Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-08-26 Agenda Packet - PC-HPC CITY OF ■ . ■ * ■ Historic Preservation Commission and Planning Commission Agenda August 26, 2020 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 7:00 p.m. PURSUANT TO GOVERNOR GAVIN NEWSOM'S EXECUTIVE ORDER N-29-20 THIS MEETING WILL BE HELD AS A TELECONFERENCE MEETING. In response to the Governor's Executive Orders, the San Bernardino County Department of Public Health requirements, and to ensure the health and safety of our residents by limiting contact that could spread the COVID-19 virus, there will be no members of the public in attendance at the Planning Commission Meetings. Members of the Planning Commission and staff will participate in this meeting via teleconference. In place of in-person attendance, members of the public can observe and offer comment at this meeting via Zoom: VIEW MEETING VIA ZOOM APP OR ZOOM.COM AT: zoom.us/join using Webinar ID: 875 7626 0247 -or- YOU CAN DIAL-IN USING YOUR PHONE UNITED STATES: + 1 (669) 900-6833 Access Code: 875 7626 0247 A. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance B. Public Communications This is the time and place for the general public to address the Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. The Commission may not discuss any issue not included on the Agenda but set the matter for a subsequent meeting. C. Consent Calendar C1. Consideration to adopt Regular Meeting Minutes of August 12, 2020. D. Public Hearings D1. TIME EXTENSION DRC2020-00238— PACIFIC SUMMIT - FOOTHILL, LLC (LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, BETWEEN RED HILL COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE AND THE PACIFIC ELECTRIC TRAIL RIGHT-OF-WAY) — A request to allow for the first one (1) year time extension of a previously approved Tentative Tract Map (SUBTT16605M) to subdivide 24.19 acres into 6 parcels for the development of 175 attached condominium units (Sycamore Heights project)within the Mixed Use (MU) District, APNs: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34 and 41, and 0207-112-09 and 10. Related Files: General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206, Design Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673. Staff finds the project to be within the scope of the project covered by a prior Mitigated Negative Declaration certified by City Council on October 4, 2017 (State Clearinghouse#2017071010) by Resolutions 17- 098 and 17-099 and does not raise or create new environmental impacts not already considered in the Mitigated Negative Declaration. D2. DESIGN REVIEW MODIFICATION DRC2020-00192 (LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF RESORT PARKWAY, NORTH OF 4TH STREET) - THE NEW HOME COMPANY - A request to modify an approved 135-unit multi-family development made up entirely of two- bedroom units by adding a third bedroom/flex office for a project site on 5.18 acres of land within Planning Area S-20 in the Village Neighborhood (VN) District of the Empire Lakes Specific Plan, Planning Area 1, located on the east side of Resort Parkway, north of 4th Street; APN:0210-102-06. Related Files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20241 and Design Review DRC2018-00784. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA), the City certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 2015041083) on May 18, 2016, in connection with the City's approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project. (CONTINUED FROM AUGUST 12, 2020, HPC/PC MEETING.) 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. E. General Business F. Director Announcements G. Commission Announcements H. Workshop — None I. Adjournment 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 complete a speaker card located next to the speaker's podium. It is important to list your name, address (optional) and the agenda item letter your comments refer to. Comments are generally limited to 5 minutes per individual. HPC/PC Agenda —August 26, 2020 Page 2 of 3 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. As an alternative to participating in the meeting you may submit comments in writing to Elizabeth.Thornhill(a)-cityofrc.us by 12:00 PM on the date of the meeting. Written comments will be distributed to the Commissioners and included in the record. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are available at www.CitvofRC.us. 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$3,206 for all decisions of the Commission. (Fees are established and governed by the City Council). Please turn off all cell phones while the meeting is in session. I, Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive Assistant of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on Thursday, August 20, 2020, seventy-two (72) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive. HPC/PC Agenda —August 26, 2020 Page 3 of 3 CITY OF ■ . ■ * ■ Historic Preservation Commission and Planning Commission Agenda August 12, 2020 MINUTES Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 7:00 p.m. A. Call to Order The meeting of the Historic Presentation Commission and Planning Commission was held on August 12, 2020. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Guglielmo at 7:00pm. Planning Commission present: Chairman Guglielmo, Vice Chair Oaxaca, Commissioner Dopp, Commissioner Morales, and Commissioner Williams. Staff Present: Nick Ghirelli, Assistant City Attorney; Anne McIntosh, Planning Director; Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive Assistant; Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner; Brian Sandona, Sr. Civil Engineer; Dat Tran, Assistant Planner; David Eoff, Sr. Planner; Jason Welday, Engineering Director; Matt Burris, Deputy City Manager; Jennifer Nakamura, Management Analyst Il; Michael Smith, Principal Planner. B. Public Communications Chairman Guglielmo opened the public communications and hearing no comment, closed public communications. C. Consent Calendar C1. Consideration to adopt Regular Meeting Minutes of July 22, 2020. Motion by Commissioner Morales, second by Vice Chair Oaxaca. Motion carried 5-0 to adopt the minutes as presented. D. Public Hearings D1. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AMENDMENT DRC2020-00124 and SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2020-00254 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - Located North Of 4th Street, South of The Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway, West of Milliken Avenue, and East of Utica/Cleveland Avenues, Within the Empire Lakes Specific Plan. The applications include a review of a proposed amendment to Development Agreement DRC2015- 00118 between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and SC Rancho Development Corp. and Empire Lakes Holding Company, LLC, that was adopted on September 5, 2018, and a review of a proposed amendment to the Empire Lakes Specific Plan to delete text within the Specific Plan document relating to street infrastructure and private open space areas. These applications apply to a property of about 160 acres located north of 4th Street, south of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) railway, west of Milliken Avenue, and east of Utica/Cleveland Avenues, within the Empire Lakes Specific Plan; APNs: 0209-272-20, 0210-102-07 through -10, 0210- 102-01 through -03, 0210-102-19 through -61, 0210-102-15 and -17, 0210-671-01 and -03 and-04, 0210-671-06 through -24, 0210-681-03 and -04 and -06 through -13, 0210-681-14 through -33, and 0210-102-11. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 20150410083) and Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program (MMRP) was reviewed and certified by the City Council on May 18, 2016. Section 15162 of the California Environmental Quality Act provides that no further environmental review is required for a previously certified EIR or for subsequent projects within the scope of a prior EIR. The Development Agreement including subsequent amendments is a contract governing timelines, terms, and conditions regarding development of Empire Lakes/The Resort and does not raise or create new environmental impacts that were not previously contemplated in the EIR. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. Mike Smith, Principal Planner, presented Commissioners with a Staff Report and oral presentation (copy on file). Mike Smith noted Exhibit B- Framework Plan. This will be incorporated as Exhibit B in the Development Agreement Amendment. Vice Chair Oaxaca asked question regarding Amendment 1. What is the thinking/reasoning behind this particular amendment. Mike Smith answered because some of the changes going on associated with the street network, there were triggers where we have to start construction of the Joint Use Public Facility (JUPF) due to timing. One of those triggers was that 22,500 sq.feet of non-residential building construction had to occur south of 61"street, but due to the nature of how they were developing their property and the change happening to the north, there was concern they would actually hit that trigger but not be able to build the direct public use facility because the improvements that would go in on the north side would make it sensible, did not exist. There was also a trigger for the number of dwellings that had to be constructed as a condition for the development of the JUPF. We adjusted it, so instead of it relying all of the improvements to occur south of 6t" street, it was expanded to occur anywhere within the project in line with keeping up with the idea that the north half of the project site was being changed with amendments. The bottom line was about being more flexible. Nick Ghirelli, Assistant City Attorney, mentioned this amendment does not preclude the City from building the JUPF as soon as possible once it receives the money from the developer as part of the development agreement. For a number of reasons that Mike explained, including some financial reasons, this provides more flexibility in terms of timing for the City to get all the money together to build the JUPF. Chairman Guglielmo opened public hearing. Tim McGinnis, Applicant, Lewis Company, asked that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the proposed amendments to the City Council. No public comments. Chairman Guglielmo closed public hearing. Commissioner Dopp stated he does not see any problems with the agreement. HPC/PC Meeting Minutes—August 12, 2020 Page 2 of 6 Draft Commissioner Morales mentioned the development agreements need to be reviewed periodically, so it's good we are doing this. Commission Williams concurred with what has been said. Vice Chair Oaxaca stated this is what we should be doing as part of the Development Agreement. Has no issues. Chairman Guglielmo stated he is in agreement with his fellow Commissioners. Motion by Vice Chair Oaxaca, second by Commissioner Williams to approve Item D1 and adopt Resolutions 20-40 and 20-41. Motion carried unanimously, 5-0 vote. D2. DESIGN REVIEW MODIFICATION DRC2020-00192 (LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF RESORT PARKWAY, NORTH OF 4TH STREET) -THE NEW HOME COMPANY-A request to modify an approved 135-unit multi-family development made up entirely of two-bedroom units by adding a third bedroom/flex office for a project site on 5.18 acres of land within Planning Area S-20 in the Village Neighborhood (VN) District of the Empire Lakes Specific Plan, Planning Area 1, located on the east side of Resort Parkway, north of 4th Street; APN:0210-102-06. Related Files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20241 and Design Review DRC2018-00784. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 2015041083) on May 18, 2016, in connection with the City's approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project. (CONTINUED FROM JULY 22, 2020, HPC/PC MEETING.) Anne McIntosh, Planning Director, explained this was on your last agenda to alter the floorplans on some units currently at the resort. The home builder asked if they could appeal to the commission to make a modification and the commission did direct they would be willing to see what they proposed and asked to work with staff and come back with a revised modification. They came back with a revision and upon staff's review felt a need for a conversation with them to make modifications of what the City was looking for. We wrote the Staff Report last week to ask you to continue this to a date uncertain. However, since that time, we heard from Holly Slevcove, New Home Representative, who has requested to continue to the next PC meeting. We have a scheduled meeting with them next week to discuss alternatives. One of the reasons we need to have more time is that if we are moving ahead with a compromised solution, we need time to evaluate whether or not we need to do additional environmental reviews before you might approve something. As you recall staff's recommendation at the last meeting was to deny the request and when you deny a request you don't need to do additional review. It's just one of the things we need to consider depending on what we conclude. We are hoping to come back with something the City can accept. She is revising the staff recommendation to continue this item to the next HPC/PC meeting of August 261h 2020. Chairman Guglielmo re-opened the public hearing. Holly Slevcove, New Home Representative provided a brief update of the revised plans they submitted. Motion by Commissioner Dopp, second by Commissioner Morales, leaving the public hearing open to continue Item D2 to August 26th HPC/PC Meeting. Motion carried unanimously, 5-0 vote. HPC/PC Meeting Minutes—August 12, 2020 Page 3 of 6 Draft D3. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2018-00533, ZONING MAP AMENDMENT DRC2018-00534, DESIGN REVIEW DRC2018-00535, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2018-00536, VARIANCE, DRC2020-00232 TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2019- 00218 (LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 200 FEET EAST OF ARCHIBALD AVENUE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF ARROW ROUTE) —ALAN SMITH FOR ARBOR EXPRESS CAR WASH -A request for site plan and architectural review of a 5,865 square foot carwash and 1,428 square foot car detailing center, a Conditional Use Permit to operate a carwash, General Plan and zoning map amendments to change the land use and zoning designations on a portion of the project site to General Commercial (GC) District, a Variance to reduce setback and landscape requirements and a Tree Removal Permit for a 1.36-acre project site in the General Commercial (GC) District and Low Medium (LM) Residential District, located approximately 200 feet east of Archibald Avenue on the north side of Arrow Route - APN: 0209-291-03 and -06. A Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts has been prepared for consideration. Anne McIntosh, Planning Director, explained this item had been noticed for this meeting and after it had been done, we met with the applicant and they indicated an interest in amending a portion of the application regarding some of the parcels and the general plan amendment. There were some concerns about a request to change the general plan designation for some of the parcels and they proposed a new proposal for moving forward and we are going to consider that, so they are in the process of making a revised application. At this point, we are requesting to continue it to a date uncertain. We will re-notice it and bring it back after it has been revised. Chairman Guglielmo opened public hearing. Motion by Commissioner Morales, second by Commissioner Williams, leaving the public hearing open to continue Item D3 to a date uncertain in the future. Motion carried unanimously, 5-0 vote. E. General Business E1. Update on Etiwanda Heights Annexation Mike Smith, Principal Planner, presented Commissioners with a Staff Report and oral presentation (copy on file). Vice Chair Oaxaca asked if there have been any opposition or protests filed with LAFCO. Mike Smith answered yes. They did receive letters prior to the public hearing in July. The Executive Officer at LAFCO had pointed out to the representative opposing the annexation, if they wanted to protest, they will need to send in within a certain time period. It appears to be the case and that is why we are having the protest proceedings here. Commissioner Williams requested if the notice can be sent to the Commissioners so they can tune in virtually to the protest hearing. Mike Smith replied yes, he will forward the meeting link along with any documents. Commissioner Morales commented that he attended some of those meetings as a resident and found it to be very informative. HPC/PC Meeting Minutes—August 12, 2020 Page 4of6 Draft E2. Discussion —General Plan Update: Draft Vision and Core Values Matt Burris, Deputy City Manager, presented Commissioners with a Staff Report and oral presentation (copy on file). Commissioner Morales mentioned he attended a lot of the sessions and noticed people spoke openly with good comments. Great job on the outreach. It was very constructive. It's things like that which makes our city great. Commissioner Williams expressed the excitement of how it is moving along. She is amazed of the input they are receiving and how people are coming together and telling us what they really like and want from the City. Found it interesting talking about the holistic approach. It's what makes Rancho Cucamonga a special place. Vice Chair Oaxaca mentioned a few things he noticed on the Staff Report. One of the items was the importance looking at the input from different parts of the city and taking into account that different parts of the city have different issues. In the interest of equity, you probably need different solutions too and glad to see that surfacing. Also, the differences as far as access to physical resources like parks, trails, and open space, those fall into categories of health and equity. Glad to see getting that kind of input and hoping to see that input influence where our General Plan goes. Commissioner Dopp mentioned he attended as many sessions as possible. The first group turnout was less than he would hope. Great to see response from second group. He agrees with Vice Chair Oaxaca on health and equity and it's important to understand and he hopes the public understands that is part of the Commissioner's job, wanting to see equity for everybody and that opportunity. What most people really want, not just the City but most people in general, they want to provide the opportunity for people to thrive. Stewardship was a great word. Our city needs to be strong economically providing strong back bone what people rely on and our natural resources, and insuring we are doing our part to make health and equity work. Anne McIntosh, Planning Director, stated the thing she likes about stewardship is it makes each of us stewards. It's a real humbling role to be the stewards of our community. Commissioner Morales agrees and believes we should build on our vision through those three lenses. Chairman Guglielmo stated he likes the direction staff is going. Concurs with Commissioners and likes terminology equity and stewardship. It's important to a thriving community in the long run looking at a 10-year vision. Anne McIntosh acknowledged and thanked Jennifer Nakamura, Management Analyst, who has put so much work into this. She is part of the Core Team of the General Plan Update and part of the outreach and putting together documents and coordinating. F. Director Announcements Anne McIntosh, Planning Director, discussed with Commissioners and agreed upon the following meeting dates - one combined date in November and a revised second meeting in December: • Wednesday, November 18th @ 6:OOpm (Reschedule due to Veteran's Day and Thanksgiving holiday). HPC/PC Meeting Minutes—August 12, 2020 Page 5 of 6 Draft • Monday, December 21 @ 7:OOpm — Special meeting for reviewing a General Plan item. (Regular meeting on December 9th will still be held.) G. Commission Announcements - None H. Workshop — None I. Adjournment Motion by Commissioner Williams, second by Vice Chair Oaxaca, to adjourn the meeting; motion carried unanimously, 5-0 vote. Meeting was adjourned at 8:35pm. Respectfully submitted, Elizabeth Thornhill Executive Assistant, Planning Department Approved: HPC/PC Meeting Minutes—August 12, 2020 Page 6 of 6 Draft CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: August 26, 2020 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Anne McIntosh, AICP, Planning Director INITIATED BY: Vincent Acuna, Associate Planner SUBJECT: TIME EXTENSION DRC2020-00238 (LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, BETWEEN RED HILL COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE AND THE PACIFIC ELECTRIC TRAIL RIGHT-OF-WAY) — PACIFIC SUMMIT- FOOTHILL, LLC —A request to allow for the first one (1) year time extension of a previously approved Tentative Tract Map (SUBTT16605M) to subdivide 24.19 acres into 6 parcels for the development of 175 attached condominium units (Sycamore Heights project) within the Mixed Use (MU) District, APNs: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34 and 41, and 0207-112-09 and 10. Related Files: General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206, Design Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673. Staff finds the project to be within the scope of the project covered by a prior Mitigated Negative Declaration certified by City Council on October 4, 2017 (State Clearinghouse #2017071010) by Resolutions 17-098 and 17-099 and does not raise or create new environmental impacts not already considered in the Mitigated Negative Declaration. RECOMMENDATION: • Approve Time Extension DRC2020-00238 for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605M through the adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval. BACKGROUND: The Sycamore Heights project went before the Planning Commission on August 23, 2017, where Planning Commission recommended that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project, and adopted the Resolution recommending that the City Council approve General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206. Additionally, the Planning Commission also adopted the Resolutions approving Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605M, Design Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673 contingent upon the City Council's adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts and approval of the General Plan Amendment. On August 31, 2017, a timely appeal of the Planning Commission decisions related to the approval of the project was filed. On October 4, 2017, the City Council heard the appeal, upheld the Planning Commission's decision, certified the Mitigated Negative Declaration, and approved all entitlements associated with the Sycamore Heights project. 010 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TIME EXTENSION DRC2020-00238— PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC August 26, 2020 Page 2 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: The project site is located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between San Bernardino Road and Baker Avenue in a hillside area on the southerly flank of Red Hill and surrounding the historic Sycamore Inn restaurant (Exhibit A). The site is irregularly shaped and is approximately 2,500 feet (east to west) by approximately 750 feet (north to south). The site topography is relatively flat in the western portion with slopes in excess of 30 percent in the eastern portion. Elevation grade changes range from a high of 1,375 along the northern property line to a low of 1,245 along the south property line, a grade difference of approximately 130 feet. The site is surrounded to the north, south, east and west by existing residential and commercial land uses, as indicated in the following table. Land Use General Plan Zoning Site Vacant Mixed Use Mixed Use (MU) District Residential condominiums, Open Space, Low Low (L) and Medium (M) North vacant, and Red Hill Country Residential, and Residential Districts Club Medium Residential Mixed Use and Mixed Use (MU) District South Residential and Commercial Medium Residential and Medium (M) Residential District East Pacific Electric Trail, Route 66 Open Space and Medium (M) Residential Trail Head, Residential Medium Residential District West Residential and Commercial Mixed Use Mixed Use (MU) District ANALYSIS: A. General: This time extension request is the first request to extend the approval period of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605M for one (1) year. The original approval of SUBTT16605M was on October 4, 2017, for a time period of 3 years. The applicant filed a time extension application on June 15, 2020, prior to the original approval's October 4, 2020 expiration date. 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 of approval), which is the maximum allowed under the State Subdivision Map Act Section 66452.69 (e). This application involves the first 1-year time extension request, which would set the expiration date to October 4, 2021. The approvals for the subject tentative tract map including the proposed time extension are outlined in the table below: 011 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TIME EXTENSION DRC2020-00238— PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC August 26, 2020 Page 3 Tentative Tract Map 20026 Approval History Approving Approval/Extension Type Approval Approval Expiration Authority Period Date Date City Council Original Approval 3 Years 10/04/2017 10/04/2020 Planning Time Extension DRC2019- 1 Year 08/26/2020 10/04/2021 Commission 00559 proposed At this time, no changes have occurred from what was previously approved, which involves the subdivision of 24.19 acres into 6 parcels for the development of 175 attached condominium units. All lots continue to comply with the development standards applicable to the Mixed Use (MU) District, as described in the Development Code. B. Public Art: The project is exempt from providing public art per RCMC Section 17.02.0205.1. The Sycamore Heights project was deemed complete on November 16, 2016, which was prior to the City Council's adoption of the Public Art ordinance on May 24, 2017. C. Environmental Assessment: The City Council certified a Mitigated Negative Declaration on October 24, 2017 (State Clearinghouse #2017071010) through Resolutions 17-098 and 17-099. The project does not raise or create new environmental impacts not already considered in the Mitigated Negative Declaration. FISCAL IMPACT: The project proponent will be responsible for paying one-time impact fees. These fees are intended to address the increased demand for City services due to the proposed project. The 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 proposed development will increase the value of the project site and the parcels will be assessed an annual property tax. A percentage of this annual tax is shared with the City. COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: Although a specific current City Council goal does not apply to this application, the proposed tentative map time extension will further the City Council's 2019 goal of enhancing our premier community status by providing an opportunity for the future development of market rate for-sale residences on the 24.19-acre infill parcel. With this time extension, the site retains the approved entitlement to subdivide the project site into 6 parcels for the development of 175 attached condominium units, consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and the objectives of the Development Code. 012 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TIME EXTENSION DRC2020-00238— PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC August 26, 2020 Page 4 CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing with a regular legal advertisement in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site. On August 18, 2020 the Planning Department received correspondence from Henry Stoy, residing at 8509 Calle Carabe. The correspondence was reviewed by the Planning Department and has been added as Exhibit D. The letter expressed opposition for the tentative map's one-year time extension request, citing concerns related to slope stability, drainage, and vehicular traffic associated with the Sycamore Heights project. EXHIBITS: Exhibit A - Location Map Exhibit B - Time Extension Request Letter Exhibit C - City Council Staff Report for SUBTT16605M dated October 4, 2017 (with Exhibits) Exhibit D - Letter from Henry Stoy dated August 18, 2020 Draft Resolution 20-42 of Approval for Time Extension DRC2020-00238 013 v 0 N y � Y Q s W low R.Y. PROPERTIES Pacific Summit-Foothill,LLC June 17, 2020 Mike Smith Principal Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive PO Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729-0807 Re: TT 16605M — Request for Time Extension Dear Mike: Pacific Summit-Foothill, LLC (PSF) is the current owner of Tentative Tract Map 16605M (TT 16605M), a residential subdivision of 6 lots for 175 attached condominium units, and is hereby applying for a 12-month time extension. TT 16605M was approved by the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission on August 23, 2017 by P.C. Resolution 17-76. The Planning Commission decision to approve TT 16605M was appealed by a third party during the 10-day appeal period. On October 4, 2017, the City Council considered the appeal and upheld the Planning Commission decision approving TT 16605M in C.C. Resolution 17-099. The TT 16605M approval is set to expire after 36 months, which is October 4, 2020 based on its final City Council approval date. Over the last few years PSF has been working diligently to bring the development project to fruition. Our completed and ongoing efforts include: • Completed years-long negotiation with Sycamore Inn property owner to resolve restaurant encroachments and utility relocation. That agreement, now fully executed, required detailed and specific input from the utility companies in support of the finalized relocation considerations. • Completed acquisition of off-site easement (on the south side of Foothill Blvd.), for downstream construction of the city's master plan drainage facility • Completed year-long consultation with California Department of Fish & Wildlife to secure a finalized Streambed Alteration Agreement 212 S.Palm Avenue,Suite 200 1 Alhambra,California 91801 1 t: 626.282.3100 1 f: 626.282.6588 I chad@rypropertiesinc.com Exhibit 6 015 Mike Smith City of Rancho Cucamonga June 17, 2020 Page 2 • Worked to resolve inter-departmental and inter-agency design conflicts, including master storm drain line placement within Foothill Blvd. and approved direction for site grading over the top of the line and adjacent retaining wall location • Prepared and processed rough grading, storm drain, water quality, and public street plans through multiple plan checks • Processing necessary permits with SBCTA (PE Trail right-of-way holder) • Processing national flood map revisions (CLOMR) through FEMA. This work is still ongoing. • Processing 401 Certification through Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. This work is still ongoing. • Completing year-long design process for coordinating other onsite necessary utility relocations • Nearing approval of public water and sewer plans through CVWD Several of these elements require sequential, rather than concurrent processing. We anticipate completing the outstanding work needed to satisfy conditions for a grading permit later this year, with a target construction start in the first half of 2021. Since this extends beyond the current expiration date of TT 16605M, we are requesting a 12-month extension. If any additional information is needed, please contact me at Pacific Summit-Foothill, LLC via email (chad@rypropertiesinc.com) or at the phone number below. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Best Regards, Chad J. Stadnicki Pacific Summit-Foothill, LLC cc: Anne McIntosh, City of Rancho Cucamonga 212 S.Palm Avenue,Suite 200 1 Alhambra,California 91801 1 t: 626.282.3100 1 f: 626.282.6588 1 chad@rypropertiesinc.com 016 i P'145 a CITY OF r :} RANCHO ! i i REPORT DATE: October 4. 2017 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager INITIATED BY: Candyce Burnett, City Planne65?�'} Tom Grahn, Associate Planner SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2016-00206 - PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC - A REQUEST TO AMEND TABLES AND TEXT, INCLUDING CLARIFYING TEXT AS NECESSARY, IN THE GENERAL PLAN TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF LAND THAT CONTAINS SLOPES OF 30 PERCENT OR GREATER. ON AUGUST 23, 2017, THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2016-00206 AMENDING TABLES AND TEXT, INCLUDING CLARIFYING TEXT AS NECESSARY, IN THE GENERAL PLAN TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF LAND THAT CONTAINS SLOPES OF 30 PERCENT OR GREATER. CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2016-00206 AND APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP MODIFICATION SUBTT16605M, DESIGN REVIEW DRC2012-00672, VARIANCE DRC2016-00207, AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2012-00673 — HANK STOY — A REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE 24.19 ACRES INTO 6 PARCELS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF 175 ATTACHED CONDOMINIUM UNITS, TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM 30- FOOT BUILDING HEIGHT, AND TO REMOVE 180 TREES IN THE MIXED USE (MU) DISTRICT, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, BETWEEN RED HILL COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE AND THE PACIFIC ELECTRIC TRAIL RIGHT-OF-WAY — APNS: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, AND 41 AND 0207-112-09 AN 10. STAFF HAS PREPARED A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS FOR CONSIDERATION. ON AUGUST 23, 2017, THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2016-00206 AND APPROVED THE RELATED APPLICATIONS CONTINGENT UPON CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council take the following actions: ■ Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project; and Page 1 of 9 Exhibit C 017 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT P146 DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, AND DRC20.12-00673 — PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC OCTOBER 4, 2017 ■ Adopt the attached Resolution approving General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206; and ■ Adopt the attached Resolution upholding the decisions of the Planning Commission, and denying the appeals, approving Tentative Tract Map Modification SUBTT16605M, Design Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012- 00673 contingent upon the City Council's adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts and approval of the General Plan Amendment. BACKGROUND: In 2006, the City Council approved a proposal to develop 21 of the current project 24-acre site. The previous approval included a Tentative Tract Map to subdivide the site into 6 lots for condominium purposes, and a Design Review application to develop 206 attached condominium units. The City Council also approved. a General Plan Amendment and Development Code Amendment.to allow the development of slopes 30% and over, provided certain conditions were met. The Development Code Amendment was incorporated into the 2012 Development Code update,. the General Plan Amendment was not incorporated into the 2010 General Plan update. In the.late 2000's the property was acquired by the applicant, who increased the project area to 24 acres, submitted a Tentative Tract Map application to subdivide the project site into 8 lots for condominium purposes, and a Design Review application to develop 175 condominium units. Additionally., the applicant submitted a new General Plan Amendment application to allow the development of slopes 30% and over provided certain conditions were met. (Refer to Attachment 1 —Planning Commission report dated August'23, 2017) On August 23, 2017, the Planning Commission took the following actions: • Recommended that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project; and ■ Adopted the Resolution recommending that the City Council approve General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206; and ■ Adopted the Resolutions approving Tentative Tract Map Modification SUBTT16605M, Design. Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673 contingent upon the City Council's adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts and approval of the General Plan Amendment. On August 31, 2017, Mr.,Hank Stoy filed a timely appeal of the Planning Commission decisions I related to the approval of.the Sycamore Heights project (Attachment$). , ANALYSIS: A. Planning Commission Action: The Planning Commission recommended the City Council approve the General Plan Amendment, and approved the Tentative Tract Map Modification, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit applications contingent upon the City Council's approval of the General Plan Amendment (Attachments 1 through 6). These applications were initiated by Pacific Summit-Foothill, LLC, to provide for the opportunity to subdivide 24.19 acres into 6 parcels forthe development of 175 attached condominium units in the Mixed Use (MU) District on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill ; Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trail Right-of-Way. Page 2 of 9 018 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT P147 DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, DRC2b12-00672, DRC2016-00207,AND ❑RC2012-00673— PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC OCTOBER 4, 2017 The Planning Commission staff report thoroughly analyzes the proposed Tentative Tract Map Modification, and Design Review applications (Attachment 1). The analysis of these applications is complete,.no further analysis is provided in the following discussion, and staff recommends the City Council uphold the decisions of the Planning Commission and deny their general,appeal, thereby approving Tentative Tract Map Modification SUBTT16605M, and Design Review DRC2012-00672. A discussion of General Plan Amendment DRC201'6- 00206, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673 is provided below. B. General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206: The General Plan Land Use Element establishes design, grading, and development criteria associated with various slope conditions_ These criteria establish policy guidelines for allowing for the development of slopes ranging from "5% or less" up to"15% to 29.9%", and prohibit development on slope conditions of "30% and over". The Development Code provides similar criteria, but was amended to permit the development of slopes "30% and over" and states that "This is an excessive slope condition and development is prohibited, unless all the following are satisfied: (i) the property is located south of Banyan:Street; (H) at least seventy-five percent (75%) of the lots or parcels that are the subject of the development application are surrounded by lots or parcels improved with structures; (iii) the proposed project is determined to appropriately address slope stability and other geological factors of the site; and (iv) vegetation fuel management for wildfire protection can be achieved and maintained"'(General Plan text is non-bold). The Mixed Use General Plan land use designation is not specifically a residential or commercial land use-category, but a designation that allows a mix of land uses. Because it can permit a variety of land -uses, it was never intended to be subject to the Hillside Development criteria of the General Plan or the -Development Code. The intent of the Hillside Development criteria is to regulate single-family residential hillside development on natural slope conditions with slopes 8% and greater, in some areas 30% and over, where the vast majority of land in that slope category in the foothill areas of the City. The Sycamore Heights project is a 24-2cre fractured site surrounded by developed land that has been so altered by surrounding development (i.e., development of the Red Chief Motel, Sycamore Inn, abandoned water basin, and surrounding residential, commercial and public developments, and graded access roads throughout the site) that the project site is not a natural slope and is outside the intent of the Hillside Development requirements of the Development Code. The General Plan Amendment proposes to modify Table LU-19 to include the above referenced text in bold, as well'as two policy sections with similar verbiage to the text added to Table LU-19. (see Draft Resolution). C. Appeal of Planning Commission Actions: Fallowing Planning Commission approval of the Sycamore Heights project Mr. Hank Stoy filed an "appeal of the decisions made by the Planning Commission at its meeting of August 23, 2017, relating to the following items: Variance to Development Code, Environmental Issues (Traffic, Wildlife, and Riparian Habitat), and Tree Removal Permit." These items are discussed below. a. Variance DRC2016-00207: The appeal letter states "Some structures would exceed the 30-foot'height limitation for buildings on slopes. Allowing these to be built would negatively impact the view from my property. The developer should be required to comply with the requirements of the Development Code." Page 3 of 9 019 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT P148 DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, AND DRC2012-00673-- PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC OCTOBER 4, 2017 Staff Response to Appeal: The project site is within a Mixed Use zoning designation and.approximately half of the-project site is located within the Hillside Overlay District, of which the Development Code establishes building envelopes and maximum building height for properties located in hillside areas_ The Hillside Development criteria establish a 30-foot maximum building height for all structures located in the Hillside- Overlay District. The applicant is proposing a total of 44 condominium units including 26 two-story tri-plex units that are up to a maximum of 29 feet in height, and 18 three- story four-, five-, and six-plex units that are up to a maximum of 35 feet in height. Roughly half-of the three-story units are located entirely within the Hillside Overlay District and exceed the allowable maximum 30-foot building height by 5 feet. Residential structures in the Mixed Use-(MU) District outside of the Hillside Overlay District are permitted up to a maximum of 75 feet in height. Because of the approximate distance of 1-85 feet•between the existing and proposed structures,the grade difference of approximately 50 feet between pad elevation for the existing and proposed structures, and the view angle from the existing structures, the proposed 5-foot height increase does not create a condition that negatively impacts views of the San Bernardino valley. Portions of structures will block views looking down towards Foothill Boulevard, but due to the distances involved and the view angle, the 5-foot height increase only incrementally disrupts views looking down and not out towards the San Bernardino valley (Attachment 11)_ Additionally, the City does not have a view ordinance that restricts construction within view areas. The developer designed the project to minimize the view impacts to the existing neighborhood to the north by lowering the pad elevations, increasing the distance to the dwelling units, and reducing; the number of total units. Staff recommends the City Council uphold the decision of the Planning Commission and deny the appeal of Variance DRC2416- 00207. b. Environmental Impacts — Traffic: The appeal letter states "An estimated additional 1642 daily vehicle trips would be generated on already heavily-traveled Foothill Boulevard. It would exacerbate problems at probably the worst intersection in the City —Foothill-and Red Hill Country Club Drive. With only one entrancelexit and right turns only in and out, the numerous U-turns required on Foothill would create safety hazards. Cut-through traffic on Red Hill is bound to increase. Yet, no mitigation measures are being required of the developer." Applicant Response to- Appeal: Linscott, Law & Greenspan, the project traffic engineer, responded to the comment (Attachment 10) and stated that the proposed project is expected to generate 1,042 additional vehicles per day (vpd) onto Foothill Boulevard. Foothill Boulevard currently has an average daily traffic volume of 22,000 ,Vpd in the vicinity of the project site and a daily capacity of 36,000 vpd. Even though the proposed project will. add 1,042 additional daily_ trips to Foothill Boulevard, the existing roadway has more than adequate capacity to accommodate the increase in daily trips associated with the proposed project. The Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) identifies that under existing traffic conditions the intersection of Red Hill Country Club Drive and Foothill Boulevard currently operates at unacceptable Level of Service (LOS) F(on a scale of descending LOS from•A to F) during the AM and PM peak hours. The proposed project will add some traffic to the already deficient intersection. The TIA recommends an improvement at that Page 4 of 9 020 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT P149 DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, AND DRC2012-00673— PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC OCTOBER 4, 2017 intersection in order to help alleviate the existing peak hour deficiency. Conditions of approval require the installation of traffic signage at the Red Hill Country Club ❑rive and Foothill Boulevard intersection to restrict northbound and southbound left-turn and through movements during the AM peak period (7:00 AM--9:00 AM) and the PM peak period (4:00 PM—6:00 PM). Primary access to the project site will be provided via a proposed "right-turn infright- turn out only" gated driveway on Foothill Boulevard_ A secondary Emergency Vehicle Access (EVA) provides access to Red Hill Country Club Drive. The Rancho Cucamonga General Plan designates Foothill Boulevard as a Major Divided Arterial (i.e_, 94-foot paved width, inclusive of a 14-foot median within a 120 foot right-of-way). The restriction of turning movements at the primary access is consistent with the City's Circulation/Mobility Plan, which indicates that left-turn access on Foothill Boulevard is allowed at signalized intersections only. Due to the right-turn in/right-turn out only restriction project residents/guests will have to make U-turn movements at the adjacent intersections of either Foothill Boulevard and Grove Avenue, Foothill Boulevard and Red Hill Country Club Drive, or Foothill Boulevard and San Bernardino Road. Traffic volume forecasting and intersection analysis included in the TIA considers the project U-turn movements at these key study intersections. The TIA prepared for the project did provide a project cut-through discussion relative to the Red Hill Country Club Drive neighborhood. Based on the project trip distribution patterns of the traffic study, it was assumed that 20% of outbound project traffic would be considered new cut-through trips (i.e., 13 of the 64 outbound AM peak hour trips and 7 of the 32 outbound PM peak hour trips). These outbound project trips were assumed to travel through the Red Hill Country Club Drive neighborhood to access Carnelian Street and/or Base Line Road. Staff Response to Appeal: The Initial Study and TIA addresses traffic impacts, project access, and cut-through traffic and appropriate conditions of approval are established for project impacts. Staff concurs with the traffic impact analysis and mitigation monitoring proposed as part of the project. The applicant is required to pay in lieu fees towards future improvements along Foothill Boulevard and construct frontage improvements adjacent to their project along Foothill Boulevard. Staff recommends the City Council uphold the decision of the Planning Commission and deny the appeal of environmental impacts to traffic. C. Environmental Impacts --Wildlife: The appeal letter states "The impact on wildlife is unrealistically understated. For example, the red tail hawk (a protected species) frequently seen on Red Hill is not even mentioned in the biological resources survey." Applicant Response to Appeal: RCA Associates, the project biologist, responded to the comment(Attachment 9)and identified that as part of their evaluation of the project site they documented all wildlife observed on the site during their field surveys. Further identifying that the red-tailed hawk was not observed, and since the species is not listed as threatened,endangered,or a species of special concern a detailed discussion of the species was not provided. Staff Response to Appeal: The Initial Study prepared far the project evaluates impacts to biological resources associated with development of the project site and relied on Page 6 of 9 021 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT P150 DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, AND ❑RC201:2-00673— PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC OCTOBER 4, 2017 the 2003 Biological Assessment and updated 2017 Biological Assessment to assess project-related impacts. No threatened, endangered, or species of concern were identified in either assessment. The level of constraint that a sensitive biological resource would pose to potential developments typically depends on the following criteria: 1)the relative value of that resource; 2) the amount or degree of impact to the resource; 3) whether or not impacts to the resource would be in violation of State and/or Federal regulations or laws; 4)whether or not impacts to the resource would require permitting by resources agencies; and 5)the degree to which impacts on the resource would otherwise be considered "significant" under-CEQA. Based on an evaluation using these criteria, existing disturbed/disked areas were considered of a relatively low biological constraint and value given the context in which they occur. This designation is because of the high level of disturbance that has resulted in low biological diversity, absence of special-status plant communities, and overall low potential for special-status species to utilize or reside within these areas. Because no threatened or endangered species are likely to occur in disturbed areas due to the highly-disturbed conditions present in a predominantly degraded environment, construction activities in these areas would not likely jeopardize the continued' existence of listed species, nor would construction adversely impact designated critical habitat. Impacts to disturbed areas would also not be expected to substantially affect special-status.resources or cause a population of plant or wildlife species to drop below self-sustaining levels, nor would impacts be expected to substantially alter diversity of wildlife in the area due to the current degraded habitat conditions. 'Project mitigation measures require Nesting Bird Surveys and Burrowing Owl Surveys consistent with the.Fish and Game Code and the Migratory Bird Act prior to the issuance of grading permits. Staff recommends the. City Council uphold the decision of the Planning Commission and deny the appeal of environmental impacts to wildlife. d. Environmental Impacts — Riparian-Habitat: The-appeal letter states "Preservation of riparian habitat is a stated goal in the City's General Plan (Policy RC-8.1). But this project would destroy a considerable amount of it." Applicant Response to Appeal: RCA Associates, the project biologist, studied the site to identify the locations of any potential riparian/riverine habitat to determine whether Federal and/or State jurisdiction applies .(Attachment 9). The study (Jurisdictional j Delineation) identified five rivedne features — four conveying drainage from the condominium project to the north and one conveying drainage from the Red Hill Country Club golf course. All features drain into developed storm drain facilities directly south of the site. Based on US Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE) and California Department of Fish, and Wildlife (CDFW) criteria these features are not subject to their jurisdiction. 'i Staff Response to Appeal: The -Initial Study evaluated a Jurisdictional Delineation prepared for the project site. The Jurisdictional Delineation evaluated five drainage channels that bisect the project,site and analyzed the impacts to riverine habitats present along the channels. Based on the results of the delineation and the jurisdictional analysis, it was determined that the five existing channels do not meet the-criteria as a Waters of the State or Waters of the United States. The channels do not meet the characteristics that the define them as a nexus to the nearest Traditional Page 6 of 9 022 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Pi 51 DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, AND DRC20 1 2-00673-- PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC OCTOBER 4, 2017 Navigable Water, located approximately 0.4 miles east of the project site. Waters that flow through the five channels flow in a southerly direction and appear to be a direct result of runoff from the development directly north of the site. The Jurisdictional Delineation determiners that jurisdictional waters were not present on the site during their field investigations, and that the proposed project will not have an impact to the Waters of the State and recommends complying with California Fish and Game Code, Section 1602, prior to issuance of any grading permit. General Plan Policy RC-8.1 addresses preserving 'the integrity of riparian habitat ... and sensitive wildlife habitat that supports biological resources." Although the policy is focused on preserving riparian habitat in the City's Sphere of Influence, located in the foothills north of the City, the policy would still be applicable to riparian habitat anywhere within the City. Here, the Jurisdictional Delineation analyzed the five drainage channels that bisect the site and determined that they are the result of runoff from the existing development to the north, that jurisdictional waters were not present during field investigations, and that the project will not have an impact to the Waters of the State. Although the Jurisdictional Delineation determined that jurisdictional waters were not present on the project site, it recommended compliance with the CDFW recommended mitigation measure prior to issuance of any grading permit. The Biological Resources section of the project Mitigated Negative Declaration includes a mitigation measure requiring the applicant to provide proof to the City that the Streambed Alteration Agreement (1602 Agreement) process has been concluded. Staff recommends the City Council uphold the decision of the Planning Commission and deny the appeal of environmental impacts to riparian habitat. e. Tree Removal Permit ❑RC2012-00673: The appeal letter states "This project would require removing 180 frees. To preserve the areas aesthetics and character, more mature trees should be saved. And it is difficult to believe that the nesting bird survey did not find a single nest in any of the frees slated for removal." Staff Response to Appeal: The Arborist Report r _ p pp p rt prepared for the protect site evaluated a total of 198 trees on-site, 64 of which meet Development Code criteria to be classified as Heritage Trees, and 18 of those Heritage Trees are recommended for preservation. The 180 trees not identified as suitable for preservation are considered over-mature, have poor growth character, have advanced decay, some are dead or are in poor general health, and many of these trees have further declined in health due to the prolonged effects of the drought. Additionally, the location of several trees, although they are in good health, conflict with proposed improvements. The Conceptual Landscape Plan prepared for the project demonstrates that the 180 trees removed will be replaced with a variety of 36-inch box, 24-inch box, and 15-gallon size trees, in a quantity in excess of the number of trees removed. A Biological Assessment prepared for the project did identify the presence of common birds on the project site, but no threatened, endangered, or species of concern were identified. Burrowing Owl and Nesting Bird Surveys were prepared, but did not identify the presence of any Burrowing Owls or nesting birds. Project mitigation measures require Nesting Bird Surveys and Burrowing Owl Surveys consistent with the Fish and Game Code and the Migratory Bird Act prior to the issuance of grading permits. Staff recommends the City Council uphold the decision of the Planning Commission and deny the appeal of Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673. Page 7 of 9 023 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT P152 DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, AND ❑RC2012-00673-- PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC OCTOBER 4, 2017 D. Environmental Assessment: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, City staff prepared an Initial Study(IS) of the potential environmental effects of the project (Exhibit P of the Planning Commission staff report). Based on the findings contained in that IS, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures related to aesthetics, agricultural resources, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hydrology and water quality, noise, 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 (MND) was prepared and was circulated on July 3, 2017. A comment letter was received from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) on July 27, 2017 in response to the circulated IS/MND. The only comment CDFW had was in relation to the possible Jurisdictional Waters on the project site. The applicant and their biologists prepared a Jurisdictional Delineation to address CDFW's comments. The Jurisdictional Delineation determined that jurisdictional waters were not present on the project site, but recommended compliance with the CDFW recommended mitigation measure prior to issuance of any grading permit. The Biological Resources section of the ISIMND, was revised to include a mitigation measure requiring the applicant to provide proof to the City that the Streambed Alteration Agreement (1602 Agreement) process has been concluded. According to CEQA Section 15073.5(a), recirculation of a negative declaration is required prior to its adoption when it has been substantially revised after public notice of its availability has been given pursuant to Section 15072. Furthermore, CEQA Section 15073.5(b) states, "a "substantial revision" of the negative declaration shall mean: (1) a new avoidable significant effect is identified and mitigation measure or project revisions must be added in order to reduce the effect to insignificance, or (2) the lead agency determines that the proposed mitigation measures or project revisions will not reduce potential effects to less than significance and new measures or revisions must be required.' Here, either the CDFVV will determine that notification under Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code is not required for the project, or they will require the applicant obtain a Streambed Alteration Agreement. The ISIMND was revised to include a discussion of the Jurisdictional Delineation for the project site and a mitigation measure requiring a Streambed Alteration Agreement was added to the MND and the project conditions of approval. The addition of a condition of approval requiring a Streambed Alteration Agreement is not considered substantial evidence in light of the whole record that cannot be mitigated. Therefore, the Streambed Alteration Agreement mitigation measure is not a substantial revision to the MND, and recirculation of the MND is not required. 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. Page 8 of 9 024 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT P153 DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, AND DRC2012-00673— PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC OCTOBER 4, 2017 The overall project, during construction may increase construction-related employment and, following its completion, will increase employment due to new industrial 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 the employees and customer patronage of local businesses. 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. The proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent with the General Plan Public Health and Safety element and its policies related to hillside development. The proposed General Plan Amendment will not preclude the continued enforcement of the Hillside Development Guidelines applicable to development of property with slope conditions. The proposed project is in a developed area with similar hillsidelslope conditions that will not be impacted by the project. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan as it identifies existing slope conditions and how the project integrates those conditions into its design, and proposed project is designed to minimize any impact to surrounding hillside developments. ' 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. One comment letter was received and is attached (Attachment 12), ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1 -- Planning Commission Staff Report dated August 23, 2017 Attachment 2 -- Planning Commission Resolution No. 17-75 Recommending Approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206 Attachment 3 — Planning Commission Resolution No. 17-76 Approving Tentative Tract Map Modification SUBTT16605M Attachment 4 — PIanning Commission Resolution No. 17-77 Approving Design Review ❑RC2012-00672 Attachment 5 — Planning Commission Resolution No. 17-78 Approving Variance DRC2016- 00207 Attachment 6 — Planning Commission Resolution No. 17-79 Approving Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673 Attachment 7 — Planning Commission Minutes dated August 23, 2017 Attachment 8 -- Mr. Hank Stoy Appeal Letter dated August 31, 2017 Attachment 9 -- RCA Associates Response Letter Attachment 10 — Linscott, Law&Greenspan Response Letter Attachment 11 — SlopelView Exhibit Attachment 12 — Charles & Lynda Treenor comment letter Attachment 13 -- Resolution of Approval for General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206 Attachment 14 - Resolution Upholding Planning Commission Approval of Tentative Tract Map Modification SUBTT16605M, Design Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207 and Tree Removal Permit ❑RC2012-00673 Page 9 of 9 025 P154 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: August 23. 2017 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Candyce Burnett, City Planner [,N`(5 INITIATED BY: Tom Grahn, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT ❑RC2016-00206 - PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC - A request to amend tables and text, including clarifying text as necessary, in the General Plan to allow the development of land that contains slopes of 30 percent or greater. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605M, Design Review DRC2012- 00672, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. This application will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP MODIFICATION SUBTT16605M - PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC - A request subdivide 24.19 acres into 6 parcels for the development of 175 attached condominium units in the Mixed Use (MU) District located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and Pacific Electric Trail Right-of-Way; APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25. 31. 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10. Related Files: General Plan Amendment ❑RC2016- 00206, Design Review ❑RC2012-00672. Variance ❑RC2016-00207. and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2012-00672 - PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL. LLC - A request to develop 175 attached condominium units on 24.19 acres of land in Mixed Use (MU) District. located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trail Right-of-Way; APN: 0207-101-13. 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10. Related Files- General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605M. Variance DRC2016- 00207. and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VARIANCE DRC2016-00207 - PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC - A request to exceed the 30 foot building envelop established by Development Code Section 17.122.020.D.1.e.(i and ii) for the develop 175 attached condominium units on 24.19 acres of land in the Mixed Use (MU) District, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trail Right-of-Way: APN' 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25. 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10. 026 Attachment 1 P155 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, AND DRC2012-00673— PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 2 Related Files: General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206,Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605M, Design Review DRC2012-00672, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT ❑RC2012-00673 - PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC -A request to remove 180 trees associated with the proposed development of 175 attached condominium units on 24.19 acres of land in Mixed Use (MU) District, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trail Right-of-Way; APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10. Related Files: General Plan Amendment ❑RC2016-00206, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605M, Design Review ❑RC2012-00672, and Variance DRC2016-00207. 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 the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project; and ■ Adopt the attached Resolution recommending that the City Council approve General Plan Map Amendment DRC2016-00206; and • Adopt the attached Resolutions approving Tentative Tract Map Modification SUBTT16605M, Design Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673 contingent upon City Council adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts and approval of the General Plan Amendment. PROJECT REVIEW AND BACKGROUND: Previous Public Hearing: The proposed applications were originally scheduled for Planning Commission consideration on August 9, 2017. During circulation of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (1SIMND) the City received comments from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and property owners in the vicinity of the project site that raised questions regarding the proposed project. The August 9, 2017 staff report recommended the Planning Commission continue the applications to an unspecific date (Exhibit A). At the August 9, 2017 Planning Commission meeting staff revised the recommended action and requested that the Commission continue review of the applications to August 23, 201 T Previous Proiect Site Approvals: In 2006 the Planning Commission considered a series of applications proposing development on 21 acres of the current 24-acre project site. On April 12, 2006, the Planning Commission took the following actions related to these previous entitlement applications: 027 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT P156 DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16505M, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, AND DRC2012-00673-- PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 3 ■ Recommended to the City Council approval of the following: a General Plan Amendment❑RC2004-00339—A request to amend the General Plan to allow the development of land that contains a 30 percent slope. o Development Code Amendment DRC2004-00352 — A request to amend the Development Code to allow the development of the land that contains a 30 percent slope. ■ Approved the following applications contingent upon City Council approval of the above applications: a Tentative Tract 16605--A residential subdivision of 8 lots for condominium purposes (206 units) on 21 acres of land. o Design Review DRC2003-00637 -- The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for 206 condominiums on 21 acres of land. a Variance DRC2005-01061 —A request to reduce the parking lot setback from 45 feet minimum to 10 feet to allow improvements to an existing parking lot for the Sycamore Inn Restaurant. o Minor Development Review DRC2004-00826--Parking lot, loading area modifications and covered patio area at the Historic Sycamore Inn Restaurant. On, June 21, 2006, the City Council subsequently approved the General Plan and Development I Code Amendment applications. Development Code Amendment DRC2004-00352 was i incorporated into Development Code Section 17.52.020(E)thereby providing an exception to the prohibition of development on slopes 30 percent and over, provided certain conditions are I satisfied. General Plan Amendment DRC2004-00339 was not incorporated into the 2010 General Plan update. The entitlement applications related to the project(i.e., Design Review DRC2003-00637,Variance DRC2005-01061, and Minor Development Review DRC2004-00826) expired on April 6, 2011. No time extensions for those applications were requested or granted; however, the Planning Commission has ,approved two subsequent 1-year time extensions for Tentative Tract SUBTT16605 extending the maps expiration date to April 12, 2018. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: The project site is located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between San Bernardino Road i and Baker Avenue in a hillside area on the southerly flank of Red Hill and surrounding the historic Sycamore Inn restaurant (Exhibit D), The site is irregularly shaped and is approximately 2,500 feet (east to west) by approximately 750 feet (north to south). The site topography is relatively flat in the western portion with slopes in excess 30 percent slope in the eastern portion. Elevation grade changes range from a high of 1,375 along the northern property line to a low of 1,245 along the south property line, a grade difference of approximately 130 feet. The site is surrounded to 028 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT P157 DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, AND DR02012-00673— PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL., LLC August 23, 2017 Page 4 the north, south, east and west by existing residential and commercial land uses, as indicated in the following table. Land Use General Plan Zoning Site Vacant Mixed Use Mixed Use MU District Residential condominiums, Open Space, Low North vacant, and Red Hill Country Residential, and LowMedium {M} (L(L)) and d Districts Club Medium Residential Residential and Commercial Mixed Use and Mixed Use (MU) District and South Medium Residential Medium (M) Residential District acific Electric Trail, Route 66 Open Space and Medium (M) Residential East P Trail Head, Residential Medium Residential District West I Residential and Commercial Mixed Use Mixed Use MU District ANALYSIS: A. General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206: The General Plan Land Use Element, Table LU-19 Slope Development Guidelines, establishes design, grading, and development criteria associated with various slope conditions. These criteria establish policy guidelines for allowing for the development of slopes ranging from '5% or less" up to "15%to 29.9%", and prohibit development on slope conditions of"30% and over" (Exhibit B). Development Code Section 17.52.020 provides similar criteria for development standards on slopes ranging from "5% natural slope or less" up to "30% and over", but also includes the provisions of the previously adopted Development Code Amendment (DRC2004-00352). This Development Code Amendment was applicable to the criteria for slopes "30% and over" and states that "phis is an excessive slope condition and development is prohibited, unless all the following are satisfied: (i) the property is located south of Banyan Street;(H)at least seventy-five percent(75%)of the lots or parcels that are the subject of the development application are surrounded by lots or parcels improved with structures; (f) the proposed project is determined to appropriately address slope stability and othergeological factors of the site;and(iv)vegetation fuel management for wildfire protection can be achievedand maintained"(Exhibit C). The Mixed Use General Plan land use designation is not specifically a residential or commercial land use category, but a designation that allows a mix of land uses (i.e., residential, commercial, agricultural, recreation, open space, education, and assembly uses). In recognition of this unique classification, it is a separate land use district in the Development Code. Because it can permit a variety of Iand uses, predominantly, but not specifically residential it was never intended to be subject to the Hillside Development p y 1 p criteria of the General Plan and Development Code, in fact,this is the only Mixed Use district in the City with a slope condition. The intent of the Hillside Development criteria of the General Plan and Development Code was to regulate single-family residential hillside development on slopes 8% and greater, and in some areas 30% and over where the vast majority of land in that slope category is located in residential districts in the foothill areas of the City. Additionally, the intent of the Hillside Development criteria was to address the development of natural slopes,and in this case,we have a 24-acre fractured site surrounded 029 I PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT P158 DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16505M, DR02012-00672, DRC2016-00207, AND DRC2012-00673-- PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 5 by developed land. The case can be made the site has been so altered by surrounding development (i.e., development of the Red Chief Motel, Sycamore Inn, abandoned water basin, and surrounding residential, commercial and public developments, and graded access roads throughout the site) that the project site is not a natural slope and is outside the intent of the Hillside Development requirements of the Development Code. The proposed General Plan Amendment proposes to modify Table LU-19 to include the above referenced text in bold, as well as two policy sections similarly (see Draft Resolution). B. Tentative Tract Map Modification SUBT716605M: The project site is proposed to be subdivided into 6 parcels for condominium purposes. The 6 parcels range in size from 2.49 acres to 5.52 acres and are each designed to accommodate a large number of condominium units within the project. There are no minimum lot area requirements within the Mixed Use (MU) District; however, the project site was designed so that the residential development of each parcel will conform to all applicable residential development standards including, but not limited to, density (up to 50 dwelling units per acre), building setbacks (50% to 75% reduction along major and secondary arterials), and landscaping (10% of project site). C. Design Review DRC2012-00672: The applicant is requesting the Design Review of a 175- unit multi-family condominium development on 24.19 acres, a density of 7.23 dwelling units per acre (Exhibits E & F). The proposed project will be a gated community with 1 vehicle entrance on Foothill Boulevard, located west of the Sycamore Inn restaurant, and 1 Emergency Vehicle Access(EVA)gate on Red Hill Country Club Drive. The site plan wraps around the Sycamore Inn restaurant providing a single right-in-right-out driveway entrance to the site. A total of 9 livelwork units are provided adjacent to the Foothill Boulevard driveway, with adjacent parking and pedestrian access, Units are provided throughout the 24-acre site, with most units situated east of the Sycamore Inn on two large relatively flat graded pads. Building pads on the lower tier east of the Sycamore Inn, directly adjacent to Foothill Boulevard, are approximately 6 to 21 feet above the existing street grade, and the building pads on the upper tier east of the Sycamore Inn are approximately 60 feet below the existing condominium project to the north. A large 30-foot-high Mechanically Stabilized Embankment (MSE) separates the lower and upper building tiers (Exhibit 1). Building pads are located throughout the project site and are situated so that their eventual development will minimize impacts to adjacent properties. The 175 units are provided throughout the project site in 44 individual buildings, each containing between 3 and 6 residential units. Units are provided in either a two-story or three-story building complex. There are 26 two-story units, 29 feet tall, with units ranging in size from 1,296 square feet to 1,701 square feet and 18 three-story units, 35 feet tall, with units ranging in size from 1,672 square feet to 2,108 square feet. Architectural styles include Santa Barbara and Provence, and include 360 degree architectural elements such as: tile roofs, stucco finish, multi-paned windows, metal balconies, wood shutters, and additional architectural embellishments (Exhibit M). Parking is provided in two-car garages for each unit, providing 350 parking spaces, 9 parking spaces for the live/work units, and 130 open parking spaces. D. Residential Unit Breakdown: The proposed development will consist of 175 housing units housed in 44 two- and three-story condominium buildings (Exhibit E). The unit mix consists 030 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT P159 DRC2016-00206,.SUBTT16605M, DRC2012-00672, DRC201.6-00207, AND DRC2012-00673— PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 6 of 28 two-bedroom units (at 1,296 square feet), 119 three-bedroom units (ranging in size from 1,540 square feet to 2,108 square feet) and 28 four-bedroom units (ranging ,in size from 1,976 square feet to 1,995 square feet). The 9 live/work units-include 2 two-bedroom units (with 1,531 square feet of living area and 249 square feet of commercial floor area) and 7 three-bedroom units (ranging in size from 1,782 square feet to 1,916 square feet of living area and 249 square feet of commercial floor area) (Exhibit M). E. Recreational Amenities: The Development Code requires that multi-family projects containing between 101 and 200 units provide 5 recreational amenities, or their equivalent (Section 17.36.010.E.3) throughout.the'project site (Exhibit E). The project exceeds this requirement and provides recreational amenities designed to meet the interests of their residents. The proposed recreational amenities include: 1. Central pool courtyard. 2. Six(6) barbeque facilities throughout the site. 3. Two (2) tot-lot play areas. 4. Five (5) open space areas. F. Project Parking Overview: The proposed project requires a total of 432 parking spaces based on a summation of uses within the project including the number of bedrooms in each unit, the Live/Work commercial floor area, and guest parking (Exhibit E). This includes 364 -parking spaces based on the bedroom mix,(322 of which are required to.be covered in a garage or carport), 9 parking spaces for the Live/Work retail component (based on 2,241 square feet of retail floor area), and 59 guest parking spaces. The design of the complex proposes to provide a total of 489 parking spaces on-site through a mix of garage and open parking spaces. The Development Code's standards for mixed use development stipulate that parking for mixed use projects .is based on a summation of parking required for the individual uses within the development. On-site parking is verified through a parking study, which reviews the adequacy of the number of proposed parking spaces; this parking study is then subject to peer review by a third-party consultant contracted by the City. If it is determined that a reduced number of parking spaces is adequate for all of the uses within a mixed use project, an application for a Minor Exception or Variance can be made to reduce the required number of on-site parking spaces. However, the current application meets or exceeds all on-site parking requirements for garage, livelwork, .and guest parking, and as such, peer review was determined to be unnecessary as no reduction on on-site parking is proposed. G. Proiect Parkin- Analysis: Section 17.64 of the Development Code establishes parking requirements for the project as follows: 031 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Peso DRC2016-00206, SU6TT16605M, D RC201 2-00672, DRC2016-00207, AND DRC2012-00673--- PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 7 DevelopmentType Number of Units Standard Covered Spaces Provided Parking Required Parking Two Bedroom Units 28 2.0 Spaces/Unit 28 56 66 1 in garage or carport) Three Bedroom Units 119 2.0 Spaces/Unit 238 238 238 2 in SaraRe or carport) Four Bedroom Units 2,5 5pacesfUnit 56 70 70 28 (2 in garage or carport) (includes 14 uncoverd) Retail Parking 2,241 1 space for each 250 square 0 9 9 feet of leasable area Guest Parking 1 175 1 1 per 3 units 0 59 116 Enclosed Garage Spaces 372 Total Parking Spaces Regulred 432 Total;Rarki ?spacesR.avidediow-site ,-r-.�:'. ' The applicant has submitted a Parking Analysis (Exhibit G), which finds that the proposed number of parking spaces exceeds the parking demand for the proposed mix of uses within the project. H. Variance DRC2016-00207: Approximately half of the project site is located within the Hillside Overlay District of the Zoning Map, of which the Development Code establishes building envelopes and maximum building height for properties located in hillside areas. Hillside Development criteria, Section 17.122.020(D)(e) of the Development Code, establishes a 30-foot maximum building height for all structures located in the Hillside Overlay District. The applicant is proposing a total of 44 condominium units including 26 two-story tri-Alex units up to a maximum of 29 feet in height, and 18 three-story four-, five-, and six-plex units up to a maximum of 35 feet in height. Roughly half of the three-story units are located within the Hillside Overlay District and exceed the allowable maximum 30-foot building height. The findings of facts below support the necessary Variance findings.which are required by the City's Development Code: 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 Hillside Development building height development standard is necessary to regulate maximum building height and bulk on slope conditions when regulating the development of a single-family home in a residential district; these development standards were not intended to regulate building height for multi-family development in the Mixed Use District. Here, the applicant proposes grading the site into large flat building tiers to accommodate the proposed attached multi-family development. As the design and development of the proposed units will not be located on a slope condition and less than half of the project site is located in the Hillside Overlay District, enforcement of the development standard is inconsistent with the objectives of the Development Code. 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. 032 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT P161 ORC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, AND DRC2012-00673— PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 8 Fact: The eastern portion of the project site has a grade change ranging from a high of 1,375 feet along the northern property line to a low of 1-,245 feet along the southern,property line, a difference of approximately 130 feet. The applicant is proposing to grade the site into two large building tiers to accommodate the development of attached mufti-family condominium buildings ranging from 3 to 6 units in 44 buildings. The entire project site is located within the Mixed Use District and the eastern portion of the site is subject to the Hillside Overlay District. The Mixed Use District permits a-density up to 50 dwelling units per acre and buildings up to 75 feet high. The multi-family units located within the Hillside Overlay District propose to exceed Hillside Development criteria by 5 feet, which is over 60 feet below the height of buildings-to the north. The location of these buildings and their proposed height are situated so that their eventual development will not negatively impact adjacent properties. 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 increase in building height ailows.the proposed multi-family units to be distributed throughout the entire project site. Enforcement of the height limit would not prevent the proposed grading and would unduly force a density shift within the project so that a higher number of units would be Iocated on the westerly half of the project, so that all units on the easterly half of the project site were within the Hillside Development standard height Iimits. This density shift will negatively impact the Sycamore inn and surrounding properties by focusing a significant increase in the number of units on the westerly half of the project site. 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: The project site is located in the Mixed Use District, which was designed to accommodate a variety of land uses. The Mixed Use District was never intended to apply to properties located on hillside conditions or be subject to the Hillside Overlay District. Because the Mixed Use District can accommodate a variety of land uses it was never intended to he subject to the Hillside.;Development criteria of the Genera[ Plan and Development Code, in fact, this 'is the gnly Mixed Use district in the City with a slope condition. The intent of the Hillside Development criteria of the General Plan and Development Code was to regulate single-family residential hillside development on slopes 8% and greater. The intent of the Hillside Development criteria was to address the development natural slopes, and in this case, we have a 24-acre fractured site surrounded by developed land. The project site has been so altered by surrounding development, is not a natural slope, is outside the intent of the Hillside Development requirements of the Development Code, and is s❑ unique that there are no other Mixed Use District slope conditions within the City. 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. 033 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT P162 DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, ❑RC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, AND DRC2012-00673— PACIFiC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 9 i� Fact: The increased building heights will not negatively impact the surrounding property owners. Due to the grade difference between the project site and properties to the north, the 5-foot increase in building height will not negatively impact views of properties to the north and the additional height increase only impacts views on the project site. 1. Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673: The Arborist Report (Jim Borer, August 2012) evaluated a total of 198 trees on the project site. Of those 198 trees, 64 meet Development Code criteria to be classified as Heritage Trees, and 18 of those Heritage Trees are recommended for preservation. The Development Code defines heritage trees as "all eucalyptus windrows, any tree in excess of thirty feet (30) in height and having a single trunk with a diameter of twenty inches (20') or more, or a multi-trunk having a diameter of I thirty inches(30') or more, a stand of frees the nature of which makes each dependent upon the others for survival, and any other tree as may be deemed historically or culturally significant because of age, size, condition, or aesthetic qualities." The Arborist Report evaluated the location and condition of 56 Coast Live Oak(Quercus agrifolia), 35 California Sycamore (Platanus racemosa), 26 California Pepper (Schinus molle), 24 Blue & Sugar Gum (Eucalyptus species), 15 Elderberry (Sambucus species), 12 BraziIian Pepper (Schinus terebinthifolia), 10 Evergreen Elm (Ulmus parvifolia), 7 Pine (Pinus species), and 13 miscellaneous trees, a total of 198 trees. The 180 trees not identified by the Arborist Report as suitable for preservation are considered over-mature, have poor growth ! character, have advanced decay, some are dead or are in poor general health; many of J these trees have further declined in health due to the prolonged effects of the drought. Additionally, several trees, although in good health, their location conflicts with proposed improvements and the applicant proposes to remove these trees. 1 The remaining 18 trees that meet Heritage Tree criteria are recommended for preservation due to their location, mature form, good growth character, and vigorous health; these trees are principally located north of the Sycamore Inn restaurant. Tree preservation priorities that should be considered include: 1) preserve-in-place healthy trees, 2) if trees cannot be preserved in place, then transplant elsewhere on-site, and as a last resort, 3) remove and replace with largest nursery grown stock available. Two of the trees proposed for removal are Coast Live Oak trees of"mature form and character, good vigor" (Borer Report, Trees No. 76 and 175) and their location conflicts with proposed improvements. Conditions of approval require the trees to be either transplanted elsewhere on-site or removed and replaced with the largest nursery grown stock available. The Conceptual Landscape Plan (Exhibit L) demonstrates that the 180 trees removed as part of this project will be I� replaced with a variety of 36-inch box, 24-inch box, and 15-gallon size trees_ Based on i Development Code requirements for tree plantings (1 tree for each 3 parking spaces, 1 tree for each 30 feet of interior property line, 1 tree for each 30 feet of building subject to public view, and slope planting requirements) a significant number of tree plantings are required for the project site, and the Landscape Plan proposes planting trees throughout the project site to address this requirement. At the request of property owners to the north, a condition of approval has been included that required tree plantings, in size, species, and placement, do not impact views to the south. J. Neighborhood Meetings: Two neighborhood meetings were conducted to gather input and comments from the owners of the surrounding properties located within 660 feet of the 034 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT P163 DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, AND DRC2012-00673— PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 10 project site. These meetings were held at the Sycamore Inn on May 9, 2016 and February 1, 2017. Approximately 30 property owners attended the first meeting and approximately 35 property owners attended the second meeting. Similar questions were raised at both meetings and included questions regarding project access, parking, drainage, grading and site improvements, timing of construction, etc. The applicant provided an overview of the project and informed the residents of the project access from Foothill Boulevard, on-site parking for residents and guests,drainage improvements(for on-site and off-site improvements)proposed grading and slope design,overall site design and proposed improvements, the anticipated construction schedule, and how the project was designed to provide privacy to adjacent residences. Due to the time that has lapsed since the last Neighborhood Meeting, and to update the community, at the request of staff the applicant conducted a third Neighborhood meeting at Lions Center East on August 17, 2017. As this staff report was completed prior to the meeting staff will provide a summary of the meeting in the oral presentation to the Planning Commission. K. Design Review Committee: The project was reviewed by the Design Review Committee (Macias,Wimberly, and Granger) on December 20, 2016(Exhibit N). No major issues were discussed in the ❑RC Comments; however, several minor issues were addressed by the Committee and include: 1) provide additional parking spaces in the vicinity of the livelwork units to ensure adequate parking is available for commercial uses; 2) provide a pedestrian connection to the Pacific Electric Trail along the east side of the project site; 3) provide additional landscaping adjacent to the project perimeter wall to the northwest of the Sycamore Inn; 4) utilize a tree species that protects the views of the homeowners living north of the project site; and 5) host an additional Neighborhood Meeting prior to scheduling i the project for Planning Commission consideration. The first 4 items above were incorporated into the Conditions of Approval, the Neighborhood Meeting items were addressed in the discussion above. The Committee then recommended approval of the project to the Planning Commission. The Committee's recommendations have been incorporated in the Resolution of Approval, L. Senate Bill 18 and Assembly Bill 52 Compliance: As required by Senate Bill 18 (SB 18),the City submitted Tribal Consultation Requests for General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206 to the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, the San Manual Band of Mission Indians, the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians — Kizh Nation, the Morong❑ Band of Mission Indians, the Serrano Nation of Mission Indians, the GabrielenolTongva Nation, the GabrielenolTongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians, and the San Fernando Band of Mission Indians. The notices were mailed on July 6, 2016 and provided for a 90-day comment period ending on October 4, 2016. Of the 8 tribes who were notified, none submitted a response requesting consultation during the notification period. As required by Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52), the City submitted Tribal Consultation Requests to the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, the San Manual Band of Mission Indians, the San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians, and the Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians following a completeness determination for Design Review DRC2012-00672. The notices were mailed: on February 16, 2017 and provided for a 30-day comment period ending on 035 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT P1 B4 DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M,,DRC2012-'00672, DRC2016-00207, AND DRC2012=00673— PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 11 March 20, 2017. No responses were received during this notification period; however., the San Manual Band of Mission Indians did respond on April 7, 2017 requesting consultation. Although the consultation request by the San Manual Band of Mission Indians was received after the end of the consultation period the City did honor their request and include their comments in the proposed mitigation measures. An additional notice was provided to the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians — Kizh Nation on May 17, 2017 following their AB 52 noticing request. On May 25, 2017 the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians — Kizh Nation responded with a request for consultation and their comments are included in the proposed mitigation measures. Should any undocumented archaeological or cultural resources be discovered during ground disturbing activities, adherence to the proposed mitigation- measures will ensure that all impacts will be less than significant. M. Environmental Assessment: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, City staff prepared an Initial Study(IS) of the potential environmental effects of the project (Exhibit P). Based on the findings contained in that iS, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures related to aesthetics, agricultural resources, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hydrology and water quality, noise, 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 (MND) was prepared and was circulated on July 3, 2017. A comment letter (Exhibit R) was received from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW)on July 27, 2017 in response to the circulated ISIMND. The only comment CDFW had was in relation to the possible Jurisdictional Waters on. the project site. The applicant and their biologists prepared a Jurisdictional Delineation to address CDFW's comments. The Jurisdictional Delineation determined that jurisdictional waters were not present on the project site, but recommended compliance with the CDFW recommended mitigation .measure prior to issuance of any grading permit. The Biological Resources section of the ISIMND, was revised to include a mitigation measure requiring the applicant to provide proof to the City that the Streambed Alteration Agreement (1602 Agreement) process has been concluded. i According to CEQA Section 15073.5(a), recirculation of a negative declaration is required priorto its adoption when it has been substantially revised after public notice of its availability has been'given pursuant to Section 15072. Furthermore, CEQA Section 15073.5(b) states, "a "substantial revision' of the negative declaration shall mean: (1) a new avoidable significant effect is:Identified and mitigation measure or project revisions must be added in order to reduce the effect to insignificance, or (2) the lead agency determines that the proposed mitigation measures or project revisions will not reduce potential effects to less than significance and new measures or revisions must be required." Here, either the CDFW will determine that notification under Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code is required for the project, ❑r they will require the applicant obtain a Streambed Alteration Agreement. The ISIMND was revised to include a discussion of the Jurisdictional Delineation for the project site and a mitigation measure requiring a Streambed Alteration Agreement was added to the MN❑ and the project conditions of approval. The addition of a condition of approval requiring a Streambed Alteration Agreement is not considered substantial i 036 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT P165 ❑RC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, AND DRC2012-00673— PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 12 evidence in light of the whole record that cannot be mitigated. Therefore, the Streambed Alteration Agreement mitigation measure is not a substantial revision to the MND, and recirculation of the MND is not required. 