The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2022-03-23 - Agenda Packet HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA March 23, 2022 7:00 p.m. A. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance B. Public Communications This is the time and place for the general public to address the Planning/Historic Preservation Commission (“Planning Commission”) on any Consent Calendar item or any item not listed on the agenda that is within the Commission’s subject matter jurisdiction. The Planning Commission may not discuss any issue not included on the agenda but may set the matter for discussion during a subsequent meeting. C. Consent Calendar C1. Consideration to adopt Regular Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2022. D. Public Hearings D1. LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF ROCHESTER AVENUE AND ARROW ROUTE – CORE 5 INDUSTRIAL PARTNERS - A request to construct a 49,745 square- foot industrial/warehouse building on a vacant 2.43-acre parcel within the Neo Industrial (NI) District. APN: 0229-021-97. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the project is exempt under CEQA Section 15332 – In-Fill Development Projects (Design Review DRC2021-00320). D2. LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, BETWEEN RED HILL COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE AND THE PACIFIC ELECTRIC TRAIL– PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC - A request to allow for a second, one (1) year time extension of a previously approved Tentative Tract Map (SUBTT16605M) and the first time extension of associated entitlements related to the project which include: Design Review DRC2012- 00672, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673 to subdivide 24.19 acres into 6 parcels for the development of 175 attached condominium units (Sycamore Heights project) within the Mixed Use (MU) District, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trail. APNs: 0207-101-13, -17, -24, -25, -31, -34 and -41, and 0207-112-09 and -10. Staff finds the project to be within the scope of the project covered by a prior Mitigated Negative Declaration certified by City Council on October 4, 2017 (State Clearinghouse SCH#2017071010) by Resolutions 17-098 and 17-099 and does not raise or create new environmental impacts not already considered in the Mitigated Negative Declaration (Time Extension DRC2021-00440). HPC/PC Agenda – March 23, 2022 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. E. General Business E1. Discussion Regarding Moratorium on New Service Station Development and the Measures Taken to Alleviate the Need for Interim Ordinance No. 980. F. Director Announcements G. Commission Announcements H. Adjournment TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium. State your name for the record and speak into the microphone. After speaking, please complete a speaker card located on the podium. It is important to list your name, address (optional) and the agenda item letter your comments refer to. Comments will be limited to 5 minutes per individual. If a large number of individuals wish to speak on an item, the Chair 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. If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under “Public Communications.” Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. As an alternative to participating in the meeting, you may submit comments in writing to Elizabeth.Thornhill@cityofrc.us by 12:00 p.m. on the date of the meeting. Written comments will be distributed to the Commissioners and included in the record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are available at www.CityofRC.us. HPC/PC Agenda – March 23, 2022 Page 3 of 3 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 $3,279 for all decisions of the Commission. (Fees are established and governed by the City Council). Please turn off all cell phones while meeting is in session. Copies of the Planning Commission agendas, staff reports, and minutes can be found at www.CityofRC.us. 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, March 17, 2022, 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 March 9, 2022 MINUTES Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 7:00 p.m. The regular meeting of the Historic Presentation Commission and Planning Commission was held on March 9, 2022. The meeting was called to order by Chair Dopp 7:03 p.m. A. Roll Call Planning Commission present: Chair Dopp, Commissioner Morales, Commissioner Boling and Commissioner Daniels; Commissioner Williams. Staff Present: Serita Young, Assistant City Attorney; Matt Burris, AICP, LEED AP, Deputy City Manager-Community Development, Interim Planning Director; Jennifer Nakamura, Deputy Director of Planning; Mike Smith, Principal Planner; Brian Sandona, Principal Civil Engineer; David F. Eoff IV, Senior Planner; Sean McPherson, AICP, Senior Planner; Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive Assistant. B. Public Communications Chair Dopp opened the public communications and hearing no one, closed public communications. C. Consent Calendar C1. Consideration to adopt Regular Meeting Minutes of February 9 and February 23, 2022. February 9th Minutes - Motion to adopt by Commissioner Boling, second by Commissioner Daniels. Motion carried 4-0 vote. Abstain -Vice Chair Williams. February 23 Minutes - Motion to adopt by Commissioner Boling, second by Commissioner Williams. Motion carried unanimously 5-0 vote. D. General Business D1. Discussion Regarding Senate Bill (SB) 9 Regulations Sean McPherson, AICP, Senior Planner, presented Commissioners with a Staff Report and presentation (copy on file). Sean McPherson provided information on Senate Bill 9 signed into law by Governor Newsom in September 2021, which requires ministerial approval of two types of projects within single family residential zones. Mainly, two-unit projects, referred to as duplexes, and urban lot splits. Reason for this is due to the historic housing shortage/ housing affordability crisis impacting the State. He said the scope of SB9 on these two projects, urban lot splits and two-unit projects, are now permitted subject to certain criteria without the need for public hearings. SB9 became effective as of January 1, 2022. He went into more detail explaining other qualifications and standard requirements. HPC/PC MINUTES – March 9, 2022 Page 2 of 2 Draft Discussion followed with certain Commissioners expressing concern with regard to potential impacts of SB 9 development. To this, staff responded that it is yet to be seen how prolific this law might be used to develop under SB 9. Additional discussion ensued on certain types of standard requirements and affordable housing needs built into Urgency Ordinance 994. E. Director Announcements - None F. Commission Announcements – None G. Adjournment Motion by Commissioner Boling, second by Commissioner Williams to adjourn the meeting, motion carried unanimously, 5-0 vote. Meeting was adjourned at 7:44 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ________________________ Elizabeth Thornhill Executive Assistant, Planning Department Approved: DATE: March 23, 2022 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Matthew R. Burris, AICP, LEED AP, Deputy City Manager – Community Development, Interim Planning Director INITIATED BY: Vincent Acuna, Associate Planner SUBJECT: LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF ROCHESTER AVENUE AND ARROW ROUTE – CORE 5 INDUSTRIAL PARTNERS - A request to construct a 49,745 square-foot industrial/warehouse building on a vacant 2.43-acre parcel within the Neo-Industrial (NI) District. APN: 0229-021-97. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the project is exempt under CEQA Section 15332 – In-Fill Development Projects (Design Review DRC2021-00320). RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve Design Review DRC2021-00320 through the adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval with Conditions. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: A request to develop a vacant site with a 49,745 square-foot industrial/warehouse building. BACKGROUND: The project site is a vacant parcel with an area of 105,770 square feet or 2.43 acres (Exhibit A). The square- shaped project site has dimensions of about 375 feet by 375 feet. The site is generally level with a gradient from north to south that results in an elevation change of roughly 8 feet across the entire parcel. There are no trees on the site and vegetation/ground cover is very limited. The existing Land Uses, General Plan Designations, and Zoning for the project site and adjacent properties are as follows: Land Use General Plan Zoning Site Vacant Neo Industrial Employment Neo-Industrial (NI) District North Industrial Office Buildings City Corridor High Neo-Industrial (NI) District South Industrial Building Neo Industrial Employment Neo-Industrial (NI) District East Self-Storage Facility City Corridor High Neo-Industrial (NI) District West Vacant Neo Industrial Employment Neo-Industrial (NI) District Page 2 of 4 PROJECT ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant proposes to construct an industrial/warehouse building totaling 49,745 square feet (Exhibit B). Included in the total building square footage is an approximately 3,000 square foot, 2-story office, located on the southeast corner of the building adjacent to the main parking lot. The building’s main parking area and loading docks are located on the east side (rear) of the building away from public view. This area is secured by an 8-foot-high wrought iron fence running along the interior north and east property lines of the site and is accessed from a gated driveway from Arrow Route. In addition to the loading area and main parking area, there also is a smaller parking lot toward the northwesterly corner of the site, accessed via a driveway from Rochester Avenue. As demonstrated in the table below, the project complies with all pertinent technical standards related to building height, site coverage, and front/rear setbacks. Development Standard Required Proposed Complies? Building Height Max. 70’ * 35’ YES  Floor Area Ratio 0.4-0.6 0.47 YES  Front Setback - Major Arterial (Milliken Avenue) Min. 45’ 47’ – 2” YES  Front Setback - Major Arterial (Rochester Avenue) Min. 45’ 48’ YES  Rear Setback 0’ 147’ – 8” YES  Open Space/Landscape Area Min. 10% 24.1% YES  *Max 70 feet as long as building is set back 1 foot from front setback for every 1-foot building height exceeds 35 feet. B. Architecture: The proposed building will be of concrete tilt-up construction painted with a palette of earth- toned colors (Exhibit D). The building will have form-lined concrete panels at various locations. As the uses expected within the building are to be logistics oriented, there is limited articulation of the wall planes in order to maximize the efficiency of the interior space. However, this limited articulation does not result in an overwhelming building mass, as vertical columns of sandblasted concrete break up the building façade. The application of glass panels along the building’s street frontages along Rochester Avenue and Arrow Route gives the structure the appearance of an office building (Exhibit E). Additionally, a small tower element proposed at the southwest corner of the project site provides further architectural interest and visually anchors the street corner. The distribution of landscaping is generally along the street frontages towards the west and south of the project site, and within the building’s parking areas (Exhibit C). As shown on the above table, landscape coverage is 24.1%, greatly exceeding the landscape coverage of 10% required by the Development Code. All trees proposed along the public right-of-way are at least 24-inch box in size or larger, and all trees planted within the subject property are at least 15 gallons in size, in compliance with the current industrial standards with regards to site landscape. The project will be conditioned to incorporate landscape lighting to enhance the site’s nighttime aesthetics, as required by the Development Code. Page 3 of 4 C. Parking and Circulation: There are two proposed points of vehicular access along the south and northeast portions of the project site. The southern driveway leading directly to the rear loading dock will be secured by a sliding wrought iron gate (Exhibit F), while the western driveway along Rochester will remain ungated. Per Table 17.64.050-1 of the Development Code, the parking requirement is based on the proposed mix of office and warehouse floor areas in the building. The project is required to provide 44 vehicle parking spaces based on the proposed 46,745 square feet of warehouse and 3,000 square feet of office area. The project is also required to provide 4 trailer parking spaces based on the proposed number of dock doors. The table below demonstrates the project’s compliance with parking. Type of Use Floor Area (Square Feet) Parking Ratio Number of Spaces Required Proposed Building (overall) 49,745 Office 3,000 1/250 12 Warehouse 46,745 varies1 32 Total Required/Total Provided: 44/442 1 - For warehouse uses, the parking calculations are 1 space per 1,000 square feet for the first 20,000 square feet; 1 space per 2,000 square feet for the second 20,000 square feet; and 1 space per 4,000 square feet for additional floor area in excess of the first 40,000 square feet. 2 - The trailer parking requirement is calculated separately from the standard parking requirement and is based on a ratio of one stall per dock door. The number of trailer parking spaces that is required is 4 spaces and the number that is provided is 4 spaces. D. Compliance with Ordinance 982 and General Plan 2020: The project, as discussed above, has been designed to meet the standards and guidelines of the Development Code, including the updated standards related to industrial development through the adopted Ordinance 982. The proposed industrial development is located in the Neo-Industrial land use designation. The Neo- Industrial land use is intended to provide for light industrial uses that result in low environmental impacts while supporting the growth of creative and innovative businesses. The size and scale of industrial building plays a role in achieving this intent. Smaller sized buildings tend to attract low-impact industrial uses, such as small warehouses, and also provide an opportunity for a range of other light and creative industrial operations and that do not necessarily need a large amount of building area. Neo-Industrial developments also serve as a soft transition between sensitive land uses. This is achieved by encouraging buildings to incorporate modern characteristics in their built form and include design features that lend themselves to a comfortable environment for pedestrians and the vehicles that may serve the business. The proposed project meets this intent with 49,745 square-foot warehouse designed for a light distribution/fulfilment operation. The size and scale of the building is appropriate for the project site and the project includes a variety of design features, such as continuous sidewalks, substantial landscape improvements, adequate and safe vehicle access, proper screening, and more, that help advance the Neo-Industrial intent and the goals of the General Plan. E. Design Review Committee: The project was reviewed by the Design Review Committee (Williams, Morales) on February 15, 2022. The Committee recommended approval of the project to the full Planning Commission. This is reflected in the in the Design Review Committee Comments (Exhibit G). F. Public Art: This project is required to provide public art as outlined in Chapter 17.124 of the Development Code. Based on the industrial square footage of the project, the total art value required per Section 17.124.020.C. is $49,745. 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 Page 4 of 4 as a Class 32 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 (In-Fill Development Projects). The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres, surrounded by industrial/warehouse buildings. Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality. Therefore, there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing with a regular legal advertisement in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site. To date, no written correspondence, phone calls, or in person inquiries have been received regarding the project notifications. COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: The development of the project achieves the City Council’s Core Value of “Intentionally embracing and anticipating the future,” and “continuous improvement.” In addition to providing the City with a new industrial warehouse facility which will attract a quality tenant, the project also results in parkway improvements along Rochester Avenue and Arrow Route, enhancing the visual character and streetscape of these throughfares. EXHIBITS: Exhibit A – Location Map Exhibit B – Site Plan Exhibit C – Conceptual Landscape Plans Exhibit D – Colors and Materials Exhibit E – Elevations Exhibit F – Fencing Plan Exhibit G – Design Review Committee Comments (February 15, 2022) and Action Agenda Exhibit H - Draft Resolution of Approval 22-07 Exhibit I – Conditions of Approval Exhibit J – Statement of Agreement N PROJECT SITE Exhibit A OFFICIAL USE ONLYOwner:Project:Consultants:Project Number:Revision:Date:Drawn by:Title:Sheet:C I V I LSTRUCTURALMECHANICALPLUMBINGELECTRICALLANDSCAPESOILS ENGINEERFIRE PROTECTION21010SH12/10/21fax: 949 863 0851tel: 949 863 1770email: hpa@hparchs.com92612irvine, ca18831 bardeen avenue, - ste. #100hpa, inc.Huitt Zollars Inc-SPLA-----300 Spectrum Center Drive Suite 880RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CAArrow &ARROW ROUTE & ROCHESTER AVE.Irvine CA 92618949-467-3290ATTN: Jon KellyRochesterPROJECT DATAVICINITY MAPPROPERTY OWNERADDRESS OF THE PROPERTYASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERLEGAL DESCRIPTIONAPPLICANTAPPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVEZONINGOVERALL SITE PLANDAB-A1.1SITE LEGENDSITE PLAN GENERAL NOTESSITE PLAN KEYNOTESSITEExhibit B 152213467D'DC'CEKGGFL66KJBDCAARROW ROUTEROCHESTER AVENUE BUILDINGF30'-0"PROJECTED TREE CANOPYCOVER AFTER 15 YRESTABLISHMENT PERIODPARKING LOT HARDSCAPEAREAS GROUND COVER AND SHRUB MASSES - GROUND COVER & SHRUB MASSES SHALL CONSIST OF THE FOLLOWING: SYMBOL GROUND COVER/SHRUB MASS NAMEWUCOLSACHILLEA MILLIFOLIUM, YARROW1 GAL. SIZELAGAVE 'BLUE FLAME', BLUE FLAME AGAVE5 GAL. SIZELAGAVE 'MEDIOPICTA ALBA', DWARF WHITE STRIPED AGAVE5 GAL. SIZELAGAVE WEBERI, WEBER'S AGAVE15 GAL. SIZELARCTOSTAPHYLLOS SPP.5 GAL. SIZELBACCHARIS P. 'PIGEON POINT', DWARF COYOTE BRUSH1 GAL. SIZELCALLISTEMON 'LITTLE JOHN', DWARF BOTTLE BRUSH5 GAL. SIZEENCELIA CALIFORNICA, CALIFORNIA BRITTLE BRUSH1 GAL. & 5 GAL. SIZELHESPERALOE PARVIFLORA, RED YUCCA5 GAL. SIZELLEYMUS C. 'CANYON PRINCE', CANYON PRINCE WILD RYE1 GAL. SIZELSALVIA CLEVELANDII, CLEVELAND SAGE5 GAL. SIZELMUHLENBERGIA C. 'REGAL MIST', PINK MUHLY1 GAL. SIZEROSEMARINUS O. 'PROSTRATUS', PROSTRATE ROSEMARY1 GAL. SIZELVERBENA 'DE LA MINA', PURPLE VERBINA1 GAL. SIZELWESTRINGIA F. 'GREY BOX', GREY BOX COAST ROSEMARY5 GAL. SIZELSPREADING GROUNDCOVER FOR EROSION CONTROL SUCH AS:BACCHARIS P. 'PIGEON POINT', DWARF COYOTE BRUSH1 GAL. SIZE @ 36" O.C.LOW GROWING GRASS IN PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY SUCH AS:CAREX DIVULSA, EUROPEAN GREY SEDGENOTE: ALL SHRUB PLANTING AREAS TO RECEIVE A 3" LAYER OF SHREDDED FINE WOOD MULCH. 2" MAX SIZE. TREES SYMBOL TREE NAMEQTY.WUCOLSPROPOSED STREET TREE ALONG ARROW ROUTELIQUIDAMBAR STYRACIFLUA, AMERICAN SWEETGUM24" BOX SIZE9MPROPOSED STREET TREE ALONG ROCHESTER AVE.RHUS LANCEA, AFRICAN SUMAC24" BOX SIZE2LPARKING LOT SHADE TREE-QUERCUS ILEX, HOLLY OAK-ULMUST P. 'TRUE GREEN', EVERGREEN ELM24" BOX SIZE BOX SIZE5LMFLOWERING ACCENT TREE AT BUILDING ENTRY AND STREETINTERSECTION- CERCIDIUM F. 'DESERT MUSEUM', BLUE PALO VERDE- LAGERSTROEMIA I. 'MUSKOGEE', LAVENDER CRAPE MYRTLE36" BOX SIZE MIN.13LMEVERGREEN SCREEN TREEGEIJERA PARVIFLORA, AUSTRALIAN WILLOW24" BOX SIZE5LCALIFORNIA NATIVE BACKDROP TREEQUERCUS AGRIFOLIA, COAST LIVE OAK24" BOX SIZE5LCALIFORNIA NATIVE BACKDROP TREEPLATANUS RACEMOSA, CALIFORNIA SYCAMORE24" BOX SIZE5MREFERENCE KEY NOTES:A. EXISTING 36" HIGH PRESSURE GAS LINEB. EXISTING 4" GAS LINEC. EXISTING ELECTRIC LINED. EXISTING PHONE LINEE. EXISTING DRIVEWAYF. PROPOSED SIDEWALK PER CIVIL DRAWINGSG. PROPOSED SCE FACILITIES (P.I.P.) PER CIVIL DRAWINGSH. PROPOSED 6" SEWER SERVICE PER CIVIL DRAWINGSI. PROPOSED 2" DOMESTIC WATER SERVIC PER CIVILDRAWINGSJ. PROPOSED TRASH ENCLOSURE PER ARCH. DRAWINGSK. PROPOSED FENCE PER ARCH. DRAWINGSL. SLOPED WALK PER CIVIL DRAWINGSSCREEN SHRUBS- TO BE SELECTED FROM THE FOLLOWING SHRUBS: SYMBOL GROUND COVER/SHRUB MASS NAMEWUCOLSHETEROMELES ARBUTIFOLIA, TOYON5 GAL. SIZELLIGUSTRUM TEXANUM, TEXAS PRIVET5 GAL. SIZEMMALOSMA LAURINUS, LAUREL SUMAC5 GAL. SIZELLEUCOPHYLLUM FRUITESCENS, TEXAS RANGER5 GAL. SIZELMYRICA CALIFORNICA, PACIFIC WAX MYRTLE5 GAL. SIZELRHUS INTEGRIFOLIA, LEMONADE BERRY5 GAL. SIZEWESTOINGRIA F. 'WYNABIE GEM', COAST ROSEMARY5 GAL. SIZELDESIGN KEY NOTES:1. PROPOSED STREET TREE IN PARKWAY PERPLANTING LEGEND2. NEW LOW GROWING GRASS IN PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAYPARKWAY, SUCH AS CAREX DIVULSA3. EROSION CONTROL GROUND COVER AT SLOPEAREAS4. FLOWERING ACCENT TREE PER PLANTING LEGEND5. NEW SCREEN SHRUBS AROUND EXISTING SCEUTILITIES6. PROPOSED SCREEN SHRUBS7. ENHANCED PAVING AT VEHICULAR ENTRY DRIVESCONSISTING OF INTEGRAL COLORED CONCRETEWITH MEDIUM ETCH FINISHSCALE: 1" = 20'-0"0 20' 40' 60'NORTHSCOTT PETERSON LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, INC.2883 VIA RANCHEROS WAYFALLBROOK, CA 92028PH: 760-842-8993DATE: NE CORNER OF ARROW ROUTE & ROCHESTER AVE | CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLANL-1WUCOLS PLANT FACTORTHIS PROJECT IS LOCATED IN 'WUCOLS'REGION '4-SOUTH INLAND VALLEY'.H = HIGH WATER NEEDSM = MODERATE WATER NEEDSL = LOW WATER NEEDSVL= VERY LOW WATER NEEDS·SLOPES GREATER THAN 3:1 SHALL BE STABILIZED WITH EROSION CONTROL GROUND COVER PER LEGEND,AND MULCH MATERIAL WITH 'BINDER' MATERIAL SHALL BE APPLIED FOR EROSION CONTROL.·ROCK RIP-RAP MATERIAL SHALL BE INSTALLED WHERE DRAIN LINES CONNECT TO INFILTRATION AREAS.·ALL UTILITY EQUIPMENT SUCH AS BACKFLOW UNITS, FIRE DETECTOR CHECKS, FIRE CHECK VALVE, AND AIRCONDITIONING UNITS WILL BE SCREENED WITH EVERGREEN PLANT MATERIAL ONCE FINAL LOCATIONS HAVEBEEN DETERMINED.·ALL TREES PLANTED 5' OR LESS TO HARDSCAPE CURB, WALKWAY OR WALL SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH DEEPROOT BARRIER PANELS. 18" MIN. DEPTH X 10' LONG. BARRIERS SHALL NOT WRAP AROUND ROOTBALL.GENERAL NOTES:THIS IS A CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPEPLAN. IT IS BASED ON PRELIMINARYINFORMATION WHICH IS NOT FULLYVERIFIED AND MAY BE INCOMPLETE. ITIS MEANT AS A COMPARATIVE AID INEXAMINING ALTERNATE DEVELOPMENTSTRATEGIES AND ANY QUANTITIESINDICATED ARE SUBJECT TO REVISIONAS MORE RELIABLE INFORMATIONBECOMES AVAILABLE.IRRIGATION NOTE:THE PROJECT WILL BE EQUIPPED WITH A LOWFLOW IRRIGATION SYSTEM CONSISTING OF ETWEATHER BASED SMART CONTROLLER, LOWFLOW ROTORS, BUBBLER AND/ OR DRIPSYSTEMS USED THROUGHOUT. THE IRRIGATIONWATER EFFICIENCY WILL COMPLY WITH THECOUNTY'S WATER CONSERVATION INLANDSCAPING ORDINANCE AND THE WATEREFFICIENT LANDSCAPE DESIGN MANUAL.CONCEPTUAL PLAN NOTE:DECEMBER 13, 2021PROPERTY LINE(949) 863-1770Irvine, CA 9261218831 Bardeen Ave. - Ste. #100www.hparchs.com·(1) TREE PER EVERY (3) PARKING STALLS IS REQUIRED FOR THESITE.·TOTAL NUMBER OF PARKING STALLS PROVIDED = 44 STALLS·TOTAL NUMBER OF TREES REQUIRED ON SITE = 15 TREES·TOTAL NUMBER OF TREES PROPOSED ON SITE = 45 TREES·PEDESTRIAN PATHWAY LANDSCAPE SHALL INCLUDE SHADE TREESPLACED SO AS TO COVER 60% OF THE TOTAL PATHWAY AREA WITHTREE CANOPIES WITHIN 15 YEARS OF SECURING BUILDING PERMIT.·TOTAL PEDESTRIAN PATHWAY AREA = 5,707 S.F.·TOTAL TREE CANOPY COVER OVER PEDESTRIAN PATHWAYSAFTER 15 YEAR ESTABLISHMENT = 3,869 S.F. (60% COVER OF TOTALPATHWAY W / TREE CANOPY AFTER 15 YR. ESTABLISHMENT·SHRUB PLANTING SHALL BE MINIMUM FIVE-GALLON SIZE.·TOTAL OFF-STREET PARKING AREA = 10,033 S.F.·TOTAL LANDSCAPE AREAS AT PARKING AREAS = 1,688 (16.8%PARKING AREA)·LANDSCAPE PLANTERS ALONG THE SIDES OF PARKING STALLSSHALL CONTAIN A MINIMUM OF 90 SQUARE FEET AND THESMALLEST OUTSIDE DIMENSIONS SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN SIXFEET.LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTSSCOTT PETERSON LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, INC.2883 VIA RANCHEROS WAYFALLBROOK, CA 92028PH: 760-842-8993(949) 863-1770Irvine, CA 9261218831 Bardeen Ave. - Ste. #100www.hparchs.comExhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E ,., A-36 GALVANIZED STEEL POST4"X4"SQ.XIIGA TUBULAR STEEL POSTS AT 8' -0" 0.C. W/ CAP WELDED ALL ARO UND. NOTES: 1.All TERMINAL POSTSTOBE4'WX4'DX 11 GA STELL TUBES WI CAPWELDED ALL AROUND. 2 ALL FENCE COMPONENTS TO BE PRIMED AND PAINTEDTO MATCH BLD'G. J.CONCRETE MOW CURB IS nnnnnn n n n n n n ------.t REQUIRED WHEN FENCE IS ADJACENT TO TURF AR EAS ONLY.ALL OTHER PLANTER AREAS ADJACENT TO FENCE WILL 'Ac36 GALVANIZED STEEL RAIL-. -----ttl ZWX2"HX14 GA TUBULAR STEEL CHANNELS. CONCRETE FOOTING, SIZE -----..___ NOT HAVE MOW CURB. 4.SAND AND GRIND ALL WELDS SMOOTH.5.PAINT BLACK PER THE SPEC.AS REQUIRED. ': � A-36 GALVANIZED STEEL 1n-,;...--1,-i64"Gt6V 1Nll�E�A STEEL POSTt5�� JftEl6 A� TUBULAR STEEL POSTS AT 8'-0" I!' O.C. WEUDED TO OUTSIDE O.C. W/ CAP WELDED ALL AROUND.OF FENCE. I!' X I!' CAST-IN-PLACE CONCRETE MOW CURB. A-36 GALVANIZED STEELPICKETS I: SQ. 16 GA TU BULAR STEEL AT ,.----A-36 GALVANIZED STEEL RAIL./ 1 W X t H X 14 GA :::;;::::::;;::::::;;:::=::::::::::=:::=:::1 ��=;;==;:;==;:?�-�• TUBULAR STEEL CHANNELS. U LI LI LI U LI LI U U LI LI u---t::f 6" O.C. WELDED TO OUTSIDEOF FENCE. \ I OR AS 18" REQUIRE D +D�R�AS+ REQUIRED ·4-._ 6' X b' CAST-IN-PLACECONCRETE MD\,/ CURB, CONCRETE FOOTING� COMPACTED SUBCiRADE, AS REQUIRED. ELEVATION PLAN VIEW 2" x 4" MIN STEEL TUBE PERIMETER FRAMEAND HORIZONTAL SUPPORT ' -, o- -, o"o"c , -;;�ggg�� t ��i�� g1�itHrn i' �im�� f h�H' �idm�hf �� f �lhi�[�� : mh �[irni�iff [� ' ' ' B ' ' <> ' ' d ' ' <, > �::m:1:1:� 1" SQUARE VERTICAL MIN. MEMBERS @ 8" O.C. TYP. - � BlACK PAINTED OBSCURING SCREEN � CAUTION SIGN bI CD NOTES: I.SAND AND GRIND ALL WELDS SMOOTH.PRIME AND PAINT TO BL ACK 2.SEE SCR EEN WALL ELEVATION FOR HEIGHT.3.EXTERIOR GATES SHALL BE ABLE TO HAVE BUS PAD LOCKFIRE DEPARTMENT PAD LOCK. _________ B_I-_P_A _R_T_IN _G _G_A _T _E _W_IT_H_O_B_S_C_U_R_IN_SCG �,1,-. S_C _R_E --c�=--1� © 7 /,·, ' ' ' ' / ·.1 j / ! \ \ \ , I \ I \ \ \ I ,\ \ \ [ 7 LJ (_, / I ," " ",, , ,, ,, , ",,,,,, ,. ,, ,, ., """\ c� '."i _c_, I. -�-,', '\ .,,, YJ;,1 ✓, �,. lJ ; I I I I \ I I I\ \ \ , \ ', '• \\ ', , , , , , ', ---\ ,,--- I I __ JI I I � 11- :_.'"I I_J rll i) ]'·, Ii ii iii\ ,,\ 'I I ''I I ,- I I I , \ , \ I I I I I --- ) I l I I I I I I -11 ' EXISTING BUILDING PRBPE-RtY-tiNE-- ---PRBP�------ - - " ' ' I 290· e"I RON F{NCf SEE DETAIL � ( ' �� / / �� / / • 0:.., [----<c----::----�-o ' <? •;' ,, B'f+• CONCRETE SCSEE DETAI 1/ ½ - 1/ 1// ½// 1// / EEN WALLD 45' Bl-PARTING GATESEE DETAIL C D I! 1!'ii'11 Sri C ALL. / -" 15'-4'' SEE DET z� /:"' Q. 0 "' Q. REEND ,-- m� w w w w z w � z 0 e-IC, �0 I 'o -I ro I--"----------------------�-------------------+--------------------------------------------------�-----I I I I I I I I I I I I I I�---1-----�---------------------�0- \ I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I ,,,I __ ' -'1r __ , I )lj c, C i '1 ,:J C)'--l .. {Q,11)--7 .. ( ,-,,-:.---_ _ _ -,-,-�,-0 U+ E __ ,_,_, __________ ,_, _ --'"'""""/· __ ,, , , __ , ___ ,-�, , __ ,_, ___ , ,, _____ _ _).\->,-, . .) un -{cf)- ----------------------------------------------------�O _V _ER_A _L_L _F--;:�;::;;:�,;:--C _E1i"::"��tcv::, N�O"@ � ro 67'-4"CONCRETE SCREEN WALL I 45' GATE SEE DETAIL C =:h��F:ff:Wff:FF=nl ==F=F=F=F ==F=F=Fl--�:+TF .. L .. LLLL .. L .. L .. LL .. L .. L .. LL .. L .. L .. L .... L .. L .. L .. L .... L .. L .. L .. L .... L...L .. L .. L .. .. L .. LLLL .. L .. L .. LL .. L .. L .. LL .. L .. L .. L .... L .. L .. L .. L .... L .. L .. L .. L .... L..J... .. L_L_ .. L .. LLLL .. L .. L .. LL .. L .. L .. LL .. L .. L .. L .... L .. L .. L .. L .... L .. L .. L .. L .... L...L .. L .. L .. .. L .. LLLL .. L .. L .. LL .. L .. L .. LL .. L .. L .. L .... L .. L .. L .. L .... L .. L .. L .. L .... L..J... .. L_L_ =�=m�=�=�=��=�=�=��=�=�=�==t�=�=�==t�=�=�==�=i:=�=�=- 15'-4"r CONCRETE SCREEN WALL I ---Sc ro SCREEN WA LL ELEVA TI O N scale: 1/8"=1'-0" D OFFICIAL USE ONLY ■ HPA architecture hpa, inc . 18831 bardeen avenue, -ste. #100 Irvine, ca 92612 tel: 949 •863 •1770 fax:949·863·0851 email: hpa@hparchs.com Owner: CORE5 INDUSTRIAL PARTNERS 300 Spectrum Center Drive Suite 880Irvine CA 92618 949-467-3290ATTN: Jon Kelly Project: Arrow & Rochester ARROW ROUTE & RO CHESTER AVE. RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA Consultants: CIV IL STRUCTURAL MECHANICAL PLUMBING ELECTRICAL LANDSCAPE ARE PROT ECTION SOILS ENGINEER Title: Huitt Zollars Inc SPLA OVERALL FENCE PLAN Project Number: 21010 SH 12/10/21 Drawn by: Date: Revision: Sheet: DAB-Al.IF Exhibit F DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS February 15, 2022 7:00 p.m. Vincent Acuna, Associate Planner LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF ROCHESTER AVENUE AND ARROW ROUTE –CORE 5 INDUSTRIAL PARTNERS - A request to construct a 49,745 square-foot industrial/warehouse building on a vacant 2.43-acre parcel within the Neo Industrial (NI) District. APN: 0229-021-97. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the project is exempt under CEQA Section 15332 – In-Fill Development Projects (Design Review DRC2021- 00320). Site Characteristics and Background: The project site is a vacant parcel with an area of 105,770 square feet (2.43 acres). The square-shaped project site has dimensions of about 375 feet by 375 feet. The site is generally level with a gradient from north to south. The elevation of the site is about 1,164 feet and 1,158 feet along the north and south property lines respectively, which results in an elevation change of about 8 feet. There are no trees on the site and vegetation/ground cover is very limited. 