board Order No. R8-2010-0036 (NPDES No. CAS 618036), the San Bernardino County Municipal Separate Storm Sewers Separation (MS4) Permit reads: Section XI.D(Water Quality Management Plan Requirements).8(Groundwater Protection): Treatment Control BMPs utilizing infiltration [exclusive of incidental infiltration and BMPs not designed to primarily function as infiltration devices (such as grassy swales, detention basins, vegetated buffer strips, constructed wetlands, etc.)] must comply with the following minimum requirements to protect groundwater: a. Use of structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause or contribute to an exceedance of ground water quality objectives. b. Source control and pollution prevention control BMPs shall be implemented to protect groundwater quality. The need for pre-treatment BMPs such as sedimentation or filtration should be evaluated prior to infiltration. g. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall be located at least 100 feet horizontally from any water supply wells. h. The vertical distance from the bottom of any infiltration structural treatment BMP to the historic high groundwater mark shall be at least 10-feet. Where the groundwater basins do not support beneficial uses, this vertical distance criteria may be reduced, provided groundwater quality is maintained. i. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause a nuisance or pollution as defined in Water Code Section 13050. Printed: 5130/2017 v m.CityofRC.us Page 11 of 12 E5—E9 Pg212 Project #: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 47. The permitted grading plan and the final project -specific water quality management plan are proposing stormwater detention basin (commonly referred to as BMPs) for the treatment of storm water runoff as required in the current adopted Municipal Separate Storm Sewers Systems (MS4) Permit. The depth of the proposed retained water equals or exceeds 18-inches. Therefore prior to the issuance of a grading permit and approval of the final project -specific water quality management plan the applicant shall show a barrier a minimum of 60-inches above the finished ground surface. 48. The conceptual utility plan is showing the nearest connection to a public sewer at the intersection of Hillside Road and Beryl Street approximately 3,678 feet from the boundary of the proposed subdivision with a note on the plan which reads "All lots to have a septic system". On October 13, 1989 the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board adopted Resolution 89-157 regarding Minimum Lot Size Requirements for New Developments Using On -Site Septic Tank -Subsurface Leaching Percolation Systems. Item H of the Resolution reads "No exemptions shall be granted for new developments on lots less than one-half acre which are 200 feet or less from a sewer which could serve that tract/parcel, barring legal impediments to such use. All other developments shall be considered on a sliding scale, e.g., for each additional unit (any development which is more than a single family dwelling), this requirement should be increased by 100-feet per dwelling unit. For example, a 10-lot subdivision shall be required to connect to a sewer if the sewer is within 1,100 feet (200 + 9x100 feet = 1,100 feet) of the proposed development barring legal impediments to connection to the sewer". Based on this criteria a connection to a public sewer is required if the sewer is 2,700 feet from the proposed subdivision. The nearest public sewer connection is in Thoroughbred Street near the intersection of Carnelian Avenue about 2,700 feet from the southerly boundary of the proposed subdivision. Therefore this project is conditioned, prior to issuance of a grading permit, to comply with the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board adopted Resolution 89-157 and connect to the public sewer system if the project is not deemed to be a minimum distance of 2,7001inear feet from the intersection of Thoroughbred Street and Carnelian Street to the southwest corner of the subject property, as done by a field survey. 49. Design Issue: The Conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan is showing a culvert inlet on the north side of the equestrian trail (Section O-O on Lot 19) with a grate which may be subject to clogging should there be a lack of maintenance during a storm event. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit, the applicant is conditioned to show an emergency overland escape route for the 100-year storm event or an alternative inlet design that will protect the proposed structures on affected lots during the 100-year storm event that is acceptable to the City. The emergency overland escape route shall be capable of withstanding possible storm water erosion control forces and protect the proposed structure(s) in the affected lots. Hydraulic calculations for the emergency overflow system shall be shown in the project drainage/hydrology/hydraulics report. Printed: 5/30/2017 �.CityofRC.us Page 12 of 12 E5-E9 Pg213 RESOLUTION NO. 17-52 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING VARIANCE DRC2016- 00748 - A REQUEST TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED LOT DEPTH OF LOTS #11 -#15 BY APPROXIMATELY 13 FEET RELATED TO TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20042 LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF CARNELIAN STREET AND NORTH OF HILLSIDE ROAD IN THE VERY LOW (VL) DISTRICT (.1 —2 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE THE HILLSIDE OVERLAY DISTRICT AND THE EQUESTRIAN OVERLAY DISTRICT; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF — APN: 1061-261-01. A. Recitals. 1. NH Weaver Lane, LLC filed an application forthe approval of Variance DRC2016-00748, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Variance request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 14th day of June 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 June 14, 2017, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to a mostly vacant property of 18.2-acres located at the northeast corner of Carnelian Street and Cherry Lane, about 665 feet north of Hillside Road in the Very Low (VL) District; and b. The project site and all surrounding properties are within the Very Low (VL) District, the Hillside Overlay District and the Equestrian Overlay District. The surrounding properties are all developed with single-family residences; and C. The applicant is requesting site plan and architectural review of 26 single-family residences; and d. The project includes a Tentative Tract Map (SUBTT20042) to subdivide the 18.2-acre project site into 26 residential lots; and e. The project includes a Variance (DRC2016-00748) for a 13-foot reduction in the lot depth requirement for Lots #11 - #15. The proposed street design creates 5 lots at the center of the E5—E9 Pg214 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-52 VARIANCE DRC2016-00748 NH WEAVER LANE, LLC JUNE 14, 2017 Page 2 project site that are deficient from meeting the required 200-foot lot depth. Each of these lots will comply with the minimum lot size requirement of 20,000 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. Strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would result in a difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this Code. The reduction in the required lot depth is necessary due to the shape of the project site. Without the lot depth reduction, the project would be required to be redesigned reducing the number of lots and creating lots up to 300 feet in depth, much deeper, and in turn larger, than the existing lots in the surrounding area. b. 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 zone. The shape of the project site, surrounding development, onsite grades and two existing ephemeral streams place limitations on the design of the internal street network. These limitations do not generally apply to the surrounding lot or lots in the same zone. C. Strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same zone. The project site is within the Very Low (VL) District which requires that lots have a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet and an average lot size of 22,500 square feet. Without the lot depth reduction, the project would need to be redesigned, reducing the number of lots and subsequently increasing the size of the remaining lots to be much larger than the required minimum or average lot sizes in the zoning district and then the existing lots in the surrounding area. Not approving the Variance, would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. d. The granting of the Variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same zone. It is not uncommon to grant a Variance to reduce a required lot dimension for a limited number of lots within a subdivision when the majority of the lots are in compliance and there are site conditions that preclude all of the lots from complying. The proposed Variance for a reduction in the required lot depth for 5 lots (Lots #11 - #15) within a 26-lot subdivision, will not constitute a grant of special privilege as existing site conditions, including the shape of the project site, surrounding development and the two onsite ephemeral streams limit alternative site designs without reducing the number of lots. e. 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. The reduction in the required lot depth for 5 lots within the proposed 26-lot subdivision will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity, as the reduction will be in keeping with other subdivisions in the surrounding area and with the intent of the Very Low (VL) District. Additionally, staff has prepared an environmental review for the proposed project and has determined that with the inclusion of mitigation measures the project will have a less than significant impact on the environment. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment forthe application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will E5—E9 Pg215 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-52 VARIANCE DRC2016-00748 NH WEAVER LANE, LLC JUNE 14, 2017 Page 3 have a significant effect upon the environment and recommends that the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds: (i) that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission further finds thatthe Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. C. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the City Planner of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition setforth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference Planning Department 1) Approval is for Variance DRC2016-00748, fora 13-foot reduction in the lot depth requirement for Lots #11 - #15 related to Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 for a site located on the east side of Carnelian Street and north of Hillside Road. APN: 1061-261-01. 2) Approval for Variance DRC2016-00748 is contingent upon Planning Commission approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042. 3) 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. E5—E9 Pg216 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-52 VARIANCE DRC2016-00748 NH WEAVER LANE, LLC JUNE 14, 2017 Page 4 4) The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents, officers, oremployees, 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 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. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2017. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MiN Francisco Oaxaca, Chairman ATTEST: Candyce Burnett, Secretary I, Candyce Burnett, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 14th day of June 2017, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: n3.��Ir;l�Ki]ul��il6�9[�LL�:�91 E5—E9 Pg217 Ask Conditions of Approval Rtnc'll`1 Community Development Department ('11C utonna Project#: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance 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. Approval of Tentative Tract No. SUBTT20042 is granted subject to the approval of Variance DRC2016-00748. 3. 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. 4. The applicant shall be required to pay California Department of Fish and Wildlife Notice of Exemption and Negative Declaration fee in the amount of $2,266.25. 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. 5. 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. 6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community, Specific Plans and/or Master Plans in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance. Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. Lettered lots A-J will be maintained by the HOA w .CityofRC.us Printed: 5/302017 E5—E9 Pg218 Project #: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 2. "Per Resolution No. 87-96: All developments, except those contained in section 7 and others specifically waived by the Planning Commission, shall be responsible for undergrounding all existing overhead utility lines including the removal the related supporting poles adjacent to and within the limits of a development... The existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical) on the project side of Carnelian Avenue shall be undergrounded from the first pole off site to the north of the project boundary to the first pole off site south of the project boundary, prior to public improvement acceptance or occupancy, whichever occurs first. 3. Per the Traffic Engineer: Carnelian Street frontage improvements to be in accordance with City "Collector" standards as required and including: A. Provide, protect, or repair curb and gutter, sidewalk and four (4) 9500 Lumen HPSV-equivalent LED street lights, as required. Coordinate with City staff for design and installation requirements. B. Provide a traffic signing and striping plan, as required. C. Proposed local street off Carnelian Street shall be either aligned with the proposed street on the opposite side or separated by at least 150'. Private street "A" improvements to be in accordance with City "Modified Local" standards as required and including: A. Provide curb, gutter, and sidewalk as required. B. Proposed Gated Entrance to be in accordance with the City "Residential Project Design Guide. C. All driveways to be in accordance with the City Driveway standard. D. Provide traffic signing and striping as required. E. Install 5800 Lumen HPSV-equivalent LED street lights at 120' staggered spacing Street Lighting Standard. Coordinate with City staff for design and installation requirements. F. All street intersections and driveways to comply with the city 'Line of Sight' unobstructed clear view of approaching traffic and pedestrians in both directions and vertically). G. Minimum centerline radius to be 300' per City Street Design Policy. H. Provide parking restrictions at the 45' radius turns. 4. For pads below streets, the first 6 feet of the driveway shall slope away from the of sidewalk) elevation at no more than 6%. Standard Conditions of Approval Gated Entrance" and per the City standards (200' both horizontally right-of-way (back Printed: 5/30/2017 www.CilyofRC.us Page 2 or 12 E5—E9 Pg219 Project #: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 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. Permits issued on or after June 2, 2014, must complete the reimbursement process through the City's Accelerate online portal within 60 days following the completion of the construction and/or demolition project or the deposit will be forfeited. Permits issued before June 2, 2014, require the following when applying for a deposit reimbursement: a completed CD-2 form, a copy of the cashier's receipt showing the deposit amount, and all weight tickets. Instructions and forms are available at the City's web site, www.CityofRC.us, under City Hall; Engineering; Environmental Programs. 6. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting Districts for street lights on Carnelian 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. 7. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 16.37.010, no person shall make connections from a source of energy, fuel or power to any building or structure which is regulated by technical codes and for which a permit is required unless, in addition to any and all other codes, regulations and ordinances, all improvements required by these conditions of development approval have been completed and accepted by the City Council, except: that in developments containing more than one building, structure or unit, the development may have energy connections made in equal proportion to the percentage of completion of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval, as determined by the City Engineer, provided that reasonable, safe and maintainable access to the property exists. In no case shall more than 95 percent of the buildings, structures or units be connected to energy sources prior to completion and acceptance of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval. Printed: 5/302www.cilyofRcros017 Page 3 of 12 E5—E9 Pg220 Project #: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT, Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 8. Improvement Plans and Construction: a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of Building Permits, whichever occurs first. b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Services Department in addition to any other permits required. c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction project along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals and interconnect wiring. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR, or any other locations approved by the City Engineer. Notes: 1) Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets, a maximum of 200 feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer. 2) Conduit shall be 3-inch pvc with pull rope or as specified. e. Access ramps for the disabled shall be installed on all corners of intersections per latest ADA requirements or as directed by the City Engineer. f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards, except for single-family residential lots. h. Street names shall be approved by the Planning Manager prior to submittal for first plan check. 9. 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. 10. 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. 11. 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. 12. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. Printed: 5/30/2017 w w.CityofRC.us Page 4 of 12 ES—E9 Pg221 Project#: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 13. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 14. 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. 15. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CVWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. 16. Add the following note to any private landscape plans that show street trees: "All improvements within the public right-of-way, including street trees, shall be installed per the public improvement plans." If there is a discrepancy between the public and private plans, the street improvement plans will govern. 17. It shall be the developer's responsibility to have the current FIRM Zone designation removed from the project area. The developer shall provide drainage and/or flood protection facilities sufficient to obtain a Zone "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. 18. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. Provide capacity in public storm drains to carry Q 100 plus debris flows. Storm water exiting the site shall be reduced to less than the erosive velocity of 6 feet per second. Building and Safety Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. Building and Fire Standard Conditions: This site is located in the fire area designated VHFHSZ, all structures must be constructed with ignition resistant or noncombustible materials in accordance with the most current edition of the CA Building/Residential Code. When the Tract and Development Review are approved submit complete construction drawings including energy and structural calculations to Building and Safety for plan review in accordance with the current edition of the CA Building and Fire Codes. The new structures are required to be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers. A soils report is required for new structures. Vegetation must be design and installed in accordance to the guidelines from the RCFPD for sites located in the fire area. Printed: 5/30/2017 mvw.CityofRC.us Page 5 of 12 E5—E9 Pg222 Project#: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. - Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 1. 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. 2. 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. 3. 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. 4. The final Grading and Drainage Plan, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be completed, submitted, and approved by the Building and Safety Official prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. A separate Grading and Drainage Plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and wet signed by a California licensed Civil Engineer prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit. 6. The applicant shall comply with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Dust Control Measures and place a dust control sign on the project site prior to the issuance of a grading permit. All dust control sign (s) shall be located outside of the public right of way. 7. If a Rough Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit are submitted to the Building and Safety Official for review, the rough grading plan shall be a separate plan submittal and permit from Precise Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit. S. 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. Copies of the letters of written permission shall be scanned and pasted onto the permitted grading and drainage plan. 9. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall implement City Standards for on -site construction where possible, and shall provide details for all work not covered by City Standard Drawings. 10. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the grading plan shall show that all manufactured slopes shall be a minimum 2-foot offset from the public right of way, permitted line, or the adjacent private property. All slope offsets shall meet the requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. 11. 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. 12. The final grading and drainage plan shall show existing topography a minimum of 100-feet beyond project boundary. 13. 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". Printed: 5130Y2017 www.CityofRC.us Page 6 of 12 E5—E9 Pg223 Project #: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 14. 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. 15. 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. 16. 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. 17. 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. 18. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall obtain a signed and notarized letter, or a recorded easement, 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. 19. 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. 20. The conceptual grading and drainage plan is showing driveway slopes exceeding 10%. Therefore, prior to issuance of a grading permit, the permitted grading plan set shall show driveway profiles for the driveways from the street curb line to the garage door(s). Printed: 5l30/2017 www.CityofRC.us Page 7 of 12 ES—E9 Pg224 Project#:SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00745, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 21. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the grading and drainage plan shall show the following information in the equestrian trails: — Provide PVC fencing per city standards, provide a 4" thick decomposed granite (DG) surface, provide a drainage V ditch parallel to the trail, provide a bridge over the V ditch where necessary for access to corals, and gates to corrals. The equestrian bridges shall be capable of carrying vehicle loads where necessary. Where the longitudinal slope (s) is S< 5% the cross fall shall be 2%, if S>5% the cross fall may be 4% maximum. Where water bars required, the spacing for the water bars is: 50' maximum for longitudinal slopes of 4% to 6%, 40' maximum for longitudinal slopes of 6.1% to 9%, 30' maximum for longitudinal slopes of 9.1% to 12%, 20' maximum for longitudinal slopes greater than 12%. In the equestrian trails water bars shall also be placed at the top and bottom of the trail where the gradient of the trail changes, i.e. a steep downhill slope which will cause additional erosion to the trail. 22. 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. 23.It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off -site drainage easements prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 24.It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off -site drainage acceptance easements(s) from adjacent downstream property owner(s) or discharge flows in a natural condition (concentrated flows are not accepted) and shall provide the Building and Safety Official a drainage study showing the proposed flows do not exceed the existing flows prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit. 25. The site shall be rough graded to eliminate all cross -lot drainage, (except in approved facilities adjacent to private trails). All slopes and retaining walls necessary to accomplish this shall be installed prior to final map approval. 26. 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. 27. Prior to issuance of a grading permit and in accordance with Planning Commission Resolution 92-17, if a lot may not directly drain off -site directly to the street or other acceptable drainage device (such as a drainage ditch adjacent to an equestrian trail), then: a) drainage may flow from only one lot onto only one other lot; b) a drainage easement shall be provided over the lot accepting the drainage; c) the drainage shall be contained within either a concrete/rock lined swale/channel or a reinforced concrete pipe; and d) the drainage shall be designed with excess capacity to account for the probable lack of necessary maintenance, therefore, it shall be designed to convey two (2) times the runoff from a 100-year storm event with the minimum diameter of the pipe being 12-inches. Printed: 5/30/2017 www.CityofRC.us Page 8 of 12 E5—E9 Pg225 Project #: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance. Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 28. Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the latest adopted California Plumbing Code. Private storm drain improvements shall be shown on the grading and drainage plan. 29. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy or final sign off by the Building Inspector the engineer of record shall certify the functionality of the storm water quality management plan (WQMP) storm water treatment devices and best management practices (BMP). 30. Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WQMP shall include a copy of the project Conditions of Approval. 31. Reciprocal access easements for all parcels and maintenance agreements ensuring joint maintenance of all storm water quality structural/treatment devices and best management practices (BMP) as provided for in the project's Storm Water Quality Management Plan, shall be provided for by CC&R's or deeds and shall be recorded prior to the approval of the Water Quality Management Plan. Said CC&R's and/or deeds shall be included in the project site specific Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) document prior to approval of the WQMP document and recording of the Memorandum of Agreement of Storm Water Quality Management Plan. 32. 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. 33. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall obtain a Waste Discharge Identification Number (WDID). The WDID number shall also be shown on the WQMP Site and Drainage Plan document. 34. 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. 35. The land owner shall provide an inspection report by a qualified person/company on a biennial basis for the Class V Injection Wells/underground infiltration chambers to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis all best management practices (BMP"s) as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 36. 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. Printed: 5/30/2017 vnvw.CityofRC.us Page 9 of 12 E5—E9 Pg226 Project#: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 37. The land owner shall provide an inspection report on a biennial basis for the structural storm water treatment devices, commonly referred to as BMPs, to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 38. The land/property owner shall follow the inspection and maintenance requirements of the approved project specific Water Quality Management Plan and shall provide a copy of the inspection reports on a biennial basis to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. 39. 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. 40. 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. 41. 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. 42. 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'. Printed: 5/30/2017 �.CityofRc.us Page 10 of 12 E5—E9 Pg227 Project #: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 43. 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". 44. 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. 45. 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. 46. GROUND WATER PROTECTION: Prior to approval of the final project specific water quality management plan (WQMP), the WQMP document shall meet the requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board Order No. R8-2010-0036 (NPDES No. CAS 618036), the San Bernardino County Municipal Separate Storm Sewers Separation (MS4) Permit reads: Section XI.D(Water Quality Management Plan Requirements).8(Groundwater Protection): Treatment Control BMPs utilizing infiltration [exclusive of incidental infiltration and BMPs not designed to primarily function as infiltration devices (such as grassy swales, detention basins, vegetated buffer strips, constructed wetlands, etc.)] must comply with the following minimum requirements to protect groundwater: a. Use of structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause or contribute to an exceedance of ground water quality objectives. b. Source control and pollution prevention control BMPs shall be implemented to protect groundwater quality. The need for pre-treatment BMPs such as sedimentation or filtration should be evaluated prior to infiltration. g. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall be located at least 100 feet horizontally from any water supply wells. h. The vertical distance from the bottom of any infiltration structural treatment BMP to the historic high groundwater mark shall be at least 10-feet. Where the groundwater basins do not support beneficial uses, this vertical distance criteria may be reduced, provided groundwater quality is maintained. i. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause a nuisance or pollution as defined in Water Code Section 13050. Printed: 5/30/2017 wwmCityofRC.us Page 11 of 12 ES—E9 Pg228 Project#: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 47. The permitted grading plan and the final project -specific water quality management plan are proposing stormwater detention basin (commonly referred to as BMPs) for the treatment of storm water runoff as required in the current adopted Municipal Separate Storm Sewers Systems (MS4) Permit. The depth of the proposed retained water equals or exceeds 18-inches. Therefore prior to the issuance of a grading permit and approval of the final project -specific water quality management plan the applicant shall show a barrier a minimum of 60-inches above the finished ground surface. 48. The conceptual utility plan is showing the nearest connection to a public sewer at the intersection of Hillside Road and Beryl Street approximately 3,678 feet from the boundary of the proposed subdivision with a note on the plan which reads "All lots to have a septic system". On October 13, 1989 the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board adopted Resolution 89-157 regarding Minimum Lot Size Requirements for New Developments Using On -Site Septic Tank -Subsurface Leaching Percolation Systems. Item H of the Resolution reads "No exemptions shall be granted for new developments on lots less than one-half acre which are 200 feet or less from a sewer which could serve that tract/parcel, barring legal impediments to such use. All other developments shall be considered on a sliding scale, e.g., for each additional unit (any development which is more than a single family dwelling), this requirement should be increased by 100-feet per dwelling unit. For example, a 10-lot subdivision shall be required to connect to a sewer if the sewer is within 1,100 feet (200 + 9x100 feet = 1,100 feet) of the proposed development barring legal impediments to connection to the sewer". Based on this criteria a connection to a public sewer is required if the sewer is 2,700 feet from the proposed subdivision. The nearest public sewer connection is in Thoroughbred Street near the intersection of Carnelian Avenue about 2,700 feet from the southerly boundary of the proposed subdivision. Therefore this project is conditioned, prior to issuance of a grading permit, to comply with the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board adopted Resolution 89-157 and connect to the public sewer system if the project is not deemed to be a _ —_minimum_distance—of___2,700_linear feet from —the intersection of Thoroughbred Street and Carnelian Street to the southwest corner of the subject property, as done by a field survey. 49. Design Issue: The Conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan is showing a culvert inlet on the north side of the equestrian trail (Section O-O on Lot 19) with a grate which may be subject to clogging should there be a lack of maintenance during a storm event. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit, the applicant is conditioned to show an emergency overland escape route for the 100-year storm event or an alternative inlet design that will protect the proposed structures on affected lots during the 100-year storm event that is acceptable to the City. The emergency overland escape route shall be capable of withstanding possible storm water erosion control forces and protect the proposed structure(s) in the affected lots. Hydraulic calculations for the emergency overflow system shall be shown in the project drainage/hydrology/hydraulics report. Printed: 5/30/2017 w .CityofRC.us Page 72 of 72 E5—E9 Pg229 RESOLUTION NO. 17-53 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2016-00376 - A REQUEST TO REMOVE SEVEN HERITAGE TREES RELATED TO HILLSIDE DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00377, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF CARNELIAN AND NORTH OF HILLSIDE ROAD IN THE VERY LOW (VL) DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (.1 — 2 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), THE HILLSIDE OVERLAY DISTRICT AND THE EQUESTRIAN OVERLAY DISTRICT; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF — APN: 1061-261-01. A. Recitals. 1. NH Weaver Lane, LLC filed an application for the approval of Variance DRC2016-00376, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Tree Removal Permit request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 14th day of June 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 June 14, 2017, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to a mostly vacant property of 18.2-acres located at the northeast corner of Carnelian Street and Cherry Lane, about 665 feet north of Hillside Road in the Very Low (VL) District; and b. The project site and all surrounding properties are within the Very Low (VL) District, the Hillside Overlay District and the Equestrian Overlay District. The surrounding properties are all developed with single-family residences; and C. The applicant is requesting site plan and architectural review of 26 single-family residences; and d. The project includes a Tentative Tract Map (SUBTT20042) to subdivide the 18.2-acre project site into 26 residential lots; and e. The project includes a Tree Removal Permit (DRC2016-00376) to remove seven heritage trees. An Arborist Report (March 18, 2016) was submitted to determine the condition of the on - site trees. The on -site trees include a Mimosa tree (40-50 foot grown spread), three Samuel Ash trees E5—E9 Pg230 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-53 VARIANCE DRC2016-00376 NH WEAVER LANE, LLC JUNE 14, 2017 Page 2 (20-30 foot crown spread) and three Date Palm trees (15-20 foot crown spread). The report concludes that the trees are generally in good condition (each tree is given a "C" rating) but will need to be removed as they are in conflict with the proposed site improvements. 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 removal of the trees is necessary due to the condition of the trees related to disease, danger of collapse, proximity to an existing structure, or interference with utility services. The removal of the seven heritage trees is not due to the condition of the trees, proximity to an existing structure or interference with utility services. Rather, the seven heritage trees on the project site are in conflict with the proposed development of 26 single-family residences on the project site. b. The removal of the trees is necessary in order to construct improvements which will allow economic enjoyment of the property. The seven heritage trees on the project site are in conflict with the proposed development of 26 single-family residences on the project site. C. The removal of the trees will not negatively impact the neighborhood, the established character of the area and property values. The removal of the seven heritage trees will not negatively impact the neighborhood or the character of the area as there are a large number of mature trees surrounding the project site. Additionally, the applicant will be conditioned to replace the seven heritage trees along with a minimum of two trees on each of the 26 proposed lots. d. The removal of the trees is necessary to construct required improvements within the public street right-of-way or within a flood control or utility right-of-way. The removal of the subject trees is not necessary to construct public improvements. The removal of the seven heritage trees is necessary to construct private infrastructure and the 26 single-family residences on the project site. e. The trees cannot be preserved through pruning and proper maintenance or relocation. The seven heritage trees are in conflict with the construction of infrastructure for the proposed 26-lot subdivision. f. The trees do not constitute a significant natural resource in the city. The seven trees slated for removal do not constitute a significant natural resource as the trees in the surrounding area are not dependent for their survival or are they significant because of their size, species, location or aesthetic qualities. g. Removal of the trees is not restricted by a Specific Plan, Community Plan or condition of approval. The seven heritage trees slated for removal are not protected by a Specific Plan, Community Plan or condition of approval. h. Every effort has been made to incorporate the trees into the design of the project and the only appropriate alternative is the removal of the tree. The seven heritage trees slated for removal are in conflict with the construction of on site improvements and cannot be incorporated in to the project. i. The removal of the trees will not have a negative impact on the health, safety, or viability of surrounding trees, nor will it negatively impact the aesthetics or general welfare of the E5—E9 Pg231 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-53 VARIANCE DRC2016-00376 NH WEAVER LANE, LLC JUNE 14, 2017 Page 3 surrounding area. The project site is in an area with a large number of mature trees. The impact on the surrounding area will be minimal with one -for -one replacement of the removed trees. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment forthe application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and recommends that the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQK) and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds: (i) that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. C. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore adopts the Mitigation. Monitoring Program for the project. d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the City Planner of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference Planning Department 1) Approval is for Tree Removal Permit DRC2016-000376 for removal of seven heritage trees related to Hillside Design Review DRC2016-00377 for a site located on the east side of Carnelian Street and north of Hillside Road. APN: 1061-261-01. E5—E9 Pg232 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-53 VARIANCE DRC2016-00376 NH WEAVER LANE, LLC JUNE 14, 2017 Page 4 2) Approval for Tree Removal Permit DRC2016-00376 is contingent upon Planning Commission approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20042 and Hillside Development Review DRC2016-00377. 3) 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. 4) The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2017. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA I Francisco Oaxaca, Chairman ATTEST: Candyce Burnett, Secretary I, Candyce Burnett, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 14th day of June 2017, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: E5—E9 Pg233 Conditions of Approval Community Development Department Project #: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance 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. Approval of Tentative Tract No. SUBTT20042 is granted subject to the approval of Variance DRC2016-00748. 3. 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. 4. The applicant shall be required to pay California Department of Fish and Wildlife Notice of Exemption and Negative Declaration fee in the amount of $2,266.25. 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. 5. 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. 6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community, Specific Plans and/or Master Plans in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance. Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. Lettered lots A-J will be maintained by the HOA Printed: 5/30/2017 w w.CayofRC us ES—E9 Pg234 Project#: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 2. "Per Resolution No. 87-96: All developments, except those contained in section 7 and others specifically waived by the Planning Commission, shall be responsible for undergrounding all existing overhead utility lines including the removal the related supporting poles adjacent to and within the limits of a development... The existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical) on the project side of Carnelian Avenue shall be undergrounded from the first pole off site to the north of the project boundary to the first pole off site south of the project boundary, prior to public improvement acceptance or occupancy, whichever occurs first. 3. Per the Traffic Engineer: Carnelian Street frontage improvements to be in accordance with City "Collector' standards as required and including: A. Provide, protect, or repair curb and gutter, sidewalk and four (4) 9500 Lumen HPSV-equivalent LED street lights, as required. Coordinate with City staff for design and installation requirements. B. Provide a traffic signing and striping plan, as required. C. Proposed local street off Carnelian Street shall be either aligned with the proposed street on the opposite side or separated by at least 150'. Private street "A" improvements to be in accordance with City "Modified Local" standards as required and including: A. Provide curb, gutter, and sidewalk as required. B. Proposed Gated Entrance to be in accordance with the City "Residential Project Gated Entrance" Design Guide. C. All driveways to be in accordance with the City Driveway standard. D. Provide traffic signing and striping as required. E. Install 5800 Lumen HPSV-equivalent LED street lights at 120' staggered spacing and per the City Street Lighting Standard. Coordinate with City staff for design and installation requirements. F. All street intersections and driveways to comply with the city 'Line of Sight' standards (200' unobstructed clear view of approaching traffic and pedestrians in both directions both horizontally and vertically). G. Minimum centerline radius to be 300' per City Street Design Policy. H. Provide parking restrictions at the 45' radius turns. 4. For pads below streets, the first 6 feet of the driveway shall slope away from the right-of-way (back of sidewalk) elevation at no more than 6%. Standard Conditions of Approval Printed: 5/30/2017 w-CityotRC.us Page 2 of 12 E5—E9 Pg235 Project#: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00746, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 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. Permits issued on or after June 2, 2014, must complete the reimbursement process through the City's Accelerate online portal within 60 days following the completion of the construction and/or demolition project or the deposit will be forfeited. Permits issued before June 2, 2014, require the following when applying for a deposit reimbursement: a completed CD-2 form, a copy of the cashier's receipt showing the deposit amount, and all weight tickets. Instructions and forms are available at the City's web site, www.CityofRC.us, under City Hall; Engineering; Environmental Programs. 6. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting Districts for street lights on Carnelian 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. 7. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 16.37.010, no person shall make connections from a source of energy, fuel or power to any building or structure which is regulated by technical codes and for which a permit is required unless, in addition to any and all other codes, regulations and ordinances, all improvements required by these conditions of development approval have been completed and accepted by the City Council, except: that in developments containing more than one building, structure or unit, the development may have energy connections made in equal proportion to the percentage of completion of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval, as determined by the City Engineer, provided that reasonable, safe and maintainable access to the property exists. In no case shall more than 95 percent of the buildings, structures or units be connected to energy sources prior to completion and acceptance of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval. Printed: 5/3012017 www.CityofRC.us Page 3 of 12 E5—E9 Pg236 Project#: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. - Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 8. Improvement Plans and Construction: a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of Building Permits, whichever occurs first. b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Services Department in addition to any other permits required. c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction project along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals and interconnect wiring. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR, or any other locations approved by the City Engineer. Notes: 1) Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets, a maximum of 200 feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer. 2) Conduit shall be 3-inch pvc with pull rope or as specified. e. Access ramps for the disabled shall be installed on all corners of intersections per latest ADA requirements or as directed by the City Engineer. f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards, except for single-family residential lots. h. Street names shall be approved by the Planning Manager prior to submittal for first plan check. 9. 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. 10. 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. 11. Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards it accordance with the City's street tree program. 12. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. Printed: 5/3012017 www.CityofRC.us Page 4 of 12 E5—E9 Pg237 Project #: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 13. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 14. 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. 15. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CVWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. 16. Add the following note to any private landscape plans that show street trees: "All improvements within the public right-of-way, including street trees, shall be installed per the public improvement plans." If there is a discrepancy between the public and private plans, the street improvement plans will govern. 17. It shall be the developer's responsibility to have the current FIRM Zone designation removed from the project area. The developer shall provide drainage and/or flood protection facilities sufficient to obtain a Zone "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. 18. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. Provide capacity in public storm drains to carry Q 100 plus debris flows. Storm water exiting the site shall be reduced to less than the erosive velocity of 6 feet per second. Building and Safety Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions Building and Fire Standard Conditions: This site is located in the fire area designated VHFHSZ, all structures must be constructed with ignition resistant or noncombustible materials in accordance with the most current edition of the CA Building/Residential Code. When the Tract and Development Review are approved submit complete construction drawings including energy and structural calculations to Building and Safety for plan review in accordance with the current edition of the CA Building and Fire Codes. The new structures are required to be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers. A soils report is required for new structures. Vegetation must be design and installed in accordance to the guidelines from the RCFPD for sites located in the fire area. Printed: 5/30/2017 www.CityofRC.us Page 5 of 12 E5—E9 Pg238 Project#: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 1. 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. 2. 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. 3. 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. 4. The final Grading and Drainage Plan, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be completed, submitted, and approved by the Building and Safety Official prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. A separate Grading and Drainage Plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and wet signed by a California licensed Civil Engineer prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit. 6. The applicant shall comply with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Dust Control Measures and place a dust control sign on the project site prior to the issuance of a grading permit. All dust control sign (s) shall be located outside of the public right of way. 7. If a Rough Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit are submitted to the Building and Safety Official for review, the rough grading plan shall be a separate plan submittal and permit from Precise Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit. 8. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall obtain written permission from the adjacent property owner(s) to construct wall(s) on property line(s) or provide a detail(s) showing the perimeter wall(s) to be constructed offset from the property line. Copies of the letters of written permission shall be scanned and pasted onto the permitted grading and drainage plan. 9. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall implement City Standards for on -site construction where possible, and shall provide details for all work not covered by City Standard Drawings. 10. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the grading plan shall show that all manufactured slopes shall be a minimum 2-foot offset from the public right of way, permitted line, or the adjacent private property. All slope offsets shall meet the requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. 11. 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. 12. The final grading and drainage plan shall show existing topography a minimum of 100-feet beyonc project boundary. 13. 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". Printed: 5/30/2017 �w.CityofRC.us Page 6 of 12 E5—E9 Pg239 Project #: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 14. 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. 15. 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. 16. 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. 17. 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. 18. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall obtain a signed and notarized letter, or a recorded easement, 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. 19. 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. 20. The conceptual grading and drainage plan is showing driveway slopes exceeding 10%. Therefore, prior to issuance of a grading permit, the permitted grading plan set shall show driveway profiles for the driveways from the street curb line to the garage door(s). Printed: 5130/2017 www.CityofRC.us Page 7 of 12 E5—E9 Pg240 Project#: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 21. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the grading and drainage plan shall show the following information in the equestrian trails: — Provide PVC fencing per city standards, provide a 4" thick decomposed granite (DG) surface, provide a drainage V ditch parallel to the trail, provide a bridge over the V ditch where necessary for access to corals, and gates to corrals. The equestrian bridges shall be capable of carrying vehicle loads where necessary. Where the longitudinal slope (s) is S< 5% the cross fall shall be 2%, if S>5% the cross fall may be 4% maximum. Where water bars required, the spacing for the water bars is: 50' maximum for longitudinal slopes of 4% to 6%, 40' maximum for longitudinal slopes of 6.1% to 9%, 30' maximum for longitudinal slopes of 9.1% to 12%, 20' maximum for longitudinal slopes greater than 12%. In the equestrian trails water bars shall also be placed at the top and bottom of the trail where the gradient of the trail changes, i.e. a steep downhill slope which will cause additional erosion to the trail. 22. 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. 23.It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off -site drainage easements prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 24.It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off -site drainage acceptance easements(s) from adjacent downstream property owner(s) or discharge flows in a natural condition (concentrated flows are not accepted) and shall provide the Building and Safety Official a drainage study showing the proposed flows do not exceed the existing flows prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit. 25. The site shall be rough graded to eliminate all cross -lot drainage, (except in approved facilities adjacent to private trails). All slopes and retaining walls necessary to accomplish this shall be installed prior to final map approval. 26. 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. 27. Prior to issuance of a grading permit and in accordance with Planning Commission Resolution 92-17, if a lot may not directly drain off -site directly to the street or other acceptable drainage device (such as a drainage ditch adjacent to an equestrian trail), then: a) drainage may flow from only one lot onto only one other lot; b) a drainage easement shall be provided over the lot accepting the drainage; c) the drainage shall be contained within either a concrete/rock lined swale/channel or a reinforced concrete pipe; and d) the drainage shall be designed with excess capacity to account for the probable lack of necessary maintenance, therefore, it shall be designed to convey two (2) times the runoff from a 100-year storm event with the minimum diameter of the pipe being 12-inches. Printed: 5/30/2017 www.CityofRC.us Page 8 of 12 E5—E9 Pg241 Project #: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-DO014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 28. Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the latest adopted California Plumbing Code. Private storm drain improvements shall be shown on the grading and drainage plan. 29. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy or final sign off by the Building Inspector the engineer of record shall certify the functionality of the storm water quality management plan (WQMP) storm water treatment devices and best management practices (BMP). 30. Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WQMP shall include a copy of the project Conditions of Approval. 31. Reciprocal access easements for all parcels and maintenance agreements ensuring joint maintenance of all storm water quality structural/treatment devices and best management practices (BMP) as provided for in the project's Storm Water Quality Management Plan, shall be provided for by CC&R's or deeds and shall be recorded prior to the approval of the Water Quality Management Plan. Said CC&R's and/or deeds shall be included in the project site specific Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) document prior to approval of the WQMP document and recording of the Memorandum of Agreement of Storm Water Quality Management Plan. 32. 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. 33. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall obtain a Waste Discharge Identification Number (WDID). The WDID number shall also be shown on the WQMP Site and Drainage Plan document. 34. 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. 35. The land owner shall provide an inspection report by a qualified person/company on a biennial basis for the Class V Injection Wells/underground infiltration chambers to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis all best management practices (BMP"s) as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 36. 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. Printed: 5/30/2017 www.CityofRC.us Page 9 of 12 E5—E9 Pg242 Project #: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 37. The land owner shall provide an inspection report on a biennial basis for the structural storm water treatment devices, commonly referred to as BMPs, to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 38. The land/property owner shall follow the inspection and maintenance requirements of the approved project specific Water Quality Management Plan and shall provide a copy of the inspection reports on a biennial basis to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. 39. 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. 40. 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. 41. 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. 42. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the Final Project -Specific Water Quality Management Plan shall include a completed copy of "Worksheet H: Factor of Safety and Design Infiltration Worksheet" located in Appendix D "Section VII — Infiltration Rate Evaluation Protocol and Factor of Safety Recommendations, ..." of the San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans. The infiltration study shall include the Soil Engineer's recommendations for Appendix D, Table VII.3: Suitability Assessment Related Considerations for Infiltration Facility Safety Factors". Printed: 5/30/2017 vnvw.CityofRC.us Page 10 of 12 ES—E9 Pg243 Project #: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 43. 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". 44. 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. 45. 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. 46. GROUND WATER PROTECTION: Prior to approval of the final project specific water quality management plan (WQMP), the WQMP document shall meet the requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board Order No. R8-2010-0036 (NPDES No. CAS 618036), the San Bernardino County Municipal Separate Storm Sewers Separation (MS4) Permit reads: Section XI.D(Water Quality Management Plan Requirements).8(Groundwater Protection): Treatment Control BMPs utilizing infiltration [exclusive of incidental infiltration and BMPs not designed to primarily function as infiltration devices (such as grassy swales, detention basins, vegetated buffer strips, constructed wetlands, etc.)] must comply with the following minimum requirements to protect groundwater: a. Use of structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause or contribute to an exceedance of ground water quality objectives. b. Source control and pollution prevention control BMPs shall be implemented to protect groundwater quality. The need for pre-treatment BMPs such as sedimentation or filtration should be evaluated prior to infiltration. g. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall be located at least 100 feet horizontally from any water supply wells. h. The vertical distance from the bottom of any infiltration structural treatment BMP to the historic high groundwater mark shall be at least 10-feet. Where the groundwater basins do not support beneficial uses, this vertical distance criteria may be reduced, provided groundwater quality is maintained. i. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause a nuisance or pollution as defined in Water Code Section 13050. www.CityofRC.us Page 11 of 12 Printed: 5l30/2017 9 E5—E9 Pg244 Project#: SUBTT20042 CEQA2016-00009, DRC2016-00376, DRC2016-00377, DRC2016-00748, DRC2017-00014 Project Name: Newland Homes Subdivision Location: 5367 CARNELIAN ST - 106126101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Hillside Development Review, Tree Removal Permit, Variance, Variance ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 47. The permitted grading plan and the final project -specific water quality management plan are proposing stormwater detention basin (commonly referred to as BMPs) for the treatment of storm water runoff as required in the current adopted Municipal Separate Storm Sewers Systems (MS4) Permit. The depth of the proposed retained water equals or exceeds 18-inches. Therefore prior to the issuance of a grading permit and approval of the final project -specific water quality management plan the applicant shall show a barrier a minimum of 60-inches above the finished ground surface. 48. The conceptual utility plan is showing the nearest connection to a public sewer at the intersection of Hillside Road and Beryl Street approximately 3,678 feet from the boundary of the proposed subdivision with a note on the plan which reads "All lots to have a septic system". On October 13, 1989 the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board adopted Resolution 89-157 regarding Minimum Lot Size Requirements for New Developments Using On -Site Septic Tank -Subsurface Leaching Percolation Systems. Item H of the Resolution reads "No exemptions shall be granted for new developments on lots less than one-half acre which are 200 feet or less from a sewer which could serve that tract/parcel, barring legal impediments to such use. All other developments shall be considered on a sliding scale, e.g., for each additional unit (any development which is more than a single family dwelling), this requirement should be increased by 100-feet per dwelling unit. For example, a 10-lot subdivision shall be required to connect to a sewer if the sewer is within 1,100 feet (200 + 9x100 feet = 1,100 feet) of the proposed development barring legal impediments to connection to the sewer". Based on this criteria a connection to a public sewer is required if the sewer is 2,700 feet from the proposed subdivision. The nearest public sewer connection is in Thoroughbred Street near the intersection of Carnelian Avenue about 2,700 feet from the southerly boundary of the proposed subdivision. Therefore this project is conditioned, prior to issuance of a grading permit, to comply with the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board adopted Resolution 89-157 and connect to the public sewer system if the project is not deemed to be a minimum distance of 2,7001inear feet from the intersection of Thoroughbred Street and Carnelian Street to the southwest corner of the subject property, as done by a field survey. 49. Design Issue: The Conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan is showing a culvert inlet on the north side of the equestrian trail (Section O-O on Lot 19) with a grate which may be subject to clogging should there be a lack of maintenance during a storm event. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit, the applicant is conditioned to show an emergency overland escape route for the 100-year storm event or an alternative inlet design that will protect the proposed structures on affected lots during the 100-year storm event that is acceptable to the City. The emergency overland escape route shall be capable of withstanding possible storm water erosion control forces and protect the proposed structure(s) in the affected lots. Hydraulic calculations for the emergency overflow system shall be shown in the project drainage/hydrology/hydraulics report. Printed: 5/30/2017 www.CityofRC.us Page 12 0(12 E5-E9 Pg245 ALRC April 12, 2017 Jeff Bloom, Deputy City Manager - Community and Economic Development 10500 Civic Center Street)) «Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729» RE: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20042 - NH WEAVER LANE, LLC Dear Mr. Jeff Bloom, Deputy City Manager - Community and Economic Development The Alta Loma Riding Club or ALRC is a community service, all volunteer, non-profit organization, dedicated to preserving, as well as enjoying, the equestrian lifestyle in the beautiful City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. The Club has been in existence for 50 years and many of our founding members were participants in the efforts leading to the incorporation of our City. In addition we were contributors to the City's Master Plan of Trails and the City Trail Implementation Plan. We are active in all levels of our community, encouraging participation of the entire family in our events. On behalf of the Alta Loma Riding Club, we are indicating our strong objection to this Project. The City Staff is supporting a development proposal for one of the last vacant pieces of land left in the Alta Loma area. This request to subdivide 18.2 acres of land into 26 lots for the purposes of developing 26 single-family residences for a site located on the east side of Carnelian Street and north of Hillside Road in the Very Low (VL) District (.1 - 2 Dwelling Units per Acre) and within the Hillside Overlay District. The Project will require 2 Variances as proposed. Variance #1 is to reduce the required lot depth of Lots 11 - 15 by approximately 13 feet. Variance #2, request to reduce the rear yard setback on Lot 16 by 23 feet, which is not equestrian friendly. This site is just north of Heritage Park and the Equestrian Center. The proposal is not Equestrian supportable and is not in keeping with City Equestrian Overlay zone which has been in place since 1987. As can be seen in the drawing below the site is very crowded and not in the highest standards of the area or the City. Dead end trails, private streets, through lots, and slopes adjacent trails to name a few of the poor design items. EXHIBIT J Pagel E5-E9 Pg246 Specifically the following Development Code provisions are being ignored and we request a written response to the following: • The (City Development Code) criteria shall not be included in the calculation of total allowable dwelling units: 1. All land areas, regardless of slope which will be subiect to inundation during a 100-year storm after development has occurred. ...3. All land area which lies within a federally recognized blue line stream or contains significant riparian or streambed environs Density Calculations according to the Applicant's Application do not provide this analysis. This Project has a Blue Line Stream. • Section 17.70.040 Equestrian Trails All residential development within the Equestrian/Rural Area designated by the General Plan shall require the following: A. Local feeder trail easements for equestrian purposes are to provide access to the rear of all lots. The first 2 lots on the north side of the entrance have trails running through the front yards! • Section 17.88.020 ... ). B. Location of Animals. All animals, excluding household pets, shall be kept a minimum distance of 70 feet from any adiacent primary dwelling, school hospital or church located on any adjoining site. Has the Applicant provide a Plan that shows compliance with this requirement. If it is not possible to comply this Application should be denied. • Grading standards are not in compliance with: 1. Standards. a. Minimize site _grading needed for development and utility construction through proper site planning. ... Preserve integrity of hillsides and minimize disruption of natural ground form by adapting structure through the use of split pads built-up foundations stepped footings, stem walls. etc --- ---- — - - - - Page 2 E5—E9 Pg247 • Fire safety - why are no 2 points of access being required since there are 26 residences proposed with only one way in and out. City Code states; ... "L. Fire Safety. Development should be designed with fire safety in mind with the application of the following standards: 1. Standards. a. Provide two (2) points of safe and ready access when required by the Fire District. • Also Sections; Section 17.122.010 Residential Development ...B. Subdivision Design. The proper layout of a subdivision's circulation, drainage, and lot pattern is important to the success of the project. The following standards and guidelines apply: 1. Standards. a. Provide two (2) means of ingress and egress. Development Code ... K. Trails. The City of Rancho Cucamonga places significant emphasis on the development of regional, community, and local feeder trails. The following standards and guidelines apply: 1. Standards. a. All new developments are to be designed in accordance with the Trail Implementation Plan and adopted trail standards. b. Within the Equestrian Overlay, provide trail connections through easements in order to connect disconnected trails and for needed access to recreation activities. (Existing Trails to the east are left as dead ends to this site) c. Provide local feeder trails on the rear of residential lots for equestrian access and related equestrian service access within the Equestrian Overlay. d. Provide a means of public access to regional trails within subdivisions. e. Within subdivisions, provide an internal loop trail system of local feeder trails. Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Article VII, Chapter 17.122 17 122-9 f. Provide a twenty-four foot (24') by twenty-four foot (241 or 12' by 48' corral area in the rear vard of all residential lots within the Equestrian Overlay. g Grade access from the corral area to the trail with a maximum slope of five to one (5:1) and a minimum width of ten feet (10'). 2. Guidelines, a. Maintain trails on natural surfaces (e.g., no grading) and locate along natural features whenever possible. b. Consider existing bicycling, Pedestrian, and equestrian access and traditional travel routes through the property, particularly routes to schools. c. Plot houses to provide reasonable rear yard opportunity and access for the keeping of horses and other animals within the Equestrian Overlay. d. Wherever possible, corral areas should be located adjacent to the local feeder trail. • Has or will the City conduct an economic feasibility analysis that demonstrates how this 26 lot HOA would be capable of providing sufficient funds for maintenance and capital replacement of the corrugated metal pipe drain that will carry flows from the mandated Blue Line Stream and all other obligations, including property and special district assessments. • The use of corrugated drain pipes under the street appears contrary to City Policy that private streets meet City Standards. Page 3 E5-E9 Pg248 • Why did the Case Planner not inform the ALRC of the DRC meeting that was held when a request was made to keep us informed of all meetings concerning this Project? We reserve the right to comment further as additional information is provided by the City. Thank you for your consideration please contact Mr. Henderson, ALRC Liaison Director for response by calling (909) 226-3956, or e-mail at Ihenderson62Ca)Outlook com, . Sincer y J6 , Cowan, ALRC President LJH Copies To: HONORABLE Mayor and City Council Chair and Members of the Planning Commission Members of Trails Advisory Committee Page 4 E5—E9 Pg249 1 � slid STAFF REPORT DATE: June 14, 2017 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Candyce Burnett, City Planner INITIATED BY: Donald Granger, Senior Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2016-00452 — DR HORTON — A request to change the Victoria Community Plan Zoning Designation for 28.4 acres of land at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road from Regionally Related Office/Commercial (RROC) to Mixed Use (MU) in the Victoria Community Plan (VCP) related to the construction of a mixed use project consisting of 380 residential units, a 71 room hotel and two restaurant buildings totaling 12,000 square feet, located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road — APN: 1090-331-05. Related Files: Preliminary Review DRC2015-01102, Pre -Application Review DRC2016- 00142, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19762, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20032, Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449, Design Review DRC2016-00450, Uniform Sign Program DRC2016-00451 and Minor Exception DRC2016-00508. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final review and action. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19762 — DR HORTON — A request to subdivide 28.4 acres of land into 4 parcels in the Victoria Community Plan (VCP) within the Mixed Use District related to the construction of a mixed use project consisting of 380 residential units, a 71 room hotel and two restaurant buildings totaling 12,000 square feet, located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road — APN: 1090-331-05. Related Files: Preliminary Review DRC2015-01102, Pre -Application Review DRC2016-00142, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20032, Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449, Design Review DRC2016-00450, Uniform Sign Program DRC2016-00451, Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2016-00452 and Minor Exception DRC2016-00508. Staff has prepared a Mitigated -Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20032 — DR HORTON — A request for a residential condominium subdivision for 380 residential units on 28.4 acres of land in the Victoria Community Plan (VCP) within the Mixed Use District related to the construction of a mixed use project consisting of 380 residential units, a 71 room hotel and two restaurant buildings totaling 12,000 square feet, located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road — APN: 1090-331-05. Related Files: Preliminary Review DRC2015-01102, Pre- E10-16 1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00508 AND DRC2016-00451 — DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 2 Application Review DRC2016-00142, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19762, Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449, Design Review DRC2016-00450, Uniform Sign Program DRC2016-00451, Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2016-00452 and Minor Exception DRC2016-00508. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00450 — DR HORTON — A request for site plan and architectural review in the Victoria Community Plan (VCP) within the Mixed Use District related to the construction of a mixed use project consisting of 380 residential units, a 71 room hotel and two restaurant buildings totaling 12,000 square feet, located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road — APN: 1090-331-05. Related Files: Preliminary Review DRC2015-01102, Pre - Application Review DRC2016-00142, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19762, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20032, Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449, Uniform Sign Program DRC2016-00451, Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2016-00452 and Minor Exception DRC2016-00508. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2016-00449 — DR HORTON — A request to operate a bar (Type 70 On Sale General — Restrictive Service) within a hotel in the Victoria Community Plan (VCP) within the Mixed Use District related to the construction of a mixed use project consisting of 380 residential units, a 71 room hotel and two restaurant buildings totaling 12,000 square feet, located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road — APN: 1090-331-05. Related Files: Preliminary Review DRC2015-01102, Pre -Application Review DRC2016- 00142, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19762, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20032, Design Review DRC2016-00450 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2016-00451, Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2016-00452 and Minor Exception DRC2016-00508. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2016- 00508 — DR HORTON — A request to allow 8 foot combination retaining/freestanding wall heights for a mixed use project in the Victoria Community Plan (VCP) within the Mixed Use District related to the construction of a mixed use project consisting of 380 residential units, a 71 room hotel and two restaurant buildings totaling 12,000 square feet, located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road — APN: 1090-331-05. Related Files: Preliminary Review DRC2015-01102, Pre -Application Review DRC2016-00142, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19762, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20032, Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449, Design Review DRC2016-00450, Uniform Sign Program DRC2016-00451 and Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2016-00452. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. E10-16 2 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00508 AND DRC2016-00451 — DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 3 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2016-00451 — DR HORTON — A request for a Uniform Sign Program in the Victoria Community Plan (VCP) within the Mixed Use District related to the construction of a mixed use project consisting of 380 residential units, a 71 room hotel and two restaurant buildings totaling 12,000 square feet, located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road — APN: 1090-331-05. Related Files: Preliminary Review DRC2015-01102, Pre - Application Review DRC2016-00142, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19762, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20032, Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449, Design Review DRC2016-00450, Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2016-00452 and Minor Exception DRC2016-00508. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission take the following actions: Recommend that the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for the project; and • Recommend that the City Council approve Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2016- 00542 through adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval; and Approve Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19762, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20032, Design Review DRC2016-00450, Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449, Minor Exception DRC2016-00508 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2016-00451 through the adoption of the attached Resolutions of Approval with Conditions. BACKGROUND: Preliminary Review: In November of 2015, DR Horton filed a Preliminary Review Application with staff to receive Design and Technical comments for the proposed 28.4 acre mixed -use project. Following receipt of staff's Design and Technical comments and a couple of meetings to review subsequent iterations of revised site plans, the applicant opted to request a Pre - Application Review to obtain comments and input from the Planning Commission prior to filing a formal application. Planning Commission Workshop: On March 23, 2016, the applicant presented conceptual designs to the Planning Commission prior to filing a formal application submittal in order to receive broad, general comments and direction. Following a brief overview and comments from staff, the Commission reviewed the project layout and gave general comments and direction. In summary, the Commission provided the following comments and direction to the applicant: E10-16 3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00508 AND DRC2016-00451 — DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 4 • Support was expressed for the proposed land use amendment to the Victoria Community plan to change the zoning to mixed use to be consistent with the General Plan. • Direction was given that stressed the importance of adding active recreational amenities and providing sufficient guest parking. • In addition to the two restaurants, some of the Commissioners supported an additional commercial component along Day Creek Boulevard. • General support was indicated for the architecture, site layout, and the installation of a low wall topped with Plexiglas along Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard. • Feedback was given, noting the importance of completing the commercial portion of the project along with the residential portion so that the project is a viable mixed use project at opening. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION A. Project Density: 15.3 dwelling units/acre Land Use General Plan Zoning Site Vacant Land Mixed Use Regionally Related Office/Commercial North Future Neighborhood Neighborhood Commercial Village Commercial, Victoria Shopping Center Community Plan Single -Family Mixed Use Single Family, South Residences Mixed Use Victoria Arbors Master Plan, Victoria Community Plan Mixed Use/Village Commercial Neighborhood Shopping and Mixed Use Single Family, East Center and Single Family Mixed Use Victoria Arbors Master Plan, Dwelling Units Victoria Community Plan Overhead Electrical West Transmission and Flood Flood Control/Utility Corridor Open Space Control Channel B. Site Characteristics: Overall, the project site is approximately 30 gross acres, 28.4 acres net, with 24.9 acres devoted to the residential portion (single-family and condominiums) and 3.5 acres allocated for the commercial uses (hotel and two restaurant pads). The rectangular shaped parcel is approximately 840 feet wide (west -east) and approximately 1,500 feet deep (north -south). The site has approximately 37 feet of fall, measured from near the north property line (elevation 1310) to the south property line (elevation 1273). Curb and gutter are existing along the Base Line and Day Creek frontage. E10-16 4 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00508 AND DRC2016-00451 — DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 5 C. Surrounding Area: The project site is bordered by Base Line Road along the north boundary; Day Creek Boulevard along the east boundary; a 16.8 acre single-family neighborhood zoned Mixed Use/Single-Family (4-6 units/acre) that is developed at 4.8 dwelling units/acre within the Victoria Arbors Master Plan in the VCP west of Day Creek Boulevard, between Church Street and the south boundary of the project; and a Southern California Edison transmission corridor zoned Open Space and the Day Creek Flood Control channel zoned Flood Control along the west boundary. Across Base Line Road at the northwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road is a future neighborhood shopping center that will be anchored by Stater Brothers that is currently under construction, and across Day Creek Boulevard at the southeast corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road is an existing neighborhood center anchored by Sprouts Farmer's Market. ANALYSIS: A. General: The project location is located along a designated view corridor in the General Plan (Day Canyon), will have high visibility at the intersection of two major divided arterials, and is one of the few remaining prominent parcels of nearly 30 acres in the City that has high land use planning and economic synergy potential with the existing commercial uses along Day Creek Boulevard, such as Victoria Gardens. The applicant proposes developing the 28.4 acre property located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road with mixed use project consisting of 380 residential units (329 attached townhomes and 51 single-family detached condos), a 71 room boutique hotel and two restaurant pads totaling 12,000 square feet. Currently, the overall project area is made up of 1 parcel totaling 28.4 acres of land. The project includes the subdivision of the 28.4 acre site into 4 parcels and a residential condominium subdivision for the 380 residential units. B. Victoria Community Plan Amendment: The project site has a General Plan Land Use Designation of Mixed Use; however, the site is currently zoned Regionally Related Office/Commercial (RROC), within the Victoria Community Plan (VCP). The General Plan Land Use Designation of Mixed Use occurred with the 2001 General Plan Update and remained Mixed Use in the 2010 General Plan Update. The VCP was adopted in 1981 and according to staff research has been zoned Regionally Related/Office Commercial since the adoption of VCP's in 1981. The applicant has submitted a Victoria Community Plan Amendment to change the Victoria Community Plan Zoning Designation from RROC to Mixed Use (MU) in order to be consistent with the goals and objectives of the General Plan. When the Victoria Community Plan was first approved over 35 years ago, Mixed Use was not included as a land use category, and the original land use planning goals only contemplated commercial or office at this location because of adjacency to major arterials. The proposed land use amendment is consistent with the General Plan and will implement the goals of the General Plan to achieve a mixed use project at this location that was envisioned since 2001 as the highest and best use of the land that is superior to a commercial/office designation by incorporating multiple land uses under a single project that are interconnected and will contribute positively to the City's General Fund. The zone change will permit the development of the site into a mixed use project featuring E10-16 5 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00508 AND DRC2016-00451 — DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 6 hospitality, commercial and residential product at densities that will support the surrounding commercial uses, and enable residents to connect to trails, commercial uses, restaurants and other nearby retail uses through alternative transportation means. The zone change to mixed use will also permit the development of a mixed use project that will align with several General Plan Policies. First, the zone change will provide for a mixed use project that has been designed with input from the community and with a goal of protecting neighborhoods from the encroachment of incompatible activities by including the design of a linear park along the southern edge to function as a buffer to the existing neighborhood to the south, thereby implementing General Plan Land Use Policy LU-1.1 by minimizing negative impacts on the residential living environment. Second, the amendment will provide for a mixed use project that will have detached single-family condos and attached single-family rowhomes in a location that is compatible with the adjacent residential area: The mixed use project has the single-family detached condos located in the southern area of the project, nearest the existing single-family neighborhood in order to provide a transition of density and be of compatible scale, thereby being consistent with General Plan Land Use Policy LU-1.6 which encourages small -lot, single unit and/or detached residential development located in areas where this density would be compatible with adjacent residential neighborhoods. Third, the amendment will change the zoning from Regionally Related Office/Commercial to Mixed Use and will bring the zoning of the Victoria Community Plan into vertical consistency with the General Plan and facilitate a mixed use project, thereby implementing General Plan Policy LU-2.1 which plans for vibrant, pedestrian -friendly mixed use and high density residential areas at strategic infill locations along transit routes. There are two Omnitrans bus routes that are nearby to the project site: Route 67 (Base Line Road) and Route 82 (Church Street). C. Parcel Map: The applicant has filed an application for 4 parcel subdivision of real property. Currently, the overall project area is made up of 1 parcel totaling 28.4 acres of land. The project includes the subdivision of the 28.4 acre site into 4 parcels: Parcels 1 and 2 for the two restaurants, Parcel 3 for the hotel, and Parcel 4 for the residential area. D. Tentative Tract Map: The applicant has filed a Tentative Tract Map application for a subdivision of air space to create residential condominiums for the 380 units (329 attached units and 51 single-family detached units). The condominium map will create market rate, for -sale condominium units. E. Circulation and Site Planning: The applicant has designed the project so that access will be from three points: one on Base Line Road that will be signalized and align with the driveway to the future Stater Brothers neighborhood center at the northwest corner of Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard; one right -in and right -out off Day Creek Boulevard; and one signalized entry off Day Creek Boulevard that will align with the existing signal at Madrigal Place. The primary access point off Day Creek Boulevard will feature a drive aisle that utilizes decorative pavement with a landscaped median that is framed by trees on either side. The project is also designed with an emergency vehicle access point along Day Creek Boulevard south of the signalized entrance at Madrigal Place. E10-16 6 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00508 AND DRC2016-00451 — DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 7 F. Mixed Use Concept and Urban Design Features: When the General Plan was adopted in 2010, the primary goal of mixed use areas was to create unique places within a suburban environment that are of higher intensity and density that the surrounding area, and integrate commercial, residential and other compatible uses into a project design that is cohesive and interconnected. The project includes several paseos and gathering areas that will facilitate interaction and connectivity to the project. The primary plaza in the residential area features a raised staged area and lounge area raised seat walls. This plaza is connected to the residential area with a shaded pedestrian walk, and also provides a walkable connection to the hotel. The plaza area is intentionally designed to offer areas that are able to accommodate a variety of uses that promote community and interaction within a livable project, such as art and craft displays, conversation areas, entertainment, community readings, outdoor reading areas, social nodes and outdoor dining. The plaza at the corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road has been designed as a publicly accessible focal point. The plaza will be shared by the two restaurants and will feature a central fountain, decorative paving, accent trees, overhead trellis structures, colored concrete and an architectural tower that pedestrians can pass through and will offer a usable public space and feature outdoor dining. In order to provide a continuity with the existing single-family neighborhood along the south, five single-family condo units along Day Creek Boulevard have been plotted with a rear -on orientation. The site planning for the balance of the project for the townhomes along Day Creek and Base Line, restaurants at the corner and the hotel along Day Creek intentionally utilizes closer street setbacks than are normally permitted under standard Development Regulations; however, for Mixed Use Districts, the Development Code provides for reduced street setbacks to intentionally create an urban street edge and encourage engagement with active street frontages. The townhomes are designed with patios that front -on to Day Creek and Base Line Road, thereby promoting pedestrian connections to the street, walking, cycling and use of the nearby Pacific Electric Trail via Day Creek Boulevard. Consistent with the goals of Mixed Use Districts to foster a walkable built environment, the project will offer opportunities to walk to neighborhood shopping centers, convenient access to Omnitrans bus routes (Route 67 off Base Line Road and Route 82 off Church Street), bike routes (Day Creek Channel, Pacific Electric Trail, Day Creek and Base Line), and enhanced pedestrian sidewalks along Day Creek Boulevard. In meeting the design goas of the Mixed Use District and with substantial input from the community, the site includes construction of a privately maintained but publicly accessible linear park along the south edge. The park will provide recreational opportunities for not only the residents at Day Creek Square, but also all residents within walking distance. The linear park will not only provide residents an opportunity to exercise, but will encourage residents to make connections in their community and provide opportunities to "have eyes on the street" in their community. The park will feature open turf areas for low intensity activities (frisbee, badminton, volleyball, ball throwing), bench areas, shaded areas with game tables, dual bocce ball courts, and a pedestrian plaza with seating. The park also is consistent with Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) as the park will feature security cameras to discourage crime. These cameras will be required to connect to the Public Video Safety Network. The San Bernardino County E10-16 7 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00508 AND DRC2016-00451 — DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 8 Sheriff's Department has reviewed and provided input that was incorporated in the final park site plan as well. G. Setbacks: As discussed above, the Development Code provides for reduced streetscape setbacks for mixed use projects in order to create a connection with the active street edge and provide a functional pedestrian connection. Setbacks are determined at the following formula: 50-75% of the standard streetscape setback. Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard are classified as Major Divided Arterials. Accordingly, the minimum building setbacks (measured from ultimate curb face) are the following for each land use type: 1. Detached single-family: 11.25 to 22.5 feet. 2. Attached single-family/multifamily: 11.25 to 22.5 feet. 3. Commercial: 11.25 to 22.5 feet. All of the project's proposed setbacks are in compliance with the standards for mixed use projects. Along Base Line Road the setbacks range from 13 to 23 feet for the hotel, 14 to 17 feet for the restaurant, and 22 feet for the attached townhomes. Along Day Creek Boulevard, the setback for the restaurant is 21 feet, the attached townhomes are plotted from 18 to 21 feet from the curb, and the detached single-family condos are plotted from 24 to 31 feet from the curb. H. Design Review: The Design Review entitlement includes the review of the detailed site plan, residential and commercial architecture and landscape palette for the project. The residential portion of the project is designed with 4 residential product types: 1) three types of three-story rowhomes (Villages A, B and C) and 2) a two-story, single-family product that is plotted along the southern edge near the existing single-family neighborhood (Village D). Village A features three floor plans featuring two or three bedrooms that range from 1,279 square feet to 1,474 square feet with a two -car garage (conventional or tandem). The two bedroom product has been paired with the tandem garages as the Development Code requires 1.5 spaces for two bedroom townhomes, of which 1 space must be in a garage or carport. Village B features two or three bedrooms that range from 1,549 square feet to 1,862 square feet with all units having a conventional (side -by -side) two -car garage. Village C is the largest of the rowhome concept and is designed with two or three bedrooms that range from 1,854 square feet to 2,202 square feet with all units having a conventional two -car garage. Village D is comprised of single- family detached condominiums. The single-family detached product are all two-story, range from 2,177 square feet to 2,333 square feet, are designed with either 4 or 5 bedrooms and include conventional two -car garages. Residential Architecture: The residential architecture of the project is designed utilizing four village themes that provide a variety of housing types, create visual interest and fulfill the requirements of providing 360-degree architecture to all buildings and plans. Village A: The architecture of the rowhomes for Village A is Craftsman -inspired, featuring board and batten siding, shingle siding, wood braces, horizontal siding and Craftsman - inspired windows and some garage doors reflecting Craftsman elements. Roof material is E10-16 8 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00508 AND DRC2016-00451 — DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 9 concrete flat tile. Village A also incorporates a showing of urban Craftsman influences, utilizing a metal awning with cable support on the 6B and 7B Elevations. Village B: The architecture of the rowhomes for Village B is Craftsman -inspired, utilizing additional elements that reflect an urban Craftsman design. Design elements include awnings with standing seam metal roofs, brick veneers and tower features. Traditional Craftsman elements include board and batten siding, shingle siding, wood braces, horizontal siding and Craftsman -inspired windows and some garage doors exhibiting Craftsman -inspired features. Some units have decks on both the front and rear elevations. Roof material is concrete flat tile. Village C: The architecture for Village C exhibits both Craftsman and Adobe features, blending the two styles appropriately. The exterior materials palette includes horizontal wood siding, board and batten siding, awnings, exposed beams and accent features in the wall plane. The wall planes are designed with both vertical and horizontal articulation, featuring balconies and roof decks. Consistent with the architectural style, the roof planes are gently sloped, Village D: Village D is designed with single-family detached condominiums. There are a total of three floor plans, and each plan is designed with four architectural styles: Craftsman, Santa Barbara, Shingle and Italianate. The Craftsman design utilizes stacked stone, horizontal siding, Craftsman -inspired doors and windows and wood braces. The roof material is concrete flat tile. The Santa Barbara style includes concrete "S" the roofs, corbels, fabric awnings, decorative metal railings and decorative tile vents. The Shingle style is designed with stacked stone, shingle siding, shutters, corbels and a flat concrete tile roof. The Italianate design includes decorative corbels under the eaves, shutters, plaster recess, and concrete tile "S" roofs. J. Amenities: The Development Code requires a total of seven recreational amenities for a 380-unit residential project. As proposed, the project is providing a total of 9 amenities, comprised of six passive areas and three active amenities. The passive amenities are designed for sitting, reading, conversation and outdoor eating, and include two plazas, three outdoor seating/lounge areas and one paseo with a connecting walkway trail near the core of the project that links one plaza and one seating area. The primary plaza in the residential area features a retractable movie screen, raised staged area, a lounge area, colored concrete with medallion and pavers, and raised seat walls. One plaza has a dual age tot lot, picnic tables and low walls that define the space. Two of the outdoor lounge areas are designed with suspended lighting, steel patterned screen walls, planter areas, low walls, and ]-beams that will frame each seating area. For active amenities, the project is designed with three areas for physical activity: 1) pool/spa/cabana area; 2) linear park and 3) double bocce court. The pool/spa area will feature outdoor dining areas, barbeques, large potted plants, trees and a restroom building. The park will feature open turf areas for low intensity activities (frisbee, badminton, volleyball, ball throwing), bench areas, shaded areas with game tables, dual bocce ball courts, and a pedestrian plaza with seating. Although the linear park will be E10-16 9 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00508 AND DRC2016-00451 — DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 10 privately maintained, it will be accessible to the public. Within the project area, another set of double bocce courts feature shade and poured in place colored concrete seat walls. K. Commercial Architecture: The architecture, scale and massing of the hotel building and two restaurants are designed to compliment the residential villages. Restaurant Buildings: The architectural vocabulary for the restaurant buildings is Santa Barbara inspired. Exterior features and materials include arches, tile insets, tile roofs, colonnades, recessed niches, awnings, curvilinear elements, and fenestration choices that enhance visual interest. Roof top equipment will be screened by the parapets. Each restaurant is 6,000 square feet, and the height of each building is 25 feet. Both restaurants are designed with a covered outdoor dining area. Hotel: Complimenting the restaurant buildings, the hotel evokes Santa Barbara -inspired design. Key architectural features include awnings, tile insets, ceramic tile elements, curvilinear parapets, French doors, decorative wood siding at key locations, medallions, exposed rafters, plaster trim and a wood trellis. The height of the hotel is 44 feet. L. Landscape: Landscape standards for mixed use projects are governed by a combination of standards from the Mixed Use District and standards from Residential Districts for multi- family projects. For landscape calculations, the density for the project equates to 13.4 dwelling units/acre based upon the entire 28.4 acre project area. Per Section 17.56.070 of the Development Code, the following are the landscape standards for projects with density ranges between 14-24 units/acre: 45 trees per gross acre shall be planted, with the following percentages of sizes: 10% shall be 36-inch box or larger; 10% shall be 24-inch box or larger; and 80% shall be 15-gallon size. Mixed Use projects require that 10% of the overall net area be landscaped. For the residential area, 19.3 acres are allocated to multi -family product, and 5.5 acres to single-family product. The project has 87 24-inch box trees, 87, 36-inch box trees and 745, 15-gallon size trees, for a grand total of 919 trees, exceeding the minimum requirement of 871 trees (45 x 19.36 acres). For required landscape area, the minimum requirement is 2.84 acres (10%), and the project is providing 4.57 acres of landscape area. For all landscape standards (tree sizes and landscape area), the project either meets or exceeds the minimum standards. M. Private Open Space Analysis: The Development Code requires that the attached townhome product provide a minimum of 150 square feet of open space per unit, with a minimum depth of 6 feet. Open space may be provide in the form of decks or balconies. All of the townhome units comply with these requirements. The Code does not specify an open space requirement for the single-family detached condominium units; however, all units will have a modest rear yard that will provide private yard areas. N. Parking Analysis: For the commercial uses (hotel and 2 restaurant pads), the project is designed with 193 stalls, meeting the required amount (120 stalls for the restaurant and 73 for the hotel). Although the Development Code permits Mixed Use projects to count tandem parking towards meeting the required parking calculation, the project is not eligible to count the second stall in the 49 tandem garage units as the garages do not meet the required depth (40' required; 36-8" proposed). In order to meet the 2 spaces per unit E10-16 10 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00508 AND DRC2016-00451 — DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 11 requirement, (1 space required in garage or carport), for 2 bedroom tandem unit, the applicant has provided 49 surface stalls. In total for all uses, the project requires 1,080 stalls, and 1,095 are provided. As indicated in Table A, the project has 15 surplus spaces. Parking study: In accordance with Section 17.64.060(D), a parking study was prepared by the applicant's consultant (Urban Crossroads) to demonstrate adequate parking. The parking study verified the land uses, applied ratios and calculations. The parking study validated the conclusion that adequate parking exists based upon the required ratios in the Code. TABLE A Number of Bedrooms Two Bedroom Units Number 94 Code Standard 2 Spaces/Unit 1 Garage or Carport) Required Parking 94 spaces Total Required .. 188 Total .-. Parking Spaces 188 Three Bedroom Units 235 2 Spaces/Unit (2 in Garage or Carport) 235 470 470 Single Family 51 2 Car Garage 102 spaces 102 102 Guest Parking 235 1 per 3 units 127 142 Subtotal: Residential Parking 887 902 Surplus +15 Hotel (71 rooms) 73 73 Two Restaurants (12,000 sq. ft total) 120 120 Subtotal: Commercial 193 193 Surplus/deficit 0 Totals 1,080 1,095 Surplus/deficit +15 O. Conditional Use Permit: The applicant has submitted a Conditional Use Permit application for a Type 70 ABC License (On Sale General — Restrictive Service). This type of ABC License authorizes the sale of beer, wine, and distilled spirits for consumption on the premises to the establishment's overnight occupancy guests and their invitees. This type of license is common and accepted business practice for hotels, and is often used in conjunction with a complimentary happy hour. This request is compatible with the hospitality use, and because of its restrictive nature, will not cause adverse impacts on the adjacent land uses. E10-16 11 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00508 AND DRC2016-00451 — DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 12 P. Minor Exception: By necessity, the project includes walls that are over the 6-foot maximum height limit because of two unique site constraints: 1) an approximate 4-5 foot grade differential that results from an upslope condition that occurs along the project's west boundary; 2) the necessity to lower pad elevations in some areas by up to 4.5 feet because of the elevation control point of matching the existing grade along the south edge in order minimize visual impacts to the existing neighborhood. This results in a challenging engineering constraint as the site falls by approximately 37 feet from the north to south and this grade differential has to be made up throughout the project while being in compliance with drive aisle gradients, pad elevation control points and drainage protocols. The applicant has submitted a Minor Exception to permit an up to 8-foot high combination perimeter wall along the western property line. The findings of facts below support the necessary findings, which are required by the City's Development Code: 1. Finding: The Minor Exception is consistent with the General Plan or any applicable specific plan or development agreement. Fact: The proposed wall height increase is necessary due to design constraints between project site and existing adjacent property. Specifically, the increase in wall height is necessary because of a 4-5 foot upslope condition at the western property line and the design of the project to match grades along the south property line. Matching the grades along the south property line demonstrates sensitivity to the existing residences to the south, exhibiting desirable site planning. 2. Finding: The proposed development is compatible with the existing and proposed land uses in the surrounding area. Fact: The proposed project is compatible with the surrounding land uses as the project site is within the Mixed Use District and will permit the development of multi- family residential structures. Additionally, combination retaining and garden wall heights over 6 feet are common where site and grading constraints justify additional wall heights 3. Finding: The proposed exception to the specific development standard(s) is necessary to allow creative design solutions compatible with the desires of the community and/or to accommodate unique site conditions. Fact: There is significant grade difference and slope conditions between the project site and the property to the west. The additional wall height along the west property line will allow the project to be constructed in a manner that provides for a privacy barrier and safety barrier on both sides of the project while concurrently accommodating the significant grade differential. 4. Finding: The granting of the Minor Exception will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district and will not be detrimental to public health safety or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvement in the vicinity. E10-16 12 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00508 AND DRC2016-00451 — DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 13 Fact: There is significant grade difference and slope gradient between the project site and the property to the west. It is common practice to permit additional wall heights where site constraints and existing grade differentials justify additional wall heights between adjacent properties. The increased wall height will not negatively impact the surrounding property owners as the wall will be of decorative material and of similar height and materials as other walls in the area. Q. Uniform Sign Program: The applicant has submitted a Uniform Sign Program for the project in order to provide a cohesive sign architecture for the hotel, two restaurants and project entry signage for the residential portion. Commercial signage: The monument signs (one on Day Creek and one on Base Line) are designed to match stucco color and texture of the hotel and restaurant buildings. The signs also feature tile roofs and recessed tile to match the hotel and restaurant buildings. The sign height and area are compliant with the Development Code regulations. Each restaurant includes provisions for two wall signs, all of which are compliant with the area and quantity requirements. Residential oroiect identification signs: The project includes a 6-foot high project identification sign at the primary entry off Day Creek Boulevard. The sign will have adjacent landscaping, and is designed with pinned steel letters attached to 24" x 48" stone/tile veneer walls. Illumination will be backlight and the height and sign area meet the Code requirements. R. Design Review Committee: The project was reviewed by the Design Review Committee (DRC) (Macias, Wimberly and Smith) on April 18, 2017. Staff raised several issues regarding adding additional architectural materials to Villages A and D in order to meet the City's 360 degree architecture requirement, and that all garage doors should be appropriate to the design theme, complimenting the selected architectural theme of the buildings. The applicant agreed to implement all of the design enhancements recommended by staff. The DRC recommended that the project move forward to the Planning Commission subject to the design recommendations of staff. Since the DRC meeting, the applicant has submitted updated plans to staff, and the final plan set incorporates all of the requested changes. S. Technical Review Committee: The project was reviewed and approved by the Technical Review Committee (TRC) on April 18, 2017. T. Neighborhood Meeting #1: DR Horton conducted a neighborhood meeting on Wednesday, August 24, 2016 at Victoria Windrows Elementary School at 6855 Victoria Park Lane, from 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. for the proposed project. Approximately 60-65 people attended the meeting. DR Horton presented an overview of the project, which was then followed by a question and answer period. City Planning staff attended the meeting and were available for questions. The meeting lasted approximately two hours, generated substantial community input and residents raised a variety of concerns regarding the E10-16 13 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00508 AND DRC2016-00451 — DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 14 proposed project. The issues raised by the residents at the meeting are summarized below: Hotel: Residents did not feel the hotel is a compatible land use in a predominately residential, neighborhood commercial area. Residents stated that hotels belong at Victoria Gardens or on Foothill Boulevard. Residents were also concerned about crime and other activities occurring at the hotel that are undesirable. Proiect density along the south edge and park along the south edge: Residents indicated that both the density and type of product along the south edge for the proposed project should match their neighborhood. Residents wanted to see single- family detached product that matches the plotting of their neighborhood, not side on single-family with minimal setbacks. Residents also indicated that their neighborhood is currently underserved by neighborhood parks that are within a walkable distance that do not require crossing of a major arterial. For a 28-acre project, residents indicated that the developer should be directed to study the viability of dedicating a minimum of 2 acres within the project area for a public park. Note: The nearest park, Victoria Arbors Park, across Day Creek Boulevard, is approximately ''/z mile away. 3. Inadequate proiect parking/crime: Residents from the single-family neighborhood to the south expressed substantial concern their neighborhood will be impacted by cars parking on the streets from the proposed project. Currently, the residential neighborhood to the south is experiencing vehicles parking on the streets from the residential development at the SWC of Day Creek Boulevard and Church Street. Additionally, the neighborhood along the south boundary of the proposed project has recently faced multiple mailbox robberies, and residents feel that there is a correlation between the crimes and vehicles coming in to their neighborhood from other areas. 4. Setbacks: Residents from the neighborhood to the south strongly expressed that the project's setbacks along the south edge are not adequate. Existing rear yard setbacks average approximately 35 feet for the neighborhood to the south. Residents indicated that single-family product along the south edge must match the setbacks of their community. 5. Additional Single -Family Units: Residents to the east, across Day Creek, would like to see single-family homes plotted along Day Creek Boulevard, not townhomes. Residents indicated that the Day Creek frontage should match the streetscape on the east side of Day Creek with single-family homes. 6. Overall Densitv: Residents from the neighborhood to the south noted that project is too dense. The neighborhood to the south is built at 4.8 du/acre. Residents did not offer a specific acceptable density for the overall project, but stressed again that the southerly density range of the '/4 of the project site should be very close to their neighborhood. E10-16 14 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00508 AND DRC2016-00451 — DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 15 7. Privacy: Residents from the neighborhood to the south were very concerned that with DR Horton's project having 18-22 foot setbacks along the south edge, their privacy into their bedrooms and back yards will be compromised. U. Neighborhood Meeting #2: The applicant conducted a second neighborhood meeting on Monday, March 27, 2017 at Etiwanda Gardens at 7576 Etiwanda Avenue from 6:30 to 8:00 p.m. DR Horton made a presentation of the project updates in response to the issues raised at Neighborhood Meeting #1. The project team from DR Horton, City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning and Engineering Department staff and the Sheriff's Department attended the meeting and were available for questions. Below is a summary of the key issues raised at the meeting, along with a response to the issue and any applicable updates from issues raised from Neighborhood Meeting #1. Land use/hotel: Several residents continued to indicate that the hotel is not a compatible land use in a predominately residential, neighborhood commercial area. Residents stated that hotels sometimes are locations for illegal activities, and that hotels are better suited along Foothill Boulevard. Residents were also concerned about crime and other activities occurring at the hotel that are undesirable. Response: A Sheriff's deputy attended the neighborhood meeting and indicated that the police have not seen significant increase or correlation in crime associated with hotels in the City. The Sheriff's deputy indicated that the deputies are available to work with hotel management and provide training on how to proactively prevent undesirable and illicit uses that could occur. Regarding building massing and scale compatibility, City staff commented that the hotel's height, scale and location is compatible with the proposed three-story townhomes, and that the hotel is located on the frontage of a major divided arterial, facing a commercial center. 2. Project density, additional single family and increased setback along the south edge: Some residents indicated that the overall density of the project is too high and that more single-family homes should be plotted. Residents did not offer up a specific acceptable density for the overall project. A few residents indicated that the proposed setback of the single-family homes along the south edge is not adequate and the rear yard setbacks should be the same or greater as the houses in the subdivision to the south. Response: The applicant indicated that it is important to reminder that the project is a mixed use, not a single family development, and that the proposed density is common to mixed use projects. 3. Inadequate project parking: Some residents expressed concern if the project is parked adequately. Response: As proposed, the project exceeds the required amount of parking by approximately 15 stalls. The applicant further indicated that they are exploring the possibility of utilizing the commercial parking during specific time periods (after the E10-16 15 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00508 AND DRC2016-00451 — DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 16 restaurants close/prior to opening) as a means to provide supplemental parking for the residential areas. 4. Linear park: Residents indicated appreciation of the developer's effort's to provide a park. Some residents expressed concerned over the park's small size (.75 acre), narrow width, lack of an adequate area for active recreation and concerns over potential noise and crime issues. Response: The developer presented a revised site plan that indicates a linear park along the south edge. The developer indicated that efforts were taken to provide a low intensity impact yet publicly accessible park. The developer indicated that the design goal of the park was to minimize potential noise impacts by providing exercise stations, walking paths and shade. City staff added that the main idea behind the park was to provide a buffer zone between the project and the single-family homes to the south in response to issues raised at the first community meeting. The developer stated that they are willing to continue to modify the design to include amenities that would be the best fit for the community. The Sheriff's deputy indicated that the installation of public safety cameras might also be possible, which would augment public safety. A condition of approval is included requiring the installation of cameras and a connection to the public video safety network. V. Neighborhood Meeting #3: The applicant conducted a third neighborhood meeting on Wednesday, May 17, 2017, at Carlton P. Lightfoot Elementary at 6989 Kenyon Way from from 6:30 to 8:00 p.m. Approximately 10 residents attended the meeting. DR Horton made a final presentation of the project indicating the final site plan. The applicant noted the final design of the linear park, which incorporates a substantial amount of community input and features open turf areas for low intensity activities, bench areas, shaded areas with game tables, dual bocce ball courts, and a pedestrian plaza with seating. The project team from DR Horton, City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning and Engineering Department staff and the Sheriff's Department attended the meeting and were available for questions. At the meeting there were no new issues raised by the residents that were not previously brought forth at Neighborhood Meetings #1 and #2. One resident asked if it would be possible if the developer would be willing to provide native landscape plant materials and large, native canopy shade trees, such as Sycamores or Oaks, in the linear park. The resident also inquired if the developer would be willing to provide a pedestrian connection along the west side of the property that would connect with the Regional Trail System along Day Creek Channel. The developer indicated that he would direct his landscape architect to study the viability of the landscape, canopy trees and trail connection request. W. Tribal Notification: California State Bill 18 (SB18) requires that the City sendproject notification to California tribal communities when a project proposes a General Plan or Specific Plan Amendment. California Assembly Bill 52 (AB52) requires that the City send project notification to interested California tribal communities when a project requires an Environmental Impact Report, Mitigated Negative Declaration or Negative Declaration. In conformance with California State Bill 18, staff contacted the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for a list of Tribal Communities to provide notice to regarding the E10-16 16 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00508 AND DRC2016-00451 — DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 17 opportunity to consult since the project has an associated 'Community Plan Amendment. The NAHC responded with a list of 12 Tribes. Along with a CHRIS Report, staff sent a Tribal Consultation Request on July 13, 2016, for the proposed Community Plan Amendment to the following Tribal Communities: Gabrieleno/ Tongva Nation, Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, Serrano Nation of Mission Indians, Moronga Band of Mission Indians, San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, Morongo Band of Mission Indians, Gabrieleno/Tongva Nation, Gabrieleno/ Tonga San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians, San Fernando Band of Mission Indians, Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, San Manuel Band of Mission Indians and Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians — Kizh Nation. Of the 12 Tribes who were notified, none requested that consultation commence. In conformance with Assembly Bill 52 (AB52), staff sent a Tribal Consultation Request on October 4, 2016, of the proposed project to the following Tribal Communities who had requested to be notified: San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians and the Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians. Following the prescribed timelines for AB52, staff did not receive any requests for consultation. X. Environmental Assessment: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA') and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. In order to adequately evaluate potential environmental impacts from the project, 15 focused reports were prepared by consultants from multiple fields, including, but not limited to, air quality, biological resources, focused biological reports for plants, birds, mammals, reptiles, peer review of focused biological reports, cultural and paleontological' resources, greenhouse gas, traffic and noise. The peer review of all four of the biological focused reports affirmed the conclusions in the reports. A comprehensive discussion of the environmental impacts and any necessary mitigation measures is in the Initial Study Parts II and III. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures related to air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and waste materials, hydrology and water quality, noise, public services, transportation/traffic, and tribal cultural resources, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have .a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. A Mitigation Monitoring Program has also been prepared to ensure implementation of, and compliance with, the mitigation measures for the project. FISCAL IMPACT/REVENUE ANALYSIS: In order to ensure that the project does not adversely impact revenues to the City's General Fund, and that that the proposed project's annual costs for providing public services do not exceed revenues generated, a Fiscal Impact Analysis was completed by Development Planning and Financing Group (July 2016). This revenue/cost analysis is especially critical since the project includes a Victoria Community Plan Amendment to change the zoning from Regionally Related Office/Commercial to Mixed Use. For the analysis, it is populated with two scenarios: 1) No zone change, and developing the site under the existing zoning, floor area ratios with a 163,350 square feet of commercial use and 392,000 square feet of office use; and 2) an analysis of the proposed mixed use project by DR Horton. For Scenario 1, it is estimated that a proposed retail/office project would generate E10-16 17 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00508 AND DRC2016-00451 — DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 18 $788,000 in annual reoccurring revenue, and $334,000 in reoccurring costs, resulting in a net fiscal positive impact to the City of $454,000. For Scenario 2, it is estimated that the proposed mixed use project would generate $691,000 in annual reoccurring revenue, and $215,000 in reoccurring costs, resulting in a net fiscal positive impact to the City of $476,000. The net impact to the City is positive under both land use scenarios, and the analysis demonstrates that reoccurring General Fund revenues generated by the project will be sufficient to cover all reoccurring General Fund Costs. FISCAL IMPACT/PROPERTY TAX AND IMPACT FEES: The project site currently is assessed an annual property tax. A percentage of this annual tax is shared with the City. The proposed development will increase the value of the project site and the City's annual share of the property tax will increase accordingly. The project proponent also will be responsible for paying one-time impact fees. These fees are intended to address the increased demand for City services due to the proposed project. The following types of services that these impact fees would support include the following: library services, transportation infrastructure, drainage infrastructure, animal services, police, parks, and community and recreation services. COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: Although a specific current City Council goal does not apply to the project, the project is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and the objectives of the Development Code. Additionally, the project will meet two ongoing objectives of the City Council: 1) AUGMENT PUBLIC SAFETY: The linear park will be constructed with cameras that will connect to the Public Video Safety Network. This use of technology will enable greater monitoring of public areas and discourage crime and nuisance activities. 2) GENERAL PLAN IMPLEMENTATION: As analyzed in prior sections, the proposed project includes a Victoria Community Plan Amendment. This legislative action will implement the goals of the General Plan to achieve a mixed use project at this location that was envisioned since 2001 as the highest and best use of the land. The land use amendment will change the zoning from Regionally Related Office/Commercial to Mixed Use and will bring the zoning of the Victoria Community Plan into vertical consistency with the General Plan and facilitate a mixed use project, thereby implementing General Plan Policy LU-2.1 by providing mixed use projects and high density residential areas at strategic infill locations. 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 1,000-foot radius of the project site. To date, staff has received some written items of public correspondence (Exhibit O), applicant's response to public correspondence (Exhibit P), and staff fielded approximately 8-10 phone calls regarding general comments, questions and information regarding the entitlement review process. The project information was also posted on the City's website for public viewing. E10-16 18 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00508 AND DRC2016-00451 — DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 19 EXHIBITS: CB:DG/Is Exhibit A — Master Title Sheet/Project Data Sheet Exhibit B — Village A Architecture Plans Exhibit C — Village B Architecture Plans Exhibit D — Village C Architecture Plans Exhibit E — Village D Architecture Plans Exhibit F — Garage and Front Door Variation Plans Exhibit G —Accessory Structure Plans Exhibit H — Commercial Buildings Exhibit I — Civil Improvement, Fire Access and Phasing Plans Exhibit J — Landscape Plans Exhibit K — Design Review Committee Agenda & Action Agenda for April 18, 2017 Exhibit L — Existing Victoria Community Plan Zoning Exhibit Exhibit M — Proposed Victoria Community Zoning Exhibit Exhibit N — Initial Study Parts 1, 11, and III Exhibit O — Public Correspondence Exhibit P — Applicant Response to Public Comments Exhibit Q — Applicant Supplemental Vegetation Analysis dated May 25, 2017 Draft Resolution Recommending Approval of Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2016-00452 Draft Resolution of Approval for Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19762 Draft Resolution of Approval for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20032 Draft Resolution of Approval for Design Review DRC2016-00450 Draft Resolution of Approval for Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449 Draft Resolution of Approval for Minor Exception DRC2016-00508 Draft Resolution of Approval for Uniform Sign Program DRC2016-00451 E10-16 19 >OEM 0 LU > CL LLJ F- w CL EXHIBIT A E10-16 20 I t rd LU ry � ::D 0 U) v LU Lli ry (M) � � � Q (D O � | LLJ U D Z O U � >- o 2 CQ= U .J z >0 O � � U j : / .. \ \ / ( i ® J mum ... /! \ / 3 } J \/ !■. \ ( \ / ) } | | � mm. ,m& [ §\ EXHIBIT B E,o-,B 22 0 r- 2 OF DAY C�E-IGYI �-IUA-R SNOfIG 1- VILLAGE `�r- E"- I -- 3 2 2 2 3 fit 41 ilITS i il it NTCHEN a ri TJL-FT 1- 0 1 DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE A - 3 STORY RH TANDEM SAP" 3 OF 35 CD N In DAY CREEK SQUARE -VILLAGE A - 3 STORY RH TANDEM MICYII CRMRIq.}�Yg11tlDYCM1}F Yxlf ,..CgIMl, G9Wf: �9,A 2 2 2 3 �NrR •n \YM MN M} N M} 1R} y, 1 WY'ER tlX -j MNIry <.. U 4 OF 35 5A PLE TMIRDFLOOR PLAN 5 OF 35 DAY CREEK SQUARE -VILLAGE A - 3 STORY RH TANDEM y' x .oeu:wr ox�oinw wwmwnnc.eaum� wan o�a�c..aa... ROyOwF PLaA,N ___ _ __ z�mrmuoevnuuw . _ _ _ '. .__ � _ •' ®uco.¢a+mv LEFT SIDE- A DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE A - 3 STORY RH TANDEM .nawwl ox we.a umwxmwuxe�e mmem.cowu uv®srse... m_ O N W L REAR ELEVATION DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE A - 3 STORY RH TANDEM wnux•oxxovm,.mwwo�w.uweemre,mmw.umeos, ryw. - ..' A L 7 7 -� ry � EN1NY� i 5 OF 35 F DAY CREEK SQUARE VILLAGE A 3 STORY RH TANDEM eA+ LEx ST •rrievrt on Ana..mv«wancunuwnw.mwxw:..aen.si rx s.. FIRFLOOR PIAN CK; YM)1 R MPI m 9 OF 35 DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE A - 3 STORY RH TANDEM wnaewr oxnenrv.momwmw.wue sane m cwoxr,uremrmaw - + SECOND FLOOR PLAN ____ou rvse ra�. 0 rn w -DAY CREEK SQUARE VILLAGE A - 3 STORY RH TANDEM - �rvxwaxr PPwamP,vm wvmPuE aure�m,conaxn.uvwn�rswu THIRI m 0 J cn w N DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE A - 3 STORY RN TANDEM L—.r_, Dxxonrim.mowwDwnci wia �m.mnDxwuwom�.aw« _- ,.. 11 OF 35 m FRONT ELEVATION - A O Q1 W W L.!FTT vnuon nEvrvores 12 OF 35 nAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE A- 3 STORY RH TANDEM .wnsex, ocno.�w.vnwawown.ae. a»*e �m ®ue.®e�rnw. ' • '' . ICI REM ELEVATION -A DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE A - 3 STORY RH TANDEM a lT 13 OF 35 EXTER10�R1ELEVATONS 14 OF 35 DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE A 3 STORY RH TANDEM " ' "` ^ "" ROOF vertu.rov.avrw.mowwu.w+cmc.[mrermccnax...uceen. �W i a15/A_mrvy)OYO - .. ��•n •r• iuEMrf Y.T. FRONT ELEVATION S LEFT SIDE - S DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE A - 3 STORY RH TANDEM /MVNI RR�OIlf0l 9llMMGLW IF¢If.Yp1E gym, CORPN G0OH0�f95W PEAR ELEVATION-8 �OAY CREEK SQUARE VILLAGE A - 3 STORY RH TANDEM .MRGME ORK^l1tOM LpWWILLAGE A-I3 STORY TA D � EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS mr-ra 17 OF 36 DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE A - 3 STORY RH TANDEM FIRST ' i, wnwronewnuraow.uvvcur.E au�+w cuiavvuomn�rsw. � �. . r. �. � • �� .v �V". o w 1 1 1 3 9 18 OF35 MY CREEK SOUARE - VILLAGE A - 3 STORY RH TANDEM 7n aLEx SECONO �LOOR PIAN ,onnexro�+wru �rewaancure. wne m canwwunaoer roses � a O i m A O DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE A - 3 STORY RH TANDEM MgiIX! ORNtl1iM, LR)YMVAYE4EIE &IIIt IOI,GORAfJtlMOKSNN 3 r... ..i �r�nr rvui .V ...i�. I� .. .i..o ...rr+�. rnJ� �W r..l n• �o i.. W.rV.n Ne 9 OF 35 20 OF 35 DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE A - 3 STORY RH TANDEM 7A.PLEX RCgPL.N . .re --. . 1. — m O A N FRONT ELEVATION - A LERSIDE-A DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE A - 3 STORY RH TANDEM ' uncwr oa wnor. veew.®ramEdre ua®as.as... REAR ELEVATION � A DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE A - 3 STORY RH TANDEM -- . NTLfNYi ORNlR1 VllHIYMO�dif.116�E WiE 1mtVWCKIGNW6IASW �. I• • LLEVATIM MEVN TES 22 OF 35 7A-PLEX EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS - --� ya,Els ,. m 0 rn A A DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE A - 3 STORY RH TANDEM wncn.. o.xwrc..mwuanunemnn m,cowwucmn� rases _m FRONT ELEVATION-9 O IT A Ln LEFTSIDEE-8 —DAY CREEK SQUARE VILLAGE A - 3 STORY RH TANDEM I — -- NgtYiYPMtl1EOY,IIq WNIXYY YREEBK1E1m,lI.MM G@IA9 Et�i)yu 1 Em W� W9 I EIEVRTICN I(ETNOtES. IF I.I.-.....,-. .. 24 OF 35 TB KEX EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS V -- L R1E- dIF Y�E�1 REARS ATIM-B 25 OF 35 DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE A - 3 STORY RH TANDEM 35 DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE A - 3 STORY RH TANDEM i, rsnc.wi ocxoniay.mowwaawaxc.aire im.wmcr�ann��su« ;' .,' .' m O T A co FRONT ELEVATION-C DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE A - 3 STORY RH TANDEM M0.' lOfl Nglip,�WA Gg4GIflC1E WI1E 1tA,CORULIGBI%'1%11%MY etEva�xorEs I: _.._... ..^ LEFT SLOE-C I' -I ^•.•• 27 OF 35 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS m_ O 01 A LD REAR ELEVATION -C DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE A - 3 STORY RH TANDEM 28 OF 35 . ., n.7C-PLEX .. EXTERIOlrzEL€NATIONS umar DAY CREEK VILLAGES - VILLAGE A - 3 STORY RH TANDEM = /.PRGWIi.�flNMfCN AINiAClQVG10.C4E WilE %QCtlW11AG9�b1 iA.5Mfl Val AILOIpNI GW 7A PLE STREETSCF 29 OF 35 FROM ELEVATION -A LEFTSIOE-A '', DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE A - 3 STORY RH TANDEM +wnxwr oxwrtax. aeowwn ewxE. sreiw.ewwPn.uwwow))ax«+ ELEVniIOx xEYNOiEY ' 30 OF 35 7A PLEX EXTERIOR ELEVAT F Yitll)IONS 1EP K 1 m O m lP N REAR ELEVATION -A „I Es 31 OF 35 DAY CREEK SQUARE VILLAGE A- 3 STORY RH TANDEM I. ,,. 7A FLEX wrtic.n,oxlwnrcx nm v«xwwvclwxE.swrt,m.ca+ow. cnmNor, ]»sw -- EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS Nltlt]IDI®iMN, pIE '' � ¢SYEYiG1E�Y161i VILLAGE A - 7A-PLEX VILLAGE e - 5A-PLEX VILLAGE C - 6A-PLEX ftMUEVATIg w�raaFntwuov.A 32 OF 35 DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE A - 3 STORY RH TANDEM _ GARAGE VARIATION Avn+urr onxamox am vvxaarca¢umrem.ccaa�Aw�®gym msu� ,,. '- Evi etiT 21 e LU LU ry Q 0 V 0 75 U Z 0 U � =ry m0 U = Z ry � 0 0 U m x 0 w z w w to t .r_r Er (L Q Z s > r� s G Q � w f f d EXHIBIT C E10-16 54 0 I M ul Ln .11 1 ❑ GONC: NI 2 PCN0.N kNl _ 1 3 kl 2 OF 99 DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE B 283 STORY RH v FIRST yl PV.N I MN �I O0.x0111CN OWNMq WICIR4tE iE GEAm0�i1'M) � .. .. L__ _ Y�D�i AI®iB�� .O _ .. 'i. �. -�.. ': r.il� • .. i.�ri�'n a �NdTE Y1M) 0 rn DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE B - 263 STORY RH +9M1CWf-OPIWlO11A1WMO�lWO6�E bWR IA.CORO�I.GOIIPP ]iPW •• 2. 1 3 '&' IA UflV�M, 1819*1 1 2 3 DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE B - 283 STORY RH wncw� ux wnruam wwuo.u.�... wia �m cnnoxn c.uwa� rsw I _ v�av m�mw�>wn m_ 0 rn 00 DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE B - 2&3 STORY RH rwwrron,m�mx wwnanu,nn.anrz �m raiow.uwmcr>a>µ r�ao giwwuwn ____ 5 OF 39 FRONT ELEVATION L.AYL�E[�K. SQUARE - VILLAGE B - 2&3 STORY RH alimm 11 PARTIAL FRONT ELEVATION AT SLOGS FACING DAY CREEK & BASE LINE 6 OF 39 REAR ELEVATION LEFT SIDE ELEVATION DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE 8 - 2&3 STORY RH " N ' 10"" WAICN1i'YXlbitll )]ID WACIQVOR4E I1E IM.COXGI.,G91l100�]dIEM� �. " r• m 0 rn rn DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE B - 2&3 STORY RH MRCMIOR IRR1M, ]2mlLNIXCWURPlF.9NR im. WIKKI.SGpl�B51 I])fi1N _ _rbll'pl®L9r5[MG __ nr... r. i�rur �r.xrr .rm v�rir ier ..... �Irn.ri �.urxln. Dui i... ��r.•rl u r riir �rre ue 8 OF 39 m_ 0 i T N FRONT ELEVATION RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION 9 OF 39 DAY CREEK SQUARE VILLAGER 2&3 STORY RH 3EWLEX .enewv. uewxray.um.waavawe eu re�m,cwu�uweomr rsaw. ^ EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS Bran armsa wra . •' .o, ..r .,. ry ,ar.. rtm w r Fm r ,..ry wuEVw i'v�no REAR ELEVATION LEFT SIDE ELEVATION DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE 8 - 263 STORY RH � NRGXI DFxpIld.9p WNppry ClgC4E Pxif 101. CfFJw.UYIl II ii Wa _ 10 OF 39 - EXTVRIORFVATK1 DAY GREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE 8 - 283 STORY RH FIRST 6FlCE�B. J• DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE 8 - 2&3 STORY RH .varwn.. w.. amT!n?t T au .coXw.. w..,. .. 3 7 C) 2 3 Mum ,maw 13 OF 39 DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE B - 2&3 STORY RH THRD 4A-P'FX ■ FL OOR :�AN .. 14 OF 39 DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE B - 20 STORY RH I ItI Ii "` ' ""'"' ' III'-"' r"" wnr moawmu.amwwaavcwae avert xm.mnuwassmogixaw. ....„�x. �„uau v.,iui a.. ,x.r ...ww. .ani iw, mx.rx nr i_ „n.�,a c. ROO �,PyN m O 00 W L FRONT ELEVATION DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE S - 20 STORY RH PP0.YYR! ORIYMI2R. ysJ V4AIXIXVCiRf.1E.BWlE IpY.CWOIAU®>V51 iJ961M RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION n �E�c nor, evruu�Es m O I m tD REAR ELEVATION LEFT SIDE ELEVATION DAY CREEK SQUARE -VILLAGE 8 - 2$3 STORY RH ' ' VRIGNt OPNMiftl.Z/m WNM1QVcM:1E 8NiE1W CP1pV.G0®Y139W „v.. r ....., .au".,. i_.evnnox r:EVHores DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE B - 2&3 STORY RH ww�owr oxwrmx.mowwuwvcwue wrz �m.00wu, rwa�oi re.m.. FRONT ELEVATION I RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE B - 2&3 STORY RH 18 OF 39 48-PLEX EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS REAR ELEVATION LEFT SIDE ELEVATION DAY GREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE B - 2&3 STORY RH NrtG911 DRrypglp pp WVICFpVApE,&X1F 18 CORtlMG�817s61Y FlEVP1iON NEYNOiES AI ... 19 OF 39 3 12 4 x DAY GREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE B - 2&3 STORY RH FIRST 20 OF 39 3 2 o a »FCK� �1 FfK r7 ' �j»s aRicei e»a Kncen� avfK:,; exs DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE S - 2&3 STORY RH wnrun o� o""Bpgy'ir xwmv®uom_ — umn..a a.. 21 OF 39 r .n .. �... n�COND LEXLEX .. SE FLOOR PLAN 3 2 1 1 2 _ 1 OfCN3 MCN3 FT H7 m J Qi MM1X eN1N � MM t - � V t!1Nam I f lERdi 1 fl .. L� 22 OF 39 r DAY CREEK SQUARE -VILLAGES - M STORY RH wnrr.r oXxoifmN.Mowwowwcfnf �m.mmxfumo—_�,.,- ,,.. .;.. ni . . ....•,.. .,, ., ,, ,,, Hl�ywOORpPUW DAY CREEK SQUARE -VILLAGE B-2&3 STORY RH riv.o�narmmrruawmcv.rt.mawnwu®a..se... •. FRONT ELEVATION RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION HAY GREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE B - M STORY RH �Albllt oA P]ItIW. S!lMMp�VCNUE BNIE IO1, fANM GPi6� JiMN 24 OF 38 Ty'T���3�GS1CiPl LEFT SIDE ELEVATION DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE 8 - 2&3 STORY RH 4RGWi OX MRtG. )aIYYII[l(WC�RRE.ENiE �0 CCgp.� GSJLYN11yE1M A�ePIiV�EVF __ �I 25 OF 39 OF 39 DAY CREEK SQUARE -VILLAGE B - 2&3 STORY RH �snraxruxxmta.mowunawcwuc wire rm acww uamerrsaw , ae � m 0 cr) Go C) FRONT ELEVATION DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE B - 2&3 STORY RH A - --t�vo\ - RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION 27 OF 39 m O co ---- ---- — -- ----j REAR ELEVATION DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE 6 - 2&3 STORY RH LEFT SIDE ELEVATION ELEVATION KEY WTE 5 28 OF 39 5B-pEEx,---= XTER%R,,E,L,. m 3 13 m Go 11` NJC � 1 29 OF 39 DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE B - 2&3 STORY RH " """ ^' RR G5_REX rnneurr on�ora aue au rc+mcawnw STFLOO�,PLAN Saxe rmm�_ 3 I EXM16 I 01 00 W I I l~ uruax I� •tiiFMG BNf• 2 1 oll (1 I11nL WTCC .11,09 M) r.. _.. 71n I DAY CREEK SQUARE VILLAGE B - 2&3 STORY RH ' NMLMf NNxyl�CN fir➢VI2aPVCW4E WlF♦W CONOX�CaOn RI r1LY ' N)FCXEN �1- 2 3 �` MFA GBrAAIIW C•' �n 30 OF 39 . ..., ,. SECOND FLOOR %AN mays 0 i 00 A 3 2 1 1 2 3 x.,R rnwuw�r _ h7— �. j v 3 wa,x Ir F!r mE ! OECRi v,�naw 31 OF 39 MY CREEK SQUARE VILLAGE B - 20 STORY RH RwLerr oRlonw wRRoouaxuc wlRElm wRouumwm oEu. „� ._ -•.. ___ — — ..TNIR�FlOOR PLAN alv mwewomwo I'�' — i mn 32 OF 39 DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE 9 - 263 STORY RH FRONT ELEVATION RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE S - 2&3 STORY RH NRENf. GIINtl1RY1ffi WMO{PYOECLEgYE tlEfd1EENG@pEN OMM o.evanori �c.,n.Es m O I Ql 00 J REAR ELEVATION DAY CREEK SQUARE VILLAGE B - 2&3 STORY RH +wMiW10EMTW. PYCNGEE.NM1I6 gym, FgMGEbD6�)!Ew y LEFT SIDE ELEVATION I EL�l1IXil YWTES L.I. �...._ A y. y. . 34 OF 39 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS gY_M161Y161) 0 rn 00 00 DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE B - 2&3 STORY RH 4TIEME OE,KpECY.t�iWIO,QXCtlCLE Mx E,m,COMMS G@W 6, EIMM ,b,l N,L®ORry4 .:......... i I i I 35 OF 39 1 RCEFe°„�n,"' m 0 01 00 LD FRONT ELEVATION RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE 6 - 20 STORY RH I '^ ,srirmr oxxura. meve%moucmc rrerm rmvwumeraew "iy i. Sinn mi®.eer wu ,:. •••o•.� ••,• W 36 OF 39 66PLE% EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS ins -I o REAR ELEVATION LEFT SIDE ELEVATION DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE 8 - 283 STORY RH I 37 OF 39 6"LEX EXTERIOR �ATmm m 0 rn to PARTIAL SITE SECTION AT VILLAGE S 38 OF 39 DAY CREEK SQUARE -VILLAGE B-283 STORY RH .,nu.l��,��,�„,Inn.. PARTIAL 9ITE�OTION AT xxuxr onwnu.amwAarsmEi+o�inw wxowuwunrss... ... .c µ' PATIO �O D.WA m CD rn N PARTIAL SITE SECTION AT VILIACE D DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE B - 2&3 STORY RH PARTIAL SITE SECTION AT wnnrer oxmwrow.rm wwaowwue axrt rmram.wumreei rsaw �..: .. PATIO SOUND WAIL mmrm. ora mwe m�i-e rwn Lij :D Q C) z U o U z W U 0 w Q U LLJ -� J C) O } U U } Q x 0 w 0 z W i��'•5j'�'7 W 1p, `� :;'rl�g�►t' F i U ... _ z� Q Q W � z DIY f— OLLJ O .... LU O a 0- a Y I< ILL > % a Ng� U a�' a 5°^ W WbI F— j g W w Of IL ! a i io EXHIBIT D E10-16 93 6 OF 13 ,w 04 1"0 c t-4 AOL 6OF13 DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE C - 3 STORY RH Wl ROOF DECKS 6 OF 13 ,4w 7 T-I Eil Jxv W, r j - Ju, .411211, SOF13 aariw DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE C - 3SITORY RH—Wl ROOF DECKS 3 OF 13 - M PLAN I lw 0 I Alfill,, DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE C - 3 STORY THIRD L ---.=E =7 'I 4 OF 13 0 m 6OF 13 lwp I I I 1 I I 1 ,I I I I I I I I 1 I I AOL BOF 13 axw DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE C - 3 STORY RH W/ ROOF DECKS """" ""' "" "" ' """' (r,,F x uncx"u�llov"almwumlwvue wlmmcuwuwomva.. " • _ . .. ' ..: "... °.. :.. `' ... ,,..._ R�PLAN 5 OF 13 a m O W FRONT ELEVATION - A RN SIDEELEVATION-A � � Euvmoa urAmss 6 OF 13 DAY CREEK SQUARE -VILLAGE C -3 STORY RH WI ROOF DECKS 6'PLEX NY.TYXi1,.,�, • EXTERIOR JLFVATIONS m O 01 ID W REAREI AT -A DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE C - 3 STORY RH Wl ROOF DECKS 7 OF 13 A. �X TK AMTERIOR FLLEV�A 9 OF 19 0 AL 9OF 1] DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE C - 3 STORY RH VW ROOF DECKS uncw.u..a.,u. rm,wmu.rxr,. vunm mo.s ufwew oau. .... . 'm 8 OF 13 m 0 O FRONT ELEVATION -B RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION, B 9 OF 13 DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE C - 3 STORY RH WI ROOF DECKS - I EXTERIORS- ELEVATIONS ■ __ �NVIIAIW1C11 pq _ _ •r • . r •. •r 14YCMR Y6] 10 OF 13 DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE C 3 STORY RH W/ ROOF DECKS ' " BB-PLIX wncw onnmmn.mwa« EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 12 OF 13 'ry i i I L 11 OF 13 DAY CREEK. SQUARE - VILLAGE C - 3 STORY RH Wf ROOF DECKS I mwcw oxxomox. aavowcuwrz m.waaumml mew - '• FRONT ELEVATION -C RIONT SIM ELEVATION - C 12 OF 13 0AV CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE C - 3 STORY RH W/ ROOF DECKS uac.x�oxxala.mowwaawuwc mrem wxaAua®esw. •. ^ • ERIO ELLEPVATIONS EXT a FAN ELEVATION- C 13 OF 13 DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE C - 3 STORY RH W/ ROOF DECKS LliI) ry w Q �$ Q o z Q Q LLJo U z W U LLIF o{ o z fi LLJ 0 2 0� Lj I U W C) O l � #;t, i! +yg c; LLJ z LL d 3� t; J r 0 5d �c a U1 w f- f- �i w •- O rr tl EXHIBIT E E10-16106 2 I ax�>:aauunav 2 OF 25 DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE D - 2 STORY SFD �����.�w�������.� ���.,�. CIRSTFLOOR I '. wneun oxxoxrw,..wwwaexnxcie.eu�im.wxavr;uw®ra�new .. �• x x u CWRT�PP N IB6KOxi[91M111 e INIIIII1�1111 � � I� • 2 2 DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE D - 2 STORY SFD -- - - ---_ 2 2 3 OF 25 SECOND FLOOR ^� COURT¢ N _ COLKTE 51NI1 T.. .. .. ..... ..... .. ---- 1,� _._.. _.. .. _�._ .___.1 _ _y------ - I� 1 I J it i 4 OF 25 DAY CREEK SQUARE VILLAGE 0 - 2 STORY SFD ' ` - '""^ wncw. ox,wrax.um wwmcwc,u. ream canoxn,uwoss, raaw - cc6`TPLAN m O O ,OFT/OPT HRS L SECOND FLOOR DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE O - 2 STORY SFD war: roxxonrax. wowwnavcwueawrz im, maoxn w.meam rsew I�I1e 8R4 gp.a+T1 �',.� FIRST FLOOR KITCHEN UVING GANFGE I ENjflY 5 OF 25 _T ROOF PLAN 1C O ROOF PLAN 1D ROOF PLAN 1A ROOF PLAN 18 6 OF 25 DAY CREEK SQUARE VILLAGE D 2 STORY SFD .� ,., .. ROOF �N 1 uxcnxroxxwrox nmwwaawe xcic w�xe gym. wxaxiuvmovw rases .• _.yypp�� _ _ _ _ _ _ _ v e0vw3a wb _ _ _ •. •. •• .. _._ WUE�WiEs'1tl DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE D - 2 STORY SFD j wnewroa.ox+a�.rmvwnww���re. wne.m, raxawawwmorsww L_ vavanmo.ewaw FRONT ELEVATION -CRAFTSMAN r: REAR ELEVATION - CRAFTSMAN 7 OF 25 PLAN IA EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS — __ muewre vian LEFT SIDE ELEVATION - SANTA BARBARA m 0 rn w FRONT ELEVATION -SANTA BARBARA m CD LEFT SIDE ELEVATION - SHINGLE H rl-TM-1 9111 SIDE ELEVATION - SHINGLE DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE D - 2 STORY SFD FRONT ELEVATION - SHINGLE DAY CREEK SQUARE -VILLAGE 0 - 2 STORY SFD wnr�r oe xwrw.rmwwuurn aE.ewre�wcwwuEmomi zsE.. N Kt K LLtVA I IUN- 1 I AL18NA I t I tD OF 25 PLAN 1O EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS w�=ra _•• _ _ _ ®YIOEIE MITI RR � M4SI ER BR UNBRY . - O Tr OP1•,BP 6 2 SECOND FLOOR I n 1 PORCH I I I FIRST FLOOR n'. 11 OF 25 DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE D - 2 STORY SFD - - - ` ` Ptntd BA wwcwr oaxox+aw.mow.naanaEUE ewrz rm conoxnumeonr nova F RPUNS ROOF PLAN 2C ROOF PLAN 2D DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE D - 2 STORY SFD wnexxro�xwru. ueowwaava�ae. wxrt �m.mxawummar rs e.0 '. � ',,.. ROOF PLAN 2A ROOF PLAN 28 12 OF 25 m J 0 LEFT SIDE RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION - CRAFTSMAN C.._N_GOpp_tl_a lFi-iN - � .Y SD_DAYCREEK SQUARE -VILLAGE D - 2 Sli I i FRONT ELEVATION - CRAFTSMAN 13 OF 25 m O m SIDE ELEVATION - SANTA BARBARA LLL Pill II II !I II it h ;HT SIDE ELEVATION - SANTA BARBARA DAY CREEK SQUARE -VILLAGE D - 2 STORY SFD uRCN>ORKN>VI RO WMIXPVGRGE.WRIO CMYN 4Y'®lb>>f 51M .__- 1.. FRONT ELEVATION -SANTA REAR ELEVATION -SANTA BARBARA 14 OF 25 v PLAN 2B . EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS rueure vim LEFT SIDE ELEVATION - SHINGLE RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION - SHINGLE SHINGLE REAR ELEVATION - SHINGLE DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE D - 2 STORY SFD uncrar . - - F: Tz 1. m LEFT SIDE ELEVATION - ITALIANATE 777 RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION - ITALIANATE REAR ELEVATION - ITALIANATE 16 OF 25 DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE D - 2 STORY SFD r 11 1 T I PLAN 2D EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS LOFT I OPT SR IAHf{ONY r I MAST ' �TRrBR THR iH m OBR 3 I f-' ••_i A( i. MMMIa11111111111NBR11 N N M BATH L. SECOND FLOOR DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE D - 2 STORY SFD xen�uvr axxoxrca.aaawawvcaae wire wo,ompv.nane. rasa K 10TCHEN ®' 1 — CJ...... I LIVING G GE .w> FIRST FLOOR G R T ROOF PLAN 3C ROOF PLAN 3D DAY CREEK SQUARE VILLAGE D - 2 STORY SFD wrunurto wmroi. au�rz �m co+win r.�n�__ __ _ ROOF PLAN 3A ROOF PLAN 3B 18 OF 25 3 ROOF PLANS vc.ra RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION - CRAFTSMAN DAY CREEK SOUARE - VILLAGE D - 2 STORY SFD �mcwr oxxoxv!lmwwuiovex�c wve imcu�w.nmemoi raaw 19 OF 25 PLAN 3A EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS ®YE W.IE SVWI) BARBARA rr RIGHT G SIDE ELEVATION - SANTA BARBARA REAR ELEVATION -SANTA BARBARA _ _20 OF 25 DAY OREEK SQUARE VILLAGE D - 2 STORY SFD r,., - .muxr on xoxrw mwwnawuxua w rermwxw.awwn• rases x EXTERIORp kiI,ATIONS amrnmum�we �, .,.. w• ,,m .. ...., wiee�wfimor m REAR ELEVATION - SHINGLE 21 OF 25 DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE D - 2 STORY SFD EITERIOR ELEVATIONS RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION - ITALIANATE a a • is i■ ii REAR ELEVATION - ITALIANATE 22 OF 25 DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE D 2 STORY SFD PUN 30 EXTERIOR VATONS m 0 N W CRAFTSMAN SANTA BARBARA DAY CREEK VILLAGES - VILLAGE D - 2 STORY SFD IPIfYI IIIInOfIG.EaV WN4NVCW¢E eull[ 1t0, mVMI. G®6� 35W �/R�b%�Ya mCRE➢R4£�YExf6KL4.WI WY SHINGLE ITALIANATE 23 OF 25 STTRREETSCENE ■ CRAFTSMAN SANTA BARBARA 24 OF 25 DAY CREEK VILLAGES - VILLAGE D - 2 STORY SFD STREET SCENE ■ wnc.xr oewn.a. vm..nwo..wm. wne �m a+.w u.a®o�+asw . 'a i�Pm m 0 1 M1121eU2 DAY CREEK VILLAGES - VILLAGE D - 2 STORY SFD b w a 4r ti ITALIANATE 25 OF 25 SHEET SCENE ■ w E e 4 \ �F X H|B|T F 2 � k > 12 / E10-16 131 | � m B m J 0 w N VILLAGE A - 7A-PLEX VILLAGE 0 - 5A-PLEX VILLAGE C - SA-PLEX FfiIXiI ELEVATM 34 OF 35 DAY CREEK SQUARE - VILLAGE A - 3 STORY RH TANDEM FRONT DOOR VARIATION .w'.rn ox.axrw.mow.aawurcu. e�.��m.mxa.nummer aa.w � - n _ EXH181T D1 VILLAGE D PLAN 1A r m _ PLAN 113 O I a, 1 W PLAN IC mr, x...r,w.ewmE PLAN 1D PLAN 2A PLAN 28 PLAN 2C PLAN 2D PLAN 3A PLAN 3B PLAN 3C PLAN 3D I DOOR VARIATION xavx, unum,a.rznwwnavfivrewrzrm arwx.uvmn,.xsw _1 ,. .:... -�R� EJWI1BIT Q2 DAY CREEK SQUARE VILLAGE A - 3 STORY RH TANDEM� (D z 0 C) z ::D 0 0 T- 0 C) z < ry LL 0 x LU w U) U) < Z w < < L) EXHIBIT G E10-16 134 r j C— 0 N E10-16 135 m J 0 Lu a) Ir KEYNOTES 1 FLOOR PLAN 2 ROOF PLAN 111-1v ,Ili=l'V 3 FRONT ELEVATION 4 LEFT SIDE ELEVATION 5 REAR ELEVATION 6 RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION vla. ro m. -.a .ne-- ra Ell. -1 o 3 OF DAY CREEK SQUARE- ANCILLARY STRUCTURES s T a u C r, CA 4KI11TECtWAI. LICENSE C J050 MAILBOXKIOSK- uv T. pxrwa nWWNULo CIr ESSOZ 10E, auuKMm l.CaSTu •" v Mr "I FETTIrtX BULLEveXn T E i' unrr SUIT[ 111VS5 P T piEOu rru 4(IJI c 1 rr l c fpa 61419y]0] F/..a'. PLANIELEVyTICNS Al9l9l... n• «�vll, — mO PLAN LJLJLJ L-7 L-1 Lujr U 01ju I I luu ELEVATION KEYNOTES FRONT ELEVATION RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION (LEFT SIMILAR) REAR ELEVATION TRASH ENCLOSURE (RESIDENTIAL AREA) 4 OF DAY CREEK SQUARE - ANCILLARY STRUCTURES TRA:C,,.NTC10SUFZE- C�_S I iww5n � � Mw$N I I- f4wyn n9K� I. iu t t PLAN ��LJ LJ LI LJILJ LI I-J�I uuluu ELEVATION KEYNOTES FRONT ELEVATION RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION (LEFT SIMILAR) REAR ELEVATION TRASH ENCLOSURE (COMMERCIAL AREA) 5 OF 5 DAY CREEK SQUARE - ANCILLARY STRUCTURES I.c �.�� , . l . ... TR SANTASH ENCcoSURE- wxr�xi.onww.amw.w.vwu«uwuewu uweo•+.waw ASARBA �w+.a ui ry e w w c (0) < z o ry z 0 LLJ o >- o cc z C) H 0 0 EXHIBIT H E10-16139 EW J DAY CREEK SQUARE - COMMERCIAL wncm* owwro- mowMnwvcor.�.mwe im wm.numemsl asaN. MEETING KITCNENI NEE STORAGE LO61 ',LAii -'EV FREEZER STORAGE EIAV V mm MEN: MAIN 0IAY I ' ,l_ f I - I � t i L I ' I I, I I i II, I Il j AVFATAeuunav 2 OF 20 .., .,.-��UTEL HOTEL FIRST FLOOR PLAN v STORAGE EL£V "Am LWA �wEximm�w DAY CREEK SQUARE - COMMERCIAL .onrwxz oxwxzu.mewwwoxuxne awze zm ranw..uaeoezmmu ' /y � r AREA rnxuunLw 3 OF 20 90UTIQUE F TEL SECONDPLOOR PLAN co DAY CREEK SQUARE - COMMERCIAL uwc.�r e�xe�ran.amwuwowacu ��r�'mcoxainumcwrisvu IJ MEA rPIDiUrICN BOUTIQUE HOTEL THIRD FLO )R PLAN ppr1 4 OF 20 OF 20 DAY CREEK SQUARE -COMMERCIAL ' wnwrex�mrai eawre.m.cmw.uneeon�naaw—�„�—. m 0 rn A A Wn III JIrt' L—. II - -T w A�_ _ RTA 'T_ . _—._ 6 OF 20 _ _ DAY CREEK SQUARE - COMMERCIAL i- BOUTIQUE HOTEL •rrisiwr v�xmrw,.mvwiaaxac a au,rt rw cwau.uvwa iaeu. ,: BUILDIN�C S fFTIONS -------------------- ---- ------ 7 OF 20 DAY CREEK SQUARE - COMMERCIAL F---BounwL HOTEL EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS m 0 rn A I f, 8 OF 20 DAY CREEK SQUARE COMMERCIAL �Ort�PVAMNS� 411 M'. Illllltltlf f1Y AW 'l..l IA..1AYN1 `' " - - Wrt MfEl9:f::f_ F oil SMVICE FREEZER OFFICE M,s KITCHEN wouER.s JI M V�E MOST LOBBY IM CD 1 1 DINING AREA DINING AREA DINING AREA A JIJ T�OR DINJING ARFA L=zr 13 0 13 0 DAY CREEK SQUARE - COMMERCIAL A Z�l I 7�1 9 OF 20 r m 10 OF 20 DAY CREEK SQUARE - COMMERCIAL Rl- 1VA-URA Wl-� = .... .... . . . RESTAURANT I - BUILDING SECTION -A [WEST) RESTAURANT 1- BUILDING SECTION -B INORTHI DAY CREEK SQUARE COMMERCIAL T — . rwcwe oxxomax veowwnave«cIe +uva®m ,as«. 1 11 OF 20 A 1�BUIlO1NG SECTIONS RESTAURANT I- FRONT ELEVATION IWESTI I e RESTAURANT 1-RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION ISOUTHI DAY CREEK SQUARE COMMERCIAL --_._ mr'Nr unwno. nmwwaannxaE ewn NN cwwuuueo��ra v.. —_— --- ., CWlAC4\EtENN9CN: R�NOiEB 12 OF 20 . ., .. itESTA-GRANT 1 E%TER10NR gg 114ATIONS m O I m LJ1 HESIhURANT 1 - REAR ELEVATION IFASTI DAY CREEK SQUARE COMMERCIAL MRICNIi YRMtlrtdi.nWNVRppVCMC1E NRE10. COMMAGB®tlp1 ApYN RESTMIRANT I- LEFT SIDE ELEVATION INORTNI _ 13 OF 20 RESTAUFOkfiff EXTERIO�RaE.VATIONS "NY VNINla Uo0 O, V3 V38V SNINIG 30"Ols AHO v3aaw 8V ONINIC ■ C-1 O'A -711 N3HOiN E10-16 152 r i _ itESfURAFTI 150F 20 DAY CREEK SQUARE - COMMERCIAL .,�---�, uncw.oc,anu �mwwnuvcu.eu,.,m uro..nmu, .saw ,• R�PLAaN m A RESTAURANT 2-BW,UNG sml,GN-AjS ,Tei IT III MST"2-WILNN SECTIONS JE Tj 16 OF 20 DAY CREEK SQUARE --COMMERCIAL T RE uURAr1� LDI [TIO Bui NOSE[$$ ZNS TIPIr AiOiT9 WY •. . n M1. .. u.... -nyi .. :.. nM1: �4a\[nlrtll m 0 i Ol 111 RESTAURANT 2. FRONT ELEVATION [SOUTH) y RESTAURANT 2 - RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION IEASTI DAY CREEK SQUARE -COMMERCIAL — — WNC.VII DAKAfW,]�WMRPYGE4F.9Y(R 10.GMGMURi10111NN LOIYEPtl4 4ElMlIOX vECNOtE B 17 OF 20 �- EXTERIOR EANT2 EAT RESTAURANT ONS A+ESra __ •. .•. iYtI WR Li_T_ _ RESTAURANT 2 - REAR ELEVATION INORTHI I RESTAURANT 2 - LEFTSIDE ELEVATION IWESTI DAY CREEK SQUARE COMMERCIAL .anon oaxamw.mwwmawcwneaom lm.cmoxr, ua�mrssw III 81 7S OF 20 RESTAGf9AM 22 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS m 0 rn Ln V �IZAXXI-l1:Io�Fl:Fblla'R1� STREET SIDE DAY CREEK SQUARE -COMMERCIAL ,,,��,:� �.«, ^,� TO MRANo1RELJ -� rrnunr onrianxmxxnnawunnn. axrt �m wumen�rs e«. •• u... r. PUNS TONER- SIOE ELEVATION ISOLh EAST] TONER- FRONT ELEVATION WORTH EAST) - DAY CREEK SQUARE - COMMERCIAL wnrw. on�nrrex. mnwxwwvexme wale �m crnwn rvemo„ss«. OF 20 ...su�lm 3xwn wem ml m m WI 311M15 31Jb1'J NOI HW W a xoiaoaa'_ aoe mweaxe � .��. �Ulm s]oxnu xvw eeasxxe3xe OVON ,3NIl,3SV8 EXHIBIT I bN. CYeM'YIb aHNir NVId 3 a Nouvwan 311S c c { 09 NN7 z+ @ pMp s } i QOOri r—R 3 } Y z�oo> s o;.zzz`i` 1< rG Q¢r P• .] � s.�. r e f .0� \ w� -« .. Y939�3 e I If I'i1 N 1' I111 I. cl I sl I 4!! BASE LINE ROAD o+±•__ �"" yi _m I1 •_�I_ u� 1.38 AC. IIZ• i �j •11� � � �::III1 � , 11 I R 11.. Er!11 1 1 1,1 ® I - r I • I I I 1 24.93 AC. 11 1�1 ® �I y � L t:• ' III r 5 fll r SEESNEELOSPVI RESTAURMls d h1 Ma 1.05AC. \ , 1 t\ 1 , i • ttL10 TAEPMUM �m� 1 l ; IE I IL® x I' I ® f.1� Uy � i • 1 _� I 11 6 � O I• ul 1 f {I. 1 111 1 I II 1 1 I •k 1. I _N' I � IIr 1 I � 1 1�1 • 1� I- -T' ® � I � fI '1 I 111 i� 11}I' 1 tl 1 i± I i ,I • �I —� _ _ - DETAILED SITE PLAN FOR CONDOMMIUM PURPOSES TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 20032 h R 939�1 111 TENTATIVE PARCEL NO. 19 62 I I (# it fl.1 N1, IN 111P(T OF RANITRI(11CAMONOA, C(II I OF SAN IS RNA--, ' a I ]InILnPGWIlNWIn :.rc. ivvxn „w: n,a.Nrc ulv .'may,° uo _ SCAL:•-i0 x6N AC lx0.115\' G�� IfLC� _.:= ., FFSU AC.IW MAY. 3111G Ia., mA-1, nla a•n n('. 11)MMIN11A1.+ 11. A. 58i3 s S@� 'i ¢m= z 11LL� pp E- C� N gg O Z W ¢ o kw a U n rcaulco er wl[ suer er Wr xafe 5< we xa eoi-1e1x cvr6,c ,A DSP-01 mx. 0 x>_satrosrm, o 4li _®'_ ��i' NOTM i3 1° I:'�I! li �' e~il *til i' I• li I I ® �l9 I FT € 24.S3AC. iii p _ I of �Pam.n a SCAIF: 1'.4W eFxonuP: vannmlttalumnes. OWNERIDEVELOPER CML ENGINEER mPw�.mlMomoao.xr nmuemam,u.c IL ..+onus® m.r.n.e°"""u u.eswwvewlo-e V ARCHITECT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT rtryaw.®nmlug.nsc DETAILED SITE PLAN FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20032 & TENTATIVE P.M. NO. 19762 W Tmi1l 14 NnN1110 ILGMWIW LIA TY W'AN HIIWAWI:O �Ammulnwmu aw. scrsu a P..m I or ana. wa .. t a PIv w ammo w A _I. I.Z �. y PwR. vM3 n m[ TQ tl M (4wir NOX[P P' SW MAY.2= asses]® UTILRYCOMPANIES WA1[fl SEWEfl: [l[CIIOC 1[IfPNOXL wrtYmlmr ovummvm nw. �rnwwm It�lv YXE rnvovbaronm i y , jF , —K— . I PNI¢LI 1 J , OfXCNYAPR' IiKAfNYnp Y4YYEMlIIE t- F- OWNERIDEVELOPER mno.lm �unYYola:v..X CMLENGINEER ARCHITECT l ..n.mmcrv¢an.Y.c LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT mmc,:,vsmn`p; A . ; Mli]1� TENTATIVE PARCEL NO. 19762 INTIp{t1]YEµ XAX11R)IIIfAMII\VA, NIIMYES IAN MpiNARDINEI ?l'AViI)1'1'AIJIi)IWIA ]AM AI`.IiMM YMIMMp Ul PARO' MAY,IDIO )ItNAp Mif 6el� 8 E \V �__�e ,_ i. � U§ a4A, §k\ §RIM\j \ d§ § � § ;} . . . .! SEESX 2 r P�JECTEItis /lm PARCEL4 AC. x c -� - i24.93 AQ a wa { iA9•/}! �. ♦ I®�p e \�i., - 1� SC0.E�: 1'=40' IIp11{� Q 'r- Qs ♦`,� ♦ ono..... o>,.D.s.rv. �ARCMECT ® Y p ♦ j 1 OWNERIOEVELOPER rl 5 1 Alw.ea °""°"'°"� .m mwun .mrs mus.recrvmaYs.mo rl t .�e ♦t t �.m w... pwimu.c>°�..wm.Jw bQ J I CIVIL ENGINEER LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT ' 'r .\ Q '�^° e%Mn `wF ♦ ♦♦ • 3�" COx9161WItl�lEe.NC �m —wvr .. ♦ % _� p �,Am WM1yIW CbRN L[FYYfIM a8 � mJ �e € � •: yymJ Aohrsen[x 1 l ft F ♦ 'p H ♦ l9� V AHY IIYA 3]IL ",/ l \ ,TENTATIVE PARCEL NO. 19762 'IMIIIPCN701:MNC11111VCAMUN(3ACOIMY •• I n�x S'F Rrrcm UFSAN URNARDINO ]]FF 9E� W y !pE SE'J SE ♦ !] I e rsamm wlsnxli . ^'aR 5 rm Or]¢DJIW mmlwsaaXD [Dnrv. - \ ]KNACURIAS .MIMWTID PAR(I]5 MAY,IDI6 rro, - .• .neq-� Y 3KMACMT Se!! $ 4�Qx a UH d 6 0; dp8s$HE ' ou.Rc xD > TPM-03 ! ama...m.rx 1 W aa..c I ems.E. UTILITY COMPANIES WAREP SEWER: ELECTRIC: TELEPHONE.LLAS: r snc N�.E.. gwAvl ON��Iemcuravunc sca _ EI sn i f�m A� � � R pwq GY:TE an[a�9 b w�w[lai �m lrtarY�s P YIrE:I®IE„:Stl m�e XMYne+n Er'+ww0•• IM IANAN[ I-�I la rbHn mEX in wa. - a e.aY,nao -- I•x rcmn Avb.�a .� HAI— :ac 'p• ` I k xml I -"- I II I I 'e LET, I [ L - Tl �'. -F. ® as _N • - - .. "i I MEN...: uwurmwouAresuur 'II - SCALE: i -100' JM �a. m+mm�mrrs 1, mcn.mcomrmae� I• !.. OWNERIDEVELOPER . I nRnarnEm„GE49Nm:nCpPAxr _ CML ENGINEER f I I W�+YA�AX4aFFA }.4"y ARCHTECT {J rAYCXwnerE<run�Y n.xb.'o �i, W: un. uvume cw%mwu LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AAA rM AYN: 111X1111-0 FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 20032 INIIdfIT Hj2NANIl101lN7AM0NGA CLXM MNNWANAWIMp TA1tiPARII lJli )RNLI p w�EY <u�m� oWl[[EY�x [I aMaF.l'NLLwl.YNS W I i uH6 gRNMO i nni'.1NUJSX 1MIA1W'.PFn un' AMY.1m4 3 tz G Q U 3 i Q Z W F fFA 0 BY wR NAN ggWX Er YAl'IN. 2 sc m w. ew-ven CPAn914 M0. I � TTM-01 0 UTILITY COMPANIES xorz rN1t wArue s[w[n: Euamcm TOLPHON]: uewaonnsvne¢Nw] BDCHRA¢® l4 [NfOWA��IfAmAx. e1eH Qj a uaN�av-xec NPurzPm� M1art. VHn � rIAVJFl e�4A: LAS not R9 n�ffyMm Ieo�M1tl A.cura.waum. .u...wva OM.G91)1Y PO.EIYryi:HU: nt�apiemry uu "rt^w°V'v. _4 F Sp PROJECT SREtl\ iF SCALE: 1 -41Y NOTES OWNERIOEVELOPER :ewxwatiwr:wr CML ENGINEER m rwrweavi wwv%]Ge ARCHTECT mva�'oua%nlu LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT y I � ANi:lll%L3ll-w FOR CONDOMMUM PURPOSES TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20032 MTIYi I'II'Yd:MNfl W RICAMI VAUFCN11MY1lVfANb1RNARl]Ci(] ]TAl9OPCAOIY)RNIA WN4 A ]uBM1V P�I65N oµ[Fl 1 V Va9S1 � WIS m :4 apRAr lf[ttlam [Mn Rm'RaVLo �:�O i O , 3193AVXR1.1 IMTIbIMDWI- MAT.W16 ]193 .NET } oW 3 a � � 4 U u F Ha- z w u¢iGm M RA" ou.�x �. wi xol9 ss I! Np. 801-]69] MM9W M0. `c TTM-02 SEE$XEET2 Ale f IN PIWECTSR IEk^ x I6 y _ 6 "y 7. - Lori I I i .. \ 24.93 AC. u M � I SCALE I'-40' ' � H NOTES q B \ 4k P I l` Ty m. o. �i , r �. ., 7 SI! �a .. "rr� ffi 1®u !�' OWNERDEVELOPER ra.uti L dLmNl°NLmrm6ua°°LNuoc6N..Nr - J : k� CIVIL ENGINEER ` � ` '1 c MrIIgO�Mer MFF� ON ARCHITECT N I6F y°E ' '•l `r:wo: : �' ® ��°g & min m" LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT 4-�,.I` r ,J I- 'R rRurM1 r ( • .rtun/1• ...� IqR iAi[ ° ; 6 € 2 I 1 1 1' �, nmrN on uuo arnuror °wN oww am v.,,a I-; P� F P p A �r 1 I I ', �` IF'.� '� :In„In ONDOMINIUM PURPOSES • .. varvw ° FOR C r TENTATIVE TRACT 20032 Nwt ANCIGCIOLNTIdtITYOl)11ANBLNAfH)I I TATL FlM9emw rxuxiz x .S` iO L a I CPNM1 R GOEi RJ5i0 M1ayMaPAwv[°u wl ' - J — .. - wciy•-' 2A•)J AC GNL1.45 LWWBIFBO WT MAY.21116 WY No TTM 03 u 2euNm I TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 20032 & TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 19762 INTIII:RIY II1:NANSIIVQICAMI1.YGn, MWY VHIN W'RNANVINU 4TA11:01 l'AI.IIX)0.MA v YM9 w^9nMpI6Rlrt@q:I F<oT[xsXYumn+mbED Y'%V.K+ 1844 AG GRO&S MAY�wlI zaYX AC MT RIiSII)1MIAL=]4.93 AC CINIMI:RI IAL. 11Y.. WVEN M11— SCRLL: r=loa yy ✓� ]r LEGEND) UTILITY COMPANIES LE¢PHONE: +i0x WA1CR SCNFA mmlr¢3 ,n r xoa m,auv GG:�v�1 EWRYAx Wu4M�G5C0 9E.CHWNN: Pa]s:YnB F PmO.GNIB rraxwxi EIYtlIBR133: .r Em CiRlc: nuaEY!O� �qs� LLVa�JMSFMLE I.iF1r3 �iXYp1IX WMIIIIIES w pawl HOLE$ OWNERIDEVELOPER m�unuvia YYBEBWM9WIJCWYNY CML ENGINEER )caws ni�velo�Gim°1Le .°yam a v fru l�wv[emeue nuotuwCCcrwe'seo�.rr.,m zu mw�WG �mlzr LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT Cy1X �.u[X.oarm�"M IOKIb(D Bf GR I WY GP.3w1 � Wl 3°IPl u 1. xa .-um 1 GXmw xn CG-01 Y 9 N•+uM1 Yt ��, • Q IEGFNG• UTILITYCOMPANIES xr waEA SEVER: �.wxR"�'n.`uRuw .ya mw.wsm wwnumr%i. oc POE.IOIf111U1 "�..y^M �Y Y RuwaamxaIXxauwl 3 F, r t ff�f NOTES � 7 RameR.xuxur•wrua I �. I;\ I' EMirMWK WIMIIlE4 'I usuruwut ej� Iy4L P Qa im<: I�+I li OWNER/DEVELOPER • ,F. we CML ENGINEER cm leca°O°n r.�lae� I , .. a.• ;e \ I• ; wr.aIXmrr< ARCHITECT IE� n...�o i >� S�gif/ • al�� t°•`-?' CO.IA xI.W WI.e LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT j'_T. 41L� mtnoy TRACT NO. 20032 & 7E P.M. NO. 19762 I il'AMOFIN. LOIWLY IIPSAN NFIWAHf1IF0 m±o� orwulaixNu YM x •4 OI6 tl Ir( SwM1 PL[YOIR tl LM 6NY.]016 n c Z O y f a U Z U g i IXSG�[0 R WIL j R1Y Z oRon rt Wx xore' u � xa uR-oen CG-02 w 0 w,wm e :y5r ti/1rw 9B r:I�l III I�III� _ 5a I( 1GB p r 4 L 1Cry:' it 11 4Bceno: UTILITY COMPANIES EUC,RIL: TC x: MAL[fl BEY2�.Iv�tm[<re, ®� eQ p�V.�runrn �,x� m GAS rvAc:mW s naury, T,,,.T1[L, I!,� vex: nr unquvnry fCIFPxOxL• PYEI®IPY,T, TALP' `T �T m .INR090P9Ym�4 A'API BENCHRARx: vtSC E 1'-30• u L.I;r ^'V FA4IHNOW(WA4il,lES. �\ �' vnu.rurvn _ OWNS IRNE�LOPER CMLENGINMR yy4 wYOEoum `men"�""� r�sS_j.rryly '�I ® �iYFT.V1YAV emroxe �`,*�ate •A.�a. nRCHRE,mn{Ui,uu LANOSCAPEARCHITECT CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20032 & TENTATIVE P.M. NO. 19762 IN THE ETEy WUNtlIo"WANUNnA. I19Mt 01: MN nI01NARnIPV !TA„i1N: L'ALIIiWNIA � N, {.� IR xYtl. xx+5 n M tl16 P- IK tVwl r6tl:¢p O YO U. 1iR11.1\ l6H AC'. NIT MAy.m INA YIIIENIYA'I.e 1� .11 Al. Z � s e �Z�� U P Z V P a u n vm,Eo ri oxrz I " oW sc I ECG 03 tl Beusa I l H IEGENG' K Wnle.m UTILITY COMPANIES EUCWQ x'aE�sEwEx tmu. .:ar nmir.w,u. umYmulydwdlwm .o.�n.wc "voeEi �uem9 II dHaNE: F If11:51: m ��wLLN V1FXr/O]NO&XYHMfPI R R G R SCALE: I'-30' NGngF m ti ID.xvpixMOuaem�Es: OMEROEVELOPER CMLENGINEER co.au.cdvao.Dme. Xw:m ARRRCHTEm L DSSCAPE ARCHITECT CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20032 & TENTATIVE P.M. NO. 19762 INnGitTYUF1UNll1U NCAM(lYt]A,(LI ONSAN Wi NAKL NU srAmEY•aunuYnTA K. �LOaP D XIW]\ 1 D :oip( W° Y I..a51411W�q,SMp w 811 :. csS 1.d I4Gl w^S n:4 d{[td Mf4M�M YSaN M. M. ]6AC. MISS W-NIX IA MAY. ]NIL 11 M nxnei-1111EAl' 5alg 8 o °w cO j An a` 6�;3b r.A M1 Ls�u+o- EASIN.wsAouAHnnEs: OWNERIOEVELOPER CMLENGINEER •moe.aac 99rxm w.,Ys9�AmrcXOu m"On.rem°`�".u9iruIw Xulwe ARCHITECT ti y v � l .a f"-e, m.r.cr.9.v,cslam I m9 V" i1 CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN UTLLmcoMPANIES EIll9N[: f°."'",.®'°".[ a�„mr.„[, POR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES rA1rn s]Jv] TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20032 & TENTATIVE P.M. NO. 19762 ov.Duu INnDiI]IYIFHANllpl9tH'AMIIVM, 21M lfi:MKw0] RMNO [rwmXn"u rvsm X>,nnu". �.�we� A�TAnv9w�w]mwntA aaao:m: tEurxave m"n maXa IOYO.LOMCJf.Eu[4r 2MA('.GH445 i9U MAY.]014 Itt\IW'XtlA1..1 SI Al. A" 3� K G Z Z 0"s Zia z o U Dram n out H yr„ Br Y1t ]019 � V ss FO XD. b1y9T D9.YW414 CG-05 or9m�o P UTILITYCOMPANIES mcmc: M1nP E[TLN: m4Y��.EtGu®� emncw,auooauem .fD1"o. ,Yw...... o.a.rwnnf ifIEVXOxE rww.wims,a, VtlGptlMtSFf•LEYEXI iE i�nwm'X SME: 1-=30' ffom+ � wi tlO° Ermirvmluccuumr¢s OWNERIDEVELOPER CMLENGINEER ARCHITECT e m Tll. _•_ faR 6YYYEl[X R • ,Krona LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 20032 & TENTATIVE P.M. NO. 19762 WVW..f1I IW"NInIIMIMONtiA, lVll RlfYlll+.xAN W'RNANIIMII 6Twn:nvl�uRaixww YM . YfQ.6q a /YSye , a .�R XM w :.e mn �i, +YL 1.a vra wrs x;<mi¢admnrc xmmuacm MAY. ]u16 ` � n ryml rrx man;�wa.mm wuunna u.ivminslnl PAY,•CFi®C, BOUL.EVAM--•_ F ttR ®�`Ymfl ..vnvti W M snTc 4Gr 1 R.v. �m,nnr.uammnn fARnr.Awc� Amrt¢s OMERDEVELOPER �n1�au...F �umm�r CML ENGINEER us.v.io�"'ama �°`vmv.iru mveemo.e ARCHITECT Avnum.�.nm¢Nn.nw u, o.awum LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT Wrm�m. CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN FOR CONDOMIMUM PURPOSES TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20032 & TENTATIVE P.M. NO. 19762 MnIL(nY1F NANf111111 N'Ae1lIN1'.A,IYNgl1Y11Y\AN WX!UNIIINI, s�An:oFrumwxu n.c.vw.eo.v��i .r emao �,i. •+u l.o .A.aolnm uA mmn mmea.a sw 1.M A, .-I' aUY,2014 fl ,1.1MAI et1 1 Al' rm,.uw 1 cm�cmrc •••••, asmua mr9.ra-r.:i mw. aru�!ewcrem -i 1 — a SIDEWALK mw.�11 g �2%_ SIDEWALK I •s, CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20032 &' TENTATIVE P.M. NO. 19762 W TY!CIIYIp'WWIIINrAUW4A1MtW Nry OPSW W'RWININO vnaii�i'o'iaunw^�nM"t a ix lul auvem n mn, . w ..ra ws .:4 ma v ,R mnn wmaz. u sa M"Y.]n!n CG-08 nBmwm I� f tea. � _ .. ��!�._ , 1 1 1♦ 1° � � ._. �_ .. ..._ P WIDE SIDEEWAWA .�.. LK -0---• -°- l.. r, 11. _o_j ._ �:. ••....a �..._._ ,�.. a WIDE SIDEWALK m_. r a `n� W �A CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20032 & MAY.1.14 LD Z K gS a a k 1 w U S� � O U 2 va�an aee eW i ti� wxx n vur vale 6 u vm xn my-uvv OYrcn 1W CG-09 N 1 Ob F I gppiMlNf 4flEN11.]]{.NJ 6ilA.]RO ocww.uE CF 'I wY � � PRELIMINARY WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR CONDOMINOM PURPOSFS NTENTATIVE TRACT NO.20032 • IAII II NJItN1N1A um 3. _.-w.. I• _ -. i - '. � • '•1 • 1 III 1 � 1 II al 1 — 1 1 1 1 1 I ly.MIECK °W YwlEx4l[F (xEWSI1�Y° m RDENA.PHY.MO r...... �� ]P.wKNnF]olsrnlY elFow.+r*FA RA �K]NPY/YRs 6ipg1 ce..x 1wM.LLVQNtlREA IO GIY]Ax ''� uuxw�You.oe �� ]4VFN]OYAL4P ME PI wS eEFPO TiL[) rvewa rtw°w.rnra ]p-s iy YS[FL PoE6Fafw NO P�Mee Ov PMfIOSPII IYMYx E°� U 119��E KiT1BYn�E N4RFWI' -�°�IIIY w. u M¢>yl� — PMv n.u', �Ni WM IUNM�ci YpYF p1Y IISITYLI CEIi161G1E i �QOYY°ENTtw�TEIfPIDw/npo,NY,Ex GMU1. Yw,lEse.fnM`9MCYM1491Mi.'MIEN ]w.rlEmn�s ,caENcaamcrt°.w°.x FPc]]DwL 1°oe sa]aw wwYFmEKP11ewIL alaN P,L �M�SW W s]vHtSNCLYIY OWNERIDEVELOPER CIVIL ENGINEER OFNX]MIP sIBG WLOK fMLLL]MCIY �' WC CCVwY a„ew 0..11F6Rw F�lO 1 BASE LINEil016-- T�. c ur S II T+!(N�^- !Y y 1 .. u »uwu�,'(,iu Y •t-4y"Yu �..+' * W A. �•. I t. r. .' uY uuuu.' w " uu •uEuuu "v u y�yIX YYYy�yyu 1Y-x -- JL^}y� ; 5 uuu Y}.iu 4u,fl.0 xYYuu uYY 41. .F J J y Y� J' f YEA � • u - ty u r F 'rye iLL »!'la Y 17 14 1 JA • J 't a � uY[u • � F YM Y '4 . ar r G J C Y A Nua.0 tn(rt nunuvY 4 �.. C Y.»» -- l '_:. E 1 r •".�E� ±9�ry ' h Ye( yr -w+w.- V.. r'rrr 4�P ,SkE 51EET6@ FaF11MbN1[ I�IMijItIES. OWNEPoDEVELOPER plxpNq� .W6Ox¢uJfiMM1 axsie.m. CIVIL ENGINEER w ` vH®a neA QM,ewetNonaN ARCMffECT ...Nw�N...,..MI. a LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT NENCNWN�u� 0 CUT / FILL MAP FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20032 & TENTATIVE P.M. NO. 19762 M'110.1'IIY FMAMII 1M AMIIMA lIM1Y 11Y SAN nNWAWNNII RAT" H 1 IJI INNIA By, P.LE ..x WxLI !Y� AJS(IX K WxN eFIWYx W'oYu MAY.NH4 0 le!! S , 3 will, s IX$o Onun �I 3 d V �a « ��. Y� uilJwx VN � .VYIV ..wM a w J .wuw i ��" ♦M .ryyMewyy �za Y Ny81.r ti y p.0 J y�e ay�Y♦ �rayJJ{Yy arraaaY • Jtit�yVJ +r ..= daN� �.f�YaYa�au�rla .ry M.�W1 ,, .Ytl Y.y aYaa..wa .ryYYa P 1,1 •O y..}r.w.i�a.�if�.� .� .. wua�r�y. u a�JJ1�� � a rY YUY lu®yraaaaYYaaWa u aaYYYYYY"Y..�4 r -- u�ra.�.a{u•• •��� ui�u . u iaa Yuraruauaaraaraa ar 'uuurrar a Y a�wa+ uiAr uaa r� jr _ .J. a .wwr a V a�Y.µa �cT<a ..�•- Y�.a."" r a .".� Yaw..a..aw a a r N = r a Waa V♦CYy _ i u x..Ywl uY ��ru Y Yaau wY N 411��l1�b1 aaa _w ar�a_a«Naha +aNYaaaauyaaYYu as r a$II ur Ya uu Y as uuWaYa-rYYaa� uN v u Yuuu -- ---- YUYruuu�eY � va s a� 4i uur-.uuauYu u aYu u .BI bl w}T�a aJtaa.h.0 Y� u" u YaY r a wear ii y.u=uuu YY NY a Y Yry r ( Y ray} DIY i v4 vuw-vuv a-----Naar�ruvvwu wS r L aY r vyv�Nj=" uar Yyavaaaa "u u.uhvaY uMxrYvuu+a�u. w r+...v u 1JY r --------- y : jww�u" waF. a.Yh.�ra..u.u0.uaau.aiu HEM: +AyappLaa= J /YY' u1 YUYuaaNuuua var♦w yTi �i aa4alaYY----..IYY�YN Yaa--- u�Y w.Yaa a Ya aiu a u..ra+vr •••'.��ddd N v .. .eAa auu�a rj�ayr�raa----Yaau�u�y-- Yu Yy Y....ryuaYY aau u.. M "yuy Jiwa. u�r rdu 1L J J1. uWa {jru'Ibai.aJYv -ie�"'emu" a�" 4 �w alYi d "�4L4ia"i� �Ku as{wraa uY aau wry�euauaaaaa+ aw�aa�araa naY ru.� u aa.yYYarYYaas raJaa arraYaar a�.0 aaaY yypprr u au �v aSA.a ar. r ururwuprua a aar Yuvu uuva r®war "yy�lwea.l a.l•YYuin Ei\ufv u a�a aJaw �uuur�r ".S�aaaY�e. uu i�.. Y N +.± liva �,y Yau aartrle e.i.4,� .9�v r.��r���..faf1��a'aLaa a =aaa y�YYY .. a Y..L..�uw�wu •..Jn•wwiuia;[Iu Y Jiaa a of.�1I uI+ w�wy�u9Y5'+µYw FY� ueb rrYuauaia yy�u�ry yyu 'FY v.'.L .V. Viru .wix f Y � u � Ye 4� u�Tf -.jY../t•u � 1�.M afJ'tTii S YN[ .I a 1...�1. - .T. , a.. - a.✓w- "a, .. n. .. G. � ^ev- scnu "-+o yir'iri � FVx111tgYlfftlMllxE� OWNERCEVVELOPER �..... CIVIL ENGINEER MC TECT --�c�nne�.nxwww M�YR1H I EISCRPEARCNITECT I 4y_ Wr.[I YOI uYeil A I I YMI�III,xY.o-� 0 CUT / FILL MAP FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSFS TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20032 & TENTATIVE P.M. NO. 19762 Inno:rtlY iw xiNeronriuiweu,evwmmr ew sMi waN�nxwe srirr.ewreulxxwu XYM'. INKS pY 4M'MT IYM PbIN.-N51 Ai �M/.Y X.I. C Mwenn n rz ux yyrn wr nu CF 02 I. WMn N -id N-—"•'—Is' r ' .}r ..-. — ; • . "! "'' '" f — __r �"' n ' " 'I" P `' r � I �{ �� • n, I r �1 I� • — gg\\o 'T .I. {j 'r - p 1 Iq • •I LEGEND: SC+LE: ,'-BB' • o OWNERIDEVELOPER vv,v m ��s CML ENGINEER ARCHITECT wn pt:uu�'� LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT c.nw.cr� w :a m BFxCMWBx: FIRE ACCESS PLAN FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20032 & TENTATIVE P.M. NO. 19762 wnB:Imrew.wvnlxxruilvaAaxlNrclwsAN w]U+AxnINa a�Am�x+l�nln�xwn v. nu cmnr� M. AC N1.1 AC. M. il' Nmy.m,6 111111M.M •il.Yl A'1)iNMLl1.l..1.51 AI' z o U Z3� ga E! w a LL Ck mlY o By WE ..rl NI•N B. IY. lol{ , ro w wrun mroro w ) FA-01 a. l mwa x ® � �PIWE]�� PIWE1� FAy,OW PNA9E] a n" QD � ib '� � W liJ �� ♦ " ) Fb1 J • 1 1 r- o .- ", a ^PI,♦,UE, -- - �. AB DRY CREEK BOULEVARD PHASING PLAN FOR CONDOMINUIM PURPOSES A TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 20032 & p�� w„TENTATIVEMP.M_YNO. 19762�) AIN W I'QAX(IMA MJ YTi„ +.te }A.NA('.IR'..1 �AL9a�lM —]�51 HI' i 3 N ouo�o rt �n OYWE XF. PH-01 EXHIBIT OVOtl 3NI13SV6 VJ Zp 1 w r z_m < .' 1 W 1 ...• leke' Ia- , : , - . I� 1 • log o i --- :7 .. - orei � 1 1 I • I 1 * I J yry1 '7 ___ _ 1------- r i- ' m .w i ♦IN K ♦ 7 ,♦,* 1 1 1 1 r W I 1 [ 1 \ 1 1 v 1 1 � 1 q ------------------------------- w 9 �€ � ^�s" yeas; �ptl ,i �_ifp y _�f -• g F z P H.- _ _ _ L__ _ S •i 1=91 5i. Y am 71 m No 2 e --------------------- I ' ' I 1 + I I I - - 1 I �• i_1 I .- .1 1 11 P. I 1 ' , I _ 1 ' 1 1 O O ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' I ' 1 � ' - 1 1 � 1 � _ 1 � I 1 I _ 1 I Z 1 Y , z"f. i yi�3i -I1 I r� li Y ! a I --------------------- OVUN 31141-13sv9 F 1 1 1 I 1 I I 1 m N 1 s P - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Oil 1 � 1 A I O m 1 ' '------- , 1----------------- 1 1 m ---------------- ?� Y of _ Q 17 Li I 1 1 i J I II 1 1 i • i � � 1 J - i C Ln 1 1 _ i J i i i O za" ; G 1 Tv 1 1 I > Q' ----------------------------' `' y '----- --------------- z o I I I - I = 1 1 _ T I ' 3 - 1 1 I 1 1 t_. 1 1 --- '< - - la `- `_3, 1 e]c L it I - I I 1 I 44 C ^w L V z � < V < 3U V q° E10-16 188 i a � \ x c s yE Of \ < a 6 a m �CL. � v z q° E10-16 189 a I ,� -■ |�| Ag ! \� |||! ! §§| \H§ ~ --.- )� 2 i ;E \\ ■UMS-M ! � o a a, 1 1 1 1 1 lS ' , Y � 1 y ; 1 f l ; t V 1 � 1 Y ' 1 n i i 1 1 1 � l � 1 N l 1 c �mi 1 ti' {f� 1 I 1� 1 r 1 I•i 1 � OVOU 3NI-13SYS ---____________________� k *o it 1 1 , 1 1 )-1 E10-16 192 r%rMiL. I Uy w I I - I. VW r-.nn. 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,- Dominick Perez, Associate Planner,' Nikki Cavazos, Assistant 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. G. 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 ther meeting for public input. Page 1 of 4 EXHIBIT K E10-16193 ffl-&rRIL IV, L.V 1 ■ - ■ .VV r.[Vl. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA RAINS Room CITY HALL 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE acres of land in the Victoria Community Plan (VCP) within the Mixed Use District related to the construction of a mixed use project consisting of 380 residential units, a 71 room hotel and two restaurant pads totaling 12,000 square feet, located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road - APN: 1090-331-05. Related Files: Preliminary Review DRC2015-01102, Pre Application Review DRC2016-00142, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19762, Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449, Design Review DRC2016-00450, Uniform Sign Program DRC2016-00451, Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2016- 00452 and Minor Exception DRC2016-00508. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00450 - DR HORTON - A request for site plan and architectural review in the Victoria Community Plan (VCP) within the Mixed Use District related to the construction of a mixed use project consisting of 380 residential units, a 71 room hotel and two restaurant pads totaling 12,000 square feet, located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road - APN: 1090-331-05. Related Files: Preliminary Review DRC2015-01102, Pre Application Review DRC2016-00142, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19762, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20032, Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449, Uniform Sign Program DRC2016-00451, Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2016-00452 and Minor Exception DRC2016-00508. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2016-00451 - DR HORTON - A request for a Uniform Sign Program in the Victoria Community Plan (VCP) within the Mixed Use District related to the construction of a mixed use project consisting of 380 residential units, a 71 room hotel and two restaurant pads totaling 12,000 square feet, located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road - APN: 1090-331-05. Related Files: Preliminary Review DRC2015-01102, Pre Application Review DRC2016-00142, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19762, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20032, Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449, Design Review DRC2016-00450, Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2016-00452 and Minor Exception DRC2016-00508. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. The Committee recommended approval subject to the 'following; Village A: For the 3 story Townhome Rowhome on all 5, 6, or 7 plex buildings and elevation schemes, additional materials and elements shall be added to the front and rear elevations that are appropriate to the Craftsman -inspired design. Materials shall include the following as appropriate: board and batten and lap siding, introducing brick, additional amounts of shingle siding, and windows appropriate to the architectural style. Village D: For all plans and architectural styles, additional materials and elements shall be added that are appropriate to each style to achieve the 360 degree architecture requirement. For the Craftsman and Shingle styles, materials shall include board and batten siding, shingle siding, brick or rock, lap siding. For the Santa Barbara and ltalianate style, materials and features shall include elements and architectural vocabulary that Page 3 of 4 E10-16 194 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Donald Granger April 18, 2017 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19762 - DR HORTON - A request to subdivide 28.4 acres of land into 4 parcels in the Victoria Community Plan (VCP) within the Mixed Use District related to the construction of a mixed use project consisting of 380 residential units, a 71 room hotel and two restaurant pads totaling 12,000 square feet, located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road - APN: 1090-331-05. Related Files: Preliminary Review DRC2015-01102, Pre Application Review DRC2016-00142, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20032, Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449, Design Review DRC2016-00450, Uniform Sign Program DRC2016-00451, Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2016-00452 and Minor Exception DRC2016-00508. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20032 - DR HORTON - A request for a residential condominium subdivision for 380 residential units on 28.4 acres of land in the Victoria Community Plan (VCP) within the Mixed Use District related to the construction of a mixed use project consisting of 380 residential units, a 71 room hotel and two restaurant pads totaling 12,000 square feet, located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road - APN: 1090-331-05. Related Files: Preliminary Review DRC2015-01102, Pre Application Review DRC2016-00142, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19762, Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449, Design Review DR02016-00450, Uniform Sign Program DRC2016-00451, Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2016- 00452 and Minor Exception DRC2016-00508. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00450 - DR HORTON - A request for site plan and architectural review in the Victoria Community Plan (VCP) within the Mixed Use District related to the construction of a mixed use project consisting of 380 residential units, a 71 room hotel and two restaurant pads totaling 12,000 square feet, located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road - APN: 1090-331-05. Related Files: Preliminary Review DRC2015-01102, Pre Application Review DRC2016-00142, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19762, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20032, Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449, Uniform Sign Program DRC2016-00451, Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2016-00452 and Minor Exception DRC2016-00508. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2016-00451 - DR HORTON - A request for a Uniform Sign Program in the Victoria Community Plan (VCP) within the Mixed Use District related to the construction of a mixed use project consisting of 380 residential units, a 71 room hotel and two restaurant pads totaling 12,000 square feet, located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road - APN: 1090-331-05, Related Files: Preliminary Review DRC2015.01102, Pre Application Review DRC2016-00142, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19762, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20032, Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449, Design Review DRC2016-00450, Victoria Community Plan Amendment ORC2016-00452 and Minor Exception DRC2016-00508. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. BACKGROUND Preliminary Review: In November of 2015, DR Horton filed a Preliminary Review Application with staff to receive Design and Technical comments for the proposed 28.4 acre mixed -use project. Following receipt of staffs Design and Technical comments and a couple of meetings Item C4-1 E10-16 195 DRC COMMENTS TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19762, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20032, DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00450, UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2016-00451 — DR HORTON April 18, 2017 Page 3 SURROUNDING AREA The project site is bordered by Base Line Road along the north boundary; Day Creek Boulevard along the east boundary; a 16.6 acre single-family neighborhood zoned Mixed Use/ Single - Family (4-6 units/acre) that is developed at 4.8 dwelling units/acre within the Victoria Arbors Master Plan in the VCP west of Day Creek Boulevard, between Church Street and the south boundary of the project; and a Southern California Edison transmission corridor zoned Open Space and the Day Creek Flood Control channel zoned Flood Control along the west boundary. Across Base Line Road at the northwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road is a future neighborhood shopping center that will be anchored by Stater Brothers that is currently under construction, and across Day Creek Boulevard at the southeast corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road is an existing neighborhood center anchored by Sprouts Farmer's Market. GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING General Plan and Zoning: The project site has a General Plan Land Use Designation of Mixed Use; however, the site is currently zoned Regionally Related Office/Commercial (RROC), within the Victoria Community Plan (VCP). The General Plan Land Use Designation of Mixed Use occurred with the 2001 General Plan update and remained Mixed Use in the 2010 General Plan update. The Victoria Community Plan was adopted in 1981 and according to staff research has been zoned Regionally Related/ Office Commercial since VCP's 1981 adoption. Zoning: The applicant has submitted a Victoria Community Plan Amendment to change the Victoria Community Plan Zoning Designation from RROC to Mixed Use (MU) in order to be consistent with the goals and objectives of the General Plan. When the Victoria Community Plan was first approved, Mixed Use was not included as a land use category. CIRCULATION AND SITE PLANNING Circulation: Regarding access and intersection alignment, the proposed project is anticipated to be compatible with streets and intersections in the surrounding area. The applicant has designed the project so that access will be from three points: one on Base Line Road that will be signalized and align with the driveway to the future Stater Brothers neighborhood center at the northwest corner of Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard; one right -in and right -out off Day Creek Boulevard; and one signalized entry off Day Creek Boulevard that will align with the existing signal at Madrigal Place. The primary access point off Day Creek Boulevard will feature a drive aisle that utilizes decorative pavement with a landscaped median that is framed by trees on either side. The project is also designed with an emergency vehicle access point along Day Creek Boulevard south of the signalized entrance at Madrigal Place. Site Planning: The project features two primary plaza areas that are accessible by both residents and hotel and retail patrons. The Village Plaza is located just south of the drive aisle adjacent to the hotel and will feature decorative pavers in the drive aisle flanked by twin fountains with tree plantings, colored concrete that will be coordinated with the drive aisle pavers in a running bond pattern, a raised stage for community performances with a retractable movie screen, lounge area and seat walls. At the corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road, the Village Center has been designed as a publicly accessible focal point. The plaza will be shared by the two restaurants and will feature a central fountain, decorative paving, accent trees, fountain, overhead trellis structures, colored concrete and an architectural tower that pedestrians can pass through. Item C4-3 E10-16 196 DRC COMMENTS TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19762, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20032, DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00450, UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2016-00451 — DR HORTON April 18, 2017 Page 5 Amenities: The Development Code requires a total of seven recreational amenities for a 380 unit residential project. As proposed, the project is providing a total of 9 amenities, comprised of six passive areas and three active amenities. The passive amenities are designed for sitting, reading, conversation and outdoor eating, and include two plazas, three outdoor seating/lounge areas and one paseo with a connecting walkway trail near the core of the project that links one plaza and one seating area. The primary plaza in the residential area features a retractable movie screen, raised staged area, a lounge area, colored concrete with medallion and pavers, and raised seat walls. One plaza has a dual age tot lot, picnic tables and low walls that define the space. Two of the outdoor lounge areas are designed with suspended lighting, steel patterned screen walls, planter areas, low walls, and I -beams that will frame each seating area. For active amenities, the project is designed with three areas for physical activity: 1) pool/ spa/ cabana area; 2) linear park and 3) double bocce court. The pool/ spa area will feature outdoor dining areas, barbeques, large potted plants, trees and a restroom building. The linear park is designed with a walking path, a pedestrian plaza with a shaded seating area, three outdoor exercise stations, and a decomposed granite path. Although the linear park will be privately maintained, it will be accessible to the public. The double bocce courts feature shade and poured in place colored concrete seat walls. Open Space: The Development Code requires that the townhome provide a minimum of 150 square feet of open space per unit, with a minimum depth of 6 feet. Open space may be provide in the form decks or balconies. All of the townhome units comply with these requirements. Landscape: Landscape standards for mixed use projects are governed by a combination of standards from the Mixed Use District and standards from Residential Districts for multi -family projects. For landscape calculations, the density for the project equates to 13.4 dwelling units/acre based upon the 28.4 acre project area. Per Section 17.56.070 of the Development Code, the following are the landscape standards for projects with density ranges between 14-24 units/acre: 45 trees per gross acre shall be planted, with the following percentages of sizes: 10% shall be 36-inch box or larger; 10% shall be 24-inch box or larger, and 80% shall be 15- gallon sized. Mixed Use projects required that 10% of the overall net area be landscape. For the residential area, 19.3 acres are allocated to multi -family product, and 5.5 acres to single- family product. The project has 87 24-inch box trees, 87 36-inch box trees and 745 15-gallon size trees, for a grand total of 919 trees, exceeding the minimum requirement of 871 trees (45 x 19.36 acres). For landscape area, the minimum requirement is 2.84 acres (10%), and the project is providing 4.57 acres of landscape area. For all landscape standards (tree sizes and landscape area), the project either meets or exceeds the minimum standards. COMMERCIAL and HOTEL ARCHITECTURE Restaurant Pads: The architectural vocabulary for the restaurant pads and hotel is Santa Barbara inspired. Exterior features and materials include arches, tile insets, tile roofs, colonnades, recessed niches, awnings, curvilinear elements, and fenestration choices that enhance visual interest. Roof top equipment will be screened by the parapets. Each restaurant is 6,000 square feet, and the height of each building is 25 feet. Both restaurants are designed with a covered outdoor dining area. Hotel: Complimenting the restaurant buildings, the hotel evokes Santa Barbara -inspired design. Key architectural features include awnings, tile insets, ceramic tile elements, curvilinear parapets, French doors, decorative wood siding at key locations, medallions, exposed rafters, Item C4-5 E10-16 197 DRC COMMENTS TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19762, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20032, DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00450, UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2016-00451 — DR HORTON April 18, 2017 Page 7 Setbacks: For Mixed Use projects, setbacks are determined at the following formula: 50-75% of the standard streetscape setback. Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard are classified as Major Divided Arterials. Accordingly, the minimum building setbacks (measured from ultimate curb face) are the following for each land use type: a. Detached single-family: 11.25 to 22.5 feet. b. Attached single-family/ multi -family: 11.25 to 22.5 feet. c. Commercial: 11.25 to 22.5 feet. All of the project's proposed setbacks are in compliance with the standards for Mixed Use projects. Along Day Creek Boulevard the setbacks range from 13 to 23 feet for the hotel, 14 to 17 feet for the restaurant, and 22 feet for the attached townhomes. Along Day Creek Boulevard, the setback for the restaurant is 21 feet, the attached townhomes are plotted from 18 to 21 feet from the curb, and the detached single-family condos are plotted from 24 to 31 feet from the curb. UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM The applicant has submitted a Uniform Sign Program for the project in order to provide a cohesive sign architecture for the hotel, two restaurants and project entry signage for the residential portion. Commercial Signage: The monument signs (one on Day Creek and one on Base Line) are designed to match stucco color and texture of the hotel and restaurant buildings. The signs also feature tile roof and recessed tile to match the hotel and restaurant buildings. The sign height and area are compliant with the Development Code regulations. Each restaurant includes provisions for two wall signs, all of which are compliant with the area and quantity requirements. Residential Proiect Identification Signs: The project includes a 6-foot high project identification sign at the primary entry off Day Creek Boulevard. The sign will have adjacent landscaping, designed with pinned steel letters attached to 24-inch by 48-inch stone/tile veneer walls and illumination will be backlight. The height and sign area meet the Code requirements. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING SUMMARY#1 DR Horton conducted a neighborhood meeting on Wednesday, August 24, 2016 at Victoria Windrows Elementary School at 6855 Victoria Park Lane, from 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. for the proposed project. Approximately 60-65 people attended the meeting. DR Horton presented an overview of the project, which was then followed by a question and answer period. The meeting lasted approximately two hours, and residents raised a variety of concerns regarding the proposed project. The issues raised by the residents at the neighborhood meeting that are germane to the scope of the review by the Design Review Committee are summarized below, along with any revisions or updates that have been made to the project since the meeting. 1. Hotel: Residents did not feel the hotel is a compatible land use in a predominately residential, neighborhood commercial area. Residents stated that hotels belong at VG or on Foothill Boulevard. Residents were also concerned about crime and other activities occurring at the hotel that are undesirable. Item C4-7 E10-16 198 DRC COMMENTS TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19762, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20032, DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00450, UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2016-00451 — DR HORTON April 18, 2017 Page 9 changed from side -on to rear -on to match the orientation of the neighborhood to the south; setbacks remain the same, ranging from 18 to 22 feet. 5. Additional Single -Family Units: Residents to the east, across Day Creek Boulevard, would like to see single-family homes plotted along Day Creek, not townhomes. Residents indicated that the Day Creek frontage should match the streetscape on east side of Day Creek Boulevard with single-family homes. Update: Between the primary driveway to the project off Day Creek Boulevard and the detached condos, the initial site plan proposed two buildings of six-plex attached townhomes. The applicant has since redesigned the project to reduce the massing by plotting 9 townhomes in three buildings of three-plex units. 6. Overall Density: Residents from the neighborhood to the south noted that the project is too dense. The neighborhood to the south is built at 4.8 dwelling units/acre. Residents did not offer up a specific acceptable density for the overall project, but stressed again that the southerly density range of 25% of the project site should be very close to their neighborhood. Update: The initial project site was for 392 units at 15.7 units to the acre; the update site plan indicates 380 units at 15.3 units to the acre. 7. Privacy: Residents from the neighborhood to the south are very concerned that with DR Horton's project having 18 to 22-foot setbacks along the south edge, their privacy into their bedrooms and back yards will be compromised. Update: The developer has redesigned the project so that the southerly edge condition has a 60-foot wide linear park that functions as a buffer along a substantial portion of the south boundary. For the remaining five single-family detached condos at the southwest corner of the site, the plotting has been changed from side -on to rear -on. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING SUMMARY#2 The applicant conducted a second neighborhood on Monday, March 27, 2017 at Etiwanda Gardens at 7576 Etiwanda Avenue from 6:30 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. DR Horton made a presentation of the revised updates as noted in the above summary for Neighborhood Meeting #1, and staff from DR Horton, City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning and Engineering Department and the Sheriffs Department were available for questions. In summary, residents appreciated the revisions made by the applicant, but still expressed concern over the following issues that are relevant to the scope of the review by the Design Review Committee: 1. Land use/ hotel: Several residents continued to indicate that the hotel is not a compatible land use in a predominately residential, neighborhood commercial area. Residents stated that hotels sometimes are locations for illegal activities, and that hotels are better suited along Foothill Boulevard. Residents were also concerned about crime and other activities occurring at the hotel that are undesirable. Response: A Sheriff's deputy attended the community meeting and indicated that the police have not seen significant increase or correlation in crime associated with hotels in the City. The Sheriff's deputy indicated that the deputies are available to work with hotel Item C4-9 E10-16 199 DRC COMMENTS TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUSTPM19762, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20032, DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00450, UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2016-00451 — DR HORTON April 18, 2017 Page 11 area. Staffs evaluation of the architecture for the hotel and two restaurant buildings is very positive and that the architectural vocabulary is well -executed. In order to meet the City's 360 degree architecture requirement for the residential product, staff recommends the following revisions: Maior Issues: Village A: For the 3 story Townhome Rowhome on all 5, 6, or 7 plex buildings and elevation schemes, add additional materials and elements to the front and rear elevations that are appropriate to the Craftsman -inspired design. Consider adding additional amounts of the following as appropriate: board and batten and lap siding, introducing brick, additional amounts of shingle siding, and windows appropriate to the architectural style. Village D: For all plans and architectural styles, add additional materials and elements that are appropriate to each style to achieve the 360 degree architecture requirement. For the Craftsman and Shingle styles, some options to consider are adding board and batten siding, shingle siding, brick or rock, lap siding. For the Santa Barbara and Italianate style, additional design elements and architectural vocabulary should be authentic to the style and placed on the wall plane appropriately in order to meet the 360 design requirement. Avoid tacked on elements that are out -of -place or not true to the style. Particular attention should be directed to enhancing the front and rear elevations. In addition to providing 360 degree architecture, staff recommendations the following specific design changes: • Plans 113, 1C and 1D: Rework the locations of the 3-inch plaster recess to reflect each style in an authentic manner. As shown, the locations appear awkward and not well -executed. • Plans 2A, 2B and 2D: With the exception of the first floor on Plans 2B and 2D, rework the locations of the 3-inch plaster recess to reflect each style in authentic manner. As shown, the locations appear awkward and not well -executed. • Plans 3B, 3C and 3D: Rework the locations of the 3-inch plaster recess to reflect each style in an authentic manner. As shown, the locations appear awkward and not well -executed. Secondary Issues: All Villages: All garage doors should be appropriate and enhance the architectural style. Recognize garage doors as an element of design rhythm and use to create varying patterns. Avoid selecting standard doors with no design features. Revise the units with standard garage doors to have features that reflect and compliment the architectural style. In addition, doors that allow natural light are encouraged. 2. Linear park: The developer should provide an update on any changes that were made in response to the comments received at the community meetings, with particular attention to adding an area large enough with turf for active recreation, and other low intensity, active amenities, such as bocce ball or horse shoes. Staff Recommendation: With the above issues addressed to the satisfaction of the Committee, staff recommends that the Committee move the project forward to the Planning Commission for review. Item C4-11 E10-16 200 (NMADOLE &Wm Wng Communities for Life 9302 KrTSBURGH AVE, SUTE 230 RANCHO CUCAMONGA CA. 9173D PHONE DD9.481.6322 FAX, 909.431.3320 EXHIBIT L E10-16 201 1 EZTNE-i�OA ' o O N II 4i J III III III ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER: 1090-331-05 a TOTAL ACREAGE: 28.44 ACRES O PROPOSED ZONING: MIXED USE w ut 'I I� I .I 0 (NMADOLE 9302 flR6BUFOi AVF—RKE 23D RANCHO CUCAMONGA CA. 9030 ♦ PHONE 909.48t6322 EWneeAng Cmnmunities Ew Life FAX, 909.48L6020 EXHIBIT M E10-16 202 Print Form ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM (Part I - Initial Study) RANCHO (Please type or print clearly using ink. Use the tab key to move from one line to the next line) CUCAMONGA Planning Department (909)477-2750 The purpose of this form is to inform the City of the basic components of the proposed project so 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. Upon review of the completed Initial Study Part I and the development application, additional information such as, but not limited to, traffic, noise, biological, drainage, and geological reports may be required. The project application will not be deemed complete unless the identified special studies/reports are submitted for review and accepted as complete and adequate. The project application will not be scheduled for Committees' review unless all required reports are submitted and deemed complete for staff to prepare the Initial Study Part II as required by CEQA. In addition to the filing fee, the applicant will be responsible to pay or reimburse the City, its agents, officers, and/or consultants for all costs for the preparation, review, analysis, recommendations, mitigations, etc., of any special studies or reports. INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE PROCESSED. Please note that it is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that the application is complete at the time of submittal; City staff will not be available to perform work required to provide missing information. Application Number for the project to which this form pertains., Project Title: DAY CREEK SQUARE SUBTPM 19762/CEQA2016-00012 Name & Address of project owner(s): MR. PETER PIEROTTI 11 FIELDING ROAD, LADUE, MO 63124 Name & Address of developer or project sponsor: D.R. HORTON LOS ANGELES HOLDING COMPANY, INC. 2280 WARDLOW CIRCLE, CORONA, CA 92880 EXHIBIT N Pagel of 10 E10-16 203 Contact Person &Address: DANIEL BOYD, VICE PRESIDENT- ENTITLEMENTS 2280 WARDLOW CIRCLE, CA 92880 Name & Address of person preparing this form (if different from above): Telephone Number. 951-739-5444 (DIRECT) EMAIL: Dboyd@drhorton.com Information indicated by an asterisk (') is not required of non -construction CUP's unless otherwise requested by staff. '1) Provide a full scale (8-112 x 11) copy of the USGS Quadrant Sheets) 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): SWC OF DAY CREEK BLVD., AND BASELINE ROAD Township 1 South, range 6 West, primarily within the NWC quarter of the NW quarter of Section 6 of USGS. 4) Assessor's Parcel Numbers (attach additional sheet if necessary): APN: 1090-331-05 •5) Gross Site Area (adsq. ft.): 28.44 ACRES/1,238,846 SQ/FT '6) Net Site Area (total site size minus area of public streets & proposed 24.93 ACRES (3.51 ACRES IS dedications): COMMERCIAL) 7) Describe any proposed general plan amendment or zone change which would affect the project site (attach additional sheet if necessary): SUBTTM20032; CUP2016-00449;DRC2016-00452; MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2016-00508; DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00450; UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2016-00451; PLANNED COMMUNITY DRC2016-00452; MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2016-0058; CEQA REVIEW CEQA2016-00012 Updated 4/1112013 Page 2 of 10 E10-16 204 8) Include a description of all permits which will be necessary from the City of Rancho Cucamonga and othergovemmental agencies in order to fully implement the project: IN ADDITION TO THOSE APPLICATIONS LISTED ABOVE UNDER SECTION 7. ALL RELATED BUILDING PERMITS, DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, INCLUDING TRIBAL CONSULTATION SB1S/AB52SITE 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/orhydrologic studies, biotic and archeological surveys, traffic studies): SITE HAS BEEN HISTORICALLY DISTURBED FROM PRIOR BULLDOZING AND WEED ABATEMENT. SITE HAS BEEN USED AS A DUMP SITE IN WHICH CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS, CONCRETE, AND OTHER MATERIALS ON SITE. THE PROJECTAREA SEDIMENT CONSISTS OF DECOMPOSING GRANTIC SAND. GRAVEL AND ROCK. SEDIMENT CHARACTERIZED AS QUATERNARY ALLUVIAL WASHNERY YOUNG ALLUVIAL FAN DEPOSITS. Updated 411112013 Page 3 of 10 E10-16 205 10) Describe the known cultural and/orhistorical aspects of the site. Cite all sources of information (books, published reports and oral history): Please see attachment (Section 10) - Narrative affixed. 11) Describe any noise sources and theirlevels that now affect the site (aircraft, roadway noise, etc.) and how they will affect proposed uses: Refer to results of Noise Impacts Survey prepared by LSA. 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: PROPOSAL INCLUDES A TOTAL OF 380 RESIDENTIAL UNITS CONSISTING OF 51 SFD COURTYARD HOMES AND 329 3-STORY ROWHOMES. THE PROPOSAL WILL ALSO INCLUDE A 3-STORY HOTEL AND TWO RESTAURANT PADS. THE HOTEL IS APPROXIMATELY 45,932 SQUARE FEET. THE RESTUARANT PADS ARE 5,947 AND 5,857 SQUARE FEET RESPECTFULLY. THE PROJECT WILL BE GRADED IN A SINGLE PHASE INCLUDING THE PRIVATE & PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE SUPPORTING THE PROJECT. THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOMPENT RESIDENTIAL SALES WILL BE PHASED OVER A PERIOD OF THREE YEARS DEPENDING UPON MARKET CONDITIONS. 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, rear yard, etc.): SITE IS SURROUNDED TO THE NORTH BY A PROPOSED NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENTER BY LEWIS DEVELOPMENT. SOURTH THERE ARE EXISTING SINGE -FAMILY HOMES; WEST OF THE SITE IS AN OPEN FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL AND TO THE EAST EXISTING COMMERCIAL AND RETAIL. (REFER TO SITE PLAN FOR SET BACKS AND OTHER DIMENSIONS) Updated 4/11/2013 Page 4 of 10 E10-16 206 14) Will the proposed project change the pattern, scale, or character of the surrounding general area of the project? NO. THE SITE IS CONSIDERED A LARGE IN -FILL SURROUNDED BY RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL & RETAIL (EXISTING). THE SITE IS DESIGNATED AS MIX -USE IN THE GENERAL PLAN. THE SITE IS VACANT AND IS SURROUNDED BY OPEN FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL AND MAJOR ROADWAY SYSTEMS FINANCED BY A CFD. 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? REFER TO LSA NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS PREPARED BY URBAN CROSSROADS FOR FULL ANALYSIS AND REFERENCE. *16) Indicate proposed removals and/or replacements of mature or scenic trees: REFER TO ARBORIST REPORT PREPARED THAT DESCRIBES THE EXISTING DEGRADED AND CONSIDERED LOW VALUE TREES ON SITE (APPROXIMATELY 3-5 TREES) 17) Indicate any bodies of water (including domestic water supplies) into which the site drains: THE SITE DOES NOT DRAIN INTO A BODY OF WATER. THE RUNOFF FROM THE DEVELOPED SITE WILL DRAIN INTO AN EXISTING CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STORM DRAIN SYSTEM SIZED TO ACCEPT 100 YEAR STORM EVENT FLOWS. 18) Indicate expected amount of water usage. (See Attachment A for usage estimates). For further clarification, please contact the Cucamonga Valley Water District at (909) 987-2591. a. Residential (gat/day) 10,352 b. Commercial/Ind. (gal/day/ac) 14,328 19) Indicate proposed method of sewage disposal. Peak use 150,528 (gal/Day) Peak use (gal/min/ac) 21,492 ❑ Septic Tank ❑x 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 Valley Water District at (909) 987-2591. a. Residential (gat/day) 74780 b. Commercial/Industrial (gal/day/ac) 6669 Updated 4/11/2013 Page 5 of 10 E10-16 207 RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS: 20) Number of residential units: 380 Detached (indicate range of parcel sizes, minimum lot size and maximum lot size: PROPOSAL INCLUDES51 SFD DETACHED HOMES AND 329 ATTACHED MULIT-FAMILY HOMES DESIGNED WITHIN A CONDOMINIUM SUBDIVISION PLAN. Attached (indicate whether units are rental or for sale units): OF THE TOTAL 380 UNITS, 329 ARE ATTACHED 21) Anticipated range of sale prices and/or rents: Sale Price300,000 s) $ to $ 400,000 Rent(permonth) $n/a to $ 22) Specify number of bedrooms by unit type: Product A (3-story Rowhomes w/ Tandems) provides for 49 two -bedrooms & 78 three -bedrooms. Product B (3-Story Rowhomes) provides for 45 two -bedrooms & 91 three -bedrooms. Product C (3 Story MF Court) provides for 66 three -bedrooms. Product D (2 Story SFD Court) provides for 94 two -bedrooms, 235 three -bedrooms and 51 five -bedrooms. 23) Indicate anticipated household size by unit type: Product A from 1279 to 1474 square feet; Product B from 1549 to 1862 square feet; Product C 1883-2192 square feet. And Product D 2177-2333 square feet. (All square footages are approximately and subject to change slightly in the final design stages) 24) Indicate the expected number of school children who will be residing within the project: Contact the appropriate School Districts as shown in Attachment B: a. Elementary., b. Junior High: 50 c. Senior High _ COMMERCIAL. INDUSTRIAL, AND INSTITUTIONAL PROJECTS 25) Describe type of use(s) and major function(s) of commercial, industrial or institutional uses: The proposal includes two (2) restaurant pads that total 11,804 square feet (No.1 5947 & No.2 5857) - A 71 room (3-story) hotel is planned that includes approximately 45,932 square feet. Updated 4/11/2013 Page 6 of 10 E10-16 208 26) Total floor area of commercial, industrial, or institutional uses by type: Botique Hotel = 45,932 sq. ft. Restaurant 1 located on Day Creek = 5,947 sq. ft. Restaurant 2 located on Base Line = 5,857 sq. ft. 27) Indicate hours of operation: The hotel will operate 7 days a week and will be open 24 hours a day. The restaurants will typically be open for lunch and dinner dining and its anticipated hours of operation will be between 11 am and 1:30pm seven days a week. 28) Number of employees: Total., Hotel estimated between 10-15 EMP/Reest 10-15 EMP Maximum Shift: Anticipated 8-hour shifts Time of Maximum Shift., Anticipated 10-hour shifts 29) Provide breakdown of anticipated job classifications, including wage and salary ranges, as well as an indication of the rate of hire for each classification (attach additional sheet if necessary): TBD 30) Estimation of the number of workers to be hired that currently reside in the City., Estimated 50%/50% *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): NA ALL PROJECTS 32) Have the water, sewer, fire, and flood control agencies serving the project been contacted to determine theirability to provide adequate service to the proposed project? If so, please indicate their response. All required "Will -Serve" Committments will be obtained and all Agencies will be contacted during the Public Notification and comment period as required under CEQA. Updated 4/11/2013 Page 7 of 10 E10-16 209 33) In the known history of this property, has there been any use, storage, or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic materials? Examples of hazardous and/or toxic materials include, but are not limited to PCBs,* radioactive substances; pesticides and herbicides; fuels, oils, solvents, and other flammable liquids and gases. Also note underground storage of any of the above. Please list the materials and describe their use, storage, and/or discharge on the property, as well as the dates of use, it known. Unknown to Applicant - Refer to technical studies provided 34) Will the proposed project involve the temporary orlong-term use, storage, ordischarge 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 35) The applicant shall be required to pay any applicable Fish and Game fee. The project planner will confirm which fees apply to this project. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission/Planning Director hearing: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for adequate evaluation of this 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 additio 1 information maybe required to be submitted before an adequate evaluation can be made by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. , k Date: 4f21117 Signature: Title: VP Entitlements Updated 4111/2013 Page 8 of 10 E10-16 210 ATTACHMENT PART 1— INITIAL STUDY QUESTION 10 RESPONSE: A cultural resource record search and survey identified no prehistoric or historic resources within the Project Area (Cultural Resource Report — LSA- May 2, 2016). As well, a fossil locality search and survey identified no significant paleontological resources directly within the project area. Geologically, project area sediment is characterized as Very Young Alluvial Fan Deposits that no paleontological sensitivity and although Plesitocene deposits that have a high paleontological sensitivity are located at a depth in the project area, excavation for project construction activities will not be deep enough to encounter these deposits (Paleontological Resource Report LSA— May 2016). As such, it is unlikely that project construction will encounter prehistoric, historic, or fossil resources. E10-16 211 ATTACHMENT"A" CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ESTIMATED WATER USE AND SEWER FLOWS FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT (Data Provided by Cucamonga Valley Water District February 2003) Water Usage Single -Family Multi -Family Neighborhood Commercial General Commercial Office Professional Institutional/Government Industrial Park Large General Industrial Heavy Industrial (distribution) Sewer Flows Single -Family Multi -Family General Commercial Office Professional Industrial Park Large General Industrial Heavy Industrial (distribution) 705 gallons per EDU per day 256 gallons per EDU per day 1000 gal/day/unit (tenant) 4082 gal/day/unit (tenant) 973 gal/day/unit (tenant) 6412 gal/day/unit (tenant) 1750 gal/day/unit (tenant) 2020 gal/day/unit (tenant) 1863 gal/day/unit (tenant) 270 gallons per EDU per day 190 gallons per EDU per day 1900 gal/day/acre 1900 gal/day/acre Institutional/Government 3000 gal/day/acre 2020 gal/day/acre 1863 gal/day/acre Source: Cucamonga Valley Water District Engineering & Water Resources Departments, Urban Water Management Plan 2000 Updated 4/11/2013 Page 9 of 10 E10-16 212 ATTACHMENT B Contact the school district for your area for amount and payment of school fees: Elementary School Districts Alta Loma 9350 Base Line Road, Suite F Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909)987-0766 Central 10601 Church Street, Suite 112 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909)989-8541 Cucamonga 8776 Archibald Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909) 987-8942 Etiwanda 6061 East Avenue P.O. Box 248 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 (909) 899-2451 High School Chaffey High School 211 West 5th Street Ontario, CA 91762 (909)988-8511 Updated 411112013 Page 10 of 10 E10-16 213 L S A LEGEND FIGURE I QProject Location 0 IOIMI ±6U1 ff.F.T SOURCE USCS 7 5' Quad - Gu i (1981), CA I DRHI601 CIS P,.pcctL.=t, m 1. GS.mxd 1! 25. 2016) Daycreek tillages Project Project Location and Vicinity E10-16 214 i J t . t'. I DAY CREEK SQUARE SITE PLAN 11 � BASE LINE ROAD �' ; ram%,, ke. S?" _ u!'C,p '_ «NMA D O L E 9302 R 56UPON AVE 3 E 230 BAN CUCAMONGA. CA W1 PAOIE, 9094B18322 Engineering Communities for Life FAX W94&5320 E10-16 216 City of Rancho Cucamonga ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM INITIAL STUDY PART II BACKGROUND 1. Project File: Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2016-00452, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19762, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20032, Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449, Design Review DRC2016-00450, Uniform Sign Program DRC2016-00451 and Minor Exception DRC2016-00508. 2. Related Files: Preliminary Review DRC2015-01102 and Pre -Application Review DRC2016- 00142. 3. Description of Project: The applicant, DR Horton, proposes developing the 28.4 acre site located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road with a mixed use project consisting of 380 single-family and townhome residential units, a boutique hotel and two restaurant buildings totaling 12,000 square feet. The overall project area is made up of 1 parcel totaling 28.4 acres of land. Of the 28.4 acres, 24.9 will be allocated to the residential portion of the site, and 3.5 acres will be allocated to the two restaurant pads and hotel site. The project is for the site plan and architectural review of the 380 residential units (329 townhomes and 51 single-family dwelling units), two restaurant pads (two 6,000 square foot restaurants), and a 71 room hotel. The project also includes the subdivision of the 28.4 acre site into 4 parcels and a residential condominium subdivision for the 380 residential units. The project includes a Victoria Community Plan Amendment to change the zoning from Regionally Related Office/Commercial (RROC) District to Mixed Use (MU) District in order to be consistent with the Mixed Use land use designation in the General Plan. A Conditional Use Permit (CUP) application is also included for the requested bar/alcohol sales (Type 70 — On Sale General Restrictive License) at the hotel. The Assessor's Parcel Number is: 1090-331-05. 4. Project Sponsor Name and Address: DR Horton Contact: Dan Boyd, Vice President/Entitlements 2280 Wardlow Circle, Suite 100 Corona, CA 92880 Contact: Dan Boyd, 961-739-5444 5. General Plan Designation: Mixed Use 6. Zoning: Regionally Related Office Commercial (RROC) District (existing); Mixed Use (MU) District (proposed) 7. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The site is currently zoned Regionally Related Office/Commercial (RROC) (District) and is within the Victoria Community Plan (VCP). It is bordered by Base Line Road along the north boundary; Day Creek Boulevard along the east boundary; a single-family neighborhood zoned Mixed Use/Single Family (4-6 units/acre) within the Victoria Arbors Master Plan in the VCP along the south boundary; and a Southern California Edison transmission corridor zoned Open Space (OS) District and the Day Creek Flood Control channel zoned Flood Control (FC) District along the west boundary. Across Base Line Road at the northwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road is a neighborhood shopping center (under construction) that will be anchored by Stater Brothers, and across Day Creek Boulevard at the southeast corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road is an existing neighborhood center anchored by Sprouts Farmer's Market. E10-16 218 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 2 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: Donald Granger Senior Planner (909) 477-2750, extension 4314 10. Other agencies whose approval is required: (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement) GLOSSARY —The following abbreviations are used in this report CALEEMOD — California Emissions Estimator Model CVWD — Cucamonga Valley Water District EIR — Environmental Impact Report FEIR — Final Environmental Impact Report FPEIR - Final Program Environmental Impact Report NPDES — National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NOx — Nitrogen Oxides ROG — Reactive Organic Gases PMio— Fine Particulate Matter RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board SCAQMD — South Coast Air Quality Management District SWPPP — Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," or "Less Than -Significant -Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. (✓) Aesthetics (✓) Biological Resources (✓) Greenhouse Gas Emissions () Land Use & Planning () Population & Housing (✓) Transportation/Traffic (✓) Mandatory Findings of DETERMINATION (✓) Agricultural Resources (✓) Cultural Resources () Hazards & Waste Materials () Mineral Resources (✓) Public Services (✓) Tribal Cultural Resources On the basis of this initial evaluation: (✓) Air Quality (✓) Geology & Soils (✓) Hydrology & Water Quality (✓) Noise (✓) Recreation ( )Utilities & Service Systems () I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 219 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 3 (✓) 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 NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant 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 By: C-Q. Reviewed By: Mike Smith Senior Planner Date: Date: May 2. 2017 Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 220 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Pace 4 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No linloact Incor prated Impact Im act EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? () () () (✓) b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but () () () (✓) not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State Scenic Highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or () () () (✓) quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, O ( ) (✓)' ( ) which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Comments: a) There are no significant vistas within or immediately adjacent to the project site. Day Creek Boulevard, which runs north -south adjacent to the east edge of the project site, and Base Line Road, which runs east -west along the north edge of the project site, are Special Boulevards according to Figure LU-6 in the General Plan. Day Creek Boulevard, above Base Line/Day Creek intersection, is a designated view corridor according to General Plan Figure LU-6. The project will be developed with residential and commercial buildings that have a maximum height of 44 feet (hotel building). The setbacks for the hotel from Base Line Road will range from 13 feet to 23 feet. The south edge of the project site contains a linear park, and the southwest corner of the site is plotted with two-story, single-family dwelling units that are comparable in height to the two-story, single-family dwelling units in the neighborhood to the south. In order be compatible and provide a transition of building massing with the existing single-family neighborhood to the south, the three-story townhomes are plotted in the following areas: along Day Creek Boulevard; the westerly edge of the project which borders a utility corridor; and in the core of the project site. The commercial building heights and setbacks are comparable to similar developments in the immediate area off Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road. With the setbacks and landscaping, the development of the project site will not negatively impact the Day Creek Boulevard view corridor above the Base Line/Day Creek intersection, or construct improvements that will negatively impact the streetscape of Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard, both of which are designated as Special Boulevards in the General Plan. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. b) The project site contains no buildings, no scenic resources, rock outcroppings, and no historic buildings within a State Scenic Highway. There are no State Scenic Highways within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. c) The site is located at the southwest corner of Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard and is characterized .by comparable residential (single-family, two and three story multi- family) and commercial (food and retail uses) development to the north, south and east. The visual quality of the area will not degrade as a result of this project because the proposed mixed use project has been designed with compatible setbacks, massing and architectural concepts as the surrounding area. The tallest structure (hotel) will be 44 feet Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 221 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 5 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g Potentially Significant Wth Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact high, compatible with existing two and three-story residential development along Day Creek Boulevard between Foothill Boulevard and Base Line Road and the future commercial center at the northwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road. Along the southerly edge, a linear park is proposed and single-family dwelling units have been plotted for land use compatibility with the existing single-family neighborhood south of the project site. Additionally, the project will become will become a larger part of the community along Day Creek Boulevard and the Victoria Community Plan. As part of the entitlement process, Design Review for the site layout, architecture and landscape palette is required prior to approval. City standards require the developer to underground existing and new utility lines and facilities to minimize unsightly appearance of overhead utility lines and utility enclosures in accordance with Planning Commission Resolution No. 87-96, unless exempted by said Resolution. d) The project would increase the number of streetlights and security lighting used in the immediate vicinity. The design and placement of light fixtures is shown on site plans which require review for consistency with City standards that require shielding, diffusing, or indirect lighting to avoid glare. Lighting will be selected and located to confine the area of illumination to within the project site. A photometric study was prepared by Candela Engineering (August 31, 2016) that indicates that illumination levels within the project area meet the requirements of the Development Code and will be confined within the project area. According to the photometric study, at all of the project boundaries/edge conditions, all of the illumination generated from the project will be at 0 foot candles. The impact is considered less than significant. 2. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or () () (✓) ( ) Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a () () () (✓) Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause re -zoning of, () () () (✓ ) forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220 (g), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104 (g))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest () () () (✓) land to non -forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment, () () () (✓) which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non -forest use? XMIS511 E10-16 222 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 6 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Signi&ant wth Mitigation Than Significant No Im act Inca raletl Im act Im act Comments: a) The site is not designated as Prime Farmlands, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance according to General Plan FEIR Exhibit 4.2-1. The site is located at the southwest corner of Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard and is characterized by comparable residential (single-family, two and three story multi -family) and commercial (food and retail uses) development to the north, south and east. There are approximately 209 acres of Farmland of Local Importance, Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance within the City of Rancho Cucamonga according to the General Plan and the California Department of Conservation Farmland Map 2010. Concentrations of Important Farmland are sparsely located in the southern and eastern parts of the City that is characterized by existing and planned development. Farmland in the southern portion of the City is characterized by industrial, residential, and commercial land uses and Farmland in the eastern portion of the City is within the Etiwanda area and planned for development. Further, a large number of the designated farmland parcels are small, ranging from 3 acres to 30 acres, and their economic viability is doubtful; therefore, they are not intended to be retained as farmland in the General Plan Land Use Plan. The General Plan FPEIR identified the conversion of farmlands to urban uses as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan for which the FPEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. b) There is no agriculturally zoned land within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. There are no Williamson Act contracts within the City. c) There are no lands within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that is zoned as forest land or timberland. Therefore no impacts would occur related to the conversion of forest land to non -forest use. Further, there are no areas within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that are zoned as forest land, timberland, or Timberland Production. No mitigation is required. d) There are no lands within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that qualify as forest land or timberland. Therefore no impacts would occur related of the loss or conversion of forest land to non -forest use. Further, there are no areas within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that are zoned as forest land, timberland, or Timberland Production. e) The site is located at the southwest corner of Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard and is characterized by comparable residential (single-family, two and three story multi- family) and commercial (food and retail uses) development to the north, south and east. The nearest agricultural use, Joseph Filippi Winery and Vineyards, is located at 12467 Base Line Road approximately '/< mile to east the east of the project site. The project site does not border this agricultural use. Additionally, the mixed use project will not negatively impact the operation of this agricultural use as the mixed use project will be comprised of land uses (residential, retail, food and hospitality) that will not create adverse impacts on the operation and cultivation of the vineyard. Short term impacts to air quality to the vineyard (dust during construction) and corresponding mitigation measures are addressed in Section 3 (Air Quality). The impact is considered less than significant. There are no lands within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that qualify as forest land. Therefore, there is no potential for conversion of forest land to a non -forest use. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 223 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 7 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact incorporated Impact Im act 3. AIR QUALITY. Would the project a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the () () () (✓) applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute () (✓) () ( ) substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of () (✓) () ( ) any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable Federal or State ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant () (✓) () ( ) concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial () () () (✓) number of people? Comments: a) As discussed in subsection b, with mitigation measures, the project would not exceed any air quality standards and would not interfere with the region's ability to comply with Federal and State air quality standards for Criterion 1 (Increase in the Frequency or Severity of Violations/local air quality impacts) or Criterion 2 (Exceed Assumptions in the AQMP [consistency with the 2003 AQMP]). Therefore, the project is consistent with the 2003 AQMP. b) Both the State of California and the Federal government have established health -based ambient air quality standards (AAQS) for seven air pollutants. These pollutants include ozone (03), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (S02), coarse particulate matter with a diameter or 10 microns or less (PMIo), fine particulate matter less than 2.5 (PM2.5) microns in diameter and lead. Among these pollutants, ozone and particulate matter (PMIo and PM2.5) are considered regional pollutants while the others have more localized effects. In addition, the State of California has set standards for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide (H2S), vinyl chloride and visibility reducing particles. These standards are designed to protect the health and welfare of the populace with a reasonable margin of safety. The City of Rancho Cucamonga area is within the South Coast Air Basin, which is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The California Clean Air Act (CCAA) provides the SCAQMD with the authority to manage transportation activities at indirect sources. Indirect sources of pollution are generated when minor sources collectively emit a substantial amount of pollution. Examples of this include motor vehicles at an intersection, a mall and on highways. SCAQMD also regulates stationary sources of pollution within a jurisdictional area. Direct emissions from motor vehicles are regulated by the Air Resources Board (ARB). Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 224 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 8 Less Than Signifcant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Signifcant wm Mitigalicn Than Signifcant No Impact Inca oraletl Im act Im W The combination of topography, low mixing height, abundant sunshine, and emissions from the second largest urban area in the United States gives the Basin the worst air pollution problem in the nation. The Basin experiences a persistent temperature inversion (increasing temperature with increasing altitude); this inversion (coupled with low wind speeds) limits the vertical dispersion of air contaminants, holding them relatively near the ground. Pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA) of 1970, the EPA established national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for six major pollutants, termed criteria pollutants: ozone (Oa), coarse particulate matter with a diameter or 10 microns or less (PM,o), fine particulate matter less than 2.5 (PM2.e) microns in diameter, carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and lead. Criteria pollutants are defined as those pollutants for which the Federal and State governments have established AAQS, or criteria, for outdoor concentrations in order to protect public health. Data collected at permanent monitoring stations are used by the EPA to classify regions as "attainment' or "non -attainment" depending on whether the regions met the requirements stated in the primary NAAQS. Nonattainment areas have additional restrictions as required by the EPA. The EPA has designated the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) responsible for ensuring the Basin's compliance with the FCAA. The South Coast Air Basin is in nonattainment Status for Ozone (8-hour) and PM,o under National Ambient Air Quality Standards, and in nonattainment status for Ozone (1-hour and 8-hour) PM10 and PM2.e under California Ambient Air Quality Standards. Specific criteria for determining whether the potential air quality impacts of a project are significant are set forth in the SCAQMD's CEQA Air Quality Handbook. The criteria include daily emissions thresholds, compliance with State and national air quality standards, and consistency with the current AQMP. As prescribed by SCAQMD, an Air Quality Impact Analysis was prepared by LSA Associates (July 19, 2016) that utilizes CalEEMod (Version 2013.2.2 to evaluate short-term construction emissions and short- term construction emissions for localized significant thresholds, long-term operational emissions, operation emissions for localized significant thresholds, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG) (see Section 7 for GHG analysis). Short Term (Construction): Project Emissions and Impacts The project is for the site plan and architectural review of a mixed use project consisting of mixed use project consisting of 380 residential units, a 71 room hotel and two restaurant pads (6,000 square feet each) totaling 12,000 square feet. The project also includes a Victoria Community Plan Amendment to change the zoning from Regionally Related Office/Commercial (RROC) District to Mixed Use (MU) District in order to be consistent with the General Plan. The project site is currently a vacant 28 acre parcel. The potential emissions associated with construction of the project are described in the following sections. Summary of Peak Construction Emissions: SCAQMD Regional Thresholds (with Best Available Control Measures): Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 225 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 9 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information S PP g ormaSources: Potentially Significant win Mitigation Than Signifcant No Im act Incur .rated Impact Im act As shown in the following tables, project implementation will not exceed significance thresholds for SCAQMD Regional Thresholds or SCAQMD Localized Thresholds. Table 3-5: Emissions Summary of Construction (with mitigation) Year Entisslo_ns,(pouhdsperday) VOC NOx CO - SOz PM10: -PNt2.5;' 2017 4.08 70.03 79.97 0.15 16.94 9.64 2018 4.49 69.18 79.62 0.15 16.85 9.56 2019 4.02 28.81 41.22 0.09 5.64 2.5 2020 37.28 28.52 45.01 0.10 6.34 2.67 Maximum Daily Emissions 37.28 1 70.03 79.97 0.15 16.94 9.64 SCAQMD Regional Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55 Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO NO NO Construction activities associated with the project will result in emissions of CO, VOCs, NOx, SOx, PMio and PM2.5 and are expected from the following construction activities: grading, building construction, paving, architectural coating and construction workers commuting. Construction is anticipated to commence in the Winter of 2018 and finish in the Winter of 2021. Summary of Peak Construction Emissions: SCAQMD Localized Significance Summary Table 3-9: Localized Significance Summary Grading -, C_O, NOz PMto PINz.5 Greding j Averaging Tune *1 Hour .;8 Hour 1=Hour 24 Ho_ urs Peak Day Localized Emissions 0.40 0.29 0.01 7.92 4.57 Background Concentration" 2.5 1.6 0.087 ��:,�,.•' 'v'_ " Total Concentration 2.90 1.89 0.10 7.92 4.57 SCAQMD Localized Significance Threshold 20 9 0.18 10.4 10.4 Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO NO A Highest concentration from the last three years of available data Note: PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations are expressed in µg/m3. All others are expressed in ppm Equipment Exhausts and Related Construction Activities Construction activities produce combustion emissions from various sources such as site grading, utility engines, on -site heavy-duty construction vehicles, asphalt paving, and motor vehicles transporting the construction crew. Exhaust emissions from construction activities envisioned on site would vary daily as construction activity levels change. The Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 226 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Pape 10 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Im act use of construction equipment on site would result in localized exhaust emissions; however, as shown in Table 3-9, the amount will not exceed any threshold of significance. Fugitive Dust Fugitive dust emissions are generally emissions associated with land clearing and exposure of soils to the air and wind, and cut -and -fill grading operations. Dust generated during construction varies substantially on a project -by project basis, depending on the level of activity, the specific operation and weather conditions at the time of construction. Construction emissions can vary greatly depending on the level of activity, the specific operations taking place, the equipment being operated, local soils, weather conditions and other factors. The proposed project will be required to comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403 to control fugitive dust. Architectural Coatings Architectural coatings contain VOCs that are similar to ROCs and are part of the 03 precursors. Based on the proposed project, it is estimated that the proposed project will result in a maximum of approximately 38.83 Ibs of VOC per day (with mitigation) combined for all construction sources during construction. Therefore, this VOC emission is the principal air emission and is less than the SCAQMD VOC threshold of 75 Ibs/day. Odors Heavy-duty equipment in the project area during construction would emit odors. These odors are temporary, short-term and intermittent, and also would not result in persistent impacts that would affect substantial numbers of people (LSA Associates; July 19, 2016). Further, the construction activity would cease to occur after individual construction is completed. No other sources of objectionable odors have been identified for the proposed project, and no mitigation measures are required for odors. In compliance with SCAQMD Rule 402 the proposed uses are not anticipated to emit any objectionable odors. Therefore, objectionable odors posing a health risk to potential on -site and existing off -site uses would not occur as a result of the proposed project. Naturally Occurring Asbestos The proposed project is located in San Bernardino County and it is not among the counties that are found to have serpentine and ultramafic rock in their soils. In addition, there has been no serpentine or ultramafic rock found in the project area. Therefore, the potential risk for naturally occurring asbestos (NOA) during project construction is small and less than significant. Based on the discussion above and with implementation of the following Best Available Control Measures (BACM) identified in the Air Quality Analysis by Urban Crossroads (July 19, 2016) and mitigation measures, short-term, construction impacts will be less - than -significant: 1) During grading activity, all construction equipment (>_ 150 horsepower) shall be California Air Resources Board (CARB) Tier 3 Certified or better. Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 227 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 11 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sou PP g maSources: Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Inoor orated Impact Im act 2) All clearing, grading, earth -moving, or excavation activities shall cease when winds exceed 25mph per SCAQMD guidelines in order to limit fugitive dust emissions. 3) 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. 4) The contractor shall ensure that traffic speeds on unpaved roads and Project site areas are reduced to 15 miles per hour or less. Cumulative Impacts: Short -Term Construction Emissions Continued development will contribute to the pollutant levels in the Rancho Cucamonga area, which already exceed Federal and State standards. 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. Nevertheless, fugitive dust and equipment emissions are required to be assessed. The General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR) analyzed the impacts of Air Quality based on the future build out of the City. Based upon on the Urban Emissions Model (URBEMIS7G) estimates in Table 4.3-3 of the General Plan (FPEIR), Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2), Ozone (03), and Particulate Matter (PM2.5 and PM10) would exceed SCAQMD thresholds for significance; therefore, they would all be cumulatively considerable if they cannot be mitigated on a project basis to a level less -than -significant. This city-wide increase in emissions was identified as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council as noted in the Section 4.3 of the General Plan FPEIR. With implementation of the following best practices and mitigation measures from the City's 2010 General Plan FPEIR that are designed to minimize short-term air quality impacts, the project's contribution to cumulative impacts will be less -than -significant: 5) 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. 6) 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 Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 228 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 panp 19 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impatl conform to any construction measures imposed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) as well as City Planning Staff. 7) The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel powered equipment where feasible. 8) The construction contractor shall ensure that construction -grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. 9) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. 10) 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. 11) 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 25mph) in accordance with Rule 403 requirements. • Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils haul trucks or cover payloads using tarps or other suitable means. 12) 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. Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 229 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 13 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sou: PP g rmaSources: Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Im act Incorporated Impact Impact 13) 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. Project Long Term (Operational) Emissions and Impacts Lang -term air pollutant emissions are those associated with stationary sources and mobile sources involving any project -related changes. The proposed project would result in a net increase in the amount of development in the area; therefore, the proposed project would result in net increases in both stationary and mobile source emissions. The stationary source emissions would come from additional natural gas consumption for on -site buildings and electricity for the lighting in the buildings and at the parking area. As shown in the following tables, project implementation will not exceed any significance thresholds. No long-term, operational impacts will occur as a result of the project. Summary of Peak Operational Emissions (SCAQMD Regional Thresholds): Table 3-6: Summary of Peak Operational Emissions (1 of 2) Operational Actlwties, Summer Scenario= _ st;•it ;r +, .Emi1sMofis(poundsperday ! n s� s - ,,. VOC NOx °. CO -, SOx ,-.,.. r, PMro ;,�... , .',_ PMzs�,. Area Source 20.69 0.36 31.52 1.6E-3 0.68 0.68 Energy Source 0.50 4.39 2.83 0.03 0.34 0.34 Mobile 12.11 30.83 124.91 0.35 23.26 6.53 Total Maximum Daily Emissions 33.30 35.58 159.26 0.38 24.28 7.55 SCAQMD Regional Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55 Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO NO NO Table 3-6: Summary of Peak Operational Emissions (2 of 2) Operatlohal Actrvtties Winter r Scenario=. -;} t9M ^M. ft ZEEmisstorls " (pounderkday)�rg VOC NO r„ CO ....... SOx` �. ' PMvo , .x> yPM2S °` Area Source 20.69 0.36 31.52 1.6E-3 0.68 0.68 Energy Source 0.50 4.39 2.83 0.03 0.34 0.34 Mobile 11.73 32.11 119.43 0.33 23.26 6.53 Total Maximum Daily Emissions 32.92 36.86 153.78 0.36 24.29 7.55 SCAQMD Regional Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55 Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO NO NO Summary of Peak Operational Emissions (SCAQMD Localized Significance Summary) Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 230 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Pace 14 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Significant wtti Mitigalion Than Significant No Im act Inco crated Impact Im act The proposed involves the construction and operation of the following: 51 single-family detached dwelling units, 329 condo/townhome units, 71 room hotel, and a 12,000 square foot sit down restaurant. According to SCAQMD LST methodology, LSTs would apply to the operational phase of a proposed project if the project includes stationary sources, or attracts mobile sources that may spend long periods queuing and idling at the site (e.g., transfer facilities and warehouse buildings). The proposed project does not include such uses, and therefore, due to the lack of significant stationary source emissions, no long- term localized significance threshold analysis is needed. Cumulative Impacts (Long Term/Operational Emissions) CO Hotspot Analysis The Project would not result in potentially adverse CO concentrations or "hot spots." Further, detailed modeling of Project -specific carbon monoxide (CO) "hot spots' is not needed to reach this conclusion. An adverse CO concentration, known as a "hot spot", would occur if an exceedance of the state one -hour standard of 20 ppm or the eight -hour standard of 9 ppm were to occur. At the time of the 1993 Handbook, the SCAB was designated nonattainment under the California AAQS and National AAQS for CO. It has long been recognized that CO hotspots are caused by vehicular emissions, primarily when idling at congested intersections. In response, vehicle emissions standards have become increasingly stringent in the last twenty years. Currently, the allowable CO emissions standard in California is a maximum of 3.4 grams/mile for passenger cars (there are requirements for certain vehicles that are more stringent). With the turnover of older vehicles, introduction of cleaner fuels, and implementation of increasingly sophisticated and efficient emissions control technologies, CO concentration in the SCAB is now designated as attainment. Also, CO concentrations in the project vicinity have steadily declined, as indicated by historical emissions data. To establish a more accurate record of baseline CO concentrations affecting the SCAB, a CO "hot spot" analysis was conducted in 2003 for four busy intersections in Los Angeles at the peak morning and afternoon time periods. This "hot spot" analysis did not predict any violation of CO standards, as shown on Table 3-10. Based on the SCAQMD's 2003 AQMP and the 1992 Federal Attainment Plan for Carbon Monoxide (1992 CO Plan), peak carbon monoxide concentrations in the SCAB were a result of unusual meteorological and topographical conditions and not a result of traffic volumes and congestion at a particular intersection. As evidence of this, for example, 9.3 ppm 8-hr CO concentration measured at the Long Beach Blvd. and Imperial Hwy. intersection (highest CO generating intersection within the "hot spot" analysis), only 0.7 ppm was attributable to the traffic volumes and congestion at this intersection; the remaining 8.6 ppm were due to the ambient air measurements at the time the 2003 AQMP was prepared. In contrast, the ambient 8-hr CO concentration within the project study area is estimated at 1.4 ppm-1.6 ppm. Therefore, even if the traffic volumes for the proposed project were double or even triple of the traffic volumes generated at the Long Beach Blvd. and Imperial Hwy. intersection, coupled with the on -going improvements in ambient Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 231 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Paqe 15 Less Than Significenl Less Issues and Supporting Information S PP gormaSources: Potentially Significant WIM Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Im act air quality, the project would not be capable of resulting in a CO "hot spot" at any study area intersections. Similar considerations are also employed by other Air Districts when evaluating potential CO concentration impacts. More specifically, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) concludes that under existing and future vehicle emission rates, a given project would have to increase traffic volumes at a single intersection by more than 44,000 vehicles per hour —or 24,000 vehicles per hour where vertical and/or horizontal air does not mix —in order to generate a significant CO impact. TABLE 3-10: CO MODEL RESULTS IntersectionLocati6n Carbon Monoxide Con centrarions(ppm) ".." .::" Morning l�hour -.. Afternoon ].;hour 8 hour Wilshire -Veteran 4.6 3.5 4.2 Sunset -Highland 4 4.5 3.9 La Cienega-Century 3.7 3.1 5.8 Long Beach -Imperial 3 3.1 9.3 Source: 2003 AQMP Notes: ppm: parts per million. Federal 1-hour standard is 35 ppm and the deferral 8-hour standard is 9.0 Flom. The General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR) analyzed the potential impacts to air quality based on the future build out of the City. In the long-term, continued development would result in significant operational vehicle emissions based upon on the URBEMIS7G model estimates in Table 4.3-3 of the General Plan FPEIR; therefore, all developments would be cumulatively significant if they cannot be mitigated on a project basis to a less -than -significant level. This City-wide increase in emissions was identified as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council as noted in the Section 4.3 of the General Plan FPEIR. With implementation of the following mitigation measures from the City's 2010 General Plan FPEIR that are designed to minimize long-term, operational air quality impacts, the project's contribution to cumulative impacts will be less -than -significant: 14) Provide adequate ingress and egress at all entrances to public facilities to minimize vehicle idling at curbsides. 15) Provide preferential parking to high occupancy vehicles and shuttle services. 16) Schedule truck deliveries and pickups during off-peak hours. 17) Improve thermal integrity of the buildings and reduce thermal load with automated time clocks or occupant sensors. 18) Landscape with native and/or drought -resistant species to reduce water consumption and to provide passive solar benefits. Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 232 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Panp 1 R Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially wth Than Significant Mitigation Signircant No Im act Incorporated Impact Im act 19) Provide lighter color roofing and road materials and tree planting programs to comply with the AQMP Miscellaneous Sources MSC-01 measure. 20) Comply with the AQMP Miscellaneous Sources PRC-03, and Stationary Sources Operations Enhanced Inspection and Maintenance and ADV-MISC to reduce emissions of restaurant operations. 21) All industrial and commercial facilities shall post signs requiring that trucks shall not be left idling for prolonged periods (i.e., in excess of 10 minutes). 22) All industrial and commercial facilities shall designate preferential parking for vanpools. 23) All industrial and commercial site tenants with 50 or more employees shall be required to post both bus and Metrolink schedules in conspicuous areas. 24) All industrial and commercial site tenants with 50 or more employees shall be required to configure their operating schedules around the Metrolink schedule to the extent reasonably feasible. 25) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate high-efficiency/low-polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water heaters. 26) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. c) As noted in the General Plan FEIR (Section 4.3), continued development would contribute to the pollutant levels in the Rancho Cucamonga area, which already exceed Federal and State standards. The General Plan FPEIR identified the citywide increase in emissions as a significant and adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. Based on the Air Quality Impact Analysis by LSA Associates (July 19, 2016), no short- term construction or long-term operational impacts to air quality would occur as a result of the project. Because the project would result in minimal emissions that do not exceed any thresholds of significance, the project's contribution to cumulative impacts is also considered minimal. With implementation of mitigation measures listed in subsection b) above from the City's 2010 General Plan FPEIR, which are designed to minimize long-term, operational air quality impacts, cumulative impacts will be less -than -significant. 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 Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 233 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Pace 17 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact impacts if they are located within '% mile of sensitive receptors and would emit toxic air contaminants identified in SCAQMD Rule 1401. The project site is located within %< mile of the following sensitive receptors: residential dwelling units. During construction, there is the possibility of fugitive dust to be generated from grading the site. The mitigation measures listed under subsection b) above and the following mitigation measure will reduce any potential impact to less -than -significant levels. 27) 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. e) Construction odors (short-term) may include odors associated with equipment use including diesel exhaust or roofing, painting and paving. These odors are temporary, intermittent and short-term, and would not result in persistent impacts. Operational odors (long-term) are not typically associated with residential and hotel uses. Odors from the proposed food uses use would most likely be from activities such as cooking and grills; however, these odors would be minimal, and would typically dissipate and disperse quickly and not considered to be significant. Project generated refuse would be stored in covered containers and removed at regular intervals. Additionally, the food uses are physically separated from the residential uses, and the project does not feature vertically integrated land uses within the same building. 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 other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally () () () (✓) protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruptigrt,.,or other means? Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 234 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Paqe 18 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g Potentially Significant With Mitigation man Significant No Impact incorporated Impact Im act 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 I Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan? Comments: a) The project site is located in an area developed with commercial and residential uses. The site has been previously disrupted during periodic discing for weed abatement. According to Section 4.4 of the General Plan FPEIR, the project site is within an area of sensitive biological resources. According to the General Plan FPEIR, the site may contain mixed sage scrub (Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub (RAFSS)). A Biological Technical Report was completed for the project site by Glenn Lukos Associates (GLA; April 21, 2017). The report includes a field study that study focused on a number of primary objectives that would comply with CEQA requirements, including (1) general biological surveys and vegetation mapping; (2) habitat assessments for special -status plant and wildlife species; (3) focused plant surveys; and (4) focused wildlife surveys. Existing Site Conditions The Project site is generally flat, ranging from approximately 1,275 feet to 1,315 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). The site is located on an old alluvial fan that at one time was connected to the broader alluvial fan to the north. Over time, various development projects, including flood control improvements to the Day Creek Channel located just west of the project site have modified the site and the surrounding landscape. The majority of the Project site is vegetated with California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum). Additional shrub species include coastal sagebrush (Artemisia californica), deerweed (Acmispon glaber), chamise (Adenostoma fasciculatum), goldenbush (Ericameria ssp.), scalebroom (Lepidospartum squamatum), and groundsel (Senecio flaccidus var. douglasii). The northwestern portion of the property has been cleared of vegetation, and supports scattered re-establishing individuals of California buckwheat, as well as non- native, ruderal vegetation and non-native grasses. Other parts of the property contain stockpiled concrete and other debris. Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 235 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 19 Less Than Significant Less and Supporting Information Sources: Foa Significant With Mitigation ThanIssues Sict No Impact nco aratetl ImDat Im act Summary of Surveys Table 2-1 Summary of Biological Surveys for the Project Site Survey Type Survey Dates Biologists Biological/Regulatory 9124/15 MR, LL Overview Gnatcatcher Focused 11/6/15 KL Surveys 11/20/15 JA 12/4115 JA 12/21/15 DM 1/4/16 JA 1/18/16 JA 2/2116 DM 2/16/16 DM 3/1116 JA Small Mammal Trapping 11(12/15 to ENVIRA 11/17/15 Delhi Sands Flower -loving 12/15/15 Ecological Sciences, Inc. Fly Habitat Evaluation Burrowing Owl Focused 3/16116 Sc Surveys 4/19/16 SC 6/6/16 Sc 7/13116 DM Rare Plant Surveys 4/1/16 DM 5/24/16 DM Vegetation Mapping 1214/16 Sc 4/1/16 DM Focused Surveys for Special Status Animal Species Based on the presence of potentially suitable habitat, focused surveys were performed for the coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) and a Habitat Suitability Evaluation was conducted for the Delhi Sands Flower Loving Fly (Rhaphiomidas terminatus abdominalis--herein DSFF). In addition, a trapping study was performed to determine the presence/absence of special -status small mammals, including the San Bernardino kangaroo rat (Dipodomys merriami parvus). Results of Surveys and Assessments for Plants and Animals Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 236 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Pace 20 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially wan Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Im act Incorporated Impact Im ad Special Plant Status No special -status plants were detected at the Project site during focused surveys, and the project will not impact any special status plants (GLA, April 21, 2017; page 19). Table 4-1 Special Status Plants Evaluated for the Project Site Species Name Status Habitat Requirements Occurrence Brand's star phacelia Federal: None Coastal dunes and coastal sage This plant was not Phacelia stellaris State: None scrub. The species typically detected during CNPS: List 1 B.1 occurs in sandy openings, sandy focused surveys. benches, dunes, sandy washes, or Not expected to flood plains of rivers. occur due to a general lack of habitat. California muhly Federal: None Chaparral, coastal sage scrub, This plant was not Muhlenbergia californica State: None lower coniferous forest and detected during CNPS: List 4.3 meadows, usually near mesic focused surveys. seeps or along streambanks. Not expected to occur due to a general lack of habitat. California saw -grass Federal: None Meadows and seeps, and alkaline This plant was not Cladium californicum State: None or freshwater marshes and detected during CNPS: List 2B.2 swamps. focused surveys. Does not occur due to a lack of suitable habitat. Chaparral ragwort Federal: None Chaparral, cismontane woodland, This plant was not Senecio aphanactis State: None coastal scrub. Sometimes detected during CNPS: List 213.2 associated with alkaline soils. focused surveys. Not expected to occur due to a general lack of habitat. Chaparral sand -verbena Federal: None Sandy soils in chaparral, coastal This plant was not Abronia villosa var. aurita State: None sage scrub. detected during CNPS: List 113.1 focused surveys. Low potential for occurrence. Coulter's goldfields Federal: None Playas, vernal pools, marshes and This plant was not Lasthenia glabrata ssp. State: None swamps (coastal salt). detected during coulteri CNPS: List 1 B.1 focused surveys. Does not occur due to a lack of Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 237 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 21 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Significant wth Mitigation Than Significant No Im act incorporated Impact act Im _] Species Name Status Habitat Requirements Occurrence suitable habitat. Coulter's saltbush Federal: None Coastal bluff scrub, coastal dunes, This plant was not Atriplex coulteri State: None coastal sage scrub, valley and detected during CNPS: List 1B.2 foothill grassland. Occurring on focused surveys. alkaline or clay soils. Does not occur due to a lack of suitable habitat. Lucky morning-glory Federal: None Historically associated with This plant was not Calystegia felix State: None wetland and marshy places, but detected during CNPS: List 3.1 possibly in drier situations as well. focused surveys Possibly silty loam and alkaline Does not occur soils. Meadows and seeps due to a lack of (sometimes alkaline), riparian suitable habitat. scrub (alluvial). Many -stemmed dudleya Federal: None Chaparral, coastal sage scrub, This plant was not Dudleya mulficaulis State: None valley and foothill grassland. detected during CNPS: List 113.2 Often occurring in clay soils, focused surveys. Does not occur due to a lack of suitable habitat. Marsh sandwort Federal: FE Bogs and fens, freshwater This plant was not Arenaria paludicola State: SE marshes and swamps. detected during CNPS: List 1 B.1 focused surveys. Does not occur due to a lack of suitable habitat. Mesa horkelia Federal: None Sandy or gravelly soils in This plant was not Horkelia cuneata var. puberula State: None chaparral (maritime), cismontane detected during CNPS: List 1 B.1 woodland, and coastal scrub. focused surveys. Not expected to occur due to a general lack of habitat. Parish's desert -thorn Federal: None Coastal sage scrub, Sonoran This plant was not Lycium parishii State: None desert scrub detected during CNPS: List 213.3 focused surveys. Not expected to occur due to a general lack of habitat. Parry's spineflower Federal: None Sandy or rocky soils in open This plant was not Chorizanthe parryi var. parryi State: None habitats of chaparral and coastal detected during CNPS: List 1 B.1 sage scrub. focused surveys. Low potential for occurrence. Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 238 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 22 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact incorporated Impact Impact Species Name Status Habitat Requirements Occurrence Plummer's mariposa lily Federal: None Granitic, rock soils within This plant was not Calochortus plummerae State: None chaparral, cismontane woodland, detected during CNPS: List 4.2 coastal sage scrub, lower focused surveys. montane coniferous forest, valley Moderate and foothill grassland. potential for occurrence. Prairie wedge grass Federal: None Mesic soils in cismontane This plant was not Sphenopholis obtusata State: None woodland, meadows and seeps. detected during CNPS: List 2B.2 focused surveys. Does not occur due to lack of suitable habitat. Robinson's pepper grass Federal: None Chaparral, coastal sage scrub. This plant was not Lepidium virginicum var. State: None detected during robinsonii CNPS: List 4.3 focused surveys. Low potential for occurrence. Salt marsh bird's -beak Federal: FE Coastal dune, coastal salt This plant was not Chloropyron maritimum ssp. State: SE marshes and swamps. detected during maritimum CNPS: List 1 B.2 focused surveys. Does not occur due to lack of suitable habitat. Salt Spring checkerbloom Federal: None Mesic, alkaline soils in chaparral. This plant was not Sidalcea neomexicana State: None coastal sage scrub, lower detected during CNPS: List 2B.2 montane coniferous forest, focused surveys. Mojavean desert scrub, and Does not occur playas. due to lack of suitable habitat. San Bernardino aster Federal: None Cismontane woodland, coastal This plant was not Symphyotrichum defoliatum State: None scrub, lower montane coniferous detected during CNPS: List 1B.2 forest, meadows and seeps, focused surveys. marshes and swamps, valley and Does not occur foothill grassland (vernally mesic). due to lack of suitable habitat. Santa Ana River woolly star Federal: FE Alluvial fan sage scrub, chaparral. This plant was not Eriastrum densifolium ssp. State: SE Occurring on sandy or rocky soils. detected during sanctorum CNPS: List 1 B.1 focused surveys. Low potential for occurrence. Slender -horned spineflower Federal: FE Sandy soils in alluvial scrub, This plant was not Dodecahema leptoceras State: SE chaparral, cismontane woodland. detected during CNPS: List 1 B.1 focused surveys.. Low potential for occurrence. Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 239 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 23 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact incorporated impact Im act Species Name Status Habitat Requirements Occurrence Smooth tarplant Federal: None Alkaline soils in chenopod scrub, This plant was not Centromadia pungens ssp. State: None meadows and seeps, playas, detected during laevis CNPS: List 1 B.1 riparian woodland, valley and focused surveys. foothill grasslands, disturbed Does not occur habitats. due to lack of suitable habitat. White rabbit -tobacco Federal: None Sandy or gravelly soils in This plant was not Pseudognaphalium State: None chaparral, cismontane woodland, detected during leucocephalum CNPS: List 2B.2 coastal scrub, and riparian focused surveys. woodland. Does not occur due to lack of suitable habitat. Status Federal FE — Federally Endangered FT — Federally Threatened FC — Federal Candidate State SE — State Endangered ST — State Threatened CNPS Rank 1A — Plants presumed extirpated in California and either rare or extinct elsewhere. Rank 1 B — Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere. Rank 2A— Plants presumed extirpated in California, but common elsewhere. Rank 2B — Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California, but more common elsewhere. Rank 3 — Plants about which more information is needed (a review list). Rank 4 — Plants of limited distribution (a watch list). Threat Code extension .1 — Seriously endangered in California (over 80% occurrences threatened) .2 — Fairly endangered in California (20-80% occurrences threatened) .3 — Not very endangered in California (<20% of occurrences threatened or no current threats known) Special Status Animals Survey Summary Two special -status small mammals (northwestern San Diego pocket mouse and desert woodrat) were detected at the project site during the trapping study. Both species were trapped in very low densities. The coastal California gnatcatcher and burrowing owl were both confirmed absent through focused surveys. No other special -status animals were detected at the project site, although the site has the potential to support several non - listed, special -status reptile species that were not observed at the site during the various surveys, but whose absence could not be ruled out. The potential for these species is relatively low based on the past disturbance of the site, and general isolation of the site. If present, the reptile species are likely to occur in low densities. Based on the results of the focused biological surveys, the project will not impact any federally or state -listed animal species, including the coastal California gnatcatcher (CAGN) and the San Bernardino kangaroo rat (SBKR), and therefore "take" authorization IMMSM161,, E10-16 240 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Paqe 24 Less Than Significant Less Issues and SupportingInformation Sources: Potentially Significant WithThen Mitigation Significant No Impact Incar crated Impact Im act would not be required for the project. Based on the results of the trapping study, the project will remove habitat supporting two non -listed, special -status small mammals, including the desert woodrat and northwestern San Diego pocket mouse. In addition, the project will remove habitat with the potential to support several non -listed, special -status reptiles, including the coast horned lizard, orangethroat whiptail, rosy boa, red diamond rattlesnake, and silvery legless lizard. However, due to relatively small size and the general isolation of the site, and the relatively low sensitivity of these species, the loss of habitat at the property would not have a substantial, adverse effect on these species. Therefore, the impacts would be less than significant and would not require mitigation for small mammals. Although burrowing owls were not detected at the Project site during focused surveys, limited portions of the site have the potential to support owls in the future. Direct impacts to burrowing owls are not permitted pursuant to the California Fish and Game Code, and so if burrowing owls were to be present during construction, those owls would have to be properly excluded from the site following accepted protocols, and subject to the approval of an exclusion plan by CDFW. As such, mitigation measures are required for pre - disturbance surveys to be performed prior to the initiation of grading or other activities that might disturb burrowing owl habitat. Table 4-2. Special Status Animals Evaluated for the Project Site Potential for Species Name Status Habitat Requirements I Occurrence Invertebrates Delhi -sands flower -loving fly Federal: FE Fine, sandy soils, often Does not occur due to (DSFLF) State: None associated with wholly or a lack of suitable Raphiomidas terminatus partially consolidated habitat. abdominalis dunes referred to as the "Delhi" series. Vegetation consists of a sparse cover, including Californica buckwheat, California croton, deerweed, and evening primrose. Reptiles California mountain kingsnake (San Federal: None Bigcone spruce and Not expected to occur Bernardino population) State: SSC chaparral at lower due to general lack of Lampropeltis zonata (parvirubra) elevations. Black oak, habitat. incense cedar, Jeffery pine, and ponderosa pine at higher elevations. Coast horned lizard Federal: None Occurs in a variety of Low potential to occur, Phrynosoma blainvillli State: SSC vegetation types including but not observed coastal sage scrub, during biological Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 241 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Paqe 25 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incor crated Impact Im act Potential for Species Name Status Habitat Requirements Occurrence chaparral, annual surveys. grassland, oak woodland, and riparian woodlands. Orangethroat whiptail Federal: None Coastal sage scrub, Low potential to occur, Aspidoscelis.hyperythra State: SSC chaparral, non-native but not observed grassland, oak woodland, during biological and juniper woodland. surveys. Red -diamond rattlesnake Federal: None Habitats with heavy brush Low potential to occur, Crotalus Tuber State: SSC and rock outcrops, but not observed including coastal sage during biological scrub and chaparral. surveys. Rosy boa Federal: None Coastal sage scrub, Low potential to occur, Charina trivirgata State: None chaparral, or mixed but not observed habitats, commonly with during biological rocky soils and outcrops. surveys. Also in oak woodlands and riparian areas bordering scrub habitats. Silvery legless lizard Federal: None Occurs primarily in areas Low potential to occur, Anniella pulchra pulchra State: SSC with sandy or loose but not observed organic soil, or where during biological there is plenty of leaf surveys. litter. Associated with coastal sage scrub, chaparral, coastal dunes, valley/foothill grasslands, oak woodlands, and pine forests. Two -striped garter snake Federal: None Aquatic snake typically Does not occur due to Thamnophis hammondii State: SSC associated with wetland a lack of suitable habitats such as streams, habitat. creeks, and pools. Western pond turtle Federal: None Slow -moving permanent Does not occur due to Emys marmorata State: SSC or intermittent streams, a lack of suitable small ponds and lakes, habitat. reservoirs, abandoned gravel pits, permanent and ephemeral shallow wetlands, stock ponds, and treatment lagoons. Abundant basking sites and cover necessary, including logs, rocks, submerged vegetation, and undercut banks. Birds Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 242 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 26 Less Than Signifwnl Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Palenliaiiy Significant Wth Mitigation Than Sipifi.nl No Im act Inco oraled Im ad Impact Potential for Species Name Status Habitat Requirements Occurrence Burrowing owl (burrow sites & some Federal: BCC Shortgrass prairies, Moderate potential to wintering sites) State: SSC grasslands, lowland occur, but determined Athene cunicularia scrub, agricultural lands absent through (particularly rangelands), focused surveys. coastal dunes, desert floors, and some artificial, open areas as a year- long resident. Occupies abandoned ground squirrel burrows as well as artificial structures such as culverts and underpasses. Coastal cactus wren Federal: BCC Occurs almost exclusively Does not occur due to Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus State: SSC in cactus (cholla and a lack of suitable sandiegensis prickly pear) dominated habitat. coastal sage scrub. Coastal California gnatcatcher Federal: FT Low elevation coastal Moderate potential to Polioptila californica californica State: SSC sage scrub and coastal occur, but determined bluff scrub. absent through focused surveys. Golden eagle (nesting & wintering) Federal: BCC In southern California, Does not occur due to Aquila chrysaetos State: WL, FP occupies grasslands, a lack of suitable brushlands, deserts, oak habitat. savannas, open coniferous forests, and montane valleys. Nests on rock outcrops and ledges. Grasshopper sparrow (nesting) Federal: None Open grassland and Not expected to occur Ammodramus savannarum State: SSC prairies with patches of due to the general lack bare ground. of habitat. Least Bell's vireo (nesting) Federal: FE Dense riparian habitats Does not occur due to Vireo bellii pusillus State: SE with a stratified canopy, a lack of suitable including southern willow habitat. scrub, mule fat scrub, and riparian forest. Loggerhead shrike (nesting) Federal: BCC Forages over open Low potential to occur, Lanius ludovicianus State: SSC ground within areas of but not observed short vegetation, pastures during biological with fence rows, old surveys. orchards, mowed roadsides, cemeteries, golf courses, riparian areas, open woodland, Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 243 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Paqe 27 Less Than Significant Less :N.P and Supporting Information Sources: gtanrai Significant can Mitigation rnIssues Significant act Incorporated Impact IIm t Potential for Species Name Status Habitat Requirements Occurrence agricultural fields, desert washes, desert scrub, grassland, broken chaparral and beach with scattered shrubs. Southwestern willow flycatcher Federal: FE Riparian woodlands along Does not occur due to (nesting) State: SE streams and rivers with a lack of suitable Empidonax traillii extimus mature dense thickets of habitat. trees and shrubs. Tricolored blackbird (nesting Federal: BCC Breeding colonies require Does not occur due to colony) State: SE, nearby water, a suitable a lack of suitable Agelaius tricolor SSC nesting substrate, and habitat. open -range foraging habitat of natural grassland, woodland, or agricultural cropland. Western yellow -billed cuckoo Federal: FT, Dense, wide riparian Does not occur due to (nesting) BCC woodlands with well- a lack of suitable Coccyzus americanus occidentalis State: SE developed understories. habitat. White-tailed kite (nesting) Federal: None Low elevation open Low potential to occur Elanus Ieucurus State: FP grasslands, savannah- for foraging, but not like habitats, agricultural observed during areas, wetlands, and oak biological surveys. woodlands. Dense The site does not canopies used for nesting contain suitable and cover. breeding habitat. Yellow -breasted chat (nesting) Federal: None Dense, relatively wide Does not occur due to Icteria virens State: SSC riparian woodlands and a lack of suitable thickets of willows, vine habitat. tangles, and dense brush with well -developed understories. Yellow warbler (nesting) Federal: BCC Breed in lowland and Does not occur due to Setophaga petechia State: SSC foothill riparian a lack of suitable woodlands dominated by habitat. cottonwoods, alders, or willows and other small trees and shrubs typical of low, open -canopy riparian woodland. During migration, forages in woodland, forest, and shrub habitats. Mammals Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 244 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 28 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Significant wtn Mitigation Than Significant No Iraact Inco orated Impact Impact Potential for Species Name Status Habitat Requirements Occurrence Los Angeles pocket mouse Federal: None Fine, sandy soils in This species was Perognathus longimembris State: SSC coastal sage scrub and determined absent brevinasus grasslands. through trapping. Low potential for occurrence. Northwestern San Diego pocket Federal: None Coastal sage scrub, sage Present. mouse State: SSC scrub/grassland Chaetodipus fallax fallax ecotones, and chaparral. Pallid bat Federal: None Deserts, grasslands, Does not occur due to Antrozous pallidus State: SSC shrublands, woodlands, a lack of suitable and forests. Most habitat. common in open, dry habitats with rocky areas for roosting. Pocketed free -tailed bat Federal: None Rocky areas with high Does not occur due to Nyctinomops femorosaccus State: SSC cliffs in pine -juniper a lack of suitable woodlands, desert scrub, habitat. palm oasis, desert wash, and desert riparian. San Bernardino kangaroo rat Federal: FE Typically found in This species was Dipodomys merriami parvus State: SSC Riversidean alluvial fan determined absent sage scrub and sandy through trapping. loam soils, alluvial fans and floodplains, and along washes with nearby sage scrub. San Diego black -tailed jackrabbit Federal: None Occupies a variety of Low potential to occur, Lepus californicus bennettii State: SSC habitats, but is most but not observed common among during biological shortgrass habitats. Also surveys. occurs in sage scrub, but needs open habitats. San Diego desert woodrat Federal: None Occurs in a variety of Present. Neotoma lepida intermedia State: SSC shrub and desert habitats, primarily associated with rock outcrops, boulders, cacti, or areas of dense undergrowth. Southern grasshopper mouse Federal: None Desert areas, especially This species was Onychomys torridus ramona State: SSC scrub habitats with friable determined absent soils for digging. Prefers through trapping. Low low to moderate shrub potential for cover. occurrence. Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 245 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 29 Less Than Signi oanl Lass Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Significant wlh Miligalicn Then Significant No Impact In. grated Im act Im act Potential for Species Name Status Habitat Requirements Occurrence Stephens' kangaroo rat Federal: FE Open grasslands or This species was Dipodomys stephensi State: ST sparse shrublands with determined absent less than 50% vegetation through trapping. Not cover during the summer. expected to occur due to a general lack of habitat. Western mastiff bat Federal: None Occurs in many open, Does not occur due to Eumops perotis californicus State: SSC semi -arid to and habitats, a lack of suitable including conifer and habitat. deciduous woodlands, coastal scrub, grasslands, and chaparral. Roosts in crevices in cliff faces, high buildings, trees, and tunnels. Western yellow bat Federal: None Found in valley foothill Does not occur due to Lasiurus xanthinus State: SSC riparian, desert riparian, a lack of suitable desert wash, and palm habitat. oasis habitats. Roosts in trees, particularly palms. Forages over water and among trees. Small Mammal Trapping Two special -status small mammals were detected during the trapping study in low numbers, including the desert woodrat (one individual) and the northwestern San Diego pocket mouse (six individuals). No listed small mammals were detected during the trapping study, including the San Bernardino kangaroo rat (SBKR) and the Stephens' kangaroo rat (SKR), and so both are considered absent from the site. Also confirmed absent was the Los Angeles pocket mouse (LAPM). Altogether, five small mammal species were detected, including the aforementioned woodrat and pocket mouse, as well as the Dulzura Kangaroo Rat (Dipodomys simulans), deer mouse (Peromyscus maniculatis), and harvest mouse (Reithrodontomys megalotis). FOCUSED SURVEYS: GNATCATCHER, DELHI SANDS FLOWER LOVING FLY AND SAN BERNARDINO KANGAROO RAT GNATCATCHER The gnatcatcher is designated as a federally threatened species and as a California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Species of Special Concern. Focused gnatcatcher surveys were conducted at the project site between November 6, 2015 and March 1, 2016 in all areas of suitable habitat in accordance with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) guidelines. The gnatcatcher was not detected at the project site. Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 246 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Paqe 30 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incorporated Im act Im act Protocol surveys for the gnatcatcher were performed in all suitable areas of CSS habitat on site. Surveys were conducted in accordance with the 1997 USFWS guidelines, which stipulate that during the non -breeding season, nine surveys shall be conducted in all areas of suitable habitat with at least 14 days between site visits. The USFWS survey guidelines also stipulate that no more than 80 acres of suitable habitat shall be surveyed per biologist per day. Because the overall site supports less than 80 acres of coastal sage scrub, the project site was treated as one survey polygon [Exhibit 3-Site Map of Biological Technical Resources Report]. GLA biologist Kevin Livergood (TE-172638-2) conducted one protocol survey on November 6, 2015. GLA biologist David Moskovitz (TE-084606-2) conducted protocol surveys on November 20, 2015, December 21, 2015, and February 2 and 16, 2016. GLA biologist Jeff Ahrens conducted protocol surveys under Ms. Ingrid Eich's recovery permit (TE 092469-2.1) on November 20, 2015, January 4 and 18, 2016 and March 1, 2016. 1 All surveys were conducted during the morning hours and were completed before 12:00 P.M. No surveys were conducted during extreme weather conditions (i.e., winds exceeding 15 miles per hour, rain, or temperatures in excess of 350C). All areas of suitable habitat were surveyed on foot by walking slowly and methodically. Taped vocalizations and "pishing" sounds were utilized to elicit a response from gnatcatchers that might be present. Table 1 summarizes survey dates and weather conditions. Table 1 (Gnatcatcher Surveys) Date Start Time End Time Temp IF start/end) Wind speed (mph) Cloud Cover (startlend) Surveyor 11/06/15 0740 1030 57/68 6/10 Clear/Clear KL 11/20/15 0700 1040 53/76 2/2 Clear/Clear JA 12/4/15 0700 1030 47/54 2/1 40190 JA/SC 12/21/15 0945 1200 50/55 2/2 Clear/Clear DM 1/4/16 0800 1125 54/56 3/2 100/70 JA 1/18/16 0820 1050 52/52 1 1/2 100/100 JA 2/2/16 1030 1240 50/55 2/2 Clear/Clear DM 2/16/16 0815 1130 74/83 2/4 Clear/Clear DM 3/1/16 0830 1130 66/74 1/3 75/60 JA JA = Jeff Ahrens, DM = Dave Moskovitz, KL = Kevin Livergood RESULTS FOR GNATCATCHER The gnatcatcher was not detected on site during focused surveys; therefore no mitigation is required for impacts to the Gnatcatcher. Common birds identified on or in close proximity to the site include house finch (Carpodacus mexicanus), blue -gray gnatcatcher (Polioptila caerulea), California towhee (Pipilo crissalis), Anna's hummingbird (Calypte anna), Bewick's wren (Thryomanes bewickii), northern flicker (Colaptes auratus), and northern mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos). Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 247 Initial Study for DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00450, Paqe 31 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No ha act Incorccrated Impact Im act DELHI SANDS FLOWER LOVING FLY In order to meet the environmental documentation and review requirements, potentially occurring sensitive biological resources must be addressed to demonstrate the applicant's conformance to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the federal Endangered Species Act (Act). As a federally -listed endangered species, a Habitat Suitability Evaluation was performed for the Delhi Sands flower -loving fly (Rhaphiomidas terminatus abdominatis--herein DSFF). A DSFF Habitat Suitability Evaluation was performed by Ecological Sciences (January 2016). According to the Evaluation, the Service listed the DSFF as an endangered species on September 23, 1993. This species is only known to occur in association with Delhi sand deposits (USFWS 1997), primarily on twelve disjunct sites within a radius of about eight miles in the cities of Colton, Rialto, and Fontana in southwestern San Bernardino and northwestern Riverside counties. However, recent survey data (1997-03) indicates that DSFF occur in low numbers in Ontario, and also in sub -optimal habitat conditions. The DSFF is restricted to the Colton Dunes, which covers approximately 40 square miles. More than 95 percent of the formerly known habitat has been converted to human uses or severely affected by human. activities, rendering it apparently unsuitable for occupation by the species Subregional areas encompassing smaller areas known to be inhabited by the DSFF or encompassing areas that contain restorable habitat for the DSFF have been grouped into three Recovery Units (RUs) by the Service based on geographic proximity, similarity of habitat, and potential genetic exchange (USFWS 1997). The subject site is located within an area designated as the Ontario RU. The Ontario RU historically contained the largest block of the Colton Dunes; however, most lands in this RU have been converted to agriculture, or developed for commercial and residential projects (USFWS 1997). The Ontario RU contains several areas that currently support DSFF, and additional areas have been proposed for restoration in the DSFF Recovery Plan. The occupied and/or potentially restorable habitat in the RUs includes only those areas that, at a minimum, contain Delhi Series soils. Further, RUs do not include residential and commercial development, or areas that have been otherwise permanently altered by human actions (USFWS 1997). DSFF will continue to exist in the Ontario RU only with land conservation, a cessation of current habitat -degrading land management practices and recreational uses, and/or a restoration or natural reversion of ecologically damaged lands back to an ecological community typical of Delhi sands formations. Potentially suitable habitats remaining in the Ontario RU are highly fragmented, and as such, the establishment of a permanent long-term reserve in this RU is currently unresolved. While many degraded sites are currently unsuitable to support DSFF, DSFF have been recorded on certain properties that have been heavily disturbed in the past (e.g., previously graded and/or scraped sites where a cessation of disturbance -related land uses have occurred such that a degree of natural conditions now occur). Accordingly, DSFF may persist on, or disperse to, certain properties that have not been exposed to recurring and/or recent land disturbances. These previously disturbed properties may be important for future preservation of the species in the region. In addition, individual DSFF have been recorded in areas generally considered unsuitable to support this taxon, and with no apparent connectivity to occupied DSFF habitats. Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 248 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 32 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Im act Ecological Sciences conducted a reconnaissance -level field survey on the subject site to evaluate potential habitat for DSFF on December 15, 2015. The survey was conducted by Scott Cameron, Principal Biologist of Ecological Sciences, Inc. Mr. Cameron holds a current federal permit to conduct focused survey for this species (TE-808642-8). Ecological Sciences biologists have observed numerous DSFF in the field since 1995, and have extensive experience conducting both focused surveys and habitat evaluations for this sensitive taxon. Ecological Sciences is well versed with the biotic characteristics of a range of habitats occupied by DSFF, as well as other sensitive wildlife species potentially occurring in the area. The site was examined on foot by walking a series of meandering transects across the subject property. As mentioned, the primary objective of the one -day field visit was to generally evaluate the site's potential to support DSFF. Dominant plant species and other habitat characteristics present at the site were identified to assess the overall habitat value. Weather conditions included partly cloudy skies, 1-5 mph breezes, and ambient temperatures of 50-55 `F. The subject site is characterized as a vacant lot dominated by dense (±90-95% cover) native mixed scrub vegetation. Dominant native plant species recorded on site include California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), California sagebrush (Artemisia californica), buckbrush (Ceanothus sp.), scalebroom (Lepidospartum squamatum), goldenbush (Ericameria or Hazardia or Isocoma spp.), California croton (Croton californicus), and chaparral dodder (Cuscuta californica). Non-native species recorded included horehound (Marubium vulgare), Mediterranean grass (Schismus arabicus), short podded mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), salt cedar (Tamarix ramosissima), and gum (Eucalyptus sp.) A review of soil maps prepared for the area by the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS 2015) indicate that the subject site is located within an area mapped as containing Tujunga loamy sand, 0 to 5 percent slopes (TuB) and Tujunga gravelly loamy sand, 0 to 9 percent slopes (TvC). A general soils field analysis was conducted due to the close association of DSFF to mostly open, sandy friable soils. The site is primarily characterized by compacted gravels and cobbles. No Delhi series soils or other friable soil types were recorded on site. RESULTS FOR DELHI SANDS FLOWER LOVING FLY (DSFF) DSFF have relatively narrow habitat requirements that are determined by appropriate plant species and open sand as defining characteristics (Kingsley 1996). It has long been established that a gradient of suitability exists composed of varying degrees of natural and artificial conditions. Observations such as the DSFFs apparent avoidance of dense (both native and non-native) vegetation (>75% coverage) or general avoidance of vegetation that is sparse or not present at all (<5% coverage) appear to suggest that DSFF generally select habitats with a combination of some vegetation, including several species of plants, and some open space with bare sand (Kiyani 1996). The presence of Delhi soils appears to be the most determinative factor of whether an area can provide suitable DSFF habitat. Delhi sands constitute the primary component of a complex ecosystem. A variety of microhabitat characteristics generally constitute potential DSFF habitat (e.g., Delhi soils, vegetation composition, soil chemistry, topography, percent vegetative cover, frequency of non-native plant species, exposure to disturbances, etc.). While the aforementioned microhabitat conditions are considered optimal/essential to support DSFF, DSFF sometimes occur in areas not typically considered suitable for this taxon. Although individual DSFF have been recorded from sites supporting mostly ruderal, Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 249 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 33 L... Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information S PP g Sources: Potentially Significant WinThan Mitigation Significant No Impact Inwr orated Impact Im act non-native vegetation, most known DSFF- occupied sites contain areas, or are adjacent to areas, of relatively undisturbed exposed patches of friable, sandy soils in association with selected native plant species. None of these conditions are present on or adjacent to the project site. There is no connectivity to the subject site from the nearest known DSFF recent occurrence record (5.8 miles south of the site) due to the presence of existing development that surrounds the site. While this species likely has the capability of dispersing over relatively large distances of seemingly unsuitable habitats under certain circumstances, it would be reasonable to assume (based on our current knowledge of the species) that there is no real likelihood of DSFF dispersing to the subject site from the nearest known off -site occupied area (or historically occupied), as no suitable habitat is present on site (e.g., presence of only compacted gravel and cobble soils and absence of friable soils). Accordingly, the subject site would not be considered a viable property for preservation or restoration due absence of suitable habitat, geographic location, isolation from areas supporting DSFF populations, and surrounding land uses which have long since fragmented potential DSFF habitat in the area. Based on results of the December 2015 habitat suitability evaluation, existing conditions present at the site are not consistent with those known or expected to support DSFF. No exposed natural or semi- natural open areas with unconsolidated wind -worked granitic soils or dunes are present. Substrate conditions are not consistent with those most often correlated with potential DSFF habitat and no DSFF plant associations are present on site. Under current conditions, the site would generally be considered prohibitive to DSSF occupation. The underlying soil environment appears to be the most definitive factor of whether an area could potentially support DSFF. Accordingly, the quality of soils present within the study area was rated for its potential to support DSFF. No areas of the site are mapped as Delhi soils; however the substrates present were visually inspected and rated based on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the best quality and most suitable habitat in the biologist's judgment: 1. Soils dominated by heavy deposits of alluvial material including coarse sands and gravels with little or no Delhi sands and evidence of soil compaction. Unsuitable. 2. Delhi sands are present but the soil characteristics include a predominance of alluvial materials (Tujunga Soils). Very Low Quality. 3. Although not clean, sufficient Delhi sands are present to prevent soil compaction. Some sandy soils exposed on the surface due to fossorial animal activity. Low Quality. 4. Abundant clean Delhi sands with little or no alluvial material or Tujunga soils present. Moderate abundance of exposed sands on the soil surface. Low vegetative cover. Evidence of moderate degree of fossorial animal activity by vertebrates and invertebrates. Moderate Quality Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 250 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Pape 34 Less Than Signifcant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: aen any SigniCcant Wth MiWga5on Than Significant No Impact Inca orated ha act Im ad 5. Sand dune habitat with clean Delhi sands. High abundance of exposed sands on the soil surface. Low vegetative cover. Evidence (soil surface often gives under foot) of high degree of fossorial animal activity by vertebrates and invertebrates. High Quality DSSF Conclusion: Based on the above ratings and existing site conditions, the study area would be considered unsuitable for DSFF. In view of correlative habitat analyses from a wide range of occupied DSFF habitats in the region, the subject site does not contain habitat suitable to support or sustain a viable DSFF population. Therefore, no impacts to DSFF are expected and no mitigation is required for less than significant impacts to DSFF under CEQA. SAN BERNARDINO KANGAROO RAT (SBKR) A protocol trapping survey by ENVIRA was performed for the San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat (SBKR). Trapping surveys were conducted on November 12 to 17, 2015. The assessment was required to determine the presence or absence of either Los Angeles Pocket Mouse (LAPM) or SBKR in the alluvial fan drainages and upland habitat located on the property. Field surveys and focused trapping for SBKR were performed by Mr. Philippe Vergne of ENVIRA who holds a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service permit to trap and handle Stephens's and San Bernardino Kangaroo rats, Pacific Pocket mouse, and to conduct field studies on sensitive small mammals in Southern California (TE-831207- 3), a California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) Memorandum of Understanding for above mentioned species and the Mohave Ground Squirrel, the Los Angeles pocket mouse, Palms Springs pocket mouse, Palm Springs ground squirrel, white -eared pocket mouse, Jacumba pocket mouse, north-western San Diego pocket mouse, and Dulzura pocket mouse , and a CDFG collection permit. Trapping was conducted according to protocols established for small mammal species and used for LAPM and SBKR surveys. The protocol calls for five consecutive nights of trapping, conducted when the animal is active aboveground at night. One five-day trapping session was deemed necessary to cover the project site. A focused trapping survey was conducted from November 12 to 17 of 2015. Trapping grids of 70 traps (7X10 lines) and two lines of 30 traps were set at trapping Areas A through D (Figure 3 of SBKR Report). Traps were placed in suitable habitat areas on the project, concentrating on locating traps in areas containing sandy soils and suitable vegetation. Areas with kangaroo sign were also targeted. Each trap was baited with a mixture of bird seed and rolled oats placed at the back of the traps. The traps were left in place, set at dusk each night and inspected once during the night and at dawn each morning. Several sensitive small mammal species were identified as potentially present in the vicinity of the project. They are the SBKR, the San Diego pocket mouse, the Los Angeles pocket mouse, and the San Diego desert woodrat. Of the animal species potentially present, only the SBKR requires specific survey protocols to establish presence or absence. These specific survey protocols are required for areas where impacts may occur to the sensitive species or their occupied habitat. The remaining species are usually identified through casual observation while trapping for targeted species. The project is not located within USFWS designated critical habitat for SBKR. The past habitat losses and potential future losses prompted the emergency listing of the SBKR as an endangered species (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1998a). The SBKR is also listed as a State Species of Special Concern. Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 251 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 35 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information S PP g Sources: Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Into crated Impact Im act RESULTS FOR SAN BERNARDINO KANGAROO RAT A total of five small mammal species and 40 small mammals were captured for a capture rate of about four percent. Sensitive species that were captured are the San Diego pocket mouse (Chaetodippus fallax fallax), and the San Diego desert woodrat (Neotoma lepida). Trapping Results Pierotti Property TRAP SITE TRAPS NIGHTS DKR PEMA PEER CHFA NELE Grid A 350 2 9 2 3 Grid B 350 1 12 2 Line C 150 4 1 Line D 150 3 1 TOTAL 1000 3 28 2 6 1 DKR-Dulzura Kangaroo Rat (Dipodomys simulans) PEMA-Deer Mouse (Permnyscus maniculatis) REME-Harvest Mouse (Reithrodontomys megalotis) CHFA-Northwestern San Diego Pocket Mouse (Chaetodipus fallax fallax) NELE- San Diego desert woodrat (Neotoma lepida) No Los Angeles pocket mice nor San Bernardino kangaroo rats were caught during the trapping surveys. A total of five small mammal species were captured. Sensitive species that were captured are the San Diego pocket mouse (Chaetodippus fallax fallax), and one San Diego desert woodrat (Neotoma lepida intermedia). The kangaroo rat species on site is the Dulzura kangaroo rat (Dipodomys simulans). The two remaining species observed onsite were the deer mouse (Peromyscus maniculatis) and harvest mouse (Reithrodontomys megalotis). No listed small mammals were detected during the trapping study, including the San Bernardino kangaroo rat (SBKR) and the Stephens' kangaroo rat (SKR), and so both are considered absent from the site. Project impacts were only generally assessed in relation to LAPM and SBKR. The proposed project is not located within designated critical habitat for the SBKR management area 4. Therefore, no impacts to LAPM or SBKR are expected and no mitigation is required. PEER REVIEW OF BIOLOGICAL REPORTS All four Biological reports (Biological Technical Resources, Gnatcatcher, Delhi Sands Flower Loving Fly and San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat) were peer reviewed by Michael Baker International. Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 252 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 36 Lass Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: POIenlially Significant with Mitigation Than Significant No Impact incorporated Impact Im act Biological Resources Report/Vegetation Communities and Gnatcatcher The peer review is in agreement with the assessment of the site for special status plants and animals, and the Gnatcatcher. Regarding vegetation communities, the peer review indicates the following: "Although in agreement with the discussion of the channelization of Day Creek resulting in only remnant indicators of a Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub (RAFSS) community, large patches of Coastal Sage Scrub (CSS) were observed in the northwestern portion of the project site that are primarily dominated by a CSS species, California sagebrush (Artemisia califomica). The remainder of relatively intact habitat on -site is adequately described as Buckwheat Scrub, which often follows disturbances, such as in this case, rather than 'an earlier stage of ecological succession" of RAFSS where the length of isolation is extensive."' In response to the peer review comments, GLA prepared a follow-up response and Technical Memorandum (Appendix P) that states the following: "GLA's Biological Technical Report noted the presence of California sagebrush throughout the site; however, as indicated in the Response to Peer Review Comments, GLA chose to map the relatively smaller patches of sagebrush with the overall buckwheat scrub, since both are components of CSS, and combining the sagebrush patches with the buckwheat scrub mapping did not affect the accuracy or findings of the Biological Technical Report." Delhi Sands Flower Loving Fly The peer review concurs with the DSS Habitat Suitability Evaluation and states that "the project site does not support suitable Delhi Sands Flower -loving Fly (DSF) habitat and DSF would not occur on the site." The peer review also suggests including a map of the Ontario DSF Recovery Unit, noting that the project site is north of the Ontario Recovery Unit, outside of the designated DSF Sands, and wind patterns are from the north, which would not carry DSF Sands to the site." In response to the peer review, the DSF Report was revised to incorporate the peer reviews comments. San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat The peer review concurs that "the project site is not currently occupied by Los Angeles pocket mouse nor San Bernardino kangaroo rat based on the results of the five night presence/absence trapping study." However, the peer reviews adds that the presence of "two sensitive species (i.e., San Diego pocket mouse and San Diego desert woodrat) would require coordination with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife for impacts to these two sensitive species under CEQA." In response to the peer review, the SBKR Report was revised with the following addition: "Project impacts to these species must be evaluated under CEQA, but since such impacts would be less than significant and would not require mitigation, coordination with CDFW is not required for the project." CONCLUSION: Based on the trap results, the property is not currently occupied by LAPM nor SBKR. There will be no direct impacts to SBKR from project implementation. Two sensitive species, the north western San Diego pocket mouse and the San Diego desert woodrat, were captured on site. The take for this species is not considered as significant under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) considering the trace/low occupancy on site and extant of the species regional distribution, small size and isolation of site, and the relatively low sensitivity of these species, the loss of habitat Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 253 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 37 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Significant with Mitigation Than Significant Nc Impact incorporated Impact Im act would not have a substantial, adverse effect. Therefore, the impacts would be less than significant and would not require mitigation. In order to avoid impacts to Burrowing Owls and nesting birds, the following mitigation measures are required and will reduce impacts to less than significant: 1) Three days prior to the removal of vegetation or ground -disturbing activities, a breeding bird survey that is in conformance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act shall be required to determine whether nesting is occurring. Occupied nests shall not be disturbed unless a qualified biologist verifies through non- invasive methods that either (a) the adult birds have not begun egg -laying or incubation; or (b) the juveniles from the occupied nests are foraging independently and are capable of independent survival. If the biologist is unable to verify one of the above conditions, then no disturbance shall occur within 300 feet of non -raptor nests, and within 500 feet of raptor nests, during the breeding season to avoid abandonment of young. If nests are discovered, they shall be avoided through the establishment of an appropriate buffer setback, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. The temporary "no construction" area shall be maintained until the nest has completed its cycle, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. Once the nest cycle is complete and all nestlings have fledged and have left the nest, construction in the area may resume. Perform a Burrowing Owl Survey that is in conformance with the Department of Fish and Wildlife Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation and submit the written report outlining the findings to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the Planning Department within 30 days of groundbreaking activity. The survey shall include a habitat assessment, survey and impact analysis. The Burrowing Owl Survey shall follow the following protocol: Burrowing Owl Survey methodology shall be based on Appendix D (Breeding and Non -breeding Season Surveys and Reports) of the CDFW Staff Report. Results of the pre -construction survey shall be provided to CDFW and the City. If the pre -construction survey does not identify burrowing owls on the project site, then no further mitigation is required. If burrowing owls are found to be utilizing the project site during the pre - construction survey, measures shall be developed by the qualified biologist in coordination with CDFW to avoid Impacting occupied burrows during the nesting period. These measures shall be based on the most current CDFW protocols and will at minimum include establishment of buffer setbacks from occupied burrows and owl monitoring. If ground -disturbing activities are delayed or suspended for more than 30 days after the pre -construction survey, the site shall be resurveyed for owls. During the non -breeding season from September 1 through January 31, if burrows are occupied by migratory or non -migratory resident burrowing Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 254 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 38 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sours: PP g Sources: Potemlany Significant With Mitigation Than Signs ant No Impact incorporated Impact Im act owls during a pre -construction survey, burrow exclusion and/or closure may be used to exclude owls from those burrows. Burrow exclusion and/or closure should only be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist in coordination with CDFW using the most current CDFW guidelines. During the avian nesting season from February 1 through August 31, if nests are discovered, they shall be avoided through establishment of an appropriate buffer setback, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. The temporary "no construction" area would have to be maintained until the nest has completed its cycle, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. Once the nest cycle is complete and all nestlings have fledged and have left the nest, construction in the area may resume. b) A Biological Technical Report was completed for the project site by Glenn Lukos Associates (GLA; April 21, 2017). The Biological Resources Assessment Survey (April 21, 2017) concluded that the project site did not include riparian habitat; therefore the project will not have any impacts on riparian habitat. IMPACTS TO VEGETATION COMMUNIITIES Nearly the entire Project site (approximately 25.48 acres) supports a scrub vegetation community dominated by California buckwheat, with the remainder of the site (2.96 acres) being disturbed or developed (Exhibit 5 — Vegetation Map of GLA Report). Additional species within the scrub habitat include coastal sagebrush, goldenbush, deerweed, white sage (Salvia apiana), groundsel, and several mature individuals of scalebroom. The property is located in an area that was historically a part of a large alluvial floodplain associated with Day Creek and the Etiwanda Fan. The vegetation at the property is an outlying remnant of a broader alluvial scrub, or more specifically, Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub (RAFSS) vegetation community associated with alluvial. In general, alluvial scrub consists of a community located on the outwash fans of large canyons within the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto Mountains, as well as other smaller riverine areas in Southern California. Alluvial scrub is located on the floodplain terraces of the larger rivers and streams associated with the alluvial fans. Alluvial scrub is made up predominantly of drought -deciduous shrubs typical of coastal sage scrub communities, but also with a significant cover of larger shrubs typically found in chaparral communities. RAFSS specifically has a coastal sage scrub component where the shrubs species are characteristic of Riversidean sage scrub, which is an inland expression of coastal sage scrub. The only dominant species that has a strong fidelity to alluvial scrub is scalebroom, which generally is regarded as an indicator of RAFSS. The subject property contains several mature individuals of scalebroom. In an alluvial system that has not been modified by flood control and development, the terraces are characteristically subjected to infrequent, but severe flood events that scour the surface, thereby removing the vegetation present and restoring the surface to an earlier stage of ecological succession. Following these large flood events, vegetation re- establishes on the scoured surface and over time the community progresses through various stages of ecological succession until the next flood event again re -scours the surface. Earlier stages of RAFSS are characterized by a dominance of species such as scalebroom and California buckwheat, but without the presence of larger evergreen shrubs and abundant annual grasses. Whereas California buckwheat is a general Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 255 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Pacle 39 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g Potentially significant Me Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Im act indicator of coastal sage scrub communities, including Riversidean sage scrub, scale broom is exclusively an indicator species of early -stage RAFSS, i.e., a RAFSS community whose alluvial surface was more recently affected by flood scour. In contrast, shrubs such as chamise and holly -leaved cherry (Prunus ilicifolia) are found in later -stage RAFSS, i.e., a community whose alluvial surface has not been affected by flood scour for some time. According to the Biological Technical Report, it is an important distinction that the existing habitat at the subject property is a remnant of what the site historically supported, and that flood control improvements to Day Creek and the overall alluvial system has modified the flood regime of the area, thereby eliminating the possibility of large-scale flooding necessary to naturally sustain a functional alluvial scrub community at the property. Furthermore, the property has been disturbed in the past, including numerous areas where the surface has been scraped by equipment. The dominance of California buckwheat, which as noted above is an indicator species of early -stage RAFSS, suggests that the onsite habitat has been disturbed repeatedly over the years such that what remains has the artificial appearance of early -stage RAFSS. Since the site would no longer be subjected to the same flooding that historically created the alluvial terraces, the remnant patches of scrub vegetation that do remain onsite no longer represent a naturally sustaining RAFSS community. Instead, what remains onsite essentially functions as Riversidean sage scrub dominated by California buckwheat, i.e., California buckwheat scrub. Furthermore, the remaining habitat does not have long-term conservation value as RAFSS due to the modification of the flood regime, and the spatial isolation of the site from the historic RAFSS community. Although RAFSS is State -designated as a S-1.1 (very threatened) community, the loss of California buckwheat -dominated Riversidean sage scrub (non-functional remnants of historic RAFSS) would not be considered as a ..substantial adverse effect' on a sensitive natural community, i.e. not on the remaining locations of functional RAFSS as a whole. The Project will result in the loss of approximately 25.48 acres of scrub vegetation that is a functionally isolated remnant of a historically broader extent of alluvial scrub vegetation, namely RAFSS, associated with the Etiwanda Fan and the Day Creek wash. However, residential/commercial development and flood control improvements over time have eliminated the majority of the alluvial scrub vegetation south of the 210 Freeway (as well as north of the Freeway), leaving only scattered remnant patches along the Day Creek Channel and in a few other locations. These patches of scrub vegetation are detached from the remaining Etiwanda Fan located north of the 210 Freeway, and are no longer subject to the alluvial processes that both created the habitat, and that are necessary to sustain the habitat in the future. The habitat at the Project site has been disturbed over the years, such that the site is dominated by California buckwheat, giving the site the appearance of alluvial scrub vegetation in an earlier stage of ecological succession. However, due to the extent of development and flood control improvements, the Project site is functionally isolated from the degree of flood scour that would be necessary to naturally sustain characteristic RAFSS habitat in the future. Furthermore, the site is not occupied by any listed species known in association with alluvial scrub habitats, including the coastal California gnatcatcher and the San Bernardino kangaroo rat, and listed plants such as the Santa Ana River woolly star and the slender horned spineflower. Although the site has some potential for future use by the gnatcatcher, the isolation of the site eliminates the Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 256 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 40 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Significant wm Mitigation Than SignificantF No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact possibility for the future occupation by SBKR, and the establishment of rare plants that are currently absent from the site, and in the case of the woolly star and spineflower, rely on periodic flooding to maintain suitable habitat conditions for these species. As a result, the scrub vegetation at the site does not have long-term conservation value as RAFSS, and the loss of vegetation at the site would not have a substantial adverse effect on remaining functional RAFSS associated with the Etiwanda Fan, Lytle Creek, Santa Ana River floodplain and elsewhere in the region. See also Peer Review of Biological Reports above under a) for additional discussion. Based upon the above analysis, impacts would be less than significant and would not require mitigation. Riparian impacts: The Biological Resources Assessment Survey (April 21, 2017 by GLA Associates) concluded that the project site did not include any water features that would be considered jurisdictional waters or streambeds by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Regional Board, waters protected under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, or streams subject to the jurisdiction of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Cumulative Impacts: The proposed Project will contribute to the cumulative impacts associated with alluvial scrub vegetation, including the associated species noted to occur or potentially occur at the site. However, due to the relatively small size of the property, functional isolation of the site, and the lack of listed species and other species of higher sensitivity, the cumulative impacts would be less than significant. c) No wetland habitat is present on -site. The Biological Resources Assessment Survey (August 19, 2016 by GLA Associates) concluded that the project site did not include any water features that would be considered jurisdictional waters or streambeds by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Regional Board, waters protected under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, or streams subject to the jurisdiction of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Therefore no adverse impacts are anticipated. d) The City is primarily located in a suburban area that does not contain large, contiguous natural open space areas. Wildlife potentially may move through the north/south trending tributaries in the northern portion of the City and within the Sphere of Influence. The Project site provides local wildlife use, but is not part of a regional wildlife corridor, and therefore, the Project will not adversely affect wildlife movement. e) There are two trees on the project site. Accordingly, an arboricultural report was prepared (LSA Associates; May 2, 2016). The author of the report is biologist Julie McNamara (ISA Certified Arborist/Certified Tree Risk Assessor WEA1439A). The arborist evaluated the trees and inventoried the following attributes for each tree: GPS location, species, diameter at breast height (54 inches above grade), rating (0-5, 0 indicates a dead tree and 5 indicates excellent health and structure). Both trees represent the Eucalyptus species, Eucalyptus polyanthemos (Silver Dollar Gum) and Eucalyptus rubis (Flooded Gum). The Silver Dollar Gum does have some conditions indicative of the structural failure profile, including extended branches and a leaning trunk. The Flooded Gum is in poor condition overall, with poor structure, longitudinal cracks and extended branches. Both Eucalyptus trees showed signs of two pests (psyllids and Eucalyptus tortoise beetles); however, the damage was not major on either tree. Both trees were given an overall rating of 2, indicating poor health. The low ratings were due to the poor structures of the tree. In order to qualify as Heritage trees Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 257 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Pace 41 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potenfally Significant wth Mitigation Tnan Signifcanl No Impact Incor omted Im act Im act under the City's Ordinance, the trees would have to meet one or more of the following criteria: All Eucalyptus windrows; • Any tree in excess 30 feet in height and having a single trunk diameter at breast height of 20 inches or more as measured from 4.5 feet above ground; • Multi -trunk trees having a total diameter breast height of 30 inches or more as measured from 4.5 feet aboveground; • A stand of trees the nature of which makes each dependent upon the others for survival; • Any other tree as may deemed historically or culturally significant by the Planning Director because of age, size, condition location or aesthetic qualities. Neither tree is part of a Eucalyptus windrow, and both trees are multi-trunked. The Silver Dollar Gum has total diameter at breast height of 22 inches, and the Flooded Gum has a total diameter at breast height of 25 inches. Since both trees are isolated, neither tree is part of a stand of trees that are significant or dependent on each other, and neither tree has characteristics that deem it historically or culturally significant as the trees are isolated, in poor overall health and do not represent a rare or perfect arboreal specimen. Since the two, multi-trunked trees do not qualify as Heritage trees under the multi-trunked threshold, as they total diameter height for each tree is less than 30 inches, a Tree Removal Permit is not required prior to removal. No impacts are anticipated from the removal of the two trees as the project will be planted with several hundred trees according to the landscape plan. f) Neither the City nor the SOI are within an adopted HCP, NCCP, or other approved State Habitat Conservation Plan area. The project site is not located within a local conservation area according to the General Plan, Open Space and Conservation Plan, Figure RC-1. No conflicts with habitat conservation plans will occur. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the () (✓) () ( ) significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the ( ) (✓) () ( ) significance of an archeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological ( ) (✓) () ( ) resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred ( ) () () (✓) outside of dedicated cemeteries? Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 258 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Paqe 42 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g orma reteneally Slgni( and Wlh Mitiga on Than Significant No Im att Into orated Impact Impact 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). A Cultural Resources Assessment was performed on the project site by LSA Associates (May 2, 2016). In conjunction with the South Central Coastal Information Center at California State University, Fullerton, the California Historical Resources Information was also consulted. A total of 24 resources were identified within a 1 mile search of the project site. Literature and aerial photographs were also reviewed. The study also included an intensive field survey of the project site. Parallel, linear transects separated by approximately 20-30 feet were conducted over the project site. Aerial photographs suggest project was once covered in vineyards. No historic aerial photographs or maps depict any buildings or structures in the project area at any time. No cultural resource sites were observed in the project area during the pedestrian survey. The project site is somewhat disturbed by prior bulldozing and dumping of construction material. The study concludes with the absence of cultural resources in the current project area and surrounding vicinity, no additional cultural work is recommended. The study does recommend that in the event that previously undocumented archaeological resources are identified during earthmoving activities, further work in the area should be halted until a professional archaeologist can assess the nature and significance of the finding can be determined. With the mitigation measure included under b) below, any impacts on historic resources will be less than significant. b) A Cultural Resources Assessment was performed on the project site by LSA Associates (May 2, 2016). In conjunction with the South Central Coastal Information Center at California State University, Fullerton, the California Historical Resources Information was also consulted. A total of 24 resources were identified within a 1 mile search of the project site. Literature and aerial photographs were also reviewed. The study also included an intensive field survey of the project site. Parallel, linear transects separated by approximately 20-30 feet were conducted over the project site. Aerial photographs suggest project was once covered in vineyards. No historic aerial photographs or maps depict any buildings or structures in the project area at any time. No cultural resource sites were observed in the project area during the pedestrian survey. The project site is somewhat disturbed by prior bulldozing and dumping of construction material. The study concludes with the absence of cultural resources in the current project area and surrounding vicinity, no additional cultural work is recommended. The study does recommend that in the event that previously undocumented archaeological resources are identified during earthmoving activities, further work in the area should be halted until a professional archaeologist can assess the nature and significance of the finding can be determined. According to the 2010 General Plan, there are no known archaeological sites or resources recorded on the project site; however, the Rancho Cucamonga area is known to have been inhabited by Native Americans according to the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.6). Construction activity, particularly grading, soil excavation, and compaction, could adversely affect or eliminate existing and potential archaeological resources. The General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR) analyzed the impacts of Cultural Resources based on the future build out of the City. The following mitigation measures as identified in the FPEIR shall be implemented: Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 259 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 43 Less Than Significent Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Significant cam Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Inm .rated Impact Impart 1. If any prehistoric archaeological resources are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. With the assistance of the archaeologist, the City of Rancho Cucamonga will: • Enact interim measures to protect undesignated sites from demolition or significant modification without an opportunity for the City to establish its archaeological value. • Consider establishing provisions to require incorporation of archaeological sites within new developments, using their special qualities as a theme or focal point. • Pursue educating the public about the archaeological heritage of the area. • Prepare a mitigation plan consistent with Section 21083.2 Archaeological resources of CEQA to eliminate adverse project effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric resources, including but not limited to, avoiding archaeological sites, capping or covering sites with soil, planning the site as a park or green space or paying an in -kind mitigation fee. • Prepare a technical resources management report, documenting the inventory, evaluation, and proposed mitigation of resources within the project area. Submit one copy of the completed report with original illustrations, to the San Bernardino County Archaeological Information Center for permanent archiving. c) Per the project's civil engineer, since the project site involves a large area of approximately 25 acres and will require grading to reach 8 feet below existing grade, a paleontological report was prepared (LSA Associates; May 2016). The report includes a locality search locality search at the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, an examination of geologic maps and paleontological literature, and a field survey. No significant paleontological resources were identified in directly within the project area during the locality search or field survey. The results of the locality search and literature review indicate that the project area contains Very Young Alluvial Fan Deposits, which have no paleontological sensitivity. In addition, Pleistocene deposits, which have a high paleontological sensitivity, likely exist at depths' beneath these Holocene deposits, possibly as shallow as 20 ft. below the current surface. However, because excavation is not expected to reach these Pleistocene deposits, development of this project is not expected to impact significant paleontological resources. On a broader level, the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.6) indicates that the Rancho Cucamonga area is on an alluvial fan. According to the research performed at the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County and the San Bernardino County database, no paleontological sites or resources have been recorded within the City of Rancho Cucamonga or the Sphere -of -Influence, including the project site; however, the area has a high sensitivity rating for paleontological resources. The older alluvium, which would have been deposited during the wetter climate that prevailed 10,000-100,000 years ago during the Late Pleistocene epoch of the Quaternary period, when the last "Ice Age" and the Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 260 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC20.16-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Pace 44 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Significant with Mitigation Than Significant No Im act Inco orated Im act Im act appearance of modern man occurred, may contain significant vertebrate fossils. The project site is underlain by Quaternary alluvium per the Public Safety Element of the General Plan; therefore, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 2. If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal fossils) are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified paleontologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. The paleontologist shall submit a report of findings that will also provide specific recommendations regarding further mitigation measures (i.e., paleontological monitoring) that may be appropriate. Where mitigation monitoring is appropriate, the program must include, but not be limited to, the following measures: • Assign a paleontological monitor, trained and equipped to allow the rapid removal of fossils with minimal construction delay, to the site full-time during the interval of earth -disturbing activities. • Should fossils be found within an area being cleared or graded, divert earth -disturbing activities elsewhere until the monitor has completed salvage. If construction personnel make the discovery, the grading contractor should immediately divert construction and notify the monitor of the find. • Prepare, identify, and curate all recovered fossils for documentation in the summary report and transfer to an appropriate depository (i.e., San Bernardino County Museum). • Submit summary report to City of Rancho Cucamonga. Transfer collected specimens with a copy of the report to San Bernardino County Museum. d) The proposed project is in an area that has already been disturbed by development. The project site has already been disrupted by periodic discing for weed abatement. A review of the 2010 General Plan indicates that no known religious archaeological or sacred archaeological 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. Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 261 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 45 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g Pctentiaily Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incor prated Impact Im act 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as () () () (✓) delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? () () (✓) ( ) iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including () () () (✓) liquefaction? iv) Landslides? () () () (✓) b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? () (✓) () ( ) c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, () () () (✓) or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table () () () (✓) 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use () () () (✓) of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? Comments: a) According to the Geotechnical Report (Geo Tek, Inc.; January 2016), no known faults pass through the site and it is not in an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone The project site is not in the Rancho Cucamonga City Special Study Zone along the Red Hill Fault, according to the General Plan Figure PS-2, and Section 4.7 of the General Plan FPEIR. The Red Hill Fault, passes within approximately 1.5 miles north of the site, and the Sierra Madre and Cucamonga Fault Zones lie approximately 3.5 miles north of the site. 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 14 miles northeasterly of the site and the San Andreas, capable of up to Mw 8.2 earthquakes, is 16 miles northeasterly of the site. Each of these faults can produce strong ground shaking. According to the Geotechnical Report (Geo Tek, Inc.; January 2016), the project site is not within a zone of potentially liquefiable soils by the San Bernardino County Land Use Services. Additionally, liquefaction is not considered a hazard at the site due to great depth of groundwater (greater than 200 feet) and the underlying dense nature of the subsurface soils. There is no evidence of ancient landslide or slope instabilities on the site; as such, the potential for landslides is Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 262 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 46 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Significant wtn Mitigation man Significant No Impactt Incur orates Im ad Impact considered negligible (Geo Tek, Inc.; January 2016). Adhering to the Uniform Building Code and Standard Conditions will ensure that geologic impacts are less -than -significant. b) The City of Rancho Cucamonga is within a designated Soil Erosion Control Area Exhibit 4.7-4 of the General Plan FPEIR. The proposed project will require the excavation, stockpiling, and/or movement of on -site soils. The Rancho Cucamonga area is subject to strong Santa Ana wind conditions during September to April, which generates blowing sand and dust, and creates erosion problems. Construction activities may temporarily exacerbate the impacts of windblown sand, resulting in temporary problems of dust control; however, development of this project under the General Plan would help to reduce windblown sand impacts in the area as pavement, roads, buildings, and landscaping are established. Therefore, the following fugitive dust mitigation measures shall be implemented to reduce impacts to less -than -significant levels: 1) The site shall be treated with water or other soil -stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) daily to reduce PM10 emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 or re -planted with drought resistant landscaping as soon as possible. 2) Frontage public streets shall be swept according to a schedule established by the City to reduce PMio emissions associated with vehicle tracking of soil off - site. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. 3) Grading operations shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed 25 mph to minimize PMto emissions from the site during such episodes. 4) Chemical soil -stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM10 emissions. c) The General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.7) indicates that there is a potential for the hillside areas at the northern end of the City and in the SOI for slope failure, landslides, and/or erosion. Areas subject to slope instability contain slopes of 30 percent or greater. Landslides may be induced by seismic activity, rain, or construction. The City Hillside Development Regulations permit development within slopes of 30 percent or greater only under certain conditions, and limits the number of units that could be constructed within the Hillside Residential and Very Low Density Residential designations in the Hillside areas. The site is not within an Earthquake hazard zone or other unstable geologic unit or soil type according to General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.7-2. Soil types on -site consist of Tujunga loamy sand/gravel soil association according to General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.7- 3. Runoff is slow to very slow. No adverse impacts are anticipated. d) The majority of Rancho Cucamonga, including the project site, is located on alluvial soil deposits. These types of soils are not considered to be expansive. Soil types on -site consist of Tujunga loamy sand/gravel soil association according to General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.7-3. Runoff is slow to very slow. These soils have slight hazard of water erosion. No adverse impacts are anticipated. e) The project will connect to, and be served by, the existing local sewer system for wastewater disposal. No septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal is proposed. Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 263 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 47 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Significant wth Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incorporated Im act Im acl 7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or () (✓) () ( ) indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation () () (✓) ( ) adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Comments: a) Background Regulations and Significance — The Federal government began studying the phenomenon of global warming as early as 1979 with the National Climate Protection Act (92 Stat. 601). In June of 2005, Governor Schwarzenegger established California's Green House Gas (GHG) emissions reduction target in Executive Order (EO) S-3-05. The EO created goals to reduce GHG emissions for the State of California to 2000 levels by 2010; GHG emissions reduced to 1990 levels by 2020; and GHG emissions reduced to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. Additionally, on December 7, 2009 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) issued findings regarding GHGs under rule 202(a) of the Clean Air Act: (1) that GHGs endanger human health; and (2) that this will be the first steps to regulating GHGs through the Federal Clean Air Act. The USEPA defines 6 key GHGs (carbon dioxide (CO2). methane (CHAI), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6)). The combined emissions of these well -mixed greenhouse gases from new motor vehicles and engines contribute to GHG pollution. The western states, including Arizona, California, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, and Washington, already experience hotter, drier climates. California is a substantial contributor of GHGs and is expected to see an increase of 3 to 4 degrees Fahrenheit (OF) over the next century. Assembly Bill (AB) 32 requires that the California Air Resources Board (ARB), the lead agency for implementing AB 32, determine what the statewide GHG emission level was in 1990 and approve a statewide GHG emissions limit (427 million metric tons of CO2 equivalent) to be achieved by 2020 and prepare a Scoping Plan to outline the main strategies for meeting the 2020 deadline. Significant progress can be made toward the 2020 goal through existing technologies and improving the efficiency of energy use. Other solutions would include improving the State's infrastructure, and transitioning to cleaner and more efficient sources of energy. The ARB estimates that 38 percent of the State's GHG emissions in 2004 was from transportation sources followed by electricity generation (both in -State and out -of -State) at 28 percent and industrial at 20 percent. Residential and commercial activities account for 9 percent, agricultural uses at 6 percent, high global warming potential gases at 3 percent, and recycling and waste at 1 percent. It is not anticipated that any single development project would have a substantial effect on global climate change but that GHG emissions from the project would combine with emissions across California, the United States, and the world to cumulatively contribute to global climate change. Therefore, consistent with the ARB's Climate Change Scoping Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 264 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 48 Less Than Signifiwnl Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Significant Wth Mitigation Than Signrf=, No Impact Inca oraled Impact Im acl Plan, the proposed project was evaluated for consistency with the Early Action Measures (Scoping Plan is a recommendation until adopted through normal rulemaking). The proposed project is assessed by determining its consistency with the 37 Recommended Actions identified by ARB. In compliance with Senate Bill (SB) 97 and CEQA, the project has been analyzed based on a qualitative analysis (CEQA 15064.4). Additionally, the ARB was directed through SB 375 to develop regional GHG emission reduction targets to be achieved within the automobile and light truck sectors for 2020 and 2035. SCAQMD and ARB maintain ambient air quality monitoring stations in the Basin. The stations closest to the project site are the Upland station and the Fontana -Arrow Highway station. The Upland station monitors all criteria pollutants except PMto, PM2.5, and SO2 which are monitored at the Fontana -Arrow Highway station. The ambient air quality in the project area for CO, NO2, and SO2 are consistently below the relevant State and federal standards (based on ARB and EPA from 2007, 2008, and 2009 readings). Ozone, PMto, and PM2.5levels all exceed State and federal standards regularly. Project Related Sources of GHG's — Based on the Guidelines for the Implementation of California Environmental Quality Act, Appendix G, a project would normally be considered to have a significant effect on air quality if the project would violate any ambient air quality standards, contribute substantially to an existing air quality violation, expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, or conflict with adopted environmental plans and goals of the community. However, neither the CEQA statutes, Office of Planning and Research (OPR) guidelines, nor the draft proposed changes to the CEQA Guidelines prescribe thresholds of significance or a particular methodology for performing an impact analysis. Significance criteria are left to the judgment and discretion of the Lead Agency. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has not established local CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) significance thresholds for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Section 15064.7 of the CEQA Amendments states that "[w]hen adopting thresholds of significance, a lead agency may consider thresholds of significance previously adopted or recommended by other public agencies or recommended by experts." As such, the City has selected two quantitative approaches to determining potential GHG emissions impacts: 1) The Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32) approach and 2) the South Coast Air Quality Management District Efficiency Measure approach. Under the AB 32 approach, GHG emissions that would be generated pursuant to development of the project area are compared with GHG emissions for a "Business as Usual" (BAU) scenario. This comparison indicates whether GHG emissions generated by the development of the project area would likely be consistent with the CARB Scoping Plan GHG emissions reductions measures and GHG emissions reductions targets. In summary, the Scoping Plan reflect implementation of measures that would achieve an approximate 28.5% reduction in GHG emissions when compared to GHG emissions produced under a "Business as Usual" scenario. Results of the analysis indicate that the Project GHG emissions would not result in or cause a potentially significant impact on the environment. To this end, the analysis demonstrates that the project is consistent with, or otherwise not in conflict with, recommended measures and actions in the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan as I04MI551-1 E10-16 265 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 49 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incorporated Im act I impact well as the CARB Scoping Plan. The Scoping Plan establishes strategies and measures to implement in order to achieve the GHG reductions goals set forth in AB 32. As shown in Table ES-1 from the Greenhouse Gas Analysis (GHG Analysis) by Urban Crossroads (July 19, 2616), project GHG emissions would be reduced by approximately 31.06% when compared to the BAU against a 2020 horizon year scenario. This reduction is consistent with the target reduction percentage of 26.5% based on the CARB's analysis supporting AB 32. TABLE ES-1: SUMMARY OF GHG EMISSIONS FOR BAU VS PROJECT (ANNUAL) Emission5our a `CO2e Emissions Levelsby,Year '�(Met�icTonsPer.Year),, 'BAUD 2020., Annual Construction -related emissions amortized over 30 years 107.38 107.38 Area 127.93 98.35 Energy Use 2,571.78 1,858.09 Mobile Sources 5,415.11 3,538.01 Waste 178.72 178.72 Water Usage 212.62 159.11 Total 8,613.54 5,939.66 Project Minimum Reduction over 2008levels 31.04% Minimum Improvement 28.5% Meets Requirement? YES SCAQMD Efficiency Measure (Tier 4 Option 3) The SCAQMD has convened a GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Working Group (Working Group). Based on the last Working Group meeting (Meeting No. 15) held in September 2010, SCAQMD is proposing to adopt a tiered approach for evaluating GHG emissions for development projects where SCAQMD is not the lead agency. SCAQMD had proposed an efficiency -based threshold approach using a 2020 target. A sector - based, project level efficiency significance threshold approach was utilized in this analysis, in which a 2020 statewide employment for land use sectors was divided by 2020 statewide service population (SP), amounting to a 4.8 MTCO2e per service population threshold (GHG Analysis; page 47). Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 266 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 50 Less Than Signiftant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Significant wth Mitigation Than Significant No Impact In= orated Im act Im ad As shown in Table ES-2 (GHG Analysis by Urban Crossroads [July 19, 20161), the proposed project will result in approximately 2.98 MTCO2e per service population and would not exceed the threshold of 4.8 MTCO2e per service population. Therefore, project - related emissions would not have a significant direct or indirect impact on GHG and climate change. TABLE ES-2: TOTAL PROJECT GHG EMISSIONS (ANNUAL) Emission Source Emissions (metric tons pe'r year COz CHa ` . . N20, Total Annual construction -related emissions amortized over 30years 107.02 0.02 -- 107.38 Area 97.66 0.01 0.00 98.35 Energy 1,847.60 0.08 0.03 1,858.09 Mobile Sources 3,535.45 0.12 0 3,538.01 Waste 79.75 4.71 0 178.72 Water Usage 130.61 0.99 2.00E-02 159.11 Total CO2E (All Sources) 5,939.66 Total Service Population 1994 Total CO2E (All Sources)/ Service Population 2.98 Threshold Service Population Threshold 4.8 Exceedance? NO Cumulative Short Term (Construction) GHG Emissions — The General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.5) indicates that GHG emissions result from construction activities associated with diesel -powered construction equipment and other combustion sources (i.e., generators, workers vehicles, material delivery, etc.). The GHG emitted by construction equipment is primarily carbon dioxide (CO2). The highest levels of construction related GHG's occur during site preparation including demolition, grading and excavation. Construction related GHG's are also emitted from off -site haul trucks and construction workers traveling to the job site. Exhaust emissions from construction activities would vary each day with the changes in construction activity on site. The combustion of fossil - Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 267 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 51 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Significant with Mitigation Than Significant No Impact incorporated Impact Im act based fuels creates GHG's such as CO2, Cho, and N2O. CH4 is emitted during the fueling of heavy equipment. Based on the Greenhouse Gas Analysis prepared by Urban Crossroads (July 19, 2016) no significant impacts to GHGs from short-term construction impacts would occur as a result of the project as shown in Tables ES-1 and ES-2 above. Because the project would result in minimal emissions that do not exceed the SCAQMD's interim threshold of significance, the project's contribution to cumulative impacts is also considered minimal. The proposed project would have less than a significant, short-term cumulative impact with implementation of the following enforceable actions, which are included as mitigation measures in accordance with Mitigation Measure 4.5-1 of the 2010 General Plan Update FPEIR: 1) The project must comply with all rules that assist in reducing short-term air pollutant emission in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403 regarding fugitive dust including treating the site with water or other soil -stabilizing agent twice daily or replanting disturbed areas as quickly as possible. 2) The construction contractor shall select construction equipment based on low -emission factors and high energy efficiency and submit a statement on the grading plan that ensures all construction equipment will be tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufactures' specification. 3) Trucks shall not idle continuously for more than 5 minutes. 4) Alternative fuel powered equipment shall be utilized in lieu of gasoline- or diesel -powered engines where feasible. 5) Construction should be timed so as not to interfere with peak -hour traffic. 6) Ridesharing and transit incentives shall be supported and encouraged for the construction crew. Cumulative Long Term (Operational) GHG's Emissions — The primary source of GHG emissions generated by the proposed project would be from motor vehicles, combustion of natural gas for space and water heating, as well as off -site GHG emissions from generation of electricity consumed by the proposed land use development over a long term. CEQA requires the Lead Agency to review the project for "adequacy, completeness, and a good faith effort at full disclosure," to determine potential impacts of GHGs. Accordingly, the project has been analyzed based on methodologies and information available to the City at the time this document was prepared. Estimates are based on past performance and represent a scenario that is a worst case with the understanding that technology changes may reduce GHG emissions in the future. To date, there is no established quantified GHG emission threshold. The project involves the construction of 380 residential units (329 townhomes and 51 single-family dwelling units), two restaurant pads totaling 12,000 square feet and one 71 room hotel and therefore would result in an increase in the net increases of both stationary and mobile source emissions. The majority of energy consumption typically occurs during project operation (more than 80 percent and less than 20 percent during construction Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 268 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Pace 52 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information S PP g Sources: Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Inco prated Impact Im act activities). The proposed project will incorporate several design features that are consistent with the California Office of the Attorney General's recommended measures to reduce GHG emission including: water efficient landscaping, shade trees, and walkways that provide accessibility to public sidewalks. The project is consistent with the California Environmental Protection Agency Climate Action Team proposed early action measures to mitigate climate change included in the CARB Scoping Plan mandated under AB 32. The proposed project will incorporate several design features including: water efficient landscaping, shade trees, and walkways that provide accessibility to public sidewalks. Additionally, the City is participating in the development of a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) with SANBAG for the San Bernardino County area pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 375. Based on the Greenhouse Gas Analysis prepared by Urban Crossroads (July 19, 2016), no significant impacts to GHGs from long-term, operational impacts would occur as a result of the project as shown in Tables ES-1 and ES-2 above. Because the project would result in minimal emissions that do not exceed the SCAQMD's interim threshold of significance, the project's contribution to cumulative impacts is also considered minimal. The proposed project would have less than a significant, long-term operational impact with implementation of the following enforceable actions, which are included as mitigation measures in accordance with Mitigation Measure 4.5-1 of the 2010 General Plan Update FPEIR: 7) Construction and Building materials shall be produced and/or manufactured locally. Use "Green Building Materials" such as materials that are resource efficient, recycled and manufactured in an environmentally friendly way including low -volatile -organic -compound (VOC) materials. 8) Design all buildings to exceed California Building Code Title 24 energy standard including, but not limited to, any combination of: • Increased insulation. • Limit air leakage through the structure. is Incorporate Energy Star or better rated windows, space heating and cooling equipment, light fixtures, and appliances. • Landscape and develop site utilizing shade, prevailing winds and landscaping. • Install efficient lighting and lighting control systems. Install light colored "cool" roofs and cool pavements. • Install solar or light emitting diodes (LED's) for outdoor lighting. 9) Prepare a comprehensive water conservation strategy appropriate for the project and include the following; Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 269 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 53 Less Than SigniGwnt Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: syni Wth Mitigation Slhancxm B No Impact Inw .rated Impactt Im act • Install water efficient landscapes and irrigation systems and devices in compliance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. • Use reclaimed water for landscaping within the project if available or as required by the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD). • Design building to be water efficient by installing water efficient fixtures and appliances including low flow faucets, dual flush toilets and waterless urinals/water heaters. • Design irrigation to control runoff and to remove water to non -vegetated surfaces. 10) Reuse and recycle construction and demolition waste. Provide interior and exterior storage areas for recyclables and green waste in public areas. Educate employees about reducing waste and about recycling. b) The project involves the development of the construction of 380 residential units (329 townhomes and 51 single-family dwelling units), two restaurant pads totaling 12,000 square feet and one 71 room hotel, which is consistent with the General Plan Mixed Use designation. The project includes a Victoria Community Plan Amendment to change the existing zoning from Regionally Related Office Commercial (RROC) District to Mixed Use (MU) District in order to 1) be consistent with the General Plan and 2) implement the goals of the General Plan. Consistency with AB 32 AB 32 requires California to reduce its GHG emissions by approximately 28.5% when compared to GHG emissions produced under a Business as Usual scenario (GHG Analysis; page 47). CARB identified reduction measures to achieve this goal as set forth in the CARB Scoping Plan. Thus, projects that are consistent with the CARB Scoping Plan are also consistent with the 28.5% reduction below business as usual required by AB 32. The Project would generate GHG emissions from a variety of sources which would all emit Carbon Dioxide (CO2), Methane (CH4) and N20. GHGs could also be indirectly generated by incremental electricity consumption and waste generation from the Project. The CARB Scoping Plan recommends strategies for implementation at the statewide level to meet the goals of AB 32. The CARB Scoping Plan recommendations serve as statewide measures to reduce GHG emissions levels. Project consistency with applicable CARB Scoping Plan GHG emissions reduction measures is summarized at Table ES-2. TABLE ES-3: PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SCOPING PLAN GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSION REDUCTION Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 270 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 54 Less Than Significant Lass Issues and Supporting Information Sources: ftanti.11y Significant With Mitigation Than Significant Nc Impact Incorporated Impact Im act jr,Measure,, ScbbffigPlain M6asure' % "',-',Rerhar Number rn Pavley Motor Vehicle Residents, employees, and customers would purchase Standards (AB 1493) T-1 vehicles in compliance with incumbent CARB vehicle standards Limit High GWP Use in H-4 Residents, employees, and customers would use consumer Consumer Products products that would comply with the incumbent regulations Motor Vehicle Air Conditioning Systems — Residents, employees, and customers would be prohibited Reduction from Non- H-1 from performing air conditioning repairs and required to use Professional Servicing professional servicing. Motor vehicles driven by residents, employees, and Tire Pressure Program T-4 customers would maintain proper tire pressure when vehicles are serviced. Low Carbon Fuel Motor vehicles driven by residents, employees, and Standard T-2 customers would use fuels that are compliant with incumbent standards. Development proposals within the Project site would Water Use Efficiency W-1 implement measures to minimize water use and maximize efficiency. Development proposals within the Project site would be Green Buildings GB-1 constructed in compliance with incumbent state or local green building standards. Air Conditioning Refrigerant Leak Test Motor vehicles driven by residents, employees, and During Vehicle Smog H-5 customers would comply with the leak test requirements Check during smog checks. Energy Efficiency E-1 The Project would comply with incumbent electrical energy Measures (Electricity) efficiency standards Energy Efficiency (Natural CR-1 Development proposals within the Project site would comply Gas) with incumbent natural gas energy efficiency standards Greening New Residential and Commercial GB-1 proposals within the Project site would comply Construction with incumbent green building standards Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 271 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Paqe 55 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Significant with Mitigation Than Than No Im act Incorporated Impact Im act Scopmg'Pla'n Measure Measure Remarks+ Number+ Greening Existing Homes Development proposals within the Project site would meet GB-1 and Commercial Buildings retrofit standards as they become effective. No other applicable plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emission apply to the project. The 2010 General Plan Update includes adopted policies and Standard Conditions that respond to the Attorney General and the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). The General Plan policies and Standard Conditions guide infill and sustainable development reliant on pedestrian connections, re -use and rehabilitation of existing structures, link transportation opportunities, promote development that is sensitive to natural resources and incentivizes denser, mixed use projects that maximize diverse opportunities. The proposed project includes water efficient landscaping, shade trees, and walkways that provide accessibility to public sidewalks and therefore is consistent with the sustainability and climate change policies of the General Plan. The General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR) analyzed the impacts of GHG's and determined that GHG emissions would be cumulatively considerable, which would be a significant, unavoidable adverse cumulative impact. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. Based on the Greenhouse Gas Analysis prepared by Urban CrossRoads (July 19, 2016, no significant impacts to GHGs from short-term, construction impacts or long-term, operational impacts would occur as a result of the project. Because the project would result in minimal emissions that do not exceed the SCAQMD's interim threshold of significance, the project's contribution to cumulative GHGs from short-term construction and long-term operational cumulative impacts is also considered minimal. With implementation of the mitigation measures listed in subsection a), less than significant impacts would occur as a result of the project. In addition, the proposed project would not hinder the State's GHG reduction goals established by AB 32 as the project has a business as usual reduction of 31.06% and exceeds the 28.5% reduction below business as usual required by AB 32. Therefore, the impact would be less than a significant impact. 8. HAZARDS AND WASTE MATERIALS. Would the project., a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the ( ) () () (✓) environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the ( ) () () (✓) environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or () () () (✓) acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 114 mile of an existing or proposed school? Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 272 Initial Study for 'City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Pace 5R Less Than Signifcant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially wth Than Signifcant Mitigation Significant No Im ad Incorporatetl Im act Im act d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of () () () (✓) hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, () () () (✓) where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, () () () (✓) would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an () () () (✓) adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of () () () (✓) loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Comments: a) The project includes hotel, restaurant and residential land uses; accordingly, the proposed project does not involve the use of hazardous materials in large quantities that would potentially result in a hazard to the public through the transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials. Development within the City may utilize or generate hazardous materials or wastes. This is usually associated with individual households, small business operations, and maintenance activities like paints, cleaning solvents, fertilizers, and motor oil or through construction activities that would use paints, solvents, acids, curing compounds, grease, and oils. These materials would be stored and used at individual sites. The City participates in a countywide interagency coalition, which is considered a full service Hazardous Materials Division that is more comprehensive than any other in the State. The City has an Emergency Operations Plan that meets State and Federal requirements and is in the process of updating the approved 2005 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Compliance with Federal, 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 project includes hotel, restaurant and residential land uses; accordingly, the proposed project does not involve the use of hazardous materials or volatile fuels in large quantities that would potentially result the release of hazardous materials into the environment. The City participates in a countywide interagency coalition, which is considered a full service Hazardous Materials Division that is more comprehensive than any other in the State. The City has an Emergency Operations Plan that meets State and Federal requirements and is in the process of updating the approved 2005 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Compliance with Federal, 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. Rev 3-1-16 E10-16.273 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 57 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g Potentiaity Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Im act c) There are no schools located within 1/4 mile of the project site. The project site is approximately 1.25 miles south of the nearest school, Windrows Elementary located at 6855 Victoria Park Lane. Typically, hotels, restaurants and residential uses do not create objectionable odors. No adverse impacts are anticipated. d) The proposed project is not listed as a hazardous waste or substance materials site. Recent site inspections did not reveal the presence of discarded drums or illegal dumping of hazardous materials. No impact is anticipated. e) The site is not located within an airport land use plan according to the General Plan Figure PS-7, General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.8-1 and the Ontario Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan and is not within 2 miles of a public airport. The project site is located approximately 4.5 northeasterly of the Ontario Airport and is offset north of the flight path. No impact is anticipated. f) There are no private airstrips within the City. The nearest private airstrip, Cable Airport, is located approximately 2.5 miles to the west of the City's westerly limits. No impact is anticipated. g) The City has a developed roadway network that provides emergency access and evacuation routes to existing development. New development will be located on a site that has access to existing roadways. The City's Emergency Operation Plan, which is updated every three years, includes policies and procedures to be administered by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in the event of a disaster. Since the project has three points of public street access and one additional Emergency Vehicle Access (EVA) and is required to comply with all applicable City codes, including, local fire ordinances, no adverse impacts are anticipated. h) Rancho Cucamonga faces the greatest ongoing threat from wind -driven fires in the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone found in the northern part of the City; however, the proposed project site is not located within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone according to General Plan Figure PS-1. No adverse impacts are anticipated. 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? ( ) (✓) () ( ) b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere ( ) () () (✓) substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the ( ) ( ) () (✓) site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 274 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 58 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information S PP g Sources: Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant Na Impact Incorporated Impact Im act d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the () () () (✓) site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off -site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed () () () (✓) the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? () (✓) () ( ) g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as () () () (✓) mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures () () () (✓) that would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of () () () (✓) loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? () () ( ) (✓) Comments: a) Water and sewer service is provided by the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD). The project is designed to connect to existing water and sewer systems. The 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. Construction activities covered under the State's General Construction permit include removal of vegetation, grading, excavating, or any other activity for new development or significant redevelopment. Prior to commencement of construction of a project, a discharger must submit a Notice of Intent (NOI) to obtain coverage under the General Permit. The General Permit requires all dischargers to comply with the following during construction activities, including site clearance and grading: Develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that would specify Best Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent construction pollutants from contacting storm water and with the intent of keeping all products of erosion from moving off -site into receiving waters. Eliminate or reduce non -storm water discharges to storm sewer systems and other waters of the nation. Perform inspections of all BMPs. Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 275 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 59 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g Pcnificalnt Significant Wth Mitigation Than Significant Impact Incorporated Impact Impact act Waste discharges include discharges of storm water and construction project discharges. A construction project for new development or significant redevelopment requires an NPDES permit. Construction project proponents are required to prepare an SWPPP. To comply with the NPDES, the project's construction contractor will be required to prepare an SWPPP during construction activities, and a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for post -construction operational management of storm water runoff. The applicant has submitted a Preliminary WQMP, prepared by Madole and Associates (July 2016), which identifies BMPs to minimize the amount of pollutants, such as eroded soils, entering the drainage system after construction. Runoff from driveways, roads and other impermeable surfaces must be controlled through an on -site drainage system. BMPs include both structural and non-structural control methods. Structural controls used to manage storm water pollutant levels include detention basins, oil/grit separators, and porous pavement. Non-structural controls focus on controlling pollutants at the source, generally through implementing erosion and sediment control plans, and various Business Plans that must be developed by any businesses that store and use hazardous materials. Practices such as periodic parking lot sweeping can substantially reduce the amount of pollutants entering the storm drain system. The following mitigation measures are required to control additional storm water effluent: Construction Activities: 1) Prior to issuance of grading permits, the permit applicant shall submit to the Building Official for approval, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) specifically identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that shall be used on -site to reduce pollutants during construction activities entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 2) An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, included in the Grading Plan, and implemented for the proposed project that identifies specific measures to control on -site and off -site erosion from the time ground disturbing activities are initiated through completion of grading. This Erosion Control Plan shall include the following measures at a minimum: a) Specify the timing of grading and construction to minimize soil exposure to rainy periods experienced in Southern California, and b) An inspection and maintenance program shall be included to ensure that any erosion which does occur either on -site or off -site as a result of this project will be corrected through a remediation or restoration program within a specified time frame. 3) During construction, temporary berms such as sandbags or gravel dikes must be used to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site when there is rainfall or other runoff. 4) During construction, to remove pollutants, street cleaning will be performed prior to storm events and after the use of water trucks to control dust in order to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site. 5) Prior to issuance of grading or paving permits, the applicant shall obtain a Notice of Intent (NOI) to comply with obtaining coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Storm Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 276 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Pape 60 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Im act Water Permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Evidence that this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Discharger's Identification Number) shall be submitted to the City Building Official for coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit. Post -Construction Operational: 6) Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit to the City Building Official for approval of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), including a project description and identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on -site to reduce pollutants into the storm drain system to the maximum extent practicable. The WQMP shall identify the structural and non-structural measures consistent with the Guidelines for New Development and Redevelopment adopted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in June 2004. 7) Landscaping plans shall include provisions for controlling and minimizing the use of fertilizers/pesticides/herbicides. Landscaped areas shall be monitored and maintained for at least two years to ensure adequate coverage and stable growth. Plans for these areas, including monitoring provisions for a minimum of two years, shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. b) According to CVWD, approximately 35 percent of the City's water is currently provided from water supplies coming from the underlying Chino and Cucamonga Groundwater Basins. CVWD complies with its prescriptive water rights as managed by the Chino Basin Watermaster and will not deplete the local groundwater resource. The proposed project will not deplete groundwater supplies, nor will it interfere with recharge because it is not within an area designated as a recharge basin or spreading ground according to General Plan Figure RC-3. Development of the site will require the grading and excavation, but would not affect the existing aquifer, estimated to be about 200 to 470 feet below the ground surface. As noted in the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.9), continued development citywide will increase water needs but will not be a significant impact. CVWD has plans to meet this increased need to the year 2030. No impacts are anticipated. c) The project will cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and amount of surface water runoff because of the amount of new building and hardscape proposed on the site; however, there are no streams or rivers onsite; therefore, the project will not alter the course of any stream or river. All runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to handle the flows. The project design includes landscaping of all non-hardscape areas to prevent erosion. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. Therefore, the project will not result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off - site. The impact is not considered significant. d) The project will cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and amount of surface water runoff because of the amount of new building and hardscape proposed on a site; however, there are no streams or rivers onsite; therefore, the project Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 277 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 61 Less Than Significant Less Issues and SupportingInftion S ormaources: Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Im act will not alter the course of any stream or river. All runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to handle the flows. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. Therefore, increase in runoff from the site will not result in flooding on- or off -site. No impacts are anticipated. e) The project will cause changes in absorption 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, increase in runoff from the site will not result in flooding on- or off -site. No impacts are anticipated. f) Grading activities associated with the construction period could result in a temporary increase in the amount of suspended solids in surface flows during a concurrent storm event, thus resulting in surface water quality impacts. The project site is for the development of residential, hotel and residential uses and is therefore required to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) to minimize water pollution. With implementation of the mitigation measures specified under subsection a) and below, less than significant impacts are anticipated. 8) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality Management Plan prepared by (Madole and Associates, July 2016) to reduce construction pollutants from entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. g) The project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area according to General Plan Figure PS-5; no adverse impacts are expected. h) The project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area according to General Plan Figure PS-5. No adverse impacts are expected. The Rancho Cucamonga area is flood protected by an extensive storm drain system designed to adequately convey floodwaters from a 100-year storm event. The system is substantially improved and provides an integrated approach for regional and local drainage flows. This existing system includes several debris dams and levees north of the City, spreading grounds, concrete -lined channels, and underground storm drains as shown in General Plan Figure PS-6. The project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area according to General Plan Figure PS-5. No adverse impacts are expected. There are no oceans, lakes, or reservoirs near the project site; therefore impacts from seiche and tsunami are not anticipated as the site is located over 50 miles from the Pacific Ocean. The Rancho Cucamonga area sits at the base of the steep eastern San Gabriel Mountains whose deep canyons were cut by mountain streams. Numerous man-made controls have been constructed to reduce the mudflow impacts to the level of non - significance within the City. This existing system includes several debris dams and levees north of the City, and spreading grounds both within and north of the City. Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 278 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 62 Less Than SigniAwnl Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g Potentially Signifwnl Wdh Mitigation Than Signi(wnt No Im act Inw oratetl Im aG Im act 10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? () () () (✓) b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or () () () (✓) regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, a general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan () () ( ) (✓) or natural community conservation plan? Comments: a) The project site is located on a vacant parcel of land at the southwest corner of Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard and is characterized by comparable residential (single- family, two and three story multi -family) and commercial (food and retail uses) development to the north, south and east. The project will be of similar design and size to surrounding residential and commercial development to the north, south and east. No demolition or relocation of people or structures is required. The project will implement the Mixed Use Land Use Designation of the General Plan and become a part of the larger Victoria Community Plan. No adverse impacts are anticipated. b) The project site's General Plan land use designation is Mixed Use (MU). The current zoning designation is Regionally Related Office Commercial (RROC) District, Victoria Community Plan. Since there is a current vertical inconsistency between the General Plan and the Victoria Community Plan, the proposed project includes a Victoria Community Plan Amendment to change the zoning from Regionally Related Office Commercial (RROC) District to Mixed Use (MU) District to bring the Victoria Community Plan into vertical consistency with the General Plan. The Victoria Arbors Master Plan governs land uses to the east and south, while the Victoria Community Plan governs land uses to the west and north. The proposed mixed use project, consisting of a hotel, two freestanding restaurant pads and 380 residential units (51 single family and 329 townhomes), is compatible with the Victoria Arbors Master Plan located to the south and east. To the east, across Day Creek Boulevard, a major arterial, is a neighborhood center anchored by a grocery store with support retail, food and professional uses located in the center. These retail uses will complement and provide services to the proposed project. Also to the east, across Day Creek Boulevard, are single-family homes. Along the south boundary of the project is a two-story, single-family neighborhood. In order to provide land use compatibility and a transition of density, the proposed mixed use project has plotted single-family product (two-story) at the southwestern corner of the project site and in the lower quadrant of the project area. In addition, the project contains a linear park along a portion of the south edge to provide a buffer between the single-family neighborhood to the south and the project. The three- story townhomes are located in the core of the project, along Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road. The 71 room, three-story hotel and restaurant uses (two buildings totaling 12,000 square feet) are located along Base Line Road and flank the corner at Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road. To the north, across Base Line Road, is a neighborhood center with a grocery store, support retail and food uses that will provide Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 279 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 63 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information S PP g Sources: Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact services to the proposed project. To the west is a Southern California Edison transmission corridor, flood control channel and vacant land. With respect to land use composition, residential product type, building massing and building heights, the proposed mixed use project is compatible with the adjacent land uses in all directions. With the proposed Victoria Community Plan Amendment, the project will be consistent with the General Plan and will not interfere with any policies for environmental protection, or SCAG's Regional Comprehensive Plan. No adverse impacts are anticipated. c) The project site is not located within any habitat conservation or natural community plan area. According to Section 4.4 of the General Plan FPEIR, the site may contain mixed sage scrub (Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub (RAFSS). Impacts from the proposed project are considered less than significant to vegetative communities. For a complete analysis of impact to vegetative communities, see discussion under Biological Resources b), above. 11. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral () () () (✓) resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important () () () (✓) mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Comments: a) The site is not designated as a State Aggregate Resources Area according to the City General Plan, Figure RC-2 and Table RC-1; therefore, there is no impact. b) The site is not designated by the General Plan, Figure RC-2 and Table RC-1, as a valuable mineral resource recovery site; therefore, there is no impact. 12. NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in () (✓) () ( ) -excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive () () (✓) ( ) ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise () () (✓) ( ) levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ( ) (✓)T77 ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 280 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 64 Less Than significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Significant With Mitigation man significant No Impact Incor prated Impact Impact e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, () () () (✓) where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, () () () (✓) would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Comments: a) The project site is within an area of noise levels exceeding City standards according to General Plan Figure PS-9 at build -out. A Noise Impact Study was prepared for the project by Urban Crossroads (March 14, 2017). The report reviewed the construction and operational noise impacts related to the project. The report finds that the increase in noise levels related to the project requires the implementation of mitigation measures to reduce construction noise and road noise from Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road. Noise impacts from construction and corresponding mitigation measures are analyzed in section d) below. According to the Noise Impact Study prepared by Urban Crossroads, mitigated exterior noise levels will range from 63.8 to 64.9 dBA. With the following mitigation measures, noise impacts from roadway noise to meet the City's exterior noise standard of 65 dBA: Exterior: 1) Construct a minimum 6-foot high noise barrier for the outdoor living areas (first floor patios) of multi -family residential condos/townhomes, and hotel rooms with first floor patios, adjacent to Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road. 2) Construct a minimum 6-foot high noise barrier for the outdoor living areas (backyards) of the single-family residential homes adjacent to Day Creek Boulevard. 3) 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. 4) Business operations shall maintain a noise level at 60dB or less during the hours of 10 p.m. until 7 p.m. No loading and unloading activities including opening, closing, or other handling of boxes, crates, containers, building materials, garbage cans, or other similar objects between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 p.m. in a manner which would cause a noise disturbance to residential areas. To meet the City's 45 dBA interior noise level criteria, buildings adjacent to Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road will require a Noise Reduction (NR) of up to 26.2 dBA and a windows closed condition. This will necessitate a means of mechanical ventilation. Per the Noise Impact Study prepared by Urban Crossroads, in order to meet the City's 45 dBA E10-16 281 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 65 Less Than Significant Less Issues and SupportingInformation Sources: Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than significant No Im act Incorporated Impact Im act interior noise standards, the project shall provide the following or equivalent noise mitigation measures: Interior: 5) Windows: All windows and sliding glass doors shall be well fitted, well weather-stripped assemblies and shall have the following minimum sound transmission class (STC) ratings: Upgraded first, second, and third floor windows with a minimum STC rating of 30 are required for residential (single - and multi -family), hotel, and commercial buildings adjacent to Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road. All other buildings require standard windows with a minimum STC rating of 27. 6) Doors: All exterior doors shall be well weather-stripped solid core assemblies at least one and three -fourths -inch thick. 7) Walls: At any penetrations of exterior walls by pipes, ducts, or conduits, the space between the wall and pipes, ducts, or conduits shall be caulked or filled with mortar to form an airtight seal. 8) Roof: Roof sheathing of wood construction shall be well fitted or caulked plywood of at least one half inch thick. Ceilings shall be well fitted, fully sealed gypsum board of at least one-half inch thick. Insulation with at least a rating of R-19 shall be used in the attic space. 9) Attic: Attic vents should be oriented away from Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road. If such an orientation cannot be avoided, then an acoustical baffle shall be placed in the attic space behind the vents. 10) Ventilation: Arrangements for any habitable room shall be such that any exterior door or window can be kept closed when the room is in use and still receive circulated air. A forced air circulation system (e.g. air conditioning) or active ventilation system (e.g. fresh air supply) shall be provided which satisfies the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. b) Operational Noise:, According to the Noise Impact Study prepared by Urban Crossroads, using reference noise levels to represent the potential noise sources with the project site, the Noise Impact Study estimates the project related operational (stationary source) noise levels at the nearby noise sensitive locations. The project related operational noise sources are expected :to include the following: roof -top air conditioning units and parking lot vehicle movement activities. The analysis shows that the project related operational noise levels will meet the City's standards at the off -site receiver locations in the project study area. Additionally, the project will not contribute an operational noise level impact to the existing ambient noise environment at any of the nearby sensitive receiver locations. Therefore, the operational noise level impacts associated with the proposed project activities, such as roof -top air conditioning units and parking lot vehicle movement activities, will be less than significant. Construction vibrations: The normal operating uses associated with this type of project (hotels, restaurants and residential dwelling units) normally do not induce ground borne Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 282 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Paqe 66 less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incor oratsd Impact Im act vibrations. Regarding construction vibrations, a Noise Impact Study was prepared for the project by Urban Crossroads (July 19, 2016). Construction activity can result in varying degrees of ground vibration, depending on the equipment and methods used, distance to the affected structures and soil type. It is expected that ground -borne vibration from the project construction activities would cause only intermittent, localized intrusion. Based on the reference vibration levels provided by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), a large bulldozer represents the peak source of vibration with a reference velocity of 0.089 in/sec Peak Particle Velocity (PPV) at a distance of 25 feet. At distances ranging from 85 to 887 feet from the project site, construction vibration velocity levels are expected to approach 0.014 in/sec PPV. Based on the City of Rancho Cucamonga vibration standards, the proposed project construction activities will exceed the vibration standard of 0.010 in sec RMS at receiver location R4 during project construction (Table 11-9 from Noise Impact Study). However, these vibration standards are applicable to permanent uses, as the City's Development Code exempts temporary construction activities from this standard. Therefore, the project -related vibration impacts at receiver location R4 represent a temporary, worse -case scenario during grading operations (large bulldozer) at the project site boundary. Since construction operations are temporary and potential vibration impacts from bulldozers would occur intermittently when earthmoving operations occur only equipment is passing at close range near the south project boundary, the impact is considered less than significant. Construction vibration on buildings: The vibration impacts due to project construction represent temporary perceptible vibration levels which may cause annoyance in residential areas; however, they do not represent vibration levels capable of causing building damage to nearby residential homes. The peak project construction levels will not exceed the FTA vibration levels for building damage for residential homes near the project site. Further, the impacts at the site of the closest sensitive receivers are unlikely to be sustained during the entire construction period, but will occur only during the times that heavy construction equipment is operating adjacent to the project site perimeter. As noted above, the City's Development Code exempts temporary construction activities from this standard. The impact is considered less than significant. c) The primary source of ambient noise levels in Rancho Cucamonga is traffic. According to the Noise Impact Study prepared by Urban Crossroads (May 23, 2016), traffic generated by the proposed project will influence the traffic noise levels in surrounding offsite areas. To quantify the off -site traffic noise increases on the surrounding off -site areas, the changes in traffic noise levels on 12 roadway segments surrounding the Project site were estimated based on the change in the average daily traffic (ADT) volumes. The traffic noise levels provided in the Noise Impact Study prepared by Urban Crossroads were based on the traffic forecasts found in the Day Creek Villages Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by Urban Crossroads (July 19, 2016). To assess the off -site noise level impacts associated with the proposed Project, noise contour boundaries were developed for Existing, Opening Year 2020, and Horizon Year 2040 conditions for both the with and without project traffic conditions. In sum, the off -site traffic noise analysis shows that the project noise level contributions will be less than significant under all with project scenarios, including: Existing, Opening Year 2020, and Horizon Year 2040 conditions. d) The General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.12) indicates that during a construction phase, on -site stationary sources, heavy-duty construction vehicles, and construction equipment, will generate noise exceeding City standard Construction noise represents a short-term Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 283 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Paqe 67 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Signifoanl Wit Mitigation Than Significant No Inspect Incorporated Impact Impact increase on the ambient noise levels. Construction -related noise impacts are expected to create temporary and intermittent high-level noise conditions at receivers surrounding the Project site when certain activities occur at the Project site boundary. According to the Noise Impact Study prepared by Urban Crossroads (July 19, 2016), the Project -related short-term construction noise levels (unmitigated) are expected to approach 72.3 dBA Leq near the south boundary of the project site from construction equipment during grading operations. These noise levels will require mitigation (temporary construction barriers), and with mitigation will the noise levels will not the 65 dBA Leq threshold. TABLE 11-8: MITIGATED CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT NOISE LEVEL SUMMARY (DBA LEQ) , `' —: Construction Noise Levels (dBA.Leq) Consf.:"` ' l ' ' :With Tem"poiary Noise. Barrieis (dBA Leq)-' z . Noise , - ; Receiver Level Tempo rary Location t Peak Threshold Thresholds Without ;Barrier r ''' :Attenuation+ .Construction - Threshold' - - 1P ALtivityZ Exceeded 74 •-', .Height r;._, NoiserLevels6 Exceeded?^; Existing"is $ (Feet) f,. Barrieers j R1 49.1 65 No No R2 57.5 65 No - - - - No R3 62.7 65 No - - - - No R4 72.3 65 Yes 75.0 12 -10.3 64.7 No R5 49.5 65 No - - - - No 'Noise receiver locations are shown on Exhibit 11-A. ' Estimated construction noise levels during peak operating conditions, as shown on Table 11-7. ' Construction noise level threshold as shown on Table 4-2. " Do the estimated Project construction noise levels meet the construction noise level thresholds? 5 Construction noise levels without the existing barrier attenuation for location R4 are used to determine the temporary construction noise barrier height required to satisfy the construction noise level threshold. 6 Peak construction noise levels with the temporary construction noise barriers as shown on Exhibit 11-A. Temporary barrier attenuation calculations are provided in Appendix 11.1. With the recommended temporary noise barriers for construction activity, noise levels would be reduced to and the impact is considered less than significant. Though construction noise is temporary, intermittent and of short duration, and will not present any long-term impacts, the following mitigation measures will reduce the short term construction noise levels to a level less than significant. Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 284 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 68 Less Then Signincanl Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Ntentdly Significant Wth Mitigation Than Signifiwnl No Impact Inco waled Im act Im act 11) Prior to approval of grading plans and/or issuance of building permits, plans shall include a note indicating that noise -generating project construction activities shall only occur between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on weekdays, including on Saturdays, with no activity allowed on Sundays and holidays. 12) Install minimum 12-foot high temporary construction noise barriers at the southern Project site boundary, as shown on Exhibit 11-A of the Noise Impact Analysis for the duration of construction activities at the project site. The noise control barriers must present a solid face from top to bottom. The noise control barrier must meet the minimum heights shown on Exhibit 11-A. • The barrier shall provide a weight of at least 4 pounds per square foot of face area with no decorative cutouts or line -of -sight openings between shielded areas and the noise source. The noise barrier shall be constructed using one of the following materials: o An acoustical blanket (e.g. vinyl acoustic curtains or quilted blankets) attached to the construction site perimeter fence or equivalent temporary fence posts; o Masonry block; o Stucco veneer over wood framing (or foam core), or 1-inch thick tongue and groove wood of sufficient weight per square foot; o Glass (1/4 inch thick), or other transparent material with sufficient weight per square foot; o Earthen berm; o Any combination of these construction materials satisfying weight of at least 4 pounds per square foot of face area. • The noise barriers must be maintained and any damage promptly repaired. Gaps, holes, or weaknesses in the barrier or openings between the barrier and the ground shall be promptly repaired. • The noise control barriers and associated elements shall be completely removed and the site appropriately restored upon the conclusion of the construction activity. • During all Project site construction, the construction contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers, consistent with manufacturers' standards. The construction contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from the noise sensitive receptors nearest the project site. • The construction contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction -related noise sources and noise -sensitive receivers nearest the project site (i.e., to the center) during all Project construction. Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 285 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Paqe 69 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially significant wth Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Inca oraleE Impact Im act • The construction contractor shall limit haul truck deliveries to the same hours specified for construction equipment (between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on weekdays, including on Saturdays, with no activity allowed on Sundays and holidays). The contractor shall prepare a haul route exhibit and shall design delivery routes to minimize the exposure of sensitive land uses or residential dwellings to delivery truck -related noise. 13) Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards specified in Development Code Section 17.66.050, as measured at the property line. Developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly noise level monitoring as specified in Development Code Section 17.66.050. Monitoring at other times may be required by the Building Official. Said consultant shall report their findings to the Building Official within 24 hours; however, if noise levels exceed the above standards, then the consultant shall immediately notify the Building Official. If noise levels exceed the above standards, then construction activities shall be reduced in intensity to a level of compliance with above noise standards or halted. 14) The perimeter block wall shall be constructed as early as possible in first phase. 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 4.5 northeasterly of the Ontario Airport and is offset north of the flight path. The project is outside the Airport Influence Area of the Ontario Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan; therefore, no impact is anticipated. The nearest private airstrip, Cable Airport, is located approximately 2.5 miles to the west of the City's westerly limits. No impact is anticipated. 13. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either () () () (✓) directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, () () () (✓) necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating () () () (✓) the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Comments: a) The project is located in a predominantly developed area and will include the construction of 51 single family homes and 329 townhomes. Although the project will increase the population growth in the area there will be a less than significant impact as the project and land use (Mixed Use) is consistent with the General Plan Designation and for which a FPEIR was prepared and certified in 2010. The density was analyzed as part of the build out in the General Plan FPEIR. Construction activities at the site will be short-term and will not attract new employees to the area. Regarding the commercial uses, once Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 286 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Pace 70 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Significant With Mititidon Than Signlfcant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact constructed, the proposed project will have a limited number of employees; hence, the project will not create a demand for additional housing as a majority of the employees will likely be hired from within the City or surrounding communities. No significant impacts are anticipated. b) The project site is vacant and contains no existing housing units. Because the property is vacant there will be no displacement of housing or people. Therefore, no adverse impact is expected. c) The project site is vacant and contains no existing housing units. Because the property is vacant and contains no existing housing units that will be demolished, there will be no displacement of housing or people. Therefore, no adverse impact is expected. 14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire protection? O O (✓) ( ) b) Police protection? () () (✓ ( ) c) Schools? () (✓) () ( ) d) Parks? () () (✓) () e) Other public facilities? () () () (✓) Comments: a) The site, located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road, would be served by Fire Station 173, located at 12270 Firehouse Court approximately''/2 mile to the north of the project site. The project will not require the construction of any new facilities or alteration of any existing facilities or cause a decline in the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new facilities. Standard conditions of approval from the Uniform Building and Fire Codes will be placed on the project to lessen the future demand and impacts to fire services. The impact is considered less than significant. b) The increase in residential units may lead to an increase in calls for service. Although there may be an increase in calls, additional police protection is not required as the addition of the project will not change the pattern of uses within the surrounding area and will not have a substantial increase in property to be patrolled as the project site is within an area that is regularly patrolled. The San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department, which provides police services to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, has reviewed the project and has concluded that the project will not result in a significant impact or a need to construct additional police facilities. The impact is considered less than significant. c) The Etiwanda School District and the Chaffey Joint Union High School District serve the project area. Both school districts have been notified regarding the proposed Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 287 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 71 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g Potentially Significant With Mitigation man Significant No Impact incorporated Impact Im act development. A standard condition of approval will require the developer to pay the school impact fees. The Etiwanda School District submitted correspondence requiring payment of the school facility fee plus the Etiwanda School District special tax as mitigation to school facilities impacts. With this standard condition and mitigation indicated below, impacts to the School Districts are considered less than significant. 1) The developer shall pay the current residential school facility fee plus the Etiwanda School District special tax. d) The site is in a developed area, currently served by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The site is in a developed area, currently served by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The nearest park, Victoria Arbors Park, is located at 7429 Arbor Lane 1 mile to the east of the project site. The project is proposing the construction of 380 residential units (and a 71 room hotel and two 6,000 square foot restaurants) which will increase park usage; however, the increase in park usage can be absorbed by the existing parks in the immediate area (5 total) and is considered 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. A standard condition of approval will require the developer to pay Park Development Fees. Additionally, the project includes the construction of a 0.73 acre pocket park that will be accessible to the public, but privately maintained. The pocket park will include the following amenities: volleyball/badminton areas, shaded areas with game tables, benches and two bocce balls courts. The project is designed with low -intensity active and passive recreational amenities which will mitigate a portion of the demand on public park usage. With the construction of the publicly accessible linear park and payment of Park Development Fees, the impact is considered less than significant. e) The proposed project will utilize existing public facilities. The site is in a developed area, currently served by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The project will not require the construction of any new facilities or alteration of any existing facilities or cause a decline in the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new facilities. Cumulative development within Rancho Cucamonga will increase demand for library services. According to the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.14), there will be a projected increase in library space demand but with the implementation of standard conditions the increase in Library Services would be mitigated to less than significant impact. Additionally, the closest public library, the Paul A. Biane Library, located at 12505 Cultural Center Drive, recently completed a second floor addition that added 13,500 square feet of specialized programming space. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan for which the FPEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. Therefore no adverse impact is expected. Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 288 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Pane 72 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Im act IncorEorated Impact Im act 15. RECREATION. Would the project a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and () ( ) (✓) ( ) regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or () () (✓) ( ) require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Comments: a) The site is in a developed area, currently served by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The site is in a developed area, currently served by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The nearest park, Victoria Arbors Park, is located at 7429 Arbor Lane approximately 1 mile to the east of the project site. The project will not require the construction of any new park facilities or alteration of any existing park facilities or cause a decline in the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new park facilities. The project is proposing the construction of 380 residential units (and a 71 room hotel and two 6,000 square foot restaurants) which will increase park usage; however, the increase in park usage can be absorbed by the existing neighborhood parks in the immediate area (5 total) and is considered less than significant. Additionally, the project includes the construction of a 0.73 acre pocket park that will be accessible to the public, but privately maintained. The pocket park will include the following amenities: volleyball/badminton areas, shaded areas with game tables, benches and two bocce balls courts. The project is designed with low -intensity active and passive recreational amenities which will mitigate a portion of the demand on public park usage. The construction of the pocket park will not remove any sensitive habitat (see discussion under Biological Resources above) cause any negative impacts on the environment, such as glare (see discussion under Aesthetics above), or cause any additional traffic trips since pocket park is designed to serve adjacent land uses by pedestrian and bicycle accessibility as the park does not contain a parking lot. A standard condition of approval will require the developer to pay Park Development Fees. The impact is considered less than significant. b) See a) response above. Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 289 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 73 Less Than Significant Lass Issues and Supporting Information S PP g Sources: Potentially Significant win Mitigation Than Significant No Impact incorporated Impact Inact 16. TRANS PO RTATIONITRAFFIC. Would the project: a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy () (✓) () (✓) establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non -motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management () (✓) () ( ) program, including, but not limited to a level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including () () () (✓) either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that result in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature () () () (✓) (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? () () () (✓) f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs () () () (✓) regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities. Comments: a) The applicant proposes developing the 28.4 acre site located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road with mixed use project consisting of single- family and townhome residential units, a boutique hotel and two restaurant pads. Of the 28.4 acres, 24.9 will be allocated to the residential portion of the site, and 3.5 acres will be allocated to the two restaurant pads and hotel site. The project breakdown is the following: 380 residential units (51 single-family dwelling units and 329 townhomes), two restaurant pads for 12,000 square feet of restaurant use (two 6,000 square foot buildings) and a 71 room hotel. A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) was prepared by Urban Crossroads (April 21, 2017). The TIA was performed in consultation with the City and follows the County of San Bernardino Congestion Management Plan (CMP) and California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) requirements. The TIA was based upon the following parameters: 1) the project will be developed in a single phase with an opening year of 2020 and 2) access to the project will be provided via three driveways. Driveway 1 will be on Base Line Road (full access with a proposed traffic signal); Driveway 2 on Day Creek Boulevard (right in/right out only); and Driveway 3 on Day Creek Boulevard (full access via an existing traffic signal at Madrigal Place). The TIA utilizes trip generation statistics published in the Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 290 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Paoe 74 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Im act Incor mated Impact Im act Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation (91h edition, 2012) manual for single-family detached residential (ITE Land Use Code 210), condo/townhomes (ITE Land Use Code 230), hotel (ITE Land Use Code 310), and high turnover (sit-down) restaurant (ITE Land Use Code 932). As the project is proposed to include land uses which attract pass -by trips, pass -by percentages were obtained from Tables ITE Trip Generation Handbook (3rd Edition, 2014) for each of the applicable uses. As the trip generation for the site was conservatively estimated based on individual land uses, an internal capture reduction was applied to recognize the interactions that would occur between the onsite complimentary land uses. For example, patrons of the hotel may also dine at the restaurant, without leaving the site. The project is estimated to generate a net total of approximately 3,356 net trip -ends per day on a typical weekday with 315 net vehicles per hour (VPH) during the weekday AM peak hour and 299 net VPH during the weekday PM peak (Table 4-2). TABLE 4-2 Land.Use. Quantity UnitsZ +AM;Peak Hour. PfN Peak Hour r,gDady7:, .,In `-,Out'. .Total, a +In `"" Out +7otal Single Family Detached Residential 51 DU 10 29 38 32 19 51 486 Condo/Townhomes 329 DU 23 122 145 115 56 171 1,911 Residential Subtotal: 33 151 184 147 75 222 2,397 Internal Capture (Residential to Restaurant) : -2 -14 -16 -8 -10 -18 -194 Internal Capture (Residential to Hotel) : 0 0 0 0 -2 -2 -22 Net Residential Trips: 31 137 168 139 63 202 2,181 Hotel 1 71 RM 22 16 38 22 21 43 580 Internal Capture (Hotel to Restaurant)': -1 -1 -2 -3 -4 -7 -91 Internal Capture (Hotel to Residential) : 0 0 0 -2 0 -2 -22 Net Hotel Trips: 21 15 36 17 17 34 468 High Turnover (Sit -Down) Restaurant 1 12.000 1 TSF 71 58 129 71 47 118 1,526 Internal Capture (Restaurant toResidential): -14 -2 -16 -10 -8 -18 -194 Internal Capture (Restaurant toHotel) : -1 -1 -2 -4 -3 -7 -91 Subtotal: 56 55 111 57 36 1 93 1,241 Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 291 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 75 Less Than Significant Less Issues and SupportingInformation Sources: Potentially Significant wtn Mitigation Than Significant Na Impact Incorporated Impact Im act Pass -by Reduction: (43%PM): 0 0 0 -15 -15 -30 -534 Net Restaurant Trips: 56 55 111 42 21 63 707 TOTAL NET TRIPS: 108 207 315 198 101 299 3,356 ' Trip Generation Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE),Trin Generation Manual, Ninth Edition (2012). 2 TSF =Thousand Square Feet; DU = Dwelling units; RM = Rooms 3 Internal capture calculated from NCHRP 684 Internal Trip Capture Estimation Tool. Pass -by reduction percentages are from the ITETrio Generation Handbook (3rd Edition): Table F.30 In order to provide a comprehensive analysis of potential traffic impacts, the TIA prepared by Urban Crossroads, impacts to circulation were assessed for each of the following conditions: Existing (2016) (Baseline) • Existing plus Project (E+P) Conditions Opening Year Cumulative (2020) Without Project Conditions • Opening Year Cumulative (2020) With Project Conditions • Horizon Year (2040) Without Project Conditions • Horizon Year (2040) With Project Conditions To account for background traffic growth, traffic associated with other known cumulative development projects in conjunction with an ambient growth from Existing (2016) conditions of 8.24% (2 percent per year over 4 years, compounded annually) is included for Opening Year Cumulative traffic conditions. The TIA studied 12 intersections (see Table 1-1), trip generation and trip distribution. TABLE 1-1: Intersection Analysis Locations ID Intersec"tton Location` ., _` '; ;Jurisdiction ±, 1 Dw . 1 / Base Line Rd. Rancho Cucamonga 2 Day Creek BI. / Victoria Park Ln. Rancho Cucamonga 3 Day Creek BI. / Base Line Rd. Rancho Cucamonga 4 Day Creek BI. / Dwy. 2 Rancho Cucamonga 5 Day Creek BI. / Dw . 3/Madrigal PI. Rancho Cucamonga 6 Day Creek BI. / Church St. Rancho Cucamonga 7 Day Creek BI. / E. Foothill BI. Rancho Cucamonga 8 Victoria Park Ln. / Base Line Rd. Rancho Cucamonga 9 Etiwanda Av. / Base Line Rd. Rancho Cucamonga 10 1-15 SB Ramps/ Base Line Rd. Rancho Cucamonga, 11 East Av. / Base Line Rd. Rancho Cucamonga, 12 1-15 NB Ramps / Base Line Rd. I Fontana, Caltrans Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 292 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Pace 76 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Signifcant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Inca oraletl Im act Im act The TIA prepared by Urban Crossroads (March 14, 2017) reviewed the cumulative impacts on the study area intersections and recommends mitigation measures to address cumulatively significant impacts. Project Impacts Impact 1.1 — Day Creek BI. / E. Foothill BI. (#7) — Although this intersection was found to operate at an unacceptable LOS (LOS F) during the PM peak hour only under existing traffic conditions, the intersection is anticipated to continue to operate at unacceptable levels during one or more of the peak hours with the addition of project traffic. As such, the impact is cumulatively considerable (Impact 1.1). Impact 2.1 — East Av. / Base Line Rd. (#11) — Although this intersection was found to operate at an unacceptable LOS (LOS E) during the AM peak hour only under existing traffic conditions, the intersection is anticipated to continue to operate at unacceptable levels during one or more of the peak hours with the addition of project traffic. As such, the impact is cumulatively considerable (Impact 2.1). Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure 1.1 — Day Creek BI. / E. Foothill BI (#7) — The following improvement is necessary to improve the intersection operations to better than pre -Project levels during the peak hours, thus reducing the cumulative impact to less than significant: Project to restripe rightmost northbound through lane as a shared through -right turn lane and adjust signal timing splits. Due to existing geometrics and the need to accommodate all modes (i.e., pedestrians and bicycles), it is not feasible to improve the vehicular LOS to LOS D. However, with the above mitigation, the delay is reduced to less than pre -Project levels as shown in Table 7- 5. Table 7-5: Intersection Analysis for Horizon Year 2040 Conditions with Improvements f ` : Intersection A roach'Lanes - ". Delay " Level of ? ` Traffic ,. (secs j ,: Service Significant Northbound Souhbound Eastbound Westbound k. Inile section .:... , ! , : .' Control, 1,Impact7„s L, T=, R - L, :!T ' R ` L',`�'7 a , R'- ' L;!, .T,`:`. R . . ANL, .PM' AM ePM; 7 Day Creek el. / E. Foothill 81. 2040 Without Project: TS 2 3 1 2 2 1>> 2 4 0 2 3 1>> 107.3 445.0 F F 2040 With Project: - Without Improvements TS 2 3 1 2 2 1>> 2 4 0 2 3 1>> 111.4 480.4 F F Yes - With Mitigation TS 1 2 2.5 1.5 2 2 1>> 2 4 0 2 3 1>> 88.3 369.0 F F No ' When a right turn Is designated, the lane can either be striped or unstriped. To function as a right turn lane there must be sufficient width for right turning vehicles to travel outside the through lanes. L = Lek; T = Through; R = Right;> = Right -Turn Overlap Phasing; » = Free -Right Turn Lane; 1= Improvement r Per the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual, overall average Intersection delay and level of service are shown for Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 293 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 77 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potenllally With Than Significant Mitigation Signifcant No Im act Incarparated Impact Im act Intersections with a traffic signal or all way stop control. For intersections with cross street stop control, the delay and level of service for the worst individual movement (or movements sharing a single lane) are shown. TS = Traffic Signal Improvement consists of converting the rightmost northbound through lane to a shared through -right turn lane and signal timing adjustments. Mitigation Measure 2.1 — East Av. / Base Line Rd. (#11) — The following improvement is necessary to improve the intersection operations back to acceptable levels during the peak hours, thus reducing the cumulative impact to less than significant: Project to contribute fair share towards improvements at East Avenue and Base Line Road as part of the 1-15 Freeway / Base Line Road Interchange Project. In sum, the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan for which the FPEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. The project is in an area that is mostly developed with street improvements existing or included in project design. The project will not create a substantial increase in the number of vehicle trips, traffic volume, or congestion at intersections when existing conditions plus project impacts and mitigation measures, planned improvements and development impact fees and are factored. 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. With the above -identified mitigation measures and impact fees, the impacts are mitigated to less than significant levels. b) As shown in Table 1-1, 12 intersections were selected for the TIA prepared by Urban Crossroads based on the methodology defined in Appendix "C" of the County of San Bernardino Congestion Management Program (CMP) (1) that require analysis of intersection locations in which a proposed project is anticipated to contribute 50 or more peak -hour trips and in consultation with City of Rancho Cucamonga staff during the scoping process. Although each intersection may have unique operating characteristics, the "50 peak hour trip" criterion is a valid and proven way to establish a study area as it generally represents a threshold of trips at which an intersection would have the potential to be impacted. Freeway Mainline Segments The TIA also analyzed freeway segments, and merge and diverge ramp junction analysis for northbound and southbound directions of flow, as shown in Tables 1-2 and 1-3, respectively. TABLE 1-2: FREEWAY MAINLINE SEGMENT ANALYSIS LOCATIONS ID > a r Freeway Majnlme Segments *`-. 1 1-15 Freeway — Southbound, North of Base Line Road 2 1-15 Freeway — Southbound, South of Base Line Road Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 294 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 79 Less Than [Bioqltntly Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: cam Mitigation man Significant No incorporated Im act Im act a I-15 Freeway/Base Line Road interchange improvements are assumed to be in place. The interchange project is currently under construction and is anticipated to be completed by the end of 2016. As indicated in Table 1-4, the intersection at Day Creek and Foothill operates at a LOS F during the PM hour. This intersection is anticipated to continue to operate at unacceptable levels during one or more of the peak hours with the addition of project traffic. As such, the impact is cumulatively considerable; however, with the improvements constructed under Mitigation Measure 1.1, the intersection will operate to better than pre - project levels during the peak hours, thus reducing the cumulative impact to less than significant. Opening Year Cumulative 2020 Freeway Off -Ramp Queuing, Freeway Segment and Freeway Merge/Diverge Analyses Off -Ramp Queuing Analysis: A queuing analysis was performed for the off -ramps at the I- 15 Freeway Base Line Road interchanges to assess vehicle queues for the off ramps that may potentially result in deficient peak hour operations at the ramp -to -arterial intersections and may potentially "spill back" onto the 1-15 Freeway mainline. There are no movements that are currently experiencing queuing issues during the weekday AM or weekday PM peak 95th percentile traffic flows. Freeway Segment Analysis: There are no additional freeway mainline segments that are anticipated to operate at unacceptable LOS, in addition to those previously identified under Existing (2016) or E+P traffic conditions for Opening Year Cumulative (2020) Without Project traffic conditions. Freeway Merge/Diverge Analysis: Ramp merge and diverge operations have been evaluated for Opening Year Cumulative (2020) Without and With Project traffic conditions at the 1-15 Freeway and Base Line Road interchange. Consistent with the basic freeway segment analysis, the ramp junction analysis has also been performed assuming the proposed interchange configuration at the 1-15 Freeway and Base Line Road. It is anticipated that all the ramp junctions along the 1-15 Freeway at Base Line Road are projected to operate at unacceptable LOS for Opening Year Cumulative Without Project traffic conditions. The addition of Project traffic is not anticipated to result in any additional LOS deficiencies for the freeway ramp junctions. Recommended improvements to address deficiencies on freeway facilities: At this time, Caltrans has no fee programs or other improvement programs in place to address the deficiencies caused by development projects in the City of Rancho Cucamonga (or other neighboring jurisdictions) on SHS roadway segments. As such, no improvements have been recommended to address the Opening Year Cumulative deficiencies on the SHS, because there is no feasible mitigation available. Opening Year Cumulative 2040 Freeway Off -Ramp Queuing, Freeway Segment and Freeway Merge/Diverge Analyses Off -Ramp Queuing Analysis: A queuing analysis was performed for the off -ramps at the I- 15 Freeway Base Line Road interchanges to assess vehicle queues for the off ramps that Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 295 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Pace 80 Less Than Signilcant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: pp 9 Potentially Significant wen Mitigation Than Significam No Impact Incorporated Impact Im act may potentially result in deficient peak hour operations at the ramp -to -arterial intersections and may potentially "spill back" onto the 1-15 Freeway mainline. There are no movements that are currently experiencing queuing issues during the weekday AM or weekday PM peak 951h percentile traffic flows. Freeway Segment Analysis: All of the study area freeway mainline segments are anticipated to operate at an unacceptable LOS (i.e., LOS E or worse) for Horizon Year Without Project conditions during one or more peak hours. The addition of Project traffic is not anticipated to result in any additional LOS deficiencies for the freeway segments. Freeway Merge/Diverge Analysis: Ramp merge and diverge operations have been evaluated for Horizon Year (2040) Without and With Project traffic conditions at the I-15 Freeway and Base Line Road interchange. It is anticipated that all the ramp junctions along the 1-15 Freeway at Base Line Road are projected to operate at unacceptable LOS for Horizon Year Without Project traffic conditions during one or more peak hours. The addition of Project traffic is not anticipated to result in any additional LOS deficiencies for the freeway ramp junctions. Recommended improvements to address deficiencies on freeway facilities: The 1-15 Corridor Improvement Project, includes two alternatives being studied by SANBAG. The first alternative includes no construction of additional travel lanes or ramp improvements. The second alternative includes the addition of two 33-mile Express Lanes in each direction between the SR-60 Freeway and the US-395. Single -occupant motorists may choose to pay a toll to travel faster in the Express Lanes; high -occupancy vehicles (HOV) would utilize the Express Lanes at no cost. Based on information provided on the website, these improvements are longer range with anticipated opening of Phase 1 in 2024. All of the freeway mainline segments are anticipated to operate at an acceptable LOS with the construction of two Express Lanes in both directions of travel (i.e., LOS D or better), with the exception of the following freeway segments: • 1-15 Freeway Southbound, South of Base Line Rd. (#2) — LOS E AM peak hour only • 1-15 Freeway Northbound, South of Base Line Rd. (#4) — LOS E PM peak hour only The 1-15 Freeway ramp junctions are anticipated to operate at an acceptable LOS with the improvements discussed above (i.e., LOS D or better), with the exception of the following freeway ramp junction: 1-15 Freeway Northbound, Off -Ramp at Base Line Rd. (#3) — LOS E PM peak hour only At this time, Caltrans has no fee programs or other improvement programs in place to address the deficiencies caused by development projects in the City of Rancho Cucamonga (or other neighboring jurisdictions) on SHS roadway segments. In November 2004, San Bernardino County voters passed the Measure I extension (30 years) which requires local jurisdictions to impose appropriate fees on development for their fair share toward regional transportation improvement projects. On May 18, 2005, the City of Rancho Cucamonga adopted a Comprehensive Transportation Fee Schedule updating Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 296 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Pace 81 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially wtt Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Im act Incorporated Impact Im act these development impact fees. As a result, the San Bernardino County Congestion Management Agency waived the Congestion Management Plan (CMP) Traffic Impact Analysis reporting requirement. This project will be required, as a condition of approval, to pay the adopted transportation development fee prior to issuance of building permit. The project is in an area that is mostly developed with all travel lanes along Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road existing. The project will be required to provide missing street improvements (curb, gutter, and sidewalk) along the street frontage of the site. See also discussion and analysis under b) above. With payment of the Transportation Impact fees and the implementation of the mitigation measures under b), the impacts will be less than significant. c) The site is not located within an airport land use plan according to the General Plan Figure PS-7, General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.8-1 and the Ontario Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan and is not within 2 miles of a public airport. The project site is located approximately 4.5 northeasterly of the Ontario Airport and is offset north of the flight path. No impact is anticipated. d) The project is in an area that is mostly developed. The project will be required to provide street improvements (curb, gutter, and sidewalk) along the street frontage of the site. The project design does not include any sharp curves or dangerous intersections or farming uses. The project will, therefore, not create a substantial increase in hazards because of a design feature. No impacts are anticipated. e) The project will be designed to provide access for all emergency vehicles during construction and upon completion of the project and will therefore not create an inadequate emergency access. The project will have one access point off Base Line Road and two access points off Day Creek Boulevard. In addition to the three access points, the project will have one Emergency Vehicle Access (EVA), for exclusive use by emergency vehicles, off Day Creek Boulevard. No impacts are anticipated. The design of the project 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.). There is an existing east -west Omnitrans bus (Route 67) that operates along the project's frontage along Base Line, and the project is within walking distance ('% mile) to Route 82 along Church Street, which connects to Milliken Avenue. No impacts are anticipated. 17. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project - Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with the cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of () () () (✓) Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1 (K)? Rev 3-1-16 . E10-16 297 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 82 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g Potentially significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incor crated Impact Im a t b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion () ( ) () ( ) and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. Comments: a) As defined in Public Resources Code 21074 and applying the criteria located in Public Resources Code Section 5024.1 (subdivision c), the project site has not been identified as a "Historic Resource" per the standards of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 2.24 (Historic Preservation. Additionally, A Cultural Resources Assessment was performed on the project site by LSA Associates (May 2, 2016). In conjunction with the South Central Coastal Information Center at California State University, Fullerton, the California Historical Resources Information was also consulted. A total of 24 resources were identified within a 1 mile search of the project site. Literature and aerial photographs were also reviewed. The study also included an intensive field survey of the project site. Parallel, linear transects separated by approximately 20-30 feet were conducted over the project site. Aerial photographs suggest project was once covered in vineyards: No historic aerial photographs or maps depict any buildings or structures in the project area at any time. No cultural resource sites were observed in the project area during the pedestrian survey. The project site is somewhat disturbed by prior bulldozing and dumping of construction material. The study concludes with the absence of cultural resources in the current project area and surrounding vicinity, no additional cultural work is recommended. No adverse impacts are anticipated. b) In conformance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, A Cultural Resources Assessment was performed on the project site by LSA Associates (May 2, 2016). In conjunction with the South Central Coastal Information Center at California State University, Fullerton, the California Historical Resources Information was also consulted. A total of 24 resources were identified within a 1 mile search of the project site. Literature and aerial photographs were also reviewed. The study also included an intensive field survey of the project site. Parallel, linear transects separated by approximately 20-30 feet were conducted over the project site. Aerial photographs suggest project was once covered in vineyards. No historic aerial photographs or maps depict any buildings or structures in the project area at any time. No cultural resource sites were observed in the project area during the pedestrian survey. The project site is somewhat disturbed by prior bulldozing and dumping of construction material. The study concludes with the absence of cultural resources in the current project area and surrounding vicinity, no additional cultural work is recommended. The study does recommend that in the event that previously undocumented archaeological resources are identified during earthmoving activities, further work in the area should be E10-16 298 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Pace 83 Less Than Signi(cant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Significant wtn Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incor .rated Impact Im act halted until a professional archaeologist can assess the nature and significance of the finding can be determined. In conformance with California State Bill 18, staff contacted the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for a list of Tribal Communities to provide notice to regarding the opportunity to consult since the project has an associated Community Plan Amendment. The NAHC responded with a list of 12 Tribes. Along with a CHRIS Report, staff sent a Tribal Consultation Request on July 13, 2016, for the proposed Community Plan Amendment to the following Tribal Communities: Gabrieleno/ Tongva Nation, Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, Serrano Nation of Mission Indians, Moronga Band of Mission Indians, San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, Morongo Band of Mission Indians, Gabrieleno/Tongva Nation, Gabrieleno/ Tonga San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians, San Fernando Band of Mission Indians, Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, San Manuel Band of Mission Indians and Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians — Kizh Nation,. Of the 12 Tribes who were notified, none requested that consultation commence. In conformance with Assembly Bill 52 (AB52), staff sent a Tribal Consultation Request on October 4, 2016, of the proposed project to the following Tribal Communities who had requested to be notified: San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians and the Torres, Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians. Following the prescribed timelines for AB52, staff did not receive any requests for consultation. Should any undocumented archaeological or cultural resources be discovered during grading activities, adherence to the mitigation measures listed below will ensure that all impacts will be less than significant. 1) In the event that human remains or funerary objects are encountered during any activities associated with the project, work in the immediate vicinity (within a 100-foot buffer of the find) shall cease and the County Coroner shall be contacted pursuant to State Health and Safety Code §7050.5 and that code enforced for the duration of the project. 2) In the event that Native American cultural resources are discovered during project activities, all work in the immediate vicinity of the find (within a 60- foot buffer) shall cease and a qualified archaeologist meeting Secretary of Interior standards shall be hired to assess the find. Work on the other portions of the project outside of the buffered area may continue during this assessment period. The archaeologist shall contact Tribal communities for input regarding the preservation, retention and final disposition of any discovered cultural resources. The archaeologist shall prepare a mitigation plan and technical resources management report, which shall document the inventory, evaluation, and proposed mitigation of resources within the project area. 3) In the event that significant Native American historical resources, as defined by CEQA (as amended, 2015), are discovered and avoidance cannot be ensured, an SOI-qualified archaeologist shall be retained to develop a cultural resources Treatment Plan, as well as a Discovery and Monitoring Plan. Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 299 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 84 Less Than Signi(wnt Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g pignifi alty Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Im act Incorporated Impact Im act 18. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project. a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the ( ) () () (✓) applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or ( ) () () (✓) wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm ( ) () () (✓) water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the () () () (✓) project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment () () () (✓) provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted ( ) () () (✓) capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with Federal, State, and local statutes and ( ) () (} (✓) regulations related to solid waste? Comments: a) The proposed project is served by the CVWD sewer system, which has waste treated by the Inland Empire Utilities Agency at the RP-1 and RP-4 treatment plants. The RP-1 capacity is sufficient to exceed the additional development within the western and southern areas of the City. The RP-4 treatment plant has a potential ultimate capacity of 28 mgd which is considered more than adequate to capacity to treat all increases in wastewater generation for buildout of the General Plan. The project is required to meet the requirements of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board regarding wastewater. No impacts are anticipated. b) The proposed project is served by the CVWD sewer system, which has waste treated by the Inland Empire Utilities Agency at the RP-4 treatment plant located within Rancho Cucamonga and RP-1 located within City of Ontario, neither of which is at capacity. The project is required to meet the requirements of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board regarding wastewater. No impacts are anticipated. c) All runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to handle the flows. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. The impact is not considered significant. Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 300 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 85 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Significant wall Mitigation Than Significant No Im act Incorporate Im acl Im art d) The CVWD provides water treatment, storage and distribution of domestic water to Rancho Cucamonga and portions of the cities of Ontario and Fontana, and a tract in Upland. The current daily water usage in the CVWD service area is approximately 41.7 million gallons per day (mgd). Residential water use amounts to about 60 percent of the total water consumed. Landscaping (public and private) is the next largest consumer of water at 20 percent. Under Senate Bill 610 (SB 610), Water Supply Assessments are required for projects that exceed the following sizes: 1) residential development of more than 600 dwelling units; 2) shipping center or business establishment employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than 500,000 square feet; 3) commercial office buildings employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than 250,000 square feet; 4) hotel or motel having more than 500 rooms; 5) industrial, manufacturing, processing plant, or industrial park housing more than 1,000 persons, occupying more than 40 acres of land, or having more than 650,000 square feet; 6) mixed use project including one or more of the projects specified above; 7),any other project that would demand an amount of water equivalent to or greater than the amount of water required by a 500-dwelling unit project; and 8) any project that accounts for an increase of 10 percent or more in the number of existing service connections for a public water system. Under SB 221, a Water Supply Assessment is required when: 1) A project that is a residential development of more than 500 dwelling units; 2) a project that accounts for an increase of 10 percent or more in the number of existing service connections for a public water system; and 3) applies to development agreements that Include such subdivision. The City has determined that the proposed mixed use project (380 residential units, 12,000 square feet of restaurant use and a 71 room hotel) does not meet one of the requirements; therefore, a Water Supply Assessment is not required. The project is served by the CVWD water system. There is currently a sufficient water supply available to the City of Rancho Cucamonga to serve this project. No impacts are anticipated. e) The proposed project is served by the CVWD sewer system, which has waste treated by the Inland Empire Utilities Agency at the 'RP-4 treatment plant located within Rancho Cucamonga and RP-1 located within City of Ontario, neither of which is at capacity. No impacts are anticipated. f) Solid waste disposal will be provided by the current City contracted hauler who disposes the refuse at a permitted landfill with sufficient capacity to handle the City's solid waste disposal needs. No impacts are anticipated. g) This project complies with Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations regarding solid waste. The City of Rancho Cucamonga continues to implement waste reduction procedures consistent with AB 939. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated. Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 301 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 86 Less Than Signifcant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Significant cam Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incorporated Im act Im act 19. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the () (✓) () ( ) quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually () (✓) () ( ) limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects that will () (✓) () ( ) cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Comments: a) The site is not located in an area of sensitive biological resources as identified on the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Figure RC-4. Additionally, the area surrounding the site is either developed or is approved for development. In order to ensure that all potential impacts to biological resources were evaluated, a Biological Technical Report, a Delhi Sands Flower Loving Fly Habitat Suitability Evaluation, a California Gnatcatcher Survey and a trapping survey for the San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat was performed. Also, according to the General Plan FPEIR, the site may contain mixed sage scrub (Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub (RAFSS). A Biological Technical Report was completed for the project site by Glenn Lukos Associates (GLA; April 21, 2017). The report includes a field study that study focused on a number of primary objectives that would comply with CEQA requirements, including (1) general biological surveys and vegetation mapping; (2) habitat assessments for special - status plant and wildlife species; (3) focused plant surveys; and (4) focused wildlife surveys. Special Status Plants: According to the Biological Technical Report, no special -status plants were detected at the Project site during focused surveys, and the project will not impact any special status plants (Glenn Lukos Associates; April 21, 2017, page 19). As such, there will be no adverse cumulative impact to special status plants. Special Status Animals: Two special -status small mammals (northwestern San Diego pocket mouse and desert woodrat) were detected at the project site during the trapping study. Both species were trapped in very low densities. The coastal California gnatcatcher and Burrowing Owl were both confirmed absent through focused surveys. No other special -status animals were detected at the project site, although the site has the Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 302 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 87 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information S PP g Sources: Potentially Signifcant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact incorporate Im ad Im aIX potential to support several non -listed, special -status reptile species that were not observed during at the site during the various surveys, but whose absence could not be ruled out. The potential for these species is relatively low based on the past disturbance of the site, and general isolation of the site. If present, the reptile species are likely to occur in low densities. Based on the results of the focused biological surveys, the project will not impact any federally or state -listed animal species, including the coastal California gnatcatcher (CAGN) and the San Bernardino kangaroo rat (SBKR), and therefore "take" authorization would not be required for the Project. Based on the results of the trapping study, the project will remove habitat supporting two non -listed, special -status small mammals, including the desert woodrat and northwestern San Diego pocket mouse. In addition, the Project will remove habitat with the potential to support several non -listed, special -status reptiles, including the coast horned lizard, orangethroat whiptail, rosy boa, red diamond rattlesnake, and silvery legless lizard. However, due to relatively small size and the general isolation of the site, and the relatively low sensitivity of these species, the loss of habitat at the property would not have a substantial, adverse effect on these species. Therefore, cumulative biological impacts would be less than significant and would not require mitigation. Burrowing Owls A burrowing owl survey is required prior to ground clearing activities to assure that burrowing owls have not occupied the project site during the intervening time between the submitted study and ground clearing activities. With the mitigation measures included under Section 4 (Biological Resources); any cumulative impacts to Burrowing Owls sensitive species will be less than significant. Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub (RAFSS) Plant Community Impacts Any CEQA project that involves the removal of habitat must consider if any special status species (e.g., Threatened or Endangered species, CNPS List 1 B and 2 plants, or species protected under Section 15380 of CEQA) are potentially present on the project site and if the project impacts could be considered significant by the City. If potential habitat is present in an area, focused surveys shall be conducted prior to construction activities in order to document the presence or absence of a species on the project site. Botanical surveys shall be conducted during the appropriate blooming period for a species. If no special status species are found on the project site, no additional action is warranted. If special status species are found, appropriate mitigation would be required in coordination with the City as described in Section 4 (Biological Resources) above. The project will result in the loss of approximately 25.48 acres of scrub vegetation that is a functionally isolated remnant of a historically broader extent of alluvial scrub vegetation, namely RAFSS, associated with the Etiwanda Fan and the Day Creek wash. However, residential/commercial development and flood control improvements over time have eliminated the majority of the alluvial scrub vegetation south of the 210 Freeway (as well as north of the Freeway), leaving only scattered remnant patches along the Day Creek Channel and in a few other locations. These patches of scrub vegetation are detached from the remaining Etiwanda Fan located north of the 210 Freeway, and are no longer Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 303 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 88 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information .Sources: PP g Potentially SignifiicaN Wth Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Im act subject to the alluvial processes that both created the habitat, and that are necessary to sustain the habitat in the future. The habitat at the Project site has been disturbed over the years, such that the site is dominated by California buckwheat, giving the site the appearance of alluvial scrub vegetation in an earlier stage of ecological succession. However, due to the extent of development and flood control improvements, the project site is functionally isolated from the degree of flood scour that would be necessary to naturally sustain characteristic RAFSS habitat in the future. Furthermore, the site is not occupied by any listed species known in association with alluvial scrub habitats, including the coastal California gnatcatcher and the San Bernardino kangaroo rat, and listed plants such as the Santa Ana River woolly star and the slender horned spineflower. Although the site has some potential for future use by the gnatcatcher, the isolation of the site eliminates the possibility for the future occupation by SBKR, and the establishment of rare plants that are currently absent from the site, and in the case of the woolly star and spineflower, rely on periodic flooding to maintain suitable habitat conditions for these species. As a result, the scrub vegetation at the site does not have long-term conservation value as RAFSS, and the loss of vegetation at the site would not have a substantial adverse effect on remaining functional RAFSS associated with the Etiwanda Fan, Lytle Creek, Santa Ana River floodplain and elsewhere in the region. Therefore, cumulative the impacts would be less than significant and would not require mitigation. Cultural Resources No cultural resources are known to exist on the site; however, in the unlikely event that archaeological and paleontological resources are discovered during construction, mitigation measures are included to ensure proper handling and protection. Therefore, there are no cumulative impacts to cultural resources. b) If the proposed project were approved, the applicant would be required to develop the site in accordance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. The 2010 General Plan was adopted along with the certification of a Program FEIR, Findings of Fact, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations for significant adverse environmental effects of build -out in the City and Sphere -of -Influence. The City made findings that adoption of the General Plan would result in significant adverse effects to Aesthetics. Agriculture and Forest Resources, Air Quality, Climate Change and Mineral Resources. Mitigation measures were adopted 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. It should also be noted that significant conservation efforts have taken place within the geographic area of the Etiwanda Fan from Deer Creek to San Sevaine Creek and include the following conservation areas: Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 304 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Pape 89 Less Than significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potenfialiy significant wen Mitigation Than significant No Iraact Incorporate Im act Im act North Etiwanda Preserve. In 1998, the County of San Bernardino created a 763-acre conservation area in response to impacts to AFSS from the Foothill Freeway (SR-210) project. The Preserve and surrounding lands also contain significant amounts of other rare and threatened habitats that include Sycamore Alluvial Woodland, California Walnut Woodland, and Fresh Water Marsh. North Etiwanda Preserve Expansion Area. In 2009 an additional 440 acres of land was set aside for conservation purposes adjacent to the North Etiwanda Preserve and within the San Sevaine Creek area. Along with the original 763 acre preserve, these lands are managed with the intent of permanently protecting the alluvial scrub and other native communities and species that occupy the North Etiwanda Preserve. U.S. Forest Service Conservation Area. This 880-acre conservation area is located adjacent to the western edge of the North Etiwanda Preserve and includes land purchased by the Metropolitan Water District along Day Canyon and Day Creek as mitigation for the MWD's Inland Feeder Project. The land has been transferred to the U.S. Forest Service and is a part of the San Bernardino National Forest. The majority of this conservation area extends beyond the City's Sphere of Influence, into unincorporated territory. San Sevaine Preserve. This 137-acre conservation area was established by San Bernardino County as mitigation for floodwater diversion structures and debris basins. Day Creek Preserve. A 200-acre conservation area was set aside through a conservation easement to the San Bernardino County Flood Control District as mitigation for impacts from sand and gravel operations. Tract 16072 Mitigation Area. This mitigation area consists of 335 acres that will be conserved as habitat mitigation for Tentative Tract 16072. This area is within the Day Creek watershed and contains various habitats that include alluvial fan sage scrub, white sage scrub, chaparral, and riparian habitat. Rancho Etiwanda/Henderson Creek Mitigation Area. This 308-acre property is surrounded by the North Etiwanda Preserve and San Bernardino National Forest. The Site was part of the mitigation requirements for the Rancho Etiwanda Estates Project and the Henderson Creek Project. The 308 acre Site is protected by a conservation easement. The above conservation areas total more than 3,000 acres and are managed primarily for species and habitat values. The project will result in the loss of approximately 25.48 acres of scrub vegetation that is a functionally isolated remnant of a historically broader extent of alluvial scrub vegetation, namely RAFSS, associated with the Etiwanda Fan and the Day Creek wash. The habitat at the Project site has been disturbed over the years, such that the site is dominated by California buckwheat, giving the site the appearance of alluvial scrub vegetation in an earlier stage of ecological succession. However, due to the extent of development and flood control improvements, the project site is functionally isolated from the degree of flood scour that would be necessary to naturally sustain characteristic RAFSS habitat in the future. Further, residential/commercial development and flood control improvements over time have eliminated the majority of the alluvial scrub vegetation south of the 210 Freeway (as well as north of the Freeway), leaving only scattered remnant patches along the Day Creek Channel and in a few other locations. Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 305 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Page 90 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Significant With Miligation Than Significant Na Impact Incor orated Impact Im att With mitigation measures listed in the Biological Section, the cumulative impacts are considered less than significant. c) Development of the site under the proposed land use change would not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. The Initial Study identifies construction -related emissions of criteria pollutants as having a potentially significant impact; therefore, proposed mitigation measures in the Air Quality Section are included and will reduce emission levels and cumulative impacts to less than significant. Additionally, impacts to air quality resulting from construction activities 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. A Noise Impact Study was submitted for the project that reviewed the potential interior and exterior noise levels. The report concluded that with the proposed mitigation measures (see Noise section above for detailed analysis and mitigation measures), elevated interior and exterior noise levels created by adjacent roadways would be reduced to less than significant. Cumulative impacts from noise would be less than significant with incorporation of the mitigation measures listed in the Noise Section. EARLIER ANALYSES Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier PEIR or Negative Declaration per Section 15063(c)(3)(D). The effects identified above for this project were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in the following earlier document(s) pursuant to applicable legal standards, and such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. The following earlier analyses were utilized in completing this Initial Study and are available for review in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Division offices, 10500 Civic Center Drive (check all that apply): (✓) General Plan FPEIR (SCH#2000061027, Certified May 19, 2010) (✓) General Plan FEIR (SCH#2000061027, Certified October 17, 2001) (✓) Master Environmental Assessment for the 1989 General Plan Update (SCH #88020115, certified January 4, 1989) (✓) Victoria Planned Community EIR (Certified May 20, 1981) Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 306 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Pace 91 Less Than Signifcanl Lass Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Significant wan Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Im act Technical Appendices (see disc) (A) Biological Technical Report (Glenn Lukos Associates, Inc; April 21, 2017) (B) California Gnatcatcher Surveys (Gleen Lukos Associates, Inc, April 12, 2016) (C) Delhi Sands Flower -Loving Fly Habitat Evaluation (Ecological Sciences, April 21, 2017) (D) Presence/Absence Trapping Surveys for San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat (ENVIRA, April 21, 2017) (E) Geotechnical Evaluation (Geo Tek, Inc.; January 21, 2016) (F) Parking Study (Urban Crossroads; March 14, 2017) (G) Arboricultural Tree Inventory (LSA Associates; May 2, 2016) (H) Paleontological Resources Report (LSA Associates; May 2016) (1) Cultural Resources Survey (LSA Associates; May 2, 2016) (J) Air Quality Impact Analysis (Urban Crossroads; July 19, 2016) (K) Greenhouse Gas Analysis (Urban Crossroads; July 19, 2016) (L) Traffic Impact Analysis (Urban Crossroads; April 21, 2017) (M) Noise Impact Analysis (Urban Crossroads; March 14, 2017) (N) Photometric Exhibit (Candela Engineering; August 31, 2016) (0) Peer Review of Biological Technical Resources, Gnatcatcher, Delhi Sands Flower Loving Fly and San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat (Michael Baker International; April 6, 2017) (P) Memorandum: Responses to Peer Review (Glenn Lukos Associates, April 21, 2017) Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 307 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2016-00452, SUBTPM19762, SUBTT20032, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016.00450, ORC2016-00451 AND DRC2016-00508 Pace 91 late'rean S,grfigranl lea Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Will, [CM,ocralee IS Slgnlllanl MniMilon gnlgcant No Impale I ut Im d APPLICANT CERTIFICATION I certify that I am the applicant for the project described In this Initial Study. I acknowledge that I have read this Initial Study and the proposed mitigation measures. Further, I have revised the project plans or proposals and/or hereby, ree to the proposed mitigation measures to avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point w cl7no significant environmental effects would occur. ApplicanYsSignattire: Date: Print Name and Title: Rev 3-1-16 E10-16 308 (L D F- U) z U) LLI M: L) (9 z R 0 F- z 0 a z 0 P f-: EL a ;p 0 d) > = A :6 Uc 0 a LU = , E 0 Eu 0 E C'j S ta 0 F- LID - r 'o 0 t d) o Q. 0 CL >1 LL IL 0 E 0 0 r M 0 zr U) z CN cli CN 'a r r. 0 = cu >❑ r 0 0 -0 0.2 !L- (D > r C C r EL a. CL IL 0 0 = Z 0 0 0 0 I 0 LD E w > W > a) > > a) > a) p > 0) 0 a LL tM a) 2 m a F 0 0 CL a. a. CL CL 0 0-0 rn 0 a) co -0 a) a)0) a) c w a (a c 0 0 o 0 (D 0 0 (D .--a 0 CU 0 -0 2 CY) CL co w a) , C: w ca a) 0.— > Q) a) -0 -0 caw a) ca M c ul 0 L) 0 = E — 0 0 (D (D cu CL u V= (u a) ui E co o 0 0 0 a) 'j� E C) a) — a) 0 0 75 '0 >; -0 0 (a - (D o cu i.Z w -2 cu M 0,T) M a) :E A an) M c —'D (a — " 0 0 (D 0 = 0 1 Cc W 0- ui Z 1, 2 w (D 0 a) 00 E a) cu w (D (D 0 E 42o 0 Co C) 0 (D 0 0 '0 (D o 0 .0 a) 0 M a) 'a Lij am c— , U) n aj E c a a) E ui 0 c` 'u = 6 0 2 cu 0= -0 W a)= a) 0 , = M.— CL , 0 w — 0 a) > 0 cm a) (p 0. > w 0) a) (D w a) ca -0 = .0 a � N. M (D a a cu 0 a) 0 0 0 A ()f = a) M 0 - c cu E 0 0 .0 I , L) co ca I o)w E c 'NO m 0) > 'E 0 cau) a) 0 Ln � E2 — a) (D a) U) < M , o 13, cc �5 E = 2 —.0 a; E C'U a) 2 > , M 0 ca c � 0 Q tM r_ A:5k (D EM E a) 0 > a .0 0 -a— (D �O > 0 -9 (D _0 co: a) "0 0— w o a)= c '2 2 t: 0 a) 0 (b a) CL a) d) CL E 0 c 0 , = d) -a 0 0 - o S 0 CL � 0 M a) oc .2 (D E C=j CUD 0(3 00) x x (U < a) 0 0 0 �-o 0 0 0 'a 0 CL 2 m 0 < 0 a) L E 2 CU! F- E (D. co cn" ,,, I 7 1 CN 1 co to EIO-16 309 0 V C o5 c E 0 0 '« U U � C O a CA V 04 ) Z fA N V' N N N N N N N N H) R m w m w `. N )0 > O C 0.2 O > U a a a s a a a s 0 IL a a. a a a a a 0- . 0 `0 0 0 w 0 0 0 0 w 0 w 0 c N '> a3 ) '> a3i '> 23) ' '> a3i a3 a3 a3 > '> '> '> '> I-> K of w af w af w of w rnT C U 0 C N = 0 C O' O ` 2LL U U U m U U U U U rn y C O N CE O O Q m U) a a m m ° m m m m m yy Q) C' C w a) >. L_ U C O O L O a7 C O m •O N a) N� O a) U 'O Q a) 3 a) m O L T 0) C N 'O L C j O a) C L O Y E��5—E3�M0a =a`� .L.+ ca 00 3m'3 m L N `m a.Oc? a ooco co 03 m00 E C)° x<m cu >,00 rn ° m° N w L) E — CL m' N o` m m o ° c 0 A E o m o U .- N c O C w = N C ,3 CL C O) > OV Q N N a) LT N N CO _ U 'O E " a) "O J (U — L w u0) O. V O- O a) •— L r- C N y C m m E ca O C N N .E ` O O O N a) >• U m a) N O O O_ D a) U N N N C ?i N V O N O L — U L O N V a) V m O Co 0 O _ O y C> C L `a E f0 `�' @ a) OQ N X a) a7 C V N O O _ O "O N Y ° C U C! a) C C .L.+ C ° 'O ECL " U N N U y N N Y C ° U O) @ cO C O. O` a1 co 0) a1 O n— V U N 0).? a1 O C`> w N a) (o p m o U C CU .N. r 'I '5 O O Ol.f/) 07 C p 0 m e m' o—a ° 0 m m c c 0 c 3 c N E c c crq > o U) CO w N N a' N E a) 3 0 o ° d N V a N N m `— "O d._ `m C Q a N Co E N a) V L• O fa N 0 L O V j, dE C _N °0 N .0 0 m�> oOo o=0cc m 2 3 c�3 00 cv c o c x Q .�'. c 0 .._T+ O N d O O Q U C O C C" O C N E N in N d O N N o a) O) U j U .O U N OI U O N C N N 'O a) �, �) 0 rG C w a) a) O` O. L Qa V m U L `p N U O p l0 N N a) a U 3 a1 l6 O_ 0 .00 O_ w O C C a L a) y N in rn ....O C O• M O. U� N 2� N 'O a) C Co V) CL a) U Q 0E'w a) O C U C —W C- N —a�m`0_—tUn0CL O d�°mc°)o3�o.c°)U� Laa))aa)) F L6waa)) H ¢ ¢ ¢ . mm °) a 0 N 0 N a) 0 as d E10-16 310 d U C � O N w O. c E o O m o v U) Z N Y_ •C zz W a7 L Y d > 0.2 0.0 - t ;= y y �> U a a a a a a ¢ a a a 0 0 .0 �U 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 � a d N C N C N C N C iq C N C N C N C w O, 0 o U U U U U U U U CL)i3 w_ N O 0)rn C C rn C m C rn C rn C m C rn C G U C C O m •= 7 C 6 O E! LL U U U U U U U U U U m al 5 `o N_ C C O O 0.2 m� a° 0 O O O O O O O O 0 m m m m m m m m m m N — Y 0 a C 'O C N "0 0)'o = 0 m C 0 L O)❑ O) C c� 'O a) (D p "0 L L (D > o C "_' '� = () a7 N >. U 0) C O m �' (6 o m al o6 Om 3 .O Ea m a)'o a) a`) N L O `mF ma�a m amp -O— m.� c o- a N d am U U u, 'C U U `N O U a) d E > Y E O N m a) .� O (n m C >O al al -00 a) O a] Ol L 0 C ..+ 0' .0 L L y 'O-' >. C al [a O "O L O_ a) D).2 L �C U 3 E a) O N 0 N N 3 U C 0 .n D 3vC) m� m 0 .a axi o m o m w mm C L C- c aa)) 'M `o N -.C-• d .... �° N 'm N :c "O Q .0 -O U y U O. U •• O .T+ M L m 0 E N p N N N 0 X m C a) C U L 0 0l O N C C O_ 3 O_. Q j 0 U ` N E N .0 0) U N 0 0 Ul 0 N— a) U Y C C al o_ V a) 0 '0 �. = a) M _0 0. a) d .0 C N m C N 01 N 0 w a) C. Y N a) n.y 7 L 0 N w t=A � O)C O E EL m@ 0 _U"� 0 "O V) N d N a) u 3 2 C_ 3 U .� C y O) '� N d o d Ci ` N G �,U 0> o Z m I0 5 c $ m v m :_ c m o o Y= o m Lo C 0 a) 0 0 -0 m a C 0)a). C d m N D 0 M� T.0 "t d N C L .h 0. U m j CL "0 d g a) y c m O C C a) TU N L al al U -0 `- M C N N _ Ol — al U 0 O N C m a7 W oo C w 0 O m N N Uui V '00 0 'm0` O O-'N > O a) Lo_ V' a5 0 N C L 'y CO E d' m m D y N C O a0j L 0 U N �a T NCL N E N C O (a N Ol m a) ❑ p > �O C E .� m N o- m �`. L Q) O) N a) N m a7 C T N a N N y coE�-oN3N>om03'-ul�mmmmmmOU�� m as a❑ m U a o o E co 3 N m a E .N N m 0 0 �2ma)0 .E O l O =o c c O a ,3::ia ma.- '> a o° c> m t'>LE cOi am r a °n `) E . F m�aco UCl) m.E aE � a aa) > a > m o p -a E N M V In (p 0 N 0 cr) (1) O) m a E10-16 311 d 0 O R r- Q. c E O 0 «U O = N O Cl) M V V Ui Z V' N N N N N U) @ i7 a 'c a, w. y as m > ¢ ¢ _ w O @ 0 O !� L m U y �> Q a ❑ ❑ U U C C C C 0 0 0 0 U U U U N f/1 N a) Ul N @ @ @ @ @ @ _ w o C C C C a a a a a a O. O O ) ) 0 0 0 0 0 0 as m m 0) 0) 3 3 3 a) 3 a) 3 3 .E ,� •J •J .J .J .@ ,a) ,( .a) a) ,@ a) ,a) CM C U 'C c O a) .+ J O m ❑ ❑ li U U U U U C) U U U U rn a c O` a1 C = O O rx d) O O O O O ❑ ❑ ❑ O O Q° m m m m m a a a in m -0 a) cE ,sue Lp @ '0 0 w @--J 0 0-0 () Ja)c0 - N 0 mnw - m r 0 r 0 ,0 - c� - a3M - a) Coe @ m@0 0 0 0`@J L m 3a 30J. t00 L@ N J N 3 u) () a) J U X D n a2 a) N 0 X m O @CU C C a) C@ O Y a) a a@ a7 C a) C a) a J J@ C p. N a) @ QI N @ U U U > O —@ —_ Co C @ C to @ J Q J E E U N f/1 D_ N_ ` U w .V N a) U r U a) L ~ U V@ V O J .O 0_ a C a C U g Nam. w O a) m u! .. @ a) a r-• d m Ol L N d C O a) Y CU Co p ..CO L.. O N O O` N (O > D_ a) .� m @ W O` m O) a) N@ a U) O O. -3c `oa�m you M a a) m =a@iQ Ewa E0 E(U EaO))- E`2oi `m c 0@ u o c m. o a) a O�=E @ c$ w o $ .� E> a 0ocN E> s 00CL o 0 0o'mN 0 0 Z c°� -_ a)a w LaJ ")ccu cc 0a@@ 0ao O_ L'U O `a) �i W@ N a.c0 C O ad =@ N a E a E N a0 C C O) @ a @ C O m a) C@@ E E J Q@ 3 a L L U a)@ v D_ N @ c N O J@ c Y a @ E O' @ @ 3 O 00 w G U @ (/7 Of N a) @ @@ m C r W a) a) O 0) 3 U O 3 O_ ur N O 19 a N a) J @ O a a) r C Q) L3I O CL @ C W U O C C C N E O O N E °) a) O' N w> a) U N y @ f0 •— `r. U O >. U (0 wN 'a J a a) ' E J@ .O C J d .Q @ J J C -O J Q C @ '00 3 Y w N N O. C N .O O C m C 0 U� a) C C 0(D J 0 a :N oofl@E •C N C tV/) EE�O ��0aa)) E@00 -o � -a� -000 -oo°)@ -a)oc -a)� -�oa aEocn UUO�a) <0-0 Qa QLOo_0 Qv)0wE QnOn@ Qa3 cm E - n oo rn o N N c� N )o N v N N co N E10-16 312 d U ` C O N c E o O '« U m o v v U) Z N N y 20 a 'c d� m 4.. m m >� c w O O m O !.) t y C y G m m O a a O« ,� o 0 cn cc C w N N a) a) a) F > 2 Elf O) T C O C C O W .+ J O d 0 LL U m rn WE a_o y C C O O a� m a .Oc O Cy ayU OOU 0a)yD .- a)� m m N OV 0 •r Qo'• NJ NO 0 .a..)C)L.. LCOOyC O"O c > pcu m a) LU 0Sof-'Tw •>a) >c3moa�i�cnc�`�ya)o O m a a)a�m�>.:n O o y 'a) n. :. w a) a o J a y c w c a m m O. .T. U o c o N.>mm�m-0 ° y N w Lo_, a a) o° m0 m m c a Q' p y -o o_ E J ` J '0J)moc"'C) Nmc�Ey3Emro v3'��mY'c> O �� O J �: 'U';. oELcma E O y' oo:ooco O) O c U ;C l0 m >o $L O C N 'O >. .L. a �:, ;" a). > c O W m c C. n c ay C) N> 00ay a3i O c �. •;N`_a, 01, O Q a) o �_ c C «> 3 c o T_ .� m w N E m c ca "O E F'• m O- ` N 3 .0 w T d ..L... N O) m 3 (a a) -O m E 'O y U a) d N a) N O) 0) C_ m .N L 0) O a) m V L J y 0 O' O ZE m O-.0 c a o t%1 L '.'. .Co�J �O c. a) `O F L y o "' N a) w C> O 'O a) >� Z — C > y N m U Y m. N (a O N y C a) O O) O N y m c m C'a N =�--� fn .` w' O -oo L .- O c y a) w J a) Q m O w .L.+ N M >' y >m�E�Co rnVam -o ���m fJA O L y o), N Y M al C 'v oo Lac>. y m-o Q_ 0) O)«C c_m• O )n LE o _30 y-O m CO dva) E y L aV >, o V E nO m m a7 O -O O mm NV ma c Cw N0) o c OO) m N L _iC> C 0QON d a) tm ?Vo cNj- ] C =` O 'gyC 0 N > a) O"O Ny Ccm: m ;o h-o -ow0mc o:o 9cm 3,0 -00OVn U L E � _ � N ,Alp O N O N (1) rn m n. E10-16 313 d U C � O r. — N c E O O ° U U � C O fA Z N m a 'c as d at m >� w c O r a m O !� L `L > C 0 O O « 0) � E `m F > Ol T C U C C O W «_ cr C O L C° CLL rn O C O a) C c O O a,.E N ` Q 0: O c 3 0 'c c° m c a) m c c- m L `-J c c .- 'D w _ m o °«� o o m.o .N m N U L m S O= N ) w C .� m T N m 0) m�a Ta)U O) a) m Ql N O U N m U �C w'-w N NL C� Q) C c a) d m N m 2 •C J M C O X ��3'aD 0j>�3 N0L o�� N_ �n'a 0o.E�E'�i (B -O v°ZZym T O O U �`') 7 N O a N 2 0. T o'N w a) a) C p_ a) D O >`•� m m «O 3 m°moo c�3� cN _m- a) m « d L C c 0 om�a)v �. o���c� U d' ? U U a V°° U L U ELAN .E CO m Im O L° 3 H E o o N E N 0 0= 0 a) E 0) j 0 c> c N m U 0° 0 C« 3 3w°_««�cYaN�C. m�t°n�O�ama) 0 c_c o�m��.>«� drn�Oa) Z 0Qow_�mmL aoroac 0) a) c�La�,CL r'�10r•3 a) na'i=Na)aa)-a iga�U Zc �a y rnc' 3 r-N 00 ��'a«N O .3 a) N c y mp_ m H o Q U C W° o° Ol C 0 0 o cm E c o o V aa)i C y o 3ma«gym °':o.N O o 0)w 0U �.�c L o o aNi y c g� o° o `- o'� ° ° m a) Ica o cmuL m 0) L>« Loco.«Na>cmmaca« v `o ° ° m 2 a a'L2 c u N Q m m C in c C m C 3 ma a" rn'- N d c a) aa') v, a U C E a) L a ..L.. m-a)p N T L N am d m c a) � L m m o 3 m a� d) Q) m o= o � o .N l o c o a) N m E 3 o o o o` f0 m c v c d '� o N c C 0-0 m o N a m an 0C))�C�� a o. '�nm ami m O m mazo`oa°��ov'E'Uc) o d uci d �U).00E` la E a) a) a) O` U 4. o�� O o.L_. 0)C wo.aa))orn'NaL d N c E E10-16 314 U C ` O A C E O O U � N O ` V U) Z cm m N a7 i, •O C a) -Z d a) a7 C 0 O 0 m O U 0 CL 0 a G � � w O O �� Q O 0 0 c ►. 3 0 3 (D a) a) p > c cTi c c o m «J c o L a) �LLtm U U �tm `o w c c 0 0 w� 0 m m m �° a a N O-QO E m a) C a' w a) m O ', )^ :, N C y N N m m U L.+'p).Yca `� U O C .N-. m •_ O m 0) m +- C 00 .0 .0. m J? a .E N E J C O E D 0- a) i — m J O y w O a) O C L U U .E ? O d m O .m.. �OpLBU caw J�, d3omm f 0r 00p0E n-5 =' c—°p `o aa)) -=o o C O c m °' � 0_-0 o L .• m `p ca — o- a) mL •0 0 m o .� 0 0 com m�-mm o>Ewua -Om o U� a) ._ v. m o_ m o ._ _ c ,•,a ) ._ cJ `0) 2 m 0 m U.. O .t.y "' m n'mc > m aa) 3 U J y- oa L o m m a) O O C U O p ]` E J -O L .;1 m m ._ U "' U V). L 3 a) O 0 d m p_ r m O.� -O m >� m .-. O� U E C a) m TMn O C (A fl_ L m U C 0 E m N m .3 J_ O m C m J ,«A O O O a) N a) m O)•n L O a a 0 C o J—c� 3m a) '�.7i., N Q' N O m Jco�w U cmi ai:co-0w a) m 3 O C C Q w m E~ C -O C j 0 0.{ 7• U m 070 L O E� E ) 7 W •- @ O` w y a) L C L L ` w m w0 C N Y m. .N O `o m O m'J 0 Z oL _ c J Tom Ea �o >om vpo=E"wa a)e, a,. o�U c9mau m E E m v w0 w 0-c 0 m y C N N r m w C O_ C a) U C O '3 O •O a) C L-' N w U S (a a) O m a) 3 N a) O C 7 p C_ U ao0-0Om :N $ �. W __ V E "O - m S C C 'C O C L •U mu00.2 _ �` �L :3i aLic3 m�'�o N ra°ad3N A Q U `�.' U '— U C a) y Y` = m N C N N m •rnmCE M13'� J O C p 0c°)oc' `oo' U d. p= u) •J U aat `o `omUm c?onm12 U-.: •� CC0) 2 0 a) E .E -O E -p O' .t—.. D a U Ya d V C C U B -O J a ,S T C O O O E � W J V) O m U� N o aa)) m° m m 3 rn OLL mum 3° E cTi� m.Cm E `�)•- aa))—> CL cLi- m E pa -c — my m `a . D1 a E cn 0 N 0 m m a E10-16 315 U C ` O 2 C E O O U U C N O V V U) Z M N m V N R a C Q) � W •V V ro ro C 0 O :i.• R 0 O !� L > a a a a a r rm r r r a a a �-0o �o� O = O O CU O O O N N N N C w N Q �`- E y N N N -C c N N N 1— > CC d' ro U 0) > C U C 0 m o d U �LL U m U m m rn d c ao rc c 0 o p m U) a a a a °a. .oC L R C) C S C N L N° N L U C O O ro C a0+ O R .w O m o N C N R O L ... 3 m N U ;O —,c CL Y ` .J O O N .� •Ol G c �C - .0 •N C .� E .3 C c U +.. o oco>Rc > omaaaoaro E N m0 °ooEEocm00) o @E N O CO N N Y 0 �p d O O ro U ro c r E N C O E O R G °" O N N o p_ v- a) E N .° N, E m_ d L" N 0 E o E E C j ro w N `1 .N E N- 0-0 N ro L O ° O L °- Y N - R ro a E rn N -° a 0 a `-' o¢ G C rn'm o) C C w- E O " 3 0 ro O L N° d o c N U R w° E$ .` a .0 N G '�!�. �p U ro .`L--' w +" ¢ `O N Y o N D_ V R L E o- E °_ON O.�Q.L.+m .U'Oo 3°��„ `�O_ roN Ow m�°'� c w LR"'C m- E- wo _ O"N 0 C L E R 0) 0- _ C c 1O °' C o O N 4) O O. 0� 0) O -o U 'C w L C M Q N R 'C O N 0 F. E U l0 ° w U N c N m 0-- C «) 0) O E N N CI L N O W C ro 0 C R m a O C 3 O) a)) Q n E .N C RO ` N O° ."R" Co N o) N U N O- N N= of O N° `p C U U U N L C: d O C Q o O N L ° L Z v ,«N, E O 0 D d U 'O a aj _> N c R •E 'O E R~ 0> O C `°_ d L N a) 3 w ro y p C o R N 'C '6) N 0 L E j' Co O fO N 0 y Ol d N °" °' o).O N N N C O. n fn w C C O U C N .M 'tn 0 'O •�. ro o ° 7 C) N° O COl a) C Y N D -) N O U) C O N ro N !� '-C-p c �.N Rco a N L C-O O.O CL 3 OIro - Qca G C co R Om E.0 co ON (� O NF= C N� c).=O f/j o)o�O TZ maw° C m�No-0 d .N _m Em>: dnoo° O. °)a � oE�@c °� ID vNiC a) d ro U O_ ro C R o E d E C E R (n C R >. ro o) = N j. r E N E 0 y¢ R O a G C C O d c E- N R a O O ro •C 7 R R 0 0 p6.6) a)o U N E • C>> - RaoUEm pE E.SE . mC ii E N C) N 0 O 00 N 0 R a E10-16 316 d U L C 22 CL E O o c c O U) Z "T M m 'a. O C a) c w m `d C W O ° m o ._ s �- m � ❑ C O C O C O C O O O O U U U U Q Q Q C C C C C °' `o `o o O O U O U OU U r'„v--. .(L) a3i a3i m m m 1-> 2�' 0 m� 'r C O a) .+ J p ) U LL m ❑ ❑ U U U U m d c ao N Y C C O O CL M L ma a m Co m m a N mCmm p00 ,.L❑Ca)m N=~OO NNU (aWo - L° o° o�G°-�L-C oEa m: C C m m C Co' �(D0 D a) ¢ m Q NT�Em` M m al 3.Em m m J m Y O a) MC> Co C .LN.- U U N M ° U E O M CO a) 'O Cu C T N E C a) U E U U r�mN U N C J O a) J' m V m a) .0 L U E O C p 0 Q m� E2 Em�(D mwm ��omC M m p CL 3 �-p�0o Co-°• �`°°°� �(,:ym �'3.pa�m tmma;E �a� ... memo C 'O N.2 C° U M m C O oL Q �.." T f .- > m❑ C m m C .N '� m E m m E J Cu a) a1 C m Y � m Q y m Q C o C p J E Q C m N �fn 3 9 U +M-. .O Q "JO d� M O a) m w m ��� L v 0 N N m E m 6 V p d. J' 2' E a) a) o N ,m0 0 .� O O. > U m-O Q m (� E m C� m CQ.' N U 0 'JO E O C L E0 N m O U > C', O E L_ O V. U) L y C in ) m m a m M m O `1 Z m�mm ov_oZ' v EcMi3a'm m>cm U OOJ ��w N UJ me mm mco �E Comm EMEmUG (a '°>-m .0M 0a)`'m�mm amn 3axim ��°c °o° Zmm LO m w E .Q m ... O M '0� a)v m C m U a) C o_ O M Y 75 m .N o m m C o m O Q E J m� O N Q> tJd O m E U U m' a) w N U Co O O N N O m Q w M m° o al m m O C C G U E- L 4)0 O p a) ~O m° Q C U m Q M .O C M C J m m ��' - G -0 3: a) .p m m m a .L+ Q «. m C E a) U O M E N m Q m ❑ V) U C w in d 'O E U "O C d N w m U) Q U) m Cn �$. m r °U a) m m o -O L C m a) 'p =p E (� >> u) O N N 1 V M m O O U to p U !EC o 0 N C V) m¢ U U N N E• • • o F- N m C Q N , LL m U >> OU (� d a) U Cn C C a) m a) - a E Cl) N ri v E10-16 317 d U o C O A"" a c E O O U C C m O 7) Z V V V V V R cV V N m a 'c w c a m >0 c w o � . a m O V m v U Q C C C C C C C C O O O O O O O O U U U U U U U U C f; N N N N N U) U) O O O O O O O U 'U U U C)U U U � U C w m - Ol - O) - O) - O) - •J - O) - C - E•c al J J J J J J J C U C 0 O N .+J C O' O ` � LL U U U U U U Q U m c B `o 0 N C C O O CL U) m m m m m m m m (0 C N O) oro U >. C= L 3 '3 m a) 'O O a) C a) m N 'O >.'O m "O c m a) 0 (a . 3 `o -0 a) �' n o .o N is c -o c m .� C o N N m N O. E — m o — U —_ C 0 O a m C N- a� .H .J t� N 'o 0)cm C O m c CoE y m �o. m "_' E cc m N ..... fn D_ cC m rn ram--. G C - o m=o E m O r N O_ N N 4) c O N T N E o .O U E E n-0 — C_ L T (� O_o T C () m N O y h N U N j. Y Y T O N Lu m m Q a O C N a 0) m 0 N a) a) 0 > U E •� 0 m U U -O � U E CO U N .0 N C L a) U C O CL 0 -0 .0 `p w a U N� N m C t o_ a a) "' c m C •� '� m ci d U m Q) J _ E o) E N c X m a) c"oi L c .o .c o _ c E � m- � v m 2 C9 � o 0 rn� w d d m o "T c W1 O O.L m'm N mom C `�yE L C N OU a m C a) �. ... 'N c C O N a) t F U O N C O O O U V E -O a) C m O `! 0 d L O C O m C a J m C m N Q mm: a; o.c E o c_ vci '� m v 0 3 co v.c o o +' g '@ O m m m c> E y m. rnw E = O m'+t y C O_ O) T@ m C d U. _ m O O) O ❑. J Y C O I V m 3 -C c Z ,Nei C j'U E ,�J. m S a O O" ` y N y E C N O m N a) C C, O 7 C 0 (l! O N O ` �O � .: 0 U E J O y a o rn L v_ U O m 2 m a J N N d J J m 'O c p m _C) O a y a O) @ "O. .0 -o 7 U C� ' `' E C N' I 5�.3 � C N y C U— 0� 9c c_ r- U) a) C L 03 m �a �.- C C a) a) C °@����m 0 7 mQlami'`E a) N °r E� O U C N NE m�3 >' m E U N U— mUa a C �11. o�ooa) m a C U E J C C m y `o m` a` f� ) ? U 'J f, Ql .— N_ N N .� m N N N N Y LO a a) N a) L y 0 C c0 J a) '— O) •— a C C :)',� R' C w C O N t`') N N N J E rr N C a E C C a) o. ?r 2 O) C J C a N r-. C T U p .N a J O N aE:G;:CO 1:. :. -OC t a) N N E o rn - m m L o E c v J m .a). _ - c ¢ O .m. a J d o p O m m m E3 a) 'j U pm f- mavmmHca)m o F mU.S4NU-Ua� d o.} E ini<: cli c v ui o m d-� O N 0 O O m m m IL E10-16 318 d U � C 0 0 w a c E 0 O .� U U � mC O M Z N m A .M 'O C a) C w y al N C 0 O m 0 O !� N (D �> U C O U C O N C O O � U c E C 0 'C C O a) = 7 C O' O a) LL Q O) (D C O Vl C C O O ni�. to 2 ° m C 'O 'O C O a) OI W T -O m 0 d C C O a) O C C' . d C m .a)„ l0 Q m N C C U O (m a mC U d mm CO 'a � Od O " > N m m m C U a) N 'O a) a) a=C O OET co > O aSa)0 3U N N `O a) C O a) C m m N m °° c 3m0 t m._ U (a a) m O c0� t L 3.. � m E c d W 0 a`) E 0 'u �m o ° a) > o 3 `o c 3 0'v n3 ° N a) ° 0w O U m C M — — aa)) O O O -O m m L fa 0) 'a ELF m a) m a) C) a 'O Q ° o .- m Y a7 a) 0 C O g z m w oa rn :- a) •3 >. 3 a) n m L a�io c a) a) m� u tw o0 Eoo �NOrnai 'md� 'S3Nwa3 Ca a) � N m`o Eli a) an d m w � a) a� u m° � C@ o c --0U � mew L) Q �_ Ccu C C 0 C O- C C` o m O N E �- C 'm0 rm.. a7 a) a7 ❑ .L.. a1 l0 C Fu 77 E C 0 J C O' >i a) a7 L J N C T W c CU d C J a3 'O C O O = U O N .. !!) Z) 3 0 m N n 0 C 'O O C C 0 .- O U a7 7 O m a) U E 0 m" . d E rn 0 N w O 1 1 a) m (a 0_ E10-16 319 d U C � O !� Ma M E O O :c U U � C c MO U) Z N N N N w 2 a 'c d� m (D . a, m c o 0 U OCD L w U a a a G C C c N N a7 a7 0 o a a n a o •- o 0 0 `o c m .-_ ,aa)i aa)) F> C U c O d) 0 YC ty ❑ ❑ ❑ Oa U U U li Q c] c7 M rn a c `o c C O O O. m m m w U c ccoJ ,, ;'. r�o='�a�'i c°'i a�'ir a aOi �••°.-- c° m E cG 0ctf a) ��a)E ��E a7 a1 a7 U "' :D ' a) U J �+ �' C U V) L J a7 E C w O V CU w J -° O` w w "' O w J N C O U] lL a�!. y .J _ ""' U N> O an d l` U O. O 0_ J .0 E w0 C (0 O i1 O a) E w° to a) C C O) o �a d O 0_ 14)ll w J c` o @ m E o .L.. ° no.aa) O'v oa E'0 �U a E� E a) c U w O Y' L wa E d "O' a) c E «-. c EO a) fa J a) ° m w c E c ._ 0 a) L cTi min a '- .0. c .a). _10 �'�o° "� > ,a)p a - -°c cOO�rno� mo-� v na) c �- ma)o J w mm �;. �E n �c�w m�v�_ot w axi -00w3o mEo OU O) ,cy'', a a o)'O c w C a) w J U J O- o a) ° a) a) ° a) !� al 0,2 c m w o CO c o c° m c 0w o m t m m° U c o f E x e c Uw IL O_"UJO �:i _ v7 cu J OU a U a. OI U E O O C a) c o� U O_ ° w .N a) a "d) la L) U ca v, � om� a Em a - a E E oo'o- morn Ecao�°YoE �caow ° a) a c � ci �'. a > c - ° `o o � W `o_ O a) m lL c ° w.- ( . °-�� 0 o d 0) a) we 0 a) y c c 0- <a.= w mwca)X ova w o� E c a) 0 oc-O ° �°: m o N.�� UVooEdF� o° cmuwaEi� wwrc U)° w a) w w U `E t.>�, U m n (0 Y N c0 c °- ° a7 ` c X Q L a) a) ° C O w •`� a) w 3 w c M W a) M. 3 W¢ Q) O 3 0) a) '�� '>:� Q CL' .w. E O .LO. U a7 ca U C �- 0 c No coo,=::C) N C 0) J �aa)i.a�a• E p° j C N CA O D_ ` w a E C L a7 W'oywo: c-0U) a �oM0) c C „O„ �mo• C C OdmdxdE0m' J E d a) n >. o E U > c 'X J ca w> a J rn 0 O)'w J. c� mo'�m5 o'"c22o, w> w Jw2m E a a m o w� 'o a`)E"!, cm n` no n� °? n a E Q � o E m` m rn � o U n m `O_ m 'y � 3 ❑ M CL w ..: O..-. U t y o E 0 N w O N a) rn m 0_ E10-16 320 mu U o U) rE O O u C a) O V V d 7 m Z N N N N N a) 'O C N C w y N M 7 ❑ _ w O 0 V M O V > a a a a N N N N M M co co = a a a a w O O m o o `O o w A ) Q a3i E •c > > > > p> Cf C U C C O d 0 d U U U U `2 LL m m m m Q) (U L ao 'y w ❑ C O O a� m m m m of ° o m a) mT " 0) O c° c E o a) n o .' a) c) ._ M ° a ° n T v o O a) o rn M M c U c J Q C 'C O c w � j w m m= w a) J Z -O D N m Y N� J L - � � m>p a) d [1 ° ° U O) .J to '_ ❑ ." C '3 O "O X a) w N 0_ 0 N O N U m "' ... N C d N L a Z o O .... L' N E m C C O O O p N J .O y 'O ' O 0` O_ M 3- O a) N Co d a) .T. N C ..T...MC .N. J V E w Co p ID M C M m U5= a)EoN� O > .N �CLME��a)❑N>c .3 0 ° O 1UM_.C�wX_ � N � ACC a) ' �wJMNN'> n E � ° a) > E °t d o C 4: 0 �n N 0 a) a U" 0) c a - a) 0_ -p_a? m6 m E L �= C E O a) p rL v ate_ o 'O a) a) (1 .L.. M O M T a) L Z (n p d' M -- ` � M O .-. C O "O - ma -_ O an d U1 U a) L- 'MO CL O O U ._ C a) a) d 'O N L tT m L1 N M 0- to M L N J O C.� "O .� Y °. J M c N U C L p '� to M O a) w O N E C ..L. to M c W o N U V) > u_ E �0 d a) w a)-o O O L O c o MLA a) —'U ° a) ... o� V N a) J � C U 'M 'c a) 0 mTY W O _ 0 c •. � o mo a`)w V a O m o-p � c y 0 .-= 0 C,ca cc )0°' p cao(D CU� _a0M oJ.ocOoa)E rn ow ZCjO)C'CE NO_0�,Em a) ��G O CNdO-M.�.aONL'OLcr_ m'p:pE>'�mAo� N O co rn N c W C M aa)) y M T Z :o a) U ? Co M 'U w F- c. M C o. N U M O N C L> a) J U C fA _� U) J O U) :O a)O °- c O Jm y L ,� ,a C 0 C 1 o M c 3 C M m7) C .0 C a a)-�> 2w �¢°o CO cv o U o` iZ a)U >o. W p m y - o°-p°)'v, N N .ai M,� E o_- Mppo V- d G7 C ') U N C O ai 0)- .LM. m0 M -p M U T❑ _ '.' 0_ O U O C a+ U and U 0) 0 'O M ffia) U J O. >. y) O ..+ M N C f/) iA m'C E m M J a C C 'C .O Z E OU E U C E N C U Z % U c N C 'O E U U W o U 'O ..`. O N N M E U O m ' E❑ J N a 0 ,� in v, ° o O a) >O N a) p p n. o. U O C7 m . a) a) a) a) �: E E w p D, O d E a M O� M O M y o. � J p M i. -W d iq O M p M J O >O a) c N m E a U❑ .L.., 02 M U M .L.. mT d a 0 N w O M M M M Q. E10-16 321 U c O .10 c -' 0 0 U c m 0 U) Z N N N N V a C Qf C al @ c "O - 0 7:. o0 L Ire., y'.. �> a s•. U U U Q c 0 m m m m U @ @ @ @ c o (L n a d c o' 0 0 0 0 ° p N N N C > m o � C C j ."O O 0 N CO m U rn m c 9 0 C E'E O O ^ O O O wP; m m m m 3^: a m a0 ° a -a (D 0 cCT'mG 0 iVvi vi o (a c a a) a3 a)@ /v o6a LC@Ec E15 omo ,a). @wmoomE @ mo .2 0 °m md 3c OmC0 m0 0 ° O E a) EO- t O m e.) L0 Q N OOO ° 6"O Co = a L'v.Vo @ co •O cOa c ma OU @ L O x0" C L 0 j m w' E S mCo OU a) @ @ a)rE o E�Z�a)@E_@ 0C a) vi 0 o O�:, ac ocE E EO° p mOm 'L - - C d L .m r @ U= 6 'E°0 °mc3c@i im.m c8@ Ea)) ca -o om a U. 0m@ca) m Na mY -O = c m ag -L 0) oa) E>@Z E> a a ^0U 0 a) OXdS 0@ 0 OOmU CN> m = aoE co O C O (D P EO T @ a) 0 fl�@@@m0) - ° OO E @ @ E om� a m a) a�m 0_ °p L ° a) c0 O wiEc+ U N ";OO O a)mO@ @LO m a Q) � L p 0 O O m ) d°- O XOcC O O c@ oLO >pO o OEm� 000c om@ocam� c a•O _mGN7. C m h� d, M d' 0 N 0 a. a) rn @ 0. E10-16 322 d U C o O A c E O O = U U C m O V V V V fn Z N N C� N N al m '0 C d w. d d m C o 0.0 L ;= y y Q Q Q ¢ Q �> U U U U U m m m m m c d d d d 0 o o '� o w 0 0 0 0 m m a3 a(If ir C U i. C 0 d = 7 c 6 0 d ' lL m m m m m m d ao d C C 00 p p p p p y2 m m m m m d ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ a a a a a 'O c^ d d C U ° C m N C d m T C d .O L a C — m m N ° U T d d d C_ L d 0 U.' H 0 m m C m 'O.QO �-O0 CO'Dm 3 y 0 —_ 2 m w 3 m y U O m m 3 mJ — N N O w o L m L m 3 y d N °' N m O m .N. -O N y a)-0 cu yOj E L C m O U CO 0 m m '�' C N C m Co an d m 'O m m Ol fn c 5 — U O d .'N-' E p d> d m S` 0 c E w c W m m w L O y m 0 u v w( O-0 d a � NdC d Dom mL- 03dgmUvE2m S wd`00 acc dmo0c mL off E N U (n N O O L 'E N •- O u) 0y O 3ac a'- d "O .0v:° C U d m 3 a) E C 0 m a`) 0 0 '° c v vi r o CU U> j y -0 > .� n m — uJ _ 7 d "0 .Y L 'O = O_ 0 0 U Y 0 N 3 0 0 7 d ` 3 N co E E m `7 °" 3 �. O O (a '0 "=O L CO C O Y m .d0 .� O U m m O d O .-. '� C= U— O N d d -L.. .Y = N m m N C 0 30 x L N C d m y 0 m¢ >i m m 'O d dT_ 0_ O n L w C m .L.. .0 u O N L O _❑ 3 ul d �" m = C m N Q Q Q.3 Ty0 m 3 — m ¢Nd m U C am C Nd' E�m E ov 2i .O .� O "O m ca' 30 C =000 Q o3d--� d' d Cw w w Tw c m— ¢❑ O E Vi w d m E ` O M d 0 m° m 'O d cO O._ 0 v� c m d C J m C m N O m vl v_ v 3Y d O m - oL m O m N d C,�U--, vv d E m o U O d C O" wo O d m ❑3� O d �'o�cmio d) �y�wof0 Q°�mo mEo�amE�3EEm rn� O 0 :, E d e n ( r- m m 0 N 0 O LO a) O) m a E10-16 323 U c O c E 0 0 U � NC O V V U) Z It N N N N m a 'c as w y as m > O c 0 Y 0m O u m y Q Q Q n> U U U c � c m m m . o `o o '«. o 0 rm w ) m E `m a3 aa) aa)) aa) i= > o a rna C U C 0 O m = 7 'C O' O v n LL m m m rn a) r- `o C 0 w2 m m m a a a ° m :a 0m0 m c E c Oi Z' c ' N N N N 0 cu N0w— Cm tm aC) m E - CL EO m. .• >cu c O ma O m C >p ` ma) .E W E o EQ= cL° t a) U -- -(0 m E41 mN� 0)— o)�.BoJ- L': + 0) mN N O)o >, ' °-O - m N `a 'N O -oNcc N 0v O- N "0 _ =TMLw Co jo 3O C fN0 YUcl xsvm ONE o mcw o0 mLQ U m m om m�° = d0 cm O L m m m Q U O"O U C5 E Em A °0 o wmm a) :E- a>° o co ow d E > N ° 0 lu m m oer v ° CmN� a) Er CC � o o'=aa) Q mEw a) ' !ZEO x m N o �mU NN Z (mVa)a) nLm• a 0 c a)-o N Cma f N wO N NY � 0° E50 mo oNOm '0 Zp a)wo a)_wo. E oZ Uv� a) 0o c dm °a) .,�_�—_N'� ,ONc L p c L Lm w�N CLa) _ O o 0c E 0°cCm_U-0NOC Q E mm ° a; Eo 0N -_3cO cu `E U..-a)a)rn >Eomm c ' U Lmo m° ) CQ � m m O_ — c�;�> cR CL m m ? N0a)�� �UN— ��N F _mNmN0 o wc � `NO �°'-0tE>°�om aNaaom c rn2 .-. E _ O N 0 N O CD N O) m a E10-16 324 d U C O !g o c E O O U U � C O ) to Z H) {0 te 'O C m w m a) a N OI > ❑ C w O Y C0 p U 0 L w °2 > C O O a O) C E P > tm C U 'C C O a) = M E S O ` 2LL rn dS ao a 'E c c 0 0 n� L ° C Q L O@ M �C ai TM amN.oaC�N ai O > -CN —mN@ M LN� o ° °dm' MComa 0 om0m0 0) m� Em n n'3 3m� N cu c'o - _V _U 3 C O m O = a EN a) w aNO ° E O 0 Cy� " a.O CoO •Y L `-•N te . T �3 a =cE° ) Nco0a) (D'a�a �ON.� �> C (D c 'LYeci'rnwca) 3� tyO ._ n>N �m E L°)� a)3 NNa o o ° a)m cc a @ > a) C N O m E ° a) C' C--= O E cc oC o Uo m ao) C Yw�O ? O N Cr O() a) O� L a) w= Na)O OO O a) O O E u a) ru E a) ° — OU Q° L O a7 `) C O M a) C W CL o d O° O O uJ a) O T U !/1 d a) Z6 d N O 3 C m a a u � a O L O T C~ N a ° a) a) m c;_ w '� N c > 0 w u m= U u a). c c m 3 E O U>@ y cu N L L U d C N C C m y w O D U O -Np (0 0 0 y C (U U N .N OU 3 U 0 ul U E O N r O L ° a1 O U C C Oj O- -O O O A Q a] 7 a) O �. N C al .� a) a7 T+' C °- C a � C O C a) .'C.. O `` n a) -CO O_ .U. ` U Q Y7 m N U N C in O) ti! .+ 3 W Q E V' Vi O 0 E N _ 'j C L J CL a) U a) a) •C O O O O O L C �— a) 0 O a) C F- a) C ca O ❑ U OU >i E N N � U p OC O) a7 .'C. N a H m U L1 CL O a) E Y Cl E E10-16 325 d) 0 0 r m 0 U) z CN 0 Ag al C a) M > ❑ A, 0 0 2 > r 0 0 0 (V Stm . 0 Of a 0 a) 0 E LL C) ao r r 0 0 CL U) as c a) 00 0 0 0 — c N o a) (D a) w 0 CU (U 0 CU.— 0 0 a) 0 M 0 E 00 m g 0 = c cm Lo -0 a) m > —a) (D '0 > Q) a) —M CL o a) c 0 'Fu m 0 a) M a) � m > 0— > w '6 o a) 5 3: 0 E E 0 m LU 0 cu (U (D 0 -0 r- 0- a) cu — m —0 OX 'a m a) E x 0`0 a) —co OF 1— CD E , W — c (a c o a) m a) M— Cf) a) o = 0 a) 0 m CLr— 0 M 0 , w JC m 0 c a) w > �- C) 0 (D 0 a) -� c a) a .0 , a) C� = — a) > — 0 Om 0 Q) a) w a) > 'cn 0 L) 0 �— 0 — w m cf) w m — .— , 0 C 0 m 0 E CU M 0 0 w 0 a) a > cu a) 0 a) a) 0 cu (D C w -0 0-0 a) 0 m cu a) t: w Q) W 0 — cm a) U) a) —W U) 0 G a) = = cu — , — 0 0 > U 0 — �o E > C� — 0 �o .— —, 0 E a) 0 '0 ?: 0 42 0 > M 0 = = m (D 073� 0— m W� G)M—,= cma m -�', MO , c 0) > cu 0 a) u — i2' wn 0 -6 z 0 -0 0) 'o a) 3� o CL ': o a) 0 E 0— U) (D 0 M1 E6 L) w 0 0 0 0 I = 0 C, 0 0 0 w a) U5 o cu cu C (1) (1) M� 0 a) w E3 ro D 3: M �d) CSL 0 0 — U) < >, a) (U CL x c a) a) o a) > a) c m-5 CD w .0 a) U) > m a) E -g E CL (v C E a) m m cu CL M jE M 0 0 0 r r 0 Cl) U) w 0 Cu C 0 !E a) w -0 > — a) M 0 a) E > > 0 cu a) 0 a) 0 W E x 0 0 FD X 0 D mo � 0 U ID 0 3t c) mo E c 0 0 CO m w a cu LLI tm CL Ce) I E10-16 326 U o _ O !a r w — Q c E' , F O O . r,U m o v v U)ZN N ;`�q M M M m n'd c- w p Q •.�., is o m O U '! + L w +4)F t Q ai Q. m 0_ a) 0 0 DCL 3 a) a) m a) m a) A ss; (M C U O Q �0 c'_ 0 O t.. t Cr O m p O. ^� m r •. >,. ,y. m m a) ` o! ° ",, • W U W U a a O p �- 'O C C 7```' N L O O OLa) O a)LO ca) m a `mO �N�W"!.;•: � �m �= o"— Eo>mwaam m°om L�oL-J O U J aOl 0N Era) m J m¢U� Em O m M co a Cr U m= >. ,., m 3 0 J (O "0 O U C .a+. N a) O C —_ U D O. U O> m m a) N O > U J Y= o° a N a) 3 amit•� m m 0 m p' m m a) a) .O m E'O D m-0 0 o m � 0 0- 0 L O m-0 m E L.. rn �. _oU '� a=ia v0 Z b' c c a) W �- w e ,Q Lo, m ¢ -O E a0i v a) E �` m y .N m o o E m m 0) am c v c' m ,fkl.ca 'E mLL > ¢ .0 '.�,.. a1•' �v• m o J o o C -O 0_ C "O l0 E a) L m a) m o a) >' o a) r > a) 0` "O c a) d c U "O O m m U 'p N J mw m. a) y 0.'^., m m N L c E. O C 1� 0 m O > L O = p m m 0 L C p_ l0 m m m m m C :C ;0 m o_mc m' 0:- amLLIda` L°:,�ct3mp-ca,•� m J p O w• w M ,�, c ry Zai m`o Om,�OL-O3 rnm 0 Z= L c0 �Y m 0� L. C O m m 'O m L m a) -i N m C w 0) .,�� O~ N a) D -JO Y m a) ;O N O .-� 0- CoC •= L �, U U L QI U Co U 3 L C C J m"W O L �0 '� a 7 U iN i C • a) C 'O C .mC m U ;m'. 3 U > m = C m 3 ca `�- O= N O) Q. F Gl ..+ > _ — O N C m m en¢Gm',°mm $a+C, L�°,w`o m `� a) m3�om J•p)v+n dmm cE o wrnF'a kl : t� �+ mmc U> m H >m ° w p c v m N a>im �wao�0 mcE E U N v m •O 0 7 (O 0 O a) J > oa) d N C C C CO �, 0) Co N J N O` 'O 'O l ri>: w m a) —� _ � � m 0 a) A= � C 0) Cl _ (a O) C O 0 N U�� O a) p a1 m m ,� U a) w —_ a) N m = J V= O. a m C += J m m 0 > C E C' L d — O 0 d Q Cy .L.. N E N m 'O 2 d m L c c a) 'p U y a) _ ` -p N m > `) U C a m O C •- to E > y Im—CL o+ o, o m m m d w E m m m m w Q m° m v E E o r m m Uj 7 E c N 1 N — 5?, 1 M E10-16 327 m E � N U a A m rn C n U LL p U o .m p v c m p 0 O ` o w m O U_ O U N a v ❑ U 4O o zo C_ O L L L Q N > � c 333rn0� 0�C) ..F N C l0 a N Ul a > m O N a r C Q n O d � C1 o w N n O i N v U m Q w Q U m O; � t m OO am a10oi Q m U ❑ Y' c r. E E T n o 0 o > o d �6 O U Ul C L w m U o l Z o OI U 0 n rn 0 E W y L 0 o U 6 E a` C O O Q m U ❑ W w ' c rn N N O - o w w rn m �..i E w c •y rn �,Oi j 0 D `o D rn °;moo 0 ao o� U u U U 0 r P '0 d O.V .0 0 N ❑ d❑❑ w O O U �•, U a U m a i,.. 0 N O O N N rn m a E10-16 328 City of Rancho Cucamonga MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM Project File No.: Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2016-00452, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19762, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20032, Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449, Design Review DRC2016-00450, Uniform Sign Program DRC2016-00451 and Minor Exception DRC2016-00508. This Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) has been prepared for use in implementing the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration forthe above -listed project. This program has been prepared in compliance with State law to ensure that adopted mitigation measures are implemented (Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code). Program Components - This MMP contains the following elements: 1. Conditions of approval that act as impact mitigation measures are recorded with the action and the procedure necessary to ensure compliance. The mitigation measure conditions of approval are contained in the adopted Resolution of Approval for the project. 2. A procedure of compliance and verification has been outlined for each action necessary. This procedure designates who will take action, what action will be taken and when, and to whom and when compliance will be reported. 3. The MMP has been designed to provide focused, yet flexible guidelines. As monitoring progresses, changes to compliance procedures may be necessary based upon recommendations by those responsible for the orooram. Program Management - The MMP will be in place through all phases of the project. The project planner, assigned by the Planning Director, shall coordinate enforcement of the MMP. The project planner oversees the MMP and reviews the Reporting Forms to ensure they are filled out correctly and proper action is taken on each mitigation. Each City department shall ensure compliance of the conditions (mitigation) that relate to that department. Procedures - The following steps will be followed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 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: City of Rancho Cucamonga - Lead Agency Planning Department E10-16 329 Mitigation Monitoring Program Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2016-00452, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19762, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20032, Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449, Design Review DRC2016-00450, Uniform Sign Program DRC2016-00451 and Minor Exception DRC2016-00508. Project Page 3 3. Appropriate specialists will be retained if technical expertise beyond the City staffs is needed, as determined by the project planner or responsible City department, to monitor specific mitigation activities and provide appropriate written approvals to the project planner. 4. The project planner or responsible City department will approve, by signature and date, the completion of each action item that was identified on the MMP Reporting Form. After each measure is verified for compliance, no further action is required for the specific phase of development. 5. All MMP Reporting Forms for an impact issue requiring no further monitoring will be signed off as completed by the project planner or responsible City department at the bottom of the MMP Reporting Form. 6. Unanticipated circumstances may arise requiring the refinement or addition of mitigation measures. The project planner is responsible for approving any such refinements or additions. An MMP Reporting Form will be completed by the project planner or responsible City department and a copy provided to the appropriate design, construction, or operational personnel. 7. The project planner or responsible City department has the authority to stop the work of construction contractors if compliance with any aspects of the MMP is not occurring afterwritten notification has been issued. The project planner or responsible City department also has the authority to hold certificates of occupancies if compliance with a mitigation measure attached hereto is not occurring. The project planner or responsible City department has the authority to hold issuance of a business license until all mitigation measures are implemented. Any conditions (mitigation) that require monitoring after project completion shall be the responsibility of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department. The Department shall require the applicant to post any necessary funds (or other forms of guarantee) with the City. These funds shall be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measure for the required period of time. 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 Planning Director prior to the issuance of building permits. E10-16 330 City of Rancho Cucamonga MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION The following Mitigated Negative Declaration is being circulated for public review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act Section 21091 and 21092 of the Public Resources Code. Project File No.: Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2016-00452, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19762, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20032, Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449, Design Review DRC2016-00450, Uniform Sign Program DRC2016-00451 and Minor Exception DRC2016-00508. Public Review Period Closes: June 14, 2017 Project Name: Day Creek Square Project Applicant: DR Horton Contact: Dan Boyd Vice President/Entitlements 2280 Wardlow Circle, Suite 100 Corona, CA 92880 Contact: Dan Boyd, 951-739-5444 Project Location (also see attached map): The project is located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road. —APN: 1090-331-05, Project Description: The applicant, DR Horton, proposes developing the 28.4 acre site located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road with a mixed use project consisting of 380 single-family and townhome residential units, a boutique hotel and two restaurant buildings totaling 12,000 square feet. The overall project area is made up of 1 parcel totaling 28.4 acres of land. Of the 28.4 acres, 24.9 will be allocated to the residential portion of the site, and 3.5 acres will be allocated to the two restaurant pads and hotel site. The project is for the site plan and architectural review of the 380 residential units (329 townhomes and 51 single-family dwelling units), two restaurant pads (two 6k restaurants), and a 71 room hotel. The project also includes the subdivision of the 28.4 acre site into 4 parcels and a residential condominium subdivision for the 380 residential units. The project includes a Victoria Community Plan Amendment to change the zoning from Regionally Related Office/Commercial (RROC) to Mixed Use in order to be consistent with the Mixed Use Land Use designation in the General Plan. A Conditional Use Permit (CUP) application is also included for the requested bar/alcohol sales (Type 70 — On Sale General Restrictive License) at the hotel. The Assessor's Parcel Number is: 1090-331-05. FINDING This is to advise that the City of Rancho Cucamonga, acting as the lead agency, has conducted an Initial Study to determine if the project may have a significant effect on the environment and is proposing this Mitigated Negative Declaration based upon the following finding: The Initial Study identified potentially significant effects but: (1) Revisions in the project plans or proposals made or agreed to by the applicant before this proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration was released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur, and; E10-16 331 (2) There is no substantial evidence before the agency that the project, as revised, may have a significant effect on the environment. If adopted, the Mitigated Negative Declaration means that an Environmental Impact Report will not be required. The factual and analytical basis for this finding is included in the attached Initial Study. The project file and all related documents are available for review at the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department at 10500 Civic Center Drive (909) 477-2750 or Fax (909) 477-2847. NOTICE The public is invited to comment on the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration during the review period. Date of Determination Adopted By E10-16 332 Granger, Donald From: Granger, Donald Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2017 3:22 PM To: 'Charlie Buquet' Subject: RE: Day Creek Square Hello Charlie. Thank you for the comments. We are currently reviewing your comments and ideas. Best, Donald Granger Senior Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department 909-477-2750 ext. 4314 donald.granger@cityofrc.us From: Charlie Buquet Sent: Monday, April 10, 2017 5: To: Granger, Donald <Donald.Granger@cityofrc.us>; Dan Boyd <dboyd@drhorton.com> Subject: Re: Day Creek Square Mr Boyd, Donald and you have done a greatjob on the architectural, but some things should be updated to finish off that wonderful effort. Some of these comments below are the same comments the City had for the Strathmore project. I am planning on attending the DRC meeting to help. Please note that I am a resident, long time business owner and shop in the area. I was proud of our projects you built, and what them to be successful for you and the City. The shopping center across the street was a design award winner, that is VERY successful and concerned the lack of parking on your project is going to impact the center across the street by guests parking there and walking across the street (not far fetched, they are doing it at your other two properties which is the reason we had to gate the Strathmore project. As you may know, I have worked on over 180 ground up projects, numerous shopping centers, mixed use, hotels a number of them in Rancho Cucamonga and just want this to be a successful project for you and the city. General comments are as follows; EXHIBIT 0 E10-16 333 Amenities, the DR Horton project we did with 182 units had only one pool. As the past HOA president and home owner I can say this is about all the project can handle. Having twice as many units will be extremely problematic with usability. One needs to look at DR Horton project on Church & Daycreek, this is double the size, need double the amenities. You need a tot lot. You should have a community room/area for property management/maintenance (to have storage space, office, etc) and uses for residents. Strathmore residents were having to store things for the HOA since there was no room. Per the code you need a minimum 3 main amenities (pools, but need another one at a minimum. I would suggest another pool and some spa's with dipping pools for more adult or chill space than just one pool. Suggestion is to make some of the "concrete patios" in front of the private concrete patios actual amenities. Furthermore, the project on Church & Daycreek DR Horton did not actually install those amenities, and the HOA was required to pay after the fact. I would recommend making it clear that the builder must actually install the amenities (BBQ, Spa, Tot Lot, benches, lighting, etc. Consideration should be made to make the mini park more square, as it is funky. The community park should be a separate amenity that is gated/fenced to protect he residents. Consideration should be made for emergency access vehicles to access this area rather than going through the residential project. My suggestion would be to flip the condo units to the North of this park so the drive aisle access is along the north side of the park, providing a better visual corridor for safety and avoiding attractive nuisance considerations and make it easier for residents and law enforcement to see the park and access the park for emergency access only. There is nothing in the park, you need things in a park. Tot lot, volleyball court, shade structures, picnic tables, park benches, etc. See below. Those exercise stations will not get much use and frankly are useless as it's configured. If there is a concern, then perhaps it should be separated into two projects as we did for the projects south of Strathmore. Is the project applying for a variance from the code required amenities? 4. Recreation Area/Facility. Where required, in the M, MH, and H residential districts, the developer shall provide recreational amenities in conjunction with common open space as follows: 1. Development consisting of thirty (30) units or less shall provide three (3) of the following recreational amenities: 1. Large open lawn area; one of the dimensions shall be a minimum of fifty feet (50'). 2. Enclosed tot lot with multiple play equipment. 3. Spa or pool. 4. Barbecue facility equipped with grill, picnic benches, etc. E10-16 334 2. Development consisting of thirty-one (3 l) units to one hundred (100) units shall provide another set of recreational amenities as described in Subsection 17.122.040.M.1 above, or equivalent, as approved by the Planning Commission. 3. Development consisting of one hundred and one (101) units to two hundred (200) units shall provide five (5) of the following recreational amenities, or equivalent, as approved by the Planning Commission: 1. Large open lawn; one of the dimensions shall be a minimum of one hundred feet (100'). 2. Multiple enclosed tot lots with multiple play equipment. The tot lots shall be conveniently located throughout the site. The number of tot lots and their location shall be subject to Planning Commission review and approval. 3. Pool and spa. 4. Community multipurpose room equipped with kitchen, defined areas for games, exercises, etc. 5. Barbecue facilities equipped with multiple grills, picnic benches, etc. The barbecue facilities shall be conveniently located throughout the site. The number of barbecue facilities and their locations shall be subject to Planning Commission review and approval. 6. Court facilities (e.g., tennis, volleyball, basketball). 4. Dispersal of recreational facilities throughout the site shall be required for development with multiple recreational facilities. (It goes on for two pages). The General plan requires for access to the Edison easement which was originally conceived to be pedestrian community trials, just show the gates with the locks. (same as other projects). Parking First, the development code requires shared parking agreement, and with the uses a shared parking study should be done. These uses are not like uses (office/retail restaurant) they are tied to transient and permanent residential uses, which create more problems than the typical commercial shared parking scenario. The parking allocation shows dens/alternate floor plans that can create conversion of units to bedrooms increasing parking demand. Furthermore, the tandem parking due to the configuration is very likely to turn into storage units not giving adequate parking. Note that the DR Horton project on Baseline Victoria Loop is having this problem, people parking on the street, residential neighborhoods, in the commercial center Etc. Strathmore we had tow truck companies, ambulances, trick drivers, contractors, landscape contractors, customers going shopping etc parking in the project and walking across the street. Further, residents parked across the street in the residential neighborhood and retail and walked into the project due to not enough parking. Shared Parking Agreement. A written agreement between the landowners and in some cases the City that runs with the land shall be filed, in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney, and include: E10-16 335 1. A guarantee that there will be no substantial alteration in the uses that will create a greater demand for parking without application for approval of an amended Conditional Use Permit. 2. A reciprocal grant of nonexclusive license among the business operator(s) and the landoivner(s) for access to and use of the shared parkingfacilities. 3. Evidence that the agreement has been recorded in the County Recorder's office. Solutions -increase guest parking, or redesign drive aisle for more guest parking or parking in front of garage units. Allow for parking permits to be used for neighboring residential to avoid people parking there and walking to the pocket park, or DR Horton Condo project. Consider variances and adjustment to the wasted open space between the hotel and residential adjust the site plan and reduce setbacks to allow for more on street parallel parking. The code requires that the lots record a reciprocal parking easement when there is shared parking and access. It should be clear that this will be done, I have not seen a report showing that this will be done, as there is an assumptions there is two lots (commercial/Residential). Based on my review of traffic trip thresholds, the residential uses, hotel, and restaurant uses have peak parking that will cause commercial shoppers to park on the residential parking and residents and guests to park on the commercial. DR Horton should show how to address this in a more compatible integral way, rather than residential first, commercial second. I know we can do this swift and make the project more attractive to prospective buyers. Site Plan - The project needs to show how it can be gated and still maintain a mixed use synergistic feel. In regards to the density concerns, they should consider the attached unit/duplex/triplex concept along the south, then blend the other uses as they go north. Here are some problematic issues to be considered. The units west of the baseline signalized intersection are have conflicting turn movements for egress traffic and are problematic and a safety concern. I have spoken to some of my retail developer clients. They have interest in the corner property but the site plan is problematic that the buildings are too narrow and site plan is not efficient which appears to be an afterthought rather than integral site plan configuration. It appears to be a "throw away" sliver. Consideration should be made for a more flexible building allocation to prevent this turning into fast food pads and other undesirable mixed use. A traffic signal cuing study should be done to confirm the stacking is sufficient for a project of this size, taking into consideration the uses proposed. Hotel- The access shown is extremely problematic for the turn movements for the intersection, and do not meet ITE safety standards. The layout is basically trying to "separate" the hotel from the residential via a landscape planter. Consideration should be made to flip the parking and move the hotel closer to the signal, allowing for a more uniform design. There should be consideration for a pool/spa. If another pooUspa clubhouse is added in the empty area on the lots, then you should consider a shared pooUspa for this area potentially (less desirable) If the hotel were on Daycreek, Daycreek is closer and more desirable address than baseline and more desirable for Hotel tenants. I am working with a high end hotel who licensed one of top luxury car brand name and they have an interest in being closer or near the mall, and consideration to move this to Daycreek and flip the uses would be more suitable, Although I would like a hotel for the E10-16 336 City, residential uses and hotels tend to not mix well due to parking issues. Introducing office would be much better. I could provide parking shared summary data to demonstrate. Would you consider an age restricted assisted living project? Lower parking, less traffic. Restaurants- Restaurants do not like competitors sharing parking, so moving the hotel to the middle, would reduce this concern. When we spoke to Mortans Steakhouse, Lazy Dog Cafes etc on the project Donald and I worked on Foothill. They want a sea of parking for them to be successful and find that people will "wait" 45-90 minutes to eat. That means that they are in parking spaces that are not otherwise utilized, hence other uses, Office, retail, etc are needed/valued. As someone who has been representing owner users there is not enough office in this market and the comps are very strong. Consideration of a building use that is complimentary or integrated (such as day care, Gym's, offices, etc) that can truly take advantage of shared parking and residents which are like an amenity should be considered. Uses - Lewis had a great concept of some office units within the project that could be used short term or month to month or long term for true live work type opportunities (Executive offices). You actually can get $4 psf which is double the market for retail/office currently. All executive offices are fully occupied in the City. You can have your management staff meet there, hoa meet there, etc. Corporate rentals are very valuable. City should also consider AIRBNB in the conditions. If people AIRBNB, they should have to register and pay the hotel tax, this would be a value add for the city and residents. This property has a lot of potential for live work (separated) for business professionals like myself. In fact, I would put my money where my mouth is and buy or lease if you could provide a building/units. If you had such a concept, and have three clients in need of such a use. Setting the pie in the sky aside (knowing this is your property) but I think it should at least help for consideration for mix of uses that are beneficial. I have a couple of retail developers/clients who would be interested in meeting with you to talk about some tweaks that could be helpful and ones they would feel confident building with the right area to do so. Regards Charlie Sent from my iPhone On Apr 10, 2017, at 8:15 AM, Granger, Donald <Donald.Granger(@citvofrc.us> wrote: Hello all. You are receiving this email because you have indicated interest in receiving updates via email regarding upcoming meetings for the proposed Day Creek Square project by DR Horton. E10-16 337 Please be advised that DR Horton/Day Creek Square Project has been scheduled for review by the Design Review Community on Tuesday, April 18, at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall in the Rains Conference Room. City Hall is located at 10500 Civic Center Drive. Please be advised of the following key points regarding the Design Review Committee: 1. The Design Review Committee is advisory Committee to the Planning Commission. No formal decision will be made on the project at the meeting. The primary focus of the Design Review Committee is to review the project's architecture, landscape and site planning. 2. The Design Review Committee is not a public hearing; however, the public is invited to attend and provide comments regarding the design and architecture of the project. 3. Agendas and reports for the April 18, 2017 Design Review Committee Meeting can found online at: https://www.cityofrc.us/cityhall/meetings/dre/default.asp At this time, the project has not been scheduled for a public hearing for review by the Planning Commission. A separate notice will be sent when the project is scheduled for review by the Planning Commission. Best regards, Donald Granger Senior Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department 909-477-2750 ext. 4314 dona Id.granger(a)cityofrc.us E10-16 338 WALTON April 11, 2017 Planning Department c/o Donald Granger, Senior Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Dr. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91786 Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department: Thank you for conducting the community meeting on March 27, 2017, regarding the Day Creek Square project proposed by the developer DR Horton. I am glad, that I was able to attend. I am an Upland resident who has been frequenting Rancho Cucamonga for over ten years. I have been an adjunct biology professor at Chaffey College, performed in several Lewis Family Playhouse productions, and volunteered at the North Etiwanda Preserve (NEP). I regularly visit many of your city's businesses, and especially enjoy riding my bike on the Pacific Electric (PE) Trail and hiking in the NEP. Most importantly, I am a wildlife biologist who is concerned with the quality of life in our foothill communities. According to its 2010 General Plan, Rancho Cucamonga (City) "intends to conserve important remnants of the City's agricultural heritage, as well as preserve significant visual resources, sensitive habitats, lands important for water resources, and recreational spaces (Chapter 6, Page RC-7;littps://www.cityofre.us/cityhall/planning/genplan.asp) ." I am disappointed, however, that the plans for Day Creek Square (DCS) show minimal regard for the above resource conservation goals and will just replace more of our open souther California landscape with urban sprawl. Therefore, I ask that you use your authority and creativity to ensure that DR Horton minimizes the DCS's impact on the environment by carrying out the following actions. Preserve and/or Restore Native Vegetation Please do not allow the common southern California practice of decimating a project site of all of its original native vegetation and then replacing it with the same non-native plant species that every other shopping center or housing development uses. Instead, I ask you to embrace our unique native California landscape, by requiring DR Horton to create a comprehensive mitigation plan to address the negative impacts to native Riversidian alluvial fan sage scrub (RAFSS) habitat found within the Day Creek Square (DCS) site. This RAFSS community includes scalebroom (Lepidospartum sguamatum), California sagebrush (Artemesia E10-16 339 californica), Deerweed (Acmispon glaber), chamise (Adenostoma fasciculatum), California b ! fi'um fasct*gttf h ....l'a varietW-:9% eP>gative fllahfxsnecies. vIM!=A Rancho Cucamonga should require DR Horton to provide provisions for the preservation and/or restoration of native RAFSS habitat, or habitat with similar species, in open spaces within the Day Creek Square (DCS) site and throughout the city for several reasons. RAFSS habitat is considered by our state to be a sensitive and declining habitat (see enclosed "Alluvial Scrub Vegetation" document), and most of it will have to be removed to complete the DCS as described. Such a requirement would also be consistent with the Rancho Cucamonga 2010 General Plan Policies RC-1.1, RC-8.1, RC-8.3, RC-8.4, and RC-8.7. Such preservation/restoration areas should be comparable in area to the amount of acreage of RAFSS lost to this DCS project. Restoration locations outside of the DCS site could include open spaces along bike paths or drainages like Day Creek Drainage. Possible permanent preservation locations could include the area on the west side of Central Park on Millikan Ave. and areas bordering the North Etiwanda Preserve (NEP). Since large areas bordering the NEP are already part of Rancho Cucamonga's proposed conservation areas to protect alluvial fan sage scrub (Rancho Cucamonga 2010 General Plan, Chapter 6, RC-4), the City should require revenue from projects like the DCS to help acquire these conservation areas. Local resources like the Inland Empire Resource Conservation District (IERCD, https:/hvww.iercd.org/) and San Bernardino County Special Districts Department should be able to help guide you with the mitigation process. I am certain that the DCS landscape architects can incorporate the native RAFSS habitat into the DCS's landscape design. For your reference, I have enclosed the list of native plants (see enclosed "Native Plant Species" list) that were found on the DCMP site since many of these plants can also be found on the DCS site. This list also indicates which plants can be purchased at a local nursery. Although preserving native habitat would be preferable to clearing and then replanting native vegetation, many of these native plants can be purchased locally. The developer can utilize biological consultants and other local entities, such as the Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden (littp://www.rsabg.org) and IERCD, to help determine how to best preserve and maintain some of this native habitat, and minimize any fire concerns. DR Horton could even work with the National Wildlife Federation on how to become a certified Wildlife Habitat Community (http://www.nwf.org/Garden-For-Wildlife/Create/Communities.aspx). Riversidian alluvial fan sage scrub was also documented just north of the Day Creek Square (DCS) site by LSA Associates Inc. at the Day Creek Market Place (DCMP) and Residential Project site in February 2015 (see enclosed "Biological Assessment" document). Yet, in 2016, Rancho Cucamonga sadly allowed this RAFSS habitat to be cleared away by Lewis Retail Centers with no thorough and detailed mitigation plan for the loss of this habitat in the DCMP site, even though such action was strongly recommended by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDWF) in October 2015 (see enclosed "CDFW Letter"). Although I was E10-16 340 glad to see that Lewis Retail Centers decided to include a native plant garden in its final DCMP plans in response to public concern, the size of this native garden will not be close to representing the acreage of native vegetation that was removed. I implore you to not repeat this lack of concern for preserving RAFSS in the DCS project plans. Within a short visit to the DCS site this spring, I was able to spot animals not normally found within highly urbanized areas such as desert cottontails (Sylvia audirbonii), side - blotched lizards (Uta stransburiana), and a variety of beautiful native birds and butterflies bustling around the flowering native vegetation. Our communities clamor to save rainforests and other habitats in foreign lands, but we rarely think twice about destroying our own native landscapes that provide habitat for hundreds of native California animal species. Please use this opportunity to think twice and act in favor of preserving/restoring RAFSS. Plant More Native Large -Canopy Trees I am happy to see that DR Horton is planning on planting native large -canopy trees in Day Creek Square (DCS), like coast live oaks (Quercus agrifolia) and California sycamores (Plantanus racemose), that provide more shade and wildlife habitat than much smaller non-native ornamental trees like crape myrtles (Lagerstroemia hybrid). However, preliminary Day Creek Square plans show that many more small -canopy non-native trees will be planted than native large -canopy trees, therefore I ask that DR Horton plant more native large -shade trees. The DCS tree palette could also include other native oaks like the canyon live oak (Quercus chrysolepi.$). Native oaks would complement the large canyon live oak tree that will be preserved just west of Fire Station 173. To get a feeling of how beautiful and welcoming native oaks can be, just drive down one of the craftsman neighborhoods around Pasadena and Claremont where one cannot help but feel their majesty - a sense of awe and peace I have yet to experience in the presence of a crape myrtle. Please also review the following enclosed article discussing the many benefits of having large city trees: "No Safe Arbor" (http://articies.latimes.com/print/2004/inar/08/entertainment/et- trees8). Minimize Light Pollution I am pleased to see that the City of Rancho Cucamonga is trying to minimize light pollution (Rancho Cucamonga Development Code, Article IV, Section 17.58.050) and, thus, preserve the visual resource of a dark night sky. In addition to requiring shielded lighting, please require DR Horton to use "warm -white" or filtered LED light bulbs that minimize the glare, or blue - light emission, of such bulbs whenever possible. Please note that LED lights can be so bright that shielding them alone does not minimize the amount of glare they can emit. E10-16 341 For more information on minimizing light pollution, please refer to the enclosed "Lighting Plan Guidelines" provided by the Dark Sky Society (http:/hvww.darkskysociety.ora/). Please also restrict blinding LED signs in this DCS community. The relatively new LED sign at the Lewis Family Playhouse has discouraged me and my husband from relaxing in what used to be an inviting plaza area. My husband and I have no desire to see more of such signs in Rancho Cucamonga. Increase Open Space and Connectivitv The project planners expressed the desire for a pedestrian friendly community where community space is the focus instead of large back yards. I agree with this concept, but DR Horton must provide much more open space and connectivity within the Day Creek Square (DCS) community to achieve this goal. Several attendees at the March community meeting expressed lack of connectivity and park space throughout the DCS plans and I strongly agree. Please significantly widen the "linear park" and extend it to the western edge of the property. I do not believe that the developer should be allowed to call this area a "park" when it is narrower than many portions of the Pacific Electric Trail. However, with some changes, this area could be made to feel more like a park and gathering space. The front doors to houses along this southern park corridor could face the park area and encourage home owners to feel connected to and watch over this area, similar to how Euclid Avenue residents in Upland face their walking trail. The privacy walls that are planned would only encourage residents to ignore this park area. With more neighborhood eyes watching this area, the desire for more obtrusive lighting and security cameras should be alleviated. Porches could also be added to these houses to encourage parents to sit and watch their kids play in the park area from the comfort of their homes. By extending the park to the western property edge, this park area could be connected to the planned bike path along Day Creek Drainage (Rancho Cucamonga 2010 General Plan, Chapter 3, Figure CM-7). Additionally, if a rod iron fence, instead of a block wall, delineated the DCS property on this western end, then smaller animals (like desert cottontails and side - blotched lizards) should be able to migrate from native habitat along Day Creek drainage and utilize native habitat in the park area. Portions of this park could easily include native California sage scrub habitat along with drought resistant native grass where turf is desired. Such a native turf grass would include the native bentgrass (Agrotis pollens; littps://joansbolton.wordpress.cotn/2012/03/13/a-new-lawn- alternative-cal i fornia-nati ve-sod/). As one other resident mentioned, the special event plaza could be connected with a promenade to the southern park area. More native canopy trees and scrub habitat could also E10-16 342 be included along these more spacious walkways. This promenade could even become a park itself with spectacular views of the mountains as people make their way up the hill. Such a park would also be in sync with Policy RC-1.2 of the Rancho Cucamonga 2010 General Plan. Add a Large Organic Garden Although I do prefer protecting native habitat over agricultural lands, I do believe in the importance of protecting land for agriculture since huge portions of our agricultural lands are being lost at an alarming rate due to urbanization (see enclosed "Agricultural Loss and Conservation' article). Therefore, I believe that a large organic garden should be included in this Day Creek Square (DCS) community. The garden can be run by the community itself or the restaurants themselves or both. This garden would help add to the amount of open space left for the community to enjoy and teach the importance of our agricultural heritage in our region. The garden could be incorporated into the restaurant area or exist as its own separate entity, but preferably within view of the restaurant area or other common walking paths. Local consultants, like Farm to Fork Garden Design(http:/hvww.farmtoforkgardendesign.comn and Robbie Bos (http://wp.sbcounty.gov/cao/countywire/?p=2451) should be able to help design such a garden. Any restaurants occupying DCS should be one that embraces locally sourced and organic food so that this organic garden will have a consistent customer or manager. Many California upscale restaurants, like the Madrona Manor (https://ethicalfoods.com/farm-to-fork/), are now embracing this "farm to fork" idea. With an organic garden on site, DCS should be able to attract one of these kinds of restaurants. With input and collaboration between all concerned parties, the plans for Day Creek Square should become more complementary to the goals of the Rancho Cucamonga 2010 General Plan and the needs of its local foothill residents. Please do not rush this important process. Thank you for your time and consideration, and let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Sincerely, Natasha Walton, M.S. Enclosures (7) E10-16 343 Native Plant Species Observed by LSA Associates Inc. at the Day Creek Market Place and Residential Project Site on February 26, 2015 Information & Nursery Availability Provided by Natasha Walton This plant list includes informational and plant availability web links for native California plant species observed on February 26, 2015,'at the Day Creek Market Place (DCMP) site. Due to the close proximity of the DCMP site to the Day Creek Square (DCS) site, many of these plants can be found on, or may have historically occupied, the DCS site. However, please also refer to any plant species list generated by any biological surveys compiled for the DCS site. Nursery Abbreviations: The following nursery abbreviations are listed after every plant that has been or is currently available at a particular native California plant nursery. Each nursery should be contacted to determine current availability. TOL - Tree of Life Nursery (http://californianativeplants.com/plants/plantcatalogdownload/) RSABG - Rancho Santa Ana Botanical Garden Nursery (http:/hvww.rsabg.org/plant- availability) TP - Theodore Payne Foundation (http://tlieodorepayne.org/nursery/inventoryo LP - Las Pilitas Nursery (http:/hwvw.IaspiIitas.com/shop/plant-products) Cal Flora Website: Included for the following plants are links to the Cal Flora website for detailed descriptions of each plant species. Some of the Cal Flora links below include updated plant name information. The Cal Flora links also provide information on the availability of plants at nurseries, but this information may not be current. Plant Species: Moschatal Family Mexican Elderberry/Blue Elderberry (Sambucars mexicana) : TOL, RSABG, TP, & LP littp:/hvww.laspi litas.com/nature-of-cal ifomia/plants/620--sambucus-mexicana http://www. cal flora. org/cgi-bin/species_query. cgi?where-calrecn um=7320 E10-16 344 Sumac Family Lemonadeberry (Rhos integrifolia): TOL, RSABG, TP, & LP http:/hNrwnv.laspi I itas. com/nature-o f-cal ifomia/plants/570--rhos-integri fo I is http://www.cal fl ora.org/cgi-bin/species_query. cg i?where-calrecnum=7090 Skunkbush (Rhus trilobata): TOL, RSABG, & LP http://NNww.laspi litas.com/nature-of-cali fomia/plants/573--rhos-tri lobata http://Nvww.cal flora. org/cgi-b in/spec ies_query. cgi?where-taxon=Rhus+trilo bata Sunflower Family California Sagebrush (Arteinesia californica): TP & LP http://www.laspil itas.com/nature-of-california/plants/93--artemisia-cal ifornica http://www. cal flora.org/cgi-bin/species_query.cgi?where-cal recnum=705 Mule fat (Baccharis salicifolia): TP & LP http://www.laspiIitas.com/nature-of-california/p[ants/I l 8--baccharis-viminea http:/hvww.tlieodorepayne.org/niediawiki/index.php?title=Baccharis_salici folia w http://ivw.cal flora.org/cgi-bin/species_gtiery.egi?where-calrecnum=1035 Pinebush (Ericameria pinifolia): http:/hvww.calflora.org/cgi-bin/specics_query.cgi?wliere-taxon=Ericameria+pinifol is Telegraph Weed (Heterothecagrandiflora): http:/hvww.laspil itas.com/nature-of-cali fomia/plants/ 1 147--heterotheca-grandi Flora http://NvNvw.calflora.org/c-i-bin/species _qLlery.cgi?where-calrecnum=4142 Scalebroom (Lepidospartum squamatum): http://www.laspi I itas.com/nature-of-cali fom ia/plants/382--lepidospartum-squamatum http://wN"v.cal flora.org/cgi-bin/species_query. cg i?where-taxon=Lepidospartum+squamatu m Borage Family Common Fiddleneck (Amsinckia n:enziesit): http:/h«vw.cal flora. org/cgi-bin/species_query.cgi?where-calrecnum=326 Cryptantha (Cryptantha species): http://wNvw.cal flora.org/cgi-bin/speciesl ist.egi?where-genus=Cryptantha Yerba Santa (Eriodicryon californicuin): LP http://www.laspi litas.com/nature-o f-california/p lants/273--criodictyon-cali fornicum http:/hvww.cal flora.org/cgi-b in/spec ies_query. cgi?where-calrecnum=3182 E10-16 345 Common Eucrypta (Euchrypta chrysanthen:folia): http://N"vw.cal flora.org/cgi-bin/species_query.cgi?where-calrecnum=3543 Sagebrush Combseed (Pectocarya linearis): http://www.cal flora.org/cgi-bin/species_query.cgi?where-calrecnum=9186 Cactus Family Valley Cholla (Cylindropuntia californica var. parkerr): http://www.calflora.oriz/cgi-bin/speciesq uery cgiywhere- taxon=Cvl indroouutia+californica+var +parkeri Beavertail (Opuntia species): (Opuntia bosilaris available at TP) http:/hvww.IaspiI itas.com/nature-of-california/plants/1005--Opuntia-basiIaris h ttp://v«vw.ca I fl ora. o rg/cgi-bin/spec ies_q uery.cg i?where-calrecnum=5926 Gourd Family Cucamonga Manroot/Wild Cucumber (Marah macrocarpirs): http://www. iaspi litas.COIU/nature-of-cal ifomia/plants/I 155--marah-fabaceus-fabaceus http:/hvww.caf flora.org/cgi-bin/species_query.cgi?where-calrecnum=5363 Spurge Family California Croton (Croton californicas): TP http://NN,"iv.laspiIitas.com/natLire-of-c,ilifornia/plants/I 145--croton-californicus http://vvww.theodorepayne.org/mediawiki/index.plip?title=Croton_cal i fornica http://www.cal nora.org/cgi-bin/species_query.cgi?where-calrecnum=2434 Dove weed (Croton sedgerus): http://www.caI tlora.org/cgi-bin/species_query.c,i?where-calreenum=9518 Pea Family Deerweed (Acmispon glaber) : TP & LP http://www.IaspiI itas.com/nature-of-california/plants/403--lotus-scoparius http://Nvww.cal flora. org/cgi-b in/species_query.cgi?wliere-taxon=Acmispon+glaber Dwarf White Milk Vetch (Astragalus didymocarpus): http:/hvww.cal flora.org/cgi-bin/species_query. cgi?where-calrecnum=826 Pomona Locoweed (Astralagus pomonensis): TP http://www.theodorepayne.org/mediawiki/index.php?title=Astragalus—Pomonensis h ttp:/hv«tiv.cal fl ora.org/egi-bin/speci es_q uery.cgi?where-calrecnum=913 E10-16 346 Beeches and Oak Family Canyon Live Oak (Quercus chrysolepis): TOL, TP, & LP (Other oak [Quercus] species can be purchased from TOL, RSABG, TP, & LP) http:/hyww.laspi l itas.com/nature-of-cal i fomia/plants/554--quercus-chryso lepis http://www.calflora.org/cgi-bin/species_query.cgi?where-calrecnum=6987 Mint Family White Sage (Salvia apiana): TOL, RSABG, TP, & LP http://www.laspi I itas.com/nature-of-califomia/plants/604--salvia-apiana littp:Hwww.cal i forn ianati veplants.com/index. php/catalog/i tem/salt' ia-apiana http:/hvwyv.calfl ora.org/cgi-bin/species_query. cgi?where-calrecnum=7298 Buckwheat Family California Buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatutn): TOL, RSABG, TP, & LP http://www.Iaspi I itas.com/nature-of-califomia/plants/283--eriogonum-fase icuIatum-foI!oIosum http://www.cal fl ora.org/cgi-bin/spec ies_query.cgi?wliere-calrecnum=3243 Wild Rhubarb (Rumexhymenosepalus): http://www. cal flora.org/cgi-bin/species_query.cgi?where-calrecnum=72 l 7 Evening Primrose Family Suncup (Canzissoniopsis species): (Species in this genus available at TP) http://www.IaspiIitas.com/nature-of-califoria/plants/1356--oenotliera-primiveris (This may not be the species that was found but it probably has a lot of characteristics similar to it) http://www.cal flora.org/cgi-bin/species l ist. cgi?whe re-genus=Cam i sson is Buckthorn Family Redberry (Rhamnus crocea): TOL, RSABG, TP, & LP http:/hvww.laspi l itas.com/nature-of-califomia/plants/568--rhamnus-crocea http://www.cal flora.org/cgi-bin/spec ies_query.cgi?where-taxon=Rhamnus+crocea Rose Family Chamise (Adenostoma fasciculatimt): TOL, RSABG, TP, & LP http://www.laspi l itas.com/nature-of-tali fomia/plants/ 16--adenostoma-fas cicu latum http://www.theodorepayne.org/mediawiki/index.php?title=Adenostoma_fasc icu latum http://www.cal flora. org/cgi-bin/species_query.cgi?where-taxon=Adenostoma+fast is ulatum E10-16 347 Mountain Mahogany (Cercocnrpus betuloldes): TOL, RSABG, TP, & LP http://Nv-,vNv.laspilitas.com/natLire-of-califomia/plants/I 93 --cercocarpus-betu lo ides http://www. cal i fom ianati vep I ants.com/i ndex.php/plants/plant-profiles/doe—detai Is/4 I - cercocarp us -beta to ides-mountain-maliogany http://wwNv.calflora.org/cgi-bin/species_query.cgi?where-calrecnum=1878 Holly Leaved Cherry (Prunus flicijoliu): TOL, RSABG, TP, & LP littp://www.laspilitas.coiii/natLire-of-califomia/plants/54 I --prunus-ilicifolia http://SNnvw.cal i fomianativeplaiits.com/index.php/catalog/item/prunus-ilicifolia-ssp-ilicifolia http:/hvww.cal tlora.org/cgi-bin/species_query.cgi?where-taxon=Prunus+ilicifolia Agave Family Chaparral Yucca (Hespereroyucca whipplei): RSABG & TP http://www.I asp i I itas.com/nature-of-cal iforn is/plan ts/879--yucca-wh i pple i-caespi tosa http://www.cal flora.org/cgi-bin/species_query.cgi?where-calrecnum=9995 Note: Although poison oak (Toxicodendron diversiloburn) is a native species found on the DCMP site, 1 have excluded this plant from the list since I expect that no one would want to preserve it within this urban landscape. E10-16 348 QUOState of California - Natural Resources Agency EDMUND G. BROWN Jr Governor DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE CHARLTONH. BONHAM, Director t' Inland Deserts Region 3602 Inland Empire Blvd., Suite C-220 Ontario, CA 91764 (909)484-0459 www.wildlife.ca.gov October 27, 2015 Mr. Tabe Van Der Zwaag Associate Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Subject: Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Day Creek Marketplace and Residential Project State Clearinghouse No. 2015101018 Dear Mr. Van Der Zwaag: The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (Department) appreciates the opportunity to comment on the Initial Study (IS) and proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration (MIND) for the Day Creek Marketplace and Residential Project (Project) [State Clearinghouse No. 2015101018]. The Department is responding to the IS and proposed MND as a Trustee Agency for fish and wildlife resources (California Fish and Game Code Sections 711.7 and 1802, and the California Environmental Quality Act [CEQA] Guidelines Section 15386), and as a Responsible Agency regarding any discretionary actions (CEQA Guidelines Section 15381), such as the issuance of a Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement (California Fish and Game Code Sections 1600 et seq.) and/or a California Endangered Species Act (CESA) Permit for Incidental Take of Endangered, Threatened, and/or Candidate species (California Fish and Game Code Sections 2080 and 2080.1). Project Description The proposed project site is located north of Base Line Road, west of Day Creek Boulevard, south of the Pacific Electric Bike Trail, and east of the Day Creek Flood Control Channel, within the City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County, California. The project proposes to amend the General Plan and Victoria Community Plan to change the land use designation to allow the development of a commercial center of 10.94 acres of land and 4 acres designated for the future development of multi -family housing, Biological Resources and Impacts The Department has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of fish, wildlife, native plants, and the habitat necessary for biologically sustainable Conserving CaCforgY''t'i" Cfe Since 1870 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Day Creek Marketplace and Residential Project SCH No. 2015101018 Page 2 of 5 populations of those species (i.e., biological resources); and administers the Natural Community Conservation Planning Program (NCCP Program). The Department offers the comments and recommendations presented below to assist the City of Rancho Cucamonga (City; the CEQA lead agency) in adequately identifying and/or mitigating the project's significant, or potentially significant, impacts on biological resources. Following review of the Biological Resources section of the IS, the Department identified a number of questions, comments and concerns, and requests that each of these be addressed prior to adoption of the proposed MND, The Department's questions, comments, and concerns include: San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat. The project site contains suitable habitat for, and is located within one mile of federally designated critical habitat for San Bernardino kangaroo rat (SBKR), a federally endangered species and California Species of Special Concern. Although the roads, flood control channel, and bike trail surrounding the site present barriers to SBKR movement, the Department does not concur that SBKR can be presumed absent based on the presence of barriers alone. Nor can SBKR be precluded by the level of disturbance on the site: SBKR have been detected in disturbed habitat, including orange groves, former vineyards, and areas containing non-native grasses and other'ruderal' vegetation (Braden and McKernan 2000). Absent a focused trapping survey, the Department recommends that the City consult with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) prior to initiation of project activities. 2. Sensitive Species. The Biological Resources Assessment (BRA) identifies the following special -status species as potentially occurring on -site: coast horned lizard (Phrynosoma blainvillil), northwestern San Diego pocket mouse (Chaetodipus fallax fallax), San Diego desert woodrat (Neotoma lepida intermedia), Parry's spineflower (Chorizanthe parryi var. parryi), and mesa horkelia (Horkelia cuneata var. puberula). As the BRA notes, "these species have a limited population distribution in southern California, and development is reducing their ranges and numbers further." The BRA states that "due to the small size of the proposed project site, existing disturbances, and proximity to surrounding development, impacts to these sensitive species are not considered significant." However, the MND does not include survey data indicating whether any of the above -listed species occur on - site, an analysis of the number of individuals expected to occupy the site, or an estimation of the regional population of the species. Please clarify what the impacts to the above -listed species are expected to be, and provide a thorough and detailed mitigation proposal to offset the temporal, permanent, and cumulative impacts. 3. Impacts to Sensitive Natural Communities. The Biological Resources section of the IS checklist indicates that there will be "no impact" on "riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or other regional plans, E10-16 350 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Day Creek Marketplace and Residential Project SCH No. 2015101018 Page 3 of 5 policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service". This is incorrect: the project site supports Riversidean alluvial fan sage scrub (RAFSS), a state designated S-1.1 "very threatened" community. Page 5 of the BRA states that "because (the on -site RAFSS) is disturbed and isolated from larger blocks of habitat, the loss of 10 acres of (RAFSS) is not considered substantial." The Department does not concur with this conclusion, and considers net loss of this imperiled habitat to be adverse and significant. We recommend that the MND be revised to include a thorough and detailed analysis of the temporal, permanent, and cumulative impacts to RAFSS habitat. The Department considers sensitive plant communities to be imperiled habitats having both local and regional significance. Plant communities, alliances, and associations with a statewide ranking of S-1, S-2, S-3, and S-4 should be considered sensitive and declining at the local and regional level. These ranks can be obtained by querying the CNDDB and are included in The Manual of California Vegetation (Sawyer et al. 2009). The Department strongly encourages the City and the project applicant to avoid and conserve the on -site RAFSS habitat to the greatest extent feasible. If complete avoidance is not possible, the Department recommends that the City revise the MND to include a thorough and detailed mitigation proposal to address the temporal, permanent, and cumulative impacts. 4. Impacts to Streambed Habitat. Page 3 of the BRA characterizes the on -site ephemeral stream as "a drainage ditch created by roadside runoff," and states that it "does not contain CDFW riparian habitat and is not considered a natural waterway regulated by CDFW." The Department does not concur with this statement. Based on a review of aerial photography, and the photographs supplied in Figure 4A of the BRA, it is likely that the project applicant will need to notify the Department per Fish and Game Code section 1602. Fish and Game Code section 1602 requires an entity to notify the Department prior to commencing any activity that may do one or more of the following: Substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow of any river, stream or lake; Substantially change or use any material from the bed, channel or bank of any river, stream, or lake; or Deposit debris, waste or other materials that could pass into any river, stream or lake. Please note that "any river, stream or lake" includes those that are episodic (i.e., those that are dry for periods of time) as well as those that are perennial (i.e., those that flow year round). This includes ephemeral streams, desert washes, and watercourses with a subsurface flow. It may also apply to work undertaken within the flood plain of a body of water. Upon receipt of a complete notification, the Department determines if the proposed project activities may substantially adversely affect existing fish and E10-16 351 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Day Creek Marketplace and Residential Project SCH No. 2015101018 Page 4 of 5 wildlife resources and whether a Lake and Streambed Alteration (LSA) Agreement is required. An LSA Agreement includes measures necessary to protect existing fish and wildlife resources. CDFW may suggest ways to modify your project that would eliminate or reduce harmful impacts to fish and wildlife resources. The Department's issuance of an LSA Agreement is a "project" subject to CEQA (see Pub, Resources Code 21065). To facilitate issuance of an LSA Agreement, if necessary, the MND should fully identify the potential impacts to the lake, stream, or riparian resources, and provide adequate avoidance, mitigation, and monitoring and reporting commitments. Early consultation with the Department is recommended, since modification of the proposed project may be required to avoid or reduce impacts to fish and wildlife resources. To obtain a Lake or Streambed Alteration notification package, please go to https://www.wiIdlife.ca.gov/Conservation/LSA/Forms. 5. Nesting Birds. Mitigation Measure 1 states that a breeding bird survey shall be required to determine whether nesting is occurring "ten days prior to ground clearing activities". The Department recommends that the City revise Mitigation Measure 1 to require nesting bird surveys to occur no more than three (3) days prior to vegetation removal or ground -disturbing activities, as many species of birds may complete nest building in fewer than ten days. Page 18 of the IS identifies the avian nesting season as February 1 through August 31. However, some species of raptors may commence nesting as early as January 1, while some passerines may continue to nest after August 31. Therefore, the Department recommends that nesting bird surveys occur regardless of the time of year. The Department appreciates the opportunity to comment on the Initial Study and proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Day Creek Marketplace and Residential Project (State Clearinghouse Number 2015101018), and requests that the City address the Department's comments and concerns prior to adoption of the MND. If you should have any questions pertaining to these comments, please contact Gabriele Quillman at (909) 980-3818 or at gabriele.quillman@wildlife.ca.gov. SLe Si (nal c air RegiManager cc: State Clearinghouse, Sacramento E10-16 352 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Day Creek Marketplace and Residential Project SCH No. 2015101018 Page 5 of 5 Literature Cited Braden, G., and R. McKernan. 2000. A Data Based Survey Protocol and Quantitative Description of Suitable Habitat for the Endangered San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat. Sari Bernardino County Museum. June 2000. 35 pp Sawyer, J. O., T. Keeler -Wolf, and J. M. Evens. 2009. A manual of California Vegetation, 2nd ed. California Native Plant Society Press, Sacramento, California. http://vegetation.cnps.org/ E10-16 353 GUIDELINES FOR GOOD EXTERIOR LIGHTING PLANS Prepared by: The Dark Sky Society (http:/hvwty darks4,socieq o�rgn 2009 These guidelines have been developed in consultation with lighting professionals (with experience in developing good lighting plans) to aid communities wishing to control light pollution and preserve the night sky. Outdoor lighting should be carefully designed with regard to placement, intensity, timing, duration, and color. Good lighting will: • Promote Safety "More light" is not necessarily" better". If not designed and installed correctly, unsafe glare can result, reducing the effect of lighting which can contribute to accidents and hinder visibility. Lighting that is too bright interferes with the eye's ability to adapt to darker areas. • Save Money Adhering to professionally recommended light levels provides adequate illumination. Shielded fixtures with efficient light bulbs are more cost-effective because they use less energy by directing the light toward the ground. See this website for cost comparisons: littR:i/www.netacc.net/—i)oulsen/liahtcost.litniI • Conserve Natural Resources Inappropriate or excessive lighting wastes our limited natural resources and pollutes the air and water by unnecessarily burning our limited supply of fossil fuels. • Be Better Neighbors Excessive or misdirected lighting can intrude on the privacy of others when light or glare trespasses over property lines. • Retain Community's Character and Reduce Skyglow Our clear view of the dark starry night sky is a resource to be preserved and protected. Stray and excessive lighting contributes to "light pollution", clutter, and unnatural "sky glow". • Protect Ecology of Flora and Fauna Research studies indicate that artificial night lighting disrupts the migrating, feeding, and breeding habits of many wildlife species, as well as growth patterns of trees. See references in The Ecological Consequences of Artificial Nieht Lighting. • Reduce Health Risks Light at night not only disrupts your sleep but also interferes with your circadian rhythms. Recent research indicates that intrusive lighting may reduce the production of melatonin, a beneficial hormone, and a resulting raise in the rates of breast and other cancers. Included: 1. Diagrams of Aceeptable[Unacceptable Lighting Fixtures 2. How to Develop an Acceptable Lighting Plan 3. Definitions of Full Cut Off, Shielded, and RLM sign lighting Fixtures 4. Lighting Plan Submissions 5. Recommended Illumination Levels for various tasks 1 E10-16 354 UNSHIELDED FIXTURES Unacceptable / Discouraged Fixtures that produce glaze and light trespass Full Cutoff and Fully Shielded Fixtures Acceptable Fixtures that shield the light source, to reduce glare and light trespass and to facilitate better vision at night. Unshielded ully-shlelded Walipacks Fixtures Sag -lens Drop -lens wl exposed light source Unshielded "Full cutofr Fixtures Fully -shielded Wallpacks Full cutoff or shielded "Colonial -type" fixtures Colonial -type Unshielded Streetlight fixtures or Dusk to Dawn Security fixtures Drop -lens ��� �--_ Flush -mounted canopy fixtures -�� canopy fixtures Diagrams courtesy of Bob Crehn *****Ask your local electrical suppliers for "full -cut off" or "fully shielded" light fixtures. Once you have selected fixtures which are compatible with your architecture and community, contact the manufacturer's representative to see a sample of the fixture(s) and to ask for a free lighting plan. If you have a CAD file, the plan can be easily provided in a short period of time. ***** Most lighting manufacturers have Application Departments which will execute free lighting plans to meet local lighting codes. See this website for links to manufacturers: http://www.darksky.org/mc/page.do?sitePageld=56422&orgId=idsa Sample of Web retailers: www.starrynightlights.com and www.greenearthlighting.com 2 E10-16 355 How to Develop an Acceptable Lighting Plan 1. Identify where as well as when lighting is needed. Confine and minimize lighting to the extent necessary to meet safety purposes. Plans should define the areas for which illumination is planned. Itemizing each area (e.g. parking lot, doorways, walkways, signage, foliage) with the anticipated hours of use. Commercial outdoor lighting should be used for safe pedestrian passage and property identification, and lit during active business hours and shut off afterward. 2. Direct light downward by choosing the correct type of light fixtures. (See Appendix 3). Specify IES (Illuminating Engineering Society) "Full Cut Off' designated or "fully shielded" fixtures, so that no light is emitted above the lowest light emitting part of the fixture. Top mounted sign lighting is recommended with "RLM" (dish) type shields, and aimed so that the light falls entirely on the sign and is positioned so that the light source (bulb) is not visible from any point off the property or into the roadway to reduce glare. For each one square foot of sign, usually no more than 200 lumens is necessary for good visibility. 3. Select the correct light source (bulb type). Compact fluorescent (2300I) or,High Pressure Sodium is recommended unless the light is motion sensor activated, in which case incandescent or the instant start compact fluorescent bulbs can be used. Metal Halide (due to its higher costs, energy use, impact on the environment, and greater contribution to "sky glow") is discouraged, as well as light sources rated over 3000 Kelvin; and outdated Mercury Vapor bulbs are prohibited. 4. Utilize "shut off' controls such as sensors, timers, motion detectors, etc. Automatic controls turn off lights when not needed. All lights should be extinguished no later than one half hour after the close of business. Additional motion sensor activated lighting can be used for emergency access. Avoid "dusk -to -dawn" sensors without a middle of the night shut off control. Lights alone will not serve to "protect" property and are a poor "security" device. Examine other means of protecting property and to discourage criminal activity. Let your local police know that you have a "lights out" policy so that they can investigate if they see lights or activity after hours. 5. Limit the height of fixtures. Locate fixtures no closer to the property line than four times the mounting height of the fixture, and not to exceed the height of adjacent structures. (Exceptions may be made for larger parking areas, commercial zones adjacent to highways, or for fixtures with greater cut off shielding behind the pole mount in commercial zones.) 6. Limit light crossing property lines, i.e. "light trespass". Limit light to spill across the property lines. Light levels at the property line should not exceed 0.1 footcandles (fc) adjacent to business properties, and 0.05 f : at residential property boundaries. Utility leased floodlight fixtures mounted on public utility poles in the public right-of-way should not be used. 7. Use the correct amount of light. Light levels and uniformity ratios should not exceed recommended values, per IESNA RP-33 or 20. (See Appendix 5,,Recommended Illumination Levels for various tasks.) "Lumen cap" recommendations for areas to be illuminated are as follows: commercial properties in non -urban commercial zones = 25,000 lumens per acre; for projects in residential and LBO zones = 10,000 lumens per acre. For residential properties: for suburban: 50,000 lumens per acre cap, and in urban areas: 100,000. 8. Ask for Assistance Your Planning Department and local lighting sales representatives can assist you in obtaining the necessary information for good lighting. For large projects over 15,000 lumens: greater energy conservation and control of light pollution, light trespass and glare, may be achieved with the help of a professional lighting designer with "dark sky" lighting plan experience. 9. A post installation inspection should be conducted to check for compliance. Substitutions by electricians and contractors are common and should not be accepted. Final Approved Site Plans will not allow additional exterior fixtures or substitutes without reviews. 10. Design interior lighting so that it does not illuminate the outdoors. Provide interior lighting photometrics for the building's perimeter areas, demonstrating that the interior lighting falls substantially within the building and not through the windows. After closing, interior lighting that extends outdoors needs to be extinguished by the use of shut off timers. 3 E10-16 356 Definition of Acceptable Fixtures: "Full Cut Off", "Fully Shielded", and RLM shield. Full cutoff fixture 900 No Ilght at or above 9W Lss dmn 100 ed pct 1000 lamp lumcos at of abovc 80Q "Full Cut Off" fixtures are independently certified by the manufacturers, and do not allow light to be emitted above the fixture and the fixture reduces glare by limiting the light output to less than 10% at and below 10 degrees below the horizontal. If the manufacturer is unable to provide the "cut off' characteristics for a fixture (also called a "luminaire"), the following definition needs to be met, which can usually be determined by a visual inspection: "Fully Shielded": a fixture constructed and installed in such a manner that all light emitted by it, either directly from the lamp (bulb) or a diffusing element, or indirectly by reflection or refraction from any part of the fixture, is projected below the horizontal. This can be determined by a "field test" or a visual assessment of an operating sample. Manufacturers and their representatives can provide photographs of light fixtures as "cut sheets" as well as literature confirming the independently tested "cut off' characteristics of their products. These IES files maybe assessed for compliance in a computer program: http://w%v%v.3dop.com/indexl.html Photometric layouts for different heights, light sources, and wattages, are also available as "IES" files, upon request or through manufacturers' websites. Fixtures must be installed properly, so that the bottom of the fixture is level with the ground. Exceptions are often given for sign lighting which requires vertical lighting: "RLM" sign lighting shield: 4 E10-16 357 Lighting Plan Submissions The following information needs to be provided to your municipality's review board which will enable them to evaluate the Site Plan for proper exterior lighting: The Lighting Plan should be depicted on a site plan, indicating the location of each current and proposed outdoor lighting fixture with projected hours of use. This plan will need to be stamped and certified by a licensed professional, such as an architect or engineer. Many lighting manufacturers can provide free photometric layouts on prepared site plans, to conform to your local requirements. (1) The lighting plan should include a KEY to the proposed lighting that provides the following information: • Type and number of luminaire equipment (fixtures), including the "cut off characteristics", indicating manufacturer and model number(s). • Lamp source type (bulb type, i.e. high pressure sodium), lumen output, and wattage. • Mounting height with distance noted to the nearest property line for each luminaire. • Types of timing devices used to control the hours set for illumination, as well as the proposed hours when each fixture will be operated. • Total Lumens for each fixture, and total square footage of areas to be illuminated. For projects that are in commercial zones, the lumens per net acre to be lit, need not exceed 25,000 lumens. For projects in residential or LBO zones: 10,000 lumens. • For all plans of more than three fixtures: A Calculation Summary indicating footcandle levels on the lighting plan, noting the maximum, average and minimum, as well as the uniformity ratio of maximum to minimum, and average to minimum levels*. (2) Lighting manufacturer -supplied specifications ("cut sheets") that include photographs of the fixtures, indicating the certified "cut off characteristics" of the fixture. (3) Footcandle Distribution, plotting the fight levels in footcandles on the ground, at the designated mounting heights for the proposed fixtures. Maximum illuminance levels should be expressed in footcandle measurements on a grid of the site showing footcandle readings in every five or ten -foot square. The grid shall include light contributions from all sources (i.e. pole mounted, wall mounted, sign, and street lights.) Show footcandle renderings five feet beyond the property lines.* (4) If requested by the reviewing agency, a statement from a lighting professional that a plan, other than that set forth, is needed to meet the intent of these standards. (5) An environmental impact statement may be required as to the impact of the exterior lighting proposed on flora, fauna, and the night sky. Location of species sensitive to light at night or the proximity to nature preserves or astronomical observatories or "Dark Sky Parks", needs to be indicated. (6) On the Approved Plan it should be noted that no substitutions, additions, or changes may be made without prior approval by the governing authority. * This information can be obtained from the manufacturer, your lighting supplier, or the manufacturer's representative. 5 E10-16 358 Recommended Illumination Levels for various tasks* I. Table of Limits of Illumination, measured in footcandles (fc) at ground level unless noted: Task Area Avg Not to exceed, 1. Active Building Entrance 2.0 fc 5 fc Approach 0.2 fc 2. Gas Station Approach 2 fc 3. Gas Station Pump Area avg: 5 fc 4. Gas Station Service Area avg. 3 fc 5. Sidewalks 0.2 fc 5 fc 6. Surface of signs 2 fc II. Average/Minimum/Uniformity Ratio Limits for Parking Lots: I. Public Parking Lots -- not to exceed: Average Minimum Uniformity Ratio 4ae to Min/Avg to Min) 0.8 0.2 20:1 / 4:1 II. Private Parking Lots -- not to exceed: Average Minimum Uniformity Ratio (Max to Min / Avg to Min) 0.5 0.13 20:1 / 4:1 M III. If illuminance grid lighting plans cannot be reviewed or if fixtures do not provide photometrics and bulbs are under 2000 lumens, use these guidelines: 1. Pole shall be no greater in height than four times the distance to the property line 2. Maximum Lumen Levels for different fixture heights: Mounting Height (Feet) Recommended Lumen Maximums 6 500 - 1000 lumens 8 600 - 1,600 lumens 10 1,000 - 2,000 lumens 12 1,600 - 2,400 lumens FOOTCANDLE: ("FC") — Is the basic unit of illuminance (the amount of light falling on a surface). Footcandle measurement is taken with a hand held light meter. One footcandle is equivalent to the illuminance produced on one square foot of surface area by a source of one candle at a distance of one foot. Horizontal footcandles measure the illumination striking a horizontal plane. Footcandle values can be measured directly with certain handheld incident light meters. LUMEN— A unit used to measure the actual amount of light that is produced by a bulb. The lumen quantifies the amount of light energy produced by a lamp at the lamp, not by the energy input, which is indicated by the "wattage". For example, a 75-watt incandescent lamp can produce 1000 lumens while a 70- watt high-pressure sodium lamp produces 6000 lumens. Lumen output is listed by the manufacturer on the packaging. * IES, Recommended Practices, (RP-33-99): Lighting for Exterior Environments; and (RP-20): Parking Lots. The Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IRS or IESNA), is an organization that establishes updated standards and illumination guidelines for the lighting industry. http://w-vw.iesna.org/sho /item-detail.cfm?ID=RP-33-99&storeid=l http:/ hv-,v%v.iesna.org/shop/item-detail.cfm?ID=RP-20-98&storeid=l E10-16 359 ALLUVIAL SCRUB VEGETATION IN COASTAL SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA' Ted L. Hanes, Richard D. Friesen, and Kathy Keane Abstract: Certain floodplain systems in southern Cali- fornia sustain a unique scrub vegetation rather than ri- parian woodlands due to a lack of perennial water. Allu- vial scrub occurs on outwash fans and riverine deposits along the coastal side of major mountains of southern California. This vegetation type is adapted to severe floods and erosion, nutrient -poor substrates, and the presence of subsurface moisture. Ten major stands were sampled by line intercepts to determine their species composition, community structure, and successional sta- tus. Plant ecology and successional dynamics of these stands are compared. Loss of this unique floodplain veg- etation type in the past, and current urban pressures from mining and flood control practices are discussed. Scrub vegetation in California is extensive and di- verse, occupying coastal and desert dunes, coastal val- leys and foothills, interior mountains and desert flats. Holland (1986), in the State's Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California, recognizes 73 different scrub types endemic to Califor- nia. However, one scrub type not included in these de- scriptions is the unique and threatened vegetation called alluvial scrub. This vegetation is considered a unique habitat with a high priority for preservation by the Cal- ifornia Natural Diversity Data Base (1987). Alluvial scrub is an open vegetation adapted to the harsh conditions of the outwash environment. It grows on sandy, rocky alluvia deposited by streams that experience infrequent episodes of severe flooding. This vegetation dominates major outwash fans at the mouths of canyons along the coastal side of the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto Mountains and lesser floodplain and riverine locations of southern California. Some alluvial scrub species occur also in sandy washes of coastal southern California apart from alluvial fans and large rivers. Alluvial scrub is composed of an assortment of drought - deciduous subshrubs and large evergreen woody shrubs that are adapted to the porous, low fertility substrate as well as to survival of intense, periodic flooding and ero- sion. Step -like shrub covered terraces above the wash channels exhibit different phases of alluvial scrub vege- tation. These phases are related to the amount of time that has elapsed since the most recent flood at each level. Three types of alluvial scrub have been recog- nized and are related to such factors as the scouring action of flood channels, distance from the flood chan- nel, time since the last catastrophic flood, and substrate features such as texture and moisture content (Smith 1980). The three types can be referred to as: pioneer - vegetation is sparse and of low species diversity and stature, and is found within active stream channels or recently scoured streambeds; intermediate - vegetation is rather dense. and is composed mainly of subshrubs; and mature - vegetation is composed of fully developed subshrubs and woody shrubs. Mature alluvial scrub is distinguished by its vege- tative composition, which contrasts in several respects with that of coastal sage scrub as described by Axelrod (1978), Cooper (1922), Epling and Lewis (1942), Kirk- patrick and Hutchinson (1977), Mooney (1988), Smith (1980), and Westman (.1981a,b). Specifically, (1) allu- vial scrub has more mesic species than most coastal sage scrub stands; (2) alluvial scrub consists of nu- merous evergreen shrubs, a diverse assemblage of sub - shrubs, and a springtime ground cover of annual wild- flowers, whereas coastal sage scrub vegetation is com- posed primarily of drought -deciduous subshrubs with sparse, if any, annual wildflowers; (3) scalebroom (Lep- idospartum , quamatum), a shrub with high fidelity to alluvial substrates, is found throughout alluvial scrub communities, but seldom in coastal sage scrub vegeta- tion; (4) species commonly found in chaparral or desert plant assemblages, such as California redberry (Rham- nus crocea), lemonadeberry (Rhus integrifolia), sugar - bush (Rhus ovata), mountain mahogany (Cercocarpus betuloides), holly -leaved cherry (Prunus ilicifolia), Cali- fornia juniper (Juniperus californica), and yucca (Yucca whipplei) are also common in the alluvial scrub com- munity, but not in coastal sage scrub vegetation; and (5) small-statured riparian woodland species, such as California sycamore (Platanus racemosa) and mulefat (Baccharis glutinosa) are laced through alluvial scrub stands along major drainages, but are not present in stands of coastal sage scrub. � Presented at the California Riparian Systems Conference; September 22-24. 1988; Davis, California. Professor of Botany, California State University, Fullerton, Fullerton, Calif.; Senior Ecologist and Staff Ecologist respectively, Michael Brandman Associates (MBA), Santa Ana, Calif. USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-110. 1989. 187 E10-16 360 I SIMI VALLEY• �1 ° J SUNLAND 2 6 , rnou0.4KS Ir :,• gp p PASADENA GLENDALE 3l 45 OSAN eERNARDI1NJ/7 A2USA 0 .RANCHO CAM 0 r�LANDS �. gNSr .Fs ,m / RIVERSIDE .' LONG � of pNA ANA ` SAN `'8 •�y JAGNTOSAN l `e \ ' ' BEACH\ L .HEMET Legend.., BIG TUJUNGA WASH BAN SEVAINE/,^' ETIWANDA/DAY CREEKS* /\) / SAN GABRIEL RIVER ©CAJON/LYTLE CREEKS`^� SAN ANTONIO CREEK FTIMENTONE AREA OF SANTAANA RIVER ®CUCAMONGA CHEEK ®SAN JACINTO RIVEfl''>''> OCEANSIDE'\ .ESCONDIDO 1 Figure 1- Distribution of major stands of alluvial scrub vegetation in southern California, U.S.A. Methods Ten stands of alluvial scrub vegetation were studied, comprising the largest, intact stands in southern Califor- nia. These stands are associated with the Big Tujunga Wash and San Gabriel River (Los Angeles County); Cu- camonga, Day, Etiwanda, San Sevaine, Lytle, and Cajon Creeks and the San Antonio and Santa Ana Rivers (San Bernardino County); and the San Jacinto River (River- side County), (fig. 1). Each stand was sampled by a series of 20 m line intercepts. Several 'lines of march" along a compass line perpendicular to the associated stream channel were established within each of the alluvial scrub study sites, beginning at the edge of the stream channel in most cases and progressively moving up onto the higher stream terraces until reaching the site boundary. At 30 In intervals (50 In intervals in degraded alluvial scrub), a 20 In line intercept, perpendicular to the line of march, was established. The intercepts alternated at each interval from right to left of the line of march. Only subshrubs and evergreen woody shrubs were measured. Plants that were bisected by the intercept line (as projected vertically) were identified by species. Their intercept lengths (to the nearest 5 cm) were recorded, and the number of dead and live individuals of each species was counted along each 20 m intercept. Any intercept length not containing shrub cover was recorded as "bare ground." Intercept data were grouped by development stage of alluvial scrub vegetation (pioneer, intermediate, or mature) for each site. The values derived were used to describe and quantify the structural and successional composition and status of each alluvial scrub site. Physical Setting Soils The floodplain soils upon which alluvial scrub oc- curs is of two types. Riverwash Association soils are 188 E10-16 361 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW. 110. 1989. found along the main river channels and consist of river - deposited sands, gravels, cobbles and stones. Inunda- tion occurs each year and is accompanied by scouring, deposition, and removal depending upon the intensity and number of rainstorms each winter. All vegeta- tion is scoured from the main channel during peak flow episodes. Soboba Association soils are located along the ter- raced banks of theriver and are formed of alluvium on the outwash of the rivers. Soboba soils have a cob- bly, coarse loamy sand surface underlain by pale brown, single -grain, loosely stratified very gravelly and cobbly sand or loamy sand subsoils. These soils are excessively drained and exhibit very high permeability, very slow runoff, low water -holding capacity and low fertility. Climate The climate of the study area is Mediterranean, with an annual rainfall of approximately 460 mm, most of which falls during a few heavy winter storms. Once every 10 to 20 years, rainfall far exceeds the norm, resulting in catastrophic floods, such as 1938 and 1969. During such past floods, the rivers have carried debris eroded from upstream slopes and riverbeds, forming broad rocky al- luvial outwash fans nearly 600 in thick. The river chan- nels within the fans are subject to frequent scouring and flooding resulting in a barren state. The most signifi- cant recent floods in the study area occurred in 1938 and 1969. These and previous major floods produced flood - plain terraces bordering the main channels and upon which the three recognizable phases of alluvial scrub veg- etation have developed. Site Conditions The sample. sites exhibit many similar conditions as well as a few distinctive features. Table 1 summarizes the various site. conditions and features. Results A total of 237 plant species was encountered on the 10 study sites. To facilitate comparison of species composition between the sites, importance values were calculated for each species. Table 2 lists those species with importance values greater than 5.0 for each site. Eriogonum fasciculaturn was an important compo- nent of all 10 sites. Lepidospartum squamatum occurred on 9 of the 10 sites. Salvia apiana and Lotus scopar- ius were next in importance, occurring in 6 of the 10 sites. Artemisia califorrrica occurred on 4 of the 10 sites. Longer -lived, woody species that characterized mature stands (see fig. 2) often had importance values less than 5.0 and are not shown in Table 2. Most (6) of the sites were composed of all three successional stages, but a few sites had two or only one stage. Lytle Creek lacked mature alluvial scrub, whereas San Sevaine lacked intermediate scrub, and Etiwanda lacked both pioneer and mature stages. Presence and absence of developmental stages reflected various factors such as upstream damming or channeflzation, time since the last major flood, human disturbances, or soil moisture. Table 1 - Summary of the Alluvial Scrub Sample Site Conditions and Features (material adapted from Michael Brandman Associates 19881 Site Acreage Location Conditions and Features San Jacinto 2,677 Upper San Relatively undisturbed except for small sand and gravel operation, golf course Jacinto River downstream; limited water conservation dikes, diversion channels, and percolation basins. Mentone 11,440 Upper Santa Variously disturbed by rock and sand quarries, aqueducts and railways; industrial, River commercial, and residential developments; extensive flood control and water conservation facilities Cajon/ Lytle 17,347 Cajon and Lytle Crossed by 2 railroad tracks, old Route 66, and (combined) Interstates 15 and Creeks Creeks 215. Residential and commercial developments along Route 66 and portions of (Combined) Cajon and Cable Canyons. Quarrying operations in lower Lytle Creek San Sevaine/ 12,531 San Sevaine/ Large lateral flood control dikes, diversion canals, and percolation basin. Major Etiwanda/Day Day Canyon electric transmission corridor and water treatment plant. New extensive residen- Canyons outwash tial developments south and west. Cucamonga 3,091 Cucamonga Flood control structures and percolation basin; small rock quarry. Surrounded by Canyon outwash residential developments. San Antonio 2,318 San Antonio Streamflow controlled outwash by dam and large lateral dikes. Two highways Canyon outwash cross the site. Quarry operation, small airport and commercial buildings present San Gabriel 300 San Gabriel Streamflow controlled outwash by dams, major lateral dikes, drop structures, and Canyon outwash percolation basins. Crossed by Route 66 and Interstate 210. Paved bikeway on east dike. Major quarrying operations. Dam, recreation area, and county natural area. downstream. Big Tujunga 1,587 Big Tujunga Natural braided floodplain flanked by hills. Bisected by Interstate 210. Dam, Canyon recreation area, and quarrying operation downstream. ' USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-110. 1989. 189 E10-16 362 Table 2 - Comparison of Species Composition of Ten Alluvial Scrub Stands Using Importance Values Greater Than 5.0- Importance Values by Development Stage Site Dominant Pioneer Intermediate Mature San Jacinto Artemisia dracunculus 7.74 16.77 4.13 Baccharis glutmosa 16.10 0.82 Croton califomica 7.13 8.02 Ericameria palmen 4.96 4.25 Eriodictyon crassifolium 1.75 11.61 Eriogonumfasciculamm 10.59 31.54 41.17 Lepidospartum squamatum 35.86 28.84 12.11 Lytham andersonh 0.94 7.76 7.48 Opuntiaparryi 0.82 7.38 Rhamnus crocea 9.51 Salvia apiana 5.38 _ Memmne Adenostoma jasciculatum 28.96 Baccharis glutinosa 8.24 Ericameria Palmeri 19.50 3.91 Eriodictyon 6ichocalyx 17.43 3.63 Eriogonum faseiculatum 84.35 33.93 16.88 Lepidospartum squamatum 7.40 Yucca whipplei 6.63 1.23 Cajon Eriodictyon trkhocalyx 18.20 18.79 12.00 Eriogonumfascicutaium 51.18 18.87 8.76 Lepidospartum squamatum 5.98 8.88 Lotus scoparius 13.10 12.38 7.51 Opuntia littoralis 4.34 4.69 7.84 Salvia apiana 5.05 12.18 Toxicodendron divers/ohm 3.95 8.42 Yucca whipplei 4.30 12.46 16:74 Lytle Creek Artemisia dracuneuhis 2.25 16.25 Eriodictyon triehocalyx 8.00 Eriogonumfasciculatum 63.20 30.98 Lepidospartum squamatum 30.19 5.43 Lotus smparius 1.10 5.19 Opuntia littoralis 1.08 5.48 Opuntia parryi 1.08 7.88 Saluia apiana 1.08 6.10 San.Sevaine Adenostomajosciculatum 9.12 Artemisia califomica 6.28 17.04 Cemocarpus hetuloides 15.05 15.70 Eriogonumfasciculatum 37.35 25.96 Lepidospartum squamatum 15.04 7.32 Lotus scoparius 10.64 1.38 Salvia apiana 19.40 14.08 Etiwanda Croton califomica 7.54 Eriogonum jasciculatum 33.48 Lotus scoparius 9.06 Saluia apiana 43.70 Cucamonga Adenostoma faseieulawan 6.34 Artemisia califomica 22.69 12.30 23.70 Enadictyon trichocalyx 30.70 11.91 Eriogonumfmciculatum 37.54 21.09 23.19 Lepidospartum squamaum. 30.46 16.65 11.73 Lotus scoparius 7.47 1.88 Rhamnus crocea 6.54 San Antonio Aehillea millsfoltum 9.50 8.13 Artemisia califomica 29.67 41.25 Encomerin pinifolia 10.67 Eriogonum fasciculatum 10.09 14.51 Lepidosportum squamatum 4.91 15.94 Lotus scoparius 6.69 Malosma (-Rhos) laurma 8.13 Salvia mellifera 12.99 2.22 San Gabriel Artemisia califomica 2.12 11.79 Bricketlia califomica 8.10 Eriogonum fosciculatum 22.76 12.19 Lepidospartum squamatum 31.43 22.53 13.02 Opuntia tittoralis 17.03 22.07 Rhus integrfolia. 7.76 Big Tujunga Baccharis giutmosa 29.29 Ericamena linearifolia 8.37 5.18 Ericameriapinifolia 2.41 5.08 Eriogonum fesciculamm 33.56 36.39 33.37 Lepidospartum equamatum 13.89 15.25 9.72 Opuntia pamyi 5.31 2.21 Ribes aureum 1.36 1.35 5.97 Solve sp. 4.53 9.85 Yucca whipplei 3.35 10.48 12.71 *Standard importance values were utilized and divided by 3 to convert,them to a base of 100 for convenience 190 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-110. 1989. E10-16 363 INCREASING FLOOD EVENT PROBABILITY MATURE PHASE merneaexunve aretlem 4 a.e Ym M a.0 u,ur,.-o, •pnp. " S61L:" - PRO ILE _ INTERMEDIATE PHASE nev... S.I W Spec'[., w �rx.u.h�-uN, rvs .nu ^-urur'arr Vm meeu�'M.ru. Yr.ner PIONEER PHASE IPEI9EEENTAiIVL LrEtlLLI PARTICLE SIZE SORTED SUBSTRATUM FROM PREVIOUS FLOODING AND DEPOSITION EVENTS MUDFLOW LENS Figure 2- Profile diagram of alluvial scrub vegetation, showing representation of the three phases of development and their representative species. In order to quantify compositional and structural fea- tures of the 3 phases of alluvial scrub at each sample site and to compare the 10stands, various indices were used: native plant species diversity, percent dominance of the shrub component, and structural diversity of the shrub component (Table 3). These indices were standardized to values between 0.0 and 1.0 against an ideal condition in a manner similar to the Habitat Evaluation Proce- dure (HEP) developed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS 1980). The procedure for establish- ing and standardizing these indices are currently being documented in a manuscript in preparation by Friesen, Jones, and Keane, and are being referred to as a Habitat Quality Assessment (HQA). San Jacinto, Cajon, and Big Tujunga sites exhibited the greatest species diversity of 8 sites. Etiwanda showed the smallest species diversity, having neither pioneer nor mature stages. Cajon and Cucamonga sites had the highest shrub component of 8 sites with San Jacinto and Big Tujung a sites nearly as high. As with species diversity, the Etiwanda site showed the lowest shrub component. The Cajon and San Gabriel sites exhibited the great - est structural diversity of 8 sites with Etiwanda showing the lowest structural diversity. Current Status The distinctive character of alluvial scrub vegetation as it relates to flood -deposited alluvia, makes it one of California's unique riparian systems (fig. 2). The inten- sity and magnitude of episodic floods creates recogniz- able vegetation phases that are related to both the age of the stand and to the site conditions of substrate and soil moisture. As a stand develops along a time gradi- ent from pioneer to mature, there is a general trend in species composition replacement from short-lived sub - shrubs to long-lived woody shrubs. Severe flooding as well as fire and man -caused disturbances can eliminate existing stands of alluvial scrub, and thus initiate new pioneer stands. In contrast, a lack of sufficient soil mois- ture can prevent an intermediate stage stand from pro- gressing to the mature stage. This condition is best illus- trated in the Etiwanda stand. Such intermediate stands may be old in years, but not fully mature in species composition and stature. USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. Paw. 110. 1989, 191 E10-16 364 Table 3 - Standardized Vegetation Parameters of Ten Alluvial Scrub Sites Based Upon Three Stages of Development Site Stage. of Development Species Diversity' Shrub Dominance2 Structural Diversity3 San Jacinto Pioneer 1.0 1.0 1.0 Intermediate 0.8 0.8 0.2 Mature 0.9 0.8 0.4 Mentone Pioneer 0.2 1.0 0.0 Intermediate 1.0 0.8 0.3 Mature 1.0 0.5 1.0 Cajon Pioneer 1.0 1.0 1.0 Intermediate 0.9 1.0 0.8 Mature 0.9 1.0 0.4 Lytle Creek Pioneer 0.5 1.0 0.1 Intermediate Mature San Sevaine Pioneer Intermediate Mature 0.9 1.0 0.4 Etiwanda Pioneer NP NP NP Intermediate Mature Cucamonga Pioneer 0.9 1.0 0.3 Intermediate 0.7 1.0 0.2 Mature 1.0 1.0 0.3 San Antonio Pioneer NP NP NP Intermediate 0.9 1.0 0.6 Mature 0.8 0.6 0.3 San Gabriel Pioneer NP NP NP Intermediate 1.0 0.7 1.0 Mature 1.0 0.8 1.0 Big Tujunga Pioneer 1.0 1.0 0.4 Intermediate 0.8 1.0 0.3 Mature 1.0 0.7 0.2 Species Diversity = D - p; logs pa where: p; - decimal fraction of total individuals belonging to the ith species % Shrub Dominance = total line intercepts of a shrub species x 100 total length of all intercepts per stage 3 Structural Diversity = ratio of shrubs (greater the 1.0 m tall) to subshrubs (less than 1.0 m tall) • NP = not present Alluvial scrub vegetation once was more widely dis- tributed along the coastal washes and rivers emanating from the Transverse and Peninsular Ranges of south- ern California, where coalescing, bajadas formed exten- sive, and in places nearly continuous, skirts along these ranges. Agricultural and urban developments in the past century have resulted in its elimination from most of its former range. As a consequence, alluvial scrub is isolated to stands along unaltered streams and out - washes on major alluvial fans. Industrial and residen- tial developments and flood control projects continue to invade these remaining stands. A number of large projects, including a professional football stadium and an international -class golf course, are proposed for de- velopment within some of the premier examples of this vegetation. Historically, rock and sand mining operations have quarried large pits within the floodplain alluvium upon which alluvial scrub vegetation depends. As these build- ing materials become scarce in the southland, alluvial scrub resources become more threatened. Proposed flood control projects further threaten the integrity and long-term vitality of this unique floodplain scrub type. Endangered Species Two alluvial scrub species are listed as endangered by both the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Califor- nia Department of Fish and Game (State of California 1988): Santa Ana River woolly -star (Eriastrurn densi- 192 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-110. 1989. E10-16 365 folium ssp. sanctorumJ is a much -branched subshrub now restricted to sandy soils on river floodplains or ter- raced alluvial deposits of the upper Santa Ana River drainage, San Bernardino County. These sites mostly are on privately owned and Bureau of Land Management lands. The Corps of Engineers currently is supporting research on the ecology of the woolly -star. Slender -horned spineflower (Centrostegia leptoceras) is a delicate prostrate annual found on fine -textured, flood deposited river terraces and washes in Los An- geles, Riverside .and San Bernardino counties. Extant populations are small and seriously threatened. Most occurrences are on private land and are unprotected. Future Prospects At present there is no program of conservation that will ensure the future existence of alluvial scrub vege- tation. However, the designation of this vegetation by the California Natural Diversity Data Base (1987) as a unique habitat with a high priority for preservation is a worthy first step. Yet, this designation lacks legal power. The presence of the two rare and endangered plant species in some of the alluvial scrub stands brings both state and federal agencies into action in the protec- tion and management of these alluvial scrub endemics. To a limited extent some alluvial scrub stands are the beneficiary of these agencies' actions. Urban development pressures and flood control struc- tures and practices increasingly will threaten alluvial scrub by direct removal or indirectly by altering the dy- namics of its hydrology. Only through the acquisition and management of major stands of alluvial scrub can its future be secured. References Axelrod, D. 1. 1978. The origin of coastal sage vegetation, Alta and Baja California. American Journal of Botany 65(10):1117-1131. Barbour, M. G. and J. Major, eds. 1988. Terrestrial vegetation of California. 2nd Edition. Sacramento, Calif.: California Native Plant Society, Special Publication No. 9. 1030 p. ' California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB). 1987. Data base record search for information on threatened, endangered, rare or otherwise sensitive species and com- munities in the vicinity of the rivers and streams in this study. California Department of Fish and Game, State of California Resources Agency, Sacramento, Calif. Cooper, W. S. 1922. The broad-sclerophyll vegetation of California. An ecological .study of chaparral and its related communities. Carnegie Institute of Washington Publication 319. 124 p. Epling, C. and H. Lewis. 1942. The centers of distribution of the chaparral and coastal sage associations. American Midland Naturalist 27:445-462. Hanes, T. L.. 1976. Vegetation types of the San Gabriel Mountains. In: J. Lotting, ed., Plant communities of southern California. Berkeley, Calif.: California Native Plant Society, Special Publication No. 2. Hanes, T. L. 1971. Succession after fire in the chaparral of southern California. Ecological Monographs 41:27-52. Hanes, T. L. 1984. Vegetation of the Santa Ana River and some flood control implications. In: Warner, R. and Hen- drix, K., eds. California riparian systems -ecology, con- servation and productive management. Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press, 882-888 pp. Hanes, T. L. 1973. The San Gabriel River floodplain, pp 369- 372. In: Stebbins, G. L. and Taylor, D. W. ,eds., A Survey of the natural history of the south pacific border region, California- -Biotic themes. Prepared for the National Park Service, U. S. Dept. of Interior, Washington, D.C. Holland, R. F. 1986. Preliminary description of the ter- restrial natural communities of California. Sacramento,. Calif: State of California, The Resources Agency, De- partment of Fish and Game. 156 p., mimeo. Kirkpatrick, J. B. and C. F. Hutchinson. 1977. The community composition of California coastal sage. scrub. Vegetation 35:21-33. Michael Brandman Associates, Inc. 1986. Final subse- quent environmental impact report: Day Creek land and gravel mining operation and reclamation plan. San Bernardino County, Environmental Public Works Agency. San Bernardino, Calif. Michael Brandman Associates, Inc. 1987. Church Street sand and gravel mining environmental assessment. Pre- pared for C. L. Pharris Sand and Gravel, Inc., Highland, Calif. Michael Brandman Associates, Inc. 1988. Preliminary draft report, Biological Resources Assessment. for Raiders Sta- dium Project, environmental impact statement/report. Prepared for Lockman and Associates, Monterey Park, Cal. and Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District. Los Angeles, Calif. Mooney, H. A. 1988. Southern coastal scrub. In: M. G. Barbour and J. Major, eds., Terrestrial vegetation of California. California Native Plant Society, Special Publication No. 9. Sacramento, Calif. 471-489p. Smith, R. L. 1980. Alluvial scrub vegetation of the San Gabriel River floodplain, California. Madrono 27:126-138. State of California. 1988. 1987 Annual report of the status of California's state listed threatened and endangered plants and animals. The Resources Agency, Dept. of Fish and Game, Sacramento, Calif. 109 pp. mimeo. USFWS. 1980. Ecological services manual - 101 ESM - habitat as a basis for environmental assessment. Division of Ecological Services, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Dept. of Interior, Washington, D.C. Westman, W. E. 1981a. Factors influencing the distribution of species of California coastal sage scrub. Ecology 62(2)L:439-455, Westman, W. E. 1981b. Diversity relations and succession in California coastal sage scrub. Ecology 62(1):170-184. USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-110. 1989, 193 E10-16 366 L C ^ LSA ASSA AVENUE. SUITE J \ LSA ISSO AVENUE. C. ]00 RIVERSIDE. CALIFORNIA 92507 February 26, 2015 BEREELEY IRVINE 95IJ519510 TEL CARLSBAD PALM SPRINGS ROCELIN 951.191,4277 FAX FRESNO PT. RICHMOND SAN LUIS OBISPO Mr. Walt Mitchell, VP Retail Project Development Lewis Retail Centers 1156 N. Mountain Avenue Upland, California 91786 Subject: Results of Biological Resources Assessment Survey for the Day Creek -Base Line Retail Development Project in the City of Rancho Cucamonga (LSA Project No. LEW 1402) Dear Mr. Mitchell: LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA) is pleased to present this letter report summarizing the results of a general biological resources assessment for the proposed Day Creek -Base Line Retail Development Project. The proposed project site is approximately 15 acres in size (Assessor's Parcel Numbers [APNs] 108-903-115, I08-903-116, 108-903-135 and a partial piece of 108-903-114) located at the northwest comer of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County, California. More specifically, the site is within Section 32, Township 1 North, Range 6 West, as shown on the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Guasri, California 7.5-minute quadrangle (attached Figure 1). The project proposes the development of approximately 90,187 square feet of retail uses including supermarket, drug store, and other outlying retail pads (attached Figure 2). METHODS A literature review was conducted to determine the existence or potential occurrence of sensitive plant and animal species on or in the vicinity of the project site. Database records for the Cucamonga, California and Guasri, California USGS 7.5-minute quadrangles were searched on December 16, 2014, using the Califomia Department of Fish and Wildlife's (CDFW) Natural Diversity Data Base application Rarefrnd 5 (version December 2, 2014, CDFW, NDDB) and the California Native Plant Society's Electronic lnvenroiy of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California (online edition, CNPS, v8-02, http://www.cnps.org/inventory). Aerial photographs (Google 2014) were reviewed, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) listed species and designated critical habitat information was used to determine the locations of any listed species sightings and critical habitat boundaries on and in the vicinity of the project site. The general biological resources survey included two site visits by LSA Biologists Claudia Bauer and Sarah Barrera. The first visit was conducted on December 23, 2014, between the hours 11:00 and 12:45 p.m. Weather conditions were sunny, warm, and windy during the site visit, with a recorded temperature of 81 ° Fahrenheit. Winds were brisk at approximately 8 to 10 miles per hour. The second site visit was conducted on February 16, 2015, between the hours of4:10 and 4:45pm. Weather conditions were sunny and warm, with a slight breeze. The recorded temperature was 75, Fahrenheit. (7-P-7/1015) R:LLEW Ia02kaio\Bia Rco9rta Unu 2?tr2015 edind LCII final decA PLANNING I EN\IRONMENTAL SCIENCES I DESIGN E10-16 367 IS IS S IICI IT LS. I.(. Observations regarding general site conditions, vegetation, potential jurisdictional waters, and suitability of habitat for special status plants, wildlife, and other biological resources present were recorded. Soil types were determined using the WebSoil Survey (USDARJRCS, http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov). All plant and animal species observed during the field survey were noted. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Elevation, Topography, and Soils The proposed project site is an undeveloped vacant parcel bordered by Day Creek Boulevard and the Day Creek Fire Station to the east, single-family residences and the Rails to Trails multi -use trail to the north, Base Line Road and open undeveloped space to the south, and a fenced equipment/truck yard to the west. The site elevation is approximately 1,320 feet above mean sea level (amsl). The site is generally flat and level, however the topography of the project area is slightly sloped to the south. A drainage feature is present on the southeasterly portion of the site, and originates from an on -site 24-inch diameter concrete culvert near Firehouse Court. Mapped soils on the site are Tujunga gravelly loamy sand, 0 to 9 percent slopes and Tujunga loamy sand, 0 to 5 percent slopes (WebSoil Survey). Soils observed on the site appeared consistent with this designation and have a gravely soil substrate, that is punctuated with rock and cobble. The site historically was located within an alluvial fan and the soils on site are remnant of this association with the alluvial fan (attached Figure 3). Attached Figure 4 depicts site conditions. Vegetation and Land Cover Total vegetation cover on the project site is approximately 70 percent and is moderately to highly disturbed. The vegetation consists of two communities: Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub (RAFSS)(Prelindnmy descriptions of the terrestrial natural coninatnities of California, Holland, R. 1986) and ruderal vegetation. The majority of the RAFSS vegetation onsite is dominated by hairy yerba santa (Eriodictyon trichocalyr). Other co -dominant plants include scalebroom (Lepidosparhtrn squanraumQ and chamise (Adenostontafascienlatttni). Lemonadeberry (Rhos inlegrifolia), mountain mahogany (Cercocarpus betuloides), and Mexican elderberry (Sanrbucus ntericana) were also found on site. The RAFSS found in the northeastern portion of the project site adjacent to the fire station is dominated by California buckwheat (Eriogonunt fascicidatum) and California sagebrush (Artendsia californica). Other co -dominant plants in this area of the project site include wedgeleaf ceanothus (Ceanothus cuneams), deerweed (Acntispon glaber) and chamise. Shoripod mustard (Hirscl feldia incana), telegraph weed (Heterothecagrandtora), fiddleneck (Antsinckia nienziesii), yellow star - thistle (Ceruaurea solslitialis), and other weedy, ruderal species are dominant along the site perimeter where the site has been most disturbed. A mature canyon live oak (Quercur chrysolepis) is found onsite, just west of Ffrehouse Court. A complete list of plant species observed is attached as Appendix A. Wildlife Wildlife species observed during the field surveys include Say's phoebe (Sayornis saya), wrentit (Cbanlaea fasciata), American kestrel (Falco sparverius), mourning dove (Zenaida inacroura), (2427115) "EW 1aa21aiolaia Resources Leper 2-26.2015 edited LCH final.dccx E10-16 368 IS% IS SO( It 1LS. IN( common raven (Comus corar), lesser goldfinch (Cardaelis psaltria) and California towhee (Melo:one crissalis). Common side -blotched lizards (0a stansburiana) were also observed. Potential Jurisdictional Waters and Streambeds The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE), under Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA), regulates discharges of dredged or fill material into "waters of the United States." These waters include wetlands and non -wetland bodies of water that meet specific criteria, including a connection to interstate commerce. This connection may be direct (through a tributary system linking a stream channel with traditional navigable waters used in interstate or foreign commerce) or it may be indirect (through a connection identified in USACE regulations). The USACE typically regulates as non -wetland waters of the U.S. any body of water displaying an "ordinary high water mark" (OHWM). In order to be considered a' jurisdictional wetland" under Section 404, an area must possess hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology. The CDFW, under Sections 1600 et seq. of the California Fish and Game Code, regulates alterations to lakes, rivers, and streams. A stream is defined by (lie presence of a channel bed and banks and at least an occasional flow of water. The Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) is responsible for the administration of Section 401 of the CWA, through water quality certification of any activity that may result in a discharge to jurisdictional waters of the U.S. The RWQCB may also regulate discharges to "waters of the Stale," including wetlands, under the California Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act. An isolated ephemeral drainage feature exists on the site. It originates at a 24-inch diameter concrete culvert approximately 6 feet south of the sidewalk on the west end of Firehouse Court. Roadside runoff from Firehouse Court enters a curbside storm drain that diverts flow onto the project site via the 24-inch diameter concrete culvert. The roadside runoff draining onto the site eventually sheet flows onto the southeasterly portion of the site. The flows do not leave the site, and do not connect to any downstream waters. The subject drainage feature is considered to be a drainage ditch created by roadside runoff. This type of drainage ditch is generally not considered jurisdictional under the CWA because it excavated in and drains only uplands, and does not cant' a relatively permanent flow of water. Additionally, this drainage feature does not contain CDFW riparian habitat and is not considered a natural waterway regulated by CDFW. Therefores, it is LSA's opinion that this drainage would not be subject to the regulatory authority of the USACE under Section 404 of the CWA, the CDFW under Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code, and the RWQB under Section 401 of the CWA. Threatened and Endangered Species Under provisions of Section 7(a)(2) of the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA), a Federal agency that permits, licenses, funds, or otherwise authorizes a project activity must consult with the USFWS to ensure that its actions would not jeopardize the continued existence of any listed threatened or endangered species or destroy or adversely modify critical habitat. The USFWS designates as threatened or endangered, species that are at risk of extinction and may also adopt recovery plans that identify specific areas that are essential to the conservation of a listed species. Critical habitat areas that may require special management considerations or protections can also be designated. (272711S) R ILEWl4020oMio R=oumes Laser ? 2fi tat$ edkd LCH amLdou E10-16 369 LSt ASS nt I %res. tlt. The California Endangered Species Act (CESA) is administered by the CDFW and prohibits the "Take" of plant and animal species identified as either threatened or endangered in the State of California by the Fish and Game Commission (Fish and Game Code Section 2050 to 2097). "Take" is defined as hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill. Sections 2091 and 2081 of the CESA allow the CDFW to authorize exceptions to the prohibition of "Take" of the State -listed threatened or endangered plant and animal species for purposes such as public and private development. The CDFW requires formal consultation to ensure that a proposed project's actions would not jeopardize the continued existence of any listed species or destroy or adversely affect listed species' habitats. Listed below are the Federal and/or State listed species and critical habitats reported to been found within a 1.5-mile radius of the project vicinity: • Coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioprila californica californica; federally listed as threatened); and • San Bernardino kangaroo rat (Dipodongs nierriandprrn us) and its Final Critical Habitat.' Coastal California Gnatcatcher. The alluvial fan sage scrub in the study area provides low quality habitat for the California gnatcatcher. Focused surveys for the California gnatcatcher are required to determine its presence or absence and any potential project effects to this species. The focused survey period during breeding season for the California gnatcatcher is March 15 through June 30 with a minimum of six site visits. Nonbreeding season surveys are conducted from July I through March 14, with a minimum of nine site visits. LSA recommends surveys during the spring breeding season for cost efficiency purposes. San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat. The project site is considered unsuitable habitat for the San Bernardino kangaroo rat (SBKR). The SBKR inhabits alluvial fan sage scrub habitats with gravelly and sandy soils of alluvial fans, braided river channels, active channels and terraces. Although alluvial fan scrub is present, it is disturbed by surrounding development and is isolated from larger blocks of RAFSS habitat. Because the site is isolated, there is no longer active soil transport on the site. Therefore, the site is not considered suitable habitat for the SBKR. In addition, the project site does not occur within SBKR designated critical habitat, which occurs approximately 1.5 miles to the north of the project site and across State Route 210. Thus, the proposed project will have no effects to SBKR and its critical habitat. Other Special Interest Species The CDFW, USFWS, local agencies, and special interest groups, such as the CNPS, maintain lists of species that they consider to be in need of monitoring. Legal protection for these special interest species varies widely. Special interest species known to occur in the region are listed below. • Coast horned lizard (P/trynosonia blainvillif; California Species of Special Concem2 [CSC]); • Northwestern San Diego pocket mouse (Chaerodlpns fallac fa/lax; CSC); ' Designation of Critical Habitat for the San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat (Dipodomys nlerrinmi panes); Department of the Interior. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Final Rule: 73 FR 61936 62002; October 2009. Refers to species with vulnerable or seriously declining populations. (2Q7/15) RtLEW IJa2%Wllia Resources tatter 2.26 2n15 ediud LCH nml does E10-16 370 LS( WSQ( IA1 r.D. INC. San Diego desert woodrat (Neotonla lepirla intermedia; CSC); • Parry's spineflower (Chorizantbe parryi var. panyi; CNPS Califomia Rare Plant Rank (CRPR) status 1B);1 and • Mesa horkelia (Horkelia cuneata var. pubenda; CNPS status I B). There is a low likelihood of these species occurring within the project site due to the habitat conditions on the site. Additionally, the species have a limited population distribution in southern California, and development is reducing their ranges and numbers further. These species have no official State or federal protection status but require consideration under CEQA. Due to the small size of the proposed project site, existing disturbances, and proximity to surrounding development, impacts to these sensitive species are not considered significant. No other special interest species are expected to occur within the project site. Migratory Bird Treaty Act Nesting bird species are protected by California Fish and Game Code Sections 3503 and 3503.5, and by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of 1918 (16 USC 703.711). These laws make it unlawful to take, possess, or needlessly destroy the nest or eggs of any migratory bird or bird of prey. Trees and shrubs on the project site may provide nesting habitat for birds observed using the site as well as other birds known from the region. It is recommended that vegetation clearing activities be scheduled outside of the avian nesting season (February 1 through August 31). If construction activities are planned during the avian nesting season, a pre -construction nesting bird survey should be conducted within 30 days prior to commencement to avoid impacts to birds protected under the Fish and Game Code and IABTA. Natural Communities of Interest The RAFSS is a CNDDB designated special -status plant community. Because this habitat is disturbed and isolated from larger block of habitat, the loss of 10 acres of RSS is not considered substantial. Adopted Habitat Conservation Plan The project site does not lie within an area covered by any adopted Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP). Local Policies and Ordinances Protecting Biological Resources City and County General Plans and development ordinances may include regulations or policies governing biological resources. For example, policies may include tree preservation, locally designated species survey areas, local species of interest, and significant ecological areas. I CRPR Status I B Plants considered by CLAPS to be rare, evwtened, or endangered in California and elsewhere. (1-1715) R:d.ER9402amlBio Resouacs Lever '-•?6•'-015 edited LCII final.docx E10-16 371 la, %S50L 1 LTL5. IN I. The City of Rancho Cucamonga would consider the canyon live oak located onsite to be a Heritage Tree (refer to Figure 3). The Heritage Tree designation is determined by various factors. The canyon live oak qualifies for the distinction because it is in "excess of 30 feet in height and has a single trunk diameter at breast height (DBH) of 20 inches or more as measured 41h feet from ground level." (City of Rancho Cucamonga Code 1980, § 17.16.080; Ord. No. 855, § 4 (attach. 1), 8-1-2012; Ord. No. 858, § 4 (attach. 1), 1-16-2013; Ord. No. 860, § 4 (attach. 1), 6-19-2013.) It is LSA understanding the canyon live oak will remain in place. Contractors working near preserved trees will need to refer to the municipal code section pertaining to the Protection of Existing Trees for specific guidelines for working adjacent to preserved trees (Code 1980, § 17.80.050; Ord. No. 855, § 4 (attach. 1), 8-1-2012). RECOMMENDATIONS The following actions are recommended in order to avoid unauthorized impacts to biological resources as a result of the proposed project: • If vegetation clearinglinitial ground -disturbing activities are planned during the avian nesting season (approximately February l through August 31), nesting bird surveys shall be conducted 30 days prior to vegetation clearing to ensure birds protected under California Fish and Game Code and the MBTA are not affected by construction -related activities. • The alluvial fan sage scrub on the project site provides potentially suitable habitat for the California gnatcatcher. Focused surveys for the California gnatcatcher would be required to determine its presence or absence and any potential project effects to this species. The focused survey period during breeding season for the California gnatcatcher is March 15 through June 30 with a minimum of six site visits. Nonbreeding season surveys are conducted from July l through March 14, with a minimum of nine site visits. LSA recommends surveys during the spring breeding season for cost efficiency purposes. Sincerely, LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. t2audi�aE64uer� � Senior Biologist Attachments: Appendix A: Plants and Animals Species Observed Onsite Figure 1: Regional and Project Location Figure 2: Project Location and Photograph Key Map Figure 3; Vegetation and Soils Figure 4: Site Photographs (2/27/15) R%EIYWOPBioNBio Raaurca ten, = 26.2015 alil d LCII fiml dooa E10-16 372 15\ "511L 11TE). 1%( Appendix A: List of Plant and Wildlife Soecies Observed Scientific Name Common Name MAGNOLIOPI YTAi MAGNOLIOPSIDA DICOT FLOWERING PLANTS Adoxaccac Moschatel family Saurbucus mericana Mexican elderberry Anacardiaceac Sumac family Rbus integrifolia Lemonadeberry Rhus trilobaia Skunkbush Toaicodendron diversilobwu Poison oak Asteraccae Sunflower family Artendsia californica California sagebrush Baccbaris salicifolia Mule fat Centaurea solstitialis Yellow star -thistle Ericarueria pintfolia Pinebush Heterotbeca grandiora Telegraph weed Lacruca serriola Prickly lettuce Lepidosparturn squaniar an Scalebroom Apinceae Parsley family Aphan graveolens Common celery Boraglnaceae Borage family Anisincdia ntenziesii Common fiddleneck Cryptandm sp. Cryptantha Eriodictvou califondcunt Yerba santa Eucr}pta chrysanthanrifolia Common cucrypta Pectacaiya linearis Sagebrush combseed Brossicaccae Mustard family Hirsclifeldia incana (non-native species) Shonpod mustard Cactacene Cactus family Cylindropnnria califondca ver. parkeri Valley cholla Optirrtia sp. Beavertail Citenopodincene Saltbush family Salsola tragus (non-native species) Russian thistle Cucurbttaceae Gourd family Marab macrocarpus Cucamonga manroot Eupharbiaceac Spurge family Croton californicus California croton Croton sedgents Dove weed Euphorbia peplos Petty spurge Ricinus caniatuids (non-native species) Castor bean (277il5) R:'LE%VI4021Bio%Bio R=um" Lcner ?46-'_015 nrirN LCII riml.doa A-1 E10-16 373 1SA OSaf I%Trl. INC. Appendix A: List of Plant and Wildlife Species Observed Scientific Name Common Name Fabaccae Pell family Acraispon glaber Deerweed Asrragahis di4vniocarpus Dwarf while milk vetch Astragalus pontonensis Pomona locoweed Fagaceae Beeches and Oaks family puercirs chrysolepis Canyon live oak Larniaceae Mint family Salida apiana White sage Afamibiumwdgare(nonmalivespecies) Horehound Polygonaccac Buckwheat family Eriogonunijasciculaium California buckwheat Ramer hyntenosepahis Wild rhubarb Onagraccae Evening primrose family Cauilssonlopsis sp. Sunup Rhamnaccac Buckthorn Family Rhanunts crocea Redberry Rosaceae Rose family Adenosionta jasciculahrnr Chemise Cercocarpirs beittloides Mountain mahogany Prunits ilicifolia Holly leaved cherry Urticacene Nettle family Unica nrens Dwarf stinging nettle S AGNOLIOPHYTA: LILIOPSIDA MONOCOT FLOWERING PLANTS Agavacene Agave family Herpercyueea whipplel Chaparral yucca REP.TILIA REPTILES Phrynosomatidne Phrynosomatid Lizards Uiasransbariano Common side -blotched lizard AVES. BIRDS Columbidse Pigeons and Doves Zenaida nracroura Mourning dove Carvidae Crows and Ravens Con -its corar Common raven (2r'-7.15) R�LEW I4UNNUtato Rcsoums L un_]-?6-2015 Wiwd LCII fiml.doex A-2 E10-16 374 11% t"I'(I1rEs. INC Appendix A: List of Plant and Wildlife Species Observed Scientific Name Common Name Emberizidne Emberizines Afelo:wie crissolis California towhee Falconidno Falcons Falco span-cHus Amercian kestrel Fr[ngillidae Finches Spinus psaltria Lesser goldfinch Sylviidac Old World Wnrblers Chamaca jasciata W remit Tyrannhh a Tyrant Flycatchers Sayondssoya Say'sphoebe (2/17,15) VLEW 170M,olitio Retomcu t IIff '_46-2015 died LCH 61u1.&cx A-3 E10-16 375 �j• 3r:i _� _s ... �^ If Scion J _.— Project Location "' W E (' 501 ..._.tom_-- - _ r'� �• .. �. - •'1 1 I SEU HOAR- u . s 1 - � , A '' I R ' - _- _ tiwa dLu r _ �CR Re ional Location 4 is � L _ It ' sch — r FOOTHILL St UL aF• f t�f(�,< Pmlcet Arco O •r ' is 8t APROW ' Ri,rrt(dr C.very � • �-3 �'____..y^ Jv. �, �0 10 ]a 11�1 1 'IL��3-'�•EtiWandN• �wrru.. L S A I a 1,000 9,000 FEET FIGURE I Day Creel✓ROseline Retail Derelopment Projecl Biological Resources Assessment SOURCE USGS7.T Quids: Cocom ,Pok{I98A),G�s1i(19gn CA, 2lmmir 8mi.2009 Regional and Project Location I'ILEWI402'Jtq. laio\agI Rcg(nc..d(213a015) E10-16 376 u..:�.r-...a- " i�SP+'�t+'7L" Op • aC'{Y j/ aJe'd+i�:5.l�p�"�.� ' Sty. r 'l'1 ♦ �. }_! L� `fib &; 05 ;` � Y4.1� chi ! r L: i r •.li�' ej�ga T'S3 r..y �I''+ -L � �� � � ,, �,. +-5 �S ice. •���� F� s it t ,�,�}/1,}�,,,. StC•1+ #YA'.',a •TTf++ICE& �' !-. �• f � ��. {' ,l}i�lf' L i �.+a` r . - FIGOUR 'all �,`-11, :� �.�i7Flt:r•1 �I //;;.'' �� f.Fn at rr l r.+ 4I" •+•. . .s � •s,� .1.yp{! a}:� f �1� F,'x�' :HET r Q►f+i rr. >y d;•-�,t, ::qr�r �n�•+'��l�f. py � ,'.lY� 2� �t � , •`.tip..` � �a �t�.+_z+�� `:.'Q2Ce,�l `^ f„' � t• `�Nr r ♦` , r r ti'a .,r C4 `j, !d Il't)r ��� .� ,V a Y i•,�7 -ir - •'T I �t r- . !k t '�M1 - ,V! 31 }S� r 4Y 1. �i� ' ttt, L t •�' '�rla� �' }f} rj 11. ���dti• t S �t �M1 a�!(�a 't i.1' V .. ` V WIN M'�Sypr.�i J_'..�r' -27—' S;.c 'G JF`' �►.. Y'F.n 1i„ad�StT+ "ii ,e7r': r 1. �fFfitr"t Y�3rrjt�t,+ �1- ti. �i t y " _t.•+ .was.-i-��^'. _ tt.r. '11) I �_ SEUNE R�rr�c'r�i �+3y� 1 '... t � _ � L•r�^ ` "• j n t J 3 •,• ~ :"Ors 1r s[. 9 `djr1 T `StJ'AiT 9w yM3� i 7Y � 11,4 t� S , k W.-Im {y• r, _i3_ j ► � " i.. i. ra>a4 :'4-'rWt Lim .�. r �. , t • tom. •i i S'.y- 4 44 �� '{I. 'Lvi. �,f}Ld11r'+F „' PHOTOGRAPH 9: VRa facing aodhralf. PHOTOGRAPH 10:Vrmfacingnorthaxn. L S A FIGURE4C Da Creelc/Baseline Retail Development Project Biological Resources Assessment Site I ILEWNO:�Rep.m\Bi6 rgi_SimPhnm..eJr (0?/INnp15) E10-16 381 No Safe Arbor in the City - Iatinnes Pagel of 3 itxk bi nn6fn.I :VIM, The Nation I COLUMN ONE No Safe Arbor in the City 'I'rvea are disupprnring from urban areas. Most people don t realize the significance q/ the loss, but one roan is fig litinp Jbr a place in the shade. March 08, 2004 1 John Balzar I Times Staff Writer Eric Oldar doesn't have to go far to find the alarming evidence. He lifts his sizable 6-foot-5 frame out of his office chair, wvlks 20 paces to the door, steps outside and glumly eyes the culprit a spindly trope myrtle tree. A whole row of them bordering the Riverside parking lot. Actually, crape myrtles aren't trees. They are shrubs that grow to look something like trees in miniature. And that, in short, is the problem. That is what puts a knot in Oldar s jaw and leaves him muttering: "People want quality lives and communities -- they say so. But subtly, all around them, they're losing one of the essentials." Our grand city trees are disappearing. The towering trees that provide us cooling shade and save on air conditioning; the trees that give roost to birds; the broad -shouldered trees that soak up the heavy rains before they gather into Floodwaters; the trees that cleanse our air and muffle the roar of metropolitan life; the great trees that inspire the poet in our battered urban hearts; the trees that soften the sharp corners of crowded living and connect us to the majesty of nature— the trees are going away. In their place: pygmy stands of crape myrtles, or clumps of even smaller bushes. Or just beds of redwood chips scattered atop plastic sheeting to make sure that even weeds don't grow. "We're eliminating trees," says Oldar with a deep sigh. "We're letting them become trivialized; without really paying attention, we're letting them disappear." Oldar is a forester and a pioneer in California's tinv urban forestry program, which is tucked away with firefighters in the state Department of Forestry. He has devoted most of his 27-year career to promoting urban forests, a concept that makes all the sense in the world if we think about it, which, let's agree, not many of us do. How many of us were even aware that Sunday was Arbor Day in California, the day for celebrating and planting trees? In our mind's eye, if not in reality, cities of the United States are made glorious by their trees, and always have been. In the imagination of entrepreneurs, the city groves are a vast, untapped and profitable stock of spectacular hardwoods and softwoods for furniture, floors and home architectural details. In truth, though, our cities are turning from green into gray-- at an alarming rate and with surprisingly costly consequences: ' According to American Forests, the nation's oldest citizen conservation organization and self-proclaimed "voice of the trees," the nation's urban area as defined by the Census Bureau have lost 21% of their tree cover in the last decade. Viewed over longer time spans, the news is even worse. For instance, Washington, a city renowned for its blossoming cherry trees, has sacrificed 60 % of its heavy tree canopy in the last generation, Even before the recent will fares, San Diego and surrounding communities had lost 27% of their green canopy in less than 20 years. In an extensive study using satellite imagery•, scientists at American Forests calculated that the trend, if unchecked, could cost taxpayers $164 million to manage future storm -water runoff. Added pollution that trees would otherwise absorb could make it more difficult for the region to attain clean -air standards. ' Ajoint study by state and federal forestry agencies determined that California cities have about 177 million trees and 242 million empty planting sites. The potential savings is huge. Three good trees planted around your house can reduce air-conditioning costs 20% or more. In a project sponsored by NASA, meteorologists determined that clearing trees had made temperatures in Ad onto 5 to 8 degrees higher than in outlying areas. This has created an urban "heat island" that generates increasingly violent thunderstorms over the city and its suburbs, contributing to flooding. And the topper: Incalculable millions are spent to process valuable tons of trees as common garbage. According to studies by the U.S. Forest Service and the International Society of Arbariculture, more potentially usable wood fiber is produced in urban areas each year than is harvested from U.S. national forests — much of it sent into an already overburdened waste stream. The numbers grow mind -numbing. Potential energy savings run into the billions of dollars if we would only shade ourselves under more trees— $3.6 billion annually in California alone, according to a study by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The savings from needless flood control is even greater. And global warming? Trees sequester epic amounts of Carbon, which is the culprit in making our atmosphere a heat -trapping greenhouse. In other words, it's not just the size of the car we drive but the number of trees we plant that may shape tomorrow's weather. To visit Oldar s cluttered, io-by-12 office near the 91 Freeway is to tumble down a rabbit hole. The simple logic behind trees in our cities is inarguable; so too are the mindless forces that work against them. That makes Oldar a man of divided spirits. What other do-gooder state bureaucrat can so easily describe a painless, profitable, easily grasped solution for a broad civic problem? This is not poverty or racial prejudice or traffic congestion — troubles that seem to defy our capacity to envision workable solutions. Hem, we can all save money and make daily life quieter, more beautiful, indeed more natural, for hardly any effort at all. Oldar's round face seems to light up. He is an unstoppable optimist. E10-16 382 No Safe Arbor in the City - Wi mes Page 2 of 3 More than 8o years ago, Helen Hoyt put it this way in her poem "Ellis Park": I take your trees, And your breeze, Your greenness, Your cleanness, Some of your shade, some of your sky, Some of your calm as I go by But then Oldar outlines the maddening obstacles in the path of shady, greener cities — all of them described in reports, videos, pamphlets, satellite photos and books that he pries up in a truly scary -large stack almost as high as his desk Most of these documents contain same version of the old buck -passing excuse: I don't know, I don't care, it's not my responsibility. Older sags in his chair with an expression of impossibility on his face, a born -again pessimist. For what it's worth, California is a national leader in the campaign to save city trees. The state's 1978 lavv on the subject says this: "Trees serve as a vital resource in the urban environment and as an important psychological link with nature for the urban dweller. Trees are a valuable economic asset ... play an important role in energy conservation ... reduce air pollution ... increase property values ... attract business... " And so forth. Here and there — and it's pretty obvious where: Beverly Hills, San Marino, Claremont to name three — individual communities continue to promote and protect their trco-scapcs. Other municipalities are awakening. San Diego has undertaken a zo-year replanting program. In the last few years, the city of Los Angeles has begun planting more curbside trees than it cuts down, and just last week announced that a $1-million federal -state transportation grant would be rued to plant 3,5oo more trees - utilizing crape myrtles only when planting space demands it. "We're planting trees greater than 40 feet whenever possible. It is extremely important for our environment to have a healthy urban forest of large -canopy, trees" says Melinda Bartlett of the Los Angeles Environmental Affairs Department. Elsewhere, though, trees tend to occupy far lower rungs of the municipal priority list, notwithstanding common sense or the law In Oldar s idealized vision of California's future, the challenge is not quite as simple as planting trees. But almost. It must be the right tree in the proper place — no single -species urban forest amnocultures that are prone to attacks like Dutch elm disease or the insect assault that has killed 3o,00a eucalyptus trees in Las Angela in the last 18 months. Plantings need to be spaced out so that entire neighborhoods of trees don't reach maturity and begin to die off at once, as is happening now in post -World War II subdivisions. Municipal leaders and those higher up the governmental organizational chain must update master plans and ordinances to recognize the manifold value of trees, Older continues. Governments need to jump-start the budding enterprise of utilizing -- and bringing to market — the wondrous woods produced by urban trees as they reach maturity. and need to be replaced. One example: Acacia trees by the hundreds, or even thousands, are chopped up and dispatched to California landfills at who -knows -what expense to municipal governments. It is not that different from city councils' hiring crews to "dispose" of underground oil reserves by pumping them into sewers. In Hawaii, by contrast, the sister tree to California's acacia is the imperiled koa, whose wood, increasingly rare, fetches from $17.50 to $5o per board foot, which is a chunk of tree smaller than a breadboard, only Iz inches square and 1 inch thick. From a briefcase under his desk, Oldar produces samples of 35 other exotic and valuable woods that are common hereabouts and now burdening landfills instead of being used for furniture, home building or even for fuel to generate energy. Stephen M. Bmtkovich, a forester with the U.S. Forest Service in St. Paul, Minn., has drawn from published studies to calculate that cities produce about 3.8 billion board feet of usable logs each year due to natural mortality, disease, storm blow-dowms and development — more wood than harvested from all of the country's 147 million acres of national foresflands. Much of it, probably most, is sent to landfills or turned into low -value products like wood chips. Bmtkovich has calculated that if all these logs were sawed into Iz-inch-wide boards and laid end to end, they would make izo round-trip paths from Los Angeles to New. York. Hoping to turn the situation mound in California, the state nmrgrubstakes entrepreneurs to try their hand at salvaging urban woods. The state Department of Forestry and Fire Protection sponsors an annual four -day Urban Forestry Academy for municipal officials. The state helps support a vast website, www.ufei.org, that guides consumers and government officials in what kind of trees to plant and, potentially, where the resulting wood ran be sold and purchased. Last autumn, the group American Forests urged miry city to establish the goal of increasing its tree canopy by Io%. Still, California remains headed down what Oldar calls "an insidious slope": Great shade trees are vanishing, leaving pygmy urban forests and gray-scapes. Why? Oldar rips into the topic with the zeal of a chatnsaw: Municipal governments manage trees but have no incentive or requirement to promote energy conservation, storm -water management or pollution abatement That's the chore of other agencies. On the other hand, local governments are required by law to reduce the volume of waste they send to landfills. They are charged with repairing sidewalks and curbs damaged by tree roots. As a consequence, trees have became a costly nuisance, not an asset to local officials. Who can blame them for the current trend to plant smaller shrubs, like the crape myrtle? As for the potential value of wasted lumber, cities consider this merely theoretical, if they consider it at all. The hidebound lumber distribution system in the U.S. is dominated by giant chain operations that have little interest In sundry lots of variety woods produced in urban forests. Meanwhile, developers, trying to maximize densities, also are planting bushes instead of trees. Ditto homeowners with a mind to expand their houses to the property lines. Thus, the crape myrtle, Lagerstroemia indices, is now the most popular tree in urban California — an idea that strikes Older like a thumb in the eye. E10-16 383 I,fin•//.,hi,.l.,�.l..fi..,n.,.n.„/n.in{/7/vllil /...nr/f1R/M4nhninm..ni/.J 4.....,�R No Sale Arbor in the City - I ati mes Page 3 of 3 "I call them crap myrtles," he grumbles. "They have their place, but should we get carried away and say this is the only tree? What does that tell us about the future?" Standing outside his office, he surveys the skinny row of 12400t-tall myrtles. "See any signs of birds there? Any nests?" He pivots i8o degrees and looks heavenward to the top of a shapely sycamore, where a large nest is silhouetted against the sky. In the summer, these trees would tell another important story — that the crape myrtles generate hardly enough shade to cover the bonnet of a compact car while one lone sycamore shelters the forestry department offices all afternoon. Added up block by block, the consequences can be startling. In the various studies of tree cover in Atlanta, scientists measured the downtown air temperature at 86 degrees, while comparative surface temperatures were 85 to go degrees in the shade of trees and 127 to 129 in direct sun. In one seven -house development built byAtlanta's Habitat for Humanity, scientists determined that homeowners would save $951 in energy and $268 in storm drainage charges each year if adequate trees were planted and allowed to mature. Meanwhile, Oldar says, municipal and regional park departments are increasingly preoccupied with recreational developments — tennis courts, softball fields, recreation centers and the like, not trees. These days, even homeowners cannot be counted on to keep their neighborhoods green— and the truth is that private citizens shoulder much of the burden as urban foresters. In Los Angeles, the city government owns 1.5 million to 2 million trees, while businesses and homeowners are responsible for perhaps in million. And while many citizens are happy to tell pollsters all the virtues of tree -lined streets, in practice a good many favor trees everywhere but on their own property, worried about storm damage or tree roots clogging their pipes or squirrels tangling with their house cats or the mess of leaves in autumn. More and more, they turn over yardwork to gardeners who are untrained in tree. care. "I have one of the few homes on my block with any substantial number of trees left," Older sadly concedes about his neighborhood in Ontario. In and climates like Southern California, the fresh water necessary for all types of vegetation is increasingly part of the civic conversation, or should be. In this, trees generally fare well — with many varieties requiring only about one-third the water of a lawn, and then, in turn, providing shade that conserves soil moisture for other plants. Asked to look ahead, Older, the father of two, remains a man divided It is entirely plausible, he says, for a common-sense turnabout. Once Californians begin to recognize what is happening, it would take only reasonable effort to increase the shade -tree canopy to 25%or 30%of our residential landscape. "That's realistic, and that's what I'd like to see," he says. "What I fear is the mind -set of doing nothing, that people wont appreciate trees generally." In that case, trees may wind up like covered bridges, a quaint part of America's past. Within a generation, perhaps only 6% of our cities will be shaded by trees —with the corresponding reduction in the quality of our lives. 'That." Older says quietly, "is what I fear for my kids. They'll wake up in the future and wonder: Where did it all go?" Los Angeles UIMCS Capydghtzor5Los Angeles Times IndebyKeyword I Indeby0ate I PdvacyPolicy I Termsof5erviee E10-16 384 Agricultural Land Loss & Conservation Of California's approximately 100 million acres of land, 43 million acres are used for agriculture. Of this, 16 million acres are grazing land and 27 million acres are cropland. Only about 9 million acres of irrigated land (see illustration), or one-third of the state's cropland, are considered to be prime, unique or of statewide importance. About 3.4 million acres of land in California's agricultural counties are now urbanized. (Another 2 million acres are in areas that are so urbanized that there is no more agriculture.) Development is now consuming an average of about 40,000 acres of agricultural land per year. One -sixth of the land urbanized since the Gold Rush, 538,000 acres, has been developed since 1990. Of this, 28 percent or 152,000 acres of land, were prime, unique or statewide important farmland. In the San Joaquin Valley, which accounts for over half of California's total agricultural output, more than 60 percent of all land developed was prime, unique or of statewide importance. Less than 40 percent of all land in this region falls into these categories. The disproportionate consumption of the best farmland is occurring primarily because most California cities were located in areas with good soils and abundant water, and most development is now occurring on the immediate urban fringe. An exception to typical urban -edge development is the proliferation of very -large lot (5- 40 acre) rural residences that have the appearance of farms or ranches, but are not, and are unlikely ever to be, used for commercial agriculture. Statewide data do not exist on these "ranchettes," but in the San Joaquin Valley, the Farmland Mapping & Monitoring Program has documented 143,000 acres devoted to this use, accounting for 20 percent of all developed land in that region while housing a much smaller fraction of the population. The underlying causes of farmland loss in California are rapid population growth and the inefficient use of land. Since 1990, urban development has consumed an acre of land for every 9.4 people statewide. In the San Joaquin Valley, the rate was an acre for every 8 people. In contrast, recent development in Sacramento County, an acknowledged leader in efficient growth, accommodated 20 people per acre. E10-16 385 19 Additional land has been removed from agriculture for environmental purposes, mainly the creation or enlargement of wildlife refuges and withdrawals due to water shortage. Between 2004 and 2006 alone, irrigated farmland declined by more than 200,000 acres statewide due to these and similar causes. Unless issues related to the impact of irrigation on the Delta are resolved, there is a significant risk much more farmland will be permanently lost to agriculture or, at least, to irrigated crop production. If current development trends continue, 1.3 million acres of California agricultural land, including 670,000 acres of prime, unique and statewide important farmland, will be developed by 2050. For irrigated cropland alone, this would entail an annual loss of an estimated $2 billion in agricultural production in current farm gate dollars. Only five counties in California now produce more than that. Though California agriculture has thus far prospered despite the loss of farmland, it - remains to be seen whether this will continue. Between 1949 and 1989, agricultural productivity growth in California averaged 2.2 percent per year, while from 1990 to 2002 it slowed to 1.2 percent. Historic increases in agricultural productivity have been sustained largely by expanding water supplies, the increasing use of fossil energy and more sophisticated technology. All of these are now under mounting pressure because of scarcity, cost and public opposition, e.g., agrichemicals and GMOs, not to mention the uncertain impact of climate change. Have we reached a tipping point? Regardless, farmland lost is gone forever, and the continuing loss of the state's best land narrows the options and reduces the resilience of California agriculture. Some California farmland will continue to be lost to urban and other uses in the future. But more effective farmland retention and urban development policies could significantly reduce the loss. In the San Joaquin Valley, a recent study done for a regional planning process called the "Blueprint," found that increasing urban densities to 10 dwellings per acre — comparable to those in the more suburban areas of the state — could reduce farmland loss by 53 percent or 174,000 acres by 2050. California has a complicated fabric of policies that address the retention of farmland for agriculture. The closest thing the state has to an official policy is AB 857 (2003), which established farmland retention as one of three state planning priorities. (Another priority, efficient urban development, would also conserve farmland.) This law requires state agencies to apply the policy and calls for an annual report by the Governor on their progress, but neither has occurred to date. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) includes farmland loss as a significant impact that must be avoided or mitigated, and some mitigation has occurred, resulting in the preservation of several thousand acres of land under conservation easement. The California Farmland Conservancy Program (CFCP), administered by the Department of Conservation, has invested $62 million in the acquisition of conservation easements on 41,000 acres, leveraging its funds with $51 million in local, federal and private contributions. State funds have come from bond acts and Williamson Act cancellation fees. Since the inception of the CFCP, the state has spent about 17 cents per capita per year on agricultural conservation easements, well below national leaders like Maryland ($4 per capita per year to protect 336,000 acres) and Pennsylvania ($2.70 to protect 408,000). Private land trusts have also acquired 20 E10-16 386 conservation easements over at least 200,000 acres of California agricultural land, most of it rangeland. The Williamson Act (1965) is perhaps the state's best-known farmland retention policy. It was intended to take development pressure off farmland by reducing property taxes in exchange for an annually -renewing 10-year commitment not to develop the land. About 16.5 million acres of land are now enrolled in Williamson at an annual cost of just under $40 million in state subvention payments to local governments (plus an undetermined amount of foregone local property tax revenue). The efficacy of the law as a deterrent to farmland conversion is called into question by the pattern of enrollment, which tends to be very spotty around cities where land is most likely to be developed. Recently -enacted state climate legislation (AB 32 and SB 375) may also have a salutary effect on farmland conversion by encouraging more compact, efficient development that not only requires less auto use and, hence, produced fewer greenhouse gas emissions, but also consumes less land per capita. A considerable number of California counties and cities have farmland retention policies, often as part of their general plans. Most call for avoiding the best land and developing land more efficiently. As farmland conversion data show, however, these well- intentioned policies have been largely ineffective. Local governments seldom appear to apply them to actual development proposals or to measure their performance against their stated policies. On the other hand, a few local governments in California have very comprehensive and effective farmland conservation programs that are considered national models. Most notable among them are Marin, Sonoma, Napa, Ventura and Yolo Counties. In contrast, leading agricultural counties such as Fresno, Tulare and Monterey have been struggling to adopt and implement effective farmland conservation policies. Key issues for resolution: What level of farmland loss is acceptable — or what level of farmland conservation is necessary — to guarantee a land base that will sustain the California agriculture industry in the face of other pressures and uncertainties? Are state and local farmland conservation policies strong enough to limit the loss to this level? How can we measure our progress and, ultimately, success? — Edward Thompson, Jr., American Farmland Trust, July 2009 Sources: Alston, J., P. Pardey and J. James, Setting agricultural science strategy in tumultuous economic times, , California Agriculture 63(l):2-2. DOL• 10.3733/ca.v063n0lp2. January -March 2009, available at: http•//ucanr org/repository/CAO/landing�p'tve cfm?article=ca vO63n01 p2&f illtext—yes Farmland Mapping & Monitoring Program, California Department of Conservation, reports available at: http://www conservation ca gov/dlrp/FMNIP/Paees/Index asox Higgins, B., et A, Institute for Local Self -Government, Farmland Protection Action Guide: 24 Strategies for California, (2002), available at: http://water.lec.ore/resource- tools/Farmland/o20Protection%20Action°/20Guide odf 21 E10-16 387 Kuminoff,N., A. Sokolow and D. Sumner, University of California Agriculture Issues Center, Farmland Conversion: Perceptions and Realities, AIC Issues Brief 916 (2001), available at: httn://aic.ucdavis.edu/oa/brie fl 6.pddf San Joaquin Valley Blueprint, Comparison of Performance Measures, available at: htto://www.valleyblueprint.org/documents/Summit 09/summit.followup/seenario.performance.measures.o df Thompson, E., American Farmland Trust, The Future Is Now: Central Valley Farmland at the Tipping Point? (2006), available at: httn://ivww.farmland.orJprourams/states/futurcisnow/defiuIt.mp Thompson, E. American Farmland Trust, Paving Paradise: A Neiv Perspective on California Farmland Conversion (2007), available at: www.farmland.ore/california Watt, T. and E. Thompson, American Farmland Trust, Case Studies in Agricultural Land Preservation in California, (2006)(summary available on Ag Vision web site) 22 E10-16 388 Granger, Donald From: Henry Tran Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2017 6:12 To: Granger, Donald Subject: Re: Day Creek Square: Third and Final Community Meeting and Upcoming Planning Commission Meeting Dear Donald I am not sure if I am able to attend the meeting to night, I want to send you my concems and suggestion for the Day Creek Square Project 1. Parking problems: I suggest that a detail report on the parking issue. a) The tandem parking in the resident highly will be converted to storage and the possible conversion of dens to bed room making the shortage the parking b) The shared parking between the commercial/business and residential which i snot like kind has to be properly studied. There haven't been many cases like this in reality. c) Highly possible parking problems to the immediate neighborhoods: Reality proved that even though with proper study the Strathmore community has the parking problems so bad that they had to build the gate. Unfortunately our community doesn't have space and resource for the gate. We want a clear solution for from the Developer and City if it,happens to our communities. What would the City will do to resolve the problems 2. Safety : With the huge number of newly built Condos , very possible it is good opportunity for investors to buyer for rental properties. Reality shows that many foreign investors turn investment properties into a Airbnb business. The chance for criminals to rent them and commit crimes is very high. I suggest that Developer via the CC&R won't allow any transaction to investors at least in the first 5 years . This will partially keep the community mainly for primary resident buyers 3. Traffic on Baseline and Etiwanda is already bad during the drop off and pick up time for schools. In traffic created by the Day Creek Market Place will definitely worsen the problems not mention the additional number of care user of futlure residents of Day Creek Square. 4. Over load schools Based on the above mentioned problems , I suggest that the City request the Developer to have more detail study on parking, traffic problems. The obvious solution is to reduce the density by lower the number of the condo style residential units with more single family units or reserve 1 of the complexes of for sale the senior citizens. -As senior mostly have 1 car, no kids, don't travel frequently Please submit my suggestion to the Planning Department and the City Council Your attention to our concerns is highly appreciated Henr Tran Getyourown ❑ -'•mailsi-nature On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 6:57 PM, Granger, Donald <Donald.Granaer a cityofrc us> wrote: E10-116 389 Granger, Donald From: Janice Elliot Sent: Thursday, A 6 0 2017 8:01 PM To: Granger, Donald Cc: Subject: a i a mitigation for Day Creek Square Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commissioners and City Council Members, As an avid conservationist, I am writing you to share my concern that the 28.4 acres of Riversidian alluvial fan sage scrub habitat be mitigated to help preserve this rapidly diminishing natural resource. The plants and animals that inhabit this community will need to find other homes or they will perish, adding to the number of our diminishing native plants and animals. Please consider a park or walking area that prominently features samples of our local native plants to encourage an appreciation of our natural herifage per the 2010 Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. This could inspire people to incorporate these plants in their home gardens, thereby encouraging water conservation as well since these native plants are drought tolerant. Thank you for considering the preservation of our beautiful sage scrub plant communities. Janice Elliott Upland city council member E10-116 390 Granger, Donald From: Suzanne Thompson Sent: Saturday, June 03, 20I7 5:09 AM To: Granger, Donald Subject: Day Creek Square Project Public Comments June 3, 2017 Donald Granger, Senior Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Dr. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department: I am not a Rancho resident, but live close by and frequently visit your city on shopping trips to Victoria Gardens, REI, or Living Spaces, dining at the Brio Tuscan Grill or the Sycamore Inn, shopping for Asian ingredients at the 99 Ranch Market, or a medical appointment at the Kaiser Medical Center. I especially enjoy exploring the wildlife and beauty of your North Etiwanda Preserve. The natural habitat and environmental quality of Rancho Cucamonga is important to me and enhances the appeal of your city. I was very disappointed to learn that development decisions are being made that compromise the remaining natural environment in Rancho. The proposed Day Creek Square project will permanently remove Riversidian alluvial fan sage scrub (RAFSS) from its 28.4 acre site. This RAFSS is considered by our state to be a sensitive and declining habitat that is home to a variety of native wildlife species including birds. As a result, I ask that the City of Rancho Cucamonga require DR Horton, the developer of this project, to mitigate for the loss of this RAFSS as per the conservation goals of the Rancho Cucamonga 2010 General Plan. An example of mitigation for the loss of RAFSS would be to require the Day Creek Square project to 1) include native alluvial fan sage scrub vegetation throughout its landscaping, and 2) extend the length of its proposed linear park to connect with the planned city bike path along the Day Creek Drainage. According to present plans, this 63 ft. wide parkway on the southern edge of the site will not extend to the far west edge of the project site. Such a connection between the linear park and future bike path should provide a corridor for wildlife between native habitat that still exists along Day Creek Drainage and native vegetation that may be included in the parkway. A more significant mitigation for the loss of this RAFSS habitat would be to require the developer to contribute to funds to help 1) restore alluvial fan sage scrub in present conservation areas, or 2) acquire proposed conservation areas that would protect alluvial fan sage scrub, or 3) do both. Present conservation areas include the North Etiwanda Preserve, and proposed conservation areas include those discussed in the Ranch Cucamonga 2010 General Plan. Thank you for considering the preservation of an invaluable plant and wildlife community. Sincerely, Suzanne Thompson E10-116 391 Granger, Donald From: Seth Thompso Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2017 9:37 AM To: Granger, Donald Subject: Importance of REAL Mitigation at Day Creek Square June 3, 2017 Donald Granger, Senior Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Dr. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department: I am not a Rancho resident, but live close by and frequently visit your city on shopping trips to Victoria Gardens, REI, or Living Spaces, dining at the Brio Tuscan Grill or the Sycamore Inn, shopping for Asian ingredients at the 99 Ranch Market, or a medical appointment at the Kaiser Medical Center. My family and I especially enjoy exploring the wildlife and beauty of your North Etiwanda Preserve. The natural habitat and environmental quality of Rancho Cucamonga is important to me and enhances the appeal of your city. I was very disappointed to learn that development decisions are being made that compromise the remaining natural environment in Rancho. The proposed Day Creek Square project will permanently remove Riversidian alluvial fan sage scrub (RAFSS) from its 28.4 acre site. This RAFSS is considered by our state to be a sensitive and declining habitat that is home to a variety of native wildlife species including birds. As a result, I ask that the City of Rancho Cucamonga require DR Horton, the developer of this project, to mitigate for the loss of this RAFSS as per the conservation goals of the Rancho Cucamonga 2010 General Plan. An example of mitigation for the loss of RAFSS would be to require the Day Creek Square project to 1) include native alluvial fan sage scrub vegetation throughout its landscaping, and 2) extend the length of its proposed linear park to connect with the planned city bike path along the Day Creek Drainage. According to present plans, this 63 ft. wide parkway on the southern edge of the site will not extend to the far west edge of the project site. Such a connection between the linear park and future bike path should provide a corridor for wildlife between native habitat that still exists along Day Creek Drainage and native vegetation that may be included in the parkway. A more significant mitigation for the loss of this RAFSS habitat would be to require the developer to contribute to funds to help 1) restore alluvial fan sage scrub in present conservation areas, or 2) acquire proposed conservation areas that would protect alluvial fan sage scrub, or 3) do both. Present conservation areas include the North Etiwanda Preserve, and proposed conservation areas include those discussed in the Ranch Cucamonga 2010 General Plan. Thank you for considering the preservation of an invaluable plant and wildlife community. Sincerely, E10416 392 Donald From: Nancy & Rich Kemerling Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2017 3:47 M To: Granger, Donald Subject: declining habitat June 4, 2017 Planning Department c/o Donald Granger, Senior Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Dr. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department: Even though I live in Riverside, I spend a lot of time in Rancho Cucamonga, visiting friends and shopping. I am disheartened to learn that the proposed Day Creek Square project will permanently remove Riversidian alluvial fan sage scrub (RAFSS) from its 28.4 acre site. This RAFSS is considered by our state to be a sensitive and declining habitat that is home to a variety of native wildlife species including birds, which are possibly as important to me as my grandchildren. As a result, I ask that the City of Rancho Cucamonga require DR Horton, the developer of this project, to mitigate for the loss of this RAFSS as per the conservation goals of the Rancho Cucamonga 2010 General Plan, which includes preserving "sensitive habitats" (Chapter 6, Page RC-7). An example of mitigation for the loss of RAFSS would be to require the Day Creek Square project to 1) include native alluvial fan sage scrub vegetation throughout its landscaping, and 2) extend the length of its proposed linear park to connect with the planned city bike path along the Day Creek Drainage. According to present plans, this 63 ft. wide parkway on the southern edge of the site will not extend to the far west edge of the project site. Such a connection between the linear park and future bike path should provide a corridor for wildlife, such as birds, between native habitat that still exists along Day Creek Drainage and any native vegetation that may be included in the parkway or other parts of the development. A more significant mitigation for the loss of this RAFSS habitat would be to require the developer to contribute to funds to help 1) restore alluvial fan sage scrub in present conservation areas, or 2) acquire proposed conservation areas that would protect alluvial fan sage scrub, or 3) do both. Present conservation areas include the North Etiwanda Preserve, and proposed conservation areas include those discussed in the Ranch Cucamonga 2010 General Plan (Chapter 6, Page RC-4). Thank you for considering the preservation of such an invaluable native plant community. Sincerely, E10 116 393 MEMORANDUM GLENN LUKOS ASSOCIATES Regulatory Services PROJECT NUMBER: 0446-93-PIER TO: Donald Granger CC: Dan Boyd FROM: David Moskovitz UN DATE: May 25, 2017 SUBJECT: Review of Natasha Walton Letter — Day Creek Square Project, City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County, California. The purpose of this memorandum is to provide a general review of a comment letter prepared by Ms. Natasha Walton (dated April 11, 2017) for the Day Creek Square development project located in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County. Ms. Walton describes herself as an Upland resident that frequents the City of Rancho Cucamonga, including hiking in the North Etiwanda Preserve. Ms. Walton is a wildlife biologist and adjunct biology professor at Chaffey College. Ms. Walton cites the City's 2010 General Plan, including the intent to "preserve significant visual resources, sensitive habitats, lands important for water resources, and recreational spaces". Ms. Walton provided a number of recommendations to the City for minimizing impacts from the Day Creek Square project. The following is a summary of those recommendations, along with my comments. Ms. Walton states that the project should create a mitigation plan to address impacts to Riversidian alluvial fan sage scrub (RAFSS); and that the City should require the project should preserve and/or restore RAFSS habitat within the project site, or elsewhere within the City, and that preservation/restoration should be comparable to the impact acreage. Ms. Walton also states that the project should incorporate RAFSS plant species into the project's landscape design, and referenced the Day Creek Market Place and Residential Project located north of Day Creels Square as an example. As stated in our Biological Technical Report for the Day Creek Square Project (dated April 21, 2017), the project site is dominated by California buckwheat scrub, which due to repeated disturbance of the site is remnant of RAFSS habitat that historically occupied the site. However, due to flood control activities with Day Creek, isolation of the site by development, and onsite disturbances, the current habitat does not have long-term conservation value as RAFSS, and the loss of vegetation at the site would not have a 29 Orchard Teleohone: (949) 837-0404 r\6■ 11l1■T P% Lake Forest E10-16 394 California 92630-8300 Facsimile: (949) 837-5834 MEMORANDUM May 25, 2017 Page 2 substantial adverse effect on remaining functional RAFSS associated with the Etiwanda Fan, Lytle Creek, Santa Ana River floodplain and elsewhere in the region. Therefore, the impacts would be less than significant and would not require mitigation. Ms. Walton's request for the project to incorporate native scrub species into the landscape plan would allow for a native plant component, but the inclusion of native species would not mitigate the loss of habitat. Ms. Walton states that she visited the Day Creek Square site this spring, and noted animals "not normally found within highly urbanized areas", including desert cottontail (Sylvilagus audubonii) and side -blotched lizard, and "a variety of beautiful native birds and butterflies". Ms. Walton made this statement as commentary against impacting native habitats. However, the species referenced by Ms. Walton are not sensitive and do not require mitigation for the loss of habitat. • Ms. Walton acknowledges that the Day Creek Square project will include "native large - canopy trees" such as coast live -oak (Quercus agrifolia) and sycamore (Platanus racemosa), but noted that more "small canopy non-native trees" will be planted than "native large -canopy trees". Ms. Walton requests that the project include a greater proportion of native trees. The project is not impacting native trees, including oaks and sycamores, and so there is no requirement to plant native trees. As such, the inclusion of any native trees in the project's landscaping would be a beneficial project design feature, but there is no expectation to provide a minimum proportion of native trees relative to non-native trees. Ms. Walton acknowledges that the City is requiring shielded lighting to minimize light pollution, but provides additional lighting recommendations to minimize glare. The project site is not located adjacent to a habitat conservation area. As such, there is no potential for indirect impacts to sensitive biological resources as a result of lighting, and therefore additional lighting modifications would not be required to mitigate impacts to biological resources. • Ms. Walton provides several comments/recommendations related to increasing open space and connectivity as it pertains to trails and park uses. However, the comments don't relate to biological resource impacts, but instead to public uses and aesthetics. As such, we don't have further comments as it pertains to this item. E10-16 395 MEMORANDUM May 25,2017 Page 3 • Ms. Walton recommends that the project include an organic garden, as she believes "in the importance of protecting land for agriculture since huge portions of our agricultural lands are being lost at an alarming rate due to urbanization". The project is not impacting agricultural lands, and therefore there is no requirement for the project to create features (such as a community garden) to offset the regional loss of agricultural lands not attributed to the project. If you have any questions regarding this memorandum, please contact me at (949) 837-0404, ext. 42, or at dmoslcovitz(k)wetlandpermittine cnni. p:0446-93b.mem.doex E10-16 396 MEMORANDUM GLENN LUKOS ASSOCIATES Regulatory Services rROJEcr r unineR: 0446-93-PIER TO: Donald Granger CC: Dan Boyd FROM: David Moskovitz Uh DATE: May 25, 2017 SUBJECT: Supplemental Vegetation Analysis — Day Creels Square Project, City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County, California. On May 15, 2017, I visited the Day Creek Square project site in Rancho Cucamonga to perform a supplemental vegetation analysis, including an updated assessment of the vegetation mapping and an updated rare plant survey. Glenn Lukos Associates, Inc. (GLA) previously performed biological surveys for the site in 2016, and prepared a Biological Technical Report (revised dated April 21, 2017) documenting the results of those surveys. The Biological Technical Report (BTR) documented that the majority of the site (25.48 acres) supports a native scrub community dominated by California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), which is a subassociation of Riversidean Sage Scrub (RSS), but also includes other scrub species commonly associated with RSS communities such as California sagebrush (drtemisia californica) and white sage (Salvia apiana). A peer review memorandum (dated April 6, 2017) prepared by Michael Baker International noted patches of "coastal sage scrub", i.e., what they referred to as patches dominated by California sagebrush. In a response memorandum (dated April 21, 2017), GLA noted that the patches are not large in the context of the dominance of buckwheat at the site, and as such GLA purposely did not call these out as a separate mapping unit. During the May 15"' visit, I mapped the two patches where there is a greater dominance of sagebrush relative to the other shrub species, One patch is located in the northern portion of the site and is approximately 0.28 acre. The second patch is located near the western edge of the property and is approximately 0.92 acre. Both of these patches are relatively small, and the presence of the sagebrush -dominated areas does not affect the findings of the BTR, which is that impacts to the scrub habitats at the site would be less than significant and would not require mitigation, as a function of repeated disturbance, relative isolation from other larger patches of native habitats, and the general lack of special -status species. The Michael Balser memorandum inferred concurrence with GLA's findings. The BTR documented that the vegetation at the property is an outlying remnant of a broader alluvial scrub, or more specifically, Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub (RAFSS) vegetation 29 Orchard H Lake Forest California 92630-8300 Telephone: (949) 837-0404 E10-16 397 Facsimile: (949) 837-5834 MEMORANDUM May 25,2017 Page 2 community associated with alluvial surfaces. RAFSS specifically has a CSS component where the shrubs species are characteristic of RSS, which is an inland expression of CSS. The only dominant species that has a strong fidelity to alluvial scrub is scalebroom (Lepidospartwn squainatum), which present at the project site. Sawyer et al (2009) categorizes vegetation communities with a greater than I % cover of scalebroom as scalebroom scrub, However, the project site does not contain enough scalebroom for the site to be categorized as scalebroom scrub. During the May 15°i site visit, I mapped 37 scalebroom individuals with an average individual area of 50 square feet, for a total scalebroom cover of approximately 1,800 square feet (0.04 acre). With the overall 25.48 acres of scrub habitat, the percentage of scalebroom is 0.16 (under two -tenths of one percent), which is well under the one -percent threshold. As such, California buckwheat scrub is the appropriate designation for the site. As noted above, I also conducted an updated survey of the site for special -status plants during the May 15°i visit. No special -status plants were detected at the site during the survey, which was consistent with survey performed in 2016. If you have any questions regarding this memorandum, please contact me at (949) 837-0404, ext. 42 or at dmoslcoviti/ ).wetlanduermittiue.com. p:0446-93c.mem,doex E10-16 398 RESOLUTION NO.17-54 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2016-00452 — A REQUEST TO CHANGE THE VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN ZONING DESIGNATION FOR 28.4-ACRES OF LAND FROM REGIONALLY RELATED OFFICE/COMMERCIAL (RROC) TO MIXED USE (MU) IN THE VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN (VCP) RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF A MIXED USE PROJECT CONSISTING OF 380 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, A 71 ROOM HOTELAND TWO RESTAURANT BUILDINGS TOTALING 12,000 SQUARE FEET, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF DAY CREEK BOULEVARD AND BASE LINE ROAD; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF — APN: 1090-331 -05. A. Recitals. 1. D.R. Horton filed an application for Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2016- 00452, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development District Amendment is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 14th day of June, 2017, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a noticed public hearing on the application and issued Resolution No 17-54 recommending to the City Council that the associated Victoria Community Plan Amendment be approved. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing on June 14, 2017, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to approximately 28.4 acres of land, basically a rectangular configuration, located at the southwest corner of Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard, and is presently vacant. Said property is currently designated as Regionally Related Office/Commercial; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is designated Village Commercial and is currently under construction as a neighborhood shopping center. The property to the west is designated Open Space and contains overhead electrical transmission lines and a flood control channel. The property to the east is designated Mixed Use/Village Commercial and Mixed Use Single -Family, and is developed with a neighborhood shopping center and single-family dwelling E10-16 399 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-54 VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2016-00452 DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 2 units. The property to the south is designated Mixed Use Single -Family and is developed with single-family dwelling units; and C. The amendment is consistentwith the General Plan and will implement the goals of the General Plan as this location is designated Mixed Use in the General Plan. The amendment will change the zoning from Regionally Related Office/Commercial to Mixed Use and will bring the zoning of the Victoria Community Plan into vertical consistency with the General Plan and will facilitate the development of a mixed use project, thereby implementing General Plan Policy LU-2.1 which plans for vibrant, pedestrian -friendly mixed use and high density residential areas at strategic infill locations along transit routes. Accordingly, this amendment is consistent with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development, within the district, in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development; and d. This amendment will provide for a mixed use project that has been designed with input from the community and with a goal of protecting neighborhoods from the encroachment of incompatible activities by including the design of a linear parking along the southern edge to function as a buffer to the existing neighboring uses to the south, thereby implementing General Plan Land Use Policy LU-1.1 by minimizing negative impacts on the residential living environment. Accordingly, the amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Land Use Element; and e. The amendment will provide for a mixed use project that will have detached single- family condos and attached single-family rowhomes in a location that is compatible with the adjacent residential area. The mixed use project has the single-family detached condos located in the southern area of the project, nearest the existing single-family neighborhood in order to provide a transition of density and be of compatible scale, thereby being consistent with General Plan Land Use Policy LU-1 which encourages small lot detached dwelling units to locate in areas where it will be compatible with adjacent neighborhoods. Accordingly, this amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties and would not have a significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding properties. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed Victoria Community Plan Amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for the development, within the district, in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development. The amendment will provide for a mixed use project that will have detached single-family condos and attached single- family rowhomes in a location that is compatible with the adjacent residential area. The mixed use project has the single-family detached condos located in the southern area of the project, nearest the existing single-family neighborhood in order to provide a transition of density and be of compatible scale, thereby being consistent with General Plan Land Use Policy LU-1.6 which encourages small lot detached dwelling units to locate in areas where it will be compatible with adjacent neighborhoods. Accordingly, 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; and b. The proposed Victoria Community Plan Amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Victoria Community Plan which in turn are consistent with and implementthe goals E10-16 400 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-54 VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2016-00452 DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 3 and objectives of the General Plan. These goals include promoting the economical and efficient use of land, promoting design and construction techniques that are responsive to the environment, and promoting development compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. The proposed amendment will change the zoning from Regionally Related Office/Commercial to Mixed Use and will bring the zoning of the Victoria Community Plan into vertical consistency with the General Plan and will facilitate the development of a mixed use project, thereby implementing General Plan Policy LU-2.1 which plans for vibrant, pedestrian -friendly mixed use and high density residential areas at strategic infill locations along transit routes; and c. The proposed Victoria Community Plan Amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. This amendment will provide for a mixed use project that has been designed with input from the community and with a goal of protecting neighborhoods from the encroachment of incompatible activities by including the design of a linear parking along the southern edge to function as a buffer to the existing neighboring to the south, thereby implementing General Plan Land Use Policy LU-1.1 by minimizing negative impacts on the residential living environment. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and recommends that the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds: (i) that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission furtherfinds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. C. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore and recommends that the City Council adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings E10-16 401 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-54 VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2016-00452 DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 4 upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the City Planner of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2016-00452 as shown in Exhibit "A" subject to each and every condition set forth below. Plannina Department 1) Approval is for Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2016-00452, to change the zoning from Regionally Related Office/Commercial to Mixed Use for 28.4 acres of land from Regionally Related Office/Commercial (RROC) to Mixed Use (MU) related to the construction of a mixed use project consisting of 380 Residential Units, a 71 room hotel, and two restaurant buildings totaling 12,000 square feet, located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road -- APN: 1090-331-05. 2) Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2016-00452 requires final approval by the City Council. 3) Approval is contingent upon City Council adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for the project and the Mitigation Monitoring Program and all mitigations contained therein. 4) Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with any sections of the Development Code, State Fire Marshal's regulations, Uniform Building Code, or any other City Ordinances. 5) 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 at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2017. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA E10-16 402 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-54 VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2016-00452 DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 5 BY: Francisco Oaxaca, Chairman ATTEST: Candyce Burnett, Secretary I, Candyce Burnett„ Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 14th day of June 2017, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: E10-16 403 �= ASE-LINE=i20 0 _ o N J I U I a ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER: > 1090-331-05 TOTAL ACREAGE: 0 28.44 ACRES w EXISTING ZONING: w REGIONALLY RELATED OFFICE / COMMERCIAL V I a ,l u. II (NMA D O L E 9302 P `F3 R GH AVE, 3lAiE 230 RANCHO CUCAMCNGA CA 9030 Fr1ONE 909.4M.6322 E10-16 404 aw""""'g cO°' itks for Me Fax: 909ARM20 �= BiCSELIAFROA 0 • II J ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER:Cc 1090-331-05 Q TOTAL ACREAGE: 28.44 ACRES O PROPOSED ZONING: m MIXED USE w w �I v I; oil ,III I I l o i �+ 9 r III II (NMA D O L E 9302 FlTTSEUHGH AVE, SXTE 230 • RANCHO CUCAMONO4, CA 9030 PHONE 9094916322 ftinearing Ca mftia (o• Me FA%z 909AIA6320 RESOLUTION NO. 17-55 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19762, A REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE 28AACRES OF LAND INTO 4 PARCELS IN THE MIXED USE DISTRICT WITHIN THE VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION OFA MIXED USE PROJECT CONSISTING OF 380 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, A 71 ROOM HOTEL AND TWO RESTAURANT BUILDINGS TOTALING 12,000 SQUARE FEET, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF DAY CREEK BOULEVARD AND BASE LINE ROAD; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF —APN: 1090-331-05. A. Recitals. 1. D.R. Horton filed an application forthe approval of Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19762, 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 14th day of June, 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 June 14, 2017, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to the property located at southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road with a street frontage of approximately 840 feet on Base Line Road and approximately 1500 feet on Day Creek Boulevard, with a parcel depth of approximately 1500 feet and a width of approximately 840 feet. The parcel is presently improved with curb and gutter along Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is designated Village Commercial and is currently under construction as a neighborhood shopping center. The property to the west is designated Open Space and contains overhead electrical transmission lines and a flood control channel. The property to the east is designated Mixed Use/Village Commercial and Mixed Use Single -Family, and is developed with a neighborhood shopping center and single-family dwelling units. The ,property to the south is designated Mixed Use Single Family and is developed with single-family dwelling units; and E10-16 406 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-55 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19762 DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 2 C. The application is for the subdivision of 24.8 acres of vacant land into 4 parcels for the purposes of developing a mixed use project consisting of 380 residential condominiums, a 71 room hotel and two restaurant buildings totaling 12,000 square feet; d. The General Plan Land Use designation of the project site is Mixed Use. The project site is within the Victoria Community Plan area with a zoning designation of Regionally Related Office/Commercial. The applicant has submitted a Victoria Community Plan Amendment to change the zoning designation to Mixed Use. The Victoria Community Plan Amendment will change the zoning from Regionally Related Office/Commercial to Mixed Use and will bring the zoning of the Victoria Community Plan into vertical consistency with the General Plan and facilitate the development of a mixed use project; and e. The General Plan Land Use designation of the project site is Mixed Use. The tentative parcel map will facilitate a real property subdivision for a mixed use project and will create parcels for commercial, hotel and residential development. The tentative parcel map will facilitate a mixed use development and be consistent with the land use goals of the General Plan. Accordingly, the tentative parcel map would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The tentative parcel map will facilitate the development of a mixed use project at a location the General Plan has designated as Mixed Use. Accordingly, the tentative parcel map is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and the Victoria Community Plan; and b. The tentative parcel map proposes the subdivision of real property into four parcels in conjunction with a mixed use project. Accordingly, the design and improvements of the tentative parcel map are consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and the Victoria Community Plan; and C. The site is 28.4 acre and contains adequate area for the subdivision, and the project site is well -suited for a mixed use project as it is at the intersection of two major boulevards that were designed to accommodate the level of traffic proposed by the development. Accordingly, the site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; and d. The tentative parcel map and mixed use project has been evaluated for environmental impacts, and with the imposition of mitigation measures, all impacts can be mitigated to less than significant. Accordingly, the design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; and e. An Initial Study was prepared for the project that includes mitigation measures to reduce any potential impacts to humans or wildlife to less than significant. Accordingly, the tentative parcel map is not likely to cause serious public health problems; and f. The tentative parcel map proposes development of the site with three points of access from the parcel's existing street frontage. Accordingly, the design of the tentative parcel map E10-16 407 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-55 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19762 DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 3 will not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and recommends that the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds: (i) that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. C. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore and recommends that the City Council adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the City Planner of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. E10-16 408 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-55 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19762 DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 4 Planning Department 1) Approval is forTentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19762 for the subdivision of 24.8 acres of land into 4 parcels for a site located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road —APN: 1090-331-05. 2) Approval of Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19762 is contingent upon City Council Approval of Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2016- 00452, and Planning Commission approval Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20032, Design Review DRC2016-00450, and Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449. 3) Approval of Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19762 is contingent upon City Council adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for the project and the Mitigation Monitoring Program and all mitigations contained therein. 4) Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with any sections of the Development Code, State Fire Marshal's regulations, Uniform Building Code, or any other City Ordinances. 5) 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 at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2017. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA go Francisco Oaxaca, Chairman ATTEST: Candyce Burnett, Secretary E10-16 409 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-55 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19762 DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 5 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 14th day of June 2017, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: E10-16 410 Conditions of Approval R'1N°1O ("�IKIAMONC..\ Community Development Department Project#: SUBTPM19762CEQA2016-00012 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Parcel Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Planning Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. CCR's shall be submitted and reviewed prior to Building Permit issuance. In addition to the CCR's, a parking management plan shall be included with the CCR's that shall include provisions for managing, inspecting and enforcement procedures to ensure that all garages are kept free and clear to provide adequate area to store 2 cars. 2. Plans submitted for plan check shall incorporate all conditions of approval from the Design Review Committee. 3. Final design of all architectural details, including, but not limited to, rafter tails, recesses, braces, awnings, recessed niches and similar architectural features, shall be subject to City Planner review and approval during plan check. Architectural elements shown on the entitlement plans that convey wood elements shall either be real wood, foam, cementitious material or equivalent that reflects an authentic wood appearance; the use of metal for wood elements, including, but not limited to, braces, columns, beams, posts, headers, trellis elements or similar features is not permitted. 4. During grading activity, all construction equipment (>_ 150 horsepower) shall be California Air Resources Board (GARB) Tier 3 Certified or better. 5. Construct a minimum 6-1foot high noise barrier for the outdoor living areas (first floor patios) of multi -family residential condos/town homes, and hotel rooms with first floor patios, adjacent to Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road. 6. Construct a minimum 6 foot high noise barrier for the outdoor living areas (backyards) of the single-family residential homes adjacent to Day Creek Boulevard. Printed 6/1/2017 mC7fr II Project#: SUBTPM19762CEQA2016-00012 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Parcel Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 7. Interior Noise Mitigation: Windows: All windows and sliding glass doors shall be well fitted, well weather71stripped assemblies and shall have the following minimum sound transmission class (STC) ratings: Upgraded first, second, and third floor windows with a minimum STC rating of 30 are required for residential (single -I and multi7family), hotel, and commercial buildings adjacent to Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road. All other buildings require standard windows with a minimum STC rating of 27. Doors: All exterior doors shall be well weather stripped solid core assemblies at least one and three -Ifourths7inch thick. Walls: At any penetrations of exterior walls by pipes, ducts, or conduits, the space between the wall and pipes, ducts, or conduits shall be caulked or filled with mortar to form an airtight seal. Roof: Roof sheathing of wood construction shall be well fitted or caulked plywood of at least one half inch thick. Ceilings shall be well fitted, fully sealed gypsum board of at least one Dhalf inch thick. Insulation with at least a rating of R719 shall be used in the attic space. Attic: Attic vents should be oriented away from Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road. If such an orientation cannot be avoided, then an acoustical baffle shall be placed in the attic space behind the vents. Ventilation: Arrangements for any habitable room shall be such that any exterior door or window can be kept closed when the room is in use and still receive circulated air. A forced air circulation system (e.g. air conditioning) or active ventilation system (e.g. fresh air supply) shall be provided which satisfies the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. 8. Prior to approval of grading plans and/or issuance of building permits, plans shall include a note indicating that noise -generating project construction activities shall only occur between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on weekdays, including on Saturdays, with no activity allowed on Sundays and holidays. Printed: 6/1/2017 C I V jt� t jjt Page 2 of 24 Project #: SUBTPM19762 CEQA2016-00012 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Parcel Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 9. Install minimum 12-foot high temporary construction noise barriers at the southern Project site boundary, as shown on Exhibit 11-A of the Noise Impact Analysis for the duration of construction activities at the project site. The noise control barriers must present a solid face from top to bottom. The noise control barrier must meet the minimum heights shown on Exhibit 11-A. • The barrier shall provide a weight of at least 4 pounds per square foot of face area with no decorative cutouts or line -of -sight openings between shielded areas and the noise source. The noise barrier shall be constructed using one of the following materials: o An acoustical blanket (e.g. vinyl acoustic curtains or quilted blankets) attached to the construction site perimeter fence or equivalent temporary fence posts; o Masonry block; o Stucco veneer over wood framing (or foam core), or 1-inch thick tongue and groove wood of sufficient weight per square foot; o Glass (1/4 inch thick), or other transparent material with sufficient weight per square foot; o Earthen berm; o Any combination of these construction materials satisfying a weight of at least 4 pounds per square foot of face area. • The noise barriers must be maintained and any damage promptly repaired. Gaps, holes, or weaknesses in the barrier or openings between the barrier and the ground shall be promptly repaired. The noise control barriers and associated elements shall be completely removed and the site appropriately restored upon the conclusion of the construction activity. During all Project site construction, the construction contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers, consistent with manufacturers' standards. The construction contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from the noise sensitive receptors nearest the project site. The construction contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction -related noise sources and noise -sensitive receivers nearest the project site (i.e., to the center) during all Project construction. • The construction contractor shall limit haul truck deliveries to the same hours specified for construction equipment (between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on weekdays, including on Saturdays, with no activity allowed on Sundays and holidays). • The construction contractor shall limit haul truck deliveries to the same hours specified for construction equipment (between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on weekdays, including on Saturdays, with no activity allowed on Sundays and holidays). The contractor shall prepare a haul route exhibit and shall design delivery routes to minimize the exposure of sensitive land uses or residential dwellings to delivery truck -related noise. 10. The developer shall pay the current residential school facility fee plus the Etiwanda School District special tax. Printed: 6/1/2017 CIJ V jj3 Page 3 of 24 Project #: SUBTPM19762 CEQA2016-00012 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Parcel Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 11. Transportation and Traffic: Project to restripe rightmost northbound through lane as a shared through -right turn lane and adjust signal timing splits at Day Creek Boulevard and Foothill Boulevard. Project to contribute fair share towards improvements at East Avenue and Base Line Road as part of the 1-15 Freeway / Base Line Road Interchange Project. Payment will be collected through Development Impact Fees. 12. Tribal Cultural Resources: In the event that human remains or funerary objects are encountered during any activities associated with the project, work in the immediate vicinity (within a 100-foot buffer of the find) shall cease and the County Coroner shall be contacted pursuant to State Health and Safety Code §7050.5 and that code enforced for the duration of the project. In the event that Native American cultural resources are discovered during project activities, all work in the immediate vicinity of the find (within a 60-foot buffer) shall cease and a qualified archaeologist meeting Secretary of Interior standards shall be hired to assess the find. Work on the other portions of the project outside of the buffered area may continue during this assessment period. The archaeologist shall contact Tribal communities for input regarding the preservation, retention and final disposition of any discovered cultural resources. The archaeologist shall prepare a mitigation plan and technical resources management report, which shall document the inventory, evaluation, and proposed mitigation of resources within the project area. In the event that significant Native American historical resources, as defined by CEQA (as amended, 2015), are discovered and avoidance cannot be ensured, an SOI-qualified archaeologist shall be retained to develop a cultural resources Treatment Plan, as well as a Discovery and Monitoring Plan. 13. No more than 50% of the permits for the residential units (190 units) shall be issued unless building permits for the hotel and two restaurant buildings have been issued. Occupancy for the residential units shall be limited to 90% (342 units) until occupancy has been approved for the hotel and the two restaurant buildings. 14. Security cameras shall be installed in the linear park along the south edge. Final design of the cameras, location and placement shall be subject to the review and approval by the Planning Department and the San Bernardino County Sheriff. The cameras shall be designed to connect to the Public Video Safety Network. 15. Prior to final map recordation, the developer shall make a good faith effort to secure easement rights at the western boundary of the project site from the property owner for pedestrian access from the project through the utility corridor to the San Bernardino County Flood Control Access Road/Regional Trail. If access rights are secured, the developer shall install a pedestrian access gate subject to City Planner review and approval. Printed: 6/1/2017 T T (IC 1 V T f2[ Page 4 of 24 Project#: SUBTPM19762 CEQA2016-00012 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Parcel Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 16. Prior to final map recordation, the parking agreement exhibit and language governing the use of parking stalls on the commercial parcels by the residential units under certain specified conditions shall be reviewed by the Planning and Engineering Department. Standard Conditions of Approval 17. As conditioned by the Design Review Committee, Villages A and D dwellings shall have the front, side and rear elevations upgraded with architectural treatment, detailing and increased delineation of surface treatment subject to Planning Director review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permits. 18. Standard patio cover plans for use by the Homeowner's Association shall be submitted for Planning Director and Building and Safety Official review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permits. 19. For the hotel and restaurant buildings, paint roll -up doors and service doors to match main building colors. 20. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners and other roof mounted equipment and/or projections shall be screened from all sides and the sound shall be buffered from adjacent properties and streets as required by the Planning Department. Such screening shall be architecturally integrated with the building design and constructed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. Any roof -mounted mechanical .equipment and/or ductwork, that projects vertically more than 18 inches above the roof or roof parapet, shall be screened by an architecturally designed enclosure which exhibits a permanent nature with the building design and is detailed consistent with the building. Any roof -mounted mechanical equipment and/or ductwork, that projects vertically less than 18 inches above the roof or roof parapet shall be painted consistent with the color scheme of the building. Details shall be included in building plans. 21. 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. 22. Approval of Design Review DRC2016-00450, Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449, Minor Exception DRC2016-00508, Uniform Sign Program DRC2016-00451,Tentative Tract SUBTT20032 and SUBTPM19762 is granted subject to the approval of Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2016-00452. 23. 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. Printed: 6/1/2017 `-'" i1,6 T1S Page 5 of 24 Project#: SUBTPM19762CEQA2016-00012 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Parcel Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 24. The applicant shall be required to pay California Department of Fish and Wildlife Notice of Exemption and Mitigated Negative Declaration fee in the amount of $2,266.25. 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. 25. Approval for Design Review, Conditional Use Permit, Minor Exception and Uniform Sign Program 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. Approval for Tentative Maps shall expire within 3 years unless the Final map has been filed with the Engineering Services Department is filed or a time extension has been approved. 26. For multi -family residential and non-residential development, property owners are responsible for the continual maintenance of all landscaped areas on -site, as well as contiguous planted areas within the public right-of-way. All landscaped areas shall be kept free from weeds and debris and maintained in healthy and thriving condition, and shall receive regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing, and trimming. Any damaged, dead, diseased, or decaying plant material shall be replaced within 30 days from the date of damage. 27. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping in the case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of Building Permits for the development or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. For development occurring in the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, the landscape plans will also be reviewed by Fire Construction Services. 28. Landscaping and irrigation systems required to be installed within the public right-of-way on the perimeter of this project area shall be continuously maintained by the developer. 29. A minimum of 20 percent of trees planted within industrial projects, and a minimum of 30 percent within commercial and office projects, shall be specimen size trees - 24-inch box or larger. 30. A minimum of trees per gross acre, comprised of the following sizes, shall be provided within the project: percent - 48-inch box or larger percent - 36-inch box or larger, percent - 24- inch box or larger, percent - 15-gallon, and percent - 5 gallon. 31. Within parking lots, trees shall be planted at a rate of one 15-gallon tree for every three parking stalls. 32. The final design of the perimeter parkways, walls, landscaping, and sidewalks shall be included in the required landscape plans and shall be subject to Planning Director review and approval and coordinated for consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which may be required by the Engineering Services Department. 33. Special landscape features such as mounding, alluvial rock, specimen size trees, meandering sidewalks (with horizontal change), and intensified landscaping, is required along Day Creek Boulevard. 34. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Services Department. Printed: 5/1/2017 L , 0QJ V 4.y6 Page 6 of 24 Project#: SUBTPM19762CEQA2016-00012 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Parcel Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 35. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of water efficient landscaping per Development Code Chapter 17.82. 36. The applicant shall contact the U.S. Postal Service to determine the appropriate type and location of mailboxes. Multi -family residential developments shall provide a solid overhead structure for mailboxes with adequate lighting. The final location of the mailboxes and the design of the overhead structure shall be subject to Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of Building Permits. 37. 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. 38. All units shall be provided with garage door openers if driveways are less than 18 feet in depth from back of sidewalk. 39. All parking lot landscape islands shall have a minimum outside dimension of 6 feet. 40. All parking spaces shall be 9 feet wide by 18 feet long with a required 1-foot overhang (e.g., over a curb stop). 41. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances, and exits shall be striped per City standards. 42. Textured pedestrian pathways and textured pavement across circulation aisles shall be provided throughout the development to connect dwellings/units/buildings with open spaces/plazas/ recreational uses. 43. The lighting fixture design shall compliment the architectural program. It shall include the plaza area lighting fixtures, building lighting fixtures (exterior), and parking lot lighting fixtures. 44. All operations 'and businesses shall be conducted to comply with the following standards which shall be incorporated into the lease agreements for all tenants: a. Noise Level - All commercial activities shall not create any noise that would exceed an exterior noise level of 65 dB during the hours of 10 p.m. until 7 a.m. and 70 dB during the hours of 7 a.m. until 10 p.m. b. Loading and Unloading - No person shall cause the loading, unloading, opening, closing, or other handling of boxes, crates, containers, building materials, garbage cans, or other similar objects between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. unless otherwise specified herein, in a manner which would cause a noise disturbance to a residential area. 45. The entire site shall be kept free from trash and debris at all times and in no event shall trash and debris remain for more than 24 hours. 46. Access gates to the rear yards shall be constructed from a material more durable than wood gates. Acceptable materials include, but are not limited to, wrought iron and PVC. 47. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community, Specific Plans and/or Master Plans in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance. �j Printed: 6/1/2017 M� LJgR &V7 Page 7 of 24 Project#: SUBTPM19762 CEQA2016-00012 Project Name: Day Creek Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Parcel Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 48. Construct block walls between homes (i.e., along interior side and rear property lines), rather than wood fencing for permanence, durability, and design consistency. 49. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, including proper illumination and in conformance with Building and Safety Services Department standards, the Municipal Code and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Department (RCFD) Standards. 50. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) and Articles of Incorporation of the Homeowners' Association are subject to the approval of the Planning and Engineering Services Department and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Map or prior to the issuance of Building Permits, whichever occurs first. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City Engineer. The Homeowners' Association shall submit to the Planning Department a list of the name and address of their officers on or before January 1 of each and every year and whenever said information changes. 51. The developer shall submit a construction access plan and schedule for the development of all lots for Planning Director and Engineering Services Department approval; including, but not limited to, public notice requirements, special street posting, phone listing for community concerns, hours of construction activity, dust control measures, and security fencing. 52. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include Site Plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and grading on file in the Planning Department, the conditions contained herein, the Development Code regulations and the Victoria Community Plan. 53. All ground -mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall be located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction ' of the Planning Director. For single-family residential developments, transformers shall be placed in underground vaults. 54. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property owner, homeowners' association, or other means acceptable to the City. Proof of this landscape maintenance shall be submitted for Planning Director and Engineering Services Department review and approved prior to the issuance of Building Permits. 55. 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. 56. Revised Site Plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of Building Permits. 57. 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. 58. 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. Printed: 6/1/2017 rmC4" fs Page 8 of 24 Project#: SUBTPM19762CEQA2016-00012 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Parcel Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 59. The contractor shall ensure that traffic speeds on unpaved roads and Project site areas are reduced to 15 miles per hour or less. 60. 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. 61. 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. 62. The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel powered equipment where feasible. 63. The construction contractor shall ensure that construction -grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. 64. All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. 65. 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. 66. 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. 67. 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. Pdnted: 6/1/2017 mgl 4fq Page 9 of 24 Project #: Project Name: Location: Project Type: SUBTPM19762 CEQA2016-00012 Day Creek Villages 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Tentative Parcel Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 68. 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. 69. Provide adequate ingress and egress at all entrances to public facilities to minimize vehicle idling at curbsides. 70. Provide preferential parking to high occupancy vehicles and shuttle services. 71. Schedule truck deliveries and pickups during off-peak hours. 72.Improve thermal integrity of the buildings and reduce thermal load with automated time clocks or occupant sensors. 73. Landscape with native and/or drought -resistant species to reduce water consumption and to provide passive solar benefits. 74. Provide lighter color roofing and road materials and tree planting programs to comply with the AQMP Miscellaneous Sources MSC-01 measure. 75. Comply with the AQMP Miscellaneous Sources PRC-03, and Stationary Sources Operations Enhanced Inspection and Maintenance and ADV-MISC to reduce emissions of restaurant operations. 76. All industrial and commercial facilities shall post signs requiring that trucks shall not be left idling for prolonged periods (i.e., in excess of 10 minutes). 77. All industrial and commercial facilities shall designate preferential parking for vanpools. 78, All industrial and commercial site tenants with 50 or more employees shall be required to post both bus and Metrolink schedules in conspicuous areas. 79. All industrial and commercial site tenants with 50 or more employees shall be required to configure their operating schedules around the Metrolink schedule to the extent reasonably feasible. 80. All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate high-efficiency/low-polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water heaters. 81. All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. 82. 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. Pnnted, 6/1/2017 rMgIgR420 Page 10 of 24 Project#: SUBTPM19762 CEQA2016-00012 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Parcel Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 83. Three days prior to the removal of vegetation or ground -disturbing activities, a breeding bird survey that is in conformance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act shall be required to determine whether nesting is occurring. Occupied nests shall not be disturbed unless a qualified biologist verifies through non-invasive methods that either (a) the adult birds have not begun egg -laying or incubation; or (b) the juveniles from the occupied nests are foraging independently and are capable of independent survival. If the biologist is unable to verify one of the above conditions, then no disturbance shall occur within 300 feet of non -raptor nests, and within 500 feet of raptor nests, during the breeding season to avoid abandonment of young. If nests are discovered, they shall be avoided through the establishment of an appropriate buffer setback, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. The temporary "no construction" area shall be maintained until the nest has completed its cycle, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. Once the nest cycle is complete and all nestlings have fledged and have left the nest, construction in the area may resume. Perform a Burrowing Owl Survey that is in conformance with the Department of Fish and Wildlife Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation and submit the written report outlining the findings to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the Planning Department within 30 days of groundbreaking activity. The survey shall include a habitat assessment, survey and impact analysis. The Burrowing Owl Survey shall follow the following protocol: • Burrowing Owl Survey methodology shall be based on Appendix D (Breeding and Non -breeding Season Surveys and Reports) of the CDFW Staff Report. Results of the pre -construction survey shall be provided to CDFW and the City. If the pre -construction survey does not identify burrowing owls on the project site, then no further mitigation is required. If burrowing owls are found to be utilizing the project site during the pre -construction survey, measures shall be developed by the qualified biologist in coordination with CDFW to avoid Impacting occupied burrows during the nesting period. These measures shall be based on the most current CDFW protocols and will at minimum include establishment of buffer setbacks from occupied burrows and owl monitoring. If ground -disturbing activities are delayed or suspended for more than 30 days after the pre -construction survey, the site shall be resurveyed for owls. • During the non -breeding season from September 1 through January 31, if burrows are occupied by migratory or non -migratory resident burrowing owls during a pre -construction survey, burrow exclusion and/or closure may be used to exclude owls from those burrows. Burrow exclusion and/or closure should only be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist in coordination with CDFW using the most current CDFW guidelines. During the avian nesting season from February 1 through August 31, if nests are discovered, they shall be avoided through establishment of an appropriate buffer setback, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. The temporary "no construction" area would have to be maintained until the nest has completed its cycle, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. Once the nest cycle is complete and all nestlings have fledged and have left the nest, construction in the area may resume. Printed: 6/1/2017 C m V 4G1 Page 11 of 24 Project #: SUBTPM19762 CEQA2016-00012 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Parcel Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. - Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 84.If any prehistoric archaeological resources are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. With the assistance of the archaeologist, the City of Rancho Cucamonga will: Enact interim measures to protect undesignated sites from demolition or significant modification without an opportunity for the City to establish its archaeological value. Consider establishing provisions to require incorporation of archaeological sites within new developments, using their special qualities as a theme or focal point. Pursue educating the public about the archaeological heritage of the area. Prepare a mitigation plan consistent with Section 21083.2 Archaeological resources of CEQA to eliminate adverse project effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric resources, including but not limited to, avoiding archaeological sites, capping or covering sites with soil, planning the site as a park or green space or paying an in -kind mitigation fee. Prepare a technical resources management report, documenting the inventory, evaluation, and proposed mitigation of resources within the project area. Submit one copy of the completed report with original illustrations, to the San Bernardino County Archaeological Information Center for permanent archiving. 85.If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal fossils) are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified paleontologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. The paleontologist shall submit a report of findings that will also provide specific recommendations regarding further mitigation measures (i.e., paleontological monitoring) that may be appropriate. Where mitigation monitoring is appropriate, the program must include, but not be limited to, the following measures: Assign a paleontological monitor, trained and equipped to allow the rapid removal of fossils with minimal construction delay, to the site full-time during the interval of earth -disturbing activities. Should fossils be found within an area being cleared or graded, divert earth - disturbing activities elsewhere until the monitor has completed salvage. If construction personnel make the discovery, the grading contractor should immediately divert construction and notify the monitor of the find. Prepare, identify, and curate all recovered fossils for documentation in the summary report and transfer to an appropriate depository (i.e., San Bernardino County Museum). Submit summary report to City of Rancho Cucamonga. Transfer collected specimens with a copy of the report to San Bernardino County Archaeological Information Center for permanent archiving. o Pnntetl: 6/1/2017 �-'—J aLL Page 12 of 24 Project#: SUBTPM19762 CEQA2016-00012 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Parcel Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. - Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 86. 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. 87. Frontage public streets shall be swept accordinc PM10 emissions associated with vehicle tracking the time of year of construction. to a schedule established by the City to reduce of soil off -site. Timing may vary depending upon 88. Grading operations shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed 25 mph to minimize PM10 emissions from the site during such episodes. 89. 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. 90. 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. 91. 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. 92. Trucks shall not idle continuously for more than 5 minutes. 93. Alternative fuel powered equipment shall be utilized in lieu of gasoline- or diesel -powered engines where feasible. 94. Construction should be timed so as not to interfere with peak -hour traffic. 95. Ridesharing and transit incentives shall be supported and encouraged for the construction crew. 96. 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. 97. 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. Printed: 6/1/2017 C I V ,tygR4L3 Page 13 of 24 Project#: SUBTPM19762CEQA2016-00012 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Parcel Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 98. 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. 99. 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. 100Prior 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. 101An 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. 102During 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. 103During 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. 104Prior 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. Pdnted: 6/1/2017 C 1 V gy �g Page 14 of 24 Project#: SUBTPM19762 CEQA2016-00012 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Parcel Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 105Prior 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. 1061-andscaping 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. 107The 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. 108Prior 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. 10913usiness operations shall maintain a noise level at 60dB or less during the hours of 10 p.m. until 7 p.m. No loading and unloading activities including opening, closing, or other handling of boxes, crates, containers, building materials, garbage cans, or other similar objects between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 p.m. in a manner which would cause a noise disturbance to residential areas. 110Construction 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. 111 The perimeter block wall shall be constructed as early as possible in the first phase. 112This tentative tract map or tentative parcel map shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, unless a complete final map is filed with the Engineering Services Department within 3 years from the date of the approval. Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions Printed: 6/1/2017 C i V W�25 Page 15 of 24 Project #: SUBTPM19762 CEQA2016-00012 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Parcel Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. Base Line Road frontage improvements shall be in accordance with City "Major Divided Arterial" standards as required and including: a. Protect, provide or replace curb and gutter, sidewalk, ADA ramps, driveway approaches, 5300 Lumen LED street lights, and signing and striping including bike lanes as required. The street light shall be owned by the City. Developer shall be responsible to coordinate and pay all costs to provide SCE power on City owned street lights. Coordinate with City staff for design and installation requirements. b. Right-of-way dedications shall be made to follow the City's Major Divided Arterial standards. C. Driveways shall be in accordance with the City Driveway Policy including minimum distances from intersections and other driveways, including adjustments to corner cutoffs for driveways. d. Applicant shall coordinate with the developer to the north (PM 19637) and enter into an annual maintenance agreement between both developers and the City for the proposed traffic signal on Base Line Road near the west end of the project. e. Parkway landscaping shall conform to the Base Line Road Beautification Master Plan. 2. Day Creek Boulevard frontage improvements shall be in accordance with City "Major Divided Arterial" standards as required and including: a. Protect, provide, or replace curb and gutter, sidewalk, ADA ramps, driveway approaches, 5300 Lumen LED street lights, and signing and striping including bike lanes as required. The street light shall be owned by the City. Developer shall be responsible to coordinate and pay all costs to provide SCE power on City owned street lights. Coordinate with City staff for design and installation requirements. b. Right-of-way dedications shall be made to follow the City's Major Divided Arterial standards. C. Driveways shall be in accordance with the City Driveway Policy including minimum distances from intersections and other driveways, including adjustments to corner cutoffs for driveways. d. No median breaks on Day Creek Boulevard. e. Parkway landscaping shall conform to the Day Creek Boulevard Beautification Master Plan. f. Provide all necessary traffic signal modifications at Day Creek Boulevard and Madrigal Place. Modify traffic striping and replace existing traffic signing as applicable. Protect, relocate, or install traffic signal equipment as required. g. No accent paving within the public right-of-way. Panted: 6/1/2617 6,frgfR426 Page 16 of 24 Project#: SUBTPM19762CEQA2016-00012 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD-109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Parcel Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: En-gineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 3. Developer will be required to install or pay one-half the cost of median landscaping on Base Line Road with developer -to -developer reimbursement agreements with PM 19637. 4. Reconstruct access ramp at the southwest corner of Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard to comply with current ADA requirements. 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 current ADA requirements. 5. Development Impact Fees are assessed at the time of building permit issuance. Fees are subject to change. 6. Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard Parkway Landscaping shall be maintained by the Homeowners' Association and/or Property Owners Association. 7. Depending upon application and type of development, drive access may be drive aisles or private streets subject to different design criteria. 8. The proposed development is slated to be included in the City's Fiber Optic / Broadband service business plan that would provide a City owned Fiber -to -the -Home (FTTH) infrastructure. Proposed fiber optics on -site (conduits and fiber) will be placed underground within a duct and structure system to be installed by the Master Developer. The fiber and conduits along the backbone streets shall be installed in a joint trench by the developer as the last lane improvements are completed. In -tract fiber and conduit shall be installed by the developers in joint trench where possible. Maintenance of the installed system will be the responsibility of the City. Development of the project requires the installation by the developers of all fiber optic infrastructure necessary to service the Project as a stand-alone development. In addition, developer shall coordinate with RCMU which may provide for high-speed internet services. 9. The proposed signalized access on both Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard shall be constructed as street types with access ramps and corner cutoffs. 10. The property benefited from CFD 2001-01 improvements but chose not to participate in the CFD. Resolution No. 01-066 was adopted by both the City and the Redevelopment Agency to implement the fair share payment required. The developer is required to pay back the advance, plus interest, at the time of development based on the fee schedule. If payment is made between March land August 30, the March 1 payment for that year is applied. If the payment is made between September land the end of February, then the September payment for that year is applied. The current payoff is $2,544,410.05. The payoff must be paid prior to final map recordation or prior to any City permits being issued, whichever occurs first. 11. No retaining walls shall be allowed within the public right-of-way. Standard Conditions of Approval 12. Developer shall execute a Line Extension Agreement for electric service and construct electrical distribution facilities in accordance with such agreement and Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility (RCMU) requirements. Developer shall dedicate such facilities to RCMU. RCMU shall be the electrical service provider for all project related development. Printed: 6/1/2017 ME, E,I g Y�y Page 17 of 24 Project#: SUBTPM19762 CEQA2016-00012 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD-109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Parcel Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 13.Install fiber optic conduit, vaults, and manholes on Day Creek Boulevard per City Standard Drawings 135-137. Public improvement plans shall show the location and limits of the conduits, vaults and manholes with construction notes. 14. An in -lieu fee as contribution to the undergrounding of the existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical) on the opposite side of Base Line Road shall be paid to the City prior to issuance of building permits or approval of the final map, whichever occurs first. The fee shall be for the length of the Base Line frontage, from the west project boundary to the centerline of Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard. The fee amount shall be determined by the reimbursement agreement with the Developer to the north side of Base Line Road. Should the agreement not be approved prior to permits, the fee amount shall be one-half the City adopted amount. 15. Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards. 16. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape (LMD 2) and Lighting Districts (SLD 1 & SLD 3) shall be filed with the Engineering Services Department prior to final map approval or issuance of Building Permits whichever occurs first. Annexation costs shall be borne by the developer. 17. 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. 18. Prior to the issuance of building permits, a Diversion Deposit and related administrative fees shall be paid for the Construction and Demolition Diversion Program. The deposit is fully refundable if at least 50% of all wastes generated during construction and demolition are diverted from landfills, and appropriate documentation is provided to the City. Permits issued on or after June 2, 2014, must complete the reimbursement process through the City's Accelerate online portal within 60 days following the completion of the construction and/or demolition project or the deposit will be forfeited. Permits issued before June 2, 2014, require the following when applying for a deposit reimbursement: a completed CD-2 form, a copy of the cashier's receipt showing the deposit amount, and all weight tickets. Instructions and forms are available at the City's web site, www.CityofRC.us, under City Hall; Engineering; Environmental Programs. 19. Easements for public sidewalks placed outside the public right-of-way shall be dedicated to the City. 20. Reciprocal access easements shall be provided ensuring access to all parcels by CC&Rs or by deeds and shall be recorded concurrently with the map. 21. 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. 22. 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. Pdnted: 6/1/2017 C I 0iI u 4n Page 18 of 24 Project#: SUBTPM19762CEQA2016-00012 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Parcel Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 23. If the required public improvements are not completed prior to approval of the final parcel map, an improvement security accompanied by an agreement executed by the Developer and the City will be required for: Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard. 24. 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. 25. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. 26. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 27. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. Approval of the final parcel map will be subject to any requirements that may be received from them. 28. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CVWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. Building and Safety Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. When the Entitlement Review is approved submit complete construction drawings including structural calculations, energy calculations and soils report to Building and Safety for plan review in accordance with the current edition of the CA Building and Fire Codes & Local Ordinances. The new structures are required to be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers as required by the CBC/CRC, NFPA 13, 13R, 13D and the Current RCFPD Ordinance. Disabled access for the site and building must be made to the in accordance to the State of CA and ADA regulations. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 1. 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. 2. 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. 3. 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. Printed: 6/1/2017 www.CityofRC.us Page 19 of 24 E10-16 429 Project#: SUBTPM19762CEQA2016-00012 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Parcel Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 4. The final Grading and Drainage Plan, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be completed, submitted, and approved by the Building and Safety Official prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. A separate Grading and Drainage Plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and wet signed by a California licensed Civil Engineer prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit. 6. The applicant shall comply with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Dust Control Measures and place a dust control sign on the project site prior to the issuance of a grading permit. All dust control sign (s) shall be located outside of the public right of way. 7. If a Rough Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit are submitted to the Building and Safety Official for review, the rough grading plan shall be a separate plan submittal and permit from Precise Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit. 8. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall obtain written permission from the adjacent property owner(s) to construct wall(s) on property line(s) or provide a detail(s) showing the perimeter wall(s) to be constructed offset from the property line. 9. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the Final Grading and Drainage Plan shall show the accessibility path from the public right of way and the accessibility parking stalls to the building doors in conformance with the current adopted California Building Code. All accessibility ramps shall show sufficient detail including gradients, elevations, and dimensions and comply with the current adopted California Building Code. 10. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall implement City Standards for on -site construction where possible, and shall provide details for all work not covered by City Standard Drawings. 11. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the grading plan shall show that all manufactured slopes shall be a minimum 2-foot offset from the public right of way, permitted line, or the adjacent private property. All slope offsets shall meet the requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. 12. Prior to the issuance of a grading plan for multi -family projects, the private streets and drive aisles within multi -family developments shall include street plans as part of the Grading and Drainage Plan set. The private street plan view shall show typical street sections. The private street profile view shall show the private street/drive aisle centerline. 13. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the grading and drainage plan shall show the maximum parking stall gradient at 5 percent. Accessibility parking stall grades shall be constructed per the, current adopted California Building Code. 14. 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. 15. The final grading and drainage plan shall show existing topography a minimum of 100-feet beyond project boundary. Painted: 6/1/2017 www.CilyofRcros Page 20 of 24 E10-16 430 Project#: SUBTPM19762 CEQA2016-00012 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Parcel Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 16. This project shall comply with the accessibility requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. 17. 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". 18. 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. 19. All roof drainage Flowing to the public right of way (Daycreek Boulevard) must drain under the sidewalk through a parkway culvert approved by the Engineering Department. This shall be shown on both the grading and drainage plan and Engineering Services Department required plans. 20. 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. 21. 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. 22. 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. 23. 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. 24. Prior to approval of the project -specific storm water quality management plan, the submit to the Building Official, or his designee, a precise grading plan showing th e Printed: 61112017 www•CityofRC.us Page 21 of 24 E10-16 431 Project #: SUBTPM19762 CEQA2016-00012 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Parcel Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 25. 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. 26. 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. 27. Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the latest adopted California Plumbing Code. Private storm drain improvements shall be shown on the grading and drainage plan. 28. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy or final sign off by the Building Inspector the engineer of record shall certify the functionality of the storm water quality management plan (WQMP) storm water treatment devices and best management practices (BMP). 29. Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WQMP shall include a copy of the project Conditions of Approval. 30. Reciprocal access easements for all parcels and maintenance agreements ensuring joint maintenance of all storm water quality structural/treatment devices and best management practices (BMP) as provided for in the project's Storm Water Quality Management Plan, shall be provided for by CC&R's or deeds and shall be recorded prior to the approval of the Water Quality Management Plan. Said CC&R's and/or deeds shall be included in the project site specific Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) document prior to approval of the WQMP document and recording of the Memorandum of Agreement of Storm Water Quality Management Plan. 31. 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. 32. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall obtain a Waste Discharge Identification Number (WDID). The WDID number shall also be shown on the WQMP Site and Drainage Plan document. 33. 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. Printed: 6/1/2017 www.CityofRC.us Page 22 of 24 E10-16 432 Project#: SUBTPM19762CEQA2016-00012 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Parcel Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 34. The land owner shall provide an inspection report by a qualified person/company on a biennial basis for the Class V Injection Wells/underground infiltration chambers to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis all best management practices (BMP"s) as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 35. The land owner shall provide an inspection report on a biennial basis for the structural storm water treatment devices, commonly referred to as BMPs, to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 36. The land/property owner shall follow the inspection and maintenance requirements of the approved project specific Water Quality Management Plan and shall provide a copy of the inspection reports on a biennial basis to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. 37. 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. 38. 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. 39. 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. www.CityofRC.us Printed: 6H/2017 page 23 of 24 E10-16 433 Project#: SUBTPM19762CEQA2016-00012 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Parcel Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 40. 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'. 41. 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". 42. The Tentative Parcel Map 19762 (SUBTPM19762) is the primary discretionary permit for the project. The final project -specific Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) shall be prepared as a Phased WQMP for SUBTPM19762 and shall include all phases of the project. Construction of the storm water treatment structural devices may be constructed as construction progresses. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, either a precise or rough grading permit, the final project -specific water quality management plan shall be recorded. 43. 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. 44. As the use of drywells are proposed for the structural storm water treatment device, to meet the infiltration requirements of the current Municipal Separate Storm Sewers Systems (MS4) Permit, adequate source control and pollution prevention control BMPs shall be implemented to protect groundwater quality. The need for pre-treatment BMPs such as sedimentation or filtration shall be evaluated prior to infiltration and discussed in the final project -specific Water Quality Management Plan document. www.CityofRC.us Printed: 6H/2017 page 24 of 24 E10-16 434 RESOLUTION NO. 17-56 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20032, A SUBDIVISION OF AIRSPACE FOR 380 RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM UNITS ON 28.4-ACRES OF LAND IN THE MIXED USE DISTRICT WITHIN THE VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF A MIXED USE PROJECT CONSISTING OF 380 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, A 71 ROOM HOTEL AND TWO RESTAURANT BUILDINGS TOTALING 12,000 SQUARE FEET, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF DAY CREEK BOULEVARD AND BASE LINE ROAD; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF — APN: 1090-331-05. A. Recitals. 1. D.R. Horton filed an application forthe approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20032, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Tentative Tract Map is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 14th day of June, 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. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing on June 14, 2017, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to the property located at southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road with a street frontage of approximately 840 feet on Base Line Road and approximately 1500 feet on Day Creek Boulevard, with a parcel depth of approximately 1500 feet and a width of approximately 840 feet. The parcel is presently improved with curb and gutter along Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is designated Village Commercial and is currently under construction as a neighborhood shopping center. The property to the west is designated Open Space and contains overhead electrical transmission lines and a flood control channel. The property to the east is designated Mixed Use/Village Commercial and Mixed Use Single -Family, and is developed with a neighborhood shopping center and single-family dwelling units. The property to the south is designated Mixed Use Single -Family and is developed with single-family dwelling units; and E10-16 435 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-56 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20032 DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 2 C. The application is for the subdivision of airspace for 380 residential units on 24.8 acres of land for the purposes of developing a mixed use project consisting of 380 residential condominiums, a 71 room hotel and two restaurant buildings totaling 12,000 square feet; d. The General Plan Land Use designation of the project site is Mixed Use. The project site is within the Victoria Community Plan area with a zoning designation of Regionally Related Office/Commercial. The applicant has submitted a Victoria Community Plan Amendment to change the zoning designation to Mixed Use. The Victoria Community Plan Amendment will change the zoning from Regionally Related Office/Commercial to Mixed Use and will bring the zoning of the Victoria Community Plan into vertical consistency with the General Plan and facilitate the development of a mixed use project; and e. The General Plan Land Use designation of the project site is Mixed Use. The tentative tract map will permit the subdivision of airspace for 380 residential units within a mixed use project. The tentative tract map will permit residential condominiums as part of a mixed use development, thereby being consistent with the land use goals of the General Plan by facilitating residential product types of various sizes that are appropriate to the Mixed Use District. Accordingly, the tentative tract would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The tentative tract map will facilitate the development of residential condominiums of various sizes within a mixed use project at a location the General Plan has designated as Mixed Use. Accordingly, the tentative tract map is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and the Victoria Community Plan; and b. The tentative tract map proposes the subdivision of airspace for residential condominium purposes in conjunction with a mixed use project. In the General Plan, the land use designation of the site is Mixed Use; the applicant has submitted a Victoria Community Plan Amendment to change the zoning designation to Mixed Use to be consistent with the General Plan. Accordingly, the design and improvements of the tentative tract are consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and the Victoria Community Plan; and C. The site is 28.4-acres and contains adequate area for the tentative tract map for residential condominiums, and the project site is well -suited for a mixed use project as it is at the intersection of two major boulevards that. were designed to accommodate the level of traffic proposed by the development. Accordingly, the site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; and d. The tentative tract map and mixed use project has been evaluated for environmental impacts, and with the imposition of mitigation measures, all impacts can be mitigated to less than significant. Accordingly, the design of the tentative tract map is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; and E10-16 436 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-56 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20032 DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 3 e. An Initial Study was prepared for the project that includes mitigation measures to reduce any potential impacts to humans or wildlife to less than significant. Accordingly, the tentative tract map is not likely to cause serious public health problems; and f. The tentative tract map proposes development of the site with three points of access off the parcel's existing street frontage. Accordingly, 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 tentative tract map. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and recommends that the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQK) and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds: (i) that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the projectwill have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission furtherfinds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. C. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore and recommends that the City Council adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the City Planner of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. E10-16 437 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-56 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20032 DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 4 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Department 1) Approval is for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20032 for the subdivision of airspace for 380 residential condominium units on 24.8 acres of land for a site located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road —APN: 1090-331-05. 2) Approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20032 is contingent upon City Council Approval of Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2016- 00452, and Planning Commission approval Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19762, Design Review DRC2016-00450, and Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449. 3) Approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20032 is contingent upon City Council adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for the project and the Mitigation Monitoring Program and all mitigations contained therein. 4) Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with any sections of the Development Code, State Fire Marshal's regulations, Uniform Building Code, or any other City Ordinances. 5) 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 at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2017. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA E10-16 438 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-56 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20032 DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 5 BY: Francisco Oaxaca, Chairman ATTEST: Candyce Burnett, Secretary I, Candyce Burnett, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 14th day of June 2017, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: E10-16 439 Conditions of Approval M N CRCommunity Development Department ACANCEO0 Project #: SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Community, Pre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform ALL OF THE PSF MIZZ9 rnunrTrnnrc n ooLIr TO YOUR o G rgGTr. Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 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 Engineering Services Department within 3 years from the date of the approval. 2. 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. Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. Base Line Road frontage improvements shall be in accordance with City "Major Divided Arterial" standards as required and including: a. Protect, provide or replace curb and gutter, sidewalk, ADA ramps, driveway approaches, 5300 Lumen LED street lights, and signing and striping including bike lanes as required. The street light shall be owned by the City. Developer shall be responsible to coordinate and pay all costs to provide SCE power on City owned street lights. Coordinate with City staff for design and installation requirements. b. Right-of-way dedications shall be made to follow the City's Major Divided Arterial standards. C. Driveways shall be in accordance with the City Driveway Policy including minimum distances from intersections and other driveways, including adjustments to corner cutoffs for driveways. d. Applicant shall coordinate with the developer to the north (PM 19637) and enter into an annual maintenance agreement between both developers and the City for the proposed traffic signal on Base Line Road near the west end of the project. e. Parkway landscaping shall conform to the Base Line Road Beautification Master Plan. www.CityorRC.us Printed 5/30/2017 E10-16 440 Project #: SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Community, Pre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform ALL OF THE rSI�P-F&R n"PG GON-0ITI61NS ARRLY TO YOUR PROiEGT: cwo��n�v o0 Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 2. Day Creek Boulevard frontage improvements shall be in accordance with City "Major Divided Arterial" standards as required and including: a. Protect, provide, or replace curb and gutter, sidewalk, ADA ramps, driveway approaches, 5300 Lumen LED street lights, and signing and striping including bike lanes as required. The street light shall be owned by the City. Developer shall be responsible to coordinate and pay all costs to provide SCE power on City owned street lights. Coordinate with City staff for design and installation requirements. b. Right-of-way dedications shall be made to follow the City's Major Divided Arterial standards. C. Driveways shall be in accordance with the City Driveway Policy including minimum distances from intersections and other driveways, including adjustments to corner cutoffs for driveways. d. No median breaks on Day Creek Boulevard. e. Parkway landscaping shall conform to the Day Creek Boulevard Beautification Master Plan. f. Provide all necessary traffic signal modifications at Day Creek Boulevard and Madrigal Place. Modify traffic striping and replace existing traffic signing as applicable. Protect, relocate, or install traffic signal equipment as required. g. No accent paving within the public right-of-way. 3. Developer will be required to install or pay one-half the cost of median landscaping on Base Line Road with developer -to -developer reimbursement agreements with PM 19637. 4. Reconstruct access ramp at the southwest corner of Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard to comply with current ADA requirements. 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 current ADA requirements. 5. Development Impact Fees are assessed at the time of building permit issuance. Fees are subject to change. 6. Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard Parkway Landscaping shall be maintained by the Homeowners' Association and/or Property Owners Association. 7. Depending upon application and type of development, drive access may be drive aisles or private streets subject to different design criteria. www.CityotRC.us Printed. 5/30/2017 Page 2 or 12 E10-16 441 Project#: SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Community, Pre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform ALL OF THE MuEdWo rn IDIT49 A PR-IYTn�y�3NR-PRQJ96T. Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 8. The proposed development is slated to be included in the City's Fiber Optic / Broadband service business plan that would provide a City owned Fiber -to -the -Home (FTTH) infrastructure. Proposed fiber optics on -site (conduits and fiber) will be placed underground within a duct and structure system to be installed by the Master Developer. The fiber and conduits along the backbone streets shall be installed in a joint trench by the developer as the last lane improvements are completed. In -tract fiber and conduit shall be installed by the developers in joint trench where possible. Maintenance of the installed system will be the responsibility of the City. Development of the project requires the installation by the developers of all fiber optic infrastructure necessary to service the Project as a stand-alone development. In addition, developer shall coordinate with RCMU which may provide for high-speed internet services. 9. The proposed signalized access on both Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard shall be constructed as street types with access ramps and corner cutoffs. 10. The property benefited from CFD 2001-01 improvements but chose not to participate in the CFD. Resolution No. 01-066 was adopted by both the City and the Redevelopment Agency to implement the fair share payment required. The developer is required to pay back the advance, plus interest, at the time of development based on the fee schedule. If payment is made between March 1 and August 30, the March 1 payment for that year is applied. If the payment is made between September 1 and the end of February, then the September payment for that year is applied. The current payoff is $2,544,410.05. The payoff must be paid prior to final map recordation or prior to any City permits being issued, whichever occurs first. 11. No retaining walls shall be allowed within the public right-of-way. Standard Conditions of Approval 12. An in -lieu fee as contribution to the undergrounding of the existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical) on the opposite side of Base Line Road shall be paid to the City prior to issuance of building permits or approval of the final map, whichever occurs first. The fee shall be for the length of the Base Line frontage, from the west project boundary to the centerline of Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard. The fee amount shall be determined by the reimbursement agreement with the Developer to the north side of Base Line Road. Should the agreement not be approved prior to permits, the fee amount shall be one-half the City adopted amount. 13. Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards. 14. Easements for public sidewalks placed outside the public right-of-way shall be dedicated to the City. 15. 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. 16. 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. Printed 5/30/2017 wvm.CityofRC.us Page 3 of 12 E10-16 442 Project#: SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Community, Pre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform ALL OF THE MUEF4ANG GGAWIPONS APPLY TO YOUR PRQA9GP Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 17, A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final map approval or the issuance of Building Permits, whichever occurs first. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer. 18. Prior to the issuance of building permits, a Diversion Deposit and related administrative fees shall be paid for the Construction and Demolition Diversion Program. The deposit is fully refundable if at least 50% of all wastes generated during construction and demolition are diverted from landfills, and appropriate documentation is provided to the City. Permits issued on or after June 2, 2014, must complete the reimbursement process through the City's Accelerate online portal within 60 days following the completion of the construction and/or demolition project or the deposit will be forfeited. Permits issued before June 2, 2014, require the following when applying for a deposit reimbursement: a completed CD-2 form, a copy of the cashier's receipt showing the deposit amount, and all weight tickets. Instructions and forms are available at the City's web site, www.CityofRC.us, under City Hall; Engineering; Environmental Programs. 19. 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. 20. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape (LMD 2) and Lighting Districts (SLD 1 & SLID 3) shall be filed with the Engineering Services Department prior to final map approval or issuance of Building Permits whichever occurs first. Annexation costs shall be borne by the developer. 21.Install fiber optic conduit, vaults, and manholes on Day Creek Boulevard per City Standard Drawings 135-137. Public improvement plans shall show the location and limits of the conduits, vaults and manholes with construction notes. 22. Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in accordance with the City's street tree program. 23. Developer shall execute a Line Extension Agreement for electric service and construct electrical distribution facilities in accordance with such agreement and Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility (RCMU) requirements. Developer shall dedicate such facilities to RCMU. RCMU shall be the electrical service provider for all project related development. 24. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. 25. Provide separate utility services to each unit including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 26. 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. Printed: 5/30/2017 ww`/ ZtyofRC.us Page 4 of 12 E10-16 443 Project #: SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD-109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Community, Pre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform ALL OF THE �S_ EM ffR96 G6111fDIVONS APP—f Y T^—�T,�^dE�T: Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 27. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CVWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. 28. Street improvement plans per City Standards for all private streets shall be provided for review and approval by the City Engineer. Prior to any work being performed on the private streets, fees shall be paid and construction permits shall be obtained from the Engineering Services Department in addition to any other permits required. 29. 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. Building and Safety Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. When the Entitlement Review is approved submit complete construction drawings including structural calculations energy calculations and soils report to Building and Safety for plan review in accordance with the current edition of the CA Building and Fire Codes. The new structures are required to be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers as required by the CBC and Current RCFPD Ordinance. Disabled access for the site and building must be made to the in accordance to the State of CA and ADA regulations. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 1. 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". Note: As this project has been previously graded and the site soils have been compacted for building pads and parking lot purposes, the use of the Custom Soil Resource Report for San Bernardino County Southwestern Part by the United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service for natural soils is not acceptable for soil groundwater infiltration rates. 2. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with current adopted California Building Code and/or the California Residential Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The Grading and Drainage Plan(s) shall be in substantial conformance with the approved conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan. Printed 5/3012017 www.CilyofRC.us Page 5 of 12 E10-16 444 Project#: SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Community, Pre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform ALL OF THE 48-PFMWAG GONDITIONF APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT, Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 3. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified Engineer licensed by the State of California to perform such work. Two copies will be provided at grading and drainage plan submittal for review. Plans shall implement design recommendations per said report. 4. 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. 5. The final Grading and Drainage Plan, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be completed, submitted, and approved by the Building and Safety Official prior to the issuance of building permits. 6. A separate Grading and Drainage Plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and wet signed by a California licensed Civil Engineer prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit. 7. 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. 8. 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. 9. 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. 10. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the Final Grading and Drainage Plan shall show the accessibility path from the public right of way and the accessibility parking stalls to the building doors in conformance with the current adopted California Building Code. All accessibility ramps shall show sufficient detail including gradients, elevations, and dimensions and comply with the current adopted California Building Code. 11. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall implement City Standards for on -site construction where possible, and shall provide details for all work not covered by City Standard Drawings. 12. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the grading plan shall show that all manufactured slopes shall be a minimum 2-foot offset from the public right of way, permitted line, or the adjacent private property. All slope offsets shall meet the requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. 13. Prior to the issuance of a grading plan for multi -family projects, the private streets and drive aisles within multi -family developments shall include street plans as part of the Grading and Drainage Plan set. The private street plan view shall show typical street sections. The private street profile view shall show the private street/drive aisle centerline. 14. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the grading and drainage plan shall show the maximum parking stall gradient at 5 percent. Accessibility parking stall grades shall be constructed per the, current adopted California Building Code. Printed: 5/30/2017 1w✓w,CltyoiRC.uS Page 6 of 12 E10-16 445 Project#: SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Community, Pre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform ALL OF THE MuEd- NAG GONDlPONS APPLY TO Y49UR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 15. 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. 16. The final grading and drainage plan shall show existing topography a minimum of 100-feet beyond project boundary. 17. This project shall comply with the accessibility requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. 18. 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. 19. All roof drainage flowing to the public right of way (xx Avenue) must drain under the sidewalk through a parkway culvert approved by the Engineering Department. This shall be shown on both the grading and drainage plan and Engineering Services Department required plans. 20. 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. 21. 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. 22. Prior to approval of the project -specific storm water quality management plan, the submit to the Building Official, or his designee, a precise grading plan showing th e Printed 513012017 www.CilyofRc.us Page 7 of 12 E10-16 446 Project#: SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Community, Pre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform ALL OF THE 48P_.91W._9 GOND!T 0NS APPI=Y TO YOUR PRE? f-r-GT- Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 23. 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. 24. 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. 25. Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the latest adopted California Plumbing Code. Private storm drain improvements shall be shown on the grading and drainage plan. 26. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy or final sign off by the Building Inspector the engineer of record shall certify the functionality of the storm water quality management plan (WQMP) storm water treatment devices and best management practices (BMP). 27. Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WQMP shall include a copy of the project Conditions of Approval. 28. Reciprocal access easements for all parcels and maintenance agreements ensuring joint maintenance of all storm water quality structural/treatment devices and best management practices (BMP) as providedfor in the project's Storm Water Quality Management Plan, shall be provided for by CC&R's or deeds and shall be recorded prior to the approval of the Water Quality Management Plan. Said CC&R's and/or deeds shall be included in the project site specific Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) document prior to approval of the WQMP document and recording of the Memorandum of Agreement of Storm Water Quality Management Plan. 29. 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". 30. The subgrade for the permeable paver storm water treatment devices shall have a level subgrade. Prior to issuance of the grading permit and approval of the final project -specific water quality management plan (WQMP) the engineer of record shall provide a pad elevation for the permeable paver subgrade on the grading plan and shall provide a detail on the WQMP site and drainage plan showing the permeable paver subgrade as level. 31. 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. 32. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall obtain a Waste Discharge Identification Number (WDID). The WDID number shall_ also be shown on the WQMP Site and Drainage Plan document. Printed; 5/30/2017 wvnv,CityofRC.us Page B of 12 E10-16 447 Project #: SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Community, Pre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform ALL OF THE 4AiMUG G0AfD1T QJYS APPLY TA YOLfR RR61 ECT' Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 33. 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. 34. The land owner shall provide an inspection report by a qualified person/company on a biennial basis for the Class V Injection Wells/underground infiltration chambers to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis all best management practices (BMP"s) as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 35. 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. 36. The land owner shall provide an inspection report on a biennial 'basis for the structural storm water treatment devices, commonly referred to as BMPs, to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 37. The land/property owner shall follow the inspection and maintenance requirements of the approved project specific Water Quality Management Plan and shall provide a copy of the inspection reports on a biennial basis to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. 38. The Site and Drainage Plan in the final project -specific Water Quality Management Plan shall show the locations of all roof downspout drains. if required for storm water quality purposes, the downspouts shall include filters. 39. Prior to the issuance of a building permit or Engineering Services Department issued right of way permit, the applicant shall submit to the Building Official, or his designee, a final project specific water quality management plan for review and approval, and shall have said document recorded with the San Bernardino County Recorder's Office. 40. Prior to the start of landscaping operations, the landscape architect and the landscape contractor shall provide a sample of the weed fabric barrier to the Project Planner, City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department. The weed barrier shall be permeable. Printed 5/3012017 w .CityofRC.uS Page 9 0! 12 E10-16 448 Project#: SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Community, Pre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform ALL OF THE 08 ZRW-G- ^^.f1fL?INGNS APPLY TO YOUR PRO E-CP Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 41. 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. 42. 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. 43. 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 V11.3: Suitability Assessment Related Considerations for Infiltration Facility Safety Factors". 44. 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". 45. The final project -specific Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) shall be prepared as a Phased WQMP and shall include all phases of the project. Construction of the storm water treatment structural devices may be constructed as construction progresses. 46. 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: 5/30/2017 v .cityolRc.uS Page 10 of 12 E10-16 449 Project#: SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Community, Pre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform ALL OF THE GOADr ONO APPLY TO YOUR o O EGT Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 47. As the use of drywells are proposed for the structural storm water treatment device, to meet the infiltration requirements of the current Municipal Separate Storm Sewers Systems (MS4) Permit, adequate source control and pollution prevention control BMPs shall be implemented to protect groundwater quality. The need for pre-treatment BMPs such as sedimentation or filtration shall be evaluated prior to infiltration and discussed in the final project -specific Water Quality Management Plan document. Printed. 5/30/2017 vnvw.CityofRC.us Page 11 of 12 E10-16 450 Project #: Project Name: Location: SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Day Creek Villages 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Community, Pre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform ALL OF THE 48 Ea- ANG ool1WfV0JVS r4RR-Y TO YO6fR PRwsaT_. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 48. GROUND WATER PROTECTION: Prior to approval of the final project specific water quality management plan (WQMP), the WQMP document shall meet the requirements of the State ' Water Resources Control Board Order No. R8-2010-0036 (NPDES No. CAS 618036), the San Bernardino County Municipal Separate Storm Sewers Separation (MS4) Permit reads: Section XLD(Water Quality Management Plan Requirements).8(Groundwater Protection): Treatment Control BMPs utilizing infiltration [exclusive of incidental infiltration and BMPs not designed to primarily function as infiltration devices (such as grassy swales, detention basins, vegetated buffer strips, constructed wetlands, etc.)] must comply with the following minimum requirements to protect groundwater: a. Use of structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause or contribute to an exceedance of ground water quality objectives. b. Source control and pollution prevention control BMPs shall be implemented to protect groundwater quality. The need for pre-treatment BMPs such as sedimentation or filtration should be evaluated prior to infiltration. c. Adequate pretreatment of runoff prior to infiltration shall be required in gas stations and large commercial parking lots. (NOTE: The State Water Quality Control Board defines a large commercial parking lot as 'Jr00,000 sq. ft. or more of commercial development to include parking lot (with 100 or more vehicle traffics), OR, by means of 5,000sgft or more of allowable space designated for parking purposes'). d. Unless adequate pre-treatment of runoff is provided prior to infiltration structural infiltration treatment BMPs must not be used for areas of industrial or light industrial activity{77}, areas subject to high vehicular traffic (25,000 or more daily traffic); car washes; fleet storage areas; nurseries; or any other high threat to water quality land uses or activities. e. Class V injection wells or dry wells must not be placed in areas subject to vehicular{78) repair or maintenance activities{79}, such as an auto body repair shop, automotive repair shop, new and used car dealership, specialty repair shop (e.g., transmission and muffler repair shop) or any facility that does any vehicular repair work. f. Structural infiltration BMP treatment shall not be used at sites that are known to have soil and groundwater contamination. g. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall be located at least 100 feet horizontally from any water supply wells. h. The vertical distance from the bottom of any infiltration structural treatment BMP to the historic high groundwater mark shall be at least 10-feet. Where the groundwater basins do not support beneficial uses, this vertical distance criteria may be reduced, provided groundwater quality is maintained. i. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause a nuisance or pollution as defined in Water Code Section 13050. Printed: 51=2017 �.CityofRC.us Page 12 of 12 E10-16 451 RESOLUTION NO.17-57 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00450 FOR THE SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OF A MIXED USE PROJECT IN THE MIXED USE DISTRICT WITHIN THE VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN CONSISTING OF 380 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, A 71 ROOM HOTEL AND TWO RESTAURANT BUILDINGS TOTALING 12,000 SQUARE FEET, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF DAY CREEK BOULEVARD AND BASE LINE ROAD; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF —APN: 1090-331-05. A. Recitals. 1. D.R. Horton filed an application for the approval of Design Review DRC2016-00450, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Review request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 14th day of June, 2017, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said meeting on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced meeting on June 14, 2017, including written and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to the property located at southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road with a street frontage of approximately 840 feet on Base Line Road and approximately 1500 feet on Day Creek Boulevard, with a parcel depth of approximately 1500 feet and a width of approximately 840 feet. The parcel is presently improved with curb and gutter along Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is designated Village Commercial and is currently under construction as a neighborhood shopping center. The property to the west is designated Open Space and contains overhead electrical transmission lines and a flood control channel. The property to the east is designated Mixed Use/Village Commercial and Mixed Use Single -Family, and is developed with a neighborhood shopping center and single-family dwelling units. The property to the south is designated Mixed Use Single -ramify and is developed with single-family dwelling units; and E10-16 452 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-57 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00450 DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 2 C. The project is for the development of a mixed use project for the site plan and architectural review of the 380 residential units (329 townhomes and 51 single-family dwelling units), two restaurant pads (two 6,000 sf restaurants), and a three-story, 71-room boutique hotel on 28.4 acres of land; and d. The project includes the subdivision of the residential portion into 380 condominium units (Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20032) for market rate residential sales and ownership; and e. The project is designed with three vehicle access points and one emergency access point; and f. The project design includes a linear park that will be accessible to the public, thereby providing recreational opportunities to the surrounding area; and g. The project incorporates tower elements, paseos, courtyards, water features, walkable areas, and 360 degree architecture, thereby creating a mixed use project that creates visual interest and contributes toward an attractive built environment, a design goal of the General Plan. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced meeting and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The land use designation of the site in the General Plan is Mixed Use. The project site is within the Victoria Community Plan area with a zoning designation of Regionally Related Office/Commercial. The applicant has submitted a Victoria Community Plan Amendment to change the zoning designation to Mixed Use. The Victoria Community Plan Amendment will change the zoning from Regionally Related Office/Commercial to Mixed Use and will bring the zoning of the Victoria Community Plan into vertical consistency with the General Plan and facilitate the development of a mixed use project. The proposed project is a mixed use project that will feature a hotel, restaurants and residential units. The residential units are of various sizes that will provide housing opportunities for various segments of the market. Accordingly, the he proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and b. The proposed mixed use project is designed with commercial, residential, and hospitality land uses. Accordingly, the project features different types of land uses that have been designed to be compatible with respect to scale, massing and architectural design. Accordingly, the proposed project and land use is in accord with the objectives of the Development Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and C. The proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code for a mixed use project, including, but not limited to, setbacks, parking, building heights and amenity requirements. Therefore, the proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code; and d. An environmental review was completed for the project which concluded that with the proposed mitigation measures, the project would have a less than significant impact on the environment. Therefore, the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not E10-16 453 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-57 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00450 DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 3 be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and recommends that the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated heroin by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds: (i) that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission furtherfinds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. C. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The City Planner therefore and recommends that the City Council adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the Planning Manager of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Department 1) Approval is for Design Review DRC2016-00450 for the site plan and architectural review for a mixed use project consisting of 380 residential units (329 townhomes and 51 single-family dwelling units), two restaurant E10-16 454 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-57 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00450 DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 4 pads (two 6,000 sf restaurants), and a three-story, 71-room boutique hotel on 28.4 acres land for a site located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road -- APN: 1090-331-05. 2) Approval of Design Review DRC2016-00450 is contingent upon City Council Approval of Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2016- 00452, and Planning Commission approval of Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19762, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20032, and Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449. 3) Approval of Design Review DRC2016-00450 is contingent upon City Council adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for the project and the Mitigation Monitoring Program and all mitigations contained therein. 4) Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with any sections of the Development Code, State Fire Marshal's regulations, Uniform Building Code, or any other City Ordinances. 5) 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 at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2017. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Li'0 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 141h day of June 2017, by the following vote -to -wit: E10-16 455 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-57 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00450 DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 5 AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: E10-16 456 Conditions of Approval cCommunity Development Department Project #: DRC2016-00450 OEQA2016-00016 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Design Review CEQA Review 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. Any approval shall expire if Building Permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 5 years from the date of approval or a time extension has been granted. Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. Comply withal] Conditions of Approval under SUBTPM19762. Building and Safety Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. When the Entitlement Review is approved submit complete construction drawings including structural calculations, energy calculations and soils report to Building and Safety for plan review in accordance with the -'Current edition of the CA Building and Fire Codes. The new structures are required to be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers as required by the CBC/CRC NFPA 13, 13D 13R and Current RCFPD Ordinance. Disabled access for the site and building must be made to the in accordance to the State of CA and ADA regulations. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 1. 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. vnvw.CityofRC.us Primed: 5/30/2017 E10-16 457 Project#: DRC2016-00450 CEQA2016-00016 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Design Review CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 2. 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. 3. 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. 4. The final Grading and Drainage Plan, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be completed, submitted, and approved by the Building and Safety Official prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. A separate Grading and Drainage Plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and wet signed by a California licensed Civil Engineer prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit. 6. The applicant shall comply with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Dust Control Measures and place a dust control sign on the project site prior to the issuance of a grading permit. All dust control sign (s) shall be located outside of the public right of way. 7. If a Rough Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit are submitted to the Building and Safety Official for review, the rough grading plan shall be a separate plan submittal and permit from Precise Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit. 8. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall obtain written permission from the adjacent property owner(s) to construct wall(s) on property line(s) or provide a detail(s) showing the perimeter wall(s) to be constructed offset from the property line. 9. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the Final Grading and Drainage Plan shall show the accessibility path from the public right of way and the accessibility parking stalls to the building doors in conformance with the 'current adopted California Building Code. All accessibility ramps shall show sufficient detail including gradients, elevations, and dimensions and comply with the current adopted California Building Code. 10. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall implement City Standards for on -site construction where possible, and shall provide details for all work not covered by City Standard Drawings. 11. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the grading plan shall show that all manufactured slopes shall be a minimum 2-foot offset from the public right of way, permitted line, or the adjacent private property. All slope offsets shall meet the requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. 12. Prior to the issuance of a grading plan for multi -family projects, the private streets and drive aisles within multi -family developments shall include street plans as part of the Grading and Drainage Plan set. The private street plan view shall show typical street sections. The private street profile view shall show the private street/drive aisle centerline. 13. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the grading and drainage plan shall show the maximum parking stall gradient at 5 percent. Accessibility parking stall grades shall be constructed per the, current adopted California Building Code. Printed: 5/30/2017 www.CityofRC.us Page 2 of 9 E10-16 458 Project #: DRC2016-00450 CEQA2016-00016 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Design Review CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 14. 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. 15. The final grading and drainage plan shall show existing topography a minimum of 100-feet beyond project boundary. 16. This project shall comply with the accessibility requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. 17. 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. 18. All roof drainage flowing to the public right of way Day Creek Boulevard) must drain under the sidewalk through a parkway culvert approved by the Engineering Department. This shall be shown on both the grading and drainage plan and Engineering Services Department required plans. 19. 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. 20. 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. 21. 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. www.CityofRC.us Printed: 5/30/2017 Page 3 of 9 E10-16 459 Project#: DRC2016-00450 CEQA2016-00016 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Design Review CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 22. 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. 23. 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. 24. Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the latest adopted California Plumbing Code. Private storm drain improvements shall be shown on the grading and drainage plan. 25. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy or final sign off by the Building Inspector the engineer of record shall certify the functionality of the storm water quality management plan (WQMP) storm water treatment devices and best management practices (BMP). 26. Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WQMP shall include a copy of the project Conditions of Approval. 27. Reciprocal access easements for all parcels and maintenance agreements ensuring joint maintenance of all storm water quality structural/treatment devices and best management practices (BMP) as provided for in the project's Storm Water Quality Management Plan, shall be provided for by CC&R's or deeds and shall be recorded prior to the approval of the Water Quality Management Plan. Said CC&R's and/or deeds shall be included in the project site specific Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) document prior to approval of the WQMP document and recording of the Memorandum of Agreement of Storm Water Quality Management Plan. 28. 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. 29. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall obtain a Waste Discharge Identification Number (WDID). The WDID number shall also be shown on the WQMP Site and Drainage Plan document. 30. 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. Printed: 5/30/2017 wv✓w.CityofRC.us Page 4 of 9 E10-16 460 Project #: DRC2016-00450 CEQA2016-00016 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Design Review CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 31. The land owner shall provide an inspection report by a qualified person/company on a biennial basis for the Class V Injection Wells/underground infiltration chambers to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis all best management practices (BMP"s) as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 32. 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. 33. The land owner shall provide an inspection report on a biennial basis for the structural storm water treatment devices, commonly referred to as BMPs, to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 34. The land/property owner shall follow the inspection and maintenance requirements of the approved project specific Water Quality Management Plan and shall provide a copy of the inspection reports on a biennial basis to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. 35. The Site and Drainage Plan in the final project -specific Water Quality Management Plan shall show the locations of all roof downspout drains. if required for storm water quality purposes, the downspouts shall include filters. 36. Prior to the issuance of a building permit or Engineering Services Department issued right of way permit, the applicant shall submit to the Building Official, or his designee, a final project specific water quality management plan for review and approval, and shall have said document recorded with the San Bernardino County Recorder's Office. 37. 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. Ptlnted 5/30/2017 www.CityofRC.us Page 5 of 9 E10-16 461 Project#: DRC2016-00450 CEQA2016-00016 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Design Review CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 38. 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. 39. 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. 40. 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". 41. 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". 42. The final project -specific Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) may be prepared as a Phased WQMP and shall include all phases of the project. Construction of the storm water treatment structural devices may be constructed as construction progresses. 43. 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. Pnntetl: 5/30/2017 www.CityofRC.us Page 6 of 9 E10-16 462 Project #: DRC2016-00450 CEQA2016-00016 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Design Review CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 44. As the use of drywells are proposed for the structural storm water treatment device, to meet the infiltration requirements of the current Municipal Separate Storm Sewers Systems (MS4) Permit, adequate source control and pollution prevention control BMPs shall be implemented to protect groundwater quality. The need for pre-treatment BMPs such as sedimentation or filtration shall be evaluated prior to infiltration and discussed in the final project -specific Water Quality Management Plan document. Pawww.CityofRC.usnted: 5/30/2017 Page 7 of 9 E10-16 463 Project #: DRC2016-00450 CEQA2016-00016 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Design Review CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section 'Standard Conditions of Approval 45. GROUND WATER PROTECTION: Prior to approval of the final project specific water quality management plan (WQMP), the WQMP document shall meet the requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board Order No. R8-2010-0036 (NPDES No. CAS 618036), the San Bernardino County Municipal Separate Storm Sewers Separation (MS4) Permit reads: Section XI.D(Water Quality Management Plan Requirements).8(Groundwater Protection): Treatment Control BMPs utilizing infiltration [exclusive of incidental infiltration and BMPs not designed to primarily function as infiltration devices (such as grassy swales, detention basins, vegetated buffer strips, constructed wetlands, etc,)] must comply with the following minimum requirements to protect groundwater: a. Use of structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause or contribute to an exceedance of ground water quality objectives. b. Source control and pollution prevention control BMPs shall be implemented to protect groundwater quality. The need for pre-treatment BMPs such as sedimentation or filtration should be evaluated prior to infiltration. c. Adequate pretreatment of runoff prior to infiltration shall be required in gas stations and large commercial parking lots. (NOTE: The State Water Quality Control Board defines a large commercial parking lot as '100,000 sq. ft. or more of commercial development to include parking lot (with 100 or more vehicle traffics), OR, by means of 5,000sgft or more of allowable space designated for parking purposes'). d. Unless adequate pre-treatment of runoff is provided prior to infiltration structural infiltration treatment BMPs must not be used for areas of industrial or light industrial activity{77}, areas subject to high vehicular traffic (25,000 or more daily traffic); car washes; fleet storage areas; nurseries; or any other high threat to water quality land uses or activities. e. Class V injection wells or dry wells must not be placed in areas subject to vehicular{78} repair or maintenance activities{79}, such as an auto body repair shop, automotive repair shop, new and used car dealership, specialty repair shop (e.g., transmission and muffler repair shop) or any facility that does any vehicular repair work. f. Structural infiltration BMP treatment shall not be used at sites that are known to have soil and groundwater contamination. g. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall be located at least 100 feet horizontally from any water supply wells. h. The vertical distance from the bottom of any infiltration structural treatment BMP to the historic high groundwater mark shall be at least 10-feet. Where the groundwater basins do not support beneficial uses, this vertical distance criteria may be reduced, provided groundwater quality is maintained. I. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause a nuisance or pollution as defined in Water Code Section 13050. w .CilyofRC.us Page 8 of 9 Printed:.5/30/2017 E10-16 464 Project #: DRC2016-00450 CEQA2016-00016 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Design Review CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 46. 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". Note: As this project has been previously graded and the site soils have been compacted for building pads and parking lot purposes, the use of the Custom Soil Resource Report for San Bernardino County Southwestern Part by the United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service for natural soils is not acceptable for soil groundwater infiltration rates. 47. 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". 48. The subgrade for the permeable paver storm water treatment devices shall have a level subgrade. Prior to issuance of the grading permit and approval of the final project -specific water quality management plan (WQMP) the engineer of record shall provide a pad elevation for the permeable paver subgrade on the grading plan and shall provide a detail on the WQMP site and drainage plan showing the permeable paver subgrade as level. www.CityofRC.us Page 9 of 9 Printed: 5/30/2017 E10-16 465 Conditions of Approval Community Development Department Project #: SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Community, Pre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform ALL OF THE 91 -P-F5- nf!YG- rnnfnfrf0NS noo-yrn vnffo oon f—r� GT. Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 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 Engineering Services Department within 3 years from the date of the approval. 2. 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. Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. Base Line Road frontage improvements shall be in accordance with City "Major Divided Arterial" standards as required and including: a. Protect, provide or replace curb and gutter, sidewalk, ADA ramps, driveway approaches, 5300 Lumen LED street lights, and signing and striping including bike lanes as required. The street light shall be owned by the City. Developer shall be responsible to coordinate and pay all costs to provide SCE power on City owned street lights. Coordinate with City staff for design and installation requirements. b. Right-of-way dedications shall be made to follow the City's Major Divided Arterial standards. C. Driveways shall be in accordance with the City Driveway Policy including minimum distances from intersections and other driveways, including adjustments to corner cutoffs for driveways. d. Applicant shall coordinate with the developer to the north (PM 19637) and enter into an annual maintenance agreement between both developers and the City for the proposed traffic signal on Base Line Road near the west end of the project. e. Parkway landscaping shall conform to the Base Line Road Beautification Master Plan. Printed. 5/30/2017 www.CityofRC.us E10-16 466 Project#: SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Community, Pre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform ALL OF THEM P� M-G- GONL7MONS ARRLY T-9 YOUR PROJECT, Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 2. Day Creek Boulevard frontage improvements shall be in accordance with City "Major Divided Arterial" standards as required and including: a. Protect, provide, or replace curb and gutter, sidewalk, ADA ramps, driveway approaches, 5300 Lumen LED street lights, and signing and striping including bike lanes as required. The street light shall be owned by the City. Developer shall be responsible to coordinate and pay all costs to provide SCE power on City owned street lights. Coordinate with City staff for design and installation requirements. b. Right-of-way dedications shall be made to follow the City's Major Divided Arterial standards. C. Driveways shall be in accordance with the City Driveway Policy including minimum distances from intersections and other driveways, including adjustments to corner cutoffs for driveways. d. No median breaks on Day Creek Boulevard. e. Parkway landscaping shall conform to the Day Creek Boulevard Beautification Master Plan. f. Provide all necessary traffic signal modifications at Day Creek Boulevard and Madrigal Place. Modify traffic striping and replace existing traffic signing as applicable. Protect, relocate, or install traffic signal equipment as required. g. No accent paving within the public right-of-way. 3. Developer will be required to install or pay one-half the cost of median landscaping on Base Line Road with developer -to -developer reimbursement agreements with PM 19637. 4. Reconstruct access ramp at the southwest corner of Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard to comply with current ADA requirements. 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 current ADA requirements. 5. Development Impact Fees are assessed at the time of building permit issuance. Fees are subject to change. 6. Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard Parkway Landscaping shall be maintained by the Homeowners' Association and/or Property Owners Association. 7. Depending upon application and type of development, drive access may be drive aisles or private streets subject to different design criteria. www.CityofRC.us Printed: 5/30/2017 Page 2 of 12 E10-16 467 Project #: SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Community, Pre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform ALL OF THE 41J9U EU- 04-9 GONAITIONS AP.P_f 'TO Y-ii RRE1jE-GT Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 8. The proposed development is slated to be included in the City's Fiber Optic / Broadband service business plan that would provide a City owned Fiber -to -the -Home (FTTH) infrastructure. Proposed fiber optics on -site (conduits and fiber) will be placed underground within a duct and structure system to be installed by the Master Developer. The fiber and conduits along the backbone streets shall be installed in a joint trench by the developer as the last lane improvements are completed. In -tract fiber and conduit shall be installed by the developers in joint trench where possible. Maintenance of the installed system will be the responsibility of the City. Development of the project requires the installation by the developers of all fiber optic infrastructure necessary to service the Project as a stand-alone development. In addition, developer shall coordinate with RCMU which may provide for high-speed internet services. 9. The proposed signalized access on both Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard shall be constructed as street types with access ramps and corner cutoffs. 10. The property benefited from CFD 2001-01 improvements but chose not to participate in the CFD. Resolution No. 01-066 was adopted by both the City and the Redevelopment Agency to implement the fair share payment required. The developer is required to pay back the advance, plus interest, at the time of development based on the fee schedule. If payment is made between March 1 and August 30, the March 1 payment for that year is applied. If the payment is made between September 1 and the end of February, then the September payment for that year is applied. The current payoff is $2,544,410.05. The payoff must be paid prior to final map recordation or prior to any City permits being issued, whichever occurs first. 11. No retaining walls shall be allowed within the public right-of-way. Standard Conditions of Approval 12. An in -lieu fee as contribution to the undergrounding of the existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical) on the opposite side of Base Line Road shall be paid to the City prior to issuance of building permits or approval of the final map, whichever occurs first. The fee shall be for the length of the Base Line frontage, from the west project boundary to the centerline of Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard. The fee amount shall be determined by the reimbursement agreement with the Developer to the north side of Base Line Road. Should the agreement not be approved prior to permits, the fee amount shall be one-half the City adopted amount. 13. Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards. 14. Easements for public sidewalks placed outside the public right-of-way shall be dedicated to the City. 15. 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. 16. 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._ Printed 5/30l2017 wrnv.CityofRC.us Page 3 of 12 E10-16 468 Project#: SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Community, Pre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform ALL OF THE 4P Pl4Wk9 GGAWITIOIVS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT' Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 17, A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final map approval or the issuance of Building Permits, whichever occurs first. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer. 18. Prior to the issuance of building permits, a Diversion Deposit and related administrative fees shall be paid for the Construction and Demolition Diversion Program. The deposit is fully refundable if at least 50% of all wastes generated during construction and demolition are diverted from landfills, and appropriate documentation is provided to the City. Permits issued on or after June 2, 2014, must complete the reimbursement process through the City's Accelerate online portal within 60 days following the completion of the construction and/or demolition project or the deposit will be forfeited. Permits issued before June 2, 2014, require the following when applying for a deposit reimbursement: a completed CD-2 form, a copy of the cashier's receipt showing the deposit amount, and all weight tickets. Instructions and forms are available at the City's web site, www.CityofRC.us, under City Hall; Engineering; Environmental Programs. 19. 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. 20. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape (LMD 2) and Lighting Districts (SLD 1 & SLD 3) shall be filed with the Engineering Services Department prior to final map approval or issuance of Building Permits whichever occurs first. Annexation costs shall be borne by the developer. 21.Install fiber optic conduit, vaults, and manholes on Day Creek Boulevard per City Standard Drawings 135-137. Public improvement plans shall show the location and limits of the conduits, vaults and manholes with construction notes. 22. Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in accordance with the City's street tree program. 23. Developer shall execute a Line Extension Agreement for electric service and construct electrical distribution facilities in accordance with such agreement and Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility (RCMU) requirements. Developer shall dedicate such facilities to RCMU. RCMU shall be the electrical service provider for all project related development. 24. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. 25. Provide separate utility services to each unit including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 26. 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. Pnnted: 5/30/2017 www.CltyofRC.us Page 4 of 12 E10-16 469 Project#: SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Community, Pre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform ALL OF THE .4_ccPvw���7r�uw � GONDIPONS APPLY Te YOUR PROjEOT: a Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 27. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CVWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. 28. Street improvement plans per City Standards for all private streets shall be provided for review and approval by the City Engineer. Prior to any work being performed on the private streets, fees shall be paid and construction permits shall be obtained from the Engineering Services Department in addition to any other permits required. 29. 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. Building and Safety Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. When the Entitlement Review is approved submit complete construction drawings including structural calculations energy calculations and soils report to Building and Safety for plan review in accordance with the current edition of the CA Building and Fire Codes. The new structures are required to be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers as required by the CBC and Current RCFPD Ordinance. Disabled access for the site and building must be made to the in accordance to the State of CA and ADA regulations. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 1. 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". Note: As this project has been previously graded and the site soils have been compacted for building pads and parking lot purposes, the use of the Custom Soil Resource Report for San Bernardino County Southwestern Part by the United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service for natural soils is not acceptable for soil groundwater infiltration rates. 2. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with current adopted California Building Code and/or the California Residential Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The Grading and Drainage Plan(s) shall be in substantial conformance with the approved conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan. Printed5/30/2e 17 www.CityofRC.us Page 5 of 72 E10-16 470 Project #: SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Community, Pre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform ALL OF THEM iF4M9 GGAWITIONS AP LY T-0 Y-QNR PRQj€GT- Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 3. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified Engineer licensed by the State of California to perform such work. Two copies will be provided at grading and drainage plan submittal for review. Plans shall implement design recommendations per said report. 4. 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. 5. The final Grading and Drainage Plan, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be completed, submitted, and approved by the Building and Safety Official prior to the issuance of building permits. 6. A separate Grading and Drainage Plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and wet signed by a California licensed Civil Engineer prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit. 7. 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. 8. 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, 9. 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. 10. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the Final Grading and Drainage Plan shall show the accessibility path from the public right of way and the accessibility parking stalls to the building doors in conformance with the current adopted California Building Code. All accessibility ramps shall show sufficient detail including gradients, elevations, and dimensions and comply with the current adopted California Building Code. 11. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall implement City Standards for on -site construction where possible, and shall provide details for all work not covered by City Standard Drawings. 12. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the grading plan shall show that all manufactured slopes shall be a minimum 2-foot offset from the public right of way, permitted line, or the adjacent private property. All slope offsets shall meet the requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. 13. Prior to the issuance of a grading plan for multi -family projects, the private streets and drive aisles within multi -family developments shall include street plans as part of the Grading and Drainage Plan set. The private street plan view shall show typical street sections. The private street profile view shall show the private street/drive aisle centerline. 14. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the grading and drainage plan shall show the maximum parking stall gradient at 5 percent. Accessibility parking stall grades shall be constructed per the, current adopted California Building Code. Printed. 5/30/2017 �.CityoiRC.us Page 6 of 12 E10-16 471 Project#: SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Community, Pre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform ALL OF THE 48_ P1_iffW'o oOAW1TI9flfS APPLY TO Y06f{i RROdECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 15. 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. 16. The final grading and drainage plan shall show existing topography a minimum of 100-feet beyond project boundary. 17. This project shall comply with the accessibility requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. 18. 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. 19. All roof drainage flowing to the public right of way (xx Avenue) must drain under the sidewalk through a parkway culvert approved by the Engineering Department. This shall be shown on both the grading and drainage plan and Engineering Services Department required plans. 20. 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. 21. 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. 22. Prior to approval of the project -specific storm water quality management plan, the applicant shall submit to the Building Official, or his designee, a precise grading plan showing the location and elevations of existing topographical features, and showing the location and proposed elevations of proposed structures and drainage of the site. Printed5/30/2017 w .CilyofRC.us Page 7 of 12 E10-16 472 Project #: SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Community, Pre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform ALL OF THEM PF4r�irn G GONAIPONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT,• Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 23. 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. 24. 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. 25. Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the latest adopted California Plumbing Code. Private storm drain improvements shall be shown on the grading and drainage plan. 26. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy or final sign off by the Building Inspector the engineer of record shall certify the functionality of the storm water quality management plan (WQMP) storm water treatment devices and best management practices (BMP). 27. Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WQMP shall include a copy of the project Conditions of Approval. 28. Reciprocal access easements for all parcels and maintenance agreements ensuring joint maintenance of all storm water quality structural/treatment devices and best management practices (BMP) as provided for in the project's Storm Water Quality Management Plan, shall be provided for by CC&R's or deeds and shall be recorded prior to the approval of the Water Quality Management Plan. Said CC&R's and/or deeds shall be included in the project site specific Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) document prior to approval of the WQMP document and recording of the Memorandum of Agreement of Storm Water Quality Management Plan. 29. 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". 30. The subgrade for the permeable paver storm water treatment devices shall have a level subgrade. Prior to issuance of the grading permit and approval of the final project -specific water quality management plan (WQMP) the engineer of record shall provide a pad elevation for the permeable paver subgrade on the grading plan and shall provide a detail on the WQMP site and drainage plan showing the permeable paver subgrade as level. 31. 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. 32. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall obtain a Waste Discharge Identification Number (WDID). The WDID number shall also be shown on the WQMP Site and Drainage Plan document. Printed. 5/30/2017 w .CityofRC.uS Page 8 of 12 E10-16 473 Project#: SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Community, Pre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform ALL OF THE 48ne 6 GQAf9)FTl^"r9,.o „°TIY TZQ Y01R—PRQjE.GT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 33. 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. 34. The land owner shall provide an inspection report by a qualified person/company on a biennial basis for the Class V Injection Wells/underground infiltration chambers to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis all best management practices (BMP"s) as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 35. 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. 36. The land owner shall provide an inspection report on a biennial basis for the structural storm water treatment devices, commonly referred to as BMPs, to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 37. The land/property owner shall follow the inspection and maintenance requirements of the approved project specific Water Quality Management Plan and shall provide a copy of the inspection reports on a biennial basis to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. 38. The Site and Drainage Plan in the final project -specific Water Quality Management Plan shall show the locations of all roof downspout drains. if required for storm water quality purposes, the downspouts shall include filters. 39. Prior to the issuance of a building permit or Engineering Services Department issued right of way permit, the applicant shall submit to the Building Official, or his designee, a final project specific water quality management plan for review and approval, and shall have said document recorded with the San Bernardino County Recorder's Office. 40. Prior to the start of landscaping operations, the landscape architect and the landscape contractor shall provide a sample of the weed fabric barrier to the Project Planner, City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department. The weed barrier shall be permeable. Printed 5/30/2017 vMnv.CityofRC.us Page 9 of 72 E10-16 474 Project #: SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Community, Pre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform ALL OF THE 48PPj4AWG G9AWIT 0Af-9.4PPLYT9 Y9UR PR9dE'6T' Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 41. 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. 42. 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. 43. 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". 44. 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". 45. The final project -specific Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) shall be prepared as a Phased WQMP and shall include all phases of the project. Construction of the storm water treatment structural devices may be constructed as construction progresses. 46. 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. wvnv.CityofRC.us Printed: 5/30/2017 Page 10 of 12 E10-16 475 Project #: SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Commppunity, Pre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform 6H ALL OF THE 46-2MG GONDIrrnnro APPLY TO YOU RQ E-GT Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 47. As the use of drywells are proposed for the structural storm water treatment device, to meet the infiltration requirements of the current Municipal Separate Storm Sewers Systems (MS4) Permit, adequate source control and pollution prevention control BMPs shall be implemented to protect groundwater quality. The need for pre-treatment BMPs such as sedimentation or filtration shall be evaluated prior to infiltration and discussed in the final project -specific Water Quality Management Plan document. www.CityofRC.us Printed � 5l31)/2017 Page 11 of 12 E10-16 476 Project#: SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Community, Pre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform ALL OF THE 481EBAGG.A.0JTI61JVS APPLY TO YOUR PRWEGT: vac v��n�vNG Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 48. GROUNDWATER PROTECTION: Prior to approval of the final project specific water quality management plan (WQMP), the WQMP document shall meet the requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board Order No. R8-2010-0036 (NPDES No. CAS 618036), the San Bernardino County Municipal Separate Storm Sewers Separation (MS4) Permit reads: Section XLD(Water Quality Management Plan Requirements).8(Groundwater Protection): Treatment Control BMPs utilizing infiltration [exclusive of incidental infiltration and BMPs not designed to primarily function as infiltration devices (such as grassy swales, detention basins, vegetated buffer strips, constructed wetlands, etc.)] must comply with the following minimum requirements to protect groundwater: a. Use of structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause or contribute to an exceedance of ground water quality objectives. b. Source control and pollution prevention control BMPs shall be implemented to protect groundwater quality. The need for pre-treatment BMPs such as sedimentation or filtration should be evaluated prior to infiltration. c. Adequate pretreatment of runoff prior to infiltration shall be required in gas stations and large commercial parking lots. (NOTE: The State Water Quality Control Board defines a large commercial parking lot as '100,000 sq. ft. or more of commercial development to include parking lot (with 100 or more vehicle traffics), OR, by means of 5,000sgft or more of allowable space designated for parking purposes'). d. Unless adequate pre-treatment of runoff is provided prior to infiltration structural infiltration treatment BMPs must not be used for areas of industrial or light industrial activity{77}, areas subject to high vehicular traffic (25,000 or more daily traffic); car washes; fleet storage areas; nurseries; or any other high threat to water quality land uses or activities. e. Class V injection wells or dry wells must not be placed in areas subject to vehicular{78} repair or maintenance activities{79}, such as an auto body repair shop, automotive repair shop, new and used car dealership, specialty repair shop (e.g., transmission and muffler repair shop) or any facility that does any vehicular repair work. f. Structural infiltration BMP treatment shall not be used at sites that are known to have soil and groundwater contamination. g. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall be located at least 100 feet horizontally from any water supply wells. h. The vertical distance from the bottom of any infiltration structural treatment BMP to the historic high groundwater mark shall be at least 10-feet. Where the groundwater basins do not support beneficial uses, this vertical distance criteria may be reduced, provided groundwater quality is maintained. i. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause a nuisance or pollution as defined in Water Code Section 13050.. w .CityotRC.us Printed: 5/30/2017 Page 12 of 12 E10-16 477 RESOLUTION NO.17-58 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. DRC2016-00449, A REQUEST TO OPERATE A BAR WITHIN A HOTEL (TYPE 70 ON SALE GENERAL — RESTRICTIVE SERVICE) AS PART OF A MIXED USE PROJECT IN THE MIXED USE DISTRICT WITHIN THE VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN CONSISTING OF 380 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, A 71 ROOM HOTEL AND TWO RESTAURANT BUILDINGS TOTALING 12,000 SQUARE FEET, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST' CORNER OF DAY CREEK BOULEVARD AND BASE LINE ROAD; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF —APN: 1090-331-05. A. Recitals. 1. D.R. Horton filed an application for the approval of Conditional Use Permit DRC2016- 00449, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Review request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 14th day of June, 2017, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said meeting on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. A. Resolution NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing on June 14, 2017, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to the property located at southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road with a street frontage of approximately 840 feet on Base Line Road and approximately 1500 feet on Day Creek Boulevard, with a parcel depth of approximately 1500 feet and a width of approximately 840 feet. The parcel is presently improved with curb and gutter along Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is designated Village Commercial and is currently under construction as a neighborhood shopping center. The property to; the west is designated Open Space and contains overhead electrical transmission lines and a flood control channel. The property to the east is designated Mixed UseNillage Commercial and Mixed Use Single -Family, and is developed with a neighborhood shopping center and single-family dwelling units. The property to the south is designated Mixed Use Single -Family and is developed with single-family dwelling units; and E1.0-16 478 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-58 DRC2016-00449 DR Horton June 14, 2017 Page 2 C. The General Plan Land Use designation of the project site is Mixed Use. The project site is within the Victoria Community Plan area with a zoning designation of Regionally Related Office/Commercial. The applicant has submitted a Victoria Community Plan Amendment to change the zoning designation to Mixed Use. The Victoria Community Plan Amendment will change the zoning from Regionally Related Office/Commercial to Mixed Use and will bring the zoning of the Victoria Community Plan into vertical consistency with the General Plan. Hotels area permitted use within the Mixed Use District; and d. The proposed hotel is three stories and has been designed to be compatible with the form, height and architecture of the proposed mixed use project. The proposed bar area is of modest scale and size and will provide ancillary alcoholic beverage service to the hotel guests; and e. The Type 70 Alcoholic Beverage License authorizes the sale or furnishing of beer, wine, and distilled spirits for consumption of the premises to the establishment's overnight occupancy guests or their invitees. This type of alcohol service is normal and accepted business practice of hospitality land uses. 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 restrictive sale (Type 70 License) of alcoholic beverages at the hotel as ancillary service to guests and their invitees, in connection with the hospitality use as the primary use, is substantially compatible with other land uses in the vicinity. Accordingly, the proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. b. The design of the mixed use project, location of the hotel along a major arterial, the restrictive nature of the Type 70 license, the applicant's operational controls and policies, and the conditions of approval will ensure proper control over the service of alcohol to hotel guests and their invitees. Accordingly, the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. C. The site is physically suited for the type and intensity of the proposed hotel use with a Type 70 license, including access, setbacks and location adjacent to a major arterial. The proposed hotel use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code for a mixed use project, including, but not limited to, setbacks, parking, and building heights. Therefore, the proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence thatthe project will have a significant effect upon the environment and recommends that the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: E10-16 479 _ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-58 DRC2016-00449 DR Horton June 14, 2017 Page 3 a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds: (i) that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. C. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore and recommends that the City Council adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the City Planner of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Department 1) Approval is for Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449 to operate a bar (Type 70 On Sale General — Restrictive Service) within a hotel as part of a mixed use project consisting of 380 residential units (329 townhomes and 51 single-family dwelling units), two restaurant pads (two 6,000 sf restaurants), and a three-story, 71-room boutique hotel on 28.4 acres land for a site located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road —APN: 1090-331-05. 2) Approval of Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449 is contingent upon City Council Approval of Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2016- 00452, and Planning Commission approval of Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19762, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20032, and Design Review DRC2016-00450. E10-16 480 PLANNING COMMISSION DRC2016-00449 DR Horton June 14, 2017 Page 4 RESOLUTION NO. 17-58 3) Approval of Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449 is contingent upon City Council adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for the project and the Mitigation Monitoring Program and all mitigations contained therein. 4) Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with any sections of the Development Code, State Fire Marshal's regulations, Uniform Building Code, or any other City Ordinances. 5) 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 at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2017. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA XW 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 14th day of June 2017, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: E10-16 481 Y�f Conditions of Approval Community Development Department Project #: DRC2016-00449 CEQA2016-00015 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Conditional Use Permit CEQA ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Planning Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. This Conditional Use Permit is limited to the Hotel for a Type 70license. Changes to the license may require a submittal- and/or modification of the CUP. Also, if other uses on site, such as the restaurants, offer alcoholic beverage service other than beer and wine, separate CUPS are required, for example, a restaurant with bar service. Buildinaand Safety Services Department Safety Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. When the Entitlement Review is approved submit complete construction drawings including structural calculations energy calculations and soils report to Building and Safety for plan review in accordance with the current edition of the CA Building and Fire Codes. The new structures are required to be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers as required by the CBC and Current RCFPD Ordinance. Disabled access for the site and building must be made to the in accordance to the State of CA and ADA regulations. Printed; 5/30/20V wM1wvCityofRC.us E10-16 482 Project #: Project Name: Location: Conditions of Approval Community Development Department SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Dav Creek Villages 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Community, Pre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform ALL OF THE 98F P ffZG_ rnnrnrrrnnre APPLY TO YOUR PRAal€OT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 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 Engineering Services Department within 3 years from the date of the approval. 2. 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. Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. Base Line Road frontage improvements shall be in accordance with City "Major Divided Arterial" standards as required and including: a. Protect, provide or replace curb and gutter, sidewalk, ADA ramps, driveway approaches, 5300 Lumen LED street lights, and signing and striping including bike lanes as required. The street light shall be owned by the City. Developer shall be responsible to coordinate and pay all costs to provide SCE power on City owned street lights. Coordinate with City staff for design and installation requirements. b. Right-of-way dedications shall be made to follow the City's Major Divided Arterial standards. C. Driveways shall be in accordance with the City Driveway Policy including minimum distances from intersections and other driveways, including adjustments to corner cutoffs for driveways. d. Applicant shall coordinate with the developer to the north (PM 19637) and enter into an annual maintenance agreement between both developers and the City for the proposed traffic signal on Base Line Road near the west end of the project. e. Parkway landscaping shall conform to the Base Line Road Beautification Master Plan. Pnnted: 5/30/20W www.CityofRC.us E10-16 483 Project#: SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Community, Pre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform ALL OF THE 46—FEN- r�r GON.91TWIVS APPLY 7-9 YOUR 2RQjE-GT Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 2. Day Creek Boulevard frontage improvements shall be in accordance with City "Major Divided Arterial" standards as required and including: a. Protect, provide, or replace curb and gutter, sidewalk, ADA ramps, driveway approaches, 5300 Lumen LED street lights, and signing and striping including bike lanes as required. The street light shall be owned by the City. Developer shall be responsible to coordinate and pay all costs to provide SCE power on City owned street lights. Coordinate with City staff for design and installation requirements. b. Right-of-way dedications shall be made to follow the City's Major Divided Arterial standards. C. Driveways shall be in accordance with the City Driveway Policy including minimum distances from intersections and other driveways, including adjustments to corner cutoffs for driveways. d. No median breaks on Day Creek Boulevard. e. Parkway landscaping shall conform to the Day Creek Boulevard Beautification Master Plan. f. Provide all necessary traffic signal modifications at Day Creek Boulevard and Madrigal Place. Modify traffic striping and replace existing traffic signing as applicable. Protect, relocate, or install traffic signal equipment as required. g. No accent paving within the public right-of-way. 3. Developer will be required to install or pay one-half the cost of median landscaping on Base Line Road with developer -to -developer reimbursement agreements with PM 19637. 4. Reconstruct access ramp at the southwest corner of Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard to comply with current ADA requirements. 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 current ADA requirements. 5. Development Impact Fees are assessed at the time of building permit issuance. Fees are subject to change. 6. Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard Parkway Landscaping shall be maintained by the Homeowners' Association and/or Property Owners Association. 7. Depending upon application and type of development, drive access may be drive aisles or private streets subject to different design criteria. Printed: 5l30/2017 www.CiryofRC.us Page 2 of 12 E10-16 484 Project #: SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Community, Pre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform ALL OF THE E Pl4s: o COMID TlONS APPLY TO YOUR ppn_1 6T: Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 8. The proposed development is slated to be included in the City's Fiber Optic / Broadband service business plan that would provide a City owned Fiber -to -the -Home (FTTH) infrastructure. Proposed fiber optics on -site (conduits and fiber) will be placed underground within a duct and structure system to be installed by the Master Developer. The fiber and conduits along the backbone streets shall be installed in a joint trench by the developer as the last lane improvements are completed. In -tract fiber and conduit shall be installed by the developers in joint trench where possible. Maintenance of the installed system will be the responsibility of the City. Development of the project requires the installation by the developers of all fiber optic infrastructure necessary to service the Project as a stand-alone development. In addition, developer shall coordinate with RCMU which may provide for high-speed internet services. 9. The proposed signalized access on both Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard shall be constructed as street types with access ramps and corner cutoffs. 10. The property benefited from CFD 2001-01 improvements but chose not to participate in the CFD. Resolution No. 01-066 was adopted by both the City and the Redevelopment Agency to implement the fair share payment required. The developer is required to pay back the advance, plus interest, at the time of development based on the fee schedule. If payment is made between March 1 and August 30, the March 1 payment for that year is applied. If the payment is made between September 1 and the end of February, then the September payment for that year is applied. The current payoff is $2,544,410.05. The payoff must be paid prior to final map recordation or prior to any City permits being issued, whichever occurs first. 11. No retaining walls shall be allowed within the public right-of-way. Standard Conditions of Approval 12. An in -lieu fee as contribution to the undergrounding of the existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical) on the opposite side of Base Line Road shall be paid to the City prior to issuance of building permits or approval of the final map, whichever occurs first. The fee shall be for the length of the Base Line frontage, from the west project boundary to the centerline of Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard. The fee amount shall be determined by the reimbursement agreement with the Developer to the north side of Base Line Road. Should the agreement not be approved prior to permits, the fee amount shall be one-half the City adopted amount. 13. Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards. 14. Easements for public sidewalks placed outside the public right-of-way shall be dedicated to the City 15, 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. 16. 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. Printed: 5/30/2017 wwv.CityofRC.us Page 3 of 12 E10-16 485 Project#: SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Community, Pre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform ALL OF THE r�J&P Pu'' 494-9 ^ONDIPONS APPLY TO YOUR RROd€ST: vccv��n�v v Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 17. A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final map approval or the issuance of Building Permits, whichever occurs first. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer. 18. Prior to the issuance of building permits, a Diversion Deposit and related administrative fees shall be paid for the Construction and Demolition Diversion Program. The deposit is fully refundable if at least 50% of all wastes generated during construction and demolition are diverted from landfills, and appropriate documentation is provided to the City. Permits issued on or after June 2, 2014, must complete the reimbursement process through the City's Accelerate online portal within 60 days following the completion of the construction and/or demolition project or the deposit will be forfeited. Permits issued before June 2, 2014, require the following when applying for a deposit reimbursement: a completed CD-2 form, a copy of the cashier's receipt showing the deposit amount, and all weight tickets. Instructions and forms are available at the City's web site, www.CityofRC.us, under City Hall; Engineering; Environmental Programs. 19. 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. 20. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape (LMD 2) and Lighting Districts (SLD 1 & SLD 3) shall be filed with the Engineering Services Department prior to final map approval or issuance of Building Permits whichever occurs first. Annexation costs shall be borne by the developer. 21, Install fiber optic conduit, vaults, and manholes on Day Creek Boulevard per City Standard Drawings 135-137. Public improvement plans shall show the location and limits of the conduits, vaults and manholes with construction notes. 22. Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in accordance with the City's street tree program. 23. Developer shall execute a Line Extension Agreement for electric service and construct electrical distribution facilities in accordance with such agreement and Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility (RCMU) requirements. Developer shall dedicate such facilities to RCMU. RCMU shall be the electrical service provider for all project related development. 24. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. 25. Provide separate utility services to each unit including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 26. 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. www.CilyofRC.us Pdnted: 5/3012017 Page 4 of 12 E10-16 486 Project #: SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASELINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Community, Pre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform ALL OF THE IS1sP i1S''&�7? G ''^AWIT ONS APPLY TO Y961R PRodE6T: o cccrr,•m�o oa Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 27. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CVWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. 28. Street improvement plans per City Standards for all private streets shall be provided for review and approval by the City Engineer. Prior to any work being performed on the private streets, fees shall be paid and construction permits shall be obtained from the Engineering Services Department in addition to any other permits required. 29. 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. Building and Safety Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. When the Entitlement Review is approved submit complete construction drawings including structural calculations energy calculations and soils report to Building and Safety for plan review in accordance with the current edition of the CA Building and Fire Codes. The new structures are required to be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers as required by the CBC and Current RCFPD Ordinance. Disabled access for the site and building must be made to the in accordance to the State of CA and ADA regulations. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 1. 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". Note: As this project has been previously graded and the site soils have been compacted for building pads and parking lot purposes, the use of the Custom Soil Resource Report for San Bernardino County Southwestern Part by the United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service for natural soils is not acceptable for soil groundwater infiltration rates. 2. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with current and/or the California Residential Code, City Grading Standards, The Grading and Drainage Plan(s) shall be in substantial conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan. adopted California Building Code and accepted grading practices. conformance with the approved Printed: 5/30/2017 www.CityofRC.us Page 5 of 12 E10-16 487 Project#: SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Community, Pre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform ALL OF THE 4JSP PI4sF? G TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 3. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified Engineer licensed by the State of California to perform such work. Two copies will be provided at grading and drainage plan submittal for review. Plans shall implement design recommendations per said report. 4. 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. 5. The final Grading and Drainage Plan, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be completed, submitted, and approved by the Building and Safety Official prior to the issuance of building permits. 6. A separate Grading and Drainage Plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and wet signed by a California licensed Civil Engineer prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit. 7. 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. 8. 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. 9. 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. 10. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the Final Grading and Drainage Plan shall show the accessibility path from the public right of way and the accessibility parking stalls to the building doors in conformance with the current adopted California Building Code. All accessibility ramps shall show sufficient detail including gradients, elevations, and dimensions and comply with the current adopted California Building Code. 11. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall implement City Standards for on -site construction where possible, and shall provide details for all work not covered by City Standard Drawings. 12. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the grading plan shall show that all manufactured slopes shall be a minimum 2-foot offset from the public right of way, permitted line, or the adjacent private property. All slope offsets shall meet the requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. 13. Prior to the issuance of a grading plan for multi -family projects, the private streets and drive aisles within multi -family developments shall include street plans as part of the Grading and Drainage Plan set. The private street plan view shall show typical street sections. The private street profile view shall show the private street/drive aisle centerline. 14. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the grading and drainage plan shall show the maximum parking stall gradient at 5 percent. Accessibility parking stall grades shall be constructed per the, current adopted California Building Code. w .CityofRC.us Printed: 5/30/2017 Page 6 of 12 E10-16 488 Project#: SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Community, Pre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform ALL OF THE 48cMWgR- ^amIt)/TIAVS ARR6Y Too Y4Q uR P.a€GT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 15. 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. 16. The final grading and drainage plan shall show existing topography a minimum of 100-feet beyond project boundary. 17. This project shall comply with the accessibility requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. 18. 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. 19. All roof drainage flowing to the public right of way (xx Avenue) must drain under the sidewalk through a parkway culvert approved by the Engineering Department. This shall be shown on both the grading and drainage plan and Engineering Services Department required plans. 20. 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. 21. 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. 22. Prior to approval of the project -specific storm water quality management plan, the applicant shall submit to the Building Official, or his designee, a precise grading plan showing the location and elevations of existing topographical features, and showing the location and proposed elevations of proposed structures and drainage of the site. Printed; 5/30/2017 www.CityofRC.us Page 7 of 72 E10-16 489 Project #: SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Community, Pre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform ALL OF THE 44 Pr4si2449 O611V_0/T/611VS APP1=Y TO YOUR PROJECP Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 23. 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. 24. 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. 25. Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the latest adopted California Plumbing Code. Private storm drain improvements shall be shown on the grading and drainage plan. 26. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy or final sign off by the Building Inspector the engineer of record shall certify the functionality of the storm water quality management plan (WQMP) storm water treatment devices and best management practices (BMP). 27. Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WQMP shall include a copy of the project Conditions of Approval. 28. Reciprocal access easements for all parcels and maintenance agreements ensuring joint maintenance of all storm water quality structural/treatment devices and best management practices (BMP) as provided for in the project's Storm Water Quality Management Plan, shall be provided for by CC&R's or deeds and shall be recorded prior to the approval of the Water Quality Management Plan. Said CC&R's and/or deeds shall be included in the project site specific Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) document prior to approval of the WQMP document and recording of the Memorandum of Agreement of Storm Water Quality Management Plan. 29. 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". 30. The subgrade for the permeable paver storm water treatment devices shall have a level subgrade. Prior to issuance of the grading permit and approval of the final project -specific water quality management plan (WQMP) the engineer of record shall provide a pad elevation for the permeable paver subgrade on the grading plan and shall provide a detail on the WQMP site and drainage plan showing the permeable paver subgrade as level. 31. 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. 32. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall obtain a Waste Discharge Identification Number (WDID). The WDID number shall also be shown on the WQMP Site and Drainage Plan document. Printed: 5/30/2017 www.CityofRC.us Page 8 of 12 E10-16 490 Project#: SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Community, Pre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform ALL OF THE Wr_^ Ed_ aW10 GQAW1T 9AfS APPLY TO YOUR PROjEG Grading Section Standard conditions of Approval 33. 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. 34. The land owner shall provide an inspection report by a qualified person/company on a biennial basis for the Class V Injection Wells/underground infiltration chambers to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis all best management practices (BMP"s) as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 35. 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. 36. The land owner shall provide an inspection report on a biennial basis for the structural storm water treatment devices, commonly referred to as BMPs, to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 37. The land/property owner shall follow the inspection and maintenance requirements of the approved project specific Water Quality Management Plan and shall provide a copy of the inspection reports on a biennial basis to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. 38. The Site and Drainage Plan in the final project -specific Water Quality Management Plan shall show the locations of all roof downspout drains. if required for storm water quality purposes, the downspouts shall include filters. 39. Prior to the issuance of a building permit or Engineering Services Department issued right of way permit, the applicant shall submit to the Building Official, or his designee, a final project specific water quality management plan for review and approval, and shall have said document recorded with the San Bernardino County Recorder's Office, 40. 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. v w .CityofRC.us Pnnted. 5/30/2017 Page 9 of 12 E10-16 491 Project#: SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Community,, prPre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform ALL OF THE GONiDI /ONS AOO—l/T— rGIUR I2.R.Q EGG Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 41. 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. 42. 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. 43. 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". 44. 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". 45. The final project -specific Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) shall be prepared as a Phased WQMP and shall include all phases of the project. Construction of the storm water treatment structural devices may be constructed as construction progresses. 46. 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: 5/30/2017 vnvw.CilyofRC.us Page 10 of 12 E10-16 492 Project #: SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Project Name: Day Creek Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Community, Pre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform ALL OF THE 06-F-EM rnr GGAWInnnrc APPLY M PROJECT —.- Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 47. As the use of drywells are proposed for the structural storm water treatment device, to meet the infiltration requirements of the current Municipal Separate Storm Sewers Systems (MS4) Permit, adequate source control and pollution prevention control BMPS shall be implemented to protect groundwater quality. The need for pre-treatment BMPs such as sedimentation or filtration shall be evaluated prior to infiltration and discussed in the final project -specific Water Quality Management Plan document. www.CltyofRC.us Prinled:5/30/2017 Page 11 of 12 E10-16 493 Project #: SUBTT20032 DRC2015-01102, DRC2016-00142, DRC2016-00449, DRC2016-00450, DRC2016-00451, DRC2016-00452, DRC2016-00508, SUBTPM19762 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Minor Exception, Planned Community, Pre Application Review, Preliminary Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Uniform ALL OF THE �_6_ AN40 GGAW! T40NS AOOLy T� n�v�fQ PR WEGT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 48. GROUND WATER PROTECTION: Prior to approval of the final project specific water quality management plan (WQMP), the WQMP document shall meet the requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board Order No. R8-2010-0036 (NPDES No. CAS 618036), the San Bernardino County Municipal Separate Storm Sewers Separation (MS4) Permit reads: Section XI.D(Water Quality Management Plan Requirements).8(Groundwater Protection): Treatment Control BMPs utilizing infiltration [exclusive of incidental, infiltration and BMPs not designed to primarily function as infiltration devices (such as grassy swales, detention basins, vegetated buffer strips, constructed wetlands, etc.)] must comply with the following minimum requirements to protect groundwater: a. Use of structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause or contribute to an exceedance of ground water quality objectives. b. Source control and pollution prevention control BMPs shall be implemented to protect groundwater quality. The need for pre-treatment BMPs such as sedimentation or filtration should be evaluated prior to infiltration. c. Adequate pretreatment of runoff prior to infiltration shall be required in gas stations and large commercial parking lots. (NOTE: The State Water Quality Control Board defines a large commercial parking lot as '100,000 sq. ft. or more of commercial development to include parking lot (with 100 or more vehicle traffics), OR, by means of 5,000sgft or more of allowable space designated for parking purposes'). d. Unless adequate pre-treatment of runoff is provided prior to infiltration structural infiltration treatment BMPs must not be used for areas of industrial or light industrial activity{77}, areas subject to high vehicular traffic (25,000 or more daily traffic); car washes; fleet storage areas; nurseries; or any other high threat to water quality land uses or activities. e. Class V injection wells or dry wells must not be placed in areas subject to vehicular{78} repair or maintenance activities{79), such as an auto body repair shop, automotive repair shop, new and used car dealership, specialty repair shop (e.g., transmission and muffler repair shop) or any facility that does any vehicular repair work. f. Structural infiltration BMP treatment shall not be used at sites that are known to have soil and groundwater contamination. g. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall be located at least 100 feet horizontally from any water supply wells. h. The vertical distance from the bottom of any infiltration structural treatment BMP to the historic high groundwater mark shall be at least 10-feet. Where the groundwater basins do not support beneficial uses, this vertical distance criteria may be reduced, provided groundwater quality is maintained. i. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause a nuisance or pollution as defined in Water Code Section 13050. Printed: 5/30/2017 vnvw.CityofRC.us Page 12 of 12 E10-16 494 RESOLUTION NO. 17-60 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2016-00508, A REQUEST TO ALLOW 8 FOOT COMBINATION RETAINING/FREESTANDING WALL HEIGHTS FOR A MIXED USE PROJECT IN THE VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN (VCP) WITHIN THE MIXED USE DISTRICT RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF A MIXED USE PROJECT (DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00450) CONSISTING OF 380 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, A 71 ROOM HOTEL AND TWO RESTAURANT BUILDINGS TOTALING 12,000 SQUARE FEET, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF DAY CREEK BOULEVARD AND BASE LINE ROAD — APN: 1090-331- 05. A. Recitals. 1. D.R. Horton filed an application for the approval of Minor Exception DRC2016- 00508, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Review request is referred to as 'the application." 2. On the 14th day of June, 2017, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said meeting on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above -referenced meeting on June 14, 2017, including written and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to the property located at southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road with a street frontage of approximately 840 feet on Base Line Road and approximately 1500 feet on Day Creek Boulevard, with a parcel depth of approximately 1500 feet and a width of approximately 840 feet. The parcel is presently improved with curb and gutter along Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is designated Village Commercial and is currently under construction as a neighborhood shopping center. The property to the west is designated Open Space and contains overhead electrical transmission lines and a flood control channel. The property to the east is designated Mixed Use/Village Commercial and Mixed Use Single -Family, and is developed with a neighborhood shopping center and single- E10-16 495 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-60 MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2016-00508 DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 2 family dwelling units. The property to the south is designated Mixed Use Single -Family and is developed with single-family dwelling units; and C. The Minor Exception is associated with an entitlement application (DRC2016- 00450) for the development of a mixed use project for the site plan and architectural review of the 380 residential units (329 townhomes and 51 single-family dwelling units), two restaurant pads (two 6,000 sf restaurants), and a three-story, 71-room boutique hotel on 28.4 acres of land; and d. The proposed project meets or exceeds all Development Code standards. As conditioned, the proposed mixed use project will meet all applicable Development Code standards. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above -referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The Minor Exception is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code or any applicable specific plan. The proposed wall height increase is necessary due to design constraints between project site and existing adjacent property. Specifically, the increase in wall height is necessary because of a 4-5 foot upslope condition at the western property line and the design of the project to match grades along the south property line. Matching the grades along the south property line demonstrates sensitivity to the existing residences to the south, exhibiting desirable site planning; and b. The proposed development is compatible with existing and proposed land uses in the surrounding area. The proposed project is compatible with the surrounding land uses as the project site is within the Mixed Use District and will permit the development of single family and multi -family residential structures. The increase in wall height is necessary because of a 4- 5 foot upslope condition at the western property line and the design of the project to match grades along the south property line. Matching the grades along the south property line demonstrates sensitivity to the existing residences to the south, exhibiting desirable site planning. Additionally, combination retaining and garden wall heights over 6 feet are common where site and grading constraints justify additional wall heights; and C. The proposed exception to the specific development standard is necessary to allow creative design solutions compatible with the desires of the community and/or to accommodate unique site conditions. There is significant grade difference and slope conditions between the project site and the property to the west. The additional wall height along the west property line will allow the project to be constructed in a manner that provides for a privacy barrier on both sides of the project while concurrently accommodating the significant grade differential; and d. The granting of the Minor Exception will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district, and will not be detrimental to public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious properties or improvements in the vicinity. There is significant grade difference and slope gradient between the project site and the property to the west. The increased wall height will not negatively impact the surrounding property owners as the wall be of decorative material and the wall will be E10-16 496 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-60 MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2016-00508 DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 3 of similar height and materials as other walls in the area. The approval of a Minor Exception is appropriate for wall height increases when site constraints and existing grade differentials justify additional wall heights between adjacent properties. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and recommends that the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQK) and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds: (i) that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. C. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore and recommends that the City Council adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the City Planner of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. E10-16 497 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-60 MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2016-00508 DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 4 Plannina Department 1) Approval is for Minor Exception DRC2016-00508 for an increase in the calculated height of combination retaining and garden walls from 6 feet to 8 feet along the west property line related to the construction of a mixed use project consisting of 380 residential units (329 townhomes and 51 single-family dwelling units), two restaurant pads (two 6,000 sf restaurants), and a three-story, 71-room boutique hotel on 28.4 acres land for a site located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road —APN: 1090-331-05. 2) Approval of Minor Exception DRC2016-00508 is contingent upon City Council Approval of Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2016- 00452, and Planning Commission approval of Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19762, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20032, Design Review DRC2016-00450, and Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449. 3) Approval of Minor Exception DRC2016-00508 is contingent upon City Council adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for the project and the Mitigation Monitoring Program and all mitigations contained therein. 4) Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with any sections of the Development Code, State Fire Marshal's regulations, Uniform Building Code, or any other City Ordinances. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2017. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA M 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 14th day of June 2017, by the following vote -to -wit: E10-16 498 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-60 MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2016-00508 DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 5 AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: E10-16 499 Conditions of Approval Community Development Department Project #: DRC2016-00508 Project Name: Day Creek Villages Location: 12215 BASE LINE RD - 109033105-0000 Project Type: Minor Exception 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. 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. Pnnted: 5/30/2017 v .CityofRC.us E10-16 500 RESOLUTION NO. 17-59 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2016-00451, A REQUEST TO ESTABLISH A UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM FOR A MIXED USE PROJECT IN THE VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN (VCP) WITHIN THE MIXED USE DISTRICT RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF A MIXED USE PROJECT (DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00450) CONSISTING OF 380 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, A 71 ROOM HOTEL AND TWO RESTAURANT BUILDINGS TOTALING 12,000 SQUARE FEET, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF DAY CREEK BOULEVARD AND BASE LINE ROAD — APN: 1090-331-05. A. Recitals. 1. D.H. Horton filed an application for the approval of Uniform Sign Program DRC2016- 00451, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Review request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 14th day of June, 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 meeting on June 14, 2017, including written and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to the property located at southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road with a street frontage of approximately 840 feet on Base Line Road and approximately 1500 feet on Day Creek Boulevard, with a parcel depth of approximately 1500 feet and a width of approximately 840 feet; and b. The parcel is presently improved with curb and gutter along Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard: and C. The property has an area of about 28.4 acres; and d. The property to the north of the subject site is designated Village Commercial and is currently under construction as a neighborhood shopping center. The property to the west is designated Open Space and contains overhead electrical transmission lines and a flood control channel. The property to the east is designated Mixed Use/Village Commercial and Mixed Use Single -Family, and is developed with a neighborhood shopping center and single-family dwelling units. The property to the south is designated Mixed Use Single -Family and is developed with single- family dwelling units; and E10-16 501 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-59 UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2016-00451 DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 2 e. The proposed project meets or exceeds all Development Code standards. As conditioned, the proposed mixed use project will meet all applicable Development Code standards; and f. The applicant proposes to establish a Uniform Sign Program (USP) for a proposed development of a mixed use project consisting of 380 residential units (329 townhomes and 51 single- family dwelling units), two restaurant pads (two 6,000 sf restaurants), and a three-story, 71-room boutique hotel on 28.4 acres of land; and g. Development Code Section 17.74.030 requires that a Uniform Sign Program be established for all new multi -tenant shopping centers, office parks, and other multi -tenant, mixed -use, or otherwise integrated developments of three (3) or more separate tenants/uses that share buildings, public spaces, landscape, and/or parking facilities. The proposed USP contains provisions that regulate permanent building signage as well as permanent monument signage for property identification for the mixed use project. The size and height of the letters, and the number of wall signs allowed per tenant comply with the technical standards described in the Development Code; and h. These signs are typical for commercial buildings; and i. The size, location, and placement of the signs will be integrated and compatible with the architecture of the buildings and the site; and 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above -referenced 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 Uniform Sign Program is consistent with the development standards for signs as provided in Chapter 17.74 (Sign Regulations for Private Property); and b. The design, location, and scale of proposed signs for the integrated development are in keeping with the architectural character of the development. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and recommends that the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA') and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds: (i) that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; E10-16 502 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-59 UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2016-00451 DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 3 and (ii) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. C. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore and recommends that the City Council adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the City Planner of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below. Planning Department 1) Approval is for the establishment of a Uniform Sign Program (DRC2016- 00451) related to the construction of a mixed use project consisting of 380 residential units (329 townhomes and 51 single-family dwelling units), two restaurant pads (two 6,000 sf restaurants), and a three-story, 71-room boutique hotel on 28.4 acres land for a site located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road - APN: 1090-331-05. 2) Approval of Uniform Sign Program DRC2016-00451 is contingent upon City Council Approval of Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2016- 00452, and Planning Commission approval Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19762, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20032, Design Review DRC2016-00450, and Conditional Use Permit DRC2016-00449. 3) Approval of Uniform Sign Program Minor Exception DRC2016-00451 is contingent upon City Council adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for the project and the Mitigation Monitoring Program and all mitigations contained therein. 4) The applicant shall submit a final draft of the Uniform Sign Program for the City's records prior to issuance of Building Permits. All signs shall require review and approval of a separate Sign Permit application by the Planning Director prior to installation. E10-16 503 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-59 UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2016-00451 DR HORTON June 14, 2017 Page 4 5) 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 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 at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2017. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Francisco Oaxaca, Chairman ATTEST: Candyce Burnett, Secretary I, Candyce Burnett, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 14th day of June 2017, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: E10-16 504