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. The overall project, during construction may increase construction-related employment and, following its completion, will increase employment due to new industrial 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 the employees and customer patronage of local businesses. 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. The proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent with the General Plan Public Health and Safety element and its policies related to hillside development. The proposed General Plan Amendment will not preclude the continued enforcement of the Hillside Development Guidelines applicable to development of property with slope conditions. The proposed project is in a developed area with similar hillsidelslope conditions that will not be impacted by the project. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan as it identifies existing slope conditions and how the project integrates those conditions into its design, and proposed project is designed to minimize any impact to surrounding hillside developments. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were maned to all property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site. One letter from Mr. Hank Stoy, a resident of the Red Hill area, was received in response to these public notifications. During the public comment period of the August 9, 2017 meeting, Mr. Stoy expressed concern regarding notification to the other residents of the continued hearing to the August 23, 2017 meeting date. In response, staff prepared and mailed a courtesy notice of the continued hearing for the August 23rd meeting. The mailing notice was incorporated with a notice announcing the Neighborhood Meeting scheduled for August 17, 2017. In addition to the courtesy notice, a newspaper advertisement was published on August 14, 2017 in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin and the project site was re-posted_ 037 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT P1 fi6 DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, ❑RC2012-00672, ❑RC2016-00207, AND DRC2012-00673— PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 13 EXHIBITS: Exhibit A - Planning Commission Staff Report, dated August 9, 2017 Exhibit B - General Plan Table LU-19 Slope Development Guidelines Exhibit C - Development Code Chapter 17.52 Hillside Development Exhibit D - Site Utilization Plan Exhibit E - Site Plan Exhibit F - Illustrative Site Plan Exhibit G- - Parking Study Exhibit, Exhibit.H - Tentative Tract Map Modification16605 Exhibit 1 - Conceptual Grading Plan Exhibit J - Existing Slope Analysis Exhibit K - Fire Access Plan Exhibit L - Conceptual Landscape Plan Exhibit M - Floor Plans and Elevations Exhibit N - Design Review Committee Comments and Action Agenda, December 20, 2107 Exhibit O - Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration with a location map Exhibit P - Initial Study (Parts 1, 11 & 111) Exhibit Q - Mitigation Monitoring Program Exhibit R - California Department of Fish and Wildlife letter dated July 27, 2017 Exhibit S - Hank Stoy letter-dated August 1, 2017 Draft Resolution Recommending Approval of General Plan Amendment DR02016-00206 Draft Resolution of Approval for Tentative Tract Map Modification SUBTT16605M Draft Resolution of Approval for Design Review DRC2012-00672 Draft Resolution-of Approval for Variance DRC2016-00207 Draft Resolution of Approval for Tree.Removal Permit DRC2012-00673 CB:TGIIs 038 P167 hCITY OF RANCHO STAFF REPORT DATE: August 9, 2017 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Candyce Burnett, City Planner;_ INITIATED BY: Tom Grahn, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2016-00206 - PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL. LLC - A request to amend tables and text. including clarifying text as necessary, in the General Plan to allow the development of land that contains slopes of 30 percent or greater- Related files. Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605M, Design Review DRC2012- 00672. Variance DRC2016-00207. and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. This application will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP MODIFICATION SUBTT16605M - PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL. LLC - A request subdivide 24.19 acres into 6 parcels for the development of 175 condominium units in the Mixed Use (MU) District located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard. between Red Hill Country Club Drive and Pacific Electric Trail Right-of-Way, 207-101-13 17. 24, 25, 31 34, and 41 and 207-112-09 and 10. Related Files- General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206, Design Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW ❑RC2012-00672 - PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL. LLC - A request to develop 175 attached condominium units on 24-19 acres of land in Mixed Use (MU) District. located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trail Right-of-Way: APN: 207-101-13. 17. 24. 25, 31. 34. and 41 and 207-112-09 and 10. Related Files: General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206. Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605M, Variance DRC2016- 00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673- Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VARIANCE DRC2016-00207 - PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL- LLC - A request to exceed the 30 foot building envelop established by Development Code Section 17.122.020.D.1.e.(i and ii) for the develop 175 attached condominium units on 24.19 acres of land in the Mixed Use (MU) District. located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard- between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trail Right-of-Way. APN: 207-101-13, 17, 24, 25. 31, 34, and 41 and 207-112-09 and 10. Related EXHIBIT A 039 PLANNING CONIMISSION STAFF REPORT ❑RC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, AND ORC2012-00673— PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, Ll_C P168 August 9, 2017 Page 2 Files: General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605M, Design Review ❑RC2012-00672, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012•-00673. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT - DRC2012-00673 - PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC - A request to remove 188 trees associated with the proposed development of 175 attached condominium units on 24.19 acres of land in Mixed Use (MU) District, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trail Right-of-Way;APN: 207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 207-112-09 and 10, Related Flies: General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT15605M, Design Review DRC2012-00672, and Variance DRC2016-00207. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206, Tentative Tract Map Modification SUBTT16605M, Design Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673 be continued to an unspecified date. The project applications will be re-advertised, noticed, and posted. CB:TGIIs 040 P'169 Tahi.e LU-19: Slope Development Guidelines 5 or less This is not a hillside condition- Grading with conventional, fully padded lots and terracing is acceptable. 5 to 7.9 Development with grading is permitted in this zone, but existing landforms must retain their natural character- Padded building sites are permitted, however, techniques such as contour grading, combined slopes, limited cut and fill, and split level architecture, or padding for the structures only, may be required to reduce grading- When in conjunction with the techniques described above, and for a project within a master plan which includes special design features such as a golf course, extensive open space, or significant use of green belts or paseos, the Planning Commission may consider the use of mass grading techniques adjacent to these special design features as partial compliance with this standard. 8 to 14.9 This is a hillside condition. Special hillside architectural and design techniques that minimize grading are required in this zone- Architectural prototypes are expected to conform to the natural landform by using techniques such as split level foundations of greater than 18 inches, stem wails, stacking and clustering- In conjunction with the alternative techniques described above, and for a project within a master plan which includes special design features such as a golf course, extensive open space or significant use of green belts ar paseos, the Planning Commission may consider padded building sites adjacent to those special features when it is found that said grading creates a better relationship between that special design feature and the adjacent lots. 15 to 29.9 Development within this zone is limited to no more than the less visually prominent slopes, and then only where it can be shown that safety, environmental and aesthetic impacts can be minimized. Use of larger lots, variable setbacks and variable building structural techniques such as stepped, or pole foundations are expected. Structures shall blend with the natural environment through their shape, materials, and colors- Impact of traffic and roadways is to be minimized by following natural contours,or using grade separations. 30 and over This is an excessive slope condition and development is prohibited. The vision for the Hillside Focus Area includes: ■ Limit development to densities that do not exceed the capacity of the City to provide public services and adequate public safety or the capacity of the land; in particular, the City's ability to protect any new development from wildland and fires is a significant concern • Protect visually prominent natural landforms and other sensitive land resources • Protect natural resources and sensitive habitat ■ Provide opportunities to experience natural habitats through education programs for students and trail extensions • Maintain a natural "visual frame"for the northern edge of the City Managing Land Use, Community Design, and Historic Resources RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN 1LU_47 EXHIBIT B 041 Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Article IV, Chapter 17.52 P170 Chapter 17.52 Hillside Development Sections: Section 17,52.010 Purpose and Applicability..................................................................17.52-1 Section 17.52.020 Establishment of Slope Zoning Limitations........................................17.52-1 Section 17.52.030 Density Limitations............................................................................17.52-2 Section 17.62.040 Transfer of Development Credits.......................................................17.52-3 Section 17.52.050 Transfer Process and Provisions.......................................................17.52-3 Section 17.52.010 Purpose and Applicability The purpose of this Chapter is to categorize hillsides into five slope categories and establish limits on land use density.Additional design standards and guidelines are provided in Article VI (Design Standards and Guidelines). The development and density Iimits established in this Chapter apply based on the location of property with five established slope zones (Section 17.52.020). Section 17.52.020 Establishment of Slope Zoning Limitations All property within Rancho Cucamonga can be categorized into one of the following slope zones. Regulations apply as indicated. A. Zone 1 (5% natural slope or less). This is not a hillside condition. Grading with conventional fully padded lots and terracing is acceptable. B. Slope Zone 2 (5% to 7.99% slope). Development with grading is permitted in this zone, but existing landforms must retain their natural character. Padded building sites are permitted; however, techniques such as contour grading,combined slopes, limited cut and fill, and split-level architectural prototypes, or padding for the structures only, may be required to reduce grading. C. Slope Zone 3 (8% to 14.9% slope). This is a hillside condition. Special hillside architectural and design techniques [see Article V11 (Design Standards and Guidelines)] that minimize grading are required in this zone. Architectural prototypes are expected to conform to the natural landform by using techniques such as split- level foundations of greater than eighteen inches (18"), stem walls, stacking, and clustering. D. Slope Zone 4 (15% to 29.9%). Development within this zone is limited to no more than the less visually prominent slopes and then only where it can be shown that safety, environmental, and aesthetic impacts can be minimized. The use of larger lots, variable setbacks, and variable building structural techniques such as stepped or pole foundations are expected. Structures shall blend with the natural environment through their shape, materials, and colors. Impact of traffic and roadways is to be minimized ` by following natural contours or using grade separations. f E. Slope Zone 5 (30% and over).This is an excessive slope condition and development is prohibited, unless ail the following are satisfied: (i) the property is located south of Banyan Street; (ii) at least seventy-five percent (75%) of the-lots or parcels that are the subject of the development application are surrounded by lots or parcels improved with structures; (ill) the proposed project is determined to appropriately address slope 17.52-1 Qcf /1-7 EXHIBIT B 042 Article 1V, Chapter 17.52 Rancho Cucarnorfga Development Code P171 stability and other geological factors of the site and (iv) vegetation fuel management for wildfire protection can be achieved and maintained. Section 17.52.030 Density Limitations This Section correlates the steepness of the terrain with limitations on development intensity.The total allowable residential dwelling units shall be calculated based on the total (buildable) land, area within each slope category multiplied by the capacity factor for each to the slope category. A. Using the Land Capacity Schedule. Table 17.52.030-1 (Land Capacity Schedule) converts the amount of gross site acres into the amount of net buildable acres based on slope measurement. TABLE 17.52.030-1 LAND CAPACITY SCHEDULE Arras of Land � Adjusted Net Buildable Slope Measurement (Gross) Ca acty Ratio Area(Acres xCa pacity Ratio) Linder 10% A 1.000 Ax 10-14.9% B 0.750 Bx 1 5--19.9% C 0.500 Cx 20-24.9% ❑ 0.250 ❑x 25--29.9% E 0.025 Ex +30% F I 0.000 Fx Total (Ax+Bx+Cx+Dx+Ex+Fx) B. Calculating Permitted Units. The maximum number of dwelling units that may be permitted in a proposed development shall be determined by multiplying the total adjusted net buildable area (Ax+Bx+Cx+Dx+Ex+Fx) above by the permitted number of allowed units per acre according to the zoning district. C. Exceptions.The following land areas, meeting any or all of the following criteria,shall not be included in the calculation of total allowable dwelling units: 1. All land: areas, regardless of slope, which will be subject to inundation during a 100-year storm after development has occurred. 2. All land which is in a geologic hazard zone, as defined in the Public Health and Safety Chapter of the General Plan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and-for which no feasible mitigation measures are proposed. 3. All land area which lies within a federally recognized blue line stream or contains significant riparian or streambed environs. 4. All the following are satisfied: (i)the property is located south of Banyan Street; (F) at least seventy-five percent(75%)of the lots or parcels that are the subject of the development application are surrounded by lots or parcels improved with 17.52-2 043 Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Article IV, Chapter 17A2 P172 structures; (111) the proposed project is determined to appropriately address slope stability and other geological factors of the site; and (iv) vegetation fuel management for wildfire protection can be achieved and maintained. Section 17.52.040 Transfer of Development Credits A development credit is a potential entitlement to construct one dwelling in a designated cluster area,which can only be exercised when the development credit has been transferred pursuant to the provisions of this Section from a donor to a receiver parcel and other requirements of law are fulfilled. A. Transfer Process.The allocation of dwelling units may be transferred from one parcel (donor)to another parcel (receiver) within a project site, or from a project site (donor) to adjacent properties (receiver), if conditions are applicable, when the development I of the subject site would cause adverse impacts. The development per donor sitelparcel shall be calculated according to Table 17.52,030-1 (Land Capacity Schedule) and the result transferred to a predetermined receiver site/parcel. B. Development Agreement Required. The transfer of development credits is subject to a Development Agreement and/or any other appropriate legal agreement. The application shall designate both the donor and receiver parcels as part of the subject property. The Development Agreement, or any other appropriate agreement, shall be used to ensure the appropriate legal direction for completion of specific conditions and encourages public and private partnership. C. Planning Commission Authority. Development credits may be authorized when the Planning Commission finds that the receiver parcel has sufficient area to accommodate development otherwise permitted under City development districts plus the development credits to be transferred and that such total development meets all of the applicable requirements of the City's General Plan and all provisions of this Section. Section 17.52.050 Transfer Process and Provisions A. When development credits are transferred, all such credits are thereafter depleted with regard to the donor parcel. Excess development credits of that donor parcel, which are not initially transferred to a receiver parcel, may be subsequently transferred to another receiver parcel in accordance with the provisions of this Section. B. The number of development credits which may be transferred shall not exceed the number of dwelling units determined for the donor parcel through applying established adjusted net buildable area from the land capacity schedule and through preliminary site review to determine the actual number of units which could be developed on the donor.parcel, subject to provisions contained within this Section. C. Approval of development credit transfers must be based on findings that this procedure is consistent with the General Plan and provides for the long-term maintenance of the, property as open space.Analysis of the eventual maintenance of the open space shall be based upon the City's estimated annual cost for maintenance and liability for the land and for provisions thereof. 17.52-3 044 m X SITE UTILIZATION PLAN C 16, '0. FESDRM4L "p Noy- --77 .89 ODURS ff ,T/11 " D p r a CLUB • 1 4-. lu 19 Z23-Ki-3 A! j % V'.�p im .i, Rr�x - -- ',:_-.1 "7.. �. It P®r V, .11% 1 z f7 4• qb) V, Llr 37 % A -- W— q W--v �Ax r FOOTHILL BLVD,SAN INO ROAD- 7— REZ;�L < CfFrEl WtP 0 0 Mli p atop, ri p p N CD -p� cn SUSM60!1 ORC2012.006ni COU NTY OF SAN BE RMALRO INQ— PAallC FTE UT I LIZATIC N PLAN RANCHO CtJCAV.Oh GAL CA TETnTALTWE TRACT htkP NO.I SITE PLAN J . ' �' m n �� � IIPrI �. i�® c. "'• rY� -:�_�u_S..—.�L�� .�..1:�__�i fr_.,�•�: y I -- � � ,l ,�� .►F'' _ ,J _ �_. �•s,a ;�tiA �+� "� •a = .•1M1. .,f•� m � -.n- e� o o.� c a *���, �o.- ^'07 �.���° o.f - �. _ , 1 L r•1? .$f� ®*•. v,+•a gl n +n:- _ri"O B�7 •y c o,_ !o or'7 �n c*-^ c�%r,J :n n 9.�.� Y-.r,,,:T`.,_'�- .:� i r. _ :ii%`w t e m c... •c o !'1'®e� o® F3:n c� •o 0�"1�'9jo n�. .c•, i r` a '[ r...ru::l ., '=•s a�I���'n O'���dc s'✓31}y. o ti o.-r c` c- ��'o gri9�a c _ '�.� �` a" _m `` o•':� ,` a ;to >o -�C'o o. ,o s•�,..�o e�-��•:o - .��.�r ,� =) a- -o ' e' � -. .. � 1 °•. erYw STCM.IL71L'�N .. k-`. .f — 1C- ,.�. - -- tom_ � _ •A_ -�'C '0..� :i8�0. •�,. /� • -19 i SAN BORNARDINCI AD• r �`!q! .r-� O T r I.... -• '' ' it SRE SUMMARY; - .....-- , wn —.—..� r....nwwr.... ' •.n ww t[ .l'y w.'�•.., ra.,o:nrr •u.^G ie it en Q.we ��� BUL NO J JAAFM �"�•�••.••,, [wn men Yu v w{FM,ny rwl, —4Ye•e[ 7 rd rw 1Rf•N[Wq l�{• ! P � u•i...�.n•a[s mAaw.w wn wo-c x[9 wra¢1 r.wr wt � PAFKNC3 SPACE SUMMAAY� >---.---:- �a�•�� •• _ , Cn w a � y�l3n>I a rDs alarzoT2.aasra COUNTY OF SAT:VERNA.RDIND PAGFIC 5J.11Mli FD'J'IfILI,LLC �IIY�.w •wa�u,>.:�w� a SITE PL.:.rJ ?':+u wa"•i �.. SYCAMORE N--I a�rl�i• w] -•u wrc.w[e v�r.u e«.,,m.er- Y PANC HO CUCAMONGA.CA ��# - •W T FN PATIVE TRACT MAP NO,I Sws $ �[ M = I W � < ta ic A Pacific Summit Foothill, LLc Site Plan Illustrative V DAVI❑EVANG AND ASSOCIATES,IND L[M CHANG ROHLJNG 6ASSWATES LANGAN ENGINEERING&ENVIRLRgMFNTAL SERVlCE5 TRG L4NO•ING Sycamore Heights i V tit m x cws are It POOL AMA [ • roT •t 9rct LOT ,--Aw AREA �tUD .f'•sr�+bc-a'Z.--js...r::>' � H SPA L SAN BERNARf1INO RD � ,z �p O � f PARK rvc SPACZ SMAAAAY LECEND �I O A - CD SUBTT .. COUNTY OF SANBE kROeNO PARIG@1G E%MNTT .- •••.•.• SYCAMORE NEi2""5 _ KIVJCIIO CLUCAM0NGA TeW^T1YE TR►Cr MAP NO �- - - x _ -FEN-TA-FIVE TFiA(-,T MAP N(D.. 1E>E5Q5 U.uH 4 FOR CONaOMJNiUM PURPaSES � c<:)uNTY C>F= SAN B1=1=tN.v>91Dlrvo -_ vi Cl-Y OF F3ANCHO C JCl AMCDNGA. CA �..J REfl FULL COLfN'TRY CLUB Dmlvc-- J f • � ;�� Ye.191 Ltl in 1. It,� . ii tPy 1, 7 - —.— — _..r� -- -- -- �_ L_� v,�Fe.zw �" Frr k f• •_' Y �✓'n+ MIL'❑ 7 3 I LOT 4 nor wFEA SUNW RY- wl ws OIL %m n — f ���� III` [. ��.�..�,�.. .�... `� - _ tea,. —•--"�'. - I$'': I lM1 f f= �..ss.,rd:�.a r Om -•.—..--.—.�1_—.—.�-.—..L.—�.. � �'� � -t �•'�. '.+�__ . Car r rg•, —.Imo„..._...—._..—_. ',• ,r-_ SAN EERNAFIC7ING RC .._._._.�..--•--•--•� �LEGA4CESCRP7101� --•- �. .�..�._�.. ..�..— •--...,jV_.._ _ f � r .� au.n F M w,r uw w�w..�wan.s. .W1+•7...�:1' `, N.�a•.u�ggl n`:A5••Iry vayi iaaia�A�s�w.ii• � N• I _ -f / �uyx cdr ,K¢p�_am�Ndwd.�ii K.a�w eY. r 0 ]F NYwv v L�Vsy.HY[rr F..r ... :ruix H W FF.'r:,e...en r r u.•wr z A r�wi.�V'v�aw4��...�n.w k..�a rrwtr Si187T1GBON J.R•.n rN.nN! oRC2U72•W 6T2 t YE�O~�/+ IVe .W1 Y.i�uEiii�i'fa i!i eEN4iir.Yn.e .,.L.•v YrwW.d W ru.S Yw'IJrJ Ir - wrWJNrY OF c .F nI.ay rrwrrewr,� rLrrriak �$YlYT1TiEa SAN BERNARDINOIN ' w.�t En.v v+wn.F�"w•�.n. P1.GflC SJAY�ry'iDOiHLL L'C — .,,��w,.�.,,+, TENTAT]VE TRACT UAP 18865 e"y`du�aii,4xrd.e wFv.,Slr..r•nn•F .L.N.J., ---- - - _ "' SYCAMORE H EI OHTS a4NC HOC U CANUMOA CA .,.y w•a¢.c[�d,...F.•r-xw.wew w,-.Fr - wrl.........;,.....,..u w 7M-1 � FE IFitYS - - • I i � ... ,=..... --�-- '- -- -- --�-- __ _- -_^rr,_.�... s= __ __ Inc f •� ,�-J�' i LOT A '"• L O T 5 I L O T 6 �� 1...� •. r❑.� i LiLi r T `�] can ' 0 SVSTl O ➢RC7017 0W0=;72 COUNTY C F 5A N BERNARD INOMM TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 1 SODS P,rC,FlC$Ul,4diFO0IFpLL,U,: — _ ••••n•••••+� SYMWORZNE,C4lRS .,u x.... - .u. a.n.r.i. .•.~�_ RANCHO CUCAAAONGk CA -T%2 M � X a CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN " tSYCAMORE HEIGHTS ; �`,Y,; Fw1[i tiLm moray momsrJ RANCHO Cl1GAMONGA, CA r TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16605 9� J ire srwr`eiw�'��YM"•ip•a Kieiema wsr.:w�r:".i � � �I r'z-J. � ::"mn'o`.na"':'•`s.rdlyd...awcw�nr.�..�. •• f � _ L_T { `Yfequ�Wd:iaOR.l.sKaimuku..�m er'ua.u�n __ -�, r• ^� - � I r r.e.a.a...n..•cr..r.m."h' _�..a.�.,�...,.....�..,..,.k[...M....ti.,.a,a ��_ �mo�+�r ccva i `on.xiu oK1a�.a�oev,."�u10ewa. we`�.ra�ii'.a�`.°R�x�i.xird •'' �• •l� k _r // muff Mm=o a�w.y��..w.m..:a wa+.g wa..w..a.. � _ {• 4 P �� 4 F ��. -� � F•�•'.'.`r'u wa m.�Q��E:2�:�eg.m..a��...y.��.�.r \ d�_ t � �i�' �• � � � � .. `' �- a�,a. �.... a �wv awratiYa�u�i�uKu n�e"aivw.irR� u•iR "�I«ITN i _-_ ••�'•��•��.- - _ r' - Msevm { Q [ml[f(w[M.rr.{{(Q}IVN6MGov�lii.elQi Iwi�m.[mY AIA.I[I• a- &- ------N-�f J' fop r -eum-u sf. ' °ew«�ie.�.as i�m:rn`t:m1Oiwmr'ti`..ro-a.'•w m`ma.w.e��awa I ~�`�~'����I _ .. _�� � _ ./• m"a.""u�'e`6.m.::s.'�i r"'r'dan.na`aww r..:a.c.... .�.,.�w�.r,...m�•..o..-w..o.�. y�r�`--- -EAST FOOTN7LL 1� �ar.'�.e�'.�ru.e.["`rr.�en"va"a rSe�"'r.raew.r...r...v.e —_.��--- i- �_�����_• ! •..,-�.�� - �.i nir�.ra�..r.•.a.r.s....�. LL INDEX MAP 1 I aKa.w.m.io wvo.[I�rl uHtwl�[`LYwlal i.Y�NW.K w '�Mrdfi t�a�•�oa�v�[mY�K K wm.o.r..m.au r••u .0 nluK��x� rwr�w.�s� y�vaf isyey�nee�/p9..Ia.Yi.rl.Cai.eM•ae..YmTI[Q.v wmS�.Y.i.an.wo�idw j YyMu�l�ee�n�ierro.�i.aev�[�mnvv �n"6.i%1.hO1LY.i 4n/tlfw""a r�i¢iRr>a�i r�xrrear �, ..r..e.aemm[a�vr orw ire vn jn.��Rala�[wt�[�.0 f vrCd YW Yr�[�an��Y.mii M� lara.rv� Yel•ut�a{�vrHA eax.XYa-rFx u'Fwati r.aav - vua � a wenr��.a.orarw.......,a..�aa..x•n Y.oa^. ..u" @ ..w." 1 �waa°wr'E•e�°�.cum[°'n.ri.~uK mnxrmnrm..uswc.� - �r ram...swim w� .a..n..�........w • A mwoarw"wwen+s■■.rrv•Wu. wsrtnw canna SHEETFC0' YQ� vmn a� ha V V•.�: f3A�OFv"r K•�m rw:mudcQ Y'�na e}i°..�.i"�ie�w•"i.or" �rL sKcr a-r .:i.ran[ M.N.e un'..'rMw.h Ar�fvn��no.efaw r�mear�.v[wrv.aRwly ry.wM.rwluq e[IY9 esi[ W.� m ' { .M l.wl.a.r.rw.q.Mu L[rK'p NN RWb1C.l..1R LF] [ ���ay,�y.• _ ..Y dol.I.I a'h WNr QY urc.e urn QNa PYSS-9[C>P551Qr OCR LmLLIiL`Sld ..ve NF Y T OG-f b.m acata �pvn C ula.rl[alR vp�r tl[1a.0 Rwtl.rwrW�Cf��Ylr�tv.e u e.. a• ...vui j ���a rq+raT�a I.e.v[ao¢w K•wxbi rw.ra. ry. �r .n 1R..c:eav .a�an...�n.de re r.aa esnw[w. qq i Wliq a WclaW'a.LKnM¢,[d41.r,.wlmMwe.rY..iv.[m.av _ is14'n. .}YS"Y4 v��rIYY�ti�ru nv�eY..nA t+•aa••.n wan b..rrew ry..o� t . ov Yy ��vaE•4+�YR. }�m•R3L nN�R Yy.Lil1�'JL ��lvp.ow<.0 .,q" aA.1[�cu•bus.�[Ow7•[��amlM4M.�IVC.Q.r/�sV1 .• 'rrlNq v.vlavo.aKvr�m.e cad aM1Anw • e. � K�i.we�.srw�i.uw..°.c e..°.°.a.ase• i i U7 SO:LSENGNEERI000LOG13T REVIEW rcnn«u.o-.,+•• ti.•Ix�nxi. ORC2'JT2.0 GG72 + � .•r.w..a•....n COUNTY OF SAN BERRARDINO - • LPNG Aa t'A im SUNIJR Froml .L LLC -—•- - car,. T � .tea wi CONGEP'RIAL GRAOIM1'G PLAN ' s�..aiO 0`w.•'�"...a"""`iw.swaYr..�w..w.a� •..,.�'�"`•e�whK..>"� r�z;rr nlr��[d.. �--. '� � aii.,+w Rmchr,Z r0;B SYCAMOR@HFiGH rn a[.e...cRQQ a. v "i Tn•a. �,.,�,,.,.,..,. .ue.. vra CA Tt:NTATrv[TRn xNO.IrAm CG-1 pKa•6 rM� TM GMCCT •V • .Velar I MEW e r•r FpMa Tu I 'III l pc. I f mr.r.ns r•os, on rae -� P ~� ALLEY GfEYE'A' - l'YPICAL - kn TYPIC AM" i TYPICAL CRM4ACE CE A L O-pu2x BIPI`*x%TYPE t fTh I -.f�J:..A fly..-wua-__"____� ` �• � .,x` diR �� �:�{�'- �_T v'{•; .•I •.• •C'�0.CaFi1YW1��- �'`:k.C:.L'44�i,'•:;�:?i}•.. w URVE•A' DETAL AT WEEP$CREED F .f vaw sc.:s a CTYF-] OK .r, e, re c ' i3 I'YPfCAL ALLEY T1IIIIfT� TYPICAL ORAINACE QETAL .r r c.. G-PLc-X B'�JQ TYPE @ oa g t 2—.orr— t .cn.1 sruc r.w ���ti •c ❑DEB• � ` I _ TYPICAL SECTION �} 1 •+3 �5• ;- •` 1 a y rr+ar I s - - -r"rc"A=Y -- r"�•"" °"•"•, TYPICAL DRIAMM DFrW -.,r.,Irrwn � � swt.rsrL.O; G C OWES' TYPICAL SE(MON I Ir:VW;:ATWl•j --- a rrt•MAL AIJAY TYPICAL.ORAIMAGE OETAL cn A- nN) ALLE!rG SECTl4N !1 — — - ��x s SUBTTIS6005 PRC2012-C 047: n COUNTY OF SAN SEFNYP.401NO PACIFIC 5LRI FIIPFWiHILL L LC — ,�,n„ CONCF1'I UAL GHAMW PLA T BYCAMOREHEIGNT9 vnrrae. r""ivw�w`-"wii 01•� „�,��....R„i��,� RAYCFIC CU_AfACNCLL CA TE N"AnVE TRACT V.4�YO-16 x CG•2 n—. St,EST P t] f ' _ � In � ry'.uhCi4.., ..+w - �•t .yna'��`' ... . r ' �uea.r.c ' '_}"y-S'• J .� j.,.a. -.`�' + `L�. � ';k -�-' I �::� •� ®r�V � �� �'� mn."°e�cwi"' a-•i� `� ^��� i- nr.r.jr _ r•i� iy -fit-• r' 7 - � - ._.. w•svu uu..x. � , '� _ � ie y,'�. r�� I, f t� •� ,�• `�i - _ � h. �•�I�, r.ern...wr�Mwr r � � .•�-. — _— i �.. � —_ti~ 'ill 1 � �L.",._r.i fti; ".o...n. LA ` ` u.�r.� C� �ll� �� •�a -�_+vrx,_. - w r:�a't L` wava•e er.0 • .� / •,,: . 4(lt tiiWi� L .r^wr'- ,..3l •.,,r�- ®' - 1 r. yh :_a��-.-- . . �. -•- rri/r �ItiY7 � � �r �'O _•mar.:, �;Y, .:•� t :.' I ^,•r•'. tr �.� �'•+ED 'S.I. �� SYCAUORE INN RESTAIL7RlY[ �� �� .vl"I�v.� _:{� .r'7 mil•. � , : � o-� a ' <4 .•I '•`�� ZTc r ORC2012.0067: rrnZI `,,,•- OOL'NTY C F SALN BE Rwc:ING � PACIRC SLUM fTFOOTHU,tlC .�.r . CONCEPTURLGRADINGPiAN •• `• RFNC O ICVC.HEc+6 C:A TENTATNE TRACT I.WP No.-.ms GG•3 GkA NIO SNECT 1 e W ,•" �J .., � � s ..•-'ram:'� ,. - � '.. �� [..al,.[. _ 1'.I v- =L �'�..•. hy-.� •• �.sa '�'-`,i?QRf S'E� =_L��,i •- 'C���---\w':' - �+i iib�,-xy�y_� �ti�� �n T I VI v L.. (;4 ry: I•i-.„y'I.._-�r;Ry,�. •Li; •rf:•ti �� �- 'G�lw� ? 'lw• - I�•=yh fi f.�� Y�. iCi — �i -- ...w.errs.w.r.w • `. •,,_r� .. ff V --_• I` f.�� ,7 ii•re ..� ` • i �v[1-wnYL ln.e iNi d,:i�ira_ `_�"��^7i. - -� l-y.•y _ �•�i J ....A u..or,r..a• Y � �- 'il�� J , LL Yuji� ��i.� U•a P'f°'[:., �. ,`S. >..�i: � y�ry .....°�'� m .;C! �y k�•� y '�'' �I�. 'i�51�� i.7!w rvYn f+•n r..iA �'` - - �- - m:-:J ' � •�'� t��' �� .F}� �� _•'�� '1` + �_;-Y�L...-;:� �� sir ..� E• _ -� •• � _ _ as • "' ....nwo,w Ij � ..I2 `,:� = '� s tip•- �-:�,,� - ;� �_' •1�' ®� - ��� T•. — ['� -�•��.®.[� �9� -�� . _......,� �-'.T .lam � }i''s - ;�� - •I'I- - - .E i., —_'.� Y��- .F'x v _ '` —�— wr.l�lel.rf„a •_A "'"� _ ,t�rt{ a�d�� �� Q n.�5 �i NI .S_L -- r�-•� ® '_ .....o�..a ".t V l {bt bifiv m I�..ve rf M• : r: tl�i • I I Ira f`I _.CIiC{(�- ••�;I �I� --,�--_ J k _•�' ��i_ _ •�.�.� _-Ri �:. •` � .'�.1..! �, 4 (!T) ED ems. tA 61 '�* 3 -I of �.a , � •�.,;�• .,; m i !•�m �ti 'r F ���� *S w �} ® "a , LF -��..++'•�S n Wort�u[�" :� a � - � �`"°'.. 4� E. F00THI.LL BLVD CD wnrAaWr[r _."�rl [ COUNTY OF 9A:V k3'-�i[Vr�R 71NO FACI:ICStJN&IRPCC7MLL•LLC - - YYYIII���eeewww EI r...n,lrlw CUNCEPYUAL.GRADING P[-AN� _ �""� rdr� SYCA•/DILL=MEIGIiTS A•��Je[lr+.{ fM�.[ RANCFrO CUC.LN6NCF�CA 7V TENTATIVE TRACT MAP RC 1scos GG4 •'^6'O0 GFFuflvp Sf[tE'r 1 . P'183 LIYCH LA r •s�-_kip- 4 iac '•wa::-:si:'C_..4 .t.f"�.: mow,. ;�"L+•_rw,n" �r�li - fi 1 r�iygti�pa.,rr�V�':�� :r .f.rw. '.��.�r }p •rya-� y _ {Ar", 'L F '�3 xirriig =c• i w r_ ]'I'��`•i �' � dddl{I- I A1.L�L�"=�'P:�• lfsl l I �'"� I� L� r-.r � ,��1�,',''. }l-1;�9 -•IFar_ ah'�{�3t1 � � X _.-.. Sk AVE } •y"� j:iZ-•i.-?a....��;t7Ti� Mif.-..'.T rL:Mill T it 1 ; � 1'' ,• - - cif � � '� y { ; ."-',. yZ 7. NP ip 7-4 Pn ,Us all I 3 r� -Lr.. \ , '•� ,� '.s' is � r ' a ..� r� a• �y �s '\ - � G a g � . e � ; 4�- p - ; •x� € 3 � � R EA f ' 1055 u 89s II SUP. ig Y n L Y� 1 i ! l i ' s •fit s R E RyyR r � y� tr � "• $ �ygr Y ] 7 SS Spe yi SIC Cgp gyf" 8 s - q\ �� �: a 1191, 2 z Ei ° g `d ¢ 7—- I. z z w aAF u❑ �, '�`, r 1 3 No 5' p v 1 ���.�, ♦ Y,�la�r�t 1 LQ � L gsi '�•. ., I '�N' I P' �� tl E K F r IN •• / _•��.-.c '�' HAY 71e3 :1 • i � � :!i �wlk•lls Yy=ti.:l-.-U- _ r 1-�"� 1 •FI ,� �r1 V' �• -+ - � _ 5'�;�:sf.y`��b f+�,� � _ �-�z•.-i'y'"'_`.,a.r.[�'z'�s-�.�+;:ire r.. y.�f+�'�, �i 6r '! I '• I � IZ�•i3^ T� :t-•:`�:'r�la+ i 1 'n•• ,�i�. �eq•^:,.':`r'g � �4 � 1�»�• i __Y �,I- 056 Arofile View of Bench Trial Alignment Scale-.Vert,1'=4' PROFILE NEW: SECTION J-J sco'ei Vert. V- Z. Herz. 1•= 4n' I 1.Wi 11 �$ n •dfv , r l .� �'I _ II ave � 4 �tT�T �' 2 eA1 1 r ; L .6 4 . 1 I. � r��`,r...� • 1p P.Aai.'"" -i.00 OeM • •_^_•1 7� � � ]WQ � IHq I PROFILE VIEW: 5=CTI0N K--K PROFILE VIEW: SECt1ON M-M Scale: ver:- l 20' , .Srale: Vert t'. 26' Hors 1'= 40' - Harz. 1"= 40' s .e 1. •i 7 y ! .wY I i !. i I ,>, i ' i •�' � I � � � I r• I .° is. ' i � F� r ` II p momwF04 ,e 71 F f� 'it I ° •- I .ram ' - 1} a. r t. v nm ! ;u F •ry.:lw1 l 1�� °t e , Ye`t. •=Qa _ i i �• +I } 'i ice! n° I � I 1 =ue L t„1 .y i = :f I 1•°vI L , ! I NQQ p -4 SuaTT1 a805 oacx07a-0ucr_� —M1M—, Mi+an � COL'SITy CF$AN RHARDJNOT ^"'•� "' CCNCEPTLIALGRA OIN6 PLAN PACIFIC 511ltNRFOCTNIL!,LlC - ram.rw S'fCAMOFE HEIGHTS RAKM r,%C:OJONOA,CA TE NTATIYE TRACT AfAP NO-IE8p5 CG•J•- ."Ax 7 R,vL FW.rLE.wp8ECTIOrvS x IJ tD GC r a co ;�� 1 �j:� I„ I 1 ��s } ' {i� I � �.i .;�„"p"' = : , �'1� j •i�! , -�.: .:. �� # � �' � } I,bM � 1 � 1 �. _ ,T�• � � I. i � � � j � i I p � i � i .� � { i" {'� ..� I I � + n ~ 71 1 .'. � � �.--���.{ µ;� i_ ...� � "'"; �~ I� I r I i } I 1 ' I i�aroc.aw a•r •�i• 'I , � } ! "i � f ,� =i-1—�_�:�•� �~EJ ' t yw. �' � I ; I - i i t I 1 1^I } - -s. � � I•'yy I - � r , r 1 � a r � i f F I � � "�� uw � - i � i S , } I. I • I " " r l ' r ' j l r 1 i 1 I � . I . 1 1 = 1 _ I l j � � rr°. r: I •t I I ! I 1 , ; I r _ 1 r � � � 1 ,,,Le uw wa, y m ..,n tr.w •v°o 1,'(A I m I°. N a• rl.m p.m u m a• SC-CTION'A-A' o4 1•-r rnY r.tr r In, ,w°: ;,; i 1 •�� — r. F ,�, 1 : _----�� --h-i��I �� 1 ' I I ,Nt.a,��a I� , � �� I 'I " i }r�I � I � ' � ==k' i P i• � s � � 1 I r I I I E I � I �='j� `j—`_—�'— i .r I r,. am rm >,•n alu rm t.m SECTION'A-A' 7VA' Inr-r..r mr r.e �s' � �,�; .� ' .....;�'�.`• ,s .I I r : I .F � 4 ' I .I � � r l r I -� 1 1 � i >.° fr-� /! I` e 11 _ i _+I• -- I I 1�r��T—���,r.:`�_ 't--�1�� I 'b°.. �""_-.'w.w n.a. tf as w _T'�'.die.r--•---•--��---•--'�-�-�Wf�me KEY MAP All r-w sw]r.-rr2--' noe=Inc E' i• "r—�` �. r i� • { I � i 1 1 f Iasi] ' .. m tt.n •e•n , m N.x Ir n wtc r..r Imc rw BUS 771 ul)C5 ORC20,2.001:7f ewr,ux•In. COUNTY OF 8AN 9ERNAROIR'O CV WE PTLIA,GFiAp IRG PLANS P,'.C.FIC SIIYLIT FOOTMU.LLC — w•��•'•••°• xYCaMp,' n]s r.w M.1.o near +.w.Ae RHEIC°fii 1 ni.l�uu. r•vao wu x..n.wwa�w RMJ_MO CUCXMQNCA CA TE NTATIYE TRACT MkP NO.IMS CG-G �y caoswrecTfar]a sheer E 1, r " a — tr t be .-w iMm t•m tx•C• m t••m hOD �.m 1 i..r��yo.I� mree r-a i uA • u�- I l I� -•�I • I I • .r.0 "'ISSSi w.a.� .1� ,tau I� Ar r-Inn i ' 'mo SEC7ION'��_ iiL t'.0 f r u� �.:::� �, � '� � .....�•� �• I�� I �' Ida 1 r { j ..�e:a � � � ;"o'f' I 1 � a�aYi.�!� �n" J"rw.� µ'11 �I ,� I iia�-Pid I i p•! I ! Iwo m. I Iji en•�l J ..i+ � Jill� I I ' �•'� .n �aa» w.m •� '~k � Y � � I r. m.n •t w ti m N R 82CT10N'H-H ,A I.11-Ic SU8TT76GR:. mu r-v oRcxols-0oEr:l °-•'�x ^• N. . COUNTY OF SAN sEPEN.&.9 0INO I ipAcl,IC SLTmkg iOMGLL.LLC rw.uln nm WNCEPTUAL GRAE)LNG PLANS I • sir x Nam.`_>� m. — TW SYCAVORE MEIOKfS nt++ `irN..•....1tl7 nsrno ven.a cn.rsv.v ..M,� RANCHO CUCAN ONO#,CA ,•r _ • w�.ra TENTATYE TRACT MAP WO.IC,5" CG•7 �yy,vs CR098.9QCTIOk9 StQ[ST } y 1 PI88 Al l 3�wHY5E H"a5 2. 3 6PK66� 66��$ �6�SE S"sb HE pp ° 060 F F f r ' �u]v t_ , ! gr I mere � `• I � � ,.�1;.3 1 I i :< � 1 ',� ° , I '>'° � f .� { �� t i ! r_ '- F—� I —I-�-- - .r�.n�.e 4 j f .. � -� 7 y� � I � { •F ' #]"'tl+or"a.. •me -DRVE'A' • .rar r..r 10 i I I I f I i i f �'� i 1`,I I ' { 4 I ' • � ' �• � � F F , � ul i L � j p � , • � wi++iF,� tMYC "ea I xnmwvYf - i IN ;p dffiE'A•FROPLE k. 1 I r 1 Y. N. i In r I 1 i ;no IL O I i ram .• i.v.7 j i c� KEY P scYc'"3vP suarTiurn:' osC=12-ucRr_ •••a-^"^" — __ COUNTY OF SAN BERNARPINO ii PAC.FIC SEISP.7T FOOTF�I-LC _ _ �n....um I:Ury CE?L'TLlAi"GRAnI�G PLAN n:�..+��w r�x. — na SYCAN[IRE ME.'OHis e.nrnu. RANCHO CVCah°ONC.L CA -- TF71YAT1V5 TR{VCT hL4P pp 1G6d5 CCi•� N ^ '❑ a Qd`$ `LL ux ' .T Bill Uj TF 8�86�•8dededbb dlbbs+lbb + i i 1 1 .•...Y mil. _ J- ., _y� d ii ia_•��j�lx£�Jw�ie1z�4�i?':PS R� ' I 062 1-11 x EXISTING SLOPE ANALYSIS SYCAMORE HEIGHTS RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CA �W it rill - OWN Fi �. 44 _AAA It o ' 1 IAKK 1115E i-.II •i :.kL � wns rilr TAFAC o"'.. Ss■■ i N ii3Ca4eI�TT751111171111 .T FE i L 8�86�•8dededbb dlbbs+lbb i i i 1 1 .•...Y mil. _ J- ., _y� d ii ia_•��j�lx£�Jw�ie1z�4�i?':PS R� ' I 064 1-11 x EXISTING SLOPE ANALYSIS SYCAMORE HEIGHTS RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CA �W it rill - OWN Fi �. 44 _AAA It o ' 1 IAKK 1115E i-.II •i :.kL I�NIN.0 VN Ii.• illy TAFAI AH"•.. . �. �, .� � / Ss■■ PI . , Xx r` 066 i a r` i a X = FIRE ACCESS FLAN f4up-11ML-C:P=JNTIZ1' rf-In"I]Tt_ LE19 lam; y� . '.-.,LI� t Ilk- ED OD OD � ; 1 �r�, ® -' 1.• ~FA 'I ���' - y __ v �� _- y �. ��" ��,-._�'���� � � � �ti• t r !l..a '� E 'F"c1 1E— 'l,. �s;fi� � -.11. �11..��; i Les,ErcD EYJSTNG SYCAMOFIE •.� 1 -,,— p r �1�1.TR�-,"jr-�. � ; J EJ�+ L r', ; w.M INhi RESTR!]RRh'r 1 93,a_ 1®-�• J� OD1 ,��1 0 F�— T.�-•� off! .,�,�. - �. r .. �, 11 , �_ ; is _, -----.�.��, �. __ � _�. ,n.,�'........., �I1 �t ifs `':• '� I � � ®=r� 'arm ®;� ��_ �VED .=... �•�• --_ L. •33 �i I [Q ' 'K' �L'�-� I ern I . � '�.' � '•�_ � ��— --`r�r—..ice —•tea __ _� i s.w ncrtn;aRniNv Rn 00 ! ! a s.J SlJ9ITlIN/::. GRC201241367t •,. •` COUNTY OF SAN BEHNARGIN 'PAZ FIC SJ IYI IT F03TKLL LL: ..a •..� ....ni w.•r FIRE ACCESS PLAN SYCAMCRS HEIGHTS .n+•.+ .ui.o-uw .r�..i...,.+s ev+.v-gnu �+•nw RANCHOCI1CAUGNGk A TETNTATIYETFtI,Ci AfAP NO-1E6 FA'T a•vro '" {VV��i I ' I I I jI . Y g C .i L L S C A R A V 8 is 7' ` ��—° � �-•` f�� � -��., ��-� ILA �_i�-�. .� � � �� f .. li•_.. ram--�;� li. O H4 C ram" bUlA,-r,I��N, ""''°i•""°" ' COIfNTY OF SAN SERNARDJN PAGFIC S-1.11,IRFd]1}7LL LLC FIRE ACCESS PLAN S'ICN.�CR=MOGFRB "`�••'��"' _ w.»u� ua r w....v.�.. r�:�n IU.NGF•0 CLGAN•CN 3"CA [STmTATIVE TRACT PAN h'Q 76F0 FPr� ` i[tlPy rr�..n 1 � 3. rn �C MEW 1' - i �-, - a :~ , - fl ° _�� 7- � . Qom- rr ' j .� •r. V •: till' "R � - '�-• '� b. IF- 10 i cry } ,w+ .;•;}'. .''41. �4i-' -�- rri =�'t- ,p' n � n {y yr p . •. 14 1 ram . r va>M:vc[ _,.c�er'K wuc rmb11�111L— _ £VYIINI YIR nr.�..•.w.c [ors�u.aEmm en.e'te•.nw��.�w nrt[1xcrlF CD r..w�• ��. 17 0 •+iti[er V , CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN f DAVld EVAN SYCAMORE HEIGHTS - - .$$o�AQVM4 , PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL LLC �.°°°'°'s"°cc PLAN 2 PLAN 3 PLAN 2 PLAN 3 Al- _ om Snap ---_ - - L 888111ttt �+[ DL't1i:G •v.w I o•.+.ea- ii f CN[81i fill i i r• I t ' I � r�vLv + Q %� DP . N.I. I.•Y.[.C, alYfyY ,. RTTC@e!1 13 t I mo' I i�1 '.THY-�IJ! IO � r: ^ � --- �-, ; •, or Hti '. - - nrLl[ev Q L.BA. -•LAMAY ` � Y�I F L/ •-e. ,y = I - � -- d 9 }},,�v �OPT. 9� I14 --t : f N•FR Q l__J - � ---- SI3'ClI&N � e � R _ IPLAN 1 LAN 2 �PI.AN 3 1 ' 2 cue C E 2-"R C D 2 CAR Dt CE ' a 1.T �r� DR. F. I }{1 u„ i N.LC, a .,..'PLAN 1 � � PLAN 1 `----------- l I SECOND FWaR FfRSI FLOOR LEGEND TYPE V-8 CONSTRUCTION R-2 OCCUPANCY P1Rn 1 1,206 SF Plan 2 1,540 SF Plan 3 1.701 SF Total 4,537 SF LOT COVERAGE 3,520 SF SYCAMORE HEIGHTS 2-STORY TRI-FLEX: BUILDING PLAN'.' Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC November lS.2016 LIP r} ' PLAN 2 PLAN 3 -------- ------- ------- --------------`. 9 P - ---------=---- - ------ -: i 1 � I 1 1 L:fs ROC=$LOPE 1 P (TYR v401 1 1 1 WW 1 1 1 1 1 I pp h 111 ' ! I P I 1 I t PLAN F anon rlarr '. r.V" I O V 7 N 2-STORY TRI-PLEX:BUILDING PLAN: SYCAMORE HEIGHTS A_1 Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC: v Novembvr 18,2016 L�t �F ❑❑ O v.eA.❑ 0 IIsFS e--� PLAN 1 IE _ :_ I � ° I ,! i E�•CAR CA GE� I M�r u. saw y b + jllaa. iu ' �i.i i r i i� i i ` me R 2 ._..... � aA.env,c •w'.�-0 wpti I.C. ' ❑ ; 16eia dr'.E�1 Wl9'�_ r xaa x •• ............ PLAN 1:SEC=FL17.OR J PLAN 1:FJWr FLOOR PI,A.ti:): MUM F1 OR 2rn,a ..air�.naA u ccccw R s e - 7Vsny � poY s• � a0e'bi. fC'li fr 11 - op STOOP r sroDP ---- gr3�rnr; R. ZI i o: °p a l_r x.r_. e g 1CRC11YY sc ,,.r.c. STUDY -� — Lolr % t'C LJLJ _ --- �sCllzN eA,a /l 0 - b -- o e 0 rr.rxe•• p,� u.e x. MAN 2:SECOND FIADR = PF.IN O:SECOND . — zKe w ra• + LAN 8 eu e w• c PLAN 3�I � 2 CABA E A SCAR�G6 1 r r � maw wlw 13R.a gC'•Ia+J' Y/ila or•#4i YRVA IraWp_CGr WII l _______ __7__ p L I ______—J Y pLLY ON 2:SECOND FLOOR Ru,ai PLAN 2. FSRSC FLOOR Ri.rx FLAN I: FIRCT FLOOR R NI at r'M 1 iCatL i•r.ny WNi '.r-G' ••VL r W•,w �j�f I R!*RWIe. a]f 5� 1/bi ILLCR C�51 SYCAMORE HEIGHT'S 2-STORY TRI-FLEX:UNIT PLAN' Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC Q November 18.2016 PLL•VATION N(YfCS L —m—h.F-T a - I J ,may:4wrttr to L7 - IJM1,Ycn-Y.L L:• .iTL:c4�C4�¢r.aGV�. Frx.�a�rac sMIL.cccv. I•� PJn�'l'TIP�E/p uy coo4 �� r r I• eanxu-cr '• .��. oil L] p.,,1-w rrx.a-w•-..:.,t'-,.M'LP • .L7i 4 �. y�- } y.s�]r � F:'. :I eaiti M..•.cn.n_ T` s �.• r"!�.2.- �� .i - i.•' ram.�^n-a�cn c't.:oJr�aa ea-.. ---•-�., � _ 1+- .I a�y.c..v-...•.yo..•, w:z ,r..�.,�..�..�.� ��L.'�ir� � F �: � l• { t.alwr.•' Ll -� ..,La � h I'd Front Elevation i 61- I • i Left Elevation- I '�'°"�' o 1 i-1 L- LJ - 4a.; L I_ LJ — 2-STORY TRIPLEX ELEVATIONS A Santa Earvarz SYCAMORE HEIGHTS �_1 Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC O Nv, er[I[cr I.znla [Al 0ldtiG Rol am 1 .5 J:i.1:�- 1 5.:;w,.I s7 1 � E .l 1 + --• ' f I 1 j I _ .rxm,o + 1 1 { I ! E v" ' !• i i ��,I s 1 el _� -1 i r 1 � •� I 1 � � I '`ro-.wan.� ,� I � I. I 1 i I K un: I '�� � � i � f � � , r N£�"r� �-1 , I•_^_'��_�_I'-i I ��•vy_ ' _� .�- .J � I-�'- I-.�_ _..._ !_�' .I�"j._,�_��. �v t j { + ` r � k I , I I t I" �• T .� t5o E r� 1 i OWE•C'pRome I.t4.t,•-w 1 C —'� _._�—. .�.•�_,_i z�,..��-fir�• '""'T�rs• �. I I j t�AP L--- �� I �-ywc+'•nc sl;Hrn erns I oF:cza+x-OOE7:I COU N[Y OF FAW 9ERNAA d I NO I PALi7[:SII61l.R�FDOTHI.1,tic _ •,,.,,rr.w C 0 MCFPT 11AL GI1AD--NG PLWN tj EYCMACAENF.IGKT.S .va++1a wx.rtr vn..w.a w•.Ne RANCHO CUCDNGq CA TE "M NTATIVE TRACT MAP w.166o1 CG•10 .—�� PROFkEs Sr,EST ,] v 1-11 x EXISTING SLOPE ANALYSIS SYCAMORE HEIGHTS RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CA �W it rill - OWN Fi �. 44 _AAA It o ' 1 4 w�rr 1HE SlU'E5 xf IBKK 1115E i-.II •1 :.kL::lilr. / �- �''•' th Ml$qk'f I - -�, -� OFF:i I Mil AWA . 1 5.:;w,.I s7 1 � E .l 1 + --• ' f I 1 j I _ .rxm,o + 1 1 { I ! E v" ' !• i i ��,I s 1 el _� -1 i r 1 � •� I 1 � � I '`ro-.wan.� ,� I � I. I 1 i I K un: I '�� � � i � f � � , r N£�"r� �-1 , I•_^_'��_�_I'-i I ��•vy_ ' _� .�- .J � I-�'- I-.�_ _..._ !_�' .I�"j._,�_��. �v t j { + ` r � k I , I I t I" �• T .� t5o E r� 1 i OWE•C'pRome I.t4.t,•-w 1 C —'� _._�—. .�.•�_,_i z�,..��-fir�• '""'T�rs• �. I I j t�AP L--- �� I �-ywc+'•nc sl;Hrn erns I oF:cza+x-OOE7:I COU N[Y OF FAW 9ERNAA d I NO I PALi7[:SII61l.R�FDOTHI.1,tic _ •,,.,,rr.w C 0 MCFPT 11AL GI1AD--NG PLWN tj EYCMACAENF.IGKT.S .va++1a wx.rtr vn..w.a w•.Ne RANCHO CUCDNGq CA TE "M NTATIVE TRACT MAP w.166o1 CG•10 .—�� PROFkEs Sr,EST ,] v 1-11 x EXISTING SLOPE ANALYSIS SYCAMORE HEIGHTS RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CA �W it C. rill - OWN Fi �. 44 _AAA It o ' 1 4 w�rr 0D 1HE SlU'E5 xf IBKK 1115E i-.II •1 :.kL AI k sLOl•,-: wk J R7 illy TAFAI AH"•.. . Ss�� I Mil AWA . 1 079 r` i a 1 : n 40 r` i a Orr AR f e.' X = FIRE ACCESS FLAN f4up-11ML-C:P=JNTIZ1' rf-In"I]Tt_ LE19 lam; y� . '.-.,LI� t Ilk- ED OD OD � ; 1 �r�, ® -' 1.• ~FA 'I ���' - y __ v �� _- y �. ��" ��,-._�'���� � � � �ti• t r !l..a '� E 'F"c1 1E— 'l,. �s;fi� � -.11. �11..��; i Les,ErcD EYJSTNG SYCAMOFIE •.� 1 -,,— p r �1�1.TR�-,"jr-�. � ; J EJ�+ L r', ; w.M INhi RESTR!]RRh'r 1 93,a_ 1®-�• J� OD1 ,��1 0 F�— T.�-•� off! .,�,�. - �. r .. �, 11 , �_ ; is _, -----.�.��, �. __ � _�. ,n.,�'........., �I1 �t ifs `':• '� I � � ®=r� 'arm ®;� ��_ �VED .=... �•�• --_ � L. •33 �i� I� [� ' '�'���L'�-��' I ern I . � '�.' � '•�_ � ��— --`r�r—..ice —•tea __ _� i s.w ncrtn;aRniNv Rn GRcxoT241367s�aos�_ •,. •` COUNTY OF SAN BEHNARGIN 'PAZ FIC SJ IYI IT F03TKLL LL: ..a •..� ....ni w.•r FIRE ACCESS PLAT. -- — - - SYCAMORE HEIGHTS r4jP wF• f .ui.o-uw .r�..i...,.+s ev+.v-ten u �+•nw RAHCHCCUCAUGHGA.CA a•vn r TETNTATIYETRACTAfAPNO-1EG(� Fa-T I ' I I I jI . Y g C A L L S C A R A V 8 is 7' ` ��—° � �-•` f�� � -��., ��-� ILA �_i�-�. .� � � �� f .. li•_.. ram--�;� li. O H4 Co sU 11TT7[RM 1 CRCsaiaoou?s ""''°i•""°" ' CoUnry OF SAN SERNARDJN PAGFIC S-1.11,IRFd]1}7LL LLC FIRE ACCESS PLAY Ih _ S'ICAM =MOGFRB "`�••'��"' _ w.»u� ua r w....v... r�:n IUNGhO CLGAN•CNQ A,CA [ETNTATIVE TRACT PAAP h'a 76@0 FA-2 rn �C MEOW r' - i �-, -ll - fl ° _69 7- � . Qom- rr 'b. IF i. .��•r. � � •: till' "R � - ... '�-• �'�� r�rs. r tws_ .. ❑• �� {y yI p . •. r ram . r va,M:vc[ �m.�.c wuc rmb11�111L— _ £VYWK YIR nr.�..•.w.c [ors�u.aEmm en.e'te•.w,�,.�w n[�nultt ..� swia!rp{wrs wii[[. � �rtom[ �- r O co CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN f aavla KvqN �± —ASSOCIATE SYCAMORE HEIGHTS PACIFIC SUMMIT FOC]THILL LLC �� a"_wo.e,six j m PLAN 2 PLAN 3 PLAN 2 PLAN 3 Al- _ om Snap ---_ - - L 888111ttt �+[ DL'r1i:G •v.w I o•.+.ea- ii f CNr81i fill i i r• I t ' I � r�vLv + Q %� DP . N.I. I.•Y.[.C, alYfyY ,. RTTC@e!1 13 t I mo' I '.THY-�IJ! IO � r: ^ � --- �-, ; •, or Hti '. - - nrLl[ev Q L.BA. -•LAMAY ` � Y�I F L/ •-e. ,y = I - � -- d 9 }},,�v �OPT. 9� I14 --t : f N•FR Q l__J - � ---- SI3'ClI&N � e � R _ IPLAN 1 LAN 2 �PI.AN 3 1 ' 2 cue C E 2-"R C D 2 CAR Dt CE ' a 1.T �r� DR. F. I }{1 u„ i N.LC, a .,..'PLAN 1 � � PLAN 1 `----------- l I SECOND FWaR FfRSI FLOOR LEGEND TYPE V-8 CONSTRUCTION R-2 OCCUPANCY P1Rn 1 1,206 8F Plan 2 1,540 SF Plan 3 1.701 SF Total 4,537 SF 000 LOT COVERAGE 3,520 SF A SYCAMORE HEIGHTS 2-STORY TRI-PLEX: BUILDING P[.R\ Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC j November 18.2016 Lipr} ' PLAN 2 PLAN 3 -------- ------- ------- --------------`. 9 P - ---------=---- - ------ -: i 1 � I 1 1 L:fs ROC=$LOPE 1 P (TYR v401 1 1 1 WW 1 1 1 1 1 I pp h 111 ' ! I P I 1 I t PLAN F anon rlarr '. r.V" I O W 7 [n 2-STORY TRI-PLEX:BUILDING PLAN: SYCAMORE HEIGHTS A_1 Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC: j Novembvr 18,2016 L t �F ❑❑ O v.eA.❑ 0 IIsFS e--� PLAN 1 IE _ :_ I � ° I ,! i E�•CAR CA GE� I M�r u. saw y b + jllaa. iu ' �i.i i r i i� i i ` me R 2 ._..... � aA.env,c •w'.�-0 wpti I.C. ' ❑ ; 16eia dr'.E�1 Wl9'�_ r xaa x •• ............ PLAN 1:SEC=FL17.OR J PLAN 1:FJWr FLOOR PI,A.ti:): MUM F1 OR 2rn,a ..air�.naA u ccccw R s e - 7Vsny � poY s• � a0e'bi. fC'li fr 11 - op STOOP r sroDP ---- gr3�rnr; R. ZI i o: °p a l_r x.r_. e g 1CRC11YY sc ,,.r.c. STUDY -� — Lolr % t'C LJLJ _ --- �sCllzN eA,a /l 0 - b -- o e 0 rr.rxe•• p,� u.e x. MAN 2:SECOND FIADR = PF.IN O:SECOND . — zKe w ra• + LAN 8 eu e w• c PLAN 3�I � 2 CABA E A SCAR�G6 1 r r � maw wlw 13R.a gC'•Ia+J' Y/ila or•#4i YRVA IraWp_CGr WII l _______ __7__ p L I ______—J Y pLLY ON 2:SECOND FLOOR Ru,ai PLAN 2. FSRSC FLOOR Ri.rx FLAN I: FIRCT FLOOR R NI at r'M 1 iCatL i•r.ny WNi '.r-G' ••VL r W•,w 00 �j�f I R!*RWIe. a]f 5� 1/bi ILLCR C�51 SYCAMORE HEIGHT'S 2-STORY TRI-FLEX:UNIT PLAN' Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC j PLL•VATION N(YfCS L —m—h.F-T a - I J ,may:4wrttr to L7 - IJM1,Ycn-Y.L L:• .iTL:c4�C4�¢r.aGV�. Frx.�a�rac sMIL.cccv. I•� PJn�'l'TIP�E/p uy coo4 �� r r I• eanxu-cr '• .��. oil L] p.,,1-w rrx.a-w•-..:.,t'-n M'LP • .L7i 4 �. y�- } y.s�]r � F:'. i.•' ram.�^n-a�cn c't.:oJr�aa ea-.. ---•-�., � _ 1+- .I a�y.c..v-...•.yo..•, w:z ,r..�..�..�..�.� ��L.'�ir� � F �: � �• { t.alwr.•' Ll -� ..,La � h I'd Front Elevation i 61- I • i Left Elevation- I '�'°"�' I i I'I L- LJ - 4a.; t i_ LJ OD _ 2-STORY TRIPLEX ELEVATIONS Santa Earvarz SYCAMORE HEIGHTS �_1 Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC i Nv, evikr i.1.010 6A![7LING R01 1%,�:i.1:�- ELEVATION NOTES • [_� a1Yi!_WY.4E'L"S'BOO•i.[.[: �, �gM.ryGQ Tw LS I7xD f.^.W'.1-:CELL:\ia+y�[},�.•{•�,;,• i tiiM Li.Yi" G•n:" • 'a� .1'arL H ICGG .L•J f-'w-m NODS 9N-.aY co,� 7 1' i 1al mc"-r fflt4-r.•.vq1� 161 P.—W W-, „� L`.. LI '•� fn!a a.•pxk c+t.wG�en1� n:.cb'. r _p�• I S 1( .•. 'i�'^J r CC.CL=i w�L'.•-qN N A?'i0 - ^'� �r i''I ra rra�.s+ewr um cuw^w:. .yf �1,� �R^ ••. 115� V�.G�'Y•_tr+r f.�JSC If —� +y44.rW�� �1U1+f � � �! S+n r.{ a=c,:w•r:'s�n.rn t' � I W.L':��i_ r�r� w-..-r..,,la ' •" ��yyy�-�, •l •• ��77 - - •I 2;ctiw-r_rl r-:� Rear E1lelvatLon1 __L�'J j LA oil 1.0 ftoo v, 1 Right Elevation-i, i )� _,.I _ 1 �I =1 = o I. i, z l l- I_1. � - 2-STORY TRIPLEX ELEVATION: Santa Barbary SYCAMORE HEIGHTS Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC j NMcInbcr IK•20I6 :11[(31ANGIMFLlkILM"'4'A. ELEVATION NOTES • [_� a1Yi!_WY.4E'L"S'BOO•i.[.[: �, �gM.ryGQ Tw LS I7xD f.^.W'.1-:CELL:\ia+y�[},�.•{•�,;,• i tiiM Li.Yi" G•n:" • 'a� .1'arL H ICGG .L•J f-'w-m NODS 9N-.aY co,� 7 1' i 1al mc"-r fflt4-r.•.vq1� 1 6 1 P.v Pam: „� L`.. LI '•� fn!a a.•pxk c+t.wG�en1� n:.cb'. r _p�• I S 1( .•. 'i�'^J r CC.CL=i w�L'.•-qN N A?'i0 - ^'� �r i''I ra rra�.s+ewr um cuw^w:. .yf �1,� �R^ ••. 115� V�.G�'Y•_tr+r f.�JSC If —� +y44.rW�� �1U1+f � � �! S+n r.{ a=c,:w•r:'s�n.rn t' � I W.L':��i_ r�r� w-..-r..,,la ' •" ��yyy�-�, •l •• ��77 - - •I 2;ctiw-r_rl r-:� Rear E1lelvatLon1 __L�'J j LA oil 1.0 ftoo 1 Right Elevation-i, o 0D - 2-STORY TRIPLEX ELEVATION: Santa Barbary SYCAMORE HEIGHTS Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC �j NMcInbcr 18,20lh R[ChiANG1zfIIILIx', 74'A. r 1 i • r �s' �cL cytiaT[y rsv ua ' -a-oa.M mac.•..N��.anr s+nP•i.�- � `� «P•'J+'+5LL'.ht^.RaJG.TN.M.V'H�Mh•Si6P. rn s- I I a.l •wti+ta rxara c�•cr:as - - {�-{ . F u -P•o.K oxw7••exse:,,'se�rn n•3n7or. .•`7 { q i rj . .•`i•• Br iS NMI acCenr�R ur••.-.R! •n .:.i. .S-,�rT,.r�`Sr I - - �� a Sr. Jr- •� r--+i F1 An 'W -- If uLlr [I[' 1 tf r• 4 Front Elevation - rn I �;•tiy:••-� ,Y� - —r - r■-� �--•-t �-` ���,/jar::.•;'x; '� �Li .•u s i . I Left Elevation 1 r 2-STORY TRIPLEX ELEVATIONS o ' SYCAMORE HEIGHTS Provemx Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC j Naveniber 1R,2016 i.iM LItAA'Ci RBIRIh Ss:n"�A:�� ELEVATION N aTU mM L GaeMI.�7'Lam'^'ll.f i ..y.Qa.e�mrt.rx�w-..r�•n.r.. I �♦rr 5 nY_hh7tn] !^ •a�',xCe]R 1..,'\Y NCO• � �'t �� .. s •��t<�xc-e��a•w�t xe+i � q a• z�w.7 r r+r�.s.r�s�.L r" � I �r O -�•b+H peCR�'�•bsNa^.ti"J h 4.boi- • � � 1� 1�� , • I !� �T � � Ir`iF - � I 41 n:c9 Ftx E-w 1 1, - `ems,:..�`�l�i�.:d �� t. , �"�' .l �i ..Y.�s. ��� � •.,,.. Rear Elevation,! 7 � — `,�Y f � ' r i i if + n �'L iZight Elevation�.11;: 2-STORY TRIPLEX ELEVATION.: SYCAMORE HEIGHTS Provenc; Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC s i40yorhrr IS.2111 C. �IMf•HA�li7RUHllh; sr,.•n,x _--_ --- ---- ---- -- 1 L _ I \ f G La 0 da �--�� --------- ---- p - - ----- L--- ---- ROOF KM UCO.10 Flank i I PLAN 3A PLAN 1 A PLAN 2A PLAN 2B PLAN 1 B PLAN 38 i 1 ' r �'l��`� � �[ � •-�'-� N��`' F�LI�NI l A P' � N� 8 P�N 1 P h! _ - x x yr i + ❑ A X I'14J T ?i`iii) oUv i.11 `r- -ti' �.;I.�U n iii•:r I nkoFiova fl�rlooR LE4EYD TYPE V--D MNSTRUCTION R-2 OCCUPANCY Plan 1A 1.672 SF Plan 1B 1,697 SV Plan 2A 1,976 SF Plan 2B i.995 SF Plan 3A 2,100 5r Plats 3B 2103 51' 0 Co N SYCAMORE HEIGHTS 3-STORY T(]WNHaMES:BUILDING PLAN. Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC N Navcmbrr Is,201f � r------------- K` 7--� �Ft 3 GL J[ ir�y+. j Y Allyll'�iX] Cl C1f�V1 . .ate . I CD J � `!r i II I n __ Y.JIL [� - p - ! Ir•N i C07'ER -� I - )= 1 ? N 2A4 79I111L FLOOR PLAN ZA:SECOYJf F[COR PaN 2A:FIRST FLOOR erxr.w-•r.� xxr.+-.rd ' rlmn Y•sr :crew ruc� .}sr ----- — ---------- "-• ' _y�: .i. - a Mr PLF- DscuJew U" 0 --- r1a It ]f]lYF -�rT�l ry • �. �R — — G81ai a9ov iti 1 1 0 H1 I 9�.. i. - LL'o CDYEA --- -- dLJ ?i �I. _' ; PDRCJJ _________'_J PLAN IA:SECOND FLOOR PLAN LA: FJFST MOR PJAe+3AI VIIRD FLOOR PLAN 3A! SECOND FLOOR PLAT{DA=FIRST FLOOR x..e•��•�r 1{Hii+S•.rve- >rw�w•.rwr (] %H!,Ip'•i'•'J' FCMY W'•i'O' FGN!•w•.I.4' Or/.CfO RODS N]ar. CO ray+rJprt yyraW'A fri 7C GJ ysoarJvor !r>r ti .rusr SYCAMORE HEIGHTS 3-STORY TOWN HOMES:UNIT PLAN Pacific Summit Foothill, LT-Cs N Niavember 18.2016 L 3, }}i��. �nl� Y_`�._��'.+-.,��..w�+5n.m c -�Y-r- �r+.r+ r_r+�!K� r•�-.,^:—r•�-r•.-r�•...�-..tea-�- y - �- _ _•ti iJa. - +w��r-+w�.� � .r.�.. _. z� �..�- :r.. .1rW'! •^ :r -' �"+S:'1•• •.ri-' ��. �'^'-� - ,,�. � yr. cr +;.. - ��. {-^^ .g��•�•' .� .. '��:....i� aµ� .. �.. Y� i x � -• � ':Yl=r.. .;far:~... r�. � � ..R y:.:.•� ':a �"'�'�'� � .. '•_�`'� tip.,�;1, - ^� :�•" "+ �� .• •' - -y�} +�` - -- - - - � •r•- -'r - •�- - _ { .. An .0 eax + A w; f�warr{� !"� - a�� �' l.:r .a:•-.:ti�.�7: RIGI-[T ELEVATION REAR ELEVAT[ON TIT •�+d.-ww.�;•Sx.•r-,`aM-,r-!'�-Z=^'et,"•r7r"n'�•5�a.tiiw.:'2i+wmw-[N*�^••�-a•wam.+w.p-.-.ww�y.�-.+��-n.a �hu......i-..�.k...�...�.��.....�.�...-�...�,.+.�,,,,,.w..a. Y«w�.�.:..`�,,,...�.g,..�.:........+,.•��..-•r•.^yw..rr<+ �-• -. _ "'"d .•ram=:,__- � ..- r 4 _. _ a.� � _ -.,e• .. ■ •�_ ' 1 i.w• *�ti� ••F r7:•`•s r d.•kC• -.�c±r' R'R i �'} I " w � ..pS- �:n•.�� -�., i Y �•, `�.. Y` r.. ',p- _ •_ �" • � • •,h� � - � {�y�. ti fP.7f'r�".J• � •"iV�xY 1}t}i �['}!jJ re,F; 3�,.:,a .- ,�� _ w �,,':•f'' '�'•l. FS•f_ ••F-y;Y�f! � `!�rt - - �:Z' �it "`�"•[, LEFT ELEVATION FRONT ELEVATION 0 A 3-STORY SIXPLEX ELEVATIONS: SYCAMORE HEIGHTS ExT[irua[t ELEVATIONS A .3 Pacific Summit Foothill, LLG ,!a Ntlrvwnlxr IN.IUlh -- - ------ - - --, ---- _ _ - - ---- 1 � 6 �1 gill P ; da -- --r- ------------- ROOF FLAN SFCO'R]f I OL'k PLAN 3A PLAN I PLAN 2A PLAN 26 n ' ''• �]O Jr c 'Z'�� N' IA L N�1 A , --- C_ r� r�ifi iei rf• r�- ❑ _ - d J FJ Cb x w-r.a I.F'GF.V➢• TYPE V—B CONSTRUCTION R-2 OCCUPANCY _ Plan 2A 1,916 SF + 240 SF COMMERCIAL = 2.165 SF Plan lA 1,521 Sr + 240 Sr COMMERCIAL = 1.780 E Plan 2A 1.782 SF + 249 SF COMMERCIAL = 2,071 SF Plan ZB 1,790 SF + Z49 SF COMMERCIAL = 2,647 SF 0 co 3-STORY LIVEJWOELKTOWNHOMBr SYCAMORE HEIGHTS BUILDING PLAN' Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC Novrmb"14,2016 i El E T-'-L RI,1-II FLEVAICN kCAR ELPVAIIBI. ' • �.�,�e.r� •sre-m•.tw �La• f LUT IA WATION FROW ELEYA'.10H CD a 3-STORY LIVE/WORK TOWNHOM1I: SYCAMORE HEIGHTS EXTERIOR.ELL-VAT1u,'", Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC N Nuhx=Lbcr M2016 •' �_ti �.:.n..'r.i �.--'M. ww.r r.. — i' ....�.a �� ' 'n'ewi "'•ti... TTP. WINDOW JANIB 13 EXTERIOR DOOR HEAD—INSWING- 9 EXTERIOR DOOR BEAD-1NMYIMG 5 EV17HRIUR LOUR HEAD—INSWING 1 SAVE DSl'1IL — "SANTA FIARBARA"K_ 17 ._vi�_;vr:-+V ���e..��u.v�� - •F. �� � �•w..w.a.� i � ���•:..:"� - m.rw..Mo-... _ "' -,,;�:`- .a•...w�� :, i.� � —'°" max. —`� RECESSED WINDOW HEAD 14 EXTERIOR DOOR JAMB—INSWING LO EXTERIOR DOOR JAMB—DJSWING 6 EXTERIOR DOOR SAM B—INSWING. } p- r+..•e°w�.w.e_ E �^a�w gec.s.e' .o-r.wx. .+..r SAYE DETAIL = "PROVENCE" w� 18 RECESSED WINDOW SILL 15 RECESSED WINDOW HEAD Li WINDOW SELL 7 TYP. WINDOW BEAD :i EXTERIOR DOOR SILL 16 RECESSEA lY1NAUg SILS. 12 SLOPEO �YIND05Y SILL 8 TYI'. WIfvI)OlY SILL i V SYCAMORE HEIGHTS nE MD- Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC T N Nuvcmhcr IN,2V 16• P226 THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA { DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA RANCH C[1CAMONGA DECEMBER 20, 2016 - 7:06 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CAL I' T() ORDER Roll Call 7:00 p.m. Regular Members: Ray Wimberly_X_ Rich Macias X Candyce Burnett Donald Granger X Alternates: Lou Munoz Rich Fletcher Francisco Oaxaca Additional Staff Present. Tom Grahn. Associate Planner II. PUBLIC COMMENT r� This is the time and place for the general public to address the Committee. State law prohibits the Committee from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Committee may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are limited to five minutes per individual. I.II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS The following items will be presented by the applicant andlor 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. I ) of 3 23 /i7 EXHI IT N 098 P227 x x � DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE � J ACTION AGENDA RANcao C11GAMONGA DECEMBER 20, 2016 A- ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 4 DRC2016-00672 ❑RC2016-00206 - PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC - A request to - Committee amend the General Plan to allow the development of land that contains a recommended 30 percent slope in the Mixed Use (MU) District, located on the north side approval of the of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Pacific proposed project Electric Trail; APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31. 34, and 41 and 0207-112- subject to the following 09 and 10. Related Files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605M, Design revisions: Review ❑RC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Provide Permit ❑RC2012-00673. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative additional Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. This application parking spaces will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. in the vicinity of the LivelWork ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP units to erasure SUBTT16605M - PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC - A request to adequate parking subdivide 24.19 acres into 6 parcels for the development of 175 attached is available for condominium units in the Mixed Use(MU)District located on the north side commercial Provide a Pr es. of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and Pacific uses, Pr ra Electric Trail Right-of-Way; 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and connection to the 0207-112-09 and 10. Related Files: General Plan Amendment ORC2016- Pacific Electric 00206, Design Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Trail along the Tree Removal Permit ❑RC2012-00673. Staff has prepared a Mitigated east side of the Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. project site Provide ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2012- additional 00672 - PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC - A request to develop 175 landscaping attached condominium units on 24.19 acres of land in the Mixed Use(MU) adjacent to the District, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red project perimeter Hill wall to the Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trail Right-of-Way;APN: 0207- northwest of the 101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10- Related Sycamore Inn. Files: General Plan Amendment ❑RC2016-00206, Tentative Tract Map Utilize a tree SUBTT16605M, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit species and DRC2012-00673. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of spacing that environmental impacts for consideration. protects the views of ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VARIANCE ❑RC2016-00207 - homeowners PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC - A request to exceed the 30-foot living north of the building envelope established by Development Code Section project site. Host an additional 2 of 3 099 P228 -Owl- r DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE l ACTION AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA D E C E M B E R 2.6, 2016 17-122.020.D.1.e.(i and ii) for the development of 175 attached Neighborhood condominium units on 24.19 acres of land in the Mixed Use (MU) District, Meeting prior to located an the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country scheduling the Club Dave and the Pacific Electric Trail Right-of-Way; APN: 0207-101-13, Project for 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10. Related Files- Planning General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206, Tentative Tract Map Commission SUBTT16605M, Design Review DRC2012-00672, and Tree Removal consideration. Permit DRC2012-00673. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT - DRC2012-00673 - PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, L.L.0 - A request to remove 188 trees associated with the proposed development of 175 attached condominium units on 24.19 acres of land in the Mixed Use(MU) District, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trail Right-of-Way; APN: 0207- 101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10. Related Files: General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605M, Design Review DRC2012-00672, and Variance DRC2016-00207. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. IV. ADJOURN MEN r The Design Review Committee has adopted Administrative Regulations that set an 11:00 p.m. adjournment time. iritems go beyond that time, they shall be heard only with the consent of the Committee. 1, Jennifer Palacios, Office Specialist 11 with the Planning Department for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on December S, 2016, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954-2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 3of3 100 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS P229 7:00 p.m. Tom Grahn December 20, 2016 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT ❑RC2016-00206 - PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC - A request to amend the General Plan to allow the development of land that contains a 30 percent slope in the Mixed Use (MU) District, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trall; APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10. Related Files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605M, Design Review DR02012-00672, Variance DRC2016- 00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-Q0673. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. This application will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16605M - PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC-A request to subdivide 24.19 acres into 6 parcels for the development of 175 attached condominium units in the Mixed Use (MU) District located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive-and Pacific Electric Trail Right-of-Way; 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10. Related Files: General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206, Design Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2012-00672 - PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC-A request to develop 175 attached condominium units on 24.19 acres of land in the Mixed Use (MU) District, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trail Right-of-Way; APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10. Related Files: General--Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605M, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VARIANCE DRC2016-00207 - PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC-A request to exceed the 30-foot building envelope established by Development Code Section 17.122.020.D.1.e.(I and ii) for the development of 175 attached condominium units on 24.19 acres of land in the Mixed Use (MU) District, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trail Right-of-way;APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10. Related Files: General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00205, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605M, Design Review DRC2012- 00672, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT - ❑RC2012-00673 - PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC-A request to remove 188 trees associated with the proposed development of 175 attached condominium units on 24.19 acres of land in the Mixed Use (MU) District, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trail Right-of-Way; APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207- 112-09 and 10. Related Files: General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605M, Design Review DRC2012-00672, and Variance DRC2016-00207. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. 101 P23D DRC COMMENTS GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2016-00206, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16605M, DESIGN REVIEW ❑RC2012-00672, VARIANCE ❑RC2016-00207 &TREE REMOVAL PERMIT ❑RC2012-00673 — PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC. December 20, 2016 Page 2 Background: On April 12, 2006 the Planning Commission took the following actions related to previous entitlement applications to develop the project site: • Recommended to the City Council approval of the following: o General PIan Amendment DRC2004-00339—A request to amend the General Plan to allow the development of land that contains a 30 percent slope. o Development Code Amendment ❑RC2004-00352 — A request to amend the Development Code to allow the development of the land that contains a 30 percent slope. • Approved the following applications contingent upon City Council approval of the above applications: o Tentative Tract 16605 --A residential subdivision of 8 lots for condominium purposes (206 units) on 21 acres of [and. o Design Review DRC2003-00637 — The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for 206 condominiums on 21 acres of land. o Variance DRC2005-01061 --A request to reduce the panting lot setback from 45 feet minimum to 10 feet to allow improvements to an existing parking lot for the Sycamore Inn Restaurant. a Minor Development Review DRC2004-00826—Parking lot, loading area modifications and covered patio area at the Historic Sycamore Inn Restaurant. On June 21, 2006, the City Council subsequently approved the General Plan and Development Code Amendment applications. Development Code Amendment DRC20C4-00352 was incorporated into Development Code Section 17.52.020(E)thereby providing an exception to the prohibition of development on slopes 30 percent and over, provided certain conditions are satisfied. General Plan Amendment DRC2004-00339 was not incorporated into the 2010 General Plan Update. The entitlement applications related to the Tentative Tract(i.e., Design Review D RC2 003-00637, Variance DRC2005-01061, and Minor Development Review DRC2004-00826) expired on April 6, 2011. No time extensions for these applications were requested or granted; however, on March 23, 2016, the Planning Commission approved a 1-year time extension (DRC2015-01110) request for SUBTT16605 thereby extending the expiration date of SUBTT16605 to April 12, 2017. Design Parameters; The project site is located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between San Bernardino Road and Baker Avenue in a hillside area on the southerly flank of Red Hill and surrounding the historic Sycamore Inn restaurant. The project site land use designation is the Mixed Use (MU) District. The property to the north contains the Red Hill Condominiums in the Medium (M) Residential District, vacant lots in the Low (L) Residential District, and the Red Hill Country Club and golf course in the Low(L) Residential District. The property to the west contains residential and commercial uses in the Mixed Use (MU) District. The property to the east is the Pacific Electric Trail, the Route 66 Trailhead, and residential uses across Foothill Boulevard in the Medium(M) Residential District.The property to the south, across Foothill Boulevard, includes 102 P23'1 DRC COMMENTS GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT ❑RC2016-00206, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16605M, DESIGN REVIEW DRC2012-00672, VARIANCE ❑RC2016-00207 &TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2012-00673—PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC. December 20, 2016 Page 3 residential and commercial land uses in the Medium (M) Residential District and the Mixed Use (MU) District.The project site is predominately vacant, but includes one restaurant use to the west of the Sycamore Inn. The current proposal provides ore access point for a right-in-right-out driveway west of the Sycamore Inn. The current proposal differs from the previously approved project site plan in that the project now surrounds the Sycamore Inn rather than taking access directly through the signalized access to the Sycamore Inn site. A majority of the site has been disturbed and replanted with non-native species; however, there are numerous mature trees located predominately in the northwestern portion of the project site. The project site contains 198 trees, 64 of which meet Development Code criteria as Heritage Trees, and 15 of those Heritage Trees were recommended far preservation by the arborist's report (these trees are predominately Coast Live Oak and California Sycamore Trees) and the project site plan. Site features include a large, concrete reservoir facility (abandoned and partially demolished), a restaurant building (associated with the Red Chief Motel), and parking lot area of the previously demolished Red Chief Motel. Significant visual features that frame the site are the historic Sycamore Inn, the Red Hill Bluff to the north, and the Pacific Electric Trail to the south and east. A significant design challenge for the project site is the steep topography; approximately 28.3 percent of the site is sloped 30 percent and greater. As noted above, the Development Code Amendment to permit development on slopes greater than 30 percent was incorporated into the 2012 Development Code update; however, the previous General Plan Amendment was not incorporated into the 2010 General Plan Update. To address this limitation, the applicant submitted a General Plan Amendment to amend General Plan Policy PS-6.1, which would continue to prohibit development on slopes that exceed 30 percent unless all the following are satisfied: (i) the property is located south of Banyan Street; (ii) at least 75 percent of the lots or parcels that are the subject of the development application are surrounded by lots or parcels improved with structures; and (iii) the proposed project is determined to appropriately address slope stability and other geological factors of the site. A Historical Assessment of the Project Site was provided for the previously approved project. That assessment identified the following as a result of research and field survey: 1) the Cucamonga Stage station site, 2) Sycamore Inn, 3) Red Chief Motel, and 4)The presence of two previously recorded historic bridges (CHS-1786-1 and CHS-1786-6) as well as the old Los Angeles to San Bernardino Road route (PS-BR-3-H)adjacent to the project boundaries as noted by The San Bernardino Museum Archaeological Information Center. At that time, these resources were all outside the project area and were not impacted by the project. The Sycamore Inn site was affected on a site-specific impact, since the main access to the residential project was through a signalized intersection into the Sycamore Inn parking lot. The redesign of the project-site around the Sycamore Inn has removed this impact and the historical integrity of this unique historical resource will not be adversely affected. The bridge and road route were addressed through the development of the Pacific Electric Trail bridge and the Route 66 Trailhead. A Cultural Resources Assessment (August 27, 2012) was prepared to evaluate the Red Chief Motel site, which concluded that the removal of the original complex and the alterations to the remaining structure (the restaurant west of the Sycamore Inn) no longer conveys its significance or association with Route 66, and neither the grounds or the site meet the minimum criteria for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources or as a local landmark. The site plan wraps around the Sycamore Inn restaurant providing a single right-in-right-out driveway entrance to the site. A secondary Emergency Vehicle Access driveway provides access to and from Red Hill Country Club on the northwest portion of the site. A total of 9 live/work units are provided adjacent to the Foothill Boulevard driveway, with adjacent parking and pedestrian 103 P232 DRC COMMENTS GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2016-00206, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16605M, DESIGN REVIEW DRC2012-00672, VARIANCE DRC2016-00207 &TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2D12-00673— PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC. December 20, 2016 Page 4 access. Units are provided throughout the 24-acre site, with most units situated east of the Sycamore Inn on two large relatively flat graded pads. Units directly adjacent to Foothill Boulevard are approximately 6 to 21 feet above the existing street grade, and a large 30-foot high Mechanically Stabilized Embankment(MSE) retaining wall separates the lower and upper building pads. Building pads are located throughout the project site and are situated so that their eventual development will minimize impacts to adjacent properties. The 175 units are provided throughout the project site in 44 individual buildings containing between 3 and 6 residential units each. Units are provided in either a two-story or three-story building complex. The two-story units range in size from 1,296 square feet to 1,701 square feet and the three-story units range in size from 1,672 square feet to 2,083 square feet. Architectural styles include Santa Barbara and Provence and include 360 degree architectural elements such as: tile roofs, stucco finish, multi-paned windows, metal balconies, wood shutters, and additional architectural embellishments. The two-story buildings are approximately 28 feet nigh and the three-story buildings are approximately 35 feet high. Because of the site topography the project is located within the Hillside Overlay District, which estabiishes a 30-foot high building envelope for all structures. This standard typically applies to the development of a single-family house where the structure is designed to follow the finish grade; however, because significant grading is proposed that essentially creates two large flat building pads the applicant has submitted a Variance to exceed the 30-foot high building envelope for the three-story units. Developments consisting of 101 units to 200 units shall provide 5 recreational amenities. The proposed project exceeds this requirement by providing a large recreational area with pool and spa, 2 large tot-lots, and 5 barbeque areas with surrounding open space. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project. 1. General Pian Amend rnent--The proposed GPA 1 s,consistent with the previously approved amendment and the adopted Development Code standards for grading on slopes 30 percent and greater. 2. View Protection — As an infill, hillside site, consideration and sensitivity to the protection of neighbors views is critical. The applicant has provided sections at various locations throughout the•project site to demonstrate the relationship of the proposed project to the surrounding properties. 3. Grading—A significant amount of grading is proposed to make development of the project site feasible. The MSE retaining wall is a unique feature to this project site and outside of the 210-Freeway right-of way has not been utilized 1n the City. i 4, Architecture — The project architecture is designed to reflect 360 degree architectural treatment.The proposed units are well designed and the architectural elaboration foreach unit is consistent with its proposed architectural style. 5. Building Height-The 35-foot building height of the three-story units should be considered in relation to the limitations and intent of the Hillside Overlay District. 104 P233 DRC COMMENTS GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT ❑RC2016-00206, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16605M. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2012-00672, VARIANCE DRC2016-00207 & TREE REMOVAL PERMIT ❑RC2012-00673 - PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC. December 20, 2016 Page 5 6. Tree Preservation -The site contains 198 trees on-site, including Oak, Sycamore, Pepper, Elm, and Eucalyptus Trees. An Arborist Report(Jim Borer, August 2, 2012) identifies that most of these trees are over-mature, have poor growth character, have advanced decay, and are in poor general health; many trees have further declined in health due to the continued effects of the drought. The Arborist Report identifies that 64 of these trees meek Development Code criteria as Heritage Trees, and 15 of those Heritage Trees are recommended for preservation due to their mature form, good growth character, vigorous health; most of these trees are situated to the north of the Sycamore Inn restaurant. The tree preservation priorities should be considered: 1) preserve-in-place healthy trees, 2) if trees cannot be preserved in place, then transplant elsewhere on-site, and as a last resort, 3) remove and replace with largest nursery grown stock available. The developer is proposing to plant numerous new trees, ranging from 15-gallon to 36-inch box sized specimens. 7, Neighborhood Meeting -Prior to scheduling this application for Design Review Committee consideration the applicant conducted a Neighborhood Meeting on May 9, 2016 and approximately 22 individuals attended the meeting. Those in attendance questioned the protection of existing views relative to buildings, fencing, and landscaping, the size and pricing of units, the timing of construction, vehicle parking, both driveway and recreational vehicles, traffic impacts, grading, erosion, emergency vehicle access, and the number of school-aged children in the project. The applicant's team responded to each question and addressed the concerns of those in attendance. Staff has requested that the applicant conduct 1 additional Neighborhood Meeting prior to scheduling the project for Planning Commission consideration. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues. 1. Pacific Electric Trail Connection - Provide a pedestrian connection from the project site to the Pacific Electric Trail. Contact the San Bernardino Associated Governments for approval. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion. 1. No policy issues have been identified. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends the Committee recommend approval of the proposed project- Design Review Committee Action: Committee recommended approval of the proposed project subject to the following revisions: • Provide additional parking spaces in the vicinity of the LivelWork units to ensure adequate parking is available for commercial uses. • Provide a pedestrian connection to the Pacific Electric Trail along the east side of the project site. • Provide additional landscaping adjacent to the project perimeter wall to the northwest of the Sycamore Inn. • Utilize a free species and spacing that protects the views of homeowners Irving north of the project site. 105 P234 ❑RC COMMENTS GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2016-00206, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16605M, DESIGN REVIEW ❑RC2012-00672, VARIANCE DRC2016-00207 & TREE REMOVAL PERMIT ❑RC2012-00673 - PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC. December 20, 2016 Page 6 • Host an additional Neighborhood Meeting prior to scheduling the project for Planning Commission consideration. Staff Planner: Tom Grahn, Associate Planner Members Present: Commissioner Ray Wimberly: Commissioner Rich Macias, Senior Planner Donald Granger i i I I 106 P235 City of Rancho Cucamonga 4 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION The following Mitigated Negative Declaration is being circulated forpublic review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act Section 21091 and 21092 of the Public Resources code. Project File No.: General Plan Amendment ❑RC2016-00206, Tentative Tract Map Modification SIJBTT16605M, Design Review❑RC2012-00672,Variance DRC2016-00207,and Tree Removal Permit ❑RC2012-00673. Public Review Period Closes: August 9, 2017 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Project Applicant: Chad Stadnicki Pacific Summit-Foothill, LLC 212 S. Palm Avenue, 2nd Floor Alhambra, CA 91801 Project Location (also see attached map): The project site is located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between San Bernardino Road and Baker Avenue in a hillside area on the southerly flank of Red Hill and surrounding the historic Sycamore Inn restaurant. Project Description: The applicant, Pacific Summit-Foothill, LLC, proposes an amendment to the General Plan to revise tables and text, including clarifying text as necessary to allow the development of land that contains slopes of 30 percent or greater,a Tentative Tract Map to subdivide a property of 24.19 acres into 6 parcels, and a Design Review for the development of 175 condominium units (including 9 live-work units) located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trail. 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 Reportwilil 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 Q rr. RZ r` wP4 f. OF Vol r '- ��'- •� ,tit• �■ • Yam,,•+ h� � ��• ''� +�. .�r• IA4+. •a `ate '[�•`- w .� t P237 MUSGS ,l i W P=Riri�T or THr IRTfRIAR c+,=srl au=ou.c� l-PW h rn. WA5n.CA s i 1 � =..n-• •I.�aTiisir . '"'^ i .._.. ! •• � Win. -... .-.. 'f'1` r 'S�_---13• :-Cr.:r'~��� Yid -.�.0 '" 1♦• .._�. ...._ .... 109 8 Print Form ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM r n (Part I - Initial Study) MYvfRancha Cumrriarga (piaase type crprint clearly using lak. Use the rah key to move from One fine to the nextllee.J Planning Oeperineni (969}47T•27511 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 pursuantto 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 geolog!cal.reports may be required. The project application wilt 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 11 as required by CEQA. In addition to the filing fee, the applicant will be responsible to pay or reimburse the City, its agents, officers, andlor consultants for all costs for the preparation, review, analysis, recommendations, mitigations, etc., of any special studies or reports. GENERAL tN ❑MPLETEAPPL! ATl LL NCTRE PR ESSEp Please note that it is the respallsUalyof the appllcantfo erasure that the application is complete at the time of submittal, City staff wfff not be available to perform work required to provide missing information. AppficatW Number for the prafect to which this form pertains: Pmject Title: Sycamore Heights Name&Address of pnaject owner(s): Pacific SummiWoothill,!_LC 212 S. Palm Avonue,2nd Floor Alhambra, CA 91801 Name&Address of developer orpnajecl sponsor- Same Contact Person&Address: Chad 5tadnick! I.1PLAPININGIFINAL1FaRMMCOUNTERVaitial Study Part'I.dac Page 1 of 10 PC O/2,3 /l 7 110 EXHIBIT P P239 212 S.Palm Avenue,2nd Floor Alhambra,CA 91801 Name&Address of person preparing this form(IT differont iron above): Telephone Number: 626-282.310U PROJECTO- Information indicated by an asterisk{)is not required of nan-construclran Cop's unless-otherwise requested by staff. '1) Fmvida a full scale(8.112 x 11)copy oflhe USG5 Quadrant$heel(s)which includes the profact site,and Indicate the site boundaries. 2� Provide a set of cotorphotograahs that shoo.representative WOWS into the.sile from the north,south,east,and west; views infq and from the sile-from the primary access points That serve the site;-and representative viows of significant foatures from the site. Include a map showing_location of each photograph. 3) P40cr Location(describe): Northside of Foothill Blvd„between Red Will Country Club Drive and the Union (Southern)Pacific Fail Road fight-of-Way(Pacific Electric Hike/Bike Trail). The site is north,east and.west of the Sycamore Inn, The northern project boundary is Red Full Country Club Dr.and the Fled Hill condominiums. 4) Assessor's Parcel Numbers(attach additional street if necessary): 0207-101-34-0.000,-31,-13,-41 and 0207=112-09-0-Oft-10,-17 '5) Gross Site Area(aclsq.R.): 24.18 Acres 'fi) Net Site Area(tolaf'site site minus area ofpublic streets&.proposed 23.1$Acres dedications) 7 Describe airy proposed general plan amendment or zone change which would affect the project site (attach additlonal sheet if necessaly): None 6 Include a description of aft permits which wilt be nacessary from the City of Rancho Cucamonga and olhergovernmantat I:IPLANNING'�FINALWOR,MStCOUNTER1tn lial Study Parti.doc Page 2 or 10 111 P240 agencies in order to fully implement the project. The project will require a grading permit and building permits 9 !]ascribe the physical setting or th a sits as it exists before the?project including information on topography,soil Ste Vity, plan Is end animals,mature trees,trails and roads,drainage courses.and scenic aspects. Describe any exisling structures err site(including ago and condition)and tha use of th0 structures. Attach photographs ofsigalroran?features described. In addition,cite all sources offarormation(i,v.,goo logical andlorhydrologic studfas,biotic and archeologicalsurveys,traffic studies): The portion of the site to the east❑I the Sycamore Inn slopes upward from Foothill Blvd.to the north. This area is vegetated with mix of grasses,shrubs,and trees. There is a partially demolished abandoned water basin located along Foothill Blvd,near the hikelbike.trail. . The portion of the site behind the Sycamore Inn slopes northward towards Red Hill Country Club Dr. This area is vegetated with mostly shrubs and trees. There are a couple of accessory structures related to irrigation and drainage that will be removed during development. The portion of the site4o the west of the Sycamore Inn is generally Rat and is vegetated mostly with grasses. A parking tat and single building are the only remnants of the Red Chief Motel, The remaining building is currently being used as a restaurant, 10 Deserib a the known cultural andlor historical aspacf s of the site. Cite all sources of information[hooks,p ublished reports and oral history): The project site is north of Route 66(Foothill Blvd.)and is adjacent to the Sycamore Inn(a City Landmark), which was a stagecoach trading depot during the agricultural development of Rancho Cucamonga. The site includes property that was once the location for the Fred Chief Motor Hotel,which served automobile traffic on Route 66. 11PLRNNINMFINRLTORA'1SZOUHTERIIrltlal S!udy Pant.doc Page 3 of 10 112 P24'1 4 ff Describe any noise sources and theirlevets that n_osv affect the sits(Wrcrafr,roadwaynoise,era)and how they wRl affect proposed uses: Foothill Boulevard is a major thoroughfare directly south of the project. Associated traffic noise will be addressed and mitigated in accordance to city requirements. 12 Describe the proposedprojecl in dalar7 This should provide an adequate description of the site in terms of ulltmala use that will result from the proposed project, Indicate if rheas are proposed phases for development, the extent of developmeni to occur with each phase,and the anticipaled complellon of each increment. Attach additional sheel{s)if necessary: The 152 unit for-sale residential project will replace a previously approved 206 unit project an the site. The revised project contains a mix of atlached Iriplex units and detached condo units that are more compatible with surrounding uses. Its simplified grading concept minimizes impacts to up-slope neighbors by using a single building pad closer to Foothill, Significant landscaping along Foothill and at the project entrance(to the west of Sycamore Inn) will create an attractive"gateway"to the City. Most units will contain a minimum of 3 bedroorre and all units will contain 2 enclosed garage parking spaces,with additional guest parking provided throughout. A separate project entrance from Foothill will allow Sycamore Inn to function independently and without impact from the pro]ecl. Residential amenities will include private exterior paIiaslyards,a comm unfly pool, a"tot lot" with play equipment, and an internal traiilwalk system that will link the units to each other and to the recently City hike and bike trail to the east. [t is anticipated that the project will be access-controlled, While the construction of individual building may be phased,it is expected that the bulk of the land development work (grading, infrastructure,streets)will be largely completed at one time. 13 Describe the surrounding properties,rncluding information on plants and animals and any cultural,historical,or Scenic aspects. Indicate the type ofland us (residantial,commercial,etc.),inian sky ofla n d use i'ona-famdy,apartment houses, shops,department stores,etc.)and scale of development(height,frontage,setback,rear yard,etc): The Red Hill Condominium Community is located to the north of the site,at the top of a large slope. The newly completed Pacific Electric Hike/Bike Trail is directly to the east of the site,with a townhouse project and small City park to the east of the trail. The project Ironts Foothill Blvd. to the south,with a variety of low-intensity commercial uses on the southern side of the roadway. The site surrounds the Sycamore Inn restaurant on 3 sides. Automobile commercial and a single family residence are located to the west of the site. 14 Will the proposed project change the partem,scale,or character of the sumvunding general area of the project?No. The scale and character of the residential project is in consistent with the adjacent Red Hill Country Club Cendo project and Pacific Trails townhouse project. The project is also ccmpatihla with the nearby commerclat uses,as there Is appropriate buffering through landscaping and differences In grade. The project is consistent with the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan. APLANNINGTINALWORMS'.COUNiERIinitial Study Partl,dvc Paga 4 Of 1U 113 P242 15 Indicate the We of sho(t-term and fon94erm noise to ba generated,including source and amount, Flow will those noise lavers affect adjacent properties and on-sfra uses? What methods orsoundproc5ng are proposed? There is no long-term noise generation,only Short term noise generated during project construction. The project will comply with applicable noise standards as they relate to construction generated noise. '18 Indicate proposed removals anNor replacements of mature or scenic trees., Development of the site requires removal and replacement of mature andlor scenic trees on site. Any necessary removals will be subject to City tree removal permit requirements. All mature Irees on site have been surveyed by an arborist and assessed for damagelhealth and suitability, 17, Indicate any bodies of water(lncluding domestic water supplies)into which the site drains: Hone. 18 Indicate expected amount of water usage. {See Attachment A for usage estimates). For further cler1ricalfon.please j confect the Cucamonga Valley Wa ter District a(987-2591. a, Residential(gal/day) 73,485 peak use(gal/Day) 148,970 b. Commetcfallind.(gatldaylac) 0.00 Peak use(gallminlac) 0,00 19 Indicate proposed alethod of sewage disposal. ❑Septic-ark ❑� Sewer. If septic tanks are proposed, allioh persvlation tests. If discharge to a sanitary sewage system is proposed indicate expected dairy sewage generation: (Sea Attachment for usage estimates), For&w1herclarifrcatlon,please contact the Gucanrvnga Valley Water[?!strict of 987-2591. a. Residential(garlday) 35040 b. Cornmerciallimdustrral(gaVday/ac) 0 RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS. 20, Number ofnesiden1W units:152 ❑alach (indicate rango of parcel sizes,minimum lot size and maximum lot size; 77 single-family detached units(detached condominium-no fee lots) Att_ ached(indicate whether units are rental wter sale units): 75 for-sale single-family triplsx units i iFLANNIHGlFIN'4AL FdRMSlCOUNTER1In ta-study Partl.doc Page 5 of 10 114 I P243 . •- ` rF 21 Andclpafed range of sale prices andlarrenls: Sore price(s) S 235.000 to $385,000 Rent(permonth) S 10 $ 22, Specify n m;ber of bedmoms by unit type: Detached(77 units) Plan i -3BR(1744 SF)Plan 2A-3BR/Oplional 4th(1813 SF)Plan 2B-3 BRIOptional 4th(1800 5F) Plan 3-4BR(1896 SFy - Attached(75 units) Plan 1 -2138(1287 SF) Plan 2-2 BR/Optional 3rd(1540 SF) Plan 3-2BRIOptiunal 3rd(1670 SF) 23, Indicate anticipated household sire by unit type. 2 BR units-2.5 persons 3 BR units-3.5 persons 4 BR units-4.2 persons 24 Indicate the expected number,of school children who will be residing within the pnaject: Contact fire apprapriale Schcof Districts as shown in Attachmeni B: a. Elementary.• b. Junior High: c. Senior High COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL PROJECTS 25, Describe type of irse(s)and major function(s)of commercial indusidaf orinstitutionar uses. NIA 26, Tolaf Boor area of commercial.Industrial,or institutional uses by type- NIA 27, Indreata hours of operation: NIA, 26) Number of employees: 0 ` Taral. Maximum Shift- Time of Maximum Shift: I%PLA.IINFNG1F1NAf_LrORMStCOUNTEMinihal Study ParV.doc Page 6 of ZO 115 P244 � r 29 Provide breakdown of anticipate djbb classifications,including wage and salary ranges,as well as an irndcatroa of the rate a hire for each rJassifcation(attach additional sheaf if necessary): NIA j I 30, Estimation of the number of workers to he hired that currently reside in the City.U *31 For corn mercial and IndusirfaI uses only, indicate the source,typa,and amount of airpollutlon emissions. {Data should be verified through the South Coast Air Quality Management District,al(818)672-6283): NIA ALL PROJECTS 32 Have fha water,sower,11",and flood control agencies serving the project been contacted to determine their ability to provFdr adequate service to the pmp0sedpmject? if so,please indicate their response, All agendes have indicated their abIlIty to provide adequate service for the project. 