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 Vacant Neo Industrial Employment Neo Industrial (NI) District North Industrial Building City Corridor High Neo Industrial (NI) District South Industrial Building Neo Industrial Employment Neo Industrial (NI) District East Self-Storage Facility City Corridor High Neo Industrial (NI) District West Vacant Neo Industrial Employment Neo Industrial (NI) District Project Overview: The applicant proposes to construct an industrial/warehouse building totaling 49,745 square feet, built to specifications for a distribution/fulfillment business. Included in the total building square footage is an approximately 3,000 square foot, 2-story office, located on the southeasterly corner of the building adjacent to the main parking lot. The building’s main parking area and loading docks are located on the east side (rear) of the building away from public view. This area is secured by an 8-foot-high wrought iron fence running along the interior north and east property lines of the site and accessed from a gated driveway from Arrow Route. In addition to the loading area and main parking area, there is also a smaller parking lot toward the northwesterly corner of the site, accessed via a driveway from Rochester Avenue. The building, based on the anticipated warehousing/distribution use and office, is required to have 44 passenger vehicle parking stalls. The project provides 44 stalls, meeting the parking requirement. As there are five dock doors, a matching number of trailer parking stalls are also provided. The plans show a truck queuing area for one truck on the southeasterly corner of the site, as required by the Development Code. Landscaping is generally distributed along the street frontages towards the west and south of the project site, and within the building’s parking areas. Landscape coverage is 24.1%, greatly exceeding the landscape coverage of 10% required by the Development Code. All trees proposed along the public right-of-way are at least 24-inch box in size or larger, and all trees planted within Exhibit G DRC COMMENTS DR DRC2021-00320 – CORE 5 INDUSTRIAL PARTNERS February 15, 2022 Page 2 the subject property are at least 15 gallons in size, in compliance with the newly updated industrial standards. The project will be conditioned to incorporate landscape lighting to enhance the site’s nighttime aesthetics, as required by the Development Code. The proposed building will be of concrete tilt-up construction painted with a palette of two colors. The building will have form-lined concrete panels at various locations. As the uses expected within the building are to be logistics oriented, there is limited articulation of the wall planes in order to maximize the efficiency of the interior space. However, this limited articulation does not result in an overwhelming building mass, as vertical columns of sandblasted concrete break up the building façade. Additionally, the application of glass panels along the building’s street frontages along Rochester Avenue and Arrow Route gives the structure the appearance of an office building. Additionally, a small tower element proposed at the southwest corner of the project site provides further architectural interest and visually anchors the street corner. The project, as discussed above, has been designed to meet the standards and guidelines of the Development Code, including the updated standards related to industrial development through the adopted Ordinance 982. Additionally, the development of the industrial building meets the intent of the General Plan, which provides for a Neo-Industrial land use designation. The Neo- Industrial land use is intended to provide for light industrial uses that result in low environmental impacts. The proposed project meets this intent with 49,745 square-foot warehouse designed for a light distribution/fulfilment operation. Staff Recommendation: Staff requests that the Design Review Committee consider the design (building architecture, site planning) of the proposed project and recommend the selected action below to the Planning Director / Planning Commission: ☒Recommend Approval of the design of the project as proposed by the applicant. ☐Recommend Approval with Modifications to the design of the project by incorporating revisions requested by the Committee. Follow-up review by the Committee is not required. The revisions shall be verified by staff prior to review and action by the Planning Director / Planning Commission. ☐Recommend Conditional Approval of the design of the project by incorporating revisions requested by the Committee. Follow-up review by the Committee is not required. The revisions shall be Conditions of Approval and verified by staff during plan check after review and action by the Planning Director / Planning Commission. ☐Recommend Denial of the design of the project as proposed by the applicant. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Vincent Acuna, Associate Planner Members Present: Staff Coordinator: Mike Smith, Principal Planner DRC COMMENTS DR DRC2021-00320 – CORE 5 INDUSTRIAL PARTNERS February 15, 2022 Page 3 Exhibit A – Project Plans Design Review Committee Meeting Rains Conference Room AGENDA February 15, 2022 MINUTES Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 7:00 p.m. A. Call to Order The meeting of the Design Review Committee was held on February 15, 2022. The meeting was called to order by Mike Smith, Staff Coordinator, at 7:00 p.m. Design Review Committee members present: Diane Williams, Tony Morales Staff Present: Vincent Acuna, Associate Planner; Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner B. Public Communications Staff Coordinator opened the public communication and, after noting there were no public comments, closed public communications. C. Consent Calendar C1. Consideration to adopt Regular Meeting Minutes of December 14th, 2021. (No meetings January 4th, 18th or February 1st, 2022.) Motion carried 2-0 vote to adopt the minutes as presented. D. Project Review Items D1. LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF ROCHESTER AVENUE AND ARROW ROUTE – CORE 5 INDUSTRIAL PARTNERS - A request to construct a 49,745 square-foot industrial/warehouse building on a vacant 2.43-acre parcel within the Neo Industrial (NI) District. APN: 0229-021-97. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the project is exempt under CEQA Section 15332 – In-Fill Development Projects (Design Review DRC2021-00320). The Committee took the following action: Recommend approval to PC/PD. 2-0 Vote Staff presented the project to the Design Review Committee. The Design Review Committee voted unanimously to recommend approval of the project to the Planning Commission. D2. LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF HILLSIDE ROAD AND RAM COURT - HILLSIDE DESIGN REVIEW DRC2020-00073 – MO+RE DESIGN SOLUTIONS – A request to construct a 4,210 square foot single-family residence with an attached 958 square foot 3-car garage and 932 square foot subterranean storage room on a vacant property totaling 25,100 square feet within the Very Low (VL) Residential District, the Hillside Overlay District and Equestrian Overlay District at 5462 Design Review Committee Regular Meeting Minutes – February 15, 2022 Page 2 of 2 FINAL Ram Court – APN: 1061-381-17. The project qualifies as a Class 3 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15303 – New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures The Committee took the following action: Recommend approval to PC/PD. 2-0 Vote Staff presented the project to the Design Review Committee. The Design Review Committee voted unanimously to recommend approval of the project to the Planning Director. E. Adjournment Meeting was adjourned at 7:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ________________________ Elizabeth Thornhill Executive Assistant, Planning Department Approved: Design Review Committee meeting 3/15/2022. RESOLUTION NO. 22-07 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW DRC2021-00320, A REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A 49,745 SQUARE- FOOT CONCRETE TILT-UP INDUSTRIAL/WAREHOUSE BUILDING WITHIN THE NEO INDUSTRIAL (NI) DISTRICT, LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF ARROW ROUTE AND ROCHESTER AVENUE – APN: 0229-021-97 A.Recitals. 1. The applicant, Core 5 Industrial Partners, filed an application for Design Review DRC2021-00320, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Design Review is referred to as "the application." 2.On February 15, 2022, the Design Review Committee reviewed the project and regular scheduled meeting and provided a recommendation of approval to the Planning Commission for consideration. 3. On March 23, 2022, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 4.All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B.Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1.This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2.Based upon the substantial evidence presented to the Planning Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on March 23, 2022, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a.The application applies to property located within the City; and b.The application applies to an approximately 2.43-acre, square-shaped piece of land within the Neo Industrial (NI) District, located at the northeast corner of Arrow Route and Rochester Avenue; and c.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 Vacant Neo Industrial Employment Neo Industrial (NI) North Industrial Building City Corridor High Neo Industrial (NI) Exhibit H PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 22-07 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2021-00320 – CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA March 23, 2022 Page 2 South Industrial Building Neo Industrial Employment Neo Industrial (NI) East Self-Storage Facility City Corridor High Neo Industrial (NI) West Vacant Neo Industrial Employment Neo Industrial (NI) d. The proposed project consists of the construction of a 49,745 square-foot industrial/warehouse building and ancillary on-site improvements; and e. The project complies with all pertinent development standards including building height, site coverage, setbacks, parking, and landscape requirements. 4. 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 objectives of the General Plan. The site is located within land designated as Neo Industrial Employment, which allows low impact industrial uses, such as incubator spaces and small warehouses that are context sensitive to the surrounding neighborhood. The project consists of a 49,745 square-foot industrial/warehouse building that is designed to accommodate a light distribution use and incorporates a variety of design features that support the intent of the Neo-Industrial land use, including built form and character, development intensity, and access. The proposed project is consistent with the Neo Industrial Employment land use as designated in the General Plan. b. The proposed use is in accord with the objectives of the Development Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. The Development Code designates the project site as a Neo Industrial (NI) zone. The proposed warehouse building is consistent with the land use intent of the Neo Industrial (NI) zone. The sites adjacent to the property are also within Neo Industrial (NI) zoning and consist mainly of industrial/storage buildings or vacant land. The overall design of the new building is similar or similar in scale and intensity to the neighboring area. c. The proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. The building is designed for the warehousing and distribution uses. The building meets all setbacks, floor area, height, and landscaping requirements. The building has been designed to meet the City’s architectural standards. The project also meets the minimum parking, loading, and access requirements. d. The proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The site is surrounded by industrial facilities of a similar scale and intensity. Furthermore, the proposed building is surrounded by existing buildings and similar developments/operations. Operations on the site are expected to meet all Development Code standards regarding noise and odor. 4. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City’s local CEQA Guidelines, the Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a Class 32 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 - In-Fill Development Projects. The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres and surrounded by existing industrial buildings and uses. Approval of the project would not result in PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 22-07 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2021-00320 – CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA March 23, 2022 Page 3 any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality. 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 23RD DAY OF MARCH 2022 PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Bryan Dopp, Chairman ATTEST: Matthew R. Burris, AICP, LEED AP, Secretary I, Matthew R. Burris, AICP, LEED AP, 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 23rd day of March 2022, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Conditions of Approval Community Development Department Project #: DRC2021-00320 Project Name: EDR - Arrow & Rochester Core5 Industrial Location: - 022902197-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions Photometric plan submitted as part of building plan check shall contain: a.) Freestanding light standards with a maximum height of 25 feet. b.) Building and landscape accent up -lighting for the development site, with a focus along the front and office/corner tower portions of the building. Decorative lighting fixtures shall have a minimum one -foot candle illumination level above that of surrounding parking lots at vehicle driveways and driveway entry/exits, pedestrian pathways, plazas and courtyards, and other activity areas. 1. Building plans shall show an outdoor break area in compliance with RCMC Sec. 17.36.040(9)(a)(iv).2. The building plans shall demonstrate an on -site renewable energy system pursuant to RCMC Sec . 17.76.020. 3. Project ground disturbing and vegetation clearing activities should occur outside of the bird nesting season of February 1 through September 15; If avoidance of ground disturbing and vegetation clearing activities cannot be implemented and these activities will occur during the bird nesting season, a qualified biologist shall conduct pre -construction nesting bird surveys during the nesting bird season within 3 days prior to vegetation removal and /or construction activities; and, If active nests are found during nesting bird surveys, they will be flagged and a 500-foot buffer for raptors and a 250-foot buffer for migratory song birds, shall be installed around the nests. The buffers must remain in place until the young have fledged and the nest becomes unoccupied. 4. The property owner/developer of the proposed industrial project shall annex the subject property into Street Lighting Community Facilities District 2022-01 Tax Zone 1 and Tax Zone 6 and Industrial Area Community Facilities District 2022-02 Tax Zone 1 once formed. Such obligation shall be satisfied prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the project. 5. www.CityofRC.us Printed: 3/23/2022 Project #: DRC2021-00320 Project Name: EDR - Arrow & Rochester Core5 Industrial Location: - 022902197-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions The City has initiated proceedings to form a Mello -Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (Gov. Code, § 53311 et seq.) Community Facilities District (“CFD”) to levy special taxes (the “CFD Taxes”) to finance the following: a) All costs pertaining to maintenance and services of streetlights, traffic signals, replacement and repairs required to keep improvements in operational and satisfactory condition within the District (Street Lighting Community Facilities District 2022-01 Tax Zone 1 and Tax Zone 6). Street Lighting CFD 2022-01 is in lieu of the City’s Street Lighting Maintenance Districts. b.) All costs attributed to maintaining and servicing streets and storm drains, police safety calls and services, and creating a capital reserve account for any future industrial repairs and maintenance (“Industrial Area Community Facilities District 2022-02 Tax Zone 1”), Prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy for the project, the applicant and the property owner shall not oppose the formation of CFD 2022-01 and CFD 2022-02, shall vote in favor of the formation of CFD 2022-01 and CFD 2022-02, and shall annex the project site into CFD 2022-01 and CFD 2022-02. The agreement to annex into these CFDs shall be in a manner to be approved by the City Engineer and City Attorney. The applicant shall pay all costs for annexation into each CFD. 6. Standard Conditions of Approval For commercial and industrial projects, paint roll -up doors and service doors to match main building colors. 7. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners and other roof mounted equipment and /or projections shall be screened from all sides and the sound shall be buffered from adjacent properties and streets as required by the Planning Department. Such screening shall be architecturally integrated with the building design and constructed to the satisfaction of the Planning 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. 8. 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. 9. www.CityofRC.us Page 2 of 18Printed: 3/23/2022 Project #: DRC2021-00320 Project Name: EDR - Arrow & Rochester Core5 Industrial Location: - 022902197-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 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 in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. In the event such a legal action is filed, the City shall estimate its expenses for litigation. The applicant shall deposit such amount with the City or enter into an agreement with the City to pay such expenses as they become due. 10. 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. 11. 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. 12. Any approval shall expire if Building Permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 2 years from the date of approval or a time extension has been granted. 13. 