Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-01-13 Agenda PacketHistoric Preservation Commission and Planning Commission Agenda January 13, 2021 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: 924 7864 4876 -or- YOU CAN DIAL-IN USING YOUR PHONE UNITED STATES: + 1 (669) 900-6833 Access Code: 924 7864 4876 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 December 9, 2020. C2. Consideration to adopt Special Meeting Minutes of December 21, 2020. D.Public Hearings D1. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18305, MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2020-00217, AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2020-00218 (LOCATED THE WEST SIDE OF HERMOSA AVENUE AT VISTA GROVE STREET) – MANNY BADIOLA – A request for site plan review to subdivide a 4-acre parcel of land into 6 residential lots for the future development of 6 single-family residences within the Very Low (VL) Residential District and the Equestrian Overlay District; APN 1074-201-01 and 02. A Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was prepared for consideration. HPC/PC Agenda – January 13, 2021 Page 2 of 3 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. D2. SGE CONSULTING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS FOR AIR GAS SPECIALTY GAS FACILITY DRC2019-00651 - (LOCATED AT 12550 ARROW ROUTE) - A request to demolish an existing office building and construct a new 18,165 square-foot industrial building/production facility with a 3,490 square-foot office and additional site improvements. The project is located in the General Industrial (GI) zone at 12550 Arrow Route – APN: 0229-031-23. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City’s CEQA guidelines under CEQA Section 15332 – In-Fill Development Projects. D3. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2020-00215 (LOCATED EAST OF INTERSTATE 15, SOUTH OF ARROW ROUTE, NORTH OF 4TH STREET, AND WEST OF THE CITY’S EASTERLY BOUNDARY) – CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA – A proposal to amend the General Plan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga to incorporate a new street network plan within the southeast industrial area of the City that is generally. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 2000061027) on May 19, 2010 in connection with the City’s approval of the City’s 2010 General Plan Update. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, an Addendum to the EIR has been prepared for consideration (Continued from December 9, 2020 public hearing). E. General Business - None 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. For each of the items listed under “PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS”, the public will be provided an opportunity to speak. To address the Planning Commission via Zoom App, click the “Raise Hand” button when the item you wish to comment on is being discussed. On Zoom via phone, you can also raise your hand by pressing *9 when the item you wish to comment on is being discussed. Comments will be limited to 5 minutes per individual. If a large number of individuals wish to speak on an item, the Chairman may limit the time to 3 minutes in order to provide an opportunity for more people to be heard. Speakers will be alerted when their time is up, and no further comments will be permitted. HPC/PC Agenda – January 13, 2021 Page 3 of 3 If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under “PUBLIC COMMENTS.” As an alternative to participating in the meeting, you may submit comments in writing to Elizabeth.Thornhill@cityofrc.us by 12:00pm 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.CityofRC.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, January 7, 2021, seventy-two (72) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive. Historic Preservation Commission and Planning Commission Agenda December 9, 2020 MINUTES Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 The meeting of the Historic Presentation Commission and Planning Commission was held on December 9, 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, City Attorney; Darrelle Field, City Attorney (Temporary); Anne McIntosh, Planning Director; Sean McPherson, Sr. Planner; Dat Tran, Assistant Planner; David Eoff, Sr. Planner; Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive Assistant; Jason Welday, Engineering Director; Robert Ball, Fire Marshall; Mike Smith, Principal Planner; Brian Sandona, Senior Civil Engineer. B. Public Communications Chairman Guglielmo opened for public communications and hearing no comment, closed communications. C. Consent Calendar C1. Consideration to adopt Special Meeting Minutes of November 12, 2020. Motion by Vice Chair Oaxaca, second by Commissioner Williams. Motion carried 5-0 to adopt the minutes as presented. D. Public Hearings D1. KEN’S JAPANESE RESTAURANT - DESIGN REVIEW DRC2019-00985 (LOCATED AT 10006 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD) - TUCKER SCHOEMAN VENTURE FOR KEN’S JAPANESE RESTAURANT - A request to construct a 3,111 square-foot single-story restaurant (Ken's Japanese Restaurant) to replace an existing 2,822 square-foot restaurant building within the Commercial Office (CO) District, Foothill Overlay District – APNS: 1077- 621-26 and -027. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City’s CEQA guidelines under CEQA Section 15303 – New Construction or Conversation of Small Structures. Related File: Conditional Use Permit DRC2020-00347. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION DRC2020-00347 (Located at 10006 Foothill Blvd) - TUCKER SCHOEMAN VENTURE FOR KEN’S JAPANESE RESTAURANT - A request to modify an existing Conditional Use Permit for a Type 47 Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) License for Ken's Japanese Restaurant within the Commercial Office (CO) District, Foothill Overlay District - APNS: 1077-621-26 and -027. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City’s CEQA guidelines under CEQA Section 15303 – New Construction or Conversation of Small Structures. Related File: Design Review DRC2019-00985. 004 HPC/PC Meeting Minutes –December 9, 2020 Page 1 of 4 Draft Vincent Acuna, Associate Planner, presented Commissioners with a Staff Report and oral presentation (copy on file). Chairman Guglielmo opened the public hearing. Mark Schoeman, Applicant, was available to answer any questions. Commissioner Morales asked what kind of art plan do they have in mind. Mr. Schoeman answered as part of the design review process, they have a suggestion for an architectural screen which will be placed in front of the patio and each individual piece will represent plates of sushi. He said it was very well received by the committee. Italo Pacheco, Resident, asked if the wall in the back (near his house) will go up from 6 ft. to 9 ft. Vincent Acuna responded yes; it is what the applicant is proposing to build a 9ft. wall. With no further public comments. Chairman Guglielmo closed public hearing. All of the Commissioners stated they were impressed with the modern design. Commissioner Williams expressed concern that the parking lot light does will not go into nearby neighbors’ homes and disturb them. Motion by Commissioner Williams, second by Commissioner Morales. Motion carried unanimously, 5-0 vote to adopt Resolutions 20-47 and 20-48. D2. TIME EXTENSION DRC2020-00377 (LOCATED AT 10235 19th STREET) – 10235 ALTA LOMA, LLC – A request to allow for the second one (1) year time extension of a previously approved 6-lot Tentative Tract Map (SUBTT20026) on 1.67 acres of land within the Low (L) Residential District; APN: 1076-121-03. Planning Department staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City’s CEQA Guidelines as a Class 32 (CEQA Guidelines Section 15332) exemption, which covers in-fill development on no more than 5 acres substantially surrounded by urban uses. Vincent Acuna, Associate Planner, presented Commissioners with a Staff Report and oral presentation (copy on file). Chairman Guglielmo opened the public hearing. Peter Chou, Applicant, was available to answer any questions. There were no questions from Commissioners. With no public comments. Chairman Guglielmo closed public hearing. All Commissioners had no additional comments and concurred to move forward with request. Motion by Commissioner Williams, second by Vice Chair Oaxaca. Motion carried unanimously, 5-0 vote to adopt Resolutions 20-46. 005 HPC/PC Meeting Minutes –December 9, 2020 Page 1 of 4 Draft D3. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2020-00215 (LOCATED EAST OF INTERSTATE 15, SOUTH OF ARROW ROUTE, NORTH OF 4TH STREET, AND WEST OF THE CITY’S EASTERLY BOUNDARY) – CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA – A proposal to amend the 2010 General Plan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga to incorporate a new street network plan within the southeast industrial area of the City. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 2000061027) on May 19, 2010 in connection with the City’s approval of the City’s 2010 General Plan Update. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, an Addendum to the EIR has been prepared for consideration. (Continued from November 12, 2020 public hearing) Sean McPherson, Senior Planner, presented Commissioners with a Staff Report and oral presentation (copy on file). Chairman Guglielmo asked the Commission if there were any questions for Staff on their Staff Report. Commissioner Morales asked if Staff did everything possible to find resolutions to some of the concerns raised to this point. Sean McPherson answered that ongoing positive dialog continues. He said staff is listening to their concerns and in some cases listening to their recommendations from some of the stakeholders to build towards world class industrial neighborhood. Anne McIntosh, Planning Director, added our goal was not to resolve every single site related issue with General Plan Amendment but to the extent we can hear from stakeholders what their operational concerns will be. She said having site specific conversations to see if we can address any concerns. Commissioner Dopp stated the one site specific question with Edison map on the southern half of the SEIQ. He knows Edison’s big concern is protruding their property. He asked what it looked like with Edison in terms of give and take. Jason Welday, Engineering Director, responded that they had a very good dialog with Edison during site tour. Their concern is the main road in blue would impact their buildable area for their plans for a center. He said they had a discussion to make sure their operations are not being impacted. It’s still an ongoing conversation but in the end, the road that is now showing in blue, if it was a public road it would preclude their plans for that area. He said the lines in red we continue to have conversations and work out the details. Commissioner Dopp stated going through the process with this General Plan Amendment, asked what does it look like on a staff level in terms of recommendation with some of these developers who seeks to get rid of one or two roads and change some alignments depending on how they plan their projects moving forward. Anne McIntosh reiterated; how would we negotiate the General Plan policy with the specific site planning that needs to be done. She said we don’t feel like we are done having those conversations and will continue. Still working through it with them. Chairman Guglielmo asked the proposed road off Etiwanda and Napa, what is it. 006 HPC/PC Meeting Minutes –December 9, 2020 Page 1 of 4 Draft Jason Welday, explained we are in the process of designing and moving forward with Etiwanda grade separation and the frontage of the parcel just north of Etiwanda becomes blocked by walls for the bridge and that would be the road that would provide public street access for that parcel. With no more questions by Commissioners, Chairman Guglielmo opened the public hearing. The following persons commented on the project recommending denying and/or to continue Item D3: John Shardlow, Gresham Savage; Mark Rothenberg, speaker on behalf of CMC Steel; Paige Gosney, Represent CMC; Jonathan Sacks, GenOn Sr. V.P.; Chuck Buquet, GenOn Contractor; Robert Evans, NAIOP and Mike Condon. For the record, it is noted that the following correspondences were received after the preparation of the agenda packet and the following general concerns are noted. The actual correspondence could be referred to for details: • Letter from Paige Gosney of Gresham, Savage, Nolan & Tilden Attorney at Law, requesting to continue Item D3. • Letter from Virginia Loufek, SCE Corporate Real Estate, requesting to defer consideration of Item D3. • Comments received from Jonathan Shardlow of Gresham, Savage, Nolan & Tilden, Attorney at Law, requesting to continuate Item D3. • Letter from Robert Evans, Executive Director NAIOP, requesting to continue Item D3. With no further public comments. Chairman Guglielmo closed public hearing. Vice Chair Oaxaca expressed to caution everyone to step back to what the visuals are. He said think about what the problems are we are trying to solve here and what the future looks like for the city. He would like to hear from staff clarity regarding conditional use permits. Anne McIntosh explained as we have been meeting with people daily not knowing each day how far along we would get in the conversation. She said we believe the Commission could make a recommendation to Council to endorse the concept of the road network with the caveat we are continuing to talk to the property owners about specific locations that would be resolved before it gets to the Council. She said it’s really up to the Commission who does have an obligation and authority to make sure the General Plan policies are adequate and feel that the comments from stakeholders are compelling, that might be the direction to go. She said regarding the CUP and its uses, it would be part of the code changes we are looking at. It’s not before you tonight regarding the General Plan Amendment, but any comments the stakeholders have about either beneficial changes we can make to the codes to remove barriers or changes to the development standards will be considered as we move forward with the code update. Nick Ghirelli, City Attorney, mentioned part of this is that no one from the City can make any commitment that there will never be any changes to the land uses or zoning regulations that apply to any zone in the city. He is not saying that to suggest that staff is planning to make any of those changes, just saying that nobody can ever make that commitment indefinitely. Commissioner Morales stated this is a planning process for improving access to various properties and internal traffic circulation, public safety services access and responsiveness to southeast industrial quadrant and it can facilitate a variety of industrial users. He said it sets forth strategy for addressing 007 HPC/PC Meeting Minutes –December 9, 2020 Page 1 of 4 Draft infrastructure needs for circulation within the city. At this point the impacts on the road network requires the city amend the General Plan. He expressed it’s important that we do this. Commissioner Dopp stated to some extent there seems to be a great deal of consensus that this is something that needs to happen in terms of finding ways to open up whether it’s for traffic reason or property value. He said if there is still a lot to negotiate that needs to be done, maybe it is best to wait to move forward. Commissioner Williams stated she agrees with stakeholders who have made some good points tonight. She said the stakeholders have come forth with creative ideas that maybe staff did not know what they had in mind. She does not believe there is a hurry and suggested to continue it until after the holidays and have it in January. Chairman Guglielmo asked if Anne McIntosh could bring her input about continuing this item. Anne McIntosh responded if that is the consensus of the Commission and with the holidays coming up, we would need some time for a continued hearing. She recommends it would be helpful to hear the endorsement of the concept, although reluctant to set a specific date. Chairman Guglielmo stated he is worried the stakeholders feel they have not had enough of an opportunity to vent their concerns. He said if there can be an opportunity to give them more time for discussion and their vision. Vice chair Oaxaca stated if we are moving forward to continue this item, he would like to highlight the time be used wisely. He said everybody is not going to get to walk away with everything they wanted. He expressed this is something significant and not to be taken lightly. Commissioner Dopp stated if we are going to continue this, we are doing it with knowledge that staff has already recommended it to us twice. He said the expectation that when it does come up, we would vote on it at that point since staff has worked so hard on it. Commission Morales stated he is not convinced if we continue it again that much more will change. We have seen the changes staff has done already and a lot has been accomplished. He said it’s a process to implement a vision for that southeast corner and do not see how much more will change to make people happy. We should move forward on it tonight. Chairman Guglielmo asked Anne McIntosh if she feels having more time will help to alleviate some concerns stakeholders have or will it be time wasted. Anne McIntosh responded we are making process with those we have talked to. She said we are continuing to consider specific proposals. The ongoing reminder has been that this is the ideal network we would like to see over a long period of time. Adjustments will need to be made as specific projects start to come in. She said whether or not you take action on it tonight, conversations will continue. Motion by Commissioner Dopp, second by Commissioner Williams to re-open public hearing and continue Item D3 to January 13th, 2021, Planning Commission regular meeting. Motion carried 4-1-0. Morales opposed. 008 HPC/PC Meeting Minutes –December 9, 2020 Page 1 of 4 Draft E. General Business - None F. Director Announcements - None G. Commission Announcements - None H. Workshop - None I. Adjournment Motion by Vice Chair Oaxaca, second by Commissioner Williams to adjourn the meeting; motion carried unanimously, 5-0 vote. Meeting was adjourned at 9:00pm. Respectfully submitted, ________________________ Elizabeth Thornhill Executive Assistant, Planning Department Approved: 009 Historic Preservation Commission and Planning Commission SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA December 21, 2020 MINUTES Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 The meeting of the Historic Presentation Commission and Planning Commission was held on December 21, 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: Darrelle Field, City Attorney; Anne McIntosh, Planning Director; Dat Tran, Assistant Planner; David Eoff, Sr. Planner; Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive Assistant; Jason Welday, Engineering Director; Mike Smith, Principal Planner; Matt Burris, Deputy City Manager; Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner. B. Public Communications Chairman Guglielmo opened the public communications. Hearing no one, closed public communications. C. Consent Calendar - None D. Public Hearings - None E. General Business E1. General Plan Update: Recommended Land Use and Community Design Strategy. Matt Burris, Deputy City Manager, made a presentation regarding the proposed Preferred General Plan Land Use Strategy – the next step in the PlanRC General Plan update process. This strategy is the result of months of community outreach efforts in which community members expressed their thoughts about the Vision for the City over the next 20 years. Three land use scenarios were developed for public review, and the most favorable elements of each were then compiled into one proposed plan. The Commissioners discussed the proposed strategy and endorsed it. They commented that this does a great job of reflecting what we heard from the community and is a viable framework for future planning and development efforts. Looking forward to working on the General Plan document as it comes together in the Winter/Spring 2021. Chairman Guglielmo asked for public comment. No comments were received. 010 HPC/PC Special Meeting Minutes – December 21, 2020 Page 2 of 2 Draft F. Director Announcements Anne McIntosh wished everyone a wonderful holiday! Next meeting will be January 13, 2021. G. Commission Announcements Commissioner Williams mentioned an article in the Daily Bulletin about the City of Corona purchasing 292 acres of land to protect from development. 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 8:17pm. Respectfully submitted, ________________________ Elizabeth Thornhill Executive Assistant, Planning Department Approved: 011 STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18305, MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2020- 00217, AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2020-00218 – MANNY BADIOLA – A request for site plan review to subdivide a 4-acre parcel of land into 6 residential lots for the future development of 6 single-family residences within the Very Low (VL) Residential District and the Equestrian Overlay District on the west side of Hermosa Avenue at Vista Grove Street; APN 1074-201-01 and 02. A Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was prepared for consideration. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the following actions: • Approve Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18305, Minor Exception DRC2020-00217, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2020-00218 through the adoption of the attached Resolutions of Approval with attached standard conditions. Site Description: The 4-acre project site is located on the west side of Hermosa Avenue, at the western terminus of Vista Grove Street. The project site is generally rectangular in shape with a 50-foot-wide strip of land connecting the main project site to Hermosa Avenue. The project site is approximately 630 feet along the north property line, 505 feet along the south property line, 309 feet along the west property line, and 280 feet along the east property line (plus the 50-foot-wide flag). The site generally slopes from north to south, with an elevation change of approximately 29 feet from the north property line (1,932 feet) to the south property line (1,903 feet). An existing single-family residence and accessory structure are located at the southeast corner of the project site. The remainder of the project site is undeveloped and covered with native and non-native grasses and multiple trees. The existing land uses on, and General Plan land use and zoning designations for, the project site and the surrounding properties (relative to the above-noted parcels) are as follows: Land Use General Plan Zoning Site Partially developed with Existing Residence Very Low Very Low (VL) Residential District (.1-2 DU Per Acre) DATE: January 13, 2021 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Anne McIntosh, AICP, Planning Director INITIATED BY: Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner 012 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUBTT18305, ME DRC2020-00217 & TRP DRC2020-00218 – MANNY BADIOLA January 13, 2021 Page 2 North Single-Family Residences Very Low Very Low (VL) Residential District (.1-2 DU Per Acre) South Single-Family Residences Very Low Very Low (VL) Residential District (.1-2 DU Per Acre) East Single-Family Residence Very Low Very Low (VL) Residential District (.1-2 DU Per Acre) West Single-Family Residences Very Low Very Low (VL) Residential District (.1-2 DU Per Acre) ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant proposes to subdivide the 4-acre project site into six (6) lots for the future development of six (6) single-family residences. Each lot complies with the development standards for the Very Low (VL) Residential District. The project includes walls up to 8 feet in height for which the applicant has submitted a Minor Exception application (DRC2020-00218) for the additional wall height. Individual lot areas range between 20,005 square feet and 26,858 square feet, which are over the minimum of 20,000 square feet that is required. The average lot size is 23,843 square feet, over the required 22,500 square foot average lot size. Required Provided Compliant? Lot With 90 Feet Interior Lots/100 Feet Corner Lots Over 90 Feet Interior Lots and 100 Feet Corner Lots Yes Lot Depth 200 Feet Over 200 Feet Yes Lot Area 20,000 Min./22,500 Avg. 20,005 - 26,858 SF 23,843 Avg. Yes Density .1-2 Units per Acre .66 Units per Acre Yes The project site is within the Equestrian Overlay District, which necessitates the installation of a 15-foot wide local feeder trail to provide trail access to the rear yard of each lot and the larger trail network. Accordingly, a 15-foot-wide equestrian trail is proposed to be located adjacent to the south, west, and east property lines of the project site along with a 15-foot- wide trail connection to Hermosa Avenue. The trail will also connect to the existing private trail network to the west. The private equestrian trail will include the required trail access gates with horse step-throughs adjacent to Parcels #1 and #6 along with a 4-inch cover of decomposed granite. Corner cutoffs to aide vehicle navigation are provided adjacent to Parcels #3 and #4 along with vehicle turnarounds at Parcels #1 and #6. Each lot also provides a flat area for a 24-foot by 24-foot flat area for an equestrian corral that is a minimum of 70 from the building pad on the adjacent parcel. B. Minor Exception DRC2020-00217: The applicant submitted a Minor Exception to allow the construction of combination walls (garden walls/open fencing on top of retaining walls) with a maximum calculated height up to 8 feet. The additional wall height is necessary due to a grade change between the project site and the existing single-family residence at 5344 Hermosa, located to the east of the project site. The subject wall will be located along the south property line of the 50-foot-wide flag connecting the project site to Hermosa Avenue and along the east property line of Lot #6. The additional wall height will be most visible from the existing residence to the east. Staff has been in contact with this property owner who has stated that 013 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUBTT18305, ME DRC2020-00217 & TRP DRC2020-00218 – MANNY BADIOLA January 13, 2021 Page 3 they do not want stepped retaining walls or sloped grades along their property line, necessitating the proposed retaining walls. The findings of facts below support the necessary Minor Exception findings, which are required by the City's Development Code: Finding: The Minor Exception is consistent with the General Plan. Fact/s: The General Plan designation of the project site is Very Low (VL) Residential and the zoning of the property is Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan. The Minor Exception does not affect the General Plan designation, zoning designation, or the residential purpose of the project site. Finding: The Minor Exception is compatible with the existing and proposed land uses in the surrounding area. Fact/s: The Minor Exception will not result in a substantially larger house, an increase in lot coverage, an increase in density, or adjustments to the physical lot area of the subject lots. Finding: The proposed exception to the specific development standard(s) is necessary to allow creative design solutions compatible with the desires of the community and/or to accommodate unique site conditions. Fact/s: The proposed walls will be located generally where there are grade differences that warrant retaining walls. The retaining walls are required to construct a property line adjacent equestrian trail and to reduce grading on the adjacent lot. The adjacent property owner has stated that they prefer increased wall heights over slopes on their property. Finding: The granting of the Minor Exception will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district, and will not be detrimental to public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious properties or improvements in the vicinity. Fact/s: The Minor Exception will allow the applicant to construct walls that will provide a flat graded area to construct an equestrian trail adjacent to the property line. The walls will be consistent with the standards and guidelines of the City. C. Tree Removal Permit (DRC2020-00218): The project includes Tree Removal Permit DRC2020-00218 for the removal of 52 trees. An Arborist Report (Laurel F. Everett, Jr., Arborist) was submitted that reviews the health and condition of the 52 onsite trees. The report concludes that based on poor health and improper pruning all the onsite trees are recommended for removal. The project is conditioned to replace the removed trees on a one-for-one basis including replanting the existing eucalyptus windrow; and D. Neighborhood Meeting: A neighborhood meeting was conducted to gather input and comments from the owners of the surrounding properties within 660 feet of the project site. This meeting was held via a Zoom video conference on June 30, 2020. Several property owners from the surrounding community attended. Although none of them had any specific 014 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUBTT18305, ME DRC2020-00217 & TRP DRC2020-00218 – MANNY BADIOLA January 13, 2021 Page 4 objections to the project, there were questions relating to the drainage, equestrian trails, traffic, and wall height. The applicant addressed the questions and there were no additional concerns. E. Trails Advisory Committee: The project was reviewed by the Trails Advisory Committee on August 12, 2020. The Committee raised the following issues related to the proposed private equestrian trails: • That the plans show trail adjacent walls encroaching into the 15-foot-wide trail easement. • That a wider step-through gate design should be used for easier equestrian access. • That the plans should show the double trail access gates at the rear of each lot. • That the proposed wall along the west property line should be replaced with trail fencing with openings to access the existing trail network to the west. The applicant agreed to make the above changes which are reflected in the attached set of plans (Exhibit A). F. Design Review Committee: The project was not required to be reviewed by the Design Review Committee as the project scope does not include the single-family residences on the lots. The house product for the proposed lots will be reviewed by the Committee when it is submitted to the City. G. AB52 Tribal Consultation: Notification in accordance with AB52 was sent on June 11, 2020, to tribal communities from a list of six tribes that have requested notification by the City. Two tribes responded (San Manuel Band of Mission Indians and Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians-Kitz Nation). The San Manuel Band of Mission Indians requested in writing that language be incorporated into the final CEQA document requiring notification if cultural resources are found. The Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians-Kitz Nation requested that mitigation measures be included in the CEQA documents requiring an onsite tribal monitor during earthmoving actives. The CEQA document prepared for the project reflects the requested language/mitigation measures. H. Public Art: The public art provision of the Development Code (Chapter17.124) requires that public art be provided at the design review stage of the project. When the related residences are submitted for review, they will be required to provide art or pay an in-lieu fee of $750 per unit. I. Environmental Assessment: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the Initial Study of the potential environmental impacts of the project was prepared by Ecorp Consulting, Inc. and reviewed by staff. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, it was 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. The mitigation measures will reduce potential impacts to less than significant. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was 015 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUBTT18305, ME DRC2020-00217 & TRP DRC2020-00218 – MANNY BADIOLA January 13, 2021 Page 5 prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. A Mitigation Monitoring Program has also been prepared to ensure implementation of, and compliance with, the mitigation measures for the project. FISCAL IMPACT: The project site currently is assessed an annual property tax. A percentage of this annual tax is shared with the City. The proposed development will increase the value of the project site and the City’s annual share of the property tax will increase accordingly. The project proponent also will be responsible for paying one-time impact fees. These fees are intended to address the increased demand for City services due to the proposed project. The following types of services that these impact fees would support include the following: library services, transportation infrastructure, drainage infrastructure, animal services, police, parks, and community and recreation services. COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: Although a specific current City Council goal does not apply to the application, the project furthers the City’s core value of building and preserving a family-oriented atmosphere. The proposed single-family residential lots will enhance the residential development in the surrounding neighborhood. The project is also consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and the objectives of the Development Code. The General Plan land use designation for the project site is Very Low Residential, and the Development Code zoning designation for the subject property is Low Residential (VL) Residential District. The proposed subdivision will create 6 single-family residential lots consistent with the underlying land use designations and compatible in size and configuration with neighboring residential lots. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing with a regular legal advertisement in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper on date on December 9, 2020, the property was posted on date, and notices were mailed to 86 property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site on date. No comments have been received in response to these notifications. EXHIBITS: Exhibit A - Complete Set of Plans Exhibit B - Trails Advisory Committee staff report dated August 12, 2020, along with TAC Minutes Exhibit C - Initial Study and Mitigation Monitoring Plan Draft Resolution 21-01 of Approval for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18305 Draft Resolution 21-02 of Approval for Minor Exception DRC2020-00217 Draft Resolution 21-03 of Approval for Tree Removal Permit DRC2020-00218 016 GROVEVISTA HERMOSA AVE "A" COURT ST.(P R I V A T E S T R E E T)(P R I V A T E S T R E E T)LOT "A"LOT "A"LOT "A"TRACT MAP NO. 18305INC.SITETECHExhibit A017 GROVEVISTA HERMOSA AVE "A" COURT ST.(P R I V A T E S T R E E T)(P R I V A T E S T R E E T)LOT "A"LOT "A"LOT "A"TRACT MAP NO. 18305INC.SITETECH018 CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLANTRACT NO. 18305RECOMMENDEDDRAWING NO.B.K.M.TRACT NO. 18305CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLANCITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGAJ.B.M.J.B.M.CHECKEDDRAWNDESIGNSHEET1OF4APPROVEDDESCRIPTION OF REVISIONDATECITY(P R I V A T E S T R E E T)(P R I V A T E S T R E E T)019 "A" COURT HERMOSA AVEGROVEVISTAST.(P R I V A T E S T R E E T)(P R I V A T E S T R E E T)LOT "A"LOT "A"LOT "A"RECOMMENDEDDRAWING NO.B.K.M.TRACT NO. 18305CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLANCITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGAJ.B.M.J.B.M.CHECKEDDRAWNDESIGNSHEET2OF4APPROVEDDESCRIPTION OF REVISIONDATECITY020 "A" COURT HERMOSA AVEGROVEVISTAST.(P R I V A T E S T R E E T)(P R I V A T E S T R E E T)LOT "A"LOT "A"LOT "A"RECOMMENDEDDRAWING NO.B.K.M.TRACT NO. 18305FINISH CONTOURSCITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGAJ.B.M.J.B.M.CHECKEDDRAWNDESIGNSHEET3OF4APPROVEDDESCRIPTION OF REVISIONDATECITY021 "A" COURT HERMOSA AVEGROVEVISTAST.(P R I V A T E S T R E E T)(P R I V A T E S T R E E T)LOT "A"LOT "A"LOT "A"RECOMMENDEDDRAWING NO.B.K.M.TRACT NO. 18305CUT/FILL MAPCITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGAJ.B.M.J.B.M.CHECKEDDRAWNDESIGNSHEET4OF4APPROVEDDESCRIPTION OF REVISIONDATECITY022 023 024 025 VISTA HERMOSA AVEGROVE STREET RECOMMENDED DRAWING NO. B.K.M. TRACT NO. 18305 TREE REMOVAL SITE PLAN CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA J.B.M. J.B.M. CHECKED DRAWN DESIGN SHEET 1 OF 1 APPROVEDDESCRIPTION OF REVISION DATE CITY TRACT NO. 18305 TREE REMOVAL SITE PLAN 026 "A" COURT HERMOSA AVEGROVEVISTAST.(P R I V A T E S T R E E T)(P R I V A T E S T R E E T)LOT "A"LOT "A"LOT "A"DRAINAGE AREA=2.78 AC.DRAINAGE AREA=0.35 AC.RECOMMENDEDDRAWING NO.B.K.M.TRACT NO. 18305WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLANCITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGAJ.B.M.J.B.M.CHECKEDDRAWNDESIGNSHEET1OF1APPROVEDDESCRIPTION OF REVISIONDATECITYTRACT MAP NO. 18305027 028 029 030 031 032 033 034 035 036 037 038 039 040 041 TRAILS ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Tabe van der Zwaag August 12, 2020 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18305 – MANNY BADIOLA – A request for site plan review to subdivide a 4-acre parcel of land into 6 residential lots for the future development of 6 single-family residences within the Very Low (VL) Residential District and the Equestrian Overlay District on the west side of Hermosa Avenue at Vista Grove Street; APN 1074-201-01 and 02. Related File: Minor Exception DRC2020-00217, and Tree Removal Permit 2020-00218. A Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was prepared for consideration. Site Characteristics and Background: The 4-acre project site is located on the west side of Hermosa Avenue, at the western terminus of Vista Grove Street. The project site is generally rectangular in shape with a 50-foot-wide strip of land connecting the project site to Hermosa Avenue. The project site is approximately 630 feet along the north property line, 505 feet along the south property line, 309 feet along the west property line, and 280 feet along the east property line (plus the above noted 50-foot-wide strip). The site generally slopes from north to south, with an elevation change of approximately 24 feet from the north property line (1,927 feet) to at the south property line (1,903 feet). There is an existing single-family residence and an accessory structure at the southwest corner of the project site. The remainder of the project site is undeveloped and covered with native and non-native grasses and multiple trees. The existing Land Uses on, and General Plan land use and Zoning designations for, the project site and the surrounding properties (relative to the above-noted lot) are as follows: Land Use General Plan Zoning Site Single-Family Residence Partially Vacant Very Low Very Low (VL) Residential District North Single-Family Residences Very Low Very Low (VL) Residential District South Single-Family Residence Equestrian Facility Very Low Very Low (VL) Residential District East Single-Family Residence Very Low Very Low (VL) Residential District West Single-Family Residences Very Low Very Low (VL) Residential District Project Overview: The applicant is requesting to subdivide the 4-acre project site into 6 lots for the future development of 6 single-family residences. The existing single-family and accessory structure on the project will be demolished with the development of the project site. The proposed lots will be accessed by a private street off of Hermosa Avenue. Each lot complies with the development standards for the Very Low (VL) Residential District. A 6- foot-tall retaining wall with a 5-foot wrought iron fence is required along the south property line of the 50-foot-wide flag due to a grade difference between the project site and an existing single- family lot to the east. The applicant has submitted a Minor Exception application (DRC2020- 00218) for the additional wall height. Exhibit B 042 TRAILS ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMMENTS TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18305 – MANNY BADIOLA August 12, 2020 Page 2 The project site is within the Equestrian Overlay District, which necessitates the installation of a 15-foot wide local feeder trail to provide trail access to the rear yard of each lot and the larger trail network. Accordingly, a proposed 15-foot-wide trail will be located adjacent to the south, west, and east property lines of the project site with a 15-foot-wide trail connection to Hermosa Avenue. The trails will connect to the existing private trail network to the west and will include a 4-inch cover of decomposed granite along with required access gates and equestrian step-throughs. Corner cutoffs to aide vehicle navigation are provided adjacent to Parcels #3 and #4 along with Vehicle turn-arounds at Parcels #1 and #6. Each lot also provides a flat area for a 24-foot by 24- foot flat area for an equestrian corral that is a minimum 70 from the building pad on the adjacent parcel. Staff Comments: Staff is in support of the proposed equestrian trail alignment for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18305, which provides local feeder trail access to the rear yard area of each of the 6 proposed lots, and to the wider equestrian trail system, in conformance with the Trails Implementation Plan. The proposed lots also provide two convenient vehicle turnarounds as well as corner cutoffs to aid vehicle movement. The plans on file show a conceptual location for a 24-foot by 24-foot corral location on each lot that is a minimum 70 feet from a residence on an adjacent lot. Each lot will also include an access gate to the equestrian trail along with the required trail gates, equestrian step-throughs, and 4- inch cover of decomposed granite. A three-foot-wide drainage easement will be provided adjacent to the equestrian trail to convey runoff from each lot. Major Issues: None Secondary Issues: None Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the Trails Advisory Committee approve the proposed equestrian trail design as presented and to recommend approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18305 to the Planning Commission as presented. 043 044 045 DRAFT Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 18305 PROJECT November 2020 Lead Agency: 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91729 Prepared for: Trinity Alliance 10803 Foothill Boulevard Suite 212 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Prepared by: 215 North Fifth Street Redlands, California 92374 Exhibit C 046 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 047 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project November 2020 1-1 Draft MND DRAFT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 18305 PROJECT Lead Agency: City of Rancho Cucamonga Project Proponent: Trinity Alliance Project Location: The Proposed Project is located within the City of Rancho Cucamonga in southwest San Bernardino County. The project site consists of an approximately 4-acre area containing undeveloped land, a single-family home, and detached garage building (APN 1074-201-01,02). The site is located southwest of the intersection of Vista Grove Street and Hermosa Avenue. The project site is approximately 1.5 miles north of the Foothill Freeway (I-210). Project Description: The Project proposes to subdivide the existing 4.0-acre parcel into six single-family residential lots. The development would include extending Vista Grove Street west, across Hermosa Avenue, for approximately 380 feet, which would turn south into a cul-de-sac surrounded by the proposed single-family residences. Construction of the Vista Grove Street extension would result in removal of the San Bernardino County Fire District access gate, which would be replaced just to the west of the road extension. A 15-foot wide equestrian trail easement would be created along the eastern and southern boundaries of the project site, connecting to the existing equestrian trail west of the project site. Access to the equestrian trail would come from the southwest corner of the new Hermosa Avenue and Vista Grove Street intersection. Public Review Period: November 16, 2020 to December 15, 2020 Mitigation Measures Incorporated into the Project to Avoid Significant Effects: Biological Resources BIO-1: Pre-Construction Burrowing Owl Survey: A pre-construction survey for burrowing owls shall be completed within the Project site between 14 and 30 days prior to construction activities in accordance with the CDFW Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (2012). A second pre- construction survey shall be conducted no more than 24 hours prior to the start of construction. If burrowing owls are observed during either of the preconstruction surveys, implementation of additional measures may be necessary to reduce impacts to a level that is less than significant, including seasonal work restrictions, no-work buffers established around active burrows, passive relocation of burrowing owls, and/or a specific mitigation methodology determined in coordination with CDFW. BIO-2: Pre-construction Nesting Bird Survey: If construction or other Project activities are scheduled to occur during the bird breeding season (February through August for raptors and March through August for most migratory bird species), a pre-construction nesting bird survey shall be 048 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Draft MND 1-2 November 2020 (2020-173) conducted by a qualified biologist to ensure that active bird nests will not be disturbed or destroyed. The survey shall be completed no more than three days prior to initial ground disturbance. The nesting bird survey shall include the project site and adjacent areas where Project activities have the potential to affect active nests, either directly or indirectly due to construction activity or noise. If an active nest is identified, a qualified biologist shall establish an appropriate disturbance limit buffer around the nest using flagging or staking. Construction activities shall not occur within any disturbance limit buffer zones until the nest has fledged or has been deemed inactive by the qualified biologist. Cultural Resources CUL-1: If subsurface deposits believed to be cultural or human in origin are discovered during construction, all work must halt within a 60-foot radius of the discovery. A qualified professional archaeologist, meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for prehistoric and historic archaeologist, shall be retained to evaluate the significance of the find, and shall have the authority to modify the no-work radius as appropriate, using professional judgment. The following notifications shall apply, depending on the nature of the find: • If the professional archaeologist determines that the find does not represent a cultural resource, work may resume immediately, and no agency notifications are required. • If the professional archaeologist determines that the find does represent a cultural resource from any time period or cultural affiliation, the archaeologist shall immediately notify the CEQA lead agency, and applicable landowner. The agencies shall consult on a finding of eligibility and implement appropriate treatment measures, if the find is determined to be eligible for inclusion in the NRHP or CRHR. Work may not resume within the no-work radius until the lead agencies, through consultation as appropriate, determine that the site either: 1) is not eligible for the NRHP or CRHR; or 2) that the treatment measures have been completed to their satisfaction. • If the find includes human remains, or remains that are potentially human, the archaeologist shall ensure reasonable protection measures are taken to protect the discovery from disturbance (AB 2641). The archaeologist shall notify the San Bernardino County Coroner (as per § 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code). The provisions of § 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code, § 5097.98 of the California PRC, and AB 2641 will be implemented. If the Coroner determines the remains are Native American and not the result of a crime scene, the Coroner will notify the NAHC, which then will designate a Native American Most Likely Descendant (MLD) for the Project (§ 5097.98 of the PRC). The designated MLD will have 48 hours from the time access to the property is granted to make recommendations concerning treatment of the remains. If the landowner does not agree with the recommendations of the MLD, the NAHC can mediate (§ 5097.94 of the PRC). If no agreement is reached, the landowner must rebury the remains where they will not be further disturbed (§ 5097.98 of the PRC). This will also include either recording the site with the NAHC or the appropriate 049 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Draft MND 1-3 November 2020 (2020-173) information center; using an open space or conservation zoning designation or easement; or recording a reinternment document with the county in which the property is located (AB 2641). Work may not resume within the no-work radius until the lead agencies, through consultation as appropriate, determine that the treatment measures have been completed to their satisfaction. SMBMI CUL-1: In the event that cultural resources are discovered during project activities, all work in the immediate vicinity of the find (within a 60-foot buffer) shall cease and a qualified archaeologist meeting Secretary of Interior standards shall be hired to assess the find. Work on the other portions of the project outside of the buffered area may continue during this assessment period. Additionally, the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians Cultural Resources Department (SMBMI) shall be contacted, as detailed within SMBMI TCR-1, regarding any pre-contact finds and be provided information after the archaeologist makes his/her initial assessment of the nature of the find, so as to provide Tribal input with regards to significance and treatment. SMBMI CUL-2: If significant pre-contact cultural resources, as defined by CEQA (as amended, 2015), are discovered and avoidance cannot be ensured, the archaeologist shall develop a Monitoring and Treatment Plan, the drafts of which shall be provided to SMBMI for review and comment, as detailed within SMBMI TCR-1. The archaeologist shall monitor the remainder of the project and implement the Plan accordingly. SMBMI CUL-3: If human remains or funerary objects are encountered during any activities associated with the project, work in the immediate vicinity (within a 100-foot buffer of the find) shall cease and the County Coroner shall be contacted pursuant to State Health and Safety Code §7050.5 and that code enforced for the duration of the project. Geology and Soils GEO-1: Unanticipated Discovery – Paleontological Resource. If paleontological resources (i.e., fossil remains) are discovered during excavation activities, the contractor will notify the City and cease excavation within 100 feet of the find until a qualified paleontological professional can provide an evaluation of the site. The qualified paleontological professional will evaluate the significance of the find and recommend appropriate measures for the disposition of the site (e.g. fossil recovery, curation, data recovery, and/or monitoring). Construction activities may continue on other parts of the construction site while evaluation and treatment of the paleontological resource takes place. Noise NOI-1: The following best management practices shall be incorporated during Project construction: • In order to reduce construction noise, a temporary noise barrier or enclosure shall be used along the property lines of adjacent residences to break the line of sight between the construction equipment and the adjacent residences. The temporary noise barrier shall 050 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Draft MND 1-4 November 2020 (2020-173) consist of a solid plywood fence and/or flexible sound curtains attached to chain link fencing. • Barriers such as flexible sound control curtains shall be erected around stationary heavy equipment to minimize the amount of noise on the surrounding land uses to the maximum extent feasible during construction. • Construction activities shall be restricted to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday and prohibited at any time on Sunday or a federal holiday. The Project’s improvement and building plans shall specify this requirement. • Equipping of all internal combustion engine-driven equipment with intake and exhaust mufflers that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. • Prohibiting unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines. • Locating stationary noise-generating equipment such as air compressors or portable power generators as far as possible from sensitive receptors. Constructing temporary noise barriers to screen stationary noise-generating equipment when located near adjoining sensitive land uses. • Utilization of "quiet" air compressors and other stationary noise sources where technology exists. • Control of noise from construction workers’ radios to a point where they are not audible at existing residences bordering the Project site. • Notification of all adjacent residences of the construction schedule, in writing, and provide a written schedule of “noisy” construction activities to the adjacent and nearby residences. • Designation of a "disturbance coordinator" who shall be responsible for responding to any complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator shall determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., bad muffler, etc.) and shall require that reasonable measures be implemented to correct the problem. Conspicuously post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site and include it in the notice sent to neighbors regarding the construction schedule. Tribal Cultural Resources Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indian – Kizh Nation (GBMIKN) Mitigation Measures GBMIKN TCR-1: Retain a Native American Monitor/Consultant. The Project Applicant shall be required to retain and compensate for the services of a Tribal monitor/consultant who is both approved by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation Tribal Government and is listed under the NAHC’s Tribal Contact list for the area of the project location. This list is provided by the NAHC. The monitor/consultant will only be present on-site during the construction phases that involve ground disturbing activities. Ground disturbing activities are defined by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation as activities that may include, but are not limited to, pavement removal, pot-holing or auguring, grubbing, tree removals, boring, grading, 051 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Draft MND 1-5 November 2020 (2020-173) excavation, drilling, and trenching, within the project area. The Tribal Monitor/consultant will complete daily monitoring logs that will provide descriptions of the day’s activities, including construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. The on-site monitoring shall end when the project site grading and excavation activities are completed, or when the Tribal Representatives and monitor/consultant have indicated that the site has a low potential for impacting Tribal Cultural Resources. GBMIKN TCR-2: Unanticipated Discovery of Tribal Cultural and Archaeological Resources. Upon discovery of any archaeological resources, cease construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the find until the find can be assessed. All archaeological resources unearthed by project construction activities shall be evaluated by the qualified archaeologist and tribal monitor/consultant approved by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation. If the resources are Native American in origin, the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation shall coordinate with the landowner regarding treatment and curation of these resources. Typically, the Tribe will request reburial or preservation for educational purposes. Work may continue on other parts of the project while evaluation and, if necessary, mitigation takes place (CEQA Guidelines Section15064.5 [f]). If a resource is determined by the qualified archaeologist to constitute a “historical resource” or “unique archaeological resource”, time allotment and funding sufficient to allow for implementation of avoidance measures, or appropriate mitigation, must be available. 