33 In the known history of this property,has thara been any use, storage, or discharge of hazardous and4cr toxic materials' Examples of hazardous andlor toxic materials iriclude,but are not limited to PCB's;radioactive substances;pesticides anc herbicides;fuels,olls,solvents.arrd other flammable liquids and gases. Aiso rrote undergmund sic rage of any of the above Please list the materials and describe Chair use,storage, andlar discharge on tha property,as welt as the dates of use, r known. None. LTLANNINGflNAL%FORMMC0UNTER11rIIW Study RaM.dac r''age 7 of t0 116 P245 34 M71 the proposed project involve the temporary or long-term use,storage,or discharge of hazardous andlor toxic materials fncfuding but not limited to these examples listed above? if yes,provide an inventory of all such materials to be used ant proposed method of dispose! The location of such uses,along with the storage and shipment areas,shall be shown ant labeled an the application plans No. �� The applicant shalt be required to pay any applicable Fish and Game fee. The project pfanner will conrrm which fees apply to this project. All checks are to he made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commissfon/Planning Director hearing: l hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for adequate evafuatiort of this projecf to the best of my ability,that the facts,statements,andrnformalion presented are true and correct tot he best of my knowledge and beflef. t further understand that additional information may be required to he submitted before an adequate evaluation can be made by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Date: Signature: —'� Title: T Ct'--� ftM k 5 ti 'IPtANNtNGWINALW-ORMMCOUNTE Min Oal Study Par l.doc Page 0 of 10 117 P246 City of Rancho Cucamonga �'71 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM INITIAL STUDY PART If BACKGROUND 1. Project File: General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206, Tentative Tract Map Modification SUBTT16605M, Design Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673. 2. Related Files: General Plan Amendment DRC2004-00339, Development Code Amendment ❑RC2004-00352, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605, Development Review DRC203-00637, Variance DRC2005-01061, Minor Development Review DRC2004-00826, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2004-00082. 3. Description of Project: The applicant, Pacific Summit-Foothill, LLC, proposes an amendment to the General Plan to revise tables and text, including clarifying text as necessary to allow the development of land that contains slopes of 30 percent or greater, a Tentative Tract Map to subdivide a property of 24.19 acres into 6 parcels, and a Design Review for the development of 175 condominium units(including 9 live-work units)located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trail, 4. Project Sponsor Name and Address: Chad Stadnicki Pacific Summit-Foothill, LLC 212 S. Palm Avenue,2nd Floor Alhambra, CA 91801 5. General Plan Designation: Mixed Use 6. Zoning: Mixed Use(MU) District 7. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The project site is located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between San Bernardino Road and Baker Avenue in a hillside area on the southerly flank of Red Hill and surrounding the historic Sycamore Inn restaurant. The project site land use designation is the Mixed Use (MU) District. The property to the north contains the Red Hill Condominiums in the Medium(M)Residential District,vacant lots in the Low(L)Residential District, and the Red Hill Country Club and golf course in the Low(L) Residential District. The property to the west contains residential and commercial uses in the Mixed Use (MU)District. The property to the east is the Pacific Electric Trail, the Route 66 Trailhead, and residential uses across Foothill Boulevard in the Medium (M) Residential District. The property to the south, across Foothill Boulevard, includes residential and commercial land uses in the Medium (M) Residential District and the Mixed Use (MU) District. The project site is predominately vacant, but includes one restaurant use to the west of the Sycamore Inn. The current proposal provides one access point for a right-in-right-out driveway west of the Sycamore Inn. The current proposal differs from the previously approved project site plan in that the project now surrounds the Sycamore Inn rather than taking access directly through the signalized access to the Sycamore Inn site. 8. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 118 P24T Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUDTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, ❑RC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 2 9. Contact Person and Phone Number: Tom Grahn,Associate Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department (909) 774-4312 10. Other agencies whose approval is required: None. 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 PM,c—Fine Particulate Matter RWQCS--Regional Water Quality Control Board SCADMD--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. V) Aesthetics ( } Agricultural Resources Air Quality [�) Biological Resources V) Cultural Resources (V') Geology& Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions [ J Hazards &Waste Materials (V) Hydrology&Water Quality ( } Land Use & Planning [ ) Mineral Resources [•'} Noise ( } population & Housing [ ) Public Services [ } Recreation [ } TransportationJTraffic ( ) Tribal Cultural Resources [ ) Utilities &Service Systems [�} Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: [ } I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. {�) I find that @[though 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. Rev 9-29-15 119 P248 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SLIBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga ❑RC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 3 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 polentially significant effects 1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EiR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to ap licabie standards,and 2)have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR r NEGA E ECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are impose on he pro sod project, nothing further is required. Prepared By: Date: N Reviewed By: Date: I Rev 9-29-15 120 P249 Initial Study for ❑RC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 4 Less Than Sign',kmrt Less potentially 4Yth Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: significant Mitigation 5igrr.-oat No I.r. aEl Ircomorated In part Impact I 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) As identified in the General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR), the City sits at the southern base of the San Gabriel Mountains, at the eastern end of its range. The San Bernardino Mountains are just east of the San Gabriel Mountains, divided by the Cajon Pass. Views of the San Gabriel and San Bernardino Mountains are visible from the project site. According to Figure LU-6 of the General Plan, there are no view corridors in the vicinity of the project site;however, the entire length of Foothill Boulevard is designated as a Major Divided Arterial (Figure CM-2)and Special Boulevard (Figure LU-6)as it traverses across the City. The proposed project is directly adjacent to portions of Foothill Boulevard. The General Plan identifies that a Special Boulevard is characterized by landscaping, hardscaping, and meandering sidewalks. Project improvements would Include the installation of landscaping and a meandering sidewalk along Foothill Boulevard, these improvements support the Special Boulevard designation. The City recognizes other scenic resources,including remaining stands of eucalyptus windrows, scattered vineyards and orange groves, and natural vegetation. Significant visual features that frame the project site include the historic Sycamore Inn,the Red Hill Bluff to the north,and the Pacific Electric Trail to the south and east. Mature heritage trees existing on-site are discussed in the Section 4e under Biological Resources below_ Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. b) The project site contains no scenic resources and no historic buildings within a State Scenic Highway. Immediately adjacent to the project site, actually surrounded by the project site, is the Sycamore Inn, a local designated Point of Interest, and the Statue of Oso Bear, a Designated Local Landmark, both items are located at 8318 Foothill Boulevard. The project design encompasses properties surrounding the Sycamore Inn and the Statue of Oso Bear,will complete all necessary right-of-way improvements along the projects Foothill Boulevard street frontage (not including the Sycamore Inn street frontage), and will install perimeter walls and landscaping as a buffer between the project site and existing land uses. There are no State Scenic Highways within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. c) The proposed project site is located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between San Bernardino Road and Baker Avenue in a hillside area on the southerly flank of Red Hill and surrounding the historic Sycamore Inn restaurant. The project proposes to amend the General Plan to permit development on slopes 30 percent and greater, the subdivision of a 24.19 acre site into 6 parcels, and the development of 175 condominium units(including Rev 9-29-15 121 P250 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SU5TT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 5 Less Than signiScanl Less Polentially Mh Than Issues and Supporting information Sources: significant U igaOn Sigrdr:an: No In: a:t Incorpa-ated Impact Invact 9 live-work units) in the Mixed Use (MU) District. The project site characterized by the existing condominiums,vacant land and golf course land uses to the north, residential and commercial land uses to the west, the Pacific Electric Trail and Route 66 Trailhead to the east,and residential and commercial land uses to the south. The visual quality of the area will not degrade as a result of this project, All necessary right-of-way improvements will be installed along both Foothill Boulevard and Red Hill Country Club Drive. Since the project fronts onto Foothill Boulevard improvements required by the Foothill Boulevard-Visual Improvement Plan will be conditioned upon approval. City standards require the developer to underground existing and new utility fines and facilities to minimize the unsightly appearance of overhead utility lines and utility enclosures in accordance with Planning Commission Resolution No. 87-95, unless exempted by said Resolution. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. d) The project site is located in an area that is subject to nighttime lighting from surrounding commercial and residential uses and street lighting along Foothill Boulevard. Additionally, development of the project site would increase the number of streetlights and security lighting used in the immediate vicinity. The design and placement of light fixtures require compliance with City standards that require shielding, diffusing, or indirect lighting to avoid glare. On-site illumination levels (provided for street lighting, parking, circulation, and pedestrian areas)will comply with Development Code standards and will be shielded from adjacent properties. Lighting will be selected and located to confine the area of illumination to within the project site. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. 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 i { } [ } { ) V) 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 proposed project site is located on the north side of foothill Boulevard, between San Bernardino Road and Baker Avenue in a hillside area on the southerly flank of Red Hill and surrounding the historic Sycamore Inn restaurant. The Rev 9-29-15 122 P25'1 Initial Study for ❑RC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 6 Less Than SiSnilicant Less ilctmitielly With TFan Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Signikc,nt W.1atian slgrdc2It M� 1-Impact ncoraoratH Impact Impact project proposes to amend the General Plan to permit development on slopes 30 percent and greater,the subdivision of a 24.19 acre site into 5 parcels,and the development of 175 condominium units (including 9 live-work units) in the Mixed Use(MU) District. The project site characterized by the existing condominiums,vacant]and and golf course land uses to the north, residential and commercial land uses to the west, the Pacific Electric Trail and Route 66 Trailhead to the east, and residential and commercial land uses to the south. 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 201 D. 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 far 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. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. c) There are no lands within the City of Rancho Cucamonga 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,or7imberland Production. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. d) There are no lands within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that qualify as forest land or timberland. Therefore no impacts would occur related to the loss or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. Further, there are no areas within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that are zoned as forest land, timberland, or Timberland Production. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. e) The proposed project site is located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between San Bernardino Road and Baker Avenue in a hillside area on the southerly flank of Red Hill and surrounding the historic Sycamore Inn restaurant. The project proposes to amend the General Plan to permit development on slopes 30 percent and greater, the subdivision of a 24.19 acre site into 6 parcels, and the development of 175 condominium units (including 9 live-work units) in the Mixed Use (MU) District. The project site characterized by the existing condominiums,vacant land and golf course land uses to the north, residential and commercial land uses to the west, the Pacific Electric Trail and Route 66 Trailhead to the east, and residential and commercial land uses to the south. Furthermore, there are no lands within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that qualify as forest land and therefore, there is no potential for conversion of forest land to a non-forest use. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. Rev 9-29-15 123 P252 Initial Study for ❑RC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga ❑RC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 7 Less Than sigrmcont Less Potentially With Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources; siglific3nt F.1:69AC'n Sigrdricant No Impact I'vicorpustee trroacl Impact 3. AIR QUALITY. Would the projeck a} Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the ( ) } } H 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 [ } V) � ) ) any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an. applicable Federal or State ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant ( } (f} ( ) ( ] concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial ( ) ( ) ( } V) number of people? Comments: a) As discussed in subsection b, the project would not exceed any air quality standards and would not interfere with the region's ability to comply with Federal and State air quality standards for Criterion 1 Increase in the Frequency or Severity of Violations (local air quality impacts) or Criterion 2 Exceed Assumptions in the AQMP (consistency with the 2003 AQMP). Therefore the project is consistent with the 2003 AQMP. I 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 (PM,o),fine particulate matter less than 2.5 (PMz_s) microns in diameter and lead. Among Ahese 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 (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 I I Rev 9-29-15 � 124 P253 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 8 Less learn slgNfica'r[ Less ?oter'ially W11V Tian Issues and Supporting Information Sources: slgnlfiCIML Miflgaton S.gni6cant No. Impact '�ecrporate7 m act lmNact speeds) limits the vertical dispersion of air contaminants, holding them relatively near the ground. Pursuant ►❑ 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 (PM10), fine particulate matter less than 2.5 (PM2.5) microns in diameter, carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide(NO2), sulfur dioxide(S02), 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, Nonattainrnent 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 so under National Ambient Air Quality Standards, and in nonattainment status for Ozone (I-hourand 8-hour) PM,o and PM2.5 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 Assessment(Landrum &Brown, July 2015)was prepared that utilizes Ca]EEMod (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 the subdivision of a '24.19 acre site into 6 parcels and the development of 175 condominium units (including 9 live-work units)in the Mixed Use(MU) District. The potential emissions associated with construction of the project are described in the following sections. Rev 9-29-15 125 P254 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and ❑RC2012-00673 Page 9 Lcss Than SigniSca.lt Less Powrtially With Thar Issues and Supporting Information Sources. SigruSCant XMIgal.on Slgniflcanl No Impact near crated lrr. a:t 1pnpact Summary of Peak Construction Emissions_ (Estimated Maximum Daily Construction Emissions and Regional Thresholds Total Construction Emissions by Activity - - Daily Emissions (lbs/day)- Activity Co. xoC VQc PMIa PMa.s 5Q'x _ Demolition 35.1 _ 45.8 4.3 2.4__ 2.2 0.0 Site Preparation -_ ^42.3 54.7 ~~ 5.2 11.3 --- 7.2 0.04 Grading -------•----------- 55.4 $1.8 -..-- 7.0 _.� $.3 � 5.2 -- 0.08 Construction (2016) 28.8 30.7 4.1 3.5 2.3 0.05 Construction (2017) ~_27.5 28.4___ -3.7 3.3 2.1 0.05 Construction (2018) 26.125.1 .._ -3.2_ 3.0 "--- t.8 - - 0.05 . . Paving ----15.3 - -17.2 ------1.7 •1 _.1 -- -a.s- --- -0.02 --- -- -Painting -...�_�. �.. 3.3 _ � 2.1 57.6 -- ----0.4 T ❑ 2 __._.. 0.01 -_ Significance 550 100 75 150 55 ISO Threshold Exceed Threshold? No No No No No No Construction activities associated with the project will result in emissions of CO' VoCs, NDx, SDx, PMzo and PM2-8 and are expected from the following construction activities: demolition, grading (including soil importlexport), building construction, painting (architectural coatings), paving (curb, gutter, and flatwork), and construction worker commuting. Localized-Significance Summary in Pounds Per Da Estimated Maximum Dail Construction Emissions and LSTs) Total Concurrent Construction- EMIssions Daily Emissions (llss/day) Activity co Koo Voc PM" w'.s sox Construction, 46.1 47.8 73.0 4.9 3.2 0.1 Painting and Paving Significance Threshold 550 200 75 150 55 1.50 Exceed Threshold? No Na 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 an site would result in localized exhaust emissions; however, as shown in the tables above,the amount will not exceed any Local Significance Threshold. Rev 9-29-15 126 P255 Initial Study for DRC2016-00205, SUBM 6605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 page 10 Lis Tt an s gniTicunt Less Potentially WIT Thar, Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Sources: significenl u�bgs:an Signifcznt No Im act fnca.peraled ITpact im :ict 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 substanlially 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 an 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 SCAQM❑ Rules 402 and 403 to control fugitive dust. Architectural Coatings Architectural coatings contain VOCs that are similar to ROCS and are part of the 0.1 precursors. Based on the proposed project, it is estimated that the proposed project will result in a maximum of approximately 73 lbs of VOC per day(combined for all construction sources) during construction. Therefore, this VOC emission is the principal air emission ' and is less than the SCAQMD VOC threshold of 75 Ibslday. Odors Heavy-duty equipment in the project area during construction would emit odors. Hoviever, the construction activity would cease to occur after individual construction is completed. No other sources of objectionable odors have been identified for the proposed project, and no mitigation measures are required. In compliance with SCAQMD Rule 402 the proposed uses are not anticipated to emit any objectionable odors. Therefore, objectionable odors posing a health risk to potential on-site and existing off-site uses would not occur as a result of the proposed project. Maturaliv 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 ukramafic rock in their sails. 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 mitigation measures, short-term, construction impacts will be less-than-significant: 1) During grading activity,all construction equipment(2! 150 horsepower)shall be California Air Resources Board (CARE)Tier 3 Certified or better. 2) 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. 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 Rev 9-29-15 127 P256 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUBM 6605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 11 Less Tnan stgnircant Laes Potentially Witn Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: 31gr.1ficark PAIE.aficn significant 140 4rpaa Incor,.amted i lnnpacl Impact 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 F also be generated during grading and construction activities. VVhile 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 he 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 ❑ioxide(NC2), Ozone(Oa), and Particulate Matter (PM2.5 and PM,a) 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 impactfor 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. This project would amend the General Plan to permit the development of slopes that are greater than 30 percent to support the subdivision of a 24.19 acre site into 6 parcels and the development of 175 condominium units (including 9 live-work units) in the Mixed Use (MU) District. Based on the Air Quality Assessment (Landrum & Brown, July 2015) no short-term, operational impacts 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 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 Rev 9-29-15 128 P257 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 12 Less Tnan significant Lcas Polentially With Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: significant Mligallon Sgnificart Na :tr ast Incorporated Impact I !moat[ also 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 SCAQIVID 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, 1n accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. Rev 9-29-15 129 P258 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUBM6605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga ❑RC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 13 Loss Than Significant Less Potenliauy With Than Issues and Supporting information Sources: siga%ant AANation sig0ftant No tMpay. Incoraorated Impact Impact 13) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQM❑ and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PMia emissions. Prolect Long Term ❑ erational 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. Summary of Peak Operational Emissions Total Emissions With Project Daily Emissions (lbs/day) Activity CID VOIC NO, PM,, PM', Sax Vehicular Emissions 45.9 3.9 12.6 8.0 2.3 0.12 Natural Gas Combustion _0.4 0.1 - - 0.9 0.i r v-a 1 -- 0.01 Landscaping 14.3 0.4 0.2 0.1 - 0.1 �v 0.00- Consumer Products 0.0 3.4 0.0 - - 0.0 0.0 0.00 Architectural Coatings 0.0 0.4_. .. 0.0 _ 0.0 --- 0.0 - -0.00 Total Emissions 60.6 3.2 13.7 8.2 2.4 0.1 Significance Threshold 550 55 55 150 55 15Q Exceed 'threshold? No No No No No No 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 'fable 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. This project would amend the General Plan to permit the development of slopes that are greater than 30 percent to support the subdivision of a 24.10 acre site into 6 parcels and the development of 175 condominium units (including 9 live-work units) in the Mixed Use (NIU) District. Based on the Air Quality Assessment (Landrum & Brown, July 2015) no short-term, operational impacts 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. Rev 9-29-15 130 P259 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 14 Liss Than Sig llrlcant Less potentially With Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Significant W:gadon SigniBcanl rb Imaact Incorporates Irn 2C4 a:t With implementation of the following mitigation measures from the City's 2010 General Plan FPBIR that are designed to minimize long-term, operational air quality impacts, the project's contribution to CIImUlative 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 andlor draught-resistant species to reduce water consumption and to provide passive solar benefits. 19) Provide lighter color roofing and road materials and tree planting programs to comply with the AQMP Miscellaneous Sources MSC-01 measure. 20) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate high-efficlencyllow-pollutirig heating,air conditioning,appliances,and water heaters. 21) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. c) As noted in the General Plan F F I R (Section 4..3), ccnIinued 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 adapted by the City Council. As noted in subsection b above, the project would amend the General Plan to permit the development of slopes that,are greater than 30 percent to support the subdivision of a 24.19 acre site into 6 parcels and the development of 175 condominium units (including g live-work units) in the Mixed Use (MU) District. Based on the Air Quality Assessment (Landrum & Brown, July 2015) no short-term, operational impacts would occur as a result of the project. Because the project would result in minimal emissions that d❑ 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 FPFIR, which are designed to minimize long-term, operational air quality impacts, cumulalive 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 SCAOM❑ 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 Rev 9-29-15 131 P26O Initial Study for❑RC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DR132012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and ❑RC2012-00673 Page 15 Less Than Significant Less Ntentlauy With Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Signifcant Mt;gadon significant No Im act Incorporated Im act Impact facilities. According to the SCAOMD, projects have the potential to create significant impacts if they are located within 114 mile of sensitive receptors and would emit toxic air contaminants identified in SCAQMD Rule 1401. The project site is located within 114 mile of residences that are to the north and south of the site. Potential impacts to air quality are consistent with the Public Health and Safety Super-Element within the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. During) construction, there is the possibility of fugitive dust to be generated from grading the site. The mitigation measures listed under subsection b above and the following mitigation measure will reduce any potential impact to less-than-significant levels. 22) 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.s 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 typically associated with the type of use. Project generated refuse would be stored in covered containers and removed at regular intervals. Odors from the proposed multi-family residential use would most likely i be from activities such as cooking; however, these odors would be minimal and not considered to be significant. Therefore, 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? Rev 9-29-15 132 P26'1 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 16 Less Than Significant Less potenualy with Thai Issues and Supporting Information Sources: signihcan, Mtigabon Significant Na Impact Incorporated Im as impact e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting { ] ( } V) { biological resources,such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat { ) {] [ ) {•f) Conservation Plan, Natural Community conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan? Comments: a) The project site is located in an urban area surrounded by properties developed with a mix of land uses. The site has been previously disrupted during the construction of infrastructure and surrounding developments and also by 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, therefore, development is not anticipated to adversely affect rare or endangered species of plants or animals because of the fact that the project is surrounded by urbanized land uses and is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Plan. I 2003 Biological Evaluation A Habitat Suitability Evaluation(Ecological Sciences, 2003)was prepared for the previous application to develop the project site. The then existing biological conditions include remnant sage scrub vegetation, comprised of a mixture of non-native grassland and sage scrub components. This habitat type occurs in a patchy distribution an the site, primarily within on-site drainages and slopes that have not been exposed to discing activities. The most common native shrubs present within this habitat type are California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), California sagebrush (Artemisia califonica), California broom (Lotus scoparlus), and white sage (Saliva apiana). Some of the sage scrub vegetation is highly degraded from invasion of non-native plant species such as star-thistle (Centaurs solstitialis), mustard (Brassica andfor Hirschfeldia sp,), ripgut (Bromus diandrus), and foxtail chess (Bromus madritensis ssp.rubens). Additional plant species recorded on-site include dove weed (Eremocarpus setigerus)and sunflower(Helianthus annuus). Portions of the on-site drainages (primarily the lower areas)also support a mixture of tree and shrub species. Characteristic species include mule fat (Baccharis saJicifofia), blue elderberry (Sambucus mexicana), Peruvian pepper (Schinus molle), Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius), fan palm (Washingtonia sp.), poison oak (Toxieodendron diversilebum), tree tobacco (Nicotiana glauca), castor bean (Ricinus communis), fennel (Foeniculum vuigare), and stands of gum tree (Eucalyptus spp.). In. addition, the most we§tern drainage supports one or more large oak (Quercus sp.) and western sycamore trees (Platanus racemose). Wildlife species directly observed on-site included California towhee(Pipilo crissalis),scrub jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens), Anna's hummingbird (Calypte antra), American crow (Corpus brachyrhynchos), northern mockingbird (Mimes polyglottos), and house finch (Carpodacus mexicanus). Common small mammals recorded, or of which sign was detected, included California ground squirrel (Spermophilus beecheyr), desert cottontail (Sylvilagus auduboni), and pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae). Common reptile species observed included side-blotched lizard (Uta stansburlana). Rev 9-29-15 133 P262 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUBTT166C5M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 17 Less i han Sign'fcart Less PoteMelly With Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: VgNF-Ant h+lugall�, Significe.it NO Imract Incur -rated .--- Im -cE The level of constraint that a sensitive biological resource would pose to potential developments typically depends on the following criteria: 1)the relative value of that resource; 2)the amount or degree of impact to the resource; 3) whether or not impacts to the resource would be in violation of State and/or federal regulations or laws; 4)whether or not impacts to the resource would require permitting by resources agencies; and 5)the degree to which impacts on the resource would otherwise be considered"significant"under CEQA. Based on an evaluation using these criteria, existing disturbed/disked areas were considered of a relatively low biological constraint and value given the context in which they occur. This designation is because of the nigh level of disturbance that has resulted in low biological diversity, absence of special-status plant communities, and overall low potential for special-status species to utilize or reside within these areas. Because no threatened or endangered species are likely to occur in disturbed areas due to the highly disturbed conditions present in a predominantly degraded environment, construction activities in these areas would not likely jeopardize the continued existence of listed species, nor would construction adversely impact designated critical habitat. Impacts to disturbed areas would also not be expected to substantially affect special-status resources or cause a population of plant or wildlife species to drop below self-sustaining levels, nor would impacts be expected to substantially alter diversity of wildlife in the area due to the current degraded habitat conditions. 2017 Biological Evaluation Update In 2017, a review of the 2003 biological conditions and the Habitat Suitability Evaluation (Ecological Sciences, 2003) was conducted (RCA Associates, 2017) to determine if any significant changes have occurred to the biological resources present on the site since the prior field investigation was conducted. The RCA analysis found the site relatively undisturbed and supporting a grassland community throughout most of the site with trees and shrubs present in the various drainages that bisect the site. The current herbaceous ground cover (2017) is relatively extensive and dense, and covers most of the property. Dominant species include brome grass (Bromus sp.), fiddlenesk (Amsinckia tesselletta), buckwheat (Eriogonum sp.), filaree (Erodium cicutarium), mustard (Descurania pinata), wild oats (Avena i~atua), eucalyptus(Eucalyptus globules)hackberry(Celtis sp.)and laurel (Umbellularia sp.). Based on a review of the Habitat Suitability Evaluation (Ecological Sciences, 2003)and a review of data collected by RCA Associates in March 2017, it is of the opinion of RCA Associates that the site conditions observed in 2003 have not changed significantly and sensitive species are unlikely to occur on the site at the present time. Furthermore, the proposed development is not expected to have a significant impact on the biological resources present on the site. Nesting Bird Survey A Nesting Bird Survey was prepared for the project site (RCA Associates, March 2017), which concluded that no active nests were observed and no diagnostic sign (feathers, pellets,fecal material, prey remains, etc.)of current nesting activities was detected during the survey, and that no native and/or non-native bird species recorded during the survey were currently utilizing the site for nesting. The contribution of the project to cumulative biological impacts is not expected to be cumulatively considerable as the project site is within an urban area, is relatively small, and is isolated from areas of better habitat. The Rev 9-29-15 134 P263 Initial Study for ORC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 18 Less Than Sigrdfcant Less Polersially Ylth Then Issues and Supporting Information Sources: siorifir.,nt Mitiga :n Significant No 1 �act iaoor zitcd Impact In- act Nesting Bird Survey did not,identify the presence of burrowing owl activity during the survey, however, due to the potential of the site to contain burrow sites and the agility of owls- to begin using the site at any time, a preconstruction clearance survey is recommended prior to site disturbance. The site does contain-a large number of mature trees which have the potential to provide nesting areas for migrating birds. To avoid any impact on nesting birds, it is recommended that a pre-construction nesting bird survey be conducted a maximum 3 days prior to ground breaking activity to avoid impact to birds protected under the Fish and Game Code and the Migratory Bird Act. 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 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-I ay!ng 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 5,000 feet of raptor nests; during the breeding season to avoid abandonment of the 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) Perform a Burrowing Owl Survey that is in conformance with the Department of Fish and Wildlife Staff Report an 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 an 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 an 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 mare 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 Rev 9-29-15 135 P264 Initial Study for ❑RC2016-0020(3, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga ORC2012-00672, ❑RC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 19 Less Than Significant Less Potentially 'Nilh Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources. Significant kli Ration Significant No I.r ant Inca sled —Irnpact Impact, 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) A Jurisdictional Waters Delineation (RCA Associates, August 2017) was prepared to evaluate five drainage channels that bisect the project site and analyzed the impacts to riverine habitats present along the channels. Based on the results of the delineation and the jurisdictional analysis, it was determined that the five existing channels do not meet the criteria as a Waters of the State or Waters of the United States. The channels do not meet the characteristics that the define them as a nexus to the nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW), which is located approximately 0.4 miles east of the property site. Waters which flow through the five channels flow in a southerly direction and appear to be a direct result of runoff from the development directly north of the site. The Jurisdictional Waters Delineation determined that jurisdictional waters were not present on the site during their field investigations, and that the proposed project will not have an impact to the Waters of the State_ The report recommends complying with California Fish and Game Code, Section 1602, prior to issuance of any grading permit. The mitigation provided below will reduce the impact to a less than significant status. 3) Prior to issuance of any grading permit, the Project Applicant shall provide to the City of Rancho Cucamonga either of the following: Written correspondence from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife stating that notification under Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code is not required for the project; or a copy of a Department executed Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement, authorizing impacts to California Fish and Game Code,section 1602 resources associated with the project. c) No wetland habitat is present on-site. As a result, project implementation would have no impact on these resources. 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. Therefore no adverse impacts are anticipated. e) The Development Code defines heritage trees as all eucalyptus windrows, any tree in excess of thirty feet (30') in height and having a single trunk with a diameter of twenty inches(20")or more,a multi-trunk having a diameter of thirty inches(30")or more,a stand of trees the nature of which makes each dependent upon the others for survival, and any other tree as may be deemed historically or culturally significant because of age, size, condition, or aesthetic qualities. The Arborist Report (Jim Borer, August 2012)evaluated Rev 9-29-15 136 P265 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, ❑RC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 20 Less Than significant Less Pateffatfy With Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: significant Mitfga."on Significant Na !rr OCI �cc uuted fr act Im act a total of 198 trees on the project site. Of those 198 trees, 64 meet Development Code criteria to be classified as Heritage Trees, and 15 of those Heritage Trees were recommended for preservation, The Arborist Report evaluated the location and condition of 56 Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolla), 35 California Sycamore (Platanus racemosa), 26 California Pepper (Schinus molle), 24 Blue & Sugar Gum (Eucalyptus species), IS Elderberry (Sambucus species), 12 Brazilian Pepper (Schinus terebirithifolia), 10 Evergreen Elm (Ulmus parvifolia), 7 Pine (Pin us species), and 13 miscellaneous trees, a total of 198 trees. The 183 trees not identified by the Arborist Report as suitable for preservation are considered over-mature, have poor growth character, have advanced decay, and are in poor general health; many of these trees have further declined in health due to the continued effects of the drought. The applicant proposes to remove these trees (related file: Tree Removal Permit ❑RC2012-00673). The remaining 15 trees that meet Heritage Tree criteria are recommended for preservation due to their mature form, good growth character, and vigorous health; these trees are principally located north of the Sycamore Inn restaurant. Tree preservation priorities that should be considered include: 1) preserve- in-place healthy trees, 2) if trees cannot be preserved in place, then transplant elsewhere on-site, and as a last resort, 3)remove and replace with largest nursery grown stock available. The developer is proposing to plant numerous new trees,ranging from 15-9allon to 36-inch box. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. f) Neither the City, nor the SO[, 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. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance ( ) of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance ( ) of an archeological resource pursuant to§ 15064,5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological () {•�) (} ( } resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those 'interred ( } ( ] ( } (✓) outside of formal cemeteries? Comments: a) A Historical Assessment of the Sycamore Village Project Site (Van Wormer, May 1990) was utilized in the preparation of the Initial Study for the previously approved applications for the project site (DRC2003-00637 and SUBTT16605) in 2006. The Van Wormer assessment identified the following as a result of research and field survey: I)the Cucamonga Stage Station Site, 2) the Sycamore Inn, 3)the Red Chief Motel, and 4}the Cucamonga Water Company Reservoir. As part of a later inquiry, the San Bernardino Museum Archaeological Information Center noted the presence of two previously recorded historic bridges (CH 5-1786-1 and CHS-1786-6) as well as the old Los Angeles to San Bernardino road route(PS-BR-3-H)adjacent to the project boundaries. At that time,these resources were all outside the then project area and were not impacted by the project. The Rev 9-29-15 137 P266 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and ❑RC2012-00673 Page 21 t.css Than Signir=nt Less Potenlia iy With Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: SigNfimnt MWplion Sgnificant No Irn act Innoraorgted ImpaC frrkpact Cucamonga Station Stage Site is located under the location of what was the Red Chief Motel complex, which was west of the original project boundary. The Sycamore Inn restaurant site was affected on a site-specific impact, since the main access to the residential project was through a signalized intersection into the Sycamore Inn parking lot. The redesign of the project site around the Sycamore Inn restaurant has removed this impact and the integrity of this unique resource will not be adversely impacted, The bridge and road route were previously addressed through the development of the Pacific Electric Trail Bridge and the Route 66 Trailhead improvements. Fallowing the expansion of the project area to include the property west of the Sycamore Inn containing the Red Chief Motel Site a Cultural Resources Assessment (Stadnicki, August 2012) was prepared. The Stadnicki assessment concluded that the "neither the remaining buildings nor the grounds were found to meet the minimum criteria for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources or as a local landmark. The design of the original motel was creative, using Spanish Colonial Revival architectural elements in a way that was distinctive and gave the site visual identity. But with the removal of the original complex and the alterations to the remaining structure it longer conveys its significance or association with Route 66. Because the building and site do not appear to qualify for the California Register, demolition to accommodate the construction of a housing development would not have a significant effect on the environment in the context of historic resources defined by CEQA." As part of the evaluation of the current project site a Cultural Resource Assessment (Applied EarthWorks, May 2017) was prepared. The Applied Earthworks assessment identified that "a cultural resource literature and records search indicated that three archaeological resources consisting of two prehistoric artifact scatters (P-36-000897 and P-36-000898) and an abandoned historical reservoir (P-36-013927) have been recorded previously within the Project area. In addition, one built-environment resource. the Red Chief Motel (P-36-013931), has been documented within the Project area [Stadnlcki, August 2012]; this resource was previously recommended as Ineligible for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources(CRHR)or the Rancho Cucamonga Register of Historical Landmarks (RCRHL)." Additionally, "an intensive cultural resource pedestrian survey of the Project area was performed by Applied Earthworks archaeologist Justin Castells on April 15, 2017. The historical reservoir(P-36-013927)was revisited during the Phase I survey. Applied EarthWorks identified the reservoir as part of a larger historical irrigation system that also included a weir box and two pump houses. Based on historical research and field observations, Applied EarthWorks concluded that P-36-013927 does not meet the criteria for listing on the CRHR or RCRHL.. As part of the fieldwork effort, Applied EarthWorks also revisited the Red Chief Motel (P-36-013931) in order to assess the current condition of the building. As a result of this work,Applied Earthworks concurred with an earlier significance evaluation that the built-environment resource is not eligible for listing on the CRHR or RCRHL. Finally.the Phase I surveyfound no evidence of prehistoric artifacts or features within the mapped locations of P-36-000897 or P-36-000898. As the absence of surface archaeological remains does not preclude the possibility that buried cultural materials may be present within the area, Applied EarthWorks recommends that an archaeological monitor is present during ground-disturbing activities that extend into intact native sediments". Refer to Section 17a under Tribal Cultural Resources below regarding archaeological monitoring during ground disturbing activities. The project site has not been identified as a "Historic Resource" per the standards of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 2.24 (Historic Preservation). Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. Rev 9-29-15 138 P267 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, ❑RC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 22 Less Than Significani Less Potentially With Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: S7gntrcarrt "fiigadon SlgniHcant No Impact Incorrora!ed Im a.H tm act b) 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. An Archaeological Assessment of the Sycamore Village Project Site (Del Chario, May 1990) was utilized in the preparation of the Initial Study for the previously approved applications for the project site (DRC2003-00637 and SLIBTT16605). The Del Chario report concluded that all exposed ground surfaces within the project area were examined and neither artifacts nor any indication of a subsurface deposit, or midden, was encountered. Because of this, no further prehistoric archaeological investigations were recommended of the Sycamore Village Project Site. Following the expansion of the project area to include the property west of the Sycamore Inn and containing the Red Chief Motel Site a Cultural Resources Assessment(Stadnicki, August 2012) was prepared. The Stadnicki report concluded that the removal of the original complex and the alterations to the remaining front office structure (the current restaurant located directly west of the Sycamore Inn) no longer conveys its significance or association with Route 66, and neither the grounds or the site meet the minimum criteria for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources or as a local landmark. As part of the evaluation of the current project site a Cultural Resource Assessment (Applied Earthworks, May 2017) was prepared. The Applied Earthworks assessment identified that "No potentially significant prehistoric or historical cultural resources were identified during the cultural resource survey of the Project area. The survey re-identified two historic period resources(P-36-013927 and P-35-013931)within the Project area and concluded that neither was eligible for listing on the CRHR or the RCRHL. A revisit to the locations of the previously recorded prehistoric sites P-36-000897 and P-36-000898 found no evidence of artifacts or indications of subsurface deposits. As the absence of surface archaeological remains does not preclude the possibility that buried cultural materials may be present within the area, Applied Earthworks recommends that an archaeological monitor is present during ground-disturbing activities that extend into intact native sediments. It should also be noted that the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation identified the project area as being within a highly sensitive village area and requested that a monitor from their tribe be present during all ground disturbing activities. In the event that potentially significant archaeological materials are encountered during project-related construction activities, all work must be halted in the vicinity of the archaeological discovery until a qualified archaeologist can visit the site of discovery and assess the significance of the archaeological resource." 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 qualified archaeologist will 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 �I City to establish its archaeological value. Rev 9-29-15 139 P268 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUB-fT16606M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 23 Less Than Significant Less Po[erWally "th Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: 5ignlBcant bli igaCan S19r'031t N❑ in• act rnco rated Im"a ImoaC • 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} 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 (Le. 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. Rev 9-29-15 140 P269 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 24 Less Than sigrl%arlt Less Potentially. YYit! Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Sirnlflcant Ll(igaHcn Significant Nd Irr.pao Inca sled Impact I aC ■ 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 grading, existing on- site and surrounding development. The site has been previously disrupted during the construction of surrounding infrastructure and surrounding developments, the construction of a concrete reservoir facility(abandoned and partially demolished for Foothill Boulevard right-of-way improvements), demolition of the Red Chief Motel (its front office currently used as a restaurant), the parking area of the Red Chief Motel, development of the Sycamore Inn restaurant, and annual discing for weed abatement. No known religious or sacred sites exist within the project area. No evidence is in place to suggest the project site has been used for human burials. The California Health and Safety Code (Section 7050.5) 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. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. 6. GEOLOGY AN D 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-Priola 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? () € ) { } (V) b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? {} (✓} { ) [ ) c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or (} { } { ) M that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on-or off-site landslide, lateral spreading,subsidence, liquefaction or4collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-8 of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? Rev 9-29-15 141 P270 Initial Study for DRC2016-40206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga ❑RC2012-00672, ❑RC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 25 Less Than Significant Less Potentia:y With Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: sigrcficarl Kt:gaban Sigrjf:z;n9t No Impae, Incur crated Imoad F aC 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) A Geotechnica[ Engineering Report (Langan Engineering & Environmental Services, February 2015) was prepared for the project site as a geotechnical investigation and fault study. The project site is located both within and adjacent to a proposed special studies zone for the Red Hill Fault. The geotechnical investigation concluded that 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(and Etiwanda Avenue Fault Scarp)lies approximately 1/4 mile south of the site,and the Cucamonga Fault Zone lies approximately 4.5 miles north. These faults are both capable of producing Kv 6.0-7.0 earthquakes. Also, the San Jacinto fault, capable of producing up to MW 7.5 earthquakes is about 15 miles northeasterly of the site and the San Andreas, capable of up to MN 8.2 earthquakes, is about 18 miles northeasterly of the site. Each of these faults can produce strong ground shaking. Adhering to the Uniform Building Code and Standard Conditions will ensure that geologic impacts are less-than-significant. b) The City of Rancho Cucamonga is within a designated Soil Erosion Control Area Exhibit I 4.7-4 of the General Plan FPEIR. The proposed project will require the excavation, I 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 l 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 PM1e emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 or re-planted with brought resistant landscaping as soon as possible. 2) Frontage public streets shall be swept according to a schedule established by the City to reduce P M 1 e 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 iD 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 Me 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 SO[ for slope failure, landslides, and/or erosion. Areas subject to slope instability contain slopes of 30 percent or greater. Rev 9-29-15 142 P27'1 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and ❑RC2012-00673 Page 26 Less Than Significant Less Fatenflany With Yhart Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Signfcart mitiga[Ign significant No Impad Inc or,ted Impact L[m ac; 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 Hiilside Residential and Very Low Density Residential designations in the Hillside areas. The related General Plan Amendment application DRC2016-00206 was submitted to amend General Plan policythat prohibits the development of slopes that exceed 30 percent in slope. The Geotechn€cal Engineering Report (Langan Engineering & Environmental Services, February 2015) finds that slopes are anticipated to be comprised of granular soils. 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 Soboba Gravelly Loamy Sand (SoC)(0 to 9 percent slope), Greenfield Fine Sandy Loam (GtD)(9 to 15 percent slope), and Saugus Sandy Loam (ShF)(30 to 50 percent slope) Sail association according to General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.7-3. Therefore, 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 Soboba Gravelly Loamy Sand (SoC)(0 to 9 percent slope), Greenfield Fine Sandy Loam(GtD)(9 to 15 percent slope),and Saugus Sandy Loam(ShF)(30 to 50 percent slope) Soil association according to General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.7-3. With adherence to standard building techniques In accordance with the building code, 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. No adverse impacts are anticipated. 7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project., a) Generale 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) 5-3-05. 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 US EPA defines 6 key G H G s(carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CHa), nitrous oxide (N24), 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 paliution. Rev 9-29-15 143 P272 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 27 Less Than Significant Less Polentis""ly With Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: signlr;cant Wgafion SgniftFrit pap Impact Inc prated Im 8ct f act --] 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(°F) 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 (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 PMIn, PM2.s, and S02 which are monitored at the Fontana-Arrow Highway station. The ambient air quality in the project area for CO, NO2, and S02 are consistently below the relevant State and Federal standards (based on ARB and EPA from 2007, 2008, and 2009 readings). Ozone, PM1o, and PM2.5 levels 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 adopted a threshold of significance for GHG emissions. However, a screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year is based upon Rev 9-29-15 144 P273 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga ❑RC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 28 Less Tnan Sign7fr:anl Less powtially w+th Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Significant I IlAf,gation •S6gnificarst No Impart Incorporatec Impact mpar! 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 Assessment (Landrum & Brown, July 2015), total project related emissions would be 1,982 MTCO2egtyear, as shown in the fallowing table: Total Con4trtiction C:U2 Emissions Annual Emissions (MT/Year) Activity CO2 C:H4 N20 CO2EQ Derriolition 38.9 0,01 0.00 39.1 Site Preparation 19.3 0.01 0.00 19.4 Grading 4134.4 0.03 0.00 135.1 Construction (2016) 39.9 0.01 0.00 40.1 Construction (2017) - 508.4 0.08 0.00 510.2 Construction (2018) 172.5 0.03 0.00 173.1 Painting 21.7� 0.01 0.00 21.9 paving 4.8 0.00 0.00 4.8 Total Emissions 940.1 0.17 0.00 943.7 Project Life Average Annual Construction Emissions{ 31.3 0.01 O.QU 3 i.5 `Fated on 30 Year Project Life E `•[A+till[ :•cgnrf7 irze-rhrer.hnids Anittlal Project CO2 Emissions Annual Enissions (MT1yr) Activity CO2 CH. N20 CO2EQ Vehicular Emissions 1,434.4 0.05 0.00 1,435.5 Natural Gas Combustion �189.1 0.00 0.00 19013 Electricity 240.0 0.01 0.00 241.0 Landscaping 2.9 0.00 0.00 3.0 Consumer Products 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 w Architectural Coating_s 0.0 0.00. 0.00 0.0 Municipal Waste 16.1 0.95 0.00 36.0 Water 67.8 0.37 0.01 78.4 Total En►iissions 1,950.3 1.39 0.01 1,984.1 Annualized Construction 31.3 0.01 0.00 31_5 Ernissions Total Anntial Project 1,981.6 1.39 0.01 2,01.5.5 Emissions Screening Threshold: 3,000 Exceed Threshold? No Rev 9-29-15 145 P274 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 29 Less Than Significant Lcss Potentially With Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources; Significant Mitigaticn Significant No rn ael Incorporated Irr. act fir act As shown in the table, direct and indirect operational emissions associated with the project as compared to the SCAQMD's interim threshold of significance of 3,000 MTCO2e per year would result in a less than significant impact with respect to GHG emissions. Cumulative Short Term (Construction) GHG Emissions -- The General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.5) indicates 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,CN,and N20. CHn is emitted during the fueling of heavy equipment. Based on the Greenhouse Gas Assessment(Landrum &Brown,July 2015), 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 d❑ 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 5CAQM❑ 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 honct 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. CEDA 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 Rev 9-29-15 146 P275 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUBM 6606M, City of Rancho Cucamonga ORC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 30 Less Thar. Significant Less Po:ezGally With Thar. Issues and Supporting information Sources: Significant bnttgaoon significant No Impact Incorporated I IrFIPWA Im a,;t 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 proposes to amend the General Plan to permit development on slopes 30 percent and greater, the subdivision of a 24.19 acre site into 6 parcels, and the development of 175 condominium units(including 9 live-work units)in the Mixed Use(MU) District. The project site characterized by the existing condominiums,vacant land and golf course land uses to the north,residential and commercial land uses to the west, the Pacific Electric Trail and Route 66 Trailhead to the east,and residential and commercial land uses to the south. 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 Assessment(Landrum& Brown,July 2015), 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 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. Rev 9-29-15 147 P276 Initial Study for ❑RC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 31 Less Than SfgrAicant Less Pdcn[?a11y With Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: 81gnlsoant Mitigation slgnfficant No f.T act Incur orated Impact Impart ■ Install efficient lighting and lighting control systems. ■ Install light colored"cool" roofs and cool pavements. Install solar or light emitting diodes (LED's)for outdoor lighting. 9) Prepare a comprehensive water conservation strategy appropriate for the project and include the following: • install.water efficient landscapes and irrigation systems and devices in compliance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. • Use reclaimed water for landscaping within the project if available or as required by the Cucamonga Valley Water District(CVWD). ■ Design building to be water efficient by installing water efficient fixtures and appliances including low flow faucets, dual flush toilets and waterless urinalslwater 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) No other applicable plans, policies,or regulations adopter{for the purpose of reducing GHG emissian 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 Assoclatlon(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 Assessment(Landrum&Brown,July 2015),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 Jess than a significant impact. Rev 9-29-15 148 P277 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga ❑RC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 32 Les;Than Significant L_ s polertially Wtn Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: VOificant PJ;Ugnion Significant No Impact lncorp�rated Impact Impact S. HAZARDS AND WASTE MATERIALS. Would the project: a) Create a slgnificant 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 [ ) { } [ } V) acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 114 mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of { ) [ ) [ } V) 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, [ ] [ ] [ ) V) 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 [ } [ ] [ ] 0/) adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, [} { ] [ ) V) 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 proposed project is located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between San Bernardino Road and Baker Avenue in a hillslde area on the southerly flank of Red Hill and surrounding the historic Sycamore Inn restaurant. The project proposes to amend the General Plan to permit development on slopes 30 percent and greater, the subdivision of a 24.19 acre site into 6 parcels,and the development of 176 condominium units(including 9 live-work units) in the Mixed Use [MU] District. The project site characterized by the existing condominiums, vacant land and golf course land uses to the north, residential and commercial land uses to the west, the Pacific Electric Trail and Route 66 Trailhead to the east, and residential and commercial land uses to the south. The City participates in a countywide interagency coalition, which is considered a full service Hazardous Materials Rev 9-29-15 149 P278 Initial Study for ❑RC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga ❑RC2012-00572, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 33 Less Thsn $igra icent Less Polentialy With Then Issues and Supporting Information Sources: slrninc3nt MitigaGan sionificant No m a:t !nccrporated [r. act Irn c[ 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 andlor waste will reduce the potential for significant impacts to a level less-than- significant. Therefore, 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. Therefore, no adverse impacts are expected. c) The project site is located within 'f mile of a sensitive receptor—residences to the north and south; however, the uses proposed do not create objectionable odors. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. d) The proposed project is not listed as a hazardous waste or substance materials site. A site inspection in March 2016 did not reveal the presence of discarded drums or illegal dumping of hazardous materials, Therefore, no impact is anticipated. e) The site is located within an airport land use plan (the Ontario Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan(ALUCP))according to the General Plan Figure PS-7 and General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.8-1; however, the site is not within 2 miles of a public airport. The project site is located approximately 3 miles northerly of the Ontario Airport and is offset north of the flight path. The project is compliant with the height limits of the ALUCP. Therefore, no impact is anticipated. f) There are no private airstrips within the City. The nearest private airstrip, Cable Airport, is located approximately 2 and 112 miles to the west of the City's westerly limits. Therefore, 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 3 years, includes policies and procedures to he administered by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in the event of a disaster. Because the project includes at least two points of public street access and is required to comply with all applicable City codes, including local fire ordinances, no adverse impacts are anticipated. h) Rancho Cucamonga faces the greatest ongoing threat from wind-driven fires in the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone found in the northern part of the City; however, the proposed project site is not located within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone according to General Plan Figure PS-1. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. Rev 9-29-15 150 P279 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 34 Less Than Significarl lass Pater.'ially Wish Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: significant Mifigafion Significant No ImoaV 1rrarporited Im act Impact 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER DUALITY. 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 ( } } ( } {•f) 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 ( ) { } { J { } 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 Reglon, 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 Rev 9-29-15 151 P28O Initial Study for DR02016-00206, SUBTf16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga ❑RC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 35 Less Than Significant Luss Foter.tially with T7an Issues and Supporting Information Sources: significant K&Uga:'on Significant hh Lnaact Iris crated Impact tRaacE significant redevelopment. Prior to commencement of construction of a project, a discharger must submit a Notice of Intent (N01) to obtain coverage under the General Permit. The General Permit requires all dischargers to comply with the following during construction activities, including site clearance and grading: • Develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that would specify Best Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent construction pollutants from contacting storm water and with the intent of keeping all products of erosion from moving off-site into receiving waters. ■ Eliminate or reduce non-storm water discharges to storm sewer systems and other waters of the nation. • Perform inspections of all BMPs. Waste discharges include discharges of storm water and construction project discharges. A construction project for new development or significant redevelopment requires an NPDES permit. Construction project proponents are required to prepare an SWPPP. To comply with the NPDES, the project's construction contractor will be required to prepare an SWPPP during construction activities, and a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for post-construction operational management of storm water runoff. The applicant has submitted a WOMP (David Evans and Associates, April 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. Rev 9-29-15 152 1 P281 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 35 Less Than sign Ucant Less Potentfaly W.th Th.n Issues and Supporting Information Sources: 50ficant MiitlgaHon &gni':caat Na Im aN, IR:a vated Imoau Imaact significant redevelopment. Prior to commencement of construction of a project, a discharger must submit a Notice of Intent (N01) to obtain coverage under the General Permit. The General Permit requires all dischargers to comply with the following during construction activities, including site clearance and grading: • Develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that would specify Best Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent construction pollutants from contacting storm water and with the intent of keeping all products of erosion from moving off-site into receiving waters. • Eliminate or reduce non-storm water discharges to storm sewer systems and other waters of the nation. Perform inspections of all BMPs. Waste discharges include discharges of storm water and construction project discharges. A construction project for new development or significant redevelopment requires an NPDES permit. Construction project proponents are required to prepare an SWPPP. To comply with the NPDES, the project's construction contractor will be required to prepare an SWPPP during construction activities,and a Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP) for post-construction operational management of storm water runoff. The applicant has ` submitted a WQMP (David Evans and Associates, April 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: 17 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. Rev 9-29-15 153 P282 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M. City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 36 Less Than S:gn'dicanl Less Potentlalty With Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources; significant 1+ rgauon SigrOoant rJo Impact Incorporated Impact Im act 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 1n order to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site. 5) Prior to issuance of grading or paving permits, the applicant shall obtain a Notice of Intent (NOI) to comply with obtaining coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Storm Water Permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Evidence that this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Discharger's Identification Number) shall be submitted to the City Building Official for coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit. Post-Construction Operational: B) 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 .tune 2004. j7) Landscaping plans shall include provisions for controlling and minimizing the use of fertilizerstpesticideslherbicides. 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 GVVVD,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 China 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 RG-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. Wherefore, no adverse 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. 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 Rev 9-29-15 154 P283 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUBTT166C5M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 37 tms n,. significant Less Potentially with Lmn Issues and Supporting Information Sources: signlreanl M69adon Significant Nc Im acl ncoranmted Im c: mpact and City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits, Therefore,the project will not result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. 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 hardseape proposed on a site; however, the project will not alter the course of any stream or river. Ali 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. Therefore, 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 an 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. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated. f) Grading activities associated with the construction period could result in a temporary increase in the amount of suspended solids in surface flows during a concurrent storm event, thus resulting In surface water quality impacts. The site is for new developmenUsignificant redevelopment;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) 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. 9) Prior to issuance of grading or paving permits, the applicant shall obtain a Notice of Intent (NDI) 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 Numher) shall be submitted to the City Building Official for coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit. 10) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the WQMP (David I Evans and Associates, April 2017) to reduce construction pollutants from entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. g) The project site 1s located within a I00-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 Rev 9-29-15 155 i I P284 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga ❑RC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and ❑RC2012-00673 Page 38 Less Than SignificantLS:Janiflcarm Patenlia'ly With Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Signfcant Mltigaton Notrnpact Vc cratedIm act 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. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. 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. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. l) 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. All new construction is required to comply with the City's Floodplain Management Regulation which would ensure thatfuture development would not impede or redirect floodwaters and would be adequately anchored to prevent flotation, collapse, or lateral movement of structures within the fioodplain. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. 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 } { } {) V) 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 { } ( ) ( } {1) or natural community conservation plan? Comments: a) The proposed project is located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between San Bernardino Road and Baker Avenue in a hillside area on the southerlyflank of Red hill and surrounding the historic Sycamore Inn restaurant. The project proposes to amend the General Plan to permit development on slopes 30 percent and greater, the subdivision of a 24.19 acre site into 6 parcels, and the development of 176 condominium units(including 9 live-work units) in the Mixed Use (MU) District. The project site characterized by the existing condominiums,vacant land and golf course land uses to the north, residential and Rev 9-29-15 156 P285 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga ❑RC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 39 Less Than Significant Less Po:eMally With Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: significant Wigabon sighlfir�ln( Nn tm a:l hCarporated Impact Im acl commercial land uses to the west, the Pacific Electric Trail and Route fib Trailhead to the east, and residential and commercial land uses to the south. The project is designed consistent with the Mixed Use (MU) District development Standards and will include elements that are consistent with surrounding development, thus becoming a part of the larger community. Additionally, the project site plan and architectural massing were designed to be sensitive to the existing neighborhood to the north of the project site through the placement of the buildings that eliminate the possibility of physically impacting an established community. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. b) The project site land use designation is Mixed Use (MU) 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. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. c) The project site is not located within any habitat conservation or natural community plan area. According to General Plan Figure RC-4 and Section 4.10 of the General Plan FPEIR, the project site is not within an area of sensitive biological resources; therefore, development will not adversely affect rare or endangered species of plants or animals because of the fact that the project is surrounded by urbanized land uses and is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Plan. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. 11. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project. i a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral ( } ( } ( } (J) 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 [ } ( } ( } [J) 'i 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, no adverse impacts are anticipated. b} The site is not deslgnated by the General Plan, Figure RC-2 and Table RC-1,as a valuable mineral resource recovery site. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. I 12. NOISE. Would the project result in: a} Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in ( } () (J) ( } 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 ( } ( ) () (J) ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise [ } {] ( ) (J) levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Rev 9-29-15 157 P286 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 40 Less Than Significa+lt LM Ntenlwly With Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: signi6card MiGgalian Significant No Impart 11rimpornted Impact frwact 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? 0 For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, } } V) 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 Figures P5-9 and PS-10. The proposed project is located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between San Bernardino Road and Baker Avenue in a hillside area on the southerly flank of Red Hill and surrounding the historic Sycamore Inn restaurant. The project proposes to amend the General Plan to permit development on slopes 30 percent and greater, the subdivision of a 24.19 acre site into 6 parcels, and the development of 176 condominium units(including 9 live-work units)in the Mixed Use(MU) District. The project site characterized by the existing condominiums,vacant land and golf course land uses to the north,residential and commercial land uses to the west, the Pacific Electric Trail and Route 66 Trailhead to the east,and residential and commercial land uses to the south. Due to the proximity of Foothill Boulevard a Noise Analysis (Mestre Greve Associates, July 2015) was prepared for the project site. For exterior noise mitigation the analysis found that in order to meet the 65 CNEL exterior noise standard, noise barriers will be required along Foothill Boulevard. The noise barriers may consist of a wall, a berm, or a combination of the two. With walls located at the top of slope the first floor exterior living areas are projected to meet the 65 CNEL outdoor noise standard. For interior noise mitigation the analysis found that with the exterior mitigation measures implemented the first floor exterior building surfaces will be exposed to noise levels of less than 65 CNEL,and therefore will require less than 20 dB exterior to interior noise reduction in order to meet the 45 CNEL interior noise standard. Utilizing construction practices common in California, residential buildings achieve outdoor to indoor noise reductions of at least 20 dB. Therefore, all first floor rooms are projected to meet the 45 CNEL interior noise standard without building upgrades. Second floor building surfaces in the project will be exposed to a maximum noise level of 69.3 CNEL, and therefore,will require at least 24.3 dB noise reduction in order to meet the 45 CNEL interior noise standard. Detailed engineering calculations are needed for building attenuation requirements greater than 20 dB. Based upon the construction details and the EWNR values,the exterior to interior noise reduction was calculated for a number of rooms in the project. The results of the EVVNR calculations indicate that the worst-case room will achieve an outdoor to indoor noise reduction of about 24.7 dB,which exceeds the required reduction of 24.3 dB. Therefore,all rooms are projected to meet the 45 CNEL interior noise standard without building upgrades. Rev 9-29-15 158 P287 Initial Study for ❑RC2016-00206, SUBM 6605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and ❑RC2012-00673 Page 41 Less Tnan Siorlfcant Less Polentolly LYIn Tars Issues and Supporting Information Sources: S190cant Miggaurrn Vgnircart NO Impact lLnco tcd I Impact [mpacl Therefore, based on the information provided in the Noise Analysis, the proposed project would not expose people to or generate noise levels in excess of the standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. With the following standard mitigation measures and special mitigation measures, the noise impacts on the project will be less than significant. Exterior. 1 y Prior to the issuance of any grading plans a construction-related noise mitigation plan shall be submitted to the-City for review and approval. The Plan shall depict the location of the construction equipment and how the noise from this equipment would be mitigated during construction. 2) during all project site excavation and grading, the project contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers consistent with the manufacturers'standards. 3) The project contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment s❑ that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive receptors nearest the project site. 4) The construction contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction-related noise sources and noise-sensitive receptors nearest the project site during all project construction. 5) The construction contractor shall obtain the City's approval for its haul plan, ' with the planned haul truck routes avoiding residential areas to the extent feasible. 6) The construction contractor shall change the timing and/or sequence of the ' noisiest construction operations to avoid sensitive times of the day. 7) Prior to the issuance of any grading plans, the applicant shall submit a construction-related noise mitigation plan for Planning Director review and approval. This plan shall depict the location of construction equipment and how the noise from this equipment would be mitigated during construction of the project. 8) During construction,the contractor shall ensure all construction equipment is equipped with appropriate noise attenuating devices. 9) Idling equipment shall be turned off when not in use. 10) Equipment shall be maintained so that vehicles and their loads are secured from rattling and banging. 11) In order to meet the ES CNEL exterior noise standard, noise barriers ranging from 4 to 5.5 feet (Noise Analysis, Mestre Greve Associates, July 2015, Exhibit 3) will be required along Foothill Boulevard. The noise barriers may consist of a wall, berm, or combination of the two. The noise barriers must have a surface density of at least 3.5 pounds per square foot, and shall have Rev 9-29-15 159 P288 Initial Study for ❑RC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 42 Less Than significant Less Potentially lvittt Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: slgrdncant Uicabcn significant No Impact Into sled Im acl Irn d no openings or gaps. The wall may be constructed of stud and stucco, 3/8- inch plate glass, or 518-inch Plexiglas, any masonry material, or a combination of these materials. The first floor exterior living areas are projected to meet the 65 CNEL outdoor noise standard with the specified noise barriers. The walls shall be located at the top of slope. inferior: 12) For proper acoustical performance, all exterior windows and doors, and sliding glass doors must have a positive seal and leaksleracks must be kept to a minimum. 13) To prevent sound leaks the following shall be provided: ■ an concrete slab,the first layer of 518"gypsum board on the unit side ,.R s should be sealed top and bottom with resilient caulk, as well as around the junction poxes. ■ Window rough-in seams should be no greater than V,and ail seams should be caulked with resilient caulking. ■ Seal, caulk, gasket or weather-strip all joints and seams to eliminate air leakage through these assemblies. Includes around window and doorframes, at penetrations through walls,and all other openings in the building envelope. r 14) All first floor rooms are projected to meet the 45 CNEL interior noise standard through the installation of the exterior noise barriers along Foothill Boulevard. All rooms, including second and third floor units, are projected to meet the 46 CNEL interior noise standard without building upgrades. 16) All buildings exposed to noise levels greater than 57 CNEL will meet the 45 CNEL interior noise standard only with windows closed. Adequate ventilation,with windows closed,will be required for those units adjacent to Foothill Boulevard (Noise Analysis, Mestre Greve Associates, July 2015, Exhibit 4). 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. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. c) The primary source of ambient noise levels in Rancho Cucamonga is traffic. The proposed project site is located on the'north side of Foothill Boulevard, between San Bernardino Road and Baker Avenue in a hillside area on the southerly flank of Red Hill and surrounding the historic Sycamore Inn restaurant. The project proposes the subdivision of a 24.19 acre site into 6 parcels, and the development of 175 condominium units (including 9 live-work units) in the Mixed Use (MU) District. Because the project will not significantly increase traffic as analyzed in Section 16 Trans portationJTraffic; it will likely not increase ambient noise levels within the vicinity of the project. Therefore, no adverse lmpacts are anticipated. Rev 9-29-15 160 P289 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, ❑RC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 43 Less Than Slgnificanl Less Patertially With Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: significant Midgation Sigri`:ani No Impact I.nccr orated Impact Impact d) The General Plan FPEIR(Section 4.12) indicates that during a construction phase, on-site stationary sources, heavy-duty construction vehicles, and construction equipment, will generate noise exceeding City standards. The fallowing measures are provided to mitigate the short-term noise impacts: 16) 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. 17) 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 shalt immediately notify the Building Official. If noise levels exceed the above standards,then construction activities shall be reduced in intensity to a level of compliance with above noise standards or halted. The 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: 18) Haul truck deliveries shall not take place between the hours of 0.00 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 d❑ 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 3 miles northerly of the Ontario Airport and is offset north of the Bight path. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. f) The nearest private airstrip, Cable Airport, is located approximately 2 112 miles to the west of the City's westerly limits. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. 13. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project. a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either ( ) } { ] V) 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, ( } ( } ( } V) necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Rev 9-29-15 161 t P290 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and ❑RC2012-00673 Page 44 Less Than Sigrr`.ant Less Potenlialy With Tnan Issues and Supporting Information Sources: signr:manl Milioa"'on significant hEo Impact 11nmrinoraled Impact Impact 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 development of a 175 condominium units (including 9 live-work units) on 24.19 acres of land. Although the projectwill increase the 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 which density was analyzed as part of the build out in the General Plan FPfiR. Since the project is an infill project and surrounded by developed infrastructure, adequate schools and the utility capacities to serve the project, this minimal increase in population is considered less than significant. Construction activities at the site will be short-term and will not attract new employees to the area. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated_ b) The majority of the project site is vacant and the only existing use is a restaurant building, which was previously the Red Chief Motel front office, located on the western portion of the site, and there will be no displacement of housing or people. Therefore, no adverse impact is expected. 0 The majority of the project site is vacant and the only existing use is a restaurant Building, which was previously the Red Chief Motel front office, located on the western portion of the site, and 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? [ } ( ) { ) V) b) Police protection? ( ) (} [) V) c) Schools? ( } { } ( ) (✓) d) Parks? [} { } ( } (V) e) Other public facilities? ( } { ) [ ) v) Comments: a) The project site, located at the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Hermosa Avenue, would be served by Fire Station #172 at 9612 San Bernardino Road, located approximately 1.6 miles from the project site. The project will not require the construction of any new facililies or alteration of any existing facilities or cause a decline in the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new facilities. Standard conditions of approval from the Uniform Building and Fire Codes will be placed on the project to lessen the future demand and impacts to fire services. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. Rev 9-29-15 162 P29'1 Initial Study for ❑RC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 45 �essThan Sia_ni6cant Less Puter.:ially With Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: sigrif ent Mtigadon. Signifcan; No Irriaact Incur cralo� Im ac. Imoam b) 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. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. c} The site is in a developed area currently served by the Central School District and the Chaffey Joint Union High School District. The project will be required to pay School Fees as.prescribed by State law prior to the issuance of building permits. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. d) The site is in a developed area, currently served by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The nearest park, Red Hill Community Park located at 7484 Vineyard Avenue, is located approximately 1.4 miles northeast 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. A standard condition of approval will require the developer to pay Park Development Fees. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. e) The proposed project will utilize existing public facilities. The site is in a developing 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 Pau[ A. Biane Library has an additional 14,000 square foot shell of vacant library space that is planned for future Library use. The.proposed project is consistent with the General Plan for which the F P E I R was prepared and Impacts evaluated. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. 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 en the environment? Comments: a} The site is in a developed area, currently served by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The nearest park, Red Hill Community Park located at 7484 Vineyard Avenue, is located approximately 1.4 miles northeast of the project site. A standard condition of approval will require the developer to pay Park Development Fees. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. b) The project does not include the development of new or the expansion of existing recreational facilities. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. Rev 9-29-15 163 i P292 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 46 Less Than Slgnificant Less Potendally With Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: slenerca-It MiUl atlon Significant No Impac[ Inc ora:ed Inilmd Irnm 16. TRANSPORTATIONITRAFFIC. 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} 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 proposed project is located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between San Bernardino Road and Baker Avenue in a hillside area on the southerly flank of Red Hill and surrounding the historic Sycamore Inn restaurant. The project proposes to amend the General Plan to permit development on slopes 30 percent and greater, the subdivision of a 24.19 acre site into 6 parcels, and the development of 175 condominium units (including 9 live-work units) in the Mixed Use (MU) District. The project site characterized by the existing condominiums,vacant land and golf course land uses to the north, residential and commercial land uses to the west, the Pacific Electric Trail and Route 66 7railhead to the east, and residential and commercial [and uses to the south. The proposed project is forecast to generate 1,042 daily trips, with 80 trips in the a.m. peak hour, and 94 trips in the p.m. peak hour (Linscott, Law& Greenspan engineers, September 2015), as shown in the following table: Rev 9-29-15 164 P293 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 47 Lcss Thai Sipificanl Less Potentially wth Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Significant W.igation Significant 1c Impacl ncarporaled Im let Im a:t PROJ£CTTRIP GEtIEPLATIJN RATES AND PCRECAST Daiky A—M Peak Haar PYS Peas,Hour ITT Laud ise C"odeTuejert Description :-Way Eufel• Exh i Total En"r Exit Torai Trio Gen ernrion Factor,: I I f I • 230:RrsidrrliLal Ceudaserinium`Tonvilousr{1"Dli] 5.81 170o I 83-v f 144 6790 j IM° 0.52 • 710:Grlitral Dflirr Surldmg[TEIl00d SF] 11.03 ss°o 12°• ! 1 5Q 171i 133% 1.49 Propasa,1 Prat?r Trio Cane;:srlorr Foie asr: ` i I ' • S)catnore Heights C'ondonliniltnis—(175 DV) 1.017 13 64 77 61 30 91 � I • Syesm ore H tights LIve.Nark—(3.241 SF) 25 3 U 3 i ? I 3 I Propaaed Pi oiert Ti'ip Geueratiou Forecast 1.042 16 I 6-4 39 62 3; 94 �n c: • 12-DD—Trip cads rcr D diag im, TE'IOCA SF—Trip tads per 1000 SF�crlvFutml Under existing conditions, all intersections operate at satisfactory LOS C or better during the AM and PM peak hours, with the exception of the intersection of Foothill Boulevard and Red Hill Country Club Drive, which is unsignalized and currently operates at LOS F during both the AM and PM peak hours, Per the Traffic Impact Study(Linscott, Law&Greenspan Engineers, September 2015), it is not uncommon that unsignalized public street intersections andlor driveways that have direct access to regionallmajor arterials, such as Foothill Boulevard, operate at an unacceptable LOS due to the limited gaps in traffic and the high volume of traffic that utilizes these streets as commuter routes. Under the opening year scenario, aI[ intersections operate satisfactorily at LOS C or better with project mitigation. The City Engineer reviewed the Traffic Impact Study submitted for the project and concurs with the report's findings. Existing Levels of Service Exsnita Wit PROJECT Cc tic I one.PEad HouR IISTEpsEcihotd CAPkCRYAH LyssSuFutARY [i1 (21 (1) [�] Eslsshl2 1 8shtlnr EShIInt "I ill PruJee[ Slgalh:aai pith P10J tit TI-af is C ohdIlion% TMlik COMM14M5 [Lipari Wilh%IW;adnn That DeDy ^" Urin; Uri:lr Kee Iutrrsection Ptlind (5.1) Ld.ti Itv) LCIS ]'es:tie [5't'] LOS Gmi a.7 e9w i1 .LNi :7 3 R 17 i II NO till 8 ' Fa54Sitl8uc]et.ad PAI �:s [' ):s C' do _�� C Ref PaIt C'ora:7V Clot.Drf.jI Xu 107.2 r 1"2.1 F Yet !'7' CI F��dv[18m+'eti-mS Poi KI. F 3'!.I F 3r5 Carrlrlraa 5rrret ar AM I la:i R tit B N, -- 3 1 Reri hill C=!:. •Chl6 T11n'r P%i 70 r. S.i r1 No — - :an B3 kulhnu Ruud Dt .Lti __' L' "_6 C No _'_•'J C FaatS:S Roelesvd PTI '7.1 C' _'=a C X9 yIK • ., +wor.4 pe>:r5xlr{dr]n•1 • LOS=[rrrl er Srni:r,p.'rw sri'n i-)MI rrr iLr LPS dcliwt m. • Sold P,lar LIDS••alurs mdgue ad%x a irn:ee Ir•.rts b—Ar the LM srt,:ae.t•MfttM3d as eL11erpnn Rev 9-29-15 165 P294 IniUaI Study for DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, ❑RC2016-00207, and ❑RC2012-00673 Page 48 Less Than 51grdTicant Lass potentially With Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: sgnifiean, N411Gga@an Slgrd`:anl ENaIm ct Inc ora;ed Im act Opening Year bevels of Service 1 m Ma"P*rxh6 PEASI HouR MERs LGncei CaPac[SY AH ALY&L91.umug1 rl I-I `I ltl [51 i V—lans 7'rnr 2013 1•rvl_pia f\xed ll.'r I'1'Ir4o 1F P[atee r MJIU Prnlrp 5l$t,incjw I a']14 P[grrer 1 rJlirc cec rrn laa, L rramr CwL[wu+ k r•m r Coo J llloav Iciparl 11'n H1.11I[}l non 7tlne ors.. Frl.• Gel{ �llela} -- K,,Ini mrFo4 NLIQ1I! 4%1F LOh I 1+11 LOS Ia ri 1.05 Ceti?n 1,y L6i ow..a.—A A.11 Irt ri ` 1-] Ir r*9 R �e IaI R I i.tlIil nark•.0 Tl .3, L S}0 C :L+ 1 ti� :�d t 8 xt 1141 C".'F5 e*'h Dn'w AM In+: k- :I.� 1- 1 51. I r Y., F.aGl1 a•,r,rc.>:a Em 5a43 1 I ow9 1 1 idea, F CanvLaslml u A5! 1.31 R Ih' ❑ it I R to NL.I HE C.:w•u1 CIvL D.— ;rm 19 A i I A 1 I Ski Hrl:�d+:aaJ):�vJn AM 23' L ` , + L• rl! ( v, ;1+I � C r.+`:[I(LWn n1 fil _.S C C j ;S1 { MR' L 'M" • . .w...t.gn k..lr J,L.] • Lo�•;e:rl.[`m :;Y ry r!Rro/d:.r•!•nJl-.'n-.r lnti.fa:�n n• • 6•W CrI,•I,r,.H.,r.al,r.Y.n•r n•r L.rl.E,.nlryU W,.,s.r,�S wa.rJn�`.,•,3..v Year 2035 Levels of Service: G EZ.EFA.-Fv ri 3IQ)• UT cOhCITIOhS PrA l[HUM WTEnEer-i j co4caY AFU LYs,s suu.FbARY III [''-r I-`I lal t G: r'iF P1.3 Hvhro is li.4rf•1 plan Rullanrs[ I r-nml Na111a T4.ur i?i r,r,'IS L1 lI�011e PYOIHr 15 irh]'l*'r 1IRLI-I.1 n[ 11 MIJ Prvjrrl i 1'JlTti[M14•Ir11an• infL'(Cno,al[Wn, CL.me[onru*bv71 Irapar!—k R It 1,LHri=Irhu I[�e NU � — Urla} - •y Lrrat' i [I velar F.n Inemrclm tl a PewF i p-t LOi (—I LOS h 1I LO% j Yn Ye I (.FI LOi Uir-,A•..:W r. At l"3 8 I :I: C" ?I 1 [' 1u -I - FarhJlD=I1 1[4 rsL I 'r i L 1 .1• [ <;Y R.d II III C-4N 101'M1 0, 4 AN :Irvr: 1 F.-gwl Sac[-.0 1 F1,! 1:+! k' J_' [' !•[ [ do 1 RA FIill i sear%fir[u r1 a[ .111 L �n 3 C,w[r.u1 P\I I ;6 1 [ :'1 L \a runrL•xv iieei,[ ,L1! I Id r 8 11 0 a IL R ' NO i AM FIII!Caovr.Chb prn•r 711 i 79 A 26 L F v .% }•, 1L l:3TJx:—K—I it .11 I --; C Mo 6 114) U tin I rp: p 1 I;1 Ii .Ir„r • ior•:r.nelsaxr:y..rn:nol•::.r,a.l.�[rrm.wa�r:_�rr • e.0 ww env.w..rk;,rre•.rs.,...nr:r s,.-tr Lvv o�l,s.c.-.aul�Ca.ryw Different from the two preceding tables, the 2035 Buildout analysis assumes the realignment of Red Hill Country Club Drive on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, west of the proposed project. Additionally, the 2035 Buildout analysis for the intersection of San Bernardino Road and Foothill Boulevard is forecast to operate at an adverse LOS during the PM peak hour(LOS F). However,the implementation of recommended improvements will offset the Project impact and return the operating condition of the intersection to an acceptable LOS during the AM and PM peak hours at year 2035. 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 Clty has established a Transportation Development fee that must be paid by the applicant prior to issuance of Rev 9-29-15 166 P295 Initial Study for DRC201.6-00206, SUBM 6605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and ❑RC2012-00673 Page 49 Less Than Significant Less Polentially Wilh Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Slgrlricanl PAligalion 51gff-.ant Nb 1 aet Incorporated Impact Impact building-permits. Pees are used to fund roadway improvements necessary to support adequate traffic circulation. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. b) In November 2004, San Bernardino County voters passed the Measure I extension which requires local jurisdictions to impose appropriate fees a 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. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipa(ed. c) Located approximately 3 miles northerly of the Ontario Airport, the site is offset north of the flight path and will not change air traffic patterns. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. d) The project is in an area that is mostly developed with commercial and residential developments. 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. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. E 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. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. f) The proposed project is located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between San iernardino Road and Baker Avenue in a hillside area on the southerly flank of Red Hill and surrounding the historic Sycamore Inn restaurant. The project proposes the subdivision of a 24.19 acre site into 6 parcels, and the development of 115 condominium units (including 9 live-work units) in the Mixed Use (MU) District. The project design provides typical features to support transportation and vehicle trip reduction (e.g., bus bays, bicycle racks, carpool parking, etc.), including local infrastructure (e.g., streets, sidewalks, and traffic/pedestrian signals), level topography, supporting transportation, and vehicle trip reduction. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. Rev 9-29-15 167 P296 initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUBT1716605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 50 Less Than Significant Less %tanbally With Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Significant Wlgahan signidicar'. No Wpm Incorporated Impact Impact 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), or 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(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 (Applied Earthworks, 2017). 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 60 cultural resource investigations have been conducted within a 1 mile search of the project site between 1973 and 2015. Five of these studies encompass portions of the project area. As a result of these studies, the entire project site has been previously surveyed. A total of 55 cultural resources have been documented within a one-mile radius of the project site. Four cultural resources have been previously documented identified within the project site;these resources include three archaeological sites and a built-environment resource. A cultural resource survey of the project area was conducted by Applied Earthworks on April 25, 2017. Survey trarnsects were oriented in an east-west direction and were spaced 10-15 meters apart. The project area contained a range of topography from flat to hilly terrain with slopes that exceeded 25 degrees. Sandy, alluvial deposits containing metamorphic cobbles were found on the flatter portions of the project area, while slopes and hilltops were characterized by reddish-brown clay loam. Vegetation included sycamores, coast live oak, chamise, and weedy species, including invasive wild mustard. The western, northern, and northeastern portions of the project area contained patches of grasses and weeds that were characterized by poor ground visibility (10-40%). Ground visibility was generally good (50-80%)in the other portions of the Project area No potentially significant prehistoric or historical cultural resources were identified during the cultural resource survey of the project area; however, two cultural resources were identified within the project area as a result of the survey efforts. These resources include the historical reservoir and irrigation system (P-36-013927) and historical building (P-36- Rev 9-29-15 . 168 r P29T Initial Study for ❑RC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 51 Less Than Sionilimnt Les; Pctentially With Tnan Issues and Supporting Information Sources: agnifieent 1&galon S3nificant No Im ad -----oretad m aFC I 013931); neither resources was eligible for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources or the Rancho Cucamonga Register of Historical Landmarks. A revisit to the locations of the previously recorded prehistoric sites P-36-000897 and P-36-000898 found no evidence of artifacts or indications of subsurface deposits. Furthermore, no newly identified cultural resources were documented during the Phase I survey. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. b) In conformance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, a Cultural Resource Assessment was performed on the project site by Applied EarthWcrks(May 2017). 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 60 cultural resource investigations have been conducted within a 1 mile search of the project site between 1973 and 2015. Five of these studies encompass portions of the project area. As a result of these studies, the entire project site has been previously surveyed. A total of 55 cultural resources have been documented within a ❑ne-mile radius of the project site. Four cultural resources have been previously documented identified within the project site; these resources include three archaeological sites and a built-environment resource, No potentially significant cultural resources were identified during the cultural resource survey of the project area;however,two cultural resources were identified within the project area as a result of the survey efforts. These resources include the historical reservoir and irrigation system (P-35-013927) and historical building (P-36-013931); neither resources was eligible for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources or the Rancho Cucamonga Register of Historical Landmarks. A revisit to the locations of the previously recorded prehistoric sites P-36-000897 and P-36-000898 found no evidence of artifacts or indications of subsurface deposits. Furthermore, no newly identified cultural resources were documented during the Phase I survey. In the event that potentially significant archaeological materials are encountered during project related construction activities, all work must be halted in the vicinity of the archaeological discovery until a qualified archaeologist can visit the site of discovery and assess the significance of the archaeological resource. As well, Health and Safety Code 7050.5, CEQA 15064.5(e), and Public Resources Code 5097.98 mandate the process to be followed in the unlikely event of an accidental discovery of any human remains in a location other than a dedicated cemetery. As required by Senate Bill 18 (SE 18), the City submitted Tribal Consultation Requests for General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206 to the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, the San Manual Band of Mission Indians, the Gabrieieno Band of Mission Indians — Kizh Nation, the Morongo Band of Mission Indians, the Serrano Nation of Mission Indians, the Gabrieleno/Tongva Nation, the Gabrieieno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians, and the San Fernando Band of Mission Indians. The notices were mailed on July 6, 2016 and provided for a 90-day comment period ending on October 4,2016. Of the 8 tribes who were notified, none submitted a response requesting consultation during the notification period. As required by Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52), the City submitted Triba] Consultation Requests to the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, the San Manual Band of Mission Indians, the San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians, and the Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians following a completeness determination for Design Review DRC2012-00672. The notices were mailed on February 16, 2017 and provided for a 30-day comment period ending on March 20, 2017. No responses were received during this notification period; however, the Rev 9-29-15 169 P298 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 52 Less Than slgnifca'It Less Polentlally Wth Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Significant Kligas'cn s+gnlFcarl No Impacl Fricorporaled Impact Impact San Manual Band of Mission Indians did respond on April 7, 2017 requesting consultation. Although the consultation request by the San Manual Band of Mission Indians was received after the end of the consultation period the City did honor their request and include their comments in the mitigation measures below. An additional notice was provided to the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians— Kizh Nation on May 17, 2017 following their AB 52 noticing request. On May 25, 2017 the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians—Kizh Nation responded with a request for consultation and their comments are included in the mitigation measures below. Should any undocumented archaeological or cultural resources be discovered during ground disturbing activities, adherence to the mitigation measures listed below will ensure that all impacts will be less than significant. 1) The applicant shall contact the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians -- Kizh Nation (GBMI-KN) and the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians (SMBMI) to discuss Tribal Monitoring of the project during all ground disturbing activities, and any trenching below the initial grade level, to ensure that cultural resources that may be encountered during ground disturbances are protected and preserved for study. The monitor(s) must be approved by the Tribal Representatives and will be present on-site during ground disturbing activities. The Native American Monitor(s)will complete monitoring logs on a daily basis. The logs will provide descriptions of the daily activities, including construction activities, locations, sail, and any cultural materials identified. in addition, the monitor(s) will be required to provide insurance certificates, including liability insurance,for any archaeological resource(s) encountered during grading and excavation activities pertinent to the provisions outlined in the California Environmental Quality Act, California Public Resources Code Division 13,and Section 21083.2(a)through(k). The on-site monitoring shall end when the project site grading and excavation activities are completed, or when the Tribal Representatives and monitor have indicated that the site has a low potential for archeological resources. The applicant shall submit the results of these consultations to the City prior to issuance of grading permits for the project site. 2) 1n 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 shall be enforced for the duration of the project. Prior to the start of ground disturbing activities,the Iand owner shall arrange a designated site location within the footprint of the project for the respectful reburial of the human remains and/or ceremonial objects. Any discoveries of human skeletal material shall be immediately reported to the County Coroner. The monitor will then notify the Qualified Archaeologist and the construction manager who will call the coroner. Work will continue to be diverted while the coroner determines whether the remains are Native American. The discovery is to be kept confidential and secure to prevent any further disturbance. If Native American,the coroner will notify the NAHC as mandated by state law who will then appoint a Most Likely Descendent. In the case where discovered human remains cannot be fully documented and recovered on the same day, the remains will be covered with muslin cloth and a steel plate that can be moved by heavy equipment placed over the excavation opening to protect the remains. If this type of steel plate is Rev 9-29-16 170 P299 Initial Study for 0 R C201 6-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 53 Less Than Significant Less potenPally With Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: significant (Vitigation 5ignificsnt No ,t act Incorporated Impact im ac: not.available, a 24 hour guard should be posted outside of working hours. The Tribe(s) will make every effort to recommend.diverting the project and keeping the remains in situ and protected. If the project cannot be diverted, it may be determined that burials will be removed. The Tribe(s) will work closely with the Qualified Archaeologist to ensure that the excavation is treated carefully, ethically,.and respectfully. If data recovery is approved by the Trlbe(s), documentation shall be taken which includes at a minimum detailed descriptive notes and sketches. Additional types of documentation shall be approved by the Tribe(s) for data recovery purposes. Cremations will either be removed in bulk or by means as necessary to ensure completely recovery of all material. If the discovery, of human remains includes 4 or more burials, the location is considered a cemetery and a separate treatment plan shall be created. The project applicant shall consult with the Tribe(s) regarding-avoidance of all cemetery sites. Once-complete, a final report of all activities are to be submitted to the NAHC. The Tribe(s) do NOT authorize any scientific study or the utilization of any invasive diagnostics on human remains. 3) In the event that Native American qultural 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 the GBMI-KN and the SMBMI 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. Additionally, the GBMI-KN and the 5MBM1 will be contacted if any such find occurs and be provided information and 'permittedlinvited to perform a site visit when the archaeologist makes his/her,assessment, so as to provide Tribal input. All archaeological resources unearthed by project construction activities shall be evaluated by the Qualified Archaeologist and Native Monitor. If the resources are Native American in origin, the Tribes) shall coordinate with the landowner regarding treatment and curation of these resources. Typically, the Tribe(s) will request reburial or preservation for educational purposes. If a resource is determined by the Qualified Archaeologist to constitute a "historical resource" pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a) or has a "unique archaeological resource" pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.2(g), the Qualified Archaeologist shall coordinate with the applicant and the City to-develop a formal treatment plan that would serve to reduce impacts to the resources. The treatment plan established for the resources shall be in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(f) for historical resources and Public Resources Code Sections 21003.2(b) for unique archaeological resources. Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of treatment. If preservation in place is not feasible, treatment may include implementation of archaeological data recovery excavations to remove the resource along with subsequent laboratory processing and analysis. Any historic - archaeological material that is not Native American in origin shall be curated Rev 9-29-15 171 P300 Initial Study for ❑RC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00572, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 54 Less Than significant Less pctentlally Wth Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Signilicanl Wigalfon SigrMut No Impact Incur crated Impact Impact at a public, non-profit institution with a research interest in the materials, such as the San Bernardino County Museum, if such an institution agrees to accept the material. If no institution accepts the archaeological material, they shall be donated to a local school or historical society in the area for educational purposes. 4) In the event that significant Native American historical resources,as defined by CEQA (as amended, 2015), are discovered and avoidance cannot be ensured, an SOl-qualified archaeologist shall be retained to develop a cultural resources Treatment Plan, as well as a Discovery and Monitoring Plan, the drafts of which shall be provided to the GBMI-KN and the SMBMI for review and comment. All in-field investigations, assessments, and/or data recovery enacted pursuant to the finalized Treatment Plan shall be monitored by a GBMI-KN and SMBMI Tribal Participant(s). The Lead Agency and/or appiicant shall, in good faith, consult with GBMI-KN and the SMBMI on the disposition and treatment of any artifacts or other cultural materials encountered during the project. 5) Non-Native American artifacts shall be inventoried, assessed, and analyzed for cultural affiliation, personal affiliation (prior ownership), function, and temporal placement. Subsequent to analysis and reporting, these artifacts shall be subjected to curation or returned to the: Property OwnerlDeveloper, as deemed appropriate. Once ground-altering activities have ceased or the Project Archaeologist determines that monitoring activities are no longer necessary, monitoring activities may be discontinued following notification to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department. 18. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project. a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the (} (} { } M applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or [} {} { } V) wastewater treatment facilities or expansion cf existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c} Requite 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? Rev 9-29-15 172 P301 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 55 Less That, S'gnlflcan( Less Polentially With Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: signiflcanl IhMgaflon Sigrtiflcant No I.m aCt Incorrorated Impact Ur act e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment [ } [ } (} V) 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 [ } ( } [ } V) 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 proposed The pr p sed project Is served by the CVWD sewer system, which has waste treated by the Inland Empire Utilities Agency at the RP-1 and RP-4 treatment plants. The RP-1 capacity is sufficient to exceed the additional development within the western and southern areas of the City. The RP-4 treatment plant has a potential ultimate capacity of 28 mgd which is considered more than adequate to capacity to treat all Increases in wastewater generation for buildout of the General Plan. The project is required to meet the requirements of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board regarding wastewater. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. b) The proposed project is served by the CVWD sewer system, which has waste treated by the Inland Empire Utilities Agency at the RP-4 treatment plant located within Rancho Cucamonga and RP-1 located within City of Ontario, neither of which is at capacity. The project is required to meet the requirements of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board regarding wastewater. Therefore, no adverse 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. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. d) The project is served by the CV1ND water system. There is currently a sufficient water supply available to the City of Rancho Cucamonga to serve this project. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. e) The proposed project Is served by the CVVV❑ 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. Therefore, no adverse 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. Therefore, no adverse 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 adverse impacts are anticipated. Rev 9-29-15 173 P3o2 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-OD672, DRC2016-00207, and ❑RC2012-00673 Page 56 Less Than *01can; Less PotenHa ly With Titan Issues and Supporting Information Sources: slgrti,Jearnt nrtlgauol significant No Impact ir: prated Impact Impact 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 proposed project is located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between San Bernardino Road and Baker Avenue in a hillside area on the southerly flank of Red Hill and surrounding the historic Sycamore Inn restaurant. The project proposes to amend the General Plan to permit development on slopes 30 percent and greater, the subdivision of a 24.19 acre site into E parcels, and the development of 175 condominium units(including 9 live-work units) in the Mixed Use (MU) District. The project site characterized by the existing condominiums, vacant land and golf course land uses to the north, residential and commercial land uses to the west, the Pacific Electric Trail and Route 66 Trailhead to the east, and residential and commercial land uses to the south. According to the General Plan Figure RC-4, and Section 4.4 of the General Plan FPElR, the project site is.not within an area of sensitive biological resources; therefore, development is riot anticipated to adversely affect rare or endangered species of plants or animals because of the fact that the project is surrounded by urbanized land uses and is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Plan. A Burrowing Owl Survey & Nesting Bird Survey was prepared for the project site (RCA Associates, March 2017), which concluded that no active nests were observed and no diagnostic sign (feathers, pellets, fecal material, prey remains, etc.) of current nesting activities was detected during the survey, and that no native and/or non- native bird species recorded during the survey were currently utilizing the site for nesting. The contribution of the project to cumulative biological impacts is not expected to be cumulatively considerable as the project site is within an urban area, is relatively small,and is isolated from areas of better habitat. The Nesting Bird Surveys Report did not identify the presence of burrowing owl activity during the survey, however, due to the potential of the site to contain burrow sites and the ability of owls to begin using the site at any time, a preconstruction clearance survey is recommended prior to site disturbance. The site does contain a large number of mature trees which have the potential to provide nesting areas for migrating birds. To avoid any impact on nesting birds, it is recommended that a pre- construction nesting bird survey be conducted a maximum 3 days prior to ground breaking activity to avoid impact to birds protected underthe Fish and Game Code and the Migratory Rev 9-29-15 174 P303 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, ❑RC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 57 Less Than *n'rficant Less Patenlla iy With Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Sigrifmant M Ugallon SlgnificsM No ' Impart lnaorpopted hrrpact tmpacl Bird Act. Mitigation measures have been added in the Biological Resources section of the study requiring the submission of a nesting bird survey and burrowing owl survey to the Planning Department prior to the issuance of a rough grading permit. 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. b) If the proposed project were approved, then the applicant would be required to develop the site in accordance with the City of Ranch❑ 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 0verriding Considerations balancing the benefits of development under the General Plan Update against the significant unavoidable adverse impacts (CEQA GuldeI!nes Section 15092 and 15096(h)). The Traffic Impact Study prepared for the project site (Linscott Law & Greenspan, September 2015) identifies that without project improvements the Red Hill Country Club ❑rive and Foothill will be at LOS F, and with improvements will improve to LOS C. 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) ❑evelopment 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 and includes mitigation measures to reduce emission levels to a less than significant impact on the environment (see Air Quality section above for detailed analysis and mitigation measures). Additionally, impacts resulting from air quality would be short- term and would cease once construction activities were completed. As prescribed by SCAQMD,the Air Quality Assessment(Landrum &Brown,July 2015), and the Greenhouse Gas Assessment (Landrum & Brown, July 2015). This analysis concluded that because the on-site emissions are low, the emissions would not exceed the ambient air quality standards prescribed by the SCAQMD. The Initial Study identified potentially significant impacts associated with the exposure of people to increased noise levels. A Noise Impact Study Noise Analysis (Mestre Greve Associates, July 2015) 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. 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 Rev 9-29-15 175 P3a4 Initial Study for ❑RC2016-00206, SLIBTT16605M, City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 58 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 (3CH#2000061027, Certified May 19, 2010) (�J General Plan FEIR (SCH#2000061027, Certified October 17, 2001) (✓) Master Environmental Assessment for the 1989 General Plan Update (SCH#88020115, Certified January 4, 1989) TECHNICAL APPENDICES [�} Air Quality Assessment (Landrum &Brown, July 30, 2015) (V) Arborist Report—Tree Inventory (Jim Borer,August 2, 2012) (/) Archaeological Survey—Red Chief Motel Site (Applied Earthworks, August 28, 2012) (f) Burrowing Owl Survey& Nesting Bird Survey (RCA Associates, March 16, 2017) Cultural Resource Assessment (Applied EarthWorks, May 15, 2017) (�) Cultura[ Resource Assessment— Red Chief Motel Sit# (Emily Stadnicki, August 27, 2012) (✓) Geotechnical Engineering Report (Langan Engineering & Environmental Services, February 20, 2.01 ✓) Greenhouse Gas Assessment (Landrum & Brown, July 30, 2015) (f) Biological Assessment—Habitat Suitability Evaluation (Ecological Sciences, July 21, 2003) (✓} Biological Assessment—Habitat Suitability Evaluation— Update (RCA&Associates, May 25, 2017) (�} Jurisdictional Waters Delineation (RCA Associates, LLC,August 14, 2017) d Analysis ( Noise Anal) Y (Mestre Greve Associates, July 20, 2015) (1) Traffic Impact Study (Linscott Law&Greenspan, November 1, 2016) Red Hill Country Club Neighborhood Area Traffic Study--Draft (KOA Corporation, February 2009) Rev 9-29-15 176 P305 Initial Study for D RC201 6-00206, SUBTT16605M, City of Ranch❑ Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DR02012-00673 Page 59 [�} Water Quality Management Plan—Draft (David Evans and Associates, April 11, 2017) TECHNICAL APPENDICES (Utilized for GPA2004-00339, DRC2004-00352, SUDTT16605, and DRC2D03-00637) [�} An Archaeological Assessment of the Sycamore Village Project Site (Kathleen Del Chario, May 1990) [ } An Historical Assessment of the Sycamore Village Project Site (Stephen Van Wormer, May 1990) Rev 9-29-15 177 P306 Initial Study for DRC2016-00206, SU13TT16605M. City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Page 60 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: 3 I Print Name and Title: _ i Mbe'+-14 Rev 9-29-15 178 P3o7 MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST (INITIAL STUDY PART 111) Project File No.: DRC2012-00672 Applicant: Pacific Summit-Foothill, I_LC Initial Study Prepared by: Tom Grahn, Associate Planner Date: August 9, 2017 Mitigation Measures No. Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date!initials Non-Compliance Short Term(Construction)Emissions 1) During grading activity, all construction PDIB0 C Review of plans A/C 214 equipment (? 150 horsepower) shall be California Air Resources Board (CARR)Tier 3 Certified or better. _ 2) All clearing, grading, earth-moving, or PD160 C Review of plans AIC 214 excavation activities shall cease when winds exceed 25 mph per SCAQMD guidelines in 3 order to limit fugitive dust emissions. 3) The contractor shall ensure that all disturbed PD C Review of plans A/C 214 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 , PD C Review of plans AfC 214 on unpaved roads and Project site areas are reduced to 15 miles per hour or less. 5) All construction equipment shall he maintained P❑ C Review of plans A/C 214 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. &) Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, PDIBO 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 Page 1 of 22 179 i P3O8 Mitigation Measures No.I Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification ❑ate 11nitials Non-Compliance [ow-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 SCAQM❑ as well as City Planning staff. 7) The construction contractor shall utilize electric PD C Review of plans A/C 214 or clean alternative fuel powered equipment where feasible. 8) The construction contractor shall ensure that PD C Review of plans AIC 2I4 construction-grading plans include a statement (hat work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. 9) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance B❑ B Review of plans A/C 2 standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. 10) All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed BO C Review of plans AIC 214 E performance standards noted in SCAQM❑ Rule 1113. Paints and coatings shall be applied either by hand or high-volume, low- � ressure spray. 11) All construction equipment shall comply with P❑ C - Review of plans AIC 2I4 SCAQM❑ Rules 402 and 403. Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions. Reestablish ground cover ❑n the BO C Review of plans AIC 2I4 construction site through seeding and watering. _ Pave or apply gravel to any on-site haul B0 C Review of plans AIC 214 roads. • Phase grading to prevent the susceptibility RO C Review of plans A/C 214 of large areas to erosion over extended periods of time. Schedule activities to minimize the BC C Review of plans AIC 214 amounts of exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. l ■ 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 Page 2 ❑f 22 180 P3o9 Mitigation Measures No. Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/Initials Non-Compliance established by the City if silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. _ • Suspend grading operations during high BO C During construction A 4 winds (i.e., wind speeds exceeding 25 mph) in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 requirements. • Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard B❑ C ❑uring Construction A 4 ratio on soils haul trucks or cover payloads using tarps or other suitable means. 12) 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. 13) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by BO C During construction A 4 SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all i inactive construction areas that remain inactive I for 96 hours or more to reduce PM,o emissions. I Long Term Emissions 14) Provide adequate ingress and egress at all_ BO C Review of plans 1VC 214 entrances to public facilities to minimize vehicle idling at curbsides. 15) Provide preferential parking to high occupancy BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 vehicles and shuttle services. 16) Schedule truck deliveries and pickups during BO C Review of plans NC 2I4 off-peak hours. 17) Improve thermal integrity of the buildings and BO C Review of plans A/C 214 reduce thermal load with automated time clocks or occupant sensors. _ 18) Landscape with native and/or drought-resistant BO C Review of plans AIC 2f4 species to reduce water consumption and to provide passive solar benefits. , 19) Provide lighter color roofing and road materials BO C Review of plans A/C 214 I and tree planting programs to comply with the AQMP Miscellaneous Sources MSC-01 measure. Page 3 of 22 181 P31v Mitigation Measures No,! Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/Initials Non-Compliance 20) All residential and commercial structures shall PD C Review of plans D 2/3 i be required to incorporate high-efficiency/low- polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water heaters. 21) All residential and commercial structures shall P❑ C Review of plans D 2/3 be required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. ; 22) W1 new development in the City of Rancho PD C Review of plans D 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 FM7_5 and precludes the installation of indoor or outdoor woad burning devices (i.e. fireplaces/hearths) in new development on or after March 9, 2009. Page 4 of 22 182 P311 Mitigation Measures No.1 Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/initials Non-Compliance w. 1} Three days prior to the removal of vegetation PD B Review of plans B 2/4 or ground-disturbing activities, a breeding bird survey that is in conformance with the s Migratory Bird Act shall be required to determine whether nesting is occurring. Occupied nests shall not be disturbed unless I a qualified biologist verifies through non- l 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 5,000 feet of raptor nests, during the breeding season to avoid abandonment of the young. i I 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) Perform a Burrowing Owl Survey that is in P❑ B Review of plans B 214 conformance with the Department of Fish and Wildlife Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation and submit the written report outlining the findings to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the Planning Department within 30 days of groundbreaking activity. The survey shall include a habitat assessment, survey and 1 impact analysis. The Burrowing Owl Survey shall follow the following protocol: Page 5 of 22 183 P312 Mitigation Measures No.1 Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification hate/Initials Non-Compliance t + Burrowing Owl Survey methodology shall be based an Appendix D (Breeding and Nan-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 ; I current CDFW protocols and will at j I minirnum include establishment of buffer i 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 I 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 I current CDFW guidelines. I ■ 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 Page 6 of 22 184 P313 Mitigation Measures No.1 Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/Initials Non-Compliance 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 issuance of any grading permit, the PDIBO B Review of report 13 2 Project Applicant shall provide to the City of + Rancho Cucamonga either of the following: Written correspondence from the California i Department of Fish and Wildlife stating that notification under Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code is not required for the project; or a copy of a Department executed take or Streambed Alteration Agreement, authorizing impacts to California Fish and Game Code, section 1602 resources associated with the ro•ect. ''Sev#ivri=5 Cult`raE Resotirrces- �„ - _ r �r . �nui4, • f.�P «y• rr ti•. `,� i%� ..�. ..,;- w,a 'C—s a - _ 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 PD1B0 C Review of report AID W 3/4 undesignated sites from demolition or significant modification without an opportunity for the City to establish its archaeological value. ■ Consider establishing provisions to require PD1BO C Review of report AID 314 incorporation of archaeological sites within new developments, using their special qualities as a theme or focal point. Page 7 of 22 185 P 3'14 Mitigation Measures No.1 Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Datellnitials Non-Compliance • Pursue educating the public about the PDIBO C Review of report AID 314 archaefllagical heritage of the area. • Prepare a mitigation plan consistent with P1D BIC Review of AID i Section 21083.2 Archeological resources PlanslReport During I of CEQA to eliminate adverse project Construction effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric resources, including but not limited to, avoiding archeological sites, capping or covering site with sail, planning I the site as a park or green space or paying an in-kind-_m_itigation fee. ■ Prepare a technical resources PD C Review of report AID 314 management report, documenting the inventory, evaluation, and proposed mitigation of resources within the project area. Submit one copy of the completed report,with original illustrations, to the San Bernardino County Archaeological Information Center for permanent archiving, _ 2] If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or PD B Review of report AID 4 animal fossils) are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a I` 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 he appropriate. Where mitigation monitoring is appropriate, the program must include, but not i be limited to, the following measures: Assign a paleontological monitor, trained P❑ B Revlew of report AID 4 and equipped to allow the rapid removal of fossils with minimal construction delay, to the site full-time during the interval of earth-disturbing activities. Should fossils be found within an area BO 8lC Review of report AID 4 being cleared or graded, divert earth- disturbing activities elsewhere until the Page 8 of 22 186 P315 Mitigation Measures No.f Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification , Verification DatelInitials lion-Compliance monitor has completed salvage. If t 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 PD D Review of report D 3 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 P❑ ❑ Review of report ❑ 3 Cucamonga. Transfer collected specimens with a copy to the report to San Bernardino County Museum. 'Sec#ibn..6 -IGebloji,and_5o�1s- .:;^ .:� 't� •1� 2.� ._,.r.. .; ���•.ry� _ - -'ice^--- _�F. a,..:,a:�`'_r�:•�. �.;-.i�o..�^- - .-��::..�"e -'w-:i ,5�,.::" - '2:` .:r 11 The site shall be treated with water or other BO C During construction A 4 soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB)daily to reduce PM,o emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 or re- planted with drought resistant landscaping as soon as possible. _ 2) Frontage public streets shall be swept E4 C During construction A 4 according to a schedule established by the City to reduce PM,a 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 B❑ C During construction i A 4 wind speeds exceed 25 mph to minimize PM,o emissions from the site_during such episodes. _ 4) Chemical soil stabilizers (approved by SO `C During construction A 14 SCAQMD and RWQCB)shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain i inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM,o emissions- - - _=:r: '- - -'..c::.-. ... _ _ '-} - •,.may. - _ :• ,; ..,. - ___ ," t _•x"'�. 774"- ^. n T— ree�i E ,a �� .� •:s'x:ter.:;''.:,.ram;. - - Sectio .G` l�ouse=Gas Emissions ,: =� _ - -.�:-� - :�-�`. ���;• - Rti;.,:, �,;. - Cumulative Short Term (Construction) GHG Emissions 1 The project must comply GOMply with all rules that BO C During construction A 4 Page 9 of 22 187 I P316 Mitigation Measures No./ Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/Initials Non-Compliance assist in reducing short-term air pollutant emission in compliance with SCAWMD 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 A 4 utilized in lieu of gasoline- or diesel-powered engines where feasible. 5) Construction should be timed so as not to BO C During construction A 4 interfere withpeak-hour traffic- 6) Ridesharing and transit incentives shall be BO C During construction A 4 supported and encouraged for construction crew. Cumulative Long Term (Operational) GHG Emissions i 7) Construction and Building materials shall be BO A During Construction C 2 i 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 A During Construction C 2 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 I windows, space heating and cooling Page 10 of 22 188 P317 Mitigation Measures No. I Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date Ilnitials Non-Compfiance equipment, light fixtures, and appliances. • Landscape and developed 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 BO A During Construction C 2 strategy appropriate for the project and include the following: • Install water efficient landscapes and irrigation systems and devices in compliance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. i f • 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 flaw faucets, dual flush toilets, and waterless urinalslwater heaters. • Design irrigalion to control runoff and to — 4 remove water to non-vegetated surfaces. I 10} Reuse and recycle construction and demolition GE A Review of plans C 2 waste. Provide interior and exterior storage I areas for recyclables and green waste In public areas. Educated employees about reducing waste and about recycling. s. : �5ection rolo acid>Wafer�Q�ual t �,.::• •=; • - .�. Construction Activities 1} Prior to issuance of grading permits,the permit SO B/C1D Review of plans A/C 214 applicant shall submit to Building Official for Page 11 of 22 189 P318 Mitigation Measures No.1 Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date!initials Non-Compliance approval, Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) specifically identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that shall be used on-site to reduce pollutants during construction activities entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. _ 2) An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, BO BICID Review of plans AIC 214 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 I Erosion Control Plan shall include the following Ij 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 BO BICID Review of plans A!C 214 i sandbags or gravel dikes must be used to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site when there is rainfall or other runoff. i 4] During construction, to remove pollutants, B❑ B(CID Review of plans NC 214 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, BO B!C!D Review of plans A/C 214 the applicant shall obtain a Notice of Intent (NO I)to comply with obtaining coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Storm Water Permit from the State Water Resources i Control Board. Evidence that this has been obtained(i.e.,a copy of the Waste Discharger's Identification Number)shall he submitted to the Page 12 of 22 190 i P319 Mitigation Measures No.I Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date lInitials Non-Compliance City Building Official for coverage under the i NPDES General Construction Permit. Post-Construction Operational 6] Prior to issuance of building permits, the 8O BICID Review of plans A/C 2/4 i 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 I the City of Rancho Cucamonga in June 2004. 7) Landscaping plans shall include provisions for BO B1CID Review of plans NC 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 i of two years, shad be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. I Grading Activities S} Prior to issuance of building permits, the SO BICID Review of plans AIC 214 `. applicant shall submit to the City Engineer for approval of a Water Quality Management Plan � (WQMP), including a project description and identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on-site to reduce pollutants into the storm drain system to the maximum extent practicable. The WQMP shall identify the structural and non-structural measures consistent with the Guidelines for New Development and Redevelopment adopted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in.tune 2004. 9] Prior to issuance of grading or aving ®rmits, B❑ BICID Review of plans A/C 214 Page 13 of 22 191 P320 Mitigation Measures No.! Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method cd Verified Sanctions far Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/Initials Nan-Compliance the applicant shall obtain a Notice of Intent (NO I)to comply with obtaining coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)General Construction Storm i 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. _ 10) The developer shall implement the BMPs B❑ BICID Review of plans A/C 214 identified in the Preliminary Water Quality � Management Plan (David Evans and E Associates, April 2017)to reduce construction I E pollutants from entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. -}'p ..�•; Win.: "7 ='�,�- �5•+;"•„ •-.5r. :.r_+° •s»._- ir.�' rs... +. _ -_ �«: ?-..F,i;:..y.!Jk-a ,a: -r yiR''. `SeCtlflR�l 2s= .Oi5@� i -s•.-t,: •,-• :�: �,.•., ,��_ c.-. ,;° ��_Sx. e�w "�ti':..w':�`� .:4r+ •.J.�� .:4.-'• _.i. .��`-fir• Exterior i 1) Prior to the issuance of any grading plans a PDIB❑ B Review of plans A/C 214 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. i 2) During all project site excavation and grading, BC B Review of plans A/C 214 the project contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers consistent with the manufacturers' standards, 3) The project contractor shall place all stationary BD S Review of plans AIC 214 construction equipment so that emitted noise's directed away from sensitive receptars nearest the project site. 4) The construction contractor shall locate BO B Review of plans A/C 214 equipment staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction- related noise sources and noise-sensitive receptors nearest the project site during all project construction. Page 14 of 22 192 P321 Mitigation Measures No.! Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for ' Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/Initials Non-Compliance i 5) The construction contractor shall obtain the CE B Review of plans D 214 City's approval for its haul plan, with the planned haul truck routes avoiding residential areas to the extent feasible. 6) The construction contractor shall change the PD/80 C Review of plans A 2/4 timing and/or sequence of the noisiest construction operations to avoid sensitive times of the 7) Prior to the issuance of any grading plans, the PD B Review of plans C 2/4 applicant shall submit a construction-related noise mitigation plan for Planning Director review and approval. This plan shall depict the location of construction equipment and how the noise from this equipment would be mitigated I during construction of the project. ' 8) During construction, the contractor shall PD B Review of plans A/C 214 ensure all construction equipment is equipped With appropriate noise attenuating devices. 9) Idling equipment shall be turned off when not PD B Review of plans A/C 2/4 in use. 14] Equipment shall be maintained so that vehicles PD B Review of plans A/C 214 and their loads are secured from rattling and ganging. i 11) In order to meet the 65 CNEL exterior noise PD B Review of plans A/C 214 standard, noise barriers ranging from 4 to 5.5 feet(Noise Analysis,Mestre Greve Associates, July 2t]15, Exhibit 3) will be required along Foothill Boulevard. The noise barriers may consist of a wall, berm, or combination of the two. The noise barriers must have a surface density of at least 3.5 pounds per square foot, and shall have no openings or gaps. The wall may be constructed of stud and stucco, 3/8- inch plate glass, or 5/8-inch Plexiglas, any i masonry material, or a combination of these materials. The first floor exterior living areas are projected to meet the 65 CNEL outdoor noise standard with the specified noise ' barriers. The walls shall be located at the top of slope. Page 15 of 22 193 P322 Mitigation Measures No.I Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for i Implementing Action for Monitoring frequency Verification Verification Date llnitials Non-Compliance . Interior i 12) For proper acoustical performance, all exterior PD B Review of plans A/C 213 windows and doors, and sliding glass doors must have a positive seal and leaks/cracks f must be kept to a minimum. _ 13) To prevent sound leaks the following should be BO BIC Review of plans A/C 213 provided: _ On concrete slab, the first layer of 518" BO BID Review of plans AIC 213 gypsum board on the unit side should be sealed top and bottom with resilient caulk, as well as around the junction boxes. i Window rough-in seams should be no BO BID Review of plans AIC 213 greater than % and all seams should be caulked with resilient caulking. • Seal, caulk, gasket or weather-strip all 80 B/D Review of plans A/C 213 joints and seams to eliminate air leakage through these assemblies. Includes around window and doorframes, at penetrations through walls, and all other openings in the building envelope. 14) All first floor rooms are projected to meet the B❑ BICID Review of plans A/C 214 ' 45 CNEL interior noise standard through the i installation of the exterior noise barriers along Foothill Boulevard. All rooms, including ! second and third floor units, are projected to meet the 45 CNEL interior noise standard without building upgrades. 15) All buildings exposed to noise levels greater BO BICID Review of plans A/C 214 than 57 CNEL will meet the 45 CNEL interior ' noise standard only with windows closed. Adequate ventilation,with windows closed,will be required for those units adjacent to Foothill Boulevard (Noise Analysis, Mestre Greve I Associates,July 2015, Exhibit 4). 16) Construction or grading shall not take place BO $1C/D Review of plans A/C 214 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. 17) Construction or grading noise levels shall not BO BICID Review of plans A/C 214 exceed the standards specified in I Page 16 of 22 194 P323 Mitigation Measures No.I Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/Initials Non-Compliance Development Code Section 17.66.060, as measured at the property line. Developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly noise level monitoring as specified in Development Code Section 17.6B.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 i 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 I compliance with above noise standards or I halted. 18) Haul truck deliveries shall not take place 130 BICID Review of plans A/C 2f4 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. I Additionally, if heavy trucks used for hauling would exceed 100 daily trips (counting both to l and from the construction site), then the it developer shall prepare a noise mitigation plan denoting any construction traffic haul routes and include appropriate noise mitigation I measures. To the extent feasible, the plan shall denote haul routes that do not pass I sensitive Iand uses or residential dwellings. aSECt10_n''t.7..-,�;'T�i}jaf�Cu[tui•a1�ResourCas•�_ <`- -_-_ .-- __ _ =____ y _ _mp •-- " . ._ ' -_ -• -_ •. • - . "_ _- ' 1) The applicant shall contact the�Gabrieleno PDIBO C Review of plans AID 314 Band of Mission Indians —Kizh Nation (GBMI- I KN) and the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians (SMBMI) to discuss Tribal Monitoring I of the project during all ground disturbing activities, and any trenching below the initial grade level, to ensure that cultural resources that may be encountered during ground disturbances are protected and preserved for I study. The monitors)must be approved by the I Tribal Representatives and will be present ❑n- Page 17 of 22 195 P324 Mitigation Measures No.! Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for E Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification pate llnitials Non-Compliance € site during ground disturbing activities. The Native American Monitor(s) will complete monitoring logs on a daily basis. The logs will provide descriptions of the daily activities, including construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. In addition, the monitor(s) will be required to provide insurance certificates, including liability insurance, for any archaeological resource(s) encountered during grading and excavation activities pertinent to the provisions outlined in the California Environmental Quality Act, California Public Resources Code Division 13, and Section 21083.2 (a) through (k). The on- I site monitoring shall end when the project site grading and excavation activities are completed, or when the Tribal Representatives and monitor have indicated that the site has a low potential for archeological resources. The applicant shall submit the results of these consultations to the City prior to issuance of grading permits for the pro ect site. 2) In the event that human remains or funerary PD/BO C Review of plans Alp 314 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 i shall be contacted pursuant to State Health and Safety Code §7050.5, and that code shall be enforced for the duration of the project. Prior to the start of ground disturbing activities, the land owner shall arrange a designated site location within the footprint of the project for the respectful reburial of the human remains and/or ceremonial objects. Any discoveries of human skeletal material shall be immediately reported to the County Coroner. The monitor will then notify the Qualified Archaeologist and the construction manager who will call the coroner. Work will continue to be diverted Page 18 of 22 196 P325 i Mitigation Measures No. Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action _ for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/Initials Non-Compliance i while the coroner determines whether the �~ remains are Native American. The discovery is to be Kept confidential and secure to prevent any further disturbance. If Native American, the coroner will notify the NAHC as mandated by state law who will then appoint a Most Likely Descendent. In the case where discovered hurnan remains cannot be fully documented and recovered on the same day, the remains i will be covered with muslin cloth and a steel plate that can be moved by heavy equipment placed over the excavation opening to protect the remains. If this type of steel plate is not available, a 24 hour guard should be posted outside of working hours. The Tribe(s) will i make every effort to recommend diverting the ' project and keeping the remains in situ and protected. If the project cannot be diverted, it may be determined that burials will be removed. The Tribe(s) will work closely with the Qualified Archaeologist to ensure that the excavation is treated carefully, ethically, and respectfully. If data recovery is approved by the Tribes), documentation shall be taken which includes at a minimum detailed descriptive notes and sketches. Additional types of documentation shall be approved by i the Tribes) for data recovery purposes. Cremations will either be removed in bulk or by means as necessary to ensure completely recovery of all material. If the discovery of human remains includes 4 or more burials, the i location is considered a cemetery and a separate treatment plan shall be created. The project applicant shall consult with the Tribe(s) I regarding avoidance of all cemetery sites. ! Once complete,a final report of all activities are to be submitted to the NAHC. The Tribe(s) do NOT authorize any sclentific study or the utilization of any invasive diagnostics on human remains. Page 19 of 22 197 P326 Mitigation Measures No.I Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date Ilnitials Hon-Compliance i 3) in the event that Native American cultural PDIBO C Review of plans AID 314 resources are discovered during project a activities, all work in the immediate vicinity of the find(within a 60-foot buffer)shall cease and I a qualified archaeologist meeting Secretary of Interior standards shall be hired to assess the find. Work on the other portions of the project i i outside of the buffered area may continue during this assessment period. The archaeologist shall contact the GBMI-KN and the SMIBMl 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. Additionally, the GBMI-KN and the SMBMI will be contacted if any such find occurs and be provided information and permitted/invited to perform a site visit when the archaeologist makes hislher assessment, so as to provide Tribal input. All archaeological resources unearthed by project construction activities shall be evaluated by the Qualified Archaeologist and Native Monitor. If the resources are Native American in origin, the Tribe(s) shall coordinate with the landowner regarding treatment and curation of these resources. Typically, the Tribe(s) will request reburial or I preservation for educational purposes. If a resource is determined by the Qualified Archaeologist to constitute a "historical resource" pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a) or has a "unique archaeological resource" pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.2(g), the Qualified Archaeologist shall coordinate with the applicant and the City to develop a formal Page 20 of 22 198 r — - P327 Mitigation Measures No./ Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for i Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/initials Non-Compliance treatment plan that would serve to reduce impacts to the resources. The treatment plan established for the resources shall be in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(f) for historical resources and Public Resources Code Sections 21083.2(b) for unique archaeological resources. Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the f preferred manner of treatment. If preservation in place is not feasible, treatment may include implementation of archaeological data recovery excavations to remove the resource along with subsequent laboratory processing and analysis. Any historic archaeological material that is not Native American in origin shall be curated at a public, non-profit institution with a research interest in the materials, such as the San Bernardino County Museum,if such an institution agrees to accept the material. If no institution accepts the archaeological material, they shall be donated to a local school or historical society in the area for educational purposes. € 4) In the event that significant Native American P0180 C Review of plans AID 3/4 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, the drafts of which shall be provided to the GBMI-KN and the SMBMI for review and comment_ 1 All in-field investigations, assessments, and/or ; data recovery enacted pursuant to the finalized Treatment Plan shall be monitored by a GBMI- KN and SMBMI Tribal Participant(s). The Lead Agency and/or applicant shall, in good faith, consult with GBMI-KN and the SMBMI on the disposition and treatment of any Page 21 of 22 199 P328 Mitigation Measures No.1 Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/initials Non-Compliance artifacts or other cultural materials ' encountered during the project. 5) Non-Native American artifacts shall be PD/BO C Review of plans AID 314 inventoried, assessed, and analyzed for cultural affiliation, personal affiliation (prior ownership), function, and temporal placement. Subsequent to analysis and reporting, these artifacts shall be subjected to curation or returned to the Property Owner/Developer, as deemed appropriate. Once ground-altering activities have ceased or the Project Archaeologist determines that monitoring activities are no longer necessary, monitoring activities may be discontinued following notification to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department_ Key to Checklist Abbreviations . Res pbnsible:Pers"on° r - _•ilAonitaring;Frequency :Method of Verification- - ' _.:Sanctions - - ^CDD-Community Development Director or designee Y A-With Each New Development A-On-site Inspection 1 -Withhold Recordation of Final Map � PD-Planning Director or designee B-Prior 7o Construction B-Other Agency Permit 1 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(ReportsiStudies/Plans) 4-Stop Work Order PO-Police Captain or designee E-Operating 5-Retain Depositor Bonds FC-Fire Chief or designee 6-Revoke CUP 7-Citation E Page 22 of 22 200 P329 City of Rancho Cucamonga ` MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM Project File No.: General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206, Tentative Tract Map Modification SUBTT16605M, Design Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit❑R02012-00673. This Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) has been prepared for use in Implementing the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the above-listed project_ This program has been prepared in compliance with State law to ensure that adopted mitigation measures are implemented (Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code), Program Components—This MMP contains the following elements: 1. Conditions of approval that act as impact mitigation measures are recorded with the action and the procedure necessary to ensure compliance. The mitigation measure conditions of approval are contained in the adopted Resolution of Approval for the project. 2. A procedure of compliance and verification has been outlined for each action necessary. This procedure designates who will take action, what action will be taken and when, and to whom and when compliance will be reported. 3. The MMP has been designed to provide focused, yet flexible guidelines. As monitoring progresses, changes to compliance procedures may be necessary based upon recommendations by those responsible for the program. Program Management—The MMP will be in place through all phases of the project. The project planner, assigned by the Planning Director,shaft coordinate enforcement of the MMP. The project planner oversees the MMP and reviews the Reporting Forms to ensure they are filled out correctly and proper action is taken on each mitigation. Each City department shall ensure compliance of the conditions (mitigation) that relate to that department. Procedures—The following steps will be followed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 1. A fee covering all costs and expenses, including any consultants' fees, incurred by the City in performing monitoring or reporting programs shall be charged to the applicant. 2. A MMP Reporting Form will be prepared for each potentially significant impact and its corresponding mitigation measure identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Checklist, attached hereto. This procedure designates who will take action, what action will be taken and when, and to whom and when compliance will be reported. All monitoring and reporting documentation will be kept in the project file with the department having the original authority for processing the project. Reports will be available from the City upon request at the following address: City of Rancho Cucamonga— Lead Agency Planning Department 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 f 71231r7 201 EXHIBIT 0 P33o Mitigation Monitoring Program GPA ❑RC2016-00207, SUBTT16605M, DR ❑RC2012-00672, VAR ❑RC2016-00207, and TRP DRC2012-00673 Page 2 3. Appropriate specialists will be retained if technical expertise beyond the City staff s is needed, as determined by the project planner, or responsible City department, to monitor specific mitigation activities and provide appropriate written approvals to the project planner. 4. The project planner, or responsible City department, will approve, by signature and date, the completion of each action item that was identified on the MMP Reporting Form. After each measure is verified for compliance, no further action is required for the specific phase of development. 5. All MMP Reporting Forms for an impact issue requiring no further monitoring will be signed off as completed by the project planner or responsible City department at the bottom of the MMP Reporting Form. 6. Unanticipated circumstances may arise requiring the refinement or addition of mitigation measures. The project planner is responsible for approving any such refinements or additions. An MMP Reporting Form will be completed by the project planner or responsible City department and a copy provided to the appropriate design, construction, or operational personnel. 7. The project planner or responsible City department has the authority to stop the work of construction contractors if compliance with any aspects of the MMP is not occurring after written notification has been issued. The project planner or responsible City department also has the authority to hold certificates of occupancies if compliance with a mitigation measure attached hereto is not occurring. The project planner or responsible City department has the authority to hold issuance of a business license until all mitigation measures are implemented. 8. Any conditions (mitigation) that require monitoring after project completion shall be the responsibility of the City of Rancho Cucamonga 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, 9. In those instances requiring long-terra 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 monitoringtreporting 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. I 202 _ P33'1 City of Rancho Cucamonga MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION The following Mitigated Negative Declaration is being circulated forpublic review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act Section 21091 and 21092 of the Public Resources Code, Project File No.: General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206, Tentative Tract Map Modification SUBTTISS05M, Design Review DRC2012-00672,Variance DRC2016-00207,and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673. Public Review Period Closes: August 9, 2017 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Project Applicant: Chad Stadnicki Pacific Summit-Foothill, LLC 212 S. Palm Avenue, 2nd Floor Alhambra, CA 91801 Project Location (also see attached map): The project site is located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between San Bernardino Road and Baker Avenue in a hillside area on the southerly flank of Red Hill and surrounding the historic Sycamore Inn restaurant. Project Description. The applicant, Pacifc Summit-Foothill, LLC, proposes an amendment to the General Plan to revise tables and text,including clarifying text as necessary to allow the development of land that contains slopes of 30 percent or greater,a Tentative Tract Map to subdivide a property of 24A 9 acres into 6 parcels, and a Design Review for the development of 175 condominium units (including 9 live-work units)located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trail. 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 Stud identified potentially significant effects but: Y p Y g (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 203 P332 DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE CHARLTON N.BONHAM,Director � Inland Deserts Region t 3602 Inland Empire Blvd . Suite C-220 Ontario, CA 91764 (909)484-0167 ►w—M wildlife-Ca.gov July 27, 2017 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMC': Sent via email JUL 2 7 2017 Mr. Thomas Grahn RECEIVED _ PLAN LINK City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 tam. ra ahn@cityofrc.us Subject: Initial Study with Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration GPA DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, DR ❑RC2012-00672, VAR ❑RC2016-00207, & TRP DRC2012-00673 (Sycamore Heights Project) State Clearinghouse No. 2017071010 Dear Mr. Grahn: The Department of Fish and *ildlife (Department) appreciates the opportunity to comment on the Initial Study and proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration (ISIMND) for General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206, Tentative Tract Map Modification SUBTT16605M, Design review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673, referred to as the Sycamore Heights Project (project) [State Clearinghouse No. 2017071010]. The Department is responding to the ISiMND 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 Afteration Agreement (California Fish and Game Code Sections 1600 et seq.) andior a California Endangered Species Act (CESA) Permit for Incidenta# Take of Endangered, Threatened, and/or Candidate species (California Fish and Game Code Sections 2080 and 2080.1). The project proposes the development of 175 attached condominium units on 24.19 acres located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trail, in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County. 204 EXHIBIT R Mitigated Negative Declaration P333 Sycamore Heights Project SCH No. 2017071010 Page 2 of 3 COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The Department has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of fish, wildlife, native plants, and the habitat necessary for biologically sustainable 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. The Department's comments and recommendations on the IS/MND include: Jurisdictional Waters Please note that the Department requires notification for work undertaken in or near any river, stream, or lake that flaws at least episodically, including ephemeral streams, desert washes, and watercourses with a subsurface flow. Fish and Game Code section 1602 states, ''An entity may not substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow of, or substantially change or use any material from the bed, channel, or bank of, any river, stream, or lake, or deposit or dispose of debris, waste, or other material containing crumbled, flaked, or ground pavement where it may pass into any river, stream, or lake, unless all of the following occur,.,." Upon receipt of a complete notification, the Department determines if the activitles may substantially adversely affect existing fish and wildlife resources. The July 21, 2003 Ecological Sciences, Inc., 2003 Habitat Suitability Evaluation states (Page 4) "The site is...bisected Icy several north-south trending drainages (n=4)" and (Page 12) "...based on our initial site visit and general jurisdictional analysis, several potentially jurisdictional features are present cn site (e.g., four generally north-south trending drainages." Page 12 of the 2003 Habitat Suitability Evaluation also comments that "A formal delineation for either state or federal wetland jurisdiction was not conducted for this analysis" and that "Further analysis would be necessary to determine jurisdictional status and more fully evaluate the need for permitting prior to site development." Despite the recommendation for further analysis, the Department was unable to ascertain (based ❑n the documents circulated far review) whether further analysis was completed. Based on review of aerial photography, the site plan, and conceptual grading plan (copies of the latter two were requested for review by the Department) the Department recommends that prior to adoption of the M N D the City condition a new mitigation measure requiring that the project applicant submit a Notification of Lake or Streambed Alteration to the Department's Lake and Streambed 205 'rIj-gated N::gMivz: Declaration P334 Sycamore Heights Project SCH No- 2017071010 Page 3 of 3 Alteration Program at the Ontario office. Specifically, the Department requests that the City condition the inclusion of the following new mitigation meaSUre in the MND: Mitigation Measure BIO-3: Prior to issuance of any grading permit Project Applicant shall provide to the City of Rancho Cucamonga either of the following: Written correspondence from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife stating that notification under Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code is not required for the project; or a copy of a Department- executed Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement, authorizing impacts to California Fish and Game Code, section 1602 resources associated with the project. Department Conclusions and Further Coordination The Department appreciates the opportunity to comment on the IS/MND for the Sycamore Heights Project (SCH No, 2017071010), and we request that the City of Rancho Cucamonga condition the inclusion of Mitigation Measure BI0-3 prior to adoption of the MND. If you should have any questions pertaining to the comments provided in this fetter, please contact Joanna Gibson at (909) 987-7449 or at Lnna-gi6son@wildlife-ca.gov. Sincerely, f LeJ cNair gional Manager ec: State Clearinghorrse 206 Ci i t OF RANCHO r'UC.1-VA0NGA E00cT C;S 1[6 Cc` m be P335 AUG 0 7 2017 Ran c h6 Cl oco mmrga j C lg (goR) - oe .p{aoolns Comm).S,31. ECEIVED - PLANNING 0C) zo 17 C ;-�y 0- Ra 0Cho 0aca vNoPjc3 My con Germs about +he propose - H[c� a;-e ex below and in +he atfa6hed QeWSOper art:(lte , n hM8 met Reclu fret +a Perm, � develop�meo t- a- slopes In exces's a� Those o-� V'S I iv ;n,q U f h r I -0ro I --he prq jec-f- [�dWc t�eer��ssure� -}�aa - bUi 1d i n� ors -Fhese hr T dsides is• per��e- -] s�a-F'� . However~ aye Were '9iv�n fhaof' Sarme � sc�rC��ces whey 60r C0&7MQnjt Was 1 ,01'If yet ,Somaof -1-he ]aPeS gave vvay W i+hf i1 a ye-at- find ?��use oP --he 1RS`�ahr1r+Y 6-F ked HH/ ,Sally r►7�r� jack;n hci bec>y) rc uired fa ,s4a b! I r ze solve, op oor un i�'. `� p iC Vehiale � -ips by -phis praj,cJet Wilt exaderba+e- carrdrfio�s �+ Probab Y fhe Woret iota-sm-+60 is +be Ct+-y Foothi I an4 Qec{ Hill CaUrrfry Club brive. a+ je'a.st- as-o vel7rclesWilt he big ,� in +he coAaruunifY and who knows how much -tr-a-'-fie, +he lrue—wdrK urjlft viiij oreaf8, Wit� 0Q1y Ong WOV ill an4 out an,4 r0f dolyl pXifin dt-i Ve Who W?S r rs � -#-o -f- aue] eaSf' Wi !1 have �-c rn t�'ra l ly prOce�-c� West) execufe a U -tdrbl some where and bead baak C or- c f t? o uea R04 H; 10- rastbound dry Ver"S ur ho WQnt fo en-t-cr fhe develop me,11t- IV I have +o reverse f he process. 8 hloP48 less people -3omefima5 ciamp ea thrs property, Rot boi ldiry -his ��1ect w i ]1 n0t SaI Ue the pro Merv) -- i+ wr 1�or�ly cause these r'Adivi4vaks 70 re oCa'1'e, +(1 e city a r rc r o[Js f' nd deue� cr a e s t a bou`f a ev is +fey shoo )� coor-di note With a enc,es +h a-F- err prcau� e -f h e h� s +e�- ao� assrstance with r�t7ta1 he-lth aoct suhstamce b I,ssC?e�5 -(-fiat fhese Boor l©st soo s r?eeci. I urge �yoo +o fit' n9a.fjve Vdte,,e on a 11 ❑-� the Q,5 ects7 a� +hrs p6ject you have -P+na 1 approval au+hoF ifuJ -pot- and rohom,menc) +d +he C ty 0000611 4het it rc- ect the reV6;r, 4 General pl R Rmer�dmen-t . leaks +ham cleuetoper~ ar•eate a pr(IJect +haf call e~ s r ncere]y� Atf8chrnent �� CC 2/7,-3/i7 20� EXHIBIT s ONCEPRISTINE , RED_ 'H1LL-,,,'C-'OM_ - -� M�UNITY"�-r . . .TR.�ABS�RB �f � OSCOND 350 MORE VEHICLESAN...-STEEP- .SLOPES . : .Y By Sherm Goldstein a ing special . Aope. With three or four-story structures xt handling and closer to-Foothill Boulevard; 175-units :approval by the '. would at the bottorn of the hill' away city council•in: from fit at the slope:Such designs are"common order.,to amend on thoroughfares throughout Southern citys gen California- in Anaheim ;.La Verne,:and.Brea, y fir. eral�pian:'"which_ 'for example: :- ' ,pr6hibited�the _ - - But concerned citizens are--also up-set development about the.i'm act on traffic.'At least"350 of slopes.great more cars,irvill be dumped'ontd'Foothilf ' . - er than'30% "Boule' rd'hetween Graiie.and fhe'Syc= - grade:'"Tfi'e: amvre-Inn.TFie intersection of Foothill< . 'y ;general'.Plan _ Bo ilevard and,GMve is.prnblematie;espe l origtirrib�RancFio Cucarnvn 'a resident : • :'- - :r g. -- .-- :took so.much.time and money to develop; cially,during rush hour.,,There- will only be and;ormer e cted o{fcial.Han[c 5toy looks .. With=sa much:c 1711'r,uni input; why-even _ -one way;in•and•out of�the development, out from h is balcony at the gorgeous view= '. �— --- - _HAVF a general plan if you're�going to;,, -between, lnn and=Red Hill of the Cucamonga Valley. That view will be -:keep amendin�c"'it?"laments Stoy.-. Country CIub.Drive: That ertii iy will b- most ruined'i€the cityrcoUnr �.s gns off on a 175 ' 'in 2006,:a•5imilar proposal came before=- - -easily accessible for vehicles`heading west unit condom] um pro Fec by Pacific Sum- the city-council :Council members'Diane' -on-Foothill. Vehicles-traveling,east on Foot- mit Foothill ! LE, vvi►nei .Y. Properties Williams-and Reis Gutierrez voted against hill coming from Upland e�vifl:be_met with �� of Alhambra.`�h project wr�a s around the it, but-it still passed.'The failing economy cement;median, so they.Will have to make Sycamore Inn, and en roaches up the fast project was a u-torn farther-dainm Foothill and come- remainin undevelo e` ~'' and recession then hit and the g p d slope of historic scuttled. Gutierrez is off the council: Ob- back' ' Red Hill. r jrY - 1:fr servers are,w6nderin liow•Ms. Williams - It'srnati the e''debts:seta ular view "•- d The entire project loos nothing for Rar�- p. . f will vote this time around. 1­16r colleagues, jgho Cucamonga other than' decrease the that irks the<Redrl ill'eor r6unjtji.'_1t Mayor Dennis Michael, and councilmen of life believes Hank'Stoy. "Devel- instabiiity'af the .. ' when trees are Sam Spagnolo and'Bill, Alexander, voted for o •ment isn't rb ress "says Stvy,."'t's ' 's remove arrditl^a=rains~icome: R the'praject'ih�2006. Will they continue to more of the same--.tnaffic�polfution,•and have_given way'in the_past.'aria trees and �..., alter the city s landscape? loss of Red Hill's character." structures have slid dawn.�Homeowners ,q possible solution would be to approve like Stoy ask, ay-tern t fate? Most of the project, but kee Crra pe•O +ale f mug ' the slope's grade is 30% or more, requir- Z6 17 I. 208 P337 RESOLUTION NO. 17-75 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT ❑RC2016-00206 TO AMEND TABLES AND TEXT, INCLUDING CLARIFYING TEXT AS NECESSARY, IN THE GENERAL PLAN TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF LAND THAT CONTAINS SLOPES OF 30 PERCENT OR GREATER; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF, A. Recitals. 1. Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC, filed an application for General Plan Amendment No. DRC2016-00206 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject General Plan Amendment is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 9th day of August 2017, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and continued the application to the August 23, 2017 Planning Commission meeting. 3. On the 23rd of August, 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. 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 August 9, 2017 and August 23, 2017, including written and oral: staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The Generai Plan Slope Development Guidelines address the development of parcels with a range of natural slopes that range from "SIA or less" to "30% and over"; and b. The application proposes to amend the Slope Development Guidelines to establishing to provide an exception to the development of slopes°30% and over" provided certain site conditions can be met; and C. Proposed applicable exceptions address the project location, percentage of development on surrounding properties, and slope stability and other geological factors of the site, and vegetation fuel management for wildfire protection; and d. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development within the district in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development; and 209 Attachment 2 P338 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-75 DRC2016-00205 -- PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 2 e. This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Land Use Element by allowing for the implementation of the Mixed Use designation in this area; and f. This amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties and would not have a significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding properties. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That the proposed amendment is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed district in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area the application will only apply to properties located south of Banyan Avenue in the Red Hill area of the City, all of the properties surrounding the project site have been developed, and the project site has been designed to appropriately address slope stability and other geologic factors of the site; and b. That the proposed amendment would not have significant impacts on the environment nor the surrounding properties as the amendment will only apply to properties located south of Banyan Avenue in the Red Hill area of the City and will not have citywide development implications, all of the properties surrounding the project site have been developed and portions of the project site have been previously disturbed (i.e., development of the Red Chief Motel, Sycamore Inn, abandoned water basin, and surrounding residential, commercial and public developments), and the project site has been designed to appropriately address slope stability and other geologic factors of the site; and C. That the proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan. The Hillside Development criteria of the General Plan and Development Code were not intended to apply as uniformly to Mixed Use designated parcels as they do to a Residential designated parcel. The intent of the Hillside development criteria density restriction was to address natural slopes, particularly those located in the foothill areas north of Banyan Street. Here, the project site has been previously disturbed (i.e., development of the Red Chief Motel, Sycamore Inn, abandoned water basin, and surrounding residential, commercial and public developments) so that the site is no longer in a natural condition. Because few, if any other sites with a "30% and over" slopes exist south of Banyan Street, the amendment will have limited application. 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 the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation 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. 210 P339 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO, 17-75 DRC2016-00206--- PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 3 A comment letter was received from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) on July 27, 2017 in response to the circulated ISIMND. The only comment CDFW had was in relation to the possible Jurisdictional Waters on the project site. The applicant and their biologists prepared a Jurisdictional Delineation to address CDFVV's comments. The Jurisdictional Delineation determined that jurisdictional waters were not present on the project site, but recommended compliance with the CDFW recommended mitigation measure prior to issuance of any grading permit. The Biological Resources section of the IS/MND, was revised to include a mitigation measure requiring the applicant to provide proof to the City that the Streambed Alteration Agreement (1602 Agreement) process has been concluded. According to CEQA Section 15073.5(a), recirculation of a negative declaration is required prior to its adoption when it has been substantially revised after public notice of its availability has been given pursuant to Section 15072. Furthermore, CEQA Section 15073,5(b) states, 'a "substantial revision" of the negative declaration shall mean: (1) a new avoidable significant effect is identified and mitigation measure or project revisions must be added in order to reduce the effect to insignificance, or (2) the lead agency determines that the proposed mitigation measures or project revisions will not reduce potential effects to less than significance and new measures or revisions must be required." Here, either the CDFW will determine that notification under Section 1502 of the Fish and Game Code is required for the project, or they will require the applicant obtain a Streambed Alteration Agreement. The ISIMN❑ was revised to include a discussion of the Jurisdictional Delineation for the project site and a mitigation measure requiring a Streambed Alteration Agreement was added to the MND and the project conditions of approval. The addition of a condition of approval requiring a Streambed Alteration Agreement is not considered substantial evidence in light of the whale record that cannot be mitigated. Therefore, the Streambed Alteration Agreement mitigation measure is not a substantial revision to the MND, and recirculation of the MND is not required; and b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative ❑eclaraticn and, based on the whole record before it, finds: (i) that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (J) 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 recommends the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration; and 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 recommends the City Council adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project; and d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, l Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's recommendation 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, 211 P340 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO, 17-75 DRC2016-00206— PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 4 this Commission hereby recommends approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206, by amending the General Plan Text, as shown in the attached Exhibits A, B, and C. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 23RD DAY OF AUGUST 2017, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: —) Francisco Oaxaca, Chairman ATTEST: Candyc—0�� me#t, 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 meld on the 23rd day of August 2017, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: FLETCHER, OAXACA, WIMBERLY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT. COMMISSIONERS: MACIAS, MUNOZ i ABSTAIN; COMMISSIONERS: NONE 212 P341 General Plan Chapter 2: Managing Land Use, Community Design, and Historic Resources ri 1 '°°T'I:'T."C* 'Ye ".. .r S �r.�-,• _ _ 1y"a•�_�•�s.-_..-'F.'r�ti.r.__�L_ri___.-r_�._�T-:r---r�_- .�.:_-._ 7his- is:nit 'a^hdtsitie i oriditiari ;Gradin withsc6nVentiarial, fulC t ' 9 y ::"''Ys ¢:{pa =' a �,_' ;padded lots and terradingis aoceptat]le. - }_• ,... • .- f , 2: : ._ire oevelgpment with grading'is"permitted. in-this'zone; •faunex sting; 'g �As ' landforms riiust�tairi1their•natural�ctiaracteK.Padded:huildirig sites ; n, - 1. a Y. r •iti. - h a,l:.:_ -• _ permitted;_however,1 ,techniques such as":contour radin onmbiried slapes.-limited cut.antl,-fll;and split leve# aicliitecture 'ar padding fdr the'structures only,may be required to,reduce grading.' i Y When iq conjunction_with file technlqd6s describedkabov6,and for a YFp�oject.ui►ithin-a masker:plsn,whicti includes special design'feafufes such•as•a,golf course;;:extensive open space,or:signi6canf use'of, I 71` `'i ^-Y=v'"' !� •'£. teen i g Tjelts-or paseas;fire;Planning Commission may consider#fie use of_mass grading,te�hnigaies-adjacent.;to these special.desigri features as partial compliance with tFiis sfandard. k. g;,to f49� `TM? 7his'is a hillside_oonditian.S cial hillside architec#uraf-and tle'si n 1 techniques ti that minimize+grading-are-:required. _in' this-zone. AncAitectilral'prpigtypes :are. expected to confodin to .tFie natrirai- w. ;Y ' 1; ,�t�;�, '1: ,laridfarm�'by using_technigries such as`split level foundations of F h greater,-than "18•inches;_sf hi waifs; stacking and -clustering. in -y e;oiijunction with the altemaf ve;echnique9 desurit5eii abo�e',and for aFproject wifhiri a master:plan-which include's spec�ai design,feafures such as'a golf capyrse,'extensive open:space.orrs gniticant.use:af g-reeri L.belfs or paseos;,:0 Planning •Commission may consider s 3: atlded bui[din sites ad anent to.tliase.s°ecial featui-es'vrhen-it is ' °r-,� ;, , .'`:'► found.;that said grading creates a.better rela6an9hi'between thit . .-.- T. special design•feature and fhe'adjacent lots: . .: ;15 to 29:9 `i _ bepelopmen�'within #his'?_one isx firriited to no:more'_'than the less' �{ R•Rtf riisually prominent slopes,antl then only where if;can'be shov�n that environmental and ae'sthefic impacts can!be minimized. Use viix•,.;1;''��y of,;`�larger.'lots,.'varialile•;sefhacks'`and•�ariaL�je'E�uilding;°structural S. s ' •.{:.` may. . -4_n - .. ti... - p,. . Yea techniques isiach' as'stepped,For_pale,-fouridaiions are ,expected .' •.r6`3 ir. 4P.r. r .c s: - s_ Stfuitirres_snail -bienil,;with;.the'natural;eniiirariment;.#hrQugti their: shaper'rnateri111, and�vlcrs: I'mpait"of tr and roadways is to be minimized by fui[owing natural cvdtouis,or using grade;separafions. 30Fandover•�';i4u This is an"excessive slope,oondition'and deve[opmerlt is prohibited, �•��'`�= elnless all:ffie fallowin 'are satisfied: I the` in` a �s-ldcated south ^: F of f3anyan Street:[il]at•least'seventy=fiye.oercbfiQ;?S )of the lots'or - -. -rsr`s;;<• pasceEs`'that are_the-subje_rt�•Uf=the•deyeloprrient'application..'are sufr6[ended•bv l6its'or:dac6e16'iniNoVed with structures: and (iii)#he' ' p_roposetl raiect is"delermined'tn aorironriately address:slopg a; _ �_- T :±i; _z s:� =stahilit r -rid•ofher e6VOi6i�acfd�s of iFie site:Arid h�'veAetation for- `' = r` ',�'' fuel mana 'sment--far-yAldfrri iotection•-can be acliiev d--and maintained. _ EXHIBIT A 213 P342 General Plan Chapter 2: Managing land Use, Community Design, and Historic Resources Land Use Goals and Policies Palicy LU-8.6: Require that hillside development minimize alteration of natural landforms, and encourage clustering where feasible to retain maximum open space. ,Oiscussisn., The objectives for managing development in hillside areas are to maintain existing slopes, vegetation, wildlife corridors, drainage patterns, knolls, rock outcrops, and ridgelines wherever feasible. Furthermore, the City should avoid development that would result in fire, flooding, landslide, erosion, and other safety hazards. The City seeks hillside development that limits the extent of grading alterations to natural landforms, and provides for innovative design and arrangement of building sites that retain significant natural habitats and features. Clustering is a way of laying out a project whereby the structures are"clustered"together and open space is shared by the residents. Existing slopes, vegetation, wildlife corridors, drainage patterns, knolls. rock outcrops,and ridgelines may be modified only if done in a manner consistent with the City's Hillside Development Ordinance. EXHIBIT B 214 s P343 General Plan Chapter 6: Public Health & Safety Public Health and Safety Goals and Policies PolicyPS-6,1. Continue enforcement of the Hillside Development Guidelines to allow ,for prudent development and redevelopment of all properties located on slopes greater than 10 percent, and continue to preserve as open space properties located on slopes greater than 30 percent, except as otherwise provided below. Oiscussi❑n,- The most effective way to protect lives and property from debris flows and slope instability is to continue to prohibit development on property that exceeds 30 percent in slope, in accordance with current ordinances unless all the following are satisfied: [i] the property is located south of Banyan Street; (ii) at least.seventy-five percent 75% of the lots or parcels that are the subject of the development application are surrounded by lots or parcels improved with structures iii the proposed project is determined to appropriately address slope stability and other geological factors of the site: and (iv) vegetation For fuel management for wildfire protection can be achieved and maintained. In addition, property having a natural slope between 1-0 and 30 percent can be made unstable by development and grading activities. Hillside development guidelines enforce the existing grading standards and require aesthetic treatments that both improve the appearance of the hillsides and preserve the stability of the slopes. These measures include returning slopes to their natural appearance, density reduction, clustering of developments, and steepness after grading. Environmental preservation of the eastern San Gabriel Mountains is also required to reduce debris flow potential. Development of the hillside terrain will only increase the potential for debris flows to damage the City unless the situation is carefully managed. EXHIBIT C 215 P344 RESOLUTION NO. 17-76 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP MODIFICATION NO. 16605M, A REQUEST SUBDIVIDE 24.19 ACRES INTO 6 PARCELS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF 175 ATTACHED CONDOMINIUM UNITS IN THE MIXED USE (MU) DISTRICT LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, BETWEEN RED HILL COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE AND PACIFIC ELECTRIC TRAIL RIGHT-OF-WAY; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN; 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, AND 41 AND 0207- 112-09 AND 10. A. Recitals. 1. Pacific Summit-Foothill, L,LC, filed an application for the approval of Tentative Tract Map Modification No, SUBTT16605M, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Tentative Tract Map request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 12th day of April, 2006, the Planning Commission adopted its Resolution No. 06-36, thereby approving Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605, subject to specific conditions and time limits. 3. The initial approval of SUBTT16605 was for a duration of 3 years, to expire on April 12, 2009. The California State Legislature passed a series of AssembIy[Senate Bills automatically extending the approval period of various active tentative maps. SB 1185 extended the approval period 1-year to April 12, 2010, AB 333 extended the approval period 2-years to April 12, 2012, AB 208 extended the approval period 2-years to April 12, 2014, and AB 116 extended the approval period 2-years to April 12, 2016, 4. On the 23rd day of March, 2016, the Planning Commission adopted its Resolution No. 16-16, thereby approving ❑RC2015-01110 for a 1-year Time Extension for SUBTT16605 to expire on April 12, 2017. 5. On the 26th day of April, 2017, the Planning Commission adopted its Resolution No. 17-28, thereby approving ❑RC2017-00249 for a 1-year Time Extension for SUBTT16605 to expire on April 12, 2018. 6. On the 9th day of August 2017, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and continued the application to the August 23, 2017 Planning Commission meeting. 7. On the 23rd day of August, 2017, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluder{ said hearing on that date. 8. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. Atta c h m e � 216 -E * ` P345 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-76 SU8TT16605M — PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 2 B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission ❑f 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 C❑mmission during the above- referenced public hearing on August 23, 2017, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The project site contains approximately 24.19 acres of a generally irregular configuration having a topography with a 30 percent ❑r greater slope, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club ❑rive and the Pacific Electric Trail, and is presently vacant; and b. The project site is located in the Mixed Use (MU) District; and C. The property to the north contains Condominiums and single-family homes in the Medium (M) Residential'District(8-14 dwelling units per acre) and Low (L) Residential District (2- 4 dwelling units per acre), the property to the south contains office; commercial, and condominiums uses in the Mixed Use (MU) District and Medium (M) Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), the property to the east contains Route 66 Trailhead and condominiums in the Medium (M) Residential ❑istrict (8-14 dwelling units per acre), the property to the west contains commercial land uses in the Mixed Use (MU) District, and the proposed project surrounds the Sycamore Inn Restaurant in the Mixed Use (MU) District; and d. The application contemplates the subdivision of the subject parcel into six (6) lots for condominium purposes (175 units): and e. The subdivision of the project site conforms to all applicable development standards applicable to property in the Mixed Use (MU) District; and f. The applicant has submitted applications related to the development of the project site including: General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00206, Tentative Tract Modification SUBTT15605M, design Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673 to allow for the subdivision and development of the project site; and g. All lots will have access to a public right-of-way. Access to the project site will be via Foothill Boulevard and will include all public right-of-way improvements including pavement, sidewalk, curb, and gutter on the north side of Foothill Boulevard as well as all right- of-way improvements-on interior streets. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public heating 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; and 217 P346 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-76 SUBTT16605M — PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 3 b. The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and any applicable specific plans; and C. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; and d. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; and e. The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems; 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, 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. A comment letter was received from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) on July 27, 2017 in response to the circulated ISlMND. The only comment CDFW had was in relation to the possible Jurisdictional Waters on the project site. The applicant and their biologists prepared a Jurisdictional Delineation to address CDFW's comments, The Jurisdictional Delineation determined that jurisdictional waters were not present on the project site, but recommended compliance with the CDFW recommended mitigation measure prior to issuance of any grading permit. The Biological Resources section of the ISIMND, was revised to include a mitigation measure requiring the applicant to provide proof to the City that the Streambed Alteration Agreement (1602 Agreement) process has been concluded. According to CEQA Section 15073.5(a), recirculation of a negative declaration is required prior to its adoption when it has been substantially revised after public notice of its availability has been given pursuant to Section 15072. Furthermore, CEQA Section 15073.5(b) states, "a "substantial revision" of the negative declaration shall mean: (1) a new avoidable significant effect is identified and mitigation measure or project revisions must be added in order to reduce the effect to insignificance, or (2) the lead agency determines that the proposed mitigation measures or project revisions will not reduce potential effects to less than significance and new measures or revisions must be required.' Here, either the CDFW will determine that notification under Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code is required for the project, or they will require the applicant obtain a Streambed Alteration Agreement. The ISIMN❑ was revised to include a discussion of the Jurisdictional Delineation for the project site and a mitigation measure 218 P347 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-76 SUBTT16605M --PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 4 requiring a Streambed Alteration Agreement was added to the MND and the project conditions of approval. The addition of a condition of approval requiring a Streambed Alteration Agreement is not considered substantial evidence in light of the whole record that cannot be mitigated. Therefore, the Streambed Alteration Agreement mitigation measure is not a substantial revision to the MND, and recirculation of the MND is not required; and 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 the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration; and 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 recommends the City Council adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project; and 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 recommendation 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 in the attached Conditions of Approval and the Mitigation Measures listed below and incorporated herein by this reference. Environmental Mitigation Air Quality Short Term (Construction) Emissions 1) During grading activity, all construction equipment (2: 150 horsepower) shall be California Air Resources Board (GARB) Tier 3 Certified or better. 2) 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. 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 219 P348 -PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-76 SUBTT16605M --PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 5 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. 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 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. 220 P349 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-76 SUBTT16605M —PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 6 Dispose of surplus excavated material in accordance with local ordinances and use sound engineering practices. 6 Sweep streets according to a schedule established by the City if silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. • Suspend grading operations during high winds (i.e., wind speeds exceeding 25 mph) in accordance with Rule 403 requirements. ■ Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils haul trucks I � or cover payloads using tarps or other suitable means. r 12) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SGAQM0 and Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB)) daily to reduce PM10 emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. 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 PM10 emissions. Long Term Proiect Operational Impacts 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. 19) Provide lighter color roofing and road materials and tree planting programs to comply with the AQMP Miscellaneous Sources MSC-01 measure. 20) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate hig h-efficiencyllow-pol luting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water heaters. 21) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. 221 P350 I PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-76 i SUBTT16605M — PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 7 22) 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.s and precludes the installation of indoor or outdoor wood burning devices (i.e. fireplaces/hearths) in new development on or after March 9, 2009. Biological Resources 1) Three days prior to the removal of vegetation or ground-disturbing activities, a breading bird survey that is in conformance with the Migratory Bird 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 5,000 feet of raptor nests, during the breeding season to avoid abandonment of the 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) Perform a Burrowing Owl Surrey 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 measurers 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 222 i P351 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-76 SUBTT16605M -- PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 8 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 CDFN/ 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 issuance of any grading permit, the Project Applicant shall provide to the City of Rancho Cucamonga either of the following: Written correspondence from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife stating that notification under Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code is not required for the project; or a copy of a Department executed Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement, authorizing impacts to California Fish and Game Code, section 1602 resources associated with the project. Cultural Resources I 1 y 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. 223 i P352 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-76 SUBTT16605M — PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 9 • Prepare a mitigation plan consistent with Section 21083.2 Archaeological resources of CEQA to eliminate adverse project effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric resources, including but not limited to, avoiding archaeological sites, capping or covering sites with soil, planning the site as a park or green space or paying an in-kind mitigation fee. • Prepare a technical resources management report, documenting the inventory, evaluation, and proposed mitigation of resources within the project area. Submit one copy of the completed report with original illustrations, to the San Bernardino County Archaeological Information Center for permanent archiving. 2) If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal fossils) are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified paleontologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. The paleontologist shall submit a report of findings that will also provide specific recommendations regarding further mitigation measures (i.e., paleontological monitoring) that may be appropriate. Where mitigation monitoring is appropriate, the program must include, but not be limited to, the following measures: • Assign a paleontological monitor, trained and equipped to allow the rapid removal of fossils with minimal construction delay, to the site full-time during the interval of earth-disturbing activities. • Should fossils be found within an area being cleared or graded, divert earth-disturbing activities elsewhere until the monitor has completed salvage. If construction personnel make the discovery, the grading contractor should immediately divert construction and notify the monitor of the find. • 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. Geology and Soils 1) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) daily to reduce PM1❑ emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 or re-planted with drought resistant landscaping as soon as possible. 224 P353 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-76 SUBTT16605M — PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 10 2) Frontage public streets shall be swept according to a schedule established by the City to reduce PM,o emissions associated with vehicle tracking of soil off-site. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. 3) Grading operations shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed 25 mph to minimize PM=o emissions from the site during such episodes. 4) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PMia emissions. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Cumulative Short Term (Construction) GHG Emissions 1) The project must comply with all rules that assist in reducing short- term air pollutant emission in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403 regarding fugitive dust including treating the site with water or other soil-stabilizing agent twice daily or replanting disturbed areas as quickly as possible. 2} The construction contractor shall select construction equipment I 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 Emissions 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; 225 P354 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-76 SUBTT16605M—PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 1 i • 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 (LSD'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 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. 10) Reuse and recycle construction and demolition waste. Provide interior and exterior storage areas for recyciables and green waste in public areas. Educate employees about reducing waste and about recycling. Hydrology and Water Quality 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. 226 P355 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-76 SUBTT16605M -- PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2417 Page 12 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) ❑uring 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 (NO[) to comply with obtaining coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Storm Water Permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Evidence that this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste ❑ischarger'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 (VVQMP), 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 ,tune 2464. 7) Landscaping plans shall include provisions for controlling and minimizing the use of fertilizerslpesticides!herbicides. Landscaped areas shall be monitored and maintained for at least two years to ensure adequate coverage and stable growth. Plans for these areas, including monitoring provisions for a minimum of two years, shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. 227 P356 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-76 SUBTT16605M —PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 13 8) Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit to the City Building Official for approval of a Water Quality Management Plan ()NQMP), 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 1NQMP shall identify the structural and non- structural measures consistent with the Guidelines for New ❑evelopment and Redevelopment adopted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in June 2004. 9) Prior to issuance of grading or paving permits, the applicant shall obtain a Notice of intent (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 ❑f the Waste Discharger's Identification Number) shall be submitted to the City Building Official for coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit. 10) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the WQMP (David Evans and Associates, April 2017) to reduce construction pollutants from entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent.practical. Noise I Exte ri o r 1} Prior to the issuance of any grading plans a construction-related noise mitigation plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval. The Plan shall depict the location of the construction equipment and how the noise from this equipment would be mitigated during construction. 2) During all project site excavation and grading, the project contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers consistent with the manufacturers' standards. 3) The project contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive receptors nearest the project site. 4) The construction contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction-related noise sources and noise-sensitive receptors nearest the project site during all project construction. 228 P357 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-76 SUBTT16605M —PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 14 5) The construction contractor shall obtain the City's approval for its haul plan, with the planned haul truck routes avoiding residential areas to the extent feasible. 6) The construction contractor shall change the timing andlor sequence of the noisiest construction operations to avoid sensitive times of the day. 7) Prior to the issuance of any grading plans, the applicant shall submit a construction-related noise mitigation plan for Planning Director review and approval. This plan shall depict the location of construction equipment and how the noise from this equipment would be mitigated during construction of the project. 8) During construction, the contractor shall ensure all construction equipment is equipped with appropriate noise attenuating devices. 9) Idling equipment shall be turned off when not in use. 10) Equipment shall be maintained s❑ that vehicles and their loads are secured from rattling and banging. 11) In order to meet the 65 CNEL exterior noise standard, noise barriers ranging from 4 to 5.5 feet (Noise Analysis, Mestre Greve Associates, July 2015, Exhibit 3) will be required along Foothill Boulevard. The noise barriers may consist of a wall, berm, or combination of the two, The noise barriers must have a surface density of at least 3.5 pounds per square foot, and shall have no openings or gaps. The wall may be constructed of stud and stucco, 318-inch plate glass, or 518-inch Plexiglas, any masonry material, or a combination of these materials. The first floor exterior living areas are projected to meet the 65 CNEL outdoor noise standard with the specified noise barriers. The walls shall be located at the top of slope. Interior 12) For proper acoustical performance, all exterior windows and doors, and sliding glass doors must have a positive seal and leaks/cracks must be kept to a minimum. 13) To prevent sound leafs the following shall be provided: ■ On concrete slab, the first layer of 5/8" gypsum board on the unit side should be sealed top and bottom with resilient caulk, as well as around the junction boxes. I ■ Window rough-in seams should be no greater than 1/4", and all seams should be caulked with resilient caulking. ■ Seal, caulk, gasket or weather-strip all joints and seams to 229 P358 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-76 SUB7T16605M —PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 15 eliminate air leakage through these assemblies. Includes around window and doorframes, at penetrations through walls, and ail other openings in the building envelope. 14) All first-floor rooms are projected to meet the 45 CNEL interior noise standard through the installation of the exterior noise barriers along Foothill Boulevard. All rooms, including second and third floor units, are projected to meet the 45 CNEL interior noise standard without building upgrades. 15) All buildings exposed to noise levels greater than 57 CNEL will meet the 45 CNEL interior noise standard only with windows closed. Adequate ventilation, with windows closed, will be required for those units adjacent to Foothill Boulevard (Noise Analysis, Mestre Greve Associates, July 2015, Exhibit 4). 16) 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. 17) 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 maybe 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 Off icial• 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, 18) 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. Tribal Cultural Resources 1} The applicant shall contact the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians— Kizh Nation (GBMI-KN) and the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians (SMBM1) to discuss Tribal Monitoring of the project during all ground disturbing activities, and any trenching below the initial grade level, to ensure that cultural resources that may be encountered during ground disturbances are protected and preserved for study. The 230 P359 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-76 SUBTT16605M — PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 16 monitor(s) must be approved by the Tribal Representatives and will be present on-site during ground disturbing activities, The Native American Monitor(s) will complete monitoring logs on a daily basis. The logs will provide descriptions of the daily activities, including construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. In addition, the monitor(s) will be required to provide insurance certificates, including liability insurance, for any archaeological resource(s) encountered during grading and excavation activities pertinent to the provisions outlined in the California Environmental Quality Act, California Public Resources Code Division 13, and Section 21083.2 (a) through (k). The on-site monitoring shall end when the project site grading and excavation activities are completed, or when the Tribal Representatives and monitor have indicated that the site has a low potential for archeological resources. The applicant shall submit the results of these consultations to the City prior to issuance of grading permits for the project site. 2) 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 shall be enforced for the duration of the project. Prior to the start of ground disturbing activities, the land owner shall arrange a designated site location within the footprint of the project for the respectful reburial of the human remains and/or ceremonial objects. Any discoveries of human skeletal material shall be immediately reported to the County Coroner. The monitor will then notify the Qualified Archaeologist and the construction manager who will call the coroner. Work will continue to be diverted while the coroner determines whether the remains are Native American. The discovery is to be kept confidential and secure to prevent any further disturbance. If Native American, the coroner will notify the NAHC as mandated by state law who will then appoint a Most Likely Descendent. In the case where discovered human remains cannot be fully documented and recovered on the same day, the remains will be covered with muslin cloth and a steel plate that can be moved by heavy equipment placed over the excavation opening to protect the remains. If this type of steel plate is not available, a 24-hour guard should be posted outside of working hours. The Tribe(s) will make every effort to recommend diverting the project and keeping the remains in situ and protected. If the project cannot be diverted, it may be determined that burials will be removed. The Tribe(s) will work closely with the Qualified Archaeologist to ensure that the excavation is treated carefully, ethically, and respectfully. If data recovery is approved by the Tribe(s), documentation shall be taken which includes at a minimum detailed descriptive notes and sketches. Additional types of documentation shall be approved by the Tribe(s) 231 P360 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-76 SUBTT16605M — PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 17 for data recovery purposes. Cremations will either be removed in bulk or by means as necessary to ensure completely recovery of all material. if the discovery of human remains includes 4 or more burials, the location is considered a cemetery and a separate treatment plan shall he created. The project applicant shall consult with the Tribes) regarding avoidance of ail cemetery sites. Once complete, a final report of all activities is to be submitted to the NAHC. The Tribes) d❑ NOT authorize any scientific study or the utilization of any invasive diagnostics on human remains. ' 3) 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 the GBMI-KN and the SUBMI 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. Additionally, the GBMI-KN and the SMSMI will be contacted if any such find occurs and be provided information and permittedrinvited to perform a site visit when the archaeologist makes his/her assessment, so as to provide Tribal input. All archaeological resources unearthed by project construction activities shall be evaluated by the Qualified Archaeologist and Native Monitor. If the resources are Native American in origin, the Tribe(s) shall coordinate with the landowner regarding treatment and curation of these resources. Typically, the Tribe(s) will request reburial or preservation for educational purposes. If a resource is determined by the Qualified Archaeologist to constitute a "historical resource" pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a) or has a "unique archaeological resource"pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.2(g), the Qualified Archaeologist shall coordinate with the applicant and the City to develop a formal treatment plan that would serve to reduce impacts to the resources, The treatment plan established for the resources shall be in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(f) for historical resources and Public Resources Code Sections 21083.2(b) for unique archaeological resources. Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of treatment. If preservation in place is not feasible, treatment may include implementation of archaeological data recovery excavations to remove the resource along with subsequent laboratory processing and analysis. Any historic archaeological material that is not Native American in origin shall be curated at a public, non-profit institution with a research interest in the materials, such as the San Bernardino County Museum, if such an institution agrees to accept the material. If no institution accepts the 232 P361 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-76 SUBTT16605M — PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 18 archaeological material, they shall be donated to a local school or historical society in the area for educational purposes. 4) In the event that significant Native American historical resources, as defined by CEO_A(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, the drafts of which shall be provided to the GBMI-KN and the SMBMI for review and comment. All in-field investigations,assessments, and/or data recovery enacted pursuant to the finalized Treatment Plan shall be monitored by a GBMI-KN and SMBMI Tribal Participant(s). The Lead Agency and/or applicant shall, in good faith, consult with GBMI-KN and the SMBMI on the disposition and treatment of any artifacts or other cultural materials encountered during the project, 5) Non-Native American artifacts small be inventoried, assessed, and analyzed for cultural affiliation, personal affiliation (prior ownership), function, and temporal placement. Subsequent to analysis and reporting, these artifacts shall be subjected to curation or returned to the Property Owner/Developer, as deemed appropriate. Once ground-altering activities have ceased or the Project Archaeologist determines that monitoring activities are no longer necessary, monitoring activities may be discontinued following notification to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 23 DAY OF AUGUST 2017. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Francisco Oaxaca, Chairman s ATTEST: Can t e 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 23rd day of August 2017, by the following vote-to-wit: 233 P362 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-766 SUBTT16605M —PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 19 AYES: COMMISSIONERS' FLETCHER, OAXACA, WIMBERLY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ASSENT: COMMISSIONERS; .MACIAS, MUNOZ ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: NONE 234 Conditions of Approval P363 1ti� Community Development Department Project#. SUBTT16605M. ❑RC2012-00572, DRC2016-00207. and DRC2012-00673 Project Name Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13. 1 T 24. 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-1 12-09 and 10 Project Type; Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance. and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Departrlient Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. Approval is for the subdivision of 24.19 acres into 6 parcels and for the development of 175 attached condominium units in the Mixed Use (MIJ) District located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard. between Red Hill Country Club Drive and Pacific Electric Trail Right-of-Way 2. Provide additional parking spaces in the vicinity of the Live/Work units to ensure adequate parking is available for commercial uses 3 Provide a pedestrian connection to the Pacific Electric Trail along the east side of the project site, subject to approval by the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA). 4 Provide additional landscaping adjacent to the project perimeter wall to the northwest of the Sycamore Inn, 5 For slope planting south of the existing residences along the project's north boundary utilize a tree species and spacing that protects the views of homeowners living north of the project site. Standard Conditions of Approval 6. For all residential development, provide conduit frorn each unit/lot and a pull box to connect to the street Provide interior structured wiring for each house/building with minimum Category 5 copper wire. Radio Grade 6 coaxial cable, and a central distribution panel, prior to release of occupancy (fiber-to-the building. FTTB). Plans shall be submitted for Planning Department and Building Official review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permits. 7. All dwellings shall have the front. side and rear elevations upgraded with architectural treatment detailing and increased delineation of surface treatment subject to Planning Department review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permits. 8. 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. 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. vAvw.CityofRC us Printed 8r23Q017 235 Project#: SUBTT16605M, ❑RC2012-00672, ❑RC2016-00207, and ORC2012-00673 P364 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24,25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review,Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Planning_Department Standard Conditions of Approval 9. Mitigation measures are required for the project. The applicant is responsible for the cost of implementing said measures, including monitoring and reporting. Applicant shall be required to post cash, letter of credit, or other forms of guarantee acceptable to the Planning Department in the amount of S767 prior to the issuance of Building Permits, guaranteeing satisfactory performance and completion of al[ mitigation measures. These funds may be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measures. Failure to complete all actions required by the approved environmental documents shall be considered grounds for forfeit. 10. In those instances requiring long term monitoring (i.e. beyond final certificate of occupancy), the applicant shall provide a written monitoring and reporting program to the Planning Department prior to issuance of Building Permits. Said program shall identify the reporter as an individual qualified to know whether the particular mitigation measure has been implemented. 11.The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the City Adopted Special Studies Zone for the Red Hill Fault, in a standard format as determined by the Planning Department, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. 12.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. 13.Approval of Tentative Tract SUBTT16605 Modification is granted subject to the approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206, Design Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673. 14.Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolutions of Approval, Conditions of Approval, and all environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size). This includes Planning Commission Resolution No.'s 17-76 (for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16606M), 17-77(for Design Review DRC2012-00672), 17-78 (for Variance DRC2016-00207), and 17-79 (for Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673). 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. 15. 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. 16.Tentative Tract 16605 Modification shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, unless a complete final map is fled with the Engineering Services Department within 3 years from the date of the approval. vrnnv.CifyorRC.us Prin[ed:8123!2017 Pale 2 of 20 236 ' Project#: SUBTT16605M, DRC2012-00672, ❑RC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 P365 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25,31,34,and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.- Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 17. For multi-family residential, 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. 18. Existing trees required to be preserved in place shall be protected with a construction barrier in accordance with the Development Code Section 17.80,050, and so noted on the grading plans. The location of those trees to be preserved in place and new locations for transplanted trees shall be shown on the detailed landscape plans. The applicant shall follow all of the arborist's recommendations regarding preservation, transplanting, and trimming methods. 19. Front yard and corner side yard landscaping and irrigation shall be required per the Development Code. This requirement shall be in addition to the required street trees and slope planting. 20.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 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, 21. 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. 22.All private slopes of 5 feet or more in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than 2:1 slope, shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 23.All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater slope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as follows: one 15-g2llon or larger size tree per each 150 sq. ft. of slope area, 1-gallon or larger size shrub per each 100 sq. ft. of slope area, and appropriate ground cover. In addition, slope banks in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5-gallon or larger size tree per each 250 sq. ft. of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary slope plane. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation-system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy: 24, Special landscape features such as mounding, alluvial rock, specimen size trees, meandering sidewalks, and intensified landscaping, is required along Foothill Boulevard. 25. Tree maintenance criteria shall be developed and submitted for Planning Department review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permits. These criteria shall encourage the natural growth characteristics of the selected tree species. 26. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of water efficient landscaping per Development Code Chapter 17.82. �rRf,Citya rf tc.us Aintad:8/23/2017 Page 3 of 20 237 Project#: SUB T T 16605M, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 P366 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review,Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Plarininci Department I Standard Conditions of Approval 27.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 Department review and approval prior to the issuance of Building Permits. 28. All units shall be provided with garage door openers if driveways are less than 18 feet in depth from back of sidewalk. 29.All parking lot landscape islands shall have a minimum outside dimension of 6 feet. 30. All parking spaces shall be 9 feet wide. by 17 feet long with a required 1-foot overhang (e.g., over a curb stop). Parallel parking spaces shall be 9 feet wide by 24 feet long. 31. Plans for any security gates shall be submitted for the Planning Department, City Engineer, and Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permits. For residential development, private gated entrances shall provide adequate turn-around space in front of the gate and a separate visitor lane with call box to avoid cars stacking into the public right-of-way. 32.All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances, and exits shall be striped per City standards. 33.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. 34.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. 35.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. 36. Construct block walls between homes (i.e., along interior side and rear property lines), rather than wood fencing for permanence, durability, and design consistency. 37.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. '38.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. 39.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. wym.Qtyo•RC.us Printed:8123i2017 page 4 of 20 238 Project#: S U 13TT1 6605M, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 P367 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 40.A uniform hardscape and street furniture design including seating benches, trash receptacles, free-standing potted plants, bike racks, light bollards, etc., shall be utilized and be compatible with the architectural style. Detailed designs shall be submitted for Planning Department review and approval prior to the issuance of Building Permits. 41.On corner side yards, provide minimum 5-took setback between walls/fences and sidewalk. The 5-foot waillfence setback and the parkway shall have landscape and irrigation in addition to the required street trees. Detailed landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning Department review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permits. The parkway landscaping including trees, shrubs, ground covers and irrigation shall be maintained by the property owner. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the parkway maintenance requirement, in a standard format as determined by the Planning Department, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. 42.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 Department and Engineering Services Department review and approved prior to the issuance of Building Permits. 43. For multiple-family development, laundry facilities shall be provided as required by the Development Code. 44.A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram, shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department and Police Department (909-477-2800) prior to the issuance of Building Permits. Such plan small indicate style, illumination, location, height, and method of shielding so as not to adversely affect adjacent properties. 45. 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. 46.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. 47. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all Conditions of Approval small be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Department. 48. 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. 49. Where rock cobble is used, it shall be real river rock. Other stone veneers may be manufactured products. 50. Street names shall be submitted for Planning Department review and approval in accordance with the adopted Street Naming Policy prior to approval of the final map �nvw.CityofR1_.us Prnted.612312�I7 Page 5 of 2] 239 Project#: SUB TT 16 6 0 5 M, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 P368 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: D207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 51. If no centralized trash receptacles are provided, all trash pick-up shall be for individual units with all receptacles shielded from public view. 52.Any approval for Design Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673 shall expire if Building Permits are not issued within 5 years from the date of approval, or a time extension has been granted, 53.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. 54. Trees shall be planted in areas of public view adjacent to and along structures at a rate of one tree per 301inear feet of building. 55. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Services Department. 56. 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. 57. 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. 58. 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. 59. 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. 60. Slope fencing along side property lines may be wrought iron or black plastic coated chain link to maintain an open feeling and enhance views. Engineering Services ❑epartment Please be advised of the following Special Conditions uw;w.CitycfRC.us Printed:812312at 7 Faas 6 of 20 240 Project#: SUBTT16605M, DRC2012-00672, ❑RC2016-00207, and DRC2012-04673 P369 Project Name. Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.- Engineering Services ❑epartment Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. Foothill Boulevard shall be improved in accordance with the City's "Major Divided Arterial"standards along the entire project frontage. a. Parkway improvements, including special streetlights, street trees and sidewalk, shall conform to the Foothill Boulevard District guidelines outlined in the Development Code and the Route 66/Foothill Boulevard Visual Improvement Plan. b. Complete parkway improvements on the north side between the Pacific Electric Trail bridge and the adjacent Sycamore Inn property. City has already installed the curb and gutter, Add parkway improvements including sidewalk, street trees, streetlights and curbside drain outlets, per Standard Drawing 107-B or 107-C as needed, c. Right turn lane, per Standard Drawing 119 (Bus Bay-Right Turn Lane option), shall be at least 150 feet in Iength with a 60-foot transition. The right turn lane shall be based off existing Foothill Boulevard elevations. d. Provide an Interim physical barrier (at the project entrance) to left turns to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. e. Provide 8,600 Lumen LED streetlights. The street lights 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. F. Foothill drive approach shall have a 20-foot radius for the inbound right turn and a least a 31-foot radius for the outbound right turn, with sidewalk crossing the approach close to perpendicular at the zero curb face. Right-of-way dedication shall encompass the full public sidewalk crossing. Driveway median and accent paving shall not extend into the public right-of-way. g. Entry gates shall conform to the City's Residential Project Gated Entrance design guideline. h. Provide traffic signage and striping as required including northbound and southbound left turn and through movement time restrictions on Red Hill Country Club Drive at Foothill Boulevard during the peals hours. i. Construct access ramps at the street type entrance on Foothill 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. Printed;e1231201 7 www.CityorRC.us Page 7 of 20 241 Project#: SLIBTT16605M, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207,and DRC2012-00673 P370 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 2. Provide the fair share contribution for the Year 2035 as stated in the project traffic impact study for Foothill Boulevard at San Bernardino Road. Ultimate improvements include construction of a 3rd westbound and a 3rd eastbound through lane, restriping the northbound shared left turn/through lane into a shared left turnithroughtright turn lane and modifications to the traffic signal. 3. Make a in-lieu contribution for a prorated share of the cost of the future improvements along the project frontage, to the future centerline of Foothill Boulevard. Final construction cost estimate to be approved by the City Engineer. 4. Red Hill Country Club Drive shall be improved in accordance with the City's "Local Street" standards along the project frontage. a. Provide curb and gutter, asphalt pavement, sidewalk, street trees and a drive approach for emergency vehicle access on the east side of the existing street. b. Drive approach for emergency vehicle access on Red Hill Country Club Drive shall be installed per Standard Drawing 105-C, with thicker concrete or reinforced sidewalk to meet Fire District standards. c. Provide a minimum 6-foot curb adjacent sidewalk width. install retaining walls as needed. d. Provide 5800 Lumen HPSV-equivalent LED streetlights along the frontage. The street lights 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. e. Provide traffic signage and striping as required. 5. Parkways shall slope at 2 percent from 1 foot behind the sidewalk to the top of the curb, along all street frontages. 6. Dedicate Lots A, B and C from the approved Tentative Map to the City, 7. Provide a copy of the on-site landscaping plans for Engineering Services Department review regarding conformance with Foothill Boulevard beautification master plan. 8. Add the following note to any private landscape plans that show street trees; "AN 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. tirvw.CityotRc.us Prin[ed_8123i2017 page 8 of 20 242 Project#: SUBT T 16605M, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 P371 Project Marne: Sycamore.Heights Location: APIV: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Track Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the fallowing Special Conditions 9. Extend !Master Plan Storm Drain Line III-1 from Foothill Boulevard to Red Hill Country Club Drive. The applicant shall submit a detailed hydrology study to engineering and said study shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to final map approval or the issuance of a Building Permit, whichever occurs first. Said study shall include the existing, interim and the ultimate proposed hydrologic conditions including key elevations, drainage patterns and proposed locations and sizes of all existing and proposed drainage devices. The hydrology study shall present a full breakdown of all the runoff generated on- and off-site. If there are any impacts to the downstream channel, the City will require full installation of the Master Plan Storm Drain culvert, south of Foothill Boulevard, along with any right-of-way acquisition and easements that may be required. Standard drainage fees for the site shall be credited to the cost of permanent master plan facilities, in accordance with City Policy. The developer may request a reimbursement agreement to recover over sizing costs, in excess of fees from future development within the same tributary area. If the developer fails to submit for said reimbursement agreement within six months of the public improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. a• Construct private, on-site storm drains to collect all project runoff, and discharges from adjacent properties to the north and convey to the Master Plan Storm Drain. b. Provide manholes at public-private junctions. 10. Maintenance access shall be granted to the City for the on-site portion of the master plan storm drain. All manholes shall be easily accessible. 11. Private drainage facilities shall prevent developed flows from entering the Pacific Electric Trail right-of-way. Existing inlet facilities for culverts in the SBCTA right-of-way shall be protected. Final drainage study shall address whether those culverts can be used for runoff from perimeter slopes or undeveloped portions of the project site. Also, surface drainage shall not flow over City right-of-way or maintained areas. Provide intercept of surface drainage such as by use of v-gutters and provide for drainage to enter street through parkway culverts. 12. The existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical) fronting the project site shall be removed or placed underground, prior to public improvement acceptance or occupancy, whichever occurs first. All services crossing Foothill Boulevard and/or Red Hill Country Club Drive shall be undergrounded at the same time. The developer may request a reimbursement agreement to recover one-half the City adopted cost for undergrounding from future development (or redevelopment) as it occurs on the opposite side of the street. If the developer fails to submit said reimbursement agreement within six months of the public improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. a.All existing overhead utilities located on site shall be removed or placed underground. wwvi.City ofRC.us Pr:n[ed:$12312317 Page 9 of 20 243 Project i�: SUB T T166051M, DrRC2012-00672, ❑iRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 P372 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review,Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 13. It shall be the developer's responsibility to have the current FIRM Zone A designation removed from the project area. The developer shall provide drainagelor flood protection facilities sufficient to obtain an unshaded "Y' designation. The developer's engineer shall prepare all necessary reports, plans, hydrologic/hydraulic calculations. A Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) shall be required prior to grading permits. A Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) shall be issued by FEMA prior to certificate of occupancy. 14. Master Plan Storm Drain Line III-1 shall be constructed and aligned so that it remains within the developer's property before connecting into the existing storm drain in the Foothill Boulevard right-of-way, A permanent storm drain easement shall be granted to the City for the public storm drain lines within the developer's property prior to acceptance of the improvements. As an alternative option to constructing the storm drain line and securing easements within the developer's property, at its sole cost and expense, the developer may voluntarily obtain a perpetual easement , through the property located at 8318 Foothill Boulevard (Sycamore Inn) for such storm drain lines. Should the developer not obtain the necessary easement prior to the filing of the final map with the City, this alternative option shall be void and the developer shall construct the storm drain lines exclusively within the developer's property. Standard Conditions of Approval I 15.A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting Districts shall be filed with the Engineering Services Department prior to final map approval or I issuance of Building Permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. 16. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 16.37.010, no person shall make connections from a source of energy, fuel or power to any building or structure which is regulated by technical codes and for which a permit is required unless, in addition to any and all other codes, regulations and ordinances, all improvements required by these conditions of development approval have been completed and accepted by the City Council, except: that in developments containing more than one building, structure or unit, the development may have energy connections made in equal proportion to the percentage of completion of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval, as determined by the City Engineer; provided that reasonable, safe and maintainable access to the property exists. In no case shall more than 95 percent of the buildings, structures or units be connected to energy sources prior to completion and acceptance of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval. wswr.CityaiRC.us primed:012312017 Pale 70 of 20 244 Project#: SUBTT 16605td, DRC2012-00672. ❑RC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 P373 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN:0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOL L O WING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: En_qineering Services De artment Standard Conditions of Approval 17. 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. 5 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. 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-Premise (FTTP) infrastructure. Proposed fiber optic conduits and vaults will be placed underground within a duct and structure system to be installed by the Master Developer per Standard Drawing 135-137. The size, placement and location of the conduit and vaults shall be shown on the Street Improvement and/or Public Improvement Plans and subject to the Engineering Services Department's review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits or final map approval, whichever comes first. f. Access ramps for the disabled shall be installed on all corners of intersections per latest ADA standards or as directed by the City Engineer. g. 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. h. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards. i. Street names shall be approved by the Planning Manager prior-to submittal for first plan check. 18. Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, small be installed per City Standards in accordance with the City's street tree program. Printed:012312017 mvN:Cityo'RC.us Page 11 of 20 245 Project#: SUBTT16606M, ❑RC2D12-00672, ❑RC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 P374 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services ❑epartment Standard Conditions of Approval 19, Install street trees per City street tree design guidelines and standards as follows. The completed legend (box below) and construction notes shall appear on the title page of the street improvement plans. Street improvement plans shall Include a line item within the construction legend stating: "Street frees 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 he per the public landscape improvement plans. Foothill Boulevard in ROW and Median Botanical Name- Prunus blireina. Common Name- N.C.N. i Min. Grow Space- 3' Spacing-20' D.C. Size - 15 gallon Foothill Boulevard On-site Botanical Name- Platanus acerifolia Common Name- London Plane Tree Min. Grow Space - 7' Spacing- 40' ❑.C. Size - 15 gallon Red Hill Country Club Drive Botanical Name- Platanus acerifolia Common Name- London Plane Tree Min. Grow Space- 7' Spacing-40' O.C. Size - 15 gallon 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. 20. Intersection fine of sight designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with adopted policy. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight shall be plotted for all project intersections, including driveways. Local residential street intersections and commercial or industrial driveways may have lines of sight plotted as required. 21. Parkway landscaping on the following street(s) shall conform to the results of the respective Beautification Master Plan: Foothill Boulevard Frinted;8123l2017 WWW.CityofRC.us Page 12 0.`26 246 Project : SUB T T 16605M. DRC2012-00672, DRC201 MC207, art❑ 0RC2012-00673 P375 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review,Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Enqineerinq Services department Standard Conditions orApproval 22. Provide separate utility services to each building including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Basements shall be provided as required. 23. The developer shall be responsible for the relacatien of existing utilities as necessary. 24. 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 CVVVD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. 26. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. Approval of the final parcel map will be subject to any requirements that may be received from them. 26. Permits shall be obtained from the following agencies for work within their right of way: San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) 27. 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 andlor 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. 28.A non-refundable deposit steal,l 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. 29. Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards, 30. Dedication shall be made of the following rights-of-way on the perimeter streets (measured from street centerline): 60 total feet on Foothill Boulevard 30 total feet on Red Hill Country Club Drive 31.All existing easements lying within future rights-of--way shall be quit-claimed or delineated on the final map. 32.Additional street right-of-way shall be dedicated along right turn lanes, to provide a minimum of 7 feet measured from the face of curbs to the right-of-way. 33.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. w+xvr.City afRC.us Printed:8123 t�17 Page 13 of 20 247 Project#: SUBTT16605M, DrRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC20 i 2-0d673 P376 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24,25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review,Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services De artment Standard Conditions of Approval 34. Reciprocal access easements 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 map. 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. 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. Piintad:912312G77 w4vw.Cityaf RC.us Page 94 ar2G 248 Project m: SUBTT16605iM, DRC2012-40672, DRC2016-00207, and ORC2012-00673 P377 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 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. 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 (Foothill 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. rfintcd:3123i2017 ti%Ww CityoRC.US Page 15 of 20 249 Project: SU8 i_'156D5NI, DRC20'12-00072, ❑rRC2015-00207, and DR102012-00673 P378 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLO WING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Graiding Section Standard Conditions of Approval 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, CBC2304.11.2.21CRC R317.1(2) and CBC2512,1.2JCRC R703.6.2.1 of the current adopted California Building CodelResidential 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. 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 Cfficial 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. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off-site drainage easements prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 25. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to .acquire any required off-site drainage acceptance easementsts) 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 d❑ not exceed the existing flows prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit. 26. Roof water is not permitted to flow over the public parkway and shall be directed to are under parkway culvert per City of Rancho Cucamonga requirements prior to issuance of a grading permit. 27. Plow 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. wunri.CityofRC.us rrintcd;a.'23120i P Page 16 ci 20 250 Project#.- SUBTT16605M. DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 P379 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location. APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34,and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 28. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall demonstrate that the storm water run-off will not adversely affect the downstream properties and that the water may legally discharge to the downstream properties. The engineer of record shall show on the final permitted grading and drainage plan one (1) or more of the following items are met: a) There is sufficient downstream capacity to accept the proposed storm water flows and that the downstream property owner have provided permission to accept the upstream storm water flows; b) a legal documentlentity exists allowing developed storm water flows to be discharged to the property lower in elevation; c) a storm drain system to safely convey the storm water flows to a public storm drain system without causing flooding to adjacent property(ies). 29. 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. 30. 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 (SMP). 31. Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WQMP shall include a copy of the project Conditions of Approval. 32. 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. 33. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit. the grading and drainage plan shall show concrete drainage swales at the toe of slopes and discharge the water to an approved drainage facility. 34. 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. 35. 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. 36.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 I❑ 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. Primed:W2312017 VAVV.CSty0fRC'.U5 Paga 17 of 20 251 Project r#: SUBTT16805hi1, DRC2012-00672, DRC201 n-00207, and ❑RC2012-00673 P380 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review,Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Gradinq Section Standard Conditions of Approval 37.The land owner shall provide an inspection report by a qualified personlcompany an a biennial basis for the Class V Injection Wellslunderground 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 (WOMP) prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 38.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. 39.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. 40. A final project-specific Storm Water Quality Management flan (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. 41. 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. 42. 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 int❑ 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 sate of the property shall be included within the WOMP document. 43. 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. tinrrh.Cityot:ZC.us Printed:8123MIl Page 1a of20 252 Project„*: SUB T T 18805 1, ❑RC2012-00572, ❑RC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 P381 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review,Variance, and Tree Removal Permit .ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 44. 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 Soll Engineer's recommendations for Appendix D, Table Vl1.3: Suitability Assessment Related Considerations for Infiltration Facility Safety Factors". 45. 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". 46. 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. 47. 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. 4$. As the use of drywelis 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. I vi a oi.ULyuiRC.us Prinle�'8�23l20t7 Page 19 of 20 253 Projvci i#: USTT'i66G51M, LiPC2012-0067i, DRC2016-00z07, and DRC2012-006"3 P382 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN; 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review,Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT; Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 49. 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. GAS 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. 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 I 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 activitiesJ791, such as an auto body repair shop, automotive repair shop, new and used car dealership, specialty repair shop (e.g., transmission and muffler repair shop) or any facility that does any vehicular repair work. f. Structural infiltration BMP treatment shall not be used at sites that are known to have soil and groundwater contamination. g. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall be located at least 100 feet horizontally from any water supply wells. h. The vertical distance from the bottom of any infiltration structural treatment BMP to the historic high groundwater mark shall be at least 10-feet. Where- the groundwater basins do not support beneficial uses, this vertical distance criteria may be reduced, provided groundwater quality is maintained. i. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause a nuisance or pollution as defined in Water Code Section 13050. The final project-specific water quality management plan shall specifically address items, a., b.; and c. above. 171VN.C Iry�iR�.L'S Prn[ed'.812 3120 1 7 Page 2C c.'20 254 P383 RESOLUTION NO. 17-77 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. DRC2012-00572, A REQUEST TO DEVELOP 175 ATTACHED CONDOMINIUM UNITS ON 24.19 ACRES OF LAND IN MIXED USE (MU) DISTRICT, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, BETWEEN RED HILL COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE AND THE PACIFIC ELECTRIC TRAIL RIGHT-OF-WAY; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF--APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, AND 41 AND 0207--112-09 AND 10. A. Recitals. 1. Pacific Summit-Foothill, LLC, filed an application for the approval of Development Review No. DRC2012-00672, 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 9th day of August 2017, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public nearing on the application and continued the application to the August 23, 2017 Planning Commission meeting. 3. On the 23rd day of August 2017, the Planning Commisslon of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a meeting or duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said meeting on that date, 4. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have ocourred. 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 August 23, 2017, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The project site contains approximately 24.19 acres of a generally irregular configuration having a topography with a 30 percent or greater slope, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trail, and is presently vacant; and b. The project site is located in the Mixed Use (MU) District; and C. The property to the north contains Condominiums and single-family homes in the Medium (M) Residential District(8-14 dwelling units per acre) and Low (L) Residential District (2- 4 dwelling units per acre), the property to the south contains office, commercial, and condominiums uses in the Mixed Use (MU) District and Medium (M) Residential District (&-14 Attachment 4 255 P384 PLANNING COMMIS&ON RESOLUTION NO. 17-77 DRC2012-00672 — PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 2 dwelling units per acre), the property to the east contains Route 66 Trailhaad and condominlums in the Medium (M) Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), the property to the west contains commercial land uses in the Mixed Use (MU) District, and the proposed project surrounds the Sycamore Inn Restaurant in the Mixed Use (MU) District; and d. The proposed project will be a gated community with 1 vehicle entrance on Foothill Boulevard, located west of the Sycamore Inn restaurant, and 1 Emergency Vehicle Access(EVA) gate on Red Hill Country Club Drive; and e. The proposed project density is 7.23 dwelling units per acre; and f. The application contemplates the development of 44 twe- and three-story condominium buildings for the development of 175 attached dwelling units; and The 175 units are provided throughout the project site in 44 individual buildings, 9� P g P 1 9 each containing between 3 and 6 residential units. Units are provided in either a two-story or three-story building complex. There are 26 two-story units, 29 feet tall, with units ranging in size from 1,296 square feet to 1,701 square feet and 18 three-story units, 35 feet tall, with units ranging in size from 1,672 square feet to 2,108 square feet; and h. The proposed unit mix witI consist of 28 two-bedroom units(at 1,296 square feet), 119 three-bedroom units (ranging in size from 1,540 square feet to 2,108 square feet) and 28 four-bedroom units (ranging in size from 1,976 square feet to 1,995 square feet). The 9 livelwork units include 2 two-bedroom units (with 1,531 square feet of living area and 249 square feet of commercial floor area) and 7 three-bedroom units(ranging in size from 1.782 square feet to 1,916 square feet of living area and 249 square feet of commercial floor area); and i. Proposed architectural styles include Santa Barbara and Provence, and include 360 degree architectural elements such as: tile roofs, stucco finish, multi-paned windows, metal balconies, wood shutters, and additional architectural embellishments; and j. A total of 9 1ivefwork units are provided adjacent to the Foothill Boulevard driveway, with adjacent parking and pedestrian access; and k. Parking for the project site is provided in two-car garages for each unit, providing 350 parking spaces, 9 parking spaces for the livelwork units, and 130 open parking spaces. 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 256 P385 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-77 DRC2012-00672—PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 I Page 3 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. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. A comment letter was received from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) on July 27, 2017 in response to the circulated ISIMND. The only comment CDFW had was in relation to the possible Jurisdictional Waters on the project site. The applicant and their biologists prepared a Jurisdictional Delineation to address CDFW's comments. The Jurisdictional Delineation determined that jurisdictional waters were not present on the project site, but recommended compliance with the CDFW recommended mitigation measure prior to issuance of any grading permit. The Biological Resources section of the ISIMND, was revised to include a mitigation measure requiring the applicant to provide proof to the City that the Streambed Alteration Agreement (1602 Agreement) process has been concluded. According to CEQA Section 15073.5(a), recirculation of a negative declaration is required prior to its adoption when it has been substantially revised after public notice of its availability has been given pursuant to Section 15072. Furthermore, CEQA Section 15073.5(b) states, "a "substantial revision" of the negative declaration shall meant: (1) a new avoidable significant effect is identified and mitigation measure or project revisions must be added in order to reduce the effect to insignificance, or (2) the lead agency determines that the proposed mitigation measures or project revisions will not reduce potential effects to less than significance and new measures or revisions must be required." Here, either the CDFW will determine that notification under Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code is required for the project, or they will require the applicant obtain a Streambed Alteration Agreement_ The ISIMND was revised to include a discussion of the Jurisdictional Delineation for the project site and a mitigation measure requiring a Streambed Alteration Agreement was added to the MND and the project conditions of approval. The addition of a condition of approval requiring a Streambed Alteration Agreement is i not considered substantial evidence in light of the whole record that cannot be mitigated. Therefore, the Streambed Alteration Agreement mitigation measure is not a substantial revision to the MND, and recirculation of the MND is not required; and 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 (11) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial 257 P386 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-77 DRC2012-00672-- PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 4 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 recommends the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration; and 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 recommends the City Council adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project; and 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 recommendation 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] All Conditions of approval as contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. 17-75 shall apply. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 23RD DAY OF AUGUST 2017. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Y=Franciscc Oaxaca, Chairman ATTEST: Candyc rnett, Secretary 258 I P387 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-77 DRC2012-00672 --- PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 5 I I, Candyce Burnett, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing ResolLltlon 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 23'rd day of August 2017, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: FL.ETCHER, OAXACA, WIMBERLY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MACIAS, MUNOZ ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: NONE 259 Conditions of Approval P388 I� Community Development Department Project#: SUBTT16605M, ❑RC2012-00672, ❑RC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit 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 24.19 acres into 6 parcels and for the development of 175 attached condominium units in the Mixed Use (MU) District located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard. between Red Hill Country Club Drive and Pacific Electric Trail Right-of-Way 2. Provide additional parking spaces in the vicinity of the Live/Work units to ensure adequate parking is available for commercial uses. 3. Provide a pedestrian connection to the Pacific Electric Trail along the east side of the project site, subject to approval by the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA). 4. Provide additional landscaping adjacent to the project perimeter wall to the northwest of the Sycamore Inn. 5. For slope planting south of the existing residences along the project's north boundary utilize a tree species and spacing that protects the views of homeowners living north of the project site. Standard Conditions of Approval 6. For all residential development, provide conduit from each unit/lot and a Paull box to connect to the street. Provide interior structured wiring for each houselbuilding with minimum Category 5 copper wire, Radio Grade 6 coaxial cable, and a central distribution panel, prior to release of occupancy [fiber-to-the building, FTTB]. Plans shall be submitted for Planning Department and Building Official review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permits. 7. All dwellings shall have the front. side and rear elevations upgraded with architectural treatment, detailing and increased delineation of surface treatment subject to Planning Department review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permits. 8. 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. 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 ropf 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. wVVW.QtyofRC.us Printed &'2312017 260 Project#: SUBTT16605M, DRC20 2-00672, DRC2016-00207, and ❑rRC2 0 1 2-04673 P389 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 9. Mitigation measures are required for the project. The applicant is responsible for the cost of implementing said measures, including monitoring and reporting. Applicant shall be required to post cash, letter of credit, or other forms of guarantee acceptable to the Planning Department in the amount of $767 prior to the issuance of Building Permits, guaranteeing satisfactory performance and completion of all mitigation measures. These funds may be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measures. Failure to complete all actions required by the approved environmental documents shall be considered grounds for forfeit. 10. In those instances requiring long term monitoring (i.e. beyond final certificate of occupancy), the applicant shall provide a written monitoring and reporting program to the Planning Department prior to issuance of Building Permits. Said program shall identify the reporter as an individual qualified to know whether the particular mitigation measure has been implemented, 11. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the City Adopted Special Studies Zone for the Red Hill Fault, in a standard format as determined by the Planning Department, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. 12. 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. 13. Approval of -tentative Tract SUBTT166C5 Modification is granted subject to the approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206, Design Review ❑RC2012-00672, Variance ❑RC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673. 14. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolutions of Approval, Conditions of Approval, and all environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size), This includes Planning Commission Resolution No.'s 17-76 (for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16606M), 17-77 (for Design Review ❑RC2012-00672), 17-78 (for Variance DRC2015-00207), and 17-79 (for Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673). 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 EngineerlArchitect. i 5.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. 16.Tentative Tract 16605 Modification 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. wnrwv.City4fRC.us Printed:3123I2017 Page 2 of 20 261 Project : SUBT i 16a605tM, L)RC2012-00672, l)RC2016-00207, and DR02012-00673 P390 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112•-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 17. For multi-family residential, 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. 18. Existing trees required to be preserved in place shall be protected with a construction barrier in accordance with the Development Code Section 17.80.050, and s❑ noted on the grading plans. The location of those trees to be preserved in place and new locations for transplanted trees shall be shown on the detailed landscape plans. The applicant shall follow all of the arborist's recommendations regarding preservation, transplanting, and trimming methods. 19. Front yard and corner side yard landscaping and irrigation shall be required per the Development Code. This requirement shall be in addition to the required street trees and slope planting. 20. 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 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. 21. 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. 22. All private slopes of 5 feet or more in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than 2:1 slope, shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 23. All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height and of 2.1 or greater slope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as follows: ore 15-gallon or larger size tree per each 150 sq• ft. of slope area, 1-galien or larger size shrub per each 100 sq. ft. of slope area, and appropriate ground cover. In addition, slope banks in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5-gallon or larger size tree per each 250 sq. ft. of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary slope plane, Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation systern to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy, 24. Special landscape features such as mounding, alluvial rock, specimen size trees, meandering sidewalks, and intensified landscaping, is required along Foothill Boulevard. 25. Tree maintenance criteria shall be developed and submitted for Planning Department review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permits. These criteria shall encourage the natural growth characteristics of the selected tree species. 26. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of water efficient landscaping per Development Code Chapter 17.82. vA".C1tyofRC.us Pr;nted:8123Ic317 Page 3 of 20 262 Project;: SUBTT16605M, DRC2012-00672, ❑RC201E-00207, and DRC2012-00673 P391 Project Marne: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review,Variance,and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning_Department Standard Conditions of Approval 27. 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 Department review and approval prior to the issuance of Building Permits. 28.All units shall be provided with garage door openers if driveways are less than 18 feet in depth from back of sidewalk. 29.All parking lot landscape islands shall have a minimum outside dimension of 6 feet. 30. All parking spaces shall be 9 feet wide by 17 feet long with a required 1-foot overhang (e.g., over a curb stop). Parallel parking spaces shall be 9 feet wide by 24 feet long. 31. Plans for any security gates shall be submitted for the Planning Department, City Engineer, and Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permits. For residential development, private gated entrances shall provide adequate turn-around space in front of the gate and a separate visitor lane with call box to avoid cars stacking into the public right-of-way. 32. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances, and exits shall be striped per City standards. 33. 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. 34. 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. 35. 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, 36. Construct block walls between homes (i.e., along interior side and rear property lines), rather than wood Fencing for permanence, durability,and design consistency. 37. 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. 38. 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. 39. 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. vrvm%CityofRC.us Pr:nte�.L';23!2e'7 Page:4 of 20 263 Project 9: SUBTT 16605M, DRC2012-00672, ❑RC2016-00207, and IJRC2012-00673 P392 Project blame: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 40. A uniform hardscape and street furniture design including seating benches, trash receptacles, free-standing potted plants, bike racks, light bellards, etc., shall be utilized and be compatible with the architectural style. Detailed designs shall be submitted for Planning Department review and approval prior to the issuance of Building Permits. 49. On corner side yards, provide minimum 5-foot setback between wallslfences and sidewalk. The 5-foot wallifence setback and the parkway shall have landscape and irrigation in addition to the required street trees. Detailed landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning Department review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permits. The parkway landscaping including trees, shrubs, ground covers and irrigation shall be maintained by the property owner. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the parkway maintenance requirement, in a standard format as determined by the Planning Department, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. 42.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 Department and Engineering Services Department review and approved prior to the issuance of Building Permits. 43. For multiple-family development, laundry facilities shall be provided as required by the Development Code. 44. A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram, shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department and Police Department (909-477-2800) prior to the issuance of Building Permits. Such plan shall indicate style, illumination, location, height, and method of shielding so as not to adversely affect adjacent properties. 45. 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. 46. 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. 47. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all Conditions of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Department, 48. 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. 49.Where rock cobble is used, it shall be real river rock. Other stone veneers may be manufactured I products. ' 50. Street names shall be submitted for Planning Department review and approval in accordance with the adopted Street Naming Policy prior to approval of the final map Printed:a 2=0i7 mwr•Ci yoSRC.uS Page 5 of 20 264 Project n: S U 8 i T168051Nil, DPC2ai2-00672, 0RC2016-00207, and ❑RC2012-00673 P393 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and C207-112-09 and 10 Project Type; Tentative Tract Map, Design Review,Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planninq Department Standard Conditions of Approval 51. If no centralized trash receptacles are provided, all trash pick-up shall be for individual units with all receptacles shielded from public view. 52. Any approval for Design Review DRC2012-00572, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673 shall expire if Building Permits are not issued within 5 years from the date of approval, or a time extension has been granted. 51 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. 54. 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. 55. All wails shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Services Department. 56. 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. 57.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 fist of the name and address of their officers on or before January 1 of each and every year and whenever said information changes. 58. 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. 59. 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 wallsifences along the project perimeter. 60. Slope fencing along side property lines may be wrought iron or black plastic coated chain link to maintain an open feeling and enhance views. En-gineering Services De artment Please be advised of the following Special Conditions Printed;81231201 7 www.CityofRC.us Page s cf 2t7 265 Project#: SUBT T 16605iM, DRC2012-00572, DRC20 io-00207, and ❑RC2012-00073 P394 Project Name; Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.• Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. Foothill Boulevard shall be improved in accordance with the City's "Major Divided Arterial" standards along the entire project frontage. a. Parkway improvements, including special streetlights, street trees and sidewalk, shall conform to the Foothill Boulevard District guidelines outlined in the Development Code and the Route 66/Foothill Boulevard Visual Improvement Plan. L Complete parkway improvements on the north side between the Pacific Electric Trail bridge and the adjacent Sycamore Inn property. City has already installed the curly and gutter. Add parkway improvements including sidewalk, street trees, streetlights and curbside drain outlets, per Standard Drawing 107-113 or 107-C as needed. c. Right turn lane, per Standard Drawing 119 (Bus Bay-Right Turn Lane option), shall be at least 150 feet in length with a 60-foot transition. The right turn lane shall be based off existing Foothill Boulevard elevations. d. Provide an interim physical barrier (at the project entrance) to left turns to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. e. Provide 8,600 Lumen LED streetlights, The street lights 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. f. Foothill drive approach shall have a 20-foot radius for the inbound right turn and a least a M-foot radius for the outbound right turn, with sidewalk crossing the approach close to perpendicular at the zero curb face. Right-of-way dedication shall encompass the full public sidewalk crossing. Driveway median and accent paving shall not extend into the public right-of-way. g. Entry gates shall conform to the City's Residential Project Gated Entrance design guideline, h. Provide traffic signage and striping as required including northbound and southbound left turn and through movement time restrictions on Red Hill Country Club Drive at Foothill Boulevard during the peak hours. i. Construct access ramps at the street type entrance on Foothill 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. Printed:e12312017 wWWZty0 Rc.us Page 7 of 2C 266 Project#: SUt3 i T 16605N], DRC2012-00,572, ❑RC2016-00207, and ❑RC2012-00673 P395 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Engineering Services Departmen# Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 2. Provide the fair share contribution for the Year 2035 as stated in the project traffic impact study for Foothill Boulevard at San Bernardino Road. Ultimate improvements include construction of a 3rd westbound and a 3rd eastbound through lane, restriping the northbound shared left turn/through lane into a shared left turnithroughlright turn lane and modifications to the traffic signal. 3. Make a in-lieu contribution for a prorated share of the cost of the future improvements along the project frontage, to the future centerline of Foothill Boulevard. Final construction cost estimate to be approved by the City Engineer. 4. Red Hill Country Club Drive shall be improved in accordance with the City's "Local Street" standards along the project frontage. a. Provide curb and gutter, asphalt pavement, sidewalk, street trees and a drive approach for emergency vehicle access on the east side of the existing street. b. Drive approach for emergency vehicle access on Red Hill Country Club Drive shall be installed per Standard Drawing 105-C, with thicker concrete or reinforced sidewalk to meet Fire District standards. c. Provide a minimurn 6-foot curb adjacent sidewalk width. Install retaining walls as needed. d. Provide 5800 Lumen HPSV-equivalent LED streetlights along the frontage. The street lights 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. e. Provide traffic signage and striping as required. 5. Parkways shall slope at 2 percent from 1 foot behind the sidewalk to the top of the curb, along all street frontages. & Dedicate Lots A, B and C.from the approved Tentative Map to the City. 7. Provide a copy of the on-site landscaping plans for Engineering Services Department review regarding conformance with Foothill Boulevard beautification master plan. 8. 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. Printed:.&2312a17 wQfw:C iofRC•us � Page 8 of 26 � 267 Project 1: SU3 i 7 i 6600—M, DR02012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 P396 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance,and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services De artment Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 9, Extend Master Plan Storm Drain Line III-1 from Foothill Boulevard to Red Hill Country Club Drive. The applicant shall submit a detailed .hydrology study to engineering and said study shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to final map approval or the issuance of a Building Permit, whichever occurs first. Said study shall include the existing, interim and the ultimate proposed hydrologic conditions including key elevations, drainage patterns and proposed locations and sizes of all existing and proposed drainage devices. The hydrology study shall present a full breakdown of all the runoff generated on- and off-site. If there are any impacts to the downstream channel, the City will require full installation of the Master Plan Storm Drain culvert, south of Foothill Boulevard, along with any right-of-way acquisition and easements that may be required. Standard drainage fees For the site shall be credited to the cost of permanent master plan facilities, in accordance with City Policy. The developer may request a reimbursement agreement to recover over sizing costs, in excess of fees from future development within the same tributary area. If the developer fails to submit for said reimbursement agreement within six months of the public improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to reimbursement small terminate. a. Construct private, on-site storm drains to collect all project runoff, and discharges from adjacent properties to the north and convey to the Master Plan Storm Drain. b. Provide manholes at public-private junctions. 10. Maintenance access shall be granted to the City for the on-site portion of the master plan storm drain. All manholes shall be easily accessible. 11. Private drainage facilities shall prevent developed flows from entering the Pacific Electric Trail right-of-way. Existing inlet facilities for culverts in the SBCTA right-of-way shall be protected. Final drainage study small address whether those culverts can be used for runoff from perimeter slopes or undeveloped portions of the project site. Also, surface drainage shall not flow over City right-of-way or maintained areas. Provide intercept of surface drainage such as by use of v-gutters and provide for drainage to enter street through parkway culverts. 12. The existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical} fronting the project site shall be removed or placed underground. prior to public improvement acceptance or occupancy, whichever occurs first. All services crossing Foothill Boulevard and/or Red Hill Country Club Drive shall be undergrounded at the same time. The developer may request a reimbursement agreement to recover one-half the City adopted cost for undergrounding from future development (or redevelopment) as it occurs on the opposite side of the street. If the developer fails to submit said reimbursement agreement within six months of the public improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. a.All existing overhead utilities located on site shall be removed or placed underground. �wvw.cityO RC.us Pnried;9%23l205 7 Page 9 of 20 268 project SUB T T 16605.k1W, DRC2012-00872, ❑R02016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 P397 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207--101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL. OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. En-gineering Services De artment Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 13. 1t shall be the developer's responsibility to have the current FIRM Zone A designation removed from the project area. The developer shall provide drainage/or flood protection facilities sufficient to obtain an unshaded "X" designation. The developer's engineer shall prepare all necessary reports, plans, hydrologic/hydraulic calculations.. A Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) shall be required prior to grading permits. A Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) shall be issued by FEMA prior to certificate of occupancy. 14. Master Plan Storm Drain Line 111-1 shall be constructed and aligned so that it remains within the developer's property before connecting into the existing storm drain in the Foothill Boulevard right-of-way. A permanent storm drain easement shall be granted to the City for the public storm drain lines within the developer's property prior to acceptance of the improvements. As an alternative option to constructing the storm drain line and securing easements within the developer's property, at its sole cost and expense, the developer may voluntarily obtain a perpetual easement through the property located at 8318 Foothill Boulevard (Sycamore Inn) for such storm drain limes. Should the developer not obtain the necessary easement prior to the filing of the final map with the City, this alternative option shall be void and the developer shall construct the storm drain lines exclusively within the developer's property. Standard Conditions of Approval 15. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting Districts shall be filed with the Engineering Services Department prior to final map approval or issuance of Building Permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. 16. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 16.37.010, no person shall make connections from a source of energy, fuel or power to any building or structure which is regulated by technical codes and for which a permit is required unless, in addition to any and all other codes, regulations and ordinances, all improvements required by these conditions of development approval have been completed and accepted by the City Council, except: that in developments containing more than one building, structure or unit, the development may have energy connections made in equal proportion to the percentage of completion of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval, as determined by the City Engineer, provided that reasonable, safe and maintainable access to the property exists. In no case shall more than 95 percent of the buildings, structures or units be connected to energy sources prior to completion and acceptance of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval. L41VW_C!t}OfRC.IlS Printed:ai2W2017 Fage 10 cf 29 269 FfOjact fir: SUB T T"16605M, URC2012-00672, ❑RC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 P398 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 26, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department = Standard Conditions of Approval 17. 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 SCR, 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. The proposed development is slated to be included in the City's Fiber Optic 1 Broadband service business plan that would provide a City owned Fiber-to-the-Premise (FTTP) infrastructure. Proposed fiber optic conduits and vaults will be placed underground within a duct and structure system to be installed by the Master Developer per Standard Drawing 135-137. The size, placement and location of the conduit and vaults shall be shown on the Street improvement and/or Public Improvement Plans and subject to the Engineering Services Department's review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits or final map approval, whichever comes first. f. Access ramps for the disabled shall be installed on al[ corners of intersections per latest ADA standards or as directed by the City Engineer. g. 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. h. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards. E. Street names shall be approved by the Planning Manager prior to submittal for first plan check. 18. 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. wvrvr.CikyafRc.U6 Printed:8l23i2L�97 Page 91 of20 270 Project m: SU 3T T'l 6605M, DRC20-12-00672, DRC201 6-00207, and DRC2012-00673 P399 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review,Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Engineering Services ❑epartment Standard Conditions of Approval 19. Install street trees per City street tree design guidelines and standards as follows. The completed legend (box below) and construction notes shall appear an 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. Foothill Boulevard in ROW and Median Botanical Name- Prunus blireina Common Name- N.C.N. Min. Grow Space- 3' Spacing_20' D.C. Size - 15 gallon Foothill Boulevard On-site Botanical flame- Platanus acerifolia Common Name- London Plane Tree Min. Grow Space-7' Spacing-40' ❑.C. Size - 15 gallon Red Hill Country Club Drive Botanical Name- Platanus acerifolia Common Name - London Plane Tree Min. Grow Space -7' Spacing-40' O.C. Size - 15 gallon 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 punting, 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. 20. intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with adopted policy. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight shall be plotted for all project intersections, including driveways. Local residential street intersections and commercial or industrial driveways may have lines of sight plotted as required. 21. Parkway landscaping on the following street(s) shall conform to the results of the respective Beautification Master Plan: Foothill Boulevard vA1rn.Ci[yofRC,us Frinted:8l23i2017 Page 2 cf 20 271 Project'": SUB I 1 16805M, t7RC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 P400 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review,Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 22. Provide separate utility services to each building 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. 23. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. 24. 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. 25. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. Approval of the final parcel map will be subject to any requirements that may be received from them. 26. Permits shall be obtained from the following agencies for work within their right of way: San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) 27. 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 andlor 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, rvww.CityofRC.us, under City Hall; Engineering; Environmental Programs. 28. 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. 29. Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards. 30. Dedication shall be made of the following rights-of-way on the perimeter streets (measured from street centerline): 60 total feet on Foothill Boulevard 30 total feet on Red Hill Country Club Drive 31. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quit-claimed or delineated on the final map. 32.Additional street right-of-way shall be dedicated along right turn lanes, to provide a minimum of 7 feet measured from the face of curbs to the right-of-way. 33. 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. rwm_CilyofRC_vs Printed:8123120 IT F.3ge 13 ct 20 272 rrcject, : S'lu3 T i-Io605M, ❑RC2012-06672, DRC2016-0020T, and DR02012-00673 P401 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type; Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 34. Reciprocal access easements 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 map. 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. 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 details} 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 Cade. wvA%CityofRC:us Fainted:&'23i26]7 Page 14 ON 273 71 Prolect, : SUB T t 1a30oM, DRC20 12-00672, DRC,20 16-00207, and DRC2012-00673 P402 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review,Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Gradinci Section Standard Conditions of Approval 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. 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 (Foothill 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. wvm-Cityo`RC.us Panted;SIF�i2D17 Page 15 of 20 274 ,::rojeci 4., SU3 i i`166Gci+J, URC2012-006 2, ❑RC20'15-00207, and ❑RCE012-00673 P403 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location. APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review,Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 20, Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit; the permitted grading plan (or architectural site plan) set shall shorn 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. 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. 1t shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off-site drainage easements prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 25. 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. 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. 27. Flow lines steeper than 6 percent could be erosive. The applicant shall provide hard lined gutters and swales where concentrated floras 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. veAw.CityofRC.us Panted!8123/2017 Page 6 of 211 275 rGjc;: SL+o i 16605iVI, DrC26 12-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-UO6 i3 P404 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0297-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 28. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall demonstrate that the storm water run-off will not adversely affect the downstream properties and that the water may legally discharge to the downstream properties. The engineer of record shall show an the final permitted grading and drainage plan one (1) or more of the following items are met: a) There is sufficient downstream capacity to accept the proposed storm water flows and that the downstream property owner have provided permission to accept the upstream storm water flows; b) a legal docurnentlentity exists allowing developed storm water flows to be discharged to the property lower in elevation; c) a storm drain system to safely convey the storm water flows to a public storm drain system without causing flooding to adjacent property(ies). 29. 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. 30. 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 (8MP), 31. Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WQMP shall include a copy of the project Conditions of Approval. 32. Reciprocal access easements for all parcels and maintenance agreements ensuring joint maintenance of all storm water quality structuralltreatment devices and best management practices (SMP) as provided for in the project's Storm Water Quality Management Plan, shall be provided for by CO&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. 33. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the grading and drainage plan shall show concrete drainage swales at the toe of slopes and discharge the water to an approved drainage facility. 34. 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, 35. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall obtain a Waste Discharge Identification Number (WDID). The WDI❑ number shall also be shown on the WQMP Site and Drainage Plan document. 36_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. antiw.CityofRC.us I Printed:612312017 Page 17 or 20 276 rra��c't SUE f7;d_)+.,3iv1, D;<C20,2-jGoi2, UR0402-0020i, a= L)RC20 ie-OG67 3 P405 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type. Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Gradin_q Section Standard Conditions of Approval 37. The land owner shall provide an inspection report by a qualified personlcompany 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. 38.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. 39. 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. 40.A final project-specific Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) shall he approved by the Building and Safety Director, or his designee, and the City of Rancho Cucamonga's "Memorandum of Storm Water Quality Management Plan" shah be recorded prior to the issuance of a grading permit or any building permit. 41. 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. 42.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 safe 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 VVQMP document. 43. Prior to issuance of a grading permit and approval or 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. tiNnrvl.CityofRC.us Printed-at23120 i 7 Page 18 or 20 277 F—r0i6 i .:tlu T 11 o605igi, rJrtiC2012-Oi)6_�Z, DRC20 i 6-JU%i7, anC1 Dk<_;2u`i 2-000-1 3 P406 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section ' -Standard Conditions of Approval 44. 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 ❑ "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". 45. 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". 46. 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. 47. 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, 48. 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 (M84) 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:ar2312017 wvnv,CityofRC.us Page 19 of 26 278 rfC�cCi T: IsIJa i + j 6605M, DkR_4.0'i 2-006/2, L;r-J,20 -id DRC!u 12-C,0873 P407 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-11 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review,Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 49. 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 BIVIPs 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 BMA treatment shall not be used at sites that are known to have sol[ 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 I beneficial uses, this vertical distance criteria may be reduced, provided groundwater quality is maintained. i. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause a nuisance or pollution as defined in Water Code Section 13050. The final project-specific water quality management plan shall specifically address items, a., b., and c. above. �Avv.CityofRC.us Printed:8123I2C" Page 20 of 20 279 P408 RESOLUTION NO. 17-78 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING VARIANCE NO, DRC2016-00207, A REQUEST TO EXCEED THE 30 FOOT BUILDING ENVELOPE ESTABLISHED BY DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 17.122.020.D.1.E,(i AND II) FOR THE DEVELOP 175 ATTACHED CONDOMINIUM UNITS ON 24.19 ACRES OF LAND IN THE MIXED USE (MU) DISTRICT, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, BETWEEN RED HILL COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE AND THE PACIFIC ELECTRIC TRAIL RIGHT-OF-WAY; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF-APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, AND 41 AND 0207-112-09 AND 10. A. Recitals. 1. Pacific Summit-Foothill, LLC, filed an application for the issuance of Variance No. iDRC2016-00207 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 9th day of August 2017, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and continued the application to the August 23, 2017 Planning Commission meeting. ' 3. On the 23rd day of August 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. 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 a I I 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 August 23, 2017, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The project site contains approximately 24.19 acres of a generally irregular configuration having a topography with a 30 percent or greater slope, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trail, and is presently vacant; and b. The project site is located in the Mixed Use (MU) District; and C. The property to the north contains Condominiums and single-family homes in the Medium (M) Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre) and Love (L) Residential District (2- 280 Attachment P409 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-78 DRC2016-00207—PACIFIC SUMMIT— FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 2 4 dwelling units per acre), the property to the south contains office, commercial, and condominiums uses in the Mixed Use (MU) District and Medium (M) Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), the property to the east contains Route 66 Trailhead and condominiums in the Medium (M) Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), the property to the west contains commercial land uses in the Mixed Use (MU) District, and the proposed project surrounds the Sycamore Inn Restaurant in the Mixed Use (MU) ❑istrict; and d. Approximately half of the project site is located within the Hillside Overlay District of the Zoning Map, of which the Development Code establishes building envelopes and maximum building height for properties located in hillside areas. Hillside Development criteria, Section 17.122.020(D)(e) of the Development Code, establishes a 30-foot maximum building height for all structures located in the Hillside Overlay District; and e. The applicant is proposing a total of 44 condominium units including 26 two-story tri-p[ex units up to a maximum of 23 feet in height, and 18 three-story four-, five-, and six-plea units up to a maximum of 35 feet in height; and f. Roughly half of the three-story units are located within the Hillside Overlay District and exceed the allowable maximum 30-foot building height. 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 strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulations would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of the Development Code. The Hillside Development building height development standard is necessary to regulate maximum building height and bulk on slope conditions when regulating the development of a single-family home in a residential district; these development standards were not intended to regulate building height for multi-family development in the Mixed Use District. Here, the applicant proposes grading the site into large flat building tiers to accommodate the proposed attached multi-family development. As the design and development of the proposed units will not be located on a slope condition and less than half of the project site is located in the Hillside Overlay District, enforcement of the development standard is inconsistent with the objectives of the Development Code; and b. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same district. The eastern portion of the project site has is a grade change ranging from a high of 1,375 feet along the northern property line to a low of 1,245 feet along the southern property line, a difference of approximately 130 feet_ The applicant is proposing to grade the site into two large building tiers to accommodate the development of attached multi-family condominium buildings ranging from 3 to 6 units in 44 buildings. The entire project site is located within the Mixed Use District and the eastern portion of the site is subject to the Hillside Overlay District. The Mixed Use District permits a density up to 50 dwelling units per acre and buildings up to 75 feet high. The multi-family units located within the Hillside Overlay District propose to exceed Hillside Development criteria by 5 feet, which is over 60 feet below the height of buildings to the north. The location of these buildings and their proposed height are situated so that their eventual development will not negatively impact to adjacent properties; and 281 f P410 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-78 VAR DRC2015-00207 --- PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 3 c, That 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 district. The increase in building height allows the proposed multi-family units to be distributed throughout the entire project site. Enforcement of the height limit would not prevent the proposed grading and would unduly force a density shift within the project so that a higher number of units would be located on the westerly half of the project, so that all units on the easterly half of the project site were within the Hillside Development standard height limits. This density shift will negatively impact the Sycamore Inn and surrounding properties by focusing a significant increase in the number of units on the westerly half of the project site; and d. That the granting of the Variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district. The project site is located in the Mixed Use, which was designed to accommodate a variety of land uses. The Mixed Use District was never intended to apply to properties located on hillside conditions or be subject to the Hillside Overlay District. Because the Mixed Use District can accommodate a variety of land uses it was never intended to be subject to the Hillside Development criteria of the General Plan and Development Code, in fact, this is the only Mixed Use district in the City with a slope condition. The intent of the Hillside Development criteria of the General Plan and Development Code was to regulate single-family residential hillside development on slopes 8% and greater. The intent of the Hillside Development criteria was to address the development natural slopes, and in this case, we have a 24-acre fractured site surrounded by developed land. The project site has been s❑ altered by surrounding development, is not a natural slope, is outside the intent of the Hillside Development requirements of the Development Code, and is s❑ unique that there are no other Mixed Use District slope conditions within the City; and e. That the granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The increased building heights will not negatively impact the surrounding property owners. Due to the grade difference between the project site and properties to the north, the 5-foot increase in building height will not negatively impact views of properties to the north and the additional height increase only impacts views on 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 adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a, Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's local C> QA 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. A comment letter was received from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDF►N) on July 27, 2017 in response to the circulated iSIMND. The only comment CDFVV had was in relation to the possible Jurisdictional Waters on the project site. The applicant 282 P411 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-78 VAR DRC2016-00207 — PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 4 and their biologists prepared a Jurisdictional Delineation to address CDFW's comments. The Jurisdictional Delineation determined that jurisdictional waters were not present on the project site, but recommended compliance with the CDFW recommended mitigation measure prior to issuance of any grading permit. The Biological Resources section of the IS/MND, was revised to include a mitigation measure requiring the applicant to provide proof to the City that the Streambed Alteration Agreement (1602 Agreement) process has been concluded. According to CEQA Section 15073.5(a), recirculation of a negative declaration is required prior to its adoption when it has been substantially revised after public notice of its availability has been given pursuant to Section 15072, Furthermore, CEQA Section 15073.5(b) states, "a "substantial revision" of the negative declaration shall mean: (1) a new avoidable significant effect is identified and mitigation measure or project revisions must be added in order to reduce the effect to insignificance, or (2) the lead agency determines that the proposed mitigation measures or project revisions will not reduce potential effects to less than significance and new measures or revisions must be required." Here, either the CDFW will determine that notification under Section 1802 of the Fish and Game Code is required for the project, or they will require the applicant obtain a Streambed Alteration Agreement. The ISJMN❑ was revised to include a discussion of the Jurisdictional Delineation for the project site and a mitigation measure requiring a Streambed Alteration Agreement was added to the MND and the project conditions of approval. The addition of a condition of approval requiring a Streambed Alteration Agreement is not considered substantial evidence in light of the whole record that cannot be mitigated. Therefore, the Streambed Alteration Agreement mitigation measure is not a substantial revision to the MND, and recirculation of the MND is not required; and 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 the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration; and 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 recommends the City Council adapt the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project; and 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 recommendation 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. a. 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 [current application.] 283 l P412 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-78 VAR DRC2016-00207—PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 5 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the attached standard conditions incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Department 1) All Conditions of Approval as contained in Planning Commission Resolution No, 17-75 shall apply. 5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 23RD DAY OF AUGUST 2017. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Francisco Oaxaca, Chairman I ATTEST: — (ft—T Candy Burnett, Secretary I, Candyce Burnett, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of'Rancho Cucamonga, d❑ hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 23rd day of August 2017, by the following vote-to-wit: I AYES: COMMISSIONERS., FLETCHER, OAXACA, WIM13ERLY � NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE' ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MACIAS, MUNOZ ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS, NONE 284 I Conditions of Approval P413 fi rsy�. Community Development Department Project#: SUBTT16605M, DRC2012-00672, ❑RC2016-00207, and ❑RC2012-00673 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24. 25, 31, 34. and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type; Tentative Tract Map, Design Review. Variance, and Tree Removal Permit 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 24.19 acres into 6 parcels and for the development of 175 attached condominium units in the Mixed Use (MU) District located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and Pacific Electric Trail Right-of-Way 2. Provide additional parking spaces in the vicinity of the Live/Work units to ensure adequate parking is available for commercial uses. 3. Provide a pedestrian connection to the Pacific Electric Trail along the east side of the project site, subject to approval by the San Bernardino County Transportations Authority (SBCTA). 4. Provide additional landscaping adjacent to the project perimeter wall to the northwest of the Sycamore Inn. 5. For slope planting south of the existing residences along the project's north boundary utilize a tree species and spacing that protects the views of homeowners living north of the project site. Standard Conditions of Approval 6. For all residential development, provide conduit from each unit/lot and a pull box to connect to the street. Provide interior structured wiring for each house/building with minimum Category 5 copper wire, Radio Grade 6 coaxial cable. and a central distribution panel, prior to release of occupancy (fiber-to-the building. FTTB). Plans shall be submitted for Planning Department and Building Official review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permits. 7. All dwellings shall have the front, side and rear elevations upgraded with architectural treatment, detailing and increased delineation of surface treatment subject to Planning Department review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permits. 8. 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. Such screening sham 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. wvnry CatyolRC us Printed.8123�2f}f 7 285 Project#: SUBTT16605M, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 P414 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review,Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.- Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 9. Mitigation measures are required for the project. The applicant is responsible for the cost of implementing said measures, including monitoring and reporting. Applicant shall be required to post cash, letter of credit, or other forms of guarantee acceptable to the Planning Department in the amount of $767 prior to the issuance of Building Permits, guaranteeing satisfactory performance and completion of all mitigation measures. These Funds may be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measures. Failure to complete all actions required by the approved environmental documents shall be considered grounds for forfeit. 10. In those instances requiring long term monitoring (i.e. beyond final certificate of occupancy), the applicant shall provide a written monitoring and reporting program to the Planning Department prior to issuance of Building Permits. Said program shall identify the reporter as an individual qualified to know whether the particular mitigation measure has been implemented, 11.The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the City Adopted Special Studies Zone for the Red Hill Fault, in a standard format as determined by the Planning Department, prior to accepting a cash deposit an any property. 12. 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. 13.Approval of Tentative Tract SUBTT16605 Modification is granted subject to the approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206, Design Review ❑R02012-00672, Variance ❑fRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit ❑RC2012-00673. 14. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolutions of Approval, Conditions of Approval, and all environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size). This includes Planning Commission Resolution No.'s 17-76 (for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16606M), 17-77(for Design Review DRC2012-00672), 17-78 (for Variance DRC2016-00207), and 17-79 (for Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673). 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. 15.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 $2,266.25. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary prior to public hearing. 16.Tentative Tract 16605 Modification shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, unless a complete final map is filed with the Engineering Services Department within 3 years from the date of the approval. �Nrnv.CikyofRC.us Printed-$I2312Q€7 Page 2020 286 Project m: SUBT T 16605iyi, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 P415 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit AL.L. OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.- Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 17. For multi-family residential, 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. 18. Existing trees required to be preserved in place shall be protected with a construction barrier in accordance with the Development Code Section 17.80.050, and so noted on the grading plans, The location of those trees to be preserved in place and new locations for transplanted trees shall be shown on the detailed landscape plans. The applicant shall follow all of the arborist's recommendations regarding preservation, transplanting, and trimming methods. 19. Front yard and corner side yard landscaping and irrigation shall be required per the Development i Code. This requirement shall be in addition to the required street trees and slope planting. 20.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 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. 21. 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. 22.All private slopes of 5 feet or more in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than 2.1 slope, shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 23.All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater slope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as follows: one 15-gallon or larger size tree per each 150 sq. ft. of slope area, 1-gallon or larger size shrub per each 100 sq. ft. of slope area, and appropriate ground cover. In addition, slope hanks in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5-gallon or larger size tree per each 250 sq. ft. of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary slope plane. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 24.Special landscape features such as mounding, alluvial rock, specimen size trees, meandering sidewalks, and intensified landscaping, is required along Foothill Boulevard. 25. Tree maintenance criteria shall be developed and submitted for Planning Department review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permits, These criteria shall encourage the natural growth characteristics of the selected tree species. 26. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of water efficient landscaping per Development Code Chapter 17.82. www.QtyofRC.u5 Painted;8123r2417 Page 3 0!20 287 Project : SUB T T16805N1, ❑RC2012-00672, DR02016-00207, and ❑RC2012-00673 P416 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.- Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 27. 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 Department review and approval prior to the issuance of Building Permits, 28. All units shall be provided with garage door openers if driveways are less than 18 feet in depth from back of sidewalk. 29. All parking lot landscape islands shall have a minimum outside dimension of 6 feet. 30. All parking spaces shall be 9 feet wide by 17 feet long with a required 1-foot overhang (e.g., over a curb stop). Parallel parking spaces shall be 9 feet wide by 24 feet long. 31. Plans for any security gates shall be submitted for the Planning Department, City Engineer, and Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District review and approval prior to Issuance of Building Permits. For residential development, private gated entrances shall provide adequate turn-around space in front of the gate and a separate visitor lane with call box to avoid cars stacking into the public right-of-way, 32.All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances, and exits shall be striped per City standards. 33. Textured pedestrian pathways and textured pavement across circulation aisles shall be provided throughout the development to connect dwellings/unitstbuildings with open spaces/plazas/ recreational uses. 34.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. 35.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. 36_Construct block walls between homes (i.e,, along interior side and rear property lines), rather than wood fencing for permanence, durability, and design consistency. 37.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. 38. 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. 39.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. L VAVW_C1ty0fRC.U3 P$r.t0%&.tVWX17 Page 4 of 20 288 Pro}ect#: SUBTT16605M, d,RC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and ❑RC2012-00673 P417 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions❑FApprovaI 40.A uniform hardscape and street furniture design including seating benches, trash receptacles, free-standing potted plants, bike racks, light bollards, etc., shall be utilized and be compatible with the architectural style. Detailed designs shall be submitted for Planning Department review and approval prior to the issuance of Building Permits. 41. On corner side yards, provide minimum 5-foot setback between wallslfences and sidewalk. The 5-foot wall/fence setback and the parkway shall have landscape and irrigation in addition to the required street trees. Detailed landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning Department review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permits. The parkway landscaping including trees, shrubs, ground covers and irrigation shall be maintained by the property owner. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the parkway maintenance requirement, in a standard format as determined by the Planning Department, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. 42. 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 Department and Engineering Services Department review and approved prior to the issuance of Building Permits. 43. For multiple-family development, laundry facilities shall be provided as required by the Development Code. 44. A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram, shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department and Police Department (909-477-2800) prior to the issuance of Building Permits. Such plan shall indicate style, illumination, location, height, and method of shielding s❑ as not to adversely affect adjacent properties. 45. 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. 46. 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. 47. Prior to any use of the ,project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all Conditions of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Department. 48. 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. 49. Where rock cobble is used, it shall be real river rock. Other stone veneers may be manufactured products. 50. Street names shall be submitted for Planning Department review and approval in accordance with the adopted Street Naming Policy prior to approval of the final map Printed:912302017 wYmCityofRC.us Page 5 of 20 289 Project#: SU13 I T1 o605M, DRC2012-00572, DRC2016-00207, and ❑RC2012-00673 P418 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25. 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-69 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review,Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 51. if no centralized trash receptacles are provided, all trash pick-up shall be for individual units with all receptacles shielded from public view. 52.Any approval for Design Review ❑RC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00573 shall expire if Building Permits are not issued within 5 years from the date of approval, or a time extension has been granted. 53.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. 54.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. 55.All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Services Department. 56. 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. 57. 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. 58. 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. 59. 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 wallsifences along the project perimeter. 60. Slope fencing along side property lines may be wrought iron or black plastic coated chain link to maintain an open feeling and enhance views. EnAineerinta Services Department Please be advised of the following special Conditions �r,CityofRC.us Printed:8123;201 T Page®of 20 290 Project: SUBTT16605NI, DRC2012-00672, DR02016-00207, and URC2012-00673 P419 Project Name; Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.- Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. Foothill Boulevard shall be improved in accordance with the City's "Major Divided Arterial''standards along the entire project frontage. a. Parkway improvements, including special streetlights, street trees and sidewalk, shall conform to the Foothill Boulevard District guidelines outlined in the Development Code and the Route 661Foathill Boulevard Visual Improvement Plan. b. Complete parkway improvements on the north side between the Pacific Electric Trail bridge and the adjacent Sycamore inn property. City has already installed the curb and gutter. Add parkway improvements including sidewalk, street trees, streetlights and curbside drain outlets, per Standard Drawing 107-B or 107-C as needed. c. Right turn lane, per Standard Drawing 119 (Bus Bay-Right Turn Lane option), shall be at least 150 feet in length with a 60-foot transition, The right turn lane shall be based off existing Foothill Boulevard elevations. d. Provide an interim physical barrier (at the project entrance) to left turns to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. e. Provide 8,609 Lumen LED streetlights. The street lights 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, f. Foothill drive approach shall have a 20-foot radius for the inbound right turn and a least a 31-foot radius for the outbound right turn, with sidewalk crossing the approach close to perpendicular at the zero curb face. Right-af-way dedication shall encompass the full public sidewalk crossing. Driveway median and accent paving shall not extend into the public right-af--way. g. Entry gates shall conform to the City's Residential Project Gated Entrance design guideline. h. Provide traffic signage and striping as required including northbound and southbound left turn and through movement time restrictions on Red Hill Country Club Drive at Foothill Boulevard during the peak hours. i. Construct access ramps at the street type entrance on Foothill 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. �vww.City0RC.us Printed;8/23/2077 Page 7 of 2e 291 Project#: SUBTT16605M, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 P420 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.- Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 2. Provide the fair share contribution for the Year 2035 as stated in the project traffic impact study for Foothill Boulevard at San Bernardino Road. Ultimate improvements include construction of a 3rd westbound and a 3rd eastbound through lane, restriping the northbound shared left tumfthrough lane into a shared left turnithrough4ight turn lane and modifications to the traffic signal. 3. flake a in-lieu contribution for a prorated share of the cost of the future improvements along the project frontage, to the future centerline of Foothill Boulevard. Final construction cost estfmate to be approved by the City Engineer. 4. Red Hill Country Club Drive small be improved in accordance with the City's "Local Street" standards along the project frontage. a. Provide curb and gutter, asphalt pavement, sidewalk, street trees and a drive approach for emergency vehicle access on the east side of the existing street. b. Drive approach for emergency vehicle access on Red Hill Country Club Drive shall be installed per Standard Drawing 105-C, with thicker concrete or reinforced sidewalk to meet Fire District standards. c. Provide a minimum 5-foot curb adjacent sidewalk width. Install retaining walls as needed. d. Provide 580C Lumen HPSV-equivalent LED streetlights along the frontage. The street lights 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. e. Provide traffic signage and striping as required. 5. ParkLvays shall slope at 2 percent from 1 foot behind the sidewalk to the top of the curb, along all street frontages. 6. Dedicate Lots A, B and C from the approved Tentative Map to the City. 7. Provide a copy of the on-site landscaping plans for Engineering Services Department review regarding conformance with Foothill Boulevard beautification master plan. 8. Add the following note to any private landscape plans that show street trees; "A[[ 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. �a vnvay.CityofRC.us i Printed =34'2097 page B of 20 292 Project#: SUB T T 16o"05tM, ❑RC2012-00572, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 P421 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13. 17,24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review,Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 9. Extend Master Plan Storm Drain Line III-1 from Foothill Boulevard to Red Hill Country Club Drive. The applicant shall submit a detailed hydrology study to engineering and said study shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to final map approval or the issuance of a Building Permit, whichever occurs first. Said study shall include the existing, interim and the ultimate proposed hydrologic conditions including key elevations, drainage patterns and proposed locations and sizes of all existing and proposed drainage devices. The hydrology study shall present a full breakdown of all the runoff generated on- and oft-site. If there are any impacts to the downstream channel, the City will require full installation of the Master Plan Storm Drain culvert, south of Foothill Boulevard, along with any right-of-way acquisition and easements that may be required. Standard drainage fees for the site shall be credited to the cost of permanent master plan facilities, in accordance with City Policy. The developer may request a reimbursement agreement to recover over sizing costs, in excess of fees from future development within the same tributary area. if the developer fails to submit for said reimbursement agreement within six months of the public improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. a. Construct private, on-site storm drains to collect all project runoff, and discharges from adjacent properties to the north and convey to the Master Plan Storm Drain. b. Provide manholes at public-private junctions. 10. Maintenance access shall be granted to the City for the on-site portion of the master plan storm drain. All manholes shall be easily accessible. 11. Private drainage facilities shall prevent developed flows from entering the Pacific Electric Trail right-of-way. Existing inlet facilities for culverts in the SBCTA right-of-way shall be protected. Final drainage study shall address whether those culverts can be used for runoff from perimeter slopes or undeveloped portions of the project site. Also, surface drainage shall not flow over City right-of-way or maintained areas. Provide intercept of surface drainage such as by use of v-gutters and provide for drainage to enter street through parkway culverts. 12. The existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical) fronting the project site shall be removed or placed underground, prior to public improvement acceptance or occupancy, whichever occurs first. All services crossing Foothill Boulevard and/or Red Hill Country Club Drive shall he undergrounded at the same time. The developer may request a reimbursement agreement to recover one-half the City adopted cost for undergrounding from future development (or redevelopment) as it Occurs on the opposite side of the street. if the developer fails to submit said reimbursement agreement within six months of the public improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. a. All existing overhead utilities located on site shall be removed or placed underground. uAvv.CityolRC.us PrEnted:812312Q17 Page 9 of 20 293 Project#: SUrr3 i i 16605M. ❑rR02012-00672, GRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 P422 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112--09 and 10 Project Type' Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and 'Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLL0WING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services De artmen# Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 13, it shall be the developer's responsibility to have the current FIRM Zone A designation removed from the project area. The developer shall provide drainage/or flood protection facilities sufficient to obtain an unshaded "x" designation. The developer's engineer shall prepare all necessary reports, plans, hydrologic/hydraulic calculations. A Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) shall be required prior to grading permits. A Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) shall be issued by FEMA prior to certificate of occupancy. 14. Master Plan Storm Drain Line I11-1 shall be constructed and aligned so that it remains within the developer's property before connecting into the existing storm drain in the Foothill Boulevard right-of way. A permanent storm drain easement shall be granted to the City for the public storm drain lines within the developer's property prior to acceptance of the improvements. As an- alternative option to constructing the storm drain line and securing easements within the developer's property, at its sole cost and expense, the developer may voluntarily obtain a perpetual easement through the property located at 8318 Foothill Boulevard (Sycamore Inn) for such storm drain lines. Should the developer not obtain the necessary easement prior to the fling of the final map with the City, this alternative option shall be void and the developer shall construct the storm drain lines exclusively within the developer's property. Standard Conditions of Approval 15. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting Districts shall be filed with the Engineering Services Department prior to final map approval or issuance of Building Permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. 16. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 16.37.010, no person shall make connections from a source of energy, fuel or power to any building or structure which is regulated by technical codes and for which a permit is required unless, in addition to any and all other codes, regulations and ordinances, all improvements required by these conditions of development approval have been completed and accepted by the City Council, except: that in developments containing more than one building, structure or unit, the development may have energy connections made in equal proportion to the percentage of completion of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval, as determined by the City Engineer, provided that reasonable, safe and maintainable access to the property exists. In no case shall more than 95 percent of the buildings, structures or units be connected to energy sources prior to completion and acceptance of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval. wv,rvr.CityafRC:us Printed;8123l2�t7 Page To of 20 294 Project#: • SUB TT16605V1, DRC2012-00672, ❑RC2016-00207, and DRC2012-0O673 P423 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN:.0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance; and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Engineerinq Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 17. 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: 17 Pull boxes shall be No. B 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. The proposed development is slated to be included in the City's Fiber Optic 1 Broadband service business plan that would provide a City owned Fiber-to-the-Premise (FTTP) infrastructure. Proposed fiber optic conduits and vaults will be placed underground within a duct and structure system to be installed by the Master Developer per Standard Drawing 135-137. The size, placement and location of the conduit and vaults shall be shown on the Street Improvement and/or Public Improvement Plans and subject to the Engineering Services Department's review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits or final map approval, whichever comes first. f. Access ramps for the disabled shall be installed on all corners of intersections per latest ADA standards or as directed by the City Engineer. - g. 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. h. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards. i. Street names shall be approved by the Planning Manager prior to submittal for first plan check. 18.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. Printed;V2312017 •ClkyofF2C.U5 Fine 11 of 20 295 Project##: SUBTT16505M, DRC2012-00672, DRC2015-00207, and ❑RC2012--00573 P424 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: En ineerin Services De artment Standard Conditions of Approval 19. Install street trees per City street tree design guidelines and standards as follows. The completed legend (box below) and construction notes shall appear on the title page of the street improvement plans. Street improvement plans shall include a line item within the construction legend stating: "Street trees shall be installed per the notes and legend on Sheet (typically Sheet 1)." Where public landscape plans are required, tree installation in those areas shall be per the public landscape improvement plans. Foothill Boulevard in ROW and Median Botanical Name- Prunus blirsina Common Name- N.C.N, Min. Grow Space - 3' Spacing 20' O.C. Size - 15 gallon Foothill Boulevard On-site Botanical Name- Platanus acerifolia Common Name- London Plane Tree Min. Grow Space-7' Spacing-40' D.C. Size - 15 gallon Red Hill Country Club Drive Botanical Name- Platanus acerifolia Common Name- London Plane Tree Min. Grow Space-7' Spacing-40' O.C. Size - 15 gallon 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. 20. Intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with adopted policy. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight shall be plotted for all project intersections, including driveways. Local residential street intersections and commercial or industrial driveways may have lines of sight plotted as required. 21. Parkway landscaping on the following street(s) shall conform to the results of the respective Beautification Master Plan: Foothill Boulevard Printedr WW2017 wvvl.CUyufRC.us Page 12❑t 20 296 Project#. SUB T T16605M, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and ❑RC2012-00673 P425 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.- Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 22. Provide separate utility services to each building 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. 23.The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. 24. 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. 25.Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. Approval of the final parcel map will be subject to any requirements that may be received from them. 26. Permits shall be obtained from the following agencies for work within their right of way: San Bernardino County Transportation Authority(SBCTA) 27. 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, 28.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. 29. Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards. 30. Dedication shall be made of the following rights-of-way on the perimeter streets (measured from street centerline): i 60 total feet on Foothill Boulevard 30 total feet on Red Hill Country Club Drive 31. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quit-claimed or delineated on the final map. 32. Additional street right-of-way shall be dedicated along right turn lanes, to provide a minimum of 7 1 feet measured from the face of curbs to the right-of--way. 33. 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. www.CityofRC.us Printecl:"MO 17 Pagc 13oF20 297 Project#: SUBT T 16605iivi, 17RC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207.and ORC2012-00673 P426 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34,and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review,Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 34. Reciprocal access easements 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 map. 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. 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 met 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 details) 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 shot sufficient detail including gradients, elevations, and dimensions and comply with the current adopted California Building Code. wvm.CityoRC.us Frintad:8/23i2G17 Page 14 of 2G 298 Project#: SUB I T 16605rM. DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00?07, and DRC2012-00673 P427 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review,Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 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. 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 (Foothill Boulevard) must drain under the sidewalk through a parkway culvert approved by the Engineering Department. This shall be shown on both I the grading and drainage plan and Engineering Services Department required plans. Printed;812312017 mwi.CilyofRC.us Page 15 of 20 299 I Froject�M: 5U;3 T 16605iM, GRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and L-)RC2012-00673 P428 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-,09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 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 CBC1804.3IGRC R401.3, CBC2304.11.2,21CRC R317.1(2) and CBC2512.1.21CRC R703.6.2.1 of the current adopted California Building Code/Residential Code, 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.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. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off-site drainage easements priorto the issuance of a grading permit. 25. 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. 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. 27. Flow lines steeper than 6 percent could be erosive. The applicant shall provide hard fined 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. enrh.CiiyofRC,us Printed:8 T2017 Page 16 of 20 300 Project ; SuBT T'l 6605,M, 17,RC2012-006�2, DRC20 l a-0020r, and DRC2a 12-00oi3 P429 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN. 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 28. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall demonstrate that the storm water run-of will not adversely affect the downstream properties and that the water may legally discharge to the downstream properties, The engineer of record shall show on the final permitted grading and drainage plan one (1) or more of the following items are met: a) There is sufficient downstream capacity to accept the proposed storm water flows and that the downstream property owner have provided permission to accept the upstream storm water Bows; b) a legal document/entity exists allowing developed storm water flows to be discharged to the property lower in elevation; c) a storm drain system to safely convey the storm water Flours to a public storm drain system without causing flooding to adjacent property(ies). 29. Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the latest adopted California Plumbing Cade. Private storm drain improvements shall be shown on the grading and drainage plan. 30. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy or final sign off by the Building [nspector 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). 31, Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WDMP shall include a copy of the project Conditions of Approval. 32, 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 Quafity 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 prier to approval of the WQMP document and recording of the Memorandum of Agreement of Storm Water Quality Management Plan. 33. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the grading and drainage plan shall show concrete drainage swales at the toe of slopes and discharge the water to an approved drainage facility. 34. 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 ❑fticial and recorded with the County Recorder's Office. 35. 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. 36.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. 1'iN'N.CII}'0 rf��,113 Pr.nted:8123l2017 Page 17 of 20 301 roject;�: SUB i i 155051V1, DRC2012-00572, DRC201c-00207, and DRC2012-00673 P430 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 37.The land owner shall provide an inspection report by a qualified person/company on a biennial basis for the Glass V Injection Wellslunderground infiltration chambers to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The [and 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. 38.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. 39.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 biennlal basis to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. 40. 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. 41. 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, 42.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 safe of the property shall be included within the WQMP document. 43. Prior to issuance of a grading permit and approval of the project specific water quality management plant 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 (VVQMP). 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. Pdnted:&231207 7 Nnnvw,CityofRC.us Page 98 o12U 302 ?roje.:;[r: SU3 i V'6605M, DRCiOl2-G0672, t7,iC20 i 6-00207,and ORC20 i 2-00873 P431 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN. 0207--101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review,Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 44. 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 ❑esign 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". 45. 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". 46.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. 47. 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, 48. 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:8123=17 www.CityorRC.u5 Page 19 of 20 303 P432 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Gradin.q Section Standard Conditions of Approval 49. GROUND WATER PROTECTION: Prior to approval of the final project specific water quality management plan (WQNIP), 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 duality 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 Cade Section 13050. The final project-specific water quality management plan shall specifically address items, a., b., and c.above. vnvw.Cityo€RC.us Printed:812312077 page 20 of 20 304 P433 RESOLUTION NO. 17-79 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TREE REMOVAL PERMIT NO. DRC2012-00673, A REQUEST TO REMOVE 180 TREES ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF 175 ATTACHED CONDOMINIUM UNITS ON 24.19 ACRES OF LAND IN MIXED USE (MU) DISTRICT, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, BETWEEN RED HILL COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE AND THE PACIFIC ELECTRIC TRAIL RIGHT-OF-WAY; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF -APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34,AND 41 AND 0207--112-09 AND 10, A. Recitals. 1. Pacific Summit-Foothill, LLC, filed an application for the approval of Tree Removal Permit No. DRC2012-00673, 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 9th day of August 2017, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and continued the application to the August 23, 2017 Planning Commission meeting. 3. On the 23rd day of August 2017, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a meeting on the application and concluded said meeting on that date. I 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 meeting on August 23, 2017, including written and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The project site contains approximately 24.19 acres of a generally irregular configuration having a topography with a 30 percent or greater slope, located on the north side of i Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trail, and is presently vacant; and b. The project site is located in the Mixed Use (MU) District; and C. The property to the north contains Condominiums and single-family homes in the Medium (M) Residential District(8-14 dwelling units per acre) and Low (L) Residential District (2- 4 dwelling units per acre), the property to the south contains office, commercial, and condominiums uses in the Mixed Use (MU) District and Medium (M) Residential District (8-14 305 Attachment 6 P434 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-79 TRP DRC2012-04673 -- PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 2 dwelling units per acre), the property to the east contains Route 66 Trailhead and condominiums in the Medium (M) Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), the property to the west contains commercial land uses in the Mixed Use (MU) District, and the proposed project surrounds the Sycamore Inn Restaurant in the Mixed Use (MU) District; and d. The trees are not designated as historically significant; and e. The trees are not noted in any Specific Plan/Community Plan or condition of approval; and f. The applicant has submitted an arborist report assessing the health of the individual trees. The Arborist Report (Jim Borer, August 2012) evaluated a total of 198 trees on the project site. Of those 198 trees, 64 meet Development Code criteria to be classified as Heritage Trees, and 18 of those Heritage Trees are recommended for preservation. The 184 trees not identified by the Arborist Report as suitable for preservation are considered over-mature, have poor growth character, have advanced decay, some are dead or are in poor general health; many of these trees have further declined in health due to the prolonged effects of the drought. Additionally, several trees, although in good health, their location conflicts with proposed improvements and the applicant proposes to remove these trees; and g. It is necessary to remove the trees in order to construct improvements which allow economic enjoyment of the property; and h. There are a significant number of trees existing in the neighborhood; the removal does not affect the established character of the area; and i i. It is necessary to remove the trees to construct required improvements within the public street right-of-way or within a flood control or utility right-of--way; and j. The trees can not be preserved by pruning and proper maintenance or relocation rather than removal; however, 2 trees (Borer Report, Trees No. 76 and 175) may be suitable candidates for relocation; and k. The trees do not constitute a significant natural resource of the City. 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 project is in accord with the objectives of the Municipal Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and C. The proposed project is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code; and d. The proposed project, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 306 P435 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-79 TRP DRC2012-00673— PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 3 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is nc substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA) and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration, A comment letter was received from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) on July 27, 2017 in response to the circulated ISIMND. The only comment CDFW had was in relation to the possible Jurisdictional Waters on the project site. The applicant and their biologists prepared a Jurisdictional Delineation to address CDFW's comments. The Jurisdictional Delineation determined that jurisdictional waters were not present on the project site, but recommended compliance with the CDFW recommended mitigation measure prior to issuance of any grading permit. The Biological Resources section of the IS/MND, was revised to include a mitigation measure requiring the applicant to provide proof to the City that the Streambed Alteration Agreement (1602 Agreement) process has been concluded, According to CEQA Section 15073.5(a), recirculation of a negative declaration is required prior to its adoption when it has been substantially revised after public notice of its availability has been given pursuant to Section 15072. Furthermore, CEQA Section 15073.5(b) stakes, "a "substantial revision" of the negative declaration shall mean: (1) a new avoidable significant effect is identified and mitigation measure or project revisions must be added in order to reduce the effect to insignificance, or (2) the lead agency determines that the proposed mitigation measures or project revisions will not reduce potential effects to less than significance and new measures or revisions must be required." Here, either the CDFW will determine that notification under Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code is required for the project, ❑r they will require the applicant obtain a Streambed Alteration Agreement. The IS/MND was revised to include a discussion of the Jurisdictional Delineation for the project site and a mitigation measure requiring a Streambed Alteration Agreement was added to the MND and the project conditions of approval. The addition of a condition of approval requiring a Streambed Alteration Agreement is not considered substantial evidence in light of the whole record that cannot be mitigated. Therefore, the Streambed Alteration Agreement mitigation measure is not a substantial revision to the MND, and recirculation of the MND is not required; and 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: (1)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 the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration; and 307 P436 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-79 TRP DRC2012-00673— PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2017 Page 4 C. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21061.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore recommends the City Council adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project; and 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 recommendation 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 attached Standard Conditions incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Department 1) All Conditions of Approval as contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. 17-75 shall apply. 2) The following trees, as identified in the Arborist Report (Jim Borer, August 2012), shall be preserved in place: Trees No. 74, 81, 82, 95, 96, 97, 99, 100, 101, 111, 112, 118, 120, 128, 129, 143, 178, and 185. The trees identified for preservation shall be identified on-site prior to removal of the remaining trees and shall be protected during all phases of construction. 3) The following trees, as identified in the Arborist Report (Jim Borer, August 2012), shall be either transplanted elsewhere on--site or replaced with the largest nursery grown stock available: Trees No. 76, and 175. The replacement tree shall be of the same species and the trees removed and shall be subject to Planning Department review and approval prior to planting. 4) The Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code requires that all heritage trees be replaced on a one-for-one basis, in the largest nursery grown stock available, and not less than a 15-gallon size. 5) This permit shall be valid for a period of 90 days, unless an extension is requested in writing at least 14 days prior to the expiration date. Where this permit is associated with development, the effective date begins and the 90 days shall start from the date of final map recordation or building permit issuance, whichever comes first. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. 308 P437 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 17-79 TRP DRC2012-00673--PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC August 23, 2D17 Page 5 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 23RD DAY OF AUGUST 2017. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: 471 Francisco Oaxaca, Chairman ATTEST: — �"( Candyce urns t, Secretary 1, Candyce Burnett, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, d❑ hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 23rd day of August 2017, by the fol[owing vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: FLETCHER, ❑AXACA, WIMBERLY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MACIAS, MUNOZ ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: NONE 309 Conditions of Approval P438 ( It %%I Community Development Department Project#. SUBTT16605M. DRC2012-00672. DRC2016-00207. and DRC2012-00673 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location- APN: 0207-101-13. 17, 24. 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type Tentative Tract Map. Design Review. Variance. and Tree Removal Permit 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 24.19 acres into 6 parcels and for the development of 175 attached condominium units in the Mixed Use (MU) District located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and Pacific Electric Trail Right-of-Way 2. Provide additional parking spaces in the vicinity of the Live/Work units to ensure adequate parking is available for commercial uses. 3. Provide a pedestrian connection to the Pacific Electric Trail along the east side of the project site, subject to approval by the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA). 4. Provide additional landscaping adjacent to the project perimeter wall to the northwest of the Sycamore Inn. 5. For slope planting south of the existing residences along the project's north boundary utilize a tree species and spacing that protects the views of homeowners living north of the project site. Standard Conditions of Approval 6. For all residential development, provide conduit from each unit/lot and a pull box to connect to the street. Provide interior structured wiring for each house/building with minimum Category 5 copper wire, Radio Grade 6 coaxial cable, and a central distribution panel, prior to release of occupancy (fiber-to-the building, FTTB). Plans shall be submitted for Planning Department and Building Official review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permits. 7. All dwellings shall have the front, side and rear elevations upgraded with architectural treatment, detailing and increased delineation of surface treatment subject to Planning Department review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permits. 8. 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. 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 Printed a23.20,,7 wwVlCdyofRC.us 310 Project#: SUBTT16605M, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and ❑RC2012-00673 P439 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planninq Department`. Standard Conditions of Approval 9. Mitigation measures are required for the project. The applicant is responsible for the cost of implementing said measures, including monitoring and reporting. Applicant shall be required to post cash, letter of credit, or other forms of guarantee acceptable to the Planning Department in the amount of $767 prior to the issuance of Building Permits, guaranteeing satisfactory performance and completion of all mitigation measures. These funds may be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measures_ Failure to complete all actions required by the approved environmental documents shall be considered grounds for forfeit. 10. In those instances requiring long term monitoring (i.e. beyond final certificate of occupancy), the applicant shall provide a written monitoring and reporting program to the Planning Department prior to issuance of Building Permits. Said program shall identify the reporter as an individual qualified to know whether the particular mitigation measure has been implemented. 11. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the City Adopted Special Studies Zone for the Red Hill Fault, in a standard format as determined by the Planning Department, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. 12. 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. 13, Approval of Tentative Tract SUBTT16605 Modification is granted subject to the approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206, Design Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit ❑RC2012-00673. 14. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolutions of Approval, Conditions of Approval, and all environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size). This includes Planning Commission Resolution No.'s 17-76 (for Tentative Tract Map SUSTT16606M), 17-77 (for Design Review DRC2012-00672), 17-78 (for Variance DRC2016-00207), and 17-79 (for Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673). 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. 15.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. 16. Tentative Tract 16605 Modification 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. www.0ityofRC.us Printed:9l23.2C17 Page 2 of 20 311 Project#: SUBTT16605M, ❑RC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DR02012-00673 P440 Project dame: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-99 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review,Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 17_ For multi-family residential, 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. 18. Existing trees required to be preserved in place shall be protected with a construction barrier in accordance with the Development Code Section 17.80.050, and so noted on the grading plans. The location of those trees to be preserved in place and new locations for transplanted trees shall be shown on the detailed landscape plans. The applicant shall follow all of the arborist's recommendations regarding preservation, transplanting, and trimming methods. 19. Front yard and corner side yard landscaping and irrigation shall be required per the Development Code. This requirement shall be in addition to the required street trees and slope planting. 20.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 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. 21. 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. 22.All private slopes of 5 feet or more in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than 2:1 slope, shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system 10 be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 23.All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater slope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as follows: one 15-gallon or larger size tree per each 150-sq. ft. of slope area, 1-gallon or larger size shrub per each 100 sq. ft, of slope area, and appropriate ground cover. In addition, slope banks in excess of 8 Feet in vertical height and 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5-gallon or larger size tree per each 250 sq. ft, of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary slope plane. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 24. Special landscape features such as mounding, alluvial rock, specimen size trees, meandering sidewalks, and intensified landscaping, is required along Foothill Boulevard. 26. Tree maintenance criteria shall be developed and submitted for Planning Department review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permits. These criteria shall encourage the natural growth characteristics of the selected tree species. 26, Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of water efficient landscaping per Development Code Chapter 17.82. wwvr.CityvfRG.us Printed:8l2V2017 Page 3 of 20 312 Project#. SIJBTT16605M, DRC2012-00672, ❑RC2016-00207, and ❑RC2012-00673 P441 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: p PlanningDepartment Standard Cond{lions of Approval 27. 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 Department review and approval prior to the issuance of Building Permits. 28.All units shall be provided with garage door openers if driveways are less than 18 feet in depth from hack of sidewalk. 29.All parking lot landscape islands shall have a minimum outside dimension of 6 feet. 30. All parking spaces shall be 9 feet wide by 17 feet long with a required 1-foot overhang (e.g., over a curb stop). Parallel parking spaces shall be 9 feet wide by 24 feet long. 31. Plans for any security gates shall be submitted for the Planning Department, City Engineer, and Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permits. For residential development, private gated entrances shall provide adequate turn-around space in front of the gate and a separate visitor lane with call box to avoid cars stacking into the public right-of-way. 32.All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances, and exits shall be striped per City standards. 33. 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. 34. 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. 35.Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Cade, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community, Specific Plans and/or Master Plans in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance. 36. Construct block walls between homes (i.e., along interior side and rear property lines), rather than wood fencing for permanence.. durability, and design consistency. 37. 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. 38.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. 39.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. Printed.812312017 tivWW.cityofRC.us Page 4 of 20 313 Project#: SUBTT16605M, DRC2 0 1 2-00672, DRC201 E-04207, and DRC2012-00673 P442 Project Name; Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.• Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 40. A uniform hardscape and street furniture design including seating benches, trash receptacles, free-standing potted plants, bike racks, light bollards, etc., shall be utilized and be compatible with the architectural style. Detailed designs shall be submitted for Planning Department review and approval prior to the issuance of Building Permits. 41. On corner side yards, provide minimum 5-foot setback between wallslfences and sidewalk. The 5-foot wall/fence setback and the parkway shall have landscape and irrigation in addition to the required street trees. Detailed landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning Department review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permits. The parkway landscaping including trees, shrubs, ground covers and irrigation shall be maintained by the property owner. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the parkway maintenance requirement, in a standard format as determined by the Planning Department, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. 42.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 Department and Engineering Services Department review and approved prior to the issuance of Building Permits. 43. For multiple-family development, laundry facilities shall be provided as required by the Development Code. 44. A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram, shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department and Police Department (909-477-2800) prior to the issuance of Building Permits. Such plan shall indicate style, illumination, location, height, and method of shielding so as not to adversely affect adjacent properties. 45. 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 shaft 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. 46. 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 tat subdivision, or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. 47. Prior to any use of. the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, aff Conditions of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Department. 48. 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. 49.Where rock cobble is used, it shall be real river rock. Other stone veneers may be manufactured prod acts, 50. Street names shall be submitted for Planning Department review and approval in accordance with the adopted Street Naming Policy prior to approval of the final map N+yVN,C 1 tyof R C;.u 9 Printed:8I23.1'ZD 17 Page 5 of 2C 314 Project#: SUBT T 16605iiM, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 P443 Project Name; Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 51. If no centralized trash receptacles are provided, all trash pick-up shall be for individual units with all receptacles shielded from public view. 52. Any approval for Design Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-OD673 shall expire if Building Permits are not issued within 5 years from the date of approval, or a time extension has been granted. 53.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. 54. 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. 55. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Services Department. 56. 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. 57. 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, 58, 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. 59. 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. 60. Slope fencing along side property lines may be wrought iron or black plastic coated chain fink to maintain an open feeling and enhance views. Engineering Services Department Please he advised of the following Spccial Conditions ti"Viv.cityofRC.us Printed:803M 17 Page 6 of 20 315 Project 7: SUBTT i 66051'41, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 P444 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34,and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.- Engineering Services ❑apartment Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. Foothill Boulevard shall be improved in accordance with the City's"Major Divined Arterial"standards along the entire project frontage. a. Parkway improvements, including special streetlights, street trees and sidewalk, shall conform to the Foothill Boulevard District guidelines outlined in the Development Code and the Route 661Foothill Boulevard Visual Improvement Plan. b, Complete parkway improvements on the north side between the Pacific Electric Trail bridge and the adjacent Sycamore Inn property. City has already installed the curb and gutter. Add parkway improvements including sidewalk, street trees, streetlights and curbside drain outlets, per Standard Drawing 107-8 or 107-C as needed. c. Right turn lane, per Standard Drawing 119 (Bus Bay-Right Turn Lane option), shall be at least 150 feet in length with a 60-foot transition. The right turn lane shall be based off existing Foothill Boulevard elevations. d. Provide an interim physical barrier (at the project entrance) to left turns to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. e. Provide 8,600 Lumen LED streetlights. The street lights 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. f. Foothill drive approach shall have a 20-foot radius for the inbound right tum and a least a 31-foot radius for the outbound right turn, with sidewalk crossing the approach close to perpendicular at the zero curb face. Right-of-way dedication shall encompass the full public sidewalk crossing. Driveway median and accent paving shall not extend into the public right-of-way, g. Entry gates shall conform to the City's Residential Project Gated Entrance design guideline. h. Provide traffic signage and striping as required including northbound and southbound left turn and through movement time restrictions on Red Hill Country Club Drive at Foothill Boulevard during the peak hours. i. Construct access ramps at the street type entrance on Foothill 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. vnvw.CityofRC.us Printed:812312g17 Page 7 of 20 316 Project#: SUBTT16605M, DRC2012-00672, C)RC2016-00207, and DR02012-00673 P445 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 26, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review,Variance; and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.• Ennineering Services De artment Please be advised of the Following Special Conditions 2. Provide the fair share contribution for the Year 2035 as stated in the project traffic impact study for Foothill Boulevard at San Bernardino Road. Ultimate improvements include construction of a 3rd westbound and a 3rd eastbound through lane, restriping the northbound shared left turn/through lane into a shared left tumithroughlright turn lane and modifications to the traffic signal. 3. Make a in-lieu contribution for a prorated share of the cost of the future improvements along the project frontage, to the future centerline of Foothill Boulevard. Final construction cost estimate to be approved by the City Engineer. 4. Red Hill Country Club Drive shall be improved in accordance with the City's "Local Street" standards along the project frontage. a. Provide curb and gutter, asphalt pavement, sidewalk, street trees and a drive approach for emergency vehicle access on the east side of the existing street. b. Drive approach for emergency vehicle access on Red Hill Country Club Drive shall be installed per Standard Drawing 105-C, with thicker concrete or reinforced sidewalk to meet Fire District standards. c. Provide a minimum 6-foot curb adjacent sidewalk width, Install retaining walls as needed, d. Provide 5800 Lumen HPSV-equivalent LED streetlights along the frontage. The street lights shall be owned by the City. Developer shall be responsible to coordinate and pay all costs to provide 5CF power on City owned street lights. Coordinate with City staff for design and installation requirements. e. Provide traffic signage and striping as required. 5. Parkways shall slope at 2 percent from 1 foot behind the sidewalk to the top of the curb, along all street frontages, 6. Dedicate hots A, B and C from the approved Tentative Map to the City. 7. Provide a copy of the on-site landscaping plans for Engineering Services Department review regarding conformance with Foothill Boulevard beautification roaster plan. 8. 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. .vvr+,v.C ity o ERC.u s NJ &' VN',7 - Page 8 of as 317 Project#; SUBTT15605iM, ❑RC2012-00672, DRC2015-0C207, and ❑RC2012-00673 P446 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location- APN; 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.- Engineering Services ❑epartment Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 9. Extend Master Plan Storm Drain Line 111-1 from Foothill Boulevard to Red Hill Country Club drive. The applicant shall submit a detailed hydrology study to engineering and said study shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to final map approval or the issuance of a Building Permit, whichever occurs first. Said study shall include the existing, interim and the ultimate proposed hydrologic conditions including key elevations, drainage patterns and proposed locations and sizes of all existing and proposed drainage devices. The hydrology study shall present a full breakdown of all the runoff generated on- and off-site. If there are any impacts to the downstream channel, the City will require full installation of the Master Plan Storm Drain culvert, south of Foothill Boulevard, along with any right-of-way acquisition and easements that may be required. Standard drainage fees for the site shall be credited to the cost of permanent master plan facilities, in accordance with City Policy. The developer may request a reimbursement agreement to recover over sizing costs, in excess of fees from future development within the same tributary area. If the developer fails to submit for said reimbursement agreement within six months of the public improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. a. Construct private, on-site storm drains to collect all project runoff, and discharges from adjacent properties to the north and convey to the Master Plan Storm Drain. b. Provide manholes at public-private junctions. 10. Maintenance access shall be granted to the City for the on-site portion of the master plan storm drain. All manholes shall be easily accessible. 11. Private drainage facilities shall prevent developed flows from entering the Pacific Electric Trail right-of-way. Existing inlet facilities for culverts in the SBCTA right-of-way shall be protected. Final drainage study shall address whether those culverts can be used for runoff from perimeter slopes or undeveloped portions of the project site. Also, surface drainage shall not flow over City right-of-way or maintained areas. Provide intercept of surface drainage such as by use of v-gutters and provide for drainage to enter street through parkway culverts. 12_The existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical) fronting the project site shall be removed or placed underground, prior to public improvement acceptance or occupancy, whichever occurs first. All services crossing Foothill Boulevard and/or Red Hill Country Club Drive shall be undergrounded at the same time. The developer may request a reimbursement agreement to recover one-half the City adopted cost for undergrounding from future development (or redevelopment) as it occurs on the opposite side of the street. If the developer fails to submit said reimbursement agreement within six months of the public improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to reimbursement shad terminate. a.All existing overhead utilities located on site shall be removed or placed underground. Printed:812312017 www.Ci[yofRC.us Page S of 20 318 Project#: SUBTT166051v1, ❑RC2012-00672, ❑RC2016-00207, and ❑RC2012-00573 P447 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location_ APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 13. It shall be the developer's responsibility to have the current FIRM Zone A designation removed from the project area. The developer shall provide drainage/or flood protection facilities sufficient to obtain an unshaded "X" designation. The developer's engineer shall prepare all necessary reports, plans, hydrologic/hydraulic calculations. A Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) shall be required prior to grading permits. A Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) shall be issued by FEMA prior to certificate of occupancy. 14. Master Plan Storm Drain Line 111-1 shall be constructed and aligned so that it remains within the developer's property before connecting into the existing storm drain in the Foothill Boulevard right-of-way, A permanent storm drain easement shall be granted to the City for the public storm drain lines within the developer's property prior to acceptance of the improvements. As an alternative option to constructing the storm drain line and securing easements within the developer's property, at its sole cost and expense, the developer may voluntarily obtain a perpetual easement through the property located at 8318 Foothill Boulevard (Sycamore Inn) for such storm drain lines. Should the developer not obtain the necessary easement prior to the filing of the final map with the City, this alternative option shall be void and the developer shall construct the storm drain lines exclusively within the developer's property. Standard Conditions of Approval 15.A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting Districts shall be filed with the Engineering Services Department prior to final map approval or issuance of Building Permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. 16, Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 16.37.010, no person shall make connections from a source of energy, fuel or power to any building or structure which is regulated by technical codes and for which a permit is required unless, in addition to any and all other codes, regulations and ordinances, all improvements required by these conditions of development approval have been completed and accepted by the City Council, except: that in developments containing more than one building, structure or unit, the development may have energy connections made in equal proportion to the percentage of completion of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval, as determined by the City Engineer, provided that reasonable, safe and maintainable access to the property exists. In no case shall more than 95 percent of the buildings, structures ar units be connected to energy sources prior to completion and acceptance of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval. Printed:8r23120 i 7 4wwr.CRyofRC.us pale 10 of 20 319 Project#: SUBT T 16605M, DRC2012-00672, ❑RC20 1 6-0020 7, and ❑RC2012-00673 P448 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location. APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.- Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 17. 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 nafne 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. The proposed development is slated to be included in the City's Fiber Optic 1 Broadband service business plan that would provide a City owned Fiber-to4he-Premise (FTTP) infrastructure. Proposed Fiber optic conduits and vaults will be placed underground within a duct and structure system to be installed by the Master Developer per Standard Drawing 135-137. The size, placement and location of the conduit and vaults shall be shown an the Street Improvement and/or Public Improvement Plans and subject to the Engineering Services Department's review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits or final map approval, whichever comes first. f. Access ramps for the disabled shall be installed on all corners of intersections per latest ADA standards or as directed by the City Engineer. g. 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. h. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards. i. Street names shall be approved by the Planning Manager prior to submittal for first plan check. 18. 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. �nrNw�Cikyo90'us Prin'.ed:&'2312017 Page I of 26 320 Project#. SUBTT16505iM, ORC2012-00672, URC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 P449 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.- Engineering Services ❑epartment Standard Conditions of Approval 19. Instail 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. Foothill Boulevard in ROW and Median Botanical Name- Prunus blireina Common Name- N.C.N. Min. Grow Space-3' Spacing- 20' Q.C. Size - 15 gallon Foothill Boulevard On-site Botanical Name- Platanus acerifolia Common Name- London Plane Tree Min. Grow Space-7' Spacing-40' O.C. Size - 15 gallon Red Hill Country Club Drive Botanical Name- Platanus acerifolia Common Name- London Plane Tree Min. Grow Space- 7' Spacing-40' O.C. Size - 15 gallon 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. 20. Intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with adapted policy. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight shall be plotted for all project intersections, including driveways. Local residential street intersections and commercial or industrial driveways may have lines of sight plotted as required. 21. Parkway landscaping on the following street(s) shall conform to the results of the respective Beautification Master Plan: Foothill Boulevard www.CityofRC.us Printed:8I2312017 Page 12 of 20 321 Project#. SUBTT16605M, ❑RC2012-00672, ❑RC2016-00207, and ❑RC2012-00673 P450 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.- En-gineeriti-pi Services De artment Standard Conditions of Approval 22. Provide separate utility services to each building 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. 23. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. 24. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CV'O/D), 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 a prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. 25.Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. Approval of the final parcel map will he subject to any requirements that may be received from them. 26. Permits shall be obtained from the following agencies for work within their right of way. San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) 27. Prior to the issuance of building permits, a Diversion Deposit and related administrative fees small 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 an or after June 2, 2014, must complete the reimbursement process through the City's Accelerate online portal within 60 days fallowing 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, 28. 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. 29. Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards. 30. Dedication shall he made of the following rights-of-way on the perimeter streets (measured from street centerline): 60 total feet on Foothill Boulevard 30 total feet on Red Hill Country Club ❑rive 31.All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quit-claimed or delineated on the final map. 32.Additional street right-of-way shall be dedicated along right turn lanes, to provide a minimum of 7 feet measured from the face of curbs to the right-of-way. 33.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. www.CltyofRC.us Printed:8I23i217S7 Page 13 of 20 322 Project* SUBTT166051V1, 0RC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 P451 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review,Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.- Engineering Services Departmen Standard Conditions of Approval 34. Reciprocal access easements 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 reap. 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 sails 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 Tar 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. S. 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 details) 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 shalt show sufficient detail including gradients, elevations, and dimensions and comply with the current adopted California Building Code. Prinsed:812312017 wWW.City0Rc.us Page 76 of 20 323 Project T: SUBTT16605Nl, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and ORC20-i2--00673 P452 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN:0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.- Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 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, 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 small 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 snail 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 (Foothill 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. wvrrr.City4rZC.us Printad:312312fl i 7 Page 15 0!20 324 Project#: SUBTT16605M, ❑RC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and ❑RC2012-00673 P453 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN. 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review,Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 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 CBC18D4.31CRC R401.3, CBC2304.11.2.2/CRC R317.1(2) and CBC2512.1.2JCRC 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 detail sheet or 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. A drainage study showing a 1OD-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. it shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off-site drainage easements prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 25. 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 flaws 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. 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. 27. 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. Printed:812312317 www,CityafRC,us gage 76 of 20 325 Project#r: SUB T T 166t75rbl, DRC20 i 2-00672, DRC2016-00207, and ❑RC2012-00n73 P454 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review,Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.- Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 28. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall demonstrate that the storm water run-off will not adversely affect the downstream properties and that the water may legally discharge to the downstream properties. The engineer of record shall show on the final permitted grading and drainage plan one (1) or more of the following items are met: a) There is sufficient downstream capacity to accept the proposed storm water flows and that the downstream property owner have provided permission to accept the upstream storm water flows; b) a legal document/entity exists allowing developed storm water flows to be discharged to the property lower in elevation; c) a storm drain system to safely convey the storm water Flows to a public storm drain system without causing flooding to adjacent property(ies). 29. 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. 30. 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). 31. Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WQMP shall include a copy of the project Conditions of Approval. 32. Reciprocal access easements for all parcels and maintenance agreements p g is ensuring joint maintenance of all storm water quality structural/treatment devices and hest 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. 33. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the grading and drainage plan shall show concrete drainage swales at the toe of slopes and discharge the water to an approved drainage facility. 34. 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. 35. 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. 36. 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 I❑ 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:ai-,212017 wtivLv.CityofRC.us Page 17 of 24 326 Project n: SUB T T1 6606iM, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DPC2012-00673 P455 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 37. The land owner shall provide an inspectlon report by a qualified person/company an a biennial basis for the Class V Injection Wellslunderground 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. 38.The land owner shall provide an inspection report or 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, 39. The Iandiproperty 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. 40.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. 41. 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. 42. The final project-specific water quality management plan (VVQMP) 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. 43. 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. Alf 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. i wwm.CityorRC.us Prnted:8123(2Q77 Page 18 of 20 327 Project SUBT i 16605M, ❑RC2012-00672, D2C2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 P456 Project Name. Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Gradinn Section Standard Conditions of Approval 44. 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 VIU: Suitability Assessment Related Considerations for infiltration Facility Safety Factors", 45. 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 Manag ement Plans". 46. The subject project, shall accept all exlsting 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. 47. 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. 48.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 Pfi:sted;e12312oi7 Page 99 of 20 328 f roject#; SUBTT9 6605,'yl, DRC20 t 2-00672, DRC2a16-0020 7, and ❑RC2 0 1 2-006 73 P457 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type; Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard conditions of Approval 49. 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. GAS 818036), 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. 1. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause a nuisance or pollution as defined in Water Code Section 13050. The final project-specific water quality management plan shall specifically address items, a., b., and c. above. Printed:e123120 17 NNW. ftyofRC.us Page 20 of 20 329 8 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AUGUST 23, 20'17 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA DRC2015-00040, and Development Cade 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. Nikki Cavazos, Assistant Planner, gave the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file), Chairman Oaxaca opened the public hearing. Hearing and seeing no comment, he closed the public hearing. Bill Kennedy, Project Manager, said he had no additional comments, they accept all the conditions. Moved by Fletcher seconded by Wimberly carried 3-0-2 (Macias, Munoz absent) to adopt Resolution No. 17-74 approving Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20073 Items D3-D7 were heard concurrently. D3. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT ❑RC2016- 00206 - PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC - A request to amend tables and text. including clarifying text as necessary, in the General Plan to allow the development of land that contains slopes of 30 percent or greater. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605M, Design Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. This application will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. CONTINUED FROM AUGUST 9, 2017 D4. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP MODIFICATION SUB- T16605M - PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC - A request subdivide 24.19 acres into 6 parcels for the development of 175 attached condominium units in the Mixed Use (MU) District located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and Pacific Electric Trail Right-of-Way; 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10. Related Files: General Plan Amendment ❑RC2016-00206, Design Review ❑RC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit ❑RC2012-00673. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. CONTINUED FROM AUGUST 9, 2017. Page 4 of 13 330 Attachment 7 1 9 RANCHOCITY OF AUGUST 23, 2017 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA ❑5. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2012-00572 - PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC - A request to develop 175 attached condominium units on 24.19 acres of land in Mixed Use (MU) District, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trail Right-of- Way; APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10. Related Files: General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605M, Variance ❑RC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit ❑RC2012-00673. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. CONTINUE❑ FROM AUGUST 9, 2017, D6. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VARIANCE ❑RC2016-00207 - PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC - A request to exceed the 30 foot building envelop established by Development Code Section 17.122.020.D.1.e.(i and ii) for the develop 175 attached condominium units on 24.19 acres of [and in the Mixed Use (MU) District, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trail Right-of-Way; APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24. 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112- 09 and 10. Related Files: General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605M, Design Review ❑RC2012-00672, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. CONTINUED FROM AUGUST 9, 2017. ❑7. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TREE REMOVAL_ PERMIT - DRC2012-00673 - PAClFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC - A request to remove 180 trees associated with the proposed development of 175 attached condominium units on 24.19 acres of land in Mixed Use (MU) District, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trail Right-of-Way; APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10. Related Files: General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605M, Design Review DRC2012-00672, and Variance ❑RC2016-00207. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. CONTINUED FROM AUGUST 9, 2017. Tom Grahn, Associate Planner, gave the staff report and PowerPoint Presentation (copy on file). He said the revised conditions of approval include two new conditions and were placed before the Commission for consideration: #3 (Planning Condition) re: the requirement to provide a pedestrian connection to the PE trail at the east side of the project and Engineering Condition #14 re: Master Plan Storm Drain Line 111-1 be constructed. (copy on file). The new conditions have been incorporated into the attached standard Page 5 of 13 331 0 s CITY OF ' CUCAMONGA AUGUST 23, 2017 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVic CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA conditions with the resolutions. Prior correspondence received before this agenda production is attached to the staff report. Mr. Grahn noted additional correspondence was received since agenda production regarding the environmental does submitted by Natasha Walton (discussion follows). Commissioner Fletcher asked if the western half of the site is 30% slope or greater. He asked how long the area has been zoned for mixed use. He also asked for a landscape plan visual with respect to the historical nature of the Sycamore Inn and if a technical geological report was provided and if there are any concerns with respect to construction on that slope. Mr. Grahn said the site has been zoned Mixed Use since about early 2000, only about 6% of the site is 30% or greater; the applicant will provide a visual of the landscape plan around Sycamore Inn later in the presentation. He noted the geotechnical report was provided and analyzed-the report indicates the soil condition and construction on the slope is not a concern. Commissioner Fletcher asked about the recreational amenities and noted 5 are required but only 4 are listed in the staff report but there are multiples of some amenities which in his mind does not constitute 5. He suggested if pets are allowed to five in the units. the developer should consider putting in a dog park for an additional amenity. Mr. Grahn said staff looked at the total number which satisfies the requirement. He deferred to the applicant. Chairman Oaxaca opened the public hearing. Chad Stadnicki, Project Manager, thanked the Commission and staff. He said Mr. Grahn has been very helpful with comments and analysis. He noted that in 2006, they had the approvals needed but no market for the product. He said the Site Plan only had a 5-year life and then they decided they could do it better. He gave a PowerPoint presentation (copy on file) and said the new plan tries to address impacts to views. traffic, parking and also enhances Foothill Boulevard and the Sycamore inn. Mark Rogers, the planner for the applicant, continued with their PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). He commented on the landscaping and buffer provided around the Sycamore inn site. Page 6 of 13 332 1 r CITY OF RANCHO a . CUCAMONGA 1 y AUGUST 23, 2017 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Commissioner Fletcher spoke re: the amenities and suggested they add a dog park as that should be easy and would satisfy the 5 amenities requirement. Mr. Rogers agreed and said there is opportunity to be creative. Chairman Oaxaca opened the public hearing. Hank Stoy. a resident of the Red Hill area noted Mr. Grahn and Mr. Stadnicki were very accessible and responsive although he still had concerns. He referred to his letter and newspaper articles. He said the residents had prior assurances that it was safe to manufacture the slope but some existing residences have experienced problems. He said the traffic plan-creates dangerous U-turns. and the regular access and emergency access point is at the far west end. He expressed concern about the added time needed for first responders to travel from the west end of the site to the east end. Paul Gomez. residing in the Red Hill area expressed concern about disturbing the bottom of the slopelhill as he lives on top of the hill. He asked why the General Plan Amendment is needed. He asked more attention be given to existing. unfinished development and suggested using the removed trees be planted in the unfinished medians. Terri DiMarco, a Red Hill resident said traffic is her biggest concern;making a left tarn into Red Hill off Vineyard takes a fang time (2 fights). She said cars are already using the neighborhood as a pass thru to get to Carnelian and north to Base Line Road. She said noise from Foothill Boulevard will increase. She objected to removing trees and wished they could be replanted and preserve the heritage trees. She said she opposes blocked views in the area and is not in favor of building on the slope. She said there is already an increase of crime: mail boxes are being broken into. She said she liked the rural feel of the area. She asked the neighborhood be saved from this development and asked the proposal be rejected. Natasha Walton, a local biologist said her letter is on file. Her letter expresses concern re: loss of character of the hillsides. She said desert cottontails. white sage and the trees are present, and she requested more native plants and trees than non-native plants and trees to provide habitat for the existing animal population. She has a concern about the bats and their habitat and allowing them to safely abandon the existing trees progressively. She said the fighting should be screened and noted the lights of the restrooms at the Page 7 of 13 333 ,y Z ■ i CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AUGUST 23, 2017 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AN❑ PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER ❑RIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA trailhead are not shielded and we should preserve the night sky-LED lights are too bright and they affect the birds. She said she would like the City to buy the property and turn it into a park. She said no surveys were supplied for bats-she said to minimize impact to bats a progressive removal of trees should be done. Jack Lieberman, a Fled Hill resident, said he attended 3 prior meetings concerning the project. He expressed concern re: GPA. He there is some misunderstanding regarding the geological history. He said LA is built on an Arroyo Seca (dry river bed). He said this project area is similar stating there are 4 hills with ravines-the riverbeds fill with rain waters and this was not mentioned in studies. He said the property has not been properly described. Chairman Oaxaca closed the public hearing. He said he heard concerns regarding re: alteration of slopes. traffic management, accesslegress. redirection of traffic through the Red Hill neighborhood, and the GPA with respect to the Development Code. Dan Eberhardt stated he is with the applicant's Engineering firm: the geotechnical consultant since 2002. He said there are cut slopes - 2:f slopes, 60 feet high. He said they have been analyzed under all types of conditions - dry, saturated, earthquake-the safety factors exceed what is required. He said studies were also done for fill slopes and in all cases they are comfortable,- this is not an issue. He said with respect to the MSF wall and gross stability all was evaluated and deemed safe and above the minimum requirements. He said the next phase after final grading plans are prepared will be to re- analyze the conditions. He said he takes exception to Mr. Liebermans'comments about there being 4 hills. The hill has erosion channels come from off-site (prior development) and most of the area is an elevated alluvial terrace. He said it erodes when it has concentrated flows and no underground streams were observed. Commissioner Fletcher said he generally believes a developed slope is more stable than undeveloped slope. Mr. Eberhardt said they analyze that it will be stable after it has been cut into: this slope is far i'n excess of the minimum safety requirements. Commissioner Fletcher asked about the drainage following development• a Page 8 of 13 334 3 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AUGUST 23, 20'17 f HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Mark Reider of David Evans and Associates, Civil Engineer said he has been involved since 2004. He said the existing development was built with outlet pipes that cause erosion and sorne of the gullies. He said there is a master plan storm drain facility that is provided and the storm drain system will drain to that facility as pall of the project. He said it will collect the run-off, He said in final engineering a hydrology study will be provided along with hydraulic analysis. He said they are very aware of the hillside and drainage conditions and their storm drain plans will address that in the future. Chairman Oaxaca asked far comment regarding the traffic. Dan Close, Senior Traffic Engineer (representing the applicant) said the restricted movement allows for better flow on Foothill Boulevard. He said it does create more U- turns and it is not uncommon to restrict driveways from a major arterial. He said the study indicates 1,000 additional daily trips over a 24-hour period-a relatively small number. He said with respect to 'cut thru traffic'. their study accounted for this and they also considered the City's study done in 2009. He said traffic movements have been consistent over the last 5 years and it is likely the 'cut thru' patterns will remain the same-additional trips through the neighborhood will be minimal. He said much of the traffic relates to children being delivered to the elementary school. Albert Espinoza. Assistant City Engineer. reported that last Wednesday at the Public Works Subcommittee. the Engineering Services Director. Jason Welday. discussed preliminary options he will be presenting to the Committee in the next couple of months to rehabilitate the west and of Foothill Boulevard from the PE Trail to Grove Avenue. (slide provided-copy on file) One option may include not widening Foothill Boulevard to 6 lanes because of regional improvements to the County such as the 210 Freeway which has redistributed traffic throughout the County (lessening the need for the originally proposed widening project). He said the proposed project will include a new traffic signal and the construction of a new alignment to Red Hill Country Club Drive which will be evenly spaced with existing signals along the corridor. He said the final design of the future improvements along Foothill Boulevard may or may not include a median in the final design. Flexibility has been given on the conditions of approval when it comes to a temporary physical barrier being installed to prevent left-turn movements from the proposed project driveway. Commissioner Fletcher asked what type of temporary barriers can be installed, two options were discussed:one is pavement delineators which can be glued to the ground or Page 9 of 13 335 4 RANCHOCITY OF AUGUST 23, 2017 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA a raised median between 2 or 3 feet in width as not to impact business access to the south of the project (Magic Lamp and Vince s). Commissioner Fletcher noted that it has been a long time since the original proposal- He said the design is attractive and is a much better plan. He said with respect to the zoning: he said the facts and findings almost creates the argument that it never should have been mixed use but it is mixed use. He said the Developer listened to residents and incorporated those things into their plan. He said it does have lower density and he likes the livelwork units: a nice City asset. He said the architectural design is very nice and good parking. He said his geological concerns were satisfied and trees can be replaced with more. He said the preservation of Bear Gulch is good. He said he wants the fifth amenity to be added:perhaps a dog park- Commissioner Wimberly concurred with all of his comments. He said lie likes the Livelwork units work well provided they are conditioned properly meaning no living in the work ,cart of the unit. He said it needs to be used as a mixed use- He said the architect worked well with staff and he worked with them on DRC -they met all the requirements- He said the project will be an improvement to that part of the City Chairman Oaxaca thanked staff and noted that time has worked in their favor with the addition of the property to the west, there is now a reduction of density and added amenities and architecture. He said the main concerns regarding the slope have been addressed and this is the best possible outcome. He asked staff to clarify the need for the GPA with respect to the Development Code. Mr. Grahn replied that it is to reestablish consistency between the Development Code and the General Plan. Moved by Fletcher seconded by Wimberly carried 3-0-2 (Macias, Munoz absent) to adopt the resolutions recommending the City Council approve General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206(Resolution No. 17-75) and the Mitigated Negative Declaration which will be forwarded to the City Council for final action and that the Planning Commission adopt the Resolutions approving SUBTT16605M (Resolution No. 17-76): Design Review DRC2012-00672 (Resolution No. 17-77),- Variance ❑RC2016-00207 (Resolution No. 17- 78) and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673 (Resolution No. 17-79) The motion included Commission direction for staff to work with the applicant to achieve the addition of a fifth amenity on the project site and they accepted the revised standard conditions as Page 10 of 13 336 5 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA , - AUGUST 23, 2017 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA placed before them on the dais (specifically Planning Condition 43 and Engineering Condition #14) or a Development Agreement between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and DR Hor or the purpose of providing vested development rights and establishing permit holds and development timelines related to the construction of a mixed use proje nsisting of 380 residential units, a 71 room hotel and two restaurant buildings total 12,00Q square feet, located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard an se Line Road — APN: 1090-331-05. The City Council adopted a Mitiga Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for this project an July 19, 20 . The California Environmental Quality Act provides that no further environmental r w of a previously adopted Negative Declaration is required for subsequent project minor revisions to projects within the scope of a previous Negative Declaration. T item will be forwarded to the City Council for final review and action. CONTINUAN REQUESTED. Donald Granger, Senior Planner n d the agreement is still under review and that staff is requesting a continuance to th xt meeting on September 13. 2017, Chairman Oaxaca opene e public hearing and hearing and seeing no comment asked the Commission for ation to leave the hearing open to the September 13. 2017 meeting. Mr. Granger s the staff report will have the agreement attached and a summary of the major term f the agreement and a summary of the background and applicable Code section at is being recommended to Council. ed by Wimberly seconded by Fletcher carried 3-0-2 (Macias, Munoz absent) to ontinue Development Agreement DRC2017-00619 to the regular meeting on September 13. 2017. E. COMMISSION BUSINESSiHISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION ENTER-AGENCY UPDATES. , ; •. Page 11 of 13 337 P466 338 •�-v�..1 VCU 8s'oq Ca l ie Casa be P467 AW 3 12017 Rancho CUCa M6aj1a, Ch q 173d CITY CLERK 0oq) 931 -�- a8ss lannr� r4cfn�- GfTYOF RWCHO CUCAMONGA ROyos t 3 i;Za i 7 P pi C;+y o; Ram2ho 12u,'3MO a RCOPY - wish to appezl the 4eeiSians made by -l-he P la+?nrn� �rmissiorr f s-i-s m Op i ny a-F RUy ust z3 ; za 17) re at i n,3 +o f h e f o w r nj I'tein.s. �larI e some S`r-r oo-fu res W a u 14 exee e4 f h e 30- Poat b v i i n3,s an tis l o pes. Rrlow i n,� +hese to he b ra i if WO P rd n e a fi ue 1 im act -Fhe ule W -Prom r4 propev,ty, `C'h 6 cJevelopeu- sbo0I be reTolred fo Comply W1+h fhe requ+remeni-s 6� +he bevelap"ent Cdde. l ro m e n-F a l I.Anest Mated a�difioval loq?- dar'1 veixicle trips Wixid be ,3eneraf-e4 can a ire.8dY heavi f y- -Fr,5- je4 roo- fh - it 401evc3rr� z'+ Wau k1 exaeei-ba-fe Prob lems of probabty ibe worst- intepsec+ion +R - -he Ci+y -- fioofhi fl and Rect Hitt C000-ry Club PriVe , only one enfray)ee1eXrt an4 r-;y fit -urns only i r? and out -f-he numerous u--turns re3ojred do rwthrll w6uld crer3fe ,salty ��►- 5. CU�'- �'�l/'oC �l "�'1-'3 iC �r'7 �C� N+ i1 i.f, bound fo I 'oeage, yetj no M1'-+(yaflor) trreasoV-Os arm being r. eqo r red o-F +he- e ue toper, ` ]e , rn p a at o 0 4v i id l i-pe is u n rea l isf-ica r i y u nder�tat� . For-ey'aM le the red +atI hawk �a f rofectecl .Spec;es) -Fr equeoflY seen on R�j If;,)/ i� nat eVei? meo4-innLed in *he broionicaf rewoTees sor-vey, �3, �aria�] Habi+a* Pr`esErvati��n cif riparian habitat %� a Stated ;loaf s' n the Cr+ys Genera f Pia rr Pol;cy �c - .r}e scif - Ws PraUec f wau[d de�V'OYa0onsr defC3 l aF i* r!e RemovaI Perm,t This Pro '� f WouI require rervxovr'rr9 18o frees , -Fo pr�esei-ve the 3rea5 ae6th��ir5 .nd eiaaracter- more Matorc,- trees Tb<3old be sauced. And 1't is d+pp-icuLt 4-o be1,'eUe +hat' fhe nes-frnq bJ'r4 SOrvey d,d ndf ¢r Ord a si��qle n esf i n an y o f t-� e f-mes Slated For remoua t, T1)e impacts of- t-hrs prqj-eci- need fo be more OdliY i nvestigafed 344 euatua`fe� . The jeu Anold hp requ-jt-ad- b2 ore h i 5 r 'ec ec C r1 iron m�r� a 1 I" - - * � ' . E .a C:beck $27ZS' 16 a-ttar-hecJ to paY the Xl;nj kE 4r myappea[, Sure l y tVtachnicnt .u� • dalrl � Hcory 1,. '` SAY � Attachment 8 339 ,,� RCA ,,� Associates LLC I15i5 Main Street. UDA-235 Hesperia, California 92345 (7h0)9%-9213 fax(76())?44d17Q I rca 12.Ya:aal_com wv A.reaassaciatesl1c.com � I September 19. 2017 Pacific Summit-Foothill, LLC 2 12 1 South Palm Avenue,Suite 200 I Alhambra. CA 91901 RL: Syeaniore 116gahts Project, Rancho Cucamonga.CA Response to comments 92017-27B Bear Sirs: As requested. we have reviewed the comments From Mr. Henry Stay and our response is provided helot%. Wildlife Biologist,, from RCA Associates, LLC documented all wifdlite species observed on the site during recent Belo! surveys. The read-tailed hawk was not observed, and since this species is not listed as threatened. endangered, or Ft species of special concern. a detailed discussion cif the species was not provide in the biological discuss. I lowe►er. the species is covered under the Migratory Bird '1 reaty Act (MBTA). and in the event the hawk is observed nesting on the site prior to the: start of ground clearing acti►•ities. the California Department of Fish and Wildli fe i (('DFW) will he contacted to discuss midgations which may be required. I Riparian Habitat in accordance "ith the City's General Plan Policy RC-8.1, RCA Associates. I.1.C' studied the site to identi k the locations of any potential riparianlriverine habitat and determine whether federal and/or state jurisdiction applies. The study identified live riverine features—tour conveying drainage Crum the condominium project on the north and one conveying drainage from the Red Hill golf course. All features drain into developed storm drain facilities directl) to the south of the:tiite. lased on U.S. Army Corps of Engineers(USACOE)and California Department of Fish and Wildlife(CDF-%V)criteria these features are not subject to their jurisdiction, However, prior i to grading, it is reconunerided that these findings be confirmed ►v ith C'DFW and USACOE. and appropriate permits be obtained. ifrequired. In addition,aside from potential jurisdictional issues. the applicant's conceptual grading plan proposes retaining much of the %vestern riverine 340 � "ttachment 9 P469 Pacific Summit-Foothill, I.I_C page 2 feature south of the golf course, This area,commonly referred to as part of"Bear Gulch", will he left in a relatively natural state. In addition. portions of the other four riverine features will be left in place, w-is. until the point their drainage is collected by the rr(fject'%proposed storm drain s�:5tcnt. Let me know ifyou have m„y questions, or if you 18OUld life to discuss the contents of this letter. sincerely. Randall C. Arnold,Jr. President & Principal Biologist HDRIc rt2017-27B 341 UNSCOTT GREENSPAN Response to Comment-- Henry Stoy Letter Project Daily Trips The commenter is correct that the proposed Sycamore Heights Project is expected to generate 1,042 additional vehicles per day(vpd) onto Foothill Boulevard. Based on information provided by City of Rancho Cucamonga staff, Foothill Boulevard currently has an average daily traffic volume of 22,000 vpd in the vicinity of the project site and a daily capacity of 36,000 vpd. Even though the proposed project will add 1,042 additional daily trips to Foothill Boulevard, the existing roadway has more than adequate capacity to accommodate the increase in daily trips associated with the proposed project. Red Hill Country Club DrivelFoothill Boulevard Intersection As presented in the traffic impact analysis report, the intersection of Red Hill Country Club Drive/Foothill Boulevard currently operates at unacceptable LDS F during the AM and PM peak hours under existing traffic conditions. The proposed Project will add some traffic to the already deficient intersection and the traffic impact analysis report does recommend an improvement at the intersection of Red Hill Country Club Drive/Foothill Boulevard in order to help alleviate the existing AM and PM peak hour deficiency. The recommended improvement, which was discussed with and approved by City of Rancho Cucamonga staff, consists of the following: Red Hill Country Club Drive at Foothill Boulevard: Install signage to restrict northbound and sorthbound left-turn and through movements during the AM peak period (7:00 AM — 9:00 AM)and the PM peak period (4:00 PM— 6:00 PM). The aforementioned improvement recommended is required to alleviate the existing deficient peak hour level of service until the City of Rancho Cucamonga completes improvements planned as part of the Red Hill Country Club Drive realignment project, which will include a new traffic signal at Redhill Country Club Drive/Magic Lamp Inn Driveway and Foothill Boulevard. P_rnject_Aecer_s As required by the City of Rancho Cucamonga, primary access to the proposed Sycamore Heights Project will be provided via a proposed "right-turn in/right-turn out only" gated driveway on Foothill Boulevard. Secondary access to the proposed project, which will be restricted to "emergency vehicles only," will be provided along Red Hill Country Club Drive. The Rancho Cucamonga General Plan designates Foothill Boulevard as a Major Divided Arterial (i.e. 94-foot paved width, inclusive of a 14-foot median within a 120-foot right-of-way). The restriction of turning movements at the primary project access on Foothill Boulevard to "right- turn in/right-turn out only" is consistent with the City's Circulation/Mobility Plan, which indicates that left-turn access on Foothill Boulevard is allowed at signalized intersections only. Due to the "right-turn in/right-turn out only' restriction at the proposed project driveway, the commenter is correct that project residents/guests will have to make u-turn movements at the adjacent intersections of either Foothill BoulevardlGrove Avenue, Foothill Boulevard/Red Hill Country Club Drive or Foothill Boulevard/San Bernardino Road when entering or exiting the project site. It should be noted that the traffic volume forecasting and intersection analysis I Attachment 10 342 7'1 LINSCOTT GREENSPAN included in the traffic impact analysis report takes into account the project u-turn movements at the aforementioned key study intersections. Project Cul-Through Traffic The traffic impact analysis report prepared for the project did provide a project cut-through discussion relative to the Red Hill Country Club Drive neighborhood. The traffic impact analysis report referenced the 2009 City-commissioned study and indicated that peak hour traffic volumes entering the neighborhood at the Foothill Boulevard and Red Hill Country Club Drive intersection in the Year 2009 versus the Year 2015 had not changed significantly and therefore came to the conclusion that the current cut-through traffic on Red Hill Country Club Drive to be similar to what was observed in 2009. Based on the project trip distribution pattern shown in Figure 5-1 of the traffic study, it was assumed that twenty percent (20%) of outbound project traffic would be considered new cut- through trips (i.e. 13 of the 64 outbound AM peak hour trips and 7 of the 32 outbound PM peak hour trips). These outbound project trips were assumed to travel through the Red Hill Country Club Drive neighborhood to access Carnelian Street and/or Baseline Road. It should be noted that this assumption was discussed and approved for use by City of Rancho Cucamonga staff. In addition, the traffic study recognized that the Valle Vista Elementary School located in the neighborhood will potentially generate project-related school drop-off and pick-up trips within the Red Hill Country Drive neighborhood. Based on the Central School District's estimates, the project is anticipated to generate 0.06 elementary students per unit, or eleven (11) new students. Assuming these 11 students are driven to school separately (i.e. no carpooling or households with multiple school age children), out of the 64 outbound AM peak hour project trips, I 1 school-related additional AM peak hour trips would be generated in a worst-case scenario. It should be noted that middle school and high school student traffic was considered (i.e. Cucamonga Middle School, Alta Loma High School, Ruth Musser Middle School and Rancho Cucamonga High School); however project patrons would not travel through the Red Hill Country Club Drive neighborhood as these schools are located outside of the neighborhood. By applying the traffic distribution pattern shown in Figut 5-1 to the project's new trips and accounting for project school-related trips, we estimate that 24 AM peak hour outbound project trips (i.e. 13 project trips and I i project school-related trips) out of 64 total outbound project trips will enter the Red Hill neighborhood at the Foothill Boulevard and Red Hill Country Club Drive intersection. These 24 new AM peak hour trips will represent an increase over current conditions, but they will not degrade the streets' level of service. It should be further noted that project-related cut-through traffic during the PM peak hour will be minimal (i.e. only the 7 outbound FM peak hour project trips discussed previously), since school-related traffic during the afternoon pick-up period occurs well before the PM peak period and given that the project driveway is restricted to right-turn in/right-turn out only movements, other project patrons are not expected to cut-through the Red Hill Country Club Drive neighborhood to access the project site. 343 LAW We appreciate the opportunity to prepare this response letter, If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at(949) 825-6 175. Sincerely, Linscott, Law & Greenspan,Engineers pl�� Daniel A. Kloos, P.E. Senior Transportation Engineer California Registration: TR 2200 344 I� Sample :3 CD rMOL S IN 187 TO PROPOSED BUILDINGS i 127 TO PARKING 142i 25 TO SLOPE 1420 1380 —__ ----__ ——— ` 1330 '►k', _ s.5' 18.5 � 1360 — ------ - —};_-- — �+ ------ -- 1360 1340 ---- ' 1340 1320 RETAINING 1320 PROPOSED 'HALL 1300 -- •- '1` � 1300 EXISTING GRADE 1280 GRADE 1230 1260 PROPOSED PROPOSED 2:1 MANUFACTURED EXISTING 1250 BLDG ROAD SLOPE IBLDG EL. 1320' PL EL. 1373' TRACT 'LOCATION OF BLDG.IN PREVIOUSLY BOUNDARY APPROVED PLAN CLOSEST TO P L P474 CC CL LJ rk .4. t Ll %)i -k-C t � �.{ ►r 14 tlx, i 'tXU �Aj i t.��14��1t� f1- . tl�,�,. 4 a� t: ��-�� `L LIc �CL.r►t�� C RECEIVED `- ►, �,��,c�q C Ik �3 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ADMINISTWION 346 Attachment 12 P475 RESOLUTION NO. 17-098 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2016-00206 TO AMEND TABLES AND TEXT, INCLUDING CLARIFYING TEXT AS NECESSARY, IN THE GENERAL PLAN TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF LAND THAT CONTAINS SLOPES OF 30 PERCENT OR GREATER; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. A. Recitals. 1. Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC, filed an application for General Plan Amendment No. DRC2016-00206 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject General Plan Amendment is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 9th day of August 2017, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and continued the application to the August 23, 2017 Planning Commission meeting. 3. On the 23rd of August, 2017, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on General Plan Amendment DRC2017- 00206 and, following the conclusion thereof, issued Resolution No. 17-75, recommending to the City Council that the General Plan Amendment be approved. 4. On the 4th day of October, 2017, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 5. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW,THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above-referenced public hearing on October 4, 2017, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The General Plan Slope Development Guidelines address the development of parcels with a range of natural slopes that range from "5% or less"to "30% and over"; and b. The application proposes to amend the Slope Development Guidelines to provide an exception to the development of slopes"30%and over"provided certain site conditions can be met; and C. Proposed applicable exceptions address the project location, percentage of Resolution No. 17-098 - Page 1 of 5 ATTACHMENT 13 347 P476 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 17-098 ❑RC2016-00206 — PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC October 4, 2017 Page 2 site, and vegetation fuel management for wildfire protection; and d. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development within the district in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development; and e. This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Land Use Element by allowing for the implementation of the Mixed Use designation in this area; and ; f. 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 Council during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Council hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That the proposed amendment is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed district in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area the application will only apply to properties located south of Banyan Avenue in the Red Hill area of the City, all of the properties surrounding the project site have been developed, and the project site has been designed to appropriately address slope stability and other geologic factors of the site; and b. That the proposed amendment would not have significant impacts on the environment nor the surrounding properties as the amendment will only apply to properties located south of Banyan Avenue in the Red Hill area of the City and will not have citywide development implications, all of the properties surrounding the project site have been developed and portions of the project site have been previously disturbed (i.e., development of the Red Chief Motel, Sycamore Inn, abandoned water basin,and surrounding residential, commercial and public developments), and the project site has been designed to appropriately address slope stability and other geologic factors of the site; and C. That the proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan. The Hillside Development criteria of the General Plan and Development Code were not intended to apply as uniformly to Mixed Use designated parcels as they do to a Residential designated parcel. The intent of the Hillside Development criteria density restriction was to address natural slopes, particularly those located in the foothill areas north of Banyan Street. Here, the project site has been previously disturbed (i.e., development of the Red Chief Motel, Sycamore Inn, abandoned water basin, and surrounding residential, commercial and public developments) so that the site is no longer in a natural condition. Because few, if any other sites with a "30% and over" slopes exist south of Banyan Street, the amendment will have limited application. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the City Council finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: Resolution No. 17-098- Page 2 of 5 348 P477 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 17-098 DRC2016-00206---PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC October 4, 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 an 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 comment letter was received from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) on July 27, 2017 in response to the circulated ISIMND. The only comment CDFW had was in relation to the possible Jurisdictional Waters on the project site. The applicant and their biologists prepared a Jurisdictional Delineation to address CDFW"s comments. The Jurisdictional Delineation determined that jurisdictional waters were not present on the project site, but recommended compliance with the CDFW recommended mitigation measure prior to issuance of any grading permit. The Biological Resources section of the IS/MND, was revised to include a mitigation measure requiring the applicant to provide proof to the City that the Streambed Alteration Agreement(1602 Agreement) process has been concluded. According to CEQA Section 15073.5(a), recirculation of a negative declaration is required prior to its adoption when it has been substantially revised after public notice of its availability has been given pursuant to Section 15072. Furthermore, CEQA Section 15073.5(b) states, "a "substantial revision" of the negative declaration shall mean: (1) a new avoidable significant effect is identified and mitigation measure or project revisions must be added in order to reduce the effect to insignificance, or (2) the lead agency determines that the proposed mitigation measures or project revisions will not reduce potential effects to less than significance and new measures or revisions must be required." Here, either the CDFW will determine that notification under Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code is required for the project, or they will require the applicant obtain a Streambed Alteration Agreement. The IS/MND was revised to include a discussion of the Jurisdictional Delineation for the project site and a mitigation measure requiring a Streambed Alteration Agreement was added to the MND and the project conditions of approval. The addition of a condition of approval requiring a Streambed Alteration Agreement is not considered substantial evidence in light of the whole record that cannot be mitigated. Therefore, the Streambed Alteration Agreement mitigation measure is not a substantial revision to the MND, and recirculation of the MND is not required; and b. The City Council 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 City Council further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City Council. Based on these findings, the City Council adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration; and C. The City Council 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 Council adopts the Mitigation Resolution No. 17-098-Page 3 of 5 349 P478 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUT10N NO. 17-098 DRC2016-00206— PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC October 4, 2017 Page 4 Monitoring Program for the project; and 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 City Council'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 Council hereby upholds the decision of the Planning Commission and denies an appeal, approving General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206, by amending the General Plan Text, as shown in the attached Exhibits A, B, and C. 6. This Council hereby provides notice to Mr. Hank Stoy and Pacific Summit-Foothill, LLC, that the time within which judicial review of the decision represented by this Resolution must be sought is governed by the provisions of California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6. 7, The City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga is hereby directed to: (a) certify to the adoption of this Resolution, and (b) forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by I certified mail, return-receipt requested, to Mr. Hank Stoy and Pacific Summit-Foothill, LLC, at the I address identified in City records. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 4TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2017. Resolution No. 17-098 - Page 4 of 5 350 P479 General Plan Chapter 2: Managing Land Use, Comrnunity Design, and Historic Resources g.aUX = 3: 1aze :tielopmetGuid'en r: P+ co at 5!0 d ne 5 ar tees T s .is. not .a-hilaside:.coriditiori._,.Grading,with,convenWF1Sl `:fully. p �dd;lofs and`.teCcirt is acceptable;± - - -- �. sw... ._._ nnen with radIn :is�}7 ittr' d';,n.' a-;but:-x i#r ci ms-must Ntair� their:natd aF tl a otar..Patld d;titiiEding Sites` �are'perrriitted, t?awever, 'techriitjues sucks ';contour gratlirg, combined-slopes limited cut and fill, and split.le iel;architecture, or. maybe regupaodrng Ered:to,redcce< ra irsrs .� ll hen in,conjuiic I€ru_wi h.th@ lec�hi�r�`�r ugs�d -fjW� bi afli tri e• 8 , '`''` ra ect=;wins er'plan'.whlelrricl�re SSA design;' `;r, ..1 ` i . such:.'as°a.igolFa i[tr$e,..e�ctensiV6'O vrn�space : :$Cgnificarit=us of . teen belts.or �asegs •the Planril g Gammissioh-Lma corisider'the 9. 0P ;._. Y : use.of•mass.gra�irig techniques;edjacent to these special��des�gn- feature�s,as partiacompliance wi. liis;standa 01 Y IT#�is is'a i7rllsi ifion.:.Special inside•ar ref attic=f � : rteclintques the x�lncnze grat n ""are kreq,tied in• this e;� !r iAkchiteaura! piati*i es'are•exlzeds[l',to.-conform .6 the rfa 1an:7 by.. using:`t--chniques su as-split- level toundatiofts=•P - + greater than I S• inches, 'stem-.walls;,:ia ck[rig,.and,:dusteririg.�.,iw . co ti tiara with the.a�temative_ i. Ues;desc i ed.above an �r fS a pia v,14hE� sxiaster plan vu i i trades special design.fei,.q g +` -:� ,�eXtensE.vew.a�peOsiia fr;-s.ignificcant,i g : greatr" gilts dr'paseos, the :F[ann ammissII may colasl 4, gadded Eauiid rag`sites'adjacent.toathose-speciat features.when:°if'1.s fbi�.rld#hat saEri gfad1hg crQates.a3 better refationsfilp between-ftiat.- ',i' ':{:_ sCtal deli fee#tire and he art ace t:.Iots::. �> - .. - 5 �9°9` � `'`-- "C3evelop 60t Withfil t619 zany�3!`%tie ;if'b,irit�; i±::. m x i : .. � Vlsuall' .rorr7inent s10 as;and:#lie,,';onl'twiii3tei�l#,�� ` �' safety,envirorimentaY a°rid aes#fLetic rmpaGts ear `lie minimizq f T '_ (S larger •lots, variable, setbagks ;and variable:-huild.Eng Steudurall -,..� �. tecitni.ques. such..as;.stepped,.;b :•pcle'fourid is: are'-ex _ 'StructUrBs;slia{l;-tai�nd;withi�ttj%Y iaiural'en-i 1�tiltlerit ti�rou i . 9r ` as 3 isiaape, mataitals indk oiors,.1 vi traffics ,�oadwaysys _ -.2 lrrrinim_i ed:by fellow;±natural cor�.6)M or usm Ode separatfo 30`aad over; ::. 1f k le an'excessiv zlbpe cooditiQn-and'.de►ielopmerit is..prohibited ak;. _ un esv all the-foltouvin ?are..satisfied` i the roe is located'south "'''" nf:B*jhv Street`` r tvleasfise iertty-eve.perrenf=(759'0l of the lotsdr'- a `FI w L :darce7sAtii t ale; 'irx tie o ' dev b -_drat::a !Ic ti"n siir ou6ded jU rots'ai=rSarcels e ;V it - tr es=a'd if r..,. protivse&.pro[ect is blermIriod to_approprialely_address'stop ° n�- stability and other geol6q cal factors of jhe si#e;ariri Cns]vegetatiiin for <' + fuel. maiiac�em8rit:..#or wilif I protection can".he'achieved and.'- ; _ _ ln'lalf3t��d.-----�'�.::----- Vke.::.�.,".^r_"zu>r���' —,.,,;..,,,;,,;,:.�•c EXHIBIT A 351 1 P48v General Plan Chapter 2: Managing Land Use, Community Design, and Historic Resources Land Use Goals and Policies Policy LU-8.6: Require that hillside development minimize alteration of natural landforms,and encourage clustering where feasible to retain maximum open space. �iac�ssrnn. The objectives for managing development in hillside areas are to maintain existing slopes, vegetation, wildlife corridors, drainage patterns, knolls, rock outcrops, and rldgelines wherever feasible. Furthermore, the City should avoid development that would result in fire, flooding, landslide, erosion, and other safety hazards. The City seeks hillside development that limits the extent of grading alterations to natural landforms, and provides for innovative design and arrangement of building sites that retain significant natural habitats and features. Clustering is a way of laying out a project whereby the structures are"clustered" together and open space is shared by the residents. Existing slopes, vegetation, wildlife corridors, drainage patterns, knolls, rock outcrops, and ridgelines may be modified only if done in a manner consistent with the City's Hillside Development Ordinance. i EXHIBIT B 352 P481 General Plan Chapter 8: Public Health & Safety Public Health and Safety Goals and Policies Continue enforcement of the Hillside Development Guidelines to allow for p��IC P���'�' prudent development and redevelopment of all properties located on slopes greater than 10 percent, and continue to preserve as open space properties located on slopes greater than 30 percent,excel2t as otherwise provided below. ❑Ise❑ssi❑n- The most effective way to protect lives and property from debris flows and slope instability is to continue to prohibit development on property that exceeds 30 percent in slope, in accordance with current ordinances unless all the following are satisfied: (i) the property is located south of Banyan Street:_(ii) at least seventy-five percent 75% of the lots or parcels that are the sub'ect of the development application are surrounded by lots or parcels improved with structures: (iii) the proposed project is determined to appropriately address slope stability and other geological factors of the site: and Ov) vegetation for fuel management for wildfire protection can be achieved and maintained. In addition, property having a natural slope between 10 and 30 percent can be made unstable by development and grading activities. Hillside development guidelines enforce the existing grading standards and require aesthetic treatments that both improve the appearance of the hillsides and preserve the stability of the slopes. These measures include returning slopes to their natural appearance, density reduction, clustering of developments, and steepness after grading. Environmental preservation of the eastern San Gabriel Mountains is also required to reduce debris flow potential. Development of the hillside terrain will only increase the potential for debris flows to damage the City unless the situation is carefully managed. EXHIBIT C 353 P482 RESOLUTION NO. 17-099 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, UPHOLDING THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP MODIFICATION NO. 16605M, DESIGN REVIEW DRC2012-00672, VARIANCE DRC2016-00207 AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2012- 00673, TO SUBDIVIDE 24.19 ACRES INTO 6 PARCELS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF 175 ATTACHED CONDOMINIUM UNITS, INCLUDING THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION, A VARIANCE FOR THE BUILDING ENVELOPE HEIGHT AND A REQUEST TO REMOVE 180 TREES IN THE MIXED USE (MU) DISTRICT LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, BETWEEN RED HILL COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE AND PACIFIC ELECTRIC TRAIL RIGHT-OF-WAY; DENYING THE APPEAL; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF-APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, AND 41 AND 0207-1.12-09 AND 10. A. Recitals. 1. Pacific Summit-Foothill„LLC, filed applications for the approval of Tentative Tract Mate Modification No. SUBTT16605M, Design Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the above-referenced entitlements are referred to as "the application." 2. On the 12th day of April,, 2006, the Planning Commission adopted its Resolution No. 06-36, thereby approving Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605, subject to specific conditions and time limits. 3. The initial approval of SUBTT16605 was for a duration of 3 years, to expire on April 12, 2009. The California State Legtslature, passed a series of Assembly/Senate Bills automatically extending the approval period of various active tentative maps. SB 1185 extended the approval period 1-year to April 12, 2010, AB 333 extended the approval period 2-years to April 12, 2012, AB 2D8 extended the approval period 2-years to April 12, 2014, and AB 116 extended the approval period 2-years to April 12, 201-6. 4. On the 23rd day:of'March, 2016, the Planning Commission adopted its Resolution No. 16-16, thereby approving DRC2015-01110 for a 1-year Time Extension for SUBTT16605 to expire on April 12, 2017. 5. On the 26th day of April, 2017, the Planning Commission adopted its. Resolution No. 17-28, thereby approving.DRC2017-00249 for a 1-year Time Extension for SUBTT16605 to expire on April 12, 2018. 6. On the 9th day of August 2017, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Tentative Tract Map Modification application in addition to the Design Review, Variance and Tree Removal applications and dontinued them to-the August 23, 2017 Planning.Commission meeting. Resolution No. 17-099 - Page 1 of 5 ATTACHMENT 14 ' 354 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 17-099 P483 APPEAL OF SUBTT16505M, DESIGN REVIEW DRC2012-00672, VARIANCE ❑RC2016-00207, AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2012-00673 — HANK STOY October 4, 2017 Page 2 7. On the 23rd of August, 2017, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on Tentative Tract Map Modification No. SUBTT16605M, Design Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673 and,following the conclusion thereof, issued Resolution Nos. 17-76, 17- 77, 17-78 and 17-79 respectively. 8. The decision represented by said Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 17-76, 17- 77, 17-78 and 17-79 was timely appealed to this Council. 9. On the 4th day of October, 2017, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 10. 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 City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above- referenced public hearing on October 4, 2017, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows: 3. SUBTT16605M: a. The project site contains approximately 24.19 acres of a generally irregular configuration having a topography with a 30 percent or greater slope, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trail, and is presently vacant; and b. The project site is located in the Mixed Use (MU) District; and C. The property to the north contains Condominiums and single-family homes in the. Medium (M) Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre) and Low (L) Residential District (2- 4 dwelling units per acre), the property to the south contains office, commercial, and condominium uses in the Mixed Use (MU) District and Medium (M) Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), the property to the east contains the Route 66 Trailhead and condominiums in the Medium (M) Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), the property to the west contains commercial land uses in the Mixed Use (MU) District, and the proposed project surrounds the Sycamore Inn Restaurant in the Mixed Use (MU) District; and d. The application contemplates the subdivision of the subject parcel into six (6) lots for condominium purposes (175 units); and Resolution No. 17-099 - Page 2 of 8 355 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 17-099 P484 APPEAL OF SUBTT16605M, DESIGN REVIEW DRC2012-00672,VARIANCE DRC2016-00207, AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2012-00673 -- HANK STOP October 4, 2017 Page 3 e. The subdivision of the project site conforms to all applicable development standards applicable to property in the Mixed Use (MU) District; and f. The applicant has submitted applications related to the development of the project site including: General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206, Tentative Tract Modification SUBTT16605M, Design Review DRC2012-00672,Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit D RC201 2-0 0673 to allow for the subdivision and development of the project site; and g. All lots will have access to a public right-of-way. Access to the project site will be via Foothill Boulevard and will include all public right-of-way improvements including pavement, sidewalk, curb, and gutter on the north side of Foothill Boulevard as well as all right- of-way improvements on interior streets; and h. The design or improvements of the tentative tract and proposed development, variance and tree removal applications are consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and any applicable specific plans; and i. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed and 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 j. The design of the subdivision, development, variance and tree removal are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; and k. The tentative tract, development, variance and tree removal applications are not likely to cause serious public health problems; and I. The design of the tentative tract nor the proposed development, variance or related tree removal applications 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 all of the evidence in the record and the findings and conclusions set forth above, this Council hereby upholds the decision of the Planning Commission and denies the appeal, approving Tentative Tract Map Modification No. SUBTT16605M. 5. Design Review DRC2012-00672: a. The proposed project will be a gated community with 1 vehicle entrance on Foothill Boulevard, located west of the Sycamore Inn restaurant, and 1 Emergency Vehicle Access (EVA) gate on Red Hill Country Club Drive; and b. The proposed project density is 7.23 dwelling units per acre; and c. The application contemplates the development of 44 two- and three-story condominium buildings for the development of 175 attached dwelling units; and Resolution No. 17-099 - Page 3 of 8 356 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 17-099 P485 APPEAL OF SUBTT16605M, DESIGN REVIEW DRC2012-00672, VARIANCE ❑RC2016-00207, AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2012-00673 — HANK STOY October 4, 2017 Page 4 d. The 175 units are provided throughout the project site in 44 individual buildings, each containing between 3 and 6 residential units. Units are provided in either a two-story or three-story building complex. There are 26 two-story units, 29 feet tall, with units ranging in size from 1,296 square feet to 1,701 square feet and 18 three-story units, 35 feet tall,with units ranging in size from 1,672 square feet to 2,108 square feet; and e. The proposed unit mix will consist of 28 two-bedroom units(at 1,296 square feet), 119 three-bedroom units (ranging in size from 1,540 square feet to 2,108 square feet) and 28 four-bedroom units (ranging in size from 1,976 square feet to 1,995 square feet). The 9 Iivelwork units include 2 two-bedroom units (with 1,531 square feet of living area and 249 square feet of commercial floor area) and 7 three-bedroom units(ranging in size from 1,782 square feet to 1,916 square feet of living area and 249 square feet of commercial floor area); and f. Proposed architectural styles include Santa Barbara and Provence, and include 360 degree architectural elements such as: tile roofs, stucco finish, multi-paned windows, metal balconies, wood shutters, and additional architectural embellishments; and g. A total of 9 Iivelwork units are provided adjacent to the Foothill Boulevard driveway, with adjacent parking and pedestrian access; and h. Parking for the project site is provided 1n two-car garages for each unit, providing 350 parking spaces, 9 parking spaces for the live/work units, and 130 open parking spaces; and i. The proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and j. 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 k. The proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code; and I. 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. 6. Based upon all of the evidence in the record and the findings and conclusions set forth above, this Council hereby upholds the decision of the Planning Commission and denies the appeal, approving Design Review DRC2012-00672. 7. Variance DRC2016-00207: a. Approximately half of the project site is located within the Hillside Overlay District of the Zoning Map, of which the Development Code establishes building envelopes and maximum building height for properties located in hillside areas. Hillside Development criteria, Section 17.122.020(D)(e) of the Development Code, establishes a 30-foot maximum building height for all structures located in the Hillside Overlay District; and Resolution No. 17-099 - Page 4 of 8 357 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO, 17-099 P486 APPEAL OF SUBTT16605M, DESIGN REVIEW DRC2012-00672, VARIANCE DRC2016-00207, AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2012-00573-- HANK STOY October 4, 2017 Page 5 b. The applicant is proposing a total of 44 condominium units including 26 two-story tri-plex units up to a maximum of 29 feet in height, and 18 three-story four-, five-, and six-plex units up to a maximum of 35 feet in height; and c. Roughly half of the three-story units are located within the Hillside Overlay District and exceed the allowable maximum 30-foot building height; and d. The project site contains approximately 24.19 acres of a generally irregular configuration having a topography with a 30 percent or greater slope, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trail, and is presently vacant; and e. The project site is located in the Mixed Use (MU) District; and f. The property to the north contains Condominiums and single-family homes in the Medium (M) Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre) and Low (L) Residential District(2- 4 dwelling units per acre), the property to the south contains office, commercial, and condominium uses in the Mixed Use (MU) District and Medium (M) Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), the property to the east contains the Route 66 Trailhead and condominiums in the Medium (M) Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), the property to the west contains commercial land uses in the Mixed Use (MU) District, and the proposed project surrounds the Sycamore Inn Restaurant in the Mixed Use (MU) District; and g. That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulations would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of the Development Code; and h. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same district; and i. That 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 district; and j. That the granting of the Variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district; and k. That the granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 8. Based upon all of the evidence in the record and the findings and conclusions set forth above, this Council hereby upholds the decision of the Planning Commission and denies the appeal, approving Variance DRC2016-00207. 9, Tree Removal Permit ❑RC2012-00673: Resolution No. 17-099 - Page 5 of 8 358 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 17-099 P487 APPEAL OF SUBTT16605M, DESIGN REVIEW❑RC2012-00672, VARIANCE DRC2016-00207, AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2012-00673 .... HANK STAY October 4, 2017 Page 6 a. The trees are not designated as historically significant; and b. The trees are not noted in any Specific Plan/Community Plan or condition of approval; and c. The applicant has submitted an arborist report assessing the health of the individual trees. The Arborist Report (Jim Borer, August 2012) evaluated a total of 198 trees on the project site. Of those 198 trees, 64 meet Development Code criteria to be classified as Heritage Trees, and 18 of those Heritage Trees are recommended for preservation. The 180 trees not identified by the Arborist Report as suitable for preservation are considered over-mature, have poor growth character, have advanced decay, some are dead or are in poor general health; many of these trees have further declined in health due to the prolonged effects of the drought. Additionally, several trees, although in good health, their location conflicts with proposed improvements and the applicant proposes to remove these trees; and d. It is necessary to remove the trees in order to construct improvements which allow economic enjoyment of the property; and e. There are a significant number of trees existing in the neighborhood; the removal does not affect the established character of the area; and f. It is necessary to remove the trees to construct required improvements within the public street right-of-way or within a flood control or utility right-of-way; and g. The trees cannot be preserved by pruning and proper maintenance or relocation rather than removal; however, 2 trees (Borer Report, Trees No. 76 and 175) may be suitable candidates for relocation; and h. The trees do not constitute a significant natural resource of the City; and i. The proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and j. The proposed project is in accord with the objectives of the Municipal Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and k. The proposed project is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the development Code; and I. The proposed project, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 10. Based upon all of the evidence in the record and the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs above, this Council hereby upholds the decision of the Planning Commission and denies the appeal, approving Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00573. Resolution No. 17-099 - Page 6 of 8 359 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 17-099 P488 APPEAL OF SUBTT16605M, DESIGN REVIEW DRC2012-00672, VARIANCE DRC2016-00207, AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT ❑RC2012-00673 — HANK STOY October 4, 2017 Page 7 11. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above- referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 through 10 above, this Council hereby finds and concludes as follows: 12. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the City Council finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts 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. A comment letter was received from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) on July 27, 2017 in response to the circulated ISIMND. The only comment CDFW had was in relation to the possible Jurisdictional Waters on the project site. The applicant and their biologists prepared a Jurisdictional Delineation to address CDFW's comments. The Jurisdictional Delineation determined that jurisdictional waters were not present on the project site, but recommended compliance with the CDFW recommended mitigation measure prior to issuance of any grading permit. The Biological Resources section of the ISIMND, was revised to include a mitigation measure requiring the applicant to provide proof to the City that the Streambed Alteration Agreement (1602 Agreement) process has been concluded. According to CEQA Section 15073,5(a), recirculation of a negative declaration is required prior to its adoption when it has been substantially revised after public notice of its availability has been given pursuant to Section 15072. Furthermore, CEQA Section 15073.5(b) states, "a "substantial revision" of the negative declaration shall mean: (1) a new avoidable i significant effect is identified and mitigation measure or project revisions must be added in order to reduce the effect to insignificance, or (2) the lead agency determines that the proposed mitigation measures or project revisions will not reduce potential effects to less than significance and new measures or revisions must be required." Here, either the CDFVV will determine that notification under Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code is required for the project, or they will require the applicant obtain a Streambed Alteration Agreement. The 1SIMN❑ was revised to include a discussion of the Jurisdictional Delineation for the project site and a mitigation measure requiring a Streambed Alteration Agreement was added to the M N D and the project conditions of approval. The addition of a condition of approval requiring a Streambed Alteration Agreement is not considered substantial evidence in light of the whole record that cannot be mitigated. Therefore, the Streambed Alteration Agreement mitigation measure is not a substantial revision to the MND, and recirculation of the MN❑ is not required; and b. The City Council has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all Resolution No. 17-099- Page 7 of 8 i i 360 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 17-099 P489 APPEAL OF SUBTT16605M, DESIGN REVIEW DRC2012-00672, VARIANCE DRC2016-00207, AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT ❑RC2012-00673—HANK STOY i October 4, 2017 Page 8 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 CEGA; 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 City Council further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City Council. Based on these findings, the City Council hereby adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration; and c, The City Council 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 Council adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project; and 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 City Council's decision is based is the City Planner of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Punning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909)477-2750. 13. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1 through 12 above, this Council hereby upholds the decision of the Planning Commission and denies the appeal, approving Tentative Tract Map Modification No. SU6TT16605M, Design Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207 and Tree Removal Permit ❑RC2012-00673 subject to each and every condition set forth in Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 17-76, 17-77, 17-78 and 17-79 shall apply as if set forth herein in full_ 14. This Council hereby provides notice to Mr. Hank Stoy and Pacific Summit-Foothill, LLC, that the time within which judicial review of the decision represented by this Resolution must be sought is governed by the provisions of California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6. 15, The City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga is hereby directed to; (a) certify to the adoption of this Resolution, and (b) forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail, return-receipt requested, to Mr. Hank Stoy and Pacific Summit-Foothill, L,LC, at the address identified in City records. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 4TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2017. Resolution No. 17-099- Page 8 of 8 361 Sycamore Heights General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206 And Appeal of Tentative Tract Map Modification SUBTT16605M Design Review DRC2012-00672 Variance DRC2016-00207 Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-60673 City Council October 4, 2017 f ■ � r � �+c�.•`� � •_-tea- — . �.Y'�Il- � �',� •e C+ S 1 kr 06 :. WR At— CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ��i 2006 Approvals • General Plan Amendment DRC2004-00339 — A request to amend the General Plan to allow the development of land that contains a 30 percent slope. • Development Code Amendment DRC2004-00352 — A request to amend the Development Code to allow the development of land that contains a 30 percent slope. • Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605 — An 8-lot residential subdivision for condominium purposes (206 units) on 21 acres. • Design Review DRC2003-00637 — The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for 206 condominiums on 21 acres. • Variance DRC2005-01061 — A request to reduce the parking lot setback to allow improvements to an existing parking lot for the Sycamore Inn Restaurant. • Minor Development Review DRC2004-00826 — Parking lot, loading area modifications and covered patio area at the Sycamore Inn Restaurant. August 23, 2017 PC Approvals The Planning Commission recommend approval of: • General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206 — A request to amend the General Plan to allow the development of land that contains a 30 percent slope. The Planning Commission approved the following, contingent upon the City Council's approval of the related General Plan Amendment. • Tentative Tract Map Modification SUBTT16605M — A 6-lot residential subdivision for condominium purposes (175 units) on 24 acres. • Design Review DRC2012-00672 — The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for 175 condominiums on 24 acres. • Variance DRC2006-00207 — A request to exceed the 30-foot maximum building height. • Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673 — A request to remove 180 trees associated with the project. Plan Comparison I i - A. 21 .3 AC. • - -X �'. :�.�.' -L��.}�1 - ��"--S'r:�V�y-j.���rr� l.ry 'x'-� � F�� /!'- • 9.7 D.U./AC. PREVK)JS PLAN • 175 D.U. 7.� D.U.IAC . ,{ • -At CURRENT PLAN RANCHOCITY OF Sycamore Heights Project � ,L CCrt NTF.Y CLlI$ VR'A C.ALLE CA;fn2L. , - 9L. r • _,. �' {�-� r;� ;a �y �`. try� FIT AW ���•i r ail �� _ '� y� �, �'� ■ RANCHOCITY OF Current Proposal • General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206 — A request to amend the General Plan to allow the development of land that contains a 30 percent slope. • Tentative Tract Modification SUBTT16605M — A 6-lot residential subdivision for condominium purposes (175 units) on 24 acres. • Design Review DRC2012-00672 — The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for 175 condominiums on 24 acres. • Variance DRC2016-00207 — A request to exceed the 30 foot building envelope. • Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673 — A request to remove 180 trees associated with the development of the project site. GPA DRC2016=00206 • Proposed GPA is identical to the previously approved GPA. • General Plan Land Use Element establishes design, grading, and development criteria associated with various slope conditions. General Plan establishes policy guidelines for the development of slopes ranging from "5% or less" up to "1 5% to 29.9%" and prohibits development on slope conditions "30% and over". CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GPA DRC2016=00206 • This is an excessive slope condition TableLU-19: SlopeDeveloptnent Guidelines and development is prohibited, Percent Natural Slope Guidelines 5 or less This is not a hillside condition. Grading with conventional: fully unless all the following are padded lots and terracing is acceptable. satisfied: 5 to 7.9 l7evelopment with grading is permitted in this zone, but existing landfarms must retain their natural character.Padded building sites are permitted. however, techniques such as contour grading. o (i) the properly is located south of combined slopes.limited cut and fill,and quirk level architecture,or padding g for the structures only.may be required to reduce grading. Banyan Street; When n in conjunction with the techniques described aInovee,and for a project within a master plan which includes special design features such as a golf course, extensive open space, of significant use of o (H) at least seventy-five percent (75%) green belts or radios,the Planning Commission may consider the use of mass grading techniques adjacent to these special design { of the lots or parcels that are the features as partial compliance with this standard. @ to 14.9 This is a hillside condition. Special hillside architectural and design subject of the development techniques that minimize grading are required in this zone. Architectural prototypes are expected to conform to the natural application are surrounded by lots or greater and by using techniques such as split foundations of greater than 18 inches, stem walls, stacking and clustering In parcels improved with structures; a pfGpction with the alternative techniques described above,and for 7 a project within a master plan which includes special design features such as a golf course. extensive open space or significant use of a (iii) the proposed project is green belts or paseos, the Planning Commission may consider padded building sites adjacent to those special features when it is determined to appropriately address found that said grading creates a better relationship between that special design feature and the adjacent lots. slope stability and other geological 15 to 29.9 Development within this zone is limited to no more than the less visually prominent slopes,and then only where it can he shown that factors of the site; and safety,environmental and aesthetic impacts can be minimized.Use of larger lots, variable setbacks and variable building structural techniques such as stepped, or pole foundations are expected. o (iv) vegetation fuel management for Strictures shall blend with the natural environment through their traffic and roadways is to wildfire protection can be achieved shape,materials,and colors.Impact of tra be minimized by following natural contours,or using grade separations. and maintained. 30 and over This is an excessive slope condition and development is prohibited unless all the following are satisfied (i)the property is located south of Banyan Street: ii at least seventy-five percent(75%)of the lots or parcels that are the subject of the development appl3cairon are surrounded by lots or parcels improved with structures:and itil the proposed project is determined to appropriately address slope stability and other geologic at factors of the site:and(N)vegetation for fuel management for vyildfiire protection can be achieved and maintained. 370 GPA DRC2016=00206 • Development Code standard is applicable to slopes "30% and over" and states: • This is an excessive slope condition and development is prohibited, unless all the following are satisfied: o (i) the properly is located south of Banyan Street; o (ii) at least seventy-five percent (75%) of the lots or parcels than are the subject of the development application are surrounded by lots or parcels improved with structures; o (iii) the proposed project is determined to appropriately address slope stability and other geological factors of the site; and o (iv) vegetation fuel management for wildfire protection can be achieved and maintained. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA SUBTT16605M TENTATIVE TRA(DT MAP Na. 16605 FOR OONMOMJ"UM PURPOSES CaUh-rY aF SAN BERNA-RD4N0 CIT' CIF FIAIYCF(D CUCAM1ACN(: A_ CA F _ s ��,_!�❑�-�e..� -a�nrrrar c_u6l�Rve �� �f k II 1 Q WMT' _��,_� s — -----— r »., `ran =•►-e L G 7 3 % tv CITY OF ! CUCAMONGA SUBTT16605M �a Y c�c� Kd,Y li.a-F. LOT 4 L D T S I L -3 7 5, 9. l a ` IT a''c s r 9 Z_ 1 F • C rG t rb si CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Design Review DRC2012=00672 • Design review of a 175-unit, multi-family attached condominium development on 24. 19 acres. • Density of 7.23 du/ac. • Gated community with 1 vehicle entrance on Foothill Boulevard, and 1 EVA gate on RHCC. • Site Plan wraps around Sycamore Inn Restaurant providing a single right-in-right-out project driveway. • 9 Live/Work units are provided at project entrance, with adjacent parking and pedestrian access. Design Review DRC2012=00672 • Units are provided throughout the 24-acre site, with most units on two large relatively flat graded pads. • Building pads on the lower tier directly adjacent to Foothill Boulevard are approximately 6 to 21 feet above the existing street grade. • Building pads on the upper tier east are approximately 60 feet below the existing condominium project to the north. • A 30-foot-high Mechanically Stabilized Embankment (MSE) separates the lower and upper building tiers. r" •� 'I I I � rrr 1� � �-: ■ SAY \ !� r•r rrao - ,�r• 1 a s ■ aarrcr I l'�, ! ,baoa rwi , c7 � pPo:r.rS I iI atav�ra ii � ■roan--• I •� S 1 � +• ter- I. �, r /' fl r II rIF 410 lrlll� )r.�. � � I � • Site Plan RETAIN GEAR CH REC CENIEF.A?JAt FNr '0 OPEN 5FACF @.Y.A-ON LY PROPOSER ROAD AND OPEN 51FACE AGAIN5f5YCAMDRE INN CdU�NTRRY U6 RVV 6�[I4 t L 1Rp RANCHOJIM CITY OF ■ 3� n.. Y Al ` 4N , MAX EIGHT 3(1� yJ h 'i • 1 1 'i'i 1i' 1 �1. • i 1 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ■ PRIOM A WA IVA 2 1117,6101 P I-49 1- phi m ONMl 0 '• a:rl-:; ':fy 7i �l ��2. 1" 1 f►;;y�. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA •a� A 2-5TORY TKI-PLEX UNIT W/ A A I ll ■ - MCULATED ENTRIE5 41 'Well 4mL pp -47 ,L')ItLr�w ft�m I L CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Grading Plan ram. � L �� �! �: .,..,. ���-,r• � ff I � _ , r,,. ra ,ram - �-r-:� - �.� ;; •� -; �. I .— r a.. � r L • - ` SYCAMORE INN RESTAl1R.tti" ' F • • {HAP"1 CITY OF RANCHO 4 • rY 41 rw I lam UZI-�.- I I i- •� � • III�I r� ,�� ^�+ ' � I � - - .. .k' °�:r � � { - l7, Grading P lan ..K.. ;. �:'� ,i'� 4#�S�•. � � -ems., L+ � .�:.�____=- .��,�.'.. �'.'` �^y � _.�L���, -=: r�,_•" � �`�• see. i> - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA • ti I ',FL ;:. �., ram. . �„ ,,, •1 1 ,ae, I .. ., �•� it C � _. ? •^� �, JilI eM Y 1 i aNllllUIol�l Grading Plan VUBULAK I 5TEELFEHCf 3.5TORY TOWN HOWE FRODIILT •t. STET.WALLS T H r5 NATUKAL MANUF WrE PR WED PROF05E0 ROAD01314 RES.41515 EXISTING RE5.p1370 0 Pacific Summit Foothill,LLC Section B Ate+.. WaG EWd$ANO A$WCIAtES,INC. LANGAN ENG,NEERNG d S WIRONMENTAL SERVICES Sycamore Heights L/d CHANG ROHN"D AABSOCLATES 9, CITY OF RANCHO . A Grading Plan 3 5TORY T0'NNH005E PRODUCT Y W SECUMY FENCE 2 �?`mac ch saeraaq�aiTcts' IN NTS PItOPflSE© PitOP05ED FROF05ED RE5.&41315 KOAD@)1276 KE591277 MAN UF.5L(FE MANUF-SLQPE 30'MSE WALL n Pacific Summit Foothill, UC Section C [+ ArF• rFr DAVIDEVANS AND ASSOCIATES.INC, �.]y£amvre Heights land.. sANGAN ENGINEERING&ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LIM CHANG R❑WNG&ASSOCIATES Grading Plan SWALE PL Y IUCK WALL WITH PLEXIGLA55 6'KET. WALL 4'KET. WALL MEANDERING �❑ WALK NTS Id PROP05EDKES@1277 MANEIF. FOOTHILL SLOPE DLYD.®1250 PA5E0 MEANDERING (MIR 15) TRAIL Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC S�epctionD A7TM• DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES.INC. Sycamore L Heights miand; LANGAN ENGINEERING&ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LIM CHANG ROHLING d ASSOCIATES CITY OF ■ CUCAMONGA Grading Plan r r f , l , i l j i t I t �. - ff 00 18T TO PROP 05ED BUILDING5 127 TO PARKING 1420 25 TO SLOPE 1420 5i htrrne 1360 =- _ 1360 - ------- =_=- -- --- - ------ -- 1340 �+Il= I 'si r an I. ram-- ---- 1340 .- ►--- 6 RETAINING 1320 1300 PROPOSED WALL 1300 EXISTING GRADE 1280 GRADE 128E1 1260 v PROPOSED PROPOSED 7:1 MANUFACTURED EXISTING 1260 BLDG ROAD SLOPE I BLDG EL.1320' 1 EL.1373' TRACT 'LOCATION OF 8L.RG-IN PREVIOUSLY BOUNDARY APPROVED PLAN CLOSEST TO P.L. CITY OF ! CUCAMONGA Design Review DRC2012=00672 • The 175 units are provided throughout the project site in 44 individual buildings, each containing between 3 and 6 residential units. • Units are provided in either a 2-story or 3-story building complex. • There are 26 two-story units, 29 feet tall , with units ranging in size from 1 ,296 square feet to 1 ,701 square feet and 18 three-story units, 35 feet tall , with units ranging in size from 1 ,672 square feet to 2 , 108 square feet. • Parking is provided in two-car garages for each unit, providing 350 parking spaces, 9 parking spaces for the live/work units, and 130 open parking spaces. Design Review DRC2012=00672 • Architectural styles include Santa Barbara and Provence, and include 360 degree architectural elements such as: the roofs, stucco finish, multi-paned windows, metal balconies, wood shutters, and additional architectural embellishments. • The 175-unit mix consists of 28 two-bedroom units, 119 three-bedroom units, and 28 four-bedroom . • The 9 live/work units include 2 two-bedroom units and 7 three-bedroom. Floor Plans & Elevations ELT,:AT a4 PIQ ES . e ...*e.r+m n•c•xp .,:.�•.va 1 7ti Front Elevation Left Elevation " 2-STORY TRIPLEX ELEVATIONS: Santa Barbara SYCAMORE HEIGHTS A-1.4 Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC lmrmfirr IIZ 2I13fi CITY OF IJNIII kL N11111i%:.5,��.•••. RANCHO Floor Plans & Elevations �V4d{1� _ •�R. aCv4�a..eyti�V M a'tc. r - -•+nS]*Bi�i.�-MY,i+can NCc 4 Rear Elevation - ■n - —_ Right Elevation. 2-STORY TRIPLEX ELEVATIONS: SYCAMORE HEIGHTS Santa Barbara A-l.5 Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC ti�M1smber ix.7utn RANCHOCITY OF Floor Plans & Elevations ELEVAl70NNOTE3 �•I- ._..i...t...�. wrr awv IT1 dill sm.+•+e�w.r.•.�.�e.. — w�ro wo+rti xvr to, eu III Front Elevation Left Elevation 2-STORY TRIPLEX ELEVATIONS- SYCAMORE HEIGHTS Provence A-l.G Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC k+�'emhr IN,?O4a RANCHOCITY OF Floor Plans & Elevations ELEVRIIOiY RY1TE5 .m�nr-a ssr-ue r Na N'x►•C�LI�t 4� �■� — f Rear Elevation r•�:�u.:sraw:. ryJ �4 ■ r Vie: I I x Right Elevation - 2-STORY TRIP1,F,.X ELEVATIONS: Provence SYCAMORE HEIGHTS A_1.7 Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC: H,wrmirr 3%.-Illh RANCHOCITY OF Floor Plans & Elevations I RICH hLEVAHUN REAR ELEVATION ERA �0 - 5 I I I I f. FMATION FRONT ELEVATION 3-STORY SIXPLFX ELEVATIONS: SYCAMORE HEIGHTS EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS A-2.:i Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC ?l W'aNrr f&:ul e CITY OF RANCHO Parking RequiredType Nuniber of Developmerd Code Units Standard Covered Spaces Provided Parking Required Parking Two Bedroom Units 28 2.0 Spaces)Unit 28 56 56 (1 in garage or ca 5 Three Bedroom Units 119 2.0 Spaces)Unit 238 238 238 '2 in clarage or ca Four Bedroom Units 2..5 Spaces)Und 56 70 70 i8 i fincludes 14 (2 n garage or carport) uncoverd) Retail Parking i 241 1 space for each 250 square 9 9 feet of leasable area Guest Parkinci 175 1 per 3 units 59 116 Enclosed Garage Spaces 322 Total vakin S^\ace3 Rewired 432 Total Parking Spaces Provided On-Site 489 CITY OF a ! CUCAMONGA • r � . {5i H'{4YlI ,10 -•Syr« �.: I � I I A .a . I .I •, ��� � 3 r { i ti ... A �b� ''lam Yti Rat "J�I Variance DRC2016=00207 • Hillside Development criteria establish a 30-foot maximum building height for all structures located in the Hillside Overlay District. • The applicant is proposing a total of 44 condominium units including 26 two-story tri-plex units up to a maximum of 29 feet in height, and 18 three-story four-, five-, and six-plex units up to a maximum of 35 feet in height. • Roughly half of the three-story units are located within the Hillside Overlay District and exceed the allowable maximum 30-foot building height. • The applicant submitted a Variance to exceed the 30-foot maximum building height. r . .. .\ . ;;. . . . . . LLL u� 1 •' �i• ;51 a �.Y ! :'� y Variance DRC2016=00207 • Hillside standards were established to regulate maximum height on slope conditions when developing SFR. • Not intended to regulate multi-family development in the Mixed Use District. • Proposed large flat building tiers • Proposed development will not be located on a slope condition. • Enforcement of the Hillside development standards will be inconsistent with the objectives of the Development Code. • Mixed Use District accommodates a variety of uses, and was never intended to apply to properties in hillside conditions. • The intent of the Hillside Development criteria was to address the development natural slopes, here, we have a 24-acre fractured site surrounded by developed land. • The project site has been so altered by surrounding development, is not a natural slope, is outside the intent of the Hillside Development requirements of the Development Code, and is so unique that there are no other Mixed Use District slope conditions within the City. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Tree Removal Permit DRC2012=00673 • The Arborist Report evaluated 198 trees on site. 64 meet Development Code criteria for Heritage Trees. Of those 64 trees, 18 are recommended for preservation. • The 180 trees not identified as suitable for preservation are considered over-mature, have poor growth character, have advanced decay, some are dead or are in poor general health; many of these trees have further declined in health due to the prolonged effects of the drought. Additionally, several trees, although in good health, their location conflicts with proposed improvements and the applicant proposes to remove these trees. • Tree preservation priorities that should be considered include: 1 ) preserve-in-place healthy trees, 2) if trees cannot be preserved in place, then transplant elsewhere on-site, and as a last resort, 3) remove and replace with largest nursery grown stock available. Tree Removal Permit DRC2012=00673 • The remaining 18 trees that meet Heritage Tree criteria are recommended for preservation due to their location, mature form, good growth character, and vigorous health; these trees are principally located north of the Sycamore Inn restaurant. • Two of the trees proposed for removal are Coast Live Oak trees of "mature form and character, good vigor" (Arborist Report, Trees No. 76 and 175) and their location conflicts with proposed improvements. Conditions of approval require the trees to be either transplanted elsewhere on-site or removed and replaced with the largest nursery grown stock available. Landscape Plan p�s - �a�� •�.�` . p4 pp� •C�a�r 'jnr' Y� .. _ ` .s�r'4 � i �r .•' :ia� v ,� ti•3�+n �� .+r:�i: ;� ° .�.� y " O v�: � .°..�" �' _ :•Gy pia^' �.�, !N• +'L3 '�y ° - ------- ------ AA 0 i�i �l� IQI� '• Qi7 = F��' °p4p'i b o . �" 4'SY►yraawn�Q'c�nn�P�,� e� ''}�v. a f►;; . CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA •a� Neighborhood Meetings Three Neighborhood Meetings have been held to discuss the project. • May 9, 2016 • February 1 , 2017 • August 17, 2017 Appeal Following the Planning Commission's approval of the project, Hank Stoy filed a timely appeal of the project. His appeal focused on the decisions made by the Planning Commission related to the following items: • Variance to the Development Code • Environmental Impacts • Traffic • Wildlife • Riparian Habitat • Tree Removal Permit Appeal - Variance • "Some structures would exceed the 30 foot height limitation for buildings on slopes. Allowing these to be built would negatively impact the view from my property. The developer should be required to comply with the requirements of the Development Code." Appeal - Variance • Structures are proposed approximately 185 feet between existing and proposed structures. • Building pads for proposed structures are approximately 50 to 60 feet below existing structures. • The view angle does not create a condition that negatively impacts views of the valley, although it may block some views looking towards Foothill Boulevard. Appeal - Variance - ff I III P i�..,?1 .7-4 77-'�. 18T TO PROP 05ED BUILDING5 127 TO PARKING 1420 25 TO SLOPE 1420 5i hthne _ _ s_.s 18,5' 1360 _ L#! - 1360 1340 = E 0 ----- -- 13401320 C - 1320 � TAINING 1300 PROPOSED WALL 1300 EXISTING GRADE 1280 GRADE 128E1 1260 PROPOSED PROPOSED 7:1 MANUFACTURED le EXISTING 1260 BLDG ROAD SLOPE I BLDG EL.1320' 1 EL.1373' TRACT 'LOCATION OF BLDG-IN PREVIOUSLY BOUNDARY APPROVED PLAN CLOSEST TO P.L. CITY OF ! CUCAMONGA Appeal = Variance • The city does not have a view ordinance that restricts construction within view areas. • The applicant designed the project to minimize the view impacts to the existing neighborhood to the north by lowering the pad elevations, increasing the distance to the dwelling units, and reducing the number of total units. • staff recommends the city Council uphold the decision of the Planning commission and deny the appeal of Variance D RC20 1 6-00207. Appeal = Traffic An estimated additional 1042 daily vehicle trips would be generated on already heavily-traveled Foothill Boulevard. It would exacerbate problems at probably the worst intersection in the City — Foothill and Red Hill Country Club Drive. with only one entrancelexit and right turns only in and out, the numerous U-turns required on Foothill would create safety hazards. Cut-through traffic on Red Hill is bound to increase. Yet, no mitigation measures are being required of the developer. „ Appeal = Traffic • Linscott, Law & Greenspan , the project traffic engineer, responded to the comment. • The proposed project is expected to generate 1 ,042 additional vehicles per day (vpd) onto Foothill Boulevard . • Foothill Boulevard currently has an average daily traffic volume of 22,000 vpd in the vicinity of the project site and a daily capacity of 36,000 vpd . • Even though the proposed project will add 1 ,042 additional daily trips to Foothill Boulevard , the existing roadway has more than adequate capacity to accommodate the increase in daily trips associated with the proposed project. Appeal - Traffic • The Traffic Impact Analysis identifies that under existing traffic conditions the intersection of Red Hill Country Club Drive and Foothill Boulevard currently operates at unacceptable Level of Service (LOS) F during the AM and PM peak hours. • Conditions of approval require the installation of traffic signage at the Red Hill Country Club Drive and Foothill Boulevard intersection to restrict northbound and southbound left-turn and through movements during the AM peak period (7:00 AM — 9:00 AM) and the PM peak period V EPA! EM&UCH REC.CENTERADJACENT TO OPEN SPACE • Primary access E.Y.A,ORLY rovided through a PROP05ED ROADAND OPEN "right turn i n/ri R SPACEACAIH5T5YCAMOU NN driveway off of � Foothill Bou I evc rO UNTRY - • A secondary E EVA) provides access to Red I+ 80 ti R40 - ,-- RANCHOCITY OF Appeal - Traffic • The TIA did provide a project cut-through discussion relative to the Red Hill Country Club Drive neighborhood. • Based on project trip distribution patterns, it was assumed that 20% of outbound project traffic would be considered new cut-through trips (i.e. , 13 of the 64 outbound AM peak hour trips and 7 of the 32 outbound PM peak hour trips). • Staff recommends the City Council uphold the decision of the Planning Commission and deny the appeal of environmental impacts to traffic. Appeal - Wildlife • "The impact on wildlife is unrealistically understated. For example, the red tail hawk (a protected species) frequently seen on Red Hill is not even mentioned in the biological resources survey. " Appeal - Wildlife • RCA Associates, the project biologist, responded to the comment and identified that as part of their evaluation they documented all wildlife observed on-site during their field surveys. • Further identifying that the red-tailed hawk was not observed, and since the species is not listed as threatened, endangered , or a species of special concern a detailed discussion of the species was not provided. Appeal - Wildlife • The high level of disturbance within the project site has resulted in low biological diversity, absence of special-status plant communities, and overall low potential for special- status species to utilize or reside within the project area. • Because no threatened or endangered species are likely to occur in disturbed areas due to the highly-disturbed conditions present in a predominantly degraded environment, construction activities in these areas would not likely jeopardize the continued existence of listed species, nor would construction adversely impact designated critical habitat. Appeal - Wildlife • Impacts to disturbed areas would also not be expected to substantially affect special-status resources or cause a population of plant or wildlife species to drop below self- sustaining levels, nor would impacts be expected to substantially alter diversity of wildlife in the area due to the current degraded habitat conditions. • Project mitigation measures require Nesting Bird Surveys and Burrowing Owl Surveys consistent with the Fish and Game Code and the Migratory Bird Act prior to the issuance of grading permits. • Staff recommends the City Council uphold the decision of the Planning Commission and deny the appeal of environmental impacts to wildlife. Appeal - Riparian Habitat • "Preservation of riparian habitat is a stated goal in the City's General Plan (Policy RC-8. 1). But this project would destroy a considerable amount of it. ..' Appeal - Riparian Habitat • There are two issues here, the potential for riparian habitat on-site and General Plan Policy regarding riparian habitat. CITY at r - sYM OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Appeal - Riparian Habitat • A Jurisdictional Waters Delineation was prepared for the project. • The jurisdictional analysis determined that the five existing channels do not meet the criteria as a Waters of the State or Waters of the United States. • The channels do not meet the characteristics that the define them as a nexus to the nearest Traditional Navigable Water, located approximately 0.4 miles east of the project site. • These waters are a direct result of runoff from the development directly north of the site. Appeal — Riparian Habitat • General Plan Policy RC-8- 1 addresses preserving "the integrity of riparian habitat . . . and sensitive wildlife habitat that supports biological resources. " • Here, the Jurisdictional Delineation determined that the five drainage channels that bisect the site are the result of runoff from the existing development to the north , that jurisdictional waters are not present, and that the project will not have an impact to any Waters of the State. • Staff recommends the city Council uphold the decision of the Planning commission and deny the appeal of environmental impacts to riparian habitat. Appeal - Tree Removal Permit • "This project would require removing 180 trees. To preserve the areas aesthetics and character, more mature trees should be saved. And it is difficult to believe that the nesting bird survey did not find a single nest in any of the trees slated for removal. " Appeal - Tree Removal Permit • The Arborist Report evaluated 198 trees, 54 of which meet Development code criteria to be classified as Heritage Trees, and 18 of those trees are recommended for preservation . • The 180 trees to be removed are over-mature, have poor growth character, advanced decay, some are dead or are in poor general health . • Several trees conflict with proposed improvements. • The Conceptual Landscape Plan demonstrates that the 180 trees removed will be replaced with a variety of 38-inch box, 24-inch box, and 1 5-gallon size trees, in a quantity in excess of the number of trees removed . Appeal - Tree Removal Permit • The Biological Assessment did identify the presence of common birds on the project site, but no threatened, endangered , or species of concern were identified . • Burrowing Owl and Nesting Bird Surveys were prepared, but did not identify the presence of any Burrowing Owls or nesting birds. • Project mitigation measures require Nesting Bird Surveys and Burrowing Owl Surveys consistent with the Fish and Game Code and the Migratory Bird Act prior to the issuance of grading permits. • Staff recommends the City Council uphold the decision of the Planning Commission and deny the appeal of Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673. Environmental Review Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, city staff prepared an Initial Study (IS) of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that IS , City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures related to aesthetics, agricultural resources, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hydrology and water quality, noise, 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 (MND) was prepared and was circulated on July 3, 2017. Environmental Review One comment letter was received from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) on July 27, 2017 in response to the circulated IS/MND. The only comment CDFW had was in relation to the possible Jurisdictional Waters on the project site. The applicant and their biologists prepared a Jurisdictional Delineation to address CDFW's comments. The Jurisdictional Delineation determined that jurisdictional waters were not present on the project site, but recommended compliance with the CDFW recommended mitigation measure prior to issuance of any grading permit. The Biological Resources section of the IS/MND, was revised to include a mitigation measure requiring the applicant to provide proof to the City that the Streambed Alteration Agreement (1602 Agreement) process has been concluded. Environmental Review According to CEQA Section 15073.5(a), recirculation of a negative declaration is required prior to its adoption when it has been substantially revised after public notice of its availability has been given pursuant to Section 15072. The IS/MND was revised to include a discussion of the Jurisdictional Delineation for the project site and a mitigation measure requiring a Streambed Alteration Agreement was added to the MND and the project conditions of approval. The addition of a condition of approval requiring a Streambed Alteration Agreement is not considered substantial evidence in light of the whole record that cannot be mitigated. Therefore, the Streambed Alteration Agreement mitigation measure is not a substantial revision to the MND, and recirculation of the MND is not required. Correspondence • Letter received from Natasha Walton at the August 23, 2017 Planning commission meeting . • Letter received from Charles & Lynda Teenor, dated August 29, 2017 (Attachment 12). • Letter from Shirley O'Morrow , dated August 29, 2017. • Letter from Pomona Valley Audubon society, dated October 2, 2017. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Recommendation Staff recommends that the city council take the following actions: • Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project; and • Adopt the Resolution approving General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206; and • Adopt the Resolution upholding the Planning Commission approval of Tentative Tract Map Modification SUBTT16605M , Design Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673 and deny the appeal. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Average Daily Trips in a 24 Hour Day (ADT) Walmart w Neighborhood Market 11// r CLUB OR ................ Project ADT — 1 ,042 RFD HILL ..... 0 ...... ............. ....... ...... ............ ................... ..... .. . .................. ............ .............. .......... ...... .......—y...... ............. Future Signal& • ........................ .47. x...... ..............Alignment f _3 ..................... Red Hill Casa Valante Mobile Home Park > San Bemard-Ino Rd (D Existing ADT - 22,000 Existing ADT - 25,000 Existing ADT - 23,000 > < I I'Ile-IN CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA SYCAMORE HEIGHTS PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC City of Rancho Cucamonga August 23, 2017 ■ .Project • Land Planner — TRG Land, Inc. • Civil Engineer — David Evans and Associates, Inc. • Landscape Architect - David Evans and Associates, Inc. . Architect — Lim Chang Rohling & Associates • Geologist — Langan Engineering & Environmental services • Traffic Engineers - Linscott, Law & Greenspan 433 Planning O for Svcarnore Heights • Work within the existing General Plan, Zoning, and physical planning parameters that came with the Property. • Create a community that meets the demand of the current Market for Multi-Family buyers. • Focus on the project edges and ensure that the views are owned by all who live in the community. • Provide a separate and distinct entry for the Community. • Elevate the Historical elements that make this area so special. • Create a walkable community including work live units. • Provide more parking than the current standards. • Locate multiple recreation opportunities onsite for the enjoyment of the residents. 434 3' CITY OF=iWH 0 tUCAIVONGA, 57 rhr if // 3. i `• .,IIS"i k1ErR +Fq?'r , i:J� r r.Yn•...�;=.:.��-.'•r��x' �� �..� ' �� .Jp�— ' � �'�y' 1 ..s� :w i... [C `r,� '��'Sr:7Ci.'4L•. �'' .. `�, ��.• i � f� �._. � e: -" ��.i. + � _ .F.. _';-.;:,'.'' ;tom_ ��:�'��i:�`'-.�'.'].:C(,; _,.'�'•:�..•`-' 4 '�rr.; J�tf ► �'='E":f:FL�S'. -Ify',��5_ �.C �T_ ..r .�•...--.� rl ... _I �} r .-2'.sC-SI�E•�2-�1µ � .. - RY.. ice' ..� ---�--•--..._ ,. .-; �'. :.:' •:�.i•� - •'r�.e 91^�E 'E-1_Ini _.. �''.: ..-. --- _ �_ '`� �•tom ".'+r_—t ,�•. -A c -P... .i titer.. ___!.�_ —W 77 _ .aµ .fie~'•'' ,-+�' � :�' �' -� � •�:•', ,_ �r �.�� Pacific1 1SiteAerial a :7� • _ L.��.fit... "' ;���' �' � �' +.'4 e - � •". � 1.Ti;.. ':�.'i _ ' � 7 Pacific1 Heights REC.CTR ADJACENT TO 0.5. ROAD AGAINST EDGE BEAR GULCH E.V.A.ONLY COMMUNITY-WIDE PEDESTRIAN 5Y5TEM LANPSCAPE 0-5-FEATURE BUFFER Co NTkY uue CAIV CALK (A!!ALC sF THROUGHOUT / ',. ;• . .�......a•frt f':l.'r' a ii::• Ire-t!�eF.' .�. PACIFIC ELECTRIC y J Otis �° 61KE TRAIL MIXED U5E COMPONENT5 r' ROUTE 66 TRAILHEAD SYCAMORE INN i 0.5.FEATURE THROUGHOUT UNITS 51PEON TO c E.FOOTHILL 6LYD. VIEWS OF VALLEY Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC Features Diagram T OAV1U EVANS AND ASSOCWTES,MC �� /-nd.• �AfJGANENGINEERINC&ENVIROtJMENTA1SERVICES Sycamore Heights JM rRANG ROHLING 8A55OCWTES 438 ■ Plan Comparison 206 D.U.213 AC. FIT, • 9.7 D.U./AC. ADDITIONAL 30 D.U. PREVKM PLAN • 175 D.U. • 24.3 AC. i --:� , ►. CURRENT PLAN 439 Neighborhood r1 AP L H RFC.CENfERADJACEHT 10 OPEH SPACE E.V.A.ON'Y PROP05ED ROADANO QPEH 5YACE ACAI45T 5YLAM0RE INN coUNTRY UB My r• - 'T C]Qry1C EVARD IN �I 440 r 1 A ' 1 1 Neighborhood LAND5CAPED MANUFACTURED ROPE PARKING A5OVE STANDARD OPEN 5PACE FEATURE OPEN SPACE PEDESTRIAN COURTYARD ) .FEATURE ■^ PEDESTRIAN ACCESS ALONG EDGE 442 AV ,. I .:i►- 1,rT, ���e,� r iL," ►�� i��j .�c ��L'�fS.�:.�.:���` !1.�..w�_��• �� M h �, r.ti� r:=�.f:4 a F��1� �'•.$ �� ,^ �r�••- a .f. •.4� -,.off 4 7 1 saw r I PJM I ffJ• I t� :r • 'I ■ Bear 5FARk%1CH TOPFMAIN q - ae- V 5EARGULCH MANUR PROP05EDREC. 5LOFE CENTER @1291 PROPOSED MANUF. PARKING MOPOSED. RES@1262 5LOPE PROPOSED. RE5.@1291 ROAD @12,57 444 BLOCK PERIMETER *} WALL OL }xy A 1.1• PR4F05EU PARKING LANE PARKING 5YCAMOKE ENN P 12/2 RE5.ea7281 MANUR5LOPE NATIIRAI Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC Sycamore Heights OAIAUXC N ENS AND ritMl ASSOCIATES.INC. Sycamo L Heigh s iAHGAN ENGIN EE RIt¢G R ENNRONMENI'AL SERVICE5 LIM CHANG ROH UNG&ASSOCIATES 445 PL 6'TUSUV+R 5TEELFENCE . ry .. 3•STORY TOWNHOUSE PRODUCT �4 j. 5'RFT.WALLS A AJ ` ,. .�IS NATURAL MANUESLOPE PROPOSED PKOP05ED ROAD 91314 RES,01315 E7(15TING RE5.®1370 Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC [� Section B �7TY DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES-INC. ,]VCa�]a]�4p Heightsand._ LANGAN ENGINEERING&ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES UM CHANG ROFILING&ASSOCIATES 446 3-STORY TOW NHOU5E PRODUCT• r 45"SECURITY FENCE . .. Miami - •��•.. :sesrt FROF05ED PROF05ED PROPOSED RES.01315 ROAD 01276 RE509 277 IAANUF.5LOFE MANUIR SLOPE 30`WE WALL Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC Section C A T DAVID EVANS AND ASSMATES,!NC. Sycamore Heights and : IANGAN ENGINEERING&ENVIRC NM E NTAL SERVIC ES LIM CHANG ROHLING&ASSOCIATES 447 SWALE PL 3'P LOCK WALL WITH PLEXIGLA% S'RET. c WALL "..• 4 KET. WALL pw �'�+r MEANDERING rD WALK lie PROP45EV RE5 @1277 I,. AIANUF. FOOTHILL 5LOPE 6LVD.Caa 125Q P `� MEANDERING (MIN.15) TRAIL A' Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC Section D oAV It7 EVANS AND ASSOCIATES,INC- Syca m a re Heights ,la LANGAN ENGINEERING&ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LIM CHANG ROHLING&ASSOCIATES 448 Sample ' I F I I S I 1 1 f j , 187 TO PROPOSED BUILDINGS 127 TO PARKING 1420 257O SLOPE 1420 13$G _ 5ightline ________-.__-_- -- - 1380 51 - - -------7-,__=_ -- --- ------- -- 1360 ---_ - - " 1---- -1350 1340 F. ,1 hL [] r=`-- ---- -� 1340 1320- --- -- RETAINING I 1320 WALL 13DD- PROPOSED I 1300 EXISTING CRADE 1280 GRADE 1280 126D PROPOSED PROPOSED K It 2:1 MANUFACTURED E]ISTING 12h0 BLDG ROAD SLOPE BLDG IV EL- 1320' EL, 1373' TRACT LOCATION OF BLDG.IN PREVIOUSLY BOUNDARY APPROVED PLAN CLOSEST TO P.L. 449 Proposed -wag -, "'I 2-STORY BUILDING • • ti s .. w oY _ • Y.Pryly r45 Pam', PROPOSED TRAIL ^ CONN ECTION Y a PACIFIC ELECTRIC r TRAIL 450 COMMUNITY OUTREACH , ls' PSF Plan • June 2012 — Meet with interested neighbors • October 2012 — Meet with interested neighbors • April 2013 — Present 18t PSF Plan to Red Hill condo owners Revised (Current) PSF Plan • March 2015 — Meet with interested neighbors to discuss revised plan • May 2016 — Community Meeting @7 Sycamore Inn (current plan) • Feb 2017 — Community Meeting @ Sycamore Inn with staff (current plan) • Aug 2017 — Community Meeting @ Lions Center (current plan) 451 - �1 t� �fi� �� ,, •��, w •his � ...-��r •' � •-ham. •4•5.. to i• } •. 4 - F a. �'Y Ir rS 453 Previous Plan (2006 ) G 2.2 { 1 1 c.3 3 1 �..:. �.. i°� �- - _ _ :.r ..i •i .fir -�_.� SEE SHCJEr. ••ems ° - 1 � --'i-- -- - -- �- -" �'� � ��. •T'�L �O. ,. — _ : - ..:. -^ SEC SIIEE•F 1#.�EET_ .. _ / { _ SE65HEET — � � C-8.2 Mir- Et 454 Current Designations MIXED USE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MIXED USE ZONING 455 Ln ., �; sue•, { Ai ,Y < f' 1 y t F r yf• k•1 k a• �V 1' II1 f y� • rY Walls 40 � 4-YrY• � � e. r�}r^t - �:=tip � ,,�, ,• I. A'. Val 1:4 • r .;1. ,�..,�" ayes • - V :v, i'y Y 457 ELI:YAl1Uti�U��5 •-swa.ti*t-n ti.�r•r+o•err _ CwI.L[�6KR ti'�OP'W a' wwwRR••.a •9 M•r aa_Ed�L�l�•YLRYyWR• . ••���D'A\sue iN. ' •:J Mi'P4 WiC�TLR • aa.yVs�r •..�.�ocv•w• L 1! 7 7} Cl, 771 \ rug i.•x ...iae ♦ •:S2LvA KSw - ' nry�K•t.e.r.1�9 CSC- � •. �� Rear Elevation Right Elevation - . 2-STORY TRIPLEX ELEVATIONS: SYCAMORE HEIGHTS Santa Barbara A-l.5 Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC „ 458 PLAN 2 PLAN 3 PLAN 2 PMN 3 X. •- - O O � • art y�� �tfaY L.S L:� 1 �� J r Z* K. r � 1.1JJfIJ- �I 1�hl - l 1 •- ■Zc i ..... I ---------------------} � - � --- -- ----------------- PLAN 1 PLAN 1 -- --- T"E v-u CONMUtnOS x-2 occupkNCY Pian 1 1.296 SF Pian 2 I•S40 SF Pip 3 A.791-sr TOW 4,537 SF LOT COVERAGE 3.520 SF SYCAMORE HEIGHTS x-STORY TR[-PLE7C:BUILDING 1.1 A- Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC I 1o+cmkv 19.2016 459 .� roea wv�••.. sire..•rt.�.....u..... � 41 W•�W^•9[�LPPY Mw9.•On f�+JG•, �~ �• w�• . �� -.r:�•eea eec.••+.n�,a-n ro� � .-�+1 R7=";) S:�iL�I1,Y�s i 71it++•R•+C►.A Front Elcr•ation 31 AVr� t Left Elevation 2-STORY TRIPLEX ELEVATION& Santa Barbara SYCAMORE HEIGHTS A-1.4 Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC 1a+cr_i�Y 460 ELEVATION roMVFA e.•xati•.za...r•rw•a.r e+.n e..ae•e.+ar•.r. � ..•.w..eerer..•.:..•we•nr •.+zr row a..r ron • •..ta rs•a.�w+rrrow •`b+M PGWP'[.•y MOP/OA M-.Y• `n:.'�t; + •n '�7 •.•�o K..w•c•�cox �'V L - s I�LOM•H„�. all Front Elevation T _;'. •-`• sell 1 Fy lA Lai - LcftIT1,�Elevation 2-STORY TRIPLEX ELEVATIONS: ence SYCAMORE HEIGHTS Prav A-1. A-16 Pacific Summit Foothills LLC II ti cater �OI4 �nenu+c�auy 4"4"'\ 461 } NMn bGw Y►n+ r f� •�MY101.2l n•+�Y NY^.Y ^.Y ^A Alp AY10 ns•Y}Lw • •A.TJ f^L•9+1 WAI!7S•T {.�� I• Y+.AA•K.�y a� � 4Rf�U►+i� _OJ .^•Y�GOiROR�V A�W,v WOO^+ � xsw•�s.a•^•.•x :.] wcw w•w I �� p164+••.R h.Zr I Rear Elevation U Right Elcvation f' 2-STORY TRIPLEX ELEVATIONS: SYCAMORE HEIGHTS Provence A-l.7 Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC �.�aA.i�,mie imouwe�wr�ih�a. 462 ' Yet � � Y - �❑ _ �� - {?�}- _ ,z C� a ..r 4 -------- ............ PLAN 3A PLAN 1A PLAN 2A PLAN 28 PLAN IS PLAN 38 Lw1 PLAN 18 PLAN 38 X = r „= a Lec�a�= TYPE Y-8 CON"RVCTION R-2 OCCUPANCY Plan IA 1.672 5P Plea �A 1.6s?'i' SP Plan 2A 1.87E SP Pten 2a 1."6 sP Plea 3A 2.10E SF Plan 3D 2083 Sr SYCAN40RE HEIGHTS 3•SfaRYTOLY H4�AES:13U1LDIhA-2 Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC 463 ---------------- U . o �. ..•_ea:,.em nme ..ur w�setae rux:t,Qi.none -------- �. ---------------- sit .-t .'I0 1 L: P 0 C, FA r n n! 9 L --- !!= �� ❑ ran" � � I rrer n.y�a crrene Hope nF� �a �ssrr nape rut a rHEO float > N u wbe now ►&N rnrtr ruse -`•_ .. .`.` 3-STORY TOWNROMES:UNIT PLANS SYCAMORE HEIGHTS A_2.2 Pacific�iSummit Foothill, LLC RiXI 464 ■■��ii�IR f''J• I la RI(i}IT I:I.FIVATION REAR ELEVATION TT 4k LEFT ELEVATIO\ FRONT ELEVATION 3-STORY SEXPLEX ELEVATIONS: SYCAMORE HEIGHTS EXTERIOR E:I.I:VAT A-2-2.3 Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC � 465 w0cwK*w PLAN 3A PLAN 1A PLAN 2A PLAN 28 PLAN 3A PLAN I A PLAN!2A PLAN 16 a ..o ftwftew t LLCE.\Dt TYPE. V-9 CONSTRUCT90N R-2 OCCUPANCY Plan Sh 1.916 SF * 249 SF COMME10CUL = U.165 Sr Plan lA 1,531 SF • V SF COHMERCLAL = 1.780 $F Plan 2h 1.782 SF + 249 SF COUMERCIAL = 2.681 Sr Plan 20 1.796 SF • 249 SF CO?IIdMUL 2.047 SF 3-STORY UVWWORK TOWNE3O,1r1ES: BUILDING PLANS SYCAMORE HEIGHTS A-3.1 Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC I 466 I tj e�rwrr.nw r..�nsr+w r gB gge eism ni ;r-R�va^W npYi R�vw� 3-STORY LIVFJWOR.K T61A'NHOMES: SYCAMOPLE HEIGHTS EXTERIOR ELLVAI3.2 Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC I .o.c�a M 2016 467 t• LEFT ELEVATION _ B® FRONT ELEVATION SYCAMORE HEIGHTS EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS Pacific Summit Foothill, LLG } 23 2015 UM CHANG RGHLUP.j A.A.Wj:"A,k 468 �L; "' �a �- ..�r --- �,7, w - - is a;•.._ "z. .. . r 3 , r - CLUB- DRIV E VA x - r'O ti ONLY " r Rid HILL @'S 1 F• r • _ :-[s „ err '^ Op Uj fix � - tu � '_� Cry `�• ,•• ;• Uj Awl SAN BERNARDINO ROAD HISTORIC RTE 66 J. ,SA B�.i� •.•'. �.' .,y Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC Grove Avenue Aerial DAVID EVANS ANO ASSOCIATES,INC- A7T1rland..: LANGAN ENGINEERING a ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Sycamore Heights UM CHANG ROHLING 3 ASSOCIATES 469 5 PHASE N lv40-WAY 3 PHASE +�iSGNA E rSIGNAL \ STOP 1 _SIG,NAL GROYE AVE o RED WLL COUNTRY CLUB DR 0 CARNEDAN 51 d SAN BUMARDWO RD O P FOOTHLi BLVD FOOTHILL BLVD RED H LL COUNTRY CLUB CAR FOOTHILL BLW NA P n h'1 ^v 4 GU aS� r CLUB OR -7 RED HILL C ! Np BLV[? 2 i L M OERNAACiNO RONp Spa 35} up4 �NP 45 w KEY �- - APPROACH LANE ASSIGNME14T FIGURE RE 3-1 0 - TRAFPC SIGNAL P -- PARKING, NP - NO PARKING (tNO SCALE U = UNDIODED, 0 - DIVIDED EXISTING ROADWAY CONDITIONS YP u iPH)tx 51W SED � � AND INTERSECTION CONTROLS ; _ PROJECT SITE SYCAMORE HEIGHTS, RANCHO CUCAiMNGA / Vtacn 71 \ / "' n \ / \ / ooc� L 0 \ J � ` � °9551 1 � � 9 J ,vim 1 J � � 1022% r` 3,9 f ��``�'\ 1 i r 2m 1 GROVE ST 4 REO FULL COUNTRY CLUB DR G CARNFLIAN ST O SAN BERM VRDWO RD 4 FDOTHIa eno FOOTHILL BLVD RED +ILL COUNTRY CLUB DR FOOTHILL BLVD u 4 J i CLUB OR 7 RED HILL T -- _ BLVD . .. -. BERNAROINO RD 4 � KEY FIGURE 3-2 PMXCT SITE (tNO SCALE EXISTING AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES SYCAMORE HEIGHTS, RANCHO cucAVi7NGA t1 r1! {D � � � q ; 1I f J•-o va _L! Bt599 74 14i1 24 1092—V7"Ill A I19$ - !t f GROVE ST Q RED HXI COUNTRY GLOB OR d CARNEDAN S7 4 SAW RERkRAMO RO O FOOTHILL BLVD FOOTHILL BLVD RED W-L COUNTRY CLUB DR FOOTHILL OUW a iE �N m a c��� f CLUB OR RI<D wPL1 �� - �— — - T3Lw BERNARDINO RD Y fa � KEY FIGURE 3-3 r. PROXCT SI TC (tNo SCALE EXISTING PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES �77 m SYCAMORE HEiGHTS, RANCHO CUCAAbNGA 40 : �+•� TWO-war r PN+3F 8■n.* y r p�•: _5244c ` T STOP ti 1>tis� - _ _9eYY — ]�� 7w7+t Ap" 0 RED HU1 COUNTRY RED HILL COUNTRY %t 6M 9")WARIN, C'AFL46 Dog MW OR (SOUTH) 0 CLUB DR (NORTH) O d.r 4V '?4"tt-A;:X4 tg F—•`" 4J FOOTHILL 800 FOOTHILL BLYD 4 R j 0 tr N�tY COUNTRY 9 LVG BERNAROINO RD Y Oil y t KFY LINSCOTTf APPROACH LAVE ASSIGNMENT FIGURE 8-1 �T • - TRAFFIC SIGNAL ILDOUT GREEKIIAN P NNO IMPROVEMENTS NO SCALE YEAR 2035 gLFILI70E3T — PROJECT SsTE PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS SYCAMORE HEIGHTS, RANCHO CUCAWNGA f 0. `STOP *ti _ ►L �{�1wa Illo7y2 %vt M RED HILL COUNTRY CLUB DR o rAliNtSAN V ■ ac1Ar IIE*1~11 r* +�++ji3F1�11 R FOOTHILL BLVD Ii:•tin CoLwTgY'=p ep rwn*IL RLWO 3 a 44JJ R S � ! CLUB DR RED MILL �- T E1LVG 21 BERNAROtNO RD o Y f KEY NOTE - APPROACH LANE ASSIGNMENT (A) 1+HAGE TO R K FIGURE 8-2 LAW GREENSPAIN �tN • TRAFFIC SIGNAL N0R1)taf747Nu �M10 a`OCI1114BOUNU VaSTING WTH PROJECT LU-1- TURel ANC >'FfRGuGH RECOMME DED IMPROVEMENTS M(Ti ENTS DURING THC AM EXISTING WITH PROJECT SCALE PROJECT SITE P1.f �F,a+r P:R+[C1a RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS SYCAMORE HEIGHTS, RANCHO CUCAVIbNGA f r}yc \ 1VO-WAY f ImaAe y; "r €il, STOP *ti _ ►L �{�1wa qaw 1Yt M M Hall_WJNTRr CLUB DR o =Imts" v ■ k1Ar rE r► rt 146 111 #A 96W FOOTHILL BLVD I i:•tilt L Gl'=s' GCS rwn*I L AL WO 1 b 44JJ iZ P 1 gg J CLUS DR RED MILL !- __ BLVD 3 .. .. SERIl RD o w Y t f>7 f KEY NOTE APPROACH LANE ASSIGNMENT CAj 1.45TA41 SN;NAGE 7a RF Ic: FIGURE 8-3 TRAFFIC SIGNAL HG' l,HOUND Al SOLI"I OLINQ YEAR 2018 MTH PROJECT `L91- nJRN AND rt4RCUCH GREENSPAN �tNO SCALE PROJE AlE1�IDEO rA1PROvE�IENTs MOVEMENTS,;plc s �> '""' YEAR 2018 WITH PROJECT pR° ' s1r RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS SYCAMORE HEIGHTS, RANCHO CUCARDNGA \ j 5 PHASE 2SA4L w SIGNAL =aya%A irxf =:a ZH9'!' M; N' �irjaiMl,! ti FOOTMLL BLw a Q CFO � Y i COUNTRY ��9 w � - BLVD Z :EKlERNtAR0lN0:RD 4 — - SP� Y m ' t KEY UNSCUll APPROACH LANE ASSIGNMENT FIGURE 8-4 LAW ,• TRAFFIC SIGNAL 11T YEAR 2M SUILDUUT YNTH PROJECT GREENSPAN NO SCALE RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS YEAR 2035 BUIIDOUT WITH PROJECT = PROJECT SITE RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS SYCAMORE HEIGHTS. RANCHO CUC NGA � �.i� tlkaS 7 •' _ i I SYCAMORE NFJGKr$,RANCHO CVCAMONGA $I, ILJA�'V e TTIWDM 8 OR WT C7012-03 TREE$URVEY EXHIBIT od a, ll NEST ��nawe n.»ra .wv wow+w.eawwa•. .- t 2 477 O� I • ZC • I � OC Ai 1 , _ ,:k Y q___j 1TA k E p Y i• Ao1 1 I b I I I 1 I 1 i T 1 I' 1 is 1 � 1 1 1 SITE UTILIZATION PLAN GOLF CX)URSE R ::.i �6— Ate_ rR:'7 '�"—r_ .. 7� � —►y r Ile op tk qL FEBDEmnA ► L, s N„yi ccuNmr auo oR. 'E a� , ', _ 41 x Mu SnE KAU - '.,� _ __ � �. _,,.r• Syr T'�� 'i.1{� eK.n.�'.i. ��� �``L` .:^ —_ [a'r�wr�em�e ieaf. "r'• •^r v,�' �� _+�,+ ?' m! � �� ' ' SAN NERNARDINO ROAD. M1��d!� �' - wi FC7iML_BLED. Y Y' • }}--� Y 9 �,. 01. OFF7CEICCMiAMCL4L +- ar. !• 31 - •. ��{\ Nm -S r`�;a}' `! •..+Ls�'E►'PR'� _ -■ �� }� .ter �'�s L a:F•• n u s�aTT�eeo6 i oRCxv�z�pezp COUNTY OF 5AN 6ERNAROINO RACF�6 I P007lllllC n,r a..w� 817E UTILIU.TIpN PLAN F3 �. � „m, n.ea SYCAMORE HEIGHTS a RTATND RACr APNo.t TEiNTATM1'E TW�Ci NAP N6,iBE05 .S�'� 1 SITE PLAN � l mi jig vi � t F r�:«•e � S� s � '�,�n.'t -- S�,T�i r F���, _. - s s ��rr�= 7 7c .ew.. �°°re �;,.� aura r■ '� �e. e.. �i■ .+� �■ - ._ — ��, r/' f Or SAN 09RNAROZ, RA- ] !�` �._'' - .�W. .. r 1. .-.l l P WE SUMMAW ' 11 C' �Ytle� aueme■oa oac2012-ooeF2-� •••�� — a uffyoram ecax+wom IlFgrscmrwTraon�uc — _ ....r $rTeruw RAW4F7RCTVAPNo.m 1 TvrrArVE'+PoOLT w1P MD.�BeeS wSP-1 480 �f f -•--- ---• -" •- PARKING STUDY ' I cm 17 A I[• AL'A:, I YENAP] . p al. 71 4k�_ SAN HSRNARDLNO RD -----Y ,•..• !TG _ - - p O O PARKNG SPACE SUMMARY: LEGEW l .wv crow wam r:wc.rwa 1 crow Nk Jlli rnu ih ]IO •rv�d nti lwa•L.Moe -.,• . �.zgllyaA�c r-140� iWr�rrYwc[�rr•'ia ii ' �iRw�4 bkJ4e pf:l 41sm f 1 [w�vx Ilirvu I SUBTTIS&O, pRC2012-00672 , COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO PACIFIC SIJMMFr FOOTHILL,LLC PARKNNG EXHIBIT "�iisauc ae r - •sr n mMo ..-ew-.xs SYCAMORE HEIGHTS alocJrow Iesel i,c,vn'°4�oT '�.a „m,uce uwu x swrnwer�z. ,,a.Me ECHO CUCAMONGA.CA TETNTATIVE TRACT MAP NC-16 0S 481 I ka-N TENTATIVE TRACT MAP Na. 15605 °,F" FOR C(::>NEaMINIUM PURPC>SES :. COUNTY OF SAN 6ERNARaINO ; CITY OF RANCHO CLJOAMONGA. CA r _ Yi.J RED HILL.CpUNTRY CLVBI 017NE.... , I � L��� -77 aim SAWARY- _�- - �.r•� '�e.rr.r ,:rfro-:, 1��i.�� i e�Hr�n�ire�rL +I E MIS I .L 0 T 8 LOT 4 I .. v" I .'fir I I ,• 7 '�:!-��' ��� �,�� �1` '� �„�ti 1• 1 \` -•: I LOT AREA Suawm x BAN R3 ARC*40 RO I �••—••� �• �•• cr.vdnwo`wuw. ..—..� .•..be•:�l.i�,Ll•:i• �• y �� axdrd srdrary.r ae r�na � E l��exn nn.n.o.edm.dr.xd n---°..HiOB mar suerrleeos.. a..•�: 'n n•n.v.m v C LINTY Of 3/W BERNARDNO nod dNaim...C,pednew PAOM SLMMIT FOOTHU,LU. ti,,vwxd TCNTATNE TRACT MAC 1�pfj S CAL401S i•EKiltt9 ovrxo®,..r-w.e r.w-..e.>wr s.io-w '��a-m. nwrrm ne swerna n. FAN[]1OCIICRN0146A.CA PTHFIi 482 CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN SYCAMORE HEIGHTS RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA . 9 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16605 �d u�erw na. °� v.Yn.a..a.,mu r�v w�6�i�.e �. t.... '-r--'__14A 7 In* �•y WTLrFY PLRVETCM v�'.Z.�.aw�e..we.„a•w.ra n•uw d�'��� �q Ida '� si _ [ � /_ ww.o.�..a 3�—M i 'k WE NNPL——VU,/ wn.....p... .. �im...,oe'wn�•r s..st•.n+ww..m ,�.ar mgTiuY.lYMnr� Caw �K, °�a i'�6Eae°q�ri�°� •,w�.�.+e,w.vea caor w,nr ac. GW51-.'ECeNi[4* CO[ n u.w..r.en,R...,ew,wena.nrmw,.. wu.rexwen.wa y ���[mµw ,ee wa.ac.n...miw awe�se.n iemn msnen� rm.1 �Ua�q�N y,p�prf a°,mn•i i 'iK�fa Ctlulh�n¢a.w1.61M1Y V sY.a..,MwA rY IN-W or+c�a+x.noma • SOILSENGIhFEft 1 GEOLOGIST RE4iEN7 rto• arE. o..u�n,r..e CWXTY OF$.Ali 6FRnAkplXp GM COER?EP II.,FIL GRADING PLAra6 .ww uw e,ee.,•wauea.ac em.�woe PCd%C>g1XYf1 «LLB: �.au S+'Cu,IpRE XEM;,,RS .nw+,r oa +,,•a ra �.n�+er' .ar¢a > Nyse vnrw¢•w.v e�mmr n RATWL O=MAP No. Tp17M1T1VE YRM1C�LIAp Xp.1C&OS As i,TL.E!HEET 1 y ip 483 SYCAMORE HEIGHTS RANCHO CIJCAMGIVGfA,, CA/ i Tti i OF(S cs acs Ex eT a Frt CALOIAtto er I ; ?9M RISE 00 RUN(WnWa N VLEW 4 I i L�— d+•a0 OV TK aSiAva WT%Em Paced mu I i ALL ROPES AM CALMATEv.A MO I)gAhv I Tµ[TOW ABOA THE Env-2i11MM)!.L+IRIAOF EACH AM RONIX IS=Ps WXD IN r L � _�• /- ® hall R Foreman 484 �7 �., ,1 �� �. T F! iys `, �� �{� x �� �� , .�, 1� • +,� � !� � 1 r,'� � 1 �;� 1 1. �:, i a �' �'; `� '��, �� �� ��, �� �� *. � C` ` ,t ,. � 1 � '` � � i *'� i� �. � ►� � � f _.._.._! z-. } � � I 6 i j � � �� I l }� � � � i 5 :. • , �' � � , � � � ! � ■ � +� ' �. _ Previously located In Section s., G,l...I ,Ie.,r,,.. t� �; ; r 2-1.2 Gelogic Hazards 8AN 96-RNAPDI N❑ NAT'kON AL F FtEST Sbpn gealn Nun 30X l+;Wn`ner�ll4 Rn�p ppsn>!�10 t Ecb bf,wS�Mxitl qr sbFl Ya.b i�C\[:lSO UkLA%10,j(:A f f � � S,opu 6et..e.n 19%.TVIL �'- . i� ] Ani.y Heycn where Ntlm nn}Qr aAp�i i tJ S,.�_� •�rZ y.� _-�5._,�-r j ti.7' I C1TY OF Sbplt his Shin ldY �r—• '�� ( rl l 1. _ lY I FONTANA �a svecei r.esrle se ,Q�� fianyn l(for re4ence) �, a —Y— sprcrod n+w�rac ] _ UN" - - Changed from:"No development is permitted in these areas,unless all the following are sahstied:(i)the �- property is located south of Banyan .•,. r N .; -R. -•^ Street;(ii)at least 75°I of the Eats or F'4" parcels that are subject of the •l ' I �i' ""� development application are surrounded by lots or parcels I improved with structures,and(iii)the proposed project is determined to I Q: appropriately address slope stability ate„ and other geological factors of the Site - — site." � � G�Bve'.EnMD�,JaYue. `I CITY OF i $uAv!C•gdi<w.MCkcasv�7pD}n6frU CuarNSrab.�q.y.PCpp . i FONTANA D ,, -- J 04 1ARI0 j Figurc I S4: -- Slopes Fear rn..nhQnes f y RANCHO C IJ CAMONGA GF NFRAL PLAN Pr:19 486 C(D,Jl,EPTUAL UTILITY PLAN pt - T swea asRnARntnn Jxa w _. a 1 i rya w..• •N.N W� .•iY��k�a vq�R •..._._ —-.r•+1 sL u rnli- •�l ""^'•' suarrieaac SLNW roop uc _ — .«•�e.». ■V..� L l.uu(US l S! tkHiRTiY£� pw`EGYG C:�•2 �i I. 487 WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN �r p`t y t•y � fit . 743I Ifi1Gti4RiR o HO 6ur(s)YROVISIDM RO TES.' _ __ 4EGEnIP: Imo., i.� r..�:n. ..rw. �.�7'Y"�"'•„ I � ......r w..r, "'ram `"'� �.. ..,. .,.......,.......... amp HIERARCf1 suth"RY •�hSTC.r_��etiL Eq.4 .� SYCAUCKM#IIFWW8.pMdHv CVnM-Ce: 488 PERVIOUS AREA MAP POST-DEVELOPMENT CC7kVDMON ip snx eluen�xwrro xP.` k. LF:GE:tiD: Krun sr.n AREA SUMMARY- I " � n.s.rxreew SYCAMORE HEIGHTS,RANCHO CUCAMONGA TEHTATIW TRACT NO.I$lm PERVICVSAREAMAP POST-CEVE LOPME NT CONDITJON E%Hi91t-a" �4 489 - A , F4 . �_ _ • , - - .. .. ' ' L^¥ Ail .- - - . •� - _ � ��. \: . /\■ ~ \ - . - ' _ � � , . // AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH Rancho Cucamonga,CA 91739 . � . ,.. 4� y yi. 7} Subject Si' rr• . y rulqw--' oil w 'k- 4_ A v N AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH 8410&8462 FooLNII Boulevard Rancho Cucamonga,CA 91739 1 Source:USGS FIGURES '1' 'AEI 491 /� Year: 1977 Job No:28425s �+' _ ;' ii' �.w„"■' pr, I s a N f Yam, Af yX. . .. ti. Sub ct 5it: '• x r +r a'. OL Al �• b r L j Jim _ �� .06 kw r +r:.� , arc lk q ■ w M 41 N AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH 8410&84622 Footh,ll Boulevard Rancho Cucamonga,CA 91739 Source: USG5 FIGURE 3 �',AEl 492 Year: 1980 Job No:284253 _ � err:4, •� :sl. ��' �' r le i # *;� ti;i . y�.r.�J111il�y; ti ;l� .1Af 16 Oki a1is IIti.LifilaJ i l�aFli0"mob r'7 " ' 7 `— y t Jk Aa15:a1IL Ir ow y � I _ a� '• • i. { 74 A A Sightline From Calle Carabe Street WOW. r �c `• yc°' •F Y ,,f n Y y, � i 7 4 1� �� � '�- 494 r! _ t.�a 1Y•.. _ t �,�, '�. •� ..tip. � �_, -r'• �e w 3 .� ',� �',. � •�.,ales L S �`; �, ITEM J1: 10/4/17 CITY COUNCIL MEETING: THREE (3) LETTERS RECEIVED REGARDING ITEM October 2, 2017 City Council & Planning Department c/o Tom Grahn, Associate Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Dr. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Dear Rancho Cucamonga City Council and PIanning Department: Pomona Valley Audubon Society is the local chapter of National Audubon Society and our territory includes the city of Rancho Cucamonga. Our chapter includes many members who reside in Rancho Cucamonga. The mission of Pomona Valley Audubon Society is to promote the protection, appreciation and enjoyment of birds and other wildlife through recreation, education and conservation of habitat. Our members are disheartened to learn of the loss of riparian habitat and open space that will be caused by the Sycamore Heights project(DRC 16-00206, SUBTT16605M, ❑RC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673) in Rancho Cucamonga(RC). In particular we disagree with some of the conclusions of the Initial Study/ Negative Declaration (ISIND) that downplay the importance of this project site to wildlife species and lack of mitigation to protect sensitive riparian habitat on the site. For the following reasons we believe that further environmental investigation and mitigation, which can addressed in a more comprehensive Environmental Impact Report (EIR), should be required of the developer before the city approves this project. 1) There is a lack of biological data regarding this project site to conclude that wildlife is not going to be significantly impacted by the project. Only two days of wildlife surveys were conducted over a 14 year span. Only 14 native bird species were documented on the project site in the IS/ND which included ten bird species„ three native mammals, and one reptile. No focused studies were conducted on mammal species, like bats,or insect species. The potential for more native species should be detennined for this site, especially since a variety of other species have been documented proximal to this site. For example, our members have documented 47 native bird species in Upland Memorial Park,just 0.5 mi east of this project site, and submissions via the eBird website (https://ebird.org/ebird/hotspot/L845141) show at least 30 bird species have been documented just north of this site at the Red Hill Country Club. In fact,just a few days ago, several of our members noted three raptor species, not mentioned in the ISIND, utilizing the steep slope of the project site where disturbed grassland and some native sage scrub species still exist. As per RC General Plan Policy RC-8.1, more significant mitigation effort should be addressed for the loss of riparian habitat that will occur due to this project. Such significant mitigation could require the developer to contribute to funds to help 1) restore and protect 495 riparian habitat in present conservation areas, or 2)acquire proposed conservation areas that would protect riparian habitat,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 flan (Chapter 6, Fig.RC-41 2) We are concerned that the remaining 46 trees that qualified as Heritage Trees described in the Tree Removal Permit are not being replaced. We appreciate the protection of the 16-18 trees that are expected to be protected by the Tree Removal Permit, however,we would like any additional native Heritage Trees to be replaced with the same species on the project site. Although these trees may not be considered as healthy as the proposed trees to be preserved, many of them (especially the native oaks sycamores, and elderberries) may still provide important habitat to native wildlife. If there is not enough room to support them on the project site, then perhaps they could be planted in public areas adjacent to the project site such as any adjacent parkways or the Route 66 Trailhead. The larger coast live oaks and California sycamores could be planted further down the slope such as not to obscure the views of the current residents and lookout points for future residents. If further environmental investigation determines that this project is not beneficial to the RC Community, then we suggest that the City of RC consider acquiring the land with the help of non-profit agencies that can help with opening it up as a passive city park. What a treasure this could be! Thank you for considering the further investigation and conservation efforts to protect our native wildlife and habitat. Sincerely, Brian Elliott Conservation Chair Pomona Valley Audubon Society 2058 N. Mills Ave. PMB 426 Claremont, CA 91711 496 WALTON 874 N. 10th Ave. ■ Upland,California 91786 ■ (909)537-2023 + notlaw_17@msn.com August 23, 2017 Planning Department c/o Thomas Grahn, Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Dr. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department: I am a local wildlife biologist who is concerned about the loss of native California vegetative communities and open space in our foothill communities. Below I am providing some comments regarding the Sycamore Heights Project being proposed by the applicant Pacific Summit Foothill LLC. Overall,I am very disappointed to learn that the character of Red Hill will be changed dramatically from a relatively bucolic area to a more urbanized development due to this housing development. I drive by this project location most every day as I frequent Rancho Cucamonga businesses like the Coffee Klatch and I am reminded of the history associated with Route 66 and the Sycamore Inn. Ideally, I would rather see this project site purchased by Rancho Cucamonga and converted to a city park that can be managed to protect the integrity of the>30% slope hillside, as well as the remaining native wildlife and vegetation, like desert cottontails (Syvilagus audubonii) and white sage (Salvia apiana), that are rarely found in our sprawling urban environment. However, since the passage of this project seems inevitable, I am glad that the landscape designer is including native plants in the project design ad preserving a few-of the native trees. I encourage the landscape designer to use more native plants and trees than non-native plants and trees on the project site. For example, in areas where low-growing trees/large shrubs are desired, I hope that the landscaping includes more native western redbuds (Cercis occidentalis) and glue elderberries (Sambucus mexicana) than non-native Crape myrtles (Lagerstroema indica). I am also happy to hear that Rancho Cucamonga and the applicant will be considering %vays to remove trees in a way to allow bat species,such as the red bat (Lasiurus 6lossewillir'),to safely abandon trees that they are likely using as roosts in the project site's riparian area. I will be providing RC City soon with any information I can find in regards to removing trees in a more ecologically sensitive manner. 497 I am also 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. Please note that some new developments, like the lights on the new bathrooms at the new Route 66 Trailhead Park,are not shielded and,thus,provide undesirable night time glare towards drivers along Foothill Blvd. Therefore, please make sure that all lights in this new development are properly shielded. In addition to requiring shielded lighting,please ask the applicant to use"warm-white" or filtered LED light bulbs that minimize the glare,or blue-tight emission,of such bulbs whenever possible. Please note that LED tights can be so bright that shielding them alone does not minimize the amount of glare they can emit. For more information on minimizing light pollution, please refer to"Lighting Plan Guidelines" (http://ibiclub.com/downtoaddocs/Lights/DarkSkySocietyGuidelines.pdo provided by the Dark Sky Society. Thank you for your time and consideration, and please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Sincerely, rX66FYC Natasha Walton, M.S. 2 498 1-01 Z7 zz el�� f zz &fib af Z,yL- -/ Oql c 2- TL 499 t� ` sod Cai O Carabe l any-ho (2ucawonjgfcR 91730 C qoT) R31- 0 SS"r z 'I, 2c 17 r��ayr�r � D�4� � i5 Iv1rc��ae � C, 14y o,9 Rancho Cc)rgMC)03a A Pub ) ac heardnL? for- -the Sycamore t4eijht5. l'ro eat wr / be oR +he 33eoda -Por -�q 01,4y Council meets ray in the neap- -PutUre , My Concerns- e bov1- this project ore e.xp res� e-d 111 the att;gched le-He-r~ 6nr newspape-r article,' , _ [an +o a Fpas to the CooQc 1 l -1'he Pls n n i 0� tomrvzis5` i +h� s roj t, In .T Urge -the Ciwna i t fo cley? Y. i b e. General Plan P ",ndme-P t req u r re4 +o allow +h lz project �� rvice�cl . Please CowP81 the 4evefoper- +o Cr-ezfe P ,Sorv)efhin� + hat O-arl b� boi l f �v ++!^rout a en mehts or Val-] anf-4cs, WOOIJ welcome 'he Opportunity +° JISCOSS fl r5 ro ect with you , My toiephone nOmber- fs rncic. ed Ls blot-y I-, " Hank" Stoy A tttach mcnts 500 Pacific Summit-Foothill, LLC Invites you to our 3rd community informational meeting for the Sycamore Heights Project (Foothill Blvd @ San Bernardino Rd) L � ��, r� rFs - A�ik•�'y 1H.T?"`cu L-�._ '� .- y.a.4�,tF i,_ .� , S j• a -- 't % .4r• {�C6C444FACii4�l�cC44cTif4TS.CT V, . r r a�. do PucfRrSmnmk Fon+AifE LLC Site Alan Muslradve �_.-.�.-.._._�.-._.. ..._.. .-."..• - SYeinr Hcighrs See the development proposal again, learn how the project design responds to community concerns,and ask any remaining questions. Meeting Location Lions East Community Center 9191 Baseline Road Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 p Date&Time Thursday, August 171h 5:00-7:30 PM nn �- z3--1-7 A-)t 7 fMA� 501 &-Te-q cn ,1 l8 cam �e Nanflinq ComMIs,910 n Fdeg 017 icy o� Ra�c:ho �'acd ��r7�� c'�r�' c�X ��•�` �elolh' �n f? h�' 80(50hec >'AISP&Per c9rt 'alp , fat j �?�U �pP�Yfeb7�' a�� sr�o s �X� SS cry 30`r��T'I�DSC � � u,�; � i G' U �r f 1� �- , � � � , 9 � vrvj fhe p r'qj c.c. , have beenti�urec-) 4hat bt)I W 101, on �F��e s n 9 t V9 rs p+,rrp .C� 'e , Rowever we were ,� n h�� �`�rn e �t.�s� �e��� w h e6r �Or' c�an�M v R i�- vv�'.s` h s�R Il; �t +h ..a a e } m� �l p s Ravv� wd yy W i'+h., n e yeOr. Rnd pause 4 + ) I os f3Gllf P kegt Hid[ so(j) MOj i(:g�: , 17 has' �be Sfa bi I i 'zC SOMC,, Op Our 00 i'f�s, �' �'� ur rec to xLauz, �t V© hiale drips ge11Qr,3fe . ty. This �r�a�er-t WIN e-.Yadcrba+e cx4i+, ns pf-Ohably fhe �vors�~ i�t r~ 1 � t� t60 C Fodth; It ah4 RPcl M s i Cnv9t'ry club Drive, R+ l�al's-r ra ve ll 'c (as WillI bo bd"�;� in fhe ��an MUnify Snd vvho tows how mch traf i� the 1r'ue- ar' a+�j �jj or,ea+p,, with an ly OR9 WAY oil a net flu f,. a i,)� r l� Il t- fu rr'1s can lyr e,uj t r'n dr-r vc rs who wish to -+rrauel ee,1,E;t wr Il have to ins+ia l ly �roee�4c� tiv�st, eYeOO+e a u--- -burn some w he+ry S nj had,,j bae-K C or cut OLjer Ref Ea5thaun j dri'Ver! who v„(-:70t fo enfer fhe deuelcprngnt tvl Il h�ve +o rdcvcrse the prnc�E.r, r filorneless People .q1Mef1'n)L5 WM 0" this P"perty. but brsi !c�t +h►5 t` eCt W x+ not S'4l U e f he pro WOO _ i't Will can� CaLLSe thCSit 1�t�IVl�fk� r Fo re loca+ z +h sty n cteuc.lopc-r",-ar c 'Ter-oc>s about f3 l le'u;af, I���vse leSS , +hey Sh.00 0 coord � Nte with enct,ess +ha-t- can prC)U, fhe fhe �-��- Inc[ assIstg11c ►r�rith n-W- r-,01 hag fh anJ su Strance �hL +-hat these poor IcLst Souls net-,4, urge you + c3&t- lleF ,3+jue Votes' Ors +h} G s pr•gjec-h you have .-PIna I OPProVa f QU*hdrit -PO and r'C2or4ger, re��►in'�c[r Cre'+�era � Pt � j Rm ,ndrnent , 1�Is k� fhc Jeuelo per` clr-eafe 4 P r^qj ect +ba f can pe bo It wit� ja&V am.'-w-d nWnls -zr- valcizu1ces, Thao l your, Slncerely� e n t /4, 1 502 IRC, M a- y get _ .new homes . � I as 4 { proposttl C., 'S rorward 1110vC, ' � A�ili�ti 11�etr til� `��i'llt t1Ctr{1�r3�i!'I'tEtlEt fill'!'i'y �` 1tAt11�tilri�ItCh� ira h1%d vel'Y �tJtsd aratl thorrnttih Ql r ...-. ._.... . - wE1uEntal.l oh.but t xtill don't a R/MCNOp#CAaIaAaY A■A plan rt:ttily atii't'e W+til thfiln,' ho to Wild 178-atra died **male said, family ta,iara[n all Sue Vus tEl►t Sluy lfvt,,K otltavi+ the liuvbl- r1Ut+a iaurrE►utuiing l]ac Syra oppivill laa iitit itE"t1�11i►[Yi�i{'ff[i 11101'E1 bin to ow!rtep l kner to kt1i.1wia 4,Hall TM1 and;.r cow o tlt'vt'lopmem. verneki fd1out 111el 'aeeed tralrit: ! P1tt:IM! �0111rltlt-Ynothiil 4nd ow ibro=.y of bitiWilig slit LLC hAa regpuaied to 'toil'' h xltlpc. on the 2v aicros Faav the inw.1- atoy s+a1d Ito 14.;aAlemplat made rtlataura tit. ut the 1.71 tng Ming an pool Owl thu iaattto propaiji.d. allit would trio-iv ytlitly,Alch futind this be Ow-work lx�ltelnarit:duane. nuw dcv�'1uparabirt will ureat.: TASt weak, 1110 Runchu 01- li 111,30 over I'MI}tr#tao a day. viunnnau plonnilla calliaflta• City oflaciall have e104 Won vtated 3.0 on the tluut+` AhUbill ilSoulevard has ithout Itas pixel knuwii an Sycaniare 41000 MOO a tiny mid can viv Heights. ily absorb the additiurial it Ilib The ronliniasion has 111Du, Tilt,prailf-Pt will have it+i+n- nt s l%]Y corniionalit of tik glr cmtrnnea -- With a right rZupet Ila ttae t:i'!y Council for turfs Ili a ad rlgtii turn out allprm"l wlk4�lht!r to 41"Ond for wttaity romone and it►pro the:plierai plait 1.0 allow it de- hlhrt dilOUt atrWO"En lted Hili "lopAi"Ilt on a 1110pe ttlat iv co naitry Club r!wive,city Bill Itreiuter ilu►ti ao pwutnt" C40111 have,uiti. ! 'fiw devefutiet Will t18HEl to Thare wtilt.1umt mt,a'$t�►an btifld a aeries of alopus anti F•ri- hialf a dozen rasidonte ri.t i tralatillt witilm. Muliwodaay d liweting,land of The City C'ullnell wilt hold y ttauwa, tbjtt:t litx y}rtalle. a3tr+i aui lle herti'irtg tm ON aviond- sW[l. "I'll a city U lulei 141d, 'M 1,Fa�l n niaanntiirr l;y ltut reatdetit Himik dtuy auto ateetin*bj .rat(t4d Lit)Cuatla• Ire;ie not.quilt.dons,with his cil nitrrliils)",iHt said. `I'll tin { opprriritlralt, illy Lwdi ro rgliv site lroolaal" u:; 1' 1 fi• - Pnr.I([� 5tlrnrr+it'FCtathA+i_t.{:Is pft70414,n j to rit0d Styrartlaol* 1 Meth?ats.175..at r-Sched awgib►amily h•,.'ftt:d Gti 24 aert#a 503 HOMNS could be, built .��. around the Syramore Inn ; ��!'.hit M�rq�rs veltieular trbl'llc:. '3'l,e:re l:. � ! IWIMUN"SkOnA r'la Out Wit bit of altefl atiutl to. dJvlirt+uJ.1481 toll 7;ur.rto �iull'uel of Ov cdevtlu�ur by r -_�... the city," tm said, '"Pliere+s r111WCeaX�ta t7va�xprteae► u rstlly an.' wily is) 1411,1 unc i triad 10 I)uJlel M; Mill-chcd Wily YJOSW611111y hornta oil the Stay S41e1 the siilu1j, eu• vlwant xsope ktirroulltdhi4+ I"II10v Is1}rii119 W furct,tIriv-the I Fr dKtlletpyl nl1in nn,uiis £•in,11 111f lsu►rlev►rd or Up ton t siart nrray, 011,4111KIi fillet 1I11t Celt Lip Paeff1v Slimttlir-Nuat11111 Club 11trivo .-elite neighbo1% j LI,C jum rerye4eige.11 lu build [itiW ••1,rl•y tc�tttlt tlsi+tti;yir on the 114 riure:, fleas• life traffic. r landm4trk rRHt4l4r4lit hilt 'i'lW itkrlaa;e w Ark tliv nAll. the prajdal rlat'gi i, lllllong Lit Itrallt'e' 'Aillt a rigi11 reri'r: uthor lilis,,y,c, I Ile city'er Ap ill fetid a lirlit tit 1%w4l Ili All. 11nWetl to tutitltd Its Ilttictet] Aatkuy and to prohiltit dIr(•rt 31431 to 41low 4 develupmenI mwelis to)Wd Hill ['r,unlly rl,l It A10110 9114 ttor dhon ;sU clul,i1'rive., ble�ulr►s amid. � purevilr. ''' hs.,ril;he-Etesrr•errlfy is,r "WO VT warkud kills to j110 ty IIW41'tIve itr make ditrr nlitku tt is aultitIlk fit for Fled it doemilt rooldle:t%itle tretilie- Bill,'Si dd Jett lfiuuln, sign. ml Foothill,'he wdii. f Ohl)CGtrr:t}nsc,ngiea a'�i'rirnlrllr V4'hett.e�uritledte stir,tlrt�it, cited CalrimuiliRV 13uv4�trip• ails is tJe1►t rheru +err Ee'rilK iT,e'nt deputy city ptHux ter. tt�r,n plans to saeligli NeilMR , n above tile dov l;opme s voil till l;jaait me) tlulti Country 1;Ii14411 32irr�s4 thu e]ellubhorhood Illilswil 4'leflte]i]1iltlrliirir;W tevt+sttle�rllti 48 ltt-d If]ll, is eulicernwl mijign !lull ifill of, well tsx a}!riot 11]t refi god trs[f c,grid lead it sigliai'whtrl'l+it icwe't, the"&INty Of hutddilig 01) i3 Pnothill BOUlavArd,lit•suid. olopti. Installing et skill al tilt: U1,r.of his WgRartt Wstiog eiltrillive of The propahad is tte"l(41111K(111 the ltfollt:, deV0101]metlt Would be,"tars 4dluK he's had to sper,tl closit et]the cxibtirIg stlxlibl tltnWartds of dWlariy ter rp- att[l toile+JLGB!CO tllsl tutaib Plume.e]d r#u ltfllltitir by lei► reallaiwil stmet and n3Kr1r1i,' Bloom said. Slewrt] Auld there would Aib W lsrtpinu►U,1}silc ilu he a wri"of sfnpeei;and I,e• c.'ucletilollga*amistant city talt,ing Wa116,whieh wIll bo ailltfile3err, ad dud tepee that r:wviewesti by ger3lrclilileld portiolt ill'Foothill boule] e'ltkt►iaflra, ttrratildiisout the Yard h ui ttbom 22,0(10 tt'lim cde3vt+ItlE>sr,urlt. a dry and Van MiNly ithmfjr r f on t110 "01tch ei)cd tot the tile,Addir.imsal irlFry. project by Fouthill doll•• 'Ttlur nlisce,i;t:e�piloi,is thRl o Ire aril, Mom sickle, thore tiew tripi per dily tr omi. 101tild be et re+titining weal 1,4Gt► iidw ►oluclt:se in fl,u closer ru tho l rldge W11h area, ha mid. In addithitl, u natu141 Ire•eteie eint"110. 110t 411 tluiee; trips will HIV. The ittirth end of the clove!• vor et-OW Bllmd flaw, L•'s3pi- opment would flaw t1 tic lies need s4tttl. of r'etitdnllm ue►lle, whiell 't'Ite, 1<141111it1[t uuirnis r t►•tluld ins i•evdowed 1iy"U., a}qit aVilll•m iw 014 e)&m r.t Imimiciii onkinart'it,Rgain.t telly NO thori au i,l tilt-43ty tltt. houbinK tim n01 es to help 1%,1 fur total eidirsro"i,i. piatntrslid fitatillize"le hill- stay said he ►elides ol: tootle'ire"Id• meetfilg (mv-erti ogle witis Tht, deveiupinlerlt wt,Wd 0"Urwil tr,artiliels !1c*filet+ et;3ei is 11111"mare dieter U40 Therl tee ve,;Cr his c ilunrel�. li leis pvC rday, W11101 Coll- 'flit) ietit11t1111A Canititly t-Ctµil}%py; a oll rswew ac 7 p,tit.let mmoo [ttltrik every}lody ii et,si• Olvtc CvnLvr 1]rivo ill 1tn17 mmiai apntit t1ie3 IrrL`ierfltliret ►:flu C4W1l1nJ3 rtil, 504 ONCE PRISTINE RED HILL COMMUNITY TO ABSORB 175 CONDOS 350 MORE Ln EHICLES ON STEEP SLOPES .? By Sherm Goldstein ing special slope. With three or four-story structures handling and closer to Foothill Boulevard, 175 units approval by the would fit at the bottom of the hill, away city council in from the slope. Such designs are common A. order to amend on thoroughfares throughout Southern the city`s gen- California- in Anaheim, La Verne, and Brea, eral plan, which for example. prohibited the But concerned citizens are also upset development about the impact on traffic_ At least 350 w _ of slopes great- more cars will be dumped onto Foothill er than 30% Boulevard between Grove and the Syc- grade. "The amore Inn. The intersection of Foothill general plan Boulevard and Grove is problematic, espe- Lformere Rancho Cucamonga resident took so much time and money to develop, cially during rush hour. There will only be and former e ekedected official Hank oustoy looks with so much community input; why even one way in and out of the development, out from his balcony at the gorgeous view HAVE a general plan if you're going to between the Sycamore Inn and Red Hill ruined the Cucamonga Valley. That view will 5 keep amending it?" laments Stoy. Country Club Drive. That entry will be most ruined if the city council signs off on a In 2006, a similar proposal came before easily accessible for vehicles heading west unit condominjum project by Pacific Sum m-- mit-Foothill LAC, awned` iy f2.Y. Properties the city council. Council members Diane on Foothill. Vehicles traveling east on Foot- Williams and Rex Gutierrez voted against hill coming from Upland will be met with a of Alhambra. The project wraps around the it, but it still passed. The failing economy cement median, so they will have to make Sycamore Inn, and encroaches up the last and recession then hit, and the project was a u-turn farther down Foothill and come remaining undevelope' slope of historic scuttled. Gutierrez is off the council. Ob- back. Red Hill. servers are wondering how Ms. Williams The entire project does nothing for Ran- It's_not the residgnts'_spectacular,view will vote this time around. Her colleagues, cho Cucamonga other than decrease the that irks the Red Hill community. It is the Mayor Dennis Michael, and councilmen quality of life, believes Hank Stoy. "Devel- instability of the slopes when trees are Sam Spagnolo and Bill Alexander, voted for opment isn't progress," says Stoy, "it's just removed arrd the rains come. Slopes the project in 2006. Will they continue to more of the same-- traffic, pollution, and have given way in the past, and trees and alter the city s landscape? loss of Red Hills character." structures have slid down. Homeowners A possible solution would be to approve like Stoy ask, why tempt fate? Most of the project, but keep condos off the steep Gra pet! r'Pe f re�5.5' the slope's grade is 30% or more, requir- May/,T-00e za 17 4)17 WALTON 874 N. loth Ave. a Upland,California 91786 a (909)532-2023 a notlaw 17@msn.com October 4,2017 City Council c/o Thomas Grahn, Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Dr. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Dear Mayor Michael and Council Members: I am a local wildlife biologist who is concerned about the loss of native California vegetative communities and open space in our foothill communities. Below I am adding some information to my original comments discussed in my August 23,2017, letter regarding the Sycamore Heights Project being proposed by the applicant Pacific Summit Foothill.LLC. A more comprehensive Environmental Impact Report should be completed before going forward with this project. Cucamonga has a treasure of native riparian habitat and open space located on this proposed project site that is an oasis to urban sprawl and wildlife. Your biological consultants say that this area is not significant, but that is all relative. In the fragmented habitat of southern California, every possible piece of native habitat can be very significant to the survival of native species, especially animals like birds, bats,and insect pollinators that can fly and use such areas. Please check the following link to an article that discusses how one native tree,like an oak tree, can help increase the entire biodiversity of an urban area. bZ://e360.yale.edu/features/urban nature how to foster biodiversiq in worlds cities The two biological surveys conducted for this project were very limited and more biological surveys, such as bat surveys, should be conducted to get a true idea of the biological diversity of the project site. I am certain that there are many more than the fourteen animal species listed in the two biological surveys conducted on this site. For example, last Friday night September 291h after eating dinner at the Sycamore Inn, I detected a bat with my Anabat II bat detector feeding as it flew south from the project site towards the northwest end of the inn's parking lot. Riparian and woodland areas are considered very important conservation areas, especially for bats (Miner and Stokes 2005),so this site should be surveyed for bats before project plans are finalized. Some of the twenty-four bat species found in this region could be utilizing trees and buildings on this site as roosts. Many of these bat species, like the western red bat,are also California Species of Special Concern. I am now in touch with a bat biologist who will be providing me with some methods of how to remove trees while minimizing bat fatalities and I will be passing that information along 506 shortly. These methods,however, will include avoiding the maternity season of bats which occurs in the spring/summer months from the time pups are born and are then able to fly. Thus, having a qualified biologist survey the area for particular species might help determine which months should be avoided. Methods can include leaving felled branches and trunks of trees overnight so that tree-roosting bats can escape from that fallen roast that night. Humane exclusion methods can be used to remove structure-roosting bats from any buildings with roosts in them. General information on the bat species in your area can be found on the Western Bat Working Group website: http://wbwg.org/wcstem-bat-species/ As I had mentioned before, if the project is approved, I encourage the landscape designer to use more native plants and trees than non-native plants and trees on the project site and preserve some of the remnant native sage scrub species and other plants and trees that were documented on the site in the 2003 and 2017 biological evaluations. Species documented on the site include California buckwheat, California sagebrush, California broom, white sage,dove weed, western sunflower, mule fat, fiddleneck, blue elderberry,coast live oaks, and California sycamores. Please also try harder to protect as many of the native heritage trees as possible. In areas where fire is a high concern,please refer to the lists of fire resistant native plants provided by organizations like the California Native Plant Society (http://www.cnps.org/)and Las Pilitas Nursery(http://www.laspilitas.com/easy/deerfire.htm). If the results of an Environmental Impact Report show that this project will be more detrimental than beneficial to our community, then please do consider having the city purchase this land with a plan to make it into a passive park. Non-profit organizations like the Trust for Public Land (https://www.tpl.orgz) should be able to help you with the process and this area would be a wonderful addition to the public space in our foothill community. Thank you for your time and consideration, and please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Sincerely, Natasha Walton, M.S. Enc. 2 507 Bats in the South Coast Ecoregion: Status, Conservation Issues, and Research Needs' Karen L. Miner2 and Drew C. Stokes3 Abstract California's bat fauna is one of the most diverse in the United States.Of the 25 species of bats in the state,24 have been detected in the south coast ecoregion.Many of these species appear to have experienced population declines in the ecoregion,and iG are officially recognized as sensitive (including one endangered) by wildlife regulatory agencies. Data from recent field survey work conducted by bat researchers were compiled in order to provide a tentative assessment of the current status of bats within the south coast ecoregion.These data suggest that the pallid bat(Antrozous pallidus),Townsend's big-eared bat(Corynorhinus townsendii), and California leaf-nosed bat(Macrotus californicus) have experienced population declines and could be seriously threatened, particularly at lower elevations. This may also be true for some of the region's other bat species,such as the western red bat(Lasiurus blossevillh),but additional research is needed.The Yuma myotis(Myotisyumanensis),Mexican free-tailed bat (Tadarida brasiliensis),and big brown bat(Eptesicus fuscus)were frequently encountered in both Krutzsch's (1948) and recent field inventories, so they appear to remain relatively common at this time.The major threat to bats in the ecoregion is the loss of habitat(especially �j riparian and oak woodland habitats) due to urban expansion as well as extermination or disturbance of bat colonies. Characterization of species-specific distribution and seasonal habitat use patterns is needed so that land managers can address both foraging and roosting habitat requirements from a landscape perspective. Research is also needed regarding the effects of urbanization, insect control, tree/snag management,bat exclusions, mute closures, and recreational activities,specifically rock-climbing,on bat populations. Key words:bat conservation,Chiroptera,habitat loss,population status,species diversity Introduction California has the fourth highest diversity of bat species in the United States, following Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas, with 25 species representing three families. Twenty-four of these species occur in the south coast ecoregion of the state, indicating the importance of the region to bat diversity. Over two-thirds of the region's bat species are officially recognized as sensitive by the California Department of Fish and Game, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and/or Federal land management agencies at this time (gable 1). The California Department of Fish and Game (B. Bolster pers. comm.) reports that four additional species have been proposed to become California Species of Special Concern in the latest draft of "Mammal Species of Special Concern in California"(CSC* in table 1). An abbreviated version of this paper was presented at Planning for Biodiversity:Bringing Research and Management Together,a Symposium for the California South Coast Ecoregion,February 29-March 2,2000,California State Polytechnic University,Pomona,CA. 2 California Department of Parks and Recreation,Southem Service Center,8885 Rio San Diego Drive, Suite 270,San Diego,CA 92108(e-mail:kminer@parks.ca.gov) 3 U.S.Geological Survey,Biological Resource Division,Western Ecological Research Center:San Diego Field Station,4165 Spruancc Road,Suite 200,San Diego,Cal ifomia 92101 (e-mail: dstokes@usgs.gov) USDA Forest Service Gen.Tech.Rep.PSW-GTR-195.2005. 211 508 Bats in the South Coast Ecoregi on—MI nor and Stokes Table 1—Bats of California and their legal status. All except Myotis occultus have been previously documented in the south coast ecoregion. Famfl 1 Scientific name' Common name Legal status' Phyllostomatidae American leaf-nosed bats Macrolus californicus California leaf-nosed bat CSC,FSS,BLM Choeron),cteris nnexicana Mexican long-tongued bat CSC Leplo►nycteris curasoae yerbabuenae Lesser long-nosed bat FE-' Vespertilionidae Mouse-eared bats Myotis lucif igus Little brown bat none Myotis occultus Arizona myotis CSC,BLM Myotis yumanensis Yuma myotis FSC,BLM Myotis velifer Cave myotis CSC,BLM-' Myotis evotis Long-eared myotis FSC,BLM Myotis ihysanodes Fringed myotis FSC,CSC*,BLM Myolis Volans Long-legged myotis FSC,CSC*,BLM Myotis californicus California myotis none Myotis ciliolabrum Small-footed myotis FSC,BLM Lasionycteris noctivagans Silver-haired bat none Pipistrellus hesperus Western pipistrelle none Eplesicus fuscus Big brown bat none Lasiurus blossevillii Red bat CSC*,FSS Lasiurus xanthinus Western yellow bat CSC* Lasiurus cinereus Hoary bat none Euderma moculatum Spatted bat CSC,FSC,BLM Cotytorhinus lownsendii Townsend's big-eared bat CSC,FSC,FSS,BLM Antrozous pollidus Pallid bat CSC,FSS,BLM Molossidae Free-tailed bats Tadarida brasiliensis Mexican free-tailed bat none Nyctinomops femorosaccus Pocketed free-tailed bat CSC Nyetinoirnops macrotis Big free-tailed bat CSC Eunnops pero[is californicus Western mastiff bat CSC,FSC,BLM Scientific names after Koopman (1993), with the exception of Cary,norhinus townsendii (Frost and Timm 1992, Tumlison and Douglas 1992), Lasiurus blossevillii, and L. xanddrnus(Baker and others 1988,Morales and Bickham 1995). 2 Legal status categories include Federal Endangered (FE), Federal Species of Concern [FSC), California Species of Special Concern (CSC), Forest Service Sensitive (FSS), and Bureau of Land Management Sensitive (BLM). Source: Calif. Dept. or Fish and Game, Special Animals List of July 2002 and species proposed to become California Species of Special Concern(CSC",DFG—B.Bolster ers.comm.) Currently known in the state from only two or three recent public health records from urban areas in the ecoregion(Constantine 1998). Despite the high diversity and sensitivity of bats in the south coast ecoregion, this group of mammals has been largely ignored during environmental review of proposed projects and in recent multi-species planning efforts. This is primarily due to the lack of information on the distribution, seasonal habitat associations, and population status of bat fauna. The purpose of this paper is to bring together recent bat inventories, in order to attempt a preliminary assessment of population status and research needs for this ecologically important group of mammals in the south coast ecoregion of California. 212 USDA Forest Service Gen.Tech.Rep.PSW-GTR-195.2005. � 20� � f509 E3,yocf Ca ra be Pj oc ho Cc3cqMon3j) CA 9 ( 73O COMM ISS400 c7Uq) q3 OBLS-S- Rancho Cua-3-1monja n U� u IS cos e one- year EX+pujSjOvj re7ueo,*fecj -Puny- 4hc le-4 +he- OPPO,5ition +C> +hi's projc-c+ t Q 20 17 , a Ma p t-e-,s evi--f-a 1-jo 61),s +o, he h5xm t7 C 0,m iv, S-S io n a o (21 120 u a C, I av)ct Copies 0� +W6 letters -T wro+e ai-c- bdiicf nov+-h-ing pri M(Jch has fqol-�- becil rfisKe,5 no ..,5,e�C5e +c me , Cieuelopev C cj u a-f is lac f- g),s i n -3 Y 8 a l-s I'S a U-e-p le C-f l'or'l c)f +he inuOluecl in Y deuelopfil'y +his propev�tyl & 1c)W au-8 some c,p 4- he COOSiderable concz�rn_� we pe4 It r-c-5i8entS Contioue -tO slop& (�eoer-al Plan Rwendnient Was -3PNOUC4 to peu-mi-f deverlopmaot C- - +he, 31ppes / n a I W1, b i cl -f ii b u 6' 1 d o n h e m is p e v--F e c t Is"a-�e we e f. Put beego'se- 0-� +6e &-p Red Hill Soy I me t -he (n rvi b-3 ij ic m e n 1,5 Save Way Wi-HMI a year, So - ca i n .the oY S on +he P -6PC ­ ­Y— O 0� Recl Hill ) ancl a- +v-Cv1e0CjO()_S L/Olume 0-� ma-f-ev- -P-/C)-VVS +h ra L)� h f-h GA iv) 'vv h 0, p r'O p O's ed deve/Cp n(s o n (Y _P&r- toefit- "ISOe-S , Other O-F P,ed i , -rrq f�1'e-, _1 Z C o u Id be ev)er-,3fz_._.Cj vv Y, uc on hea U I' ly - trave je-c( Foo-1-6 , i I 1300le V(:30d. Wi+h on one-- en in arld Ouf-, numerools U -4urn's ononly rijilt +Ur(LS +-+b r-O(j,? D Fo c -fie -Sa�_e a z cl"�15 Rai JAI- it woo n ortase. 13L)-i- P6 m I tija+ ion ro eds u res are be. C1 1.red Op _i_ i)e (�,2vJlope s f 2 H r8,si m*s hai/a c-1-1jc4 6`., SAC +hL, P la P () 1 015 3-cc-v I C e�� +h e P_y f-C­ 0,S A 0 _�jjat ally ptans sohmitted -PLL) i- S-i-af.� +6 +6 prevte)(�s aetior),� 0 � +be, planni I 6+�Nct ty C1C"11?_Oi_fv1 4 h a u- cc>n Ce r as mould C, off cx+evvt' ;vice O-C i Y) O-ft3ch m C- 0+S Exhibit D 510 I ILL_v4.1V CU 8s6q Ca i le Cara be AUG 3 71,2017 Rancho OoCaM6n Ch q1736 CITY CLERK C<j cq) cl,31 — o SS-U- nire c-_f 0 1- C17Y OF RANCHO CuCAMONGA Rojo,0- -31j20 )7 i+y o; RaPulfio 12c)CaMD EC I WiSh +,n appedi +be4eo_iS 16 o,5 rn ad y file P 18 P7 0 1 V7�I (�omaj, i6sion 8 et I of 0,7 C'St Z3 , L617) r,e +o h e G i t c W w6014 ewce,84 the 30­-PwJ- he' ht ,A holi4in,7's on Slopes. hj1oWjj,7 +bese +o be boil+ VV6014 ne -�iueiy jmpacf -fhE! uieW Prom Thd developev- ,,,-bou he requlre� +0 comply wi+h -+he r&>quiremenfs 0� +be Deuelop(ment Dade: Enviroyalenfql_ 9n es+imste4 aciJifi,60al j0q ?_ vehicle f-rIPS W/oWd be dqneracQ alre_8dy heguiiy- -t(,,5V' (5je4 Poofiiill lwlevarc , X+ w6old prob lern,5 af probably -Me worst- in+er-,sec+ion 1j? -�be Cj'+y-- F--00fhilj i5nd Red Hill Coon-1-t-y 0 ' b Prive , wt'-m n c- on iy ogre n-�r,30celexlt On4 +Ijrns on �,v i.i? ar)T,60- fl?e num8ro � u-toms -requires( 6#0 n o m H, 11 i,5 bp o n 4 10r) wedsov,-e�5 -grcj- beikg �-equweJ c-P +he- Jeuetoper, T Me- li'mPoet on wiWii-pe- Nsred +a I I hawk �a p rpfec fe,( S pec)I es-) �req u e 0)f i y Seen 0 P PC-cj is no'- e'Ven amen- -'coed In the- bioiojica I resources s-urvey, 3, Q i Hg b i'+a-t Poe-servation of ri pariGn habt'i-at is a ;';I -I-he Ci`fys C-e-Pet-al PI-30 6Pch'eyRC -8 ,I)� Bj* fhi,!� project wo(jI4 u 0+ &9 117 free Removal Permi't Tb;5 Pro* at wo __1cT_T-e require removinag 180 free's ' -6 VeSeruc f-he a �eas a5fheic! and ahara0re rioore w, vtorc ireessbcold be sued , �-jnj irc4' _.5,orvc- pirld 'j is 4jp�,'cL)tt- 4-o belieue +ha+ ��he n,-,5 ' b ' - y J i n c� 51,ville ne's-f- i' n f-�e trees, stated Por remoua 1, _rnp- h requ - 0 impae_--�s oP- fti5 pNzj',��_cf- need +o be. niorg A) Ily inve,-,fi_�jfeij avi4 The ooid b P oecd +6 el o h C -POI-,1272�S- 1',' :17tt--7C-be1J tO P9_� Xli'nj filtachment 511 e,TCCT calle, ("Ncmdie izancho Mannino Commisslorl cj+Y 4 Qaflaho Oocclmof) a naoor% nboot +be pvopose� below gnJ- in +he stfoehe�-1 0c>W,5Paf.)er + ' Perkyllf. cleve)k Tho,5e us I U h 1 1-0 ryl --he P 'Zi have e,,c,,g c)re 4 ha boild itj� on ftes 1 d t tad Perpec+, /V �ioWe�,ef* We Were, SaMe, on ,% * Al i 1� 1,11� Ye C)� +be '�'Jclpe'q .qave W W '-f h , 17 n il) V " -f) H-- year, ej tecause 4 +hc! 'u (715fiabilf'+Y 6-r- ke4 H * 0 "so ;e3ok"n.'I has� 1)ee- ej to I , I Y7 re 9 u r, ,134a b I z(& SOW', op Our Uni lh� Vehicle eeN,t?rc7fLA4 +66 prc)ject will exacierbai.e cdqj4io" at jp,rerSaj-fie ' n +bp C PY - - Foothill 804 Pecl C',1 0 10 t r y C I u b Arrive + I eejj-r 3S C-)' V e f 1 Ic W I, bra anel YAO kPOW 6 how Mcl,;j fra- Pic.- +he Wl'ij anly jv Ong W 4 �how out acQ r�qhl- furyj�v 66Y1 E-xi inc? Who Wl'sh, +0 iraue 1 a'3'sf- Wi I I hav'e -to i+id I ly P -kurf) ,somewhere a()4 hen`! boo-k � m j%� H ; I Igo E48thounj, c1ri'Ver4 who O-t *0 en fhp clevp� t have +r) r-evcrSf,- -tt)e pp�,Oe cr. wmt em thj'4 property , 00- bu;lc4iqq +45 P ' nor, 's Diom olue the 'PI'v -- 1 '-� Will Only Caste', theve T 11e C&Y, S0dcje!L)ej0Pej-- are 'SPrI00-15, CS bout d I leviafiflq they '64000 Coordinatt_- Wife?? encj +hat. (2ap '5 , -thee Shelter 'Is I)d ass-i,5tance with awnf'71 he-alr� d0j "-'iS()e,5 -f-ha+ these poor- need. urge 'you +C) 03-1�t neqQ+j'0e-. vote--'5 on Q11 V I , L .4-hrs- pr-qjev-f you have -Pi'I'lial approval QU*horif i �jot� anci + the 01,ty Clounoil 4hallit rej,ect there7t 4 in c ri I P 90101jrneiltt Map 1C I'0 'Hle rArweloper- bn Pe It I&L�-aut QAV a4lepuhnius- �1 Y 00, red Y) Attachment ;f, ' 512 RESOLUTION NO. 20-42 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TIME EXTENSION DRC2020-00238, A REQUEST TO ALLOW FOR THE FIRST ONE (1) YEAR TIME EXTENSION OF A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (SUBTT16605M) TO SUBDIVIDE 24.19 ACRES INTO 6 PARCELS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF 175 ATTACHED CONDOMINIUM UNITS (SYCAMORE HEIGHTS PROJECT)WITHIN THE MIXED USE (MU) DISTRICT, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, BETWEEN RED HILL COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE AND THE PACIFIC ELECTRIC TRAIL RIGHT-OF-WAY; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34 AN D 41, AN D 0207-112-09 AN D 10. A. Recitals. 1. Pacific Summit-Foothill, LLC filed an application for the extension of the approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605M, 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 October 4, 2017, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 17-099, thereby approving the application subject to specific conditions and time limits. 3. On August 26, 2020, 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 substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on August 26, 2020, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to a 24.19-acre parcel located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trail Right-of- Way; and b. The subject property is within the Mixed Use (MU) District. The site topography is relatively flat in the western portion with slopes in excess of 30 percent in the eastern portion. Elevation grade changes range from a high of 1,375 along the northern property line to a low of 1,245 along the south property line, a grade difference of approximately 130 feet; and 513 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 20-42 TIME EXTENSION 2020-00238 (TENTATIVE MAP SUBTT16605M) PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC August 26, 2020 Page 2 C. The subject property is surrounded by residential condominiums and the Red Hill Country Club to the north within the Low (L) and Medium (M) Residential Districts. To the south are residential and commercial developments within the Mixed Use (MU) and Medium (M) Residential Districts. To the east is the Pacific Electric Trail and residential developments within the Medium (M) Residential District. To the west are residential and commercial developments within the Mixed Use (MU) District; and d. The subdivision of the project site conforms to all applicable development standards of the Mixed Use (MU) District; and e. This application is a request to extend the approval period of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605M for one (1) additional year. The time extension is necessary to provide the applicant time to prepare the project site for grading and construction. The expiration date with the approval of Time Extension DRC2020-00238 will be October 4, 2021. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The previously approved subdivision is consistent with the City's current General Plan and Zoning Code. The approved project is for the subdivision of 24.19 acres of land into 6 parcels for the development of 175 attached condominium units. The approved subdivision is consistent with each of the related City requirements for the project site; and b. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of the previously approved subdivision. The project site is well suited for the approved subdivision as there are similar residential developments north of the site; and C. The previously approved subdivision, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The City Council certified a Mitigated Negative Declaration on October 24, 2017 (State Clearinghouse #2017071010) through Resolutions 17- 098 and 17-099. The project does not raise or create new environmental impacts not already considered in the Mitigated Negative Declaration; and d. The previously approved subdivision complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. The previously approved subdivision complies with all development standards outlined in the Development Code for the development of multi-family residential condominiums within the Mixed Use (MU); and e. The time extension is within the time limits established by State law and local ordinance. State law allows for one (1) year time extensions of tentative maps. 4. The Planning Department staff finds the project to be within the scope of the project covered by a prior Mitigated Negative Declaration certified by City Council on October 4, 2017 (State Clearinghouse #2017071010) by Resolutions 17-098 and 17-099 and does not raise or create new environmental impacts not already considered in the Mitigated Negative Declaration. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3 and 4 above, 514 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 20-42 TIME EXTENSION 2020-00238 (TENTATIVE MAP SUBTT16605M) PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC August 26, 2020 Page 3 this Commission hereby grants a one (1) year time extension. The new expiration date for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605M is October 4, 2021. 6. All applicable Conditions of Approval in Planning Commission Resolution No. 17-76 and City Council Resolution No. 17-099 for SUBTT16605M shall apply to Time Extension DRC2020-00238. 7. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF AUGUST 2020. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Tony Guglielmo, Chairman ATTEST: Anne McIntosh, AICP Secretary I, Anne McIntosh, AICP, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 26th day of August 2020, by the following vote- to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: 515 Conditions of Approval RANCHO CUCAMONGA Community Development Department Project#: DRC2020-00238 Project Name: EDR - Sycamore Heights Location: 8270 FOOTHILL BLVD - 020710117-0000 Project Type: Time Extension ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. Prior to the approval of the street improvement plans for this project, the applicant shall show on the street improvement plans for Red Hill Country Club Drive the existing golf course fencing to be moved to the right of way line. During the course of construction for the proposed storm drain system the existing golf course fencing within the public right of way will be removed. To allow for City crews to allow for maintenance of the storm drain inlet system, the golf course fencing shall be relocated to the street right of way line from the inlet structure to 50-feet east of the inlet structure. This shall include the relocation of the golf course maintenance gate. www.CityofRC.us Printed:8/17/2020 516 Project#: DRC2020-00238 Project Name: EDR - Sycamore Heights Location: 8270 FOOTHILL BLVD - 020710117-0000 Project Type: Time Extension ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 2. 1. Foothill Boulevard between Grove Avenue and Baker Avenue shall be improved in accordance with the conceptual plans on file with the Engineering Services Department to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. a. Existing pavement section (asphalt, base, and subgrade) shall be regraded and reconstructed. b. Parkway improvements, including streetlights, street trees, multi-use bike/pedestrian path, and sidewalks, shall conform to the standards established by the City Engineer. C. Complete parkway improvements on the north side between the Pacific Electric Trail bridge and the adjacent Sycamore Inn property. City has already installed the curb and gutter. Add parkway improvements including sidewalk, street trees, streetlights and curbside drain outlets, per Standard Drawing 107-B or 107-C as needed. d. Provide an physical barrier at the project entrance and at the existing intersection with Red Hill Country Club Drive to prevent left turns. e. Provide 8,600 Lumen LED streetlights. The street lights 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. f. Foothill drive approach shall be specially designed for the inbound right turn and for the outbound right turn,[WJ1] [WJ2] with sidewalk crossing the approach close to perpendicular at the zero curb face. Right-of-way dedication shall encompass the full public sidewalk crossing. Driveway median and accent paving shall not extend into the public right-of-way. g. Entry gates shall conform to the City's Residential Project Gated Entrance design guideline. h. Provide traffic signage and striping as required including left turn and through movement restrictions on Red Hill Country Club Drive at Foothill Boulevard during the peak hours. i. Construct or reconstruct all access ramps on Foothill Boulevard from Grove Avenue to Baker Avenue 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. j. Construct a traffic signal at the intersection of Foothill Boulevard and the realigned Red Hill Country Club Drive. k. Developer shall be eligible to enter into a developer-developer agreement with the City for the future www.CityofRC.us Printed:8/17/2020 517 Page 2 of 3 Project#: DRC2020-00238 Project Name: EDR - Sycamore Heights Location: 8270 FOOTHILL BLVD - 020710117-0000 Project Type: Time Extension ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions reimbursement of a portion of the cost of the improvements required by this condition from the future development of the properties with the following APNs 20701144, 20711220, 20711311-18,[WJ3] 20711323, 20711324, 20712334, on a pro rata basis based on gross land area. 3. 1. Red Hill Country Club Drive shall be improved in accordance with the conceptual plans on file with the Engineering Services Department to the satisfaction of the City Engineer . a. Provide curb and gutter, asphalt pavement, sidewalk, street trees and a drive approach for emergency vehicle access on the east side of the existing street. b. Drive approach for emergency vehicle access on Red Hill Country Club Drive shall be installed per Standard Drawing 105-C, with thicker concrete or reinforced sidewalk to meet Fire District standards. c. Provide a minimum 6-foot curb adjacent sidewalk. Install retaining walls as needed. d. Provide 5800 Lumen HPSV-equivalent LED streetlights along the frontage . The street lights 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. e. Provide traffic signage and striping as required. www.CityofRC.us Printed:8/17/2020 518 Page 3 of 3 Planning Department Statement of Agreement and Acceptance of Conditions of Approval for Time Extension DRC2020-00238 I, Chad Stadnicki as applicant for Time Extension DRC2020-00238, hereby state that I am in agreement with and accept the conditions of approval for Time Extension DRC2020-00238, for property located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trail Right-of-Way, APNs: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34 and 41, and 0207- 112-09 and 10, Rancho Cucamonga, California, as adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga on August 26, 2020 and as listed below and attached. Applicant Signature Date Conditions of Approval 1. The applicant shall sign the Statement of Agreement and Acceptance of Conditions of Approval provided by the Planning Department. The signed Statement of Agreement and Acceptance of Conditions of Approval shall be returned to the Planning Department prior to the submittal of grading/construction plans for plan check, request for a business license, and/or commencement of the approved activity. 2. All conditions of approval attached to Resolution of Approval No. 20-42 for Time Extension DRC2020-00238. 519 J0I I CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DATE: August 26, 2020 STAFF REPORT TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Anne McIntosh, AICP, Planning Director INITIATED BY: Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW MODIFICATION DRC2020-00192 - THE NEW HOME COMPANY (LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE OF RESORT PARKWAY, NORTH OF 4T" STREET) - A request to modify an approved 135-unit multi-family development made up entirely of two-bedroom units by adding a third bedroom/flex office for a project site on 5.18 acres of land within Planning Area S-20 in the Village Neighborhood (VN) District of the Empire Lakes Specific Plan, Planning Area 1; APN:0210-102-06. Related Files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20241 and Design Review DRC2018-00784 Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA), the City certified an Environmental Impact Report(EIR) (SCH No. 2015041083) on May 18, 2016, in connection with the City's approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the following action: • Continue Design Review Modification DRC2020-00192 to an unspecified date. PROJECT REVIEW BACKGROUND: On July 22, 2020, the Planning Commission reviewed the applicant's request to modify the entitlement for the subject project. The Commission considered the proposed request and, after considering staff's analysis and recommendation, and comments from the applicant, they directed staff and the applicant to continue working on a solution (or set of solutions) that would be mutually acceptable to the City and the applicant. The Commission continued the public hearing to August 12, 2020. On August 12, 2020, the Commission continued the public hearing to August 26, 2020 to allow staff and the applicant more time to resolve the applicable issues with the proposed modifications to the original entitlement. As that process is still ongoing and additional analysis is required, staff recommends that the Planning Commission continue the review of the request to an unspecified date in the future. 520