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. 14. www.CityofRC.us Page 3 of 18Printed: 3/23/2022 Project #: DRC2021-00320 Project Name: EDR - Arrow & Rochester Core5 Industrial Location: - 022902197-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval For multi-family residential and non -residential development, property owners are responsible for the continual maintenance of all landscaped areas on -site, as well as contiguous planted areas within the public right-of-way. All landscaped areas shall be kept free from weeds and debris and maintained in healthy and thriving condition, and shall receive regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing, and trimming. Any damaged, dead, diseased, or decaying plant material shall be replaced within 30 days from the date of damage. 15. 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. 16. 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. 17. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of water efficient landscaping per Development Code Chapter 17.82. 18. All parking spaces shall be 9 feet wide by 17 feet long with a required 1-foot overhang (e.g., over a curb stop). 19. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances, and exits shall be striped per City standards. 20. The signs indicated on the submitted plans are conceptual only and not a part of this approval. Any signs proposed for this development shall comply with the Sign Ordinance and shall require separate application and approval by the Planning Department prior to installation of any signs. 21. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community, Specific Plans and /or Master Plans in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance. 22. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, including proper illumination and in conformance with Building and Safety Services Department standards, the Municipal Code and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Department (RCFD) Standards. 23. 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. 24. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include Site Plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and grading on file in the Planning Department, the conditions contained herein, and the Development Code regulations. 25. www.CityofRC.us Page 4 of 18Printed: 3/23/2022 Project #: DRC2021-00320 Project Name: EDR - Arrow & Rochester Core5 Industrial Location: - 022902197-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval All Double Detector Checks (DDC) and Fire Department Connections (FDC) required and/or proposed shall be installed at locations that are not within direct view or line -of-sight of the main entrance. The specific locations of each DDC and FDC shall require the review and approval of the Planning Department and Fire Construction Services /Fire Department. All Double Detector Checks (DDC) and Fire Department Connections (FDC) shall be screened behind a 4-foot high block wall. These walls shall be constructed of similar material used on-site to match the building. 26. 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. 27. 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. 28. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property owner, homeowners' association, or other means acceptable to the City. Proof of this landscape maintenance shall be submitted for Planning Director and Engineering Services Department review and approved prior to the issuance of Building Permits. 29. A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram, shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director and Police Department (909-477-2800 ) prior to the issuance of Building Permits . Such plan shall indicate style, illumination, location, height, and method of shielding so as not to adversely affect adjacent properties. 30. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all California Building Code and State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Services Department to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance and final acceptance granted prior to occupancy. 31. 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. 32. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all Conditions of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. 33. Trash receptacle (s) are required and shall meet City standards. The final design, locations, and the number of trash receptacles shall be subject to Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of Building Permits. 34. Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions www.CityofRC.us Page 5 of 18Printed: 3/23/2022 Project #: DRC2021-00320 Project Name: EDR - Arrow & Rochester Core5 Industrial Location: - 022902197-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions Electric: The Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility (RCMU) shall be the electrical service provider for all project related development. The Developer shall execute a Line Extension Agreement for electric service and shall construct electrical distribution facilities in accordance with such agreement and RCMU requirements and dedicate such facilities to the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility. RCMU’s existing underground electric system is located off of Rochester Ave adjacent to the proposed development. 1. Fiber: The proposed development is slated to be included in the City ’s Fiber Optic Master Plan that would provide a City owned Fiber-to-the-Premise (FTTP) infrastructure. The City will require the developer to install a 1-4” UG Fiber Optic dark conduit on the frontage of the development (East side of Rochester Ave and the North side of Arrow Route) along the project boundary, connecting to the existing RC Fiber Vault on the frontage on Rochester Ave and placing a new 3’x4’x3’ pullbox/vault on the end run along Arrow Route and into the project boundary. The size, placement and location of the conduit and vaults shall be shown on the Street Improvement and /or Public Improvement Plans and subject to the Engineering Services Department's review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits or final map approval, whichever comes first. On site, the City will require 1-2” UG HDPE or equal fiber optic conduit to be placed underground within a duct and structure system to be installed joint trench by the Developer per Standard Drawing 135-137 and interconnected into the City's 4" fiber optic conduit. The size, placement and location of the conduit and/or vaults shall run into each of the development ’s individual telecommunication room and be shown on the final dry utility onsite substructure plans and subject to the Engineering Services Department's review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits or final map approval, whichever comes first. 2. Development impact fees are due prior to issuance of a building permit or certificate of occupancy per the Engineering Fee schedule, Government Code Section 66000, et seq. and local ordinance. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d), the 90-day approval period in which the applicant may protest these fees will begin at the date the fees are invoiced. Protests must be made in writing and be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the close of business on the 90th day of the 90-day approval period. 3. Standard Conditions of Approval www.CityofRC.us Page 6 of 18Printed: 3/23/2022 Project #: DRC2021-00320 Project Name: EDR - Arrow & Rochester Core5 Industrial Location: - 022902197-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: A) Arrow Route frontage improvements to be in accordance with City “Major Arterial” standards as required and including: 1) Dedicate right of way 64’ from centerline 2) Sidewalk & parkway 3) Curb & Gutter 4) Street lights shall be installed per City Standard 410, RCMU will be the electricity provider to the streetlights. Developer shall be responsible to coordinate and pay all costs to provide power on City owned street lights. Coordinate with City staff for design and installation requirements. 5) Traffic striping & signage - shall include dual lefts, two thru lanes, one right turn pocket, buffer bike lane. 6) Right turn pocket per city standard, for the west to north movement 7) Drive approach - shall be in accordance with the City Driveway Policy including minimum width for a commercial approach. 8) Street Trees (a) Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. B) Rochester Avenue frontage improvements to be in accordance with City "Major Arterial" standards as required and including: 1) Dedicate right of way 64' from centerline 2) Sidewalk & parkway 3) Curb & Gutter 4) Street lights shall be installed per City Standard 410, RCMU will be the electricity provider to the streetlights. Developer shall be responsible to coordinate and pay all costs to provide power on City owned street lights. Coordinate with City staff for design and installation requirements. 5) Bus Stop - shall include a curb adjacent concrete pad and any other requirements from the Planning Department. 6) Street Trees 7) Traffic striping and signage as required 8) Underground existing overhead utilities per the City's undergrounding policy C) Construct ADA Ramp at the NEC of Rochester & Arrow D) Relocate existing Traffic Signal equipment at the NEC of Rochester Ave & Arrow Rte including but 4. www.CityofRC.us Page 7 of 18Printed: 3/23/2022 Project #: DRC2021-00320 Project Name: EDR - Arrow & Rochester Core5 Industrial Location: - 022902197-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval not limited to traffic signal pole with mastarm for NB vehicle indication, type 1A pole for EB and NB pedestrian indication, and type 15TS for WB right turn and EB left turn vehicle indication. Final location to be determined during plan check. E) Furnish and install all equipment necessary within the existing traffic signal cabinet to establish communication to the City's (RCMU) fiber optics network, including but not limited to fiber optics to copper communication switch, fiber patch panel, fiber optic cable and conduit to existing vault (city), splice enclosure. Fiber strand to be spliced shall be determined during plan check. 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. 5. www.CityofRC.us Page 8 of 18Printed: 3/23/2022 Project #: DRC2021-00320 Project Name: EDR - Arrow & Rochester Core5 Industrial Location: - 022902197-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval Improvement Plans and Construction: a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of Building Permits, whichever occurs first. b. Prior to any work being performed in public right -of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Services Department in addition to any other permits required. c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction project along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals and interconnect wiring . Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR, or any other locations approved by the City Engineer. Notes: 1) Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets, a maximum of 200 feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer. 2) Conduit shall be 3-inch pvc with pull rope or as specified. e. Access ramps for the disabled shall be installed on all corners of intersections per latest ADA standards or as directed by the City Engineer. f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards, except for single-family residential lots. h. Street names shall be approved by the Planning Manager prior to submittal for first plan check. 6. www.CityofRC.us Page 9 of 18Printed: 3/23/2022 Project #: DRC2021-00320 Project Name: EDR - Arrow & Rochester Core5 Industrial Location: - 022902197-0000 Project Type: Design Review 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 Botanical Name Common Name Min. Grow Space Spacing Size Qty. Construction Notes for Street Trees: 1) All street trees are to be planted in accordance with City standard plans. 2) Prior to the commencement of any planting, an agronomic soils report shall be furnished to the City inspector. Any unusual toxicities or nutrient deficiencies may require backfill soil amendments, as determined by the City inspector. 3) All street trees are subject to inspection and acceptance by the Engineering Services Department. Street trees are to be planted per public improvement plans only. 7. 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. 8. All public improvements (interior streets, drainage facilities, community trails, paseos, landscaped areas, etc.) shown on the plans and /or tentative map shall be constructed to City Standards. Interior street improvements shall include, but are not limited to, curb and gutter, AC pavement, drive approaches, sidewalks, street lights, and street trees. 9. 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. 10. Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards.11. Dedication shall be made of the following rights -of-way on the perimeter streets (measured from street centerline): 64 total feet on Arrow 64 total feet on Rochester 12. Easements for public sidewalks placed outside the public right-of-way shall be dedicated to the City.13. www.CityofRC.us Page 10 of 18Printed: 3/23/2022 Project #: DRC2021-00320 Project Name: EDR - Arrow & Rochester Core5 Industrial Location: - 022902197-0000 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 the grading permit. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer. 14. ** 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. 15. Permits shall be obtained from the following agencies for work within their right of way: City of Rancho Cucamonga, Engineering Services Department Cucamonga Valley Water District 16. A signed consent and waiver form to join and /or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting Districts shall be filed with the Engineering Services Department prior to issuance of Building Permits. Property shall be annexed into: Landscape Maintenance District 3B Street Light Maintenance District 1 Street Light Maintenance District 6 17. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary.18. 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. 19. Fire Prevention / New Construction Unit Standard Conditions of Approval Locking and latching hardware for access doors is required to be operable from the exterior of the building and is required to be single action latch/lock release on the interior of the building. 1. www.CityofRC.us Page 11 of 18Printed: 3/23/2022 Project #: DRC2021-00320 Project Name: EDR - Arrow & Rochester Core5 Industrial Location: - 022902197-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Fire Prevention / New Construction Unit Standard Conditions of Approval Access doors are required to be identified in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-5. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section. 2. Plans for the alarm and /or supervision (monitoring) 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. 3. Plans for high piled combustible storage 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. 4. Plans for the private, onsite fire underground water infrastructure 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. 5. Plans for the automatic fire 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. 6. Exterior doors and doors providing access to fire protection and life safety systems and equipment are required to have identification signage in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-5. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section. 7. Fire flow information for this project is obtained from the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD). CVWD can be reached at 909-944-6000 or custserv@cvwdwater.com. 8. Fire flow is required to be in accordance with Appendix B of the California Fire Code. The Fire District has adopted the appendix without local amendments except that the minimum fire flow for commercial buildings shall not be less than 1500 gpm. Proof of the availability of the required fire flow must be provided to the Fire District in the form of a letter or written report dated within the past 12 months. 9. Fire sprinkler are required to be installed in accordance with Fire District Standard 9-5. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section. 10. 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. 11. Coordinate landscaping with the roof access ladder points and address signage. Landscaping cannot obstruct roof access or clear visibility of address signage from time of installation to maturity of the shrubs and trees. 12. Roof access is required to be in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-6. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section. 13. 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. 14. www.CityofRC.us Page 12 of 18Printed: 3/23/2022 Project #: DRC2021-00320 Project Name: EDR - Arrow & Rochester Core5 Industrial Location: - 022902197-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Fire Prevention / New Construction Unit Standard Conditions of Approval Fire apparatus access roads and emergency vehicle access is required to be identified with signs and/or other approved makings in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-1. A copy of the Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section. 15. 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. 16. 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. 17. Public and private fire service water mains, public and private hydrants, water control valves, fire sprinkler risers, fire department connections (FDCs), and other fire protection water related devices and equipment are required to be provided, designed, and installed in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-10. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section. 18. A fire service site plan is required in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-11. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section. 19. 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 California 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 California and ADA regulations. 1. 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. 1. www.CityofRC.us Page 13 of 18Printed: 3/23/2022 Project #: DRC2021-00320 Project Name: EDR - Arrow & Rochester Core5 Industrial Location: - 022902197-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 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. 2. 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. 3. 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. 4. 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. 5. 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. 6. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall obtain written permission from the adjacent property owner(s) to construct wall(s) on property line(s) or provide a detail(s) showing the perimeter wall(s) to be constructed offset from the property line. 7. 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. 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. 9. The applicant shall provide a grading agreement and grading bond for all cut and fill combined exceeding 5,000 cubic yards prior to issuance of a grading permit. The grading agreement and bond shall be approved by the Building and Safety Official. 10. The final grading and drainage plan shall show existing topography a minimum of 100-feet beyond project boundary. 11. This project shall comply with the accessibility requirements of the current adopted California Building Code. 12. www.CityofRC.us Page 14 of 18Printed: 3/23/2022 Project #: DRC2021-00320 Project Name: EDR - Arrow & Rochester Core5 Industrial Location: - 022902197-0000 Project Type: Design Review 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 Engineering Services Department an original and a copy of the Pad Certifications to be prepared by and properly wet signed and sealed by the Civil Engineer and Soils Engineer of Record; iv) The rough grading certificates and the compaction reports will be reviewed by the Associate Engineer or a designated person and approved prior to the issuance of a building permit. 13. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the grading and drainage plan shall show the maximum parking stall gradient at 5 percent. Accessibility parking stall grades shall be constructed per the, current adopted California Building Code. 14. 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." 15. 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 CBC 1804.3/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. 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. 17. 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. 18. 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). 19. www.CityofRC.us Page 15 of 18Printed: 3/23/2022 Project #: DRC2021-00320 Project Name: EDR - Arrow & Rochester Core5 Industrial Location: - 022902197-0000 Project Type: Design Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval Prior to approval of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the WQMP shall include a copy of the project Conditions of Approval. 20. Prior to 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. 21. 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. 22. 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. 23. 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. 24. 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”. 25. 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”. 26. www.CityofRC.us Page 16 of 18Printed: 3/23/2022 Project #: DRC2021-00320 Project Name: EDR - Arrow & Rochester Core5 Industrial Location: - 022902197-0000 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. 27. www.CityofRC.us Page 17 of 18Printed: 3/23/2022 Project #: DRC2021-00320 Project Name: EDR - Arrow & Rochester Core5 Industrial Location: - 022902197-0000 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. 28. 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. 29. 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. 30. All roof drainage flowing to the public right of way (Arrow Rte & Rochester Ave) must drain under the sidewalk through a parkway culvert approved by the Engineering Department. This shall be shown on both the grading and drainage plan and Engineering Services Department required plans. 31. www.CityofRC.us Page 18 of 18Printed: 3/23/2022 Planning Department Statement of Agreement and Acceptance of Conditions of Approval for Design Review DRC2021-00320 I, Jon Kelly, as applicant for Design Review DRC2021-00320 hereby state that I am in agreement with and accept the conditions of approval for Design Review DRC2021-00320, for property located at the northeast corner of Rochester Avenue and Arrow Route, APN: 0229-021-97, Rancho Cucamonga, California, as adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga on March 23, 2022 and as listed below and attached. Applicant Signature____________________________ Date ______________________________ Conditions of Approval 1.The applicant shall sign the Statement of Agreement and Acceptance of Conditions of Approval provided by the Planning Department. The signed Statement of Agreement and Acceptance of Conditions of Approval shall be returned to the Planning Department prior to the submittal of grading/construction plans for plan check, request for a business license, and/or commencement of the approved activity. 2.All conditions of approval attached to Resolution of Approval No. 22-07 for Design Review DRC2021-00320. Exhibit J 1 DATE: March 23, 2022 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Matthew R. Burris, AICP, LEED AP, Deputy City Manager – Community Development, Interim Planning Director INITIATED BY: Mena Abdul-Ahad, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, BETWEEN RED HILL COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE AND THE PACIFIC ELECTRIC TRAIL– PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC - A request to allow for a second, one (1) year time extension of a previously approved Tentative Tract Map (SUBTT16605M) and the first time extension of associated entitlements related to the project which include: Design Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016- 00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673 to subdivide 24.19 acres into 6 parcels for the development of 175 attached condominium units (Sycamore Heights project) within the Mixed Use (MU) District, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trail. APNs: 0207-101-13, -17, -24, -25, -31, -34 and -41, and 0207-112-09 and - 10. Staff finds the project to be within the scope of the project covered by a prior Mitigated Negative Declaration certified by City Council on October 4, 2017 (State Clearinghouse SCH#2017071010) by Resolutions 17-098 and 17-099 and does not raise or create new environmental impacts not already considered in the Mitigated Negative Declaration (Time Extension DRC2021-00440). RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve Time Extension DRC2021-00440 for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605M,Design Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673 through the adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: A request to approve a time extension for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605M, Design Review DRC2012- 00672, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673. This constitutes the second request for a time extension of the subject tentative tract map, and the first request for a time extension for Design Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673. BACKGROUND: The project site is located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trail in a hillside area on the southerly flank of Red Hill and surrounding the historic Sycamore Inn restaurant (Attachment A). The site is irregularly shaped and is approximately 2 2,500 feet (east to west) by approximately 750 feet (north to south). The site topography is relatively flat in the western portion with slopes in excess of 30 percent in the eastern portion. Elevation grade changes range from a high of 1,375 feet along the northern property line to a low of 1,245 feet along the south property line; a grade difference of approximately 130 feet. The site is surrounded to the north, south, east, and west by existing residential and commercial land uses, as indicated in the following table. Land Use General Plan Zoning Site Vacant Traditional Town Center Mixed Use (MU) District North Residential condominiums, vacant, and Red Hill Country Club Traditional Neighborhood, General Open Space and Facilities Low (L) and Medium (M) Residential Districts South Residential and Commercial Traditional Town Center, Suburban Neighborhood Low Mixed Use (MU) District and Medium (M) Residential District East Pacific Electric Trail, Route 66 Trail Head, Residential General Open Space and Facilities Mixed-Use (MU) District West Residential and Commercial Traditional Town Center Mixed Use (MU) District The project is the subdivision of 24.19 acres into six (6) parcels for the development of 175 attached condominium units. The project was reviewed by the Planning Commission on August 23, 2017. The Planning Commission adopted the Resolutions approving Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605M, Design Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673 contingent upon the City Council’s adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts and approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206. On August 31, 2017, a timely appeal of the Planning Commission decisions related to the approval of the project was filed by a resident who raised a number of concerns regarding the project related to obstruction of views, traffic, impacts to biological resources and riparian habitat, and the amount of trees proposed to be removed. For a full background regarding the nature of this appeal, reference the October 4, 2017 City Council staff report included with this report as Attachment C. On October 4, 2017, the City Council heard the appeal, upheld the Planning Commission’s decision to approve Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605M, Design Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016- 00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673, adopted the Mitigated Negative Declaration, and approved General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206. PROJECT ANALYSIS: General: This time extension request is the second request to extend the approval period of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605M for one (1) year and the first request to extend the subject Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit associated with the project which are scheduled to expire on October 4, 2022. The original approval of the project was on October 4, 2017, with the approval of SUBTT16605M valid for 3 years, and the corresponding Design Review, Variance and Tree Removal 3 Permit valid for 5 years. Following the initial approval in 2017, the applicant requested an initial time extension for Tentative Parcel Map SUBTT16605M (DRC2020-00238), which was approved by the Planning Commission on August 26, 2020. In addition to this initial time extension, Assembly Bill (AB) 1561 automatically extended the map another 6 months, which provided an expiration date of April 4, 2022. Notably, Design Review, Variance and Tree Removal Permit are also scheduled to expire in the near future, on October 4, 2022. Thus, the subject request to extend the approval of the tentative tract map for an additional year also includes a request to extend these associated entitlements. Development Code Section 17.14.090.C provides that time extensions for such entitlements extends the expiration date for two years from the original permit date. After this initial permit extension, a final one-year extension of time may be granted pursuant to the same process as set forth in this section. Thus, if approved, the time extension request for the Design Review, Variance and Tree Removal Permit will set a new expiration date of October 4, 2024. A timeline for both the map and associated entitlements is provided below: Project Approval History Approving Authority Approval/Extension Type Approval Period Approval Date Expiration Date Planning Commission Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605M, Design Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673 3 years for the Map (5 years for associated entitlements) August 23, 2017 Appealed to October 4, 2017 City Council City Council Original Approval 3 Years for the map (5 years for associated entitlements) 10/04/2017 10/04/2020 (October 4, 2022) Planning Commission Time Extension DRC2020-00238 1 Year 08/26/2020 04/04/2022* Planning Commission Time Extension DRC2021-00440 (proposed) 1 year for map (2 years for associated entitlements) 03/09/2022 (proposed) 04/04/2023 (October 4, 2024) *Includes automatic extension resulting from AB 1561 In justifying their request for a time extension, the applicant notes that the following steps have been taken toward obtaining all necessary permits (reference applicant’s “Time Extension Letter” as Attachment B to this staff report for full detail): • Completed negotiation with Sycamore Inn property owner to resolve restaurant encroachments and utility relocation; • Completed acquisition of off-site easement (on south side of Foothill Blvd.) to facilitate drainage facility; • Completed consultation with California Department of Fish and Wildlife to secure Streambed Alteration Agreement; • Prepared and processed multiple rounds of plan checks; • Received design approval for work in SBCTA Right of Way (PE Trail); • Received approval through FEMA for Conditional National Flood Map Revisions (CLOMR); 4 • Completed consultation with Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control board (RWQCB); • Completed CVWD investigation into on-site and nearby water infrastructure and received board approval for easement quitclaim; • Completed design process for coordinating on-site utility relocations; • Nearing approval of public water and sewer plans through CVWD. The applicant anticipates completing outstanding work for grading permits with a target grading start date of summer/fall 2022 with vertical construction anticipated to follow shortly thereafter. Thus, the applicant has requested the subject time extension. At this time, no changes to the project have occurred from what was previously approved, which involves the subdivision of 24.19 acres into 6 parcels for the development of 175 attached condominium units. Thus, the scope of this application involves only a request for time extension. No changes to the project scope are proposed, nor permitted, with this request for time extension and no conditions relative to the project are proposed, nor permitted, to be altered other than those which affect time limits. CEQA DETERMINATION: The City Council certified a Mitigated Negative Declaration on October 24, 2017 (State Clearinghouse SCH#2017071010) through Resolutions 17-098 and 17-099. The project does not raise or create new environmental impacts not already considered in the Mitigated Negative Declaration. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing with a regular legal advertisement in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site on March 9, 2022. To date, staff has received one (1) written response from a resident via email which has been included with this staff report as Attachment D. Staff responded to the party by phone. Upon directing the resident to contact the Fire Department to address the fire- related concerns and ensuring the resident that there were no changes proposed to the project as part of the request for a time extension, the resident requested a set of plans but did not express any opposition to the time extension. Staff also received one phone call from another resident who was simply inquiring as to whether the project scope has changed. Upon learning from staff that the scope of the project will not change, the resident expressed no opposition to the request for a time extension. FISCAL IMPACT: The project proponent will be responsible for paying one-time impact fees. These fees are intended to address the increased demand for City services due to the proposed project. The following types of services that these impact fees would support include the following: library services, transportation, infrastructure, drainage infrastructure, animal services, police, parks, and community and recreation services. The proposed development will increase the value of the project site and the parcels will be assessed an annual property tax. A percentage of this annual tax is shared with the City. COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: The development of the project achieves the City Council’s Core Value of “Intentionally embracing and anticipating the future,” and “continuous improvement.” By allowing a time extension for a previously approved new housing development that would give the opportunity of homeownership to individuals and families, as well as provide much needed housing stock to the area, the project also results in parkway and road improvements on Red Hill Country Club Drive and Foothill Boulevard, enhancing the visual character and streetscape of these throughfares. 5 ATTACHMENT: Exhibit A - Location Map Exhibit B - Time Extension Request Letter Exhibit C – Planning Commission and City Council Staff Report dated August 23, and October 4, 2017 Exhibit D - Resident Letters Exhibit E - Draft Resolution of Approval 22-06 for Time Extension N Exhibit A Pacific Summit-Foothill, LLC 212 S. Palm Avenue, Suite 200 | Alhambra, California 91801 | t: 626.282.3100 | f: 626.282.6588 | www.rypropertiesinc.com December 9, 2021 Mike Smith Principal Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive PO Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729-0807 Re: TT 16605M – Request for Time Extension Dear Mike: Pacific Summit-Foothill, LLC (PSF) is the current owner of Tentative Tract Map 16605M (TT 16605M), a residential subdivision of 6 lots for 175 attached condominium units, and is hereby applying for a 12-month time extension. TT 16605M was approved by the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission on August 23, 2017 by P.C. Resolution 17-76. The Planning Commission decision to approve TT 16605M was appealed by a third party during the 10-day appeal period. On October 4, 2017, the City Council considered the appeal and upheld the Planning Commission decision approving TT 16605M in C.C. Resolution 17-099. A 12-month extension of the map was approved by Planning Commission on August 26, 2020 by P.C. Resolution 20-42, while the State’s AB1561 automatically extended the map another 6 months to its current expiration on April 04, 2022. Over the last few years PSF has worked diligently to bring the development project to fruition. Our completed and ongoing efforts include: •Completed years-long negotiation with Sycamore Inn property owner to resolve restaurant encroachments and utility relocation. That agreement required detailed and specific input from the utility companies in support of the finalized relocation considerations. •Completed acquisition of off-site easement (on the south side of Foothill Blvd.), for downstream construction of the city’s master plan drainage facility •Completed year-long consultation with California Department of Fish & Wildlife to secure a finalized Streambed Alteration Agreement Exhibit B Mike Smith City of Rancho Cucamonga December 9, 2021 Page 2 212 S. Palm Avenue, Suite 200 | Alhambra, California 91801 | t: 626.282.3100 | f: 626.282.6588 | www.rypropertiesinc.com • Prepared and processed rough grading, storm drain, water quality, and public street plans through multiple plan checks • Received design approval for work in SBCTA ROW (PE Trail). • Received approval for conditional national flood map revisions (CLOMR) through FEMA in 2021. • Received approval from U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for Section 404 Nationwide Permit in 2021. • Completed consultation with Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and received approval of Section 401 Clean Water Act certification and state Waste Discharge Requirements in 2021. • Completing year-long design process for coordinating other onsite necessary utility relocations • Nearing approval of public water and sewer plans through CVWD We anticipate completing the outstanding work needed to satisfy conditions for a grading permit early next year, with a target construction start in summer 2022. Since this extends beyond the current expiration date of TT 16605M, we are requesting a 12-month extension. If any additional information is needed, please contact me at Pacific Summit-Foothill, LLC via email (chad@rypropertiesinc.com) or at the phone number below. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Best Regards, Chad J. Stadnicki Pacific Summit-Foothill, LLC Page 1 of 10 REPORT DATE: October 4, 2017 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager INITIATED BY: Candyce Burnett, City Planner Tom Grahn, Associate Planner SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2016-00206 - PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC - A REQUEST TO AMEND TABLES AND TEXT, INCLUDING CLARIFYING TEXT AS NECESSARY, IN THE GENERAL PLAN TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF LAND THAT CONTAINS SLOPES OF 30 PERCENT OR GREATER. RELATED FILES: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16605M, DESIGN REVIEW DRC2012-00672, VARIANCE DRC2016-00207, AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2012-00673. STAFF HAS PREPARED A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS FOR CONSIDERATION. CONSIDERATION OF THE APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2016-00206 - HANK STOY - THE APPEAL OF A REQUEST TO AMEND TABLES AND TEXT, INCLUDING CLARIFYING TEXT AS NECESSARY, IN THE GENERAL PLAN TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF LAND THAT CONTAINS SLOPES OF 30 PERCENT OR GREATER. RELATED FILES: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16605M, DESIGN REVIEW DRC2012-00672, VARIANCE DRC2016- 00207, AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2012-00673. STAFF HAS PREPARED A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS FOR CONSIDERATION. CONSIDERATION OF THE APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S APPROVAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP MODIFICATION SUBTT16605M - HANK STOY - THE APPEAL OF A REQUEST SUBDIVIDE 24.19 ACRES INTO 6 PARCELS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF 175 ATTACHED CONDOMINIUM UNITS IN THE MIXED USE (MU) DISTRICT LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, BETWEEN RED HILL COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE AND PACIFIC ELECTRIC TRAIL RIGHT-OF-WAY; APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, AND 41 AND 0207-112-09 AND 10. RELATED FILES: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2016-00206, DESIGN REVIEW DRC2012-00672, VARIANCE DRC2016-00207, AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2012- 00673. STAFF HAS PREPARED A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS FOR CONSIDERATION. Exhibit C CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, AND DRC2012-00673 – PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC OCTOBER 4, 2017 Page 2 of 10 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council take the following actions: CONSIDERATION OF THE APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S APPROVAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2012-00672 - HANK STOY - THE APPEAL OF A REQUEST TO DEVELOP 175 ATTACHED CONDOMINIUM UNITS ON 24.19 ACRES OF LAND IN MIXED USE (MU) DISTRICT, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, BETWEEN RED HILL COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE AND THE PACIFIC ELECTRIC TRAIL RIGHT-OF-WAY; APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, AND 41 AND 0207-112-09 AND 10. RELATED FILES: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2016-00206, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16605M, VARIANCE DRC2016-00207, AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2012-00673. STAFF HAS PREPARED A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS FOR CONSIDERATION. CONSIDERATION OF THE APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S APPROVAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VARIANCE DRC2016-00207 - HANK STOY - THE APPEAL OF A REQUEST TO EXCEED THE 30 FOOT BUILDING ENVELOPE ESTABLISHED BY DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 17.122.020.D.1.E.(I AND II) FOR THE DEVELOP 175 ATTACHED CONDOMINIUM UNITS ON 24.19 ACRES OF LAND IN THE MIXED USE (MU) DISTRICT, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, BETWEEN RED HILL COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE AND THE PACIFIC ELECTRIC TRAIL RIGHT-OF-WAY; APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, AND 41 AND 0207-112-09 AND 10. RELATED FILES: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2016-00206, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16605M, DESIGN REVIEW DRC2012-00672, AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2012-00673. STAFF HAS PREPARED A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS FOR CONSIDERATION. CONSIDERATION OF THE APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S APPROVAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT - DRC2012-00673 - HANK STOY - THE APPEAL OF A REQUEST TO REMOVE 180 TREES ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF 175 ATTACHED CONDOMINIUM UNITS ON 24.19 ACRES OF LAND IN MIXED USE (MU) DISTRICT, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, BETWEEN RED HILL COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE AND THE PACIFIC ELECTRIC TRAIL RIGHT-OF- WAY; APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, AND 41 AND 0207-112-09 AND 10. RELATED FILES: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2016-00206, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16605M, DESIGN REVIEW DRC2012- 00672, AND VARIANCE DRC2016-00207. STAFF HAS PREPARED A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS FOR CONSIDERATION. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, AND DRC2012-00673 – PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC OCTOBER 4, 2017 Page 3 of 10 • Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project; and • Adopt the attached Resolution approving General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206; and • Adopt the attached Resolutions upholding the decisions of the Planning Commission, and denying the appeals, approving Tentative Tract Map Modification SUBTT16605M, Design Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012- 00673 contingent upon the City Council’s adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts and approval of the General Plan Amendment. BACKGROUND: On August 23, 2017, the Planning Commission took the following actions: • Recommended that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project; and • Adopted the Resolution recommending that the City Council approve General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206; and • Adopted the Resolutions approving Tentative Tract Map Modification SUBTT16605M, Design Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673 contingent upon the City Council’s adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts and approval of the General Plan Amendment. On August 31, 2017, Mr. Hank Stoy filed a timely appeal of the Planning Commission decisions related to the approval of the Sycamore Heights project (Attachment 8). ANALYSIS: A. Planning Commission Action: The Planning Commission recommended the City Council approve the General Plan Amendment, and approved the Tentative Tract Map Modification, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit applications contingent upon the City Council’s approval of the General Plan Amendment (Attachments 1 through 6). These applications were initiated by Pacific Summit-Foothill, LLC, to provide for the opportunity to subdivide 24.19 acres into 6 parcels for the development of 175 attached condominium units in the Mixed Use (MU) District on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trail Right-of-Way. The Planning Commission staff report thoroughly analyzes the proposed Tentative Tract Map Modification, and Design Review applications (Attachment 1). The analysis of these applications is complete, no further analysis is provided in the following discussion, and staff recommends the City Council uphold the decisions of the Planning Commission and deny their general appeal, thereby approving Tentative Tract Map Modification SUBTT16605M, and Design Review DRC2012-00672. A discussion of General Plan Amendment DRC2016- 00206, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673 is provided below. B. General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206: The General Plan Land Use Element establishes design, grading, and development criteria associated with various slope conditions. These criteria establish policy guidelines for allowing for the development of CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, AND DRC2012-00673 – PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC OCTOBER 4, 2017 Page 4 of 10 slopes ranging from “5% or less” up to “15% to 29.9%”, and prohibit development on slope conditions of “30% and over”. The Development Code provides similar criteria, but was amended to permit the development of slopes “30% and over” and states that “This is an excessive slope condition and development is prohibited, unless all the following are satisfied: (i) the property is located south of Banyan Street; (ii) at least seventy-five percent (75%) of the lots or parcels that are the subject of the development application are surrounded by lots or parcels improved with structures; (iii) the proposed project is determined to appropriately address slope stability and other geological factors of the site; and (iv) vegetation fuel management for wildfire protection can be achieved and maintained” (General Plan text is non-bold). The Mixed Use General Plan land use designation is not specifically a residential or commercial land use category, but a designation that allows a mix of land uses. Because it can permit a variety of land uses, it was never intended to be subject to the Hillside Development criteria of the General Plan or the Development Code. The intent of the Hillside Development criteria is to regulate single-family