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 Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County or the Fowler Museum, if such an institution agrees to accept the material. If no institution accepts the archaeological material, they shall be offered to a local school or historical society in the area for educational purposes. GBMIKN TCR-3: Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains and Associated Funerary Objects. Native American human remains are defined in PRC 5097.98 (d)(1) as an inhumation or cremation, and in any state of decomposition or skeletal completeness. Funerary objects, called associated grave goods in PRC 5097.98, are also to be treated according to this statute. Health and Safety Code 7050.5 dictates that any discoveries of human skeletal material shall be immediately reported to the County Coroner and excavation halted until the coroner has determined the nature of the remains. If the coroner recognizes the human remains to be those of a Native American or has reason to believe that they are those of a Native American, he or she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) and PRC 5097.98 shall be followed. 052 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Draft MND 1-6 November 2020 (2020-173) GBMIKN TCR-4: Resource Assessment & Continuation of Work Protocol. Upon discovery, the tribal and/or archaeological monitor/consultant/consultant will immediately divert work at minimum of 150 feet and place an exclusion zone around the burial. The monitor/consultant(s) will then notify the Tribe, the qualified lead 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 the finds are determined to be Native American, the coroner will notify the NAHC as mandated by state law who will then appoint a Most Likely Descendent (MLD). GBMIKN TCR-5: Kizh-Gabrieleño Procedures for burials and funerary remains. If the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation is designated MLD, the following treatment measures shall be implemented. To the Tribe, the term “human remains” encompasses more than human bones. In ancient as well as historic times, Tribal Traditions included, but were not limited to, the burial of funerary objects with the deceased, and the ceremonial burning of human remains. These remains are to be treated in the same manner as bone fragments that remain intact. Associated funerary objects are objects that, as part of the death rite or ceremony of a culture, are reasonably believed to have been placed with individual human remains either at the time of death or later; other items made exclusively for burial purposes or to contain human remains can also be considered as associated funerary objects. Treatment Measures: • Prior to the continuation of ground disturbing activities, the landowner shall arrange a designated site location within the footprint of the project for the respectful reburial of the human remains and/or ceremonial objects. 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 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 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, documentation shall be taken which includes at a minimum detailed descriptive notes and sketches. Additional types of documentation shall be approved by the Tribe 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 four or more burials, the location is considered a cemetery and a separate treatment plan shall be created. Once complete, a final report of all activities is to be submitted to the Tribe and the NAHC. The Tribe does NOT authorize any scientific study or the utilization of any invasive diagnostics on human remains. • Each occurrence of human remains and associated funerary objects will be stored using opaque cloth bags. All human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects and objects of 053 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Draft MND 1-7 November 2020 (2020-173) cultural patrimony will be removed to a secure container on site if possible. These items should be retained and reburied within six months of recovery. The site of reburial/repatriation shall be on the project site but at a location agreed upon between the Tribe and the landowner at a site to be protected in perpetuity. There shall be no publicity regarding any cultural materials recovered. GBMIKN TCR-6: Professional Standards: Archaeological and Native American monitoring and excavation during construction projects will be consistent with current professional standards. All feasible care to avoid any unnecessary disturbance, physical modification, or separation of human remains and associated funerary objects shall be taken. Principal personnel must meet the Secretary of Interior standards for archaeology and have a minimum of 10 years of experience as a principal investigator working with Native American archaeological sites in southern California. The Qualified Archaeologist shall ensure that all other personnel are appropriately trained and qualified. San Manuel Band of Mission Indians (SMBMI) Mitigation Measures SMBMI TCR-1: The San Manuel Band of Mission Indians Cultural Resources Department (SMBMI) shall be contacted, as detailed in SMBMI CUL-1, of any pre-contact cultural resources discovered during project implementation, and be provided information regarding the nature of the find, so as to provide Tribal input with regards to significance and treatment. Should the find be deemed significant, as defined by CEQA (as amended, 2015), a cultural resources Monitoring and Treatment Plan shall be created by the archaeologist, in coordination with SMBMI, and all subsequent finds shall be subject to this Plan. This Plan shall allow for a monitor to be present that represents SMBMI for the remainder of the project, should SMBMI elect to place a monitor on-site. SMBMI TCR-2: Any and all archaeological/cultural documents created as a part of the project (isolate records, site records, survey reports, testing reports, etc.) shall be supplied to the applicant and Lead Agency for dissemination to SMBMI. The Lead Agency and/or applicant shall, in good faith, consult with SMBMI throughout the life of the project. 054 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Draft MND 1-8 November 2020 (2020-173) THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 055 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Table of Contents i November 2020 (2020-173) CONTENTS Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration – Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project ....................................................... 1 Mitigation Measures Incorporated into the Project to Avoid Significant Effects ....................................................... 2 SECTION 1.0 Background ...................................................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Summary ............................................................................................................................................................ 1-1 1.2 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.3 Surrounding Land Uses/Environmental Setting ................................................................................. 1-2 SECTION 2.0 Project Description ........................................................................................................................................ 2-1 2.1 Project Characteristics .................................................................................................................................. 2-1 2.2 Project Timing ................................................................................................................................................. 2-2 2.3 Regulatory Requirements, Permits, and Approvals .......................................................................... 2-2 2.4 Consultation With California Native American Tribe(s) .................................................................. 2-2 SECTION 3.0 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected and Determination ................................................. 3-1 3.1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected......................................................................................... 3-1 SECTION 4.0 Environmental Checklist and Discussion .............................................................................................. 4-1 4.1 Aesthetics .......................................................................................................................................................... 4-1 4.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources ........................................................................................................ 4-3 4.3 Air Quality ......................................................................................................................................................... 4-6 4.4 Biological Resources ................................................................................................................................... 4-18 4.5 Cultural Resources ....................................................................................................................................... 4-24 4.6 Energy ............................................................................................................................................................... 4-27 4.7 Geology and Soils ........................................................................................................................................ 4-30 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ...................................................................................................................... 4-34 4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ......................................................................................................... 4-39 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality ................................................................................................................. 4-42 4.11 Land Use and Planning .............................................................................................................................. 4-47 4.12 Mineral Resources ........................................................................................................................................ 4-49 4.13 Noise ................................................................................................................................................................. 4-50 4.14 Population and Housing ........................................................................................................................... 4-58 4.15 Public Services ............................................................................................................................................... 4-59 4.16 Recreation ....................................................................................................................................................... 4-61 4.17 Transportation ............................................................................................................................................... 4-62 4.18 Tribal Cultural Resources .......................................................................................................................... 4-65 4.19 Utilities and Service Systems ................................................................................................................... 4-70 4.20 Wildfire ............................................................................................................................................................. 4-75 056 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Table of Contents ii November 2020 (2020-173) 4.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance ..................................................................................................... 4-77 SECTION 5.0 List of Preparers .............................................................................................................................................. 5-1 5.1 City of Rancho Cucamonga ....................................................................................................................... 5-1 5.2 ECORP Consulting, Inc. ................................................................................................................................ 5-1 SECTION 6.0 Bibliography ..................................................................................................................................................... 6-1 SECTION 7.0 List of Appendices ......................................................................................................................................... 7-1 Appendix A – Air Quality/Climate Change Technical Report Appendix B – Biological Resources Assessment Appendix C – Cultural Resources Assessment Memo Appendix D – Noise Impact Assessment LIST OF TABLES Table 1.3-1. Surrounding Zoning and Land Use Designations ........................................................................... 1-2 Table 4.3-1. Unmitigated Construction-Related Emissions (Regional Significance Analysis) ............... 4-11 Table 4.3-2. Construction-Related Emissions (Localized Significance Analysis) ........................................ 4-12 Table 4.3-3. Operational-Related Emissions (Regional Significance Analysis) ........................................... 4-13 Table 4.6-1. Non-Residential Electricity Consumption in San Bernardino County 2014-2018 ............ 4-28 Table 4.6-2. Non-residential Natural Gas Consumption in San Bernardino County 2014-2018 ......... 4-28 Table 4.6-3. Automotive Fuel Consumption in San Bernardino County 2015–2019 ................................ 4-29 Table 4.8-1. Construction-Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions ........................................................................ 4-36 Table 4.8-2. Operational-Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions .......................................................................... 4-37 Table 4.11-1. Surrounding Zoning and Land Use Designations ...................................................................... 4-48 Table 4.13-1. Existing (Baseline) Noise Measurements ....................................................................................... 4-52 Table 4.13-2. Construction Average (dBA) Noise Levels by Receptor Distance and Construction Phase – Unmitigated ...................................................................................................................................................................... 4-53 Table 4.13-3. Vibration Source Amplitudes for Construction Equipment .................................................... 4-56 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Project Vicinity .................................................................................................................................................... 1-3 Figure 2. Project Location .................................................................................................................................................. 1-4 057 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Table of Contents iii November 2020 (2020-173) Figure 3. Project Site Plan ................................................................................................................................................. 2-3 Figure 4. Water Quality Management Plan .............................................................................................................. 4-44 A CRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS AB Assembly Bill AQMP Air Quality Management Plan BMPs Best Management Practices CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model Caltrans California Department of Transportation CARB California Air Resources Board CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CH4 methane CO carbon monoxide CO2 carbon dioxide CO2e carbon dioxide equivalent CO Plan Federal Attainment Plan for Carbon Monoxide CRHR California Register of Historic Places CWA Clean Water Act DTSC Department of Toxic Substances Control EIR Environmental Impact Report EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency FEIR Final Environmental Impact Report FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map GHG Greenhouse Gas LST Localized Significance Threshold MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act MLD Most Likely Descendent MMT Million Metric Tons MND Mitigated Negative Declaration MTCO2e metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent NAHC Native American Heritage Commission ND Negative Declaration NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System N2O nitrous oxide NOx nitrogen oxides NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service NRHP National Register of Historic Places OPR California Office of Planning and Research PM2.5 Particulate Matter Less than 2.5 Microns in Diameter 058 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Table of Contents iv November 2020 (2020-173) PM10 Particulate Matter Less than 10 Microns in Diameter RCPG Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide ROG Reactive Organic Gases RTP Regional Transportation Plan RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers SCAG Southern California Association of Governments SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District SCS Sustainable Communities Strategy SIP State Implementation Plan SP Service Population SoCAB South Coast Air Basin SR State Route SRA Sensitive Receptor Area SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board 059 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Background 1-1 November 2020 (2020-173) SECTION 1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 Summary Project Title: Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91729 Contact Person and Phone Number: Tabe Van der Zwaag Associate Planner (909) 477-2450 Project Location: The Proposed Project is located within the City of Rancho Cucamonga in southwest San Bernardino County (Figure 1). The project site consists of an approximately 4-acre area containing undeveloped land, a single-family home, and detached garage building (APN 1074-201-01,02). The site is located southwest of the intersection of Vista Grove Street and Hermosa Avenue (Figure 2). The project site is approximately 1.5 miles north of the Foothill Freeway (I- 210). General Plan Designation: Very Low Residential (VL) Zoning: Very Low Residential (VL) 1.2 Introduction The City of Rancho Cucamonga is the Lead Agency for this Initial Study. The Initial Study has been prepared to identify and assess the anticipated environmental impacts of the Tentative Tract Map 18305. This document has been prepared to satisfy the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Pub. Res. Code, Section 21000 et seq.) and State CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR 15000 et seq.). CEQA requires that all state and local government agencies consider the environmental consequences of projects over which they have discretionary authority before acting on those projects. A CEQA Initial Study is generally used to 060 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Background 1-2 November 2020 (2020-173) determine which CEQA document is appropriate for a Project (Negative Declaration [ND], Mitigated Negative Declaration [MND], or Environmental Impact Report [EIR]). 1.3 Surrounding Land Uses/Environmental Setting The Proposed Project is located within the City of Rancho Cucamonga in southwest San Bernardino County (Figure 1). The project site consists of an approximately 4-acre area containing undeveloped land, a single-family home, and detached garage building (APN 1074-201-01,02). The project site is located southwest of the intersection of Vista Grove Street and Hermosa Avenue (Figure 2). As shown on the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute Cucamonga Peak, California topographic quadrangle map (1996), the Project Area is located in the northeastern quarter of Section 28 of Township 1 north, Range 7 west of the San Bernardino Base and Meridian (Figure 2). The project site is approximately 1.5 miles north of the Foothill Freeway (I-210). The project site is bounded by residential properties to the east and west, an existing SBCFCD access road to the north, and an equestrian boarding and training facility to the south. The elevation of the project site ranges from 1,915 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) to 1,944 feet AMSL. It is located approximately 364 feet southeast of a drainage, which emanates from the San Gabriel Mountains 0.55 mile to the north. The project site is very disturbed, with most of the vegetation on the project site consisting of non-native grasses and forbs known to persist in disturbed areas. Surrounding land uses are described in the table below. Table 1.3-1. Surrounding Zoning and Land Use Designations Land Use Designation Zoning Designation Existing Land Use Project Site Very Low Residential (VL) Very Low Residential (VL) Very Low Residential (VL) North Very Low Residential (VL) Very Low Residential (VL) SBCFD Access Road East Very Low Residential (VL) Very Low Residential (VL) Very Low Residential (VL) South Very Low Residential (VL) Very Low Residential (VL) Equestrian Boarding and Training Facility West Very Low Residential (VL) Very Low Residential (VL) Very Low Residential (VL) Source: City of Rancho Cucamonga 2010a 061 Project Location ^_ San BernardinoNationalForest AngelesNationalForest ClevelandNationalForest San PedroChannel L o s A n g e l e s L o s A n g e l e sC o u n t y C o u n t y O r a n g e O r a n g e C o u n t y C o u n t y R i v e r s i d e R i v e r s i d eC o u n t y C o u n t y S a n S a nB e r n a r d i n o B e r n a r d i n oC o u n t y C o u n t y ÄÆ1 ÄÆ79 ÄÆ83 ÄÆ261 ÄÆ19 ÄÆ66 ÄÆ91 ÄÆ138 ÄÆ66 ÄÆ134 ÄÆ110 ÄÆ42 ÄÆ330ÄÆ210 ÄÆ60 ÄÆ133 ÄÆ72 ÄÆ60 ÄÆ138 ÄÆ74 ÄÆ22 ÄÆ91 ÄÆ71 ÄÆ90ÄÆ57 ÄÆ55 ÄÆ73 ÄÆ241 ÄÆ74 ÄÆ14 ÄÆ60 £¤395 ¨§¦405 ¨§¦210 ¨§¦5 ¨§¦605 ¨§¦15 ¨§¦215 ¨§¦105 ¨§¦5 ¨§¦215 ¨§¦10 Edwards AirForce Base LongBeach Santa Ana Anaheim Corona East LosAngeles El Monte Fontana FullertonGardenGrove HuntingtonBeach Lancaster Moreno ValleyNorwalk Ontario Orange Palmdale Pasadena Pomona Rancho Cucamonga Riverside San Bernardino West Covina Costa MesaIrvine Figure 1. Regional Location 2020-173 Tentative Track Map No. 18305 ProjectLocation: N:\2018\2018-195 Environmental Studies for Tract 18305\MAPS\Location_Vicinity\Trinity_Vic_V1.mxd (MAG)-mguidry 10/22/2018 Map Date: 10/22/2018Service Layer Credits: Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA P a c i f i c O c e a n !"c$ !"^$ !"^$ !"a$!"b$ !"`$ !"_$ Reno Fresno Santa AnaLos Angeles Oakland San Jose San Diego Las Vegas Long Beach Bakersfield Sacramento Carson City San Francisco CACA NVNV UTUT AZAZ OROR IDID Size of printing extent and margins differs with printer settings, please adjust margins if necessary.MAP REQUIRES A MAPLEX LICENSENOTE: This map is set up in NAD 1983 UTM Zone 11N.Please Change to Define Your Local State Plane or UTM Coordinate System. I 0 5 10 Miles 062 Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed Figure 2. Project Location Map Date: 10/31/2018Base Source: USGS Topographic Quadrangle Cucamonga Peak 2020-173 Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 ProjectLocation: N:\2018\2018-195 Environmental Studies for Tract 18305\MAPS\Location_Vicinity\Trinity_Loc_Quad_V1.mxd (MAG)-mguidry 10/31/2018 I 0 1,000 2,000 Feet Map Contents Project Boundary 063 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Project Description 2-1 November 2020 (2020-173) SECTION 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1 Project Characteristics The Proposed Project would subdivide the existing 4.0-acre parcel into six single-family residential lots for an overall density of 1.5 lots per acre. The proposed lots range in size from 20,000 square feet (SF) to 26,858 SF with an average size of 23,843 SF. The Proposed Project would demolish the existing single- family home and detached garage building. No change in land use designation or zoning are proposed. Please see Figure 3 for the proposed site plan. Access and Circulation The Proposed Project would construct approximately 630 lineal feet of new private street within the development. The development would include extending Vista Grove Street west, across Hermosa Avenue, for approximately 380 feet, which would turn south into a cul-de-sac surrounded by the proposed single-family residences. Construction of the Vista Grove Street extension would result in removal of the San Bernardino County Fire District (SBCFD) access gate, which would be replaced just to the west of the road extension. Landscaping The Project would remove the existing eucalyptus, elm, and palm trees on site and replace them with new City-approved trees along the south right-of-way of Vista Grove Street. No regulated trees or plants are expected to be removed as part of the Project. Any proposed removal of trees is subject to review by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Equestrian and Community Trails A 15-foot wide equestrian trail easement would be created along the eastern and southern boundaries of the project site, connecting to the existing equestrian trail west of the project site. Access to the equestrian trail would come from the southwest corner of the new Hermosa Avenue and Vista Grove Street intersection, as well as private gates for each of the six lots. The trail would be covered with decomposed granite. In addition, the Proposed Project includes a community trail pass-through along Vista Grove Street. Storm Drainage The Proposed Project would construct stormwater drainage improvements including the construction of a water quality basin at the south-central portion of the site between Lot 3 and Lot 4 (see Figure 3). Runoff from the proposed residential lots would be conveyed to the water quality basin. The Proposed Project would also construct two 4 by 4 foot’ catch basins at the southern end of the cul-de-sac, and a third catch basin in the southwest corner of the site. Septic System Each of the six lots would be provided with a private septic system, seepage pit, and expansion area. Specific location and capacity of the septic systems would be determined at the time of construction and 064 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Project Description 2-2 November 2020 (2020-173) a percolation report would be completed prior to final design. The Proposed Project would maintain a 25- foot minimum setback from the septic system to all property lines and the drainage basin. 2.2 Project Timing Project construction is expected to begin in March 2021 for a duration of approximately 10 months. 2.3 Regulatory Requirements, Permits, and Approvals The following approvals and regulatory permits would be required for implementation of the Proposed Project: • City of Rancho Cucamonga Grading Permit, Building Permit 2.4 Consultation With California Native American Tribe(s) The following California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area have been notified of the project: San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians; San Manuel Band of Mission Indians; Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians; Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians; Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation; and Morongo Band of Mission Indians. The San Manuel Band of Mission Indians and Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation have requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1. A summary of the consultation process, including the determination of significance of impacts to tribal cultural resources, is provided in Section 4.18 of this Initial Study. 065 GROVEVISTA HERMOSA AVE"A" COURTST. (P R I V A T E S T R E E T)(P R I V A T E S T R E E T)LOT "A"LOT "A"LOT "A"TRACT MAP NO. 18305 INC.SITETECH Figure 3. Site Plan2020-173 Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project066 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Project Description 2-4 November 2020 (2020-173) THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 067 068 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Factors and Determination 3-2 November 2020 (2020-173) THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 069 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-1 November 2020 (2020-173) SECTION 4.0 E NVIRONMENTAL C HECKLIST AND D ISCUSSION 4.1 Aesthetics 4.1.1 Environmental Setting Regional Setting Major scenic resources in the City of Rancho Cucamonga include the San Gabriel and San Bernardino Mountains and foothills, vistas of the City from hillside areas, and other views of special vegetation and permanent open space features. These north-south views are particularly prominent along the straight alignments of Archibald, Haven, and Etiwanda Avenues. Views of the mountains are available from most areas in the City and provide a visual backdrop for the Project site and surrounding communities. State Scenic Highways The California Scenic Highway Program protects and enhances the scenic beauty of California’s highways and adjacent corridors. A highway can be designated as scenic based on how much natural beauty can be seen by users of the highway, the quality of the scenic landscape, and if development impacts the enjoyment of the view (Caltrans 2019). No officially designated state scenic highways are located in or near the City of Rancho Cucamonga (Rancho Cucamonga 2010b). The nearest designated scenic highway is State Route (SR) 138, located in the San Gabriel Mountains approximately 11.5 miles north of the project site. Visual Character of the Project Site The 4-acre site is relatively flat and consists of a vacant undeveloped lot, single family home, and detached garage building. 4.1.2 Aesthetics (I) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Less than significant. The dominant scenic views from the project site and the surrounding area include the San Gabriel Mountains to the northwest and the San Bernardino Mountains to the north and northeast. The mountains are clearly visible from Hermosa Avenue (east of the project site) but these views would not be obstructed by the Proposed Project. Short-term construction activities could potentially temporarily degrade the existing visual character and quality of the site and surroundings. In all, the Proposed Project would involve grading activities and 070 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-2 November 2020 (2020-173) construction of streets, sidewalks, fencing, storm drainage infrastructure, utility installation, and landscaping. During the construction phase, various equipment, vehicles, building materials, stockpiles, disposal receptacles, and related activities could be potentially visible from several vantage points near the project site. However, construction-related activities would be short-term and temporary in nature. Once completed, all general construction activities would cease, along with any construction-related aesthetic impacts. Upon completion, the proposed improvements would be consistent and compatible with the existing residential uses in the project area. Impacts to scenic vistas would be less than significant. Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? No impact. The Project would remove the existing eucalyptus, elm, and palm trees on site and replace them with new City-approved trees along the south right-of-way of Vista Grove Street. No regulated trees or plants are expected to be removed as part of the Proposed Project. Any proposed removal of trees is subject to review by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. There are no rock outcroppings present on the site. Furthermore, the project site is not located within a state scenic highway. No impact would occur. Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? Less than significant. The project site is located in an urbanized area with residential development to the north, south, and west. The project site is zoned Very Low Density Residential. The proposed development of single family lots would be a compatible development in the project area, which is developed with single-family homes to the north, south, east and west. Impacts would be less than significant. 071 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-3 November 2020 (2020-173) Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact d) Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Less than significant. The Proposed Project would create new light or glare sources typical of single-family residential development and would be similar to the light and glare sources from the existing residential development to the north, south, east and west. The Proposed Project’s lighting plan would be subject to review and approval by the City of Rancho Cucamonga to ensure compliance with the City’s General Plan. Development of each individual lot would also be subject to City review which would ensure light or glare do not adversely affect day or nighttime views. Glare impacts from the proposed structures are not anticipated. Architectural glass with low glare characteristics would be used to minimize glare impacts on surrounding properties. Compliance with City Municipal Code Chapter 17.58 Outdoor Lighting Standards would ensure that impacts would be less than significant. 4.1.3 Mitigation Measures No significant impacts were identified, and no mitigation measures are required. 4.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources 4.2.1 Environmental Setting “Forest land” as defined by Public Resources Code Section 12220(g) is “…land that can support 10-percent native tree cover of any species, including hardwoods, under natural conditions, and that allows for management of one or more forest resources, including timber, aesthetics, fish and wildlife, biodiversity, water quality, recreation, and other public benefits.” “Timberland” as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526 means “…land, other than land owned by the federal government and land designated by the board as experimental forest land, which is available for, and capable of, growing a crop of trees of a commercial species used to produce lumber and other forest products, including Christmas trees. Commercial species shall be determined by the board on a district basis.” “Timberland zoned Timberland Production” is defined by Public Resources Code Section 51104(g) as “..an area which has been zoned pursuant to Section 51112 or 51113 and is devoted to and used for growing and harvesting timber, or for growing and harvesting timber and compatible uses, as defined in subdivision h.” Although the entire City of Rancho Cucamonga was once an agricultural area, few large areas remain in active production today. Much of the City is characterized by industrial, residential, and commercial land uses. Farmland in eastern Rancho Cucamonga is concentrated in Etiwanda; these farmland areas were 072 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-4 November 2020 (2020-173) designated by the Department of Conservation due to their local historical importance. However, most of the Etiwanda area is planned for development, and is not intended to be retained as farmland (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2010a). The Proposed Project would be located in a developed residential area which does not contain any agricultural uses or areas designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. The project site is located on Urban and Built-up Land and is not under a Williamson Act Contract (CDC 2017). Therefore, there are no local policies for agricultural resources that apply to the project site. 4.2.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources (II) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 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? No impact. The project site is currently zoned for residential uses and does not contain any agricultural land. According to the California Department of Conservation (CDC) the site is designated Urban and Built-Up Land (CDC 2017). Therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in a conflict with an agricultural zoning designation. No impact would occur. Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? No impact. As discussed above, no land on or near the project site is currently under agricultural production, nor are any parcels zoned for agricultural uses. The site is not designated for agricultural use nor is it listed under a Williamson Act contract (CDC 2017). No impact would occur. 073 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-5 November 2020 (2020-173) Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? No impact. The project site is currently developed and is not zoned for forest land, timberland, or timberland production. There is no forestland or timber in the vicinity, nor are there any parcels zoned for forestland or timberland. No impact would occur. Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? No impact. As discussed above, the project site is currently developed and does not contain forestland or timberland, thus it would not convert forest land to non-forest use. No impact would occur. Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 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? No impact. The project site and the surrounding properties are not currently used for agriculture. As discussed above, the Proposed Project would not result in the conversion of forest land to non-forest use. No impact would occur. 4.2.3 Mitigation Measures No significant impacts were identified, and no mitigation measures are required. 074 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-6 November 2020 (2020-173) 4.3 Air Quality 4.3.1 Environmental Setting The California Air Resources Board (CARB) divides the state into air basins that share similar meteorological and topographical features. Rancho Cucamonga lies in the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB), which includes the non-desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties and all of Orange County. The air basin is on a coastal plain with connecting broad valleys and low hills and is bounded by the Pacific Ocean on the southwest, with high mountains forming the remainder of the perimeter (SCAQMD 1993). Both the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the CARB have established ambient air quality standards for common pollutants. These ambient air quality standards are levels of contaminants representing safe levels that avoid specific adverse health effects associated with each pollutant. The ambient air quality standards cover what are called “criteria” pollutants because the health and other effects of each pollutant are described in criteria documents. The six criteria pollutants are ozone (O3) (O3 precursor emissions include nitrogen oxide (NOx) and reactive organic gases (ROG)), carbon monoxide (CO), particulate matter (PM), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and lead. Areas that meet ambient air quality standards are classified as attainment areas, while areas that do not meet these standards are classified as nonattainment areas. The Los Angeles County portion of the SoCAB region is designated as a nonattainment area for the federal O3, fine particulate matter (PM2.5), and lead standards and is also a nonattainment area for the state standards for O3, coarse particulate matter (PM10), and PM2.5. (It is noted that lead is not emitted from standard land use developments, such as that proposed by the Project.) The local air quality agency affecting the SoCAB is the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), which is charged with the responsibility of implementing air quality programs and ensuring that national and state ambient air quality standards are not exceeded and that air quality conditions are maintained in the SoCAB. In an attempt to achieve national and state ambient air quality standards and maintain air quality, the air district has completed several air quality attainment plans and reports, which together constitute the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the portion of the SoCAB encompassing the Project. The SCAQMD has also adopted various rules and regulations for the control of stationary and area sources of emissions. Provisions applicable to the Proposed Project are summarized as follows: • Rule 402 (Nuisance) – This rule prohibits the discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property. This rule does not apply to odors emanating from agricultural operations necessary for the growing of crops or the raising of fowl or animals. 075 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-7 November 2020 (2020-173) • Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust) – This rule requires fugitive dust sources to implement best available control measures for all sources, and all forms of visible particulate matter are prohibited from crossing any property line. This rule is intended to reduce PM10 emissions from any transportation, handling, construction, or storage activity that has the potential to generate fugitive dust. PM10 suppression techniques are summarized below: a) Portions of a construction site to remain inactive longer than a period of three months will be seeded and watered until grass cover is grown or otherwise stabilized. b) All on-site roads will be paved as soon as feasible or watered periodically or chemically stabilized. c) All material transported off-site will be either sufficiently watered or securely covered to prevent excessive amounts of dust. d) The area disturbed by clearing, grading, earthmoving, or excavation operations will be minimized at all times. e) Where vehicles leave a construction site and enter adjacent public streets, the streets will be swept daily or washed down at the end of the workday to remove soil tracked onto the paved surface. • Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings) – This rule requires manufacturers, distributors, and end- users of architectural and industrial maintenance coatings to reduce reactive organic gas (ROG) emissions from the use of these coatings, primarily by placing limits on the ROG content of various coating categories. 4.3.2 Air Quality (III) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Less than significant. As part of its enforcement responsibilities, the EPA requires each state with nonattainment areas to prepare and submit a State Implementation Plan (SIP) that demonstrates the means to attain the federal standards. The SIP must integrate federal, state, and local plan components and regulations to identify specific measures to reduce pollution in nonattainment areas, using a combination of performance standards and market-based programs. Similarly, under state law, the California Clean Air Act requires an air quality attainment plan to be prepared for areas designated as nonattainment with regard to the federal and state ambient air quality standards. Air quality attainment plans outline emissions limits and control measures to achieve and maintain these standards by the earliest practical date. 076 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-8 November 2020 (2020-173) As previously mentioned, the project site is located within the SoCAB, which is under the jurisdiction of the SCAQMD. The SCAQMD is required, pursuant to the federal Clean Air Act, to reduce emissions of criteria pollutants for which the SoCAB is in nonattainment. In order to reduce such emissions, the SCAQMD drafted the 2016 Air Quality Management Plan (2016 AQMP). The 2016 AQMP establishes a program of rules and regulations directed at reducing air pollutant emissions and achieving state (California) and national air quality standards. The 2016 AQMP is a regional and multi-agency effort including the SCAQMD, CARB, SCAG, and the US EPA. The plan’s pollutant control strategies are based on the latest scientific and technical information and planning assumptions, including SCAG’s 2016 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy, updated emission inventory methodologies for various source categories, and SCAG’s latest growth forecasts. (SCAG’s latest growth forecasts were defined in consultation with local governments and with reference to local general plans.) The Proposed Project is subject to the SCAQMD’s Air Quality Management Plan. According to the SCAQMD, in order to determine consistency with SCAQMD’s air quality planning two main criteria must be addressed. Criterion 1: With respect to the first criterion, SCAQMD methodologies require that an air quality analysis for a project include forecasts of project emissions in relation to contributing to air quality violations and delay of attainment. a) Would the project result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new air quality violations? As shown in Table 4.3-1, Table 4.3-2, and Table 4.3-3, the Proposed Project would result in emissions that would be below the SCAQMD regional and localized thresholds during both construction and operations. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations and would not have the potential to cause or affect a violation of the ambient air quality standards. b) Would the project delay timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissions reductions specified in the AQMP? As shown in Table 4.3-1 and Table 4.3-3 the Proposed Project would be below the SCAQMD regional thresholds for construction and operations. Because the Proposed Project would result in less than significant regional emission impacts, it would not delay the timely attainment of air quality standards or AQMP emissions reductions. Criterion 2: With respect to the second criterion for determining consistency with SCAQMD and SCAG air quality policies, it is important to recognize that air quality planning within the SoCAB focuses on attainment of ambient air quality standards at the earliest feasible date. Projections for achieving air quality goals are based on assumptions regarding population, housing, and growth trends. Thus, the SCAQMD’s second criterion for determining Project consistency focuses on whether or not the Proposed Project exceeds the assumptions utilized in preparing the forecasts presented its air quality planning documents. Determining 077 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-9 November 2020 (2020-173) whether or not a project exceeds the assumptions reflected in the 2016 AQMP involves the evaluation of the three criteria outlined below. The following discussion provides an analysis of each of these criteria. a) Would the project be consistent with the population, housing, and employment growth projections utilized in the preparation of the 2016 AQMP? A project is consistent with regional air quality planning efforts in part if it is consistent with the population, housing, and employment assumptions that were used in the development of the SCAQMD air quality plans. Generally, three sources of data form the basis for the projections of air pollutant emissions in Rancho Cucamonga: 2010 General Plan (General Plan), SCAG’s Growth Management Chapter of the Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG), and SCAG’s 2016 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS). The RTP/SCS also provides socioeconomic forecast projections of regional population growth. The Proposed Project is consistent with the land use designation and development density presented in the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. As previously stated, the project site is designated by the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan as “Very Low Residential”, which allows for detached, very low- density single residential units on 0.5-acre lots or larger, with private yards and private parking. As a result, the Proposed Project does not involve any uses that would increase population beyond what is considered in the General Plan and, therefore, would not affect City-wide plans for population growth at the project site. Thus, the Proposed Project is consistent with the types, intensity, and patterns of land use envisioned for the site vicinity in the General Plan and RCPG. As a result, the Proposed Project would not conflict with the land use assumptions or exceed the population or job growth projections used by SCAQMD to develop the 2016 AQMP. The City’s population, housing, and employment forecasts, which are adopted by SCAG’s Regional Council, are based on the local plans and policies applicable to the City; and these are used by SCAG in all phases of implementation and review. Additionally, as the SCAQMD has incorporated these same projections into their air quality planning efforts, it can be concluded that the Proposed Project would be consistent with the projections. SCAG’s latest growth forecasts were defined in consultation with local governments and with reference to local general plans. Therefore, the Proposed Project would be considered consistent with the population, housing, and employment growth projections utilized in the preparation of SCAQMD’s air quality plans. b) Would the project implement all feasible air quality mitigation measures? In order to further reduce emissions, the Proposed Project would be required to comply with emission reduction measures promulgated by the SCAQMD, such as SCAQMD Rules 402, 403, and 1113. SCAQMD Rule 402 prohibits the discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property. SCAQMD Rule 403 requires fugitive dust sources to implement Best Available Control Measures for all sources, and all forms of visible particulate matter are prohibited from crossing any property line. SCAQMD Rule 403 is intended to reduce PM10 emissions from any transportation, handling, construction, or storage activity that has the potential to generate fugitive dust. SCAQMD 1113 requires manufacturers, distributors, and end-users of architectural and industrial maintenance coatings to reduce ROG emissions from the use of 078 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-10 November 2020 (2020-173) these coatings, primarily by placing limits on the ROG content of various coating categories. As such, the Proposed Project meets this consistency criterion. c) Would the project be consistent with the land use planning strategies set forth by SCAQMD air quality planning efforts? The AQMP contains air pollutant reduction strategies based on SCAG’s latest growth forecasts, and SCAG’s growth forecasts were defined in consultation with local governments and with reference to local general plans. The Proposed Project is consistent with the land use designation and development density presented in the City’s General Plan and therefore would not exceed the population or job growth projections used by the SCAQMD to develop the AQMP. In conclusion, the determination of AQMP consistency is primarily concerned with the long-term influence of a project on air quality. The Proposed Project would not result in a long-term impact on the region’s ability to meet State and Federal air quality standards. The Proposed Project’s long-term influence would also be consistent with the goals and policies of the SCAQMD’s 2016 AQMP. No impact would occur. Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? Less than significant. Project Construction-Generated Criteria Air Quality Emissions Regional Construction Significance Analysis Construction-generated emissions are temporary and short term but have the potential to represent a significant air quality impact. Three basic sources of short-term emissions would be generated through construction of the Proposed Project: operation of the construction vehicles (i.e., excavators, trenchers, dump trucks), the creation of fugitive dust during clearing and grading, and the use of asphalt or other oil-based substances during paving activities. Construction activities such as excavation and grading operations, construction vehicle traffic, and wind blowing over exposed soils would generate exhaust emissions and fugitive particulate matter emissions that affect local air quality at various times during construction. Effects would be variable depending on the weather, soil conditions, the amount of activity taking place, and the nature of dust control efforts. The dry climate of the area during the summer months creates a high potential for dust generation. Construction activities would be subject to SCAQMD Rule 403, which requires taking reasonable precautions to prevent the emissions of fugitive dust, such as using water or chemicals, where possible, for control of dust during the clearing of land and other construction activities. 079 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-11 November 2020 (2020-173) Construction-generated emissions associated the Proposed Project were calculated using the CARB- approved CalEEMod computer program, which is designed to model emissions for land use development projects, based on typical construction requirements. Predicted maximum daily construction-generated emissions for the Proposed Project are summarized in Table 4.3-1. Construction-generated emissions are short term and of temporary duration, lasting only as long as construction activities occur, but would be considered a significant air quality impact if the volume of pollutants generated exceeds the SCAQMD’s thresholds of significance. Table 4.3-1. Unmitigated Construction-Related Emissions (Regional Significance Analysis) Construction Year Pollutant (pounds per day) ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Construction in 2019 4.51 45.64 33.57 0.05 9.56 6.10 Construction in 2020 4.14 33.55 32.99 0.05 2.22 1.86 SCAQMD Regional Significance Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55 Exceed SCAQMD Threshold? No No No No No No Source: CalEEMod version 2016.3.2, ECORP 2020a. Refer to Appendix A in the Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Assessment for Model Data Outputs. Notes: Emission reduction/credits for construction emissions are applied based on the required implementation of SCAQMD Rule 403. The specific Rule 403 measures applied in CalEEMod include the following: sweeping/cleaning adjacent roadway access areas daily; washing equipment tires before leaving the construction site; water exposed surfaces three times daily; water all haul roads twice daily; and limit speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour. Reductions percentages from the SCAQMD CEQA Handbook (Tables XI-A through XI-E) were applied. Emissions estimates account for the demolition of 4,200 square feet of structures. Building construction, paving, and painting assumed to occur simultaneously. As shown in Table 4.3-1, emissions generated during Proposed Project construction would not exceed the SCAQMD’s regional thresholds of significance. Impacts would be less than significant. Localized Construction Significance Analysis The nearest sensitive receptors to the project site are residences in all directions. In order to identify impacts to sensitive receptors, the SCAQMD recommends addressing Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs) for construction. LSTs were developed in response to SCAQMD Governing Boards' Environmental Justice Enhancement Initiative (I-4). The SCAQMD provided the Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology (dated June 2003 [revised 2008]) for guidance. The LST methodology assists lead agencies in analyzing localized impacts associated with project-specific level proposed projects. For this Proposed Project, the appropriate source receptor area (SRA) for the localized significance thresholds is the Southwest San Bernardino Valley source receptor area (SRA 33) as this source receptor area includes the project site. The Proposed Project would disturb approximately 4-acres during construction. As previously described, the SCAQMD has produced look-up tables for projects that disturb 080 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-12 November 2020 (2020-173) less than or equal to five acres daily. Thus, the LST threshold value for a 4-acre construction was interpolated from the LST lookup tables. The nearest sensitive receptors to the project site are directly adjacent to the site. LST thresholds are provided for distances to sensitive receptors of 25, 50, 100, 200, and 500 meters. Notwithstanding, the SCAQMD Methodology explicitly states: “It is possible that a project may have receptors closer than 25 meters. Projects with boundaries located closer than 25 meters to the nearest receptor should use the LSTs for receptors located at 25 meters.” Therefore, LSTs for receptors located at 25 meters were utilized in this analysis. The SCAQMD’s methodology clearly states that “off-site mobile emissions from a project should not be included in the emissions compared to LSTs.” Therefore, for purposes of the construction LST analysis, only emissions included in the CalEEMod “on-site” emissions outputs were considered. Table 4.3-2, presents the results of localized emissions during the grading and construction phases, which are construction activities that disturbs the most acreage daily. The LSTs reflect a maximum disturbance of 4 acres daily at 25 meters for the Proposed Project. Table 4.3-2. Construction-Related Emissions (Localized Significance Analysis) Activity Pollutant (pounds per day) NOX CO PM10 PM2.5 Demolition 35.78 22.06 1.87 1.68 Project Site Preparation 45.57 22.06 9.43 6.07 Project Site Grading 28.34 16.29 3.95 2.59 SCAQMD Localized Significance Threshold 240.00 1,513.80 11.90 6.80 Exceed SCAQMD Threshold? No No No No Source: CalEEMod version 2016.3.2. Refer to Appendix A in the Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Assessment for Model Data Outputs. Notes: Emission reduction/credits for construction emissions are applied based on the required implementation of SCAQMD Rule 403. The specific Rule 403 measures applied in CalEEMod include the following: sweeping/cleaning adjacent roadway access areas daily; washing equipment tires before leaving the construction site; water exposed surfaces three times daily; water all haul roads twice daily; and limit speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour. Reductions percentages from the SCAQMD CEQA Handbook (Tables XI-A through XI-E) were applied. Emissions estimates account for the demolition of 4,200 square feet of structures. Building construction, paving, and painting assumed to occur simultaneously. Table 4.3-2 shows that the emissions of these pollutants on the peak day of construction would not result in significant concentrations of pollutants at nearby sensitive receptors. Therefore, significant impacts would not occur concerning LSTs during construction activities. Impacts would be less than significant. 081 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-13 November 2020 (2020-173) Project Operations Criteria Air Quality Emissions Regional Operational Significance Analysis Implementation of the Proposed Project would result in long-term operational emissions of criteria air pollutants such as PM10, PM2.5, CO, and SO2 as well as ozone precursors such as ROG and NOX. Project- generated increases in emissions would be predominantly associated with motor vehicle use. Long-term operational emissions attributable to the Project are identified in Table 4.3-3 and compared to the regional operational significance thresholds promulgated by the SCAQMD. Table 4.3-3. Operational-Related Emissions (Regional Significance Analysis) Emission Source Pollutant (pounds per day) ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Summer Emissions Area 0.27 0.09 0.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 Energy 0.00 0.04 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 Mobile 0.14 0.91 1.76 0.00 0.43 0.12 Total 0.42 1.05 2.31 0.00 0.45 0.13 SCAQMD Regional Significance Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55 Exceed SCAQMD Threshold? No No No No No No Winter Emissions Area 0.27 0.09 0.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 Energy 0.00 0.04 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 Mobile 0.12 0.92 1.54 0.00 0.45 0.13 Total 0.40 1.06 2.10 0.00 0.45 0.13 SCAQMD Regional Significance Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55 Exceed SCAQMD Threshold? No No No No No No Source: CalEEMod version 2016.3.2. Refer to Appendix A in the Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Assessment for Model Data Outputs. Notes: Emissions projections account for a trip generation rate identified ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition (2017). As shown in Table 4.3-3, the Proposed Project’s emissions would not exceed any SCAQMD thresholds for any criteria air pollutants. Impacts would be less than significant. 082 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-14 November 2020 (2020-173) Localized Operational Significance Analysis According to the SCAQMD localized significance threshold methodology, LSTs would apply to the operational phase of a proposed project only if the project includes stationary sources or attracts mobile sources that may spend long periods queuing and idling at the site (e.g., warehouse or transfer facilities). The Proposed Project does not include such uses. Therefore, in the case of the Proposed Project, the operational phase LST protocol does not need to be applied. Cumulative Air Quality Impacts The cumulative setting for air quality includes Rancho Cucamonga and the SoCAB. The SoCAB is designated as a nonattainment area for state standards of ozone, PM10, and PM2.5. The region is also designated as a nonattainment area for federal standards of ozone and PM2.5 (CARB 2017b). Cumulative growth in population, vehicle use, and industrial activity could inhibit efforts to improve regional air quality and attain the ambient air quality standards. Thus, the setting for this cumulative analysis consists of the SoCAB and associated growth and development anticipated in the air basin. The SCAQMD’s approach to assessing cumulative impacts is based on the AQMP forecasts of attainment of ambient air quality standards in accordance with the requirements of the federal and California Clean Air Acts. As discussed earlier, the proposed Project would be consistent with the 2016 AQMP, which is intended to bring the SoCAB into attainment for all criteria pollutants. In addition, the SCAQMD recommends that any given project’s potential contribution to cumulative impacts be assessed using the same significance criteria as for project-specific impacts. Therefore, individual projects that do not generate operational or construction emissions that exceed the SCAQMD’s daily thresholds for project- specific impacts would also not cause a cumulatively considerable increase in emissions for those pollutants for which the air basin is in nonattainment and therefore would not be considered to have a significant, adverse air quality impact. Alternatively, individual project-related construction and operational emissions that exceed SCAQMD thresholds for project-specific impacts would be considered cumulatively considerable. As previously noted, the Proposed Project would not exceed the applicable SCAQMD regional thresholds for construction or operational-source emissions. As such, the Proposed Project would result in a cumulatively less than significant impact. Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less than significant. Exposure of Sensitive Receptors to Toxic Air Contaminants Sensitive receptors are defined as facilities or land uses that include members of the population that are particularly sensitive to the effects of air pollutants, such as children, the elderly, and people with illnesses. Examples of these sensitive receptors are residences, schools, hospitals, and daycare centers. CARB has 083 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-15 November 2020 (2020-173) identified the following groups of individuals as the most likely to be affected by air pollution: the elderly over 65, children under 14, athletes, and persons with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, emphysema, and bronchitis. Construction-Generated Air Contaminants Construction-related activities would result in temporary, short-term project-generated emissions of diesel particulate matter (DPM) from the exhaust of off-road, heavy-duty diesel equipment for site preparation (e.g., clearing, grading); soil hauling truck traffic; paving; application of architectural coatings; and other miscellaneous activities. For construction activity, DPM is the primary toxic air contaminants (TAC) of concern. Particulate exhaust emissions from diesel-fueled engines (i.e., DPM) were identified as a TAC by the CARB in 1998. The potential cancer risk from the inhalation of DPM, as discussed below, outweighs the potential for all other health impacts (i.e., non-cancer chronic risk, short-term acute risk) and health impacts from other TACs. Accordingly, DPM is the focus of this discussion. Based on the emission modeling conducted the maximum construction-related annual emissions of PM2.5 exhaust, considered a surrogate for DPM, would be 2.20 pounds per day during construction activity. PM2.5 is considered a surrogate for DPM because more than 90 percent of DPM is less than 1 microgram in diameter and therefore is a subset of particulate matter under 2.5 microns in diameter (i.e., PM2.5), according to CARB. Most PM2.5 derives from combustion, such as use of gasoline and diesel fuels by motor vehicles. Furthermore, even during the most intense month of construction, emissions of DPM would be generated from different locations on the project site, rather than a single location, because different types of construction activities (e.g., demolition, site preparation, building construction) would not occur at the same place at the same time. The dose to which receptors are exposed is the primary factor used to determine health risk (i.e., potential exposure to TAC emission levels that exceed applicable standards). Dose is a function of the concentration of a substance or substances in the environment and the duration of exposure to the substance. Dose is positively correlated with time, meaning that a longer exposure period would result in a higher exposure level for any exposed receptor. Thus, the risks estimated for an exposed individual are higher if a fixed exposure occurs over a longer period of time. According to the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), health risk assessments, which determine the exposure of sensitive receptors to TAC emissions, should be based on a 70-, 30-, or 9-year exposure period; however, such assessments should be limited to the period/duration of activities associated with the Proposed Project. Consequently, an important consideration is the fact that construction of the Proposed Project is anticipated to last less than two years. Furthermore, the use of off-road heavy-duty diesel equipment would be limited to the periods of construction for which most diesel-powered off-road equipment use would occur, which are the site preparation and grading phases of construction, and these construction activities are anticipated to last less than two months. Therefore, considering the relatively low mass of DPM emissions that would be generated during even the most intense season of construction, the relatively short duration of construction activities (one year) required to develop the site, including just two months of site preparation and grading activities, and the highly dispersive properties of DPM, construction-related TAC emissions would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial amounts of air toxics. 084 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-16 November 2020 (2020-173) Furthermore, the Proposed Project has been evaluated against the SCAQMD’s LSTs for construction. As previously stated, LSTs were developed in response to SCAQMD Governing Boards' Environmental Justice Enhancement Initiative (I-4) and can be used to assist lead agencies in analyzing localized impacts associated with project-specific level proposed projects. As shown in Table 4.3-2, the emissions of pollutants on the peak day of construction would not result in significant concentrations of pollutants at nearby sensitive receptors. Impacts would be less than significant. Operational Air Contaminants The Proposed Project involves the construction of six single family homes. The Proposed Project would not include the provision of new permanent stationary or mobile sources of emissions, and therefore, by its very nature, would not generate quantifiable air toxic emissions from Proposed Project operations. Impacts would be less than significant. Carbon Monoxide Hot Spots It has long been recognized that CO exceedances are caused by vehicular emissions, primarily when idling at intersections. Concentrations of CO are a direct function of the number of vehicles, length of delay, and traffic flow conditions. Under certain meteorological conditions, CO concentrations close to congested intersections that experience high levels of traffic and elevated background concentrations may reach unhealthy levels, affecting nearby sensitive receptors. Given the high traffic volume potential, areas of high CO concentrations, or “hot spots,” are typically associated with intersections that are projected to operate at unacceptable levels of service during the peak commute hours. However, transport of this criteria pollutant is extremely limited, and CO disperses rapidly with distance from the source under normal meteorological conditions. Furthermore, vehicle emissions standards have become increasingly more stringent in the last 20 years. Currently, the CO standard in California is a maximum of 3.4 grams per mile for passenger cars (requirements for certain vehicles are more stringent). With the turnover of older vehicles, introduction of cleaner fuels, and implementation of control technology on industrial facilities, CO concentrations in the project vicinity have steadily declined. Accordingly, with the steadily decreasing CO emissions from vehicles, even very busy intersections do not result in exceedances of the CO standard. The analysis prepared for CO attainment in the South Coast Air Quality Management District 1992 Federal Attainment Plan for Carbon Monoxide (1992 CO Plan) in Los Angeles County can be used to demonstrate the potential for CO exceedances. The SCAQMD CO hot spot analysis was conducted for four busy intersections in Los Angeles County during the peak morning and afternoon time periods. The intersections evaluated included Long Beach Boulevard and Imperial Highway (Lynwood), Wilshire Boulevard and Veteran Avenue (Westwood), Sunset Boulevard and Highland Avenue (Hollywood), and La Cienega Boulevard and Century Boulevard (Inglewood). The busiest intersection evaluated was at Wilshire Boulevard and Veteran Avenue, which has a traffic volume of approximately 100,000 vehicles per day. The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority evaluated the level of service in the vicinity of the Wilshire Boulevard/Veteran Avenue intersection and found it to be level of service (LOS) E at peak morning traffic and LOS F at peak afternoon traffic (LOS E and F are the two least efficient traffic LOS ratings). Even with the inefficient LOS and volume of traffic, the CO analysis concluded that there was no violation of CO standards (SCAQMD 1992). 085 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-17 November 2020 (2020-173) According to the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition (2017), the Proposed Project is anticipated to generate 56 daily trips on average. Because the Proposed Project would not increase traffic volumes at any intersection to more than 100,000 vehicles per day, there is no likelihood of the Proposed Project traffic exceeding CO values. No impact would occur. Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people? No impact. Typically, odors are regarded as an annoyance rather than a health hazard. However, manifestations of a person’s reaction to foul odors can range from psychological (e.g., irritation, anger, or anxiety) to physiological (e.g., circulatory and respiratory effects, nausea, vomiting, and headache). With respect to odors, the human nose is the sole sensing device. The ability to detect odors varies considerably among the population and overall is quite subjective. Some individuals have the ability to smell minute quantities of specific substances; others may not have the same sensitivity but may have sensitivities to odors of other substances. In addition, people may have different reactions to the same odor; in fact, an odor that is offensive to one person (e.g., from a fast-food restaurant) may be perfectly acceptable to another. It is also important to note that an unfamiliar odor is more easily detected and is more likely to cause complaints than a familiar one. This is because of the phenomenon known as odor fatigue, in which a person can become desensitized to almost any odor and recognition only occurs with an alteration in the intensity. According to the SCAQMD, land uses commonly considered to be potential sources of obnoxious odorous emissions include agriculture (farming and livestock), wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting facilities, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding. The Proposed Project would develop low density residential homes that could potentially house horses and other livestock. Animal waste would be required to be cleaned and disposed of on a monthly basis, thereby, reducing odor impacts. This type of use would be compatible with the project area as it already includes equestrian. Impacts would be less than significant. 4.3.3 Mitigation Measures No significant impacts were identified, and no mitigation measures are required. 086 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-18 November 2020 (2020-173) 4.4 Biological Resources 4.4.1 Environmental Setting ECORP Consulting, Inc. prepared a Biological Technical Report in 2018 and performed an updated literature review, database search, and biological reconnaissance survey of the project site in October 2020 (ECORP 2020b; Appendix B). An updated literature review and database search was conducted using California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s (CDFW’s) California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB; CDFW 2020) and the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Electronic Inventory (CNPS 2020) was performed before the survey was conducted to determine if any new special-status plant or wildlife species had been recorded on the property or surrounding area since the last survey. The current survey was conducted by ECORP as an update to a previous biological reconnaissance survey conducted in October 2018, as requested by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Both reports are included in Appendix B. The project site consists of approximately 4.0 acres of mostly undeveloped former agriculture land immediately southwest of the intersection of Hermosa Avenue and Vista Grove Street. One structure, a small house, was identified on the project site. The project site was bounded by residential properties to the east and west, an existing SBCFCD access road to the north, and an equestrian boarding and training facility to the south. The project site was very disturbed, with most of the vegetation on the project site consisting of non-native grasses and forbs known to persist in disturbed areas. Representative site photographs are presented in Appendix B. Vegetation Communities No native vegetation communities were present on the project site. The project site was generally classified as disturbed and developed. No special-status habitats or vegetation communities were observed on or near the project site. Plants Plant species observed on the project site were typical of the disturbed and developed land present on the project site. Plant species identified within the disturbed habitat on the project site included mustard (Brassica nigra), Russian thistle (Salsola tragus), cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum), and jimsonweed (Datura wrightii). A row of eucalyptus (Eucalyptus Sp.) is present along the northern border of the project site. Tree of heaven (Ailanthus altissima) and oleander (Nerium oleander) are also present on the project site. A full list of plant species observed on or immediately adjacent to the project site is included in Appendix B. Wildlife Due to its disturbed/developed nature, the project site did not provide much habitat for wildlife species. However, some common wildlife species were observed during the survey, including house finch (Haemorhous mexicanus), acorn woodpecker (Melanerpes formicivorus), pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae), and mourning dove (Zenaida macroura). A complete list of wildlife species observed on or immediately adjacent to the project site is included in Appendix B. 087 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-19 November 2020 (2020-173) Soils According to the National Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey website (NRCS 2020), soil on the project site consists of Soboba Gravely Loamy Sand. The Rancho Cucamonga General Plan EIR describes these soils as consisting of grayish-brown stony loamy sand on the surface, about 10 inches thick, with underlying material of brown very stony loamy sand and very pale brown stony sand about 60 inches thick. Potential Waters of the U.S. Although a formal jurisdictional delineation was not conducted, no jurisdictional drainages, stream courses, and/or other water features were identified on the project site. No hydric soils or riparian vegetation were observed within the project site boundaries. A SBCFCD channel was identified along the west border of the project site and is likely jurisdictional to the USACE, CDFW, and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Special-Status Plants The literature review and database searches identified 58 special-status wildlife species that occur near the project site; however, due to the project site’s long history of being heavily disturbed and/or developed, and the current lack of suitable habitat for the special-status plant species identified in the literature review and database searches, all 58 species are presumed to be absent from the project site. Plant species with a CNPS Rare Plant Rank 3 or 4 were eliminated from the analysis because these rankings are considered a review list and a watch list, respectively. Descriptions of the CNPS designations and a list of the 55 special-status plant species identified in the literature review is presented in Appendix B. Special-Status Wildlife The literature review and database searches identified 45 special-status wildlife species that occur near the project site; however, based on the condition of the project site, the project site’s history of being heavily disturbed, developed, disced, and the current lack of suitable habitat for special-status wildlife species on the project site, all of the special-status wildlife species identified in the literature review were presumed absent from the project site. A list of the 45 special-status wildlife species identified in the literature review is presented in Appendix B. Migratory Birds and Raptors Potential nesting habitat for migratory birds and raptors protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and California Fish and Game Code (CDFG Code) was present on the project site within the large trees on and adjacent to the project site. Although the trees were generally identified as being in poor condition (TLC 2018), the trees are still considered suitable for nesting. Raptors typically breed between February and August, and songbirds and other passerines generally nest between March and August. 088 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-20 November 2020 (2020-173) 4.4.2 Biological Resources (IV) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Less than significant with mitigation incorporated. The literature review and database searches identified 58 special-status plant species that occur near the project site; but due to elevational factors, the project site’s history of being heavily disturbed, developed, disked, and the current lack of suitable habitat for special-status plant species on project site, all of the special-status plant species identified in the literature review were presumed absent from the project site. Therefore, the removal of approximately 4 acres of disturbed and developed land on the project site would not contribute to the overall decline of any of the plant species identified in the literature review and database searches. No impacts to special-status plant species are anticipated to result from the development of the Proposed Project. The literature review and database searches identified 45 special-status wildlife species that occur near the project site; however, based on the condition of the project site, the project site’s history of being heavily disturbed, developed, disked, and the current lack of suitable habitat for special-status wildlife species on the project site, all of the special-status wildlife species identified in the literature review were presumed absent from the project site. Therefore, the removal of approximately 4.0 acres of disturbed and developed land on the project site would not contribute to the overall decline of any of the wildlife species identified in the literature review and database searches. No impacts to special-status wildlife species are anticipated to result from the development of the Proposed Project. However, if the equestrian uses of the project site were to stop on all or portions of the project site and due to its highly mobile nature, there is potential for burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) to use the site before the start of construction due to the presence of open areas. If burrowing owls occupy the project site prior to construction potential impacts in the form of injury, mortality from entombing, and loss of habitat may occur. With the implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1 impacts to burrowing owl would be less than significant level. Migratory Birds and Raptors The trees on and immediately adjacent to the project site could provide nesting habitat for nesting birds and raptors protected by the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code. If construction of the proposed Project occurs during the bird breeding season (typically February 1 through August 31), ground- disturbing construction activities could directly affect birds protected by the MBTA and their nests through the removal of habitat on the project site and indirectly through increased noise, vibrations, and 089 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-21 November 2020 (2020-173) increased human activity. Impacts to nesting birds would be less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2. No federally or state-listed species are expected to occur on the project site. Therefore, it is not likely that the Proposed Project would need to acquire a mechanism for “take” of federally or state-listed plant or wildlife species. Impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? No impact. In general, the project site consisted of disturbed/developed land that supported mostly non-native grass and forb species. The project site does not contain any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities that would need to be preserved. No impacts to sensitive natural communities are anticipated to result from the development of the Proposed Project. Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? No impact. The project site does not contain any federally protected wetlands or Waters of the United States. The development of the project site would not result in impacts to federally protected wetlands or Waters of the United States. No impact would occur. 090 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-22 November 2020 (2020-173) Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 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? No impact. The concept of habitat corridors addresses the linkage between large blocks of habitat that allow the safe movement of mammals and other wildlife species from one habitat area to another. The definition of a corridor varies, but corridors may include such areas as greenbelts, refuge systems, underpasses, and biogeographic land bridges. In general, a corridor is described as a linear habitat, embedded in a dissimilar matrix, which connects two or more large blocks of habitat. Wildlife movement corridors are critical for the survivorship of ecological systems for several reasons. Corridors can connect water, food, and cover sources, spatially linking these three resources with wildlife in different areas. In addition, wildlife movement between habitat areas provides for the potential of genetic exchange between wildlife species populations, thereby maintaining genetic variability and adaptability to maximize the success of wildlife responses to changing environmental conditions. This is especially critical for small populations subject to loss of variability from genetic drift and effects of inbreeding. The nature of corridor usage and wildlife movement patterns vary greatly among species. The project site is located within and adjacent to areas containing existing disturbances (e.g., paved roads and residential). The project site is heavily disturbed and/or developed and contained very little vegetative cover that would facilitate wildlife movement. No migratory wildlife corridors or native wildlife nursery sites were identified within the project site. No impacts to wildlife corridors or nursery sites are expected to occur during the development of the project site. Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? No Impact. In October 2018, Tree of Life Consulting (TLC) prepared an arborist report for the Proposed Project to document the onsite trees’ current conditions, provide a digital map of their locations, and to recommend if they were suitable for preservation or relocation. Twenty-seven of the trees were eucalyptus sp. and sat along Vista Grove St. The trees were in various stages of decline and had rock and debris piled up around the root flares limiting access. Many of these trees had previously failed and were adventitious root 091 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-23 November 2020 (2020-173) sprouts. The remaining trees were mostly in a fenced in area that was still occupied by residents and access was limited. A few trees sat in the vacant field and were likely previous failures or removals that had re-sprouted. Other than two eucalyptus trees and one fan palm, no trees were suitable for preservation or relocation. Due to the age of the trees, un-correctable structure, poor locations and varying stages of decline, any preservation or relocation practices would largely be useless (TLC 2018). The City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance in the Municipal Code (Chapter 17.80 Tree Preservation) purpose is to protect trees, considered to be a community resource, from indiscriminate cutting or removal. Provisions within Chapter 17.80 are specifically intended to protect and expand the eucalyptus windrows. Heritage Trees, as defined in Municipal Code Section 17.16.080, are also protected are require a permit prior to removal. The Proposed Project would include removal of all onsite trees. Thus, the applicant would acquire a permit prior to the removal, relocation, or destruction of a Heritage Tree. All construction and grading activities would comply with City Municipal Code 17.16.080 and obtain a tree removal permit prior to the removal of the existing trees. No impact would occur. Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? No impact. The project site is not located within an HCP or NCCP. Development of the project site will not conflict with the provisions of an adopted HCP, NCCP, or other approved local, regional or state HCP. No impact would occur. 4.4.3 Mitigation Measures BIO-1: Pre-Construction Burrowing Owl Survey: A pre-construction survey for burrowing owls shall be completed within the Project site between 14 and 30 days prior to construction activities in accordance with the CDFW Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (2012). A second pre- construction survey shall be conducted no more than 24 hours prior to the start of construction. If burrowing owls are observed during either of the preconstruction surveys, implementation of additional measures may be necessary to reduce impacts to a level that is less than significant, including seasonal work restrictions, no-work buffers established around active burrows, passive relocation of burrowing owls, and/or a specific mitigation methodology determined in coordination with CDFW. BIO-2: Pre-construction Nesting Bird Survey: If construction or other Project activities are scheduled to occur during the bird breeding season (February through August for raptors and March 092 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-24 November 2020 (2020-173) through August for most migratory bird species), a pre-construction nesting bird survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to ensure that active bird nests will not be disturbed or destroyed. The survey shall be completed no more than three days prior to initial ground disturbance. The nesting bird survey shall include the project site and adjacent areas where Project activities have the potential to affect active nests, either directly or indirectly due to construction activity or noise. If an active nest is identified, a qualified biologist shall establish an appropriate disturbance limit buffer around the nest using flagging or staking. Construction activities shall not occur within any disturbance limit buffer zones until the nest has fledged or has been deemed inactive by the qualified biologist. 4.5 Cultural Resources 4.5.1 Environmental Setting A Cultural Resources Inventory Report was prepared by ECORP Consulting, Inc. (ECORP 2020c, Appendix C) for the Proposed Project to determine if cultural resources were present in or adjacent to the project site and assess the sensitivity of the project site for undiscovered or buried cultural resources. The cultural context of the project area including regional and local prehistory, ethnography, and regional and project area histories can be found in the report in Appendix C. In October 2018, a cultural resources records search was conducted at the South Central Coastal Information Center at California State University, Fullerton. The purpose of the records search was to determine the extent of previous cultural resources investigations and the presence of previously- recorded archaeological sites or historic-period (i.e., over 50 years in age) resources within a one-mile (1600-meter) radius of the project site. Materials reviewed included reports of previous cultural resources investigations, archaeological site records, historical maps, and listings of resources on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), California Points of Historical Interest, California Landmarks, and National Historic Landmarks. In addition to the records search, ECORP contacted the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) on October 10, 2018, to request a search of the Sacred Lands File for the project area. The results of the search showed no Native American cultural resources in the project area; however, the absence of specific site information in the search does not indicate the absence of cultural resources in any project area. 4.5.2 Cultural Resources (V) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5? No impact. 093 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-25 November 2020 (2020-173) The records search results indicated that no previous cultural resources study had been conducted within the project site, and 36 investigations have occurred within a one-mile radius of the project site between 1975 and 2014. The records search also revealed that no previously recorded resources are located within the project site, and 14 previously recorded resources are located within a one-mile radius of the project site. The results of the search of the Sacred Lands File by the NAHC did not indicate the presence of any Native American cultural resources within one mile of the project site. As a result of the field survey, an agricultural complex with two historic-age buildings and four features consisting of building foundations (TR-001) was documented and evaluated using CRHR eligibility criteria. TR 001 was evaluated as not eligible for listing in the CRHR under any criteria and not eligible as a City of Rancho Cucamonga Historic Landmark. TR-001 is also not currently listed in a local register of historical resources, as defined in Public Resources Code (PRC) 5020.1(k), and has not been identified as significant in a historical resources survey, as defined in PRC 5024.1(g). Therefore, TR 001 is not considered an Historical Resource as defined by CEQA. The Proposed Project would not result in any significant impacts on known Historical Resources under CEQA. No impact would occur. Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Archaeological resources are defined as the physical remains of past human activities and can be either prehistorical or historical in origin. Archaeological sites are locations that contain evidence of human activity. In general, an archaeological site is defined by a significant accumulation, or presence, of one or more of the following: food remains, waste from the manufacturing of tools, concentrations or alignments of stones, modification of rock surfaces, unusual discoloration or accumulation of soil, or human skeletal remains. Geologic maps show that the project area contains early Holocene Quaternary alluvium. While these sediments are contemporaneous with pre-contact human occupation of the area, the two pre-contact resources within the one-mile records search radius are both located at least ¾-mile from the project site, and are exclusively centered around bedrock outcrops near the mouths of canyons. The project site does not contain any bedrock outcrops and no surface-level artifacts were found that would indicate it had been intensively used during the pre-contact period. Sediments within the project site have been disturbed by use of the property as a citrus grove, removal of the citrus grove, construction and removal of several buildings, and the operation of the property as an agricultural complex through the years. Therefore, the archaeological sensitivity of the area is believed to be low (ECORP 2018c). Although the archaeological sensitivity is low, there is still a potential for ground-disturbing activities to expose previously unrecorded cultural resources. CEQA requires the lead agency to address any 094 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-26 November 2020 (2020-173) unanticipated cultural resources discoveries during project construction. Therefore, implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-1, SMBMI CUL 1, and SMBMI CUL-2 would reduce potential adverse impacts to less than significant. Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries? Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. No human remains or dedicated cemeteries were identified during the records search and field survey completed for the Proposed Project. However, the possibility exists that human remains could be uncovered during construction of the Proposed Project. Implementation of mitigation measures CUL-1 and SMBMI CUL-3 would ensure that impacts to human remains are less than significant. 4.5.3 Mitigation Measures CUL-1: If subsurface deposits believed to be cultural or human in origin are discovered during construction, all work must halt within a 60-foot radius of the discovery. A qualified professional archaeologist, meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for prehistoric and historic archaeologist, shall be retained to evaluate the significance of the find, and shall have the authority to modify the no-work radius as appropriate, using professional judgment. The following notifications shall apply, depending on the nature of the find: • If the professional archaeologist determines that the find does not represent a cultural resource, work may resume immediately, and no agency notifications are required. • If the professional archaeologist determines that the find does represent a cultural resource from any time period or cultural affiliation, the archaeologist shall immediately notify the CEQA lead agency, and applicable landowner. The agencies shall consult on a finding of eligibility and implement appropriate treatment measures, if the find is determined to be eligible for inclusion in the NRHP or CRHR. Work may not resume within the no-work radius until the lead agencies, through consultation as appropriate, determine that the site either: 1) is not eligible for the NRHP or CRHR; or 2) that the treatment measures have been completed to their satisfaction. • If the find includes human remains, or remains that are potentially human, the archaeologist shall ensure reasonable protection measures are taken to protect the discovery from disturbance (AB 2641). The archaeologist shall notify the San Bernardino County Coroner (as per § 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code). The provisions of § 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code, § 5097.98 of the California PRC, and AB 2641 will be implemented. If the Coroner determines the remains are Native American and not the result of a crime scene, 095 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-27 November 2020 (2020-173) the Coroner will notify the NAHC, which then will designate a Native American Most Likely Descendant (MLD) for the Project (§ 5097.98 of the PRC). The designated MLD will have 48 hours from the time access to the property is granted to make recommendations concerning treatment of the remains. If the landowner does not agree with the recommendations of the MLD, the NAHC can mediate (§ 5097.94 of the PRC). If no agreement is reached, the landowner must rebury the remains where they will not be further disturbed (§ 5097.98 of the PRC). This will also include either recording the site with the NAHC or the appropriate information center; using an open space or conservation zoning designation or easement; or recording a reinternment document with the county in which the property is located (AB 2641). Work may not resume within the no-work radius until the lead agencies, through consultation as appropriate, determine that the treatment measures have been completed to their satisfaction. SMBMI CUL-1: In the event that cultural resources are discovered during project activities, all work in the immediate vicinity of the find (within a 60-foot buffer) shall cease and a qualified archaeologist meeting Secretary of Interior standards shall be hired to assess the find. Work on the other portions of the project outside of the buffered area may continue during this assessment period. Additionally, the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians Cultural Resources Department (SMBMI) shall be contacted, as detailed within SMBMI TCR-1, regarding any pre-contact finds and be provided information after the archaeologist makes his/her initial assessment of the nature of the find, so as to provide Tribal input with regards to significance and treatment. SMBMI CUL-2: If significant pre-contact cultural resources, as defined by CEQA (as amended, 2015), are discovered and avoidance cannot be ensured, the archaeologist shall develop a Monitoring and Treatment Plan, the drafts of which shall be provided to SMBMI for review and comment, as detailed within SMBMI TCR-1. The archaeologist shall monitor the remainder of the project and implement the Plan accordingly. SMBMI CUL-3: If human remains or funerary objects are encountered during any activities associated with the project, work in the immediate vicinity (within a 100-foot buffer of the find) shall cease and the County Coroner shall be contacted pursuant to State Health and Safety Code §7050.5 and that code enforced for the duration of the project. 4.6 Energy 4.6.1 Environmental Setting Electricity/Natural Gas Services Southern California Edison provides electrical services to Rancho Cucamonga through State-regulated public utility contracts. Southern California Edison, the largest subsidiary of Edison International, is the primary electricity supply company for much of Southern California. It provides 14 million people with electricity across a service territory of approximately 50,000 square miles. 096 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-28 November 2020 (2020-173) The Southern California Gas Company provides natural gas services to the Project area. Southern California Gas services approximately 21.6 million customers, spanning roughly 20,000 square miles of California. Energy Consumption Electricity use is measured in kilowatt-hours (kWh), and natural gas use is measured in therms. Vehicle fuel use is typically measured in gallons (e.g. of gasoline or diesel fuel), although energy use for electric vehicles is measured in kWh. The electricity consumption associated with all non-residential uses in San Bernardino County from 2014 to 2018 is shown in Table 4.6-1. As indicated, the demand has increased since 2014. Table 4.6-1. Non-Residential Electricity Consumption in San Bernardino County 2014-2018 Year Residential Electricity Consumption (kWh) 2018 10,189,923,519 2017 10,079,280,332 2016 9,972,705,757 2015 9,826,231,162 2014 9,998,887,200 Source: ECDMS 2019 The natural gas consumption associated with all non-residential uses in San Bernardino County from 2014 to 2018 is shown in Table 4.6-2. As indicated, the demand has increased since 2014. Table 4.6-2. Non-residential Natural Gas Consumption in San Bernardino County 2014-2018 Year Residential Natural Gas Consumption (therms) 2018 268,614,328 2017 257,879,077 2016 259,752,692 2015 245,499,027 2014 238,061,850 Source: ECDMS 2019 Automotive fuel consumption in San Bernardino County from 2015 to 2019 is shown in Table 4.6-3. As shown, automotive fuel consumption has remained relatively constant in the county since 2015. 097 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-29 November 2020 (2020-173) Table 4.6-3. Automotive Fuel Consumption in San Bernardino County 2015–2019 Year Automotive Fuel Consumption (gallons) 2019 3,334,922,526 2018 3,385,160,075 2017 3,427,137,695 2016 3,469,323,122 2015 3,336,730,022 Source: California Air Resources Board (CARB) 2017 4.6.2 Energy (VI) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? Less than significant. Project construction is expected to have a nominal effect on local and regional energy supplies. No unusual project characteristics would necessitate the use of construction equipment that would be less energy-efficient than at comparable construction sites in the region or the state. Construction contractors would purchase their own gasoline and diesel fuel from local suppliers and would conserve the use of their supplies to minimize costs to their profits. Additionally, construction equipment fleet turnover and increasingly stringent state and federal regulations on engine efficiency combined with state regulations limiting engine idling times and requiring recycling of construction debris, would further reduce the amount of transportation fuel demand during project construction. For these reasons, it is expected that construction fuel consumption associated with the Proposed Project would not be any more inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary than other similar residential development projects of this nature. The Proposed Project would not result in any unusual characteristics that would result in excessive long- term operational energy consumption. Energy consumption associated with the Proposed Project would not be considered inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary in comparison to other similar residential developments in the region. For these reasons, this impact would be less than significant. 098 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-30 November 2020 (2020-173) Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? Less than significant. The Proposed Project would be designed in a manner that is consistent with relevant energy conservation plans designed to encourage development that results in the efficient use of energy resources. The project site is designated Very Low Residential by the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan and as such, the Proposed Project is consistent with the development projections for the area. The Proposed Project would comply with relevant energy conservation policies included in the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan; many of which are included in the Resource Conservation Goals and Policies section. A major overarching goal of this component of the General Plan is to ensure that development in the City aligns with the City’s resource conservation goals. The Propsoed Project would not conflict or obstruct any local or state plans for renewable energy or energy efficiency. For these reasons, this impact would be less than significant. 4.6.3 Mitigation Measures No significant impacts were identified, and no mitigation measures are required. 4.7 Geology and Soils 4.7.1 Environmental Setting Regional Seismicity and Fault Zones An “active fault,” according to California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, is a fault that has indicated surface displacement within the last 11,000 years. A fault that has not shown geologic evidence of surface displacement in the last 11,000 years is considered “inactive.” A major earthquake (7.0 magnitude) on the Cucamonga Fault, located approximately 2.5 miles north of the project site, is assumed to be the worst-case earthquake scenario for the City. Ground displacements of up to 9 feet could occur along the fault, intense ground shaking could last more than 30 seconds, and losses could be extensive (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2010a). The Etiwanda Avenue Fault Scarp (potential for 6.5 magnitude earthquake) is considered capable of ground shaking at an intensity that presents unacceptable risks to proposed structures. This fault is located approximately one mile north of the project site. Soils The elevation of the project site ranges from 1,915 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) to 1,944 feet AMSL. It is located approximately 364 feet southeast of a drainage, which emanates from the San Gabriel Mountains 0.55 mile to the north. According to the National Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey website (NRCS 2020), soil on the project site consists of Soboba Gravely Loamy Sand. The Rancho 099 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-31 November 2020 (2020-173) Cucamonga General Plan EIR describes these soils as consisting of grayish-brown stony loamy sand on the surface, about 10 inches thick, with underlying material of brown very stony loamy sand and very pale brown stony sand about 60 inches thick. These soils are excessively drained and highly permeable. Runoff on these soils is slow and erosion hazard is slight. They have low shrink-swell potential (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2010b). 4.7.2 Geology and Soils (VII) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Directly or indirectly cause substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? Less than significant. i) According to the City’s General Plan, the nearest Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone is the Etiwanda Avenue Fault Scarp, located approximately one mile north of the project site (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2010a). In the event of an earthquake, strong ground shaking would occur. However, future construction of residential structures would be required to comply with current building codes and design standards which would reduce the risk of loss, injury, or death resulting from strong ground-shaking. Design of the Proposed Project would follow the recommendations of a registered civil, structural engineer and/or engineering geologist and at a minimum meet current building standards and codes including those associated with protection from anticipated seismic events. As such, impacts would be less than significant. ii) As discussed above, in the event of an earthquake strong ground shaking is expected to occur on the project site. The Proposed Project would not expose people or structures to strong seismic ground shaking greater than what currently exists. Design and construction 100 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-32 November 2020 (2020-173) would comply with current building codes and standards which would reduce the risk of loss, injury, or death resulting from strong ground shaking. Impacts would be less than significant. iii) Liquefaction is a phenomenon in which water-saturated granular soil loses shear strength during strong ground shaking produced by earthquakes. The loss of soil strength occurs when cyclic pore water pressure increases below the groundwater surface. Potential hazards due to liquefaction include the loss of bearing strength beneath structures, possibly causing foundation failure and/or significant settlements. According to the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan, groundwater is generally 350 feet or more below the ground surface. The project site is not located in a zone of potential liquefaction (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2010a). For these reasons, the Proposed Project is not anticipated to have adverse effects that could result in risk of loss, injury, or death due to liquefaction that may occur during a seismic event. Impacts would be less than significant. iv) Landslides refer to a wide variety of processes that result in the perceptible downward and outward movement of soil, rock, and vegetation under gravitational influence. Common names for landslide types include slump, rockslide, debris slide, lateral spreading, debris avalanche, earth flow, and soil creep. Landslides may be triggered by both natural- and human-induced changes in the environment resulting in slope instability. The project site and surrounding terrain are relatively flat and no hillsides exist in the immediate vicinity. According to the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Geologic Hazard Map, the project site does not lie in a region susceptible to landslides (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2013a). As such, no impact would occur. Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less than significant. The Proposed Project would require ground-disturbing activities, such as grading, that could potentially result in soil erosion or loss of topsoil. These exposed soils could potentially cause erosion impacts during windy conditions and from construction vehicles traveling through the project site. Heavy rains could cause the exposed soils to run off into public rights-of-way and/or storm drainage systems. Construction of the Proposed Project would be required to comply with the Construction General Permit, either through a waiver or through preparation and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Best Management Practices (BMPs) included in the SWPPP would minimize soil erosion during construction. The Proposed Project’s grading plan and SWPPP would also ensure that the proposed earthwork and storm water structures are designed to avoid soil erosion. Impacts would be less than significant. 101 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-33 November 2020 (2020-173) Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? Less than significant. As discussed in the responses to questions a) i) through iv) of this section, hazards associated with liquefaction, lateral spread, and landslides are not expected. Compliance with City procedures for plan check, permit issuance, and construction inspection ensure would ensure that the Proposed Project is appropriately designed to minimize potential hazards related to soil instability. Impacts would be less than significant. Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? No impact. According to the General Plan EIR, soboba soils that are stony loamy sand (SpC) are found are found at the project site. These soils consist of grayish-brown stony loamy sand on the surface, about 10 inches thick, with underlying material of brown very stony loamy sand and very pale brown stony sand about 60 inches thick. These soils are excessively drained and highly permeable. Runoff on these soils is slow and erosion hazard is slight. They have low shrink-swell potential (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2010b). Therefore, no impact would occur. Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? Less than significant. 102 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-34 November 2020 (2020-173) The Proposed Project would install private septic systems for the six residential lots. As discussed in the responses to questions a) i) through iv) of this section, geologic hazards associated with liquefaction, lateral spread, and landslides are not expected. Compliance with City procedures for plan check, permit issuance, and construction inspection ensure would ensure that the Proposed Project is appropriately designed to minimize potential hazards associated with installation of the proposed septic system. Impacts would be less than significant. Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Less than significant with mitigation incorporated. According to the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan EIR, no direct evidence of paleontological resources has been found as a result of surveys in the City (Rancho Cucamonga 2010b). Although no paleontological resources are known to exist on site, there is a possibility that paleontological resources exist at sub-surface levels on the project site and may be uncovered during grading and excavation activities. Implementation of mitigation measure GEO-1 would ensure that if any such resources are found during construction of the Proposed Project, they would be handled according to the proper regulations and any potential impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels. 4.7.3 Mitigation Measures GEO-1: Unanticipated Discovery – Paleontological Resource. If paleontological resources (i.e., fossil remains) are discovered during excavation activities, the contractor will notify the City and cease excavation within 100 feet of the find until a qualified paleontological professional can provide an evaluation of the site. The qualified paleontological professional will evaluate the significance of the find and recommend appropriate measures for the disposition of the site (e.g. fossil recovery, curation, data recovery, and/or monitoring). Construction activities may continue on other parts of the construction site while evaluation and treatment of the paleontological resource takes place. 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 4.8.1 Environmental Setting Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions are released as byproducts of fossil fuel combustion, waste disposal, energy use, land use changes, and other human activities. This release of gases, such as carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and chlorofluorocarbons, creates a blanket around the earth that allows light to pass through but traps heat at the surface, preventing its escape into space. While this is a naturally occurring process known as the greenhouse effect, human activities have accelerated the 103 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-35 November 2020 (2020-173) generation of GHGs beyond natural levels. The overabundance of GHGs in the atmosphere has led to an unexpected warming of the earth and has the potential to severely impact the earth’s climate system. Each GHG differs in its ability to absorb heat in the atmosphere based on the lifetime, or persistence, of the gas molecule in the atmosphere. CH4 traps over 25 times more heat per molecule than CO2, and N2O absorbs 298 times more heat per molecule than CO2. Often, estimates of GHG emissions are presented in carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e). Expressing GHG emissions in carbon dioxide equivalents takes the contribution of all GHG emissions to the greenhouse effect and converts them to a single unit equivalent to the effect that would occur if only CO2 were being emitted. The local air quality agency regulating the SoCAB is the SCAQMD, the regional air pollution control officer for the basin. To provide guidance to local lead agencies on determining significance for GHG emissions in CEQA documents, SCAQMD staff convened a GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Working Group. The Working Group was formed to assist the SCAQMD’s efforts to develop a GHG significance threshold and is composed of a wide variety of stakeholders including the State Office of Planning and Research (OPR), CARB, the Attorney General’s Office, a variety of city and county planning departments in the Basin, various utilities such as sanitation and power companies throughout the Basin, industry groups, and environmental and professional organizations. On October 8, 2008, the SCAQMD released the Draft AQMD Staff CEQA GHG Significance Thresholds. On September 28, 2010, the SCAQMD recommended an interim screening level numeric, bright-line threshold of 3,000 metric tons of CO2e annually and an efficiency-based threshold of 4.8 metric tons of CO2e per service population (Project employees + patrons + residents) per year in 2020 and 3.0 metric tons of CO2e per service population per year in 2035. These thresholds were developed as part of the SCAQMD GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Working Group. The working group was formed to assist the SCAQMD’s efforts to develop a GHG significance threshold and is composed of a wide variety of stakeholders including the state Office of Planning and Research (OPR), CARB, the Attorney General’s Office, a variety of city and county planning departments in the SoCAB, various utilities such as sanitation and power companies throughout the basin, industry groups, and environmental and professional organizations. The numeric bright line and efficiency-based thresholds were developed to be consistent with CEQA requirements for developing significance thresholds, are supported by substantial evidence, and provide guidance to CEQA practitioners and lead agencies with regard to determining whether GHG emissions from a proposed project are significant. ECORP prepared an Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Technical Report for the Proposed Project in October 2018 (Appendix A). For the purposes of this evaluation, the Proposed Project is compared to the SCAQMD interim screening level numeric bright-line threshold of 3,000 metric tons of CO2e annually. If it is determined that the Proposed Project is estimated to exceed this screening threshold, it will then be compared to the SCAQMD-recommended efficiency-based threshold of 4.8 metric tons of CO2e per service population per year in 2020, and 3.0 metric tons of CO2e per service population per year in 2035. The Proposed Project is also evaluated for compliance with the City Sustainable Community Action Plan. As part of the Sustainable Community Action Plan, Rancho Cucamonga set a goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 15 percent below 2008 levels by 2020. The Sustainable Community Action Plan also addresses GHG emissions beyond 2020 as informed by the statewide post-2020 GHG reduction targets. 104 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-36 November 2020 (2020-173) Rancho Cucamonga will look to align greenhouse gas reduction goals with State targets for 2030 and beyond. 4.8.2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions (VIII) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? No impact. Construction Construction-related activities that would generate GHGs include worker commute trips, haul trucks carrying supplies and materials to and from the project site, and off-road construction equipment (e.g., dozers, loaders, excavators). Table 4.8-1 illustrates the specific construction-generated GHG emissions that would result from construction of the Proposed Project. Table 4.8-1. Construction-Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions Emissions Source CO2e (Metric Tons/ Year) Construction in 2019 510 Construction in 2020 108 Total 618 Source: CalEEMod version 2016.3.2. Refer to Appendix A in the Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Assessment for Model Data Outputs (ECORP 2020a). Notes: Emissions estimates account for the demolition of 4,200 square feet of structures. Building construction, paving, and painting assumed to occur simultaneously. As shown in Table 4.8-1, Proposed Project construction would result in the generation of approximately 618 metric tons of CO2e over the course of construction. Once construction is complete, the generation of these GHG emissions would cease. Projected GHGs from construction have been quantified and amortized over the life of the Proposed Project (30 years). The amortized construction emissions are added to the annual average operational emissions. Operations Operation of the Proposed Project would result in GHG emissions predominantly associated with motor vehicle use. Long-term operational GHG emissions attributable to the Proposed Project are identified in Table 4.8-2 and compared to SCAQMD’s interim screening level numeric bright-line threshold of 3,000 metric tons of CO2e annually. 105 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-37 November 2020 (2020-173) Table 4.8-2. Operational-Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions Emissions Source CO2e (Metric Tons/ Year) Construction Emissions (Amortized over 30 years) 21 Area Source Emissions 1 Energy Source Emissions 27 Mobile Source Emissions 91 Solid Waste Emissions 4 Water Emissions 3 Total Emissions 147 SCAQMD Screening Threshold 3,000 Exceed SCAQMD Threshold? No Source: CalEEMod version 2016.3.2. Refer to Appendix A in the Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Assessment for Model Data Outputs (ECORP 2020a). Notes: Emissions projections account for a trip generation rate identified ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition (2017). SCAQMD thresholds were developed based on substantial evidence that such thresholds represent quantitative levels of GHG emissions, compliance with which means that the environmental impact of the GHG emissions will normally not be cumulatively considerable under CEQA. These thresholds were developed as part of the SCAQMD GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Working Group. The working group was formed to assist the SCAQMD’s efforts to develop a GHG significance threshold and is composed of a wide variety of stakeholders including the state OPR, CARB, the Attorney General’s Office, a variety of city and county planning departments in the SoCAB, various utilities such as sanitation and power companies throughout the basin, industry groups, and environmental and professional organizations. As shown in Table 4.8-2, operational-generated emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD’s interim screening level numeric bright-line threshold of 3,000 metric tons of CO2e annually. No impact would occur. Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Less than significant. City of Rancho Cucamonga Sustainable Community Action Plan The Rancho Cucamonga Sustainable Community Action Plan (2017) is a strategic planning document that identifies sources of GHG emissions within the City’s boundaries, presents current and future emissions estimates, identifies a GHG reduction target for future years, and presents strategic policies and actions to reduce emissions from the energy, transportation, land use, water use, and waste sectors. The GHG- reduction strategies in the Plan build on inventory results and key opportunities prioritized by City staff and members of the public. The Sustainable Community Action Plan strategies consist of strategies that 106 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-38 November 2020 (2020-173) identify the steps the City will take to support reductions in GHG emissions. The City will achieve these reductions in GHG emissions through a mix of voluntary programs and new strategic standards. All standards presented in the Sustainable Community Action Plan respond to the needs of development though achieving more efficient use of resources. Both the existing and the projected GHG inventories in the Sustainable Community Action Plan were derived based on the land use designations and associated densities defined in the City 2010 General Plan. The Proposed Project is consistent with the land use designation and development density presented in the 2010 General Plan. As previously stated, the project site is designated by the City’s General Plan as “Very Low Residential”, which allows for detached, very low-density single residential units on 0.5-acre lots or larger, with private yards and private parking. Since the Proposed Project is consistent with the General Plan it is consistent with the types, intensity, and patterns of land use envisioned for the site vicinity in the General Plan. As a result, the Proposed Project would not conflict with the land use assumptions or exceed the population or job growth projections used by the City to develop the Sustainable Community Action Plan. While the Sustainable Community Action Plan does not contain specific requirements for new developments like that proposed by the Proposed Project, all development in Rancho Cucamonga, including the Proposed Project, is required to adhere to all City-adopted policy provisions, including those contained in the adopted Sustainable Community Action Plan. The City ensures all feasible GHG-reducing strategies of the Sustainable Community Action Plan are incorporated into projects and their permits through development review and applications of conditions of approval as applicable. The Proposed Project would not conflict with an adopted plan, policy, or regulation pertaining to GHGs. Thus, a less than significant impact would occur in this regard. Cumulative GHG Impacts Climate change is a global problem and GHGs are global pollutants, unlike criteria air pollutants and toxic air contaminants, which are pollutants of regional and local concern. Whereas pollutants with localized air quality effects have relatively short atmospheric lifetimes (about 1 day), GHGs have much longer atmospheric lifetimes of 1 year to several thousand years that allow them to be dispersed around the globe. It is generally the case that an individual project of this size and nature is of insufficient magnitude by itself to influence climate change or result in a substantial contribution to the global GHG inventory. GHG impacts are recognized as exclusively cumulative impacts; there are no non-cumulative GHG emission impacts from a climate change perspective. The additive effect of project-related GHGs would not result in a reasonably foreseeable cumulatively considerable contribution to global climate change. In addition, the Proposed Project as well as other cumulative related projects would also be subject to all applicable regulatory requirements, which would further reduce GHG emissions. As previously discussed, the Proposed Project would not conflict with the City CAP. As a result, the Proposed Project would not conflict with any GHG reduction plans. Therefore, the Proposed Project’s cumulative contribution of GHG 107 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-39 November 2020 (2020-173) emissions would be less than significant and the Proposed Project’s cumulative GHG impacts would also be less than cumulatively considerable. 4.8.3 Mitigation Measures No significant impacts were identified, and no mitigation measures are required. 4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 4.9.1 Hazards and Hazardous Materials (IX) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Less than significant. The construction phase of the Proposed Project may include the transport, storage, and short-term use of petroleum-based fuels, lubricants, pesticides, and other similar materials. These activities would be short- term and one-time events and would be subject to federal, state, and local health and safety requirements. The transport of hazardous materials by truck is regulated by federal safety standards under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Department of Transportation. Additionally, the implementation of BMPs stipulating proper storage of hazardous materials and vehicle refueling would be implemented during construction as part of the SWPPP. All transport, handling, use, and disposal of substances such as petroleum products, paints, and solvents related to the operation and maintenance of the Proposed Project would comply with all Federal, State, and local laws regulating management and use of hazardous materials. Long-term operation of the Proposed Project would involve very little transport, storage, use, or disposal of hazardous material. A less than significant impact related to the use or transport of hazardous materials is expected to occur. Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Less than significant. On-site storage and/or use of large quantities of hazardous materials capable of affecting soil and groundwater are not proposed. However, during construction some hazardous materials, such as diesel 108 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-40 November 2020 (2020-173) fuel and herbicides, would be used. A SWPPP, listing BMPs to prevent construction pollutants and products from violating any water quality standard or waste discharge requirements would be prepared for the Proposed Project. The potential risk associated with accidental discharge during use and storage of equipment-related hazardous materials would be low since the handling of such materials would be addressed through the implementation of BMPs. With the implementation of BMPs, the Proposed Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous material. Impacts would be less than significant. Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? No impact. The nearest school to the project site is Hermosa Elementary School, approximately 0.4 mile south of the site. As such, the Proposed Project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous materials within one-quarter mile of a school. No impact would occur. Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? No impact. A search of the Department of Toxic Substances Control’s (DTSC) Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List (Cortese List) and EnviroStor online database and the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) GeoTracker online database was conducted for the Proposed Project area (DTSC 2020a and 2020b; SWRCB 2020). The searches revealed no known hazardous materials on the project site or immediate vicinity. No impact would occur. 109 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-41 November 2020 (2020-173) Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? No impact. The project site is not located within two miles of a public or private airport. The nearest airport is Cable Airport, approximately 6.2 miles southwest of the project site. As such, the Project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area. No impact would occur. Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Less than significant. The City produced the Ready RC Guide in 2017, which provides essential tips on what to do before, during and after a disaster. The guide focuses primarily on fire, flood, earthquake, and wind disasters. This comprehensive booklet includes emergency kit checklists, evacuation route maps, shelter information and more (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2017). The nearest designated emergency access route by the Ready RC Guide is Banyan Street, approximately one mile south of the project site. Emergency access to the site would be available via one entrance on Hermosa Avenue, thereby facilitating emergency response and evacuation, if necessary. The City's project review process includes reviews by the City’s fire and police departments for consideration of emergency access requirements. The Proposed Project’s design would meet City standards for required emergency vehicle access and emergency egress of residents. Established City procedures including plan check, permit issuance, and construction inspection would ensure implementation of the Proposed Project is consistent with the approved design. A less than significant impact would occur. 110 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-42 November 2020 (2020-173) Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? No impact. According to the CALFIRE Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map, the project site is located within a VHFHSZ (CALFIRE 2008). The project site is located on relatively flat a terrain and not in the vicinity of any large wildland areas. Emergency access to the site would be available via one existing entrance at the intersection of Vista Grove Drive and Hermosa Avenue. In addition, the Proposed Project would not substantially alter the slope, wind patterns, or other factors that could exacerbate wildfire risks. The City's project review process includes reviews by the City’s Fire, Building and Safety, and Planning Departments for consideration of wildfire risk, emergency access requirements, and consistency with General Plan policies. The Proposed Project’s design would meet City standards and the latest building construction codes. Established City procedures including plan check, permit issuance, and construction inspection would ensure implementation of the Proposed Project is consistent with the approved design. Impacts would be less than significant. 4.9.2 Mitigation Measures No significant impacts were identified, and no mitigation measures are required. 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality 4.10.1 Environmental Setting Regional Hydrology The City of Rancho Cucamonga is underlain by the Chino and Cucamonga groundwater basins, with the Cucamonga basin underlying the area located generally north of the Red Hill inferred fault and the Chino basin underlying the area south of the fault. The Red Hill Fault acts as a hydrological barrier between the two groundwater basins. The project site is located within the Cucamonga Basin (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2010b). The alluvial fans underlying the City were created by several stream systems from the eastern San Gabriel Mountains. These fans and washes represent debris flow events in the recent geologic period. The San Bernardino County Flood Control District maintains debris basins and flood-control facilities in the area to control debris flows and flooding hazards along the canyons, creeks and washes (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2010b). 111 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-43 November 2020 (2020-173) Site Hydrology and On-Site Drainage The elevation of the Project Area ranges from 1,915 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) to 1,944 feet AMSL. It is located approximately 364 feet southeast of a drainage, which emanates from the San Gabriel Mountains 0.55 mile to the north. For details of the proposed water quality management plans, please see Figure 4. 4.10.2 Hydrology and Water Quality (X) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? Less than significant. During construction of the Proposed Project water quality impacts could occur without proper controls. Soils loosened during grading, spills of fluids or fuels from vehicles and equipment or miscellaneous construction materials and debris, if mobilized and transported offsite in overland flow, could degrade water quality. Because the area of ground disturbance affected by construction of the Proposed Project would exceed one acre, the Proposed Project would be subject to the requirements of the statewide NPDES stormwater permit for construction activity (Order 98-08 DWQ). The proponent of the Proposed Project would implement a SWPPP listing BMPs to prevent construction pollutants and products from violating any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. During operations the Proposed Project would implement a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP). The WQMP details the Proposed Project’s stormwater management system to address post-construction runoff quality and quantity. The Proposed Project’s stormwater management system includes a water quality basin at the southern end of the cul-de-sac, between Lot 3 and Lot 4 (Figure 4. Water Quality Management Plan). Stormwater runoff from the proposed development would be directed to the proposed water quality basin. Impacts to surface or ground water quality during project operation would be less than significant. 112 "A" COURTHERMOSA AVEGROVEVISTA ST. (P R I V A T E S T R E E T)(P R I V A T E S T R E E T)LOT "A"LOT "A"LOT "A"DRAINAGE AREA=2.78 AC. DRAINAGE AREA=0.35 AC. RECOMMENDED DRAWING NO. B.K.M. TRACT NO. 18305 WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA J.B.M. J.B.M. CHECKED DRAWN DESIGN SHEET 1 OF 1 APPROVEDDESCRIPTION OF REVISION DATE CITY TRACT MAP NO. 18305 Figure 4. Water Quality Management Plan2020-173 Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project113 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-45 November 2020 (2020-173) Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? Less than significant. The Proposed Project would include both pervious (water quality basin, drainage easement, and landscape areas) and impervious (hardscapes, building footprints) surfaces. The Proposed Project would not involve the withdrawal of groundwater. Water supply for the residential uses would be provided by the Cucamonga Valley Water District. The Proposed Project’s stormwater management system includes the use of a water quality basin, which would allow groundwater recharge. Therefore, the Proposed Project is not anticipated to substantially affect groundwater recharge. Impacts would be less than significant. Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner that would: i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite; iii) 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; or iv) impede or redirect flood flows? Less than significant. i) The Proposed Project would require grading of the project site which would result in localized changes in discharge patterns, which could result in erosion and/or siltation. Erosion and/or siltation during construction would be minimized by implementation of BMPs included in the 114 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-46 November 2020 (2020-173) Proposed Project’s SWPPP. Furthermore, the Proposed Project grading plan and stormwater management system has been designed by a registered civil engineer to meet City development standards and safely collect and convey runoff to on-site basins. Energy dissipators, such as rip-rap, would be used at discharge locations within the proposed basins to reduce the erosion potential. Impacts would be less than significant. ii) The Proposed Project’s WQMP details the project’s strategy to control the velocity and volume of surface runoff originating from the project site. The Proposed Project’s WQMP includes the use of a water quality basin and catch basins, which would accept runoff from the proposed development. The Proposed Project’s basins are designed to allow stormwater to infiltrate into the ground reducing the velocity and volume of stormwater that is discharged from the project site. As such, the potential for flooding on- or offsite is reduced. Impacts would be less than significant. iii) The Proposed Project’s stormwater management system was designed by a registered civil engineer to ensure that the system’s components are sized to treat the runoff volumes that are anticipated for the post-development condition. The system has also been designed to treat polluted runoff that is typical for residential development. Impacts would be less than significant. iv) The proposed grading plan and stormwater management system are designed to prevent flooding conditions. According to the General Plan EIR Figure 4.9-3 Flood Hazard Zones, the project site is located outside of the 0.2 percent chance of annual flood zone. Runoff from the proposed residential lots would be conveyed to the water quality basin and various catch basins throughout the site. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not impede or redirect flood flows. No impact would occur. Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? No impact. According to the General Plan EIR Figure 4.9-3 Flood Hazard Zones, the project site is located outside of the 0.2 percent chance of annual flood zone. Additionally, the project site is located approximately 40 miles northeast of the Pacific Ocean and not in the vicinity of a large body of water. Due to the distance to the Pacific Ocean, the project site would not be subject to inundation from seiches or tsunamis. The project site is also located outside of an inundation area (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2010b). No impact would occur. 115 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-47 November 2020 (2020-173) Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? Less than significant. The project site is located within the Cucamonga Groundwater Basin. According to the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD) 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), CVWD predicts that it would have sufficient supply to meet water demands in the foreseeable future. To meet demand, the difference from reduced canyon flows, imported water restrictions and State mandated water reductions during a multi- dry year shall be made up from the district’s stored groundwater from the Chino Basin, tier II imported water (if available), replenishment water (if available), and implementation of the water shortage contingency plan (CVWD 2016). The Proposed Project would comply with the Water Shortage Contingency Plan outlined in the UWMP, if implemented. For example, limits may be applied to the number of days, frequency and duration of outdoor watering. It is anticipated that the addition of six residential lots would not exceed the capacity of water supplies of the Cucamonga Basin. Furthermore, the Proposed Project would comply with the NPDES stormwater permit for construction activity (Order 98-08 DWQ), and as such would prepare a SWPPP to prevent groundwater contamination. By complying with all City and regional water conservation policies and regulations, impacts to water quality control and groundwater recharge would be less than significant. 4.10.3 Mitigation Measures No significant impacts were identified, and no mitigation measures are required. 4.11 Land Use and Planning 4.11.1 Environmental Setting The Proposed Project is located within the City of Rancho Cucamonga in southwest San Bernardino County (Figure 1). The project site consists of an approximately 4-acre area containing undeveloped land, a single-family home, and detached garage building (APN 1074-201-01,02). The site is located southwest of the intersection of Vista Grove Street and Hermosa Avenue (Figure 2). As shown on the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute Cucamonga Peak, California topographic quadrangle map (1996), the Project Area is located in the northeastern quarter of Section 28 of Township 1 north, Range 7 west of the San Bernardino Base and Meridian (Figure 2). The project site is approximately 1.5 miles north of the Foothill Freeway (I-210). The project site is bounded by residential properties to the east and west, an existing SBCFCD access road to the north, and an equestrian boarding and training facility to the south. The project site is very disturbed, with most of the vegetation on the project site consisting of non-native grasses and forbs known to persist in disturbed areas. Surrounding land uses are described in the table below. 116 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-48 November 2020 (2020-173) Table 4.11-1. Surrounding Zoning and Land Use Designations Land Use Designation Zoning Designation Existing Land Use Project Site Very Low Residential (VL) Very Low Residential (VL) Very Low Residential (VL) North Very Low Residential (VL) Very Low Residential (VL) SBCFD Access Road East Very Low Residential (VL) Very Low Residential (VL) Very Low Residential (VL) South Very Low Residential (VL) Very Low Residential (VL) Equestrian Boarding and Training Facility West Very Low Residential (VL) Very Low Residential (VL) Very Low Residential (VL) Source: City of Rancho Cucamonga 2010a The project site has a City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan designation of Very Low Residential (VL). The VL General Plan designation provides for detached, very low-density single residential units on 0.5- acre lots or larger, with private yards and private parking. This designation generally applies to the foothill areas north of Banyan Street and north of the Pacific Electric Trail in the Etiwanda area. 4.11.2 Land Use and Planning (XI) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Physically divide an established community? No impact. While there are residential neighborhoods in the vicinity of the project site, no separation of uses or disruption of access between land uses around the site would occur as a result of the Proposed Project. All development associated with the Proposed Project would be confined to the project site and would not disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of the established community. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not affect any established community. No impact would occur. Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? 117 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-49 November 2020 (2020-173) No impact. The City’s 2010 General Plan Future assumes that future development and redevelopment in the City would lead to the conversion of vacant and undeveloped land to urban land uses and the redevelopment of underutilized lots (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2010b). The Proposed Project is located in a Very Low Residential (VL) land use designation and would result in six new residential lots, which aligns with the redevelopment goals outlined in the General Plan. Additionally, the Proposed Project would continue the same recreational land uses within the project site; therefore, it would not conflict with the City’s land use plans. No impact would occur. 4.11.3 Mitigation Measures No significant impacts were identified, and no mitigation measures are required. 4.12 Mineral Resources 4.12.1 Environmental Setting Approximately 2,422 acres of potential aggregate mineral resources are located within the City. The majority of this acreage is planned for Open Space, Conservation, Flood Control/Utility Corridor, or Hillside Residential, which represents a very low-density of development. As of 2009, approximately 437 acres of the sectors in the City have been developed. Consequently, land use conflicts between residential uses and possible aggregate extraction is likely to occur in the City, particularly as residential use increases. The Sphere of Influence currently contains a rock crushing plant located within the Day Creek area, which is the only active aggregate operation in the Planning Area. As such, aggregate deposits available for recovery within the City may be limited due to conflicts between urban development, access, and the nature of typical surface mining operations (Rancho Cucamonga 2010a). 4.12.2 Mineral Resources (XII) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? No impact. According to the General Plan Mineral Land Classification Map, the project site is located in Mineral Resource Zone 2 (MRZ-2). MRZ-2 is defined as areas where geologic data indicate that significant PCC- Grade aggregate resources are present (CGS 2007). However, the Proposed Project consists of residential development and does not include mining activities. No impact to mineral resources would occur. 118 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-50 November 2020 (2020-173) Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally- important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? No impact. There are four coalescing alluvial fans in or near the City, comprising a significant local sand and gravel resource. From west to east these alluvial fans are known as the San Antonio, Cucamonga, Deer Creek, and Day Creek fans (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2010a). According to the City’s General Plan, the project site is not located in one of these regionally significant aggregate mineral resource areas. As discussed above, the Proposed Project would prepare a 4-acre site for development of six residential lots. No mining activities currently exist on the site, nor are any proposed. Therefore, no impact to locally important mineral resources would occur. 4.12.3 Mitigation Measures No significant impacts were identified, and no mitigation measures are required. 4.13 Noise 4.13.1 Environmental Setting Noise Fundamentals Noise is generally defined as sound that is loud, disagreeable, or unexpected. The selection of a proper noise descriptor for a specific source is dependent on the spatial and temporal distribution, duration, and fluctuation of the noise. The noise descriptors most often encountered when dealing with traffic, community, and environmental noise include the average hourly noise level (in Leq) and the average daily noise levels/community noise equivalent level (in Ldn/CNEL). The Leq is a measure of ambient noise, while the Ldn and CNEL are measures of community noise. Each is applicable to this analysis and defined as follows: • Equivalent Noise Level (Leq) is the average acoustic energy content of noise for a stated period of time. Thus, the Leq of a time-varying noise and that of a steady noise are the same if they deliver the same acoustic energy to the ear during exposure. For evaluating community impacts, this rating scale does not vary, regardless of whether the noise occurs during the day or the night. • Day-Night Average (Ldn) is a 24-hour average Leq with a 10-dBA “weighting” added to noise during the hours of 10:00 pm to 7:00 am to account for noise sensitivity in the nighttime. The logarithmic effect of these additions is that a 60 dBA 24-hour Leq would result in a measurement of 66.4 dBA Ldn. 119 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-51 November 2020 (2020-173) • Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) is a 24-hour average Leq with a 5-dBA weighting during the hours of 7:00 pm to 10:00 pm and a 10-dBA weighting added to noise during the hours of 10:00 pm to 7:00 am to account for noise sensitivity in the evening and nighttime, respectively. Noise can be generated by a number of sources, including mobile sources, such as automobiles, trucks and airplanes, and stationary sources, such as construction sites, machinery, and industrial operations. Sound spreads (propagates) uniformly outward in a spherical pattern, and the sound level decreases (attenuates) at a rate of approximately 6 dB for each doubling of distance from a stationary or point source. Sound from a line source, such as a highway, propagates outward in a cylindrical pattern, often referred to as cylindrical spreading. Sound levels attenuate at a rate of approximately 3 dB for each doubling of distance from a line source, such as a roadway, depending on ground surface characteristics (Federal Highway Administration [FHWA] 2011). No excess attenuation is assumed for hard surfaces like a parking lot or a body of water. Soft surfaces, such as soft dirt or grass, can absorb sound, so an excess ground-attenuation value of 1.5 dB per doubling of distance is normally assumed. For line sources, an overall attenuation rate of 3 dB per doubling of distance is assumed (FHWA 2011). Vibration Fundamentals Ground vibration can be measured several ways to quantify the amplitude of vibration produced. This can be through peak particle velocity or root mean square velocity. These velocity measurements measure maximum particle at one point or the average of the squared amplitude of the signal, respectively. Vibration impacts on people can be described as the level of annoyance and can vary depending on an individual’s sensitivity. Generally, low-level vibrations may cause window rattling but do not pose any threats to the integrity of buildings or structures. Noise-Sensitive Land Uses Noise-sensitive land uses are generally considered to include those uses where noise exposure could result in health-related risks to individuals, as well as places where quiet is an essential element of their intended purpose. Residential dwellings are of primary concern because of the potential for increased and prolonged exposure of individuals to both interior and exterior noise levels. Additional land uses such as parks, historic sites, cemeteries, and recreation areas are considered sensitive to increases in exterior noise levels. Schools, churches, hotels, libraries, and other places where low interior noise levels are essential are also considered noise-sensitive land uses. Nearby noise-sensitive land uses consist of single family residences to the north, east and west. The closest residences includes those directly adjacent to the project site on the east and west. Existing Ambient Noise Environment The City of Rancho Cucamonga, which encompasses the project site, is impacted by various noise sources. It is subject to typical urban noise such as noise generated by traffic, heavy machinery, and day-to-day outdoor activities as well as noise generated from the various land uses (i.e., residential, commercial, institutional, and recreational and parks activities) throughout Rancho Cucamonga that generate stationary source noise. Mobile sources of noise, especially cars and trucks, are the most common source 120 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-52 November 2020 (2020-173) of noise in the community. The noise surveys conducted in 2009 for the City’s General Plan concluded that the ambient noise environment in Rancho Cucamonga is largely influenced by roadway noise. In order to quantify existing ambient noise levels in the Project area, ECORP Consulting conducted two short-term noise measurements on October 10, 2018. The noise measurement sites were representative of typical existing noise exposure within and immediately adjacent to the project site (see Appendix D for Noise Measurement Locations). The 10-minute measurements were taken between 10:55 a.m. and 11:24 p.m. Short-term (Leq) measurements are considered representative of the noise levels throughout the day. The average noise levels and sources of noise measured at each location are listed in in Table 4.13-1. Table 4.13-1. Existing (Baseline) Noise Measurements Site Number Location Leq dBA Lmin dBA Lmax dBA Time 1 Center of Project Site; west of Hermosa Avenue and South of Vista Grove Street 43.2 34.6 61.3 10:55 a.m. – 11:05 a.m. 2 At the Corner of Briartree Place & Bramblewood Drive 38.5 37.8 46.7 11:14 a.m. – 11:24 a.m. Source: Measurements were taken by ECORP Consulting with a Larson Davis SoundExpert LxT precision sound level meter, which satisfies the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) for general environmental noise measurement instrumentation. Prior to the measurements, the SoundExpert LxT sound level meter was calibrated according to manufacturer specifications with a Larson Davis CAL200 Class I Calibrator. See Appendix D for noise measurement outputs. As shown in Table 4.13-1, the ambient recorded noise levels ranged from 38.5 dBA to 43.2 dBA near the project site (see Appendix D for noise measurement locations). The noise most commonly in the Project vicinity is produced by automotive vehicles (cars, trucks, buses, motorcycles). Traffic moving along streets produces a sound level that remains relatively constant and is part of the Project area’s minimum ambient noise level. Vehicular noise varies with the volume, speed and type of traffic. Slower traffic produces less noise than fast moving traffic. Trucks typically generate more noise than cars. Infrequent or intermittent noise also is associated with vehicles, including sirens, vehicle alarms, slamming of doors, trains, garbage and construction vehicle activity and honking of horns. These noises add to urban noise and are regulated by a variety of agencies. 4.13.2 Noise (XIII) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? 121 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-53 November 2020 (2020-173) Less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Project Construction Noise Construction noise associated with the Proposed Project would be temporary and would vary depending on the nature of the activities being performed. Noise generated would primarily be associated with the operation of off-road equipment for on-site construction activities as well as construction vehicle traffic on area roadways. Construction noise typically occurs intermittently and varies depending on the nature or phase of construction (e.g., building construction, paving). Noise generated by construction equipment, including earth movers, material handlers, and portable generators, can reach high levels. Typical operating cycles for these types of construction equipment may involve 1 or 2 minutes of full power operation followed by 3 to 4 minutes at lower power settings. Other primary sources of acoustical disturbance would be random incidents, which would last less than one minute (such as dropping large pieces of equipment or the hydraulic movement of machinery lifts). During construction, exterior noise levels could negatively affect sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the construction site. Nearby noise-sensitive land uses consist of single family residences to the north, east and west. As described in Section 17.66.050 of the City’s Municipal Code, noise sources associated with construction, repair, remodeling, or grading of any real property or during authorized seismic surveys, are exempt provided said activities: a. When adjacent to a residential land use, school, church or similar type of use, the noise generating activity does not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday, and provided noise levels created do not exceed the noise standard of 65 dBA when measured at the adjacent property line. In order to estimate the worst-case construction noise levels that may occur at the nearest noise-sensitive receptors in the Project vicinity, the combined construction equipment noise levels were calculated using the Roadway Noise Construction Model for the demolition, site preparation, grading, paving, building, and coating phases. The anticipated short-term construction noise levels generated during demolition, grading, paving, building, and coating activities are presented in Table 4.13-2. Table 4.13-2. Construction Average (dBA) Noise Levels by Receptor Distance and Construction Phase – Unmitigated Description Estimated Exterior Construction Noise Level @ Adjacent Residences to North, East and West (25’ Distance) Construction Noise Standards (dBA Leq) Exceeds Standards? Demolition (mobile equipment) 84.6 65.0 Yes Site Preparation (mobile equipment) 78.8 Yes Grading (mobile equipment) 80.7 Yes Building Construction, Paving, & Painting (mobile equipment) 84.5 Yes 122 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-54 November 2020 (2020-173) Table 4.13-2. Construction Average (dBA) Noise Levels by Receptor Distance and Construction Phase – Unmitigated Description Estimated Exterior Construction Noise Level @ Adjacent Residences to North, East and West (25’ Distance) Construction Noise Standards (dBA Leq) Exceeds Standards? Building Construction, Paving, & Painting (stationary equipment) 76.5 Yes Source: Traffic noise levels were calculated by ECORP Consulting using the FHWA Roadway Noise Construction Model (FHWA 2006). Refer to Attachment B for noise modeling assumptions and results. Notes: Construction equipment used during each phase derived from CalEEMod 2016.3.2. Distance between proposed demolition activities and receptors measured from the area of demolition. Leq = the equivalent energy noise level, is the average acoustic energy content of noise for a stated period of time. Thus, the Leq of a time-varying noise and that of a steady noise are the same if they deliver the same acoustic energy to the ear during exposure. For evaluating community impacts, this rating scale does not vary, regardless of whether the noise occurs during the day or the night. As shown, noise construction standards for all construction phases would be exceeded. Noise source control is the most effective method of controlling construction noise. Source controls, which limit noise, are the easiest to oversee on a construction project. Mitigation at the source reduces the problem everywhere, not just along one single path or for one receiver. Noise path controls are the second method in controlling noise. Barriers or enclosures can provide a substantial reduction in the nuisance effect in some cases. Path control measures include moving equipment farther away from the receiver; enclosing especially noisy activities or stationary equipment; erecting noise enclosures, barriers, or curtains; and using landscaping as a shield and dissipater. Implementation of mitigation measure NOI-1 would reduce construction-generated noise levels. According to the Federal Highway Administration, a solid wall or berm generally reduces noise levels by 10 to 20 dBA (FHWA 2011). However, noise barriers or enclosures specifically designed to reduce site- specific construction noise, such as can be accomplished when erecting flexible sound control curtains around stationary heavy equipment, can provide a sound reduction 35 dBA or greater (WEAL 2000). Noise barriers or enclosures such as that required by mitigation measure NOI-1 can provide a sound reduction robust enough to reduce construction noise to levels below the 65 dBA residential standard at the adjacent property lines. Impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Ambient Noise Impacts Project Construction A 3-dBA change in the existing ambient noise environment is just-perceivable to the average human ear outside of the laboratory. A change in level of at least 5 dBA is required before any noticeable change in community response would be expected. A 10-dBA change is subjectively heard as an approximate doubling in loudness and would almost certainly cause an adverse change in community response. Therefore, an increase in the ambient noise environment, even though temporary, would be considered a substantial increase and mitigation measure NOI-1 is recommended. Mitigation measure NOI-1 contains best management practices for reducing construction-generated noise. Impacts to ambient noise levels during construction would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. 123 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-55 November 2020 (2020-173) Project Operation Operational noise sources associated with the Proposed Project include off-site mobile and stationary (i.e., mechanical equipment, typical residential neighborhood activities, etc.) sources. Project operation would also result in additional traffic on adjacent roadways, thereby increasing vehicular noise in the project vicinity. According to the ITE’s Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition Data, the Proposed Project would generate an average of 56 automobile trips daily. According to the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol (2013), doubling of traffic on a roadway would result in an increase of 3 dB (a barely perceptible increase). The Proposed Project’s minimal daily trips (56 total) would be nominal compared to the current vehicle capacity of Hermosa Avenue, Vista Grove Street, and Hillside Road and thus, would not result in a perceptible increase traffic noise levels. Traffic noise impacts associated with the Proposed Project would be less than significant. Potential stationary noise sources related to long-term operation of future development of the project site would include mechanical equipment. Mechanical equipment (e.g., HVAC equipment) typically generates noise levels less than 40 dBA at 40 feet, which is less than City daytime and nighttime thresholds for stationary sources. The Proposed Project places residential uses adjacent to other residential uses. As previously described, the most basic planning strategy to minimize adverse impacts on new land uses due to noise is to avoid designating certain land uses at locations within the City that would negative affect noise sensitive land uses. The project site has a General Plan designation of Very Low Residential, which provides for the development of conventional single-family detached houses and suburban subdivisions, such as the Proposed Project. The Proposed Project is consistent with the types, intensity, and patterns of land use envisioned for the project vicinity, and as previously described, the Proposed Project is considered compatible with the existing noise environment. Operation of the Proposed Project would not result in a significant noise-related impact. Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact b) Result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Less than significant. Excessive groundborne vibration impacts result from continuously occurring vibration levels. Once operational, the Proposed Project would not be a source of groundborne vibration since project operations would not include the use of any stationary equipment that would result in excessive vibration levels. Increases in groundborne vibration levels attributable to the Proposed Project would be primarily associated with short-term construction-related activities. Construction on the project site would have the potential to result in varying degrees of temporary groundborne vibration, depending on the specific construction equipment used and the operations involved. Ground vibration generated by construction equipment spreads through the ground and diminishes in magnitude with increases in distance. 124 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-56 November 2020 (2020-173) Construction-related ground vibration is normally associated with impact equipment such as pile drivers, jackhammers, and the operation of some heavy-duty construction equipment, such as dozers and trucks. However, it is noted that construction of the Proposed Project would not require the use of pile drivers since a deep foundation is not included as part of the Proposed Project’s design and no subterranean structures are proposed. Vibration decreases rapidly with distance and it is acknowledged that construction activities would occur throughout the project site and would not be concentrated at the point closest to sensitive receptors. Groundborne vibration levels associated with representative construction equipment are summarized in Table 4.13-3. Table 4.13-3. Vibration Source Amplitudes for Construction Equipment Equipment Type Peak Particle Velocity at 25 Feet (inches per second) Hoe Ram 0.089 Large Bulldozer 0.042 Caisson Drilling 0.042 Loaded Trucks 0.035 Rock Breaker 0.016 Jackhammer 0.001 Small Bulldozer/Tractor 0.042 Source: FTA 2018 The nearest off-site structures to the project site are approximately 25 feet distant. 0.2 in/sec PPV is the threshold at which there is a risk of architectural damage to normal dwellings. Based on the vibration levels presented in Table 4.13-3, ground vibration generated by heavy-duty equipment would not be anticipated to exceed approximately 0.089 in/sec PPV at 25 feet. Furthermore, per Section 17.66.070 of the City Municipal Code, vibrations from temporary construction/demolition and vehicles that leave the subject parcel (e.g., trucks, trains, and aircraft) are exempt from vibration standards. Therefore, groundborne vibration impacts would be considered less than significant during Proposed Project construction. Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No impact. The Proposed Project is located just under seven miles north of Ontario International Airport. The project site is not located within a noise impact zone in the LA/Ontario International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (2011). Furthermore, implementation of the Proposed Project would not affect airport 125 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-57 November 2020 (2020-173) operations nor result in increased exposure of noise-sensitive receptors to aircraft noise. Thus, no impact related to airport noise would occur with implementation of the Proposed Project. 4.13.3 Mitigation Measures NOI-1: The following best management practices shall be incorporated during Project construction: • In order to reduce construction noise, a temporary noise barrier or enclosure shall be used along the property lines of adjacent residences to break the line of sight between the construction equipment and the adjacent residences. The temporary noise barrier shall consist of a solid plywood fence and/or flexible sound curtains attached to chain link fencing. • Barriers such as flexible sound control curtains shall be erected around stationary heavy equipment to minimize the amount of noise on the surrounding land uses to the maximum extent feasible during construction. • Construction activities shall be restricted to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday and prohibited at any time on Sunday or a federal holiday. The Project’s improvement and building plans shall specify this requirement. • Equipping of all internal combustion engine-driven equipment with intake and exhaust mufflers that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. • Prohibiting unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines. • Locating stationary noise-generating equipment such as air compressors or portable power generators as far as possible from sensitive receptors. Constructing temporary noise barriers to screen stationary noise-generating equipment when located near adjoining sensitive land uses. • Utilization of "quiet" air compressors and other stationary noise sources where technology exists. • Control of noise from construction workers’ radios to a point where they are not audible at existing residences bordering the project site. • Notification of all adjacent residences of the construction schedule, in writing, and provide a written schedule of “noisy” construction activities to the adjacent and nearby residences. • Designation of a "disturbance coordinator" who shall be responsible for responding to any complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator shall determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., bad muffler, etc.) and shall require that reasonable measures be implemented to correct the problem. Conspicuously post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site and include it in the notice sent to neighbors regarding the construction schedule. 126 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-58 November 2020 (2020-173) 4.14 Population and Housing 4.14.1 Environmental Setting The City of Rancho Cucamonga incorporated in 1977 with a population of approximately 44,600 persons (Rancho Cucamonga 2010b). The City’s population has risen to over 177,000 persons as of 2017. According to the General Plan EIR, the City’s housing stock consisted of 42,134 housing units in 2000. In January 2009, the housing stock increased to 55,716 housing units. Since 2000, the City and the County have both experienced positive growth of their housing stock; however, the annual growth rates experienced between 2000 to 2006 were higher in the City than in the County and, in 2007 and 2008, the housing stock in the County increased at a more rapid pace (Rancho Cucamonga 2010b). 4.14.2 Population and Housing (XIV) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? Less than significant. The Proposed Project would result in the development of six residential lots, which would directly induce population growth. However, the Proposed Project is consistent with the VL land use designation established under the City’s General Plan (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2010a). Because the Proposed Project is consistent with the General Plan, the Proposed Project would not result in new impacts beyond those previously evaluated in the General Plan EIR. Impacts would be less than significant. Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact b) Displace substantial numbers of people or existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No impact. There is currently one habitable structure on site, which would be vacated and demolished as part of the Proposed Project. Development activities would be contained within the project site and would not displace housing. No impact would occur. 127 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-59 November 2020 (2020-173) 4.14.3 Mitigation Measures No significant impacts were identified, and no mitigation measures are required. 4.15 Public Services 4.15.1 Environmental Setting Police Services Since incorporation of Rancho Cucamonga in 1977, law enforcement services in the City have been provided through a contract with the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department. The Department is made of two divisions: the Traffic Division, which facilitates the safe and effective movement of traffic; and the Patrol Division, which carries out basic law enforcement services (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2020a). Fire Services The Rancho Cucamonga Fire District provides fire protection and emergency medical response services to approximately 50 square miles in and around the City limits. The Fire District maintains seven fire stations throughout the City. The nearest fire station to the project site is East Avenue Fire Station 177, located approximately one mile southwest of the project site (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2020b). Schools Primary public education services are provided by the Alta Loma School District, which serves the northwestern section of the City; the Central School District, which serves the west-central portions; the Cucamonga School District, which serves the southern portions; and the Etiwanda School District, which serves the eastern portion of the City and a portion of the City of Fontana. The unincorporated SOI area to the north is served by the Alta Loma School District and Etiwanda School District (Rancho Cucamonga 2010b). The nearest school to the project site is Hermosa Elementary School, approximately 2,300 feet to the south. Parks The City owns and operates 30 public parks and seven recreational facilities, as well as 130 acres of undeveloped parkland not including undeveloped trail acreage. Private recreational facilities complement the City’s parks, trails, and bikeways and include the 128-acre Red Hill Country Club Golf Course and Tennis Center and the 144-acre Empire Lakes Golf Course. 128 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-60 November 2020 (2020-173) 4.15.2 Public Services (XV) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) 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: Fire Protection? Police Protection? Schools? Parks? Other Public Facilities? Fire Protection The Proposed Project would develop six residential lots on a currently undeveloped parcel which would add to the demand on fire protection services. However, the Proposed Project would be required to implement all applicable California Fire Code Standards. The Proposed Project’s design and construction plans would be reviewed by City of Rancho Cucamonga’s Fire and Building & Safety Departments to ensure fire codes are met and that adequate fire protection services would be available to meet the Proposed Project’s needs. The Applicant would pay the City of Rancho Cucamonga’s Development Impact Fees. The City imposes development impact fees on development projects to lessen the impact to public services, infrastructure and facilities. Impacts would be less than significant. Police Services As previously stated, the Proposed Project would result in the development of six residential lots on a currently undeveloped parcel. This development would result in an increase in demand for police protection services. The Applicant would pay the City of Rancho Cucamonga’s Development Impact Fees, which would cover the Proposed Project’s fair share on public services. Impacts would be less than significant. Schools The Applicant would pay Alta Loma School District development impact fees to address impacts on schools as a result of the Proposed Project. As such, impacts would be less than significant. 129 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-61 November 2020 (2020-173) Parks The Applicant would pay the City of Rancho Cucamonga’s Development Impact Fees, which would cover the Proposed Project’s fair share on public services including parks. Impacts would be less than significant. Other Public Facilities The Proposed Project is not anticipated to induce unplanned population growth; therefore, it would not create additional demand for other public facilities, such as libraries. The Applicant would comply with the City of Rancho Cucamonga’s Development Impact Fees, which would lessen the Proposed Project’s impacts on public services, infrastructure and facilities. Impacts would be less than significant. 4.15.3 Mitigation Measures No significant impacts were identified, and no mitigation measures are required. 4.16 Recreation 4.16.1 Environmental Setting The City of Rancho Cucamonga has approximately 347.6 acres of parkland and recreational facilities. These include 25 neighborhood parks, three community parks, and eight special use facilities. In addition, the City’s Multi-Use Regional and Community Trails add approximately 295 acres of land for recreational use. The trails provide a network of interconnecting off-road, urban, and wilderness trails that allow horseback riding, hiking, jogging, running, and walking into open space areas and connect the residential areas to commercial activity centers (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2010b). 4.16.2 Recreation (XVI) Materials Checklist Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 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? Less than significant. The Proposed Project would develop six residential lots on a currently undeveloped parcel which could potentially increase the use of existing recreational facilities. The Applicant would comply with the City of Rancho Cucamonga’s Development Impact Fees, which would lessen the Proposed Project’s impacts on public services, infrastructure, and facilities. Impacts would be less than significant. 130 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-62 November 2020 (2020-173) Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Less than significant. The Proposed Project does not include recreational facilities. The Proposed Project would develop six residential lots on a currently undeveloped parcel. Due to the proposed scale of development it is not anticipated that the Proposed Project would require the construction or expansion of existing recreational facilities. The Applicant would comply with the City of Rancho Cucamonga’s Development Impact Fees, which would lessen the Proposed Project’s impacts on public services, infrastructure, and facilities. Impacts would be less than significant. 4.16.3 Mitigation Measures No significant impacts were identified, and no mitigation measures are required. 4.17 Transportation 4.17.1 Transportation (XVII) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? Less than significant. Transit Facilities Bus transit services are available in the City through fixed-route and demand-response services provided by Omnitrans. There are seven bus routes that run through the City, connecting to the neighboring cities of Fontana, Upland, Ontario, Montclair, and Chino. The routes serve major destinations in the region, such as Chaffey College, the Rancho Cucamonga Metrolink Station, the Fontana Metrolink Station, the Ontario Mills Mall, the LA/Ontario Airport, the Ontario Civic Center, the Pomona TransCenter, the Montclair TransCenter, the Chino Civic Center and Transit Center, and the Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2010a). 131 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-63 November 2020 (2020-173) Within Rancho Cucamonga, the bus routes run on major roadways, including Haven Avenue, Day Creek Boulevard, Milliken Avenue, Carnelian Street/Vineyard Avenue, Base Line Road, Foothill Boulevard, and Arrow Highway, and segments of Banyan Street, Victoria Park Lane, and 4th Street. The nearest bus route to the project site runs along Haven Avenue near Chaffey College, approximately 1.2 miles southeast of the project site. No bus routes run in the vicinity of the project site. Thus, no impact to bus routes would occur. Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities The nearest bicycle facility to the Project is a Class III bike lane along Hillside Road, approximately 950 feet south of the project site. In addition, a community trail and equestrian trail run adjacent to the project site along Hermosa Avenue. A 15-foot wide equestrian trail easement would be created along the eastern and southern boundaries of the project site, connecting to the existing equestrian trail west of the project site. Access to the equestrian trail would come from the southwest corner of the new Hermosa Avenue and Vista Grove Street intersection, as well as private gates for each of the six lots. In addition, the Proposed Project includes a community trail pass-through along Vista Grove Street. Project Impacts The Proposed Project would generate short-term construction related vehicle trips. However, traffic generated by construction of the Proposed Project would be temporary and would not conflict with the City of Rancho Cucamonga’s Circulation Element, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities. The Proposed Project would develop six residential lots, each of which would eventually be occupied by single family homes. According to the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition (2017), the Proposed Project is anticipated to generate 56 daily trips on average. As such, the Proposed Project would not generate a substantial increase in traffic, nor would it decrease the performance or safety of existing or planned public facilities. Impacts would be less than significant. Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? No impact. According to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines (2020), projects generating fewer than 250 daily trips are screened out from a formal Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT) analysis. Projects in this category generally correspond to “typical” development potentials, including development of 25 or fewer single-family housing units (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2020). According to the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition (2017), the Proposed Project is anticipated to generate 56 daily trips on average. The Proposed Project is therefore screened out from a formal VMT analysis in accordance with the City’s adopted thresholds of significance. No impact would occur. 132 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-64 November 2020 (2020-173) Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? No impact. The Proposed Project would construct approximately 630 lineal feet of new private street within the development. The development would include extending Vista Grove Street west, across Hermosa Avenue, for approximately 380 feet, which would turn south into a cul-de-sac surrounded by the proposed single-family residences. Construction of the Vista Grove Street extension would result in removal of the San Bernardino County Fire District access gate, which would be replaced just to the west of the road extension. Improvements would be reviewed by a registered civil engineer to meet the City of Rancho Cucamonga’s development standards. No impact would occur. Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact d) Result in inadequate emergency access? Less than significant. Vehicular access to the project site would be provided via an extension of Vista Grove Street. No offsite roadway improvements would interfere with emergency access, response times, or impede circulation of emergency vehicles on surrounding roadways. All construction vehicles and equipment would be stationed in a designated area on-site within the project site boundaries. Access along surrounding roadways would be maintained throughout Project construction activities. During the course of the City of Rancho Cucamonga’s required review of the Proposed Project’s applications, the site plan has been reviewed to ensure that adequate access to and from the site and around the proposed buildings is provided for emergency vehicles. Compliance with City approved site plan and subsequent City reviewed and approved construction documents will ensure that potential impacts to emergency access would be less than significant. 4.17.2 Mitigation Measures No significant impacts were identified, and no mitigation measures are required. 133 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-65 November 2020 (2020-173) 4.18 Tribal Cultural Resources 4.18.1 Regulatory Setting Assembly Bill 52 Effective July 1, 2015, Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52) amended CEQA to require that: 1) a lead agency provide notice to those California Native American tribes that requested notice of projects proposed by the lead agency; and 2) for any tribe that responded to the notice within 30 days of receipt with a request for consultation, the lead agency must consult with the tribe. Topics that may be addressed during consultation include TCRs, the potential significance of project impacts, type of environmental document that should be prepared, and possible mitigation measures and project alternatives. Pursuant to AB 52, Section 21073 of the Public Resources Code defines California Native American tribes as “a Native American tribe located in California that is on the contact list maintained by the NAHC for the purposes of Chapter 905 of the Statutes of 2004.” This includes both federally and non-federally recognized tribes. Section 21074(a) of the Public Resource Code defines TCRs for the purpose of CEQA as: 1. Sites, features, places, cultural landscapes (geographically defined in terms of the size and scope), sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are either of the following: a. included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources; and/or b. included in a local register of historical resources as defined in subdivision (k) of Section 5020.1; and/or c. 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 Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1 for the purposes of this paragraph, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. Because criteria a and b also meet the definition of a historical resource under CEQA, a TCR may also require additional consideration as a historical resource. TCRs may or may not exhibit archaeological, cultural, or physical indicators. Recognizing that California tribes are experts in their tribal cultural resources and heritage, AB 52 requires that CEQA lead agencies provide tribes that requested notification an opportunity to consult at the commencement of the CEQA process to identify TCRs. Furthermore, because a significant effect on a TCR is considered a significant impact on the environment under CEQA, consultation is used to develop appropriate avoidance, impact minimization, and mitigation measures. 134 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-66 November 2020 (2020-173) 4.18.2 Summary of AB 52 Consultation On June 11, 2020 the City sent project notification letters to the following California Native American tribes, which had previously submitted general consultation request letters pursuant to 21080.3.1(d) of the Public Resources Code: • San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians • San Manuel Band of Mission Indians • Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians • Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians • Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation • Morongo Band of Mission Indians Two responses were received in response to the City’s AB 52 letters. One June 23, 2020, the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation (GBMIKN) provided a letter to the City stating that the tribe is the direct lineal descendant of the project area. The letter provided the tribe’s suggested tribal cultural resource mitigation measures for the City to consider. The City consulted by phone with Andrew Salas of the GBMIKN on August 25, 2020. In that phone conversation, Mr. Salas stated that Tribe recommends the implementation the mitigation measures provided to the City. These mitigation measures are incorporated into this Initial Study as Mitigation Measures GBMIKN TCR-1 through GBMIKN TCR-6. On [date], the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians (SMBMI) e-mailed City staff to discuss the project. The response stated that the proposed project area exists within Serrano ancestral territory and, therefore, is of interest to the Tribe. However, due to the disturbed nature of the project location, the SMBMI does not have any concerns with the Proposed Project’s implementation. The response also included the tribe’s suggested cultural resource and tribal cultural resource mitigation for the City to consider. These suggestions were incorporated into Mitigation Measures SMBMI CUL-1, SMBMI CUL-2, SMBMI CUL-3, SMBMI TCR-1, and SMBMI TCR-2. 4.18.3 Tribal Cultural Resources (XVIII) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) 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 135 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-67 November 2020 (2020-173) with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: i) 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 ii) 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. ai. No Impact. As discussed in the response to question a of Section 4.5, the records search revealed that no previously recorded resources are located within the project site (ECORP 2020c). As a result of the field survey, an agricultural complex with two historic-age buildings and four features consisting of building foundations (TR-001) was documented and evaluated using CRHR eligibility criteria. TR 001 was evaluated as not eligible for listing in the CRHR under any criteria and not eligible as a City of Rancho Cucamonga Historic Landmark. TR-001 is also not currently listed in a local register of historical resources, as defined in PRC 5020.1(k), and has not been identified as significant in a historical resources survey, as defined in PRC 5024.1(g). Therefore, TR 001 is not considered an Historical Resource as defined by CEQA. The Proposed Project would not result in any significant impacts on known Historical Resources under CEQA. Furthermore, no listed or eligible historical resources were identified by the tribes that consulted with the City of Rancho Cucamonga under AB 52. No impact would occur. aii. Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. No TCRs were identified within the project area during AB 52 consultation. The Proposed Project would not result in significant impacts to known TCRs. However, as a result of the AB 52 consultation the project area was identified as being sensitive and has the potential to contain unknown TCRs. Significant impacts may occur from the disturbance of unknown TCRs during ground disturbing construction activities associated with the Proposed Project. With the implementation of Mitigation Measures GBMIKN TCR-1 through GBMIKN TCR-6 and SMBMI TCR-1, and SMBMI TCR-2, impacts would be less than significant. 4.18.4 Mitigation Measures Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indian – Kizh Nation (GBMIKN) Mitigation Measures GBMIKN TCR-1: Retain a Native American Monitor/Consultant. The Project Applicant shall be required to retain and compensate for the services of a Tribal monitor/consultant who is both 136 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-68 November 2020 (2020-173) approved by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation Tribal Government and is listed under the NAHC’s Tribal Contact list for the area of the project location. This list is provided by the NAHC. The monitor/consultant will only be present on-site during the construction phases that involve ground disturbing activities. Ground disturbing activities are defined by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation as activities that may include, but are not limited to, pavement removal, pot-holing or auguring, grubbing, tree removals, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching, within the project area. The Tribal Monitor/consultant will complete daily monitoring logs that will provide descriptions of the day’s activities, including construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. The on-site monitoring shall end when the project site grading and excavation activities are completed, or when the Tribal Representatives and monitor/consultant have indicated that the site has a low potential for impacting Tribal Cultural Resources. GBMIKN TCR-2: Unanticipated Discovery of Tribal Cultural and Archaeological Resources. Upon discovery of any archaeological resources, cease construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the find until the find can be assessed. All archaeological resources unearthed by project construction activities shall be evaluated by the qualified archaeologist and tribal monitor/consultant approved by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation. If the resources are Native American in origin, the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation shall coordinate with the landowner regarding treatment and curation of these resources. Typically, the Tribe will request reburial or preservation for educational purposes. Work may continue on other parts of the project while evaluation and, if necessary, mitigation takes place (CEQA Guidelines Section15064.5 [f]). If a resource is determined by the qualified archaeologist to constitute a “historical resource” or “unique archaeological resource”, time allotment and funding sufficient to allow for implementation of avoidance measures, or appropriate mitigation, must be available. 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 Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County or the Fowler Museum, if such an institution agrees to accept the material. If no institution accepts the archaeological material, they shall be offered to a local school or historical society in the area for educational purposes. GBMIKN TCR-3: Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains and Associated Funerary Objects. Native American human remains are defined in PRC 5097.98 (d)(1) as an inhumation or cremation, and in any state of decomposition or skeletal completeness. Funerary objects, called associated grave goods in PRC 5097.98, are also to be treated according to this statute. Health and Safety Code 7050.5 dictates that any discoveries of human skeletal material shall be immediately reported to the County Coroner and excavation halted until the coroner has determined the 137 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-69 November 2020 (2020-173) nature of the remains. If the coroner recognizes the human remains to be those of a Native American or has reason to believe that they are those of a Native American, he or she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) and PRC 5097.98 shall be followed. GBMIKN TCR-4: Resource Assessment & Continuation of Work Protocol. Upon discovery, the tribal and/or archaeological monitor/consultant/consultant will immediately divert work at minimum of 150 feet and place an exclusion zone around the burial. The monitor/consultant(s) will then notify the Tribe, the qualified lead 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 the finds are determined to be Native American, the coroner will notify the NAHC as mandated by state law who will then appoint a Most Likely Descendent (MLD). GBMIKN TCR-5: Kizh-Gabrieleño Procedures for burials and funerary remains. If the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation is designated MLD, the following treatment measures shall be implemented. To the Tribe, the term “human remains” encompasses more than human bones. In ancient as well as historic times, Tribal Traditions included, but were not limited to, the burial of funerary objects with the deceased, and the ceremonial burning of human remains. These remains are to be treated in the same manner as bone fragments that remain intact. Associated funerary objects are objects that, as part of the death rite or ceremony of a culture, are reasonably believed to have been placed with individual human remains either at the time of death or later; other items made exclusively for burial purposes or to contain human remains can also be considered as associated funerary objects. Treatment Measures: • Prior to the continuation of ground disturbing activities, the landowner shall arrange a designated site location within the footprint of the project for the respectful reburial of the human remains and/or ceremonial objects. 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 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 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, documentation shall be taken which includes at a minimum detailed descriptive notes and sketches. Additional types of documentation shall be approved by the Tribe 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 four or more burials, the location is considered a cemetery and a separate treatment plan shall be created. Once complete, a final report of all activities is to be 138 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-70 November 2020 (2020-173) submitted to the Tribe and the NAHC. The Tribe does NOT authorize any scientific study or the utilization of any invasive diagnostics on human remains. • Each occurrence of human remains and associated funerary objects will be stored using opaque cloth bags. All human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects and objects of cultural patrimony will be removed to a secure container on site if possible. These items should be retained and reburied within six months of recovery. The site of reburial/repatriation shall be on the project site but at a location agreed upon between the Tribe and the landowner at a site to be protected in perpetuity. There shall be no publicity regarding any cultural materials recovered. GBMIKN TCR-6: Professional Standards: Archaeological and Native American monitoring and excavation during construction projects will be consistent with current professional standards. All feasible care to avoid any unnecessary disturbance, physical modification, or separation of human remains and associated funerary objects shall be taken. Principal personnel must meet the Secretary of Interior standards for archaeology and have a minimum of 10 years of experience as a principal investigator working with Native American archaeological sites in southern California. The Qualified Archaeologist shall ensure that all other personnel are appropriately trained and qualified. San Manuel Band of Mission Indians (SMBMI) Mitigation Measures SMBMI TCR-1: The San Manuel Band of Mission Indians Cultural Resources Department (SMBMI) shall be contacted, as detailed in SMBMI CUL-1, of any pre-contact cultural resources discovered during project implementation, and be provided information regarding the nature of the find, so as to provide Tribal input with regards to significance and treatment. Should the find be deemed significant, as defined by CEQA (as amended, 2015), a cultural resources Monitoring and Treatment Plan shall be created by the archaeologist, in coordination with SMBMI, and all subsequent finds shall be subject to this Plan. This Plan shall allow for a monitor to be present that represents SMBMI for the remainder of the project, should SMBMI elect to place a monitor on-site. SMBMI TCR-2: Any and all archaeological/cultural documents created as a part of the project (isolate records, site records, survey reports, testing reports, etc.) shall be supplied to the applicant and Lead Agency for dissemination to SMBMI. The Lead Agency and/or applicant shall, in good faith, consult with SMBMI throughout the life of the project. 4.19 Utilities and Service Systems 4.19.1 Environmental Setting Water Service CVWD provides the City of Rancho Cucamonga, including the project site, with water services. CVWD’s service area includes the City of Rancho Cucamonga, portions of the cities of Fontana, Ontario, and Upland and some unincorporated areas of San Bernardino County. The District has a diverse water supply 139 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-71 November 2020 (2020-173) consisting of the Cucamonga Basin and Chino Basin aquifers, four local canyon watersheds, and imported water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta through the State Water Project. The District’s water system consists of 711 miles of distribution lines, 28 groundwater wells, 34 storage reservoirs, three water treatment plants, 48,516 meters of various sizes and the service lines associated with the meters. According to the CVWD 2018 Water Quality Report, 59 percent of the water delivered to CVWD consumers in 2018 was imported from Northern California via the State Water Project. This water is treated at CVWD’s Lloyd W. Michael Water Treatment Plant. 37 percent of the water delivered to CVWD consumers in 2018 was groundwater pumped from the Cucamonga Basin and Chino Basin aquifers. Four percent of the water delivered to CVWD’s consumers in 2018 was local canyon and tunnel water including Cucamonga Canyon, Deer Canyon, Day Canyon, East Etiwanda Canyon, and a number of tunnels in the local San Gabriel Mountains. This water is treated at CVWD’s Arthur H. Bridge or Lloyd Michael Treatment Plants and then flows into storage reservoirs and then into the distribution system to consumers (CVWD 2018). Wastewater Wastewater services for the City of Rancho Cucamonga are also provided by CVWD. CVWD currently operates and maintains approximately 421 miles of wastewater collection system ranging from 8 to 36 inches in diameter. Wastewater that is generated by CVWD’s customers is transported through this collection system and sent to Inland Empire Utilities Agency (IEUA) Wastewater Treatment facilities where it is processed into recycled water. The IEUA operates the wastewater Regional Plant No. 4 located at the intersection of 6th Street and Etiwanda Avenue in Rancho Cucamonga. This wastewater plant has been in operation since 1997 and treats an annual flow of seven million gallons per day, with an ultimate build-out capacity of 28 million gallons per day. Solid Waste Burrtec Waste Industries is the single franchised waste hauler for the City of Rancho Cucamonga and is responsible for providing recycling, refuse, and green waste services for residents, commercial and industrial customers. Burrtec Waste Industries is the only business permitted to haul solid waste in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. In July 2001, the County of San Bernardino contracted Burrtec to operate and maintain their solid waste disposal facilities located throughout the County. This includes both active and closed landfills, transfer stations and community collection centers. Solid waste generated in the City is transferred to Burrtec’s West Valley Materials Recovery Facility (MRF), located immediately southeast of the City at 13373 Napa Street in Fontana. Solid waste that is not diverted is primarily disposed at Mid-Valley Landfill, a County Class III (i.e., municipal waste) landfill located at 2390 North Alder Avenue in Rialto. It is permitted for 7,500 tons per day (TPD) maximum with 67,520,000 cubic yards remaining. The landfill has enough projected capacity to serve residents and businesses until approximately 2053 (CalRecycle 2020). Electricity Southern California Edison provides electricity to over 15 million people in 50,000 square miles of service area, encompassing 15 counties in central, coastal, and southern California. SCE would extend electric 140 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-72 November 2020 (2020-173) service to the Project in accordance with rules and policies for extension of service on file with the California Public Utilities Commission. Natural Gas The Southern California Gas Company provides natural gas services to the area and would extend service to the project site at the time contractual arrangements are made in accordance with SoCalGas policies and extension rules on file with the California Public Utilities Commission. 4.19.2 Utilities and Service Systems (XIX) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? Less than significant. Water and Wastewater The Proposed Project would result in the development of six residential lots, which would require connections to the City’s water system. The Proposed Project is below the 500 dwelling unit threshold for a Water Supply Assessment. Due to the scale of the proposed development it is not anticipated that six new connections for single-family homes would require the construction or expansion of water facilities. The six residential lots would be connected to private septic systems, and therefore no impact on wastewater treatment would occur. Impacts would be less than significant. Storm Drainage The Proposed Project includes stormwater drainage improvements. Improvements include the construction of a water quality basin. Runoff from the proposed residential lots would be conveyed to the water quality basin and catch basins throughout the site. Impacts would be less than significant. Electricity, Natural Gas, and Telecommunications As discussed in Section 4.6 Energy, Proposed Project construction is expected to have a nominal effect on local and regional energy supplies. No unusual project characteristics would necessitate the use of construction equipment that would be less energy-efficient than at comparable construction sites in the region or the state. Construction contractors would purchase their own gasoline and diesel fuel from local suppliers and would conserve the use of their supplies to minimize costs to their profits. Additionally, construction equipment fleet turnover and increasingly stringent state and federal regulations on engine efficiency combined with state regulations limiting engine idling times and requiring recycling of 141 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-73 November 2020 (2020-173) construction debris, would further reduce the amount of transportation fuel demand during project construction. For these reasons, it is expected that construction fuel consumption associated with the Proposed Project would not be any more inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary than other similar residential development projects of this nature. The Proposed Project would not result in any unusual characteristics that would result in excessive long- term operational energy consumption. Energy consumption associated with the Project would not be considered inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary in comparison to other similar residential developments in the region. The Proposed Project is located adjacent to existing streets and existing development of residential land uses. As such, utilities are available in the immediate project area to serve the project site. All required improvements have been analyzed as part of the Proposed Project in this Initial Study. Overall, the proposed facilities are not expected to require relocation or reconstruction of existing utilities. Impacts would be less than significant. Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? Less than significant. The project site is located within the Cucamonga Groundwater Basin. According to the CVWD 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), CVWD predicts its water demands to be 58,900 acre-feet (AF) in 2020 and 61,300 AF in 2025 during normal year conditions. Water supplies during normal years would be 60,500 AF in 2020 and 63,100 AF in 2025. In single dry year and multiple dry year scenarios, water supplies would also be 60,500 AF in 2020 and 63,100 AF in 2025 (CVWD 2016). In foreseeable multiple dry years, CVWD predicts that it would have sufficient supply to meet water demands. To meet demand, the difference from reduced canyon flows, imported water restrictions and State mandated water reductions during a multi-dry year shall be made up from the district’s stored groundwater from the Chino Basin, tier II imported water (if available), replenishment water (if available), and implementation of the water shortage contingency plan (CVWD 2016). The Proposed Project would comply with the Water Shortage Contingency Plan outlined in the UWMP, if implemented. For example, limits may be applied to the number of days, frequency and duration of outdoor watering. It is anticipated that the addition of six residential lots would not exceed the capacity of water supplies of CVWD. By complying with all City and regional water conservation policies and regulations, impacts on water supplies would be less than significant. 142 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-74 November 2020 (2020-173) Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? No impact. Each of the six lots would have a septic tank, seepage pit and expansion area. Specific location and capacity of the septic systems would be determined at the time of construction and a percolation report would be completed prior to final design. The Proposed Project would maintain a 25-foot minimum setback from the septic system to all property lines and the drainage basin. No impact to the wastewater treatment provider would occur. Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? No impact. The Proposed Project is consistent with the land use designation and development density presented in the General Plan. As previously stated, the project site is designated by the City’s General Plan as Very Low Residential (VL). The Proposed Project proposes the development of six residential lots on what is currently four acres of vacant land and is therefore consistent with the City General Plan designation of VL. As such, the Proposed Project is within the growth contemplated by the General Plan. The addition of six residential lots is not anticipated to generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards or in excess of the capacity of local solid waste facilities. Furthermore, the Proposed Project would comply with all solid waste reduction goals. Impacts would be less than significant. Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? No impact. 143 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-75 November 2020 (2020-173) Waste generated by the Proposed Project would comply with solid waste statues and regulations. The Proposed Project would be required to comply with all Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Regulations, including Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), as well as City of Rancho Cucamonga waste reduction programs. Additionally, the Proposed Project would comply with City requirements for receptacles, solid waste collection, and provisions regarding service rates, fees, and charges. The implementation of these programs would reduce the amount of solid waste generated be the Proposed Project and diverted to landfills. No impact to waste management and reduction statutes would occur. 4.19.3 Mitigation Measures No significant impacts were identified, and no mitigation measures are required. 4.20 Wildfire 4.20.1 Environmental Setting Government Code 51175-89 directs the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) to identify areas of very high fire hazard severity zones within Local Responsibility Areas (LRA). Mapping of the areas, referred to as Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ), is based on data and models of potential fuels over a 30 to 50-year time horizon and their associated expected fire behavior, and expected burn probabilities to quantify the likelihood and nature of vegetation fire exposure to buildings. According to the CALFIRE Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map, the project site is located within a VHFHSZ (CALFIRE 2008). 4.20.2 Wildfire (XX) Environmental Checklist and Discussion If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? No impact. According to the CALFIRE Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map, the project site is located within a VHFHSZ (CALFIRE 2008). The Proposed Project would not substantially impair any adopted emergency response plans. The City produced a Ready RC Guide which provides essential tips on what to do before, during and after a disaster. The guide focuses primarily on fire, flood, earthquake, and wind disasters. This comprehensive booklet includes emergency kit checklists, evacuation route maps, shelter information and more (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2017). The nearest designated emergency access route by the Ready RC Guide is Banyan Street, approximately 5,000 feet south of the project site. Emergency access to the site would be available via one entrance on 144 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-76 November 2020 (2020-173) Hermosa Avenue, thereby facilitating emergency response and evacuation, if necessary. No impact would occur. If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? No impact. The project site is located on relatively flat a terrain. Emergency access to the site would be available via one existing entrance at the intersection of Vista Grove Drive and Hermosa Avenue. In addition, the Proposed Project would not substantially alter the slope, wind patterns, or other factors that could exacerbate wildfire risks. Thus, the Proposed Project would not expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or uncontrolled spread of a wildfire. No impact would occur. If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? No impact. The Proposed Project is located within an urbanized area and would require utility connections to serve the proposed recreational use, however such connections would not exacerbate fire risk. The Project would construct supporting infrastructure to serve the future residential units. The project site is surrounded by residential development and would not exacerbate fire risk or impacts to the environment. As such, no impact would occur. 145 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-77 November 2020 (2020-173) If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? No impact. The project site is relatively flat and is not likely to cause downstream flooding or landslides. The Project would not substantially alter the drainage patterns of the site, and thus would not expose people or structures to significant risks from runoff or post-fire instability. No impact would occur. 4.20.3 Mitigation Measures No significant impacts were identified, and no mitigation measures are required. 4.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance 4.21.1 Mandatory Findings of Significance (XXI) Environmental Checklist and Discussion Does the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Have the potential to substantially 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, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Impacts to biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils (paleontological resources), and tribal cultural resources are discussed in the respective sections of this Initial Study. Impacts would be less than significant with Mitigation Measures BIO-1, BIO-2, CUL-1, SMBMI CUL-1 to SMBMI CUL-3, GEO-1, GBMIKN TCR-1 to GBMIKN TCR-6, SMBMI TCR-1, and SMBMI TCR-2. 146 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-78 November 2020 (2020-173) Does the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact b) Have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? Less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Impacts from the Proposed Project on transportation, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions and noise are discussed in corresponding sections of this Initial Study. As discussed in their respective sections of this Initial Study document, no significant impacts associated with air quality, greenhouse gas, or traffic have been identified. Cumulative impacts associated with noise would be less than significant with implementation of mitigation measure NOI-1. Consequently, Project impacts when considered with identified cumulative projects would not be cumulatively considerable. Does the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact c) Have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Direct and indirect impacts to human beings would be less than significant with the implementation of mitigation measures listed in this Initial Study. 147 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project List of Preparers 5-1 November 2020 (2020-173) SECTION 5.0 LIST OF PREPARERS 5.1 City of Rancho Cucamonga Lead Agency Tabe Van der Zwaag, Associate Planner 5.2 ECORP Consulting, Inc. CEQA Documentation/Air Quality/Biological Resources/Cultural Resources/Greenhouse Gas/Noise Alfredo Aguirre, Project Manager Lindsay Liegler, Associate Environmental Planner Seth Myers, Senior Air Quality/GHG/Noise Analyst Kristen Wasz, Senior Wildlife Biologist Wendy Blumel, Senior Archaeologist 148 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project List of Preparers 5-2 November 2020 (2020-173) THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 149 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Bibliography 6-1 November 2020 (2020-173) SECTION 6.0 B IBLIOGRAPHY [CALFIRE] 2008 Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA. Available at https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/5948/rancho_cucamonga.pdf. Accessed October 1, 2020. [CalRecycle] 2020 SWIS Facility Detail Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill. Available at https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SWFacilities/Directory/36-AA-0055/Detail. Accessed October 11, 2020. [Caltrans] California Department of Transportation 2013 Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. 2019 List of eligible and officially designated State Scenic Highways. Available at: https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/lap-landscape-architecture-and-community-livability/lap-liv-i-scenic-highways. Accessed on September 30, 2020. CAPCOA 2013 Health Effects. http://www.capcoa.org/health-effects/. 2017 California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), version 2016.3.2. [CARB] California Air Resources Board 2017 EMFAC2017 Web Database Emissions Inventory. https://www.arb.ca.gov/emfac/2017/. [CDC] California Department of Conservation 2017 San Bernardino Important Farmland 2016: Sheet 2 of 2. Published August 2017. Available at https://www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/fmmp/Pages/SanBernardino.aspx/. Accessed September 30, 2020. City of Rancho Cucamonga 2010a City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. Available at https://www.dropbox.com/sh/jq8ppqh277lswqq/AABgaDSgPfG8T9CC5_V3Ybbla/General%20Plan?dl=0&subfolder_nav_tracking=1. Accessed October 17, 2020. 2010b City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan EIR. Available at https://www.dropbox.com/sh/jq8ppqh277lswqq/AABgaDSgPfG8T9CC5_V3Ybbla/General%20Plan ?dl=0&subfolder_nav_tracking=1. Accessed October 17, 2020. 2017 Ready RC: Before, During and After a Disaster in Rancho Cucamonga. Available at https://www.cityofrc.us/sites/default/files/2019-08/ReadyRCRevisedMarch2017.pdf. Accessed October 11, 2020. 150 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Bibliography 6-2 November 2020 (2020-173) 2020a Police Department. Available at https://www.cityofrc.us/public-safety/police. Accessed October 1, 2020. 2020b Fire District. Available at https://www.cityofrc.us/public-safety/fire. Accessed October 1, 2020. 2020c Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines. June 2020. [CVWD] Cucamonga Valley Water District 2016 Cucamonga Valley Water District 2015 Urban Water Management Plan. Published June 2016. Available at https://www.cvwdwater.com/DocumentCenter/View/1955/2015-Urban-Water- Management-Plan---CVWD?bidId=. Accessed October 11, 2020. 2018 2018 Water Quality Report. Available at https://www.cvwdwater.com/DocumentCenter/View/3415/2018-Water-Quality-Report. Accessed October 11, 2020. [DTSC] Department of Toxic Substances Control 2020a Hazardous Waste and Substances List (Cortese List). Available at: https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/. Accessed October 1, 2020. 2020b EnviroStor. Available at: https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/. Accessed on October 1, 2020. [ECDMS] California Energy Commission 2019 California Energy Consumption Database. http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/Default.aspx. [ECORP] ECORP Consulting, Inc. 2020a Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Assessment. October 2020. 2020b Biological Resources Assessment. October 2020 2020c Cultural Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report for Trinity Redevelopment Tract 18305 Project. October 2020. 2020d Noise Impact Assessment. October 2020. [FHWA] Federal Highway Administration 2006 Roadway Construction Noise Model. 2011 Effective Noise Control During Nighttime Construction. Available online at: http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/wz/workshops/accessible/schexnayder_paper.htm. [IPCC] International Panel on Climate Change 2014 Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report: Approved Summary for Policymakers. http://www.ipcc.ch/. 151 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Bibliography 6-3 November 2020 (2020-173) 2013 Carbon and Other Biogeochemical Cycles. In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. http://www.climatechange2013.org/ images/report/WG1AR5_ALL_FINAL.pdf. [ITE] Institute of Transportation Engineers 2017 Trip Generation Manual. [NRCS] Natural Resources Conservation Service 2019 "Web Soil Survey" from http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov. Accessed October 1, 2020. [SCAG] Southern California Association of Governments 2016 2016–2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. Adopted April 2016. http://scagrtpscs.net/Pages/FINAL2016RTPSCS.aspx. 2008 Regional Comprehensive Plan. http://www.scag.ca.gov/NewsAndMedia/Pages/RegionalComprehensivePlan.aspx. [SCAQMD] South Coast Air Quality Management District 2009 Localized Significance Threshold Appendix C – Mass Rate LST Look-Up Tables. Revised October 21, 2009. http://www.aqmd.gov/ceqa/handbook/LST/LST.html. 2008 Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology (dated June 2003 [revised 2008]). 1993 CEQA Air Quality Handbook. http://www.aqmd.gov/home/rules-compliance/ceqa/air-quality- analysis-handbook. 1992 1992 Federal Attainment Plan for Carbon Monoxide. [SWRCB] State Water Resources Control Board 2020 GeoTracker database. Available at: https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/map/. Accessed on September 29, 2020. [TLC] Tree of Life Consulting 2018 Everett, L. Arborist Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Tract # 18305 City of Rancho Cucamonga. Prepared for ECORP Consulting, INC. [USEPA] U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2020 EnviroMapper database. Available at https://www.epa.gov/emefdata/em4ef.home. Accessed on September 29, 2020. [WEAL] Western Electro-Acoustic Laboratory, Inc. 2000 Sound Transmission Sound Test Laboratory Report No. TL 96-186. 152 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Bibliography 6-4 November 2020 (2020-173) THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 153 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project SECTION 7.0 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A – Air Quality/Climate Change Technical Report Appendix B – Biological Resources Assessment Appendix C – Cultural Resources Assessment Memo Appendix D – Noise Impact Assessment 154 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project APPENDIX A Appendix A – Air Quality/Climate Change Technical Report 155 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project APPENDIX B Appendix B – Biological Resources Assessment 156 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project APPENDIX C Appendix C – Cultural Resources Assessment Memo 157 Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project APPENDIX D Appendix D – Noise Impact Assessment 158 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 1 November 2020 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Requirements Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21081.6 (enacted by the passage of Assembly Bill [AB] 3180) mandates that the following requirements shall apply to all reporting or mitigation monitoring programs: • The public agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes made to the project or conditions of project approval in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. The reporting or monitoring program shall be designed to ensure compliance during project implementation. For those changes which have been required or incorporated into the project at the request of a Responsible Ag ency or a public agency having jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by the project, that agency shall, if so requested by the Lead Agency or a Responsible Agency, prepare and submit a proposed reporting or monitoring program. • The Lead Agency shall specify the location and custodian of the documents or other material, which constitute the record of proceedings upon which its decision is based. A public agency shall provide the measures to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environmen t that are fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures. Conditions of project approval may be set forth in referenced documents which address required mitigation measures or in the case of the adoption of a plan, policy, regulation, or other project, by incorporating the mitigation measures into the plan, policy, regulation, or project design. • Prior to the close of the public review period for a draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), a Responsible Agency, or a public agency having jurisdiction over natural resources affected by the project, shall either submit to the Lead Agency complete and detailed performance objectives for mitigation measures which would address the significant effects on the environment identified by the Responsible Agency or agency having jurisdiction over natural resources affected by the project, or refer the Lead Agency to appropriate, readily available guidelines or reference documents. Any mitigation measures submitted to a Lead Agency by a Responsible Agency or an agency having jurisdiction over natural resources affected by the project shall be limited to measures that mitigate impacts to resources, which are subject to the statutory authority of, and definitions applicable to, that agency. Compliance or noncompliance by a Responsible Agency or agency having jurisdiction over natural resources affected by a project with that requirement shall not limit that authority of the Responsible Agency or agency having jurisdiction over natural resources affected by a project, or the authority of the Lead Agency, to approve, condition, or deny projects as provided by this division or any other provision of law. 2. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Procedures The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been prepared in compliance with PRC Section 21081.6. It describes the requirements and procedures to be followed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga to ensure that all mitigation measures adopted as part of the Proposed Project will be carried out as described in the Draft IS/MND. Table 1 lists each of the mitigation measures specified in th e Draft IS/MND and identifies the party or parties responsible for implementation and monitoring of each measure. 159 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 2 November 2020 Table 1.Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features Responsible Party Timing for Standard Condition or Mitigation Measure Compliance Verification (Date and Signature Required) 1. Aesthetics The proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts related to aesthetics. No mitigation would be required. 2. Agricultural and Forestry Resources The proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts related to agriculture and forestry resources. No mitigation would be required. 3. Air Quality The proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts related to air quality. No mitigation would be required. 4. Biological Resources BIO-1: Pre-Construction Burrowing Owl Survey: A pre- construction survey for burrowing owls shall be completed within the Project site between 14 and 30 days prior to construction activities in accordance with the CDFW Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (2012). A second pre- construction survey shall be conducted no more than 24 hours prior to the start of construction. If burrowing owls are observed during either of the preconstruction surveys, implementation of additional measures may be necessary to reduce impacts to a level that is less than significant, including seasonal work restrictions, no-work buffers Project Applicant, with verification by Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department, or designee First survey between 14 and 30 days prior to construction activities. Second survey no more than 24 hours prior to the start of construction. 160 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 3 November 2020 Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features Responsible Party Timing for Standard Condition or Mitigation Measure Compliance Verification (Date and Signature Required) established around active burrows, passive relocation of burrowing owls, and/or a specific mitigation methodology determined in coordination with CDFW. BIO-2: Pre-Construction Nesting Bird Survey: If construction or other Project activities are scheduled to occur during the bird breeding season (February through August for raptors and March through August for most migratory bird species), a pre-construction nesting bird survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to ensure that active bird nests will not be disturbed or destroyed. The survey shall be completed no more than three days prior to initial ground disturbance. The nesting bird survey shall include the project site and adjacent areas where Project activities have the potential to affect active nests, either directly or indirectly due to construction activity or noise. If an active nest is identified, a qualified biologist shall establish an appropriate disturbance limit buffer around the nest using flagging or staking. Construction activities shall not occur within any disturbance limit buffer zones until the nest has fledged or has been deemed inactive by the qualified biologist. Project Applicant, with verification by Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department, or designee Conduct survey no more than three days prior to initial ground disturbance, if construction is to occur during breeding season. 5. Cultural Resources CUL-1: If subsurface deposits believed to be cultural or human in origin are discovered during construction, all work must halt within a 60-foot radius of the discovery. A qualified professional archaeologist, meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for prehistoric and historic archaeologist, shall be retained to evaluate the significance of the find, and shall have the authority to Project Applicant, with verification by Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department, or designee During ground disturbing construction activities. 161 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 4 November 2020 Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features Responsible Party Timing for Standard Condition or Mitigation Measure Compliance Verification (Date and Signature Required) modify the no-work radius as appropriate, using professional judgment. The following notifications shall apply, depending on the nature of the find: • If the professional archaeologist determines that the find does not represent a cultural resource, work may resume immediately, and no agency notifications are required. • If the professional archaeologist determines that the find does represent a cultural resource from any time period or cultural affiliation, the archaeologist shall immediately notify the CEQA lead agency, and applicable landowner. The agencies shall consult on a finding of eligibility and implement appropriate treatment measures, if the find is determined to be eligible for inclusion in the NRHP or CRHR. Work may not resume within the no-work radius until the lead agencies, through consultation as appropriate, determine that the site either: 1) is not eligible for the NRHP or CRHR; or 2) that the treatment measures have been completed to their satisfaction. • If the find includes human remains, or remains that are potentially human, the archaeologist shall ensure reasonable protection measures are taken to protect the discovery from disturbance (AB 2641). The archaeologist shall notify the San Bernardino County Coroner (as per § 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code). The provisions of 162 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 5 November 2020 Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features Responsible Party Timing for Standard Condition or Mitigation Measure Compliance Verification (Date and Signature Required) § 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code, § 5097.98 of the California PRC, and AB 2641 will be implemented. If the Coroner determines the remains are Native American and not the result of a crime scene, the Coroner will notify the NAHC, which then will designate a Native American Most Likely Descendant (MLD) for the Project (§ 5097.98 of the PRC). The designated MLD will have 48 hours from the time access to the property is granted to make recommendations concerning treatment of the remains. If the landowner does not agree with the recommendations of the MLD, the NAHC can mediate (§ 5097.94 of the PRC). If no agreement is reached, the landowner must rebury the remains where they will not be further disturbed (§ 5097.98 of the PRC). This will also include either recording the site with the NAHC or the appropriate information center; using an open space or conservation zoning designation or easement; or recording a reinternment document with the county in which the property is located (AB 2641). Work may not resume within the no-work radius until the lead agencies, through consultation as appropriate, determine that the treatment measures have been completed to their satisfaction. SMBMI CUL-1: In the event that 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 Project Applicant, with verification by Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department, or designee During ground disturbing construction activities. 163 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 6 November 2020 Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features Responsible Party Timing for Standard Condition or Mitigation Measure Compliance Verification (Date and Signature Required) during this assessment period. Additionally, the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians Cultural Resources Department (SMBMI) shall be contacted, as detailed within SMBMI TCR- 1, regarding any pre-contact finds and be provided information after the archaeologist makes his/her initial assessment of the nature of the find, so as to provide Tribal input with regards to significance and treatment. SMBMI CUL-2: If significant pre-contact cultural resources, as defined by CEQA (as amended, 2015), are discovered and avoidance cannot be ensured, the archaeologist shall develop a Monitoring and Treatment Plan, the drafts of which shall be provided to SMBMI for review and comment, as detailed within SMBMI TCR-1. The archaeologist shall monitor the remainder of the project and implement the Plan accordingly. Project Applicant, with verification by Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department, or designee During ground disturbing construction activities. SMBMI CUL-3: If human remains or funerary objects are encountered during any activities associated with the project, work in the immediate vicinity (within a 100-foot buffer of the find) shall cease and the County Coroner shall be contacted pursuant to State Health and Safety Code §7050.5 and that code enforced for the duration of the project. Project Applicant, with verification by Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department, or designee During ground disturbing construction activities. 6. Energy The proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts related to energy. No mitigation is required. 164 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 7 November 2020 Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features Responsible Party Timing for Standard Condition or Mitigation Measure Compliance Verification (Date and Signature Required) 7. Geology and Soils GEO-1: Unanticipated Discovery – Paleontological Resource. If paleontological resources (i.e., fossil remains) are discovered during excavation activities, the contractor will notify the City and cease excavation within 100 feet of the find until a qualified paleontological professional can provide an evaluation of the site. The qualified paleontological professional will evaluate the significance of the find and recommend appropriate measures for the disposition of the site (e.g. fossil recovery, curation, data recovery, and/or monitoring). Construction activities may continue on other parts of the construction site while evaluation and treatment of the paleontological resource takes place. Project Applicant, with verification by Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department, or designee During project excavation and grading activities 8. Greenhouse Gas Emissions The proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts related to greenhouse gas emissions. No mitigation would be required. 9. Hazards and Hazardous Materials The proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials. No mitigation would be required. 165 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 8 November 2020 Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features Responsible Party Timing for Standard Condition or Mitigation Measure Compliance Verification (Date and Signature Required) 10. Hydrology and Water Quality The proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts related to hydrology and water quality. No mitigation would be required. 11. Land Use and Planning The proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts related to land use and planning. No mitigation would be required. 12. Mineral Resources The proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts related to mineral resources. No mitigation would be required. 13. Noise NOI-1: The following best management practices shall be incorporated during Project construction: • In order to reduce construction noise, a temporary noise barrier or enclosure shall be used along the property lines of adjacent residences to break the line of sight between the construction equipment and the adjacent residences. The temporary noise barrier shall consist of a solid plywood fence and/or flexible sound curtains attached to chain link fencing. • Barriers such as flexible sound control curtains shall be erected around stationary heavy equipment to minimize Project Applicant, with verification by Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department, or designee During Project construction. 166 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 9 November 2020 Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features Responsible Party Timing for Standard Condition or Mitigation Measure Compliance Verification (Date and Signature Required) the amount of noise on the surrounding land uses to the maximum extent feasible during construction. • Construction activities shall be restricted to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday and prohibited at any time on Sunday or a federal holiday. The Project’s improvement and building plans shall specify this requirement. • Equipping of all internal combustion engine-driven equipment with intake and exhaust mufflers that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. • Prohibiting unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines. • Locating stationary noise-generating equipment such as air compressors or portable power generators as far as possible from sensitive receptors. Constructing temporary noise barriers to screen stationary noise- generating equipment when located near adjoining sensitive land uses. • Utilization of "quiet" air compressors and other stationary noise sources where technology exists. • Control of noise from construction workers’ radios to a point where they are not audible at existing residences bordering the Project site. 167 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 10 November 2020 Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features Responsible Party Timing for Standard Condition or Mitigation Measure Compliance Verification (Date and Signature Required) • Notification of all adjacent residences of the construction schedule, in writing, and provide a written schedule of “noisy” construction activities to the adjacent and nearby residences. • Designation of a "disturbance coordinator" who shall be responsible for responding to any complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator shall determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., bad muffler, etc.) and shall require that reasonable measures be implemented to correct the problem. Conspicuously post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site and include it in the notice sent to neighbors regarding the construction schedule. 14. Population and Housing The proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts related to population and housing. No mitigation would be required. 15. Public Services The proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts related to public services. No mitigation would be required. 16. Recreation The proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts related to recreation. No mitigation would be required. 168 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 11 November 2020 Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features Responsible Party Timing for Standard Condition or Mitigation Measure Compliance Verification (Date and Signature Required) 17. Transportation The proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts related to transportation. No mitigation would be required. 18. Tribal Cultural Resources Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indian – Kizh Nation (GBMIKN) Mitigation Measures GBMIKN TCR-1: Retain a Native American Monitor/Consultant. The Project Applicant shall be required to retain and compensate for the services of a Tribal monitor/consultant who is both approved by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation Tribal Government and is listed under the NAHC’s Tribal Contact list for the area of the project location. This list is provided by the NAHC. The monitor/consultant will only be present on-site during the construction phases that involve ground disturbing activities. Ground disturbing activities are defined by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation as activities that may include, but are not limited to, pavement removal, pot-holing or auguring, grubbing, tree removals, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching, within the project area. The Tribal Monitor/consultant will complete daily monitoring logs that will provide descriptions of the day’s activities, including construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. The on -site monitoring shall end when the project site grading and excavation activities are completed, or when the Tribal Representatives and monitor/consultant have indicated that Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department, or designee Prior to commencement of any ground disturbing activities/During project excavation and grading activities 169 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 12 November 2020 Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features Responsible Party Timing for Standard Condition or Mitigation Measure Compliance Verification (Date and Signature Required) the site has a low potential for impacting Tribal Cultural Resources. GBMIKN TCR-2: Unanticipated Discovery of Tribal Cultural and Archaeological Resources. Upon discovery of any archaeological resources, cease construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the find until the find can be assessed. All archaeological resources unearthed by project construction activities shall be evaluated by the qualified archaeologist and tribal monitor/consultant approved by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation. If the resources are Native American in origin, the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation shall coordinate with the landowner regarding treatment and curation of these resources. Typically, the Tribe will request reburial or preservation for educational purposes. Work may continue on other parts of the project while evaluation and, if necessary, mitigation takes place (CEQA Guidelines Section15064.5 [f]). If a resource is determined by the qualified archaeologist to constitute a “historical resource” or “unique archaeological resource”, time allotment and funding sufficient to allow for implementation of avoidance measures, or appropriate mitigation, must be available. 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 Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department, or designee Prior to commencement of any ground disturbing activities/During project excavation and grading activities 170 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 13 November 2020 Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features Responsible Party Timing for Standard Condition or Mitigation Measure Compliance Verification (Date and Signature Required) 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 Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County or the Fowler Museum, if such an institution agrees to accept the material. If no institution accepts the archaeological material, they shall be offered to a local school or historical society in the area for educational purposes. GBMIKN TCR-3: Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains and Associated Funerary Objects. Native American human remains are defined in PRC 5097.98 (d)(1) as an inhumation or cremation, and in any state of decomposition or skeletal completeness. Funerary objects, called associated grave goods in PRC 5097.98, are also to be treated according to this statute. Health and Safety Code 7050.5 dictates that any discoveries of human skeletal material shall be immediately reported to the County Coroner and excavation h alted until the coroner has determined the nature of the remains. If the coroner recognizes the human remains to be those of a Native American or has reason to believe that they are those of a Native American, he or she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) and PRC 5097.98 shall be followed. Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department, or designee During project excavation and grading activities (if human remains are identified) GBMIKN TCR-4: Resource Assessment & Continuation of Work Protocol. Upon discovery, the tribal and/or archaeological monitor/consultant/consultant will immediately divert work Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga During project excavation and grading activities 171 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 14 November 2020 Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features Responsible Party Timing for Standard Condition or Mitigation Measure Compliance Verification (Date and Signature Required) at minimum of 150 feet and place an exclusion zone around the burial. The monitor/consultant(s) will then notify the Tribe, the qualified lead 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 the finds are determined to be Native American, the coroner will notify the NAHC as mandated by state law who will then appoint a Most Likely Descendent (MLD). Planning Department, or designee GBMIKN TCR-5: Kizh-Gabrieleño Procedures for burials and funerary remains. If the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation is designated MLD, the following treatment measures shall be implemented. To the Tribe, the term “human remains” encompasses more than human bones. In ancient as well as historic times, Tribal Traditions included, but were not limited to, the burial of funerary objects with the deceased, and the ceremonial burning of human remains. These remains are to be treated in the same manner as bone fragments that remain intact. Associated funerary objects are objects that, as part of the death rite or ceremony of a culture, are reasonably believed to have been placed with individual human remains either at the time of death or later; other items made exclusively for burial purposes or to contain human remains can also be considered as associated funerary objects. Treatment Measures: Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department, or designee Prior to commencement of any ground disturbing activities/During project excavation and grading activities 172 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 15 November 2020 Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features Responsible Party Timing for Standard Condition or Mitigation Measure Compliance Verification (Date and Signature Required) • Prior to the continuation of ground disturbing activities, the landowner shall arrange a designated site location within the footprint of the project for the respectful reburial of the human remains and/or ceremonial objects. 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 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 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, documentation shall be taken which includes at a minimum detailed descriptive notes and sketches. Additional types of documentation shall be approved by the Tribe 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 four or more burials, the location is considered a cemetery and a separate treatment plan shall be created. Once complete, a final report of all activities is to be submitted to the Tribe and the NAHC. The Tribe does NOT 173 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 16 November 2020 Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features Responsible Party Timing for Standard Condition or Mitigation Measure Compliance Verification (Date and Signature Required) authorize any scientific study or the utilization of any invasive diagnostics on human remains. • Each occurrence of human remains and associated funerary objects will be stored using opaque cloth bags. All human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects and objects of cultural patrimony will be removed to a secure container on site if possible. These items should be retained and reburied within six months of recovery. The site of reburial/repatriation shall be on the project site but at a location agreed upon between the Tribe and the landowner at a site to be protected in perpetuity. There shall be no publicity regarding any cultural materials recovered. GBMIKN TCR-6: Professional Standards: Archaeological and Native American monitoring and excavation during construction projects will be consistent with current professional standards. All feasible care to avoid any unnecessary disturbance, physical modification, or separation of human remains and associated funerary objects shall be taken. Principal personnel must meet the Secretary of Interior standards for archaeology and have a minimum of 10 years of experience as a principal investigator working with Native American archaeological sites in southern California. The Qualified Archaeologist shall ensure that all other personnel are appropriately trained and qualified. Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department, or designee Prior to commencement of any ground disturbing activities/During project excavation and grading activities 174 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 17 November 2020 Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features Responsible Party Timing for Standard Condition or Mitigation Measure Compliance Verification (Date and Signature Required) San Manuel Band of Mission Indians (SMBMI) Mitigation Measures SMBMI TCR-1: The San Manuel Band of Mission Indians Cultural Resources Department (SMBMI) shall be contacted, as detailed in SMBMI CUL-1, of any pre-contact cultural resources discovered during project implementation, and be provided information regarding the nature of the find, so as to provide Tribal input with regards to significance and treatment. Should the find be deemed significant, as defined by CEQA (as amended, 2015), a cultural resources Monitoring and Treatment Plan shall be created by the archaeologist, in coordination with SMBMI, and all subsequent finds shall be subject to this Plan. This Plan shall allow for a monitor to be present that represents SMBMI for the remainder of the project, should SMBMI elect to place a monitor on-site. Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department, or designee Prior to commencement of any ground disturbing activities/During project excavation and grading activities SMBMI TCR-2: Any and all archaeological/cultural documents created as a part of the project (isolate records, site records, survey reports, testing reports, etc.) shall be supplied to the applicant and Lead Agency for dissemination to SMBMI. The Lead Agency and/or applicant shall, in good faith, consult with SMBMI throughout the life of the project. Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department, or designee Prior to commencement of any ground disturbing activities/During project excavation and grading activities 19. Utilities and Service Systems The proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts related to utilities and service systems. No mitigation would be required. 175 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Tentative Tract Map No. 18305 Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 18 November 2020 Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features Responsible Party Timing for Standard Condition or Mitigation Measure Compliance Verification (Date and Signature Required) 20. Wildfire The proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts related to wildfire. No mitigation would be required. 176 RESOLUTION NO. 21-01 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18305, A REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE 4 ACRES INTO SIX (6) PARCELS IN THE VERY LOW (VL) RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT ON THE WEST SIDE OF HERMOSA AVENUE AT VISTA GROVE STREET; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF – APN: 1074-201-01 AND 02. A. Recitals. 1. Manny Badiola filed an application for the issuance of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18305, 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 13th day of January 2021, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on said application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced meeting on January 13, 2021, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to a 4-acre parcel of land located on the west side of Hermosa Avenue at Vista Grove Street; and b. The project site is approximately 630 feet along the north property line, 505 feet along the south property line, 309 feet along the west property line, and 280 feet along the east property line (plus the 50-foot-wide flag); and c. The existing land uses on, and General Plan land use and zoning designations for, the project site and the surrounding properties (relative to the above-noted parcels) are as follows: Land Use General Plan Zoning Site Partially developed with Existing Residence Very Low Very Low (VL) Residential District (.1-2 DU Per Acre) North Single-Family Residences Very Low Very Low (VL) Residential District (.1-2 DU Per Acre) South Single-Family Residences Very Low Very Low (VL) Residential District (.1-2 DU Per Acre) 177 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 21-01 SUBTT18305 – MANNY BADIOLA January 13, 2021 Page 2 East Single-Family Residence Very Low Very Low (VL) Residential District (.1-2 DU Per Acre) West Single-Family Residences Very Low Very Low (VL) Residential District (.1-2 DU Per Acre) d. The project is for the subdivision of a 4-acre parcel of land into six (6) parcels for the future development of six (6) single-family residences; and e. Each lot complies with the development standards for the Very Low (VL) Residential District. Including lot dimensions, minimum lot size, and average lot size; and f. The project scope includes a Minor Exception (DRC2020-00217) to permit walls up to 8 feet in height, and Tree Removal Permit (DRC2020-00218) to remove up to 52 on-site trees. 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 development is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. The proposal is to subdivide a 4-acre parcel of land into six (6) lots for single-family residential development. The underlying General Plan designation is Very Low Residential. b. The proposed development, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The proposed land use is consistent with the land uses within the vicinity where it is located and the expectations of the community. The zoning of the property and all surrounding properties is Very Low (VL) Residential District. c. The proposed development complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code except the necessity for combination walls up to 8 feet in height. The applicant has submitted Minor Exception DRC2020-00217 for consideration by the Planning Commission. The proposed development, otherwise, meets all standards outlined in the Development Code and the design and development standards and policies of the Planning Commission and the City. 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 Initial Study of the potential environmental impacts of the project was prepared by Ecorp Consulting, Inc. and reviewed by staff. 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 178 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 21-01 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18305 – MANNY BADIOLA January 13, 2021 Page 3 provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds: (i) that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. c. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program, and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission’s decision is based is the Planning Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021. 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 13th day of January 2021, by the following vote-to-wit: 179 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 21-01 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18305 – MANNY BADIOLA January 13, 2021 Page 4 AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: 180 RESOLUTION NO. 21-03 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2020-00218, A REQUEST TO REMOVE 52 TREES RELATED TO A REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE 4 ACRES OF LAND INTO SIX (6) PARCELS FOR THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF 6 SINGLE-FAMILY IN THE VERY LOW (VL) RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT ON THE WEST SIDE OF HERMOSA AVENUE AT VISTA GROVE STREET; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF – APN: 1074-201-01 AND 02. A. Recitals. 1. Manny Badiola filed an application for the approval of Tree Removal Permit DRC2020-00218, 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 13th day of January 2021, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearings of January 13, 2021, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to a 4-acre parcel of land located on the west side of Hermosa Avenue at Vista Grove Street; and b. The project site is approximately 630 feet along the north property line, 505 feet along the south property line, 309 feet along the west property line, and 280 feet along the east property line (plus the 50-foot-wide flag); and c. The existing land uses on, and General Plan land use and zoning designations for, the project site and the surrounding properties (relative to the above-noted parcels) are as follows: Land Use General Plan Zoning Site Partially developed with Existing Residence Very Low Very Low (VL) Residential District (.1-2 DU Per Acre) North Single-Family Residences Very Low Very Low (VL) Residential District (.1-2 DU Per Acre) South Single-Family Residences Very Low Very Low (VL) Residential District (.1-2 DU Per Acre) 181 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 21-03 TRP DRC2020-00218 – Manny Badiola January 13, 2021 Page 2 d. Tentative Tract SUBTT18305 is for the subdivision of a 4-acre parcel of land into six (6) parcels for the future development of six (6) single-family residences; and e. Tree Removal Permit DRC2020-00218 is for the removal of 52 trees. An Arborist Report (Laurel F. Everett, Jr., Arborist) was submitted that reviews the health and condition of the 52 onsite trees. The report concludes that based on poor health and improper pruning all the onsite trees are recommended for removal. The project is conditioned to replace the removed trees on a one-for-one basis including replanting the existing eucalyptus windrow; and a. The project scope includes Minor Exception DRC2020-00218 for property line walls over the permitted 6-foot height limit. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed Tree Removal Permit is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan. The removal of the tress is related to Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18305 for the subdivision of the project site into residential lots, which are consistent with the Very Low (VL) land use designation in the General Plan; and b. The proposed Tree Removal Permit will be in accord with the objectives of the Municipal Code and the purposes of the district in which permits the removal of heritage trees when associated with the development of the project site. In this case, removal of the trees is necessary due to the health and condition of the trees; and c. The proposed Tree Removal Permit will be compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code including replacement of the removed trees with trees of a species and quantity commensurate with the aesthetic value of the trees to be removed; and d. The proposed Tree Removal Permit, 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 as the 52 removed trees will be replaced on a one-for-one basis as part of the overall landscape theme. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the application, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that no subsequent or supplemental environmental document is required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in connection with the review and approval of this application based upon the following findings and determinations: East Single-Family Residence Very Low Very Low (VL) Residential District (.1-2 DU Per Acre) West Single-Family Residences Very Low Very Low (VL) Residential District (.1-2 DU Per Acre) 182 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 21-03 TRP DRC2020-00218 – Manny Badiola January 13, 2021 Page 3 a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the Initial Study of the potential environmental impacts of the project was prepared by Ecorp Consulting, Inc. and reviewed by staff. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, it was determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds: (i) that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. c. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission, therefore, recommends that the City Council adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission’s recommendation is based are the Planning Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Department 1) The approval of Tree Removal Permit DRC2020-00218 is contingent upon Planning Commission approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18305 and Minor Exception DRC2020-00217. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13th DAY OF JANUARY 2021. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Tony Guglielmo, Chairman 183 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 21-03 TRP DRC2020-00218 – Manny Badiola January 13, 2021 Page 4 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 13th day of January 2021, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: 184 RESOLUTION NO. 21-02 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2020-00217, A REQUEST FOR AN INCREASE IN THE MAXIMUM WALL HEIGHT FROM 6 FEET TO 8 FEET RELATED TO TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18305, A REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE 4 ACRES INTO SIX (6) PARCELS IN THE VERY LOW (VL) RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT ON THE WEST SIDE OF HERMOSA AVENUE AT VISTA GROVE STREET; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF – APN: 1074-201-01 AND 02. A. Recitals. 1. Manny Badiola filed an application for Minor Exception DRC2020-00217 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Minor Exception request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 13th day of January 2021, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on said application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on January 13, 2021, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to a 4-acre parcel of land located on the west side of Hermosa Avenue at Vista Grove Street; and b. The project site is approximately 630 feet along the north property line, 505 feet along the south property line, 309 feet along the west property line, and 280 feet along the east property line (plus the 50-foot-wide flag); and c. The existing land uses on, and General Plan land use and zoning designations for, the project site and the surrounding properties (relative to the above-noted parcels) are as follows: Land Use General Plan Zoning Site Partially developed with Existing Residence Very Low Very Low (VL) Residential District (.1-2 DU Per Acre) 185 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 21-02 ME DRC2020-00217 – MANNY BADIOLA January 13, 2021 Page 2 North Single-Family Residences Very Low Very Low (VL) Residential District (.1-2 DU Per Acre) South Single-Family Residences Very Low Very Low (VL) Residential District (.1-2 DU Per Acre) East Single-Family Residence Very Low Very Low (VL) Residential District (.1-2 DU Per Acre) West Single-Family Residences Very Low Very Low (VL) Residential District (.1-2 DU Per Acre) d. The project is for the subdivision of a 4-acre parcel of land into six (6) parcels for the future development of six (6) single-family residences; and e. Each lot complies with the development standards for the Very Low (VL) Residential District. Including lot dimensions, minimum lot size, and average lot size; and f. Minor Exception DRC2020-00217 will allow the construction of combination walls (garden/screen walls on top of retaining walls) with a height of up to 8 feet along the perimeter of the project site; and g. The project scope includes Tree Removal Permit (DRC2020-00218) to remove 52 on-site trees. h. Per Table 17.48.050-1 of the Development Code, the maximum wall height of fences and walls along the rear and interior property lines is 6 feet. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The Minor Exception is consistent with the General Plan. The General Plan designation of the project site is Very Low (VL) Residential and the zoning of the property is Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan. The Minor Exception does not affect the General Plan designation, zoning designation, or the residential purpose of the project site. b. The Minor Exception is compatible with the existing and proposed land uses in the surrounding area. The Minor Exception will not result in a substantially larger house, an increase in lot coverage, an increase in density, or adjustments to the physical lot area of the subject lots. c. The proposed exception to the specific development standard(s) is necessary to allow creative design solutions compatible with the desires of the community and/or to accommodate unique site conditions. The proposed walls will be located generally where there are grade differences that warrant retaining walls. The retaining walls are required to construct a property line adjacent equestrian trail and to reduce grading on the adjacent lot. The adjacent property owner has stated that they prefer increased wall heights over slopes on their property. d. The granting of the Minor Exception will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district, and will not be detrimental to public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious properties or improvements 186 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 21-02 ME DRC2020-00217 – MANNY BADIOLA January 13, 2021 Page 3 in the vicinity. The Minor Exception will allow the applicant to construct walls that will provide a flat graded area to construct a property line adjacent equestrian trail. The walls will be consistent with the standards and guidelines of the City. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the application, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that no subsequent or supplemental environmental document is required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in connection with the review and approval of this application based upon the following findings and determinations: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the Initial Study of the potential environmental impacts of the project was prepared by Ecorp Consulting, Inc. and reviewed by staff. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds: (i) that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. c. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program, and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission’s decision is based is the Planning Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below. 187 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 21-02 ME DRC2020-00217 – MANNY BADIOLA January 13, 2021 Page 4 Planning Department 1) The approval of Minor Exception DRC2020-00217 is contingent upon Planning Commission approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18305. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021. 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 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 13th day of January 2021, by the following vote- to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: 188 Conditions of Approval Community Development Department Project #: SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218 Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305 Location: 5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions The 52 trees to be removed as part of the project shall be replaced on a one-for-one basis including replanting the existing eucalyptus windrow. 1. Standard Conditions of Approval 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. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 3. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval or Approval Letter, Conditions of Approval, and all environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size). The sheet(s) are for information only to all parties involved in the construction/grading activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect. 4. 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 $2,456.75. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary prior to public hearing. 5. This tentative tract map or tentative parcel map shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, unless a complete final map is filed with the Engineering Services Department within 3 years from the date of the approval. 6. 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. 7. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) shall not prohibit the keeping the equine animals where zoning requirements for the keeping of said animals have been met. Individual lot owners in subdivisions shall have the option of keeping said animals without the necessity of appealing to boards of directors of homeowners' associations for amendments to the CC&Rs. 8. www.CityofRC.us Printed: 12/7/2020 189 Project #: SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218 Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305 Location: 5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 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. 9. 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. 10. Provide a 24-foot by 24-foot or 12-foot by 48-foot corral area in the rear yard adjacent to the Local Feeder Trail. Grade access from corral to trail with a maximum slope of 5:1 and a minimum width of 10 feet. 11. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include Site Plans and grading plans on file in file with the Planning Department, the conditions contained herein, and the Development Code regulations, 12. 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. 13. On corner side yards, provide minimum 5-foot setback between walls/fences and sidewalk. The 5-foot wall/fence setback and the parkway shall have landscape and irrigation in addition to the required street trees. Detailed landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permits. The parkway landscaping including trees, shrubs, ground covers and irrigation shall be maintained by the property owner. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the parkway maintenance requirement, in a standard format as determined by the Planning Director, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. 14. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property owner, homeowners' association, or other means acceptable to the City. Proof of this landscape maintenance shall be submitted for Planning Director and Engineering Services Department review and approved prior to the issuance of Building Permits. 15. Local Feeder Trail entrances shall also provide access for service vehicles, such as veterinarians or hay deliveries, including a 12-foot minimum drive approach. Entrance shall be gated provided that equestrian access is maintained through step-throughs in accordance with Engineering Services Department Standard Drawing 1006-B and 1007-B. 16. Local Feeder Trail grades shall not exceed 0.5 percent at the downstream end of a trail for a distance of 25 feet behind the public right-of-way line to prohibit trail debris from reaching the street. Drainage devices may be required by the Building and Safety Official. 17. www.CityofRC.us Page 2 of 18Printed: 12/7/2020 190 Project #: SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218 Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305 Location: 5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval Where corner side, interior side or rear yard property lines are adjacent to local equestrian trails, construct minimum 6-foot high decorative masonry walls. Decorative masonry shall mean split-face double sided block, ‘slump stone’ or an alternative material that is acceptable to the Design Review Committee. 18. For single-family residential development within the Equestrian/Rural Overlay District, at least one model home shall be provided with a constructed 24-foot by 24-foot corral with appropriate fencing. 19. 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. 20. 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. 21. For residential development, return walls and corner side walls shall be decorative masonry.22. Where rock cobble is used, it shall be real river rock. Other stone veneers may be manufactured products. 23. Street names shall be submitted for Planning Director review and approval in accordance with the adopted Street Naming Policy prior to approval of the final map 24. A detailed plan indicating trail widths, maximum slopes, physical conditions, fencing, and weed control, in accordance with City Master Trail drawings, shall be submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to approval and recordation of the Final Tract Map and prior to approval of street improvement and grading plans. Developer shall upgrade and construct all trails, including fencing and drainage devices, in conjunction with street improvements. 25. For single-family residential development, all slope planting and irrigation shall be continuously maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each individual unit is sold and occupied by the buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for those units, an inspection shall be conducted by the Planning Department to determine that they are in satisfactory condition. 26. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping in the case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of Building Permits for the development or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. For development occurring in the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, the landscape plans will also be reviewed by Fire Construction Services. 27. 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. 28. www.CityofRC.us Page 3 of 18Printed: 12/7/2020 191 Project #: SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218 Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305 Location: 5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 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. 29. 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. 30. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Services Department. 31. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of water efficient landscaping per Development Code Chapter 17.82. 32. New windrow planting of Eucalyptus Maculata (Spotted Gum) is required. The size, spacing, staking, and irrigation of these trees shall be in conformance with the City's Development Code Chapter 17.80. 33. Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions Street improvement plans, prepared by a registered Civil Engineer, shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Prior to any work being performed in public rights-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer’s office. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public improvements, prior to the issuance of a City construction permit. 1. Parkways shall slope at 2 percent from the top of curb to one foot behind the sidewalk along all street frontages. 2. Driveways on corner lots shall be located at least 50 feet from the intersection BCR, or the maximum distance allowed by the lot size. 3. Provide a residential drive approach for access to the private local trail on Vista Grove Street.4. Public improvement plans shall be 90 percent complete prior to the issuance of grading permits. Public improvement plans shall be 100 percent complete, signed by the City Engineer, and an improvement agreement and bonds executed by the developer, prior to building permit issuance. 5. Any existing overhead utilities along Hermosa Avenue shall be undergrounded along the project frontage per the requirements of City Resolution No. 87-96. 6. www.CityofRC.us Page 4 of 18Printed: 12/7/2020 192 Project #: SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218 Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305 Location: 5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions Off site street and drainage improvements shall be completed prior to approval of the final map or an improvement agreement, accompanied by appropriate improvement securities, shall be executed by the Developer and the City. This includes, but is not limited to, the private storm drain system and all improvements along Hermosa Avenue. 7. All walls and fences along the public right of ways shall be privately maintained and shall be located outside of the public right of way. 8. A private storm drain is proposed. Prior to the recordation of the final map, the applicant shall submit CC&R's to the City Engineering Services Department for review. The CC&Rs' shall state that the storm drain shall be privately maintained. The CC&R's shall be recorded concurrently with the final map. The storm drain plans shall note which storm drain lines are private and which storm drain lines are public. 9. Prior to approval of the grading plan (including the private storm drain plans) the applicant shall provide a copy of any correspondence and/or approval letter from SBCFCD regarding the private storm drain plans. All private storm drain plans shall be a part of the rough or precise permitted grading plan set, whichever permit is issued first. 10. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall comply with the following San Bernardino County Flood Control District requirement: Obtain Encroachment Permit: An encroachment permit shall be obtained for any work within the San Bernardino County Flood Control District right-of-way or involving District facilities. No construction shall occur within the District’s right-of-way without the encroachment permit being obtained. Contact Flood Control Permit Section for permit information, (909) 387-7995. A copy of the signed encroachment permit obtained from the District shall be submitted to Land Development Division Land Use Services, and the City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Services Department, prior to final grading permit issuance. 11. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy the applicant shall comply with the following San Bernardino County Flood Control District requirement: Encroachment Permit is finalized: Final Building/Occupancy Permits for any buildings within the approved project will not be released prior to the San Bernardino County Flood Control District finalizing any and all encroachment permits obtained by the developer for this project. The applicant shall submit an official letter issued by the San Bernardino County Flood Control District, which states that all items under the issued encroachment permit have been satisfied and the encroachment permit has been finalized and closed, must be submitted to Land Use Services, and the City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Services Department, prior to the Final Building/Occupancy Permits being issued.. 12. Prior to the recordation of the final map the applicant shall comply with the following San Bernardino County Flood Control District (SBCFCD) requirement: Public and Private Storm Drainage Easements. Adequate San Bernardino County Drainage Easements (width of the drainage easement to meet SBCFCD requirements) and based on recommendations of the approved drainage study shall be provided over the natural drainage courses, drainage facilities/or concentration of runoff from the site. Proof of recordation of the easement to SBCFCD shall be provided to the Land Development Division, and the City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Services Department prior to the recordation of the final map. This easement shall be also shown/referenced on the final map. 13. www.CityofRC.us Page 5 of 18Printed: 12/7/2020 193 Project #: SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218 Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305 Location: 5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions Prior to the recordation of the final map the applicant shall comply with the following San Bernardino County of Public Works requirement: On-site Drainage Easement. On-site flows shall be directed within a drainage easement. 14. Prior to the recordation of the final map the applicant shall construct the proposed public and private storm drainage facilities, or shall post a Security and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the private improvements. 15. The conceptual grading plan and tentative map provide cross sections showing walls, and/or wall footings, within the public street right of way. Prior to the approval of a ROW permit and the approval of the street improvement plans, the applicant shall provide a grading plan (approved and permitted through the Engineering Services Department) and a separate wall plan (approved and permitted through the Building and Safety Services Department) showing cross sections in detail with all walls and wall footings outside of the street public right of way. A slope is proposed within the public right of way of Hermosa Avenue. This slope shall be designed to be as flat as possible within the design constraints. Any required surfacing of the slope shall be at the City Engineer's direction. 16. Along the north boundary of Tentative Tract Map 18305, the map shows an "Ex. County Road Right of Way" of undetermined width. This County Road was transferred to the City during the incorporation of the City. This road right of way will be vacated on the final map. The San Bernardino County Flood Control District (SBCFCD) requires legal and physical access through Tract 18305 to maintain the flood control basin west of this tract. The applicant shall apply through SBCFCD to provide the District an easement along the northerly boundary of the tract, The width of the easement shall meet SBCFCD requirements. This easement shall be per a separate document and recorded concurrently with the final map. This easement shall also be shown/referenced on the final map. The proposed SBCFCD easement will be over the proposed private street (Lot A) and Lot 1. The applicant shall provide the City a copy of the correspondence with SBCFCD prior to the issuance of a grading permit, or recordation of the final map, whichever occurs first. 17. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall construct fencing/gate within the proposed San Bernardino County Flood Control District (SBCFCD) easement meeting SBCFCD requirements. Prior to issuance a grading permit the applicant shall provide a copy of the correspondence with SBCFCD. 18. Prior to the issuance of a building permit the applicant shall coordinate with the City to reconstruct fencing within the City Drainage easement north of the north line of the tract. This coordination may be either by the applicant obtaining permission from the underlying land owner to construct the improvements. Or, by entering into an agreement with the City to maintain, repair or reconstruct the fence within the City's easement with the applicant paying the costs to the City for the fencing. 19. San Bernardino County Flood Control District (SBCFCD) shall approve all plans that impact their easement, including utilities, storm drain, slopes, and street trees and landscaping prior to issuance of a grading permit. A note shall be included on all pertinent plans requiring San Bernardino County Flood Control District to be notified two working days prior to starting any work in the vicinity of their facilities. 20. www.CityofRC.us Page 6 of 18Printed: 12/7/2020 194 Project #: SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218 Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305 Location: 5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions Prior to issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall obtain written comments from the San Bernardino County Flood Control District regarding site design restrictions within their easement and provide a copy of said comments to the City Engineer, or his designee, for review. 21. Standard Conditions of Approval Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be provided and shall be delineated or noted on the final map. 22. Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards.23. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quit-claimed or delineated on the final map. 24. Rights-of-way and easements shall be dedicated to the City for all interior public streets, community trails, public landscape areas, street trees, and public drainage facilities as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. Private easements for non-public facilities (cross-lot drainage, local feeder trails, etc.) shall be reserved as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. 25. A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final map approval or the issuance of Building Permits, whichever occurs first. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer. 26. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. 27. 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. 28. 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. 29. Prior to approval of the final map, a deposit shall be posted with the City covering the estimated cost of apportioning the assessments for the Assessment District, among the newly created parcels. 30. 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. This project shall annex into the following districts: LMD 1, SLD 1 and SLD 2. 31. www.CityofRC.us Page 7 of 18Printed: 12/7/2020 195 Project #: SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218 Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305 Location: 5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval Hermosa Avenue frontage improvements to be in accordance with City “Collector” standards including: A. Protect or repair existing curb and gutter, signing, and striping as required. B. Provide access ramps in accordance with the latest ADA standards. C. Acquire right of way to be in accordance with City Standard Plan 100-B. Notes: (a) Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. Visa Grove Street and "A" Court (Lot "A" private street) frontage improvements to be in accordance with City “Local” standards including: A. Provide curb and gutter, sidewalk, drive approaches, street lights, signing, and striping as required. B. 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. C. Proposed driveways shall be in accordance with the City Driveway Policy. 32. Improvement Plans and Construction: a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, and street lights 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 street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of Building Permits, whichever occurs first. b. Prior to any work being performed in the 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, and street name signing shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. d. Access ramps for the disabled shall be installed on all corners of intersections per ADA regulations or as directed by the City Engineer. e. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 33. All public improvements and private streets (interior streets, drainage facilities, landscaped areas, etc.) shown on the plans and/or tentative map shall be constructed to City Standards. Interior street improvements shall include, but are not limited to, curb and gutter, AC pavement, drive approaches, sidewalks, street lights, and street trees. The private streets shall be a separate set of street plans from the public street plans. 34. 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. 35. www.CityofRC.us Page 8 of 18Printed: 12/7/2020 196 Project #: SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218 Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305 Location: 5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 36. 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. 37. Provide drainage devices so that no surface drainage shall enter trails from adjacent lots.38. An encroachment permit from the San Bernardino County Flood Control District is required for work within its right-of-way and must be obtained prior to grading permit issuance. An easement for the proposed storm drain must also be obtained prior to grading permit issuance. The encroachment permit must be finalized prior to occupancy. 39. Development Impact Fees are due prior to building permit issuance. Fees are subject to change.40. 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. 41. www.CityofRC.us Page 9 of 18Printed: 12/7/2020 197 Project #: SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218 Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305 Location: 5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval Install street trees per City street tree design guidelines and standards as follows. The completed legend (box below) and construction notes shall appear on the title page of the street improvement plans. Street improvement plans shall include a line item within the construction legend stating: “Street trees shall be installed per the notes and legend on Sheet ___ (typically Sheet 1).” Where public landscape plans are required, tree installation in those areas shall be per the public landscape improvement plans. Street Name: Vista Grove Avenue (entire length of the proposed cul-de-sac) Botanical Name: Platanus acerifolia Common Name: London Plane Tree Min. Grow Space: Spacing: 40-feet on center Size: 15 gallon minimum Qty: determined during permitting process 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. 42. 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. 43. Fire Prevention / New Construction Unit Standard Conditions of Approval Due to the type of construction, construction materials, the floor area of the project, and known risks associated with projects of this nature, a Fire Protection and Site Safety plan is required to be implemented when combustible construction materials are delivered to the site, with the exception of foundation form materials. The Fire Prevention and Site Safety plan is required to be in compliance with Fire District Standard 33-3. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section. Review and approval of the fire prevention and site safety plan is a condition of construction permit approval. The fire prevention and site safety plan is required to be approved by the Fire District prior to construction permits being approved and issued. 1. Temporary fire apparatus access (fire lanes) and temporary fire hydrants, if needed, are required to be in accordance with Fire District Standard 33-2. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section. 2. www.CityofRC.us Page 10 of 18Printed: 12/7/2020 198 Project #: SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218 Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305 Location: 5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Fire Prevention / New Construction Unit Standard Conditions of Approval The site/project is located in the designated Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Area. Construction materials and methods and automatic fire sprinkler systems are to be in compliance with Chapter 7A of the California Building Code, Section R337 of the California Residential Code, and Fire District Standard 49-1. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section. 3. The site/project is located in the designated Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Area. Landscaping, vegetation management, fuel reduction, and other wildland fire safety features and practices are required to comply with all applicable provisions of Fire District Standard 49-1. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section. 4. The site/project is located in the designated Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Area. A site-specific or project-specific fire protection plan is required for this project. The fire protection plan is required to be in accordance with Fire District Standard 49-1. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section. 5. Gates installed across a residential emergency vehicle access road (fire lane) are required to be in accordance with Standard 5-3. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section. 6. Building and Safety Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions This site is located in the fire area designated VHFHSZ, all structures must be constructed with ignition resistant or noncombustible materials in accordance with the approved Fire protection Plan and/or the most current edition of the CA Building Code including all local ordinances and standards. When the Entitlement Review is approved submit complete construction drawings including energy and structural calculations to Building and Safety for plan review in accordance with the stricter regulations of the approved Fire protection Plan (if applicable) for the development and current edition of the CA Building and Fire Codes including all local ordinances and standards. The new structures are required to be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers. A soils report is required for new structures. Vegetation must be design and installed in accordance to the guidelines from the RCFPD for sites located in the VHFHSZ fire area. 1. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, the applicant shall grade and construct the equestrian trails to City standards. A grading permit shall be required from the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 1. Prior to the recordation of the Final Map or issuance of a grading permit, whichever occurs first, the developer/applicant shall prepare a final project-specific Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for review and approval by the City of Rancho Cucamonga and shall record said WQMP document, including any Codes, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's), with the San Bernardino County Recorder's Office. Said CC&R's shall be recorded prior to the recordation of the WQMP. A copy of the recorded CC&R's shall be included in the WQMP document. 2. www.CityofRC.us Page 11 of 18Printed: 12/7/2020 199 Project #: SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218 Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305 Location: 5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with current adopted California Building Code and/or the California Residential Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The Grading and Drainage Plan(s) shall be in substantial conformance with the approved conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan. 3. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified Engineer licensed by the State of California to perform such work. Two copies will be provided at grading and drainage plan submittal for review. Plans shall implement design recommendations per said report. 4. The 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, and/or the limits of construction 5. A separate Grading and Drainage Plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and wet signed by a California licensed Civil Engineer prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit. 6. The applicant shall comply with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Dust Control Measures and place a dust control sign on the project site prior to the issuance of a grading permit. All dust control sign(s) shall be located outside of the public right of way. 7. If a Rough Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit are submitted to the Engineering Services Department for review, the rough grading plan shall be a separate plan submittal and permit from Precise Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit. 8. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall obtain written permission from the adjacent property owner(s) to construct wall(s) on property line(s) or provide a detail(s) showing the perimeter wall(s) to be constructed offset from the property line. 9. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the grading plan shall show that all manufactured slopes shall be a minimum 2-foot offset from the public right of way, permitted line, or the adjacent private property. All slope offsets shall meet the requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. 10. The applicant shall provide a grading agreement and grading bond for all cut and fill combined exceeding 5,000 cubic yards prior to issuance of a grading permit. The grading agreement and bond shall be approved by the City Engineer or his designee. 11. The final grading and drainage plan shall show existing topography a minimum of 100-feet beyond project boundary. 12. www.CityofRC.us Page 12 of 18Printed: 12/7/2020 200 Project #: SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218 Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305 Location: 5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval Grading Inspections: a) Prior to the start of grading operations the owner and grading contractor shall request a pre-grading meeting. The meeting shall be attended by the project owner/representative, the grading contractor and the Building Inspector to discuss about grading requirements and preventive measures, etc. If a pre-grading meeting is not held within 24 hours from the start of grading operations, the grading permit may be subject to suspension by the Building Inspector; b) The grading contractor shall call into the City of Rancho Cucamonga Building and Safety Department at least 1 working day in advance to request the following grading inspections prior to continuing grading operations: i) The bottom of the over-excavation; ii) Completion of Rough Grading, prior to issuance of the building permit; iii) At the completion of Rough Grading, the grading contractor or owner shall submit to the Permit Technicians (Building and Safety Front Counter) an original and a copy of the Pad Certifications to be prepared by and properly wet signed and sealed by the Civil Engineer and Soils Engineer of Record; iv) The rough grading certificates and the compaction reports will be reviewed by the Associate Engineer or a designated person and approved prior to the issuance of a building permit. 13. Prior to issuance of a wall permit, on engineered combination garden/retaining walls along the property boundary the structural calculations for the wall shall assume a level toe/heel at the adjacent off-site property (i.e. a manufactured slope is not present). This shall be shown in the typical sections of the grading and drainage plan. 14. Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the permitted grading plan (or architectural site plan) set shall show in each of the typical sections and the plan view show how the separations between the building exterior and exterior ground surface meet the requirements of Sections CBC1804.3/CRC R401.3, CBC2304.11.2.2/CRC R317.1(2) and CBC2512.1.2/CRC R703.6.2.1 of the current adopted California Building Code/Residential Code. 15. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall obtain a recorded easement(s) from the adjacent property owner(s) for ALL work proposed on the adjacent property(ies). The easement(s) shall be scanned and pasted onto the permitted grading plan set. The easement(s) shall show on a detail sheet of the grading and drainage plan set. 16. Prior to the issuance of any grading permits or street permits, the applicant shall obtain approval of the project-specific storm water quality management plan, and the applicant shall submit to the City Engineer, or his designee, a precise grading plan showing the location and elevations of existing topographical features, and showing the location and proposed elevations of conceptual structures and future drainage of the site. 17. www.CityofRC.us Page 13 of 18Printed: 12/7/2020 201 Project #: SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218 Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305 Location: 5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the grading and drainage plan shall show the following information in the equestrian trails: – Provide PVC fencing per city standards, provide a 4” thick decomposed granite (DG) surface, provide a drainage V ditch parallel to the trail, provide a bridge over the V ditch where necessary for access to corals, and gates to corrals. The equestrian bridges shall be capable of carrying vehicle loads where necessary. Where the longitudinal slope (s) is S< 5% the cross fall shall be 2%, if S>5% the cross fall may be 4% maximum. Where water bars required, the spacing for the water bars is: 50’ maximum for longitudinal slopes of 4% to 6%, 40’ maximum for longitudinal slopes of 6.1% to 9%, 30’ maximum for longitudinal slopes of 9.1% to 12%, 20’ maximum for longitudinal slopes greater than 12%. In the equestrian trails water bars shall also be placed at the top and bottom of the trail where the gradient of the trail changes, i.e. a steep downhill slope which will cause additional erosion to the trail. 18. A drainage study showing a 100-year, AMC 3 design storm event for on-site drainage shall be prepared and submitted to the Engineering Services Department 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. 19. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off-site drainage easements, and/or other easements on private property prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 20. 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 City Engineer, or his designee, a drainage study showing the proposed flows do not exceed the existing flows prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 21. The site shall be rough graded to eliminate all cross-lot drainage, (except in approved facilities adjacent to private trails). All slopes and retaining walls necessary to accomplish this shall be installed prior to final map approval. 22. 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. 23. 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). 24. www.CityofRC.us Page 14 of 18Printed: 12/7/2020 202 Project #: SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218 Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305 Location: 5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval Prior to issuance of a grading permit and in accordance with Planning Commission Resolution 92-17, if a lot may not directly drain off-site directly to the street or other acceptable drainage device (such as a drainage ditch adjacent to an equestrian trail), then: a) drainage may flow from only one lot onto only one other lot; b) a drainage easement shall be provided over the lot accepting the drainage; c) the drainage shall be contained within either a concrete/rock lined swale/channel or a reinforced concrete pipe; and d) the drainage shall be designed with excess capacity to account for the probable lack of necessary maintenance, therefore, it shall be designed to convey two (2) times the runoff from a 100-year storm event with the minimum diameter of the pipe being 12-inches. 25. Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the latest adopted California Plumbing Code. Private storm drain improvements shall be shown on the grading and drainage plan. 26. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy or final sign off by the Building Inspector the engineer of record shall certify the functionality of the storm water quality management plan (WQMP) storm water treatment devices and best management practices (BMP). 27. Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WQMP shall include a copy of the project Conditions of Approval. 28. 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 Engineering Services Department and recorded with the County Recorder’s Office. 29. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall obtain a Waste Discharge Identification Number (WDID). The WDID number shall also be shown on the WQMP Site and Drainage Plan document. 30. The homeowners association 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 homeowners association 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 WQMP infiltration basin are the responsibility of the homeowners association. 31. The homeowners association 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. 32. A final project-specific Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) shall be approved by the City Engineer, or his designee, and the City of Rancho Cucamonga’s “Memorandum of Storm Water Quality Management Plan” shall be recorded prior to the recordation of the Final Map or issuance of a grading permit whichever comes first. 33. www.CityofRC.us Page 15 of 18Printed: 12/7/2020 203 Project #: SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218 Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305 Location: 5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval Prior to issuance of a grading permit or the recordation of the Final Map, whichever comes first, the Final Project-Specific Water Quality Management Plan shall include a completed copy of “Worksheet H: Factor of Safety and Design Infiltration Worksheet” located in Appendix D “Section VII – Infiltration Rate Evaluation Protocol and Factor of Safety Recommendations, …” of the San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans. The infiltration study shall include the Soil Engineer’s recommendations for Appendix D, Table VII.3: Suitability Assessment Related Considerations for Infiltration Facility Safety Factors”. 34. 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”. 35. The final project-specific Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) may be prepared as a Phased WQMP and shall include all phases of the project if it is prepared as a phased WQMP. Construction of the storm water treatment structural devices may be constructed as construction progresses. 36. 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. 37. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy by the Building Official, or his designee, the civil engineer of record shall file a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Post Construction Storm Water Treatment Devices As-Built Certificate with the Environmental Programs Coordinator, City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Services Department. 38. 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”. 39. The proposed tentative map is proposing a land division only and may include grading of lots per Note #8 shown on the preliminary water quality management plan. The USEPA regulations include the term “common plan of development or sale” to ensure that acreage within a common project does not artificially escape the permit requirements because construction activities are phased, split among smaller parcels, or completed by different owners/developers”. In keeping with the intent of this USEPA regulation the applicant as a condition of approval shall be required to submit a final project-specific water quality management plan to the City Engineer, or their designee, prior to the recordation of the final map. This final project-specific water quality management plan shall be recorded concurrently with the final map. As development of each lot is unknown at this time, the applicant shall use the maximum allowed lot coverage per the zoning requirements to calculate the design capture volume (DCV) for each lot and provide a typical structural storm water treatment device meeting low impact development (LID) principles for the entire tract as the lots develop in the future. 40. www.CityofRC.us Page 16 of 18Printed: 12/7/2020 204 Project #: SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218 Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305 Location: 5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval Grading will be required for the construction of the street(s). Prior to the issuance of any permits for the construction of the streets, the applicant shall submit to the City Engineer, or his designee, a grading plan for grading permit purposes and private street plans for the construction of the private streets and the equestrian trails. 41. The City of Rancho Cucamonga does not allow on-site storm water quality treatment BMP devices within the individual single-family lots which will be required to be inspected and maintained by each individual homeowner. As a condition of approval for this single-family residential project (including tentative tract maps and parcel maps, and final tract maps and parcel maps of 2 parcels or more) a common storm water treatment system will be required which shall be maintained by a homeowners’ association prior to the approval of a water quality management plan and issuance of a grading permit. 42. Prior to approval of the final project-specific water quality management plan the applicant shall have a soils engineer prepare a project-specific infiltration study for the project for the purposes of storm water quality treatment. The infiltration study and recommendations shall follow the guidelines in the current adopted “San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans”. Note: As this project is proposing surface basins after the project site has been rough graded, the use of the Custom Soil Resource Report for San Bernardino County Southwestern Part by the United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service for natural soils is not acceptable for soil groundwater infiltration rates. 43. The project is proposing on-site waste water disposal (septic) systems for the individual lots. The on-site waste water disposal systems shall meet the requirements of the current adopted City of Rancho Cucamonga Local Agency Management Plan (LAMP) for On-Site Wastewater Treatment Systems (OWTS). A copy of the OWTS plan shall be submitted to the Building and Safety Services Department (B&S) for review. A copy of the B&S OWTS review comments shall be provided to the Engineering Services Department for review prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 44. As the developer is proposing to sell each lot individually and to provide a continuity of the equestrian trail along the boundary of the project, prior to the recordation of the final map the developer shall pull a precise grading permit and construct the equestrian trail(s) per City of Rancho Cucamonga standards and the private streets per a separate permit. 45. As shown on the preliminary water quality management plan, noted as "Preliminary - Acceptable" by the City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Services Department dated March 12, 2019, lots 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6 shall drain to Vista Grove Street. Lot 3 is tabled to drain to the southwest corner of the lot. Lot 3 shall have a separate storm water treatment (BMP) for an equestrian use to be maintained by the owner of Lot 3. 46. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the grading plan shall show all slopes outside of the 5-foot cross lot drainage easement. 47. Prior to recordation of the final map the developer shall pull a precise grading permit and construct the proposed storm water quality treatment basins located at the south portion of the "A" Court (private street) cul-de-sac. 48. www.CityofRC.us Page 17 of 18Printed: 12/7/2020 205 Project #: SUBTT18305-1 CEQA2016-00026, DRC2020-00217, DRC2020-00218 Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 18305 Location: 5360 HERMOSA AVE - 107420101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review, Minor Exception, Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval Prior to approval of the final project specific water quality management plan the developer shall provide recorded CC&R's describing that the private storm water quality basins shall be maintained by a homeowner's association. 49. The proposed water quality basin located southerly of the cul-de-sac is proposing a water depth of 2-feet. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit the grading plan shall show the construction of a 60-inch guard (fencing) around the water quality basin. The fencing/gate shall be maintained by the homeowner's association. 50. www.CityofRC.us Page 18 of 18Printed: 12/7/2020 206 DATE: January 13, 2021 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Anne McIntosh, AICP, Planning Director INITIATED BY: David F. Eoff IV SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW DRC2019-00651 – SGE CONSULTING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS FOR AIR GAS SPECIALTY GAS FACILITY - A request to demolish an existing office building and construct a new 18,165 square-foot industrial building/production facility with a 3,490 square-foot office and additional site improvements. The project is located in the General Industrial (GI) zone at 12550 Arrow Route – APN: 0229-031-23. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City’s CEQA guidelines under CEQA Section 15332 – In-Fill Development Projects. RECOMMENDATION: Approve Design Review DRC2019-00651 to allow the demolition of an existing office building and the construction of a new industrial building/production facility for the existing Air Gas Specialty Gas Facility operation through the adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval. BACKGROUND: The overall project site is roughly 19 acres in area with a property depth of 1,270 feet north to south and a width of 660 feet east to west. The project site is currently developed with several small operation buildings, various employee parking areas, and outdoor production and manufacturing equipment that is necessary for the Air Gas operation. A majority of the site is paved with concrete for parking areas and vehicle/truck circulation, and the Air Gas production (Exhibit A). The existing Land Use, General Plan, and Zoning Designations for the project site and adjacent properties are as follows: Land Use General Plan Zoning Site Industrial General Industrial General Industrial (GI) District North Shopping Center (Foothill Marketplace) General Commercial Regional Related Commercial (RRC) District (Foothill Boulevard Overlay District) South Industrial Heavy Industrial Heavy Industrial (HI) District 207 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DESIGN REVIEW DRC2019-00651 – SGE CONSULTING January 13, 2021 Page 2O East Industrial (Metropolitan Water District (MWD) facility) General Industrial General Industrial (GI) District West Industrial General Industrial General Industrial (GI) District PROJECT ANALYSIS: A. General. The applicant proposes to demolish an existing single-story 9,133 square-foot office building and replace it with a new 18,165 square-foot industrial/production building that includes a 3,490 square- foot office space. The project will also include new landscape improvements, improvements to the parking lot area to accommodate additional parking stalls, and improvements to circulation throughout the property. The project plans are included as Exhibit B. The proposed building is located near the south portion of the property. Most of the existing production equipment for the Air Gas operation is located towards the northern area of the site. The building will be setback roughly 72 feet from the face of curb along Arrow Route. The proposed building is designed into two components - the production area for the air gas operation, and the office area for the administrative needs. The proposed building is mostly comprised of production area, occupying roughly 15,000 square- feet of the overall building area, while the remaining office portion is integrated into the overall structure near the southeast portion of the building. The exterior finish of the proposed building will consist primarily of an insulated panel material that will have slight textured finish to replicate stucco or concrete tilt-up construction. The remainder of the building, primarily the office portion, will use integrally colored split face block as the exterior finish. The color palette will include white as the primary color, with tans and a teal incorporated as accents to enhance the visual interest. To help break up the wall plane, the production area will include a large rectangular clerestory windows along the south, east, and west elevations. The office portion will also include a large storefront-like windows along the south and west elevations. The office area is also designed to extend out from the primary building wall plane, to create movement and articulation in the building, to further improve the visual interest in the building along the south and west elevations. The building will have a shed-style roof using standing seam metal roofing. This will result in an overall building height that ranges from roughly 18 feet to 27 feet. To enhance the overall appearance of the building, additional architectural features such as steel canopies will be placed over the office windows, a large steel canopy will be constructed over the loading dock, and a large screen wall be constructed to screen outdoor production equipment. The screen wall will be designed using the same split face block to provide consistency with the rest of the building design. B. Parking and Access. Overall site improvements include the expansion of a new parking lot to accommodate additional parking spaces for employees and to account for the expanded building area. The project requires 73 parking stalls; 75 parking stalls were provided, creating a surplus of 2 stalls. This does not include truck parking. The project includes one loading dock, which will require one parking space specifically for trucks. The project site currently has 13 existing truck stalls, making it compliant with the City’s Development Code. 208 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DESIGN REVIEW DRC2019-00651 – SGE CONSULTING January 13, 2021 Page 3O The project will also include new circulation routes throughout the property to accommodate fire access and proper truck circulation for the Air Gas operation onto the site and around the proposed building. New landscaping will also be provided in place of the demolished building and throughout the site. The property frontage along Arrow Route will be improved with new parking landscape consisting of trees, shrubs and ground cover, as well as a new sidewalk that meets the City standards within the required average landscape setback of 45 feet. C. Design Review Committee. The project was reviewed by the Design Review Committee (Oaxaca, Williams, and Smith) on November 10, 2020. No major issues were discussed, however there were two secondary issues related to the design of the canopy columns and the proposed fencing along Arrow Route, as reflected in the attached Design Review Committee Comments report prepared by Staff (Exhibit C). The Committee accepted Staff’s recommendation that the project be forwarded to the Planning Commission for their review and action with the requirement that the applicant work with staff to revise the design/material of the perimeter fencing along Arrow Route. The applicant has agreed to revise the fencing as required by DRC and is reflected in the project plans as proposed. D. Public Art. This project is required to provide public art as outlined in Chapter 17.124 of the Development Code. Based on the square footage of the project, the total art value required per Section 17.124.020.C. is $18,165.00. The applicant is working to incorporate public art as part of the project. A condition has been included pursuant to the Development Code that requires the public art requirement to be met prior to occupancy. CEQA DETERMINATION: The Planning Department staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines. The project qualifies under the Class 32 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 - In-Fill Development Projects, as the project includes in-fill development consistent with the applicable General Plan designation and regulations. The proposed construction of the new industrial/production building will occur on a site that is developed and operational by the Air Gas Specialty company. The project will not result in any significant impacts relating to traffic, noise, and air quality or water quality. The project is surrounded by adequate streets that have capacity to serve the property and the construction of the new production building is unlikely to create significant impacts to traffic. The project will include water quality improvements that meet State and local requirements, conditions of approval have been included to ensure proper water quality measures are completed prior to occupancy. Technical studies for air quality and noise have been provided that analyzed the potential impacts from the project. The results of the air quality study indicated the project will result in less than significant impacts to air quality based on State and Southern California Air Quality Management District regulations. The results of the noise study also indicated the project will not result in any significant impacts to noise. Therefore, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The proposed building will improve efficiency of the current Air Gas operation, the surrounding area is developed with similar uses and is adequately served by all required utilities and public services. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing with a regular page legal advertisement in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site. No comments/correspondence have been received in response to these notifications 209 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DESIGN REVIEW DRC2019-00651 – SGE CONSULTING January 13, 2021 Page 4O COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: Although a specific 2020 City Council goal does not directly apply to this application, the proposed industrial/production building does meet the City Council’s Core Value of continuous improvement. The demolition of the existing office building and replacement with a new production building with office space will improve the functionality, access, safety, and aesthetics of the project site and the surrounding area. EXHIBITS: Exhibit A – Aerial Photo Exhibit B – Project Plans Exhibit C – Design Review Committee Action Agenda and Comments Draft Resolution 21-04 of Approval for Design Review DRC2019-00651 210 Exhibit A 211 Exhibit B 212 BUILDING 1 2 7 0 . 1 5 '1 2 7 0 . 0 5 '6 6 0 . 0 0 '6 6 0 . 0 0 'YELLOWWOOD POND ACCESS ROAD PONDCELLTOWERBUILIDINGARROW ROUTEEXISTINGPARKING LOT FIREACCESSENTRANCEBUILDINGTO BEDEMOLISHEDETIWANDA PLANTDISTRIBUTIONOFFICES,BLDG 'G'TRUCKSHOP,BLDG 'C'H-2BLDG,'F'NEW POWER DISTRIBUTION SCEBLDGSCESUBSTATIONCANOPYCANOPYOFFICESTRUCKDOCK OLD POWER DISTRIBUTIONCONTROLBLDG, 'A'ADMIN.BLDG,'D'COMPRESSORBLDG, 'B'WALL GATEGATEGATEFIREACCESSGATEFIREACCESSFIREACCESSFIREACCESSFIREACCESSFIREACCESSFIREACCESSFIREACCESSFIREACCESSFIREACCESSFIREACCESSFIREACCESSFIREACCESSFIREACCESSFIREACCESSFIREACCESSNEWBUILDINGMINIMUM TURNING RADII20'-0" INSIDE RADIUS46'-0" OUTSIDE RADIUSDEADENDCONSTRUCTIONLIMIT LINECONSTRUCTIONLIMIT LINECONSTRUCTIONLIMIT LINE6k gal3k galARCHITECTS / PLANNERSan Air Liquide company213 OVERALL ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLANBUILDING 1 2 7 0 . 1 5 '1 2 7 0 . 0 5 '6 6 0 . 0 0 '26.0'NORTHYELLOWWOOD POND ACCESS ROAD PONDCELLTOWERBUILIDINGARROW ROUTESITEACCESSPOINTBUILDINGTO BEDEMOLISHEDETIWANDA PLANTEQUIPMENTSHADECANOPYDISTRIBUTIONOFFICES,BLDG 'G'TRUCKSHOP,BLDG 'C'H-2BLDG,'F'NEW POWER DISTRIBUTION SCE BLDGNO ACCESSSCESUBSTATIONOLD POWER DISTRIBUTIONCONTROLBLDG, 'A'ADMIN.BLDG,'D'COMPRESSORBLDG, 'B'8 STALLSREQUIRED, 1EXISTING STALL,7 STALLSLOCATED INPRIME PARKING5 STALLSREQUIRED, 2EXISTING STALLS,3 STALLS LOCATEDIN PRIME PARKINGUNINHABITABLENO PARKINGSTALLS REQUIRED6 EXISTINGPARKINGSTALLS7 STALLS REQUIRED,7 STALLS LOCATED INPRIME PARKING7 STALLSREQUIRED, 6PROVIDED, 1STALLLOCATED INPRIME PARKINGUNINHABITABLENO PARKINGSTALLS REQUIREDUNINHABITABLENO PARKINGSTALLS REQUIREDUNINHABITABLENO PARKINGSTALLS REQUIREDWALL UNINHABITABLENO PARKINGSTALLS REQUIREDTRUCKDOCKCANOPYCANOPYOFFICES PROPOSEDBUILDING'H'BREAKAREA852 SF6 6 0 . 0 0 '"PRIME PARKING"40 ORIGINALSTALLS + 26 NEW= 66 PARKINGSTALLS ENTIRELOT TO BERESTRIPED &ENLARGEDCLEAN AIR ELEC. VEH.FIRE LANEFIRE LANEFIRE LANE FIRE LANE FIRE LANE FI R E L A N E FIRE LANEHABITABLEPORTION IS 1,036S.F., 3 STALLSLOCATED IN PRIMEPARKING7,846 SFNET9,133 SFGROSS6k gal3k galAS100OVERALL ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN ARCHITECTS / PLANNERSan Air Liquide company ABUILDING ID (1) BUILDING SF MUNI CODE REQ (6) REQUIRED PARKING BUILDING USE OFFICE 2100 SF 4/1000 SF 9-1=8 NET (7) B (2) COMP BLDG 1036 SF 3 C TRUCK SHOP 3300 SF 7 D OFFICE 1440 SF 6-1=5 NET (7) H-2 BLDG 0 0 2/1000 SF 2/1000 SF 4/1000 SF 0 F (3) OFFICE 2500 SF 8-1=7 NET (7) 4/1000 SF G INDUSTRIAL 16,153 SF 33 2/1000 SF H - PROD OFFICE 3233 SF 13-4=9 NET (7) 4/1000 SF H - OFFICES (1) THERE IS NO BUILDING E. (2)PARTIALLY HABITABLE BUILDING, HABITABLE AREA IS 1036 SF. (3) UNINHABITABLE BUILDING. (4) WHERE INSUFFICIENT PARKING IS PROVIDED ADJACENT TO A PARTICULAR M BUILDING THE BALANCE OF THAT PARKING IS PROVIDED IN THE LARGE PARKING LOT, THIS IS DONE TO LIMIT VEHICULAR TRAFFIC ON THE SITE FOR SAFETY PURPOSES. (5) TABLE CDC 11B-208.2, 76-100 STALLS = 4 ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES, ACCESSIBLE STALL QAUNTITY IS INCLUDED TOTAL STALLS OF 73. (6)TABLE 17.64.050 NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES REQUIRED. (7) SECTION 17.64.050, ITEM A.6. NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES REQUIRED, REDUCTIONS FOR OFFICE SPACE. (8) 75 STALLS PROVIDED OCCUPANCY TYPE B F-1 S-1 B H-2 B F-1 / H-2 B PARKING TABLE (4) ADA PARKING (5) 1 1 1 2 (5) 6 (8) 73 TOTALS 1 NET REDUCED SF 1867 SF 1200 SF 2187 SF 2238 SF 214 GENERALINDUSTRIAL(GI) ZONEARROW ROUTE(MAJOR ARTERIAL STREET)NEW CANOPYNEW CANOPY NEW OFFICES NEW BUILDING6k gal3k galARCHITECTS / PLANNERSan Air Liquide company215 MKSFTIR 10-CYLINDER SAMPLE MANIFOLD AUTOFTIR #1 10-CYLINDER SAMPLE MANIFOLD AUTOFTIR #1 10-CYLINDER SAMPLE MANIFOLD AUTOFTIR #1 10-CYLINDER SAMPLE MANIFOLD AUTOFTIR #2 10-CYLINDER SAMPLE MANIFOLD AUTOFTIR #2 10-CYLINDER SAMPLE MANIFOLDGC AREAPUREGASRACKLABPACK#1LABPACK#2LABPACK WORK BENCH GC2.5' X 12'WORKSTATION 8' X 2.5' 3 CHEMIST DESKS - BUILT IN 30" X 15'-0"MKS FTIR& SAMPLESYSTEMAUTOFTIR#1DESKAUTOFTIR#2LABPACK #1SAMPLELABPACKSTDSLABPACK #2SAMPLEGCGCGCGCGC & HALF RACKGCGCGCGCGC2.5' X 12'ARCHITECTS / PLANNERSan Air Liquide company216 BOOTHDRYERN26k gal023k galROLLERVAPSTORAGE BINSCOMPCOOLINGVAPVACBAKECOMPRESSORSPAINTLINEAR FLAMGRAVSTATPANEL PREP HELIUMCOMPRESSORHELIUMPURIFIERDYNAMICCOMPRESSORPREP PREP PREP PREPACUGRAVDYNAMICBLENDPANELDYNAMIC BLENDMANIFOLDDVVACBAKESCRUBBERDBFLAMSUPGRAVFLAMSUPDBOXSUPGRAVOXSUPSCALESCALEGRAVSTATPANEL ARCHITECTS / PLANNERSan Air Liquide company217 N2/HEAIR/O2STORAGE BINSMKSFTIR 10-CYLINDER SAMPLE MANIFOLD AUTOFTIR #1 10-CYLINDER SAMPLE MANIFOLD AUTOFTIR #1 10-CYLINDER SAMPLE MANIFOLD AUTOFTIR #1 10-CYLINDER SAMPLE MANIFOLD AUTOFTIR #2 10-CYLINDER SAMPLE MANIFOLD AUTOFTIR #2 10-CYLINDER SAMPLE MANIFOLDGC AREAPUREGASRACKLABPACK#1LABPACK#2LABPACK WORK BENCH GC2.5' X 12'WORKSTATION 8' X 2.5' 3 CHEMIST DESKS - BUILT IN 30" X 15'-0"MKS FTIR& SAMPLESYSTEMAUTOFTIR#1DESKAUTOFTIR#2LABPACK #1SAMPLELABPACKSTDSLABPACK #2SAMPLESPAREGCGCGCGCGC & HALF RACKGCGCGCGCGC2.5' X 12'SCALEGAS DETECTCONT PANELARCHITECTS / PLANNERSan Air Liquide company218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 ARCHITECTS / PLANNERSan Air Liquide company227 FDCARCHITECTS / PLANNERSan Air Liquide company228 ARCHITECTS / PLANNERSan Air Liquide company229 ARCHITECTS / PLANNERSan Air Liquide companyAE302BUILDING SECTIONS 230 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. David F. Eoff IV November 10, 2020 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2019-00651 – SGE CONSULTING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS FOR AIR GAS SPECIALTY GAS FACILITY - A request to demolish an existing office building and construct a new 18,165 square-foot industrial building/production facility with a 3,490 square-foot office and additional site improvements. The project is located in the General Industrial (GI) zone at 12550 Arrow Route – APN: 0229-031-23. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City’s CEQA guidelines under CEQA Section 15332 – In-Fill Development Projects. Site Characteristics and Background: The overall project site is roughly 19 acres in area with a property depth of 1,270 feet north to south and a width of 660 feet east to west. The project site is currently developed with several small operation buildings, various employee parking areas, and outdoor production and manufacturing equipment that is necessary for the Air Gas operation. A majority of the site is paved with concrete for parking areas and vehicle/truck circulation, and the Air Gas production. The unpaved areas will be improved with landscape and hardscape and graded to accommodate the new production facility. The existing Land Use, General Plan, and Zoning Designations for the project site and adjacent properties are as follows: Land Use General Plan Zoning Site Industrial General Industrial General Industrial (GI) District North Shopping Center (Foothill Marketplace) General Commercial Regional Related Commercial (Foothill Boulevard Overlay District) South Industrial Heavy Industrial Heavy Industrial (HI) District East Industrial (Metropolitan Water District (MWD) facility) General Industrial General Industrial (GI) District West Industrial General Industrial General Industrial (GI) District Project Overview: The applicant proposes to demolish an existing single-story 9,133 square-foot office building and replace it with a new 18,165 square-foot industrial/production building that includes a 3,490 square-foot office space. The project will also include new landscape improvements, improvements to the parking lot area to accommodate additional parking stalls, and improvements to circulation throughout the property. The proposed building is located near the south portion of the property. Most of the existing production equipment for the Air Gas operation is located towards the northern area of the site. The building will be setback roughly 72 feet from the face of curb along Arrow Route. The proposed building is designed into two components - the production area for the air gas operation, and the office area for the administrative needs. The proposed building is mostly comprised of Exhibit C 231 DRC COMMENTS DESIGN REVIEW DRC2019-00651 – SGE CONSULTING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS FOR AIR GAS SPECIALTY GAS FACILITY November 10, 2020 Page 2OMMENTS production area, occupying roughly 15,000 square-feet of the overall building area, while the remaining office portion is integrated into the overall structure near the southeast portion of the building. The exterior finish of the proposed building will consist primarily of an insulated panel material that will have slight textured finish to replicate stucco or concrete tilt-up construction. The remainder of the building, primarily the office portion, will use integrally colored split face block as the exterior finish. The color palette will include white as the primary color, with tans and a teal incorporated as accents to enhance the visual interest. To help break up the wall plane, the production area will include a large rectangular clerestory windows along the south, east, and west elevations. The office portion will also include a large storefront-like windows along the south and west elevations. The office area is also designed to extend out from the primary building wall plane, to create movement and articulation in the building, to further improve the visual interest in the building along the south and west elevations. The building will have a shed-style roof using standing seam metal roofing. This will result in an overall building height that ranges from roughly 18 feet to 27 feet. To enhance the overall appearance of the building, additional architectural features such as steel canopies will be placed over the office windows, a large steel canopy will be constructed over the loading dock, and a large screen wall be constructed to screen outdoor production equipment. The screen wall will be designed using the same split face block to provide consistency with the rest of the building design. Overall site improvements include the expansion of a new parking lot to accommodate additional parking spaces for employees and to account for the expanded building area. The project requires 73 parking stalls; 75 parking stalls were provided, creating a surplus of 2 stalls. This does not include truck parking. The project includes one loading dock, which will require one parking space specifically for trucks. The project site currently has 13 existing truck stalls, making it compliant with the City’s Development Code. The project will also include new circulation routes throughout the property to accommodate fire access and proper truck circulation for the Air Gas operation onto the site and around the proposed building. New landscaping will also be provided in place of the demolished building and throughout the site. The property frontage along Arrow Route will be improved with new parking landscape consisting of trees, shrubs and ground cover, as well as a new sidewalk that meets the City standards within the required average landscape setback of 45 feet. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Major Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding the project: None Secondary Issues: Once all the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. Canopy Columns - The project includes the addition of a large canopy along the west elevation 232 DRC COMMENTS DESIGN REVIEW DRC2019-00651 – SGE CONSULTING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS FOR AIR GAS SPECIALTY GAS FACILITY November 10, 2020 Page 3OMMENTS to provide cover over the loading dock and adjacent walkways. The design/appearance of the canopy can be improved with wider columns and a wider base that is in better proportion with the overall canopy. 2. Fencing along Arrow Route - The applicant has proposed to retain the existing chain link fence along the property frontage although fencing is not required, the applicant has indicated the fence is necessary for security purpose. Staff understands the need for the fencing for security purposes, however considering the overall site improvements that are being proposed, staff believes enhancing the fence material to wrought iron will add to the overall improvements to the site. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. All Double Detector Checks (DDC) and Fire Department Connections (FDC) shall be screened behind a 4-foot high block wall. These walls shall be constructed of decorative masonry block such as slumpstone or stackstone or poured in-place concrete with design elements incorporated to match the building. 2. All ground-mounted equipment, including utility boxes, transformers, and back-flow devices, shall be surrounded by a minimum of two rows of shrubs spaced a minimum of 18 inches on center. All ground-mounted equipment shall be painted dark green except as directed otherwise by the Fire Department. 3. Decorative paving shall be provided at each vehicle entrance to the site, behind the public right-of-way. These decoratively paved areas shall extend from the front property line to the building setback line and have a width equal to that of the driveway. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee recommend approval of the proposed project as submitted to the Planning Commission. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: David F. Eoff IV Members Present: Staff Coordinator: Mike Smith 233 234 235 RESOLUTION NO. 21-04 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW DRC2019-00651, A REQUEST TO DEMOLISH AN EXISTING OFFICE BUILDING AND CONSTRUCT A NEW 18,165 SQUARE-FOOT INDUSTRIAL BUILDING/PRODUCTION FACILITY WITH A 3,490 SQUARE-FOOT OFFICE AND ADDITIONAL SITE IMPROVEMENTS. THE PROJECT IS LOCATED IN THE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL (GI) ZONE AT 12550 ARROW ROUTE – APN: 0229-031-23. A. Recitals. 1. SGE Consulting Structural Engineers for Air Gas Specialty Gas Facility filed an application for the approval of Design Review DRC2019-00651 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Design Review request is referred to as "the application." 2. On January 13, 2021, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on January 13, 2021, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to the property located at 12550 Arrow Route with an area of roughly 19 acres and is currently developed with an industrial/production facility and various parking areas. The site is bound by industrial uses to the south, east, and west, and general commercial to the north; and b. The property to the south is zoned Heavy Industrial (HI), the property to the east, and west is zoned General Industrial (GI), and the property to the north is zoned Regional Related Commercial (RRC); and c. The site has a General Plan land use designation of General Industrial; and d. The application is a proposal to demolish an existing office building and construct a new 18,165 square-foot industrial/production building for the current Air Gas Specialty Gas operation; and 236 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 21-04 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2019-00651 – SGE CONSULTING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS FOR AIR GAS SPECIALTY GAS FACILITY. JANUARY 13, 2021 Page 2 e. The proposed industrial building and the included office space will require 73 parking stalls. The applicant proposes to provide 75 spaces, resulting in a surplus of parking spaces. Additionally, the proposed industrial building will include one loading, which will require a minimum of one parking space specifically for trucks. The project site contains 13 truck parking spaces, exceeding the minimum amount required; and f. The proposed building will feature elements of a modern architectural style, containing an angled roof using standing-seam metal, an exterior finish consisting of textured insulated panels designed to replicate stucco or concrete tilt-up, and various windows to help break up the façade. The building will also include variation in height to complement the angled roof and various elements such as steel canopies and window coverings to enhance the overall design; and g. The project was reviewed by the Design Review Committee (DRC) on November 10, 2020. No major issues were discussed. Two secondary issues related to the design of the canopy columns and the proposed fencing along Arrow Route were discussed. The Committee accepted Staff’s recommendation that the project be forwarded to the Planning Commission for their review and approval with the requirement that the applicant work with staff to revise the design/material of the perimeter fencing along Arrow Route. The applicant has agreed to revise the fencing as required by DRC and is reflected in the project plans; and 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan. The General Plan land use designation for the project is General Industrial, which provides for a wide range of industrial uses, such as warehousing and production. The project is for the development of a new industrial/production facility with office space, which is consistent with the intent of the General Plan’s General Industrial land use designation; and b. The proposed use is in accord with objective of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. The Development Code states that the General Industrial zones are areas designated for the widest possible range of light and medium industrial activity, including manufacturing, assembling, fabrication, wholesaling, heavy commercial, and office uses. The project is to construct a production facility with ancillary office space to improve the operation and efficiency of the Specialty Air Gas Facility operation; and c. The proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. The project meets all applicable development and performance standards for a industrial development set forth by the Development Code; and d. The proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The proposed use is a compatible and complimentary to the existing surrounding developments where it is located, as it meets the intent and purpose of the General Plan Designation and Zoning District for the project site; and 237 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 21-04 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2019-00651 – SGE CONSULTING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS FOR AIR GAS SPECIALTY GAS FACILITY. JANUARY 13, 2021 Page 3 4. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City’s local CEQA Guidelines, the Planning Commission finds that the qualifies under the Class 32 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 - In-Fill Development Projects, as the project includes in-fill development consistent with the applicable General Plan designation and regulations. The proposed construction of the new industrial/production building will occur on a site that is developed an operational by the Air Gas Specialty company. In addition, the proposed building will improve efficiency of the current Air Gas operation, the surrounding area is developed with similar uses and is adequately served by all required utilities and public services. The Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. 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 Conditions of Approval, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 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 13th day of January 2021, by the following vote- to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: 238 Conditions of Approval Community Development Department Project #: DRC2019-00651 Project Name: Airgas Specialty Gas Facility Location: 12550 ARROW RTE - 022903123-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions The perimeter fencing along Arrow Route and Yellow Wood Road shall be constructed using wrought-iron or similar for the entire stretch of street frontage. Any changes to the required fencing improvement shall require approval from the Planning Director. 1. Construction plans submitted to Building and Safety for review shall be in substantial compliance with the approved design by the Planning Commission. Any changes to the approved plans shall require approval from the Planning Department prior to issuance of permits. 2. Standard Conditions of Approval Any approval shall expire if Building Permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 1 year from the date of approval or a time extension has been granted. 3. This project is subject to public art requirement outlined in Chapter 17.124 of the Development Code. Prior to the issuance of building permits (for grading or construction), the applicant shall inform the Planning Department of their choice to install public art, donate art or select the in-lieu option as outlined in 17.124.020.D. If the project developer chooses to pay the in-lieu fee, the in-lieu art fee will be invoiced on the building permit by the City and shall be paid by the applicant prior to building permit issuance. If the project developer chooses to install art, they shall submit, during the plan check process, an application for the art work that will be installed on the project site that contains information applicable to the art work in addition to any other information as may be required by the City to adequately evaluate the proposed the art work in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 17.124. If the project developer chooses to donate art, applications for art work donated to the City shall be subject to review by the Public Art Committee which shall make a recommendation whether the proposed donation is consistent with Chapter 17.124 and final acceptance by the City Council. No final approval, such as a final inspection or the a issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, for any development project (or if a multi-phased project, the final phase of a development project) that is subject to this requirement shall occur unless the public art requirement has been fulfilled to the satisfaction of the Planning Department. 4. www.CityofRC.us Printed: 1/7/2021 239 Project #: DRC2019-00651 Project Name: Airgas Specialty Gas Facility Location: 12550 ARROW RTE - 022903123-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 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. 5. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 6. The applicant shall be required to pay California Department of Fish and Wildlife Notice of Exemption fee in the amount of $50.00. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary prior to public hearing or within 5 days of the date of project approval. 7. For commercial and industrial projects, paint roll-up doors and service doors to match main building colors. 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 as required by the Planning Department. Such screening shall be architecturally integrated with the building design and constructed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. Any roof-mounted mechanical equipment and/or ductwork, that projects vertically more than 18 inches above the roof or roof parapet, shall be screened by an architecturally designed enclosure which exhibits a permanent nature with the building design and is detailed consistent with the building. Any roof-mounted mechanical equipment and/or ductwork, that projects vertically less than 18 inches above the roof or roof parapet shall be painted consistent with the color scheme of the building. Details shall be included in building plans. 9. Landscaping and irrigation systems required to be installed within the public right-of-way on the perimeter of this project area shall be continuously maintained by the developer. 10. 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. 11. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of water efficient landscaping per Development Code Chapter 17.82. 12. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances, and exits shall be striped per City standards. 13. Downspouts shall not be visible from the exterior of any elevations of the buildings. All downspouts shall be routed through the interior of the building walls. 14. www.CityofRC.us Page 2 of 12Printed: 1/7/2021 240 Project #: DRC2019-00651 Project Name: Airgas Specialty Gas Facility Location: 12550 ARROW RTE - 022903123-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 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. 15. A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram, shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director and Police Department (909-477-2800) prior to the issuance of Building Permits. Such plan shall indicate style, illumination, location, height, and method of shielding so as not to adversely affect adjacent properties. 16. Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions (Undergrounding Overhead Facilities): Per Resolution No. 87-96: All developments, except those contained in section 7 and others specifically waived by the Planning Commission, shall be responsible for undergrounding all existing overhead utility lines including the removal the related supporting poles adjacent to and within the limits of a development as follows: 1. Lines on the project side of the street. a. Said lines shall be undergrounded at the developers expense. b. In those circumstances where the Planning Commission decides that undergrounding is impractical at present for such reasons as short length of undergrounding (less than 300 feet and not undergrounded adjacent), a heavy concentration of services to other users, disruption to existing improvements, etc., the Developer shall pay an in-lieu fee for the full amount per Section 6. c. The developer shall be eligible for reimbursement of one-half the cost of undergrounding from future developments as they occur on opposite sides of the street. 2. Lines on the opposite of the street from the project: The Developer shall pay a fee to the City for one-half the amount per Section 6. 3. Lines on both sides of the street: The Developer shall comply with Section 1 above and be eligible for reimbursement or pay additional fees so that he bears a total expense equivalent to one-half the total cost of undergrounding the lines on both sides of the street. 1. (D.I.F. Fees): Development impact fees must be paid prior to issuance of building permit: *Note that fees are subject to change annually. 2. Protect or repair existing improvements along Arrow Rte including sidewalk, curb & gutter, drive approaches, and signing & striping as required. 3. Standard Conditions of Approval www.CityofRC.us Page 3 of 12Printed: 1/7/2021 241 Project #: DRC2019-00651 Project Name: Airgas Specialty Gas Facility Location: 12550 ARROW RTE - 022903123-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of Building Permits, whichever occurs first. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer. 4. ** CD Information Required Prior to Sign-Off for Building Permit Prior to the issuance of building permits, if valuation is greater or equal to $100,000, a Diversion Deposit and a related administrative fee shall be paid for the Construction and Demolition Diversion Program. The deposit is fully refundable if at least 65% of all wastes generated during construction and demolition are diverted from landfills, and appropriate documentation is provided to the City. Applicant must identify if they are self-hauling or utilizing Burrtec prior to issuance of a building permit. Proof of diversion must be submitted to the Environmental Engineering Division within 60 days following the completion of the construction and / or demolition project. Contact Marissa Ostos, Environmental Engineering, at (909) 774-4062 for more information. Instructions and forms are available at the City's website, www.cityofrc.us, under City Hall / Engineering / Environmental Programs / Construction & Demolition Diversion Program. 5. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 16.37.010, no person shall make connections from a source of energy, fuel or power to any building or structure which is regulated by technical codes and for which a permit is required unless, in addition to any and all other codes, regulations and ordinances, all improvements required by these conditions of development approval have been completed and accepted by the City Council, except: that in developments containing more than one building, structure or unit, the development may have energy connections made in equal proportion to the percentage of completion of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval, as determined by the City Engineer, provided that reasonable, safe and maintainable access to the property exists. In no case shall more than 95 percent of the buildings, structures or units be connected to energy sources prior to completion and acceptance of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval. 6. All public improvements (streets, drainage facilities, landscaped areas, etc.) shown on the plans shall be constructed to City Standards. Street improvements shall include, but are not limited to, curb and gutter, AC pavement, drive approaches, sidewalks, street lights, and street trees. 7. Developer shall execute a Line Extension Agreement for electric service and shall construct electrical distribution facilities in accordance with such agreement and shall construct electrical distribution facilities in accordance with such agreement and Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility requirements and dedicate such facilities to the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility. The Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility shall be the electrical service provider for all project related development. 8. www.CityofRC.us Page 4 of 12Printed: 1/7/2021 242 Project #: DRC2019-00651 Project Name: Airgas Specialty Gas Facility Location: 12550 ARROW RTE - 022903123-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 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. 9. Fire Prevention / New Construction Unit Standard Conditions of Approval Required alarm systems and supervision systems are required to be in accordance with Fire District Standard 9-3. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section. 1. Plans for the sprinkler system are required to be submitted separately and issued a separate permit. Submit all plans to the Building & Safety Department for routing to the Fire District. 2. Fire extinguishers are required in accordance with Section 906 of the California Fire Code. Consult with the Fire Inspector for the correct type, size, and exact installation locations. 3. A Knox Box key box is required in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-9. Additional boxes may be required depending on the size of the building, the location of fire protection and life safety system controls, and the operational needs of the Fire District. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section. If an installed Knox Box is available to this project or business, keys for the building/suite/unit are required to be provided to the Fire Inspector at the final inspection. 4. Fire apparatus access roads (fire lanes) can be included in an engineered onsite storm water retention plan. The ponding of storm water shall not exceed a designed depth of four (4) inches in the designated fire apparatus access road(s) and the area between the fire apparatus access road(s) and the exterior walls of all normally occupied buildings. 5. Street address and unit/suite signage for commercial and industrial buildings are required to be in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-8. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section. 6. Identification of fire protection systems and components, fire alarm systems and components, and equipment and devices associated with fire and life safety systems is required to be in accordance with Fire District Standards 5-5 and 5-10. The Standards have been uploaded to the Documents section. 7. Building and Safety Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions www.CityofRC.us Page 5 of 12Printed: 1/7/2021 243 Project #: DRC2019-00651 Project Name: Airgas Specialty Gas Facility Location: 12550 ARROW RTE - 022903123-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Building and Safety Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions When the Entitlement Review is approved submit complete construction drawings including structural calculations, energy calculations and soils report to Building and Safety for plan review in accordance with the current edition of the CA Building and Fire Codes including all local ordinances and standards which are effective at the time of Plan Check Submittal. The new structures are required to be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers per the CBC and Current RCFPD Ordinance. Disabled access for the site and building must be in accordance to the State of CA and ADA regulations. A separate permit and submittal is required for the paint booth. 1. Grading Section Please be advised of the following Special Conditions Prior to issuance of a wall permit, a copy of the Grading Special Conditions of Approval shall be included within the engineered wall plans and calculations. 1. Standard Conditions of Approval Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with current adopted California Building Code and/or the California Residential Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The Grading and Drainage Plan(s) shall be in substantial conformance with the approved conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan. 2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified Engineer licensed by the State of California to perform such work. Two copies will be provided at grading and drainage plan submittal for review. Plans shall implement design recommendations per said report. 3. The final Grading and Drainage Plan, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be completed, submitted, and approved by the Engineering Services Department prior to the issuance of building permits. 4. 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. 5. 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. 6. If a Rough Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit are submitted to the Engineering Services Department for review, the rough grading plan shall be a separate plan submittal and permit from Precise Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit. 7. www.CityofRC.us Page 6 of 12Printed: 1/7/2021 244 Project #: DRC2019-00651 Project Name: Airgas Specialty Gas Facility Location: 12550 ARROW RTE - 022903123-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 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. 8. 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. 9. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the grading plan shall show that all manufactured slopes shall be a minimum 2-foot offset from the public right of way, permitted line, or the adjacent private property. All slope offsets shall meet the requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. 10. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the grading and drainage plan shall show the maximum parking stall gradient at 5 percent. Accessibility parking stall grades shall be constructed per the, current adopted California Building Code. 11. The applicant shall provide a grading agreement and grading bond for all cut and fill combined exceeding 5,000 cubic yards prior to issuance of a grading permit. The grading agreement and bond shall be approved by the Engineering Services Department. 12. This project shall comply with the accessibility requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. 13. 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 (Engineering Services Department 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. 14. Prior to issuance of a wall permit, on engineered combination garden/retaining walls along the property boundary the structural calculations for the wall shall assume a level toe/heel at the adjacent off-site property (i.e. a manufactured slope is not present). This shall be shown in the typical sections of the grading and drainage plan. 15. www.CityofRC.us Page 7 of 12Printed: 1/7/2021 245 Project #: DRC2019-00651 Project Name: Airgas Specialty Gas Facility Location: 12550 ARROW RTE - 022903123-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the permitted grading plan (or architectural site plan) set shall show in each of the typical sections and the plan view show how the separations between the building exterior and exterior ground surface meet the requirements of Sections CBC1804.3/CRC R401.3, CBC2304.11.2.2/CRC R317.1(2) and CBC2512.1.2/CRC R703.6.2.1 of the current adopted California Building Code/Residential Code. 16. Prior to approval of the project-specific storm water quality management plan, the applicant shall submit to the City Engineer, 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. 17. A drainage study showing a 100-year, AMC 3 design storm event for on-site drainage shall be prepared and submitted to the Engineering Services Department for review and approval for on-site storm water drainage prior to issuance of a grading permit. The plan and 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. 18. Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the latest adopted California Plumbing Code. Private storm drain improvements shall be shown on the grading and drainage plan. 19. Prior to 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). 20. Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WQMP shall include a copy of the project Conditions of Approval. 21. Prior to 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 Engineering Services Department and recorded with the County Recorder’s Office. 22. 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. 23. If 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 Engineering 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. 24. www.CityofRC.us Page 8 of 12Printed: 1/7/2021 246 Project #: DRC2019-00651 Project Name: Airgas Specialty Gas Facility Location: 12550 ARROW RTE - 022903123-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval The land owner shall provide an inspection report by a qualified person/company on a biennial basis for the Class V Injection Wells/underground infiltration chambers to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis all best management practices (BMP”s) as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 25. 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. 26. 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. 27. A final project-specific Storm Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) shall be approved by the Engineering 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. 28. Prior to the issuance of a building permit or Engineering Services Department issued right of way permit, the applicant shall submit to the Engineering Department, or his designee, a final project specific water quality management plan for review and approval, and shall have said document recorded with the San Bernardino County Recorder's Office. 29. Prior to the start of landscaping operations, the landscape architect and the landscape contractor shall provide a sample of the weed fabric barrier to the Project Planner, City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department. The weed barrier shall be permeable. 30. The final project-specific water quality management plan (WQMP) shall include executed maintenance agreements along with the maintenance guidelines for all proprietary structural storm water treatment devices (BMP’s). In the event the applicant cannot get the proprietary device maintenance agreements executed prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant is required to submit a letter to be included within the WQMP document, and scanned and pasted onto the Site and Drainage Plan which states that prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy with applicant shall enter into a contract for the maintenance of the proprietary storm water treatment device. If the proprietary storm water treatment device is part of a residential subdivision, prior to the sale of the residential lot, the developer shall include maintenance agreement(s) as part of the sale of the residential lot to the buyer. A copy of the maintenance agreements to be included in the sale of the property shall be included within the WQMP document. 31. www.CityofRC.us Page 9 of 12Printed: 1/7/2021 247 Project #: DRC2019-00651 Project Name: Airgas Specialty Gas Facility Location: 12550 ARROW RTE - 022903123-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval Prior to issuance of a grading permit the Final Project-Specific Water Quality Management Plan shall include a completed copy of “Worksheet H: Factor of Safety and Design Infiltration Worksheet” located in Appendix D “Section VII – Infiltration Rate Evaluation Protocol and Factor of Safety Recommendations, …” of the San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans. The infiltration study shall include the Soil Engineer’s recommendations for Appendix D, Table VII.3: Suitability Assessment Related Considerations for Infiltration Facility Safety Factors”. 32. Prior to approval of the final project-specific water quality management plan the applicant shall have a soils engineer prepare a project-specific infiltration study for the project for the purposes of storm water quality treatment. The infiltration study and recommendations shall follow the guidelines in the current adopted “San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans”. 33. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy by the Building Official, or his designee, the civil engineer of record shall file a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Post Construction Storm Water Treatment Devices As-Built Certificate with the Environmental Programs Coordinator, City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Services Department. 34. Section 1.5.1, Table 1-1 Priority Projects, Category No. 1, of the San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans reads “All significant re-development projects – defined as the addition or replacement of 5,000 or more square feet (sq. ft.) of impervious surface on an already developed site subject to discretionary approval of the permitting jurisdiction. In addition: Where re-development results in an increase of 50% or more of the impervious surfaces of a previously existing developed site, the numeric sizing criteria discussed in Section 4 applies to the entire development. This project is a cumulative project and requires a Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (PWQMP) for the entire parcel. This project is conditioned, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, to prepare a final project-specific water quality management plan to treat the storm water runoff of the entire development’s impervious area. 35. www.CityofRC.us Page 10 of 12Printed: 1/7/2021 248 Project #: DRC2019-00651 Project Name: Airgas Specialty Gas Facility Location: 12550 ARROW RTE - 022903123-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval GROUND WATER PROTECTION: Prior to approval of the final project specific water quality management plan (WQMP), the WQMP document shall meet the requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board Order No. R8-2010-0036 (NPDES No. CAS 618036), the San Bernardino County Municipal Separate Storm Sewers Separation (MS4) Permit reads: Section XI.D(Water Quality Management Plan Requirements).8(Groundwater Protection): Treatment Control BMPs utilizing infiltration [exclusive of incidental infiltration and BMPs not designed to primarily function as infiltration devices (such as grassy swales, detention basins, vegetated buffer strips, constructed wetlands, etc.)] must comply with the following minimum requirements to protect groundwater: a. Use of structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause or contribute to an exceedance of ground water quality objectives. b. Source control and pollution prevention control BMPs shall be implemented to protect groundwater quality. The need for pre-treatment BMPs such as sedimentation or filtration should be evaluated prior to infiltration. c. Adequate pretreatment of runoff prior to infiltration shall be required in gas stations and large commercial parking lots. (NOTE: The State Water Quality Control Board defines a large commercial parking lot as ‘100,000 sq. ft. or more of commercial development to include parking lot (with 100 or more vehicle traffics), OR, by means of 5,000sqft or more of allowable space designated for parking purposes’). d. Unless adequate pre-treatment of runoff is provided prior to infiltration structural infiltration treatment BMPs must not be used for areas of industrial or light industrial activity{77}, areas subject to high vehicular traffic (25,000 or more daily traffic); car washes; fleet storage areas; nurseries; or any other high threat to water quality land uses or activities. e. Class V injection wells or dry wells must not be placed in areas subject to vehicular{78} repair or maintenance activities{79}, such as an auto body repair shop, automotive repair shop, new and used car dealership, specialty repair shop (e.g., transmission and muffler repair shop) or any facility that does any vehicular repair work. f. Structural infiltration BMP treatment shall not be used at sites that are known to have soil and groundwater contamination. g. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall be located at least 100 feet horizontally from any water supply wells. h. The vertical distance from the bottom of any infiltration structural treatment BMP to the historic high groundwater mark shall be at least 10-feet. Where the groundwater basins do not support beneficial uses, this vertical distance criteria may be reduced, provided groundwater quality is maintained. i. Structural infiltration treatment BMPs shall not cause a nuisance or pollution as defined in Water Code Section 13050. 36. www.CityofRC.us Page 11 of 12Printed: 1/7/2021 249 Project #: DRC2019-00651 Project Name: Airgas Specialty Gas Facility Location: 12550 ARROW RTE - 022903123-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval NONRESIDENTIAL MANDATORY MEASURES – CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE – Prior to the issuance of any building permit the applicant shall comply with Section 5.106.10 (Grading and paving) of the current adopted California Green Building Standards Code: Construction plans shall indicate how site grading or a drainage system will manage all surface water flows to keep water from entering buildings. Examples of methods to manage surface water include, but are not limited to, the following: 1. Swales. 2. Water collection and disposal systems. 3. French drains. 4. Water retention gardens. 5. Other water measures which keep surface water away from buildings and aid in groundwater recharge. Exception: Additions and alterations not altering the drainage path. 37. (Grd.0017) 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”. 38. (Grd.091) Prior to approval of the final project-specific water quality management plan the applicant shall have a soils engineer prepare a project-specific infiltration study for the project for the purposes of storm water quality treatment. The infiltration study and recommendations shall follow the guidelines in the current adopted “San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans”. Note: As this project has been previously graded and the site soils have been compacted for building pads and parking lot purposes, the use of the Custom Soil Resource Report for San Bernardino County Southwestern Part by the United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service for natural soils is not acceptable for soil groundwater infiltration rates. 39. (Grd.100) Prior to issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall show on the site plan and the permitted grading plan set for non-residential projects the designated parking for clean air vehicles per the current adopted California Green Building Standards Code, section 5.106.5.2 40. (Grd.101) Prior to issuance of a grading permit for non-residential projects the applicant shall show on the electrical plans and the permitted grading plan set the location for a future installation of an Electric Vehicle (EV) charging station/parking area per the current adopted California Green Building Standards Code, section 5.106.5.3. 41. www.CityofRC.us Page 12 of 12Printed: 1/7/2021 250 DATE: January 13, 2021 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Anne McIntosh, AICP, Planning Director INITIATED BY: Sean McPherson, AICP, Senior Planner SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2020-00215 – CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA – A proposal to amend the General Plan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga to incorporate a new street network plan within the southeast industrial area of the City that is generally located east of Interstate 15, south of Arrow Route, north of 4th Street, and west of the City’s easterly boundary). Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 2000061027) on May 19, 2010 in connection with the City’s approval of the City’s 2010 General Plan Update. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, an Addendum to the EIR has been prepared for consideration (continued from December 9, 2020 public hearing). RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission continue this item to a date unspecified. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: A General Plan Amendment to amend portions of the Community Mobility Chapter 2010 General Plan. BACKGROUND: On November 12, 2020, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider a recommendation to the City Council to approve a General Plan Amendment to amend portions of the Community Mobility Chapter of the 2010 General Plan relative to a proposed road network expansion throughout the southeast industrial quadrant (hereafter referred to as the ”SEIQ“), an area bounded by Arrow Route to the north, Interstate 15 (I- 15) to the west, 4th Street to the south, and the City’s jurisdictional boundary to the east. A detailed discussion including background and analysis on this item is included with the staff report prepared for the November 12, 2020 and December 9, 2020 meetings. Following staff’s presentation of this item and public testimony from the public at the November 12 meeting, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to continue the item to December 9, 2020, in order to: 1) provide staff sufficient time to respond to concerns raised during the meeting; and 2) allow staff and the development community to dialogue and find resolutions to some of these concerns. 251 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2020-00215– CITY OF RANCHO CUCMAONGA January 13, 2021 Page 2O At the December 9, 2020 public hearing, staff updated the Commission as to the progress made in discussions with the various stakeholders. Following public testimony and deliberation, the Commission voted (4 in favor, 1 against), to continue the item to the January 13, 2021 public hearing in order to allow additional time for staff and stakeholders to discuss concerns and questioned raised regarding the proposed General Plan Amendment. PROJECT ANALYSIS: Following the December 9, 2020 public hearing, Planning staff continues to engage in dialogue with the various stakeholders, specifically the representatives of the Southern California Edison (SCE), GenOn, and CMC sites. As of the writing of this report, staff is currently reviewing and discussing alternative site plans provided by GenOn and CMC representatives. Dialogue continues with SCE, as well. Further, staff notes that on December 16, 2020, the City Council voted unanimously to extend a moratorium on industrial development within certain portions of the City, which includes the SEIQ, to June 30, 2021. This extension now provides staff additional time to dialogue with stakeholders and continue to work on the proposed road network. In order to maintain constructive and helpful dialogue between the City and all stakeholders, staff recommends that the Planning Commission continue this item to a date unspecified. CEQA DETERMINATION: Not applicable CORRESPONDENCE: Not applicable COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: Not applicable EXHIBITS: Not applicable 252