residential hillside development on natural slope conditions with slopes 8% and greater, in some areas 30% and over, where the vast majority of land in that slope category in the foothill areas of the City. With the Sycamore Heights project, we have a 24-acre fractured site surrounded by developed land that has been so altered by surrounding development (i.e., development of the Red Chief Motel, Sycamore Inn, abandoned water basin, and surrounding residential, commercial and public developments, and graded access roads throughout the site) that the project site is not a natural slope and is outside the intent of the Hillside Development requirements of the Development Code. The proposed General Plan Amendment proposes to modify Table LU- 19 to include the above referenced text in bold, as well as two policy sections similarly (see Draft Resolution). C. Appeal of Planning Commission Actions: Following Planning Commission approval of the Sycamore Heights project Mr. Hank Stoy filed an “appeal of the decisions made by the Planning Commission at its meeting of August 23, 2017, relating to the following items: Variance to Development Code, Environmental Issues (Traffic, Wildlife, and Riparian Habitat), and Tree Removal Permit.” These items are discussed below. a. Variance DRC2016-00207: The appeal letter states “Some structures would exceed the 30-foot height limitation for buildings on slopes. Allowing these to be built would negatively impact the view from my property. The developer should be required to comply with the requirements of the Development Code.” Staff Response to Appeal: Approximately half of the project site is located within the Hillside Overlay District, of which the Development Code establishes building envelopes and maximum building height for properties located in hillside areas. The Hillside Development criteria establish a 30-foot maximum building height for all structures located in the Hillside Overlay District. The applicant is proposing a total of 44 condominium units including 26 two-story tri-plex units that are up to a maximum of 29 feet in height, and 18 three-story four-, five-, and six-plex units that are up to a maximum of 35 feet in height. Roughly half of the three-story units are located entirely within the Hillside Overlay District and exceed the allowable maximum 30-foot building height by 5 feet. Residential structures in the Mixed Use (MU) District outside of the Hillside Overlay District are permitted up to a maximum of 75 feet in height. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, AND DRC2012-00673 – PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC OCTOBER 4, 2017 Page 5 of 10 Because of the approximate distance of 185 feet between the existing and proposed structures, the grade difference of approximately 50 feet between pad elevation for the existing and proposed structures, and the view angle from the existing structures, the proposed 5 foot height increase does not create a condition that negatively impacts views of the San Bernardino valley. Portions of structures will block views looking down towards Foothill Boulevard, but due to the distances involved and the view angle, the 5 foot height increase only incrementally disrupts views looking down and not out towards the San Bernardino valley (Attachment 11). Staff recommends the City Council uphold the decision of the Planning Commission and deny the appeal of Variance DRC2016-00207. b. Environmental Impacts – Traffic: The appeal letter states “An estimated additional 1042 daily vehicle trips would be generated on already heavily-traveled Foothill Boulevard. It would exacerbate problems at probably the worst intersection in the City – Foothill and Red Hill Country Club Drive. With only one entrance/exit and right turns only in and out, the numerous U-turns required on Foothill would create safety hazards. Cut-through traffic on Red Hill is bound to increase. Yet, no mitigation measures are being required of the developer.” Applicant Response to Appeal: Linscott, Law & Greenspan, the project traffic engineer, responded to the comment (Attachment 10) and stated that the proposed project is expected to generate 1,042 additional vehicles per day (vpd) onto Foothill Boulevard. Foothill Boulevard currently has an average daily traffic volume of 22,000 vpd in the vicinity of the project site and a daily capacity of 36,000 vpd. Even though the proposed project will add 1,042 additional daily trips to Foothill Boulevard, the existing roadway has more than adequate capacity to accommodate the increase in daily trips associated with the proposed project. The Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) identifies that under existing traffic conditions the intersection of Red Hill Country Club Drive and Foothill Boulevard currently operates at unacceptable Level of Service (LOS) F (on a scale of descending LOS from A to F) during the AM and PM peak hours. The proposed project will add some traffic to the already deficient intersection. The TIA recommends an improvement at that intersection in order to help alleviate the existing peak hour deficiency. Conditions of approval require the installation of traffic signage at the Red Hill Country Club Drive and Foothill Boulevard intersection to restrict northbound and southbound left-turn and through movements during the AM peak period (7:00 AM – 9:00 AM) and the PM peak period (4:00 PM – 6:00 PM). Primary access to the project site will be provided via a proposed “right-turn in/right- turn out only” gated driveway on Foothill Boulevard. A secondary Emergency Vehicle Access (EVA) provides access to Red Hill Country Club Drive. The Rancho Cucamonga General Plan designates Foothill Boulevard as a Major Divided Arterial (i.e., 94-foot paved width, inclusive of a 14-foot median within a 120-foot right-of-way). The restriction of turning movements at the primary access is consistent with the City’s Circulation/Mobility Plan, which indicates that left-turn access on Foothill Boulevard is allowed at signalized intersections only. Due to the “right-turn in/right-turn out only” restriction project residents/guests will have to make U-turn movements at the adjacent intersections of either Foothill Boulevard and Grove Avenue, Foothill Boulevard and Red Hill Country Club Drive, or Foothill Boulevard and San Bernardino CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, AND DRC2012-00673 – PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC OCTOBER 4, 2017 Page 6 of 10 Road. Traffic volume forecasting and intersection analysis included in the TIA considers the project U-turn movements at these key study intersections. The TIA prepared for the project did provide a project cut-through discussion relative to the Red Hill Country Club Drive neighborhood. Based on the project trip distribution patterns of the traffic study, it was assumed that 20% of outbound project traffic would be considered new cut-through trips (i.e., 13 of the 64 outbound AM peak hour trips and 7 of the 32 outbound PM peak hour trips). These outbound project trips were assumed to travel through the Red Hill Country Club Drive neighborhood to access Carnelian Street and/or Baseline Road. Staff Response to Appeal: The Initial Study and TIA addresses traffic impacts, project access, and cut-through traffic and appropriate conditions of approval are established for project impacts. Staff recommends the City Council uphold the decision of the Planning Commission and deny the appeal of environmental impacts to traffic. c. Environmental Impacts – Wildlife: The appeal letter states “The impact on wildlife is unrealistically understated. For example, the red tail hawk (a protected species) frequently seen on Red Hill is not even mentioned in the biological resources survey.” Applicant Response to Appeal: RCA Associates, the project biologist, responded to the comment (Attachment 9) and identified that as part of their evaluation of the project site they documented all wildlife observed on the site during their field surveys. Further identifying that the red-tailed hawk was not observed, and since the species is not listed as threatened, endangered, or a species of special concern a detailed discussion of the species was not provided. Staff Response to Appeal: The Initial Study prepared for the project evaluates impacts to biological resources associated with development of the project site and relied on the 2003 Biological Assessment and updated 2017 Biological Assessment to assess and project related impacts. No threatened, endangered, or species of concern were identified in either assessment. The level of constraint that a sensitive biological resource would pose to potential developments typically depends on the following criteria: 1) the relative value of that resource; 2) the amount or degree of impact to the resource; 3) whether or not impacts to the resource would be in violation of State and/or federal regulations or laws; 4) whether or not impacts to the resource would require permitting by resources agencies; and 5) the degree to which impacts on the resource would otherwise be considered "significant" under CEQA. Based on an evaluation using these criteria, existing disturbed/disked areas were considered of a relatively low biological constraint and value given the context in which they occur. This designation is because of the high level of disturbance that has resulted in low biological diversity, absence of special-status plant communities, and overall low potential for special-status species to utilize or reside within these areas. Because no threatened or endangered species are likely to occur in disturbed areas due to the highly disturbed conditions present in a predominantly degraded environment, construction activities in these areas would not likely jeopardize the continued existence of listed species, nor would construction adversely impact designated critical habitat. Impacts to disturbed areas would also not be expected to substantially affect special-status resources or cause a population of plant or wildlife CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, AND DRC2012-00673 – PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC OCTOBER 4, 2017 Page 7 of 10 species to drop below self-sustaining levels, nor would impacts be expected to substantially alter diversity of wildlife in the area due to the current degraded habitat conditions. Project mitigation measures require Nesting Bird Surveys and Burrowing Owl Surveys consistent with the Fish and Game Code and the Migratory Bird Act prior to the issuance of grading permits. Staff recommends the City Council uphold the decision of the Planning Commission and deny the appeal of environmental impacts to wildlife. d. Environmental Impacts – Riparian Habitat: The appeal letter states “Preservation of riparian habitat is a stated goal in the City’s General Plan (Policy RC-8.1). But this project would destroy a considerable amount of it.” Applicant Response to Appeal: RCA Associates, the project biologist, studied the site to identify the locations of any potential riparian/riverine habitat to determine whether federal and/or state jurisdiction applies (Attachment 9). The study (Jurisdictional Delineation) identified five riverine features – four conveying drainage from the condominium project to the north and one conveying drainage from the Red Hill Country Club golf course. All features drain into developed storm drain facilities directly south of the site. Based on US Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE) and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) criteria these features are not subject to their jurisdiction. Staff Response to Appeal: The Initial Study evaluated a Jurisdictional Delineation prepared for the project site. The Jurisdictional Delineation evaluated five drainage channels that bisect the project site and analyzed the impacts to riverine habitats present along the channels. Based on the results of the delineation and the jurisdictional analysis, it was determined that the five existing channels do not meet the criteria as a Waters of the State or Waters of the United States. The channels do not meet the characteristics that the define them as a nexus to the nearest Traditional Navigable Water, located approximately 0.4 miles east of the project site. Waters that flow through the five channels flow in a southerly direction and appear to be a direct result of runoff from the development directly north of the site. The Jurisdictional Delineation determined that jurisdictional waters were not present on the site during their field investigations, and that the proposed project will not have an impact to the Waters of the State and recommends complying with California Fish and Game Code, Section 1602, prior to issuance of any grading permit. General Plan Policy RC-8.1 addresses preserving “the integrity of riparian habitat … and sensitive wildlife habitat that supports biological resources.” Although the policy is focused on preserving riparian habitat in the City’s Sphere of Influence, located in the foothills north of the City, the policy would still be applicable to riparian habitat anywhere within the City. Here, the Jurisdictional Delineation analyzed the five drainage channels that bisect the site and determined that they are the result of runoff from the existing development to the north, that jurisdictional waters were not present during field investigations, and that the project will not have an impact to the Waters of the State. Although the Jurisdictional Delineation determined that jurisdictional waters were not present on the project site, it recommended compliance with the CDFW recommended mitigation measure prior to issuance of any grading permit. The Biological Resources section of the project Mitigated Negative Declaration includes a mitigation measure requiring the applicant to provide proof to the City that the CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, AND DRC2012-00673 – PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC OCTOBER 4, 2017 Page 8 of 10 Streambed Alteration Agreement (1602 Agreement) process has been concluded. Staff recommends the City Council uphold the decision of the Planning Commission and deny the appeal of environmental impacts to riparian habitat. e. Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673: The appeal letter states “This project would require removing 180 trees. To preserve the areas aesthetics and character, more mature trees should be saved. And it is difficult to believe that the nesting bird survey did not find a single nest in any of the trees slated for removal.” Staff Response to Appeal: The Arborist Report prepared for the project site evaluated a total of 198 trees on-site, 64 of which meet Development Code criteria to be classified as Heritage Trees, and 18 of those Heritage Trees are recommended for preservation. The 180 trees not identified as suitable for preservation are considered over-mature, have poor growth character, have advanced decay, some are dead or are in poor general health, and many of these trees have further declined in health due to the prolonged effects of the drought. Additionally, the location of several trees, although they are in good health, conflict with proposed improvements. The Conceptual Landscape Plan prepared for the project demonstrates that the 180 trees removed will be replaced with a variety of 36-inch box, 24-inch box, and 15-gallon size trees, in a quantity in excess of the number of trees removed. A Biological Assessment prepared for the project did identify the presence of common birds on the project site, but no threatened, endangered, or species of concern were identified. Burrowing Owl and Nesting Bird Surveys were prepared, but did not identify the presence of any Burrowing Owls or nesting birds. Project mitigation measures require Nesting Bird Surveys and Burrowing Owl Surveys consistent with the Fish and Game Code and the Migratory Bird Act prior to the issuance of grading permits. Staff recommends the City Council uphold the decision of the Planning Commission and deny the appeal of Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673. D. Environmental Assessment: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City’s local CEQA Guidelines, City staff prepared an Initial Study (IS) of the potential environmental effects of the project (Exhibit P). Based on the findings contained in that IS, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures re lated to aesthetics, agricultural resources, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hydrology and water quality, noise, and tribal cultural resources there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was prepared and was circulated on July 3, 2017. A comment letter was received from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) on July 27, 2017 in response to the circulated IS/MND. The only comment CDFW had was in relation to the possible Jurisdictional Waters on the project site. The applicant and their biologists prepared a Jurisdictional Delineation to address CDFW’s comments. The Jurisdictional Delineation determined that jurisdictional waters were not present on the project site, but recommended compliance with the CDFW recommended mitigation measure prior to issuance of any grading permit. The Biological Resources section of the IS/MND, was revised to include a mitigation measure requiring the applicant to provide proof to the City that the Streambed Alteration Agreement (1602 Agreement) process has been concluded. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, AND DRC2012-00673 – PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC OCTOBER 4, 2017 Page 9 of 10 According to CEQA Section 15073.5(a), recirculation of a negative declaration is required prior to its adoption when it has been substantially revised after public notice of its availability has been given pursuant to Section 15072. Furthermore, CEQA Section 15073.5(b) states, “a “substantial revision” of the negative declaration shall mean: (1) a new avoidable significant effect is identified and mitigation measure or project revisions must be added in order to reduce the effect to insignificance, or (2) the lead agency determines that the proposed mitigation measures or project revisions will not reduce potential effects to less than significance and new measures or revisions must be required.” Here, either the CDFW will determine that notification under Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code is not required for the project, or they will require the applicant obtain a Streambed Alteration Agreement. The IS/MND was revised to include a discussion of the Jurisdictional Delineation for the project site and a mitigation measure requiring a Streambed Alteration Agreement was added to the MND and the project conditions of approval. The addition of a condition of approval requiring a Streambed Alteration Agreement is not considered substantial evidence in light of the whole record that cannot be mitigated. Therefore, the Streambed Alteration Agreement mitigation measure is not a substantial revision to the MND, and recirculation of the MND is not required. FISCAL IMPACT: The project site currently is assessed an annual property tax. A percentage of this annual tax is shared with the City. The proposed development will increase the value of the project site and the City’s annual share of the property tax will increase accordingly. The project proponent also will be responsible for paying one-time impact fees. These fees are intended to address the increased demand for City services due to the proposed project. The following types of services that these impact fees would support include the following: library services, transportation infrastructure, drainage infrastructure, animal services, police, parks, and community and recreation services. The overall project, during construction may increase construction-related employment and, following its completion, will increase employment due to new industrial uses, and may increase employment at surrounding existing and future businesses that will provide services to the employees and customers of the project. Also, a positive fiscal impact for the City will occur through increased sales tax revenue generated by the employees and customer patronage of local businesses. COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: Although a specific current City Council goal does not apply to the project, the project is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and the objectives of the Development Code. The proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent with the General Plan Public Health and Safety element and its policies related to hillside development. The proposed General Plan Amendment will not preclude the continued enforcement of the Hillside Development Guidelines applicable to development of property with slope conditions. The proposed project is in a developed area with similar hillside/slope conditions that will not be impacted by the project. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan as it identifies existing slope conditions and how the project integrates those conditions into its design, and proposed project is designed to minimize any impact to surrounding hillside developments. CORRESPONDENCE: CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DRC2016-00206, SUBTT16605M, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, AND DRC2012-00673 – PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC OCTOBER 4, 2017 Page 10 of 10 This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site. One comment letter was received and is attached (Attachment 12). ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1 – Planning Commission Staff Report dated August 23, 2017 Attachment 2 – Planning Commission Resolution No. 17-75 Recommending Approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206 Attachment 3 – Planning Commission Resolution No. 17-76 Approving Tentative Tract Map Modification SUBTT16605M Attachment 4 – Planning Commission Resolution No. 17-77 Approving Design Review DRC2012-00672 Attachment 5 – Planning Commission Resolution No. 17-78 Approving Variance DRC2016- 00207 Attachment 6 – Planning Commission Resolution No. 17-79 Approving Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673 Attachment 7 – Planning Commission Minutes dated August 23, 2017 Attachment 8 – Mr. Hank Stoy Appeal Letter dated August 31, 2017 Attachment 9 – RCA Associates Response Letter Attachment 10 – Linscott, Law & Greenspan Response Letter Attachment 11 – Slope/View Exhibit Attachment 12 – Charles & Lynda Treenor comment letter Draft Resolution of Approval for General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206 Draft Resolution of Upholding Approval for Tentative Tract Map Modification SUBTT16605M Draft Resolution of Upholding Approval for Design Review DRC2012-00672 Draft Resolution of Upholding Approval for Variance DRC2016-00207 Draft Resolution of Upholding Approval for Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673 RESOLUTION NO. 22-06 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TIME EXTENSION DRC2021-00440, A REQUEST TO ALLOW FOR THE SECOND ONE (1) YEAR TIME EXTENSION OF A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (SUBTT16605M) AND THE FIRST TIME EXTENSION OF ASSOCIATED ENTITLEMENTS RELATED TO THE PROJECT WHICH INCLUDE: DESIGN REVIEW DRC2012-00672, VARIANCE DRC2016- 00207, AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2012-00673, TO SUBDIVIDE 24.19 ACRES INTO 6 PARCELS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF 175 ATTACHED CONDOMINIUM UNITS (SYCAMORE HEIGHTS PROJECT) WITHIN THE MIXED USE (MU) DISTRICT, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, BETWEEN RED HILL COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE AND THE PACIFIC ELECTRIC TRAIL RIGHT-OF-WAY; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34 AND 41, AND 0207-112-09 AND 10. A.Recitals. 1.Pacific Summit-Foothill, LLC filed an application for the extension of the approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605M, Design Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016- 00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the Time Extension request is referred to as "the application." 2.On August 23, 2027, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga approved Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605M, Design Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673, contingent upon the City Council’s adoption of an associated Mitigated Negative Declaration and approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206. 3.On August 31, 2017, a timely appeal of the Planning Commission decisions related to the approval of the project was filed by a resident raising a number of concerns regarding the project. 4. On October 4, 2017, the City Council heard the appeal and upheld the Planning Commission’s decision by adopting Resolution No. 17-099, thereby approving the above referenced entitlements subject to specific conditions and time limits whereas the subject Tentative Tract Map was originally set to expire on October 4, 2020, and the associated Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit were set to expire October 4, 2022. 5.On August 23, 2020, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a noticed public hearing and granted a one-year time extension to SUBTT16605M, which was further extended an additional 6 months upon the approval of Assembly Bill (AB 1561) by the State legislature, for a new expiration of April 4, 2022. 6.On December 9, 2021, citing the need to complete various project tasks in order to obtain permits, the applicant submitted a letter in writing requesting an extension of time for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605M, Design Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016- 00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673. Exhibit E PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 22-06 TIME EXTENSION 2021-00440 (TENTATIVE MAP SUBTT16605M) PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC March 23, 2022 Page 2 7. On March 23, 2022, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 8. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on March 23, 2022, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to a 24.19-acre parcel located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trail Right-of- Way; and b. The land use, General Plan designation, and Zoning designation of the project site and surrounding properties are as follows: Land Use General Plan Zoning Site Vacant Traditional Town Center Mixed Use (MU) District North Residential condominiums, vacant, and Red Hill Country Club Traditional Neighborhood, General Open Space and Facilities Low (L) and Medium (M) Residential Districts South Residential and Commercial Traditional Town Center, Suburban Neighborhood Low Mixed Use (MU) District and Medium (M) Residential District East Pacific Electric Trail, Route 66 Trail Head, Residential General Open Space and Facilities Mixed-Use (MU) District West Residential and Commercial Traditional Town Center Mixed Use (MU) District PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 22-06 TIME EXTENSION 2021-00440 (TENTATIVE MAP SUBTT16605M) PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC March 23, 2022 Page 3 c. The subdivision of the project site conforms to all applicable development standards of the Mixed Use (MU) District; and d. This application is a request to extend the approval period of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605M for one (1) additional year. The time extension is necessary to provide the applicant time prepare the project site for grading and construction. The expiration date with the approval of Time Extension DRC2021-00440 will be April 4, 2023 for the Tentative Tract Map Map, and October 4, 2024 for the Design Review, Variance and Tree Removal Permit. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The previously approved subdivision is consistent with the City's current General Plan and Zoning Code. The approved project is for the subdivision of 24.19 acres of land into 6 parcels for the development of 175 attached condominium units. The approved subdivision is consistent with each of the related City requirements for the project site; and b. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of the previously approved subdivision. The project site is well suited for the approved subdivision as there are similar residential developments near and around the site; and c. The previously approved subdivision, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The project allows for the development of residential units in an area identified in the City’s General Plan and Zoning Code as suitable for residential development of this type and intensity. The City Council certified a Mitigated Negative Declaration on October 24, 2017 (State Clearinghouse #2017071010) through Resolutions 17-098 and 17- 099. The project does not raise or create new environmental impacts not already considered in the Mitigated Negative Declaration; and d. The previously approved subdivision complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. The previously approved subdivision complies with all development standards outlined in the Development Code at the time of approval for the development of multi-family residential condominiums within the Mixed Use (MU); and e. The time extension is within the time limits established by State law and local ordinance. State law allows for one (1) year time extensions of tentative maps. 4. California Environmental Quality Act Findings. a. The Planning Department staff finds the project to be within the scope of the project covered by a prior Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) certified by City Council on October 4, 2017 (State Clearinghouse #2017071010) by Resolutions 17-098 and 17-099 and does not raise or create new environmental impacts not already considered in the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has independently reviewed City staff’s determination, and based upon the whole record before it, and its independent review and judgment, finds that that the Project, is not subject to further environmental review pursuant to the Guidelines because: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 22-06 TIME EXTENSION 2021-00440 (TENTATIVE MAP SUBTT16605M) PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC March 23, 2022 Page 4 (1) The Project and the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken do not involve substantial changes which will result in new significant environmental effects, and that the Project does not involve new information of substantial importance which shows that the Project will have significant effects not discussed in the prior MND; and (2) All potential environmental impacts associated with extension of time for the Project are adequately addressed by the prior MND, and the mitigation measures contained in the prior MND will reduce those impacts to a level that is less than significant. c. The custodian of records for the prior MND, and all other materials that constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission determination is based, is the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3 and 4 above, this Commission hereby grants a one (1) year time extension for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605M for a new expiration date of April 4, 2023, and a two (2) year time extension for Design Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673 for a new expiration date of October 4, 2024. 6. All applicable Conditions of Approval in Planning Commission Resolution No. 17-76 and City Council Resolution No. 17-099 for SUBTT16605M shall apply to Time Extension DRC2021-00440. 7. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 23RD DAY OF MARCH 2022. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Bryan Dopp, Chairman ATTEST: Matthew R. Burris, AICP, LEED AP, Secretary I, Matthew R. Burris, AICP, LEED AP, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 23rd day of March 2022, by the following vote- to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 22-06 TIME EXTENSION 2021-00440 (TENTATIVE MAP SUBTT16605M) PACIFIC SUMMIT-FOOTHILL, LLC March 23, 2022 Page 5 NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: